What is the context?
The account returns to Judah and summarizes Jehoshaphat’s twenty-five-year reign. He follows his father Asa in doing what is right in the LORD’s eyes, but the high places remain in use. His peace with Israel also belongs to this mixed picture.
The king removes the remaining male shrine prostitutes. The account then mentions Edom’s deputy ruler and Jehoshaphat’s unsuccessful shipping venture: ships intended to obtain gold from Ophir are wrecked at Ezion-geber. He refuses Ahaziah’s offer to have their servants sail together.
2 Chronicles 20:31–37 provides further detail, connecting the loss of the ships with a rebuke for an alliance with Ahaziah. Jehoshaphat’s son Jehoram succeeds him.
How is this passage commonly understood?
Henry emphasizes the overall good character of Jehoshaphat’s reign. Wesley also takes the favorable assessment seriously while treating the alliance with Ahab as a blemish with consequences for the family.
Wesley and Gill read the refusal of Ahaziah’s proposal in light of the earlier failed partnership described in Chronicles. The two accounts together explain why this king can be commended for faithfulness while still needing correction.
Where does this fit in God's plan?
The consequences of this family alliance continue beyond Jehoshaphat’s death. 2 Chronicles 21:1–7 explains that Jehoram married a daughter of Ahab and followed the ways of Ahab’s house. It then says the LORD did not destroy David’s house because of His covenant with David.
That continuation places the flawed reigns within the larger story of God keeping His promise. The covenant does not make the kings’ evil acceptable; it explains why their failures do not simply bring David’s family line to an end.
What is our position?
We don't have a position on this passage yet. When our study reaches a conclusion the text supports, it will appear here.