Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Kings 4:38
And Elisha came again to Gilgal: and [there was] a dearth in the land; and the sons of the prophets [were] sitting before him: and he said unto his servant, Set on the great pot, and seethe pottage for the sons of the prophets.
38 41. Elisha at Gilgal heals the noxious Pottage (Not in Chronicles)
38. Elisha came again to Gilgal ] There are no notes of time in this narrative, or in the others, though we can see, here and there, that the events are not put together chronologically. (See below, on 2Ki 8:1.) Elisha had been at Gilgal with Elijah, but there is no need to suppose that ‘came again’ alludes to that visit. Gilgal (on which see note on 2Ki 2:1 above) was a centre of prophetic activity and it is probable that it was visited frequently both by Elijah and Elisha.
and there was a dearth in the land ] The first noun has the article, and the clause might well be rendered ‘ the famine was in the land’. The allusion will then be to the famine foretold in 2Ki 8:1. That some of the incidents related before that chapter occurred after the famine, see note on 2Ki 8:4.
the sons of the prophets were sitting before him ] They would naturally gather round the great prophet, made famous by a large share of Elijah’s spirit, and catch at all he had to say. We can see from this story one aspect of the life in the colleges of the prophets. The members sat at the feet of some elder member, and learnt from him their duty and how to carry it out. (Cf. 2Ki 6:1, and note.) By Elisha’s teaching, which would be drawn from his own experience, they would gather faith and courage, seeing that God was working in their midst, and had not forsaken Israel in spite of their sins. Hence grew the hope of a thorough reformation in the breasts of these who must be regarded as the reformers of their time.
unto his servant ] Probably some one of the sons of the prophets, appointed to wait on Elisha while he tarried at Gilgal.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
There was a dearth in the land – Rather, The famine was in the land. The seven years dearth of which Elisha had prophesied (marginal reference) had begun.
The sons of the prophets – See 1Ki 20:35 note. They were sitting before him as scholars before their master, hearing his instructions.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
2Ki 4:38-44
And Elisha came again to Gilgal, and there was a dearth in the land.
Ministries to man, good and bad
Elisha had returned to Gilgal, the seat of a school of the prophets; he had come thither once more on his early circuit, and during the famine which prevailed in the land. As the students sat before their master, he discerned in their emaciated forms the terrible effects upon them of the famine.
I. Here is the ministry of severe trial. There was a dearth in the land. A destitution of those provisions essential to the appeasement of hunger and the sustentation of life is undoubtedly one of the greatest trials. Such destitution is of two kinds, the avoidable and the unavoidable. The former is common.. The latter kind of destitution, viz., the inevitable, is that recorded in these verses; it arose out of the sterile condition into which nature was thrown.
II. Here is the ministry of gross ignorance. The sons of the prophets, says Matthew Henry, it would seem were better skilled in divinity than philosophy, and read their Bibles more than their herbals. What they put into the pot tended to produce death rather than to strengthen life. Every day men are afflicted through the gross ignorance of themselves and others. The cook, the doctor, the brewer, the distiller, how much death do they bring into the pot of human life! Through ignorance, too, men are everywhere putting death in the pot in a spiritual sense. Mans ignorance of God and His claims on the soul, its nature, laws, and necessary conditions of true spiritual progress, is the minister of death.
III. Here is the ministry of human kindness. And there came a man from Baal-shalisha, and brought the man of God bread of the first fruits, twenty loaves of barley, and full ears of corn in the husk thereof. Whoever this man was he was an heaven-inspired philanthropist. Mercy, the highest attribute of heaven, was in him, and he left his home and came forth to minister to the needs of his suffering race.
IV. Here is the ministry of supernatural power. Supernatural power through Elisha comes to the relief of these sufferers. The supernatural was manifested in two ways.
1. In counteracting the death tendency of what was in the pot. A supernatural power is required to counteract the pernicious in life. If the Almighty allowed evil to take its course free and full, death would run riot and reduce the whole race to extinction. The supernatural was manifested.
2. In increasing the supplies of life. Elisha commanded his servant to distribute amongst his starving pupils the provisions which the man that came from Baal-shalisha had brought. As the pot of oil increased in the pouring, so the provisions increased in the eating. It has been said of old of God that He will abundantly bless the provisions of His people, and satisfy the poor with bread. It is true that the tendency of moral goodness, truth, and justice, skill, prudence, and diligence, has a tendency to increase everywhere the provisions of human life, and it is doing so every day. (Homilist.)
The famine in Gilgal
There was a dearth at Gilgal. Palestine is about the most plentiful region in the world, although it now labours under the curse of the Turkish law and the malediction of God. There was death, there was famine at Gilgal. In the time of plenty, do you know that right on your heels there is coming a dearth, a famine Never a child of God ever passed from the earth without a dearth, without famine. You pencil the Sahara off–so many degrees longitude and so many latitude; and you say, north and south of that burning desert you have plenty, but in those regions you have drought. So, certainly, in every human life there is a Sahara to be traversed, during which your soul Will cry for bread. Caravans laden with provisions have plunged into the Sahara, and the camels have dropped and fallen, and the whole party has been lost in the desert. I never saw a life without a Sahara. Man, the caravans have come into your life. You have plenty of money, you have abounding health. The messenger that would come to you and say, Sahara ahead! you would greet with an incredulous Get away, but death is before you. Men have tried to deck the death-bed with rose-leaves, but they have never managed it; and you have to tramp through the dark desert of the Sahara of death. Have you got a Joseph to give you bread? What is to be your hope on the death-bed, when the hands are fallen nervelessly over the coverlet? When Dr. Raleigh lay dying of a disease that prevented him from taking food, he said, Never mind; Jesus is bringing to me the Bread of Life, and he passed away. (J. Robertson.)
Hard times
It is not likely the sons of the prophets fared sumptuously at any time. The provision for the maintenance of religion under the law had been diverted to the support of those who professed and taught the principles of idolatry; and little wonder it was that, when a season of famine occurred, they were reduced to great straits.
1. There is one lesson to be learned from this in common with many other passages of Scripture: Gods people are not exempted from the ordinary afflictive visitations of Providence. The sons of the prophets must feel the effects of the dearth as well as the grossest idolater in all the land: there is no promise of any such exemption held out to them. If we attend to the words of our blessed Lord we shall find that He never seeks to allure His followers by promising them days of ease, or seasons of the enjoyment of any temporal comfort. Rather are they warned that they are to expect nothing in this life but a narrow way and a strait gate, much opposition, plenty of obloquy; and well for them if they meet not even with harder fare,–well for them if they escape persecution whilst they live, and are suffered to end their days by aught but a death of violence like the Master they serve. But they are promised what will sustain them under all these inflictions, and make them more than conquerors, even the heirs of a glorious immortality.
2. And there are not a few records of very remarkable instances in which providential supplies have been brought to the people of God in distress. Take another instance somewhat similar, recorded by Samuel Clarke, and quoted by Flavel in the fourth volume of his works, at the 396th page. I do not profess to give the exact words of either author, but the substance of the incident is briefly this: Mr. John Fox, in the latter part of the reign of Henry VIII, went to London, where he quickly spent the slender means with which his friends had supplied him or he had acquired by his own exertions, and began to be in great want. He was a faithful servant of God, but he was ready to perish for hunger, as many of the faithful have been. In this condition he sat one day in St. Pauls Church, every one seeming to shun such a spectacle of horror. But when he little expected but that his time had come, a person unknown to him thrust an untold supply of money into his hands, and bade him be of good cheer, for that he would ere long be placed in a position in which he might honourably earn his bread. Not long afterwards he was sent for by a person of rank and title, and entrusted with the charge of a noblemans children.
3. But a common calamity ought always to foster a common sentiment of benevolence. This was the case with Elisha. His means were very slender, but he would treat the sons of the prophets with the best he had to give; and his example is well worthy imitation. We need not at present advert to those ghastly records which tell us that human nature loses all its better instincts in circumstances of extreme distress, and which mention instances of mothers forgetting their little ones so far as to snatch from them the morsel so much required–thus suffering the maternal affection, one of the strongest, deepest, and purest of our nature, to be lost in a selfishness not only shocking but unavailing. There is not much to be learned from such extreme cases. It cannot be denied, it seems, that our better instincts may be suppressed, but as they will be sure to vindicate themselves as long as they remain, it ought to be our utmost endeavour to foster and preserve them by keeping them in constant exercise. (J. Murray.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 38. Came again to Gilgal] He had been there before with his master, a short time prior to his translation.
Set on the great pot and seethe pottage for the sons of the prophets.] It was in a time of dearth, and all might now stand in need of refreshment; and it appears that the prophet was led to put forth the power he had from God to make a plentiful provision for those who were present. The father of the celebrated Dr. Young, author of the Night Thoughts, preaching a charity sermon for the benefit of the sons of the clergy, took the above words for his text; nor could they be said to be inappropriate.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Elisha came again to Gilgal; where he came with Elijah, 2Ki 2:1; where was a school of the prophets, whom he designed to comfort concerning the present dearth and their other discouragements, and to confirm in the profession and practice of religion, and to instruct in the duties of the present season.
Sitting before him; at his feet, as scholars to be taught by him. See 2Ki 2:3; Act 22:3.
Seethe pottage: he provides no delicious meats, but mere necessaries, to teach them the contempt of worldly delights.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
38. there was a dearth in theland(see on 2Ki 8:1).
the sons of the prophets weresitting before himWhen receiving instruction, the scholars satunder their masters. This refers to their being domiciled under thesame roof (compare 2Ki 6:1).
Set on the great potAsit is most likely that the Jewish would resemble the Egyptian “greatpot,” it is seen by the monumental paintings to have been alarge goblet, with two long legs, which stood over the fire on thefloor. The seethed pottage consisted of meat cut into small pieces,mixed with rice or meal and vegetables.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And Elisha came again to Gilgal,…. Where he was with Elijah a little before his assumption to heaven, 2Ki 2:1 and whither he went, there being a school of the prophets, as he did to all places where there were any, and where he had been before with Elijah; partly to instruct, encourage, and strengthen them, and partly to confirm his office as a prophet by miracles, which he did in several places he came to:
and there was a dearth in the land; a famine through drought:
and the sons of the prophets were sitting before him: as disciples before their master, see Ac 22:3
and he said unto his servant; very probably Gehazi:
set on the great pot, and seethe pottage for the sons of the prophets; who seemed to have lived together in one house or college, and to be to the number of one hundred, see 2Ki 4:43 and therefore required to have a large pot set on to boil pottage for them all.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Elisha Makes Uneatable Food Wholesome. – 2Ki 4:38. When Elisha had returned to Gilgal, the seat of a school of the prophets (see at 2Ki 2:1), i.e., had come thither once more on his yearly circuit, during the famine which prevailed in the land (see at 2Ki 8:1), and the prophets’ scholars sat before him (the teacher and master), he directed his servant (i.e., probably not Gehazi, but the pupil who waited upon him) to put the large pot to the fire and boil a dish for the pupils of the prophets. answers to the German beisetzen, which is used for placing a vessel upon the fire (cf. Eze 24:3).
2Ki 4:39 One (of these pupils) then went to the field to gather vegetables ( , olera: for the different explanations of this word see Celsii Hierobot. i. 459ff., and Ges. Thes. p. 56), and found , i.e., not wild vines, but wild creepers (Luther), field-creepers resembling vines; and having gathered his lap full of wild cucumbers, took them home and cut them into the vegetable pot. because they did not know them. is rendered in the ancient versions colocynths (lxx , i.e., according to Suid., Colocynthis), whereas Gesenius ( Thes. p. 1122), Winer, and others, follow Celsius ( l.c. i. 393ff.), have decided in favour of wild cucumbers, a fruit resembling an acorn, or, according to Oken, a green fleshy fruit of almost a finger’s length and an inch thick, which crack with a loud noise, when quite ripe, and very gentle pressure, spirting out both juice and seeds, and have a very bitter taste. The reason for this decision is, that the peculiarity mentioned answers to the etymon , to split, in Syr. and Chald. to crack. Nevertheless the rendering given by the old translators is apparently the more correct of the two; for the colocynths also belong to the genus of the cucumbers, creep upon the ground, and are a round yellow fruit of the size of a large orange, and moreover are extremely bitter, producing colic, and affecting the nerves. The form of this fruit is far more suitable for oval architectural ornaments ( , 1Ki 6:18; 1Ki 7:24) than that of the wild cucumber.
2Ki 4:40 The extremely bitter flavour of the fruit so alarmed the pupils of the prophets when they began to eat of the dish, that they cried out, “Death in the pot,” and therefore thought the fruit was poison. If eaten in any large quantity, colocynths might really produce death: vid., Dioscorid. iv. 175 (178).
2Ki 4:41 Elisha then had some meal brought and poured it into the pot, after which the people were able to eat of the dish, and there was no longer anything injurious in the pot. , then take, denoting sequence in thought (vid., Ewald, 348, a.). The meal might somewhat modify the bitterness and injurious qualities of the vegetable, but could not take them entirely away; the author of the Exegetical Handbook therefore endeavours to get rid of the miracle, by observing that Elisha may have added something else. The meal, the most wholesome food of man, was only the earthly substratum for the working of the Spirit, which proceeded from Elisha, and made the noxious food perfectly wholesome.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| The Miracle on the Poisoned Pottage; the Miracle on the Barley Loaves. | B. C. 887. |
38 And Elisha came again to Gilgal: and there was a dearth in the land; and the sons of the prophets were sitting before him: and he said unto his servant, Set on the great pot, and seethe pottage for the sons of the prophets. 39 And one went out into the field to gather herbs, and found a wild vine, and gathered thereof wild gourds his lap full, and came and shred them into the pot of pottage: for they knew them not. 40 So they poured out for the men to eat. And it came to pass, as they were eating of the pottage, that they cried out, and said, O thou man of God, there is death in the pot. And they could not eat thereof. 41 But he said, Then bring meal. And he cast it into the pot; and he said, Pour out for the people, that they may eat. And there was no harm in the pot. 42 And there came a man from Baal-shalisha, and brought the man of God bread of the firstfruits, twenty loaves of barley, and full ears of corn in the husk thereof. And he said, Give unto the people, that they may eat. 43 And his servitor said, What, should I set this before an hundred men? He said again, Give the people, that they may eat: for thus saith the LORD, They shall eat, and shall leave thereof. 44 So he set it before them, and they did eat, and left thereof, according to the word of the LORD.
We have here Elisha in his place, in his element, among the sons of the prophets, teaching them, and, as a father, providing for them; and happy it was for them that they had one over them who naturally cared for their state, under whom they were well fed and well taught. There was a dearth in the land, for the wickedness of those that dwelt therein, the same that we read of, ch. viii. 1. It continued seven years, just as long again as that in Elijah’s time. A famine of bread there was, but not of hearing the word of God, for Elisha had the sons of the prophets sitting before him, to hear his wisdom, who were taught, that they might teach others. Two instances we have here of the care he took about their meat. Christ twice fed those to whom he preached. Elisha was in the more care about it now because of the dearth, that the sons of the prophets might not be ashamed in this evil time, but, even in the days of famine, might be satisfied, Ps. xxxvii. 19.
I. He made hurtful food to become safe and wholesome. 1. On the lecture-day, the sons of the prophets being all to attend, he ordered his servant to provide food for their bodies, while he was breaking to them the bread of life for their souls. Whether there was any flesh-meat for them does not appear; he orders only that pottage should be seethed for them of herbs, v. 38. The sons of the prophets should be examples of temperance and mortification, not desirous of dainties, but content with plain food. If they have neither savoury meats nor sweet meats, nay, if a mess of pottage be all the dinner, let them remember that this great prophet entertained himself and his guests no better. 2. One of the servitors, who was sent to gather herbs (which, it should seem, must serve instead of flesh for the pottage), by mistake brought in that which was noxious, or at least very nauseous, and shred it into the pottage: wild gourds they are called, v. 39. Some think it was coloquintida, a herb strongly cathartic, and, if not qualified, dangerous. The sons of the prophets, it seems, were better skilled in divinity than in natural philosophy, and read their Bibles more than their herbals. If any of the fruits of the earth be hurtful, we must look upon it as an effect of the curse (thorns and thistles shall it bring forth unto thee), for the original blessing made all good. 3. The guests complained to Elisha of the unwholesomeness of their food. Nature has given man the sense of tasting, not only that wholesome food may be pleasant, but that that which is unwholesome may be discovered before it comes to the stomach; the mouth tries meat by tasting it, Job xii. 11. This pottage was soon found by the taste of it to be dangerous, so that they cried out, There is death in the pot, v. 40. The table often becomes a snare, and that which should be for our welfare proves a trap, which is a good reason why we should not feed ourselves without fear; when we are receiving the supports and comforts of life we must keep up an expectation of death and a fear of sin. 4. Elisha immediately cured the bad taste and prevented the bad consequences of this unwholesome pottage; as before he had healed the bitter waters with salt, so now the bitter broth with meal, v. 41. It is probable that there was meal in it before, but that was put in by a common hand, only to thicken the pottage; this was the same thing, but cast in by Elisha’s hand, and with intent to heal the pottage, by which it appears that the change was not owing to the meal (that was the sign only, not the means), but to the divine power. Now all was well, not only no death, but no harm in the pot. We must acknowledge God’s goodness in making our food wholesome and nourishing. I am the Lord that healeth thee.
II. He made a little food to go a great way. 1. Elisha had a present brought him of twenty barley-loaves and some ears of corn (v. 42), a present which, in those ages, would not be despicable at any time, but now in a special manner valuable, when there was a dearth in the land. It is said to be of the first-fruits, which was God’s due out of their increase; and when the priests and Levites were all at Jerusalem, out of their reach, the religious people among them, with good reason, looked upon the prophets as God’s receivers, and brought their first-fruits to them, which helped to maintain their schools. 2. Having freely received, he freely gave, ordering it all to be set before the sons of the prophets, reserving none for himself, none for the hereafter. “Let the morrow take thought for the things of itself, give it all to the people that they may eat.” It well becomes the men of God to be generous and open-handed, and the fathers of the prophets to be liberal to the sons of the prophets. 3. Though the loaves were little, it is likely no more than what one man would ordinarily eat at a meal, yet with twenty of them he satisfied 100 men, 2Ki 4:43; 2Ki 4:44. His servant thought that to set so little meat before so many men was but to tantalize them, and shame his master for making so great an invitation to such short commons; but he in God’s name, pronounced it a full meal for them, and so it proved; they did eat, and left thereof, not because their stomachs failed them, but because the bread increased in the eating. God has promised his church (Ps. cxxxii. 15) that he will abundantly bless her provision, and satisfy her poor with bread; for whom he feeds he fills, and what he blesses comes to much, as what he blows upon comes to little, Hag. i. 9. Christ’s feeding his hearers was a miracle far beyond this; but both teach us that those who wait upon God in the way of duty may hope to be both protected and supplied by a particular care of divine Providence.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Food for the Hungry – Verses 38-44
The incidents now to be studied occurred in Elisha’s ministry with the school of the prophets at Gilgal. This was not Gilgal near Jericho, where Israel first camped when Joshua led them into the land, but a town of that name in the tribe of Ephraim. It is interesting that these schools seem to have thrived in spite of the wicked kings and Jezebel of the times. The occasion of Elisha’s visit was probably in teaching and training of the young men, and to encourage them.
It was a time of drouth in the land, and there was a scarcity of food for the sons of the prophets. While the prophets were seated before Elisha hearing him the prophet instructed his servant to prepare a pot of stew for them. One of those preparing it went into the field to gather wild herbs to season it. Possibly their supply of food was rather meager and they needed wild foods to augment it. Anyway the one gathering did not know his plants very well. He gathered a lap full of wild gourds and shredded them into the pot of stew.
When class was over and the men began to eat the food they discovered that it was poisonous. It is not clear whether they recognized it by seeing the ingredients, or perhaps were beginning to be sick from it. Anyway they began to cry to Elisha, “O man of God, there is death in the pot.” It was possibly the last of their food, and the gourds had rendered it unfit to eat, besides which if some had eaten of it they might die. Elisha remained calm, there was a remedy. If there is death in the pot, then bring meal, he told them. So someone found some meal, which Elisha put in the pottage and rendered it palatable.
An analogy can be drawn from this miracle of the pot. Many false teachers gather and shred poison into the pot of theology, and many are sickened and killed spiritually thereby. However, those who recognize death in the pot may take the good meal of the gospel and apply it, making the word wholesome by it.
During this same period of time God put into the heart of an unnamed man from Baal-Shalisha to bring a food offering of the first fruits of his barley to the sons of the prophets. This place was some distance to the northwest of Gilgal, but he made the journey at an expedient time for the hungry young men. It consisted of twenty loaves and some unthreshed grain (possibly for parching). Yet there were a hundred of the prophets, and this was not enough to feed them under ordinary circumstances.
When Elisha commanded the servant to serve it to the hundred students, he thought Elisha must be joking. But he was told again to serve it to them, for the Lord had said they would eat and there would be food left over. So he was prevailed on to serve it, and it turned out as Elisha said, there was leftover food. This reminds one of Christ’s miraculous increase of the loaves and fish, whereby He fed thousands of people (Mat 14:15-21; Mat 15:32-39)
The lessons from chapter four: 1) God’s people are not destitute; of that they have, they may serve Him satisfactorily; 2) Christian hospitality is becoming in all the saved; 3) God will abundantly reward those who serve Him by serving His servants; 4) whatever occurs all is well with the one in God’s will; 5) sometimes the Lord lets the faith of His children be tried before granting their petition; 6) the poison of heresy can be countered by application of the pure word of God; 7) the Lord’s increase will be sufficient to satisfy His followers.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES.
2Ki. 4:38. Sons of the prophets were sitting before himThis means, not that they lived in common with Elisha, but sat as scholars before him for teaching. Seethe pottageA kind of thick broth of rice or meal, vegetables, and meat.
2Ki. 4:40. There is death in the potProbably the wild gourds (2Ki. 4:39) were the fruit of the colocynth, exceedingly bitter, and causing severe cholic. Freely eaten, they might cause death. 2Ki. 4:42-44. Barley loaves, supernaturally multipliedA foreshadowing of Christs greater miracle of feeding the thousands. This man from Baal-shalisha brought the first fruits (Deu. 18:4, &c.) to Elisha as being the man of God, rather than to the false priests of Baal who overran the land, but were judged by this man to be less worthy to act as Jehovahs representatives and receive his religious offering than the prophet.W. H. J.
HOMILETICS OF 2Ki. 4:38-41
THE POISON OF SIN AND ITS CURE
THIS miracle of the healing of the poisonous pottage is a counterpart of that of the healing of the waters of Jericho (2Ki. 2:19-22). There the power of Elishas God works on the water; here on the food of the prophets. The chief value of both miracles lies in the rich typical lessons they suggest concerning the coming in of Divine grace and power into the domain of mans most common life and wants, to leaven and heal with gracious influences all the disturbances and bitternesses of earthly experience. The incident related in this paragraph is illustrative of the poison of sin and its cure. Observe
I. That humanity is infected with the poison of sin. It penetrates all classes, and mingles with the ever-changing circumstances of human life. It is so subtle in its workings, and so deceptive in its appearance, as to escape detection till its effects are felt, as was the case with the wild gourds innocently gathered by a son of the prophets (2Ki. 4:39). It weakens everything it taints. It is a foe to all stability. It is said that when Nicephorus Phocas had built a strong wall about his palace for his own security, in the night time he heard a voice crying to him, O Emperor! though thou build thy wall as high as the clouds, yet if sin be within, it will overthrow all. It is the custom of hunters in Africa, when they have killed a poisonous snake, to cut off its head, and carefully bury it in the ground, well knowing that if a naked foot trod on one of these fangs it would be fatally wounded; the venom is as deadly after the snake is dead. But sin is a venomous snake which no human hunter can slay; it insinuates itself everywhere, and everywhere spreads its deadly virus.
II. That the poison of sin is fatal in its effects. There is death in the pot (2Ki. 4:40). Sin when it is finished bringeth forth death (Jas. 1:15). The almond tree blossoms before the foliage appears. The splendour of its ruby flowers lures the winged insects of the air, but as they sip its poisoned chalices they fall dead in myriads at its root. So sin is like that tree, attracting human souls to drink in pleasure from its luscious flowers until they fall, deluded, in toxicated, dead. By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned (Rom. 5:12).
III. That the poison of sin is neutralized by the gracious provisions of the Gospel (2Ki. 4:41). There was no virtue in the meal itself to dissipate the poison of the pottage; it was but the means by which the miraculous power wrought the cure. So in the restoration to moral health of sin-poisoned humanity, while means are used, and must be used, the healing, saving power is Divine. The gospel, divinely devised, divinely developed, and divinely applied, is the unfailing panacea for the worlds evil.
LESSONS:
1. Sin is the great source of all human misery.
2. The remedy for human misery is Divinely provided.
3. God is not indifferent to the common daily wants of human life.
GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES
2Ki. 4:38. The pursuit of truth. I. Is carried on by earnest souls in the midst of national distress. There was a dearth in the land. II. Brings men into the presence of the great and good. The sons of the prophets were sitting before him. III. Contented with a modest supply of physical needs. Set on the great pot, and seethe pottage for the sons of the prophets.
The prophets were poor, and glad of pottage. The saints are kept at hard commons, but have their keeping of free cost. The wicked have larger cakes, but pay sweetly.Trapp.
The sons of the prophets had to struggle with want and distress, but no want could hinder them from entering the community, or could induce them to separate. Life in common, in faith, in prayer, in the praise of God, was dearer to them than pleasant days, and enjoying the pleasure of sin. Where unity of spirit and true love call people together to a common meal, there is no need of great preparations and expensive wishes; they are readily satisfied with the simplest food.Lange.
2Ki. 4:39. Ignorance of simple things. I. Inexcusable, because within the reach of all. II. Yet, alas! too prevalent. III. May be the occasion of fatal consequences.
2Ki. 4:40. The deadly power of sin. I. Mingles itself with the sweetest experiences of life. II. Causes many to turn with loathing even from their necessary food. III. Beyond all human power to conquer.
It is often with spiritual good as it is with bodily good: it looks as if it were healthful and nourishingi.e., the words are beautiful and attractiveand yet there is soul-poison in it, which is destructive, if we are not on our guard.
2Ki. 4:41. What was there in the meal to counter ct the bad properties of the gourds? Nothing, necessarily.
The meal, like the salt cast into the foul waters of Jericho (2Ki. 2:21), and the tree at Marah (Exo. 15:25), was merely the suggestive symbol of the Divine powers of nourishment and healing which subsisted in Elishas God. It bore a similar relation to this miracle that Elishas stretching himself upon the body of the dead child did to the Divine power that raised the child to life. It was the earthly medium through which the spirit worked. All the bad properties of the pottage were miraculously taken away. So, say some of the older divines, the healthsome meal of sound Christian doctrine, entering into the mind and heart of the church, shall counteract and take away the poison of ill-born heresy.
Eminent goodness. I. Is not lifted above the commonest wants of life. II. Sympathizes with the needy and the suffering. III. Is the medium of timely relief.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
II. MIRACLES ON BEHALF OF THE SONS OF THE PROPHETS 4:3844
As the spiritual head of the sons of the prophets, Elisha frequently was called upon apparently to use his powers for the benefit of the group. On two occasions he rescued these men from serious sickness and possible death. In the closing verses of chapter 4 the author narrates (1) the healing of the noxious pottage (2Ki. 4:38-41); and (2) the multiplication of the loaves (2Ki. 4:42-44).
A. HEALING OF THE NOXIOUS POTTAGE 4:3841
TRANSLATION
(38) And Elisha returned to Gilgal. Now famine was in the land; and the sons of the prophets were sitting before him. And he said to his lad, Set on the great pot, and boil pottage for the sons of the prophets. (39) And one went out into the field to gather herbs, and he found a vine of the field, and gathered from it a garment full of gourds of the field, and he came and sliced them into the pot of pottage; but they knew it not. (40) And they poured out to the men to eat, and it came to pass as they were eating of the pottage, that they cried out and said, Death In the pot, O man of God. And they were not able to eat it. (41) And he said, Take meal and throw it in the pot. And he said, Pour out to the people that they may eat. And there was no evil thing in the pot.
COMMENTS
The next miracle related of Elisha took place during a famine when the prophet was visiting the prophetic school at Gilgal on one of his regular tours of the land. During the course of his lecture, while the sons of the prophets were sitting before him, Elisha ordered that the large communal pot be put on the fire, and pottage or vegetable stew be prepared (2Ki. 4:38). The sons of the prophets fanned out in the neighborhood to look for wild fruits or vegetables which might be put into the stew. Perhaps because of the famine the men could not be as selective as they usually were. One young chap came upon some kind of wild vine, the fruit of which looked very appealing.[530] Gathering as many of these gourds as he could carry, he returned to the pot and began to skin and slice them into the pot. The prophetic students standing about were either paying no attention to what their colleague was doing, or else they failed to recognize the gourds as poisonous (2Ki. 4:39).
[530] Dalman (SSW, pp. 81ff.) attempts to identify the particular plant here involved. He points to a vine which grows in the vicinity of Jericho which produces yellow fruits like melons. These melons have powerful laxative properties and if eaten in great quantity may indeed be fatal. The technical name of the plant is citrullus colocynthus.
As the men were eating of the vegetable stew, they came to realize, either by the bitter taste of the brew or else by the nauseous effects, that they were eating unwholesome food. Jumping to the worst possible conclusion, they thought they were being poisoned, and so cried out to Elisha, O man of God, there is death in the pot! No one was able to continue eating the stew (2Ki. 4:40). Elisha took prompt action. He called for some meal and cast it into the pot. Meal, of course, has no power in and of itself to neutralize poison any more than salt has to purify bitter waters (cf. 2Ki. 2:19-21). Elisha could as easily have performed this miracle by a spoken word. But under divine direction, he was instructed to employ meal, the most wholesome food of man, to symbolize the purification of the pottage. It is possible that the meal might have modified some of the bitterness of the brew and its injurious qualities. But the primary purpose of the meal seems to have been symbolic. At any rate the pottage was served anew, and those who had faith in Elisha and continued to eat of it were harmed in no way (2Ki. 4:41).
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(38) And Elisha came again.Now Elisha had returned, commencing a new narrative. The word return refers to the prophets annual visit. (Comp. 2Ki. 4:25, and 2Ki. 2:1, Notes.) The story is not put in chronological sequence with the foregoing.
And there was a dearth.And the famine was.
The sons of the prophets were sitting before him.As disciples before a master; probably in a common hall, which served for lecture, work, and dining-room. (Comp. 2Ki. 6:1; Eze. 8:1; Eze. 14:1; Act. 22:3.)
His servant.Perhaps not Gehazi, but one of the sons of the prophets. So in 2Ki. 4:43.
Seethe pottage.Gen. 25:29.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
(38-44) Elisha among the sons of the prophets at Gilgal during the famine.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
THE POISONOUS POTTAGE HEALED, 2Ki 4:38-41.
This miracle of the healing of the poisonous pottage is a counterpart of that of the healing of the waters of Jericho. 2Ki 2:19-22. There the power of Elisha’s God works on the water; here, on the food of the prophets. The chief value of both miracles lies in the rich typical lessons they suggest concerning the coming in of Divine grace and power into the domain of man’s most common life and wants, to leaven and heal with gracious influences all the disturbances and bitternesses of earthly experience.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
38. Came Gilgal Where was a school of the prophets. See note on 2Ki 2:1.
A dearth in the land The seven years’ famine which Elisha had foretold. 2Ki 8:1. This is mentioned to show the necessity of their sending out into the fields to gather herbs for food.
Sitting before him As disciples were wont to gather round their master to listen to the instructions which fell from his lips.
Set on the great pot That is, put it over the fire. The great pot is mentioned as a well known, commonly used article among them.
Seethe pottage Boil vegetables.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Death In The Pot ( 2Ki 4:38-41 ).
To turn this story into an example of the culinary art, with Elisha as the experienced chief cook is to misrepresent it. Whatever we may think it is quite clear that the author saw it as a miracle, and intended it to be read in that way. Furthermore it would never have been recorded had it not been seen in that way by the participants. They would have had many experiences of when food did not quite taste right and was put right by adding something more, no doubt resulting in some leg-pulling. No one bothered to record things like that. But this was clearly seen as something different.
One problem is, of course, that, while we may hazard guesses, there is no indication what the plant was that was added to the pot, but we can safely assume that it was not anything common. That is why we do not see it as fitting in with the usual suggestions. It was clearly not a commonly recognised plant (‘they did not know them’). However, the idea that it was poisonous did simply rest on the taste. But no one, probably even Elisha, knew whether it was so or not. Thus the adding of the meal was intended to be a divine remedy for the situation, not just something to make the stew more palatable, necessary because it was a time of shortage and they could not afford to lose what was in the pot. And for that it turned out to be perfectly satisfactory. It was another example of Elisha’s remarkable powers.
Analysis.
a
b And he said to his servant, “Set on the great pot, and boil stew for the sons of the prophets” (2Ki 4:38 b).
c And one went out into the field to gather herbs, and found a wild vine, and gathered from it wild gourds, his lap full, and came and shred them into the pot of stew, for they did not know them (2Ki 4:39).
b So they poured out for the men to eat. And it came about, as they were eating of the stew, that they cried out, and said, “O man of God, there is death in the pot.” And they could not eat of it (2Ki 4:40).
a But he said, “Then bring meal.” And he cast it into the pot, and he said, “Pour out for the people, that they may eat.” And there was no harm in the pot (2Ki 4:41).
Note that in ‘a’ there was famine in the land and the sons of the prophets were depending on Elisha, and in the parallel their need is met by Elisha. In ‘b’ the stew was set on the fire so that it would be ready for the sons of the prophets to eat, and in the parallel they tried to eat of it but could not. Central in ‘c’ is the reason for the problem, the gathering of an unknown ingredient.
2Ki 4:38
‘And Elisha came again to Gilgal. And there was a famine in the land, and the sons of the prophets were sitting before him. And he said to his servant, “Set on the great pot, and boil stew for the sons of the prophets.” ’
The famine was probably the same one as described in 2Ki 8:1. We do not know which Gilgal it was, whether the one in the Jordan rift valley, or the one in the hills above Bethel, or possibly another one. The important thing is that Elisha and the sons of the prophets were having a community meal. This may have been because the famine had brought them together, or because they were having a special conference in view of the coming of Elisha to the region. But as their acknowledged leader when he was present Elisha gave orders for a large pot of stew to be put on the fire to boil, ready for their meal.
2Ki 4:39
‘And one went out into the field to gather herbs, and found a wild vine, and gathered from it wild gourds, his lap full, and came and shred them into the pot of stew, for they did not know them.’
We have here a stark warning of the danger of eating things which are unknown to us, unless of course we have good grounds for knowing them to be safe. This is especially so when we gather them in the wild. In this case one of the sons of the prophets found an unknown ‘vine’ and gathered its fruits, which he then placed in his turned up robe (forming a carrier bag). When they were brought back to the camp they were shredded with everything else, even though ‘they did not know them’. Possibly no one thought to ask, each assuming that the others knew what they were. The fact that it was unknown indicates that it was a rare plant, and it is therefore unlikely that we can identify it. The description is a loose one using common terminology. The plant was ‘a creeping plant’ producing some kind of ‘knop like fruit’, but as the description came from a layman it cannot be taken too literally. Any suggestions based on plants which were common can be discounted (thus we exclude the later guess at the colocynth, a common wild plant which produced cucumber like fruit, and was purgative, and in quantities, poisonous. It would be too commonly known).
2Ki 4:40
‘So they poured out for the men to eat. And it came about, as they were eating of the stew, that they cried out, and said, “O man of God, there is death in the pot.” And they could not eat of it.’
‘There is death in the pot.’ It would only be when the stew was tasted and found to be inedible that questions would be asked, and it may well be that when that occurred the description from the culprit indicated to a fellow son of the prophets some kind of rare ‘fruit’ which from past experience he knew to be poisonous. Thus it may well be that it was literally poisonous. To make it into a kind of joke such as we might make over something we do not like the taste of is to ignore the seriousness with which this story has been treated. It is not meant to be light entertainment. As a result of what they had discovered they could clearly not eat of it. As presumably what the man had put in was a relatively small part of the ingredients, its drastic effect on the taste is remarkable evidence of its potency.
2Ki 4:41
‘But he said, “Then bring meal.” And he cast it into the pot, and he said, “Pour out for the people, that they may eat.” And there was no harm in the pot.’
So Elisha called for some meal to be brought , and he himself cast it into the pot, and then declared it to be now perfectly safe. And so it turned out to be. While we would not discount the fact that adding meal could quite well have a taste-changing effect on the stew, making it palatable, we would not deny. It may even have helped to compensate for whatever poison was in the pot. But if so it was YHWH Who knew about that, not Elisha and the sons of the prophets. They saw it as a miracle. And it was certainly a miracle of answered prayer.
The final point behind the story was that as the God of Creation, YHWH had full control over all vegetation, and could make of it what He would.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Among Tthe Sons of the Prophets
v. 38. And Elisha came again, v. 39. And one, v. 40. So they poured out for the men to eat. And it came to pass, as they were eating of the pottage, that they cried out and said, O thou man of God, there is death in the pot! v. 41. But he said, Then bring meal, v. 42. And there came a man from Baal-shallsha, v. 43. And his servitor said, What, should I set this before an hundred men? v. 44. So he set it before them, and they did eat,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
This setting before the prophet, implies receiving instruction: probably expounding the scripture. Eze 8:1 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
IV
THE SCHOOLS OF THE PROPHETS
The more important passages bearing on this subject are 1Sa 3:1-4 ; 1Sa 10:5 ; 1Sa 10:9-12 ; 1Sa 18:13-24 ; 1Ki 19:18 ; 1Ki 19:20-21 ; 1Ki 20:35 ; 2Ki 2:3-5 ; 2Ki 4:38 ; 2Ki 6:1 ; 1Ch 29:29 ; 2Ch 9:29 ; 2Ch 12:15 ; 2Ch 13:22 and other chapters in that book I do not enumerate. The last one is Amo 7:14-15 . The reader will understand that I give these instead of a prescribed section in the Harmony. These constitute the basis of this discussion.
Let us distinguish between the prophetic gift and the prophetic office , and give some examples. Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, his seventy elders, Balaam, Joshua, and others before Samuel’s time had the gift, but not the office; perhaps we may except Moses as in a measure having the office. After Samuel’s time, David, many of his singers, and particularly Daniel, had the gift in a high degree, but not the office. Moreover, the high priests from Aaron to Caiphas in Christ’s time, were supposed to have officially the gift of prophecy that is, to hear and report what the Oracle said but Samuel is the first who held the office.
The distinction between a prophet and a son of a prophet is this: A son of a prophet was a candidate for the office, ministering to the prophet, a disciple instructed by him, consecrated to the work, and qualifying himself to perform the services of the office with the highest efficiency. A prophet is one who, through inspiration of the Holy Spirit, speaks or writes for God. In this inspiration he is God’s mouth or pen, speaking or writing not his own words, but God’s words. This inspiration guides and superintends his speech and his silence; what is recorded and what is omitted from the record. The gift of prophecy was not one of uniform quantity nor necessarily enduring. The gifts were various in kind, and might be for one occasion only. As to variety of kinds, the revelation might come in dreams or open visions, or it might consist of an ecstatic trance expressed in praise or song or prayer. If praise, song, or prayer, its form was apt to be poetic, particularly if accompanied by instrumental music.
As to the duration of the gift, it might be for one occasion only, or a few, or many. The scriptures show that the spirit of prophecy came upon King Saul twice only, and each time in the form of an ecstatic trance. In his early life it came as a sign that God had chosen him as king. In his later life the object of it was to bar his harmful approach to David. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 12-14 inclusive, explains the diversity of these gifts and their relative importance.
There are two periods of Hebrew history in which we find clearest notices of the schools of the prophets, the proofs of their persistence between the periods, and their influence on the nation. The notices are abundant in the time of Samuel, and in the time of Elijah and Elisha, but you have only to study the book of Chronicles to see that the prophetic order, as an office, continued through these periods and far beyond. Later you will learn that in the time of persecution fifty of these prophets were hidden in a cave and fed regularly. The object of the enemy was to destroy these theological seminaries, believing that they could never lead the nation astray while these schools of the prophets continued. Their object, therefore, was to destroy these seats of theological education. Elijah supposed that every one of them was killed except himself, but he was mistaken.
Samuel was the founder of the first school of the prophets, and the scripture which shows his headship 1Sa 19:20 , where Saul is sending messengers to take David, and finally goes himself and finds the school of the prophets, with Samuel as its appointed head. The reason for such a school in Samuel’s time is shown, first, by an extract from Kirkpatrick’s Commentary on 1 Samuel, page 33. He says:
Samuel was the founder of the prophetic order. Individuals in previous ages had been endowed with prophetic gifts, but with Samuel commenced the regular succession of prophets which lasted through all the period of the monarchy, and did not cease until after the captivity. The degeneracy into which the priesthood had fallen through the period of the judges demanded the establishment of a new order for the religious training of the nation.
For this purpose Samuel founded the institutions known as the schools of the prophets. The “company of prophets” at Gibeah (1Sa 10:10 ) and the scene at Ramah described in 1Sa 19:18 ff., imply a regular organization. These societies are only definitely mentioned again in connection with the history’ of Elijah and Elisha but doubtless continued to exist in the interval. By means of these the Order was maintained, students were educated, and common religious exercises nurtured and developed spiritual gifts.
Kirkpatrick’s is a fine commentary. The priests indeed were instructors of the people, but the tendency of the priesthood was to rest in external sacrifices, and to trust in a mere ritualistic form of sacrifice. That is the trouble always where you have a ritual. And after a while both priest and worshiper began to rely upon the external type, and on external conformity with the ritual. God needed better mouthpieces than those, hence while in the past there was a prophetic gift here and there, he now establishes the prophetic school, or society, in which training, bearing upon the prophetic office, should be continuous. The value of these schools of the prophets is also seen from Kirkpatrick, page 1 Samuel 34:
The value of the prophetic order to the Jewish nation was immense. The prophets were privy-counsellors of kings, the historians of the nation, the instructors of the people. It was their function to be preachers of righteousness to rich and poor alike: to condemn idolatry in the court, oppression among the nobles, injustice among the judges, formality among the priests. They were the interpreters of the law who drew out by degrees the spiritual significance which underlay ritual observance, and labored to prevent sacrifice and sabbath and festival from becoming dead and unmeaning forms. Strong in the unshaken consciousness that they were expressing the divine will, they spoke and acted with a fearless courage which no threats could daunt or silence.
Thus they proved a counterpoise to the despotism of monarchy and the formalism of priesthood. In a remarkable passage in his essay on “Representative Government,” Mr. John Stuart Mill attributes to their influence the progress which distinguished the Jews from other Oriental nations. “The Jews,” he writes, “had an absolute monarchy and hierarchy. These did for them what was done for other Oriental races by their institutions subdued them to industry and order, and gave them a national life. . . . Their religion gave existence to an inestimably precious institution, the order of prophets. Under the protection, generally though not always effectual, of their sacred character, the prophets were a power in the nation, often more than a match for kings and priests, and kept up in that little corner of the earth the antagonism of influences which is the only real security for continued progress.”
I was surprised the first time I ever saw the statement from Mill. He was a radical evolutionist and infidel, but a statesman, and in studying the development of statesmanship among the nations, he saw this singular thing in the history of the Jews, unlike anything he saw anywhere else, and saw what it was that led that nation, when it went into backsliding, to repentance; what power it was that brought about the reformation when their morals were corrupted; what power it was that was the real light of the nation and the salt of the earth, and saw that it was this order of prophets which was the conservator of national unity, purity, and perpetuity. I have the more pleasure in quoting that passage, as it comes from a witness in no way friendly to Christianity, just as when I was discussing missions I quoted the testimony of Charles Darwin to the tremendous influence for good wrought by the missionaries of South America.
Particularly in this case of the schools of the prophets we find their value, by noting very carefully the bearing on the case under Samuel. We have already noticed the corruption of the priesthood under Eli, Hophni, and Phinehas; how the ark was captured, the central place of worship desecrated; how Samuel, called to the office of prophet, needed assistance, and how he instituted this school of the prophets. He gathered around him the brightest young men of the nation and had the Spirit of God rest on them, and in order that their instruction might be regular he organized them into companies, or schools; he would go from one to another, and these young “theologs” were under the instruction of Samuel and for twenty years worked as evangelists in making sensitive the national conscience. It took twenty years to do it, and he could not have done it by himself, but with that tremendous power, the help he had, at the end of twenty years, he saw the nation repentant and once more worshiping God. I am for a theological seminary that will do that.
I give a modern example somewhat parallel: Mr. Spurgeon was called to the city of London, when about nineteen years old, to be the pastor of the old historic church of Dr. Gill, and in his evangelical preaching impressed a number of men to feel that they were also called to preach (if your preaching does not impress somebody else to preach, you may be sure that you are not called to preach), and it impressed the women and a multitude of laymen to do active Christian service. Therefore, Mr. Spurgeon organized what is called “The Pastoral College.” He wouldn’t let a drone be in it; he did not want anybody in it that was not spiritually minded. In other words, he insisted that a preacher should be religiously inclined, and should be ready to do any kind of work. He supported this institution largely through his own contributions, although the men and women all over England, when they saw what it was doing, would send money for its support. I used to read the monthly reports of the contributions and the list of donors that accompanied them.
Mr. Spurgeon determined to work a revolution, just as Samuel did, and he used this school of the prophets for that purpose. Consequently, hundreds of young preachers belonging to that school of the prophets preached in the slums of the city, in the byways, in the highways, in the hedges, in the mines, on the wharves to the sailors, and in the hospitals. Hundreds of laymen said, “Put us to work,” and he did; he had pushcarts made for them, and filled them with books and so sent out over the town literature that was not poisonous. He put the women to work, and established) or rather perpetuated in better form, a number of the almshouses for the venerable old women who were poor and helpless, following out the suggestion in 2 Timothy, and he erected a hospital. Then they got to going further afield. They went all over England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, crossed over into the Continent, crossed the seas to Australia, and the islands of the seas, and into heathen lands. I have always said that Spurgeon’s Pastoral College came nearer to the Bible idea of a seminary than any other in existence. There was not so much stress laid on mere scholarship as on spiritual efficiency.
It is important to note particularly what I am saying now, because it was burnt into my heart as one of the reasons for establishing a theological seminary. The nature of that society was that it was a school. They left their homes and came to stay at this school, with what we now call a mess hall in which all the theological students, by contributing so much, have their table in common. It was that way then; they had their meals in common. In preparing dinner one day for the sons of the prophets, somebody put a lot of wild gourds into the pot, and when they began to eat it, one of them cried out: “Ah, man of God, there’s death in the pot!” Once I preached a sermon on this theme: “Wild Gourds and Theological Seminaries,” to show that to feed the students in theological seminaries on wild gourds of heresy is to put death in the pot; they will do more harm than good, as they will become instruments of evil.
In determining what were their duties, we must consult quite a number of passages. We gather from this passage that they were thoroughly instructed in the necessity of repentance, individually and nationally, and of turning from their sins and coming back to God with faithful obedience. That lesson was ground in them. They were taught the interpretation of the spiritual meaning of the law, all its sacrifices, its feasts, its types, and therefore when you are studying a prophet in the Old Testament you will notice how different his idea of types and ceremonies from that of the priests. They will tell you that to do without eating is fasting, but the prophet will show that literal fasting is not true fasting; that there must be fasting at heart; that there must be a rending of the soul and not the garment as an expression of repentance; that to obey God w better than a formal sacrifice.
Another thing they were taught, which I wish particularly to emphasize, was music, both vocal and instrumental. In that school of the prophets started the tremendous power of music in religion so wonderfully developed by David, who got many of his ideas from associating with the schools of the prophets. And from that time unto this, every evangelical work, and all powerful religious work, has been associated with music, both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament; not merely vocal, but instrumental music. The heart of a religion is expressed in its songs, and if you want to get at the heart of your Old Testament you find it in the hymnbook of the Hebrew nation the Psalter. It is indeed an interesting study to see what has been the influence of great hymns on the national life. There is an old proverb: “You may make the laws of the people, if you will let me write their ballads.” Where is there a man capable of measuring the influence of “How Firm a Foundation,” or “Come, Thou Fount,” or “Did Christ O’er Sinners Weep?” There is a rich literature on the influence of hymns on the life.
In the awful times of the struggle in England, Charles I against the Parliament, one faction of the nation held to ritualism, while the other followed spirituality, even to the extreme of not allowing any form, not even allowing any instruments of music. One of the finest stories of this period is the account of a church that observed the happy medium, using instrumental as well as vocal music, and congregational singing as well as the use of the choir; every sabbath somebody’s soul was melted in the power of that mighty singing. I can’t sing myself, but I can carry the tunes in my mind, and I can be more influenced by singing than by preaching. It was singing that convicted me of sin. It was on a waving, soaring melody of song that my soul was converted. I once knew a rugged, one-eyed, homely, old pioneer Baptist preacher, who looked like a pirate until his religion manifested itself, and then he was beautiful. I heard him one day when a telegram was put into his hand stating that his only son had just been killed by being thrown from a horse. While weeping, his face became illumined; he got up and clapped his hands and walked through that audience, singing, “O, Jesus, My Saviour, to Thee I Submit.”
John Bunyan wrote that song while in Bedford Jail. They had put him there to keep him from preaching, and looking out through the bars of the dungeon he saw his poor blind girl, Mary, begging bread, and he sat down and wrote that hymn. The effect of the old preacher’s singing John Bunyan’s song was a mighty revival.
The relation of the schools of the prophets to modern theological seminaries is this: The purpose was the same. And so in New Testament times, Jesus recognized that if he wanted to revolutionize the world by evangelism he must do it with trained men. He did not insist that they be rich, great or mighty men. He did not insist that they be scholars. He called them from among the common people, and he kept them right with him for three years and a half, and diligently instructed them in the principles and spirit of his kingdom. He taught them in a variety of forms; in parables, in proverbs, in exposition, illustrating his teachings by miracles, and in hundreds of ways in order that they might be equipped to go out and lead the world to Christ. You cannot help being impressed with this fact: That the theological seminaries in Samuel’s time and in Christ’s time were intensely practical, the object being not to make learned professors, but to fill each one with electricity until you could call him a “live wire,” so that it burnt whoever touched it.
This is why I called Samuel a great man, and why in a previous discussion, counting the men as the peaks in a mountain range, sighting back from Samuel to Abraham, only one other peak comes into line of vision, and that is Moses.
QUESTIONS
1. What are the more important passages bearing on the schools of the prophets?
2. Distinguish between the prophetic gift and the prophetic office and illustrate by examples.
3. Distinguish between a prophet and a son of a prophet.
4. What is the meaning of prophet?
5. In what two periods of Hebrew history do we find the clearest notices of the school of prophets, what are the proofs of their persistence between these periods, and what is their influence on the nation?
6. Who was the founder of the first school of the prophets?
7. What scripture shows his headship?
8. What was the reason for such school in Samuel’s time?
9. What was the value of these schools of the prophets, and particularly in this case, and what illustration from modern instances?
10. What was the nature of that society, and what was the instruction given?
11. What was the relation of the schools of the prophets to modern theological seminaries?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
X
GATHERING UP THE FRAGMENTS THAT NOTHING BE LOST
The title of this chapter is a New Testament text for an Old Testament discussion. For the sake of unity the last two chapters were devoted exclusively to Elijah and Elisha. It is the purpose of this discussion to call attention to some matters worthy of note that could not very well be incorporated in those personal matters, and yet should not be omitted altogether.
It is true, however, that the heart of the history is in the lives of these two great prophets of the Northern Kingdom. In bringing up the record we will follow the chronological order of the scriptures calling for exposition.
Jehoshaphat’s Shipping Alliance with Ahaziah. We have two accounts of this: first, in 1Ki 22:47-49 , and second, in 2Ch 20:35-37 . I wish to explain, first of all, the locality of certain places named in these accounts. Tarshish, as a place, is in Spain. About that there can be no question. About Ophir, no man can be so confident. There was an Ophir in the southern part of Arabia; a man named Ophir settled there, but I do not think that to be the Ophir of this section. The Ophir referred to here is distinguished for the abundance and fine quality of its gold. Several books in the Bible refer to the excellency of “the gold of Ophir,” and to the abundance of it. Quite a number of distinguished scholars would locate it in the eastern part of Africa. Some others would locate it in India, and still others as the Arabian Ophir. My own opinion is, and I give it as more than probable, that the southeastern coast of Africa is the right place for Ophir. Many traditions put it there, the romance of Rider Haggard, “King Solomon’s Mines,” follows the traditions. The now well-known conditions of the Transvaal would meet the case in some respects.
Ezion-geber is a seaport at the head of the Gulf of Akaba, which is a projection of the Red Sea. What is here attempted by these men is to re-establish the famous commerce of Solomon. I cite the passages in the history of Solomon that tell about this commerce. In 1Ki 9:26 we have this record: “And King Solomon made a navy of ships in Eziongeber, which is beside Eloth, on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom. And Hiram (king of Tyre) sent in the navy his servants, shipmen that had knowledge of the sea, with the servants of Solomon. And they came to Ophir, and fetched from thence gold, four hundred and twenty talents, and brought it to King Solomon.” Now, 1Ki 10:11 reads: “And the navy also of Hiram, that brought gold from Ophir, brought in from Ophir great plenty of Almug trees and precious stones.” This “almug-trees” is supposed to be the famous sweet-scented sandalwood. The precious stones would agree particularly with the diamond mines at Kimberly in the Transvaal.
Then1Ki_10:22 reads: “For the king had at sea a navy of Tarshish with the navy of Hiram: Once every three years came the navy of Tarshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.” The ivory and apes would fit very well with the African coast, but we would have to go to India to get the spices, which are mentioned elsewhere, and the peacocks. A three years’ voyage for this traffic seems to forbid the near-by Arabian Ophir, and does make it reasonable that the merchant fleet touched many points Arabia, Africa, and the East Indies. It is, therefore, not necessary to find one place notable for all these products gold, jewels, sandalwood, ivory, apes, spices, and peacocks. Solomon, then, established as his only seaport on the south Eziongeber, a navy, manned partly by experienced seamen of Tyre, and these ships would make a voyage every three years. That is a long voyage and they might well go to Africa and to India to get these varied products, some at one point and some at another.
Now Jehoshaphat and Ahaziah (king of Israel) made an alliance to re-establish that commerce. The first difficulty, however, is that the Chronicles account says that these ships were to go to Tarshish, and the Kings account says that they were ships of Tarshish to go to Ophir. My explanation of that difficulty is this: It is quite evident that no navy established at Eziongeber would try to reach Spain by circumnavigating Africa, when it would be so much easier to go from Joppa, Tyre, or Sidon over the Mediterranean Sea to Spain. “Tarshish ships” refers, not to the destination of the ships, but to the kind of ships, that is, the trade of the Mediterranean had given that name to a kind of merchant vessel, called “Ships of Tarshish.” And the ships built for the Tarshish trade, as the name “lndianman” was rather loosely applied to certain great English and Dutch merchant vessels. It is an error in the text of Chronicles that these ships were to go to Tarshish. They were Tarshish ships, that is, built after the model of Tarshish ships, but these ships were built at Eziongeber for trade with Ophir, Africa, and India.
1Ki 22:47 of the Kings account needs explanation: “And there was no king in Edom; a deputy was king.” The relevancy of that verse is very pointed. If Edom had been free and had its own king, inasmuch as Eziongeber was in Edom, Judah never could have gone there to build a navy. But Edom at this time was subject to Judah, and a Judean deputy ruled over it. That explains why they could come to Eziongeber.
One other matter needs explanation. The account in Kings says, “Then said Ahaziah the son of Ahab unto Jehoshaphat, Let my servants go with thy servants in the ships. But Jehoshaphat would not.” Ahaziah attributed the shipwreck of that fleet to the incompetency of the Judean seamen. He did not believe that there would have been a shipwreck if he had been allowed to furnish experienced mariners, as Hiram did. So Kings gives us what seems to be the human account of that shipwreck, viz: the incompetency of the mariners; but Chronicles gives us the divine account, thus: “Because thou hast joined thyself with Ahaziah, the Lord hath destroyed thy works. And the ships were broken.” How often do we see these two things: the human explanation of the thing, and the divine explanation of the same thing. Ahaziah had no true conception of God, and he would at once attribute that shipwreck to human incompetency, but Jehoshaphat knew better; he knew that shipwreck came because he had done wickedly in keeping up this alliance with the idolatrous kings of the ten tribes.
THE TRANSLATION OF ELIJAH Let us consider several important matters in connection with the translation of Elijah, 2Ki 2:1-18 . First, why the course followed by Elijah? Why does he go from Carmel to Gilgal and try to leave Elisha there, and from Gilgal to Bethel and try to leave Elisha there, and from Bethel to Jericho and try to leave Elisha there? The explanation is that the old prophet, having been warned of God that his ministry was ended and that the time of his exodus was at hand, wished to revisit in succession all of these seminaries. These were his stopping places, and he goes from one seminary to another. It must have been a very solemn thing for each of these schools of the prophets, when Elisha and Elijah came up to them, for by the inspiration of God as we see from the record, each school of the prophets knew what was going to happen. At two different places they say to Elisha, “Do you know that your master will be taken away to-day?” Now, the same Spirit of God that notified Elijah that his time of departure was at hand, also notified Elisha, also notified each school of the prophets; they knew.
But why keep saying to Elisha, “You stay here at Gilgal; the Lord hath sent me to Bethel,” and, “You stay here at Bethel; the Lord hath sent me to Jericho,” and “You stay here at Jericho; the Lord hath sent me to the Jordan”? It was a test of the faith of Elisha. Ruth said to Naomi, “Entreat me not to leave thee, nor to forsake thee; for where thou goest, I will go; and God do so to me, if thy God be my God, and thy people my people, and where thou diest there will I die also.” With such spirit as that, Elisha, as the minister to Elijah, and as the disciple of Elijah, and wishing to qualify himself to be the successor of Elijah, steadfastly replied: “As the Lord liveth and thy soul liveth, I will not forsake thee.” “I am going with you just as far as I can go; we may come to a point of separation, but I will go with you to that point.” All of us, when we leave this world, find a place where the departing soul must be without human companionship. Friends may attend us to that border line but they cannot pass over with us.
We have already discussed the miracle of the crossing of the Jordan. Elijah smote the Jordan with his mantle and it divided; that was doubtless his lesson to Elisha, and we will see that he learned the lesson. I heard a Methodist preacher once, taking that as a text, say, “We oftentimes complain that our cross is too heavy for us, and groan under it, and wish to be relieved from it.” “But,” says he, “brethren, when we come to the Jordan of death, with that cross that we groaned under we will smite that river, and we will pass over dry-shod, and leave the cross behind forever, and go home to a crown to wear.”
The next notable thing in this account is Elijah’s question to Elisha: “Have you anything to ask from me?” “Now, this is the last time; what do you want me to do for you?” And he says, “I pray thee leave a double portion of thy spirit on me.” We see that he is seeking qualification to be the successor. “Double” here does not mean twice as much as Elijah had, but the reference is probably to the first-born share of an inheritance. The first-born always gets a double share, and Elisha means by asking a double portion of his spirit that it may accredit him as successor. Or possibly “double” may be rendered “duplicate,” for the same purpose of attenuation. The other prophets would get one share, but Elisha asks for the first-born portion. Elijah suggests a difficulty, not in himself, but in Elisha ; he said, “You ask a hard thing of me, yet if you see me when I go away, you will get the double portion of my spirit,” that is, it was a matter depending on the faith of the petitioner, his power of personal perception. “When I go up, if your eyes are open enough to see my transit from this world to a higher, that will show that you are qualified to have this double portion of my spirit.” We have something similar in the life of our Lord. The father of the demoniac boy says to our Lord, “If thou canst do anything, have compassion on us and help us.” Jesus replied, “If thou canst! All things are possible to him that believeth.” It was not a question of Christ’s ability, but of the supplicant’s faith.
The next thing is the translation itself. What is meant by it? In the Old Testament history two men never died; they passed into the other world, soul and body without death: Enoch and Elijah. And at the second coming of Christ every Christian living at that time will do the same thing. “In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, they shall be changed.” Now, what is that change of the body by virtue of which without death, it may ascend into heaven? It is a spiritualization of the body eliminating its mortality, equivalent to what takes place in the resurrection and glorification of the dead bodies. I preached a sermon once on “How Death [personified] Was Twice Startled.” In the account of Adam it is said, “And he died” and so of every other man, “and he died.” Methuselah lived 969 years, but he died. And death pursuing all the members of the race, strikes them down, whether king or pauper, whether prophet or priest. But when he comes to Enoch his dart missed the mark and he did not get him. And when he came to Elijah he missed again. Now the translations of Enoch and Elijah are an absolute demonstration of two things: First, the immortality of the soul, the continuance of life; that death makes no break in the continuity of being. Second, that God intended from the beginning to save the body. The tree of life was put in the garden of Eden, that by eating of it the mortality of the body might be eliminated. Sin separated man from that tree of life, but it is the purpose of God that the normal man, soul and body, shall be saved. The tradition of the Jews is very rich on the spiritual significance of the translation of Enoch and Elijah. In Enoch’s case it is said, “He was not found because God took him,” and in this case fifty of the sons of the prophets went out to see if when Elijah went to heaven his body was not left behind, and they looked all over the country to find his body. Elisha knew; he saw the body go up.
Now, in Revelation we have the Cherubim as the chariot of God. This chariot that met Elijah at the death station was the chariot of God, the Cherubim. Just as the angels met Lazarus and took his soul up to heaven, and it is to this wonderful passage that the Negro hymn belongs: “Swing Low, Sweet Chariot.”
Elisha cried as the great prophet ascended, “My Father! My rather I The chariots of Israel and the horsemen thereof,” the meaning of which is that thus had gone up to heaven he who in his life had been the defense of Israel, worth more than all of its chariots and all of its cavalry. Now these very words “were used when Elisha died. “My Father! My Father! The chariots of Israel and the horsemen thereof,” signifying that he had been the bulwark of the nation as Elijah had been before him.
ELISHA’S MINISTRY, 2Ki 2:19-25 As Elijah went up something dropped not his body, but just his mantle his mantle fell, and it fell on Elisha, symbolic of the transfer of prophetic leadership from one to the other. Now, he wants to test it, a test that will accredit him; so he goes back to the same Jordan, folds that same mantle up just as Elijah had done, and smites the Jordan. But, mark you, he did not say, “Where is Elijah” the man, Elijah, was gone, but, “Where is the Lord God of Elijah?” and the waters divided and he came over. There he stood accredited with a repetition of the miracle just a little before performed by Elijah, which demonstrated that he was to be to the people what Elijah had been. And this was so evident that the sons of the prophets recognized it and remarked on it: “The spirit of Elijah doth rest on Elisha.” It is a touching thing to me, this account of more than fifty of these prophets, as the president of their seminary is about to disappear, came down the last hill that overlooks the Jordan, watching to see what became of him. And they witness the passage of the Jordan they may have seen the illumination of the descent of the chariot of fire. They wanted to go and get the body the idea of his body going up they had not taken in, and they could not be content until Elisha, grieved at their persistence) finally let them go and find out for themselves that the body had gone to heaven.
I have just two things to say on the healing of the noxious waters at Jericho. The first is that neither the new cruse nor the salt put in it healed the water. It was a symbolic act to indicate that the healing would be by the power of God. Just as when Moses cast a branch into the bitter waters of Marah, as a symbolic act. The healing power comes from God. The other re-mark is on that expression, “unto this day,” which we so frequently meet in these books. Its frequent recurrence is positive proof that the compiler of Kings and the compiler of Chronicles are quoting from the original documents. “Unto this day” means the day of the original writer. It does not mean unto the day of Ezra wherever it appears in Chronicles, but it means unto the day of the writer of the part of history that he is quoting from. More than one great conservative scholar has called attention to this as proof that whoever compiled these histories is quoting the inspired documents of the prophets.
THE CHILDREN OF BETHEL AND THE SHE-BEARS Perhaps a thousand infidels have referred Elisha’s curse to vindictiveness and inhumanity. The word rendered “little children” is precisely the word Solomon uses in his prayer at Gibeon when he says, “I am a little child” he was then a grown man. Childhood with the Hebrews extended over a much greater period of time than it does with us. The word may signify “young men” in our modern use of the term. And notice the place was Bethel, the place of calf worship, where the spirit of the city was against the schools of the prophets, and these young fellows call them “street Arabs,” “toughs,” whom it suited to follow this man and mock him: “Go up, thou bald bead; go up, thou bald head.” Elisha did not resent an indignity against himself, but here is the point: these hostile idolaters at Bethel, through their children are challenging the act of God in making Elisha the head of the prophetic line. He turned and looked at them and he saw the spirit that animated them saw that it was an issue between Bethel calf worship and Bethel, the school of the prophets, and that the parents of these children doubtless sympathized in the mockery, and saw it to be necessary that they should learn that sacrilege and blasphemy against God should not go unpunished. So, in the name of the Lord he pronounces a curse on them had it been his curse, no result would have followed. One man asks, “What were these she-bears doing so close to Bethel?” The answer is that in several places in the history is noted the prevalence of wild animals in Israel. We have seen how the old prophet who went to this very Bethel to rebuke Jeroboam and turned back to visit the other prophet, was killed by a lion close to the city.
Another infidel question is, “How could God make a she bear obey him?” Well, let the infidel answer how God’s Spirit could influence a single pair of all the animals to go into the ark. Over and over again in the Bible the dominance of the Spirit of God over inanimate things and over the brute creation is repeatedly affirmed. The bears could not understand, but they would follow an impulse of their own anger without attempting to account for it.
THE INCREASE IN THE WIDOW’S OIL, 2Ki 4:1-7
We have already considered this miracle somewhat in the chapter on Elisha, and now note particularly:
1. It often happens that the widow of a man of God, whether prophet or preacher, is left in destitution. Sometimes the fault lies in the imprudence of the preacher or in the extravagance of his family, but more frequently, perhaps, in the inadequate provision for ministerial support. This destitution is greatly aggravated if there be debt. The influence of a preacher is handicapped to a painful degree, when, from any cause, he fails to meet his financial obligations promptly. In a commercial age this handicap becomes much more serious.
2. The Mosaic Law (Lev 25:39-41 ; see allusion, Mat 18:25 ) permitted a creditor to make bond-servant of a debtor and his children. For a long time the English law permitted imprisonment for debt. This widow of a prophet appeals to Elisha, the head of the prophetic school, for relief, affirming that her husband did fear God. In other words, he was faultless in the matter of debt. The enforcement of the law by the creditor under such circumstances indicates a merciless heart.
3. The one great lesson of the miracle is that the flow of the increased oil never stayed as long as there was a vessel to receive it. God wastes not his grace if we have no place to put it: according to our faith in preparation is his blessing. He will fill all the vessels we set before him.
DEATH IN THE POT, 2Ki 4:38-41 We recall this miracle to deepen a lesson barely alluded to in the chapter on Elisha. The seminaries at that time lived a much more simple life than the seminaries of the present time; it did not take such a large fund to keep them up. Elisha said, “Set on the great pot,” and one of the sons of the prophets went out to gather vegetables. He got some wild vegetables he knew nothing about here called wild gourd and shred them into the pot, not knowing they were poisonous. Hence the text: “O man of God, there is death in the pot.” I once took that as the text for a sermon on “Theological Seminaries and Wild Gourds,” showing that the power of seminaries depends much on the kind of food the teachers give them. If they teach them that the story of Adam and Eve is an allegory, then they might just as well make the second Adam an allegory, for his mission is dependent on the failure of the first. If they teach them the radical criticism; if they teach anything that takes away from inspiration and infallibility of the divine Word of God or from any of its great doctrines then, “O man of God, there is death in the pot” that will be a sick seminary.
In a conversation once with a radical critic I submitted for his criticism, without naming the author, the exact words of Tom Paine in his “Age of Reason,” denying that the story of Adam and Eve was history. He accepted it as eminently correct. Then I gave the author, and inquired if it would be well for preachers and commentators to revert to such authorities on biblical interpretation. He made no reply. We find Paine’s words not only in the first part of the “Age of Reason,” written in a French prison without a Bible before him, but repeated in the second part after he was free and had access to Bibles. I gave this man a practical illustration, saying, “You may take the three thousand published sermons of Spurgeon, two sets of them, and arrange them, one set according to the books from which the texts are taken Gen 1:2 , Gen 1:3 , etc., and make a commentary on the Bible. By arranging the other set of them in topical order, you have a body of systematic theology.” Now this man Spurgeon believed in the historical integrity and infallibility of the Bible, in its inspiration of God, and he preached that, just that. As the old saying goes, “The proof of the pudding is in the chewing of the bag.” He preached just that, and what was the result? Thousands and thousands of converts wherever he preached, no matter what part of the Bible he was preaching from; preachers felt called to enter the ministry, orphan homes rose up, almshouses for aged widows, colportage systems established, missionaries sent out, and all over the wide world his missionaries die in the cause. One man was found in the Alps, frozen to death, with a sermon of Spurgeon in his hand. One man was found shot through the heart by bush rangers of Australia, and the bullet passed through Spurgeon’s sermon on “The Blood of Jesus.” Now, I said to this man, “Get all your radical critics together, and let them preach three thousand sermons on your line of teaching. How many will be converted? How many backsliders will be reclaimed? How many almshouses and orphanages will be opened? How many colportage systems established? Ah! the proof of the pudding is in the chewing of the bag. If what you say is the best thing to teach about the Bible is true, then when you preach, it will have the best results. But does it?”
We have considered Elisha’s miracle for providing water for the allied armies of Israel, Judah, and Edom, when invading Moab (2Ki 3:10-19 ). We revert to it to note partakelarly this passage: “And when the king of Moab saw that the battle was too sore for him, he took with him seven hundred men that drew sword, to break through unto the king of Edom: but they could not. Then he took his eldest son that should have reigned in his stead, and offered him for a burnt offering upon the wall. And there was great wrath against Israel: and they departed from him, and returned to their own land” (2Ki 3:26-27 ). On this passage I submit two observations:
1. Not long after this time the prophet Micah indignantly inquires, “Shall I give my firstborn for my transgressions, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?” The context is a strong denunciation of the offering of human sacrifices to appease an angry deity. The Mosaic law strongly condemned the heathen custom of causing their children to pass through the fire of Molech. Both this book of Kings and Jeremiah denounce judgment on those guilty of this horrible practice. The Greek and Roman classics, and the histories of Egypt and Phoenicia, show how widespread was this awful custom.
2. But our chief difficulty is to expound the words, “There was great wrath against Israel.” But what was its connection with the impious sacrifice of the king of Moab? Whose the wrath? The questions are not easy to answer. It is probable that the armies of Edom and Judah were angry at Israel for pressing the king of Moab to such dire extremity, and so horrified at the sacrifice that they refused longer to co-operate in the campaign. This explanation, while not altogether satisfactory, is preferred to others more improbable. It cannot mean the wrath of God, nor the wrath of the Moabites against Israel. It must mean, therefore, the wrath of the men of Judah and Edom against Israel for pressing Mesha to such an extent that he would offer his own son as a sacrifice.
QUESTIONS
I. On the two accounts of Jehoshaphat’s shipping alliance with Ahaziah, 2Ki 22 ; 2Ch 20 , answer:
1. Where is Tarshish?
2. Where is Ophir?
3. Where is Ezion-geber?
4. What is the relevance of 1Ki 22:47 ?
5. Explain “ships of Tarshish” in Kings, and “to go to Tarshish” in Chronicles.
6. What commerce were they seeking to revive, and what passage from 1 Kings bearing thereon?
7. How does the book of Kings seem to account for the wreck of the fleet, and how does Chronicles give a better reason?
II. On the account of Elijah’s translation (2Ki 2:1-18 ) answer:
1. Why the course taken by Elijah by way of Gilgal, Bethel, and Jericho?
2. How did both Elisha and the schools of the prophets know about the impending event?
3. What was the object of Elijah in telling Elisha to tarry at each stopping place while he went on?
4. What was the meaning of Elisha’s request for “a double portion” of Elijah’s spirit and why was this a hard thing to ask, i.e., wherein the difficulty? Illustrate by a New Testament lesson.
5. What was the meaning of Elijah’s translation, and what other cases, past or prospective?
6. What was the meaning of Elisha’s expression, “My Father! My Father! The chariots of Israel and the horsemen thereof,” and who and when applied the same language to Elisha?
7. How does Elisha seek a test of his succession to Elijah and how do others recognize the credentials?
III. How do you explain the seeming inhumanity of Elisha’s cursing the children of Bethel?
IV. On the widow’s oil (2Ki 4:1-7 ), answer:
1. What often happens to the widow of a prophet or preacher, and what circumstance greatly aggravates the trouble?
2. What is the Mosaic law relative to debtors and creditors?
3. What one great lesson of the miracle?
V. On “Death in the Pot” answer:
1. What the incident of the wild gourds?
2. What application does the author make of this?
3. What comparison does the author make between Spurgeon and the Radical Critics?
VI. On Elisha’s miracle, the water supply, answer:
1. What is the allusion in Micah’s words, “Shall I give my first-born,” etc.?
2. What the meaning of “There was great wrath against Israel”?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
2Ki 4:38 And Elisha came again to Gilgal: and [there was] a dearth in the land; and the sons of the prophets [were] sitting before him: and he said unto his servant, Set on the great pot, and seethe pottage for the sons of the prophets.
Ver. 38. See the pottage. ] The propbets were poor, and glad of pottage. Nescio quomodo bonae mentis sorer est paupertas. a The saints are kept at hard commons, but have their keeping of free cost. The wicked have larger provisions, but pay sweetly.
a Petron.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
2Ki 4:38-41
2Ki 4:38-41
THE MIRACLE OF HEALING THE DEATH IN THE POT
“And Elisha came again to Gilgal. And there was a dearth in the land; and the sons of the prophets were sitting before him; and he said unto his servant, Set on the great pot, and boil pottage for the sons of the prophets. And one went out into the field to gather herbs, and found a wild vine, and gathered thereof wild gourds his lap full, and came and shred them into the pot of pottage; for they knew them not. So they poured out for the men to eat. And it came to pass, as they were eating of the pottage, that they cried out and said, O man of God, there is death in the pot. And they could not eat thereof, But he said, Then bring meal. And he cast it into the pot; and he said, Pour out for the people, that they may eat. And there was no harm in the pot.”
“There was a dearth in the land” (2Ki 4:38). “This may well be the same drought mentioned in 2Ki 8:1.
Stigers identified these wild gourds as, “Wild cucumbers, egg-shaped gourds having a bitter taste, and producing violent diarrhea when eaten, or even death.”
The spiritual lesson to be derived from this has an application to the anti-Biblical teaching that is offered in some seminaries of our day. The brew that is being fed to some young theological students today is most certainly “Death in the Pot.” It is God’s Word, as revealed in the Bible, that yields all of the rich benefits desired for the children of Adam, and not the unbelieving speculative denials and theories of evil men who strive continually to discredit and destroy faith in the Bible!
These wonderful miracles were given for the purpose of certifying Elisha as a true prophet of God, an urgent need sorely felt in Israel at that time.
E.M. Zerr:
2Ki 4:38. In times of distress or emergency, the student prophets looked to their master prophet for relief. At this time the shortage of food was caused by the dearth, and the group of prophets expected something from Elisha. The large boiling vessel was ordered put on the fire to seethe pottage, which means to boil soup.
2Ki 4:39. While one servant was making ready the pot for the soup, another was out foraging for something to use in the pottage. As there was a dearth, there would not be a great supply of vegetables. Strong defines these wild gourds as wild cucumbers. They resembled other vine products and hence the servants made the mistake of getting a poisonous plant.
2Ki 4:40. By the time the soup was ready to eat its true character was discovered, and they appealed to Elisha to help them out of their predicament.
2Ki 4:41. The meal was ground grain and an ordinary article of food. It had no power of removing poison from another food without miracle. The student should frequently refer to the comments at .2Ki 2:8.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Who Giveth Food to All Flesh
2Ki 4:38-44
This miracle, it has been justly remarked, is a faint foreshadowing of our Lords marvelous feeding of thousands with even scantier materials. As Elijah was a type of John the Baptist; so Elisha was, in many respects, a type of our Lord. In his peaceful, human life, his mild and gentle character, his constant circuits, his many miracles of mercy, he resembles, more than any other prophet, the Messiah.
We have also, in this miracle, the great province of the Gospel to counteract the ancient curse of a forfeited Paradise and meet the hunger of the soul. The grace of God will turn an evil into a blessing and multiply a little to feed a multitude. See Mar 16:18; Psa 132:15. Can there be any doubt that to faith and prayer resources are open which are closed to all else? If nature contained all we need, ready to our hand, of what use would prayer be? The very injunctions to prayer and the success of those who have prayed, prove that God has forces available, which can operate in behalf of those who love Him and are the called according to His purpose.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Elisha: 2Ki 2:1, 1Sa 7:16, 1Sa 7:17, Act 10:38, Act 15:36
a dearth: 2Ki 8:1, Lev 26:26, Deu 28:22-24, Deu 28:38-40, 2Sa 21:1, Jer 14:1-6, Eze 14:13, Luk 4:25
the sons: 2Ki 2:3, 1Sa 19:20
were sitting: Pro 8:34, Luk 2:46, Luk 8:35, Luk 8:38, Luk 10:39, Act 22:3
Set on the great pot: Mar 6:37, Mar 8:2-6, Luk 9:13, Joh 21:5, Joh 21:9
Reciprocal: Gen 12:10 – was a 1Sa 10:5 – a company 1Ki 20:35 – of the sons 2Ki 4:1 – sons 2Ki 4:42 – bread 2Ki 6:1 – the place Job 30:4 – for their meat Amo 4:6 – and want Amo 7:14 – neither
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2Ki 4:38. There was a dearth in the land The same that we read of chap. 2Ki 3:1. It continued seven years, just as long again as that in the time of Elijah. For if a wicked nation will not be reformed by a lesser judgment, they must expect to be visited with a greater. The sons of the prophets were sitting before him To hear his wisdom, and be instructed in the law, that they might teach others. He said unto his servant, Seethe the pottage, &c. By this it appears that they lived together in society, and, after their lectures, were wont to eat together with their master; who now ordered his servant to prepare some food for them, which was very plain and common, such as the gardens and the fields would produce.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2Ki 4:38-44. Two Minor Miracles of Elisha.The death (poison) in the pot healed and the feeding of a hundred prophets. The bread of the firstfruits (2Ki 4:42) was by the Law the property of the priests (Num 18:13, Deu 18:4). Here the loaves and ears of corn are offered to prophets. In the Christian Teaching of the Twelve Apostles the prophets are to be given of the firstfruits, for they are your priests. There is no similar instance in the OT.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
4:38 And Elisha came again to Gilgal: and [there was] a dearth in the {s} land; and the sons of the prophets [were] sitting before him: and he said unto his servant, Set on the great pot, and seethe pottage for the sons of the prophets.
(s) That is, in the land of Israel.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The deadly effects of apostasy 4:38-41
God again disciplined Israel by withholding fertility from the land and producing a famine (2Ki 4:38; cf. 1 Kings 17). The people were not only hungry for bread but also for what would truly satisfy their spiritual hunger, namely, the Word of God. The wild gourds were similar to Baalism. They looked attractive but proved disgusting and deadly when consumed. Scripture compares meal or bread to the Word of God because it is what satisfies people’s most basic needs (cf. Deu 8:3).
In Elisha’s day, the people of Israel had turned from God and His Law. This had resulted in a spiritual famine. The people were hungry spiritually and, to satisfy their need, had swallowed Baalism. It looked harmless enough, but it proved fatal. God’s prophets helped counteract the deadly effects of Baalism by making the Word of God available to the people. People need the Word of God (Mat 4:4).
"This event shows the power to make the harmful innocuous (cf. Luk 10:19) as well as God’s care and provision for his own." [Note: Wiseman, p. 205.]