Albert Barnes Commentary Amos 1:4

Albert Barnes Commentary

Amos 1:4

1798–1870
Presbyterian
Albert Barnes
Albert Barnes

Albert Barnes Commentary

Amos 1:4

1798–1870
Presbyterian
SCRIPTURE

"but I will send a fire into the house of Hazael, and it shall devour the palaces of Ben-hadad." — Amos 1:4 (ASV)

And I will send a fire on the house of Hazael - The fire is probably at once material fire, by which cities are burned in war, since he adds, it shall devour the palaces of Benhadad. It also stands as a symbol of all other severity in war, as in the ancient proverb: a fire is gone out from Heshbon, a flame from the city of Sihon; it hath consumed Ar of Moab, the lords of the high places of Arnon (Numbers 21:28). And again, it is a symbol of the displeasure of Almighty God, as when He says, a fire is kindled in Mine anger, and it shall burn unto the lowest hell (Deuteronomy 32:22).

For the fire destroys not only the natural buildings, but the house of Hazael, that is, his whole family. In these prophecies, a sevenfold vengeance by fire is denounced against the seven people, an image of the eternal fire into which all iniquity shall be cast.

The palaces of Benhadad - Hazael, having murdered Benhadad his master and ascended his throne, called his son after his murdered master, probably in order to connect his own house with the ancient dynasty. Benhadad, meaning son or worshiper of the idol Hadad, or the sun, had been the name of two of the kings of the old dynasty. Benhadad III was at this time reigning.

The prophet foretells the entire destruction of the dynasty founded in blood. This prophecy may have had a fulfillment in the destruction of the house of Hazael, with whose family Rezin, the king of Syria in the time of Ahaz, stands in no known relation. Defeats, such as those of Benhadad III by Jeroboam II who took Damascus itself, are often the close of an usurping dynasty. Having no claim to regard except success, failure vitiates its only title.

The name Hazael, whom God looked upon, implies a sort of acknowledgment of the One God, like Tab-el, God is good, El-iada’, whom God knoweth, even amid the idolatry in the names, Tab-Rimmon, good is Rimmon; Hadad-ezer, Hadad is help; and Hadad, or Benhadad. Bad men abuse every creature, ordinance, or appointment of God. It may be then that, as Sennacherib boasted, am I now come up without the Lord against this land to destroy it? the Lord said unto me, Go up against this land and destroy it (Isaiah 36:10); so Hazael made use of the prophecy of Elisha to give himself out as the scourge of God, and thought of himself as one on whom God looked.

Knowledge of futurity is an awful gift. As Omniscience alone can wield Omnipotence, so superhuman knowledge needs superhuman gifts of wisdom and holiness. Hazael seemingly hardened himself in sin with the help of the knowledge which should have been his warning. Probably he came to Elisha with the intent to murder his master already formed, in case he should not die a natural death, and Elisha read his heart.

But he very probably justified himself to himself in what he had already purposed to do, on the ground that Elisha had foretold to him that he should be king over (2 Kings 8:13). In his massacres of God’s people, he gave himself out as being, what he was, the instrument of God. Scourges of God have known themselves to be what they were, although they themselves were no less sinful in sinfully accomplishing the Will of God (see the note at Hosea 1:4). We have heard of a Christian Emperor who has often spoken of his mission, although his mission has already cost the shedding of much Christian blood.