ii. The Israelite triumph (20:13–34)

OVERVIEW

This section contains two distinct narratives. The first tells of the battle for Samaria (vv.13–25) and the second of the battle at Aphek (vv.26–34). The central characters in both accounts are the kings Ahab and Ben-Hadad together with their counselors.

The two battle reports proceed in quasiparallel fashion.

A Before the first battle, the Lord’s prophet assures Ahab that the Lord will give him the victory and counsels him to attack the Aramean forces (vv.13–14).

B Ahab musters his army while Ben-Hadad and his chiefs are getting drunk in their tents (vv.15–16).

C The Israelite attack is successful; it inflicts heavy losses on the Arameans and puts the survivors to flight (vv.17–20a).

D Ben-Hadad manages to escape while the Israelites are inflicting heavy losses on the enemy forces (vv.20b–21).

E After the battle both kings receive advice from their counselors. The Lord’s prophet warns Ahab that Ben-Hadad will return; Ben-Hadad’s officers advise him to select a battle site in the plains where Israel’s “mountain god” will be ineffective (22–25).

A´ In the second battle, both kings muster their forces at Aphek (vv.26–27).

B´ Ahab is advised that the Lord will once more give him the victory (v.28).

C´ When the battle is joined the Israelites are again successful (vv.29–30a).

D´ Ben-Hadad manages to escape and hides in Aphek (v.30b).

E´ Ben-Hadad’s officials advise him to seek Ahab’s mercy—a strategy that proves more successful than they could have hoped (vv.31–34).

13Meanwhile a prophet came to Ahab king of Israel and announced, “This is what the LORD says: ‘Do you see this vast army? I will give it into your hand today, and then you will know that I am the LORD.’”

14“But who will do this?” asked Ahab.

The prophet replied, “This is what the LORD says: ‘The young officers of the provincial commanders will do it.’”

“And who will start the battle?” he asked.

The prophet answered, “You will.”

15So Ahab summoned the young officers of the provincial commanders, 232 men. Then he assembled the rest of the Israelites, 7,000 in all. 16They set out at noon while Ben-Hadad and the 32 kings allied with him were in their tents getting drunk. 17The young officers of the provincial commanders went out first.

Now Ben-Hadad had dispatched scouts, who reported, “Men are advancing from Samaria.”

18He said, “If they have come out for peace, take them alive; if they have come out for war, take them alive.”

19The young officers of the provincial commanders marched out of the city with the army behind them 20and each one struck down his opponent. At that, the Arameans fled, with the Israelites in pursuit. But Ben-Hadad king of Aram escaped on horseback with some of his horsemen. 21The king of Israel advanced and overpowered the horses and chariots and inflicted heavy losses on the Arameans.

22Afterward, the prophet came to the king of Israel and said, “Strengthen your position and see what must be done, because next spring the king of Aram will attack you again.”

23Meanwhile, the officials of the king of Aram advised him, “Their gods are gods of the hills. That is why they were too strong for us. But if we fight them on the plains, surely we will be stronger than they. 24Do this: Remove all the kings from their commands and replace them with other officers. 25You must also raise an army like the one you lost—horse for horse and chariot for chariot—so we can fight Israel on the plains. Then surely we will be stronger than they.” He agreed with them and acted accordingly.

26The next spring Ben-Hadad mustered the Arameans and went up to Aphek to fight against Israel. 27When the Israelites were also mustered and given provisions, they marched out to meet them. The Israelites camped opposite them like two small flocks of goats, while the Arameans covered the countryside.

28The man of God came up and told the king of Israel, “This is what the LORD says: ‘Because the Arameans think the LORD is a god of the hills and not a god of the valleys, I will deliver this vast army into your hands, and you will know that I am the LORD.’”

29For seven days they camped opposite each other, and on the seventh day the battle was joined. The Israelites inflicted a hundred thousand casualties on the Aramean foot soldiers in one day. 30The rest of them escaped to the city of Aphek, where the wall collapsed on twenty-seven thousand of them. And Ben-Hadad fled to the city and hid in an inner room.

31His officials said to him, “Look, we have heard that the kings of the house of Israel are merciful. Let us go to the king of Israel with sackcloth around our waists and ropes around our heads. Perhaps he will spare your life.”

32Wearing sackcloth around their waists and ropes around their heads, they went to the king of Israel and said, “Your servant Ben-Hadad says: ‘Please let me live.’”

The king answered, “Is he still alive? He is my brother.”

33The men took this as a good sign and were quick to pick up his word. “Yes, your brother Ben-Hadad!” they said.

“Go and get him,” the king said. When Ben-Hadad came out, Ahab had him come up into his chariot.

34“I will return the cities my father took from your father,” Ben-Hadad offered. “You may set up your own market areas in Damascus, as my father did in Samaria.”

Ahab said, “On the basis of a treaty I will set you free.” So he made a treaty with him, and let him go.

COMMENTARY

14–16 Both the personnel and the timing of the attack were unusual. Attacks were not ordinarily launched at noon. This tactic together with the sending out of 232 specially selected young men may have caught the Arameans completely off guard.

17–21 The battle strategy appears to have been to send out the small but well-trained advance party, who could perhaps draw near to the Syrians without arousing too much alarm, and then, at a given signal, initiate a charge. In conjunction with Ahab’s main striking force, this process would both catch the drunken Arameans off guard and throw them into confusion. The plan was more successful than Ahab dared to imagine.

22 Late spring into early summer was one of two regular seasons for military expedition, when grass was readily available for the cattle.

23–31 For the second campaign the counselors advised Ben-Hadad to dispense with the calling of individual units that left him with an army of heterogeneous parts and to form an integrated whole that would comprise a disciplined fighting force.

Undisciplined, noncohesive units can easily quit fighting in the midst of the battle’s heat (cf. Antony’s difficulties in Greece in his fighting with Octavian) or get sidetracked by stopping for plunder (as did the army of Thutmose III before Megiddo).

32–34 Ahab and Ben-Hadad were apparently rearranging the terms of a previously existing treaty, perhaps enacted as a result of the action detailed in 15:18–20. Here, of course, the stipulations are somewhat reversed: the lost Israelite districts are restored and the trade concessions in Damascus previously held by Ben-Hadad in Samaria are granted to Ahab.

The reason for Ahab’s leniency toward Ben-Hadad may lie in his appraisal of the troublesome political situation of those days. Already Shalmaneser III was on the move against the Aramean tribes. Ahab doubtless preferred to have a restored and friendly Ben-Hadad, with his ability to deliver a sizeable force of chariots and infantry between himself and Shalmaneser.

Indeed, the two allies, along with several other Aramean kings, were soon to face Shalmaneser head-on in the famous Battle of Qarqar (853 BC). In so doing Ahab was trusting in his own appraisal of his needs and the world situation rather than in God, who had given him the miraculous victory. In a touch of irony the author uses a form of the same verb šlḥ) for the sending away of Ahab (NIV, “let him go”) that was utilized previously of Ben-Hadad’s sending of messengers to Ahab (vv.2, 5–7, 9–10).

NOTES

14–15 The (naʿ^arîm, “young officers”) probably comprised a mobile unit of professional soldiers. Like the following term— (śārê hamm^edînôt, “provincial commanders”; cf. Est 1:3)—it is a technical military designation. See further B. Cutler and J. MacDonald, “The Identification of the NAʿAR in the Ugaritic Texts,” UF 8 (1976): 27–35.

31 For (ḥesed, “merciful”), see Note on 3:6. While Ben-Hadad’s counselors undoubtedly hoped for generosity from Ahab, Gray, 429, may be correct in suggesting that the Syrians were counting on the Israelites’ known reputation for being covenant makers and keepers.

Just as the counsel given after the first battle (v.23) set the background for the second, so the successful counsel of Ben-Hadad’s officials after the second campaign provides the backdrop for the prophetic condemnation of Ahab to follow (vv.35–43). The chapter thus displays fine structural and thematic unity.

32 The counselors’ sackcloth was symbolic of mourning and penitence. The rope around the head was a sign of supplication, the figure being that of the porter at the wheel of the victor’s chariot. Thus on his third campaign Sennacherib uses the figure of holding the yoke as a metaphor for vassalage in reporting conditions after his victory at Ashkelon (see ANET, 287).

33 The force of the verbal aspect of (nāḥaś, “take as a good sign”) indicates that Ben-Hadad’s embassy came looking for a favorable omen in Ahab’s speech or attitude. Accordingly, Ahab’s use of the term “my brother” (v.32) appeared to be an exceptionally good sign.

34 For details of similar treaty stipulations, see the vassal treaties of Matiʾilu of Arpad with the Assyrian king Ashurnirari V (ANET, 532–33) and with Bargaʾyah of Ktk (see ANET, 659–61). One may wonder whether in accordance with ancient precedent Ben-Hadad came and put his shoulder to Ahab’s chariot, thereby giving a symbolic act of submission (see the Barrakab Inscription [ANET, 655]).

For details of Shalmaneser’s campaigning against Aram and Israel, see M. Elat, “The Campaigns of Shalmaneser III against Aram and Israel,” IEJ 25 (1975): 25–35. For the battle of Qarqar, see Hallo, 158–61.

iii. The prophet’s rebuke (20:35–43)

OVERVIEW

Ahab’s self-trust and his leniency toward Ben-Hadad were not to go without divine rebuke. God again raised up a prophet to deal with Ahab. While this incident has its own self-contained story line, it takes its setting from Ahab’s failure to deal properly with his defeated foe Ben-Hadad. As the account unfolds, we learn that a prophet of the Lord asked one of the prophet’s companions to smite the seer (v.35). Because the second prophet refused to obey the divine direction, he was immediately killed by a lion (v.36). The first prophet then got another man to strike him (v.37). Thus wounded, he waited in a disguise for Ahab (v.38). When the king passed by, the prophet represented himself as a soldier who had been wounded in battle and had been assigned a prisoner to guard on penalty of his life or the payment of a large sum of money (v.39). Unfortunately, he had inadvertently allowed his prisoner to escape (v.40a).

Merciless Ahab confirmed the death sentence (v.40b). At that point the prophet revealed himself to the king (v.41). The prophet’s action had been symbolic. Ahab was that one who had allowed the prisoner to escape; therefore, as he himself had judged to be right, the king would pay with his life and Israel would suffer loss (v.42). It was a sullen and angry Ahab who returned in triumph from the battle to his palace in Samaria (v.43).

35By the word of the LORD one of the sons of the prophets said to his companion, “Strike me with your weapon,” but the man refused.

36So the prophet said, “Because you have not obeyed the LORD, as soon as you leave me a lion will kill you.” And after the man went away, a lion found him and killed him.

37The prophet found another man and said, “Strike me, please.” So the man struck him and wounded him. 38Then the prophet went and stood by the road waiting for the king. He disguised himself with his headband down over his eyes. 39As the king passed by, the prophet called out to him, “Your servant went into the thick of the battle, and someone came to me with a captive and said, ‘Guard this man. If he is missing, it will be your life for his life, or you must pay a talent of silver.’ 40While your servant was busy here and there, the man disappeared.”

“That is your sentence,” the king of Israel said. “You have pronounced it yourself.”

41Then the prophet quickly removed the headband from his eyes, and the king of Israel recognized him as one of the prophets. 42He said to the king, “This is what the LORD says: ‘You have set free a man I had determined should die. Therefore it is your life for his life, your people for his people.’” 43Sullen and angry, the king of Israel went to his palace in Samaria.

COMMENTARY

35 Although mention has been made previously of Obadiah’s hiding of groups of fifty prophets (18:4), here is the first mention in Kings of “the sons of the prophets” (cf. 2Ki 2:3–7, 15; 4:1, 38; 5:22; 6:1; 9:1).

36–43 The principle of making payment or restitution for the loss of an entrusted item was already established in the law (cf. Ex 22:7–15). The silver payment, however, was an exorbitant one—one hundred times more than the price of a slave (Ex 21:32).

As a spoil of holy warfare in which God clearly had given the victory, Ben-Hadad should have been devoted to destruction (cf. Lev 27:29; Jos 6:17–21; 1Sa 15:7–10, 18–23). Like David before him (2Sa 12:1–10), Ahab has determined his own fate.

NOTES

43 (sar, “sullen”) comes from the root sārar (“be stubborn”; cf. Akkad. sarāru, “be unstable, obstinate”). It often portrays Israel, which, like Ahab, walked in its own stubborn way (cf. Ne 9:29; Ps 78:8; Isa 1:23; 65:2; Jer 5:23; 6:28; Zec 7:11).

The word translated by the NIV as “angry” (Heb. zāʿēp) may also be viewed as deriving from a second homographic root meaning “look pitiful/wretched.” In either case, Ahab did not return to Samaria in the best of spirits! For details, see NIDOTTE, 1:1129–31.

d. Ahab and the conscription of Naboth’s vineyard (21:1–29)

OVERVIEW

The narrative concerning Ahab’s taking of Naboth’s vineyard falls into two sections. The first is structured in chiastic symmetry.

A Ahab covets Naboth’s vineyard. Unfortunately for the king, he fails in his attempt to buy it. He goes home “sullen and angry.”

B When Jezebel finds Ahab pouting in his chamber and learns of the reason for it, she assures him that she will get the property for him (vv.4b–7).

C Jezebel conspires with city officials and leading citizens to denounce Naboth as a blasphemous traitor to the crown (vv.8–10).

C´ The plot is duly carried out and results in Naboth’s execution (vv.11–14).

B´ Jezebel informs Ahab of Naboth’s death and the availability of his vineyard (v.15).

A´ Ahab takes possession of the property (v.16).

Moreover, as Walsh, 317, points out, the parallel series share common elements such as location (A and A´), dialogue between Ahab and Jezebel (B and B´), and characters (C and C´), thus tying the units more closely together.

The second section is developed in concentric symmetry.

A The Lord instructs Elijah to go to meet Ahab in Naboth’s vineyard and denounce him for his deed (vv.17–19).

B Elijah does so and condemns both Ahab and Jezebel (vv.20–24).

C The account is interrupted by the narrator’s own evaluation of the evils of the royal couple (vv.25–26).

B´ Ahab reacts to Elijah’s rebuke with apparently genuine contrition (v.27).

A´ The Lord promises to postpone parts of the threatened judgment until the days of Ahab’s son (vv.28–29).

Unity of plot is achieved by featuring the Lord himself in the first and last portions of this unit, and Elijah in the second and fourth. The narrator’s denunciation of the royal couple is thus allowed to be of central importance. His evaluation adds cumulative evidence for the divine rebuke, while the whole episode has been chosen under inspiration to illustrate their corrupt character.

1Some time later there was an incident involving a vineyard belonging to Naboth the Jezreelite. The vineyard was in Jezreel, close to the palace of Ahab king of Samaria. 2Ahab said to Naboth, “Let me have your vineyard to use for a vegetable garden, since it is close to my palace. In exchange I will give you a better vineyard or, if you prefer, I will pay you whatever it is worth.”

3But Naboth replied, “The LORD forbid that I should give you the inheritance of my fathers.”

4So Ahab went home, sullen and angry because Naboth the Jezreelite had said, “I will not give you the inheritance of my fathers.” He lay on his bed sulking and refused to eat.

5His wife Jezebel came in and asked him, “Why are you so sullen? Why won’t you eat?”

6He answered her, “Because I said to Naboth the Jezreelite, ‘Sell me your vineyard; or if you prefer, I will give you another vineyard in its place.’ But he said, ‘I will not give you my vineyard.’”

7Jezebel his wife said, “Is this how you act as king over Israel? Get up and eat! Cheer up. I’ll get you the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite.”

8So she wrote letters in Ahab’s name, placed his seal on them, and sent them to the elders and nobles who lived in Naboth’s city with him. 9In those letters she wrote:

“Proclaim a day of fasting and seat Naboth in a prominent place among the people. 10But seat two scoundrels opposite him and have them testify that he has cursed both God and the king. Then take him out and stone him to death.”

11So the elders and nobles who lived in Naboth’s city did as Jezebel directed in the letters she had written to them. 12They proclaimed a fast and seated Naboth in a prominent place among the people. 13Then two scoundrels came and sat opposite him and brought charges against Naboth before the people, saying, “Naboth has cursed both God and the king.” So they took him outside the city and stoned him to death. 14Then they sent word to Jezebel: “Naboth has been stoned and is dead.”

15As soon as Jezebel heard that Naboth had been stoned to death, she said to Ahab, “Get up and take possession of the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite that he refused to sell you. He is no longer alive, but dead.” 16When Ahab heard that Naboth was dead, he got up and went down to take possession of Naboth’s vineyard.

17Then the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite: 18“Go down to meet Ahab king of Israel, who rules in Samaria. He is now in Naboth’s vineyard, where he has gone to take possession of it. 19Say to him, ‘This is what the LORD says: Have you not murdered a man and seized his property?’ Then say to him, ‘This is what the LORD says: In the place where dogs licked up Naboth’s blood, dogs will lick up your blood—yes, yours!’”

20Ahab said to Elijah, “So you have found me, my enemy!”

“I have found you,” he answered, “because you have sold yourself to do evil in the eyes of the LORD. 21‘I am going to bring disaster on you. I will consume your descendants and cut off from Ahab every last male in Israel—slave or free. 22I will make your house like that of Jeroboam son of Nebat and that of Baasha son of Ahijah, because you have provoked me to anger and have caused Israel to sin.’

23“And also concerning Jezebel the LORD says: ‘Dogs will devour Jezebel by the wall of Jezreel.’

24“Dogs will eat those belonging to Ahab who die in the city, and the birds of the air will feed on those who die in the country.”

25(There was never a man like Ahab, who sold himself to do evil in the eyes of the LORD, urged on by Jezebel his wife. 26He behaved in the vilest manner by going after idols, like the Amorites the LORD drove out before Israel.)

27When Ahab heard these words, he tore his clothes, put on sackcloth and fasted. He lay in sackcloth and went around meekly.

28Then the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite: 29“Have you noticed how Ahab has humbled himself before me? Because he has humbled himself, I will not bring this disaster in his day, but I will bring it on his house in the days of his son.”

COMMENTARY

1–8 Just as Ahab had gone home “sullen and angry” in 20:43, so he goes home “sullen and angry” (same two Heb. words) after Naboth’s refusal to sell his property. This circumstance may account for the placement of ch. 21 after ch. 20. Although land was considered as belonging to God and entrusted to people as tenants, Naboth’s refusal indicates that the course of action proposed by Jezebel would be profane in the eyes of God, since it is expressly forbidden in the law (Lev 25:23–28; Nu 36:7–12).

9–13 On a given day the elders and nobles, who comprised a sort of local senate (cf. Dt 16:18), were to call an assembly for solemn fasting (v.9), as though the city had committed some great sin (cf. 1Sa 7:6) whose penalty needed averting (cf. Lev 4:13–21; Dt 21:1–9; 2Ch 20:2–4; Joel 1:14–15). Should the person who was the cause of God’s judgment against the city be found out, he would be sorely punished (cf. Jos 7:16–26; 1Sa 14:40–45).

Naboth was to be given a conspicuous place so that the two accusers could easily single him out (v.10; cf. Nu 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15; cf. Mt 18:16; 26:60; 2Co 13:1). It may be that Naboth was an influential person anyway, so his prominent position at the meeting would not arouse suspicion.

The charge against Naboth was twofold: he had blasphemed both God and the king. The penalty for such action was death by stoning (Dt 13:10–11; 17:5) outside the city (Lev 24:14; Dt 22:24). Proper procedure called for at least two witnesses (Dt 17:6; 19:15). They were to lay their hands on the accused (Lev 24:14) and cast the first stones (cf. Jn 8:7). Since death by stoning was the responsibility of the whole community, the rest of the people were to take up the stoning.

14–24 According to 2 Kings 9:26, Naboth’s sons were also put to death at the same time. Ahab used the pretext that since there was no male heir and because the crime was a capital offense, the crown could lay a claim against the property. Such confiscation was clearly against the spirit of the law (Dt 13:12–16; 17:17).

25–26 The narrator’s evaluation reinforces the divine estimation of Ahab: Ahab was the vilest of all the Israelite kings. Completely under the domination of his wicked, pagan wife, he was unmatched in evil and spiritual harlotry in Israel. Thus the confiscation of Naboth’s vineyard was very much in line with the character and record of the royal couple.

27–29 The rending of garments was a common expression of grief or terror in the face of great personal or national calamity (Ge 37:29, 34; 44:13; Nu 14:6; Jos 7:6; Jdg 11:35; 2Sa 1:2; 3:31; 2Ki 5:7–8; 11:14; 19:1; 22:11; Ezr 9:3; Est 4:1; Job 2:12). The Lord then mitigated his words of judgment against Ahab.

NOTES

1 The phrase “some time later” is omitted in the LXX, since it inverts chs. 20 and 21. (hêkāl, “palace”) first occurs here in Kings in this sense. Previously it was used of Solomon’s temple (6:3, 5, 17, 33; 7:21, 50). Both meanings are allowable. The word is of Mesopotamian origin (see Overview to 6:1–38; see Sumerian É.GAL; Akkad. êkallu, “big house, palace”; cf. also Egyp. pr-ʾʿ, “big house,” and only later “Pharaoh”; see A. Gardiner, Egyptian Grammar [3rd ed.; London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1957], 75).

The title “king of Samaria” (cf. 2Ki 1:3) locates the base of power for the Omride dynasty.

7 The independent personal pronoun “you,” in an emphatic position in the MT, probably indicates a touch of sarcasm: “Are you not the one who exercises kingship over Israel?”

8 Written by a royal scribe, an ancient letter was chiefly in the form of a scroll written in columns (occasionally on both sides) and sealed in clay or wax imprinted with the sender’s personal sign. Many such seals have been found in the excavations of the Holy Land (cf. TWOT, 2:632–34).

10 The two witnesses are called literally “sons of Belial” (i.e., “sons of worthlessness”; cf. Pr 19:28). The term is used of utter reprobates (hence the NIV’s “scoundrels”; cf. Jdg 19:22; 1Sa 10:27) and came to be applied by Jewish writers and the writers of the NT to Satan (cf. 2Co 6:15).

F. I. Andersen (“The Socio-Juridical Background of the Naboth Incident,” JBL 85 [1966]: 46–55) suggests that the charge against Naboth was that he defaulted on his promise to sell his land to the king, a charge that would provide grounds for Ahab’s seizure of Naboth’s property in accordance with the legal codes of the ancient Near East. If, in addition, he had taken a formal oath in the presence of God and king as to his rightful ownership of the property or as to his refusal to sell, and he was convicted of wrongdoing, such blasphemous conduct would demand his death.

15 D. J. Wiseman (“Mesopotamian Gardens,” Anatolian Studies 33 [1983]: 139) mentions royal confiscation of land in the case of a man found guilty and executed for treachery in ancient Syria.

19 R. Jamieson (R. Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and D. Brown, A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments [Hartford: Scranton, 1870], 2:365) points out that since dogs were allowed to run wild in packs in the ancient world, it was common to speak of giving the carcass of an enemy or a scoundrel to the dogs (cf. Ps 68:23 and Achilles’ treatment of Hector in Homer’s Iliad, Book 22). The fact that the prophecy was not literally fulfilled is conditioned by vv.27–29; the modified prophecy was fulfilled in Jehu’s slaughter of Ahab’s sons (2Ki 9:26) and in the licking of Ahab’s blood by dogs at the pool in Samaria (1Ki 22:37–38).

23 The fact that 2 Kings 9:10, 36–37 uses the phrase “the plot of ground at Jezreel” need not mean that one must insert it here in v.23 as do the Vulgate, Syriac, Targum, and nine Hebrew MSS, which corrected v.23 in accordance with the later fulfillment statement in 2 Kings 9:36.

27–29 M. White (“Naboth’s Vineyard and Jehu’s Coup: The Legitimation of a Dynastic Extermination,” VT 44 [1994]: 66–76) suggests that these verses provide the basic point to the whole narrative.

e. Ahab and the campaign for Ramoth Gilead (22:1–40)

OVERVIEW

With this chapter the narrator brings the account of Ahab’s life to its close. Although a great deal of attention is devoted to the battle and its preparations, the underlying reason for it all is also divulged. Indeed, this battle is seen as merely the surface account of the deeper structure of Ahab’s life and its termination. For this king, with whom God had been so patient and forgiving, the battle was God’s means of bringing closure to one whose legacy was multiplied evil (cf. 16:30–34; 21:25–26).

Understood in this manner, the first forty verses of ch. 22 may be viewed as written in straightforward narrative: (1) Ahab’s plans for occupying Ramoth Gilead (vv.1–6); (2) God’s plans for Ahab’s demise (vv.7–28); (3) Ahab’s death at Ramoth Gilead (vv.29–38); and (4) closing notices concerning Ahab (vv.39–40). For convenience these verses will be considered in two parts: (1) preparations for Ramoth Gilead (vv.1–28), and (2) closing details concerning Ahab (vv.29–40).

i. Preparations for Ramoth Gilead (22:1–28)

1For three years there was no war between Aram and Israel. 2But in the third year Jehoshaphat king of Judah went down to see the king of Israel. 3The king of Israel had said to his officials, “Don’t you know that Ramoth Gilead belongs to us and yet we are doing nothing to retake it from the king of Aram?”

4So he asked Jehoshaphat, “Will you go with me to fight against Ramoth Gilead?”

Jehoshaphat replied to the king of Israel, “I am as you are, my people as your people, my horses as your horses.” 5But Jehoshaphat also said to the king of Israel, “First seek the counsel of the LORD.”

6So the king of Israel brought together the prophets—about four hundred men—and asked them, “Shall I go to war against Ramoth Gilead, or shall I refrain?”

“Go,” they answered, “for the Lord will give it into the king’s hand.”

7But Jehoshaphat asked, “Is there not a prophet of the LORD here whom we can inquire of?”

8The king of Israel answered Jehoshaphat, “There is still one man through whom we can inquire of the LORD, but I hate him because he never prophesies anything good about me, but always bad. He is Micaiah son of Imlah.”

“The king should not say that,” Jehoshaphat replied.

9So the king of Israel called one of his officials and said, “Bring Micaiah son of Imlah at once.”

10Dressed in their royal robes, the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat king of Judah were sitting on their thrones at the threshing floor by the entrance of the gate of Samaria, with all the prophets prophesying before them. 11Now Zedekiah son of Kenaanah had made iron horns and he declared, “This is what the LORD says: ‘With these you will gore the Arameans until they are destroyed.’”

12All the other prophets were prophesying the same thing. “Attack Ramoth Gilead and be victorious,” they said, “for the LORD will give it into the king’s hand.”

13The messenger who had gone to summon Micaiah said to him, “Look, as one man the other prophets are predicting success for the king. Let your word agree with theirs, and speak favorably.”

14But Micaiah said, “As surely as the LORD lives, I can tell him only what the LORD tells me.”

15When he arrived, the king asked him, “Micaiah, shall we go to war against Ramoth Gilead, or shall I refrain?”

“Attack and be victorious,” he answered, “for the LORD will give it into the king’s hand.”

16The king said to him, “How many times must I make you swear to tell me nothing but the truth in the name of the LORD?”

17Then Micaiah answered, “I saw all Israel scattered on the hills like sheep without a shepherd, and the LORD said, ‘These people have no master. Let each one go home in peace.’”

18The king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat, “Didn’t I tell you that he never prophesies anything good about me, but only bad?”

19Micaiah continued, “Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne with all the host of heaven standing around him on his right and on his left. 20And the LORD said, ‘Who will entice Ahab into attacking Ramoth Gilead and going to his death there?’

“One suggested this, and another that. 21Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the LORD and said, ‘I will entice him.’

22“‘By what means?’ the LORD asked.

“‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,’ he said.

“‘You will succeed in enticing him,’ said the LORD. ‘Go and do it.’

23“So now the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The LORD has decreed disaster for you.”

24Then Zedekiah son of Kenaanah went up and slapped Micaiah in the face. “Which way did the spirit from the LORD go when he went from me to speak to you?” he asked.

25Micaiah replied, “You will find out on the day you go to hide in an inner room.”

26The king of Israel then ordered, “Take Micaiah and send him back to Amon the ruler of the city and to Joash the king’s son 27and say, ‘This is what the king says: Put this fellow in prison and give him nothing but bread and water until I return safely.’”

28Micaiah declared, “If you ever return safely, the LORD has not spoken through me.” Then he added, “Mark my words, all you people!”

COMMENTARY

1–4 Some three years after the last Syrian war (1Ki 20), probably late in the same year that the combined Aramean and Hebrew forces had withstood Shalmaneser III at Qarqar (853 BC), Ahab became concerned for the recovery of Ramoth Gilead to the east of the Jordan. Although the territory had been ceded over to Israel by Ben-Hadad in his submission to Ahab (cf. 15:20; 20:34), the affair with Assyria had probably kept the Israelites from reoccupying the territory. With the threat of hostilities somewhat relaxed, however, and with Ben-Hadad once again flexing his military muscle, the strategic importance of Ramoth Gilead, with its key fortress at the eastern end of the Plain of Jezreel barring access to the very heart of Israel, became all too apparent.

Having consulted his officials, Ahab sought the help of Jehoshaphat. Jehoshaphat’s reply is a classic piece of idiomatic Hebrew: “Like me, like you; like my people, like your people; like my horses, like your horses.” Thus Jehoshaphat puts himself and his forces, both infantry and chariots, at Ahab’s disposal.

5–14 In keeping with ancient Near Eastern protocol, divine counsel was sought before battle (see Note on v.5). Jehoshaphat asked for the Lord’s will in the matter. Ahab, however, called in his own prophets, who could be counted on to give the king his desired answer. Their initial reply appears somewhat vague in that Yahweh is not specifically mentioned, nor is the victorious king identified. The later speech of Zedekiah ben Kenaanah (v.11), however, makes it clear that the advice of Ahab’s prophets intended that Israel’s God would give Ahab the victory. Moreover, as the prophet Micaiah is summoned (v.9), much against Ahab’s wishes (v.8), he is warned that his reply had better be in line with that of Zedekiah and the state prophets. Micaiah’s reply reflects his true status as the Lord’s prophet. He can repeat only what the Lord gives him.

15–23 Micaiah’s two visions indicate that Israel will be defeated at Ramoth Gilead (v.17). The second reinforces the first with the added feature that God intends the battle to be the means by which Ahab will lose his life (vv.20–23).

The troublesome lying spirit that God sanctions here is best understood as a parabolic vision, indicating that God sovereignly will use the advice of Ahab’s prophets to bring about the king’s demise. Like several other instances in the OT, the ploy may be seen as a ruse de guerre (e.g., Jos 2:1–7; 8:1–28; Jdg 3:15–25; 5:24–27; 7:20; 2Ki 6:15–20; 7:6–7).

24–28 Micaiah’s visions are met with two reactions, to each of which the prophet gives a reply. To Zedekiah’s slapping of his face, Micaiah predicts that the false prophet will learn the truth when he is forced to hide on the day of invasion. This prophecy was probably fulfilled when Jehu seized the palace. To Ahab’s sentencing of him to prison on minimum rations until the king should return, Micaiah replied that if Ahab returned at all, the Lord had not spoken through his prophet. Micaiah’s reply amounts to a virtual announcement of the king’s certain death.

NOTES

1 The exact location of Ramoth Gilead is debated, with at least three sites being strong possibilities. Famed as a key administrative center in the Solomonic era (1Ki 4:13), the city was lost to Israel when Ben-Hadad took it from Omri (cf. Josephus, Ant. 8.398–99 [15.3]). It was to figure greatly in the fall of the Omride dynasty (cf. 2Ki 9:1–15; 2Ch 22:2–6).

That Ahab’s daughter was married to Jehoshaphat’s son probably indicates that at least a loose alliance existed between the two kingdoms. By “horses” Jehoshaphat probably meant his war chariots (cf. Ex 15:19). The parallel account in 2 Chronicles 18:3 does not read these words but does give Jehoshaphat’s promise to join Ahab in war.

2 Jehoshaphat’s “going down” to see Ahab reflects the prominence of Jerusalem. Traditionally one “goes down” from or “comes up” to Jerusalem, which is situated high in the Judean hill country.

5 The kings of the ancient Near East commonly sought the will of their god(s) before entering into battle. See, for example, the Zakir Inscription (ANET, 655) and the Moabite Stone (ANET, 320–21). The Assyrian kings regularly consulted an oracle before battle (see the various annalistic reports in ANET, 274–301). For consulting the Lord before battle, see Judges 20:27–28; 1 Samuel 23:2–4; 30:8; 2 Samuel 5:19–25.

6 Cyrus Gordon (The Ancient Near East [3rd rev. ed.; Newcastle: Norton, 1965], 202) calls such false prophets “a variety of court flatterers.”

9 (sārîs, “[court] official”) comes from the Akkadian ša rēšii (šarri) (“the one of the [king’s] head”). Its frequent translation by “eunuch” comes from the ancient practice of using such men in key positions in the court (cf. Est 2:3–15; 4:4–5; see further TWOT, 2:634–35).

10 Threshing floors were often used as places of important assemblies. At times the site also held spiritual significance (cf. Jdg 6:36–40). Thus Joseph mourned for Jacob at a threshing floor (Ge 50:10), and David built an altar and Solomon the temple at the famous threshing floor of Araunah (2Sa 24:18–25; 1Ch 21:15–22:1; 2Ch 3:1). In Canaanite tradition the threshing floor became the scene where court was held at a place near the city gate (see ANET, 144–45, 151, 153). Gordon, 381, compares the word to the Akkadian maqrattu found at Nuzu, which depicts a place where a court of justice was held.

11 For the image of the goring horn, see Daniel 8; Micah 4:13; Zechariah 1:18–19. Sennacherib, on his fifth campaign, reported that he led his men like a wild ox (see R. Borger, Babylonisch-Assyrische Lesestücke [Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1963], 3:47). Ashurbanipal reported that his enemies were gored by the goddess Ninlil’s horns (see ANET, 300). Pharaoh could also be represented as a goring bull, as already on the Narmer Palette (see Seton Lloyd, The Art of the Ancient Near East [New York: Praeger, 1961], 32–33, ill. 14).

12–16 Ahab apparently sensed the sarcasm in Micaiah’s voice. God’s prophets were not above using sarcasm when the situation demanded it (e.g., 1Ki 18:27; cf. Job 12:1–2).

17 The motif of the shepherd and the sheep is a familiar one. God himself was shepherd to Israel, his flock (Isa 40:11; Jer 31:10; Eze 34:12; cf. Ge 48:15; 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1). Israel’s leaders were charged with caring for the people as a shepherd watched over his flock (Nu 27:17). The later prophets were to address Israel’s leaders as false shepherds (Jer 2:8; 10:21; 23; 25:32–38; Eze 34; Zec 10:2–3; 11:4–17). Ultimately the Messiah would be the great (Heb 13:20) and good shepherd, who lays down his life for his sheep (Zec 13:7; Jn 10:11–18; 1Pe 2:25). For the smitten shepherd and the scattered sheep, see Zechariah 13:7; Matthew 26:31; Mark 14:27.

19 For the use of trickery in the OT, see R. D. Patterson, “The Old Testament Use of an Archetype: The Trickster,” JETS 42 (1999): 385–94.

That the angels do form a heavenly assemblage is stated elsewhere in the Scriptures (Job 1:6; 2:1; Pss 82:1; 89:6–7; 103:19–20; 148:1–2; Zec 6:5–8; cf. 1Ti 5:21; Heb 1:6; 12:22; Rev 5:11–12; 7:11–12; 14:10), though their doing so in no way need be construed that they meet to counsel God or to intercede for those on earth.

20 The “lying spirit” is, as Keil, 276–77, and Montgomery, 339, correctly maintain, the personified spirit of prophecy (cf. 1Sa 10:10–12; 19:23–24; Zec 13:2; 1Jn 4:6) that works in accordance with the sovereign will of God. That the prophets were under evil influence is true; but their delusive prophecies only fed the king’s own self-destructive ends. The Lord used all these conditions to effect his will in the situation.

26 The “king’s son” probably refers here to an important state official who was of royal blood. See A. F. Rainey, “The Prince and the Pauper,” UF 7 (1975): 427–32.

ii. Closing details concerning Ahab (22:29–40)

OVERVIEW

These verses tell of the battle for Ramoth Gilead and Ahab’s personal strategy for the battle (vv.29–31), Ahab’s death in the battle (vv.32–36), and final notices concerning his death and accomplishments (vv.37–40). Through it all the reader is to remember that the exciting details concerning the flow of battle and the Israelite defeat are but the means for carrying out God’s will with regard to Ahab.

29So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat king of Judah went up to Ramoth Gilead. 30The king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat, “I will enter the battle in disguise, but you wear your royal robes.” So the king of Israel disguised himself and went into battle.

31Now the king of Aram had ordered his thirty-two chariot commanders, “Do not fight with anyone, small or great, except the king of Israel.” 32When the chariot commanders saw Jehoshaphat, they thought, “Surely this is the king of Israel.” So they turned to attack him, but when Jehoshaphat cried out, 33the chariot commanders saw that he was not the king of Israel and stopped pursuing him.

34But someone drew his bow at random and hit the king of Israel between the sections of his armor. The king told his chariot driver, “Wheel around and get me out of the fighting. I’ve been wounded.” 35All day long the battle raged, and the king was propped up in his chariot facing the Arameans. The blood from his wound ran onto the floor of the chariot, and that evening he died. 36As the sun was setting, a cry spread through the army: “Every man to his town; everyone to his land!”

37So the king died and was brought to Samaria, and they buried him there. 38They washed the chariot at a pool in Samaria (where the prostitutes bathed), and the dogs licked up his blood, as the word of the LORD had declared.

39As for the other events of Ahab’s reign, including all he did, the palace he built and inlaid with ivory, and the cities he fortified, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel? 40Ahab rested with his fathers. And Ahaziah his son succeeded him as king.

COMMENTARY

29–31 Two battle strategies are noted here. The king of Aram directed his men to seek out Ahab in the fray. Thus he would repay Ahab’s leniency (cf. 1Ki 20:34, 42). Ahab, on his part, entered the battle disguised as a common soldier but told Jehoshaphat to wear his royal robes. Seeking out the enemy leader was a common battle tactic, for doing so could both disrupt the opposition’s battle plans and demoralize its troops.

32–36 The Aramean king’s plan nearly cost Jehoshaphat his life. Ahab’s plan backfired when an Aramean bowman randomly shot him between one of the strips of armor, made with moveable joints that attached the solid breastplate to the lower armor. Although Ahab gave orders to his chariot driver to remove him from the raging battle, apparently the fighting was so intense that the driver could not dislodge the chariot from the fray. Whether or not the wound was a mortal one, Ahab bled to death in his chariot.

37–38 True to previous prophecy (1Ki 21:19), dogs lapped up Ahab’s blood at a pool in Samaria where prostitutes bathed.

39–40 Ahab’s palace (cf. Am 3:15), unearthed in the excavations at Samaria, could be described as an “ivory house” for two reasons: (1) the outside of the building was covered with a polished white limestone that would give an ivory-like appearance in the gleaming sun, and (2) many articles of ivory decorated the inside of the palace.

NOTES

29 The Chronicler (2Ch 19:1–3) reports that God’s prophet denounced Jehoshaphat’s involvement at Ramoth Gilead.

32 For (ʾām^erû, “they thought”), see Note on 2 Kings 5:11.

34 Wiseman, 1 & 2 Kings, 189, remarks, “Armour made up of linked small metal plate segments from this period has been found at Lachish and at Nuzi and Nimrud in Iraq . . . the shot appears to have struck between the chain mail . . . and the breastplate.” The NIV follows the LXX here in translating “out of the fighting”; the MT reads “out of the camp.”

38 The alternative reading of the NIV, “cleaned the weapons,” depends on changing (zōnôt, “harlots”) to (z^eyānôt), from the Aramaic sense of “armor” (cf. KJV; Syr., “they cleaned his armor”). The reference to harlots is not without its point. That pool where Ahab’s blood flowed may have been a sacred one erected for the lustration rites of the priestesses of the very cult Ahab and Jezebel introduced into Israel. Such “priestesses” are called by the sacred writer for what they were: “harlots.” The LXX is emphatic: “The swine and the dogs licked up the blood and the harlots bathed in the blood.”

4. The Reign of Jehoshaphat in the Southern Kingdom (22:41–50)

41Jehoshaphat son of Asa became king of Judah in the fourth year of Ahab king of Israel. 42Jehoshaphat was thirty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem twenty-five years. His mother’s name was Azubah daughter of Shilhi. 43In everything he walked in the ways of his father Asa and did not stray from them; he did what was right in the eyes of the LORD. The high places, however, were not removed, and the people continued to offer sacrifices and burn incense there. 44Jehoshaphat was also at peace with the king of Israel.

45As for the other events of Jehoshaphat’s reign, the things he achieved and his military exploits, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Judah? 46He rid the land of the rest of the male shrine prostitutes who remained there even after the reign of his father Asa. 47There was then no king in Edom; a deputy ruled.

48Now Jehoshaphat built a fleet of trading ships to go to Ophir for gold, but they never set sail—they were wrecked at Ezion Geber. 49At that time Ahaziah son of Ahab said to Jehoshaphat, “Let my men sail with your men,” but Jehoshaphat refused.

50Then Jehoshaphat rested with his fathers and was buried with them in the city of David his father. And Jehoram his son succeeded him.

COMMENTARY

41–42 Jehoshaphat, who had ruled three years as coregent with his father, Asa, came into independent rule in the fourth year of Ahab of Israel (874–853 BC, i.e., 870 BC; v.41). His total reign was some twenty-five years (873–848 BC; v.42). The record of Jehoshaphat’s reign is greatly abbreviated by the author of Kings; it contains only a short sketch of his lengthy reign, a brief evaluation of his spiritual condition and activities, and a few notices of international events before recording his death. A fuller discussion of the events of Jehoshaphat’s reign can be found in 2 Chronicles 17:1–21:1.

43–46 Jehoshaphat’s spiritual condition was basically sound and largely commended by God (v.43a; cf. 2Ch 17:3–4; 19:4–7; 20:3–13, 32). His concern for spiritual things (2Ch 17:7–9) manifested itself in religious and social reforms (v.46; cf. 2Ch 17:6; 19:3–11). Accordingly, God blessed his reign (2Ch 17:1–6, 12–18:1) and gave him respite and respect from all the lands round about (v.44; 2Ch 17:10–11; 20:28–30). He did, however, stop short of a full purging of idolatry (v.43b; 2Ch 20:33); and the marriage of his son Jehoram to Athaliah, Ahab’s daughter, was to bring about a tragic condition in Judah (2Ki 8:18–19; 11:1–3; 2Ch 21:6–7, 11).

Three other tragic areas are singled out in the divine record: (1) Jehoshaphat went with Ahab to the battle of Ramoth Gilead, despite Micaiah’s warning (22:1–40; cf. 2Ch 18:28–19:3); (2) he subsequently entered into an ill-fated commercial venture with Ahaziah (vv.48–49; 2Ch 20:35–37); (3) still later, he went with Jehoram on his expedition into Transjordan (2Ki 3:6–27).

47–49 The historical notice in v.47 is probably intended to explain how it was that Jehoshaphat could have renewed commercial activities in Ezion Geber. The Edomite weakness may be attributable to Jehoshaphat’s victory over the Transjordanian coalition, as detailed in 2 Chronicles 20. Jehoshaphat’s commercial alliance with Ahaziah (v.48) was denounced by the Lord through his prophet Eliezer (2Ch 20:36–37). Because Ahaziah was an apostate, God sent a storm to destroy the fleet before it could set sail. Evidently Jehoshaphat was wise enough to refuse a second trading proposal put forward by Ahaziah (v.49).

50 The notice of Jehoshaphat’s passing is amplified by the fact that his further life and history were recorded in the historical records of Jehu son of Hanani (cf. 2Ch 20:34).

NOTES

45 Jehoshaphat’s exploits and military achievements included the strengthening of his border by establishing permanent garrison cities along the northern frontier (2Ch 17:1–2, 12), the training and equipping of a sizeable army (2Ch 17:14–19) that was able to quell a Transjordanian invasion (2Ch 20:1–30), and the placing of Edom under the power of Judah, which thereby controlled the important caravan route to the south (2Ki 3:8–27; 2Ch 20:36). His political successes inaugurated an era of peace and cooperation with Israel, with which Judah had been constantly at war (v.44; 2Ki 3; 2Ch 18:1–19:3). Jehoshaphat was also an able administrator who effected important judicial (2Ch 19:5–11) and religious reforms (2Ch 17:3–9).

46 For male shrine-prostitutes, see Note on 14:24.

47 Edom’s continued dependence on Judah can be seen in the fact that it joined with Israel and Judah in their later expedition to Moab (2Ki 3:9–27).

48–49 The phrase “trading ships” can also be translated “ships of Tarshish” (cf. NIV note; see comment on 10:22). The original location of Tarshish has not been established with absolute certainty. Some have linked it with Tartessus in Spain (BDB, 1076) or with Numidian Africa (Young, 1:128). The inscriptions of Esarhaddon of Assyria (681–668 BC) equate Tarshish with a Phoenician land at the western end of the Mediterranean Sea (cf. Jnh 1:3), and an inscription from Nora on Sardinia links that Phoenician trading center with Tarshish (see Unger, 225–26). Isaiah 23:1 perhaps connects Tarshish with Greek maritime activity (cf. Ge 10:4; Isa 66:19). W. F. Albright (“New Light on the Early History of Phoenician Colonization,” BASOR 83 [1941]: 21) points out the relation of Tarshish with Akkadian taršišu (“smelting plant, refinery”) and suggests that Jehoshaphat’s ships of Tarshish were a refinery fleet that transported smelted ore.

While Tarshish apparently lay in the western Mediterranean, possibly on Sardinia, it could be reached via Ezion Geber (10:22; 2Ch 20:36). Accordingly, Cyrus Gordon (Before Columbus [New York: Crown, 1971], 113–14, 136–37) boldly suggests an Atlantic port, possibly even a new world site, such as Mexico!

Not only metal ores, but also various precious and exotic commodities are tied in with Tarshish fleets (e.g., gold, silver, iron, tin, lead, ivory products, and peacocks; cf. 10:22; 2Ch 9:21; Jer 10:9; Eze 27:12). The trade in these luxury items from distant lands may have transferred the original significance into a general term for a distant and exotic land reached by “Tarshish ships.”

5. The Reign of Ahaziah in the Northern Kingdom (1Ki 22:51-2Ki 1:18)

OVERVIEW

The short account of Ahaziah of Israel’s kingship is structured in chiastic symmetry:

A Notice of accession (1Ki 22:51–53)

B Ahaziah falls and then sends messengers to Ekron (2Ki 1:1–2).

C An angel instructs Elijah to meet the messengers (vv.3–4).

D The messengers report back to Ahaziah (vv.5–8).

D´ Ahaziah thrice sends soldiers to bring Elijah to Samaria (vv.9–14).

C´ An angel instructs Elijah to accompany the third contingent of soldiers with God’s message (vv.15–16).

B´ Ahaziah dies as a result of his fall (v.17).

A´ Closing notice (v.18)

Thus this section focuses not so much on Ahaziah’s reign but on God. At issue is God’s position in the royal house of the northern kingdom. Elijah’s amazing power should have been enough to convince all concerned as to who truly is God—Yahweh or Baal.

51Ahaziah son of Ahab became king of Israel in Samaria in the seventeenth year of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and he reigned over Israel two years. 52He did evil in the eyes of the LORD, because he walked in the ways of his father and mother and in the ways of Jeroboam son of Nebat, who caused Israel to sin. 53He served and worshiped Baal and provoked the LORD, the God of Israel, to anger, just as his father had done.

2Ki 1:1After Ahab’s death, Moab rebelled against Israel. 2Now Ahaziah had fallen through the lattice of his upper room in Samaria and injured himself. So he sent messengers, saying to them, “Go and consult Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron, to see if I will recover from this injury.”

3But the angel of the LORD said to Elijah the Tishbite, “Go up and meet the messengers of the king of Samaria and ask them, ‘Is it because there is no God in Israel that you are going off to consult Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron?’ 4Therefore this is what the LORD says: ‘You will not leave the bed you are lying on. You will certainly die!’” So Elijah went.

5When the messengers returned to the king, he asked them, “Why have you come back?”

6“A man came to meet us,” they replied. “And he said to us, ‘Go back to the king who sent you and tell him, “This is what the LORD says: Is it because there is no God in Israel that you are sending men to consult Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron? Therefore you will not leave the bed you are lying on. You will certainly die!”’”

7The king asked them, “What kind of man was it who came to meet you and told you this?”

8They replied, “He was a man with a garment of hair and with a leather belt around his waist.”

The king said, “That was Elijah the Tishbite.”

9Then he sent to Elijah a captain with his company of fifty men. The captain went up to Elijah, who was sitting on the top of a hill, and said to him, “Man of God, the king says, ‘Come down!’”

10Elijah answered the captain, “If I am a man of God, may fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty men!” Then fire fell from heaven and consumed the captain and his men.

11At this the king sent to Elijah another captain with his fifty men. The captain said to him, “Man of God, this is what the king says, ‘Come down at once!’”

12“If I am a man of God,” Elijah replied, “may fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty men!” Then the fire of God fell from heaven and consumed him and his fifty men.

13So the king sent a third captain with his fifty men. This third captain went up and fell on his knees before Elijah. “Man of God,” he begged, “please have respect for my life and the lives of these fifty men, your servants! 14See, fire has fallen from heaven and consumed the first two captains and all their men. But now have respect for my life!”

15The angel of the LORD said to Elijah, “Go down with him; do not be afraid of him.” So Elijah got up and went down with him to the king.

16He told the king, “This is what the LORD says: Is it because there is no God in Israel for you to consult that you have sent messengers to consult Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron? Because you have done this, you will never leave the bed you are lying on. You will certainly die!” 17So he died, according to the word of the LORD that Elijah had spoken.

Because Ahaziah had no son, Joram succeeded him as king in the second year of Jehoram son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah. 18As for all the other events of Ahaziah’s reign, and what he did, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel?

COMMENTARY

1–2 Ahab’s son Ahaziah (853–852 BC), who perpetuated his father’s wickedness, incurred God’s judicial anger (1Ki 22:51–53). The divine judgment took numerous forms:

1. 1. Politically, Moab found in the death of Ahab occasion to rebel against Israel (v.1).
2. 2. Economically, God thwarted Ahaziah’s attempted commercial enterprise with Jehoshaphat (1Ki 22:47–48; 2Ch 20:36–37).
3. 3. Personally, the circumstances of Ahaziah’s life were allowed to proceed in such a way that Israel’s new king suffered a seriously injurious fall through the latticework of the upper chamber to the courtyard below (2Ki 1:2).

Ahaziah was aware of the seriousness of his physical condition. In such circumstances a person’s basic spiritual temperament will often surface. Immersed in the Baalism of his father, Ahaziah sent messengers to inquire of the oracle at Ekron whether he would recover from his injuries (v.2). The question naturally arises as to why Ahaziah should send away to foreign soil to inquire of Baal, since Baalism permeated the Israelite kingdom. The answer may be threefold.

1. 1. Politically, the young king may well have had his political rivals and enemies, as was so often true in Israel and the ancient Near East.
2. 2. Religiously, Baal seems to have been particularly the cult god of Ekron (e.g., as opposed to Dagon at Ashdod). Moreover, the Philistines and possibly the Baal of Ekron had a well-known reputation for divination and soothsaying (1Sa 6:2; Isa 2:6).
3. 3. Geographically, Ekron, being located just a few miles from the confluence of Israel’s southwestern border with Judah and Philistia, lay near at hand.

3–4 Previously, angels have played an important role in Elijah’s ministry (cf. 1Ki 19:5, 7); as then, so now (cf. vv.15–16) an angel twice deals with Elijah. The term “the angel of the LORD” occurs in Kings only in this setting (cf. v.15) and in 1 Kings 19:7 and 2 Kings 19:35. In none of these cases does the term appear to refer to a Christophany. Both here and in 1 Kings 19 (note esp. v.5), the angel in question is Yahweh’s messenger (angel) in contradistinction to that of the wicked royalty. In 2 Kings 19:35 God’s death angel is in view.

The title “king of Samaria” reflects a frequent biblical custom of designating a king by his capital city (cf. 1Ki 21:1; Jnh 3:6) and is by no means a mark of a late editor, as is often charged. Prophetic use of sarcasm has already been seen in Elijah’s mocking of Baal (1Ki 18:27) and Micaiah’s parroting of the false prophets’ words to Ahab (see Note on 1Ki 22:15–16).

5–8 The fearful appearance and awful message caused the messengers to return instantly to the king (v.5), where they reported to Ahaziah the whole episode (v.6). The king recognized at once that the stern rebuke was from none other than Elijah the Tishbite (v.8). The secret mission and hidden desires of the royal chambers were not unknown to the true King of the universe. Did Ahaziah understand this truth? If so, the scriptural record contains no hint that Ahaziah repented in the least; rather, all that follows speaks of an obdurate and sinful heart.

9–14 In contrast to the arrogance of the first two commanders of fifty soldiers—an insolence that brought them and their men instant divine judgment—the third commander approached Elijah with respect. With tact he asked God’s prophet to accompany them to Samaria. No indication exists that Elijah acted out of personal vindictiveness or vengeance; rather, the arrogance of the first two officers was as much directed toward God as Elijah. For as God’s authoritative prophet, Elijah was defending the sacred reputation of God and the authority of his word. Once again fire symbolized the awesome presence of God (cf. 1Ki 18:38).

Threefold repetition is a favorite authorial device in Kings, which has used it a number of times previously (1Ki 18:33–35; 20:2–11; cf. also 11:9–13).

15–18 The account closes with elements found near its beginning. Once again an angel gives directions to God’s prophet. As a final note the narrator reports that Ahaziah’s fall ended in his death. His demise, however, was due as much to his stubborn disbelief and settled wickedness as the fall itself. Ahaziah’s brother succeeded the childless king in what was the second year of the reign of Jehoshaphat’s son, also named Jehoram (852 BC), of the southern kingdom (v.17).

NOTES

1:1 The notice concerning the Moabite rebellion provides the historical framework for events after the passing of Ahab. The author will return to the Moabite problem again in ch. 3.

2 On the upper room see Note on 9:30. The typical Syrian upper balcony was enclosed with a jointed wooden latticework that, while suitable for privacy, could easily be broken. For legislation concerning protective parapets to minimize the danger of someone’s falling from domestic houses, see Deuteronomy 22:8.

The exact name and distinct nature of (baʿal z^ebûb, “Baal Zebub”), the local god of Ekron, have been much discussed (cf. Mt 12:24). The more original cognate may be “Baal Zebul” (“Baal is prince”; see Note on 1Ki 16:31).

Although Hebrew scribes may have, with pejorative intent, deliberately perpetuated the inherent confusion in the names, so that “Baal Zebul” (“prince Baal”) became “Baal Zebel” (“lord of dung”) and “Baal Zebub” (“lord of flies”), here the present form “Baal Zebub,” reflected fully in the Syrian and Vulgate traditions, may indicate a more originally positive designation. The existence in Ugaritic of the cognate term il ḏbb (ANET, 137) may, as J. J. M. Roberts (The Earliest Semitic Pantheon [Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1972], 119) suggests, make it “impossible to simply dismiss zebub as a vulgarization for zebul.” Moreover, the uncertainties inherent in Ugaritic ḏ (see UT, 26–27) complicate the entire picture so that perhaps the original signification will never be known.

3 The Hebrew verb (dāraš, “consult”) is frequently used for consulting a deity. The particular construction employed here is often used when a false deity is involved (cf. 1Sa 28:7; 1Ch 10:13). This episode is the second of four instances in the books of Kings in which a dying king sends messengers to inquire as to his chances of recovery (cf. 1Ki 14:1–18; 2Ki 8:7–15; 20:1–11). This incident is unique in that the king does not send his messengers to Yahweh. Nevertheless, in all four cases the Lord’s word proves effective: Jeroboam, Ahaziah, and Ben-Hadad all die; Hezekiah is healed as a result of his soul-searching pleading with God. See further R. Cohn, “Convention and Creativity in the Book of Kings: The Case of the Dying Monarch,” CBQ 47 (1985): 603–16.

8 (baʿal śē ʿār, lit., “possessor of hair”) has been understood in two ways: (1) “a hairy man” (so the ancient versions, KJV, NASB), and (2) “a garment of hair” (so the NIV, RSV, and the majority of modern commentators). Not only the syntax, which stresses the appearance of Elijah as one who wore a hairy garment girded at the waist with a leather belt, but also the prophetic garb itself (cf. Zec 13:4) and the typical role of Elijah ascribed to John the Baptist (Mt 3:4) favor the latter view.

9 The term “captain of fifty” indicates something of the organization of Israel’s standing army (see further de Vaux, 214–28). The similar title occurs in the Akkadian rab ḥamšû. The hill on which Elijah sat has been identified by many as one of the peaks of the Carmel mountain range.

17 The chronological note with regard to Jehoram of Israel’s ascending to the throne takes its point of departure as the second year of Jehoram of Judah insofar as Jehoram would rule Judah for the greater part of the time that Israel’s Jehoram was ruling in the north.

	Israel	Judah
2 Kings 1:17	Jehoram’s first year	= Jehoram’s second year (cf. his coregency) = 852 BC
2 Kings 3:1	Jehoram’s first year	= Jehoshaphat’s eighteenth year (since his independent reign, which began in 870/869) = 852 BC
2 Kings 8:16	Jehoram’s fifth year	= Jehoram’s first year (of independent rule) = 848 BC

So Jehoram of the northern kingdom reigned 852–841 BC; Jehoram of the southern kingdom, 853 (coregent)/848 (full power)–841 BC; and Jehoshaphat, southern kingdom, 872 (coregent)/870/869 (full power)–848/847 BC. See further Archer, 204–5.

6. The Prophetic Ministry of Elisha in the Era of Jehoram of the Northern Kingdom (2:1–9:37)

OVERVIEW

At first sight this section appears to present a myriad of diverse details rather loosely related to one another only by the mention of Elisha in each chapter. Indeed, many scholars have decided that especially chs. 2–8 represent various stages of editorial collection. Conservatives have reacted to such suggestions in many ways—from ignoring the problem altogether to finding intricate subsurface thematic interconnections between the various portions. (See the excellent bibliography in Phillip E. Satterthwaite, “The Elisha Narratives and the Coherence of 2 Kings 2–8,” TynBul 49 [1998]: 1–28.)

The study presented here keeps two basic tenets in focus: (1) Kings contains a great deal of material that is best termed “prophetic narrative,” and (2) the ancients applied well-known methods of composition and compilation (see Introduction: Literary Form). The careful application of these principles provides a rationale for the canonical arrangement of the material in these chapters and their placement after ch. 1.

Thus ch. 2 provides a hinge to both the first and third chapters, for the Samaria mentioned in 1:1 is seen again at the conclusion of Elisha’s journeying at the end of ch. 2. Likewise ch. 3 begins with the mention of Samaria and deals with the Moabite problem already noted in 1:1. Chapter 3 ends with the Israelite soldiers’ (and Elisha’s) returning to the northern kingdom. Accordingly, Elisha’s early miracles in the northern kingdom are the subject of ch. 4. Moreover, various themes connect the miracles of ch. 4, such as the common theme of food (4:2–8, 38–41, 42–44), the concern of mothers for their families (4:1, 8–37), and terms such as the “sons of the prophets” (4:1, 38) and “[holy] man of God” (4:7, 9, 21–22, 25, 27, 40, 42). Further connections are noted in the Overview to ch. 4.

The section 5:1–8:6 details Elisha’s further life-giving miracles during the Aramean crisis. We also learn more about Elisha’s servant Gehazi, whom we first meet in ch. 4 (vv.27–31). He figures prominently in the dealings between Elisha and the Aramean commander Naaman and is present in the concluding episode of 8:1–6. Thus matters concerning Gehazi are placed strategically to form an inner inclusio.

Nor are connections between the various units of this section wanting. Elisha’s instructions to Naaman to bathe in the Jordan River in ch. 5 provide a setting for Elisha’s miracle at the Jordan in 6:1–7. The problem of the Aramean crisis detailed in 6:8–23 provides the background for the events that occur in 6:24–7:20. The famine of this latter unit in turn supplies the occasion for the account of the return of the Shunammite’s land in 8:1–6. Thus matters concerning Aram, Samaria, and Elisha largely highlight the entire section.

In a brief interlude the narrator resumes his practice of tracing events in the kingdom parallel to the one under consideration (8:16–29). He then completes his treatment of the events of Elisha’s ministry with a discussion of the prophet’s part in the anointing of Jehu and Jehu’s subsequent coup d’état (9:1–37).

Several other words and thematic associations are discernable in these chapters, but enough has been shown to demonstrate that the material in them is not haphazardly brought together. Indeed, they need to be accounted for in no other way than the careful forethought of the author/narrator.

a. Prelude: prophetic transition (2:1–25)

OVERVIEW

Chapter 2 sketches the prophetic succession from Elijah to Elisha. Central to the narrative is Elisha’s witnessing of Elijah’s translation to heaven (vv.9–12). The account is told in chiastic symmetry:

A Elijah and Elisha depart for Bethel (vv.1–2)

B Elijah and Elisha at Bethel (vv.3–4)

C Elijah and Elisha at Jericho (vv.5–6)

D The sons of the prophets watch as Elijah and Elisha cross the Jordan (vv.7–8)

E Elisha’s request and the translation of Elijah (vv.9–12)

D´ The sons of the prophets watch as Elisha crosses the Jordan (vv.13–18)

C´ Elisha at Jericho (vv.19–22)

B´ Elisha at Bethel (vv.23–24)

A´ Elisha departs from Bethel (v.25)

The overall pattern of the chapter thus displays the form of the journey from Bethel to and back from the Jordan River. It also contains strong elements of a quest motif, for Elisha is aware of Elijah’s impending passing and is determined not only to be with him when it happens but also to receive Elijah’s final blessing. He also desires empowerment as Elijah’s successor. Having accomplished that goal, he retraces his steps and on the way performs miraculous deeds both in Jericho and Bethel. He then moves on to Samaria via Mount Carmel. The movement to Samaria provides the hook to the next narrative, which begins with the mention of Joram’s becoming king in Samaria (3:1).

1When the LORD was about to take Elijah up to heaven in a whirlwind, Elijah and Elisha were on their way from Gilgal. 2Elijah said to Elisha, “Stay here; the LORD has sent me to Bethel.”

But Elisha said, “As surely as the LORD lives and as you live, I will not leave you.” So they went down to Bethel.

3The company of the prophets at Bethel came out to Elisha and asked, “Do you know that the LORD is going to take your master from you today?”

“Yes, I know,” Elisha replied, “but do not speak of it.”

4Then Elijah said to him, “Stay here, Elisha; the LORD has sent me to Jericho.”

And he replied, “As surely as the LORD lives and as you live, I will not leave you.” So they went to Jericho.

5The company of the prophets at Jericho went up to Elisha and asked him, “Do you know that the LORD is going to take your master from you today?”

“Yes, I know,” he replied, “but do not speak of it.”

6Then Elijah said to him, “Stay here; the LORD has sent me to the Jordan.”

And he replied, “As surely as the LORD lives and as you live, I will not leave you.” So the two of them walked on.

7Fifty men of the company of the prophets went and stood at a distance, facing the place where Elijah and Elisha had stopped at the Jordan. 8Elijah took his cloak, rolled it up and struck the water with it. The water divided to the right and to the left, and the two of them crossed over on dry ground.

9When they had crossed, Elijah said to Elisha, “Tell me, what can I do for you before I am taken from you?”

“Let me inherit a double portion of your spirit,” Elisha replied.

10“You have asked a difficult thing,” Elijah said, “yet if you see me when I am taken from you, it will be yours—otherwise not.”

11As they were walking along and talking together, suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire appeared and separated the two of them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind. 12Elisha saw this and cried out, “My father! My father! The chariots and horsemen of Israel!” And Elisha saw him no more. Then he took hold of his own clothes and tore them apart.

13He picked up the cloak that had fallen from Elijah and went back and stood on the bank of the Jordan. 14Then he took the cloak that had fallen from him and struck the water with it. “Where now is the LORD, the God of Elijah?” he asked. When he struck the water, it divided to the right and to the left, and he crossed over.

15The company of the prophets from Jericho, who were watching, said, “The spirit of Elijah is resting on Elisha.” And they went to meet him and bowed to the ground before him. 16“Look,” they said, “we your servants have fifty able men. Let them go and look for your master. Perhaps the Spirit of the LORD has picked him up and set him down on some mountain or in some valley.”

“No,” Elisha replied, “do not send them.”

17But they persisted until he was too ashamed to refuse. So he said, “Send them.” And they sent fifty men, who searched for three days but did not find him. 18When they returned to Elisha, who was staying in Jericho, he said to them, “Didn’t I tell you not to go?”

19The men of the city said to Elisha, “Look, our lord, this town is well situated, as you can see, but the water is bad and the land is unproductive.”

20“Bring me a new bowl,” he said, “and put salt in it.” So they brought it to him.

21Then he went out to the spring and threw the salt into it, saying, “This is what the LORD says: ‘I have healed this water. Never again will it cause death or make the land unproductive.’” 22And the water has remained wholesome to this day, according to the word Elisha had spoken.

23From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. “Go on up, you baldhead!” they said. “Go on up, you baldhead!” 24He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths. 25And he went on to Mount Carmel and from there returned to Samaria.

COMMENTARY

1–6 On the journey from Gilgal to the Jordan River Elijah urges Elisha to remain behind on three different occasions. Three times Elisha refuses to leave his prophetic master. Once again, threefold repetition figures strongly in the telling of the story (see comments on 1:9–14). The phrase translated by the NIV as “stay here” is cast in a polite form. Rather than indicating that Elijah is prohibiting Elisha from accompanying him first to Bethel, then to Jericho, and then finally to the Jordan, it suggests that Elijah is testing Elisha as to whether he will remain with him to the end.

It would appear from the narrative that Elijah had disclosed to his various students that his ministry is nearing a close and that someday soon he will pass by for the last time. Elisha either knows from separate divine communication or strongly suspected that this day might be Elijah’s last. Strongly desirous of God’s will for his life and concerned to succeed Elijah as the Lord’s prophet to Israel, Elisha is determined to be with his tutor until the end. It is instructive to note that even though Elijah knows this day will be his last on earth, his concern is that the Lord’s work will continue after his passing; so he wants to assure himself of the progress of his “seminary students.”

7 Fifty prophetical students are privileged to witness the great miracle of Elijah’s translation into heaven and the passing of the prophet’s mantle to Elisha. What a contrast these fifty spiritually concerned young men form with the squads of fifty that Ahaziah had recently sent to Elijah (cf. ch. 1)!

8 The young students behold a grand scene. The two great prophets, master and successor, stand on the banks of the Jordan. Taking his prophet’s mantle and rolling it up rod-like—as did Moses of old at the Red Sea (cf. Ex 14:16–28)—Elijah smites the river. Immediately the waters to the north pile up in a heap, with the waters on the south continuing to run toward the Dead Sea. As happened so long ago, the waters of the Jordan again part; the two men pass through on dry ground (cf. Ex 14:21–22; 15:8; Jos 2:10; 3:14–17; 4:22–24; Ps 114:3–5).

But here they go in the opposite direction. Whereas Israel had crossed into Canaan to take possession of its God-appointed earthly heritage—and Elisha, too, must return there to the place of his appointment—Elijah passes out of Canaan through the boundary waters of the Jordan to his heavenly service, there to await a future earthly appearance (cf. Mal 4:5; Mt 17:4; Mk 9:5; Lk 9:33; Rev 11:6). In this regard his ministry anticipates that of his Messiah, who came incarnately to an earthly service (Jn 1:14) and subsequently, as resurrected Savior, ascended again into heaven, there to await his triumphant, glorious second advent (cf. Zec 14:3, 9; Mt 24:30; Ac 1:9–11; 1Ti 3:16; Rev 19:11–17).

9 When Elisha requested a double portion of Elijah’s spirit, he may not have asked simply for the privilege of being Elijah’s successor in terms of the Deuteronomic legislation concerning the eldest son’s inheritance (Dt 21:17), for both he and Elijah knew that Elisha was to be Elijah’s successor-heir (cf. 1Ki 19:16–21). Nor was the request simply to give some confirmatory sign to Elisha, for doing so would scarcely be “a difficult thing” (v.10). Rather, the enormity of the loss of Elijah must have so gripped the humble Elisha that, claiming his position as heir, he asked for the firstborn’s “double portion”—that is, for specially granted spiritual power far beyond his own capabilities to meet the responsibilities of the awesome task that lay before him. He wished, virtually, that Elijah’s mighty prowess might continue to live through him.

10 The request lay beyond Elijah’s power to grant. Nonetheless Elijah told Elisha that if God chose to allow Elisha to see Elijah’s translation, then (and only then) would the full force of Elisha’s request be granted. The sign would indicate to Elisha that God, who alone could grant such a request (cf. Jn 3:34; 1Jn 3:24; 4:13), had in fact done so.

11–12 Elijah was taken up to heaven in the whirlwind, not in the chariot and horses of fire as so often taught. Nor is the account of Elijah’s translation drawn from mythological sources (contra Jones, 385–86), such as those depicting a god moving across the sky (e.g., the Egyptian god Re).

13–15 Elijah’s fallen mantle lay at Elisha’s feet. The younger prophet had once had that mantle symbolically laid on his shoulders (1Ki 19:19); now it would rest there permanently. All he needed to do was to pick it up. Once again the presence of those who witnessed the entire spectacle is mentioned. What they had seen convinced them that the Spirit who once rested upon Elijah was now in control of Elisha’s prophetic ministry.

16–18 The failure to locate Elijah gave assurance to the sons of the prophets that they truly had seen him go up into heaven and that Elijah’s departure was permanent. Doubtless Elijah’s reputation for disappearing and reappearing suddenly (cf. 1Ki 18:12) may have lain behind their concern. In any case, Elisha was surely now the acknowledged leading prophet in Israel.

19–22 Although Jericho had been rebuilt (with difficulty) in the days of Ahab (1Ki 16:34), it had remained unproductive. Apparently the water still lay under Joshua’s curse (cf. Jos 6:26), so that both citizenry and land suffered greatly (v.19). Elisha’s miracle fully removed the age-old judgment, thus allowing a new era to dawn on this area (vv.20–22). The use of a previously unused bowl (cf. Dt 21:3) of salt (cf. Nu 18:19) probably symbolized the Lord of the covenant’s (cf. 2Ch 13:5) cleansing of the water and its permanent purity.

23–25 The public insult against Elisha was aimed ultimately at the God he represented. Elisha’s prophetic ministry was in jeopardy; so the taunt had to be dwelt with decisively. With these two miracles Elisha’s position as God’s chief prophetic successor to Elijah was assured.

NOTES

1 The MT reads literally “in the whirlwind,” probably emphasizing the well-known whirlwind by which Elijah was translated into heaven without dying.

2 Whether the Gilgal mentioned here is the city near Jericho or the Gilgal that lay north of Bethel is uncertain. If the narratives in 4:38–44 and 6:1–7 take place at the Gilgal near Jericho, perhaps that site is the location here also. Sadly, Gilgal and Bethel were to be condemned by prophets in the next century as centers of pagan idolatry (Hos 4:15; 9:15; 12:11; Am 4:4; 5:5).

The mention of fifty prophets from Jericho in v.7 does not, as F. W. Meyer (Elijah and the Secret of His Power [Chicago: Moody Press, 1976], 154) maintains, demand that the schools were always formed into groups of fifty young men (cf., e.g., 4:43); rather, the mention merely indicates that fifty of their number were present. Doubtless the three prophetic schools were in some way dependent on Elijah’s leadership.

3 The Hebrew verb used here is also used of Enoch’s translation (Ge 5:24).

9 The “double portion” has been widely discussed. The position taken here avoids the extremes of holding that nothing more than the right of succession is requested by Elisha (Montgomery) and the view that Elisha is asking for a double measure of Elijah’s Holy Spirit (Luther), an idea often fortified by noting that Elisha performed “double” the miracles that Elijah had done (see e.g., J. P. Free, Archaeology and Bible History [Wheaton, Ill.: Scripture, 1962], 184–85).

Spiritual comparisons between Elijah and Christ are abundant. Certainly the desire of each to prepare his disciples adequately for events after his departure is most evident (cf. Lk 24:44–48; Jn 14–16; see also the apostles’ concern for their readers [2Ti 4:18; 2Pe 1:12–15]).

11 Isaiah (Isa 66:15–16) utilizes the figure of fire and chariots like a whirlwind to depict God’s coming in judicial anger against sinful humanity. Much of that imagery was probably drawn from texts portraying God as present in intense thunderstorms (e.g., Pss 18:9–15; 29:3–9).

12 Elisha’s cry is one of tribute to Elijah. The translated prophet had been a spiritual father to Israel and as such, spiritually, her foremost defense. Elisha would doubtless be pleased at the same testimony given to him at his death (2Ki 13:14). The cry is one of personal sorrow and loss as well, as his rending of his clothes indicates (cf. Joel 2:13; see Note on 1Ki 21:27).

14 The LXX inserts before Elisha’s question, “and it was not divided.” The translators may have deduced that the waters remained undivided before Elisha’s question and until the second mention of his striking of the waters.

20 For the use of salt in ritual purification, see Leviticus 2:13; Numbers 18:19; Ezekiel 43:24.

23 Baldness, regarded as a disgrace, was here an epithet of scorn (cf. Isa 3:17, 24).

24 Montgomery, 366, notes that bears were common enough in ancient Israel. The Ursus Syriacus was noted for its ferocity. The awfulness of the sentence has caused many to brand the account as incompatible with genuine piety. The youths’ taunting “Go on up” was doubtless a mocking caricature of Elijah’s own “going up” into heaven. The name and sacred reputation of God himself was at stake both in Elijah’s translation and the reception of Elisha’s prophetic ministry (cf. Dt 18:15). It should be pointed out that the Hebrew phrase translated “youth” (NIV) is best understood as young lads or young men. As W. C. Kaiser Jr. (Hard Sayings of the Old Testament [Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1988], 123) remarks, “From numerous examples where ages are specified in the Old Testament, we know that these were boys from twelve to thirty years old.”

Accounts such as this one and the execution of the Canaanites, while difficult to understand from the purely human ethical standpoint, must be left ultimately to divine sovereignty and the justice of an all-righteous God, who does not act capriciously. Certainly in each case the vileness and corruption of the Canaanite religion and its danger to Israel are to be underscored.

That Elisha visits Mount Carmel (cf. 1Ki 18) and Samaria (cf. 2Ki 1) demonstrated further that he now is serving as Elijah’s successor.

b. Theme: The ministry of Elisha (3:1–8:15)

i. The Moabite campaign (3:1–27)

OVERVIEW

With this chapter the ministry of Elisha reaches national proportions. For the narrator, both the reigns of Joram in the northern kingdom and the historical event of this chapter, the Moabite campaign, are opportunities to inform readers of Elisha’s growing prowess and mighty deeds.

After the customary accession notice (vv.1–3), the chapter returns (cf. 1:1) to the subject of the Moabite rebellion by detailing Joram’s reaction to it. The details of the campaign against Moab are given in straight narrative: (1) occasion of the campaign (vv.4–6); (2) preparations for the campaign (vv.7–9a); (3) the stalled campaign and the appeal to Elisha (vv.9b–15a); (4) Elisha’s prophecy of victory (vv.15b–19); (5) the fulfillment of Elisha’s prophecy in the campaign (vv.20–25); (6) the close of the campaign (vv.26–27).

1Joram son of Ahab became king of Israel in Samaria in the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and he reigned twelve years. 2He did evil in the eyes of the LORD, but not as his father and mother had done. He got rid of the sacred stone of Baal that his father had made. 3Nevertheless he clung to the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, which he had caused Israel to commit; he did not turn away from them.

4Now Mesha king of Moab raised sheep, and he had to supply the king of Israel with a hundred thousand lambs and with the wool of a hundred thousand rams. 5But after Ahab died, the king of Moab rebelled against the king of Israel. 6So at that time King Joram set out from Samaria and mobilized all Israel. 7He also sent this message to Jehoshaphat king of Judah: “The king of Moab has rebelled against me. Will you go with me to fight against Moab?”

“I will go with you,” he replied. “I am as you are, my people as your people, my horses as your horses.”

8“By what route shall we attack?” he asked.

“Through the Desert of Edom,” he answered.

9So the king of Israel set out with the king of Judah and the king of Edom. After a roundabout march of seven days, the army had no more water for themselves or for the animals with them.

10“What!” exclaimed the king of Israel. “Has the LORD called us three kings together only to hand us over to Moab?”

11But Jehoshaphat asked, “Is there no prophet of the LORD here, that we may inquire of the LORD through him?”

An officer of the king of Israel answered, “Elisha son of Shaphat is here. He used to pour water on the hands of Elijah.”

12Jehoshaphat said, “The word of the LORD is with him.” So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat and the king of Edom went down to him.

13Elisha said to the king of Israel, “What do we have to do with each other? Go to the prophets of your father and the prophets of your mother.”

“No,” the king of Israel answered, “because it was the LORD who called us three kings together to hand us over to Moab.”

14Elisha said, “As surely as the LORD Almighty lives, whom I serve, if I did not have respect for the presence of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, I would not look at you or even notice you. 15But now bring me a harpist.”

While the harpist was playing, the hand of the LORD came upon Elisha 16and he said, “This is what the LORD says: Make this valley full of ditches. 17For this is what the LORD says: You will see neither wind nor rain, yet this valley will be filled with water, and you, your cattle and your other animals will drink. 18This is an easy thing in the eyes of the LORD; he will also hand Moab over to you. 19You will overthrow every fortified city and every major town. You will cut down every good tree, stop up all the springs, and ruin every good field with stones.”

20The next morning, about the time for offering the sacrifice, there it was—water flowing from the direction of Edom! And the land was filled with water.

21Now all the Moabites had heard that the kings had come to fight against them; so every man, young and old, who could bear arms was called up and stationed on the border. 22When they got up early in the morning, the sun was shining on the water. To the Moabites across the way, the water looked red—like blood. 23“That’s blood!” they said. “Those kings must have fought and slaughtered each other. Now to the plunder, Moab!”

24But when the Moabites came to the camp of Israel, the Israelites rose up and fought them until they fled. And the Israelites invaded the land and slaughtered the Moabites. 25They destroyed the towns, and each man threw a stone on every good field until it was covered. They stopped up all the springs and cut down every good tree. Only Kir Hareseth was left with its stones in place, but men armed with slings surrounded it and attacked it as well.

26When the king of Moab saw that the battle had gone against him, he took with him seven hundred swordsmen to break through to the king of Edom, but they failed. 27Then he took his firstborn son, who was to succeed him as king, and offered him as a sacrifice on the city wall. The fury against Israel was great; they withdrew and returned to their own land.

COMMENTARY

1–3 Joram’s accession notice includes mention of his tearing down of the stele to Baal that Ahab had established. Although erection of this stele is not mentioned in the earlier records of Ahab’s activities, Ahab’s having done so would scarcely be out of character for the royal couple. The location of the stele is uncertain, but similar stones had existed since the days of Jeroboam I (1Ki 14:23) and were still in evidence at the time of the later purge of Jehu (2Ki 10:26–27). In addition, Joram is condemned for perpetuating Jeroboam’s state religion and thus leading Israel into continued apostasy.

4–6 The narrator describes Moab’s rebellion in terms of withholding the required annual tribute. These verses resume and flesh out the historical notice of 1:1. The discovery of the Moabite Stone of King Mesha brings the affairs of Israel’s Omride dynasty into close relationship with Moab (cf. Note on 1Ki 16:21; see ANET, 320–21).

While the precise historical details and correspondences are difficult to trace, apparently Omri had defeated northern Moab (with southern Moab seeming to have remained free of Israelite domination; cf. 2Ch 20)—a subjugation that was to continue for some forty years, that is, throughout Omri’s reign (885–874 BC) and those of Ahab (874–853 BC) and Ahaziah (853–852 BC), and also the first part of Jehoram’s (852–841 BC). The domination of Moab would thus be by Omri and Ahab, with the insurrection against Israel occurring after the death of Ahab (1:1; 3:5) and partially through the reign of Omri’s grandson J(eh)oram.

The Moabite Stone also tells of King Mesha’s systematic victories, which enabled him to drive Israel out of his territory. Apparently his campaigning brought the entire northern portion of the country under his control, thus making any Israelite attempt to retaliate via the area east of Jericho extremely risky at best. In the face of the emergency, Joram mobilized “all Israel,” which “probably included the local militia as well as the regular army” (Hobbs, 35).

7–9a Once again Jehoshaphat joins an Israelite king on a military mission (cf. 1Ki 22:1–40). No doubt because the launching of an attack on Moab’s northern sector was dangerous, Jehoshaphat proposed a campaign route through Edom. The narrator mentions that the king of Edom also joined the venture. Because 1 Kings 22:47 relates that at this time there was no king in Edom, and 2 Kings 8:22 records that in the time of Jehoshaphat’s son Jehoram “Edom rebelled against Judah and set up its own king,” the Edomite “king” was apparently a client-ruler for Jehoshaphat; so a route through Judean-controlled Edom seemed the logical, though less direct, choice.

9b–15a When the lengthy trek proved to be so arduous and long that the water supply failed, Joram and Jehoshaphat became worried as to the outcome of the campaign. Having learned of Elisha’s presence and something of his relation to Elijah, the two kings sought him out. Because Elisha knew of Jehoshaphat’s concern for spiritual matters, he assured the kings that he would seek God’s mind in the situation.

Elisha’s call for a harpist probably indicates the need for creating a proper mood for receiving God’s message in the midst of the prevailing turmoil and despair. Although 1 Samuel 10:5–6 is often put forward as setting a precedent for normal prophetic activity, such a precedent is scarcely demonstrable; for the “prophesying” there was assuredly in the sense of proclaiming and praising the person and work of God.

15b–19 The prophecy of an ample water supply was accompanied by the need for human response. The kings’ men were to dig ditches; for though they would see no storm, yet the Lord would send water in abundance.

Likewise the word of the Lord included instructions for the proposed invasion. If carried out explicitly, victory would certainly follow.

20–25 God’s miraculous sending of water fulfilled the first part of Elisha’s prophecy to the kings. It accomplished more than expected, for the Moabites wrongly assumed from the red appearance of the water that the former antagonists had had a falling out that led them to mutual destruction (cf. similarly, 2Ch 20:22–23). Wiseman, 1 & 2 Kings, 201, suggests that they misread the effect of “the red stone of the Wadi Hesa reflecting on the water.”

To bring the reader to this point in the account the narrator steps back to note that the approach of the allies was not unknown to the Moabites. Accordingly, they had mobilized “every man, young and old, who could bear arms,” and deployed them along the Wadi Ḥesa, which formed the border between Moab and Edom.

The Moabites’ mistake turned the tide of war and led to the allied invasion of Moab itself. Moab was soundly defeated, with the allies effecting near total destruction on city and countryside in accordance with Elisha’s prophecy. The allies failed to appropriate the full provisions of the prophecy, however, during the siege of Kir Hareseth.

27 The narrator reports that because of the Moabite king’s sacrifice of his firstborn, “the fury against Israel was great.” The precise meaning of this great fury is unclear. The same Hebrew phrase occurs elsewhere five times (Dt 29:28; Jer 21:5; 32:37; Zec 1:15; 7:12). In every case except Zechariah 1:15, the Lord’s fury is against Israel for violating God’s covenant. Here, however, it is Moab that has sinned. Perhaps the great fury wells up because Israel’s assault has driven the Moabite king to desperate lengths. Some scholars have suggested that the fury is Israel’s own, brought on by their disgust at the gruesome spectacle of human sacrifice.

NOTES

4 (nōqēd, lit., “sheepmaster”) is a term also applied to Amos (1:1). Gray, 484–85, suggests that since the term is also applied to one of the chief priests at Ugarit and is related to an Akkadian verbal cognate used in divination through animal livers, Mesha himself may have been a hepatoscopist. Although there can be no certainty in the matter, support for this view may arise from the reported “revelations” to Mesha and in the sacrifice of his own son to accomplish the deliverance of Moab.

7 Jehoshaphat remained a relative of Jehoram of Israel, for his son (and coregent), also named Jehoram, had married Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab (and perhaps Jezebel; see Note on 8:26) and hence a sister of Jehoram of Israel. Thus, Jehoram of Judah was a nephew by marriage of Jehoram of Israel.

9 The chronological relation of the campaigns of 2 Kings 3 and 2 Chronicles 20:1–29 is variously understood. If the events detailed in Chronicles took place prior to those in 2 Kings 3, the choice of a route through Edom is even more understandable. If as seems more likely, however, 2 Chronicles tells of a later invasion, the memory of the Judahite participation in the earlier invasion of Moab may have inspired a strengthened Moabite king to even the score. For the Kings–Chronicles relation, see M. J. Selman, 2 Chronicles (TOTC; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 421–22.

12 Elisha’s own reputation and past relationship with Elijah are evidently well known to Jehoshaphat. Whether Elisha was by divine direction traveling with the army, as diviner-prophets often did in the ancient Near East (cf. C. F. Jean, Archives royales de Mari, ed. A. Parrot and G. Dossin [Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1950ff.], 2, letter 22, lines 28–31), or simply was ministering in the area is uncertain.

13 The Hebrew idiom (mâ-lî wālāk, “What do we have to do with each other?”) is commonly used to express emphatic denial (cf. 2Sa 16:10) or differences of opinion between the persons involved (cf. Jn 2:4).

15 Elisha’s call for a minstrel has often been cited as evidence that Israel’s prophets were ecstatics. But as Leon Wood (The Holy Spirit in the Old Testament [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976], 118) points out, “It is more likely amid these calamitous circumstances Elisha simply wanted soothing music played so that he might be quieted before God and thus to be brought to a mood conducive for God to reveal to him his will.”

16 Miraculous deeds and prophecies associated with the prophets often included instructions for human participation and response, perhaps as encouragement to faith (cf. 1Ki 17:13–16; 2Ki 2:20; 4:3–6; 5:10; 13:14–19; 20:7).

19 The wartime measures depicted here are severe and, in the case of the despoiling of the fruit trees, even beyond the normal limitations of battle (cf. Dt 20:19–20). The biblical indication of Moab’s numerous fortified cities has been demonstrated to be accurate by archaeological investigations in the area. For conditions in ancient Moab, including Moab’s numerous fortifications, see Nelson Glueck, “Explorations in Eastern Palestine,” AASOR 18–19 (1939): esp. pp. 60–113; and AASOR 25–28 (1951): esp. pp. 371ff.

20 Flash flooding in otherwise dry wadis is common enough in arid portions of the world. Not only the timing of the heaven-sent waters, but also the total effect of their arrival bespeak the miraculous fulfillment of Elisha’s prophetic message. Seemingly barren and harmless riverbeds can become perilous places for those unfortunate enough to become trapped there in torrential waters born from distant storm-soaked mountains.

21 The Moabite Stone mentions Mesha’s campaigning on the southern border (lines 32–33). For text and translation of the inscription itself, see J. C. L. Gibson, Textbook of Syrian Semitic Inscriptions (Oxford: Clarendon, 1975), 1:71–83. For text and commentary see H. Donner and W. Röllig, Kanaanäische und Aramäische Inschriften (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1964), 1:33; 2:168–79. For the suggestion that the term “House of David” occurs in line 31 of the inscription, see A. Lemaire, “‘House of David’ Restored in Moabite Inscription,” BAR 20/3 (1994): 30–37.

23 That disaffection between allied kings can develop may be illustrated by the case of the Graeco-Egyptian campaign against the Persian holdings in Phoenicia in 360 BC (see A. H. Gardner, Egypt of the Pharaohs [Oxford: Clarendon, 1961], 376; Diodorus 15.90ff.).

26 Although the Hebrew may be understood as the king of Moab’s attempting to “break through to” the Edomite lines (i.e., for support as a result of the Edomites’ defecting to the Moabite forces), more than likely the meaning is “break out against” (i.e., because the Edomites offered the least amount of force). No evidence exists for the conjecture to read “Aram” for “Edom” and so see the Moabite king as attempting to make his way in safety to friendly Aramean territory.

27 The account of Mesha’s sacrifice of his firstborn son is a case of Scripture providing supplementary information to details of secular history. Montgomery, 363, reports that Mesha’s desperate action of human sacrifice is amply paralleled in the literature of the ancient Near East.

ii. Various miracles in the northern kingdom (4:1–44)

OVERVIEW

Chapter 4 continues the presentation of Elisha’s ministry by narrating four miraculous deeds after his return from the Jordan. Although the narratives record separate incidents, they are bound together by many common threads. Thus the term “man of God” to refer to Elisha is found in all four stories (vv.7, 9, 21–22, 25, 27, 40, 42). Also in all four stories occur prophetic instruction (vv.3, 7, 29, 38, 41, 43) and a concern for food/sustenance (vv.2–8, 38, 42). Attention to servants is noted in the last three of the accounts (vv.12, 14, 16, 22, 24–25, 27, 29, 31, 38, 43).

Other threads stitching the sections together include: for the first and second units, “shut the door” (vv.4–5, 21, 33), “what to do?” (vv.2, 13), and a mother’s concern for her family; for the first and third, “sons/company of the prophets” (vv.1, 38) and “pour out” (vv.4–5, 40–41). As noted below, the second narrative concerning Elisha and the Shunammite woman also displays close inner thematic parallelism and verbal repetition at the scenes of some subunits.

Together all these features argue for careful authorial composition and editing. For convenience the chapter will be considered in three segments: Elisha and the widow’s oil (vv.1–7), Elisha and the lady of Shunem (vv.8–37), and Elisha and the supply of food (vv.38–44).

(a) Elisha and the widow’s oil (4:1–7)

OVERVIEW

This story is told in a familiar format: (1) a widow goes to Elisha with a problem; (2) Elisha gives her instructions; (3) Elisha’s instructions are carried out; and (4) the widow goes to Elisha, who provides the solution to her problem.

1The wife of a man from the company of the prophets cried out to Elisha, “Your servant my husband is dead, and you know that he revered the LORD. But now his creditor is coming to take my two boys as his slaves.”

2Elisha replied to her, “How can I help you? Tell me, what do you have in your house?”

“Your servant has nothing there at all,” she said, “except a little oil.”

3Elisha said, “Go around and ask all your neighbors for empty jars. Don’t ask for just a few. 4Then go inside and shut the door behind you and your sons. Pour oil into all the jars, and as each is filled, put it to one side.”

5She left him and afterward shut the door behind her and her sons. They brought the jars to her and she kept pouring. 6When all the jars were full, she said to her son, “Bring me another one.”

But he replied, “There is not a jar left.” Then the oil stopped flowing.

7She went and told the man of God, and he said, “Go, sell the oil and pay your debts. You and your sons can live on what is left.”

COMMENTARY

1 A widow’s indebtedness had brought about her creditor’s insistence that her two children be taken as slaves to work off the debt. However inhumane this might seem, the creditor was within his rights, for Mosaic law allowed him to enslave the debtor and his children until the next Year of Jubilee to work off the debt (Ex 21:2–4; Lev 25:39; Ne 5:5; Isa 50:1; Am 2:6; 8:6; cf. Mt 18:25).

2–4 Once again the prophet’s instructions involved human response and participation. Elisha’s instructions meant that the quantity of oil would be limited only by the amount of empty jars she would be able to gather. The command to fill the jars behind closed doors prevented the miracle from becoming a mere spectacle. Hers was a private need privately met by a sovereign and loving God (cf. Mt 6:6). This incident is reminiscent of Elijah’s helping the widow of Zarephath (1Ki 17:7–16).

5–6 The woman’s response in faith was rewarded. The fact that Elisha would not be there when the miracle took place was intended to display the power of God alone and thus encourage the widow to still greater faith. Devout obedience can produce great spiritual blessing!

7 God’s meeting of the needs of both the widow and Elisha is in keeping with his concern for the downtrodden of society, such as widows, orphans, and the poor (Dt 10:18–19; Ps 82:3–4; Isa 1:23; Jas 1:27).

NOTES

1 Josephus (Ant. 9.47 [4.2]) and some rabbis speculate that the widow’s husband was the righteous Obadiah, who had aided the persecuted prophets during Ahab’s reign (1Ki 18:4)—a work carried on by the widow herself after his demise, but to her financial ruin. Support for this suggestion has been found in the widow’s plea that her husband, like Obadiah, was one who revered the Lord (cf. 1Ki 18:12).

2 The enslavement of family members in lieu of payment of debt was widely practiced in the ancient Near East (cf. Code of Hammurabi, par. 7, 9, 213).

7 For this motif, see my comments in “The Widow, the Orphan and the Poor,” BSac 130 (1973): 223–34.

(b) Elisha and the lady of Shunem (4:8–37)

OVERVIEW

This narrative falls into two distinct but somewhat parallel sections. The first (vv.8–20) largely forms the setting for the miraculous deed in the second (vv.21–37). Each of these subunits in the first section is introduced by the phrase “one day” (vv.8, 11, 18). While the second section bears no such distinguishing mark, its three subunits greatly reflect those of the first section. The passage may be outlined in parallel sections as follows:

1. First section
   1. A Preparation to receive Elisha (vv.8–10)
   2. B Elisha and the woman (vv.11–17)
   3. C Death of the son (vv.18–20)
2. Second section
   1. A´ Preparation for going to Elisha (vv.21–26)
   2. B´ The woman and Elisha (vv.27–30)
   3. C´ Revival of the son (vv.31–37)

8One day Elisha went to Shunem. And a well-to-do woman was there, who urged him to stay for a meal. So whenever he came by, he stopped there to eat. 9She said to her husband, “I know that this man who often comes our way is a holy man of God. 10Let’s make a small room on the roof and put in it a bed and a table, a chair and a lamp for him. Then he can stay there whenever he comes to us.”

11One day when Elisha came, he went up to his room and lay down there. 12He said to his servant Gehazi, “Call the Shunammite.” So he called her, and she stood before him. 13Elisha said to him, “Tell her, ‘You have gone to all this trouble for us. Now what can be done for you? Can we speak on your behalf to the king or the commander of the army?’”

She replied, “I have a home among my own people.”

14“What can be done for her?” Elisha asked.

Gehazi said, “Well, she has no son and her husband is old.”

15Then Elisha said, “Call her.” So he called her, and she stood in the doorway. 16“About this time next year,” Elisha said, “you will hold a son in your arms.”

“No, my lord,” she objected. “Don’t mislead your servant, O man of God!”

17But the woman became pregnant, and the next year about that same time she gave birth to a son, just as Elisha had told her.

18The child grew, and one day he went out to his father, who was with the reapers. 19“My head! My head!” he said to his father.

His father told a servant, “Carry him to his mother.” 20After the servant had lifted him up and carried him to his mother, the boy sat on her lap until noon, and then he died. 21She went up and laid him on the bed of the man of God, then shut the door and went out.

22She called her husband and said, “Please send me one of the servants and a donkey so I can go to the man of God quickly and return.”

23“Why go to him today?” he asked. “It’s not the New Moon or the Sabbath.”

“It’s all right,” she said.

24She saddled the donkey and said to her servant, “Lead on; don’t slow down for me unless I tell you.” 25So she set out and came to the man of God at Mount Carmel.

When he saw her in the distance, the man of God said to his servant Gehazi, “Look! There’s the Shunammite! 26Run to meet her and ask her, ‘Are you all right? Is your husband all right? Is your child all right?’”

“Everything is all right,” she said.

27When she reached the man of God at the mountain, she took hold of his feet. Gehazi came over to push her away, but the man of God said, “Leave her alone! She is in bitter distress, but the LORD has hidden it from me and has not told me why.”

28“Did I ask you for a son, my lord?” she said. “Didn’t I tell you, ‘Don’t raise my hopes’?”

29Elisha said to Gehazi, “Tuck your cloak into your belt, take my staff in your hand and run. If you meet anyone, do not greet him, and if anyone greets you, do not answer. Lay my staff on the boy’s face.”

30But the child’s mother said, “As surely as the LORD lives and as you live, I will not leave you.” So he got up and followed her.

31Gehazi went on ahead and laid the staff on the boy’s face, but there was no sound or response. So Gehazi went back to meet Elisha and told him, “The boy has not awakened.”

32When Elisha reached the house, there was the boy lying dead on his couch. 33He went in, shut the door on the two of them and prayed to the LORD. 34Then he got on the bed and lay upon the boy, mouth to mouth, eyes to eyes, hands to hands. As he stretched himself out upon him, the boy’s body grew warm. 35Elisha turned away and walked back and forth in the room and then got on the bed and stretched out upon him once more. The boy sneezed seven times and opened his eyes.

36Elisha summoned Gehazi and said, “Call the Shunammite.” And he did. When she came, he said, “Take your son.” 37She came in, fell at his feet and bowed to the ground. Then she took her son and went out.

COMMENTARY

8–10 Shunem lay seven kilometers north of Jezreel and thirty-two kilometers east of Mount Carmel. An ancient site, it is mentioned in the annals of the Egyptian pharaoh Thutmosis III (fifteenth century BC) and Shishak (tenth century BC), as well as in the Amarna letters.

The Shunammite woman is termed a “great woman.” Her wealth and social prominence would necessitate no formal favors from the prophet. Being a pious woman, her concern for Elisha was purely spontaneous and bears the imprint of a genuine, godly sense of hospitality. The provision of a permanent room on the roof for Elisha “indicates something of the respect in which he was held by the woman” (Hobbs, 51).

11–17 A second “one day” takes the reader to Elisha’s desire to repay the woman in some way. Unlike in his earlier question to the widow as to what help he could be (v.2), Elisha now speaks through Gehazi, as the prophet does throughout the early portions of the narrative (vv.11–13, 15, 25, 29), doubtless to avoid any semblance of impropriety.

18–20 The third “one day” reverses the anticipated joy of “holding a son” (cf. v.16) to the agony of witnessing the death of the promised son. The cause of the lad’s death is generally considered to be sunstroke, although uncertainly so.

21–25a The “greatness” of the woman is shown in her decisive actions both in taking the child to Elisha’s room and in her instant resolve to take the matter to the prophet who had promised a son to her. The woman’s request to her husband for a servant to provide transportation so that she could go to Elisha elicits from him no reaction regarding the health of the sick lad. Some interpreters suggest that the husband appears less than concerned for his wife and sick boy; however, her reply, “It’s all right,” may hint at some anxiety in the tone of his voice.

His question as to why she would wish to see Elisha when it was neither the New Moon nor the Sabbath may point to the prophet’s practice of receiving people on holy days, perhaps for worship or teaching. The husband may not have offered to accompany her because the day was undoubtedly a work day, not a holy day when he would be free to go.

25b–30 The Shunammite’s reply is deliberately ambiguous. It may be taken as a polite greeting or simply as her resolve to deal with no one other than Elisha. The mother’s deep bitterness of sorrow is shown in her pointed rhetorical question. She had not asked for a son; it was Elisha that had promised one to her. Was now her great gift from God to be snatched from her and so leave her in a worse state than before? It would have been better never to have had a son than to have such joy taken away so quickly!

Elisha’s command to Gehazi to greet no one on the way underscores the urgency of the situation. His mission must not be slowed down with idle greetings or compromised with common business (cf. Lk 10:4).

Although the author of Kings assigns no reason for Elisha’s instructions and actions, Elisha surely did not send Gehazi on a hopeless mission. Because he was young, Gehazi could cover the distance to Shunem quickly; and it was imperative that a representative of God arrive there as soon as possible. Very likely Gehazi’s task was preparatory and symbolic of the imminent arrival of Elisha himself.

The woman’s greatness and forcefulness are further revealed in her dealing with Elisha and his servant. She would entrust neither herself nor the final disposition of her son to Gehazi but rather stayed with Elisha until he could reach Shunem. Her faith and concern for her son’s cure were totally centered in God’s approved prophet. The woman’s declaration must have struck a familiar chord for Elisha, for he himself had steadfastly thrice vowed to Elijah that he would not leave him, using the same words (2Ki 2:2, 4, 6).

33 The command to “shut the door” echoes Elisha’s earlier instructions to the widow (v.4). In these two cases the prophet’s miracle working was not for public display but intended to provide for individuals’ needs and the increasing of their faith.

34 Although Elisha’s attempt to revive the dead lad bears similarities to that of his teacher Elijah (cf. 1Ki 17:19–21), the two events show pronounced differences. While Elijah stretched himself over the boy, Elisha placed himself above him and matched eyes, mouth, and hands with those of the lad. Although Elijah’s lad revived instantly, Elisha needed a second time to stretch himself out on the lad to effect the desired result.

37 Whereas the woman fell at Elisha’s feet earlier in desperation and grief, she now does so in heartfelt gratitude and praise. Unlike her earlier exit from Elisha’s room, when she left a dead son behind a closed door, she now takes him out with her, alive and well.

NOTES

12 Gehazi is called Elisha’s (naʿar, “lad, servant”). For the same word as a social/military term, see Note on 1 Kings 20:14–15. For the use of the word to connote special concern, see H. Bariligo, “The Case of the neʿārin,” Beth Mikra 27 (1981–82): 151–80. Gehazi may be the unnamed chief attendant in v.43. The term (šārat, “serve, attend”) was used of Elisha’s own relation to Elijah (1Ki 19:21). Later Gehazi referred to himself simply as Elisha’s “servant” or “slave” (cf. 2Ki 5:25).

Gehazi is portrayed in a less-than-satisfactory light in several places in the narrative. His lack of solid spiritual fiber surfaces in ch. 5. Later Jewish tradition is strongly condemnatory of Gehazi.

27 For the grasping of the feet in humiliation and veneration, see Matthew 28:9.

29 Bronner, 105, suggests that placing Elisha’s staff on the boy’s body would prevent its premature burial. Perhaps the staff as the symbol of God-given prophetic power (cf. Ex 4:1–4; 17:8–13) signified Elisha’s faith that God would stay further physical degeneration until he could come.

32–35 Elisha’s faith was evidenced not only by his fervent prayer but also in his carrying out of known prophetic symbolism (cf. 1Ki 17:21; Ac 20:9–10; for NT raisings of the dead, see Mk 5:39–42; Lk 7:13–15; Jn 11:43–44; Ac 9:36–43).

(c) Elisha and the supplying of food (4:38–44)

OVERVIEW

The chapter closes with two incidents involving the supply of food. In the first (vv.38–41), Elisha gives instructions to prepare a stew for the sons of the prophets at Gilgal. As a consequence one student gathers fruit from a wild vine. When the fruit is suspected to be poisonous, the students’ outcry brings Elisha’s instructions to put some flour in the pot of stew. Upon doing so, the stew is now edible. The story moves in the familiar ABA’ pattern, with Elisha’s instructions bracketing the narrative (vv.38, 41).

The second incident involves the multiplication of some small loaves of freshly baked barley bread and some ears of new grain. Elisha’s instruction to his servant to set this unexpected blessing before the gathered group is met with hesitation. Humanly speaking, the gift is insufficient to feed everyone (v.43); nevertheless, Elisha orders their distribution and tells his servant that there will surely be sufficient food for all—in fact, some of it will be left over. And so it comes to pass.

Both accounts are told in a manner typical of prophetic miracle working: background/setting (vv.38–39, 42); a problem arises (vv.40, 43a); the prophet’s instructions are carried out and the problem is solved (vv.41, 43b–44).

38Elisha returned to Gilgal and there was a famine in that region. While the company of the prophets was meeting with him, he said to his servant, “Put on the large pot and cook some stew for these men.”

39One of them went out into the fields to gather herbs and found a wild vine. He gathered some of its gourds and filled the fold of his cloak. When he returned, he cut them up into the pot of stew, though no one knew what they were. 40The stew was poured out for the men, but as they began to eat it, they cried out, “O man of God, there is death in the pot!” And they could not eat it.

41Elisha said, “Get some flour.” He put it into the pot and said, “Serve it to the people to eat.” And there was nothing harmful in the pot.

42A man came from Baal Shalishah, bringing the man of God twenty loaves of barley bread baked from the first ripe grain, along with some heads of new grain. “Give it to the people to eat,” Elisha said.

43“How can I set this before a hundred men?” his servant asked.

But Elisha answered, “Give it to the people to eat. For this is what the LORD says: ‘They will eat and have some left over.’” 44Then he set it before them, and they ate and had some left over, according to the word of the LORD.

COMMENTARY

38–40 Elisha, as titular head of the prophets, duly acted as host at the communal meal. In this role he anticipated the divine Host, who so often freely and abundantly provided for his disciples (cf. Mt 15:29–39; Mk 14:12–25; Lk 24:28–31; Jn 6:1–13; 21:9–13; 1Co 11:23–25). Elisha’s servant is not identified by name in this story or the next but is commonly assumed to be Gehazi in both.

41 As had been the case with Elijah his teacher, Elisha used flour to demonstrate the concern of God for people’s daily provisions (cf. 1Ki 17:14–16).

42–43a The small loaves of fresh barley bread and ears of new grain were brought to Elisha as firstfruits. Normally these portions were reserved for God (Lev 23:20) and the Levitical priests (Nu 18:13; Dt 18:4–5). Because the religion in the northern kingdom was apostate, the owner of the portions brought them to someone (Elisha) whom he considered to be the true repository of godly religion in Israel.

43b–44 Elisha’s faith lay in the living God for supplying ample food. The prophet’s example applies today (cf. Mt 6:11). The multiplication of the loaves in accordance with the word of the Lord through his prophet anticipates the messianic ministry of the living Word himself (cf. Mt 14:16–20; 15:36–37; Jn 6:11–13). Like Elisha’s servant, Jesus’ followers could also show skepticism about the sufficiency of the food supply (Mt 14:17; 15:33; Jn 6:7–9).

NOTES

38 For the problem of the location of Gilgal, see Note on 2:2.

42 Baal Shalishah is probably to be identified with Khirbet al Marjamah in the Sharon Plain. Saul went there in search of his father’s donkeys (1Sa 9:3–4). For the significance of Sharon, see my remarks in NIDOTTE, 4:1212–13.

43b–44 C. S. Lewis (Miracles [New York: MacMillan, 1953], 16–17) calls such cases “miracles of the old creation” involving “miracles of fertility”—that is, those in which humans see in extraordinary fashion that which God alone has produced customarily in nature. While far beyond human ability to accomplish, they are routine for the Lord of the impossible.

iii. The Aramean crisis (5:1–8:6)

(a) Elisha, Naaman, and Gehazi (5:1–27)

OVERVIEW

The telling of Elisha’s miraculous deeds continues with the account of an Aramean army commander named Naaman, who was afflicted with a serious skin ailment. The story is told in straightforward narrative. (1) In the opening section Naaman learns, through his wife’s servant (an Israelite maiden who had been taken captive in an earlier Aramean raid into Israelite territory), of the existence of a miracle-working Israelite prophet. Naaman, having received his king’s permission, departs for Samaria carrying letters of transit to the king of Israel, as well as gifts for Elisha. When he arrives at Elisha’s house, the prophet, rather than receiving him, sends him away to wash in the Jordan River. Naaman departs disappointed and angry.

(2) Upon considering the advice of one of his servants, Naaman decides to follow Elisha’s instructions. On doing so he is healed and returns to the Israelite prophet to thank and reward him for the cure. When Elisha refuses any gift, Naaman leaves and takes with him some Israelite soil, apparently on which to kneel when worshiping the God of Israel (vv.13–19a).

(3) Elisha’s servant Gehazi decides to gain for himself some of the gifts that Naaman was carrying. He goes to Naaman with a fabricated story of a sudden need that had arisen back at Elisha’s house. Gehazi returns with the gifts and hides them (vv.19b–24).

(4) When Gehazi appears before his master Elisha, he is confronted with his misdeed. Elisha condemns him to being afflicted with Naaman’s ailment (vv.25–27).

Thematic symmetry is achieved by focusing on the opening and closing sections dealing with the bothersome skin ailment, while the middle two portions revolve around the matter of whether gifts should be received for performing the Lord’s service. Several of the other literary threads, which knit together the fabric of the account, will be noted in the commentary that follows.

1Now Naaman was commander of the army of the king of Aram. He was a great man in the sight of his master and highly regarded, because through him the LORD had given victory to Aram. He was a valiant soldier, but he had leprosy.

2Now bands from Aram had gone out and had taken captive a young girl from Israel, and she served Naaman’s wife. 3She said to her mistress, “If only my master would see the prophet who is in Samaria! He would cure him of his leprosy.”

4Naaman went to his master and told him what the girl from Israel had said. 5“By all means, go,” the king of Aram replied. “I will send a letter to the king of Israel.” So Naaman left, taking with him ten talents of silver, six thousand shekels of gold and ten sets of clothing. 6The letter that he took to the king of Israel read: “With this letter I am sending my servant Naaman to you so that you may cure him of his leprosy.”

7As soon as the king of Israel read the letter, he tore his robes and said, “Am I God? Can I kill and bring back to life? Why does this fellow send someone to me to be cured of his leprosy? See how he is trying to pick a quarrel with me!”

8When Elisha the man of God heard that the king of Israel had torn his robes, he sent him this message: “Why have you torn your robes? Have the man come to me and he will know that there is a prophet in Israel.” 9So Naaman went with his horses and chariots and stopped at the door of Elisha’s house. 10Elisha sent a messenger to say to him, “Go, wash yourself seven times in the Jordan, and your flesh will be restored and you will be cleansed.”

11But Naaman went away angry and said, “I thought that he would surely come out to me and stand and call on the name of the LORD his God, wave his hand over the spot and cure me of my leprosy. 12Are not Abana and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than any of the waters of Israel? Couldn’t I wash in them and be cleansed?” So he turned and went off in a rage.

13Naaman’s servants went to him and said, “My father, if the prophet had told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much more, then, when he tells you, ‘Wash and be cleansed’!” 14So he went down and dipped himself in the Jordan seven times, as the man of God had told him, and his flesh was restored and became clean like that of a young boy.

15Then Naaman and all his attendants went back to the man of God. He stood before him and said, “Now I know that there is no God in all the world except in Israel. Please accept now a gift from your servant.”

16The prophet answered, “As surely as the LORD lives, whom I serve, I will not accept a thing.” And even though Naaman urged him, he refused.

17“If you will not,” said Naaman, “please let me, your servant, be given as much earth as a pair of mules can carry, for your servant will never again make burnt offerings and sacrifices to any other god but the LORD. 18But may the LORD forgive your servant for this one thing: When my master enters the temple of Rimmon to bow down and he is leaning on my arm and I bow there also—when I bow down in the temple of Rimmon, may the LORD forgive your servant for this.”

19“Go in peace,” Elisha said.

After Naaman had traveled some distance, 20Gehazi, the servant of Elisha the man of God, said to himself, “My master was too easy on Naaman, this Aramean, by not accepting from him what he brought. As surely as the LORD lives, I will run after him and get something from him.”

21So Gehazi hurried after Naaman. When Naaman saw him running toward him, he got down from the chariot to meet him. “Is everything all right?” he asked.

22“Everything is all right,” Gehazi answered. “My master sent me to say, ‘Two young men from the company of the prophets have just come to me from the hill country of Ephraim. Please give them a talent of silver and two sets of clothing.’”

23“By all means, take two talents,” said Naaman. He urged Gehazi to accept them, and then tied up the two talents of silver in two bags, with two sets of clothing. He gave them to two of his servants, and they carried them ahead of Gehazi. 24When Gehazi came to the hill, he took the things from the servants and put them away in the house. He sent the men away and they left. 25Then he went in and stood before his master Elisha.

“Where have you been, Gehazi?” Elisha asked.

“Your servant didn’t go anywhere,” Gehazi answered.

26But Elisha said to him, “Was not my spirit with you when the man got down from his chariot to meet you? Is this the time to take money, or to accept clothes, olive groves, vineyards, flocks, herds, or menservants and maidservants? 27Naaman’s leprosy will cling to you and to your descendants forever.” Then Gehazi went from Elisha’s presence and he was leprous, as white as snow.

COMMENTARY

1–2 The latter days of the reign of Israel’s king Jehoram were marked by hostilities with the Aramean king Ben-Hadad II. Probably because of Israel’s failure to participate in the continued Syro-Assyrian confrontation that marked most of the sixth decade of the ninth century BC, the Arameans continually chastened the northern kingdom with systematic raids (cf. 6:8), culminating in an all-out military excursion into Israel (cf. 6:24–7:20). Apparently during the course of one such raid, an Israelite maiden had fallen into the hands of Ben-Hadad’s field marshall, Naaman.

3 Elisha was called by the internationally known term “prophet.” But Elisha was more; he was the prophet par excellence of Israel. Samaria, as the chief and capital city, may denote Israel as such or may indicate that Elisha had a residence there (cf. 6:32).

4–6 Letters concerning medical courtesy and the giving of gifts in connection with the situation are attested in several ancient Near Eastern archives. Naaman’s gifts, however, were exceptionally large.

7 Jehoram’s reaction to what he considered a letter of provocation is reminiscent of the comments between the Hyksos king Apophis and the Egyptian pharaoh Seqnen-Re at Thebes (ANET, 231–32). For a biblical example, see 1 Kings 20:1–11; cf. 2 Kings 14:8–10.

8–9 Elisha may have still been at Gilgal when news reached him of the king’s consternation (so Hobbs, 64). A Gilgal location would fit well with Elisha’s instructions to Naaman to bathe in the Jordan River. It would also explain the canonical placement of ch. 5 after ch. 4, which closed with Elisha at Gilgal, and before 6:1–7, which again places Elisha at the Jordan. If so, the maid’s remark (v.3) may point to Elisha’s normal home in Samaria.

10 Elisha’s instructions to Naaman reflect the general procedure for healing leprosy (Lev 14:7–9), although the specific details are different. The command for Naaman to bathe seven times in the Jordan River may approximate the sevenfold sprinkling administered by the priest. The number seven occurs frequently in the regulations in Leviticus 13–14, probably symbolizing the wholeness and completeness of the healing process.

11–12 Naaman expected to be received with respect and that some distinctive act of healing would be performed, rather than his being sent to an Israelite river. After all, the great rivers of Damascus were available back home. The Abana is usually idenified with the modern Barada River, which originates in the Anti-Lebanon mountains. The Pharphar is uncertain though often identified with the ʿAwaj, south of Damascus.

15–16 Naaman could in no sense be allowed to think that God’s favor was to be purchased or that the prophet served God only for the desire of personal gain. Indeed Elisha was responsible to a higher authority. The narrator captures the force of Elisha’s commitment by a play on the word for “standing.” While Naaman stood before Elisha (v.15), Elisha stood before Yahweh (v.16; so KJV, NKJV, NASB; cf. NIV’s “whom I serve”).

Moreover, a soul for whom God was concerned was at stake. God’s blessing had been designed for Naaman’s response in repentance and faith (cf. Ro 2:4), Gentile though he was (cf. Lk 4:27).

17–18 The narrator reports without approval or condemnation Naaman’s request for two loads of dirt to be carried back home. This report may indicate that although Naaman’s public duties as the king’s “right-hand man” might cause him to bow down to the state god, he wanted to build a personal altar to Yahweh.

20–21 The story next focuses on Gehazi, who saw an opportunity to gain some of the proffered commodities for himself (v.20). Slipping away stealthily, he overtook the Syrian general (v.21). What a contrast can be seen in the meeting between Naaman and Gehazi! Naaman’s descent from his chariot to meet Elisha’s servant is a mark of his being a changed man. No longer a proud, arrogant person (vv.9–12), the grateful (v.15), reverent (v.17), and humble (v.18) Aramean came down from his honored place to meet a prophet’s servant. He who had been a fallen, hopeless sinner displayed the true believer’s grace. Contrariwise Gehazi, who had enjoyed all the privileges of his master’s grace, was about to abuse them and fall from that favor.

A further contrast in spiritual attitudes may be seen in Gehazi’s oath (v.20) as compared with that of Elisha (v.16). Although Elisha’s oath displays his servant’s heart before God, Gehazi’s borders on a blasphemous taking of the Lord’s name in vain (Ex 20:7).

23–24 Unlike Elisha (vv.15–16), greedy Gehazi gladly accepts Naaman’s generous offer of gifts. Naaman even supplies two servants to assist Gehazi in carrying them. Naaman’s servants must surely have been perplexed by Gehazi’s subsequent actions in dismissing them without taking the gifts directly to Elisha.

The exact understanding of “the hill” (hāʿōpel) is uncertain. Because it cannot refer to its most common designation as a district in Jerusalem (e.g., 2Ch 27:3), the meaning of the term must be related to the place where Elisha was now residing. If Samaria, it could refer to some well-known ascent or citadel (Gray, 510). If Gilgal, it could refer to some vantage point where Gehazi could carry out his deed in presumed concealment from Elisha’s view. In this regard the LXX (cf. Vul.) translates “the darkness” (probably transposing the Heb. consonants ʿpl to ʾpl), while the Targum reads “a hidden place.”

25–27 Gehazi attempts to steal back to Elisha’s house unnoticed—only to be confronted by the prophet (v.25). His master knows all that has transpired (v.26)! Gehazi’s lies only worsen the situation (v.25). Previously Naaman stood before Elisha in humble gratitude (v.15). Gehazi stands before him in attempted deception. He apparently does not appreciate that as Elisha’s attendant his is a privileged position of spiritual responsibility.

Accordingly, Elisha announces Gehazi’s punishment: Naaman’s condition will become Gehazi’s. Elisha’s privileged aide is banished in disgrace, for he has misused his favored position in an attempt to acquire wealth for himself. Gehazi needs to learn that the ministry has no place for those who will make merchandise of it.

NOTES

1 While the term “commander of the army” is not the only one used of an army’s highest-ranking officer, such is its clear intention in the case of Phicol (Ge 21:22), Sisera (1Sa 12:9), and Joab (1Ch 27:34; cf. also the theophany in Jos 5:14–15). Doubtless Naaman held such an honor with the Aramean king, who must have been Ben-Hadad II.

Naaman’s epithets are instructive: (ʾîš gādôl, “a great man”), a man of high social standing and importance whose influence reached to the king himself (cf. the lady from Shunem, 4:8); (n^eśu ʾpānîm, “highly regarded,” lit., “lifted up of face”), a term reminiscent of his being dubbed with the king’s scepter (cf. Est 8:3–4); (gibbôr ḥayil, “valiant soldier”), that is, a man of landed property whose wealth, bearing, and personal valor destined him for high military service.

Because (m^eṣōrāʿ, “leper”) was translated in the LXX by words in the word group λέπρα (lepra, “leprosy”; true leprosy, however, was normally designated by ἐλεφαντίασις [elephantiasis]), ancient (e.g., Vul., leprosus, “leprous”; Peshitta, g^erēb, “leper”) and modern translations have followed its lead. Contemporary scholarship, however, prefers “skin disease” (cf. GWT). See further the comments of G. J. Wenham, The Book of Leviticus (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979), 189–214.

3 For the various OT terms for prophet, see Note on 1 Kings 13:1. The maiden’s confident assertion that Elisha could “cure him [Naaman] of his leprosy” is reminiscent of Miriam, who also was received back into the camp after her healing from leprosy. The Hebrew verb is the same in both cases: (ʾāsap, “gather, receive”; here, “take away, remove”).

5–6 Examples of letters concerning medical matters are known from the Hittite, Mari, and Assyrian archives. For details, see D. J. Wiseman, “Medicine in the Old Testament World,” in Medicine and the Bible, ed. B. Palmer (Exeter: Paternoster, 1986), 32. For Egyptian examples see J. Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt (London: Histories & Mysteries of Man, 1988), 4:34–37.

Letters of introduction such as that sent by the Aramean king were, of course, common (cf. 2Co 3:1). For correspondence in the ancient Near East, see H. W. F. Saggs, The Greatness That Was Babylon (New York: Hawthorne, 1962), 244–47; A. L. Oppenheim, Letters from Mesopotamia (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1967).

8 For the tearing of robes in grief and agitation, see Note on 11:14. For the problem of the location of Gilgal, see Notes on 2:2 and 4:38.

10 For the wide use of the number seven symbolically in the OT and the ancient Near East, see J. J. Davis, Biblical Numerology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1968), 115–19. For the number seven, see NIDOTTE, 4:34–37.

11 (ʾāmar) is normally used of “speaking,” but occasionally some of the wider usages attested in this common Semitic root (e.g., Akkad. “see”; Geez “show”; Tigre “know”) are at times felt in the OT. The Hebrew idiom “to say in one’s heart” (i.e., “think”) is a kindred idea (Dt 8:17; 1Ki 12:26), so that the use of the verb independently with a similar nuance is a natural development (cf. Ge 20:11; 26:9; Ru 4:4; 1Sa 20:26; 2Sa 5:6; 12:22; 1Ki 22:32). See further TDOT, 1:328–45.

The position of the prepositional phrase “unto me” (ʾēlay) is emphatic: “(I thought)—unto me he would surely come out!” Naaman was incensed.

12 For the MT’s “Abana” (cf. LXX, Vul.) the Qere and Syriac read “Amana.” The Amana/Abana valley is noted for its natural loveliness.

13–14 The servant called his master “father.” The term may indicate the respect he felt for Naaman (cf. 2:12; 6:21). Suggested emendations are unnecessary. For washing and cleansing, see Psalm 51:2; Isaiah 1:16. The story of Naaman’s cleansing remained well known into NT times (Lk 4:27).

17–18 Montgomery, 377, reports that the transporting of holy soil was a widespread custom. The name of the Aramean god Rimmon probably contains a scribal parody of the Syrian storm god Hadad, whom the Assyrians called Ramman (“the thunderer”). The father of Ben-Hadad I was named Tabrimmon (1Ki 15:18); so the equation of Rimmon with Hadad as the god of the royal house of Damascus seems certain. Both gods are often integrated with the Canaanite Baal. In typical Jewish fashion the Aramean god is given a new vowel pointing, here that of the Hebrew word for pomegranate.

20 (kî-ʾim-raṣtî, “I will run”) contains an extremely emphatic resolve (cf. 1Sa 25:34). Gehazi will most certainly correct Elisha’s light treatment of this foreigner by going after him and relieving him of some of the “blessing.” Naaman’s greeting and Gehazi’s reply are those of Gehazi’s question and the Shunammite’s reply in the previous chapter (4:26). Both replies involve deception, although with different emphases. The verbal repetition provides further reason for the canonical placement of ch. 5 after ch. 4.

23–24 The Hebrew word for Naaman’s urging of Gehazi prṣ) is a conscious play on that used of his earlier urging of Elisha (pṣr; v.16). The latter is a common verb for urging an action on someone (e.g., Jacob’s urging of Esau to accept his gift; Ge 33:11). The former is frequently used of breaking through something (e.g., a city wall; 2Ki 14:13). It can also imply the bursting of a new situation upon someone/something, whether in blessing (Ge 30:30, 43) or judgment (2Sa 6:8). Here Naaman presumes that, like Elisha previously, his servant might need added pressure to accept the gifts, even though they have been requested. The deliberate play on the verbs illustrates Naaman’s generous spirit as opposed to Gehazi’s callous avarice. For the two verbs involved, see NIDOTTE, 3:656–57, 691–94.

That the MT’s hāʿōpel is the proper reading, whatever its understanding, is certain not only from uniform manuscript attestation but also from the Syriac reading, which, while apparently influenced by the LXX, yet retains the usual Hebrew meaning for the term ʿōpel. Thus we get the conflated reading, “a hidden/secret place of a hill/mountain.” Wherever the location of Gehazi’s nefarious deed was, any mound just large enough to accomplish the task was all that was necessary.

(b) Elisha’s further miracle at the Jordan (6:1–7)

OVERVIEW

This story proceeds like the two miracle accounts that precede the Naaman narrative. After the background/setting (vv.1–4a), a problem arises (vv.4b–5), and the prophet involves the participant in solving the problem (vv.6–7).

1The company of the prophets said to Elisha, “Look, the place where we meet with you is too small for us. 2Let us go to the Jordan, where each of us can get a pole; and let us build a place there for us to live.”

And he said, “Go.”

3Then one of them said, “Won’t you please come with your servants?”

“I will,” Elisha replied. 4And he went with them.

They went to the Jordan and began to cut down trees. 5As one of them was cutting down a tree, the iron axhead fell into the water. “Oh, my lord,” he cried out, “it was borrowed!”

6The man of God asked, “Where did it fall?” When he showed him the place, Elisha cut a stick and threw it there, and made the iron float. 7“Lift it out,” he said. Then the man reached out his hand and took it.

COMMENTARY

1–4 Whether this company of prophets was quartered at Jericho or nearby Gilgal is uncertain. Either location is possible, since the request is to go to the Jordan River for lumber. Although this area of the Jordan Valley was not noted for its supply of wood, the narrator takes it for granted that a sufficient source was available.

5–7 The narrator simply describes the miracle without further comment. As in two previous miracle accounts, throwing something is part of the healing process (cf. 2:21; 4:41). Attempts to explain how iron could float are futile, as are rationalistic explanations (e.g., Jones, 422).

(c) The campaign for Samaria (6:8–7:20)

OVERVIEW

The account of the Aramean campaign for Samaria proceeds in two broad movements. The first (vv.8–23) is written in chiastic symmetry.

A Elisha has the ability to know the Aramean king’s raiding strategies and can thus repeatedly deliver the Israelites from possible danger (vv.8–10).

B When the Aramean king learns of Elisha’s capabilities, he dispatches troops to Dothan to capture him (vv.11–14).

C When Elisha’s servant sees the enemy forces, he is greatly alarmed; therefore, in accordance with Elisha’s prayer, the Lord opens the servant’s eyes to behold God’s angelic forces protecting the city (vv.15–17).

C´ Next, through Elisha’s prayer the Aramean troops are so blinded that Elisha is able to lead them to Samaria. After their eyes are opened, they find that they are trapped inside Israel’s capital city (vv.18–20).

B´ When the Israelite king wishes to kill the Arameans, Elisha advises that a better course is to treat them well and release them (vv.21–22).

A´ Having received kind treatment the Arameans return home, and Israel is delivered from further Aramean raids (v.23).

The second account (6:24–7:20) records a later Aramean strike that placed Samaria under siege. It is told in two phases, each written in similar fashion.

A The Aramean king’s siege of Samaria results in a severe famine (6:24–29).

B Blaming Elisha, God’s prophet, for the terrible conditions, which had reduced the city to cannibalism, the king vows to have him killed. Instead, Elisha gives a prophecy of sure relief from the siege and its famine (6:30–7:2).

A´ Due to the famine four lepers go to the Aramean camp and find it deserted, for the Lord has tricked the Arameans into fleeing in such haste that they have left their goods behind. The lepers’ report to the king that the siege has been lifted is eventually confirmed (vv.3–16).

B´ The details of Elisha’s prophecy are minutely fulfilled (vv.17–20).

8Now the king of Aram was at war with Israel. After conferring with his officers, he said, “I will set up my camp in such and such a place.”

9The man of God sent word to the king of Israel: “Beware of passing that place, because the Arameans are going down there.” 10So the king of Israel checked on the place indicated by the man of God. Time and again Elisha warned the king, so that he was on his guard in such places.

11This enraged the king of Aram. He summoned his officers and demanded of them, “Will you not tell me which of us is on the side of the king of Israel?”

12“None of us, my lord the king,” said one of his officers, “but Elisha, the prophet who is in Israel, tells the king of Israel the very words you speak in your bedroom.”

13“Go, find out where he is,” the king ordered, “so I can send men and capture him.” The report came back: “He is in Dothan.” 14Then he sent horses and chariots and a strong force there. They went by night and surrounded the city.

15When the servant of the man of God got up and went out early the next morning, an army with horses and chariots had surrounded the city. “Oh, my lord, what shall we do?” the servant asked.

16“Don’t be afraid,” the prophet answered. “Those who are with us are more than those who are with them.”

17And Elisha prayed, “O LORD, open his eyes so he may see.” Then the LORD opened the servant’s eyes, and he looked and saw the hills full of horses and chariots of fire all around Elisha.

18As the enemy came down toward him, Elisha prayed to the LORD, “Strike these people with blindness.” So he struck them with blindness, as Elisha had asked.

19Elisha told them, “This is not the road and this is not the city. Follow me, and I will lead you to the man you are looking for.” And he led them to Samaria.

20After they entered the city, Elisha said, “LORD, open the eyes of these men so they can see.” Then the LORD opened their eyes and they looked, and there they were, inside Samaria.

21When the king of Israel saw them, he asked Elisha, “Shall I kill them, my father? Shall I kill them?”

22“Do not kill them,” he answered. “Would you kill men you have captured with your own sword or bow? Set food and water before them so that they may eat and drink and then go back to their master.” 23So he prepared a great feast for them, and after they had finished eating and drinking, he sent them away, and they returned to their master. So the bands from Aram stopped raiding Israel’s territory.

24Some time later, Ben-Hadad king of Aram mobilized his entire army and marched up and laid siege to Samaria. 25There was a great famine in the city; the siege lasted so long that a donkey’s head sold for eighty shekels of silver, and a quarter of a cab of seed pods for five shekels.

26As the king of Israel was passing by on the wall, a woman cried to him, “Help me, my lord the king!”

27The king replied, “If the LORD does not help you, where can I get help for you? From the threshing floor? From the winepress?” 28Then he asked her, “What’s the matter?”

She answered, “This woman said to me, ‘Give up your son so we may eat him today, and tomorrow we’ll eat my son.’ 29So we cooked my son and ate him. The next day I said to her, ‘Give up your son so we may eat him,’ but she had hidden him.”

30When the king heard the woman’s words, he tore his robes. As he went along the wall, the people looked, and there, underneath, he had sackcloth on his body. 31He said, “May God deal with me, be it ever so severely, if the head of Elisha son of Shaphat remains on his shoulders today!”

32Now Elisha was sitting in his house, and the elders were sitting with him. The king sent a messenger ahead, but before he arrived, Elisha said to the elders, “Don’t you see how this murderer is sending someone to cut off my head? Look, when the messenger comes, shut the door and hold it shut against him. Is not the sound of his master’s footsteps behind him?”

33While he was still talking to them, the messenger came down to him. And the king said, “This disaster is from the LORD. Why should I wait for the LORD any longer?”

7:1Elisha said, “Hear the word of the LORD. This is what the LORD says: About this time tomorrow, a seah of flour will sell for a shekel and two seahs of barley for a shekel at the gate of Samaria.”

2The officer on whose arm the king was leaning said to the man of God, “Look, even if the LORD should open the floodgates of the heavens, could this happen?”

“You will see it with your own eyes,” answered Elisha, “but you will not eat any of it!”

3Now there were four men with leprosy at the entrance of the city gate. They said to each other, “Why stay here until we die? 4If we say, ‘We’ll go into the city’—the famine is there, and we will die. And if we stay here, we will die. So let’s go over to the camp of the Arameans and surrender. If they spare us, we live; if they kill us, then we die.”

5At dusk they got up and went to the camp of the Arameans. When they reached the edge of the camp, not a man was there, 6for the Lord had caused the Arameans to hear the sound of chariots and horses and a great army, so that they said to one another, “Look, the king of Israel has hired the Hittite and Egyptian kings to attack us!” 7So they got up and fled in the dusk and abandoned their tents and their horses and donkeys. They left the camp as it was and ran for their lives.

8The men who had leprosy reached the edge of the camp and entered one of the tents. They ate and drank, and carried away silver, gold and clothes, and went off and hid them. They returned and entered another tent and took some things from it and hid them also.

9Then they said to each other, “We’re not doing right. This is a day of good news and we are keeping it to ourselves. If we wait until daylight, punishment will overtake us. Let’s go at once and report this to the royal palace.”

10So they went and called out to the city gatekeepers and told them, “We went into the Aramean camp and not a man was there—not a sound of anyone—only tethered horses and donkeys, and the tents left just as they were.” 11The gatekeepers shouted the news, and it was reported within the palace.

12The king got up in the night and said to his officers, “I will tell you what the Arameans have done to us. They know we are starving; so they have left the camp to hide in the countryside, thinking, ‘They will surely come out, and then we will take them alive and get into the city.’”

13One of his officers answered, “Have some men take five of the horses that are left in the city. Their plight will be like that of all the Israelites left here—yes, they will only be like all these Israelites who are doomed. So let us send them to find out what happened.”

14So they selected two chariots with their horses, and the king sent them after the Aramean army. He commanded the drivers, “Go and find out what has happened.” 15They followed them as far as the Jordan, and they found the whole road strewn with the clothing and equipment the Arameans had thrown away in their headlong flight. So the messengers returned and reported to the king. 16Then the people went out and plundered the camp of the Arameans. So a seah of flour sold for a shekel, and two seahs of barley sold for a shekel, as the LORD had said.

17Now the king had put the officer on whose arm he leaned in charge of the gate, and the people trampled him in the gateway, and he died, just as the man of God had foretold when the king came down to his house. 18It happened as the man of God had said to the king: “About this time tomorrow, a seah of flour will sell for a shekel and two seahs of barley for a shekel at the gate of Samaria.”

19The officer had said to the man of God, “Look, even if the LORD should open the floodgates of the heavens, could this happen?” The man of God had replied, “You will see it with your own eyes, but you will not eat any of it!” 20And that is exactly what happened to him, for the people trampled him in the gateway, and he died.

COMMENTARY

8–13 The MT indicates that the Aramean incursions were carried out frequently. Apparently the Aramean king hoped to catch Joram at some point, perhaps during his travels or hunting trips. The repeated occasions of such raids and Elisha’s timely warnings are further indicated by the Hebrew idiom “not once or twice” (v.10; “time and again,” NIV). As in the situation with Naaman (5:8–10), Elisha is seemingly on good terms with Joram.

14 The Aramean king dispatched an unusually large force to capture one man. Perhaps he reasoned that this was necessary so as to be sure that Elisha could not escape from Dothan.

15–16 The perspective of the siege changes to that of the viewers from within Dothan. The narrator notes that Elisha’s servant “rose early.” It is often reported that the Lord’s servants rose early, especially to worship God (e.g., Ge 28:16–22; Ex 24:4–8; 1Sa 1:19; 2Ch 29:20–35; Job 1:5). Such a practice is also recorded of Jesus (Mk 1:35). The psalmists often commend the morning hour for spiritual exercise (e.g., Pss 59:16; 88:13; 92:2; 143:8). No indication is found here that Elisha’s servant was praying (although such might be assumed); rather, he saw only overwhelming danger.

17 The spectacle that the servant was permitted to see is reminiscent of the earlier scene at Elijah’s translation (2:11).

18–23 The opening of the blinded Arameans’ eyes parallels the opening of Elisha’s servant’s eyes, which had previously been blind to unseen spiritual realities. Because the soldiers would have to follow Elisha for some distance in order to get to Samaria, Hobbs, 78, and Keil, 326, may be correct in suggesting that the blindness was more mental delirium or deception than physical loss of sight. A similar conclusion with regard to the only other occurrence of the noun involved (Ge 19:11) is less certain and therefore suggests caution in interpreting both contexts.

24 At a later date war broke out again between Ben-Hadad II and Joram (v.24). Perhaps the miraculously arranged temporary lull had been divinely designed to teach Israel God’s abiding love and concern for his people, to whom he had sent his duly authenticated prophet, Elisha. But with no evidence of repentance by Israel, God withdrew his protective hand; and Israel faced a full-scale Syrian invasion. The Arameans were eminently successful—they penetrated to the gates of Samaria itself and put the city under a dire siege.

25–30 The lengthy siege evoked a severe famine that, in turn, produced highly inflated prices for the humblest commodities. So scarce had food become that one day, as the king was on a tour about the embattled city’s wall, he stumbled upon a case of cannibalism (v.26).

31 The king blamed Elisha for the terrible siege and famine. He apparently reasoned that it was Elisha whom Ben-Hadad had been after all along. Moreover, Elisha’s humiliation of the Aramean troops sent to capture him had further infuriated their king. Indeed, the very troops whom Elisha had talked the king into releasing were probably even now part of the besieging force!

32 The narrator’s recording of the verb “sitting” brings a note of calmness to the prevailing chaos of the situation. The reader is thus prepared for a change of conditions in the existing circumstances. Elisha in fact is as aware of the Israelite king’s intentions as he was of the Aramean king (6:12). Thus he knew why the king’s messenger was coming and that the king himself would soon arrive to see whether the deed had been accomplished. Elisha’s instructions to “shut and secure the door” would perhaps forestall the messenger’s murderous attempt until Elisha could deliver an encouraging word to the king.

33 Just who is speaking is somewhat ambiguous in the MT (so also the KJV, the ancient versions, and modern foreign language versions). Is it the messenger, Elisha, or the king, as suggested by many commentators and modern English translations (emending the text; e.g., NIV, NLT, NKJV, NRSV, REB)? Following the MT, the choice appears to be either Elisha (Hobbs) or the messenger (GWT). If the former is the case, Elisha is perhaps indicating that the siege and famine have served their divine purpose, and it is time for a change of conditions. If the latter, the messenger is delivering the king’s own sentiment of the hopelessness of the situation. If the messenger’s word is essentially the king’s, no emendation is required. Elisha’s following pronouncement (7:1), as well as the syntax, would appear to favor taking the words as those of the king through his messenger.

7:1–2 In contrast to the previous note of despair, Elisha prophesies that by the next day conditions will so improve that good products will be available again in substantial quantity. When Joram’s chief aide finds such a statement preposterous, Elisha assures him that not only will the prophecy come true, the officer will see it fulfilled with his own eyes, but he will not partake of it! His faithless incredulity will cause him to miss God’s blessing on the people.

3–4 Like the previous episode, this one begins with seated men (cf. “stay,” NIV). This time it is four lepers whose situation is desperate. They faced starvation and death where they are. Accordingly, they have nothing to lose by deserting to the Arameans.

5–7 Once again the Lord uses a ruse de guerre to accomplish his mysterious purposes. The Arameans feared a coalition of Hittite and Egyptian kings coming against them. By Hittite is meant the Neo-Hittite remnants of the once mighty Hittite nation of Anatolia now living in northern Syria. The Egyptians would be part of the gradually weakening Twenty-Second Dynasty.

8–12 The lepers’ happy despoiling of the abandoned Aramean camp soon turns to caution. Whether stricken by moral conviction, feelings of guilt, or the realization of possible reprisal, they determine to share the good news with their fellow Israelites in Samaria. When the news reaches the king, however, he suspects an Aramean trick. Withdrawal in feigned retreat so as to set up an ambush was a common military tactic (cf. Jos 8:3–23).

13–16 Once again a servant gives a high official sound advice or information (cf. 3:11; 5:13; 6:12). The seeming incongruity of selecting five horses but sending two chariots has been approached in a variety of ways. Perhaps it is simplest to suggest that there were five men who made a selection from the horses but that they either rode in two chariots, or some of the men rode horses while others went in two chariots. In any case, the king follows the advice and sends out a detail of men to investigate the lepers’ report. With the Arameans’ flight confirmed, great booty is taken from their camp—so much booty that Elisha’s prophecy comes true.

17–20 The narrative closes with an affirmation of the complete fulfillment of Elisha’s prophecy, including the death of the king’s trusted aide, who had scoffed at Elisha’s prediction. The incident once again underscores the nature of Kings as both historic and prophetic narrative.

NOTES

6:14 Dothan was situated about fourteen kilometers north of Samaria.

15 (šākēm, “rise early”) occurs idiomatically in Jeremiah (eleven times) to depict God’s repeated efforts at reaching his disobedient people. Zephaniah (Zep 3:7) utilizes the verb to describe Judah’s punishment for acting “corruptly in all they did.”

16 Elisha’s word of assurance to this servant has become a source of comfort to many subsequent servants of God who have faced seemingly overwhelming adversity.

17 The spectacular sight that the servant is enabled to see is like the double army of angels encamped around Jacob (Ge 32:1–2). The Lord’s promise to “encamp around those who fear him” (Ps 34:7; cf. 55:18; 91:11–12) has become a visible reality to Elisha’s servant. The whole episode underscores the power of prayer (cf. Jas 5:16). For divine revelation to men and for the activities of the unseen world, see Ezekiel 10–11; Daniel 10 (cf. Nu 12:6).

19 Keil, 326, correctly explains Elisha’s deception as a ruse de guerre. Yet in a sense his words will prove true in that the city where Elisha will ultimately be found is Samaria, not Dothan.

21–22 The records of the ancient Near East are uneven as to the treatment of captured people. For example, in some cases the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal carried them off as slaves (see Luckenbill, 2:296), while in others he executed them on the spot (ibid., 2:304). In still other cases the citizens of some cities were variously treated. Thus in Ashurbanipal’s capture of Elamite Bit-Imbi some were carried off alive, while others were killed and their heads cut off (ibid., 2:306).

Similarly, David executed two-thirds of the captured Moabites, while the rest were allowed to live as vassals (2Sa 8:2). A still different scenario may be seen in Sennacherib’s treatment of the people of Ekron. Although he killed its leading citizens, he took others as prisoners of war, while still others were released (Luckenbill, 2:120).

25 The written consonants of the MT’s have been divided in some translations into (ḥārê yônîm, “dove’s dung”; so NASB, KJV, RSV). The NIV apparently follows Gray, 518, and others in adopting an often-suggested emendation to (ḥarûbîm, “[carob] seed pods”). The pointing of the MT (ḥiryyônîm) comes from the reading of a few MSS and the Qere: (dibyônîm, “doves’/pigeons’ droppings”). If dove’s dung is not the popular name for some common food or was not simply to be used as fuel for fire or as a substitute for salt (so Josephus, Ant. 9.62 [4.4]), the reduction of the people to eating dung may be paralleled by a similar incident at the siege of Jerusalem (see Josephus, J.W. 5.571 [13.7]).

For ancient Near Eastern parallels to conditions in time of siege, see J. C. Greenfield, “Doves’ Dung and the Price of Food: The Topoi of II Kings 6:24–7:2,” in Storia e tradizioni di Israele: Scritti in onore di J. Alberto Soggin, ed. D. Garrone and F. Israel (Brescia: Paideia, 1991), 121–26.

26–29 Cannibalism in time of siege was the prophetic threat for Israel’s disobedience (Lev 26:29; Dt 28:53, 57; Eze 5:10). It was to befall Jerusalem both in OT times (La 2:20; 4:10) and in NT times (cf. Josephus, J.W. 6.201–13 [3.4]). For extrabiblical cases see A. Leo Oppenheim, “Siege Documents from Nippur,” Iraq 17 (1955): 68–89.

7:1 Public business was carried on at the gate of the city (cf. Ge 19:1; Ru 4:1; 2Sa 15:1–5). The rare Hebrew expression (kāʿēt māḥār, “by this time tomorrow”) emphasizes the certainty of Elisha’s prediction.

2 Hebrew (šālîš, “officer”) has been variously understood. Because it is related to the Hebrew word for “three,” it is commonly assumed to designate originally the third man in a war chariot, who acted as an armor bearer, and later some trusted official. Such an understanding appears justified by the use of the term in 9:25. Hobbs, 89, however, points out that it appears in both military and nonmilitary contexts to designate choice officials serving in important capacities. In any case, this officer is Joram’s chief aide, as was the situation with Naaman (5:18).

6 Since Egypt was in decline at this time, some scholars have suggested that a Cilician kingdom known as Muṣri, whose spelling in Semitic would have been the same first three consonants (mṣr) as the Hebrew word for “Egypt,” was intended (see Gray, 524–25; Montgomery, 387). But since the Akkadian spelling for “Egypt” was uniformly muṣir throughout the first millennium BC, there can be little doubt that the MT intends Egypt. See further the note on 19:24.

9 (ʿāwôn) means primarily “iniquity,” then the “guilt” that stems from iniquity, and thus the consequences of it all—“punishment.” Accordingly, what the lepers feared was not that the Arameans might return and do them in but that a greedy failure to share in the available bounty would make them culpable and hence deserving of divine punishment.

13 The verse is a well-known crux, with the MT being generally regarded as corrupt (see Gray, 525). Certainly the redundant phraseology makes the syntax awkward at best. But the report of impassioned speech with its broken diction makes an accurate recording difficult. The NIV has paraphrased well the intent of the MT. The whole emphasizes the seemingly hopeless situation in which Israel found itself.