That [there] was [such a one], this very chapter attests [through the LXX], as was noted above at q. 32, and the book of 1 Kings, ch. 16, v. 34, thus: In his days (namely, of King Ahab) Hiel of Bethel built Jericho. But he who is there called Hiel is called in the same place by the Seventy [LXX] ἀχιὴλ [Achiēl], but here ἐζὰν [Ezan]; in other Greek copies — as the Masian [that of Masius] — ἀζωζὰν [Azōzan]. “Whence that dissonance of the names is not yet sufficiently clear to me,” says Masius. But this is certain: that many in sacred history are recorded as having two names. And this happens either because two truly different names were imposed on them, or because one of the names is a synonym of the other — as I said concerning St. Jude Lebbaeus and St. Simon the Canaanite, in my little book On the Apostles. And so in this very place Hiel and ἐζὰϊ [Ezai] seem to agree in signification. For hotz [עֹז, ʿoz] in Hebrew is “strength and might”; but Hiel — or, as it is written in Hebrew, חיאל — means exactly the same, if (as not rarely happens in the paragogic letters of the Hebrews) the aleph [א] be reckoned not necessary; or, if we think it necessary, it will be, with one lamed [ל] subtracted (as I said elsewhere in [the case of] corban and cobā), “the power and strength of God” — that is, “great.” For Chail [חיל] is “strength,” [and] el [אל] is “God”; but that it might be signified that the aleph could be absent, our [Vulgate] Interpreter omitted it;
(col. 817)
Interpreter [omitted the aleph]; but the Seventy [LXX], in that chapter of Kings, moved it from its [proper] place, and set it at the beginning of the word [→ Achiel]. But that others say ἀζωζὰν [Azōzan] is either corrupt, or [is so framed] that that great force and power (of which I have spoken) might be signified — [being] a repetition of the same former syllable, as if it were said “hotz hotz,” “strength [upon] strength” — by which manner of speaking the meaning is known to be intensified among the Hebrews. Nor will he wonder at ἀζ and ὠζ [az and ōz] who is not ignorant that the vowels sound variously among various [peoples], as I noted in [my work on] Mainz (bk. 1, ch. 3); and again in the following question an example will occur. But this I hold a thing to wonder at: how it could come to pass that an Israelite, in the midst of Israelites, could be so bold as to count for nothing this imprecation of so great a leader, and of a man so dear to God. But indeed — We always strive after the forbidden, and desire what is denied [Ovid, Amores 3.4.17]. How is it that so many robbers today do not fear the gibbets and wheels set fixed before the eyes of all? How is it that so many neglecters and violators of testaments fear nothing at all from the imprecations of the dead? How is it that so many perjurers and treaty-breakers do not dread the curses which they had imprecated upon themselves? How did Adam and Eve not dread that terrible Thou shalt die the death [Gen. 2:17]? How do we ourselves not dread [it] daily? How, [with] hell threatened and most certainly foretold by the Apostles, by CHRIST the Lord, and eternal Gehenna — do we not shudder, [we] so many, daily [being] greedy, ambitious, greedy of vainglory, puffed up, drunken, lustful? Doubtless we close our eyes: we do not look upon these things; we do not turn [them] over in our mind; we shut [them] out from our ears, if ever they are brought in through the voices of the preachers; and we feign for ourselves causes — flattering to our disposition, pleasant to our desires — which not only do not restrain us from crimes, but incite [us], and drive [us] headlong. So indeed Hiel — whether from the rebuilding of Jericho [he coveted] certain profitable revenues, or palaces most full of pleasantness, or the celebrity of [his] name and its propagation to late descendants (which Rupert asserts, ch. 20), or [whether] he coveted all these at once, and many other like things — counted Joshua’s devoting for a trifle. Perhaps too he silently reasoned within himself that Joshua had been too severe, and too hostile to this city; that his detestation proceeded from fury and excessive cruelty, not from the Spirit of God, who is gentle and meek; and was neither approved nor heard by God himself; or certainly that, since it had been conceived in the year of the world’s creation 2490, and King Ahab (in whose time, as was said, he set about this restoration) began to reign [in the year] 3222, it had by now grown obsolete through age, and, after more than 700 years, the force of that detestation had vanished. Nay, perhaps the wretch had even advanced to such a [degree] of madness that he despised not only Joshua, but even the God of Israel, and counted His books, [His] Prophets, and [His] servants as nothing. For this seems to me to be signified by that book of Kings, when Hiel is so expressly noted as having undertaken this building “in the days of King Ahab.” For Ahab was an impious king, and a most wicked author and sower of impiety, as he is described in the same place (v. 29 and following). This King, then, Hiel wished to please; and that he might please [him], he willed to profess his contempt of the highest King [God] by some signal crime; and the wealth in which he abounded (for none but a very powerful [man] could have undertaken so great a thing) he conferred toward the rebuilding of Jericho, against the vow and imprecation of God’s servant and Prophet. And so we discern an illustrious example of certain Courtiers, and of those who today are called Politiques [Politici]; we see the course of this world — namely, what studies most [men] pursue, on which they pour out their wealth; how they accommodate themselves to the wills of wicked Princes; how, under these [princes’] reigns, those things are wont to be rebuilt which Joshua had torn down and reduced to ashes — [things] which he had forbidden to be restored unto all posterity, which he had willed [to be] anathema and devoted to curses: that is, [things] which CHRIST JESUS, our Lord and Saviour, hates and detests; which He blots out and disturbs by His life and doctrine; which He pursues through His Church with anathematizings and execrations — crimes, heresies, and impieties and vanities of every kind. And these too are sometimes restored by those who are “of Bethel,” that is, “of the house of God,” by Ecclesiastics and Monks — as [happens] almost in this our time through Luther, Zwingli, Beza, Calvin, and the like — even if they were not the supreme ones — [these] Monk-nuns [Monachæ, a barb at apostate monks] of Ahab.