1 Kings 20:23

“And the servants of the king of Syria said unto him, etc.] His ministers of state, his privy counsellors: their gods are gods of the hills, therefore they were stronger than we; and beat them in the last battle; this notion they might receive from what they had heard of Jehovah delivering the law on Mount Sinai to Moses, and of the miraculous things done lately on Mount Carmel, as well as of their worship being in high places, especially at Jerusalem, the temple there being built on an hill, as was Samaria itself, near to which they had their last defeat; and this notion of topical deities very much obtained among the Heathens in later times, some of which they supposed presided over rivers,…”

“Their gods are gods of the hills - The local power and influence of deities was a fixed principle of the ancient polytheism. Each country was considered to have its own gods; and wars were regarded as being to a great extent struggles between the gods of the nations engaged in them. This is apparent throughout the Assyrian inscriptions. Compare also 2 Kings 18:33-35; 2 Kings 19:12. The present passage gives an unusual modification of this view. The suggestion of the Syrian chiefs may have been a mere politic device - they being really anxious, “an military grounds,” to encounter their enemy on the plain, where alone their chariots would be of much service. In the plain the Israelites had…”

“Said to him - They suppose that their gods were no better than the Syrian gods and that there were many gods who had each his particular charge and jurisdiction; which was the opinion of all heathen nations; that some were gods of the woods, other of the rivers, and others of the mountains; and they fancied these to be the latter, because the land of Canaan was a mountainous land, and the great temple of their God at Jerusalem, stood upon an hill, and so did Samaria, where they had received their last blow: it is observable, they do not impute their ill success to their negligence, and drunkenness, and bad conduct, nor to the valour of the Israelites; but to a divine power, which was indeed…”

“20:23 The reasoning that Israel had gods of the hills set the stage for the Lord to show his true identity (20:28). Ben-hadad’s officers had a pagan religious outlook. Perhaps their erroneous view was fostered by traditional knowledge of the Lord’s appearance to Israel on Mount Sinai (Exod 19:1-3, 16-18) or of Israel’s long-term settlement of the hill country of Canaan (see Josh 10:40; 11:16; Judg 1:19). The Arameans were not aware that God is the Creator and Lord of all the earth (Isa 40:28; 54:5), the only God who alone can save (Isa 45:5, 22).”

“Their gods: It was the general belief in the heathen world, that each district had its tutelary and protecting deity, who could do nothing out of his own province. Kg1 20:28, Kg1 14:23; Sa1 4:8; Kg2 19:12; Ch2 32:13-19; Psa 50:21, Psa 50:22, Psa 121:1, Psa 121:2; Isa 42:8 3 Kings (1 Kings) 20:24”

“The Second Victory. - Kg1 20:23, Kg1 20:24. The servants (ministers) of Benhadad persuaded their lord to enter upon a fresh campaign, attributing the defeat they had sustained to two causes, which could be set aside, viz., to the supposed nature of the gods of Israel, and to the position occupied by the vassal-kings in the army. The gods of Israel were mountain gods: when fighting with them upon the mountains, the Syrians had had to fight against and succumb to the power of these gods, whereas on the plain they would conquer, because the power of these gods did not reach so far. This notion concerning the God of Israel the Syrians drew, according to their ethnical religious ideas, from the…”