A verse by verse commentary on 2 Kings 25 dealing with Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon marched against Jerusalem with his whole army which led to the fall of Jerusalem.

1. 2 KI GS 25 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
1 So in the ninth year of Zedekiah’s reign, on the
tenth day of the tenth month, ebuchadnezzar
king of Babylon marched against Jerusalem with
his whole army. He encamped outside the city and
built siege works all around it.
BAR ES, "In the ninth year ... - As the final catastrophe approaches, the
historian becomes more close and exact in his dates, marking not only the
year, but the month and the day, on which the siege began, no less than
those on which it closed 2Ki_25:3. From Eze_24:1 we find that on the very
day when the host of Nebuchadnezzar made its appearance before
Jerusalem the fact was revealed to Ezekiel in Babylonia, and the fate of the
city announced to him Eze_24:6-14. The army seems to have at first spread
itself over all Judaea. It fought, not only against Jerusalem, but especially
against Lachish and Azekah Jer_34:7, two cities of the south 2Ch_11:9,
which had probably been strongly garrisoned in order to maintain the
communication with Egypt. This division of the Babylonian forces
encouraged Hophra to put his troops in motion and advance to the relief of
his Jewish allies Jer_37:5. On hearing this, Nebuchadnezzar broke up from
before Jerusalem and marched probably to Azekah and Lachish. The
Egyptians shrank back, returned into their own country Jer_37:7; Eze_
17:17, and took no further part in the war. Nebuchadnezzar then led back his
army, and once more invested the city. (It is uncertain whether the date at
the beginning of this verse refers to the first or to the second investment.)
Forts - Probably moveable towers, sometimes provided with battering-
rams, which the besiegers advanced against the walls, thus bringing their
fighting men on a level with their antagonists. Such towers are seen in the
Assyrian sculptures.
CLARKE, "In the ninth year of his reign - Zedekiah, having revolted
against the Chaldeans, Nebuchadnezzar, wearied with his treachery, and
the bad faith of the Jews, determined the total subversion of the Jewish
state. Having assembled a numerous army, he entered Judea on the tenth
day of the tenth month of the ninth year of the reign of Zedekiah; this,

2. according to the computation of Archbishop Usher, was on Thursday,
January 30, A.M. 3414, which was a sabbatical year: whereon the men of
Jerusalem hearing that the Chaldean army was approaching, proclaimed
liberty to their servants; see Jer_34:8-10, according to the law, Exo_21:2;
Deu_15:1, Deu_15:2, Deu_15:12 : for Nebuchadnezzar, marching with his
army against Zedekiah, having wasted all the country, and taken their
strong holds, except Lachish, Azekah, and Jerusalem, came against the
latter with all his forces. See Jer_34:1-7. On the very day, as the same author
computes, the siege and utter destruction of Jerusalem were revealed to
Ezekiel the prophet, then in Chaldea, under the type of a seething pot; and
his wife died in the evening, and he was charged not to mourn for her,
because of the extraordinary calamity that had fallen upon the land. See
Eze_24:1, Eze_24:2, etc.
Jeremiah, having predicted the same calamities, Jer_34:1-7, was by the
command of Zedekiah shut up in prison, Jeremiah 32:1-16.
Pharaoh Hophra, or Vaphris, hearing how Zedekiah was pressed, and
fearing for the safety of his own dominions should the Chaldeans succeed
against Jerusalem, determined to succor Zedekiah. Finding this, the
Chaldeans raised the siege of Jerusalem, and went to meet the Egyptian
army, which they defeated and put to flight. Joseph. Antiq., lib. 10, cap. 10.
In the interim the Jews, thinking their danger was passed, reclaimed their
servants, and put them again under the yoke; Jer_34:8, etc.
GILL, "And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign,.... Of the reign of
Zedekiah king of Judah. From hence to the end of 2Ki_25:7, the account
exactly agrees with Jer_52:4.
HE RY, "We left king Zedekiah in rebellion against the king of Babylon
(2Ki_24:20), contriving and endeavouring to shake off his yoke, when he
was no way able to do it, nor took the right method by making God his friend
first. Now here we have an account of the fatal consequences of that
attempt.
I. The king of Babylon's army laid siege to Jerusalem, 2Ki_25:1. What
should hinder them when the country was already in their possession? 2Ki_
24:2. They built forts against the city round about, whence, by such arts of
war as they then had, they battered it, sent into it instruments of death, and
kept out of it the necessary supports of life. Formerly Jerusalem had been
compassed with the favour of God as with a shield, but now their defence
had departed from them and their enemies surrounded them on every side.
Those that by sin have provoked God to leave them will find that
innumerable evils will compass them about. Two years this siege lasted; at
first the army retired, for fear of the king of Egypt (Jer_37:11), but, finding
him not so powerful as they thought, they soon returned, with a resolution
not to quit the city till they had made themselves masters of it.
JAMISO , "2Ki_25:1-3. Jerusalem again besieged.
Nebuchadnezzar ... came ... against Jerusalem — Incensed by the revolt of
Zedekiah, the Assyrian despot determined to put an end to the perfidious

3. and inconstant monarchy of Judea. This chapter narrates his third and last
invasion, which he conducted in person at the head of an immense army,
levied out of all the tributary nations under his sway. Having overrun the
northern parts of the country and taken almost all the fenced cities (Jer_
34:7), he marched direct to Jerusalem to invest it. The date of the beginning
as well as the end of the siege is here carefully marked (compare Eze_24:1;
Jer_39:1; Jer_52:4-6); from which it appears, that, with a brief interruption
caused by Nebuchadnezzar’s marching to oppose the Egyptians who were
coming to its relief but who retreated without fighting, the siege lasted a
year and a half. So long a resistance was owing, not to the superior skill and
valor of the Jewish soldiers, but to the strength of the city fortifications, on
which the king too confidently relied (compare Jer_21:1-14; 37:1-38:28).
pitched against it, and ... built forts — rather, perhaps, drew lines of
circumvallation, with a ditch to prevent any going out of the city. On this
rampart were erected his military engines for throwing missiles into the
city.
K&D, "Siege and conquest of Jerusalem; Zedekiah taken prisoner and led
away to Babel (cf. Jer_52:4-11 and Jer_39:1-7). - 2Ki_25:1. In the ninth year
of the reign of Zedekiah, on the tenth day of the tenth month,
Nebuchadnezzar marched with all his forces against Jerusalem and
commenced the siege (cf. Jer_39:1), after he had taken all the rest of the
fortified cities of the land, with the exception of Lachish and Azekah, which
were besieged at the same time as Jerusalem (Jer_34:7). On the very same
day the commencement of the siege of Jerusalem was revealed to the
prophet Ezekiel in his exile (Eze_24:1). “And they built against it (the city)
siege-towers round about.” ‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ , which only occurs here and in Jeremiah
(Jer_52:4) and Ezekiel (Eze_4:2; Eze_17:17; Eze_21:27; Eze_26:8), does not
mean either a line of circumvallation (J. D. Mich., Hitzig), or the outermost
enclosure constructed of palisades (Thenius, whose assertion that ‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ is
always mentioned as the first work of the besiegers is refuted by Eze_17:17
and Eze_21:27), but a watch, and that in a collective sense: watch-towers or
siege-towers (cf. Ges. thes. p. 330, and Hävernick on Eze_4:2).
ELLICOTT, "And it came to pass in the a ninth year of his reign, in the b
tenth month, in the tenth [day] of the month, [that] Nebuchadnezzar king of
Babylon came, he, and all his host, against Jerusalem, and pitched against
it; and they built forts against it round about.
(a) That is, of Zedekiah.
(b) Which the Hebrews call Teber, and it contains part of December and
part of January.
MACLAREN 1-112, "THE END

4. Eighteen months of long-drawn-out misery and daily increasing famine
preceded the fall of the doomed city. The siege was a blockade. No assaults
by the enemy, nor sorties by the inhabitants, are narrated, but the former
grimly and watchfully drew their net closer, and the latter sat still in their
despair. The passionless tone of the narrative here is very remarkable. Not
a word escapes the writer to show his feelings, though he is telling his
country’s fall. We must turn to Lamentations for sighs and groans. There we
have the emotions of devout hearts; here we have the calm record of God’s
judgment. It is all one long sentence, for in the Hebrew each verse begins
with ‘and,’ clause heaped on clause, as if each were a footstep of the
destroying angel in his slow, irresistible march.
The narrative falls into two principal parts-the fate of the king and that of
the city. It is unnecessary to dwell on the details. The confusion of counsels,
the party strife, the fierce hatred of God’s prophet, the agony of famine, are
all suppressed here, but painted with terrible vividness in the Book of
Jeremiah. At last the fatal day came. On the north side a breach was made in
the wall, and through it the fierce besiegers poured-the ‘princes of the king
of Babylon,’ with their idolatrous and barbarous names, ‘came in, and sat in
the middle gate.’ It was night. The sudden appearance of the conquerors in
the heart of the city shot panic into the feeble king and his ‘men of war’ who
had never struck one blow for deliverance; and they hurried under cover of
darkness, and hidden between two walls, down the ravine to the king’s
garden, once the scene of pleasure, but waste now, and thence, as best they
could, round or over Olivet to the road to Jericho. The king’s flight by night
had been foretold by Ezekiel far away in captivity (Eze_12:12); and the same
prophet received on that very day a divine message announcing the fall of
the city, and bidding him ‘write thee the name of the day, even of this
selfsame day,’ as that on which the king of Babylon ‘drew close unto
Jerusalem’ (Eze_24:1 et seq.).
Down the rocky road went the flying host, with ‘their shaftless, broken
bows’ closely followed by the avenging foe with ‘red pursuing spear.’ Where
Israel had first set foot on its inheritance, the last king of David’s line was
captured and his monarchy shattered. The scene of the first victory, when
Jericho fell before unarmed men trusting in God, was the scene of the last
defeat. The spot where the covenant was renewed, and the reproach of
Israel rolled away, was the spot where the broken covenant was finally
avenged and abrogated. The end came back to the beginning, and the cradle
was the coffin.
Away up to Riblah, in the far north, under the shadow of Lebanon, the
captive was dragged to meet the conqueror. The name of each is a
profession of belief. The one means ‘Jehovah is righteousness’; the other,
‘Nebo, protect the crown.’ The idol seemed to have overcome, but the defeat
of the unbelieving confessor of the true God at the hands of the idolater is
really the victory of the righteousness which the name celebrated and the
bearer of the name insulted. His murdered sons were the last sight which he
saw before he was blinded, according to the ferocious practice of the East. It
was ingenuity of cruelty to let him see for so long, and then to give him that
as the last thing seen, and therefore often remembered. Note how the
enigma of Ezekiel’s prophecy (Eze_12:13) and its apparent contradiction of
Jeremiah’s (Jer_32:4; Jer_34:3) are reconciled, and learn how easily the

5. fact, when it comes, clears the riddles of prophecy, and how easily,
probably, the whole facts, if we knew them, would clear the difficulties of
Scripture history. The blinded king was harmless, but according to Jewish
tradition, was set to work in a mill (though that is probably only an
application of Samson’s story), and according to Jeremiah (Jer_52:11), was
kept in prison till his death. So ended the monarchy of Judah.
The fate of the city was not settled for a month, during which, no doubt,
there was much consultation at Riblah whether to garrison or destroy it.
The king of Babylon did not go in person, but despatched a force
commanded by a high officer, to burn palace, Temple, the more important
houses (the poorer people would probably be lodged in huts not worth
burning), and to raze the fortifications. In accordance with the practice of
the great Eastern despotisms, deportation followed victory-a clever though
cruel device for securing conquests. But some were left behind; for the land,
if deserted, would have fallen out of cultivation, and been profitless to
Babylon. The bulk of the people of Jerusalem, the fugitives who had joined
the invaders during the siege, and the mass of the general population, were
carried off, in such a long string of misery as we may still see on the
monuments, and a handful left behind, too poor to plot, and stirred to
diligence by necessity. So ended the possession by Israel of its promised
inheritance.
Now this fall of Jerusalem is like an object-lesson to teach everlasting truth
as to the retributive providence of God. What does it say?
It declares plainly what brings down God’s judgments. The terms on which
Israel prospered and held its land were obedience to God’s law. We cannot
directly apply the principles of God’s government of it to modern nations.
The present analogue of Israel is the Church, not the nation. But when all
deductions have been made, it is still true that a nation’s religious attitude is
a most potent factor in its prosperous development. It is not accidental that,
on the whole, stagnant Europe and America are Roman Catholic, and the
progressive parts Protestant. Nor was it causes independent of religion that
scattered a decaying Christianity in the lands of the Eastern Church before
the onslaught of wild Arabs, who, at all events, did believe in Allah. So there
are abundant lessons for politics and sociology in the story of Jerusalem’s
fall.
But these lessons have direct application to the individual and to the
Christian Church. All departure from God is ruin. We slay ourselves by
forsaking Him, and every sinner is a suicide. We live under a moral
government, and in a system of things so knit together as that even here
every transgression receives its just recompense-if not visibly and palpably
in outward circumstances, yet really and punctually in effects on mind and
heart, which are more solemn and awful. ‘Behold the righteous shall be
recompensed in the earth: much more the wicked and the sinner.’ Sin and
sorrow are root and fruit.
Especially does that crash of Jerusalem’s fall thunder the lesson to all
churches that their life and prosperity are inseparably connected with
faithful obedience and turning away from all worldliness, which is idolatry.
They stand in the place that was made empty by Israel’s later fall. Our very
privileges call us to beware. ‘Because of unbelief they were broken off, and

6. thou standest by faith.’ That great seven-branched candlestick was removed
out of its place, and all that is left of it is its sculptured image among the
spoils on the triumphal arch to its captor. Other lesser candlesticks have
been removed from their places, and Turkish oppression brings night
where Sardis and Laodicea once gave a feeble light. The warning is needed
to-day; for worldliness is rampant in the Church. ‘If God spared not the
natural branches, take heed lest He also spare not thee.’ The fall of
Jerusalem is not merely a tragic story from the past. It is a revelation, for
the present, of the everlasting truth, that the professing people of God
deserve and receive the sorest chastisement, if they turn again to folly.
Further, we learn the method of present retribution. Nebuchadnezzar knew
nothing of the purposes which he fulfilled. ‘He meaneth not so, neither doth
his heart think so.’ He was but the ‘axe’ with which God hewed. Therefore,
though he was God’s tool, he was also responsible, and would be punished
even for performing God’s ‘whole work upon Jerusalem,’ because of ‘the
glory of his high looks.’ The retribution of disobedience, so far as that
retribution is outward, needs no ‘miracle.’ The ordinary operations of
Providence amply suffice to bring it. If God wills to sting, He will ‘hiss for
the fly,’ and it will come. The ferocity and ambition of a grim and bloody
despot, impelled by vainglory and lust of cruel conquest, do God’s work, and
yet the doing is sin. The world is full of God’s instruments, and He sends
punishments by the ordinary play of motives and circumstances, which we
best understand when we see behind all His mighty hand and sovereign will.
The short-sighted view of history says ‘Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem
B.C. so and so,’ and then discourses about the tendencies of which
Babylonia was exponent and creature. The deeper view says, God smote the
disobedient city, as He had said, and Nebuchadnezzar was ‘the rod of His
anger.’
Again, we learn the Divine reluctance to smite. More than four hundred
years had passed since Solomon began idolatry, and steadily, through all
that time, a stream of prophecy of varying force and width had flowed, while
smaller disasters had confirmed the prophets’ voices. ‘Rising up early and
sending’ his servants, God had been in earnest in seeking to save Israel from
itself. Men said then, ‘Where is the promise of His coming?’ and mocked His
warnings and would none of His reproof; but at last the hour struck and the
crash came. ‘As a dream when one awaketh; so, O Lord! when Thou
awakest, Thou shalt despise their image.’ His judgment seems to slumber,
but its eyes are open, and it remains inactive, that His long-suffering may
have free scope. As long as His gaze can discern the possibility of
repentance, He will not strike; and when that is hopeless, He will not delay.
The explanation of the marvellous tolerance of evil which sometimes tries
faith and always evokes wonder, lies in the great words, which might well be
written over the chair of every teacher of history: ‘The Lord is not slack
concerning His promise, as some men count slackness; but is long-suffering
to us-ward.’ Alas, that that divine patience should ever be twisted into the
ground of indurated disobedience! ‘Because sentence against an evil work is
not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in
them to do evil.’
God’s reluctance to punish is no reason for doubting that He will. Judgment
is His ‘strange work,’ less congenial, if we may so paraphrase that strong

7. word of the prophet’ s, than pure mercy, but it will be done nevertheless.
The tears over Jerusalem that witnessed Christ’s sorrow did not blind the
eyes like a flame of fire, nor stay the outstretched hand of the Judge, when
the time of her final fall came. The longer the delay, the worse the ruin. The
more protracted the respite and the fuller it has been of entreaties to
return, the more terrible the punishment. ‘Behold, therefore, the goodness
and severity of God: towards them which fell, severity; but toward thee,
goodness, if thou continue in His goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut
off.’
BENSON, ". Nebuchadnezzar came, and all his host, against Jerusalem — To
chastise Zedekiah for his rebellion and perjury: for, contrary to the solemn
oath he had taken, he had been contriving and endeavoring to revolt from
the king of Babylon, and shake off his yoke. They built forts against it round
about — To keep all supplies of men and provisions from entering into the
city, and that from thence, by such arts of war as they then had, they might
batter the walls, shoot arrows, and throw darts or stones into it. Formerly
Jerusalem was compassed with the favour of God as with a shield, but now
their defence is departed from them, and their enemies surround them on
every side. The siege lasted two years. At first the besieging army retired for
fear of the king of Egypt, who came to help Zedekiah; and then Jeremiah
endeavoured to get out of the city, to go into the land of Benjamin, but was
hindered, seized, and imprisoned, Jeremiah 37:11. The Chaldeans, finding
that Pharaoh was not so powerful as they at first supposed, soon returned,
as Jeremiah had foretold they would, with a resolution not to quit the siege
till they had made themselves masters of the place.
COFFMAN 1-6, "The big problem in this paragraph is the mention of Gehazi.
Unless he had providentially been healed of his leprosy, this episode would
necessarily have had to happen PRIOR TO the healing of Naaman, because
it would be quite unlikely that the king of Israel would be talking freely with
a leper. This problem has resulted in different opinions of scholars
regarding which king restored the Shunammite's properties. Hammond
believed it was Jehoram,[1] and Martin wrote that it was Jehu.[2] (See our
introduction regarding the uncertainties regarding the chronologies in
2Kings.) The very fact of the sacred author's omitting the information that
men seek regarding such questions underscores their lack of importance. It
really does not make any difference which king it was. The big point of the
narrative is that of the Shunammite's trust of the prophet's word and her
reward in doing so.
"She went with her household and sojourned in the land of the Philistines"
(2 Kings 8:2). The coastal plain of Palestine was usually spared from
droughts that came to Israel, and even when it was not spared, supplies
were readily available by sea from Egypt and the Nile Delta. Of course,

8. during the woman's seven years' absence, her properties were appropriated
by someone else, hence, her appeal to the king. Also, it would appear that
during her sojourn in Philistia her husband had died.
"The king was talking with Gehazi ... and as he was telling the king ...
behold, the woman ... cried to the king" (2 Kings 8:4,5). Nothing is more
wonderful than the timing of the providences of God. "Note the coincidence.
God times incidents with precision; `things work together' (Romans 8:28);
they interweave."[3] Another example is found in the reading to the king of
Persia of the honors due Mordecai just before his asking Haman what
should be done for the man whom the king delighted to honor (Esther 6:1-
14).
"The king appointed unto her a certain officer, saying, Restore all that was
hers" (2 Kings 8:6). "The primary meaning of the word officer here is
eunuch, and the secondary meaning is court minister."[4] "Eunuch is the
preferred meaning here for propriety's sake when a man accompanied a
lady."[5] The introduction of eunuchs into the social structure of the royal
families of Israel was due to their shameful harems. David possessed
eunuchs (1 Chronicles 28:1), and presumably Solomon also; and afterward
"Eunuchs were common in the Samarian court of Israel; but there is no
record of them in the kingdom of Judah until the times of Hezekiah (Isaiah
56:3-4)."[6]
"What happened here shows that Elisha's previous offer to speak to the king
for the Shunammite woman (2 Kings 4:13) had not been an idle one."[7]
PULPIT, "
LAST SIEGE AND CAPTURE OF JERUSALEM. The open rebellion of
Zedekiah was followed almost immediately by the advance into Judaea of a
Babylonian army under Nebuchadnezzar in person, and the strict
investment of the capital. We learn the circumstances of the siege from
Jeremiah, in the prophecy which bears his name, and in the Book of
Lamentations. It lasted one year and seven months, and was accompanied
by a blockade so strict that the defenders were reduced to the last extremity,
and, as in Samaria under Jehoram (2 Kings 6:29), and again in Jerusalem
during the siege by Titus (Josephus, 'Bell. Jud.,' 6.3. § 4), mothers ate their
children (see Lamentations 2:20; Lamentations 4:10). When resistance was
no longer possible, Zedekiah, with his men-at-arms, attempted to escape by
night, and fled eastward, but were overtaken and captured in the plain of
Jericho (Jeremiah 39:4, Jeremiah 39:5). Meanwhile the city fell into the
enemy's hands, and was treated with all the rigors of war. The temple, the
royal palace, and the great houses of the rich men were first plundered and
then delivered to the flames (verse 9). The walls of the city were broken
down (verse 10), and the gates laid even with the ground (Lamentations

9. 2:9). A great massacre of the population took place in the streets
(Lamentations 2:3, Lamentations 2:4).
2 Kings 25:1
And it cams to pass in the ninth year of his—i.e. Zedekiah's—reign, in the
tenth month, in the tenth day of the month. Extreme exactness with respect
to a date indicates the extreme importance of the event dated. In the whole
range of the history contained in the two Books of the Kings, there is no
instance of the year, month, and day being all given excepting in the present
chapter, where we find this extreme exactness three times (2 Kings 25:1, 2
Kings 25:4, and 2 Kings 25:8). The date in 2 Kings 25:1 is confirmed by
Jeremiah 52:10 and Ezekiel 24:1. That Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon
came, he, and all his host, against Jerusalem. 'According to the description
of the eye-witness, Jeremiah, the army was one of unusual magnitude.
Nebuchadnezzar brought against Jerusalem at this time "all his army, and
all the kingdoms of the earth of his dominion, and all the people" (Jeremiah
34:1). The march of the army was not direct upon Jerusalem; it at first
spread itself over Judea, wasting the country and capturing the smaller
fortified towns (.Josephus, 'Ant. Jud.,' 10.7. §3)—among them Lachish, so
famous in the war against Sennacherib (2 Kings 18:14, 2 Kings 18:17; 2 Kings
19:8), and Azekah (Jeremiah 34:7). The capture of these two places was
important as intercepting Zedekiah's line of communication with Egypt.
Having made himself master of them, Nebuchadnezzar proceeded to invest
the capital. And pitched against it—i.e; encamped, and commenced a
regular siege—and they built forts against it round about. It has been argued
that ‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ד‬‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ד‬‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ד‬‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ד‬ does not mean a "fort" or "tower," but a "line of circumvallation" (Michaelis, Hitzig,does not mean a "fort" or "tower," but a "line of circumvallation" (Michaelis, Hitzig,does not mean a "fort" or "tower," but a "line of circumvallation" (Michaelis, Hitzig,does not mean a "fort" or "tower," but a "line of circumvallation" (Michaelis, Hitzig,
Thenius, Bahr). Jerusalem, however, can scarcely be surrounded by lines of circumvallation,Thenius, Bahr). Jerusalem, however, can scarcely be surrounded by lines of circumvallation,Thenius, Bahr). Jerusalem, however, can scarcely be surrounded by lines of circumvallation,Thenius, Bahr). Jerusalem, however, can scarcely be surrounded by lines of circumvallation,
which, moreover, were not employed in their sieges by the Orientals. Dayek (which, moreover, were not employed in their sieges by the Orientals. Dayek (which, moreover, were not employed in their sieges by the Orientals. Dayek (which, moreover, were not employed in their sieges by the Orientals. Dayek ( ‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ד‬‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ד‬‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ד‬‫ק‬ ֵ‫י‬ ָ‫ד‬ ) seems to be) seems to be) seems to be) seems to be
properly a "watchtower," fromproperly a "watchtower," fromproperly a "watchtower," fromproperly a "watchtower," from ‫דוּק‬‫דוּק‬‫דוּק‬‫,דוּק‬ speculari, whence it passed into the meaning of a "tower", speculari, whence it passed into the meaning of a "tower", speculari, whence it passed into the meaning of a "tower", speculari, whence it passed into the meaning of a "tower"
generally. The towers used in sieges by the Assyrians and Babylonians were movable ones,generally. The towers used in sieges by the Assyrians and Babylonians were movable ones,generally. The towers used in sieges by the Assyrians and Babylonians were movable ones,generally. The towers used in sieges by the Assyrians and Babylonians were movable ones,
made of planks, which were pushed up to the walls, so that the assailants might attack theirmade of planks, which were pushed up to the walls, so that the assailants might attack theirmade of planks, which were pushed up to the walls, so that the assailants might attack theirmade of planks, which were pushed up to the walls, so that the assailants might attack their
adversaries, on a level, with greater advantage. Sometimes they contained battering rams (seeadversaries, on a level, with greater advantage. Sometimes they contained battering rams (seeadversaries, on a level, with greater advantage. Sometimes they contained battering rams (seeadversaries, on a level, with greater advantage. Sometimes they contained battering rams (see
Layard, 'Monuments of Nineveh,' first series, pl.Layard, 'Monuments of Nineveh,' first series, pl.Layard, 'Monuments of Nineveh,' first series, pl.Layard, 'Monuments of Nineveh,' first series, pl. 19191919; and comp. Jeremiah; and comp. Jeremiah; and comp. Jeremiah; and comp. Jeremiah 52525252::::4444 ; Ezekiel; Ezekiel; Ezekiel; Ezekiel 4444::::2222;;;;
EzekielEzekielEzekielEzekiel 17171717::::17171717; Ezekiel; Ezekiel; Ezekiel; Ezekiel 26262626::::8888; Josephus, 'Ant. Jud.,'; Josephus, 'Ant. Jud.,'; Josephus, 'Ant. Jud.,'; Josephus, 'Ant. Jud.,' 10101010....8888. §. §. §. § 1111).).).).
EBC, "Verses 1-21
THE FALL OF JERUSALEM
B.C. 586

10. 2 Kings 25:1-21
"In that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all nations."
- Zechariah 12:3
"An end is come, the end is come; it awaketh against thee: behold the end is
come."
- Ezekiel 7:6
"Behold yon sterile spot Where now the wandering Arab’s tent Flaps in the
desert blast; There once old Salem’s haughty fane Reared high to heaven its
thousand golden domes, And in the blushing face of day Exposed its
shameful glory."
- SHELLEY
AFTER the siege had lasted for a year and a half, all but one day, at midnight
the besiegers made a breach in the northern city wall. It was a day of
terrible remembrance, and throughout the exile it was observed as a solemn
fast. {Zechariah 8:19}
Nebuchadrezzar was no longer in person before the walls. He had other
warlike operations and other sieges on hand-the sieges of Tyre, Asekah, and
Lachish-as well as Jerusalem. He had therefore established his
headquarters at Lachish, and did not superintend the final operations
against the city. But now that all had become practically hopeless, and the
capture of the rest of Jerusalem was only a matter of a few days more,
Zedekiah and his few best surviving princes and soldiers fled by night
through the opposite quarter of the city. There was a little unwatched
postern between two walls near the king’s garden, and through this he and
his escort fled, hoping to reach the Arabah, and make good his escape,
perhaps to the Wady-el-Arish, which he could reach in five hours, through
the wilds beyond the Jordan. The heads of the king and his followers were
muffled, and they carried on their shoulders their choicest possessions. But
he was betrayed by some of the mean deserters, and pursued by the
Chaldaeans. His movements were doubtless impeded by the presence of his
harem and his children. His little band of warriors could offer no
resistance, and fled in all directions. Zedekiah, his family, and his
attendants were taken prisoners, and carried to Riblah to appear before the
mighty conqueror. Nebuchadrezzar showed no pity towards one whom he

11. had elevated to the throne, and who had violated his most solemn
assurances by intriguing with his enemies. He brought him to trial, and
doomed him to witness with his own eyes the massacre of his two sons and
of his attendants. After he had endured this anguish worse than death, his
eyes were put out, and, bound in double fetters, he was sent to Babylon,
where he ended his miserable days. To blind a king deprived him of all hope
of recovering the throne, and was therefore in ancient days a common
punishment. The LXX adds that he was sent by the Babylonians to grind a
mill. This is probably a reminiscence of the blinded Samson. But thus were
fulfilled with startling literalness two prophecies which might well have
seemed to be contradictory. For Jeremiah had said, -{Jeremiah 34:3}
"Thine eyes shall behold the eyes of the King of Babylon, and he shall speak
with thee mouth to mouth, and thou shalt go to Babylon."
Whereas Ezekiel had said, {Ezekiel 12:13} -
"I will bring him to Babylon, the land of the Chaldaeans; yet shall he not see
it, though he shall die there."
Henceforth Zedekiah was forgotten, and his place knew him no more. We
can only hope that in his blindness and solitude he was happier than he had
been on the throne of Judah, and that before death came to end his miseries
he found peace with God.
The conqueror did not come to spoil the city. He left that task to three great
officers, -Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard, or chief executioner;
Nebushasban, the Rabsaris, or chief of the eunuchs; and Nergalshareser,
the Rabmag, or chief of the magicians. They took their station by the Middle
Gate, and first gave up the city to pillage and massacre. No horror was
spared. {Psalms 79:2-3} The sepulchers were rifled for treasure; the young
Levites were slain in the house of their Sanctuary; women were violated;
maidens and hoary-headed men were slain. "Princes were hanged up by the
hand, and the faces of elders were dishonored; priest and prophet were
slain in the Sanctuary of the Lord," {2 Chronicles 36:17; Lamentations 2:21;
Lamentations 5:11-12} till the blood flowed like red wine from the winepress
over the desecrated floor. The guilty city drank at the hand of God the dregs
of the cup of His fury. It was the final vengeance. "The punishment of thine
iniquity is accomplished, O daughter of Zion. He will no more carry thee
away into captivity." {Lamentations 4:22} And, meanwhile, the little
Bedouin principalities were full of savage exultation at the fate of their
hereditary foe. {Psalms 79:1} This was felt by the Jews as a culmination of
their misery, that they became a derision to their enemies. The callous
insults hurled at them by the neighboring tribes in their hour of shame
awoke that implacable wrath against Gebal and Ammon and Amalek which
finds its echo in the Prophets and in the Psalms. After this the devoted

12. capital was given up to destruction. The Temple was plundered. All that
remained of its often-rifled splendors was carried away, such as the ancient
pillars Jachin and Boaz, the masterpieces of Hiram’s art, the caldron, the
brazen sea, and all the vessels of gold, of silver, and of brass. Then the walls
of the city were dismantled and broken down. The Temple, and the palace,
and all the houses of the princes were committed to the flames. As for the
principal remaining inhabitants, Seraiah the chief priest, perhaps the
grandson of Hilkiah and the grandfather of Ezra, Zephaniah the second
priest, the three Levitic doorkeepers, the secretary of war, five of the
greatest nobles who "saw the king’s face," {Comp. Esther 1:14} and sixty of
the common people who had been marked out for special punishment, were
taken to Riblah, and there massacred by order of Nebuchadrezzar. With
these Nebuchadrezzar took away as his prisoners a multitude of the
wealthier inhabitants, leaving behind him but the humblest artisans. As the
craftsmen and smiths had been deported, these poor people busied
themselves in agriculture, as vine-dressers and husbandmen. The existing
estates were divided among them; and being few in number, they found the
amplest sustenance in treasures of wheat and barley, and oil and honey, and
summer fruits, which they kept concealed for safety, as the fellaheen of
Palestine do to this day. {Jeremiah 41:8; Jeremiah 40:12} According to the
historic chapters added to the prophecies of Jeremiah, the whole number of
captives carried away from Jerusalem by Nebuchadrezzar in the seventh,
the eighteenth, and the twenty-third years of his reign were 4,600. The
completeness of the desolation might well have caused the heartrending
outcry of Psalms 79:1-13. "O God, the heathen are come into Thine
inheritance; Thy holy Temple have they defiled; they have made Jerusalem
a heap of stones. The dead bodies of Thy servants have they given to be meat
unto the fowls of heaven, and the flesh Of Thy saints unto the beasts of the
land. Their blood have they shed like water round about Jerusalem; and
there was no man to bury them."
Among the remnant of the people was Jeremiah. Nebuzaradan had received
from his king the strictest injunctions to treat him honorably; for he had
heard from the deserters that he had always opposed the rebellion, and had
prophesied the issue of the siege. He was indeed sent in manacles to
Ramah; but there Nebuchadnezzar gave him free choice to do exactly as he
liked-either to accompany him to Babylon, where he should be well treated
and cared for, or to return to Jerusalem, and live where he liked. This was
his desire. Nebuchadnezzar therefore dismissed him with food and a
present; and he returned. The LXX and Vulgate represent him as sitting
weeping over the ruins of Jerusalem, and tradition says that he sought for
his lamentations a cave still existing near the Damascus Gate. Of this
Scripture knows nothing. But the melancholy prophet was only reserved for
further tragedies. He had lived one of the most afflicted of human lives. A
man of tender heart and shrinking disposition, he had been called to set his
face like a flint against kings, and nobles, and mobs. Worse than this, being
himself a prophet and priest, naturally led to sympathize with both, he was
the doomed antagonist of both-victim of "one of the strongest of human
passions, the hatred of priests against a priest who attacks his own order,
the hatred of prophets against a prophet who ventures to have a voice and a

13. will of his own." Even his own family had plotted against his life at humble
Anathoth, {Jeremiah 11:19-21} and when he retreated to Jerusalem, he
found himself at the center of the storm. Now perhaps he hoped for a gleam
of sunset peace. But his hopes were disappointed. He had to tread the path
of anguish and hatred to the bitter end, as he had trodden it for nearly fifty
years of the troubled life which had followed his call in early boyhood.
"But, in the case of Jerusalem," says Dean Stanley, "both its first and second
destruction have the peculiar interest of involving the dissolution of a
religious dispensation, combined with the agony of an expiring nation, such
as no other people has survived, and, by surviving, carried on the living
recollection, first of one, and then of the other, for centuries after the first
shock was over."
GUZIK, "A. Jerusalem is conquered.
1. (2 Kings 25:1-3) Jerusalem under siege.
Now it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, on the
tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and all his
army came against Jerusalem and encamped against it; and they built a
siege wall against it all around. So the city was besieged until the eleventh
year of King Zedekiah. By the ninth day of the fourth month the famine had
become so severe in the city that there was no food for the people of the
land.
a. They built a siege wall against it all around: Nebuchadnezzar used the
common method of attack in those days of securely walled cities - a siege
wall. A siege was intended to surround a city, prevent all business and trade
from entering or leaving the city, and to eventually starve the population
into surrender.
i. “The Babylonians relied initially on tight control using ‘watch towers’
rather than siege works, allowing those who wished to leave to do so (cf. 2
Kings 25:11; Jeremiah 38:19; Jer_39:9), but starving out the city (Jeremiah
38:2-9).” (Wiseman)
ii. In the ninth year of his reign: “This is the first time in Kings that an event
in the history of Israel is dated by a foreign era.” (Dilday)
b. The famine had become so severe in the city: This was the intended goal
of a siege. This indicates that Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians were at

14. the point of victory over Jerusalem.
i. “The one and a half year siege may be due to (i) Nebuchadnezzar’s absence
at Riblah and concern with containing the Phoenician sea-ports and, (ii) his
watchfulness against Egypt’s potential intervention on behalf of Zedekiah
(Jeremiah 37:5; Jer_37:11).” (Wiseman)
2 The city was kept under siege until the eleventh
year of King Zedekiah.
BAR ES, "The siege lasted almost exactly a year and a half. Its calamities -
famine, pestilence, and intense suffering - are best understood from the
Lamentations of Jeremiah, written probably almost immediately after the
capture.
CLARKE, "And the city was besieged, etc. - Nebuchadnezzar, having
routed the Egyptian army, returned to Jerusalem, and besieged it so closely
that, being reduced by famine, and a breach made in the wall, the Chaldeans
entered it on the ninth day of the fourth month, (Wednesday, July 27),
Zedekiah and many others endeavoring to make their escape by night.
GILL 1-7, "2 Kings 25:1-7
And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign,.... Of the reign of Zedekiah
king of Judah. From hence to the end of 2Ki_25:7, the account exactly
agrees with Jer_52:4.
K&D, "2Ki_25:2
“And the city was besieged till the eleventh year of king Zedekiah,” in
which the northern wall of the city was broken through on the ninth day of
the fourth month (2Ki_25:3). That Jerusalem could sustain a siege of this
duration, namely eighteen months, shows what the strength of the
fortifications must have been. Moreover the siege was interrupted for a
short time, when the approach of the Egyptian king Hophra compelled the
Chaldaeans to march to meet him and drive him back, which they appear to

15. have succeeded in doing without a battle (cf. Jer_37:5., Eze_17:7).
PULPIT, "And the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of King
Zedekiah. The writer omits all the details of the siege, and hastens to the
final catastrophe. From Jeremiah and Ezekiel we learn that, after the siege
had continued a certain time, the Egyptian monarch, Hophra or Apries,
made an effort to carry out the terms of his agreement with Zedekiah, and
marched an army into Southern Judaea, with the view of raising the siege
(Jeremiah 37:5; Ezekiel 17:17). Nebuchadnezzar hastened to meet him. With
the whole or the greater part of his host he marched southward and offered
battle to the Egyptians. Whether an engagement took place or not is
uncertain. Josephus affirms it, and says that Apries was "defeated and
driven out of Syria" ('Ant. Jud.,' 10.7. § 3). The silence of Jeremiah is
thought to throw doubt on his assertion. At any rate, the Egyptians retired
(Jeremiah 37:7) and took no further part in the struggle. The Babylonians
returned, and the siege recommenced. A complete blockade was
established, and the defenders of the city soon began to suffer from famine
(Jeremiah 21:7, Jeremiah 21:9; Lamentations 2:12, Lamentations 2:20). Ere
long, as so often happens in sieges, famine was followed by pestilence
(Jeremiah 21:6, Jeremiah 21:7; Josephus, 'Ant. Jud.,' l.s.c.), and after a time
the place was reduced to the last extremity (Lamentations 4:3-9). Bread was
no longer to be had, and mothers devoured their children (Lamentations
4:10). At length a breach was effected in the defenses; the enemy poured in;
and the city fell (see the comment on verse 4).
3 By the ninth day of the fourth[a] month the
famine in the city had become so severe that there
was no food for the people to eat.
HE RY, "II. During this siege the famine prevailed (2Ki_25:3), so that for
a long time they ate their bread by weight and with care, Eze_4:16. Thus
they were punished for their gluttony and excess, their fulness of bread and
feeding themselves without fear. At length there was no bread for the
people of the land, that is, the common people, the soldiers, whereby they
were weakened and rendered unfit for service. Now they ate their own
children for want of food. See this foretold by one prophet (Eze_5:10) and
bewailed by another, Lam_4:3, etc. Jeremiah earnestly persuaded the king

16. to surrender (Jer_38:17), but his heart was hardened to his destruction.
JAMISO , "on the ninth day of the fourth month the famine prevailed —
In consequence of the close and protracted blockade, the inhabitants were
reduced to dreadful extremities; and under the maddening influence of
hunger, the most inhuman atrocities were perpetrated (Lam_2:20, Lam_
2:22; Lam_4:9, Lam_4:10; Eze_5:10). This was a fulfillment of the
prophetic denunciations threatened on the apostasy of the chosen people
(Lev_26:29; Deu_28:53-57; Jer_15:2; Jer_27:13; Eze_4:16).
K&D, "2Ki_25:3-4
Trusting partly to the help of the Egyptians and partly to the strength of
Jerusalem, Zedekiah paid no attention to the repeated entreaties of
Jeremiah, that he would save himself with his capital and people from the
destruction which was otherwise inevitable, by submitting, to the
Chaldaeans (cf. Jer_38:17, Jer_38:18), but allowed things to reach their
worst, until the famine became so intense, that inhuman horrors were
perpetrated (cf. Lam_2:20-21; Lam_4:9-10), and eventually a breach was
made in the city wall on the ninth day of the fourth month. The statement of
the month is omitted in our text, where the words ‫י‬ ִ‫יע‬ ִ‫ב‬ ְ‫ֽר‬ ָ‫ה‬‫י‬ ִ‫יע‬ ִ‫ב‬ ְ‫ֽר‬ ָ‫ה‬‫י‬ ִ‫יע‬ ִ‫ב‬ ְ‫ֽר‬ ָ‫ה‬‫י‬ ִ‫יע‬ ִ‫ב‬ ְ‫ֽר‬ ָ‫ה‬ ‫שׁ‬ ֶ‫ּר‬‫ח‬ ַ‫שׁ‬ ֶ‫ּר‬‫ח‬ ַ‫שׁ‬ ֶ‫ּר‬‫ח‬ ַ‫שׁ‬ ֶ‫ּר‬‫ח‬ ַ (Jer_52:6, cf.
Jer_39:2) have fallen out before ‫ה‬ ָ‫ע‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫ת‬ ְ‫ה‬ ָ‫ע‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫ת‬ ְ‫ה‬ ָ‫ע‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫ת‬ ְ‫ה‬ ָ‫ע‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫ת‬ ְ (2Ki_25:3, commencement) through
the oversight of a copyist. The overwhelming extent of the famine is
mentioned, not “because the people were thereby rendered quite unfit to
offer any further resistance” (Seb. Schm.), but as a proof of the truth of the
prophetic announcements (Lev_26:29; Deu_28:53-57; Jer_15:2; Jer_27:13;
Eze_4:16-17). ‫ץ‬ ֶ‫ר‬ፎ ָ‫ה‬‫ץ‬ ֶ‫ר‬ፎ ָ‫ה‬‫ץ‬ ֶ‫ר‬ፎ ָ‫ה‬‫ץ‬ ֶ‫ר‬ፎ ָ‫ה‬ ‫ם‬ ַ‫ע‬‫ם‬ ַ‫ע‬‫ם‬ ַ‫ע‬‫ם‬ ַ‫ע‬ are the common people in Jerusalem, or the citizens of
the capital. From the more minute account of the entrance of the enemy
into the city in Jer_39:3-5 we learn that the Chaldaeans made a breach in
the northern or outer wall of the lower city, i.e., the second wall, built by
Hezekiah and Manasseh (2Ch_32:5; 2Ch_33:14), and forced their way into
the lower city (‫ה‬ֶ‫נ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ ַ‫ה‬‫ה‬ֶ‫נ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ ַ‫ה‬‫ה‬ֶ‫נ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ ַ‫ה‬‫ה‬ֶ‫נ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ ַ‫,ה‬ 2Ki_22:14), so that their generals took their stand at
the gate of the centre, which was in the wall that separated the lower city
from the upper city upon Zion, and formed the passage from the one to the
other. When Zedekiah saw them here, he fled by night with the soldiers out
of the city, through the gate between the two walls at or above the king's
garden, on the road to the plain of the Jordan, while the Chaldaeans were
round about the city. In 2Ki_25:4 a faulty text has come down to us. In the
clause ‫ה‬ ָ‫מ‬ ָ‫ח‬ ְ‫ל‬ ִ ַ‫ה‬‫ה‬ ָ‫מ‬ ָ‫ח‬ ְ‫ל‬ ִ ַ‫ה‬‫ה‬ ָ‫מ‬ ָ‫ח‬ ְ‫ל‬ ִ ַ‫ה‬‫ה‬ ָ‫מ‬ ָ‫ח‬ ְ‫ל‬ ִ ַ‫ה‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬ the verb ‫חוּ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ִ‫י‬‫חוּ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ִ‫י‬‫חוּ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ִ‫י‬‫חוּ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ִ‫י‬ is omitted, if not even more, namely ‫יר‬ ִ‫ע‬ ָ‫ה‬‫יר‬ ִ‫ע‬ ָ‫ה‬‫יר‬ ִ‫ע‬ ָ‫ה‬‫יר‬ ִ‫ע‬ ָ‫ה‬ ‫ן‬ ִ‫מ‬‫ן‬ ִ‫מ‬‫ן‬ ִ‫מ‬‫ן‬ ִ‫מ‬
‫ֽאוּ‬ ְ‫צ‬ֵ ַ‫ו‬‫ֽאוּ‬ ְ‫צ‬ֵ ַ‫ו‬‫ֽאוּ‬ ְ‫צ‬ֵ ַ‫ו‬‫ֽאוּ‬ ְ‫צ‬ֵ ַ‫ו‬ ‫חוּ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ִ‫י‬‫חוּ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ִ‫י‬‫חוּ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ִ‫י‬‫חוּ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ִ‫,י‬ “fled and went out of the city.” And if we compare Jer_39:4, it is
evident that before ‫הם‬‫הם‬‫הם‬‫הם‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬still more has dropped out, not merely ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ ַ‫ה‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ ַ‫ה‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ ַ‫ה‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ ַ‫,ה‬
which must have stood in the text, since according to 2Ki_25:5 the king was
among the fugitives; but most probably the whole clause ‫ה‬ ָ‫הוּד‬ ְ‫י‬‫ה‬ ָ‫הוּד‬ ְ‫י‬‫ה‬ ָ‫הוּד‬ ְ‫י‬‫ה‬ ָ‫הוּד‬ ְ‫י‬ ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ‫מ‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ‫מ‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ‫מ‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ‫מ‬ ‫הוּ‬ָ ִ‫ק‬ ְ‫ד‬ ִ‫צ‬‫הוּ‬ָ ִ‫ק‬ ְ‫ד‬ ִ‫צ‬‫הוּ‬ָ ִ‫ק‬ ְ‫ד‬ ִ‫צ‬‫הוּ‬ָ ִ‫ק‬ ְ‫ד‬ ִ‫צ‬ ‫ם‬ፎ ָ‫ר‬‫ם‬ፎ ָ‫ר‬‫ם‬ፎ ָ‫ר‬‫ם‬ፎ ָ‫ר‬
‫ר‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ ֲ‫א‬ ַⅴ‫ר‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ ֲ‫א‬ ַⅴ‫ר‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ ֲ‫א‬ ַⅴ‫ר‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ ֲ‫א‬ ַⅴ ‫י‬ ִ‫ה‬ ְ‫י‬ַ‫ו‬‫י‬ ִ‫ה‬ ְ‫י‬ַ‫ו‬‫י‬ ִ‫ה‬ ְ‫י‬ַ‫ו‬‫י‬ ִ‫ה‬ ְ‫י‬ַ‫,ו‬ since the words ‫הם‬‫הם‬‫הם‬‫הם‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬ have no real connection with what
precedes, and cannot form a circumstantial clause so far as the sense is

17. concerned. The “gate between the two walls, which (was) at or over (‫ל‬ ַ‫ע‬‫ל‬ ַ‫ע‬‫ל‬ ַ‫ע‬‫ל‬ ַ‫)ע‬ the
king's garden,” was a gate at the mouth of the Tyropoeon, that is to say, at
the south-eastern corner of the city of Zion; for, according to Neh_3:15, the
king's garden was at the pool of Siloah, i.e., at the mouth of the Tyropoeon
(see Rob. Pal. ii. 142). By this defile, therefore, the approach to the city was
barred by a double wall, the inner one running from Zion to the Ophel,
whilst the outer one, at some distance off, connected the Zion wall with the
outer surrounding wall of the Ophel, and most probably enclosed the king's
garden. The subject to ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ֵ ַ‫ו‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ֵ ַ‫ו‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ֵ ַ‫ו‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ֵ ַ‫ו‬ is ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ ַ‫ה‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ ַ‫ה‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ ַ‫ה‬ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ ַ‫,ה‬ which has dropped out before ‫הם‬‫הם‬‫הם‬‫הם‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬‫י‬ ֵ‫שׁ‬ְ‫נ‬ፍ‫ל־‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫.ו‬
‫ה‬ ָ‫ב‬ ָ‫ר‬ ֲ‫ע‬ ָ‫ה‬‫ה‬ ָ‫ב‬ ָ‫ר‬ ֲ‫ע‬ ָ‫ה‬‫ה‬ ָ‫ב‬ ָ‫ר‬ ֲ‫ע‬ ָ‫ה‬‫ה‬ ָ‫ב‬ ָ‫ר‬ ֲ‫ע‬ ָ‫ה‬ is the lowland valley on both sides of the Jordan (see at Deu_1:1).
BENSON, "2 Kings 25:3. The famine prevailed in the city — So that for a long
time they ate their bread, as Ezekiel foretold they should do, (Ezekiel 4:16,)
by weight and with care, and drunk their water by measure and with
astonishment, perceiving the quantity of it lessening fast every day, and
having no hope of a fresh supply. Thus they were punished for their
gluttony and excess, their fulness of bread, and feeding themselves without
fear. At length there was no bread for the people of the land — For the
common people, who, upon the approach of the Babylonian army, had
flocked from all parts of the country, to secure themselves and their
families, but only for the great men. Now they eat their own children for
want of food, as had been foretold by one prophet, (Ezekiel 5:10,) and is
bewailed by another, Lamentations 4:3, &c. Jeremiah, in this extremity,
earnestly persuaded the king to surrender, but his heart was hardened to
his destruction.
ELLICOTT, "And on the ninth [day] of the [fourth] month the famine c
prevailed in the city, and there was no bread for the people of the land.
(c) So much that the mothers ate their children, (Lamentations 4:10).
PULPIT, "And on the ninth day of the fourth month. The text of Kings is
hero incomplete, and has to be restored from Jeremiah 52:6. Our
translators have supplied the missing words. The famine prevailed in the
city (see the comment on Jeremiah 52:2). As I have elsewhere observed,
"The intensity of the suffering endured may be gathered from
Lamentations, Ezekiel, and Josephus. The complexions of the men grew
black with famine (Lamentations 4:8; Lamentations 5:10); their skin was
shrunk and parched (Lamentations 4:8); the rich and noble women
searched the dunghills for setups of offal (Lamentations 4:5); the children
perished for want, or were even devoured by their parents (Lamentations
2:20; Lamentations 4:3, Lamentations 4:4, Lamentations 4:10; Ezekiel
5:10); water was scarce, as well as food, and was sold at a price
(Lamentations 5:4); third part of the inhabitants died of the famine, and the
plague which grew out of it (Ezekiel 5:12)". And there was no bread for the

18. people of the land. Bread commonly fails comparatively early in a siege. It
was some time before the fall of the city that Ebed-Meleeh expressed his
fear that Jeremiah would starve, since there was no more bread in the place
(see Jeremiah 38:9).
4 Then the city wall was broken through, and the
whole army fled at night through the gate between
the two walls near the king’s garden, though the
Babylonians[b] were surrounding the city. They
fled toward the Arabah,[c]
BAR ES, "The city was broken up - Rather, “broken into,” i. e., A breach
was made about midnight in the northern wall Eze_9:2, and an entry
effected into the second or lower city (see the 2Ki_22:14 note), which was
protected by the wall of Manasseh 2Ch_33:14.
Precipitate flight followed on the advance of the Babylonians to the
“middle gate,” or gate of communication between the upper and the lower
cities. This position was only a little north of the royal palace, which the
king therefore quitted. He escaped by the royal garden at the junction of the
Hinnom and Kidron valleys, passing between the two walls which skirted on
either side the valley of the Tyropoeon
Toward the plain - “The Arabah” or the great depression which bounds
Palestine Proper on the east (Num_21:4 note). The “way toward the
Arabah” is here the road leading eastward over Olivet to Bethany and
Jericho.
CLARKE, "And the city was besieged, etc. - Nebuchadnezzar, having
routed the Egyptian army, returned to Jerusalem, and besieged it so closely
that, being reduced by famine, and a breach made in the wall, the Chaldeans
entered it on the ninth day of the fourth month, (Wednesday, July 27),
Zedekiah and many others endeavoring to make their escape by night.
HE RY 4-7, "III. At length the city was taken by storm: it was broken up,

19. 2Ki_25:4. The besiegers made a breach in the wall, at which they forced
their way into it. The besieged, unable any longer to defend it, endeavoured
to quit it, and make the best of their way; and many, no doubt, were put to
the sword, the victorious army being much exasperated by their obstinacy.
IV. The king, his family, and all his great men, made their escape in the
night, by some secret passages which the besiegers either had not
discovered or did not keep their eye upon, 2Ki_25:4. But those as much
deceive themselves who think to escape God's judgments as those who think
to brave them; the feet of him that flees from them will as surely fail as the
hands of him that fights against them. When God judges he will overcome.
Intelligence was given to the Chaldeans of the king's flight, and which way
he had gone, so that they soon overtook him, 2Ki_25:5. His guards were
scattered from him, every man shifting for his own safety. Had he put
himself under God's protection, that would not have failed him now. He
presently fell into the enemies' hands, and here we are told what they did
with him. 1. He was brought to the king of Babylon, and tried by a council of
war for rebelling against him who set him up, and to whom he had sworn
fidelity. God and man had a quarrel with him for this; see Eze_17:16, etc.
The king of Babylon now lay at Riblah (which lay between Judea and
Babylon), that he might be ready to give orders both to his court at home
and his army abroad. 2. His sons were slain before his eyes, though
children, that this doleful spectacle, the last his eyes were to behold, might
leave an impression of grief and horror upon his spirit as long as he lived. In
slaying his sons, they showed their indignation at his falsehood, and in
effect declared that neither he nor any of his were fit to be trusted, and
therefore that they were not fit to live. 3. His eyes were put out, by which he
was deprived of that common comfort of human life which is given even to
those that are in misery, and to the bitter in soul, the light of the sun, by
which he was also disabled for any service. He dreaded being mocked, and
therefore would not be persuaded to yield (Jer_38:19), but that which he
feared came upon him with a witness, and no doubt added much to his
misery; for, as those that are deaf suspect that every body talks of them, so
those that are blind suspect that every body laughs at them. By this two
prophecies that seemed to contradict one another were both fulfilled.
Jeremiah prophesied that Zedekiah should be brought to Babylon, Jer_
32:5; Jer_34:3. Ezekiel prophesied that he should not see Babylon, Eze_
12:13. He was brought thither, but, his eyes being put out, he did not see it.
Thus he ended his days, before he ended his life. 4. He was bound in fetters
of brass and so carried to Babylon. He that was blind needed not be bound
(his blindness fettered him), but, for his greater disgrace, they led him
bound; only, whereas common malefactors are laid in irons (Psa_105:18;
Psa_107:10), he, being a prince, was bound with fetters of brass; but that the
metal was somewhat nobler and lighter was little comfort, while still he was
in fetters. Let it not seem strange if those that have been held in the cords of
iniquity come to be thus held in the cords of affliction, Job_36:8.
JAMISO , "2Ki_25:4-30. Zedekiah taken.
the city was broken up — that is, a breach was effected, as we are
elsewhere informed, in a part of the wall belonging to the lower city (2Ch_

20. 32:5; 2Ch_33:14).
the men of war fled by night by the way of the gate between two walls,
which is by the king’s garden — The king’s garden was (Neh_3:15) at the
pool of Siloam, that is, at the mouth of the Tyropaeon. A trace of the
outermost of these walls appears to be still extant in the rude pathway
which crosses the mouth of the Tyropaeon, on a mound hard by the old
mulberry tree, which marks the traditional spot of Isaiah’s martyrdom
[Robinson]. It is probable that the besiegers had overlooked this pass.
the king went ... toward the plain — that is, the Ghor, or valley of Jordan,
estimated at five hours’ distance from Jerusalem. The plain near Jericho is
about eleven or twelve miles broad.
BE SO , "2 Kings 25:4. The city was broken up — It was taken by storm, the
besiegers having made a breach in the wall, at which they forced their way into it.
All the men of war fled — Being unable any longer to defend the city, they
endeavoured to quit it, which many of them found means to do by the way of the
gate between the two walls — That is, between the inward and outward walls of the
city, or between the wall and the outworks, by a private way, having the advantage
of the darkness of the night, and possibly of some vault under the ground. Many
however, no doubt, were put to the sword, the victorious army being much
exasperated by their obstinacy. To account, in some degree, for the besieged making
their escape, Josephus observes, that as the city was taken about midnight, the
enemies’ captains, with the rest of the soldiers, went directly into the temple, which
Zedekiah perceiving, took his wives, children, commanders, and friends, and they
all slipped away together, by a narrow passage, toward the wilderness. But what
this narrow passage was, is still a question. The Jews think there was a
subterraneous passage from the palace to the plains of Jericho, and that the king
and his courtiers might endeavour to make their escape that way. And we learn
from Dion, that in the last siege of Jerusalem by the Romans, the Jews had covered
ways, which lay under the walls of the city, to a considerable distance into the
country, out of which they were wont to sally, and fall upon the Romans that were
straggling from the camp: but since neither Josephus nor the sacred historian takes
notice of any such subterraneous passage at this siege, it is most likely that the
Chaldeans having made a breach in the wall, many of the besieged escaped through
it, proceeding privately between the wall and the outworks, by a passage which the
Chaldeans did not suspect. The king went toward the plain — Of Jericho, as it
follows.
COKE, "2 Kings 25:4. The men of war fled by night— It is difficult to conceive
how the besieged could make their escape, as the Chaldees had encompassed the
city. Josephus indeed gives us this account, that as the city was taken about
midnight, the captains with the rest of the soldiers went directly into the temple;
which Zedekiah perceiving, he took his wives, children, commanders, and friends,
and they all slipped away together by a narrow passage towards the wilderness; but
then what this narrow passage was is still the question. The Jews think that there

21. was a subterraneous passage from the palace to the plains of Jericho, and that the
king and his courtiers might endeavour to make their escape that way. Dion, it is
true, tells us, lib. 66: that, in the last siege of Jerusalem, the Jews had covered ways,
which lay under the walls of the city, to a considerable distance into the country, out
of which they were wont to sally, and fall upon the Romans that were straggling
from their camp; but since neither Josephus nor the sacred historian take notice of
any such subterraneous passage at this siege, we may suppose that, the Chaldeans
having made a breach in the wall, the besieged got away privately between the wall
and the out-works, by a passage which they did not suspect. See Jeremiah 25:4 and
Joseph. Hist. Bell. lib. 10: cap. 11.
ELLICOTT, "And the city was broken up, and all the men of war [fled] by night
by the way of the d gate between two walls, which [is] by the king's garden: (now the
Chaldees [were] against the city round about:) and [the king] went the way toward
the plain.
(d) Which was a back door, or some secret gate to leave by.
GUZIK, "2. (2 Kings 25:4-7) Zedekiah is captured and executed.
Then the city wall was broken through, and all the men of war fled at night by
way of the gate between two walls, which was by the king’s garden, even though the
Chaldeans were still encamped all around against the city. And the king went by
way of the plain. But the army of the Chaldeans pursued the king, and they
overtook him in the plains of Jericho. All his army was scattered from him. So they
took the king and brought him up to the king of Babylon at Riblah, and they
pronounced judgment on him. Then they killed the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes,
put out the eyes of Zedekiah, bound him with bronze fetters, and took him to
Babylon.
a. Then the city wall was broken through: At this desperate point for Judah at the
siege of Jerusalem, Zedekiah made a last-chance effort to escape the grip of the
nearly-completely successful siege. They planned a secret break through the city
walls and the siege lines of the Babylonians, using a diversionary tactic.
i. “It seems that the army scattered to avoid capture; some link the prophecy of
Obadiah 1:2-14 about Edom to this time.” (Wiseman)
b. The army of the Chaldeans pursued the king, and they overtook him in the
plains of Jericho: This was a considerable distance from Jerusalem. Zedekiah
probably thought that his strategy was successful, and that he had escaped the
judgment that prophets such as Jeremiah had promised. Yet God’s word was

22. demonstrated to be true and he was captured in the plains of Jericho.
i. “It seems ironic that here, at the very spot where Israel first set foot on the
Promised Land, the last of the Davidic kings was captured and his monarchy
shattered. Here, where Israel experienced her first victory as the walls of Jericho
feel before unarmed men who trusted God, was the scene of her last defeat.”
(Dilday)
c. Then they killed the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes, put out the eyes of
Zedekiah: The Babylonians were not known to be as cruel as the Assyrians who
conquered the northern kingdom of Israel some 150 years earlier, but they were still
experts in cruelty in their own right. They made certain that the last sight King
Zedekiah saw was the murder of his own sons, and then he spent the rest of his life
in darkness.
i. This fulfilled the mysterious promise God made through Ezekiel regarding
Zedekiah shortly before the fall of Jerusalem: I will also spread My net over him,
and he shall be caught in My snare. I will bring him to Babylon, to the land of the
Chaldeans; yet he shall not see it, though he shall die there. (Ezekiel 12:13)
ii. “This also fulfilled Ezekiel’s prophecy that Zedekiah would be taken to
Babylon but not see it (Ezekiel 12:13). Blinding prisoners was a rare occurrence (cf.
Judges 16:21), for most were put to work. If Zedekiah had heeded the prophet’s
word he would have saved both Jerusalem and himself (Jeremiah 38:14-28), for he
was to die in Babylon (Ezekiel 12:14).” (Wiseman)
iii. “With his eyes put out, and bound in fetters, he was carried to the court of the
conqueror, the symbol of the people who had rebelled against God, and had been
broken in pieces.” (Morgan)
iv. “The eyes of whose mind had been put out long before; else he might have
foreseen and prevented this evil - as prevision is the best means of prevention, - had
he taken warning by what was foretold.” (Trapp)
v. “Josephus (Antiquities x.8.8) says ebuchadnezzar ‘kept Zedekiah in prison
until he died; and then buried him magnificently.’ This agrees with Jeremiah 34:5.”
(Knapp)
PULPIT, "And the city was broken up; rather, brown into; i.e. a breach was
made in the walls. Probably the breach was on the north side of the city, where the
ground is nearly level (see Ezekiel 9:2). According to Josephus ('Ant. Jud.,' 10.8. §
2), the enemy entered through the breach about midnight. And all the men of war—

23. i.e; all the soldiers who formed the garrison—fled by night by the way of the gate
between two walls; rather, between the two walls, as in Jeremiah 52:7. As the enemy
broke in on the north, the king and garrison quitted the city on the south by a gate
which opened into the Tyropoeon valley, between the two walls that guarded the
town on either side of it. Which is by the king's garden. The royal gardens were
situated near the Pool of Siloam, at the mouth of the Tyrepoeon, and near the
junction of the Hinnom with the Kidron valley (see Josephus, 'Ant. Jud.,' 7.11).
( ow the Chaldees were against the city round about.) The town, i.e; was guarded
on all sides by Chaldean troops, so that Zedekiah and his soldiers must either have
attacked the line of guard, and broken through it, or have slipped between two of
the blockading pests under cover of the darkness. As no collision is mentioned,
either here or in Jeremiah, the latter seems the more probable supposition. And the
king went the way toward the plain; literally, and he 'went. The writer supposes
that his readers will understand that the king left the city with his troops; and so
regards "he went" as sufficiently intelligible. Jeremiah 52:7 has "they went. By "the
plain" (literally, "the Arabsh") the valley of the Jordan is intended, and by "the
way" to it the ordinary road from Jerusalem to Jericho.
5 but the Babylonian[d] army pursued the king
and overtook him in the plains of Jericho. All his
soldiers were separated from him and scattered,
BAR ES, "Jeremiah Jer_38:23 and Ezekiel Eze_12:13 had prophesied this
capture; and the latter had also prophesied the dispersion of the troops
2Ki_25:14.
CLARKE, "The army of the Chaldeans pursued - Zedekiah was taken, and
brought captive to Riblah in Syria, where Nebuchadnezzar then lay, who
ordered his sons to be slain before his face, and then put out his eyes; and
having loaded him with chains, sent him to Babylon, (see Jer_39:4, Jer_
39:7; Jer_52:7, Jer_52:11), thus fulfilling the prophetic declarations, that
his eyes should see the eyes of the king of Babylon, Jer_32:4; Jer_34:3; but
Babylon he should not see, though he was to die there; Eze_12:13.
K&D, "2Ki_25:5

24. As the Chaldaeans were encamped around the city, the flight was
immediately discovered. The Chaldaean army pursued him, and overtook
him in the steppes of Jericho, whilst his own army was dispersed, all of
which Ezekiel had foreseen in the Spirit (Eze_12:3.). ‫ּו‬‫ח‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫י‬‫ּו‬‫ח‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫י‬‫ּו‬‫ח‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫י‬‫ּו‬‫ח‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫י‬ ‫ּות‬‫ב‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫ע‬‫ּות‬‫ב‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫ע‬‫ּות‬‫ב‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫ע‬‫ּות‬‫ב‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫ע‬ are that
portion of the plain of the Jordan which formed the country round Jericho
(see at Jos_4:13).
BENSON, "2 Kings 25:5. The army of the Chaldees pursued after the king
— Intelligence was soon given of his flight, and which way he was gone, so
that they soon overtook him. And all his army — His guards; were scattered
from him — Every man shifting for his safety. Had he made his peace with
God, and put himself under his protection, he would not have failed him
now. It seems to have been the design of the king, and of those with him, to
escape into Egypt through Arabia Deserta.
PULPIT, "And the army of the Chaldees pursued after the king. When the
escape of Zedekiah and the soldiers of the garrison was discovered, hot
pursuit was made, since the honor of the great king required that his
enemies should be brought captive to his presence. The commanders at
Jerusalem would fuel this the more sensibly, since Nebuchadnezzar had for
some time retired from the siege, and left its conduct to them, while he
himself exercised a general superintendence over military affairs from
Riblah (see 2 Kings 25:6). They were liable to be held responsible for the
escape. And overtook him in the plains of Jericho. The "plains of Jericho"
( ‫צוֹ‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫י‬ ‫בוֹת‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫ע‬‫צוֹ‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫י‬ ‫בוֹת‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫ע‬‫צוֹ‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫י‬ ‫בוֹת‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫ע‬‫צוֹ‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫י‬ ‫בוֹת‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫)ע‬ is the fertile tract on the right bank of the Jordan near its embouchure, which was) is the fertile tract on the right bank of the Jordan near its embouchure, which was) is the fertile tract on the right bank of the Jordan near its embouchure, which was) is the fertile tract on the right bank of the Jordan near its embouchure, which was
excellently watered, and cultivated in gardens, orchards, and palmexcellently watered, and cultivated in gardens, orchards, and palmexcellently watered, and cultivated in gardens, orchards, and palmexcellently watered, and cultivated in gardens, orchards, and palm----groves. It is probable,groves. It is probable,groves. It is probable,groves. It is probable,
though not certain, that Zedekiah intended to cross the Jordan, and seek a refuge in Moab.though not certain, that Zedekiah intended to cross the Jordan, and seek a refuge in Moab.though not certain, that Zedekiah intended to cross the Jordan, and seek a refuge in Moab.though not certain, that Zedekiah intended to cross the Jordan, and seek a refuge in Moab.
And all his army were scattered from him (comp. EzekielAnd all his army were scattered from him (comp. EzekielAnd all his army were scattered from him (comp. EzekielAnd all his army were scattered from him (comp. Ezekiel 12121212::::14141414). This seems to be mentioned). This seems to be mentioned). This seems to be mentioned). This seems to be mentioned
in order to account for there being no engagement. Perhaps, thinking themselves in security,in order to account for there being no engagement. Perhaps, thinking themselves in security,in order to account for there being no engagement. Perhaps, thinking themselves in security,in order to account for there being no engagement. Perhaps, thinking themselves in security,
and imagining that they were not followed, the troops had dispersed themselves among theand imagining that they were not followed, the troops had dispersed themselves among theand imagining that they were not followed, the troops had dispersed themselves among theand imagining that they were not followed, the troops had dispersed themselves among the
farmhouses and homesteads, to obtain a muchfarmhouses and homesteads, to obtain a muchfarmhouses and homesteads, to obtain a muchfarmhouses and homesteads, to obtain a much----needed refreshment.needed refreshment.needed refreshment.needed refreshment.
6 and he was captured.
He was taken to the king of Babylon at Riblah,
where sentence was pronounced on him.

25. BAR ES, "To Riblah - See 2Ki_23:33 note. A position from where
Nebuchadnezzar could most conveniently superintend the operations
against Tyre and Jerusalem. In the absence of the monarch, the siege of
Jerusalem was conducted by a number of his officers, the chief of whom
were Nebuzar-adan, the captain of the guard, and Nergal-shar-ezer
(Neriglissar), the Rab-mag Jer_39:3, Jer_39:13.
JAMISO 6-7, "they took the king, and brought him ... to Riblah —
Nebuchadnezzar, having gone from the siege to oppose the auxiliary forces
of Pharaoh-hophra, left his generals to carry on the blockade, he himself
not returning to the scene of action, but taking up his station at Riblah in
the land of Hamath (2Ki_23:33).
they gave judgment upon him — They, that is, the council (Jer_39:3, Jer_
39:13; Dan_6:7, Dan_6:8, Dan_6:12), regarding him as a seditious and
rebellious vassal, condemned him for violating his oath and neglecting the
announcement of the divine will as made known to him by Jeremiah
(compare Jer_32:5; Jer_34:2; Jer_38:17). His sons and the nobles who had
joined in his flight were slain before his eyes (Jer_39:6; Jer_52:10). In
conformity with Eastern ideas, which consider a blind man incapable of
ruling, his eyes were put out, and being put in chains, he was carried to
perpetual imprisonment in Babylon (Jer_52:11), which, though he came to
it, as Ezekiel had foretold, he did not see (Jer_32:5; Eze_12:13; Eze_17:16).
K&D, "2Ki_25:6
Zedekiah having been seized by the Chaldaeans, was taken to the king of
Babel in the Chaldaean headquarters at Riblah (see at 2Ki_23:33), and was
there put upon his trial. According to 2Ki_25:1, Nebuchadnezzar had
commenced the siege of Jerusalem in person; but afterwards, possibly not
till after the Egyptians who came to relieve the besieged city had been
repulsed, he transferred the continuance of the siege, which was a
prolonged one, to his generals, and retired to Riblah, to conduct the
operations of the whole campaign from thence. ‫ת־פל‬ ֶ‫א‬‫ת־פל‬ ֶ‫א‬‫ת־פל‬ ֶ‫א‬‫ת־פל‬ ֶ‫א‬ ‫ט‬ ָ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫מ‬‫ט‬ ָ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫מ‬‫ט‬ ָ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫מ‬‫ט‬ ָ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫מ‬ ‫ר‬ ֶ ִ‫ר‬ ֶ ִ‫ר‬ ֶ ִ‫ר‬ ֶ ִ , to conduct
judicial proceedings with any one, i.e., to hear and judge him. For this
Jeremiah constantly uses the plural ִ‫ם‬ ִ‫ט‬ ָ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫מ‬ִ‫ם‬ ִ‫ט‬ ָ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫מ‬ִ‫ם‬ ִ‫ט‬ ָ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫מ‬ִ‫ם‬ ִ‫ט‬ ָ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫,מ‬ not only in Jer_52:9 and Jer_
39:5, but also in Jer_1:16 and Jer_4:12.
BENSON, "2 Kings 25:6. And brought him to the king of Babylon, to Riblah
— Where Nebuchadnezzar stayed, that he might both supply the besiegers
with men and military provisions, as their occasions required, and have an
eye to Chaldea, to prevent or suppress any commotions which might happen
there in his absence. They gave judgment upon him — The king’s officers
appointed thereunto examined his cause, and passed the following sentence
against him.

26. ELLICOTT, "So they took the king, and brought him up to the king of
Babylon to Riblah; and they e gave judgment upon him.
(e) Or, condemned him for his perjury and treason, (2 Chronicles 36:13).
PULPIT, "So they took the king [Zedekiah], and brought him up to the
King of Babylon. The presentation of rebel kings, when captured, to their
suzerain, seated on his throne, is one of the most common subjects of
Assyrian and Babylonian sculptures. The Egyptian and Persian artists also
represent it. To Riblah. (For the situation of Riblah, see the comment on 2
Kings 23:33.) As Nebuchadnezzar was engaged at one and the same time in
directing the sieges both of Tyro and of Jerusalem, it was a most convenient
position for him to occupy. And they gave judgment upon him. As a rebel,
who had broken his covenant and his oath (Ezekiel 17:16, Ezekiel 17:18),
Zedekiah was brought to trial before Nebuchadnezzar and his great lords.
The facts could not be denied, and sentence was therefore passed upon him,
nominally by the court, practically by Nebuchadnezzar (Jeremiah 52:9). By
an unusual act of clemency, his life was spared; but the judgment was still
sufficiently severe (see the next verse).
7 They killed the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes.
Then they put out his eyes, bound him with
bronze shackles and took him to Babylon.
BAR ES, "Before his eyes - This refinement of cruelty seems to have
especially shocked the Jews, whose manners were less barbarous than
those of most Orientals. It is noted by Jeremiah in two places Jer_39:6;
Jer_52:10.
And put out the eyes of Zedekiah - Blinding has always been among the
most common of secondary punishments in the East (compare Jdg_16:2 l).
The blinding of Zedekiah reconciled in a very remarkable way prophecies,
apparently contradictory, which had been made concerning him. Jeremiah
had prophesied distinctly that he would be carried to Babylon Jer_32:5;
Jer_34:3. Ezekiel had said that he should not “see Babylon” Eze_12:13. His
deprivation of sight before he was carried to the conqueror’s capital
fulfilled the predictions of both prophets.
With fetters of brass - literally, (see Jer_39:7 margin), “with two chains of

27. brass.” The Assyrians’ captives are usually represented as bound hand and
foot - the two hands secured by one chain, the two feet by another.
According to Jewish tradition Zedekiah was, like other slaves, forced to
work in a mill at Babylon. Jeremiah tells us that he was kept in prison until
he died Jer_52:11.
GILL, "And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign,.... Of the reign of
Zedekiah king of Judah. From hence to the end of 2Ki_25:7, the account
exactly agrees with Jer_52:4.
K&D, "2Ki_25:7
The punishment pronounced upon Zedekiah was the merited reward of
the breach of his oath, and his hardening himself against the counsel of the
Lord which was announced to him by Jeremiah during the siege, that he
should save not only his own life, but also Jerusalem from destruction, by a
voluntary submission to the Chaldaeans, whereas by obstinate resistance he
would bring an ignominious destruction upon himself, his family, the city,
and the whole people (Jer_38:17., Jer_32:5; Jer_34:3.). His sons, who,
though not mentioned in 2Ki_25:4, had fled with him and had been taken,
and (according to Jer_52:10 and Jer_39:6) all the nobles (princes) of
Judah, sc. those who had fled with the king, were slain before his eyes. He
himself was then blinded, and led away to Babel, chained with double
chains of brass, and kept a prisoner there till his death (Jer_52:11); so that,
as Ezekiel (Eze_12:13) had prophesied, he came to Babel, but did not see the
land, and died there. Blinding by pricking out the eyes was a common
punishment for princes among the Babylonians and Persians (cf. Herod. vii.
18, and Brisson, de region Pers. princip. p. 589). ‫ם‬ִ‫י‬ ַ ְ‫שׁ‬ ֻ‫ח‬ְ‫נ‬‫ם‬ִ‫י‬ ַ ְ‫שׁ‬ ֻ‫ח‬ְ‫נ‬‫ם‬ִ‫י‬ ַ ְ‫שׁ‬ ֻ‫ח‬ְ‫נ‬‫ם‬ִ‫י‬ ַ ְ‫שׁ‬ ֻ‫ח‬ְ‫,נ‬ double brazen
chains, are brazen fetters for the hands and feet. Samson was treated in the
same manner by the Philistines (Jdg_16:21).
BENSON, "2 Kings 25:7. They slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes —
Though they were but children, that this spectacle, the last he was to behold,
might leave a deep and durable impression of grief and horror upon his
spirit. And in slaying his sons they in effect declared that the kingdom was
no more, and that neither he nor any of his breed were fit to be trusted:
therefore not fit to live. And put out his eyes, and carried him to Babylon —
Thus two prophecies were fulfilled, which seemed contrary the one to the
other. Jeremiah foretold, That he should be delivered into the hands of the
king of Babylon, and should speak with him mouth to mouth, and his eyes
should behold his eyes, and that he should go to Babylon, Jeremiah 32:4;
Jeremiah 34:3; and Ezekiel prophesied, That he should never see Babylon,
though he should die there, Ezekiel 12:13. This seeming contradiction,
Zedekiah the false prophet could not reconcile, and therefore concluded
that both prophecies were false, and, if we may credit Josephus, Zedekiah
the king stumbled at this difficulty. Both, however, were literally
accomplished. The reflection which Josephus makes on this event, is worthy
of the reader’s attention: “This may serve to convince even the ignorant, of

28. the power and wisdom of God; and of the constancy of his counsels through
all the various ways of his operations. It may likewise show us that God’s
foreknowledge of things is certain; and his providence regular in the
ordering of events; and besides, it holds forth a most exemplary instance of
the danger of our giving way to the motions of sin and infidelity, which
deprive us of the means of discerning God’s judgments, even though ready
to fall upon us.” — Antiq., lib. 10., cap. 11.
COFFMAN, "That Elisha was honorably received in Damascus at that time
might have been due to his fame that resulted from the healing of Naaman.
Certainly, something had changed from that situation in which Benhadad
sought to capture him (2 Kings 6:13ff). "Not only in Israel, but also in the
neighboring nations, Elisha was well known and respected as God's
man."[8]
"And the king said unto Hazael" (2 Kings 8:8). This character should not
be confused with the father of Benhadad, who was called the son of Hazael
(2 Kings 13:3). This Hazael was the "son of a nobody,"[9] who murdered
Benhadad and seized his throne.
"Hazael ... took a present with him ... forty camels' burden ... Shall I
recover of this sickness?" (2 Kings 8:9). "One camel's burden is six hundred
pounds";[10] but, "This affair must be judged according to Oriental custom
of making a grand display with the sending of presents, employing as many
men or beasts of burden as possible to carry them, each one of them
carrying only a single article."[11]
"Shall I recover of this sickness?" That the king of Syria would bring such
a question before Elisha is a strong indication that the Gentiles, generally,
throughout that whole era, were aware of the True God's existence and of
the worthlessness of the pagan deities of the peoples.
The exact date of this event is not known; however, "The inscriptions of
Shalmanezer III, record his victory over Benhadad in 846 B.C. and another
victory over Hazael, whom he described as `a nobody who seized the
throne,' in the year 842 B.C. This would have been during the reign of
Jehoram in Judah, about three years before Jehu seized the throne of
Israel."[12]
A number of scholars suppose that Elisha anointed Hazael king over Syria
on this trip, but there is nothing here to support such a view. God had
commanded Elijah at Horeb to anoint Hazael (1 Kings 19:15); and there are
two ways of understanding what happened: (1) Either Elijah went to
Damascus and anointed him without any Scriptural record of it being
recorded, or (2) Elijah transferred the obligation to Elisha who anointed
him without any record of it being placed in the Bible. LaSor assumed that,
"Elisha's doing so was the purpose of this visit."[13] Honeycutt also wrote

29. that, "The anointings, both of Hazael and of Jehu, were fulfilled by
Elisha."[14] The Lord has not revealed to us everything that happened,
because such information, if we had it, would be of no value. The purpose of
the sacred author was that of revealing the manner of God's triumph over
paganism.
COKE, "2 Kings 25:7. And put out the eyes of Zedekiah, &c.— Josephus
takes notice, that the seeming contradiction in the prophesies of Ezekiel and
Jeremiah concerning the fate of Zedekiah, made that prince give no heed to
what was foretold. Ezekiel's prophesy runs thus: I will bring him to
Babylon, to the land of the Chaldeans, yet shall he not see it, though he die
there, chap. 2 Kings 12:13. Jeremiah's thus: He shall be delivered into the
hands of the king of Babylon, and shall speak with him mouth to mouth, and
his eyes shall behold his eyes, Jeremiah 32:4. Both of which were literally
accomplished; for Zedekiah was carried to Riblah, where he saw the king of
Babylon, and spake to him, and beheld his children executed, but had
afterwards his eyes put out, and was then carried to Babylon, which
however he was incapable of seeing. The reflection which Josephus makes
upon this event as excellent: "This may serve to convince even the
ignorant," says he, "of the power and wisdom of God; and of the constancy
of his counsels through all the various ways of his operations. It may
likewise shew us, that God's foreknowledge of things is certain, and his
providence regular in the ordering of events; and besides it holds forth a
most exemplary instance of the danger of our giving way to the motions of
sin and infidelity, which deprive us of the means of discerning God's
judgments, even though ready to fall upon us;" Antiq. lib. 10: cap. 11.
REFLECTIONS.—Zedekiah soon felt what an unequal match he was for the
king whom he had by rebellion provoked; for, how could he hope to resist,
who had not only the powers of earth but the arm of God against him?
1. Jerusalem is besieged, and, after suffering the greatest extremities of
famine, Ezekiel 5:10, Jeremiah 52:6 taken by storm. How terrible is war!
2. The king is taken prisoner as he attempted to escape, forsaken of his
guards, and brought back with shame to the camp of the Chaldeans, to
behold those miseries which, had he followed Jeremiah's advice, chap.
Jeremiah 38:17 he might have escaped. He is condemned to suffer the
reward of his deeds; first, to behold the tormenting sight of his sons all
murdered before his eyes, and then for ever to close them upon this
mournful scene, as left in misery to ruminate on the cause; while,
languishing in fetters of iron, he passed his wretched days, a miserable
spectacle, and monument of the wages of sin. Note; (1.) They who refuse
God's counsel to escape, will find the vanity of their own contrivances. (2.)
The impenitent sinner's doom is, to be bound in chains of darkness unto the
judgment of the great day.

30. PULPIT, "And they slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes (comp.
Herod; 2 Kings 3:14, and 2 Macc. 7; for similar aggravations of condemned
persons' sufferings). As Zedekiah was no more than thirty-two years of age
(2 Kings 24:18), his sons must have been minors, who could not justly be
held responsible for their father's doings. It was usual, however, in the East,
and even among the Jews, to punish children for the sins of their fathers
(see Joshua 7:24, Joshua 7:25; 2 Kings 9:26; 2 Kings 14:6; Daniel 6:24). And
put out the eyes of Zedekiah. This, too, was a common Oriental practice. The
Philistines blinded Samson ( 16:21). Sargon, in one of his sculptures, seems
to be blinding a prisoner with a spear (Botta, 'Monumens de Ninive,' pl. 18).
The ancient Persians often blinded criminals. In modern Persia, it was,
until very lately, usual for a king, on his accession, to blind all his brothers,
in order that they might be disqualified from reigning. The operation was
commonly performed in Persia by means of a red-hot iron rod (see Herod;
7.18). Zedekiah's loss of eyesight reconciled the two apparently conflicting
prophecies—that he would be carried captive to Babylon (Jeremiah 22:5,
etc.), and that he would never see it (Ezekiel 12:13)—in a remarkable
manner. And bound him with fetters of brass; literally, with a pair of brazen
fetters. Assyrian fetters consisted of two thick rings of iron, joined together
by a single long link (Botta, l.s.c.); Babylonian were probably similar.
Captives of importance are usually represented as fettered in the
sculptures. And carried him to Babylon. Jeremiah adds (Jeremiah 52:11)
that Nebuchadnezzar "put him in prison till the day of his death:" and so
Josephus ('Ant. Jud.,' 10.8. § 7). The latter writer further tells us that, at his
death, the Babylonian monarch gave him a royal funeral (comp. Jeremiah,
Jeremiah 34:5).
8 On the seventh day of the fifth month, in the
nineteenth year of ebuchadnezzar king of
Babylon, ebuzaradan commander of the
imperial guard, an official of the king of Babylon,
came to Jerusalem.
BAR ES, "The nineteenth year of king Nebuchadnezzar - 586 B.C., if we
count from the real date of his accession (604 B.C.); but 587 B.C., if, with the
Jews, we regard him as beginning to reign when he was sent by his father to

31. recover Syria and gained the battle of Carchemish (in 605 B.C.).
Captain of the guard - literally, “the chief of the executioners” Gen_37:36.
CLARKE, "In the fifth month - On the seventh day of the fifth month,
(answering to Wednesday, Aug. 24), Nebuzar-adan made his entry into the
city; and having spent two days in making provision, on the tenth day of the
same month, (Saturday, Aug. 27), he set fire to the temple and the king’s
palace, and the houses of the nobility, and burnt them to the ground; Jer_
52:13, compared with Jer_39:8. Thus the temple was destroyed in the
eleventh year of Zedekiah, the nineteenth of Nebuchadnezzar, the first of
the XLVIIIth Olympiad, in the one hundred and sixtieth current year of the
era of Nabonassar, four hundred and twenty-four years three months and
eight days from the time in which Solomon laid its foundation stone.
GILL, 8-12 "And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month,.... In
Jer_52:12 it is the tenth day of the month; which, how to be reconciled; see
Gill on Jer_52:12.
which is the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadnezzar; who, according to
Ptolemy's canon, reigned forty three years; Metasthenes (u) says forty five;
and from hence, to the end of 2Ki_25:12 facts are related as in Jer_52:12
whither the reader is referred.
HE RY 8-21, "Though we have reason to think that the army of the
Chaldeans were much enraged against the city for holding out with so much
stubbornness, yet they did not therefore put all to fire and sword as soon as
they had taken the city (which is too commonly done in such cases), but
about a month after (compare 2Ki_25:8 with 2Ki_25:3) Nebuzar-adan was
sent with orders to complete the destruction of Jerusalem. This space God
gave them to repent, after all the foregoing days of his patience, but in vain;
their hearts (for aught that appears) were still hardened, and therefore
execution is awarded to the utmost. 1. The city and temple are burnt, 2Ki_
25:9. It does not appear that the king of Babylon designed to send any
colonies to people Jerusalem and therefore he ordered it to be laid in ashes,
as a nest of rebels. At the burning of the king's house and the houses of the
great men one cannot so much wonder (the inhabitants had, by their sins,
made them combustible), but that the house of the Lord should perish in
these flames, that that holy and beautiful house should be burnt with fire
(Isa_64:11), is very strange. That house which David prepared for, and
which Solomon built at such a vast expense - that house which had the eye
and heart of God perpetually upon it (1Ki_9:3) - might not that have been
snatched as a brand out of this burning? No, it must not be fire-proof
against God's judgments. This stately structure must be turned into ashes,
and it is probable the ark in it, for the enemies, having heard how dearly the
Philistines paid for the abusing of it, durst not seize that, nor did any of its
friends take care to preserve it, for then we should have heard of it again in
the second temple. One of the apocryphal writers does indeed tell us that

32. the prophet Jeremiah got it out of the temple, and conveyed it to a cave in
Mount Nebo on the other side Jordan, and hid it there (2 Macc. 2:4, 5), but
that could not be, for Jeremiah was a close prisoner at that time. By the
burning of the temple God would show how little cares for the external
pomp of his worship when the life and power of religion are neglected. The
people trusted to the temple, as if that would protect them in their sins
(Jer_7:4), but God, by this, let them know that when they had profaned it
they would find it but a refuge of lies. This temple had stood about 420,
some say 430 years. The people having forfeited the promises made
concerning it, those promises must be understood of the gospel-temple,
which is God's rest for ever. It is observable that the second temple was
burnt by the Romans the same month, and the same day of the month, that
the first temple was burnt by the Chaldeans, which, Josephus says, was the
tenth of August. 2. The walls of Jerusalem are demolished (2Ki_25:10), as if
the victorious army would be revenged on them for having kept them out so
long, or at least prevent the like opposition another time. Sin unwalls a
people and takes away their defence. These walls were never repaired till
Nehemiah's time. 3. The residue of the people are carried away captive to
Babylon, 2Ki_25:11. Most of the inhabitants had perished by sword or
famine, or had made their escape when the king did (for it is said, 2Ki_25:5,
His army was scattered from him), so that there were very few left, who
with the deserters, making in all but 832 persons (as appears, Jer_52:29),
were carried away into captivity; only the poor of the land were left behind
(2Ki_25:12), to till the ground and dress the vineyards for the Chaldeans.
Sometimes poverty is a protection; for those that have nothing have nothing
to lose. When the rich Jews, who had been oppressive to the poor, were
made strangers, nay, prisoners, in an enemy's country, the poor whom they
had despised and oppressed had liberty and peace in their own country.
Thus Providence sometimes remarkably humbles the proud and favours
those of low degree. 4. The brazen vessels, and other appurtenances of the
temple, are carried away, those of silver and gold being most of them gone
before. Those two famous columns of brass, Jachin and Boaz, which
signified the strength and stability of the house of God, were broken to
pieces and the brass of them was carried to Babylon, 2Ki_25:13. When the
things signified were sinned away what should the signs stand there for?
Ahaz had profanely cut off the borders of the bases, and put the brazen sea
upon a pavement of stones (2Ki_16:17); justly therefore are the brass
themselves, and the brazen sea, delivered into the enemy's hand. It is just
with God to take away his ordinances from those that profane and abuse
them, that curtail and depress them. Some things remained of gold and
silver (2Ki_25:15) which were now carried off; but most of this plunder was
brass, such a vast quantity of it that it is said to be without weight, 2Ki_
25:16. The carrying away of the vessels wherewith they ministered (2Ki_
25:14) put an end to the ministration. It was a righteous thing with God to
deprive those of the benefit of his worship who had slighted it so long and
preferred false worships before it. Those that would have many altars shall
now have none. 5. Several of the great men are slain in cold blood - Seraiah
the chief priest (who was the father of Ezra as appears, Ezr_7:1), the second
priest (who, when there was occasion, officiated for him), and three door-
keepers of the temple (2Ki_25:18), the general of the army, five privy-
counsellors (afterwards they made them up seven, Jer_52:25), the secretary