137
This is the meaning of vv. 19 and 21, and not as in our A.V. The R.V. is misleading, as conveying that it was the
ground that miscarried.
138
Although we do not agree with Captain Conder (Tent-work in Palestine, Vol. 2, pp. 106 -108), that the Bethel of the
worship of Jeroboam was, as mediaeval tradition represents it, on Mount Gerizim, we cannot help transferring to our
pages some lines of his very graphic description of our Bethel: "Bethel at the present day is one of the most desolate-
looking places in Palestine; not from lack of water.... All the neighborhood is of grey, bare stone, or white chalk. The
miserable fields are fenced in with stone walls, the hovels are rudely built of stone, t he hill to the east is of hard rock,
with only a few scattered fig -gardens... The place seems as it were turned to stone."
139
In the present instance, the expression would be equivalent to what in similar circumstances an older man might
contemptuously use: a set of boys.
140
It is used in different application in the following passages: Leviticus 13:43; 21:5; Numbers 6:5; Isaiah 3:17; 15:2.
141
It has been contended that the expression refers only to Elisha's "going up" to Bethel; but it is exactly that which is
used of the ascent of Elijah, and it explains alike the temper of those young men, and the judgment that overtook them.
142
It is impossible to decide whether the calamity happened at once or a little while afterwards. But it should be noticed
that it was not Elisha who slew those forty-two youths, but the LORD in His Providence, just as it had been Jehovah,
not the prophet, who had healed the waters of Jericho.
143
It may here be noticed that, if the event had not really taken place, the inventor would have ascribed the destruction
of the mocking youths to some less startling cause, say to pestilence, or the sword, or else to a sudden and direct
interposition from heaven.
144
Compare here such passages as 1 Samuel 17:34; 2 Samuel 17:8; Proverbs 17:12; 28:15; Daniel 7:5; Hosea 13:8;
Amos 5:19.
145
Canon Tristram, The Land of Moab, p. 134.
146
Tristram, u.s.
147
The first to give it in English version was Dr. Neubauer, of the Bodleian Library.
148
The dots mark where I have not filled in the words missing in the inscription; the words within square brackets []
where I have adopted those supplemented by previous writers. Comp. Sayce, Fresh Light from the Ancient
Monuments, pp. 91-93.
149
The common view is that the "Inscription" refers to the rebellion of Mesha in the time of Ahaziah, and (in the lines
not copied by us) to a supposed later occupation of Jahaz (which some even locate south of the Arnon) either by
Ahaziah or Joram, who was afterwards driven from it by Mesha (Comp. Sayce, u.s. p. 95; Schlottmann in Riehm's Bibl.
Hand-W.II). But: 1. There is not a trace of any such supposed invasion of Moab either by Ahaziah, or, still less, by
Joram before his allied expedition with Jehoshaphat and Edom. 2. Joram could not have penetrated to Jahaz, which
assuredly was not south but north of the Arnon, in the territory of Reuben (Joshua 13:18), without having taken the
whole north of Moab - of which there is not a trace in the Bible - while the contrary is indicated in the "Inscription." 3.
The reprisals upon Edom, a lso referred to in the "Inscription," must have taken place after the allied expedition, since
before that Edom was in league with Moab (2 Chronicles 20:2, 22, 23). All these difficulties are avoided in the view
taken in the text.
150
As I understand it, the Inscription traces in the first six lines the state of Moab under Omri and Ahab. For reasons
easily understood, reference is not made to the straits to which Kir -haraseth was reduced, while at the same time, and
very significantly, emphasis is laid on the help given by Chemosh. Similarly the withdrawal of the Jewish expedition is
passed over, and the Inscription goes on to record how (after their withdrawal) Mesha gradually recovered, town by
town, all Northern Moab, how he rebuilt the various towns, and finally also made reprisals on Edom.