1 Kings 22 4

1 Kings 22:4 kjv

And he said unto Jehoshaphat, Wilt thou go with me to battle to Ramothgilead? And Jehoshaphat said to the king of Israel, I am as thou art, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses.

1 Kings 22:4 nkjv

So he said to Jehoshaphat, "Will you go with me to fight at Ramoth Gilead?" Jehoshaphat said to the king of Israel, "I am as you are, my people as your people, my horses as your horses."

1 Kings 22:4 niv

So he asked Jehoshaphat, "Will you go with me to fight against Ramoth Gilead?" Jehoshaphat replied to the king of Israel, "I am as you are, my people as your people, my horses as your horses."

1 Kings 22:4 esv

And he said to Jehoshaphat, "Will you go with me to battle at Ramoth-gilead?" And Jehoshaphat said to the king of Israel, "I am as you are, my people as your people, my horses as your horses."

1 Kings 22:4 nlt

Then he turned to Jehoshaphat and asked, "Will you join me in battle to recover Ramoth-gilead?" Jehoshaphat replied to the king of Israel, "Why, of course! You and I are as one. My troops are your troops, and my horses are your horses."

1 Kings 22 verses

1 Kings 22 4 Meaning

The verse captures King Ahab of Israel's direct invitation to King Jehoshaphat of Judah for a military alliance to recapture Ramoth-gilead. Jehoshaphat's immediate and unequivocal response indicates full commitment of himself, his people, and his military might, mirroring Ahab's own. This agreement signifies a compromising alliance between a wicked king of Israel and a generally pious king of Judah, setting the stage for future divine disapproval and consequences.

1 Kings 22 4 Context

This verse is pivotal within the narrative of King Ahab of Israel and King Jehoshaphat of Judah. The broader context of 1 Kings 22 reveals Ahab's desire to reclaim Ramoth-gilead, a strategic city in Transjordan (modern-day Jordan), from the Arameans (Syrians). This territory had historically been part of Israel, serving as a levitical city and a city of refuge. The conflict over Ramoth-gilead reflects ongoing tensions between the northern kingdom of Israel and the Aramean kingdom of Damascus, frequently clashing for control of key trade routes and buffer zones.

King Ahab, known for his wickedness, idolatry (particularly Baal worship, heavily influenced by his Phoenician wife Jezebel), and rejection of God's prophets, initiates this proposed military campaign. King Jehoshaphat, despite his general righteousness and reforms in Judah, repeatedly showed a propensity for making ill-advised alliances with the ungodly, including intermarriage (as seen later with his son Jehoram marrying Athaliah, Ahab's daughter) and military pacts. This specific alliance against Aram marks a significant point of spiritual compromise for Jehoshaphat, prioritizing political stability and military might over God's clear separation principles. It sets the stage for a dramatic confrontation between true and false prophecy, culminating in Ahab's demise and Jehoshaphat's narrow escape, serving as a vivid example of the consequences of an "unequal yoking."

1 Kings 22 4 Word analysis

• And he said: Refers to King Ahab, the notoriously wicked king of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. This direct address shows his immediate pursuit of a military objective.
• unto Jehoshaphat: The king of the Southern Kingdom of Judah, known for generally doing "that which was right in the sight of the LORD" (1 Kgs 22:43), yet prone to strategic and familial alliances that compromised his devotion to God. This instance marks one of his more significant failures.
• Wilt thou go with me to battle: Ahab's request is an invitation for a full military alliance. The directness highlights Ahab's confidence and perhaps a diplomatic skill in seeking powerful allies.
• to Ramothgilead?: רָמֹת גִּלְעָד (Ramoth Gil'ad), meaning "heights of Gilead." A significant fortress city east of the Jordan, near the Syrian border, part of the territory of Gad. It had historical importance as a city of refuge and a strategically vital possession, representing sovereignty and control over Transjordan. Control of Ramoth-gilead meant controlling vital trade routes and defending against invasions from the east. It was frequently contested between Israel/Judah and Aram.
• And Jehoshaphat said: Jehoshaphat's immediate response indicates readiness and willingness, without hesitation to consult God, as would have been fitting for a king who generally sought the Lord. This contrasts sharply with later instances where he did seek God's guidance when facing overwhelming odds (e.g., 2 Chr 20).
• to the king of Israel, I am as thou art, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses.: This is a powerful statement of solidarity, compromise, and full commitment. The Hebrew reads: כְּמוֹךָ אֲנִי כְּמוֹ עַמְּךָ עַמִּי כְּמוֹ סוּסֶיךָ סוּסָי (k'mokha ani k'mo ammekha ammi k'mo susayikha susay).
  • I am as thou art: (כְּמוֹךָ אֲנִי - k'mokha ani) – Signifies identity, partnership, or being entirely aligned. It reflects a merging of royal will and purpose, almost a pledge of subservience or full submission in this specific military venture.
  • my people as thy people: (כְּמוֹ עַמְּךָ עַמִּי - k'mo ammekha ammi) – Expresses commitment of Judah's entire populace and its military might, implying no distinction or reservation. It’s a complete union of the national resources and manpower.
  • my horses as thy horses: (כְּמוֹ סוּסֶיךָ סוּסָי - k'mo susayikha susay) – Refers to military assets and cavalry, symbolizing the strength and totality of the forces. In a time when cavalry (chariots and horses) represented peak military technology and power, this indicated full military commitment and strategic alignment.
• Words-group Analysis: "I am as thou art, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses": This tripartite statement signifies an unconditional, emphatic declaration of full unity and solidarity between the two kings. It indicates a merging of national interests and resources, overlooking the profound theological and moral divide between Jehoshaphat's more righteous reign and Ahab's egregious idolatry. This alliance goes beyond simple military cooperation; it's a profound commitment that disregards God's principles regarding fellowship between His people and those steeped in paganism or disobedience. This ready agreement highlights Jehoshaphat's fatal flaw of prioritizing political pragmatism and alliances over exclusive trust and obedience to God, which drew divine displeasure and consequences for Judah (2 Chr 19:2, 2 Chr 20:37).

1 Kings 22 4 Bonus section

Jehoshaphat's character throughout Kings and Chronicles presents a complex portrait of piety mixed with compromise. While he initiated significant reforms in Judah, appointed judges, and sent Levites to teach God's law, his repeated attempts at political and marital alliances with the idolatrous Northern Kingdom of Israel (1 Kgs 22:44, 2 Chr 18:1, 2 Chr 20:35-37) demonstrate a recurring vulnerability to trusting in human connections and strategic alliances over divine distinctiveness. This pattern contrasts with God's clear commands against "unequal yoking" and emphasizes that a true relationship with God necessitates separation from ungodliness, even when politically inconvenient or socially desirable. The Ramoth-gilead incident served as a powerful lesson to Judah about the consequences of neglecting to seek God's counsel before embarking on ventures with the unrighteous.

1 Kings 22 4 Commentary

1 Kings 22:4 starkly illustrates the dangers of spiritual compromise and the allure of worldly alliances for God's people, even for a generally righteous king like Jehoshaphat. Ahab, epitomizing the ungodly ruler, readily invites Jehoshaphat into a dangerous military venture. Jehoshaphat's enthusiastic and complete affirmation – committing himself, his people, and his military without apparent hesitation or seeking divine counsel – is a significant theological misstep. This verse highlights the tension between Judah's true identity as a people set apart for God and the temptation to mimic the ways of surrounding nations or to ally with wicked leaders for strategic advantage. His agreement, phrased with total solidarity, reflects a fatal spiritual shortsightedness, demonstrating a trust in human alliances and military strength (horses) rather than in God's exclusive protection and guidance. This sets the stage for God's clear disapproval, a dramatic confrontation between true and false prophets, and a costly, nearly fatal experience for Jehoshaphat, underlining that God does not bless such unholy yokes.