The Expositor's Bible: The Second Book of KingsFarrar, F. W. (Frederic William)
Religion
The Expositor's Bible: The Second Book of Kings
Farrar, F. W. (Frederic William)
Bible. Kings, 2nd -- Commentaries
Pleasure, then?--the consecration of the natural impulses, the
devotion in religious cultus of the passions and appetites of the
flesh--why should that be so abhorrent to Jehovah? Other deities
exulted in licentiousness. Was not the temple of Astarte full of her
women-worshippers and of her eunuchs? Was there no fascination in the
voluptuous allurements, the orgiastic dances, the stolen waters, the
bread eaten in secret, when not only was the conscience lulled by the
removal therefrom of all sense of guilt and degradation, but such
orgies were even crowned with merit, as part of an acceptable worship?
After all, there was "a fascination of corruption" in these idols of
gold and jewels, of lust and blood!
How stern, how cold, how bare, by comparison, was the moral law which
only said, "Thou shalt not," and emphasised its prohibition with the
unalterable sanctions, "This do, and thou shalt live"; "Do it not, and
thou shalt die"! What could they make of a religion which was so
eloquently silent as to the meritoriousness of ritual?
And how chill and simple and dreary was that which--according to
Micah--Jehovah had shown to be good, and which He required of every
man,--which was nothing more than to do justly, and to love mercy, and
to walk humbly with God!
And what right had the prophets--so asked these apostates--to lord it
over God's heritage in this way? Solomon was the greatest king of
Israel and Judah; and Solomon had never been so exclusive in his
religionism, though he had built the Temple of the Lord; nor Rehoboam;
nor the great Phœnician Queen Athaliah; nor the cultivated and
æsthetic Ahaz; nor, in the kingdom of Israel, the lordly warrior Ahab;
nor the splendid and long-lived victor Jeroboam II. Had not Manasseh
plenty of examples of religious syncretism, to which he might appeal
in the joy of his youthful age?
Not impossibly there lay in the background another reason why the
young king might be inclined to listen to these evil counsellors.
Micah may still have been living; but of Isaiah we hear no more.
Probably he was dead. It is not recorded that he delivered any
prophecy during the reign of Manasseh, nor is it certain that he
outlived the former king. Tradition, indeed, in later days, asserted
that he had confronted Manasseh, and been doomed to death; that he had
taken refuge in a cedar tree, and in that cedar had been sawn asunder;
but the tradition is wholly without a vestige of authority. One of
Micah's sternest oracles was perhaps uttered in the days of
Manasseh.[628] But Micah was only a provincial prophet of
Moresheth-Gath. He never moved in the midst of princes as Isaiah had
done, or possessed a tithe of the authority which had rested for so
many years on the shoulders of his mighty contemporary.
Moreover--so the heathen party might suggest--had not Isaiah's
prophecies been falsified by the result? Had he not distinctly
promised and pledged his credit to two things? and had not both turned
out to be unworthy of reliance?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account