an abominable image] Exactly what is meant by this phrase is uncertain. The image was one of peculiarly repulsive appearance, or perhaps of specially degrading significance.
for an Asherah] Revised Version margin (rightly, as representing the meaning of the Chronicler) for Asherah, since Asherah here and in a few other passages (1 Kings xviii. 19; 2 Kings xxi. 7, xxiii. 4, 7) is to be translated as the name of a goddess, about whom however very little is known. Excavations at Ta‘anach have revealed that a goddess named Ashirat (= Asherah) was worshipped in Palestine from an early period. The references here and in the passages cited above would therefore seem to be to this goddess. That conclusion, if sound, disposes of the opinion that the Chronicler was mistaken in imagining that “Ashērah” was anything more than a common noun denoting the wooden symbol of a deity. We must of course translate according to the meaning of the Chronicler whether he has fallen into an error or not. See also the note on xiv. 3, p. 224.
the brook Kidron] On the east of Jerusalem, an unclean place; compare 2 Kings xxiii. 4, “in the fields of Kidron.” Bädeker, Palestine⁵, p. 80.
¹⁷But the high places were not taken away out of Israel: nevertheless the heart of Asa was perfect all his days.
17. the high places] Hebrew bāmōth. These were not necessarily places of idolatrous worship, but they were sanctuaries rigorously forbidden by the Law from the Deuteronomic period onwards, which in the opinion of the Chronicler of course meant from the time of Moses. Failure to “remove” the high places was therefore reckoned by him as a sin in any of the kings, no matter how early in the period of the monarchy.
were not taken away ... days] So also 1 Kings xv. 14, but a direct contradiction of the Chronicler’s statement in xiv. 3! Two explanations seem possible; either, “Israel” (contrary to the frequent usage of the word in Chronicles, see xi. 3) here denotes the Northern Kingdom as distinct from Judah, in which case xiv. 3 is to be taken as referring only to Judah, or perhaps these verses 16–19 are an addition to Chronicles inserted by someone who thought the Chronicler had wrongfully neglected 1 Kings xv. 13–15.
perfect] i.e. “whole, undivided in its allegiance.”
¹⁸And he brought into the house of God the things that his father had dedicated, and that he himself had dedicated, silver, and gold, and vessels.
18. the things that his father had dedicated] Probably spoils of war; compare 1 Chronicles xviii. 11. It is implied that Abijah had vowed a portion of his spoils, but that Asa first actually presented them in the Temple. The verse is quoted verbatim from 1 Kings xv. 15, and is most obscure, so that there is probability in the view that it is only a misplaced repetition of 1 Kings vii. 51b. No stress can therefore be laid on the suggestion that we may see in this statement an indirect confirmation of Abijah’s victory recorded in 2 Chronicles xiii.
¹⁹And there was no more war unto the five and thirtieth year of the reign of Asa.