Now she wrote in the letters, saying, “Proclaim a fast and seat Naboth at the head of the people; and seat two worthless men before him, and let them testify against him, saying, ‘You cursed God and the king.’ Then take him out and stone him to death” (1 Kings 21:9-10).

Notice the evil of Jezebel. She was not simply evil. Her evil was amplified by her intelligence. She made sure that there were two false witnesses to testify against Naboth. One witness would not do. She likely remembers the injunction in the Law of Moses, which said, 

On the testimony of two or three witnesses a person is to be put to death, but no one is to be put to death on the testimony of only one witness (Deuteronomy 17:6).

One witness is not enough to convict anyone accused of any crime or offense they may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses (Deuteronomy 19:15).

In addition to the two witnesses, she couched the accusations against Naboth in the context of a religious fast, where people would be particularly sensitive to matters of blasphemy. 

Here is a situation, where an evil woman used a good law to do evil. 

Friends, while there is nothing obscure here as to the evil of Jezebel's actions, let us not simply dismiss them as if we ourselves could never be touched by such wickedness. In a sense Jezebel used the Word of God to pursue her evil designs. I wonder, can we sometimes be guilty of using the Word of God to further our interests? 

The Pharisees proclaimed the law of Corban, where people could give to the Temple the money that would have gone to support their parents. Listen to Jesus' indictment of this practice:

And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.” (Mark 7:9-13).

Friends, the Pharisees may or may not have had wrong motivations when they instituted the law of Corban, but Jesus clearly declared it wrong and a nullification of the true command of God. Thus, a good motivation does not make a wrong teaching or a wrong practice right. That is why we are commanded to rightly interpret the Word of God:

Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:14).

Rob Bell has become notorious for his wrongful teaching against the reality of hell. His motive? He says that it is to preserve the loving character of God. As a testament to the slippery slope of false teaching, he is now supporting gay marriage. He says on Oprah,

"I think culture is already there and the church will continue to be even more irrelevant when it quotes letters from 2,000 years ago as their best defense, when you have in front of you flesh-and-blood people who are your brothers and sisters, and aunts and uncles, and co-workers and neighbors, and they love each other and just want to go through life" (Huffington Post article).

Is the Bible simply some outdated document that has no relevance for people today? Certainly not! It is the Word of God. Rob Bell made waves because he was a well-known pastor of a megachurch, but I see Christians and Christian leaders with lesser credentials treating God's Word with the same cavalier attitude. Rather than submitting to God's Word, many use it to serve their own ends and to support their own misguided views. They select verses here and there to "prove" their point, even while they completely neglect the context that drives the meaning of any verse. Let us all be weary of such a dangerous practice. 

Jehoshaphat made ships of Tarshish to go to Ophir for gold, but they did not go for the ships were broken atEzion-geber. Then Ahaziah the son of Ahab said to Jehoshaphat, “Let my servants go with your servants in the ships.” But Jehoshaphat was not willing 1 Kings 22:48-49).

Here is the parallel and fuller description of what happened in the Chronicles:

Later, Jehoshaphat king of Judah made an alliance with Ahaziah king of Israel, whose ways were wicked. He agreed with him to construct a fleet of trading ships. After these were built at Ezion Geber, Eliezer son of Dodavahu of Mareshah prophesied against Jehoshaphat, saying, “Because you have made an alliance with Ahaziah, the Lord will destroy what you have made.” The ships were wrecked and were not able to set sail to trade (2 Chronicles 20:35-37).

As to the matter of Ahaziah's request to have his servants sail with that of Jehoshaphat after the destruction of the ships, consider the following explanation by Keil & Delitsche:

The brief notice concerning Jehoshaphat's attempt to build Tarshish ships for the voyage to Ophir is expanded in 2 Chronicles 20:36-37, where we learn that Jehoshaphat had allied himself with Ahaziah of Israel for this purpose, and that the prophet Eliezer predicted the destruction of his ships on account of this alliance. When the ships had been broken in pieces in Eziongeber, no doubt by a storm, Ahaziah made this fresh proposal to him: "Let my people sail with thy people;" but Jehoshaphat would not. Ahaziah evidently wanted to persuade Jehoshaphat to make another attempt, after the destruction of the ships which were first built; but Jehoshaphat did not agree to it any more, because it was impossible for him, after the fulfilment of Eliezer's prediction, to expect a more favourable result. Thus the two accounts can be harmonized in a very simple manner.

Jehoshaphat was a good king in all respects except in his insistence in allying with the ungodly kings of Israel. It appears that he felt that he could convert his brother kings to a right faith. 

This seems very much like Christians that date or marry unbelievers in the hopes of converting them, yet the Bible says in no uncertain terms, "Don't do it!" (cf. 2 Corinthians 6:14-18; 1 Corinthians 7:39). It is easier for them to corrupt you than for you to convert them. But more importantly, the Lord has forbidden it; therefore, those who attempt this, already show themselves corrupted in part. 

Even though Ahab was the worst of the kings of the Northern Kingdom, God graciously showed him some mercy because he humbled himself. Then the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite: “Have you noticed how Ahab has humbled himself before me? Because he has humbled himself, I will not bring this disaster in his day, but I will bring it on his house in the days of his son.” (1 Kings 21:28-29)

It was after Ahab's death that judgment would fall on his entire household through Jehu.

When Jehu came to Samaria, he killed all who were left there of Ahab’s family; he destroyed them, according to the word of the LORD spoken to Elijah. (2 Kings 10:17)

If only Ahab repented further and actually got rid of Baal worship in Israel, I wonder if God would have been even more gracious in extending his mercy. As I read this section on Naboth's vineyard, Ahab appears to be a man of weak character, easily intimidated and somewhat childish. When Naboth refuses to sell his vineyard, he goes home sullen and angry. He lay on his bed sulking and refused to eat. (1 Kings 4)  It seems that his wife had a much stronger personality, unfortunately she was the most evil of all woman in the Bible. With a woman like Jezebel at his side, a man of Ahab's weak character probably couldn't do much against her wishes. It just shows how much influence our spouse has on our lives. 

 I must admit that when I got married, I had no idea what I was getting myself into. When I look back on my mental list of what I wanted in a husband, "god-fearing" was NOT on the top of my list. These things we learn as we mature in our walk with Christ. The Bible clearly teaches us that it is never too late to humble ourselves before the Lord. Let us each examine where our heart is today.

Friends,

We read this testimony about Ahab: "But there was no one like Ahab who sold himself to do wickedness in the sight of the LORD" (1 Kings 21:25). Yet, God withheld judgment on his house. Why? We are told that when Elijah confronted Ahab about his sin against Naboth, Ahab humbled himself: "So it was, when Ahab heard those words, that he tore his clothes and put sackcloth on his body, and fasted and lay in sackcloth, and went about mourning" (1 Kings 21:27). God said, "Because he has humbled himself before Me, I will not bring the calamity in his days. In the days of his son I will bring the calamity on his house" (1 Kings 21:29).

As wicked as Ahab was during the length of his rule, when he humbled himself before the Lord and repented of his sin, God accepted him. Once again we see demonstrated the words of David in Psalm 51:17, "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, a broken and a contrite heart—These, O God, You will not despise." We see this with the worst king of Israel, and we will see it again with the worst king of Judah, namely, Manasseh. He too will receive mercy and grace.

Let us remember to humble ourselves before the Lord, for we know that it is only by His grace that we are saved from eternal judgment in the Lake of Fire, which is reserved for all whose names are not written in the Lamb's Book of Life.

The other day, Franklin Graham was on Fox News with Bill O'Reilly. Praise the Lord, he affirmed the Gospel clearly on national television even though O'reilly seemed to suggest that "good" people, even apart from Christ, could be saved. O' Reilly asserted that God will judge everyone according to their free will based on the opportunity given them. But praise God that Franklin Graham stood on the testimony of Scripture and that Christ was the only way for people to be saved. People who argue for a salvation based on "free will" must inevitably be somewhat inclusive or universal, as O'Reilly was, with respect to salvation, because at the heart of the argument for "free will" is the idea of fairness, such that it is unfair for God to condemn people who have not been given enough opportunity to believe. After all, unless God gives everyone equal opportunity, it would be an infringement on their "free will." In the world's logic, this makes sense, and so Rob Bell and others can assert that eventually everyone will be saved because God is fair. But this is not what the Scriptures teach! The Bible says that if God judged us fairly and according to our free will, we would all be condemned, for "none seeks after God, not even one" (see Romans 3:10-12), and before Christ saved us by grace through the new birth by the Holy Spirit, we were all "dead in our trespasses and sins" (Ephesians 2:1). What is the price of complete freedom, where we are fully self-determining beings except for the one point (though admittedly a big point) that we were created by God? In God's economy, the price is eternal condemnation, because only God can be totally free and self-determining. He will not share this glory with another. Our forefather Adam was probably nearer than anyone to "free will"-based life, having no sin nature as of yet and living in a pure an undefiled relationship with God. Yet, he, our representative head, turned away from God. Can anyone say that they are better? By his free will, he was condemned, and so we are condemned in him. That is how we begin life. As David wrote, "In sin my mother conceived me." We carry this inherited condemnation until we confirm it with our own actions (see Romans 5:12). After Adam sinned, he did not immediately repent and seek after God. No. God found him and made provision for him. He extended grace to Adam, as He does for us today. Let us praise God that in spite of our free will He chose to save us.

Multiple times in the OT, it metions people tearing their robes, generally before falling and begging for forgiveness from God (or so it seems).  What is the significance of the tearing of their robes/clothes?  Also, what is the significance of wearing burlap?  It mentions Ahab tearing his clothes, then wearing and sleeping on burlap after Jezebel kills Naboth, and God saying Ahab humbled himself by doing so. 

Yujin responds... Here's what I found from the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament: 

It is impossible to determine with certainty the original meaning of tearing one's clothing. In the context of mourning, it seems probable that the action symbolizes ritual nakedness, a common primitive response to death. But it may also reflect an archaic identification of clothing with the person who wears it, so that tearing a garment represents the rending of the wearer's inmost being. This explanation associates the action with the rites of self-humiliation a person uses to express a sense of diminished humanity, present or imminent.

This same resource suggests that the wearing of sackloth carried a smiliar meaning, namely, penance and self-humiliation.