1 Kings 16:20

Translation
King James Version
Now the rest of the acts of Zimri, and his treason that he wrought, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?
Ask
KJV (with Strong's)
Now the rest H3499 of the acts H1697 of Zimri H2174, and his treason H7195 that he wrought H7194, are they not written H3789 in the book H5612 of the chronicles H1697 H3117 of the kings H4428 of Israel H3478?
Ask
Complete Jewish Bible
Other activities of Zimri and his conspiracy are recorded in the Annals of the Kings of Isra'el.
Ask
Berean Standard Bible
As for the rest of the acts of Zimri and the treason he committed, are they not written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel?
Ask
American Standard Version
Now the rest of the acts of Zimri, and his treason that he wrought, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?
Ask
World English Bible Messianic
Now the rest of the acts of Zimri, and his treason that he committed, aren’t they written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?
Ask
Geneva Bible (1599)
And the rest of the actes of Zimri, and his treason that hee wrought, are they not written in the booke of the Chronicles of the Kinges of Israel?
Ask
Young's Literal Translation
and the rest of the matters of Zimri, and his conspiracy that he made, are they not written on the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel?
Ask
See also
1 Kings 16:51 Kings 16:141 Kings 16:271 Kings 15:311 Kings 14:191 Kings 22:39
See on the biblical-era map
City Plan: Jerusalem in the Time of Solomon
City Plan: Jerusalem in the Time of Solomon View full PDF
Baasha, Zimri, and Omri
Baasha, Zimri, and Omri View full PDF
Ahab and Ben-Hadad
Ahab and Ben-Hadad View full PDF

Map © Biblica Open Bible Maps · CC BY-SA 4.0

In the KJVVerse 9,304 of 31,102

Study This Verse

SUMMARY

1 Kings 16:20 serves as a concise, formulaic editorial conclusion to the remarkably brief and violent seven-day reign of King Zimri of Israel. This statement directs the reader to the "book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel" for further details regarding Zimri's actions, particularly his treacherous coup and the subsequent events that led to his swift demise. It underscores the biblical narrative's selective nature, focusing on theological implications while affirming the historical grounding of the account, emphasizing the divine judgment inherent in the rise and fall of unrighteous rulers.

CONTEXT

  • Literary Context: This verse immediately follows the dramatic and truncated account of Zimri's short-lived reign, detailed in 1 Kings 16:9-19. Zimri's ascent to power was marked by a treacherous assassination of King Elah while he was intoxicated, an act vividly described in 1 Kings 16:9. His subsequent actions included a ruthless purge of the entire house of Baasha, Elah's predecessor, fulfilling a divine prophecy against Baasha's dynasty (compare with 1 Kings 16:1-4). However, Zimri's reign was cut short when Omri, the commander of the army, besieged Tirzah. Rather than surrender, Zimri chose to commit suicide by burning the royal palace around himself, an event recorded in 1 Kings 16:18. Verse 19 explicitly attributes his downfall to "the sins which he sinned in doing evil in the sight of the LORD," setting the stage for the concluding editorial note of verse 20. This concluding formula is a standard Deuteronomistic device used throughout the books of Kings to mark the end of a king's reign and to point to external historical records, highlighting the selective nature of the biblical narrative.
  • Historical & Cultural Context: The period of the divided monarchy, particularly in the Northern Kingdom of Israel, was characterized by extreme political instability, frequent coups, and a rapid succession of short-lived dynasties. Zimri's reign (circa 885 BCE) serves as a vivid illustration of this turbulent era. The assassination of a king, followed by the systematic extermination of his entire lineage, was a common, albeit brutal, practice in the ancient Near East. This practice, often referred to as damnatio memoriae or dynastic purge, aimed to eliminate any potential rival claims to the throne. The "book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel" refers to official court annals or state records, meticulously maintained by scribes in royal archives. These were not the later biblical books of Chronicles but rather comprehensive historical documents from which the biblical authors selectively drew information. The consistent reference to such external sources lends historical credibility to the biblical narrative, situating it within the broader historical record of the time, even as its primary purpose remains theological rather than purely historical.
  • Key Themes: Though brief, this verse contributes significantly to several overarching themes within 1 Kings and the broader Deuteronomistic History. Firstly, it powerfully illustrates the fleeting nature of unrighteous power and the inherent instability of human kingship when it deviates from divine appointment and covenant faithfulness. Zimri's seven-day reign, the shortest in Israelite history, serves as a stark object lesson on the futility of seizing power through violence and treachery. This echoes the biblical principle that "the way of the wicked will perish" (as articulated in Psalm 1:6). Secondly, the verse reinforces the consistent theme of divine judgment and consequences. Zimri's swift and violent end is presented as a direct result of his "treason" and "sins" (explicitly stated in 1 Kings 16:19), emphasizing that God holds rulers accountable for their actions. Lastly, the recurring reference to the "book of the chronicles" underscores the unique nature of biblical historiography, demonstrating that the biblical narrative is not exhaustive but selective, focusing on God's interaction with His people and the profound theological implications of their actions, while acknowledging the existence of broader historical records.

EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Key Word Analysis

  • Acts (Hebrew, דָּבָר, dâbâr, H1697): While often translated "word," in this context, dâbâr refers to "matters," "affairs," or "deeds." It encompasses the totality of Zimri's actions and events during his brief reign, including his treacherous coup, his subsequent purge of Baasha's house, and his ultimate demise. The use of this term here is a standard way to refer to the full scope of a king's activities.
  • Treason (Hebrew, קֶשֶׁר, qesher, H7195): This term specifically denotes a conspiracy, rebellion, or plot against the established authority. Zimri's act of assassinating King Elah (as described in 1 Kings 16:9) and seizing the throne constitutes a clear act of qesher. This word carries strong negative connotations, highlighting the illegitimate and violent nature of his ascent to power.
  • Chronicles (Hebrew, דִּבְרֵי הַיָּמִים, divrei hayyamim - a compound of H1697 and, H1697): Literally meaning "the words of the days," this phrase refers to official state annals or historical records meticulously kept by royal scribes. These were comprehensive documents detailing royal decrees, military campaigns, building projects, and other significant events of a king's reign. The biblical authors frequently cite these "chronicles" to indicate that their narrative is a selective, theologically-driven account, not an exhaustive historical record, yet one grounded in verifiable historical sources.

Verse Breakdown

  • "Now the rest of the acts of Zimri": This opening phrase signals that the biblical account of Zimri's reign is not exhaustive. It implies that there were other details, perhaps administrative or minor events, that were not deemed essential for the theological message of the book of Kings. The extreme brevity of his reign (seven days) makes this phrase almost ironic, as there was little "rest" to his acts beyond the initial coup and subsequent self-immolation.
  • "and his treason that he wrought": This clause explicitly highlights the most significant and defining act of Zimri's reign: his violent and illegitimate seizure of power. His "treason" (Hebrew: qesher) against King Elah is singled out as the pivotal event that set the course for his brief and condemned rule. This phrase underscores the moral and theological judgment on his actions, emphasizing the illegitimacy of his claim to the throne.
  • "[are] they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?": This is a recurring Deuteronomistic formula used to conclude the account of a king's reign in the Northern Kingdom. It serves as an editorial note, directing the reader to external, more comprehensive historical records. The rhetorical question implies that these records exist and are accessible, thereby grounding the biblical narrative in historical reality while simultaneously asserting its theological selectivity and focus on divine judgment.

Literary Devices

The concluding formula in 1 Kings 16:20 employs several significant literary devices. Most prominently, it utilizes Formulaic Language, specifically the recurring phrase "are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?" This repeated phrase serves as a structural marker throughout the books of Kings, signaling the end of a king's narrative and pointing to external historical sources. This creates a strong sense of Verisimilitude, lending an air of historical authenticity to the biblical account by acknowledging a broader historical record beyond the immediate narrative's scope. There is also an element of Ironic Understatement given the extreme brevity of Zimri's reign, which lasted only seven days. To speak of "the rest of the acts of Zimri" when his entire rule was so short and tumultuous subtly highlights the futility and ultimate insignificance of his violent power grab. This formula also functions as a form of Intertextuality, implicitly inviting the reader to consult other historical documents, even if those specific "chronicles" are no longer extant or identifiable with later biblical books.

THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS

The brief mention of Zimri's reign and its swift conclusion in 1 Kings 16:20, though seemingly a mere historical footnote, carries profound theological weight. It serves as a powerful testament to God's sovereignty over human affairs, even in the midst of political chaos and violent usurpation. Zimri's rapid rise and fall illustrate the principle that power gained through treachery and unrighteousness is inherently unstable and ultimately subject to divine judgment. His demise, explicitly linked to his sins in the preceding verse, underscores the consistent biblical theme that actions have consequences, and no human ruler, regardless of their perceived might, can escape accountability before the Lord. This theological lens interprets historical events not as random occurrences but as manifestations of God's justice and His overarching plan for His people, demonstrating that even the most fleeting human reigns operate under the watchful eye of the Almighty.

REFLECTION AND APPLICATION

The story of Zimri, though compressed into a few verses and concluded by this editorial note, offers a timeless warning about the allure and ultimate futility of power pursued through unrighteous means. His fleeting reign, marked by violence and treachery, reminds us that true authority and lasting influence are not found in ruthless ambition or the accumulation of worldly power, but in integrity, faithfulness, and a humble submission to God's will. For us today, Zimri's rapid downfall serves as a stark reminder that our actions, especially those driven by selfish ambition or a disregard for justice, have consequences, both temporal and eternal. It challenges us to examine our own motivations for seeking influence or leadership, urging us to pursue righteousness and service rather than self-aggrandizement. The biblical narrative's willingness to record even such a brief and ignominious reign, while pointing to a larger historical record, affirms that God is sovereign over all history, and every human story, no matter how short or seemingly insignificant, is ultimately part of His grand narrative of redemption and judgment.

Questions for Reflection

  • How does Zimri's brief reign challenge our understanding of power and ambition in our own lives or in society?
  • In what ways might we be tempted to pursue goals through "treasonous" or unrighteous means, even subtly, in our personal or professional spheres?
  • What does the swiftness of Zimri's judgment teach us about the consequences of sin and the nature of divine justice?
  • How can we ensure that our pursuit of influence or leadership is rooted in integrity, humility, and service, rather than self-interest or a desire for control?

FAQ

Why does the Bible refer to "the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel" so often?

Answer: The frequent references to "the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel" (and Judah) serve multiple crucial purposes within the biblical narrative. Firstly, they function as an editorial device, signaling the conclusion of a king's reign and indicating that the biblical account is not exhaustive. The authors of 1 and 2 Kings were not writing a comprehensive political history but a theological history, interpreting events through the lens of God's covenant with Israel and Judah. Secondly, these references lend significant historical credibility to the biblical account by pointing to external, contemporary royal archives or state records. This demonstrates that the biblical narrative is grounded in verifiable historical reality, even though its primary focus is on the spiritual and moral lessons derived from that history. It implies that a more detailed historical record existed for those who wished to consult it, reinforcing the authenticity of the events described and underscoring the selective, purposeful nature of the biblical text.

CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT

The tumultuous and ultimately futile reign of Zimri, concluded by a reference to human historical records, stands in stark contrast to the eternal and righteous reign of Jesus Christ. While earthly kings like Zimri grasp for power through treachery and violence, leading to brief, unstable rule and inevitable judgment (as seen in 1 Kings 16:19), Christ's kingship is established not by human might but by divine appointment and self-sacrificial love. His kingdom is "not of this world" (John 18:36), yet it is a kingdom that will never end (Luke 1:33). The "chronicles of the kings of Israel" record a lineage of flawed rulers, many of whom led their people astray, but the ultimate "chronicle" of redemptive history culminates in the perfect King, Jesus. He is the Lamb of God who "takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29), and whose reign brings true justice, peace, and eternal life. Unlike the fleeting power of earthly monarchs, Christ's dominion is everlasting (Revelation 11:15), fulfilling all the hopes and promises that human kings so consistently failed to deliver, and His is the only reign that truly matters in the divine record.

Copy as

Commentary on 1 Kings 16 verses 15–28

Solomon observes (Pro 28:2) that for the transgression of a land many were the princes thereof (so it was here in Israel), but by a man of understanding the state thereof shall be prolonged - so it was with Judah at the same time under Asa. When men forsake God they are out of the way of rest and establishment. Zimri, and Tibni, and Omri, are here striving for the crown. Proud aspiring men ruin one another, and involve others in the ruin. These confusions end in the settlement of Omri; we must therefore take him along with us through this part of the story.

I. How he was chosen, as the Roman emperors often were, by the army in the field, now encamped before Gibbethon. Notice was soon brought thither that Zimri had slain their king (Kg1 16:16) and set up himself in Tirzah, the royal city, whereupon they chose Omri king in the camp, that they might without delay avenge the death of Elah upon Zimri. Though he was idle and intemperate, yet he was their king, and they would not tamely submit to his murderer, nor let the treason go unpunished. They did not attempt to avenge the death of Nadab upon Baasha, perhaps because the house of Baasha had ruled with more gentleness than the house of Jeroboam; but Zimri shall feel the resentments of the provoked army. The siege of Gibbethon is quitted (Philistines are sure to gain when Israelites quarrel) and Zimri is prosecuted.

II. How he conquered Zimri, who is said to have reigned seven days (Kg1 16:15), so long before Omri was proclaimed king and himself proclaimed traitor; but we may suppose it was a longer time before he died, for he continued long enough to show his inclination to the way of Jeroboam, and to make himself obnoxious to the justice of God by supporting his idolatry, Kg1 16:19. Tirzah was a beautiful city, but not fortified, so that Omri soon made himself master of it (Kg1 16:17), forced Zimri into the palace, which being unable to defend, and yet unwilling to surrender, he burnt, and himself in it, Kg1 16:18. Unwilling that his rival should ever enjoy that sumptuous palace, he burnt it; and fearing that if he fell into the hands of the army, either alive or dead, he should be ignominiously treated, he burnt himself in it. See what desperate practices men's wickedness sometimes brings them to, and how it hurries them into their own ruin; see the disposition of incendiaries, who set palaces and kingdoms on fire, though they are themselves in danger of perishing in the flame.

III. How he struggled with Tibni, and at length got clear of him: Half of the people followed this Tibni (Kg1 16:21), probably those who were in Zimri's interest, with whom others joined, who would not have a king chosen in the camp (lest he should rule by the sword and a standing army), but in a convention of the states. The contest between these two lasted some years, and, it is likely, cost a great deal of blood on both sides, for it was in the twenty-seventh year of Asa that Omri was first elected (Kg1 16:15) and thence the twelve years of his reign are to be dated; but it was not till the thirty-first year of Asa that he began to reign without a rival; then Tibni died, it is likely in battle, and Omri reigned, Kg1 16:22. Sir Walter Raleigh, in his History of the World (2.19.6), enquires here why it was that in all these confusions and revolutions of the kingdom of Israel they never thought of returning to the house of David, and uniting themselves again to Judah, for then it was better with them than now; and he thinks the reason was because the kings of Judah assumed a more absolute, arbitrary, and despotic power than the kings of Israel. It was the heaviness of the yoke that they complained of when they first revolted from the house of David, and the dread of that made them ever after averse to it, and attached to kings of their own, who ruled more by law and the rules of a limited monarchy.

IV. How he reigned when he was at length settled on the throne. 1. He made himself famous by building Samaria, which, ever after, was the royal city of the kings of Israel (the palace at Tirzah being burnt), and in process of time grew so considerable that it gave name to the middle part of Canaan (which lay between Galilee on the north and Judea on the south) and to the inhabitants of that country, who were called Samaritans. He bought the ground for two talents of silver, somewhat more than 700l. of our money, for a talent was 353l. 11s. 10 1/2d. Perhaps Shemer, who sold him the ground, let him have it considerably the cheaper upon condition that the city should be called after his name, for otherwise it would have borne the name of the purchaser; it was called Samaria, or Shemeren (as it is in the Hebrew), from Shemer, the former owner, Kg1 16:24. The kings of Israel changed their royal seats, Shechem first, then Tirzah, now Samaria; but the kings of Judah were constant to Jerusalem, the city of God. Those that cleave to the Lord fix, but those that leave him ever wander. 2. He made himself infamous by his wickedness; for he did worse than all that were before him, Kg1 16:25. Though he was brought to the throne with much difficulty, and Providence had remarkably favoured him in his advancement, yet he was more profane, or more superstitious, and a greater persecutor, than either of the houses of Jeroboam or Baasha. He went further than they had done in establishing iniquity by a law, and forcing his subjects to comply with him in it; for we read of the statutes of Omri, the keeping of which made Israel a desolation, Mic 6:16. Jeroboam caused Israel to sin by temptation, example, and allurement; but Omri did it by compulsion.

V. How he ended his reign, Kg1 16:27, Kg1 16:28. He was in some repute for the might which he showed. Many a bad man has been a stout man. He died in his bed, as did Jeroboam and Baasha themselves; but, like them, left it to his posterity to fill up the measure, and then pay off the scores, of his iniquity.

Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 15–28. Public domain.
Copy as
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as

Continue studying 1 Kings 16:20 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

Read & Compare

Commentaries

Original Language & Research

Sermons, Hymns & Audio

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.