Talk:Zedekiah

Book of Mormon

The Book of Mormon Entry in this article is stated as though it is a truthful historical claim with historical backing. But since the Book of Mormon is not an widely accepted source of historical information it must be considered that this part of the entry may be false. Tommack2953 01:08, May 15, 2006 (UTC)

The section with the Book of Mormon begins with, "According to the Book of Mormon..." This is more than enough context for articles on works of fiction, why does it require any more disclaimer for something that many people consider a historical account? Val42 03:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

The problems with using the Book of Mormon as a dating reference are numerous (even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the Book of Mormon is historically accurate) because of the lack of information concerning the number of days in a calendar year, the type of calendar (solar, lunar, Mayan), the possibility of mistakes or generalities, etc. For an introductory discussion on the problems associated with Book of Mormon dating (published by BYU's FARMS institute), see http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=276 (towards the bottom). Because of this, I have deleted the reference under the Book of Mormon section to the beginning date of Zedekiah's reign. (BipBop10 13:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC))

The Book of Mormon is not an accepted historical bible reference for 99.99999% of Christians. It should be removed. (surf_fanatico 29 Sept 2007)

I disagree here. Since there are 2.18 billion Christians in the world (according to a recent study), if you think only .00001% believe that the Book of Mormon is true, that would mean only mean only 21,800 Christians accept the Book of Mormon, a far cry from the 14+ million members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I say it stays. 128.187.97.22 (talk) 05:10, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Zedekiah's lineage

2 Chronicles 36:10 states that Zedekiah was brother rather than uncle of Jeconiah (Jeoiachin). This is almost certainly in error, but it would seem to be deserving of a mention. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Opaanderson (talk • contribs) 18:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC).

According to Gesenisus's Lexicon, the word ah (h is hard), usually translated "brother", also has the meaning of "any relative, kinsman." Examples are Genesis 13:8 and 14:16, where it is used for Abraham's relationship to his nephew Lot. In Genesis 9:12 Jacob uses it to refer to his uncle Laban. In 2 Chronicles 36:10 it therefore can be translated as "uncle," and comparison with 2 Kings 24:17 indicates that this is the proper translation there (as is done in the NIV). Chronic2 (talk) 18:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Zedekiah was NOT a strong king

Indicating that Zedekiah was a very weak ruler is the fact that, when the princes later requested that Jeremiah be put to death for allegedly weakening the morale of the besieged people, Zedekiah said: “Look! He is in your hands. For there is nothing at all in which the king himself can prevail against you.” However, afterward Zedekiah granted Ebed-melech’s request to rescue Jeremiah and directed that Ebed-melech take along 30 men to assist in this. Later Zedekiah again had a private audience with Jeremiah. He assured the prophet that he would neither kill him nor deliver him into the hands of those seeking his death. But Zedekiah feared reprisals from the Jews who had fallen away to the Chaldeans and, therefore, did not heed Jeremiah’s inspired advice to surrender to the princes of Babylon. In further display of his fear, the king requested that Jeremiah not reveal the subject of their private discussion to the suspicious princes.—Jer 38:1-28.

When you consider such strong kings as Saul, David, Solomon, Jehoshaphat, etc...King Zedekiah should not be considered "strong". His kingdom was not firmly established by anyone other than power of Babylon. There is really nothing that set Zedekiah apart, other than his stubbornness in not listening to advice from counsel. He must have known that he did not have the manpower to resist the Chaldeans attack, and could only resort to making the residence of Jerusalem suffer before a near complete destruction. Had he remained submitted to Babylon, many lives would not have been wasted in the most demoralized way.

The statement was uncited and probably original research, see WP:OR as are, I'm afraid, your comments. We should not be interpreting primary sources. We can summarise them and report what reliable sources - WP:RS have said, but no commentary. Dougweller (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

response: I thought this was just a discussion area, sorry for not citing a source. I am new to this and just wanted to make a comment about the article stating Zedekiah was a strong king when my reading indicates something different. The first section of my comment is from "Insight on the Scriptures" Volume 2 page 1128. Thanks for the advice though, will keep that in mind.

It's a discussion area for the article, not the subject of the article, but most new editors shouldn't be expected to realise the difference. It's a useful comment and I acted on it, so thanks. You need to sign your posts here with 4 tildes, eg ~~~~ Dougweller (talk) 05:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

"Every worst woe" citation

Concerning the passage below, the biblical references there cited do not refer to the quotation given. In fact, I can't find the quotation anywhere in the King James version.... I'm assuming that the quotation marks are supposed to refer to a source that identifies the woes identified in the biblical passages supplied as being "the worst woe[s]" but if so, this source should be cited.

During this siege, which lasted about thirty months, "every worst woe befell the devoted city, which drank the cup of God's fury to the dregs". (2 Kings 25:3; Lamentations 4:4, 5, 9) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbrown29 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

“Zadok-i-Ah 'Priest of Ah'” is unsupported, I am deleting

The alternative translation of Zedekiah as "Priest of Ah" (inserted after mention of Nebuchadnezzar's designation of this throne name for the new king, at the end of the section titled Genealogical note), is news, to say the least (with or without revocalisation and resegmentation → Zadok-i-Ah). Just for starters, at the time of this post it is found nowhere on the entire Internet, except in this article, and in a copy of it on Answers.com.

Zadok/Ṣāḏôq does not even mean "priest", although there was a well-known priest of King David's time by that name. The name may mean "righteous" like its cognate adjective (t)zadik/ṣaddîq, as the well-known Brown-Driver-Briggs lexicon suggests. As already indicated at the start of the article, (T)zidkiyyahu/Ṣiḏqiyyā́hû means "YHWH is my righteousness"; the latter phrase in bold translates Hebrew (t)zidkiy/ṣiḏqiy (→ṣiḏqî when standing alone...), which in turn is derived by simple and straightforward application of Hebrew grammar from (t)zedek/ṣéḏeq "righteousness".

I am removing this translation as utterly unsupported. If anyone wishes to restore it, they should provide a reference that is a bona fide peer-reviewed secondary source. IfYouDoIfYouDon't (talk) 10:50, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Zedekiah - Works - New Section Needed

The inclusion of reference to Scarlatti's Oratorio Sedecia would enhance this article. See http://www.todoperaweb.com.ar/biblio/Sedecia.html 193.108.78.10 (talk) 09:26, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Zedekiah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.btinternet.com/~lmf12/TransGuide.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:22, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Too few opinions, NPOV maybe

Maybe there's nothing in it, but there's a whole book called The Last Kings of Judah: Zedekiah and Sedekias in the Hebrew and Old Greek Versions of Jeremiah 37 44 :1-40 47 :6 which discusses the differences between the Hebrew and the Greek texts.[1] Doug Weller talk 13:24, 26 February 2020 (UTC)