2 Kings 3:26

THE GREAT INDIGNATION THAT CAME AGAINST ISRAEL

"And when the king of Moab saw that the battle was too sore for him, he took with him seven hundred men that drew the sword, to break through unto the king of Edom; but they could not. Then he took his eldest son that should have reigned in his stead, and offered him for a burnt-offering upon the wall. And there was great wrath against Israel: and they departed from him, and returned to their own land."

The best explanation of what happened here is perhaps that of Honeycutt. "The scene of the king sacrificing his oldest son on the wall, the one destined to succeed him as king, so moved and excited the Moabites that they fell upon the coalition and defeated it."[12] It is certainly ridiculous to suppose, as Mesha reported it on the Moabite Stone, that his pagan god Chemosh defeated Israel.

"He took seven hundred men ... to break through to the king of Edom" (2 Kings 3:26). In this maneuver, Mesha, the king of Moab, evidently supposed that the king of Edom, a vassal of Jehoshaphat, might actually change sides and help him, or at least be a less enthusiastic fighter than others of the coalition. Montgomery called this passage a contradiction[13] of the fact of Edom being a part of the coalition. However, he merely misunderstood the thinking of Mesha.

"And there was great wrath against Israel" (2 Kings 3:27). The source of this wrath is NOT stated, and scholars have different views of its origin. Keil believed that, "The Israelites brought upon themselves the wrath of God by occasioning the offering of an abominable human sacrifice."[14] Adam Clarke agreed with that view, writing that, "The Lord was displeased with Israel for driving things to such an extremity."[15] Jackson declared that, "The great wrath that came upon Israel was from the god of Moab who accepted the human sacrifice of his worshippers."[16]

We cannot agree with either of these opinions. God would hardly have been angry with Israel for carrying out the same kind of victorious destruction of Moab that God's prophet had prophesied, as Keil thought. Nor is it possible to suppose that a nonentity like Chemosh, the Moabite's pagan god, could either have "accepted" or "rejected" anything. However, in this case, it must be admitted that the defeat of Israel following Mesha's appeal to Chemosh by the sacrifice of his son and heir gave that pagan ruler ample excuse for attributing the victory to his pagan god. In this connection, the words of Dentan are helpful:

"It may seem strange that our Bible would contain a story that can be interpreted as teaching the efficacy of human sacrifice, even such a sacrifice to a heathen god, Chemosh of the Moabites; but this is another striking bit of evidence of basic honesty."[17]

If there had been any such person as that mythical Deuteronomist so sternly jealous of the honor of the One True God and his unique sanctuary in Jerusalem, why would he have allowed anything like this to appear in the Bible? The existence of it proves that no such person existed!

Another possible explanation of Israel's repulse here is that of LaSor:

"It is possible that the Israelites believed that human sacrifice was efficacious to Chemosh in his own land, because the popular beliefs of the Israelites were often in opposition to revealed truth, as spoken by the prophets."[18] If that was the case, it is easy to see how there might have ensued a general panic following the sacrifice of Mesha's son.

It appears, therefore, that the great wrath that came upon Israel was that of the Moabites who were aroused to a frantic frenzy by their kings abominable sacrifice of his son. At any rate, the campaign ended then and there.