A verse by verse commentary on 2 Chronicles 12 dealing with Shishak Attacks Jerusalem.

1. 2 CHRO ICLES 12 COMME TRY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
Shishak Attacks Jerusalem
1 After Rehoboam’s position as king was
established and he had become strong, he and all
Israel[a] with him abandoned the law of the Lord.
BAR ES, "All Israel with him - i. e., “all Judah and Benjamin” - all the Israelites
of those two tribes.
CLARKE, "He forsook the law of the Lord - This was after the three years
mentioned 2Ch_11:17.
GILL, "And it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the
kingdom,.... Or when the kingdom of Rehoboam was established; the tribes of Judah
and Benjamin being firmly attached to him, and great numbers from the other tribes
coming over to him, and things going on peaceably and prosperously during the three
years that he and his people abode by the pure worship of God:
and had strengthened himself; built fortified cities for the defence of himself and
kingdom, 2Ch_11:5, he forsook the law of the Lord; after he had reigned three years, and
was become strong, and thought himself safe and secure on the throne, trusting to his
strength:
and all Israel with him; the greater part of them following the example of their king;
of this defection, and the sins they fell into, see 1Ki_14:22.
HE RY 1-4, "Israel was very much disgraced and weakened by being divided into
two kingdoms; yet the kingdom of Judah, having both the temple and the royal city, both
the house of David and the house of Aaron, might have done very well if they had
continued in the way of their duty; but here we have all out of order there.
I. Rehoboam and his people left God: He forsook the law of the Lord, and so in effect

2. forsook God, and all Israel with him, 2Ch_12:1. He had his happy triennium, when he
walked in the way of David and Solomon (2Ch_11:17), but it expired, and he grew remiss
in the worship of God; in what instances we are not told, but he fell off, and Judah with
him, here called Israel, because they walked in the evil ways into which Jeroboam had
drawn the kingdom of Israel. Thus he did when he had established the kingdom and
strengthened himself. As long as he thought his throne tottered he kept to his duty, that
he might make God his friend; but, when he found it stood pretty firmly, he thought he
had no more occasion for religion; he was safe enough without it. Thus the prosperity of
fools destroys them. Jeshurun waxed fat and kicked. When men prosper, and are in no
apprehension of troubles, they are ready to say to God, Depart from us.
II. God quickly brought troubles upon them, to awaken them, and recover them to
repentance, before their hearts were hardened. It was but in the fourth year of
Rehoboam that they began to corrupt themselves, and in the fifth year the king of Egypt
came up against them with a vast army, took the fenced cities of Judah, and came
against Jerusalem, 2Ch_12:2, 2Ch_12:3, 2Ch_12:4. This great calamity coming upon
them so soon after they began to desert the worship of God, by a hand they had little
reason to suspect (having had a great deal of friendly correspondence with Egypt in the
last reign), and coming with so much violence that all the fenced cities of Judah, which
Rehoboam had lately fortified and garrisoned and on which he relied much for the safety
of his kingdom, fell immediately into the hands of the enemy, without making any
resistance, plainly showed that it was from the Lord, because they had transgressed
against him.
JAMISO , "2Ch_12:1-12. Rehoboam, forsaking God, is punished by Shishak.
when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and had strengthened
himself — (See on 2Ch_11:17). During the first three years of his reign his royal
influence was exerted in the encouragement of the true religion. Security and ease led to
religious decline, which, in the fourth year, ended in open apostasy. The example of the
court was speedily followed by his subjects, for “all Israel was with him,” that is, the
people in his own kingdom. The very next year, the fifth of his reign, punishment was
inflicted by the invasion of Shishak.
K&D, "Rehoboam's defection from the Lord, and his humiliation by the Egyptian
king Shishak. - 2Ch_12:1. The infinitive ‫ין‬ ִ‫כ‬ ָ‫ה‬ ְⅴ, “at the time of the establishing,” with an
indefinite subject, may be expressed in English by the passive: when Rehoboam's royal
power was established. The words refer back to 2Ch_11:17. ‫ּו‬‫ת‬ ָ‫ק‬ְ‫ז‬ ֶ‫ח‬ ְⅴ, “when he had become
strong” (‫ה‬ ָ‫ק‬ְ‫ז‬ ֶ‫ח‬ is a nomen verbale: the becoming strong; cf. 2Ch_26:16; 2Ch_11:2), he
forsook the Lord, and all Israel with him. The inhabitants of the kingdom of Judah are
here called Israel, to hint at the contrast between the actual conduct of the people in
their defection from the Lord, and the destiny of Israel, the people of God. The forsaking
of the law of Jahve is in substance the fall into idolatry, as we find it stated more
definitely in 1Ki_14:22.
BE SO , "2 Chronicles 12:1. When Rehoboam had established the kingdom —
Israel was very much disgraced and weakened by being divided into two kingdoms;
yet the kingdom of Judah, having both the temple and the royal city, both the house

3. of David and the house of Aaron, might have done very well if they had continued in
the way of their duty: but here we have all out of order there. For Rehoboam
forsook the law of the Lord, and all Israel with him — That is, all his people, all
Judah, here called Israel, because they walked in the evil ways into which Jeroboam
had drawn the kingdom of Israel. Of this defection from God and his service, see 1
Kings 14:22-24. Observe, reader; as long as he thought his throne in an insecure
state, he kept to his duty, that he might make God his friend; but when he judged
that he was established in his kingdom, he acted as if he thought he had no more
occasion for religion. Thus the prosperity of fools destroys them.
ELLICOTT, "THE EGYPTIA CO QUEST.
(a) SHISHAK’S I VASIO OF JUDAH, A D THE PREACHI G OF
SHEMAIAH (2 Chronicles 12:1-12).
The parallel in Kings is much briefer. (See 1 Kings 14:25-28.)
Verse 1
(1) When Rehoboam had established the kingdom.—Rather, when Rehoboam’s
kingdom had been established. The construction is impersonal: when one had
established Rehoboam’s kingdom. The narrative is resumed from 2 Chronicles
11:17.
And had strengthened himself.—And when he had become strong (hezqâh, an
infinitive, used again at 2 Chronicles 26:16; Daniel 11:2, and nowhere else).
He forsook the law of the Lord—i.e., lapsed into idolatry. (See 1 Kings 14:22-24,
where the offence is more precisely described.)
All Israel.—The southern kingdom being regarded as the true Israel. (Comp. 2
Chronicles 12:6.)
TRAPP, " And it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and
had strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the LORD, and all Israel with him.
Ver. 1. When Rehoboam had established the kingdom.] For the first three years of
his reign, when the rent was but newly made, and he might well fear the loss of his
kingdom, he seemed to have some goodness in him; but when he saw himself settled,
he revolted from the Lord.
“ Luxuriant animi rebus plerunque secundis:
ec facile est aequa commoda mente pati. ”
And all Israel with him.] Israel is here, and 2 Chronicles 12:6, put and meant for

4. Judah.
PARKER, "The Idolatry of Rehoboam
"And it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and had
strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the Lord, and all Israel with him" ( 2
Chronicles 12:1).
A accursed word is that sometimes—"established," or "strengthened," or
prospered, or succeeded. It was the mark of the place where we turned hellward.
We prayed when we were poor; we went to the sanctuary when we were weak. Who
can stand fatness and sunshine all the year round? Who can understand the
meaning of prosperity? Who can be modest, and great? Who can be humble, and
rich? Who can be prayerful, and successful in business? The story thus comes to us
with modernness of aspect and detail quite startling. Where are the rich? How
delicate in health they became when their riches multiplied! How sensitive to cold
when they rolled round in gorgeous chariot drawn by prancing and foaming steed!
How short-tempered when they became long-pursed! What a change in their public
prayers when they became the victims of social status and reputation! All the
spirituality fled away from the prayer; the words were mechanically correct, and
the sentences followed one another with some sequence; but the bloom, the
fragrance, the tender delicate spirituality was gone. A man cannot have been three
years wise, and then have returned to old courses, without his return being marked
by aggravations of evil. The last state of the man is worse than the first. "The dog is
turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the
mire." To have been half way to heaven, and then to have been thrown down—what
agonies of recollection! What a temptation to drown the agonising memory in any
dissipation that will permit us to bathe in its depths! Is it possible for a man who has
once tasted the heavenly gift, and who has turned away from the divine table, ever
to be brought back again? "With men this is impossible: but with God all things are
possible." In that word "possible" find the gospel which many a despairing heart
needs as hunger needs bread.
GUZIK, "2 CHRO ICLES 12 - THE CHASTISEME T OF REHOBOAM A D
JUDAH
A. Egypt comes against a disobedient kingdom of Judah.
1. (2 Chronicles 12:1) The sin of Rehoboam and his people.
ow it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the kingdom and had
strengthened himself, that he forsook the law of the LORD, and all Israel along with
him.
a. That he forsook the law of the LORD: Rehoboam did this when he was strong

5. and secure. He trusted in God so long as he felt he needed Him; but he grew
independent of God instead of more dependent on Him.
i. 1 Kings 14:21-24 tells us that this forsaking of the law of the LORD went so far as
the allowance of perverted persons in the land, specifically describing prostitutes
associated with the worship of idols. It is possible that the term perverted persons
refers to both men and women cultic prostitutes. However, the term was used in
Deuteronomy 23:17-18 in distinction to feminine cultic prostitutes.
b. And all Israel along with him: The worst part about Rehoboam’s sin was that it
led the entire kingdom into sin with him.
i. 1 Kings 14:21-24 describes Judah’s apostasy like this: “Judah did evil in the sight
of the LORD, and they provoked Him to jealousy with their sins. These sins
provoked the LORD to jealousy because they were essentially sins of idolatry. Israel
turned their back on the God who loved and redeemed them, and like an unfaithful
spouse, they pursued spiritual adultery with idols.
PULPIT, "This chapter finishes for us the history of Rehoboam, his "acts" and his
character; and, with the preceding two chapters, it may be counted among the
masterpieces of Scripture biography. In so short a compass, how well marked, how
distinctly limned, are the features of the man! The name of Rehoboam is,
undoubtedly, one of the more important, if not taking rank among the most
important, of Scripture, and no one can rise from the study of the fifty-eight verses
of these three chapters without a very satisfactory conception of the man Rehoboam
and what he was. It will be seen from the language of the second verse, compared
with 2 Chronicles 11:17, that, roughly speaking, this chapter stretches over the last
sad and evil twelve of the whole seventeen years of Rehoboam's reign. This,
however, does not negative the possibility of the anticipation in 2 Chronicles 11:1-
23. of what, in point of chronology, belongs to this 2 Chronicles 12:1-16. The parallel
of this chapter is 1 Kings 14:21-31, which gives us more than our 1 Kings 14:1, 1
Kings 14:6, 1 Kings 14:12, 1 Kings 14:14, of what is personal to the evil-doing of
Rehoboam, but much less than our text respecting Shishak and his army, and
Shemalah and his messages.
2 Chronicles 12:1
When Rehoboam had established the kingdom … strengthened himself; i.e. while
insecure and full of apprehensions, Rehoboam walked humbly and surely, but when
he thought his object, simply safety, was gained, his true and worse self appeared or
reappeared, and, clothed with self-confidence, he forsakes the "Law," to bring sure
retribution on himself. All Israel with him. When we turn to the fuller statements of
the parallel (1 Kings 14:22-24), we see that the sins that were at work were not those
of king merely, but of people, especially in abominations such as those of sodomy
and the immoral practices of the "groves," as well as the ecclesiastical and
irreligious iniquities of "high places" and "image" worship!

6. BI 1-2, "He forsook the law of the Lord, and all Israel with him.
Rehoboam, first king of Judah
Individual lives attract and reward attention; hence the interest and fascination of fiction
and history. What others have experienced and done comes to us as a revelation of a life
in which we share.
I. Its waste of opportunities exceptionally grand.
1. He was the first king of Judah. Unless forfeited by misconduct, special honour and
grateful appreciation are the inheritance of the founders of a dynasty. Conspicuous
in time and relative position, they have an acknowledged leadership, though dead for
centuries.
2. He inherited institutions and traditions of a prestige sacred and commanding. His
was the city of David, with all its history, radiant with the Divine presence; his the
temple, of which God was the architect and his father the master builder; his the
unbroken priesthood, exalted to a genuine mediatorship between God and His
people; his all the costly and sacred relics upon which the Queen of Sheba looked
with amazement; about himself centred the hope of a coming prophet, ruler; his the
sole honour of continuing the royal line.
3. He was of mature age and superior abilities.
4. He had the best material of all Israel as well. Jeroboam and his sons had cast off
the Levites from executing the priest’s office unto the Lord, and they emigrated to
Jerusalem in a body, “and after them, out of all the tribes of Israel, such as set their
hearts to seek the Lord God of Israel, came to Jerusalem, to sacrifice unto the Lord
God of their fathers.” Thus all the land of Canaan was sifted for his benefit.
5. The very smallness of Judah was an element of strength. He could and did
intrench himself in his central fortress on Zion, and surround himself with a chain of
fortresses mutually supporting from their proximity. His people were homogeneous,
and not liable to the jealous rivalries which imperilled the ten divisions of Israel. But
alas! the example of Rehoboam reveals the insufficiency of opportunities, however
golden, to command a wise improvement.
II. His inability to Bear prosperity. When strengthened in his little kingdom of Judah, he
at once repeated the folly which had only recently dispossessed him of the grand
unbroken empire left by Solomon. Like multitudes, before and since, he was willing to
use God’s help when in extremity, but when successful, when apparently sailing in
smooth waters, he and all Israel forsook the law of the Lord. How inexplicable that
blindness which increases with added light, that moral and spiritual weakness which
grows when supplemented with all Divine help, that confidence in self built out of
dependence and gracious gifts! Rehoboam and his numberless imitators in all time
illustrate this. Left to himself, he mars and almost ruins the grandest schemes of infinite
wisdom, and foils the gracious designs of a long-suffering God for his own rescue and
elevation.
III. Chastisement brought partial repentance and humility. There is such a thing as
“final permanence of character,” upon which all Divine warnings or dealings are
unavailing except to harden. All moral character is voluntary, but the absoluteness of
moral inability is only the measure and result of obdurate wilfulness. We are inclined to

7. credit the humility of Rehoboam, because it vindicated God in the midst of His
judgments. He and his princes said, “The Lord is righteous.” Their lips, and possibly
their hearts, may have been free from murmuring when city after city crumbled before
invading hosts. Repentance is safe to the degree in which it acknowledges and enthrones
God. We cannot omit passing mention of the superior inheritance of those who
submissively suffer. The tragedy of life comes from hopeless, helpless opposition to the
irresistible.
IV. Nevertheless, religion was not its controlling influence. Though he never quite cast
off God, he “did evil because he fixed not his heart to seek the Lord.” When the service of
God dominates affections, plans, and deeds, then, and not until then, is true and steady
progress possible. There can be no harmony, no worthy enthusiasm, nor any noble
elevation to life which enthrones self. We live in a time of special peril, because of its
wealth of opportunity. Never were the resources of the world so placed at man’s
disposal. But this wealth of opportunity brings a corresponding peril. Nothing but a
heart “fixed to seek the Lord” can withstand its temptations to indulgence, to pride of
power, to high looks and vain imaginations.
V. A change of masters for the worse. This change of masters, and opportunity to
compare their respective service, which was thus true of Rehoboam, has a perfect
parallel in the lives of all wanderers from God. Man will have some master, and he cuts
loose from glad allegiance to God—the only true liberty—only to give servile obedience to
a tyrant. It is one of the reassuring signs of progress to-day that man as an individual—
his rights, his essential worth, and dignity—is valued and talked about more than the
collective State or nation; but danger lurks in the shadow of the gain. That individuality
is in danger of becoming overweening and imperious. The ego may, and sometimes
does, glory in a self-sufficiency that looks almost patronisingly upon the Divine
existence, or denies it altogether. Virtue is a queen whose subjects note her faintest wish,
but their service is perfect liberty. It springs from the gladness of pure hearts, and knows
no compulsion but sweet willingness. (Monday Club Sermons.)
Established in life
An accursed word is that sometimes—“established” or “strengthened,” or prospered, or
succeeded. It was the mark of the place where we turned hell-ward. We prayed when we
were poor. We went to the sanctuary when we were weak. Who can stand fatness,
sunshine, all the year round? Where are the rich? How delicate in health they became
when their riches multiplied! How sensitive to cold when they rolled round in gorgeous
chariot drawn by prancing and foaming steeds! How short-tempered when they became
long-pursed! What a change in their public prayers when they became the victims of
social status and reputation! (J. Parker, D.D.)
Because they had transgressed against the Lord.—
Transgression against the Lord
See how religious the Bible is! We should now say that men are punished because they
have transgressed the laws of nature; men are suffering because they have transgressed
the laws of health; men are in great weakness because they have tempted debility, and
brought it upon themselves by neglect or by indulgence. Even atheists have
explanations. They cannot treat life as a piece of four-square wood, the whole of which

8. can be seen at once; even they have laws, ministries, spectral actions, physiological
explanations; it would seem as if the Bible gathered up all these and glorified them with
a Divine name, and said, “This is the Lord’s doing.” (J. Parker, D.D.)
2 Because they had been unfaithful to the Lord,
Shishak king of Egypt attacked Jerusalem in the
fifth year of King Rehoboam.
BAR ES, "Shishak ... came up ... because they had transgressed - The writer
speaks from a divine, not a human, point of view. Shishak’s motive in coming up was to
help Jeroboam, and to extend his own influence.
CLARKE, "Shishak king of Egypt - Concerning this man, and the motive which
led him to attack the Jews, see the note on 1Ki_14:31.
Transgressed against the Lord - “Against the Word of the Lord.” - Targum.
GILL, "And it came to pass in the fifth year of Rehoboam,.... In the fourth year,
the apostasy of him and his people began; and, in the year following, what is next related
happened, as a punishment of it:
Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem; of whom see 1Ki_11:40,
because they transgressed against the Lord; transgressed the law of the Lord by
falling into idolatry and other abominable evils; the Targum is,"against the Word of the
Lord.''
JAMISO , "Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem — He was the
first king of the twenty-second or Bubastic Dynasty. What was the immediate cause of
this invasion? Whether it was in resentment for some provocation from the king of
Judah, or in pursuance of ambitious views of conquest, is not said. But the invading
army was a vast horde, for Shishak brought along with his native Egyptians an immense
number of foreign auxiliaries.

9. K&D 2-3, "In punishment of this defection (‫בי‬ ‫לוּ‬ ֲ‫ע‬ ָ‫מ‬ ‫י‬ ִⅴ, because they had acted
faithlessly to Jahve), Shishak, the king of Egypt, marched with a great host against
Jerusalem. This hostile invasion is also briefly narrated in 1Ki_14:25-28. Shishak (Sisak)
is, as we have remarked on 1 Kings 14, Sesonchis or Sechonchosis, the first king of the
22nd dynasty, who has celebrated his victory in a relief at Karnak. In this sculpture the
names of the cities captured are recorded on shields, and a considerable number have
been deciphered with some certainty, and by them our account is completely confirmed.
According to 2Ch_12:3, Shishak's host consisted of 1200 chariots, 60,000 horsemen-
numbers which, of course, are founded only upon a rough estimate-and an innumerable
multitude of footmen, among whom were ‫ים‬ ִ‫וּב‬ ְ‫,ל‬ Libyans, probably the Libyaegyptii of the
ancients (see on Gen_10:13); ‫ים‬ִ ִⅴ ֻ‫,ס‬ according to the lxx and Vulg. Troglodytes, probably
the Ethiopian Troglodytes, who dwelt in the mountains on the west coast of the Arabian
Gulf; and Cushites, i.e., Ethiopians. The Libyans and Cushites are mentioned in Nah_3:9
also as auxiliaries of the Egyptians.
BE SO , "2 Chronicles 12:2. In the fifth year Shishak came up against Jerusalem
— Presently after the apostacy of the king and people, which was in the fourth year.
As this great calamity came upon them so soon after they began to desert the
worship of God, and by a hand they had so little reason to suspect, having had a
great deal of friendly correspondence with Egypt in the last reign; and as it came
with so much violence, that all the fenced cities of Judah, which Rehoboam had
lately fortified and garrisoned, and on which he relied much for the safety of his
kingdom, fell into the hands of the enemy without making any resistance, it plainly
appeared that the Lord had sent it, because they had transgressed against him. And
doubtless God brought this unexpected trouble upon them so soon after their
departure from him, not only to manifest his displeasure at, and to punish them for,
their crime, but also and especially to recover them to repentance before their hearts
were hardened.
ELLICOTT, "(2) And it came to pass.—See 1 Kings 14:25, with which this verse
literally coincides, except that the last clause, “because they had transgressed,” is
added by the chronicler.
In the fifth year of king Rehoboam.—The order of events is thus given: For three
years Rehoboam and his people continued faithful to the Lord (2 Chronicles 11:17);
in the fourth year they fell away; and in the fifth their apostacy was punished.
Shishak.—The Sesonchis of Manetho, and the sh-sh-nk of the hieroglyphs, was the
first king of the 22nd dynasty. “His name,” says Ebers, “and those of his successors,
Osorkon (Zerah) and Takelot, are Semitic, a fact which explains the Biblical notice
that Solomon took a princess of this dynasty for his consort, and stood in close
commercial relations with Egypt, as well as, on the other hand, that Hadad the
Edomite received the sister of Tahpenes the queen to wife (1 Kings 11:19). In the

10. year 949 B.C. Shishak, at the instigation of Jeroboam, took the field against
Rehoboam, besieged Jerusalem, captured it, and carried off a rich booty to Thebes.
On a southern wall of the Temple of Karnak, all Palestinian towns which the
Egyptians took in this expedition are enumerated” (Riehm’s Handwort. Bibl.
Alterth., p. 333).
Because they had transgressed.—For they had been faithless to Jehovah. This is the
chronicler’s own parenthetic explanation of the event, and expresses in one word his
whole philosophy of Israelite history. Of course it is not meant that Shishak had any
consciousness of the providential ground of his invasion of Judah.
TRAPP, "2 Chronicles 12:2 And it came to pass, [that] in the fifth year of king
Rehoboam Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, because they had
transgressed against the LORD,
Ver. 2. In the fifth year of Rehoboam.] In his fourth year they fell from God’s
service to idolatry, and did evil as they could. Had they taken away the idol temple
set up by Solomon - as Zisca in Bohemia, and Cromwell here, did the monasteries,
they had not likely so soon and so much corrupted themselves. But herein also
Manasseh was to blame; and Constantine the Great, in that he only shut up the idol
temples, and destroyed them not, which Julian the apostate did soon after set open
again.
Shishak king of Egypt.] See on 1 Kings 14:25.
Came up against Jerusalem,] Which when he had taken, he went on to other parts,
and subdued all Asia, say Herodotus and Siculus.
Because they had transgressed against the Lord.] See 1 Kings 14:22-24. Shishak
probably was stirred up by Jeroboam who had lived in the court of Egypt, and
married a wife there of the blood-royal, as some say - to invade Rehoboam’s
country: but this he could not have done, had they not prevaricated against the
Lord.
COFFMA , ""Because they had trespassed against Jehovah" (2 Chronicles 12:2).
The aggressive war of Shishak against Jerusalem is here stated to have been
brought about by God Himself because of Israel's rebellion against God's law. It is
the conviction of this writer that God still rules in the kingdoms of men, and that no
nation that turns its back upon God's teachings can escape the eventual and certain
judgment against them by Almighty God.
We live in a generation that appears no longer to believe this, despite the fact that
all of the great leaders of America's past believed it, as attested by George
Washington's kneeling in the snows at Valley Forge, a fact beautifully memorialized

11. by Ward's famous bronze plaque attached to the old Sub Treasury building of the
United States across from the ew York Stock Exchange building. evertheless, it
still stands in the Eternal Word, "God rules in the kingdom of men and giveth it to
whomsoever he will" (Daniel 4:25). In the words of Rudyard Kipling,
"LORD GOD OF HOSTS; BE WITH US YET,
LEST WE FORGET; LEST WE FORGET."
"That they may know my service and the service of the kingdoms of the countries"
(2 Chronicles 12:8). This meant that Israel might find out the difference between
serving God and serving Shishak! These verses are not parallel to Kings, but
Shishak's invasion is mentioned in 1 Kings 14:25-26.
PARKER, "The Lord explains his way amongst men,—
"It came to pass that in the fifth year of king Rehoboam... [that the Lord punished
him—with this explanation]... because they had transgressed against the Lord" ( 2
Chronicles 12:2).
How religious the Bible is! We should now say men are punished because they have
transgressed the laws of nature: men are suffering physically because they have
transgressed the laws of health; men are in great weakness because they have
tempted debility, and brought it upon themselves by neglect or by indulgence. Even
atheists have explanations. They cannot treat life as a piece of four-square wood, the
whole of which can be seen at once; even they have laws, ministries, spectral actions,
physiological explanations: it would seem as if the Bible gathered up all these and
glorified them with a divine name, and said, This is the Lord"s doing: he has laid
hold of the sinner, he has arrested the transgressor, the grip of eternity is upon the
neck of sinful time. There is no reason to surrender this frankness or to conceal this
divine and spiritual action in life.
GUZIK, "2. (2 Chronicles 12:2-4) Egypt attacks a disobedient Judah.
And it happened in the fifth year of King Rehoboam, that Shishak king of Egypt
came up against Jerusalem, because they had transgressed against the LORD, with
twelve hundred chariots, sixty thousand horsemen, and people without number who
came with him out of Egypt; the Lubim and the Sukkiim and the Ethiopians. And
he took the fortified cities of Judah and came to Jerusalem.
a. Shishak king of Egypt: “Known in Egyptian history as Sheshonk I, he was the
founder of the Twenty-Second Dynasty and its most energetic Pharaoh. This
particular campaign is documented by a list of conquered Palestinian cities that
stands to this day carved on the wall of his temple of Amon at Karnak, Thebes.”
(Payne)

12. b. Because they had transgressed against the LORD: One might give any number of
geopolitical explanations of why the Egyptians attacked the Kingdom of Judah at
this time. The Chronicler understood that it was really the hand of the LORD in
motion because of their disobedience.
i. The word transgressed (translated unfaithful in the IV) is an important term
here. “To be unfaithful to God is one of Chronicles’ key terms (it never occurs in
Samuel and Kings), and its regular occurrence shows Israel’s constant estrangement
from God. . . . It involves denying God the worship due to him, usually on a national
scale, and is the primary reason given in Chronicles for the exile.” (Selman)
c. He took the fortified cities of Judah and came to Jerusalem: This was a serious
threat to the entire southern kingdom. It might very well perish in just two
generations since David.
PULPIT, "Shishak; Hebrew, ‫ק‬ַ‫ישׁ‬ ִ‫שׁ‬ ; Septuagint, σουσάκιµ; Shishak, Sheshonk,
Sesonchis, the Sheshenk I. or Shashank I. of the monuments, son of an Assyrian
king called imrod or emaruth, became King of Egypt as first of six kings who
lasted in all a hundred and seventy years, of the twenty-second dynasty of Manetho,
reigning in Bubastis. To him Jeroboam had fled for refuge from Solomon (1 Kings
11:40). He reigned An. Sac. 3830 to 3851 or 3863. This makes Solomon's reign A.S.
3799 to 3839. Shishak's invasion, therefore, in aid of Jeroboam, was A.S. 3844. A
representation of it exists in relief sculptured on the south external wall of the
temple of Amen, at Karnak, Thebes; and, together with this, an elaborate list of
countries, cities, tribes, conquered by Sheshenk or tributary to him, a hundred and
thirty-three in number. Among these are some of the very fifteen fenced cities (see
our 2 Chronicles 12:4) which Rehoboam built or fortified, viz. the three, Shoco,
Adoraim, and Aijalon, while the erasure of fourteen names just where these are
found accounts, no doubt, for the non-appearance of others of them. There are also
the names of Levitical and Canaanite cities, situated in the kingdoms of the ten
tribes, but belonging to the Levites who had been compelled to migrate into Judah.
The dates given above are those accepted by Conder, in his 'Handbook to the Bible',
and do not quite agree with those adopted in Smith's 'Bible Dictionary,' 3.1287-
1294. Both of these most interesting articles will well repay perusal, as well as the
article "Thebes" in the latter work, 3.1471-1475.
3 With twelve hundred chariots and sixty
thousand horsemen and the innumerable troops
of Libyans, Sukkites and Cushites[b] that came

13. with him from Egypt,
BAR ES, "twelve hundred chariots - This number is not unusnal (compare
Exo_14:7; 1Ki_10:26). Benhadad brought 1,200 chariots into the field against
Shalmaneser II; and Ahabhad at the same time a force of 2,000 chariots (compare the
1Ki_20:1 note).
The Lubims or “Libyans” Dan_11:43, were a people of Africa, distinct from the
Egyptians and the Ethiopians dwelling in their immediate neighborhood. They were
called Ribu or Libu by the Egyptians. See Gen_10:13.
Sukkiims - This name does not occur elsewhere. The Septuagint, who rendered the
word “Troglodytes,” regarded the Sukkiim probably as the “cave-dwellers” along the
western shore of the Red Sea; but the conjecture that the word means “tent-dwellers” is
plausible, and would point rather to a tribe of Arahs (Scenitae).
CLARKE, "The Lubims - Supposed to be a people of Libya, adjoining to Egypt;
sometimes called Phut in Scripture, as the people are called Lehabim and Ludim.
The Sukkiims - The Troglodytes, a people of Egypt on the coast of the Red Sea. They
were called Troglodytes, Τρωγλοδυται, οᅷ τας τρωγλας οικουντες, “because they dwelt in
caves.” - Hesych. This agrees with what Pliny says of them, Troglodytae specus
excavant, haec illis domus; “The Troglodytes dig themselves caves; and these serve them
for houses.” This is not very different from the import of the original name ‫סכיים‬
Sukkiyim, from ‫סכה‬ sachah, to cover or overspread; (hence ‫סוך‬ such, a tabernacle); the
people who were covered (emphatically) under the earth. The Septuagint translate by the
word Τρωγλοδυται, Troglodytes.
The Ethiopians - ‫כושים‬ Cushim. Various people were called by this name,
particularly a people bordering on the northern coast of the Red Sea; but these are
supposed to have come from a country of that name on the south of Egypt.
GILL, "With twelve hundred chariots, and threescore thousand horsemen;
and the people were without number,.... The foot soldiers; their number,
according to Josephus (h) was 400,000:
that came with him out of Egypt; the above numerous army came from thence with
him, which was famous for horses and chariots of war, see Exo_14:7, what follow seem
to have joined him after he came out of Egypt, or whom he subdued in his way; the
Lubim or Lybians, inhabitants of Libya, a country near Egypt the same with the
Lehabim; of whom see Gen_10:13,
the Sukkiims; who were either the Scenite Arabs, who dwelt in tents, as this word
signifies; or the Troglodytes, according to the Septuagint and Vulgate Latin versions,

14. who dwelt in dens and caves, in which sense the word "Succah" is sometimes used, Job_
38:40 and in their country was a town called Suchae, mentioned by Pliny (i); they
inhabited near the Red sea; and if Shishak is the same with Sesostris, as is thought, these
people were subdued by him, as Herodotus (k) and Strabo (l) testify:
and the Ethiopians; some think these were the Cushite Arabs, and that Sesostris came
into Arabia is testified by the above writers; though rather the proper Ethiopians are
meant, since they are joined with the Lubim or Africans; and since, as Herodotus (m)
says, he ruled over Ethiopia; and Diodorus Siculus (n) says he fought with them, and
obliged them to pay him tribute.
JAMISO 3-5, "the Lubims — the Libyans of northeastern Africa.
the Sukkiims — Some think these were the Kenite Arabs, dwellers in tents, but
others maintain more justly that these were Arab troglodytes, who inhabited the caverns
of a mountain range on the western coast of the Red Sea.
and the Ethiopians — from the regions south of Egypt. By the overwhelming force
of numbers, they took the fortresses of Judah which had been recently put in a state of
defense, and marched to lay siege to the capital. While Shishak and his army was before
Jerusalem, the prophet Shemaiah addressed Rehoboam and the princes, tracing this
calamity to the national apostasy and threatening them with utter destruction in
consequence of having forsaken God (2Ch_12:6).
BE SO , "2 Chronicles 12:3. The Lubims — The people of Lybia, a famous
country of Africa, adjoining to Egypt. And the Sukkiims were the Troglodytes, a
people who lived on the western side of the Red sea, and had that name from their
dwelling in dens and caves of the earth, which is also the meaning of the Hebrew
word ‫סכיים‬, succhiim, here used. As for the people called Cush, which we translate
Ethiopians, they were either those to the south of Egypt, or the Scenit,
ELLICOTT, "(3) With twelve hundred chariots.—The short account in Kings says
nothing of the numbers or constituents of the invading host. The totals here assigned
are probably round numbers founded on a rough estimate. The cavalry are exactly
fifty times as many as the chariots. Thenius finds the numbers “not in credible.”
The Lubims, the Sukkiims, and the Ethi-opians.—Rather, Lybians, Sukkîyans, and
Cushites (without the definite article). These were “the people”—i.e., the footmen.
The Lybians and Cushites are mentioned together as auxiliaries of Egypt in ahum
3:9. (Comp. 2 Chronicles 16:8.) The Sukkîyans are unknown, but the LXX. and
Vulg. render Troglodytes, or cave-dwellers, meaning, it would seem, the Ethiopian
Troglodytes of the mountains on the western shore of the Arabian Gulf. (Comp.
sukkô, “his lair,” Psalms 10:9.)
TRAPP, "2 Chronicles 12:3 With twelve hundred chariots, and threescore thousand
horsemen: and the people [were] without number that came with him out of Egypt;
the Lubims, the Sukkiims, and the Ethiopians.
Ver. 3. The Lubims.] Or, Lybians. [ ahum 3:9]

15. The Sukkiims.] Or, Scenites, such as dwelt in tents. The same are called omades
and Troglodytes, of whom Mela (a) saith that they were ullarum opum domini,
strident potius quam loquunur, specus subeunt, alunturque serpentibus, beggarly,
barbarous, savage people, all which made against the Jews, but for the fulfilling of
God’s threatenings. [Deuteronomy 28:15-68]
COKE, "2 Chronicles 12:3. The Lubims, the Sukkiims— The Lubims were a people
of Lybia, which adjoined to Egypt, and are sometimes in Scripture called Phut, and
sometimes Lubims, from the Arabic word Lub, which signifies dry or thirsty, as was
the land which they inhabited. The Sukkiims were the people called Troglodites,
because they dwelt in Troglais, caves and dens in the earth, on the coast of the Red
Sea. The people called Cush, which we translate Ethiopians, were either inhabitants
of a country on the south of Egypt, or the Scenitae of Arabia; for the name was
common to both.
PULPIT, "Twelve hundred chariots. The parallel does not give the numbers. These
are large, but not inconsistent with those mentioned in other connections, whether
those of Solomon, or, going further back, of Pharaoh. Lubims. The letter s is
orthographically redundant in this, as also in the following names, the forms being
already plural. The Lubim mean the Libyans, west of Egypt. They are probably the
people represented on the Egyptian monuments as Lebu, of Semitic type,
subjugated by Egypt's kings in the thirteenth century B.C. They were among the
oldest of colonists, that drifted along the coast of Africa, north of the Great Desert,
from the East, and are perhaps the same as the Lehabim (Genesis 10:13; 2
Chronicles 16:8; ahum 3:9; Daniel 11:43; Jeremiah 46:9; Ezekiel 38:5). Sukkiims.
Probably an Arab tribe, though the Septuagint Version gives τρωγοδύται, as though
taking them for Troglodytes in the hills west of the Red Sea; so, too, the Vulgate.
Gesenius at once renders the ‫ִים‬‫יּ‬ִ‫כּ‬ֻ‫ס‬ tent-dwellers, and sets the people in question
down for some African tribe. They are not mentioned elsewhere so as to be
recognized. Ethiopians. These were ethnically Cushites, but the territorial
application of the term was confined to the African Cushite settlers. It is remarkable
that, in 2 Chronicles 21:16, Ethiopians are classed with Arabians, but otherwise
with African peoples, and in particular Egypt (Psalms 68:31; Isaiah 20:3, Isaiah
20:4; Isaiah 43:3; Isaiah 45:14; Jeremiah 46:9; Ezekiel 30:5; Ezekiel 38:5). They
were many-tribed, and the Sabaeans were a leading tribe of them. It is evident that
Shishak could draw from a large and varied dominion subject to his dynasty at this
time.
4 he captured the fortified cities of Judah and

16. came as far as Jerusalem.
BAR ES, "See 1 the Kings 14:25 note.
GILL, "And he took the fenced cities which pertained to Judah,.... Which
Rehoboam had lately built, and placed his sons in them, 2Ch_11:5, these he took without
any opposition:
and came to Jerusalem; there being no army to oppose him; and so Sesostris took
many countries without fighting, and among the rest Phoenicia, as Manetho (o) relates,
in which Judea may be included.
K&D 4-7, "After the capture of the fenced cities of Judah, he marched against
Jerusalem. - 2Ch_12:5. Then the prophet Shemaiah announced to the king and the
princes, who had retired to Jerusalem before Shishak, that the Lord had given them into
the power of Shishak because they had forsaken Him. ‫ד‬ַ‫י‬ ְ ‫ב‬ַ‫ז‬ ָ‫,ע‬ forsaken and given over
into the hand of Shishak. When the king and the priests immediately humbled
themselves before God, acknowledging the righteousness of the Lord, the prophet
announced to them further that the Lord would not destroy them since they had
humbled themselves, but would give them deliverance in a little space. ‫ט‬ ָ‫ע‬ ְ‫מ‬ ִⅴ, according
to a little, i.e., in a short time. ‫ה‬ ָ‫יט‬ ֵ‫ל‬ ְ is accusative after ‫י‬ ִ ַ‫ת‬ָ‫נ‬ְ‫.ו‬ My anger shall not pour itself
out upon Jerusalem. The pouring out of anger is the designation of an exterminating
judgment; cf. 2Ch_34:25.
ELLICOTT, "(4) He took the fenced cities.—Those very cities which Rehoboam had
fortified as bulwarks against Egypt (2 Chronicles 11:5-12). Fourteen names of cities
have disappeared from the Karnak inscription, but Socho, Adoraim, and Ajalon,
are still read there.
Came to (so far as to) Jerusalem.—Comp. Isaiah 36:1-2. The verse is not in Kings.
Thenius (on 1 Kings 14:26) says that the chronicler has here made use of “really
historical notices.” It is self-evident.
TRAPP, "2 Chronicles 12:4 And he took the fenced cities which [pertained] to
Judah, and came to Jerusalem.
Ver. 4. And he took the fenced cities.] There is no fence against God; no shielding
ourselves against his fire. The Turks do so in Hungary and other parts of
Christendom for the punishment of Popish artolatry and other abominations.

17. 5 Then the prophet Shemaiah came to Rehoboam
and to the leaders of Judah who had assembled in
Jerusalem for fear of Shishak, and he said to
them, “This is what the Lord says, ‘You have
abandoned me; therefore, I now abandon you to
Shishak.’”
GILL, "Then came Shemaiah the prophet to Rehoboam,.... The same as in 2Ch_
11:2, there called the man of God:
and to the princes of Judah that were gathered together to Jerusalem
because of Shishak; through fear of him, and for safety and protection from him, and
to consult what was to be done at this critical juncture, whether to fight him, or make
peace with him on the best terms they could:
and said unto them, thus saith the Lord, ye have forsaken me; his law, his
word, worship, and ordinances, 2Ch_12:1,
and therefore have I also left you in the hand of Shishak; suffered him to invade
their land, take their fenced cities, and come up to Jerusalem without any opposition, as
a punishment of their apostasy; and to explain this providence to them, and call the
HE RY 5-6, "III. Lest they should not readily or not rightly understand the meaning
of this providence, God by the word explains the rod, 2Ch_12:5. When the princes of
Judah had all met at Jerusalem, probably in a great council of war, to concert measures
for their own safety in this critical juncture, he sent a prophet to them, the same that had
brought them an injunction from God not to fight against the ten tribes (2Ch_11:2),
Shemaiah by name; he told them plainly that the reason why Shishak prevailed against
them was not because they had been impolitic in the management of their affairs (which
perhaps the princes in this congress were at this time scrutinizing), but because they had
forsaken God. God never leaves any till they first leave him.
IV. The rebukes both of the word and of the rod being thus joined, the king and
princes humbled themselves before God for their iniquity, penitently acknowledged the
sin, and patiently accepted the punishment of it, saying, The Lord is righteous, 2Ch_
12:6. “We have none to blame but ourselves; let God be clear when he judgeth.” Thus it

18. becomes us, when we are under the rebukes of Providence, to justify God and judge
ourselves. Even kings and princes must either bend or break before God, either be
humbled or be ruined.
BE SO , "2 Chronicles 12:5. Then came Shemaiah the prophet to Rehoboam and
the princes of Judah — Lest they should not readily or rightly understand the
meaning of this providence, God sends a prophet to explain it, namely, the same
Shemaiah that had brought them an injunction from God not to fight against the ten
tribes, who plainly tells them, that the reason why Shishak prevailed against them
was, not because they had been impolitic in the management of their affairs, but
because they had forsaken God.
ELLICOTT, "(5) Then.—And.
Shemaiah the prophet.—The section relating to his mission and its results (2
Chronicles 12:5-8) is peculiar to the chronicle.
The princes of Judah, that were gathered together to Jerusalem.—Repulsed by the
Egyptian arms, they had fallen back upon Jerusalem, to defend the capital. While
the invading host lay before the city, Shemaiah addressed the king and princes.
Ye have forsaken.—There is emphasis on the pronoun. Literally, Ye have forsaken
me, and I also have forsaken you, in (into) the hand of Shishak. The phrase “to leave
into the hand” of a foe occurs ehemiah 9:28. (Comp. also 2 Chronicles 15:2; 2
Chronicles 24:20; and Deuteronomy 31:16-17.) Here the words amount to a menace
of utter destruction. (Comp. Jonah 3:4.)
TRAPP, "2 Chronicles 12:5 Then came Shemaiah the prophet to Rehoboam, and
[to] the princes of Judah, that were gathered together to Jerusalem because of
Shishak, and said unto them, Thus saith the LORD, Ye have forsaken me, and
therefore have I also left you in the hand of Shishak.
Ver. 5. Then came Shemaiah the prophet.] See 1 Kings 12:12. This was a great
mercy that a prophet was sent unto them to exhort them to repentance, and to
prescribe them a course.
Because of Sishak.] Who was but the vial through whose hands God poured out his
wrath. [2 Chronicles 12:7]
PARKER, "How did the Lord propose to punish Rehoboam and his kingdom? He
said he would leave them in the hands of a certain Prayer of Manasseh ,—
"Then came Shemaiah the prophet to Rehoboam, and to the princes of Judah, that
were gathered together to Jerusalem because of Shishak, and said unto them, Thus

19. saith the Lord, Ye have forsaken me, and therefore have I also left you in the hand
of Shishak" ( 2 Chronicles 12:5).
That is all. But what an all it is!—I have left you, abandoned you, handed you over:
how can I give thee up? How can I cut thee off? How can I smite thee? Yet there is
no alternative sometimes but to shut the door in the prodigal"s face, sometimes to
tell him that his home is no longer at his service, sometimes to tell him that the old
altar burns with a fire that will consume him should he draw nigh. Solemn
words—"therefore have I also left you in the hand of Shishak"; and when God
leaves a people in the hand of the enemy, the hand of the enemy is by so much
strengthened, because of the weakness of the people who are left. This is the
explanation of national disaster, and of many elements and features connected with
national history. We are seeking in mean politics for an explanation of this or that
tremendous suffering, awful destitution, sense of orphanage: whereas the
explanation of it lies in the sanctuary that is above; God has handed over his people
to the hand of the enemy for a time.
GUZIK, "3. (2 Chronicles 12:5) God’s word to Rehoboam and Judah.
Then Shemaiah the prophet came to Rehoboam and the leaders of Judah, who were
gathered together in Jerusalem because of Shishak, and said to them, “Thus says the
LORD: ‘You have forsaken Me, and therefore I also have left you in the hand of
Shishak.’”
a. Shemaiah the prophet: This was the same prophet that discouraged Rehoboam
from attacking the 10 tribes of Israel that rejected his leadership and formed the
northern kingdom of Israel (2 Chronicles 11:1-4). He had the opportunity to speak
to all the leaders of Judah because they were gathered on account of Shishak’s
invasion.
b. You have forsaken Me, and therefore I also have left you in the hand of Shishak:
This was a correction that matched the offence. If Judah insisted on forsaking God,
they would find themselves forsaken in the day of their need. The great danger of
telling God “Leave me alone” is that someday He may answer that prayer.
PULPIT, "Shemaiah (see Exposition, 2 Chronicles 11:2). The princes. These seem to
have been a fruit of some original organization with Solomon, as they are not found
with David (1 Kings 4:2-6). Ye have forsaken me … therefore have I also left you.
The same Hebrew verb is employed in both members of this sentence, and the
rendering should follow in like manner (see 2 Chronicles 7:19-22).
6 The leaders of Israel and the king humbled

20. themselves and said, “The Lord is just.”
BAR ES, "They said, The Lord is righteous - i. e., they acknowledged the justice
of the sentence which had gone forth against them 2Ch_12:5.
CLARKE, "Whereupon the princes of Israel and the king humbled
themselves - This is not mentioned in the parallel place, 1Ki_14:25-29 : this was the
sole reason why Jerusalem was not at this time totally destroyed, and the house of David
entirely cut off; for they were totally incapable of defending themselves against this
innumerable host.
GILL, "Whereupon the princes of Israel and the king humbled
themselves,.... Both by words acknowledging their sins, and the justice of God, and by
deeds, perhaps putting on sackcloth, as was usual on such occasions, and betaking
themselves to fasting and prayer:
and they said, the Lord is righteous; in giving them up into the hand of their
enemies, seeing they had forsaken him, and sinned against him.
JAMISO , "the princes of Israel — (compare 2Ch_12:5, “the princes of Judah”).
BE SO , "2 Chronicles 12:6. Whereupon the princes and the king humbled
themselves — They penitentially acknowledged their sin, and patiently accepted the
punishment of it, saying, The Lord is righteous — We have none to blame but
ourselves: let God be clear when he is judged. Thus it becomes us, when we are
under the rebukes of divine providence, to justify God, and judge ourselves. “Even
princes and kings,” says Henry, “must either bend or break; either be humbled or
ruined.”
ELLICOTT, "(6) Whereupon.—And.
The princes of Israel.—See ote on 2 Chronicles 12:1. “princes of Judah “. (2
Chronicles 12:5) is the meaning.
Humbled themselves.—Literally, bowed (2 Chronicles 7:14). (Comp. Jonah 3:5-6.)
The Lord is righteous.—Comp. Exodus 9:27 (the exclamation of Pharaoh); and
Ezra 9:15.

21. TRAPP, "2 Chronicles 12:6 Whereupon the princes of Israel and the king humbled
themselves; and they said, The LORD [is] righteous.
Ver. 6. Whereupon the princes of Israel.] That is, Of Judah, as 2 Chronicles 12:1.
And the king humbled themselves.] But feignedly and forcedly, {see 2 Chronicles
12:14} as was that of Pharaoh and Ahab.
GUZIK, "B. Repentance and servitude comes of Judah.
1. (2 Chronicles 12:6) The repentance of Rehoboam and Judah.
So the leaders of Israel and the king humbled themselves; and they said, “The
LORD is righteous.”
a. So the leaders of Israel and the king humbled themselves: This national
repentance was initiated by the leaders of the kingdom. Historically, great moves of
God’s Spirit are seen when leaders are zealous about repentance and humility.
b. The LORD is righteous: This was the summary of their confession of sin. To
recognize that the LORD is righteous is also recognize that we are not. To say this
meant they understood that they deserved their present misfortune at the hands of
Shishak.
PULPIT, " ote, as very apt parallel passages, Jeremiah 13:15, Jeremiah 13:18;
Exodus 9:27.
7 When the Lord saw that they humbled
themselves, this word of the Lord came to
Shemaiah: “Since they have humbled themselves,
I will not destroy them but will soon give them
deliverance. My wrath will not be poured out on
Jerusalem through Shishak.

22. BAR ES, "Compare the repentance of Ahab (marginal reference) and that of the
Ninevites Jon_3:5-10 which produced similar revocations of divine decrees that had
been pronounced by the mouth of a prophet.
Some deliverance - Rather, “deliverance for a short space” (see the margin).
Because of the repentance, the threat cf immediate destruction was withdrawn; but the
menace was still left impending, that the people might be the more moved to contrition
and amendment.
GILL, "And when the Lord saw that they humbled themselves,.... Though but
externally; the Lord takes notice of external humiliation, as he did of Ahab's, 1Ki_21:29,
the word of the Lord came to Shemaiah, saying, they have humbled
themselves, therefore I will not destroy them; not now, at least not altogether,
2Ch_12:12,
but I will grant them some deliverance; yet not a complete one, for they were
brought into servitude by Shishak, 2Ch_12:8, or only for a short time:
and my wrath shall not be poured out against Jerusalem by the hand of
Shishak; that is, to the uttermost; that was reserved to another time, and to be done by
another hand, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon.
HE RY, 7-12, "V. Upon the profession they made of repentance God showed them
some favour, saved them from ruin, and yet left them under some remaining fears of the
judgment, to prevent their revolt again.
1. God, in mercy, prevented the destruction they were now upon the brink of. Such a
vast and now victorious army as Shishak had, having made themselves masters of all the
fenced cities, what could be expected but that the whole country, and even Jerusalem
itself, would in a little time be theirs? But when God saith, Here shall the proud waves
be stayed, the most threatening force strangely dwindles and becomes impotent. Here
again the destroying angel, when he comes to Jerusalem, is forbidden to destroy it: “My
wrath shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem; not at this time, not by this hand, not
utterly to destroy it,” 2Ch_12:7, 2Ch_12:12. Note, Those that acknowledge God righteous
in afflicting them shall find him gracious. Those that humble themselves before him
shall find favour with him. So ready is the God of mercy to take the first occasion to
show mercy. If we have humbled hearts under humbling providences, the affliction has
done its work, and it shall either be removed or the property of it altered.
2. He granted them some deliverance, not complete, but in part; he gave them some
advantages against the enemy, so that they recruited a little; he gave them deliverance
for a little while, so some. They reformed but partially, and for a little while, soon
relapsing again; and, as their reformation was, so was their deliverance. Yet it is said
(2Ch_12:12), in Judah things went well, and began to look with a better face. (1.) In
respect of piety. There were good things in Judah (so it is in the margin), good
ministers, good people, good families, who were made better by the calamities of their
country. Note, In times of great corruption and degeneracy it is some comfort if there be
a remnant among whom good things ar found; this is a ground of hope in Israel. (2.) In

23. respect of prosperity. In Judah things went ill when all the fenced cities were taken
(2Ch_12:4), but when they repented the posture of their affairs altered, and things went
well. Note, If things do not go so well as we could wish, yet we have reason to take notice
of it with thankfulness if they go better than was to have been expected, better than
formerly, and better than we deserved. We should own God's goodness if he do but grant
us some deliverance.
3. Yet he left them to smart sorely by the hand of Shishak, both in their liberty and in
their wealth.
JAMISO 7-8, "when the Lord saw that they humbled themselves — Their
repentance and contrition was followed by the best effects; for Shemaiah was
commissioned to announce that the phial of divine judgment would not be fully poured
out on them - that the entire overthrow of the kingdom of Judah would not take place at
that time, nor through the agency of Shishak; and yet, although it should enjoy a respite
from total subversion, [Judah] should become a tributary province of Egypt in order
that the people might learn how much lighter and better is the service of God than that
of idolatrous foreign despots.
BE SO , "2 Chronicles 12:7. They have humbled themselves — Which though
they did by constraint and with reluctance, yet God was pleased so far to regard it,
as to mitigate their calamity. I will not destroy them — Such a vast, and now
victorious army as Shishak had, having made themselves masters of all the fenced
cities, what else could be expected, but that the whole country; and even Jerusalem
itself, would in a little time be theirs? But when God says, Here shall the proud
waves be stayed, the most threatening force strangely dwindles, and becomes
impotent. I will grant them some deliverance — I will give some stop to the course of
my wrath, which was ready to be poured forth upon them to their utter destruction.
Those who acknowledge God is righteous in afflicting them, shall find him gracious.
They that humble themselves before him, shall find favour with him. So ready is the
God of mercy to take the first occasion to show mercy. Reader, if thy heart be
humbled, and made contrite under humbling and distressing providences, the
affliction has done its work, and it shall either be removed, or the property of it
altered.
ELLICOTT, "(7) But I will grant them some deliverance.—Rather, and I will give
them a few for a remnant. (Comp. 2 Chronicles 12:12, “that he would not destroy
him altogether.”) For the phrase “to give a remnant,” see Ezra 9:13. The word
rendered “few” is kim‘at. (Comp. 1 Chronicles 16:19 : Isaiah 1:9.) The pointing kim
‘ât is peculiar to this passage.
My wrath shall not be poured out.—Or, pour itself out, wreak itself. The phrase
denotes a judgment of extermination. (Comp. its use in 2 Chronicles 34:25.)
By the hand of Shishak.—The destruction of Jerusalem was reserved for the hand
of ebuchadnezzar.

24. TRAPP, "2 Chronicles 12:7 And when the LORD saw that they humbled
themselves, the word of the LORD came to Shemaiah, saying, They have humbled
themselves; [therefore] I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some
deliverance; and my wrath shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem by the hand of
Shishak.
Ver. 7. They have humbled themselves, &c.] After a sort they had. ow if the leaves
of this tree of humiliation be so sovereign, what are the fruits? If the shadow so
effectual, what the substance?
But I will grant them some deliverance.] Or, A little deliverance. So gracious is the
Lord, and liberal to all.
And my wrath shall not be poured out.] See on 2 Chronicles 12:5. "In the midst of
judgment he remembereth mercy": and suffereth not his whole wrath to arise
against sinners, lest they should be utterly taken away by that tempest.
GUZIK, "2. (2 Chronicles 12:7-8) Deliverance with a reminder.
ow when the LORD saw that they humbled themselves, the word of the LORD
came to Shemaiah, saying, “They have humbled themselves; therefore I will not
destroy them, but I will grant them some deliverance. My wrath shall not be poured
out on Jerusalem by the hand of Shishak. evertheless they will be his servants, that
they may distinguish My service from the service of the kingdoms of the nations.”
a. I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some deliverance: In response to the
repentance of His people, God granted Judah some deliverance. He would not allow
them to be completely destroyed, but He would allow some difficult to come to them.
b. They will be his servants, that they may distinguish My service from the service of
the kingdoms of the nations: When Judah forsook the law of the LORD, it was as if
they offered themselves as servants to another master. God will allow them to
experience some of the consequences of serving another master.
i. “They shall be preserved, and serve their enemies, that they may see the difference
between the service of God and that of man. While they were pious, they found the
service of the Lord to be perfect freedom; when they forsook the Lord, they found
the fruit to be perfect bondage. A sinful life is both expensive and painful.” (Clarke)
ii. “Know by woeful experience, the worth of my work and wages by the want
thereof, and the contrary miseries.” (Trapp)
PULPIT, "Some deliverance. The Hebrew for "some" here is ‫ַט‬‫ע‬ְ‫מ‬ִ‫כּ‬ . There is plain
authority (Ruth 2:7; Psalms 38:10) for translating this word as of time, and the

25. rendering "a little while" of the margin, will, therefore, seem preferable. But see
next note, and the" altogether" of 2 Chronicles 12:12. It has often been most justly
remarked what grateful note should be taken of the fact that God always is recorded
as turning such a wistful, loving eye to any symptom of repentance (1 Kings 21:27-
29; Jonah 2:5-9). Who can estimate the loss of men, that the symptoms have been so
frequent, so comparatively easily found as compared with the reality of lastingness?
8 They will, however, become subject to him, so
that they may learn the difference between
serving me and serving the kings of other lands.”
BAR ES, "That they may know my service, and the service of the kingdom
- i. e., that they may contrast the light burthen of the theocracy with the heavy yoke of a
foreign monarch.
CLARKE, "They shall be his servants - They shall be preserved, and serve their
enemies, that they may see the difference between the service of God and that of man.
While they were pious, they found the service of the Lord to be perfect freedom; when
they forsook the Lord, they found the fruit to be perfect bondage. A sinful life is both
expensive and painful.
GILL, "Nevertheless, they shall be his servants,.... tributaries to the king of
Egypt:
that they may know my service, and the service of the kingdoms of the
countries; the difference between them, how easy the one, which they might perform
without taxes and tributes, and how hard and heavy the other, through the exactions and
exorbitant demands of those to whom they became subjects.
HE RY 8-9, "(1.) In their liberty (2Ch_12:8): They shall be his servants (that is, they
shall lie much at his mercy and be put under contribution by him, and some of them
perhaps be taken prisoners and held in captivity by him), that they may know my
service, and the service of the kingdoms of the countries. They complained, it may be, of
the strictness of their religion, and forsook the law of the Lord (2Ch_12:1) because they
thought it a yoke to hard, too heavy, upon them. “Well,” saith God, “let them better

26. themselves if they can; let the neighbouring princes rule them awhile, since they are not
willing that I should rule them, and let them try how they like that. They might have
served God with joyfulness and gladness of heart, and would not; let them serve their
enemies then in hunger and thirst (Deu_28:47, Deu_28:48), till they think of returning
to their first Master, for then it was better with them,” Hos_2:7. This, some think, is the
meaning of Eze_20:24, Eze_20:25. Because they despised my statutes, I gave them
statutes that were not good. Note, [1.] The more God's service is compared with other
services the more reasonable and easy it will appear. [2.] Whatever difficulties or
hardships we may imagine there are in the way of obedience, it is better a thousand
times to go through them than to expose ourselves to the punishment of disobedience.
Are the laws of temperance thought hard? The effects of intemperance will be much
harder. The service of virtue is perfect liberty; the service of lust is perfect slavery.
(2.) In their wealth. The king of Egypt plundered both the temple and the exchequer,
the treasuries of both which Solomon left very full; but he took them away; yea, he took
all, all he could lay his hands on, 2Ch_12:9. This was what he came for. David and
Solomon, who walked in the way of God, filled the treasuries, one by war and the other
by merchandise; but Rehoboam, who forsook the law of God, emptied them. The taking
away of the golden shields, and the substituting of brazen ones in their place (2Ch_12:9-
11), we had an account of before, 1Ki_14:25-28.
K&D, "But (‫י‬ ִⅴ after a negative clause) they shall be his servants, sc. for a short time
(see 2Ch_12:7), “that they may know my service, and the service of the kingdoms of the
countries” (cf. 1Ch_29:30); i.e., that they may learn to know by experience the difference
between the rule of God and that of the heathen kings, and that God's rule was not so
oppressive as that of the rulers of the world.
BE SO , "2 Chronicles 12:8. They shall be his servants — That is, they shall be
much at his mercy, and put under contribution by him, and some of them taken
prisoners, and held in captivity by him: that they may know my service, and the
service of the kingdoms, &c. — That they may experimentally know the difference
between my yoke, and the yoke of a foreign and idolatrous prince. The more God’s
service is compared with other services, the more reasonable and easy it will appear.
And, whatever difficulties or hardships we may imagine there are in the way of
obedience, it is better, a thousand times, to go through them, than to expose
ourselves to the punishment of disobedience. Are the laws of temperance thought
hard? The effects of intemperance will be much harder. The service of virtue is
perfect liberty, the service of vice perfect slavery.
ELLICOTT, "8) evertheless they shall be.—For they shall become servants (i.e.,
tributaries) to him; scil., for a while.
That they may know (or, discern) my service, and the service of the kingdoms.—
That they may learn by experience the difference between the easy yoke of their
God, and the heavy burden of foreign tyranny, which was entailed upon them by
deserting Him.

27. Kingdoms of the countries.—See 1 Chronicles 29:30.
TRAPP, "2 Chronicles 12:8 evertheless they shall be his servants; that they may
know my service, and the service of the kingdoms of the countries.
Ver. 8. That they may know my service.] Know by woeful experience, the worth of
my work and wages by the want thereof, and the contrary miseries. They that serve
not God with cheerfulness "in the abundance of all things, shall serve their
enemies" another while "in want of all." [Deuteronomy 28:47-48]
PULLPIT, "The genius of this verse, nevertheless, will quite admit of the
Authorized Version rendering, proposed to be superseded in the last verse. This says
life shall be spared, but still severe moral reckoning (that of servitude in a sense and
tributariness) shall be taken with the transgressors and forsakers of the Lord! The
contrast of God's service and that of men and the world again touchingly recalls the
words of Christ (Matthew 11:28-30).
BI, "Nevertheless they shall be his servants.
Servitude or service-which
?—
I. That there are some who have already chosen the service of the kingdoms of the
countries. Some have chosen—
1. To be the slaves of open sin.
2. To be the votaries of money-making.
3. To be lovers of fashion, lovers of society, admirers of the world.
4. To become the devotees of “culture.”
5. To be the seekers of self-righteousness.
II. Some seem to be pining to give up the service of God, and to go to the service of the
kingdoms. Some want to change—
1. Out of sheer love of change.
2. Because of the outward aspect of the new thing.
3. Because of their loss of joy in the service of God.
4. Because of the flagging of others.
5. Because religion now has brought them to a point where it entails some extra self-
sacrifice.
III. There is a great contrast between the service of God and any other service. The
service of God is delightful. Remember, young man, if you are about to engage in the
service of God—

28. 1. There is nothing demanded of you that will harm you.
2. There is nothing denied you, in the service of God, that would be a blessing to you.
3. That in the service of God strength will always be given according to your day.
4. That there is no threat made to hang upon it.
5. All the while that you are a servant of God, you have a sweet peace in reflecting
upon what you have done.
6. There is, above all this, a hope of the eternal reward which is so soon to come. (C.
H. Spurgeon.)
Comparative service
It is an old failing of human nature not to know when it is well off, and the text furnishes
an illustration of that failing. There is a great lesson here for to-day. Adam was
discontented with Paradise, Israel with Canaan, and many now are despising the goodly
inheritance we have in Christ. We are fond of comparing the service of God with
alternative services, to the disparagement of the former.
I. Compare the faith of Christ with the faith of scepticism. I say the faith of scepticism,
for the sceptic has a creed just as truly as the Christian believer has. Many are greatly
dissatisfied with the Christian revelation; they are anxious to set it aside, to find
substitutes for it. The proverb says: “The cow in the meadow, knee-deep in clover, often
looks over the hedge and longs for the common.” So, many are now looking over the
hedge of revelation, and longing for the bare wastes and the wild growths of infidelity.
1. If we renounce revelation, shall we be better off intellectually? It must be
remembered that if revelation is rejected, all the dark problems of nature, all the
perplexing enigmas of human life, will still be left. Revelation has not created the
confusions, the cruelties, the calamities of the world. You will not make a black sky
blue by smashing the weather-glass; you will not turn cruel winter into glorious
summer by throwing out the thermometer; neither will you get rid of sorrow and
mystery and death by rejecting the Bible. Can you, having rejected revelation, give
that dark world any clearer or happier interpretation?
2. If we renounce revelation, shall we be better off as pertaining to the conscience?
Take away the Bible, and conscience is left—an accusing conscience is left. To what
terrible beliefs and deeds an accusing conscience drives men the history of paganism
clearly shows. A guilty conscience built the wicker-basket of Druidism; it doomed the
children to pass through the fire to Molech. “Yes,” you reply, “but it is impossible for
these tragedies of superstition to be repeated; Druidism, for instance, can never
come back again.” Who can say what may, or may not, come back again? Theosophy
teaches that through endless reincarnations we must be purged from our sins. Our
sorrows in this life are the results of the sins and errors of past incarnations, and
before us is a dreary vista of fresh incarnations in which we are again to sin and
suffer. It is terrible to think of the monstrous intellectual and religious systems
which must arise when men no longer know the mercy of God in Jesus Christ our
Lord. The guilty conscience will not go to sleep; it will have blood and tears.
3. If we renounce revelation, shall we be better off touching character? If unbelief
triumphed, and Christ were rejected as the pattern and perfecter of character, would
anything be gained? The whole world of thoughtful men acknowledges the

29. marvellous, the incomparable moral beauty of Jesus Christ.
II. Compare the doctrine of Christ with the doctrine of the world. Thus many now are
inclined to prefer the worldly life to the Christian life. It seems so much more free. Men
feel that the Christian law retards their youth, cramps and foils their appetites and
curiosities. But is this so? “The doctrine of Jesus is hard, men say. But how much
harder,” exclaims Tolstoy, “is the doctrine of the world!” Take its doctrine of glory. Cruel
doctrine! What blood, groans, tears, it implies! And not only on the battlefield is the
doctrine of glory seen to be merciless; it works woe in a thousand subtle ways in all
spheres of human life and action. Take its doctrine of gain. How that principle of
selfishness, which is the doctrine of the world, grinds men to powder! Take its doctrine
of fashion. What a terrible price the world exacts for its empty shows, its vain titles, its
purple and gold! Take its doctrine of pleasure. Millions have been ruined by following in
its paths of roses and music and beauty. How cruel! Ah! the world has far more martyrs
than the Church has. And what is the doctrine of Jesus that men call hard? Instead of the
doctrine of glory, He teaches the doctrine of humility and service; for the doctrine of
gain, the doctrine of equity and love; for the doctrine of fashion, the doctrine of
simplicity and truth; for the doctrine of pleasure, the doctrine of purity and peace. Well
may Jesus dare to say, “My yoke is easy, and My burden is light.”
III. Compare the law of Christ with the service of self-will. A man says: “I will not be
restrained; I will determine my own path, choose my own pleasures, shape my own
character, be the architect of my own fortune. It shall throughout be according to my
own preferences and determinations.” Is, then, the self-willed man happy? Is he happy
as he sets himself against nature? You tell your boy not to play with fire; but he is self-
willed, and takes the opportunity to sport with matches and gunpowder, and probably
repents ever after. It does not pay to set up our will against the grand ordinances of
nature. Is the self-willed man happy as he opposes himself to the laws and institutions of
society? To outrage the judgments, the feelings, the rights of society is to be keenly
miserable. Is the self-willed man happy within himself? You say proudly, “I am my own
master.” Could you have a worse? It is a terrible thing to setup our will against the
Divine will as that will is expressed in the physical universe, in society, or as it seeks to
fulfil itself in our personal nature and life. Self-will is captivity and ruin: loving
obedience to the will of God in Christ, with its self-control and self-denial, is health and
peace. To be His slaves is to be kings. Surrender yourselves to Him, and prove what is
that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. “The service of the kingdoms of the
countries.” The Jews often heard delightful things about this foreign service. They
remembered the fish which they did eat in Egypt freely, the cucumbers, and the melons,
and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlic. Nothing to do in Egypt but to regale
themselves with piquant viands, and to stroll under the palms on the banks of the Nile.
They heard of the attractions of Babylon, of its hanging gardens, its luxuries and
delights. And the ambassadors of Sennacherib painted for them in glowing colours the
life of Assyria: “A land of corn and wine, a land of bread and vineyards.” No more work,
no more worry, no more worship. Getting away from Jerusalem, they were to get away
from temple and law, from priest and prophet, and to taste the pleasures of an
unfettered life. But did they find captivity so desirable? You who are tempted to despise
God’s Word, beware. Young men, weary of the order and restraint of a godly home, and
ever hankering after a looser life, be wise, and stay thankfully where you are.
Discontented Englishmen, ever protesting against narrowness and austerity, against
Protestantism, Puritanism, and bumbledom, and ever looking with longing eyes to laxer
civilisations, be content; subdue your murmurings and wantonness, lest God spoil you of
your rich inheritance. Discontented Christians, ever casting lingering glances at the life

30. you have left, be content; see to it that there is in you no evil heart of unbelief in
departing from the living God. (W. L. Watkinson.)
9 When Shishak king of Egypt attacked
Jerusalem, he carried off the treasures of the
temple of the Lord and the treasures of the royal
palace. He took everything, including the gold
shields Solomon had made.
CLARKE, "Took away the treasures - Such a booty as never had before, nor has
since, come into the hand of man.
The shields of gold - These shields were the mark of the king’s body-guard: it was in
imitation of this Eastern magnificence that Alexander constituted his Argyraspides,
adorned with the spoils taken from Darius. See Quintus Curtius, lib. viii., c. 5, et alibi.
GILL 9-11, "So Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem,.... The
Vulgate Latin version is,"departed from Jerusalem,''as he did, having taken it, and
spoiled it of its riches, and settled a yearly tax on the inhabitants of the land; of this, and
the two following verses; see Gill on 1Ki_14:26. 1Ki_14:27. 1Ki_14:28.
JAMISO 9-11, "So Shishak ... came up against Jerusalem — After the
parenthetical clause (2Ch_12:5-8) describing the feelings and state of the beleaguered
court, the historian resumes his narrative of the attack upon Jerusalem, and the
consequent pillage both of the temple and the palace.
he took all — that is, everything valuable he found. The cost of the targets and
shields has been estimated at about $1,200,000 [Napier, Ancient Workers in Metal].
the shields of gold — made by Solomon, were kept in the house of the forest of
Lebanon (2Ch_9:16). They seem to have been borne, like maces, by the guards of the
palace, when they attended the king to the temple or on other public processions. Those
splendid insignia having been plundered by the Egyptian conqueror, others were made
of inferior metal and kept in the guard room of the palace, to be ready for use; as,
notwithstanding the tarnished glory of the court, the old state etiquette was kept up on
public and solemn occasions. An account of this conquest of Judah, with the name of

31. “king of Judah” in the cartouche of the principal captive, according to the interpreters, is
carved and written in hieroglyphics on the walls of the great palace of Karnak, where it
may be seen at the present day. This sculpture is about twenty-seven hundred years old,
and is of peculiar interest as a striking testimony from Egypt to the truth of Scripture
history.
K&D 9-12, "With 2Ch_12:9 the account of the war is taken up again and continued
by the repetition of the words, “Then marched Shishak ... against Jerusalem” (2Ch_
12:4). Shishak plundered the treasures of the temple and the palace; he had
consequently captured Jerusalem. The golden shields also which had been placed in the
house of the forest of Lebanon, i.e., the palace built by Solomon in Jerusalem, which
Solomon had caused to be made (cf. 2Ch_9:16), Shishak took away, and in their place
Rehoboam caused brazen shields to be prepared; see on 1Ki_14:26-28. - In 2Ch_12:12
the author of the Chronicle concludes the account of this event with the didactic remark,
“Because he (Rehoboam) humbled himself, the anger of Jahve was turned away from
him.” ‫ית‬ ִ‫ח‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ַ‫ה‬ ְ‫ל‬ ‫ּא‬‫ל‬ְ‫,ו‬ and it was not to extermination utterly (‫ה‬ ָ‫ל‬ ָ‫כ‬ ְ‫,ל‬ properly to destruction,
i.e., completely; cf. Eze_13:13). And also in Judah were good things. This is the other
motive which caused the Lord to turn away His wrath. Good things are proofs of piety
and fear of God, cf. 2Ch_19:3.
BE SO , "2 Chronicles 12:9-10. Shishak took away the treasures of the house of
the Lord, and of the king’s house — He plundered both the temple and the
exchequer, the treasuries of both which Solomon had left full. David and Solomon,
who walked in the ways of God, filled the treasuries, one by war, and the other by
merchandise; but Rehoboam, who forsook these ways, emptied them. Respecting the
taking away of the golden shields, and substituting brazen ones in their place, see
notes on 1 Kings 14:25-28.
ELLICOTT, "(9) So Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem.—The
narrative is resumed after the parenthesis relating to Shemaiah by repeating the
statement of 2 Chronicles 12:2.
And took away the treasures of the house of the Lord.—See 1 Kings 14:26, with
which the rest of this verse is identical.
TRAPP, "2 Chronicles 12:9 So Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem,
and took away the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the
king’s house; he took all: he carried away also the shields of gold which Solomon
had made.
Ver. 9. So Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem.] Josephus saith he
marched into it, and plundered it. But it is more likely that he compounded with
Rehoboam for a great sum, as Sennacherib did with Hezekiah, [2 Kings 18:14-15]

32. and upon this account had the treasures and golden shields.
COFFMA , "SHISHAK ROBS THE SACRED TREASURES OF ISRAEL
"So Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, and took away the treasures
of the house of Jehovah, and the treasures of the king's house; he took all away; he
took away also the shields of gold that Solomon had made. And king Rehoboam
made in their stead shields of brass, and committed them to the hands of the captain
of the guard, that kept the door of the king's house. And it was so, that as off as the
king entered into the house of Jehovah, the guard came and bare them, and brought
them back into the guard-chamber. And when he humbled himself the wrath of
Jehovah turned from him, so as not to destroy him altogether: moreover there was
in Judah good things found."
Much of 1 Kings 14 is parallel with what we have here. Oddly enough, neither in
Kings nor in Chronicles is it stated that Shishak captured Jerusalem; but either he
actually did this, or Rehoboam was able to buy him off with all the treasures both of
the temple and of the king's house.
"And king Rehoboam made in their stead shields of brass" (2 Chronicles 12:10).
(See our somewhat extensive comment on this in 1Kings pp, 185-186.)
PARKER, ""So Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, and took away
the treasures of the house of the Lord, and the treasures of the king"s house; he
took all: he carried away also the shields of gold which Solomon had made. Instead
of which king Rehoboam made shields of brass, and committed them to the hands of
the chief of the guard, that kept the entrance of the king"s house" ( 2 Chronicles
12:9-10).
How deterioration walks in the steps of wickedness! Poor Rehoboam puts up brass
instead of gold! He might have had all vessels of finest gold, gold seven times
refined; but he failed, he fell back in a tremendous apostacy, and now that he wants
shields he must have them made of brass. See how deteriora tion follows all
character that goes down in its religious aspect. This deterioration marks the whole
progress of human development. What songs we used to sing! How sweet in praise,
how lofty in thought, how sacred in emotion! And now the song dies on our palsied
and mumbling lips. How we used to preach—with what burning passion, with what
apostolic zeal, with what divine fury and madness! And now we apologise for
referring to the kingdom of heaven; and the cross, once our boast and glory, we
have written all over with "laws of nature," "laws of mind," "laws of progress,"
"revelations of obedience: it used to be associated with mysterious blood; it used to
be a fountain opened for sin and for uncleanness: now it is a shadow in history, a
spectre in the night-time of speculation: an uneasy, weird, unwelcome thing on the
disc of progress. Is it not so with regard to all personal service? How ardent we once
were! How devoted to the house of God, how punctual in attendance, how zealous in
worship! How we longed for the hour of praise to double itself, for the sun to stand

33. still and the moon, that we might have long intercourse with the Father and the Son
and the Holy Ghost! ow how soon we become restless; how we long to be released,
how patience becomes sensitive, and yields in angry surrender, because too much
tried! You never bring gold for brass when you leave God. The prodigal never
brings any treasure back with him; he comes back naked, hungry, starved; he comes
back a gaunt skeleton, without touch of quality or worth; a beggar, a mendicant, a
suppliant that dare hardly pray, for he would seem to have no right in language
when he has fouled and despoiled all thought. When Rehoboam returns he will
bring with him a shield of brass in place of a shield of gold; when men go away
intellectually from the Bible this is what they do—they bring back brass for gold;
when they leave the Bible morally they bring back brass for gold; when they leave
sympathetically they bring back artifice for inspiration, mechanics for vital
communion. "Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall." There is a
providence ruling all things; a great retributive law is at work in the universe. Men
cannot do wrong, and the Lord leave them unpunished. "Whoso breaketh an hedge,
a serpent shall bite him." A serpent is on the other side of every hedge that God has
planted. If we would enlarge our liberty by violating the hedge we shall be serpent-
bitten. Let all human history say if this be not so.
GUZIK, "3. (2 Chronicles 12:9-12) The “some deliverance” granted to Judah.
So Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, and took away the treasures
of the house of the LORD and the treasures of the king’s house; he took everything.
He also carried away the gold shields which Solomon had made. Then King
Rehoboam made bronze shields in their place, and committed them to the hands of
the captains of the guard, who guarded the doorway of the king’s house. And
whenever the king entered the house of the LORD, the guard would go and bring
them out; then they would take them back into the guardroom. When he humbled
himself, the wrath of the LORD turned from him, so as not to destroy him
completely; and things also went well in Judah.
a. Took away the treasures of the house of the LORD and the treasures of the king’s
house: Solomon left great wealth to his son Rehoboam, both in the temple and in the
palace. After only five years, that wealth was largely gone – because Rehoboam and
Judah forsook the law of the LORD.
b. He also carried away the gold shields which Solomon had made: 1 Kings 10:16-17
mentions these 500 shields, 200 large and 300 small. These shields made beautiful
displays in the House of the Forest of Lebanon, but they were of no use in battle.
Gold was too heavy and too soft to be used as a metal for effective shields. This was
an example of the emphasis of image over substance that began in the days of
Solomon and worsened in the days of Rehoboam.
i. “Rehoboam made in their stead shields of bronze, and with these pathetically tried
to keep up former appearances. It is like souls, who, when despoiled of their
freshness and power by the enemy, laboriously endeavor to keep up an outward

34. appearance of spiritual prosperity; or, like a fallen church, shorn of its strength,
and robbed of its purity, seeking to hide its helplessness, and cover its nakedness,
with the tinsel of ritualism, spurious revivalism, union, and anything that promises
to give them some appearance.” (Knapp)
ii. According to Dilday, each large shield was worth about $120,000. The smaller
shields were worth $30,000. $33 million was invested in gold ceremonial shields -
and now in the hands of the Egyptians.
c. King Rehoboam made bronze shields in their place: The replacement of gold with
bronze is a perfect picture of the decline under the days of Rehoboam. They dynasty
of David went from gold to bronze in five years.
i. “They wished to emphasize how far Rehoboam fell in a mere few years. He had
inherited an empire; five years later, master of a small state, he could protect his
capital itself only by denuding his palace of its treasures. Solomon’s court had
despised silver; his son’s court had to be content with bronze!” (Payne)
ii. “The picture of Rehoboam’s substitution of brass for gold is unutterably pathetic.
Yet how often do the people of Jehovah masquerade amid imitations because they
have lost the things of pure gold through unfaithfulness and sin.” (Morgan)
d. And committed them to the hands of the captains of the guard: In the days of
Solomon, the gold shields hung on display in the House of the House of the Forest of
Lebanon (1 Kings 10:16-17). Under Rehoboam, the replacement bronze shields were
kept in a protected guardroom until they were specifically needed for state
occasions.
e. When he humbled himself, the wrath of the LORD turned from him, so as not to
destroy him completely: This great humbling of Rehoboam came after he had
humbled himself as described in 2 Chronicles 12:6. It shows that God knew there
was more humbling to do even after Rehoboam did it himself. Even so, this was
God’s favor and mercy to him because both Rehoboam and Judah deserved far
worse. By the measure of justice alone God had the right to destroy him completely.
i. “If God could show favour to a man such as Rehoboam, who typified the attitude
which resulted in Judah’s eventual collapse, there was always hope for those who
humbled themselves before God. Indeed, the interest in the people was surely a
direct encouragement to the Chronicler’s contemporaries to seek God for
themselves.” (Selman)
ii. Many in sin humble themselves before God hoping that He will not humble them
further. evertheless, God knows just how much humbling someone needs and if
more is necessary, God will certainly bring it.
f. Things also went well in Judah: According to Poole this is literally, “There were
good things.” The idea is either that despite their corruption there was still a

35. remnant of good in Judah and for that reason God held back judgment; or, that
despite the terrible loss to the Egyptians there was still a remnant of prosperity in
Judah.
PULPIT, "Words do not tell in this verse the "humbled service" of Rehoboam and
the princes; but the position speaks, speaks volumes of itself. Where did Rehoboam
hide himself, where would he not have been glad to hide himself, while the treasures
of the house of the Lord, and those of his own house, were coolly taken by the
foreign soldiery, none forbidding them, nor resisting, nor even making afraid?
BI 9-10, "Instead of which king Rehoboam made shields of brass.
The downward grade
See how deterioration follows all character that goes down in its religious aspects. This
deterioration marks the whole progress of human development. Is it not so with regard
to all personal service? How ardent we once were! How devoted to the house of God,
how punctual in attendance, how zealous in worship! How we longed for the hour of
praise to double itself, that we might have long intercourse with the Father and the Son
and the Holy Ghost! Now how soon we become uneasy, how we long to be released, how
patience becomes sensitive, and yields in angry surrender because too much tried! You
never bring gold for brass when you leave God. The prodigal never brings any treasure
back with him. When men go away intellectually from the Bible they bring back brass for
gold. When they leave the Bible morally they bring back brass for gold. When they leave
sympathetically they bring back artifice for inspiration, mechanics for vital communion.
(J.Parker, D.D.)
10 So King Rehoboam made bronze shields to
replace them and assigned these to the
commanders of the guard on duty at the entrance
to the royal palace.
ELLICOTT, "(10) Instead of which king Rehoboam made.—See ote on 1 Kings
14:27, with which this verse coincides.
Chief of the guard.—Literally, captains of the runners, or couriers.

36. TRAPP, "2 Chronicles 12:10 Instead of which king Rehoboam made shields of
brass, and committed [them] to the hands of the chief of the guard, that kept the
entrance of the king’s house.
Ver. 10. Instead of which, &c.] See on 1 Kings 14:27.
PULPIT, "Instead of which King Rehoboam made shields of brass. A most
humbling reversal of the glowing promise afterwards given, "For brass I will bring
gold" (Isaiah 9:17).
11 Whenever the king went to the Lord’s temple,
the guards went with him, bearing the shields, and
afterward they returned them to the guardroom.
ELLICOTT, "1) And when.—And as often as.
The guard came and fetched . . .—The runners came and bare them; and they (after
the royal procession) restored them to the guard room of the runners. (See on 1
Kings 14:28, which reads, “the runners used to bear them.”)
Solomon’s golden shields had been kept in “the house of the forest of Lebanon” (2
Chronicles 9:16).
TRAPP, "2 Chronicles 12:11 And when the king entered into the house of the
LORD, the guard came and fetched them, and brought them again into the guard
chamber.
Ver. 11. And when the king entered into the house of the Lord.] He went no more -
for a while at least - to the high places.
“ παθων δε τε νηπιος εγνω.”

37. The guard came and fetched them.] Either to secure his person, who might be in
danger of his life from discontented persons, by reason of the late great loss, or at
least that he might not be altogether slighted by his people. See 1 Kings 14:28.
PARKER, ""And when the king entered into the house of the Lord, the guard came
and fetched them, and brought them again into the guard chamber. And when he
humbled himself, the wrath of the Lord turned from him, that he would not destroy
him altogether: and also in Judah things went well" [literally, "Moreover in Judah
there were good things"] ( 2 Chronicles 12:11-12).
We are called upon to observe the relation and progress of events, and to inquire
into the moral reasons which explain either their ill-going or their happy
advancement. We often speak of things going well in too narrow a sense, simply
meaning that property increases, that health is continued, and that the whole
outward environment is comfortable and satisfactory. That is not a proper estimate
of the whole question. Things can only go well when the heart goes well. In
proportion as we are right with God we shall feel that all things are ours. The world,
or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are ours; and we are
Christ"s; and Christ is God"s. Things may be going well externally whilst the very
life is being poisoned or eaten out by some deadly cancer. When the king humbled
himself the wrath of the Lord turned from him, and he would not destroy him
altogether. Then it is added, "also in Judah things went well," the very structure of
the sentence implying that what was a moral explanation in the one case was a
moral explanation in the other. When the king humbled himself, the wrath of the
Lord turned; then comes the word "also," signifying that the thought of the
Chronicler is still advancing along the same moral line, implying that in Judah also
there was humbleness of mind, and a tender longing after God; so that all things
within the kingdom went well. Things go well when they are right: contentment
comes after obedience: a triumphant death comes after a faithful and consecrated
life: an abundant harvest follows a seedtime that has been carefully studied and
turned to its full degree of advantage. When things do not go well we should inquire
into moral reasons: why this affliction, why this loss, why this discontentment, why
this bitterness of soul? Do not spare the inquiries; use them as spears, and thrust
them into the heart, for out of such faithful self-dealing will come the humbleness,
the penitence, the brokenheartedness, which are always followed by pardon,
restoration, and spiritual harmony.
12 Because Rehoboam humbled himself, the
Lord’s anger turned from him, and he was not
totally destroyed. Indeed, there was some good in

38. Judah.
GILL, "And when he humbled himself,.... That is, Rehoboam; or broke his heart,
as the Targum, was of a contrite spirit seemingly, for it was merely external:
the wrath of the Lord turned from him; which appeared by the departure of
Shishak's army:
that he would not destroy him altogether; or make an utter destruction of him
and his people:
and also in Judah things went well; prospered and succeeded after this affair of
Shishak was over: or "in Judah there were good things" (p); there were some good men,
priests, Levites, and many of the common people, that did good things, kept up and
abode by the pure worship and service of God; and which was another reason why the
Lord would not destroy them altogether now, see Gen_18:31.
JAMISO , "when he humbled himself, the wrath of the Lord turned from
him — The promise (2Ch_12:7) was verified. Divine providence preserved the kingdom
in existence, a reformation was made in the court, while true religion and piety were
diffused throughout the land.
BE SO , "2 Chronicles 12:12. In Judah things went well — Hebrew, There were
good things. The meaning is either, 1st, Though there were many corruptions in
Judah, yet there were also divers good things there, which were not in Israel, as the
word, and ordinances, and pure worship of God, prophets and ministers of God’s
appointment, and divers truly religious people. And thus, this was an additional
reason why God would not destroy them. Or, 2d, otwithstanding this loss, they
began to recruit themselves, and to regain some degree of their former prosperity.
In Judah, things went ill when all the fenced cities were taken; but when they
repented, the posture of the affairs altered, and things went well. If at any time
things do not go so well as we could wish, yet we have reason to take notice of it with
thankfulness, if they go better than they have done, and better than we expected or
deserved, and to own God’s goodness, if he do but grant us some deliverance.
ELLICOTT, "(12) And when he humbled himself, the wrath of the Lord turned
from him.—In fulfilment of the promise of 2 Chronicles 12:7. This remark, the tone
of which is in perfect accord with the chronicler’s conception of the real import of
Shishak’s invasion, is wanting in Kings.