2 Kings 3:27

“Then he took his eldest son, that should have reigned in his stead, etc.] Not the eldest son of the king of Edom, whom the king of Moab had in his hands before, which made the king of Edom the more willing to join in this expedition for the recovery of his son, as Joseph Kimchi thinks; or whom he took now in his sally out upon him, as Moses Kimchi and Ben Gersom, proceeding upon a mistaken sense of (<300201>Amos 2:1) for the king of Edom could have no son that had a right, or was designed to succeed him, since he was but a deputy king himself; and besides, the sacrificing of him was not the way to cause the kings to raise the siege, but rather to provoke them to press it the more closely: it…”

“took his eldest son that should have reigned in his stead, and offered him for a burnt offering, &c.--By this deed of horror, to which the allied army drove the king of Moab, a divine judgment came upon Israel; that is, the besiegers feared the anger of God, which they had incurred by giving occasion to the human sacrifice forbidden in the law (Lev 18:21; Lev 20:3), and hastily raised the siege. Next: 2 Kings Chapter 4”

“Compare the marginal reference. Mesha, when his sally failed, took, as a last resource, his first born son, and offered him as a burnt-offering to appease the manifest anger of his god Chemosh, and obtain his aid against his enemies. This act was thoroughly in accordance with Moabitish notions. And there was great indignation against Israel - Either the Israelites were indignant with themselves, or the men of Judah and the Edomites were indignant at the Israelites for having caused the pollution of this sacrifice, and the siege was relinquished. return to 'Top of Page' Footnotes: Copyright Statement These files are public domain. Bibliographical Information Barnes, Albert. "Commentary on 2…”

“His son - Or rather, his own son: whom he sacrificed; partly, to obtain the favour of his god, according to the manner of the Phoenicians and other people in publick calamities; and partly, to oblige the Israelites to quit the siege out of compassion; or, as despairing to conquer (at least without greater loss of men than it was worth) him who was resolved to defend the city to the utmost extremity. On the wall - That the besiegers might see it, and be moved by it. There was, &c. - Or, great trouble or repentance upon Israel, the Israelitish king and people (who was the first cause of the war, and had brought the rest into confederacy with him) were greatly grieved for this barbarous action,…”

“3:27 So there was great anger against Israel: The Hebrew phrase translated great anger occurs elsewhere to describe the Lord’s fury against Israel for covenant violations (Jer 21:5; 32:37; Zech 7:12).”

“offered him: In cases of great extremity, it was customary in various heathen nations, to offer human sacrifices, and even their own children. This was frequent among the Phoenicians, Greeks, Romans, Scythians, Gauls, Africans, and others; and was the natural fruit of a religious system, which had for the objects of its worship cruel and merciless divinities. The king of Moab, in this case, sacrificed his son to obtain the favour of Chemosh his god, who, being a devil, delighted in blood and murder, and the destruction of mankind. The dearer anything was to them, the more acceptable those idolaters thought the sacrifice, and therefore burnt their children in the fire to their honour. Gen…”