| MANASSEH (FOURTEENTH), AMON 
					(FIFTEENTH), KINGS OF JUDAH. 
					 Popular Mourning for 
					Hezekiah — Accession of Manasseh — Temptations and Character 
					of the King — Idolatry and Cruelty of his Reign — Moral 
					State of the People — Prophetic Announcement of Judgment — 
					Supplementary Narrative in the Book of Chronicles — Its 
					Reliableness Confirmed by the Assyrian Inscriptions — The 
					Captivity of Manasseh in Babylon — His Repentance and Prayer 
					— His Restoration to Jerusalem — Superficial Character of 
					his Reformation — His Death — Reign of Amon. 
					 (2 KINGS 21; 2 CHRONICLES 
					33) 
					     With the death of Hezekiah, another and a strange chapter 
					in Jewish 
					history opens. When they buried him "in the ascent of the 
					sepulchers of 
					the sons of David," 1 not only the inhabitants of Jerusalem 
					— for the 
					defense, adornment, and convenience of which he had done so 
					much — but 
					all Judah united to do him honor. His reign, despite 
					temporary reverses 
					and calamities, had been prosperous for his country, and he 
					left it in 
					political circumstances far different from those when he had 
					ascended the 
					throne. Above all, his history might have been full of most 
					important 
					theocratic teaching to the people. If it was otherwise, we 
					see in this only 
					fresh evidence of that spiritual decay of which the 
					prophets, in their 
					description of the moral condition of the people, give so 
					realistic a picture. 
      
					Manasseh was only twelve years old 2 when he succeeded his 
					father. 
					According to our Western notions, he would have to be 
					regarded as merely 
					a child. But in the East he would at that age have reached 
					the most 
					dangerous period of wakening manhood, before thought could 
					have 
					tempered willfulness, or experience set bounds to impulse. 
					In such 
					circumstances, to have resisted the constant temptation and 
					incitement to 
					gratify every will and desire, would have required one of 
					strong moral 
					fibber. But Manasseh was selfish and reckless, weak and 
					cruel in his 
					wickedness, and scarcely respectable even in his repentance. 
					When the 
					
					
					
					
					
					infant Jehoash acceded to the throne, he had the benefit of 
					the advice of 
					Jehoiada (2 Kings 12:2), and we know how his later and 
					independent reign 
					disappointed its early promise. But Manasseh had not any 
					such guidance. 
					The moral and religious corruption in his grandfather's 
					reign, must, as we 
					infer from the prophetic writings, be regarded as not only 
					the outcome, but 
					also partly the explanation of the measures of Ahaz. This 
					condition of 
					things could not have been effectually checked during 
					Hezekiah's reign of 
					twenty-nine years, especially amidst the troubles and the 
					disorganization 
					connected with the Assyrian invasion. In fact, we know that 
					even among 
					the intimate counselors of Hezekiah, there were those whom 
					the prophetic 
					word emphatically condemned (comp. Isaiah 22:15-19; 
					29:14-16; 30:1, 9- 
					14). 
      
					In these circumstances the sudden re-action and the 
					"counter-reformation" 
					of Manasseh' s reign, in which he, apparently, carried the 
					people with him, 
					cannot appear altogether strange or surprising. Briefly, it 
					was a kind of 
					heathen ideal of religion in which various forms of national 
					idolatry were 
					combined. The corrupt mode of Jehovah-worship on "the 
					heights" was 
					restored. To this were added the Phoenician rites of Baal 
					and Asherah, 
					which Ahab had introduced in Israel, and the Assyro-Chaldean 
					worship of 
					the stars. All this was carried to its utmost sequences. In 
					the Temple, on 
					which Jehovah had put His thrice Holy Name, and which, as a 
					firm and 
					lasting abode in contrast to the Tabernacle, symbolized the 
					permanence of 
					His dwelling in the midst of Israel, and their permanence in 
					the land, 
					Manasseh built altars to the host of heaven, placing them in 
					the outer and 
					inner courts. Nay, in the sacred "house" itself, he set up 
					the vilest of idols: 
					"the graven image of the Asherah," whose worship implied all 
					that was 
					lascivious. Conjoined with this was the institution of a new 
					priesthood, 3 
					composed of them that had familiar spirits, and "wizards," 
					while the king 
					himself practiced divination and enchantment 
					4 And as usual, 
					together with 
					all this, (Compare Deuteronomy 18:10, 11.) the service of 
					Moloch, with 
					its terrible rite of passing children through the fire, was 
					not only 
					encouraged by the example of the king (2 Kings 21:6; 2 
					Chronicles 33:6), 
					but apparently came into general practice (2 Kings 23:10). 
					Alike the extent 
					and the shameless immorality of the idolatry now prevalent, 
					may be 
					inferred from the account of the later reformation by Josiah 
					(2 Kings 23:4- 
					8). For, whatever practices may have been introduced by 
					previous kings, 
					
					
					
					
					
					the location, probably in the outer court of the Temple, of 
					a class of 
					priests, who, in their unnaturalness of vice, combined a 
					species of madness 
					with deepest moral degradation, 5 and by their side, and in 
					fellowship with 
					them, that of priestesses of Astarte, must have been the 
					work of 
					Manasseh. 
      
					We know that some such abominations formed part of the 
					religious rites, 
					not only of the inhabitants of Canaan, but of the 
					Babylonians. 6 On the 
					other hand, we can scarcely avoid the inference that these 
					forms of idolatry 
					were chiefly encouraged for the sake of the vices connected 
					with them. 
					Thus it involved not only religious, but primarily moral 
					degeneracy. Yet, 
					as might be expected, there was also spiritual protest and a 
					moral reaction 
					against all this. Prophetic voices were heard announcing the 
					near doom of a 
					king and people more wicked than the Canaanites 
					7 of old. 
					But it is 
					significant that the names of these Divine messengers are 
					not mentioned 
					here. 8 In truth, it was a time of martyrdom, rather than of 
					testimony. 
					There may be exaggeration in the account of Josephus, that 
					Manasseh 
					killed all the righteous among the Hebrews, and spared not 
					even the 
					prophets, but every day slew some among them (Ant. x. 
					3, 1); and only a 
					basis of historical truth may underlie the Jewish tradition, 
					9 which was 
					adopted by the Fathers, 10 that by command of Manasseh 
					Isaiah was sawn 
					asunder in a cedar-tree, in which he had found refuge. But 
					Holy Scripture 
					itself relates that Manasseh had filled Jerusalem "from end 
					to end" with 
					innocent blood. 
      
					As we have already marked, these sins were national, and 
					this in a more 
					special sense than merely the identification of a nation 
					with its rulers and 
					their public acts. As this condition of the people was not 
					exceptional, but 
					the outcome of a long course, so the Divine judgments were 
					to be 
					cumulative, extending back from the first beginning to the 
					present stage of 
					guilt (2 Kings 21:15). And commensurate not only with the 
					sin of Israel, 
					but with their utter unfaithfulness to the meaning and 
					purpose of their 
					calling, would be the coming evil. 11 In the figurative 
					language of Scripture, 
					the desolation of Jerusalem would be as complete as that of 
					Samaria and of 
					the house of Ahab — as it were, a razing to the ground, so 
					that the builder 
					might stretch over it the measuring line and apply the 
					plummet, as if not 
					anything had stood there (comp. Isaiah 34:11; Lamentations 
					2:8; Amos 
					7:7-9). Nay, Jerusalem would be thoroughly emptied and 
					cleansed, as a 
					
					
					
					
					
					dish that was wiped, and then turned upside down. 
					12 For 
					Judah — the 
					remnant of what had been the inheritance of God — would be 
					cast off, and 
					surrendered to their enemies for "a prey and a spoil" (2 
					Kings 21:12-14). 
      
					Here the history of Manasseh abruptly breaks off in the Book 
					of Kings, to 
					be resumed and supplemented in that of Chronicles (2 
					Chronicles 33:11- 
					20). This in itself is noticeable, first, as casting fresh 
					light on the 
					"prophetic" character of the history as presented in the 
					Books of the 
					Kings, and, secondly, as attesting the historical value of 
					those of 
					Chronicles. In the Books of the Kings, the writer, or 
					compiler, gives not 
					the annals of a reign, nor the biographies of kings and 
					heroes; but groups 
					together such events as bear on the Divine issues of this 
					history, in relation 
					to the calling of Israel. This explains not only the brief 
					summary of the 
					longest reign in Judah or Israel — that of Manasseh, which 
					lasted fifty-five 
					years — but specifically the omission of what he had done 
					for the defense 
					of Jerusalem and Judah (2 Chronicles 33:14), as well as of 
					his captivity, 
					his repentance, return to his capital, and reformation. For 
					these defenses of 
					Judah were useless; the captivity of Manasseh was temporary; 
					and his 
					reformation was, as we shall see, only superficial. But 
					rarely has the 
					skepticism of a certain school of critics received more 
					severe rebuke than in 
					regard to the doubts which on internal grounds have been 
					cast — and that 
					not long ago 13 — on the credibility of the narrative in 2 
					Chronicles 33:11- 
					20. It was called in question for this reason, that, in view 
					of the silence of 
					the Book of Kings, there was not ground for believing that 
					the Assyrians 
					exercised supremacy in Judah — far less that there had been 
					a hostile 
					expedition against Manasseh; and because, since the 
					residence of the 
					Assyrian kings was in Nineveh, the reported transportation 
					of Manasseh 
					to Babylon (ver. 11) must be unhistorical. To these were 
					added, as 
					secondary objections, that the unlikely account of a king 
					transported in 
					iron bonds and fetters was proved to be untrustworthy by the 
					still more 
					incredible notice that such a captive had been again 
					restored to his 
					kingdom. Eminently specious as these objections may seem, 
					they have 
					been entirely set aside by the evidence from the Assyrian 
					inscriptions, the 
					preservation of whose testimony is here specially 
					providential. 
					Unfortunately, the lessons which might have been learned in 
					regard to 
					skepticism on "internal grounds" have had little influence.
					
					
					
					
					
      
					Of the supremacy of Assyria over Judah in the time of 
					Manasseh, there 
					cannot be any doubt, notwithstanding the silence of the Book 
					of Kings. In 
					a list of twenty-two subject kings of "the land Chatti," in 
					the reign of 
					Esarhaddon, whom that monarch summoned, appears expressly 
					the name 
					of Minasi sar mat (ir) Jaudi, Manasseh, king of 
					Judah. 14 But the capture 
					of Manasseh by the Assyrian captains, and his deportation to 
					Babylon, 
					recorded in 2 Chronicles 33:11, seems to have taken place 
					not in the reign 
					of Esarhaddon, but in that of his successor, Asurbanipal 
					(the Sardanapalus 
					of classical writers), when his brother Samas-sum-ukln, the 
					viceroy of 
					Babylon, involved among other countries also Phoenicia and 
					Palestine in 
					his rebellion. And although the ordinary residence of 
					Asurbanipal was in 
					Nineveh, we have not only reason to believe that after his 
					assumption of 
					the dignity of king of Babylon, he temporarily resided in 
					that city, but 
					monumental evidence of it in his reception there of 
					ambassadors with 
					tributary presents. Lastly, we find the exact counterpart 
					alike of this, that 
					Manasseh was carried to Babylon with "hooks," 
					15 and "bound 
					in fetters," 
					and then afterwards restored to his kingdom, in the Assyrian 
					record of. 
					precisely the same mode of deportation and of the same 
					restoration by Asurbanipal of Necho of Egypt. 
					16 
      
					Holy Scripture tracing this restoration — not, as in the 
					Assyrian 
					inscription, to its secondary cause "the mercy of the king" 
					— but to its 
					real source, connects it with the repentance and prayer of 
					Manasseh in his 
					distress (2 Chronicles 33:12, 13). That in such 
					circumstances the son of 
					Hezekiah, with the remembrance of the Divine deliverance of 
					his father in 
					his mind, should have recognized the folly and guilt of his 
					conduct, 
					humbled himself, and prayed unto the Lord 
					17 — seems so 
					natural as 
					scarcely to require confirmation. Yet there is such, at 
					least of his return to 
					Jerusalem, in the historical notice of his additions to the 
					fortifications of 
					Jerusalem (2 Chronicles 33:14). And if his abolition of the 
					former idolatry, 
					and restoration of the service of Jehovah, seem not 
					consistent with the 
					measures that had afterwards to be adopted by his grandson 
					Josiah, we 
					have to remember that between them intervened the wicked 
					reign of Amon; 
					that Manasseh seems rather to have put aside than destroyed 
					idolatry; and 
					that the sacred text itself indicates the superficiality and 
					incompleteness of 
					his reformation (2 Chronicles 33:17). 
					
					
					
					
      
					The events just recorded must have taken place near the 
					close of this reign, 
					which extended over the exceptional period of fifty-five 
					years. As Holy 
					Scripture refers to his sins as extreme and permanent 
					instance of guilt (2 
					Kings 23:26; 24:3; Jeremiah 15:4), so, on the other hand, 
					Jewish tradition 
					dwells upon the repentance of Manasseh and the acceptance of 
					his prayer, 
					as the fullest manifestation of God's mercy, and the 
					greatest 
					encouragement to repentant sinners. 18 And, in truth, the 
					threatened 
					judgment upon Jerusalem was deferred for more than half a 
					century. So it 
					was in peace that Manasseh laid himself to sleep.
					19 He was 
					buried in a 
					garden attached to his palace, which popularly bore the name 
					of "the 
					garden of Uzza." 20 
      
					That the reformation made by Manasseh could only have been 
					superficial, 
					appears also from the record of the brief reign of his son 
					and successor 
					Amon. Indeed, some writers have seen a picture of that 
					period in certain of 
					the utterances of Zephaniah, 21 although he prophesied 
					during the reign of 
					Josiah. Amon was twenty-four years old at his accession, and 
					his rule only 
					lasted two years. It was marked by the resumption of the 
					idolatry of 
					Manasseh — apparently in an even aggravated form (2 
					Chronicles 33:23). 
					A palace-conspiracy put an end to his life. As on a former 
					occasion (2 
					Kings 14:20, 21), "the people of the land" secured the 
					Davidic succession 
					by proclaiming Josiah, the youthful son of Amen, heir to his 
					throne. 
					       |