forget what is written in 1 Sam. ii. 7 sq. For Baasha, also, the hour struck when it was said, Behold, oh! most proud, &c. (Jer. 1. 31). The throne which has been obtained by lying, deceit, and falsehood and bloodshed has no stability. The judgment of God, though delayed for a time,

will not always tarry (Ps. v. 6, 7). Robbers and murderers are not always in caves and the hidden recesses of forests, sometimes they are seated upon thrones; but the Lord will "sweep them away,' and their end will be with horror: before His tri bunal no people, no crown is a protection.

8

B.-The reigns of Elah, Zimri, Omri, and Ahab.

CHAP. XVI. 8-34.

In the twenty and sixth year of Asa king of Judah' began Elah the son of 9 Baasha to reign over Israel in Tirzah, two years. And his servant Zimri, captain of half his chariots, conspired against him, as he was in Tirzah, drinking 10 himself drunk in the house of Arza, steward of his house in Tirzah. And Zimri went in and smote him, and killed him, in the twenty and seventh year of Asa 11 king of Judah, and reigned in his stead. And it came to pass, when he began to reign, as soon as he sat on his throne, that he slew all the house of Baasha: he left him not one that pisseth against a wall, neither of his kinsfolks, nor of his 12 friends. Thus did Zimri destroy all the house of Baasha, according to the word 13 of the Lord [Jehovah], which he spake against Baasha by Jehu the prophet, for all the sins of Baasha, and the sins of Elah his son, by which they sinned, and by which they made Israel to sin, in provoking the Lord [Jehovah] God of Israel 14 to anger with their vanities. Now the rest of the acts of Elah, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel? In the twenty and seventh year of Asa king of Judah' did Zimri reign seven days in Tirzah. And the people were encamped against Gibbethon, which be16 longed to the Philistines. And the people that were encamped heard say, Zimri hath conspired, and hath also slain the king: wherefore all Israel made Omri, 17 the captain of the host, king over Israel that day in the camp. And Omri went 18 up from Gibbethon, and all Israel with him, and they besieged Tirzah. And it

15

came to pass, when Zimri saw that the city was taken, that he went into the palace [citadel] of the king's house, and burnt the king's house over him with 19 fire, and died, for his sins which he sinned in doing evil in the sight of the Lord [Jehovah], in walking in the way of Jeroboam, and in his sin which he 20 did, to make Israel to sin. Now the rest of the acts of Zimri, and his treason [conspiracy] that he wrought, are they not written in the book of the Chronicles 21 of the kings of Israel? Then were the people of Israel divided into two parts: half of the people followed Tibni the son of Ginath, to make him king; and half 22 followed Omri. But the people that followed Omri prevailed against the people that followed Tibni the son of Ginath: so Tibni died, and Omri reigned.

23

In the thirty and first year of Asa king of Judah began Omri to reign over 24 Israel, twelve years: six years reigned he in Tirzah. And he bought the hill Samaria of Shemer for two talents of silver, and built on the hill, and called the name of the city which he built, after the name of Shemer, owner of the hill, 25 Samaria. But Omri wrought evil in the eyes of the Lord [Jehovah], and did worse 26 than all that were before him. For he walked in all the way of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, and in his sin [sins] wherewith he made, Israel to sin, to provoke 27 the Lord [Jehovah] God of Israel to anger with their vanities. Now the rest of the acts of Omri which he did, and his might' that he shewed, are they not 28 written in the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel? So Omri slept with his fathers, and was buried in Samaria: and Ahab his son reigned in his stead."

29 And in the thirty and eighth year of Asa king of Judah began Ahab the son of Omri to reign over Israel: and Ahab the son of Omri reigned over Israel

30 in Samaria twenty and two years. And Ahab the son of Omri did evil in the 31 sight of the Lord [Jehovah] above all that were before him. And it came to pass,

as if it had been a light thing for him to walk in the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, that he took to wife Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal king of the Zidoni32 ans, and went and served Baal, and worshipped him. And he reared up an altar 33 for Baal in the house of Baal, which he had built in Samaria. And Ahab made

a grove; and Ahab did more to provoke the Lord [Jehovah] God of Israel to anger than all the kings of Israel that were before him. In his days did Hiel 34 the Beth-elite build Jericho: he laid the foundation thereof in Abiram his first-born, and set up the gates thereof in his youngest son Segub, according to the word of the Lord [Jehovah], which he spake by Joshua the son of Nun.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

1 Ver. 8.-[The Vat. Sept. omits the preceding comparative date.

2 Ver. 11.-[The Vat. Sept. omits the latter half of ver. 11 and the first of ver. 12.

Ver. 11.-1

גאליו!

= his kinsman who might avenge his death. The full force of the word as the avenger of

blood can hardly be conveyed by any single English word.

4 Ver. 15.-[The Vat. Sept. here again omits the comparative date.

Ver. 18.-[The division of verses breaks the connection, and obscures the dependence of ver. 19 upon the word "died."

and all that he did," thus assimilating the expression to that used in regard to some other kings, cf. ver. 14; xv. 7, 28, 81, &c., although the expression of this text is also used elsewhere.

Ver. 28.-[The Vat, Sept. here inserts (with some chronological variations) the account of the reign of Jehoshaphat from chap. xxii. 41-50, again repeating that account (without those variations) in its proper place. The insertion was evidently made to avoid the chronological difficulty between verses 23 and 29, for the explanation of which see the Exeg. Com. Accordingly in ver. 29 instead of the 38th year of Asa the Vat. Sept. has "in the second year of Jehoshaphat The Alex. Sept. follows the Hebrew.-F. G.]

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Vers. 15-20. Did Zimri reign seven days, &c. The distance of Tirzah from Gibbethon requires us to suppose that the seven days apply to the time during which Zimri was in undisturbed possession of the throne, i. e., until the day when the army in Gibbethon made their chief, Omri, king, who then first went to Tirzah and besieged it. Zimri's death followed when he saw that he could not hold the town against the besiegers. The "people" and "all Israel" mean here all those who were armed, i. e., the men of war.

Vers. 8-14. Began Elah to reign, &c. For Tirzah see on chap. xiv. 17. As Elah commenced his reign in the twenty-sixth year of Asa, and according to ver. 10 was killed in the twentyninth, the two years he was king could not have been full ones. is now generally translated riding; but a comparison with chap. ix. 19; x. 26 would seem to indicate that it should be chariot. There is no doubt that some of the chariot-cities which Solomon built (see on the place) were in, from the root to be high, is the part the kingdom of Israel; perhaps "the half" of all the chariots were at the capital, and Zimri was placed over them. According to Josephus (Antiq. viii. 12, 4), Zimri took advantage of the absence of the army and its chief to undertake the siege of Gibbethon (see above on chap. xv. 27). The house steward Arza, who had arranged a drinking bout, was no doubt the principal person in the conspiracy which Zimri set on foot. Cf. chap. xiv. 10 with ver. 11. Zimri acted, as Grotius remarks, according to the tyrannical principles νήπιος, ὃς πατέρα κτείνας υἱοὺς κατέλιπε. But he went farther than Baasha, inasmuch as he not only killed the relatives of the king, but also his friends, in order to secure himself from any possible blood-revenge; all this took place in a few days, for his whole reign was only seven days. For vers. 12 and 13 cf. ver. 3, and above on chap. xiv. 15, 16. □ i. e., vanitates, anything which is called God, yet is not God, and which is consequently vain and empty (cf. Deut. xxxii. 21). The word here does not refer to idols, properly speakng, but to images of Jehovah, which, however, are, like the former, empty and vain.

that was highest, that is "the fortress of the royal palace, the securest and inmost place, the citadel, as it were; for the royal palace contained a great number of buildings" (Gesenius, cf. 2 Kings xv. 25). Zimri set fire to this last place of refuge, and through it to the entire palace, in order not to fall into the hands of his enemies, and to prevent the palace and all it contained from passing into their possession. Similar instances are to be found in Justin. hist. i. 3; Liv. xxi. 14: Flor. ii. 18. Ewald's rendering of is quite arbitrary; he gives the "women's chamber," the harer; and supposes that Zimri went there, for the "eifeminate man had only suffered the queen and other women of the palace to live, as they readily lent themselves to the murder of their lord; and the queen mother seems to have offered him her favor." However, there is not a syllable of all this either in the text or anywhere else. Besides, the deed recorded in ver. 18 rather displays courage and contempt of death than effeminacy. The Syriac has: and they, the besiegers, tired his royal house over his head; and Kimchi translates: and he, that is Omri, set fire, &c.; both are de

cidedly wrong.

short reign of seven days, we must conclude from ver. 19 that he had formerly shown much partiality for the calf-worship of Jeroboam, and that, at the time of his accession, he had no intention of removing it.

In consideration of Zimri's | of the name of the city to be "wrong," because the owner must otherwise have been called (Petermann). The mountain of Shemer is not far to the east of Tirzah, and it lies north-east of Shechem. The palace at Tirzah, which was destroyed under Zimri, does not seem to have been rebuilt, and Omri appears, as soon as he became king, to have taken the resolution of building a new capital and royal city, for which that mountain was peculiarly adapted. It was a "beautiful round mountain, covered with splendid trees, and lying in a valley or basin enclosed with mountains; " it commanded a glorious prospect of the fruitful valley and the heights and villages surrounding it" (Knobel on Isa., xxviii. 1-4; Robinson, Palest. III. 1, p. 503 sq.). Samaria, therefore, continued to be the capital of the kingdom until its destruction. The two talents of silver, for which Omri bought the hill, are reckoned at 5,200 Thr. by Keil, and at 4,000 Thr. by Thenius [$3,900 and $3,000 respectively]. We may infer from Mic. vi. 16, where Judah is reproached with keeping "the statutes of Omri and all the works of the house of Ahab," that Omri went further in regard to the worship than the former kings of Israel (ver. 25). We have no more exact information, but it is certain, at any rate, that he prepared the way for the state of things under his successor Ahab. That Omri was a vali ant warrior appears from the word in (ver. 27), which is used respecting Asa and Baasha, Elah

Vers. 21-22. Then the people of Israel divided. Ver. 21 sq. It is generally thought that two parties had arisen within the army, each of which wished to make their leader king, and that they fought for some time until the weaker party succumbed, and their leader Tibni fell in battle. According to Ewald, Tibni was assisted in the war by his brother Joram, and both fell in the one battle. But it is very doubtful if the "people of Israel," ver. 21, means the same as "the people that were encamped," ver. 18, i. e., only the army. The latter had not divided, for according to ver. 16 Omri was made king by "all" the army; it is only said of him that he was the captain of the host, but neither this nor anything similar is said of Tibni. We have therefore more reason to suppose that after the death of Zimri a faction arose, which did not acknowledge the soldier-king Omri, who had been chosen by the army alone, and which faction set up Tibni in opposition. The Sept only makes mention of a brother of Tibni (kaì àπέθανε θαβνὶ καὶ Ἰωρὰμ ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ EKɛiv), and Josephus also (Ant. viii. 12, 15), only says, Tibni was killed by Omri's faction, but not that the two brothers fell in the same battle.

Vers. 23-28. Began Omri to reign over Israel, twelve years. Ver. 23. According to ver. 15 the elevation and death of Zimri occurred in the twenty-seventh year of the reign of Asa, king of Judah (929); according to ver. 29, Ahab, the successor of Omri, came to the throne in the thirtyeighth year of Asa (918); therefore the twelve years of Omri's reign could not have been twelve full years. And furthermore, if Omri became king in the thirty-first year of Asa, according to ver. 23 (925), and yet died in the 38th year of Asa, according to ver. 29 (918), that is, in from seven to eight years, it is plain that the twelve years of his reign are reckoned from the year in which he was made king by the host (929), but did not at the same time attain the sole sovereignty, as part of the people wished Tibni to be king. He became sole sovereign only in the year 925, so that the struggle with Tibni's faction must have lasted four years. The six years during which Omri resided at Tirzah were the first half of the twelve years of his reign; during the latter six years he lived in Samaria, a city which he had newly built (ver. 24). In order to explain some chronological difficulties that occur later, with regard to the kings Jehoram and Jehoshaphat, Ewald (III. s. 432) refuses to reckon the four years before Tibni's death in the twelve years of Omri's reign, and as Asa reigned four years as a contemporary of Ahab, the successor of

and Zimri, but not of Nadab.

Vers. 29 to 34 describe the government of Ahab Vers. 29-33. Ahab........to reign over Israel. generally; from chaps. xvii. to xxii. follow notiand then in chap. xxii. 39, 40, comes the usual conces of separate events that occurred in this time, cluding formula, the rest of the acts, &c. Our section, therefore, forms a general introduction, and at the ticulars; it is also designed to place the reader same time the superscription to the following parbeforehand upon the stand-point from which all that is coming must be viewed and judged. Omri had departed farther than any of his predecessors from the fundamental law, but Ahab went still farther than his father (ver. 30 is therefore no with the sin of Jeroboam, but he formally intromere repetition of ver. 25). He was not contented duced the service of Baal into his kingdom, in consequence of his marriage with Jezebel, and he capital Samaria. Ethbaal is no doubt the Eiẞaeven built a temple to Baal in the royal city and 20

(who was mentioned by Menander in Josephus ceeded to the throne about fifty years after Hiram's c. Apion. I. 18), king of Tyre and Sidon, who sucdeath, and could, therefore, have very well been the father-in-law of Ahab; he was priest of Astarte and the murderer of his brother, king Pheles. What is related of Jezebel afterwards coincides perfectly with what we should expect from the daughter of such a father. Sy is the known chief male divinity of the Phoenicians, "the sungod, which was regarded as the primary preserver and principle of physical life, and of the genera tive, reproductive power in nature, which flowed from his being" (Movers, Rel. d. Phon. s. 184). According to 2 Kings iii. 2; x. 27 the image of Baal which Ahab had made, was max, i. e., a

Omri (chap. xxii. 41), Asa could not have reigned forty-one years (chap. xv. 10) but forty-seven, for the years mentioned in chap. xvi. 15 amount to that; 27+4+12+4. "But according to this supposition, the numbers here and in ver. 29, also in chap. xv. 10, which are perfectly correct, should be altered" (Thenius), and there is no reason whatever for doing so. The name (ver. 24), is probably the same as i and (1 Chron. vii. 3234), we cannot, therefore, pronounce the derivation monument, a monumental pillar (see on chap. xiv.

TT

23). In the temple of the Tyrian Hercules (=Baal), at Tyre, there stood two pillars, one of gold, the other of emerald (Herodot. II. 44, see above). Besides the male divinity there was also the is, the female deity a (wooden) image of Astarte (see above 7). From the great number of the priests who were employed in the worship of Baal which Ahab introduced (chap. xviii. 19), it appears that it was very extensive and magnificent. More particulars regarding the temple of Baal are given in 2 Kings x. 25-27. That Ahab built besides "another splendid building of the same kind, which served as a sacred grove for Astarte, and which was probably close to his favorite palace at Jezreel" (Ewald III. s. 457), is a pure invention, of which there is not a single word in

the text.

of Jericho the stronghold of Canaanitism fell, its destruction was begun, and the pledge of the same lay, in a measure, in the destruction of that city. But just for this very reason it should never again become what it was before its capture. Ahab, however, who placed the country again in its ante-Israelitish condition through the introduction of the Canaanite idol-worship, caused the fortress, which had been destroyed by the almighty power of Jehovah, to be restored. As he denied the God of Israel, and placed the Baal of the Canaanites in His stead, so he also denied the great saving act of Jehovah as manifested in the fall and destruction of Jericho. He showed his apostasy from Jehovah by causing the walls of Jericho to be rebuilt. It appears, however, that the God of Israel would not suffer contempt of Him to go unpunished. The curse of Joshua was fulfilled as a warning that the divine threatenings would not remain unfulfilled. The account in ver. 34, thus understood, is so well connected with that of ver. 32 that it forms the direct transition to the activi

HISTORICAL AND ETHICAL.

Ver. 34. In his days did Hiel the Bethelite build Jericho. Ver. 34. The city of Jericho, which was very strong at the time of the conquest of the promised land, was destroyed after being taken, and Joshua pronounced these words over it: "Cursed be the man before the Lord that rais-ty of the prophet Elijah (of whom the following chapter treats) against the apostasy of Ahab. eth up and buildeth Jericho; he shall lay the foundation thereof in his first-born, and in his youngest son shall he set up the gates of it" (Josh. vi. 1, 2,4 26). This does not mean that no one 1. The unspeakable results of the partition of the should live there again, but he who endeavors to kingdom, and the consequent breach of the fundamenmake it again what it was, i. e., a fortress, shall be tal law of Israel, appears more plainly in the history severely punished. Jericho was afterwards ap- of the reigns of Elah, Zimri, Omri, and Ahab, than portioned to the tribe of Benjamin, but in Ahab's in those of the three previous kings. All four of time it certainly belonged to the kingdom of Isra- these kings continued in the sins of Jeroboam, beel (Josh. xviii. 21; 2 Kings ii. 5, 18). At the comcause they as well as he considered it to be nemand of Ahab, Hiel of Bethel (the chief seat of the cessary to the separate existence of their kingdom calf-worship) now built, i. e. fortified (as in and to the support of their power. In fact each one surpassed the other until the image-worship chaps. xi. 27; xii. 25), Jericho again; probably be- reached its natural goal in the worship of idols cause it lay on the borders of Ephraim, or was (see above), which the last of them, Ahab, not only designed to protect the passage of the Jordan, permitted, but introduced as the State-religion. which was near. Whether this was done in deti- With Ahab, therefore, the history of the kingance of Joshua's prediction, as older commenta-dom of Israel comes to a conclusion relatively, tors think, or in ignorance of it, is uncertain; at any rate Joshua's word was fulfilled. "We cannot doubt the truth of what is related in this verse, for the names are mentioned, and the signification of these names has no reference to the event (Thenius). There is no other ground for the supposition that Joshua's utterance was a vaticinium ex eventu than the rationalistic presupposition that all prophecies are impossible. The supposition of the Rabbins that all the sons of Hiel, from the eldest to the youngest, were destroyed during the building, is unsupported by the text. However, the question remains how the whole of the information contained in ver. 34 comes to be inserted just here. As it follows immediately after the account of the introduction of the Canaanitish idolatrous worship by Ahab (vers. 30-33), cur author may very well have thought of it in connection with the latter. The fortress of Jericho was, in Joshua's time, the gate and key to the whole land of Canaan; he who possessed it had the entire country open before him (Josh. ii. 1, 24; vi. 1 sq.). The taking of this town was, therefore, of the greatest importance; it was achieved by a miraculous act of Jehovah, which was compared, on that account, to the passage through the Red Sea, i. e., the complete deliverance from Egypt (Josh. ii. 9 sq.). With it, the land of Canaan fell into the hands of the Israelites; with the walls

and a new epoch begins, characterized by the appearing of the great prophet Elijah and his struggle with idolatry (chap. xvii.). The consequences of the partition, which were felt in the sphere of religion, were felt, in like manner, in that of politics, on account of the peculiar and insepa rable connection of the Israelite people with their religion. The monarchy in Israel had arisen by means of rebellion and forcible separation from the house of David, and thus it lacked the ground of divine law. What Jeroboam conceived he was justified in doing, every other one thought he had a right to do also, as soon as he had followers and power enough; that was the case with Baasha and still more with Zimri and Omri. Thus the kingdom became the football of human ambition and caprice, so that one insurrection followed another; and in the comparatively short time of from fifty to sixty years, seven kings reigned, of whom four attained the throne by violence and even murder. But no blessing could rest on such a kingdom. The people of the ten tribes, who were already more inclined to nature-life, and therefore more adapted for the reception of Jeroboam's calfworship, must, by the persistence of their kings in this worship, and by their complete separation from Judah, the guardian and protector of the law, and with it of the spirited life by the nation, have sunk lower and lower. A people can

indeed endure a bad ruler without themselves de- | concluded peace with the kingdom of Judah. generating; but a whole line of sovereigns, of whom each obtained the throne by conspiracy, rebellion, and murder, is only possible where the people themselves are rough and barbarous. What social and religious degeneracy is presupposed, where the nation accepted all the abominations of its rulers, and where an Ahab (finally) met no opposition in instituting the shameful and indecent worship of Baal and Astarte as the State-religion! How far different the state of things in Judah! For though the religious liberty permitted by Solomon bore evil fruit, yet the fundamental law was always adhered to by the kings, and the idolworship was completely destroyed by Asa, who reigned two years contemporaneously with Ahab. The kingdom was firm; there was not a trace of conspiracy or rebellion, and the house of David retained the throne. Although the kingdom of Judah was much smaller and weaker than that of Israel, and was continually in danger from the latter; yet, holding fast to its royal house, it victoriously repelled all attempts to subjugate it. Such was the blessing which rested in fidelity to Jehovah and His law.

2. Of the two kings, Elah and Zimri, we learn nothing besides that they held to the sin of Jeroboam, except how they died. This was, however, sufficient to characterize them. We see that Elah did not even inherit energy and courage from his father Baasha, but was a coward and a low-souled glutton; because when the whole army was engaged in combat with the Philistines before Gibbethon, he not only remained at home, but drank and caroused. Zimri was still worse; ambition led him to unfaithfulness and treason; he not only murdered his king and master, but the king's whole house. How little esteemed and respected he was, appears from the fact that the whole army, as soon as they heard of his having ascended the throne, immediately made another king, and marched against Zimri. Then, when shut in and surrounded, he set fire to the citadel over his head and gave himself to the flames-his act was one of despair rather than of heroism.

3. The accounts of Omri's reign are limited entirely to this: that he built the city of Samaria after the taking of Tirzah, and that he walked in all the ways of Jeroboam, and was worse than all who preceded him. It is not said in what respect he was worse, but it certainly implies that he maintained the anti-theocratic institutions of Jeroboam with great zeal and decision. It appears that he stood well as captain of the army, for it was in the camp that he was elected to the throne. Yet however valiant he may have been as a warrior, in the chief thing, i. e., in his relation to Jehovah and the theocratic fundamental law, he stood worse than any of his predecessors, and was furthest from being what was especially required of a theocratic king, that is, a servant of Jehovah. According to Ewald (III. s. 452 sq.), whom Eisenlohr (II. s. 150) again follows, Omri was "a ruler as enterprising as he was prudent," and "very wisely took advantage of the times to secure greater prosperity for his kingdom and security to his own house. This camp-king ruled his people with great power and decision, not even sparing the prophets when they opposed his designs. But without, he Bought..... the needful peace in order to trengthen himself in his internal relations. He

Omri's chief efforts were directed towards the furtherance of trade, commerce," &c. Every one that has eyes can see that the text does not say a word of all this; it gives us another example of how history is made. Omri is not great and distinguished even as a commander, for it took him four years to conquer the already weaker faction of Tibni, and according to chap. xx. 34; xxii. 3, he was, as Eisenlohr himself is obliged to confess, "forced to conclude a peace with (the Syrian king) Benhadad on very humiliating conditions." It is not credible that a soldier-king should have thought only of quiet and peace; and it does not follow from the marriage of his son Ahab with the Sidonian Jezebel that his chief desires were for the furtherance of trade and commerce, for Ahab did not marry till after he became king, that is, after the death of Omri (ver. 31). It is just as arbitrary to conclude that because he was worse than they all, the prophets must have thrown obstacles in the way of his designs, and that he "punished their interference with the utmost severity." Ahab is the first of these kings of whom we have a complete picture, which is given in the following chapters.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.

Vers. 8-34. General reflections upon the history of the reigns of the four kings in the following succession, Elah, Zimri, Omri, and Ahab. (a) At variance as they were with each other, hating, destroying, and killing each other, yet they all remained faithful to the calf-worship, regarding it as the means by which they could maintain their own kingdom and their dominion over Judah. The religion of the people in the service of the policy of the sovereign. How often does it happen that selfish profit, power, or seeming form the real motive of a confession of faith. (b) One exceeds the other in revolt against the living God.-CALW. B.: In sin and departure from God there are always gradual advances, just as in godliness and welldoing-one step follows another, and the slavery of sin is ever increasing (2 Tim. iii. 13). (c) One successful insurrection seldom stands alone in history, but is ever followed by a fresh one, and becomes a passion, which, like a deadly plague, saps the moral and religious life of a nation to its foundations. Hence the apostle's meaning: let no man, &c. (1 Tim. ii. 1-3).

Vers. 8-10. King Elah. (a) He riots and carouses whilst his people are pouring out their blood in war. It is a sign of great barbarousness and rudeness amid exterior retinement, when the great and rich lead a frivolous and luxurious life, whilst the masses eat their bread in the sweat of their brow, and are famishing. A riotous court life is the usual precursor of the storm which shakes or destroys the throne. (b) Death overtakes him in drunkenness. To go suddenly and unprepared from time into eternity is a heavy fate; but it is still more fearful to leave the world in darkness. Therefore, we should daily pray: Lord, teach us so to, &c. (Ps. xc. 12).—WÜRT. SUMM.: The nearer chastisement comes to the ungodly the more secure are they. When they say, "There is peace, there is no danger," then destruction shall overtake them suddenly, and they shall not escape from it (1 Thess. v. 3; cf. Ps. xxxix. 6). Therefore: be