Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Kings 5:1

Now Naaman, captain of the host of the king of Syria, was a great man with his master, and honorable, because by him the LORD had given deliverance unto Syria: he was also a mighty man in valor, [but he was] a leper.

Ch. 2Ki 5:1-14. The cure of Naaman’s leprosy (Not in Chronicles)

1. honourable ] An attempt is made by the LXX. to translate literally the Hebrew expression which is the same as in Isa 3:3. , ‘admired in the eyes of’. The idea is the passive of ‘an acceptor of persons’. Hence ‘one accepted and acceptable’.

because by him the Lord had given deliverance ] R.V. victory. That the Lord was the deliverer is the thought of the Jewish writer. The Syrians would have put the case differently. It is however a matter of interest to note that Jehovah was not regarded by the compiler of this narrative as exclusively the God of the Jews, nor the Gentiles thought to be beyond, or deprived of, His care. He helps them though they know Him not.

deliverance unto Syria ] That Naaman was the man ‘who drew a bow at a venture’ and smote Ahab at Ramoth Gilead, and thus gained victory for Syria, is a conjecture of Jewish commentators for which there is not the smallest foundation. About this time the Assyrians invaded Syria and the countries round about, and it is not improbable that this was the war in which Naaman had gained his fame.

a mighty man in [R.V. of ] valour ] The phrase occurs many times, and nowhere but here is the preposition ‘in’ used, but always ‘of’. The disease with which Naaman was afflicted must have been of a less malignant character than leprosy mostly is, otherwise he would have been physically incapable of soldierly duties.

a leper ] The laws of the Jews concerning the separation of lepers from the rest of the people are given in Leviticus 13, 14, and are extremely stringent. Clearly in Syria there were no such regulations, for Naaman goes with the host to war, returns and lives at home with his wife and the household, and attends on the king when he goes to worship in the house of Rimmon.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

By him the Lord had given deliverance unto Syria – An Assyrian monarch had pushed his conquests as far as Syria exactly at this period, bringing into subjection all the kings of these parts. But Syria revolted after a few years and once more made herself independent. It was probably in this war of independence that Naaman had distinguished himself.

But he was a leper – leprosy admitted of various kinds and degrees Lev. 13; 14 Some of the lighter forms would not incapacitate a man from discharging the duties of a courtier and warrior.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

2Ki 5:1-19

Now Naaman, captain of the host of the King of Syria.

The History of Naamans disease and cure; illustrative of certain forces in the life of man

I. The force of worldly position. Why all the interest displayed in his own country, and in Israel, concerning Naamans disease? The first verse of this chapter explains it. Now Naaman, captain of the host of Syria, was a great man, etc. Perhaps there were many men in his own district who were suffering from leprosy, yet little interest was felt in them. They would groan under their sufferings, and die unsympathised with and unhelped. But because this mans worldly position was high, kings worked, prophets were engaged, nations were excited for his cure. It has ever been a sad fact in our history that we magnify both the trims and the virtues of the grandees, and think but little of the griefs and graces of the lowly.

1. This fact indicates the lack of intelligence in popular sympathy. Reason teaches that the calamities of the wealthy have many mitigating circumstances, and therefore the greater sympathy should be towards the poor.

2. It indicates the lack of manliness in popular sympathy.

II. The force of individual influence. The influence of this little slave girl should teach us three things.

1. The magnanimity of young natures.

2. The power of the humblest individual.

3. The dependence of the great upon the small.

III. The force of self-preservation. The instinct of self-preservation is one of the strongest in human nature. Skin for skin; all that a man hath will he give in exchange for his life. Men will spend fortunes and traverse continents in order to rid themselves of disease and prolong life. This strenuous effort for recovery from disease reminds us oral. The value of physical health. This man had lost it, and what was the world to him without it? Bishop Hall truly says of him, The basest slave in Syria would not change skins with him.

2. The neglect of spiritual health.

IV. The force of caste-feeling. And the King of Syria said, Go to; go, and I will send a letter to the King of Israel. He, forsooth, was too great to know a prophet–too great to correspond with any one but a king.

1. Caste-feeling sinks the real in the adventitious. The man who is ruled by it so exaggerates externalisms as to lose sight of those elements of moral character which constitute the dignity and determine the destiny of man. He lives in bubbles.

2. Caste-feeling curtails the region of human sympathies. He who is controlled by this feeling, has the circle of his sympathies limited not only to the outward of man, but to the outward of those only in his own sphere. All outlying his grade and class are nothing to him.

3. It antagonises the Gospel. Christ came to destroy that middle wall of partition that divides men into classes. The Gospel overtops all adventitious distinctions, and directs its doctrines, and offers its provisions to man as man.

V. The force of guilty suspicion. And it came to pass when the King of Israel had read the letter, that he rent his clothes, and said, Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man doth send unto me to recover a man of his leprosy? Wherefore, consider, I pray you, and see how he seeketh a quarrel against me? The construction that the monarch put upon the message of his royal brother was, instead of being true and liberal, the most false and ungenerous. Where this suspicion exists, one of the two, if not the two following things, are always found.

1. A knowledge of the depravity of society. The suspicious man has frequently learnt, either from observation, testimony, or experience, or all these, that there is such an amount of falsehood, and dishonesty in society, as will lead one man to take an undue advantage of another.

2. The existence of evil in himself. The suspicious man knows that he is selfish, false, dishonest, unchaste, and he believes that all men are the same.

VI. The force of remedial goodness. Though the king could not cure, there was a remedial power m Israel equal to this emergency. That power, infinite goodness delegated to Elisha. The passage suggests several points concerning this remedial power.

1. It transcends natural power. When Elisha, the man of God, had heard that the King of Israel had rent his clothes, . . . he sent to the king, saying, Wherefore hast thou rent thy clothes? let him come now to me, and he shall know that there is a prophet in Israel. The monarch felt his utter insufficiency to effect the cure. Natural science knew nothing of means to heal the leper.

2. It offends human pride.

3. It clashes with popular prejudice. Are not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? May I not wash in them and be clean?

4. It works by simple means.

5. It demands individual effort. Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God. Naaman had to go down himself to the river, and to dip himself seven times in its waters.

6. It is completely efficacious. His flesh came again like the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.

VII. The force of a new conviction. Observe–

1. The subject of the new conviction. What was the subject? That the God of Israel was the only God. He felt that it was Gods hand that healed him.

2. The developments of this new conviction. A conviction like this must prove influential in some way or other. Abstract ideas may lie dormant in the mind, but convictions are ever operative. What did it do in Naaman?

(1) It evoked gratitude. Standing with all his company before the prophet, he avowed his gratitude Now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant.

(2) It annihilated an old prejudice. Just before his cure he despised Judaea. Jordan was contemptible as compared with the rivers of Damascus. But now the very ground seems holy. He asks of the prophet liberty to take away a portion of the earth.

(3) It inspired worship. Thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt-offering nor sacrifice, but unto the Lord.

VIII. The force of associates.

IX. The force of sordid avarice. Gehazi is the illustration of this in his conduct as described in 2Ki 5:20-22. In his case we have avarice–

1. Eager in its pursuits.

2. This avarice is in one associated with the most generous of men. He was the servant of Elisha.

3. This avarice sought its end by means of falsehood.

X. The force of retributive justice. There is justice on this earth as well as remedial goodness, and Heaven often makes man the organ as well as the subject of both. Elisha, who had the remedial power, had also the retributive. Here we see retributive justice in–

1. Detecting the wrongdoer.

2. Reproving the wrongdoer.

3. It punishes the wrongdoer. (Homilist.)

Naaman the Syrian

1. There is not a man or woman living, however happy or prosperous, in whose description sooner or later we do not come to a but. There is always some drawback here, some drop in every cup that needs extraction, some thorn in every path to be removed. And even though this but were not in our health and circumstances, it is always in our nature. Leprosy is Gods one great disease in the Bible to represent sin. It meant exclusion from the camp and distance from our fellowmen. Hideous and revolting in itself, it poisoned the springs of mans existence. Hence it strikingly represents that sin which is in man, and, in the absence of everything else, is the terrible but which mars and spoils the fairest earthly picture. Like man by nature, Naaman carried within him that disease which none but God could heal.

2. Contrast with this great man and honourable, the little maid. Torn away from her home and friends by rude hands, and probably amid the bitter tears of parental affection, she had been taken captive and sold as a slave. But amid all these discouraging circumstances she possessed a secret to which Naaman, with all his greatness, was a stranger. She knew of God and Gods healing grace. Naaman felt the disease, she knew the healing. This made all the difference between her and Naaman. This makes all the difference between a Christian and one who is not. This makes the mighty difference between one man and another.

3. God disposes each lot in life. Naaman has his own peculiar sorrow, and so has the little maid hers. They are widely different. Yet God measures out to each one their position and circumstances, their blessings and afflictions, as will best show forth His glory. God had been leading her, through that strange way, to do for this great man and honourable what he could not do for himself, nor any one in the royal court of Benhadad. The Lord had need of her for this His great work. Before passing on, notice another truth. Nanmans heavy trial had no power to subdue his haughty spirit. Sorrow of itself can never sanctify. Men may pass through Gods hottest furnaces and only come out harder than ever. It is only when the Holy Spirit uses our sorrows–when we put them into His hands to use–that they will ever be made a blessing to us. Let us learn again, from the difference between Naaman and this little maid, that inequalities of social position are divine, and are means of blessing. We have seen two characters here, both of them representative–Naaman and the little maid. Let us now look at a third–Benhadad, King of Syria. In him we have man in his loftiness and arrogance. Nothing can be done, he feels, but through him. He prepares his litter, his gold and silver and raiment. All this is worldly religion–mans proud thoughts about Gods ways. And yet all he does is but labour lost. There is yet another character–Joram, King of Israel. Here is a man who knows about the true God, knows the revelation of His will, knows of the true Elisha at his very door, and yet, with all this knowledge, unable to take his true place and act Gods part in directing the poor leper to the healer in Israel. Here is the man of religion, of true religion, of many privileges above others around him, yet all lost, and he utterly unable to direct the diseased one to the saviour prophet!

4. Let us now turn to the saviour prophet, Elisha, and his dealing with the poor leper. The King of Syria prepares a great price–7500 value of our money. Naaman sets out with it on his journey, and King Jehoram acquiesces m it. Thus the idea of each is that the healing is to be obtained by a price. It is the latent thought of every man by nature. Without money and without price is Gods Word, and this narrative of the healing of Naaman, and Elishas dealings with him, are an illustration of this. And what is Elishas message? Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean. How simple, how plain! Then what am I to do with the 7500 and the raiment? Has it no value? None whatever in the eyes of Elisha. None whatever before God. Take it back with thee as the dregs of the sinners righteousness, and learn that all thou art to receive, all that is to set thee free from sin and death and make thee a new creature in Christ Jesus, is of the free sovereign grace of God. Thus we see the pride of the natural heart. Are not Abana and Pharpar better? Here is the leper taking his own way of healing, and regarding it as better than Gods. He turned and went away in a rage. Here is the despising of God s remedy and the enmity of the natural heart showing itself. And Naaman was right. Abanas waters were clear and beautiful. Jordans were clayey and muddy. There was nothing for Sight in all this. It was only for faith. It was God choosing the base things of this world to bring to nought the mighty. Is it not so still? What is this blood of Christ? the sinner says. What! are all my prayers, my good deeds, my sacraments, all my honest efforts to do my best and to please God to go for nothing? But the grace that can provide for a leprous soul can plead with a reluctant heart. It can use a ministry as well as open a fountain; and this ministry is, like the remedy, simple and artless, and exactly suited to its end, for one is divine as the other. Like the little maid before, it is the servants now, for such are Gods means at all times. Human righteousness and greatness, and all natures fond conceits are set aside completely.

5. Observe the effects of the healing the form in which it was manifested: his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child. This is the new birth. It is put before us m this form in other parts of Scripture: if there be a Mediator with him, the One above the thousands of angels to show man (Gods) righteousness, then He is gracious unto him, and saith, Deliver him from going down to the pit; I have found the ransom. His flesh shall be fresher than a childs: he shall return to the days of his youth (Job 33:23-24). Here the same truth is brought before us. Again we have it in the New Testament: Except a man be born from above he cannot enter the kingdom of God. If any man be in Christ he is a new creature; old things are passed away: behold, all things are become new.

6. Observe, in the next place, the manifestation of this new nature in the conduct of Naaman. From this point it is seen there is a great change in him. His spirit, his tone, his language, his whole bearing seems from this moment to form a striking contrast to all that has gone before, so much so that, had his name not been mentioned, we should have said it could not possibly be the same man. And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him, and he said: Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel: now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant. Observe the fruits of the new nature here, in their order. Naaman stands with all his company before Elisha. It is not now the proud and haughty Naaman, but the subdued and humbled one. Here is the first-fruit of the Holy Spirit in his character. He was humble because he was washed. Secondly, he makes a goodly confession of the one and only God. He had learnt the true God through the virtue of His grace exerted on himself–through the health and salvation he had received from Him. This is the only way the soul can ever learn Him. Thirdly, he presses his gifts upon Elisha, not now to purchase the healing, but because he has been healed. He has been forgiven much, therefore he loves much. Fourthly, he will henceforth know no other God. To this end he seeks materials to raise an altar to the true God. And fifthly, he has now a renewed conscience, quick and sensitive about any, even apparent, departure from the God who had so blessed him. (F. Whitfield, M. A.)

Namman the Syrian

There is scarcely a story in all Scripture of deeper interest than this of Naaman, the Syrian.

I. The character and condition of Naaman. There is no mention of Naaman in the Bible, save in this connection. There is, however, a Jewish tradition as old as the time of Josephus, which identifies him as the archer whose arrow struck Ahab with his mortal wound, and thus gave deliverance to Syria. Whether this be true or not, some brave deed of Naaman had lifted him into special prominence, and crowned him with exceptional honour. But he was a leper! This made him loathsome and a burden to himself. Here we learn that no honour, no valour, no victory, can place men beyond the reach of the sorest calamities of life. These are as likely to visit the rich as the poor; are as likely to fall on princes as on peasants. No king is always happy; no prime minister of state but has his fears and sorrows, Naaman stood next the king, but he was a leper, afflicted more than many a slave in Syria. There is no possession so vast, no position so high, no attainment so conspicuous, no employment so congenial, no association so sweet, as not to have its but, revealing sorrow, or some great unmet want. There is, however, a skeleton in every home. Each heart has, and knows, its own bitterness. One reaps advantage of one kind here, another of another kind there, but every man reaps disadvantage of one kind or another. The good and ill of life are far more evenly distributed than most imagine.

II. The character and service of the little maid. She was by birth an Israelite, carried captive into Syria. There she became a servant in Naamans household. In her early home, and among her own people, she had become familiar with the worship and history of Israel. It is possible that she had met the prophet Elisha. Those homes of Israel were schools for the household. The children there were trained to believe in, and worship, the God of their fathers. History with them was sacred. With scepticism and atheism those Israelitish homes were not darkened and afflicted as our homes are. Egypt, Sinai, Samaria were all alive with Divine deliverances, which old and young alike appreciated. God was among the people, and this the children understood. The confidence of children is remarkable in the beneficence of God and in the influence of the good with Him. Children may be, not only our greatest comforters, but our wisest teachers and our divinest helpers. In their simple, childish faith they often put us to shame, and in their generous desire to serve others, often rebuke our indifference.

III. The miraculous cure. It appears that Naaman somehow heard of the desire and faith of this little maid in his home, and was encouraged to make trial of the prophet. It appears further, that, aside from the maid, none was more anxious for the cure than the king. Through the instrumentality,–possibly of some one overhearing the conversation of this maid with her mistress, or possibly of some one informed by this woman, and sent by her, or, it may be of Naaman himself, the king learned of the wish and the faith. It is more than probable that both Naaman and the king had heard of Elisha as a worker of wondrous miracles; for his fame must have reached to the farthest bounds of the kingdom. But be this as it may, the leper sighs for help, and is ready for the experiment of seeking Elisha. Poor man! There he stood at the prophets door, a leper, full of large expectations; yet dictating as to the manner of the cure, and falling into a frenzy because it was not to be effected with pomp and parade such as he thought became his rank and station. Why the prophet bade him go to Jordan instead of the waters of Damascus, he could not understand. He seems to have forgotten that Jordan belonged to the God of Israel, and that, in a miraculous cure, relation to God was of far more importance than the depth or beauty of the stream. Besides, Jordan was the river appointed; and if Naaman is to be cured by Divine power he must obey the Divine will. He was, however, proud and haughty–style and rank were offended. What now? Jordan has become a healing stream for this afflicted man. No longer shall he compare that river with the waters of Damascus. No longer shall Elisha be regarded as an enemy, or as indifferent to his welfare. To be cured of such a disease in such a manner was enough to convince Naaman of the power of God, and of Elisha as a true prophet of God. Experience is a wonderful teacher. This cure had been effected by consciously supernatural means. This he was ready to confess. (Monday Club Sermons.)

Naaman, the Syrian

I. In turning to the story of this Naaman, the first thing that I would notice is a contrast in service. We set him before us dwelling in the stately palace of the king, the commander of the kings armies; with authority to speak to the whole nation, and all men are ready to obey him: with troops of horses and hosts of chariots, and servants that wait upon him and minister to him. Altogether, in council and in camp, the foremost man in Syria. And as brave as he was wise, of whose valour many a stirring tale was told. Here is greatness: great in himself, great in his position, great in his possessions, great in his achievements, great in his authority: no element of greatness is lacking. Then do you notice how beside this word great there is set the word little; and alongside of this mighty man of valour is put the record of this captive maid? Poor little thing, her story is a very sad one. A troop of Syrians marching one day into Israel–fierce fellows, burning the homesteads of the villagers, before whom the frightened people fled to the mountains or caves–had come to some cottage, and there, it may be, tending a sick mother, too feeble to escape, or guarding some little one of the family whom she would not forsake, this girl is taken captive and carried away by the soldiers. They sell her as a slave to Naamans wife. A stranger in a strange land, with the memory of her bitter griefs–in thought and feeling, and hope and religion, severed from those about her, so she must wait upon her mistress and do her bidding, with none to befriend her. We can think of her sighing in her loneliness. Ah, me; if I were only King of Syria, or even this great lord, I would set right the wrongs of the poor folks, and bid the cruel soldiers stay at home. I would have no burning cottages, no ruined homes, and no poor captive men or maidens if I were king. How good it must be to be so great! But I am only a little maiden; what can I do? here there are so many troubles? It is dreadful to be so weak and little. And yet this little maid it is who brings deliverance to the great man of Syria, for in her are two things that are never little–a kind heart and faith in God. So, in the great world, with its sorrows, there is always room for loving-kindness and for faith in God. It is not greatness that the poor world wants mostly, not chief captains or men of valour; but love. The little, and the least, with love and faith, can always find a place for service; a service that is always blessed, and shall have its golden wages. Our measure for service is not in position, nor in gifts, nor in greatness, but in love. Her tender love and simple faith do set this little maid alongside of this great captain. Take it, I pray you, for whom it is meant, and give thanks to God. Say it and sing it within yourself: If in this great world I can do nothing else, I can do this–and since I can do this I will envy none. Wherever I am I can keep a simple faith in God and a kind heart. Thank God, little one, that He has a place for thee.

II. Notice the wisdom of Naaman. He no sooner hears that there is a chance of his being cured than he sets off for the prophet. He does not despise the suggestion because it is a prophet of Israel who has the power. If this is a chance of his being cured he will go forth and seek it. He might very naturally have said, I will get my master, the King of Syria, to write a letter to the King of Israel, and he can send the prophet to see me. The prophet is much better able to travel than I am; and it is altogether more fitting that he should come here. It is an enemys country, and the people may oppose my coming, and I am ill fit to journey. I will send my horses and chariots, and a company of soldiers for his escort, and I will pay him well for his coming. So he might have said, but that will not do. He will go himself. There must be no delay. If there is a chance of being cured he will do his best to avail himself of that chance. At once everybody in the place is set to work to hasten his going. Now do not let this Naaman the Syrian rise up in judgment against us. We have heard that in Jesus Christ is our salvation; that there is One who is able to break the power of our sin, to rid us from its loathsomeness, and to make us whole. To us the testimony concerning the salvation which is in Christ Jesus comes from ten thousand who have found in Him their deliverance from the curse and power of sin, the cleansing from its foul leprosy. Think if he should bid his musicians sing of this: Elisha, and chant his greatness, and week after week should sit and listen to the story of the captive maiden. I like to hear her, says he, she is so much in earnest, and her gestures are so graceful, and her words so well chosen. O fool! and all the time the leprosy is eating into him with horrid cruelty, deeper and deeper, and every day he is growing more hideous and scarred, and his case becomes more desperate. And the longer he delays the more he questions about going at all. And now the King of Syria comes to see him. Well, have you been? he asks. Been where? saith Naaman. Why, to the great prophet that can heal thee of thy leprosy, cries the king, wondering. No, saith Naaman, I have not exactly been to him, you know. But I have heard all about him, and have got quite familiar with his name and history, and what he has said and done. But surely, cries the astonished king, it were as well never to have heard of him if you do not go. Then one day the tidings spread, Naaman is dead; died of his leprosy. Dead! and he knew so much about the prophet. And in the palace is heard the wail of the little maiden, Would God my lord had gone to the prophet that is in Samaria. Alas! it is only in religion that men play the fool like this: only in the deeper and more dreadful leprosy of the soul! Can you imagine any greater folly, hearing of Christ as the Saviour, year in and year out, and yet never coming to Him?

III. Notice the needless preparation. (M. G. Pearse.)

Naaman, the leper

Men who are called to like positions in our own day are generally the objects of envy. Doubtless, Naaman was such an object in the eyes of many. But how greatly were they mistaken in the estimate they formed. Naaman knew, before others knew, that the leprosy had marked him as its victim. The small spot, herald of the approaching disease, was upon him; the worm was at the root of the gourd; the cancer was beginning to prey upon his very vitals; the heart was already feeding upon its own bitterness. Naaman, the illustrious,–Naaman, the captain of the kings hosts,–Naaman, with all his greatness, must henceforth carry about with him a monitor of his own weakness, yea, his own sinfulness. And, upon the face of the record, do we not read this lesson,–

I. The sinfulness of pride in the sight of God? All pride will be humbled in like manner. God resisteth the proud (Jam 4:6) always, at all times, and in all eases. He that exalteth himself shall be abased (Luk 14:11). Pride is the idolatry of self. Where pride reigns, God cannot reign, but God will judge. Let each beware of pride. Pride does not help a man to fill his station; it leads him to overstep his station. Humility ennobles, for it is a Divine grace; but pride degrades, for it is earth-born, a satanic spirit. If the proud man does not seek the throne of grace, and humble himself there, pride will prove his ruin.

II. Another truth, of which the experience of Naaman may remind us, is this,–our entire and absolute dependence upon God. We are not the arbiters of our own destiny. We cannot determine our own future. Even to-days bread is dependent on Gods bounty. As He will, is the law of our condition, absolutely and without qualification. Naaman, the captain of the host of Syria, the mighty man of valour, was no exception to this law. In his leprosy he carried about with him a silent but a faithful monitor of the supremacy of God. There was manifestly a will above his will,–a will that had determined his affliction, irrespective of himself.

III. But there is yet another, and a principal lesson, which the experience of Naaman enforces,–the insufficiency of earthly good to confer happiness upon the possessor. Naaman possessed fame, and honour, and friends, and wealth; but he was a leper. I ask, Is there not always some but, or some if, to act as a drawback on the earthly portion? Has the man ever lived who, being of the earth, earthy, living for this world only, could say he was so happy as not to need something to be added or to be taken away? It has even become a proverb, Man never is, but always to be, blest. Is the child happy? asks one of our Puritan Fathers. He will be, when he is a man. Is the peasant satisfied? He will be, when he is rich. Is the rich man satisfied? He will be, when he is ennobled. Is the nobleman satisfied? He will be, when he is a king. Is the king satisfied? Listen! for one is speaking, Vanity of vanities, all is vanity. Each is devising a portion for himself, in which he thinks happiness will be found; but none attain happiness. Riches may be pursued and acquired; but riches cannot confer happiness. It is a true testimony, which all experience confirms: They that increase riches, increase sorrow with them. There is always some but attached to the best estate. The knowledge that God is our God for ever and ever–that we are reconcried to Him by faith in Christ Jesus–that He will be our guide, the director of our steps, even until death,–this is the knowledge which alone discovers to us the secret of happiness–this is the knowledge which places in our possession the key which may be said to open to man a Paradise regained. (C. Bullock.)

Some modern lessons from an ancient story

This whole story of Naaman, ancient as it is, is not one out of relation with our present lives. It is a story which can easily teach us some most valuable modern lessons.

I. The universal subtraction from our addition. Consider them in Naamans case.

1. Consider the addition.

(1) Captain of the host of the King of Syria.

(2) A great man with his master.

(3) And honourable.

(4) Because by him the Lord had given deliverance unto Syria.

(5) He was also a mighty man in valour.

How many items in this addition, and how large the sum of their values–high military command, great favour at court, splendid reputation, success, great personal bravery.

2. Consider the subtraction–one vast damaging item, but he was a leper. Take a New-Testament instance, that of Paul (2Co 12:1-21).

(1) Addition. Rapture (2Ki 5:2). Presence in Paradise (2Ki 5:4). Vision of the unspeakable glories (2Ki 5:4). Abundant revelations (2Ki 5:7).

(2) Subtraction–thorn in the flesh (2Ki 5:7). Are not those instances more or less exactly parallel in our own lives? You can add together many a favouring circumstance and possession: then here is sure to come the subtracting–but. Why is this? Why, in our common lot, must there be this universal subtraction from our addition? If this life were all, and were intended to be all, it would be cruel. But there is another life. These subtractions from our additions are allowed, lest we should somnolently settle into the feeling that this life is all.

II. That of faithfulness to ones religion in strange place and circumstance. The little Hebrew maid (2Ki 5:2-4) how unlike her are those professing Christians who, moving to a new place or city, will not use their church letters but drop into the sad throng of non-churchgoers!

III. The unwisdom of making beforehand plans for god.

1. Behold the ancient picture–the letter; the presents worth $50,000; the ostentatious arrival before the prophets door; the message; the reply and rage (2Ki 5:11-12).

2. Behold the modern counterpart. Simple was the remedy the prophet ordered–the washing in the Jordan. So simple is the Gospel–personal acceptance of Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord. But men, thinking their thoughts, making beforehand plans for God, say, Are not the Abana and Pharpar of my moralities better? or, Are not the Abana and Pharpar of my penances better? or Are not the Abana and Pharpar of some shining experience I have imagined better?

IV. The wisdom of doing first what God says (2Ki 5:14). Have you not been delaying, and thinking, and imagining, and holding to your way long enough? Now, in the beginning of this New Year, will you not wisely submit to God, as Naaman did? Will you not accept Jesus Christ and so, in the only possible way, find forgiveness for your sin? (Homiletic Review.)

The method of grace

There is much modern application in these Old Testament circumstances. There is so much humaneness in the Bible which makes it always a new book. Principles know nothing of years. Truth is not hampered by time. The Scriptures are as old as eternity, and yet as new as every morning. The Gospel in the narrative may thus be developed.

I. The gospel appeals to the man, not his accidents. The prophets message was to the leper, not to the courtier. Naaman came with his horses and with his pageantry. He came in a lordly air, but the prophet did not even meet him. The true man is never moved by glitter. Some of us would have bowed as sycophants; it would have been the reddest-letter day of our lives, if the premier of Syria had stood at our door. Even if a trinket, or a book, be given to us by a royal hand, we transmit it as an heirloom. There is a nobility of office, but there is a higher nobility of character. There is a kingliness of name, but there is also a kingliness of nature. We should not judge by appearance, but judge by righteous judgment. The prophet saw through all the haughtiness of Naaman, leprous man. God sees through all lifes accidents–all our intelligence, parade, wealth, and respectability–a heart of corruption and sorrow. He sees that the imagination of the thoughts of man are evil continually. The message is to man, not to his circumstances. It speaks to us as sinners. It speaks, not to contingencies, but to the human nature that is in us all. It was man that fell, and to man the message is sent. He came to seek and to save that which was lost.

II. The gospel message and conditions are always simple. It speaks in a language all can understand. It speaks to the heart, and the heart has but one language, the wide world over. The tongue speaks many a vernacular, and the lips chatter many dialects, but the hearts voice never varies. The great universal heart beats in us all. The Gospel sees us fallen, and it sends forth the common message and a universal welcome. Come unto Me all ye that labour and are heavy laden. The message is one, but its emphasis is varied according to our deafness, and its strokes to our hardness. The stone is hard, and the sculptors mallet must be heavy, and his chisels sharp. The wound is deep, and the corrosive must burn, and the instrument probe deeply. The jewel is encased in adamant, and the lapidary must select his instruments accordingly. Our prejudices are great, our hearts are haughty, and the conditions are adapted. Christianity is to us what we are. Loving in disposition, it speaks in a still small voice. Impenitent in heart, it speaks in thunder-tones. Some are so deaf that they can only hear thunder; others are so divinely sensitive, they can hear angels whispers, and Gods steps on the wind. According to our heart-life, God is either a Father, or a consuming fire. A revengeful God is the creation of a wicked life. The Gospel speaks to the heart, and of necessity must temper its voice to its disposition and difficulties. It is a message so simple that a child can understand it, and yet its inexhaustibleness challenges the highest mind. So plain, that the wayfaring man need not Stumble; and yet its sublimity creates a sensation new in angel bosom. Its simplicity reveals its wonders, as its stoop manifests its height.

III. The gospel conditions are repulsive to human prejudices. We might swear that it is night when the sun shines, but the light would only prove our insanity. We may curse the Book, but its truth is inviolable. We may blaspheme the Gospel, but the loudness of our voice may only reveal the perfectness of our idiocy. How presumptuous is man?

1. How we presume on Gods ways? I thought he would surely come out to me, etc.

2. How we presume on Gods means? Are not Abana and Pharpar . . . better than all the waters of Israel?

3. How we presume on Gods patience? And he turned away in a rage.

4. How we presume on self-sufficiency? Some great thing, wouldst thou not have done it? The conditions of the Gospel may arouse our resentment, but to resist is to be blind to our best interests. The prophet said: Wash and be clean; and Naaman turned away in a rage. Christ says: Sell all thou hast and give to the poor; and the young man went away sorrowing. The Gospel says: Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved; and we are disgusted with the conditions. The Cross to the Jew may be a stumbling-block, and to the Greek, foolishness, but to as many as believe, it is the power of God unto salvation. The answer to all our prejudices is, that it is Gods appointed way. There is no royal road. The conditions are, believe and live, and the authority is, he that believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned. Our prejudices may recoil, and we may turn away in wrath. But we turn our face from the sun only to see our shadow. (W. Mincher.)

Naaman

Let us cast our eyes upon Naaman himself; and then upon the method of his restoration.

I. Naamans condition.

1. Official.

2. Personal

3. Bodily. But he was a leper–the one drawback, and that a terrible one.

II. Naamans restoration.

1. First notice the providence of God. It was by means of a little captive maid.

2. Thus, what must have seemed a great calamity to the little maids friends and to herself–to be captured and carried away into an idolatrous country–became a blessing.

3. Then we have the picture of Naaman, with his equipage and servants, in state at the door of Elisha, and the prophet sending a message to him with the command in the text.

4. Let us see the moral and spiritual purposes of Elishas treatment. The spirit of pride had to be subdued. The prophets method is unexpected, but not without design. There is no prayer or personal contact, only a message by a servant.

5. But for the kindly expostulation of the servants, Naaman would have returned into his own country a leper, as he set out from it.

III. Lessons.

1. From instances of natural virtue in the heathen world, we learn that nature, though fallen, is not totally corrupt. We must keep a middle course between Pelagius and Calvin.

2. What weak and often unworthy means God uses for making known His truth!–the enslaved Israelite maid!

3. How children should strive to remember what they were taught in youth about God and His ministers, that it may be a blessing to themselves and to others! (Canon Hutchings.)

Greatness secondary to goodness

The great Augustine discovered this when a young man. His father, a heathen, had said to the lad, Be great. His mother, Monica, a devoted Christian, had whispered, Be good. I will be both, he answered, but great first. And when, after years of folly and then of philosophy, he resolved to be good, he found himself a slave to sin. Not till he cast himself wholly on Divine power and grace did he gain the new heart. Then, the things he had once been afraid to lose he cast from him with joy. Thou expellest them, he cried, in an ecstasy of joy, and comest in Thyself instead of them. Thus Augustine the sinner became Augustine the saint.

But he was a leper.

The fruits of adversity

How many might be tempted to envy him, how many of his fellow-men might be tempted to say, within themselves, Would that I were in his place, would that I could have done with all these anxious cares, and weary disappointments which I meet with every day! Would that I could be free from all this drudgery, and see, at any rate, some result of all my toil! Here am I fighting every day against difficulty and hardship, yet gaining never a victory; here am I passing the best part of my days in obscurity, with never a prospect of rising in the world; there seems to be nothing for me but toils and cares from morning till night, from years end to years end. Would that I could be successful in life as Naaman was, could reach a high and honoured position as he did! Yet stay, Naaman has his drawback, he is not by any means the happy man you take him to be. But he was a leper. Do not these words–five in English, but only two in the original Hebrew–seem to throw a deep, dark shadow over the whole life of Naaman? We cannot possibly know, as well as Naaman did, all that those words meant. None but a leper can truly know the meaning of leprosy. Yet we do know that it was something terrible; that it was a serious affliction; that it made life dark, gloomy, unbearable. There is, in fact, something in the life-history of every man which gives, or should give to him, lowly views of himself, which is intended to keep down his pride, and to remind him that this world is a pathway leading to a country where alone there is nothing to mar our pleasure, no interruption to our happiness, where alone there is no drawback. There is a but in the history of every soul on this side of the grave. That rich man you see, and upon whose wealth you may often have looked with envious eye, is the victim of some serious disorder; death is, as it were, staring him in the face. That strong and healthy man, who seems able and willing to do battle in the great world, who possesses an energy equalled by few, and surpassed by none, is yet a poor man; there is a large family depending upon him; many mouths to be filled, many backs to be clothed; and that strong, willing worker, heaves a sigh as he thinks that his earnings will prove miserably inadequate to the needs of his household. And, if you trace the matter right through, you will find that this drawback is a very common experience, known and felt not only by the poor, but also by the well-to-do; not only by those low down in the world, but also by those occupying high positions. And yet there is a value in these drawbacks; they are not so utterly hopeless as many would feign imagine; we are apt to look upon them as a great evil, with not a single redeeming feature. Not a few might feel disposed to ask, Why should these things exist at all? Why cannot I be allowed to pass through life without having to encounter all these difficulties–these things which interfere so greatly with my happiness? Life is short, why should it be made miserable? Why should I not be able to enjoy, to my hearts content, these days and weeks, these months and years, which are passing all too quickly away? These are the questions which probably are going forth from thousands of hearts to-day; they seem practical questions; let us deal with them in a practical way. Let us bear in mind that these things come to us not by chance, they are sent. That difficulty of yours, that matter which is costing you so many weary days, and sleepless nights, that great heart-sorrow, that heavy burden has not visited you at random as it were, but has been sent to you; that is the first thought, the first fact to be carefully remembered. And the Sender; Who is the Sender? God, the God who loves you with an amazing love, pities you with wondrous pity, sends you that very thing which is the cause of much vexation, and which you could heartily wish had never been sent. Brethren, it seems strange, almost like a contradiction, but it is neither. Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: but rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christs sufferings; that, when His glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy (1Pe 4:19; 1Pe 4:13). This is the kind action of a loving Father; He is training us and educating us for heaven. Never let us forget that, and honestly let us ask ourselves what would be the result if we had everything just as we wished. If, in this life, there were no difficulties, or trials, or sorrows to meet, what feelings and thoughts would take possession of us? Should we be filled with earnest longing to reach the heavenly city? Much of the choicest, holiest portions of a mans character is formed in those seasons of his life which call forth the pity of those about him. When they are pitying, heaven is rejoicing; rejoicing that the feet are turned Zionwards, that the wanderer is returning home. Brethren, let it be so with us. Remember they who suffer with Christ shall also reign with Him, and that, All things work together for good to those who love God. (E. F. Chapman, M. A.)

The conquest of disadvantages

1. Among the figures of the Old Testament there is hardly any more interesting or more attractive than that of Naaman the Syrian. He belongs, indeed, to a class of persons which never fails to arrest notice and evoke admiration, the class of those who, afflicted by physical disadvantages which are commonly incapacitating, have such constancy of purpose, such strength of will, such nobility of character, that they triumph over their infirmities, and take rank among the leaders of mankind. Habitual suffering does incapacitate for exertion; physical infirmity disables the will and abashes the courage. Marked out from the rest by defects, repulsive or ludicrous, or practically disadvantageous, men are humbled and cowed by a consciousness of inferiority, which not rarely becomes a vague sense of wrong, a dreary feeling of unmerited exile from the common society, and along with these, an embitterment of character, which, in its turn, adds yet further obstacles to frank fellowship with ordinary folk. The annals of the English monarchy, for instance, contain no worthier names than those of Alfred, the traditional founder of our constitution, and of William III., its champion and restorer, and both those admirable sovereigns were chronic invalids. Our literature has no greater name than that of Milton, who was a blind man when he wrote his principal poem; no name more venerable than that of Johnson, who from childhood was afflicted with a repulsive malady. It would be hard to find among modern politicians a name more justly honoured than that of Henry Fawcett, whose sight was destroyed by a lamentable accident when he was twenty-five years old, but who bore the calamity with a superlative courage, and won for himself a niche in the Temple of Fame. These show the class to which Naaman belonged, the class of the intrinsically heroic, to whom, whatever their creed or career, the description of Scripture seems properly to belong, who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the power Of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, from weakness were made strong, waxed mighty in war, turned to flight armies of aliens.

2. It is matter of common experience that the class of heroes which Naaman represents, is a very large class; we all have known and could name from among our acquaintance persons who belong to it. Nay, in some sense, we all ought ourselves to come within it, for there is none of us, however fortunately placed, who is altogether without some disadvantage, which is capable of daunting and disabling us. Of course–if you will–this is the tritest of moralisations. But he knows little of human life as it proceeds in its cycles of customary work and common association, who has not discovered that immense injury to character, and waste of energy, and loss of happiness arise from the single cause of that sustained resentment of disadvantage which is one of the commonest of human faults. Perhaps there are reasons why, under the circumstances of modern life, such resentment should tend to increase among us. It is matter of common observation that among all classes there is a passion for enjoyment, which easily induces disgust of work and discontent with all limitations of liberty. Religion, we shall all agree, is the source of fortitude and the spur of moral effort. When religion loses authority over the will, and fails to move the heart, men fall inevitably under the empire of circumstance, having nothing outside themselves to sustain them under misfortune, nothing beyond the native resources of character.

3. The disadvantage in Naamans case was one for which we may believe that he was not personally responsible; the hideous disease by which he was stricken may have been inherited, or contracted by accidental contact with persons similarly afflicted, or the result of privations endured in his campaigns. He could not, in any case, blame himself as the cause of his calamity. In this respect the valorous Syrian represents a great multitude of afflicted persons. I notice that Mr. Samuel Laing ascribes the prevalence of pessimistic theories among us to this very circumstance. In ruder states of society, he says, such weaklings were got rid of by the summary process of being killed off, while with the more humane and refined arrangements of modern times they live on and weary deaf heaven with their fruitless cries. It must be allowed that weak health and chronic pain ordinarily tend to induce such gloomy and morbid mental dispositions, and it is impossible not to feel compassion for those who, however deluded, are still the victims of their own undeserved misfortunes; but here, as in all other human affairs, there is an extraordinary latent power in man himself, which, if brought into action, can turn back the natural tendency of his circumstances, and bend those very circumstances to new and higher interests. The magnanimity of the ancient Stoics rises in the case of the sickly and crippled Epictetus to a genuine piety. Dare to look up to God, he says, and say, Deal with me for the future as Thou wilt: I am of the same mind as Thou art; I am Thine; I refuse nothing that pleaseth Thee; lead me where Thou wilt; clothe me in any dress Thou choosest; is it Thy will that I should hold the office of a magistrate, that I should be in the condition of a private man, stay here or be in exile, be poor, be rich? I will make Thy defence to men in behalf of all these conditions. There is a ring of personal affection in such words which argues that the Stole philosopher was (though he knew it not) a Christian in spirit. St. Paul s curiously similar language includes the confession of a discipleship which Epictetus could not own. I know how to be abased.

4. But, though physical afflictions that are undeserved may bring a sore strain to bear on the character, and can hardly fail, save in the case of a few extraordinary persons, to cast a gloom over the mind, and give a melancholy tinge to the whole life, still it is not in such calamities that the most disabling and daunting influences are found. There are men among us, richly endowed with gifts of intellect, of character, of fortune, who are held in a state of degrading idleness by the disabling memory of some moral treason in the past. Men wonder at them, knowing nothing and suspecting nothing–but to their own consciousness the sinister fact stands out with threatening prominence. They have lost faith in themselves; self-respect, the backbone of character, is broken. I might borrow the words of the text to describe such a man–a mighty man of valour, but a leper. (H. H. Henson, B. D.)

The buts of life

There you have a romance and a tragedy summed up in a single verse. You only need a little imagination to fill in the details, and lo! you have a book of human life, with its prides and humblings, its grandeurs, and its shames. The writer tells you in the same breath of this mans glory and of his awful cross. But! Ah, if we could only get rid of that little word, how happy we should be! Alas! it is always popping in to disturb our self-congratulating reflections, It drops into human speech at every turn. It is found at every stage of human experience. I hear it every day in the common talk of the people about me. I catch my own lips dropping it unawares times without number. There is always something to qualify our congratulations, praises, and thanksgivings. Fortune has dealt well with you, but! You have had a smooth and prosperous career, but! Your husband is almost perfection, but! Your children are doing well, but! That friend of yours has many admirable qualities, but! Your employer is generous and considerate, but! Your partner is honest and capable, but! Your church is orthodox and peaceable, and pre-eminently respectable, but! Your minister is a wonderful preacher, but! There is always that little or big cloud athwart your sunlight, always the wasp in the honey-cup, always the seamy side to your bliss, always the dull leaden background to the shield whose face is all gold. Mercy and judgment meet, and the darkness and the light make up one picture in every human lot. Naaman was a great man, and honourable, but he was a leper. Now sometimes we forget this other side in our thoughts of others, and frequently we make too much of it in thoughts of ourselves. And if the other side relates to character, we reverse the process, making too much of it in others and overlooking it in ourselves.

I. Remember that every Naaman has his cross. The side of the shield which he shows to the world is perhaps polished gold, but he who walks behind it sees the heavy iron casing. How foolish we are to envy the great their greatness, the rich their riches, the honourable their honours, and the wise their wisdom, and to fancy that because they have more of these things than we they are necessarily happier and more contented. And how blind we are to overlook our own blessings and joys, and repine because others seem more fortunate than we. Uneasy is the head that wears any sort of crown. Where Fortune drops its choicest honours, it imposes its heaviest burdens, and the path which is lined with roses has most of the prickly thorns of care. The more brilliant the sunlight, the darker the shadows. The more a man gets his own way, the more he frets when he cannot get his own way. You cannot climb high to pluck the choicest fruit and flowers without getting many a prick and bruise. The man who wears purple and fine linen before the world has often underneath, if you could see it, rough sackcloth and chafing cords; and there is a cloud of cares weighing like midnight on many a heart in which outward fortune seems constantly to smile. In the old ballad the queen tides by on her gallant palfrey, with cloth of gold and glittering jewels, and splendid array of attendants, and the village maiden, looking out of her lattice window, sighs, Oh! to be a queen! while the queen, looking up, sighs far more deeply, and whispers to her heart, Oh! to be free from all this burden, and like that happy careless maiden! Yes; there are cold blasts on the heights which those below never feel. And many a time, when all the things of the world go well with a man, his inner life is anything but right with God. The leprosy of doubt, or the leprosy of sin has crept over all his thoughts, and corrupted his human affections, and put a withering blight upon his world, and he knows nothing of the peace and gladness in which your simple faith walks continually.

II. You are not likely to forget your own cross. No; but do not make too much of it. No doubt there is a seamy side to your life. It is not all sunlight. But it is not well to keep the seamy side always uppermost and talk as if tears and cares and worries were your meat and drink continually. Why cannot we let our cheerful thoughts have free course sometimes without stopping them with that everlasting but? Yes; I have many things to be grateful for, but I That word often expresses the concentrated essence of ingratitude. It is a volume of murmurings and fretfulness bound up in three letters. Do not make too much, I repeat, of that other side. Your house is not so large as you desire. No; but maybe there is far more love and happiness in it than in many a bigger house. Your children are not all shaping as you would wish. No; but some of them, let us hope, bring brightness to your homes and put music into your hearts continually. Your business prospects are not brilliant maybe. No; but you have never lacked a sufficiency of comforts, and your way has always so far been made clear. We should be far happier and far more generous-hearted men if we did not make so much of that but in thinking of and discussing those who love us and whom we love. They please us in many things, but! Ah, well, magnify the many things, and let that other side go by. (J. Greenhough, M. A.)

Alloy in grandeur

Naaman was a mighty man, but he was a leper. Every man has some but or other in his character–something that blemishes and diminishes him–some alloy in his grandeur–some damp to his joy: he may be very happy–very good; yet, in something or other, not so good as he should be, nor so happy as he would be. (Matthew Henry.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CHAPTER V

The history of Naaman, captain of the host of the king of

Syria, a leper; who was informed by a little Israelitish

captive maid that a prophet of the Lord, in Samaria, could

cure him, 1-4.

The king of Syria sends him, with a letter and rich presents,

to the king of Israel, that he should recover him of his

leprosy, 5, 6.

On receiving the letter, the king of Israel is greatly

distressed, supposing that the Syrian king designed to seek a

quarrel with him; in desiring him to cleanse a leper, when it

was well known that none could cure that disorder but God, 7.

Elisha, hearing this, orders Naaman to be sent to him, 8.

He comes to Elisha’s house in great state, 9.

And the prophet sends a messenger to him, ordering him to wash

in Jordan seven times, and he should be made clean, 10.

Naaman is displeased that he is received with so little

ceremony, and departs in a rage, 11, 12.

His servants reason with him; he is persuaded, goes to Jordan,

washes, and is made clean, 13, 14.

He returns to Elisha; acknowledges the true God; and offers

him a present, which the prophet refuses, 15, 16.

He asks directions, promises never to sacrifice to any other

god, and is dismissed, 17-19.

Gehazi runs after him, pretends he is sent by his master for a

talent of silver and two changes of raiment; which he receives,

brings home, and hides, 20-24.

Elisha questions him; convicts him of his wickedness;

pronounces a curse of leprosy upon him, with which he is

immediately afflicted; and departs from his master a leper,

as white as snow, 25-27.

NOTES ON CHAP. V

Verse 1. Naaman, captain of the host] Of Naaman we know nothing more than is related here. Jarchi and some others say that he was the man who drew the bow at a venture, as we term it, and slew Ahab: see 1Kg 22:34, and the notes there. He is not mentioned by Josephus, nor has he any reference to this history; which is very strange, as it exists in the Chaldee, Septuagint, and Syriac.

King of Syria] The Hebrew is melech Aram, king of Aram; which is followed by the Chaldee and Arabic. The Syriac has [Syriac] Adom; but as the Syriac [Syriac] dolath is the same element as the Syriac [Syriac] rish, differing only in the position of the diacritic point, it may have been originally Aram. The Septuagint and Vulgate have Syria, and this is a common meaning of the term in Scripture. If the king of Syria be meant, it must be Ben-hadad; and the contemporary king of Israel was Jehoram.

A great man] He was held in the highest esteem.

And honourable] Had the peculiar favour and confidence of his master; and was promoted to the highest trusts.

Had given deliverance unto Syria] That is, as the rabbins state, by his slaying Ahab, king of Israel; in consequence of which the Syrians got the victory.

A mighty man in valour] He was a giant, and very strong, according to the Arabic. He had, in a word, all the qualifications of an able general.

But he was a leper.] Here was a heavy tax upon his grandeur; he was afflicted with a disorder the most loathsome and the most humiliating that could possibly disgrace a human being. God often, in the course of his providence, permits great defects to be associated with great eminence, that he may hide pride from man; and cause him to think soberly of himself and his acquirements.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

A great man with his master; in great power and favour with the king of Syria. Honourable; highly esteemed, both for his quality and success. By him the Lord had given deliverance unto Syria; which expression he useth, partly to mind the Israelites that all the hurt they had from the Tyrians was from the Lord, who used them as his rod, and gave them the successes against Israel, which are recorded; and partly to check that proud conceit which then was working, and afterwards more fully discovered itself, in the Israelitish nation, as if the care, and providence, and goodness of God were wholly confined to themselves, and not imparted to any other people.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

1. Naaman, captain of the host ofthe king of Syria, was a great man with his masterhighlyesteemed for his military character and success.

and honourablerather,”very rich.”

but he was a leperThisleprosy, which, in Israel, would have excluded him from society, didnot affect his free intercourse in the court of Syria.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Now Naaman, captain of the host of the king of Syria,…. The general of Benhadad’s army; for he was now king of Syria, though some think Hazael his successor was:

was a great man with his master; high in his favour and esteem:

and honourable; not only acceptable to the king, and loaded with honours by him, but greatly respected by all ranks and degrees among the people:

because by him the Lord had given deliverance unto Syria; out of the hands of their enemies, and victory over them, and particularly in the last battle with Israel, in which Ahab was slain, and, as the Jews suppose, by the hands of Naaman, [See comments on 1Ki 22:34] however, when any salvation was wrought, or victory obtained, even by Heathens, and by them over Israel, the people of God, it was of the Lord:

he was also a mighty man in valour; a very courageous valiant man:

but he was a leper; was stricken with the leprosy, which had deformed and disgraced his person, and weakened his strength, and dispirited him; all his grandeur and honour could not protect him from this loathsome disease.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Curing of Naaman from Leprosy. – 2Ki 5:1. Naaman, the commander-in-chief of the Syrian king, who was a very great man before his lord, i.e., who held a high place in the service of his king and was greatly distinguished ( , cf. Isa 3:3; Isa 9:14), because God had given the Syrians salvation (victory) through him, was as a warrior afflicted with leprosy. The has not dropped out before , nor has the copula been omitted for the purpose of sharpening the antithesis (Thenius), for the appeal to Ewald, 354, a., proves nothing, since the passages quoted there are of a totally different kind; but is a second predicate: the man was as a brave warrior leprous. There is an allusion here to the difference between the Syrians and the Israelites in their views of leprosy. Whereas in Israel lepers were excluded from human society (see at Lev 13 and 14), in Syria a man afflicted with leprosy could hold a very high state-office in the closest association with the king.

2Ki 5:2-3

And in Naaman’s house before his wife, i.e., in her service, there was an Israelitish maiden, whom the Syrians had carried off in a marauding expedition ( : they had gone out in (as) marauding bands). She said to her mistress: “O that my lord were before the prophet at Samaria! (where Elisha had a house, 2Ki 6:32), he would free him from his leprosy.” , to receive (again) from leprosy, in the sense of “to heal,” may be explained from Num 12:14-15, where is applied to the reception of Miriam into the camp again, from which she had been excluded on account of her leprosy.

2Ki 5:4-5

When Naaman related this to his lord (the king), he told him to go to Samaria furnished with a letter to the king of Israel; and he took with him rich presents as compensation for the cure he was to receive, viz., ten talents of silver, about 25,000 thalers (3750 – Tr.); 600 shekels (= two talents) of gold, about 50,000 thalers (7500); and ten changes of clothes, a present still highly valued in the East (see the Comm. on Gen 45:22). This very large present was quite in keeping with Naaman’s position, and was not too great for the object in view, namely, his deliverance from a malady which would be certainly, even if slowly, fatal.

2Ki 5:6-7

When the king of Israel (Joram) received the letter of the Syrian king on Naaman’s arrival, and read therein that he was to cure Naaman of his leprosy ( , and now, – showing in the letter the transition to the main point, which is the only thing communicated here; cf. Ewald, 353, b.), he rent his clothes in alarm, and exclaimed, “Am I God, to be able to kill and make alive?” i.e., am I omnipotent like God? (cf. Deu 32:39; 1Sa 2:6); “for he sends to me to cure a man of his leprosy.” The words of the letter , “so cure him,” were certainly not so insolent in their meaning as Joram supposed, but simply meant: have him cured, as thou hast a wonder-working prophet; the Syrian king imagining, according to his heathen notions of priests and gotes, that Joram could do what he liked with his prophets and their miraculous powers. There was no ground, therefore, for the suspicion which Joram expressed: “for only observe and see, that he seeks occasion against me.” to seek occasion, sc. for a quarrel (cf. Jdg 14:4).

2Ki 5:8

When Elisha heard of this, he reproved the king for his unbelieving alarm, and told him to send the man to him, “that he may learn that there is a prophet in Israel.”

2Ki 5:9-12

When Naaman stopped with his horses and chariot before the house of Elisha, the prophet sent a messenger out to him to say, “Go and wash thyself seven times in the Jordan, and thy flesh will return to thee, i.e., become sound, and thou wilt be clean.” , return, inasmuch as the flesh had been changed through the leprosy into festering matter and putrefaction. The reason why Elisha did not go out to Naaman himself, is not to be sought for in the legal prohibition of intercourse with lepers, as Ephraem Syrus and many others suppose, nor in his fear of the leper, as Thenius thinks, nor even in the wish to magnify the miracle in the eyes of Naaman, as C. a Lapide imagines, but simply in Naaman’s state of mind. This is evident from his exclamation concerning the way in which he was treated. Enraged at his treatment, he said to his servant (2Ki 5:11, 2Ki 5:12): “I thought, he will come out to me and stand and call upon the name of Jehovah his God, and go with his hand over the place (i.e., move his hand to and fro over the diseased places), and take away the leprosy.” , the leprous = the disease of leprosy, the scabs and ulcers of leprosy. “Are not Abana and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? (for the combination of with , see Ewald, 174f.) Should I not bathe in them, and become clean?” With these words he turned back, going away in a rage. Naaman had been greatly strengthened in the pride, which is innate in every natural man, by the exalted position which he held in the state, and in which every one bowed before him, and served him in the most reverential manner, with the exception of his lord the king; and he was therefore to receive a salutary lesson of humiliation, and at the same time was also to learn that he owed his cure not to any magic touch from the prophet, but solely to the power of God working through him. – Of the two rivers of Damascus, Abana or Amana (the reading of the Keri with the interchange of the labials and , see Son 4:8) is no doubt the present Barada or Barady (Arab. brd, i.e., the cold river), the Chrysorrhoas (Strabo, xvi. p. 755; Plin. h. n. 18 or 16), which rises in the table-land to the south of Zebedany, and flows through this city itself, and then dividing into two arms, enters two small lakes about 4 3/4 hours to the east of the city. The Pharpar is probably the only other independent river of any importance in the district of Damascus, namely, the Avaj, which arises from the union of several brooks around Sa’sa’, and flows through the plain to the south of Damascus into the lake Heijny (see Rob. Bibl. Researches, p. 444). The water of the Barada is beautiful, clear and transparent (Rob.), whereas the water of the Jordan is turbid, “of a clayey colour” (Rob. Pal. ii. p. 256); and therefore Naaman might very naturally think that his own native rivers were better than the Jordan.

2Ki 5:13

His servants then addressed him in a friendly manner, and said, “My father, if the prophet had said to thee a great thing (i.e., a thing difficult to carry out), shouldst thou not have done it? how much more then, since he has said to thee, Wash, and thou wilt be clean?” , my father, is a confidential expression arising from childlike piety, as in 2Ki 6:21 and 1Sa 24:12; and the etymological jugglery which traces from = = (Ewald, Gr. 358, Anm.), or from (Thenius), is quite superfluous (see Delitzsch on Job, vol. ii. p. 265, transl.). – … is a conditional clause without (see Ewald, 357, b.), and the object is placed first for the sake of emphasis (according to Ewald, 309, a.). , how much more (see Ewald, 354, c.), sc. shouldst thou do what is required, since he has ordered thee so small and easy a thing.

2Ki 5:14

Naaman then went down (from Samaria to the Jordan) and dipped in Jordan seven times, and his flesh became sound ( as in 2Ki 5:10) like the flesh of a little boy. Seven times, to show that the healing was a work of God, for seven is the stamp of the works of God.

2Ki 5:15-16

After the cure had been effected, he returned with all his train to the man of God with this acknowledgment: “Behold, I have found that there is no God in all the earth except in Israel,” and with the request that he would accept a blessing (a present, , as in Gen 33:11; 1Sa 25:27, etc.) from him, which the prophet, however, stedfastly refused, notwithstanding all his urging, that he might avoid all appearance of selfishness, by which the false prophets were actuated.

2Ki 5:17-18

Then Naaman said: , “and not” = and if not, (lxx; not “and O,” according to Ewald, 358, b., Anm.), “let there be given to thy servant (= to me) two mules’ burden of earth (on the construction see Ewald, 287, h.), for thy servant will no more make (offer) burnt-offerings and slain-offerings to any other gods than Jehovah. May Jehovah forgive thy servant in this thing, when my lord (the king of Syria) goeth into the house of Rimmon, to fall down (worship) there, and he supports himself upon my hand, that I fall down (with him) in the house of Rimmon; if I (thus) fall down in the house of Rimmon, may,” etc. It is very evident from Naaman’s explanation, “for thy servant,” etc., that he wanted to take a load of earth with him out of the land of Israel, that he might be able to offer sacrifice upon it to the God of Israel, because he was still a slave to the polytheistic superstition, that no god could be worshipped in a proper and acceptable manner except in his own land, or upon an altar built of the earth of his own land. And because Naaman’s knowledge of God was still adulterated with superstition, he was not yet prepared to make an unreserved confession before men of his faith in Jehovah as the only true God, but hoped that Jehovah would forgive him if he still continued to join outwardly in the worship of idols, so far as his official duty required. Rimmon (i.e., the pomegranate) is here, and probably also in the local name Hadad-rimmon (Zec 12:11), the name of the supreme deity of the Damascene Syrians, and probably only a contracted form of Hadad-rimmon, since Hadad was the supreme deity or sun-god of the Syrians (see at 2Sa 8:3), signifying the sun-god with the modification expressed by Rimmon, which has been differently interpreted according to the supposed derivation of the word. Some derive the name from = , as the supreme god of heaven, like the of Sanchun. (Cler., Seld., Ges. thes. p. 1292); others from , a pomegranate, as a faecundantis , since the pomegranate with its abundance of seeds is used in the symbolism of both Oriental and Greek mythology along with the Phallus as a symbol of the generative power (vid., Bhr, Symbolik, ii. pp. 122,123), and is also found upon Assyrian monuments (vid., Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, p. 343); others again, with less probability, from , jaculari , as the sun-god who vivifies and fertilizes the earth with his rays, like the ; and others from = Arab. rmm, computruit, as the dying winter sun (according to Movers and Hitzig; see Leyrer in Herzog’s Cyclopaedia). – The words “and he supports himself upon my hand” are not to be understood literally, but are a general expressly denoting the service which Naaman had to render as the aide-de-camp to his king (cf. 2Ki 7:2, 2Ki 7:17). For the Chaldaic form , see Ewald, 156, a. – In the repetition of the words “if I fall down in the temple of Rimmon,” etc., he expresses the urgency of his wish.

2Ki 5:19

Elisha answered, “Go in peace,” wishing the departing Syrian the peace of God upon the road, without thereby either approving or disapproving the religious conviction which he had expressed. For as Naaman had not asked permission to go with his king into the temple of Rimmon, but had simply said, might Jehovah forgive him or be indulgent with him in this matter, Elisha could do nothing more, without a special command from God, than commend the heathen, who had been brought to belief in the God of Israel as the true God by the miraculous cure of his leprosy, to the further guidance of the Lord and of His grace.

(Note: Most of the earlier theologians found in Elisha ‘ s words a direct approval of the religious conviction expressed by Naaman and his attitude towards idolatry; and since they could not admit that a prophet would have permitted a heathen alone to participate in idolatrous ceremonies, endeavoured to get rid of the consequence resulting from it, viz., licitam ergo esse Christianis , seu symbolizationem et communicationem cum ceremonia idololatrica, either by appealing to the use of and to the distinction between incurvatio regis voluntaria et religiosa (real worship) and incurvatio servilis et coacta Naemani, quae erat politica et civilis (mere prostration from civil connivance), or by the ungrammatical explanation that Naaman merely spoke of what he had already done, not of what he would do in future (vid., Pfeiffer, Dub. vex. p. 445ff., and J. Meyer, ad Seder Olam, p. 904ff., Budd., and others). – Both are unsatisfactory. The dreaded consequence falls of itself if we only distinguish between the times of the old covenant and those of the new. Under the old covenant the time had not yet come in which the heathen, who came to the knowledge of the true deity of the God of Israel, could be required to break off from all their heathen ways, unless they would formally enter into fellowship with the covenant nation.)

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Naaman’s Leprosy.

B. C. 894.

      1 Now Naaman, captain of the host of the king of Syria, was a great man with his master, and honourable, because by him the LORD had given deliverance unto Syria: he was also a mighty man in valour, but he was a leper.   2 And the Syrians had gone out by companies, and had brought away captive out of the land of Israel a little maid; and she waited on Naaman’s wife.   3 And she said unto her mistress, Would God my lord were with the prophet that is in Samaria! for he would recover him of his leprosy.   4 And one went in, and told his lord, saying, Thus and thus said the maid that is of the land of Israel.   5 And the king of Syria said, Go to, go, and I will send a letter unto the king of Israel. And he departed, and took with him ten talents of silver, and six thousand pieces of gold, and ten changes of raiment.   6 And he brought the letter to the king of Israel, saying, Now when this letter is come unto thee, behold, I have therewith sent Naaman my servant to thee, that thou mayest recover him of his leprosy.   7 And it came to pass, when the king of Israel had read the letter, that he rent his clothes, and said, Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man doth send unto me to recover a man of his leprosy? wherefore consider, I pray you, and see how he seeketh a quarrel against me.   8 And it was so, when Elisha the man of God had heard that the king of Israel had rent his clothes, that he sent to the king, saying, Wherefore hast thou rent thy clothes? let him come now to me, and he shall know that there is a prophet in Israel.

      Our saviour’s miracles were intended for the lost sheep of the house of Israel, yet one, like a crumb, fell from the table to a woman of Canaan; so this one miracle Elisha wrought for Naaman, a Syrian; for God does good to all, and will have all men to be saved. Here is,

      I. The great affliction Naaman was under, in the midst of all his honours, v. 1. He was a great man, in a great place; not only rich and raised, but particularly happy for two things:– 1. That he had been very serviceable to his country. God made him so: By him the Lord had often given deliverance to Syria, success in their wars even with Israel. The preservation and prosperity even of those that do not know God and serve him must be ascribed to him, for he is the Saviour of all men, but especially of those that believe. Let Israel know that when the Syrians prevailed it was from the Lord. 2. That he was very acceptable to his prince, was his favourite, and prime-minister of state; so great was he, so high, so honourable, and a mighty man of valour; but he was a leper, was under that loathsome disease, which made him a burden to himself. Note, (1.) No man’s greatness, or honour, or interest, or valour, or victory, can set him out of the reach of the sorest calamities of human life; there is many a sickly crazy body under rich and gay clothing. (2.) Every man has some but or other in his character, something that blemishes and diminishes him, some allay to his grandeur, some damp to his joy; he may be very happy, very good, yet, in something or other, not so good as he should be nor so happy as he would be. Naaman was a great as the world could make him, and yet (as bishop Hall expresses it) the basest slave in Syria would not change skins with him.

      II. The notice that was given him of Elisha’s power, by a little maid that waited on his lady, 2Ki 5:2; 2Ki 5:3. This maid was, by birth, an Israelite, providentially carried captive into Syria, and there preferred into Naaman’s family, where she published Elisha’s fame to the honour of Israel and Israel’s God. The unhappy dispersing of the people of God has sometimes proved the happy occasion of the diffusion of the knowledge of God, Acts viii. 4. This little maid, 1. As became a true-born Israelite, consulted the honour of her country, and could give an account, though but a girl, of the famous prophet they had among them. Children should betimes acquaint themselves with the wondrous works of God, that, wherever they go, they may have them to talk of. See Ps. viii. 2. 2. As became a good servant, she desired the health and welfare of her master, though she was a captive, a servant by force; much more should servants of choice seek their masters’ good. The Jews in Babylon were to seek the peace of the land of their captivity. Jer. xxix. 7. Elisha had not cleansed any leper in Israel (Luke iv. 27), yet this little maid, from the other miracles he had wrought, inferred that he could cure her master, and from his common beneficence inferred that he would do it, though he was a Syrian. Servants may be blessings to the families where they are, by telling what they know of the glory of God and the honour of his prophets.

      III. The application which the king of Syria hereupon made to the king of Israel on Naaman’s behalf. Naaman took notice of the intelligence, though given by a simple maid, and did not despise it for the sake of her meanness, when it tended to his bodily health. He did not say, “The girl talks like a fool; how can any prophet of Israel do that for me which all the physicians of Syria have attempted in vain?” Though he neither loved nor honoured the Jewish nation, yet, if one of that nation can but cure him of his leprosy, he will thankfully acknowledge the obligation. O that those who are spiritually diseased would hearken thus readily to the tidings brought them of the great Physician! See what Naaman did upon this little hint. 1. He would not send for the prophet to come to him, but such honour would he pay to one that had so much of a divine power with him as to be able to cure diseases that he would go to him himself, though he himself was sickly, unfit for society, the journey long, and the country an enemy’s; princes, he thinks, must stoop to prophets when they need them. 2. He would not go incognito–in disguise, though his errand proclaimed his loathsome disease, but went in state, and with a great retinue, to do the more honour to the prophet. 3. He would not go empty-handed, but took with him gold, silver, and raiment, to present to his physician. Those that have wealth, and want health show which they reckon the more valuable blessing; what will they not give for ease, and strength, and soundness of body? 4. He would not go without a letter to the king of Israel from the king his master, who did himself earnestly desire his recovery. He knows not where in Samaria to find this wonder-working prophet, but takes it for granted the king knows where to find him; and, to engage the prophet to do his utmost for Naaman, he will go to him supported with the interest of two kings. If the king of Syria must entreat his help, he hopes the king of Israel, being his liege-lord, may command it. The gifts of the subject must all be (he thinks) for the service and honour of the prince, and therefore he desires the king that he would recover the leper (v. 6), taking it for granted that there was a greater intimacy between the king and the prophet than really there was.

      IV. The alarm this gave to the king of Israel, v. 7. He apprehended there was in this letter, 1. A great affront upon God, and therefore he rent his clothes, according to the custom of the Jews when they heard or read that which they thought blasphemous; and what less could it be than to attribute to him a divine power? “Am I a God, to kill whom I will, and make alive whom I will? No, I pretend not to such an authority.” Nebuchadnezzar did, as we find, Dan. v. 19. “Am I a God, to kill with a word, and make alive with a word? No, I pretend not to such a power;” thus this great man, this bad man, is made to own that he is but a man. Why did he not, with this consideration, correct himself for his idolatry, and reason thus:–Shall I worship those as gods that can neither kill nor make alive, can do neither good nor evil? 2. A bad design upon himself. He appeals to those about him for this: “See how he seeketh a quarrel against me; he requires me to recover the leper, and if I do not, though I cannot, he will make that a pretence to wage war with me,” which he suspects the rather because Naaman is his general. Had he rightly understood the meaning of the letter, that when the king wrote to him to recover the leper he meant that he would take care he might be recovered, he would not have been in this fright. Note, We often create a great deal of uneasiness to ourselves by misinterpreting the words and actions of others that are well intended: it is charity to ourselves to think no evil. If he had bethought himself of Elisha, and his power, he would easily have understood the letter, and have known what he had to do; but he is put into this confusion by making himself a stranger to the prophet: the captive maid had him more in her thoughts than the king had.

      V. The proffer which Elisha made of his services. He was willing to do any thing to make his prince easy, though he was neglected and his former good services were forgotten by him. Hearing on which occasion the king had rent his clothes, he sent to him to let him know that if his patient would come to him he should not lose his labour (v. 8): He shall know that there is a prophet in Israel (and it were sad with Israel if there were not), that there is a prophet in Israel who can do that which the king of Israel dares not attempt, which the prophets of Syria cannot pretend to. It was not for his own honour, but for the honour of God, that he coveted to make them all know that there was a prophet in Israel, though obscure and overlooked.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

Second Kings – Chapter 5

A Famous Leper- Verses 1-7

The miracle-working power of Elisha had become widely known and accepted in Israel, but seems to have been little noted in the higher circles of society. It is about to become well known through the word of mouth of a small captive girl, stolen from her home in Israel during one of the raids of the Syrians into her country. She had been taken by Naaman, the valorous captain of the Syrian host, into his home and put to the service of his wife.

Naaman seems to have been a man of principle and bravery,

though he was, of course, a pagan. The Syrian king valued his service very highly, for the Lord had allowed Syria to defeat her enemies through the prowess of this man. It is most likely that he had played a prominent and probably leading part in the defeat of Israel and Judah at Ramoth-gilead. He would have been hated, therefore, by the Israelites. His raids against their towns, his capturing and enslavement of their children, was certainly a bitter thing for them. Yet this man suffered from a loathsome malady; he was a leper. His leprosy was doubtless of the type for which there was no cure.

Looking again at the little Israelite girl, a slave to the great Syrian lady, one finds much to admire. It is to be noted, 1) though she was removed from parents, home, and country, she does not appear bitter; 2) she respected her master and mistress and sought their good, as a godly servant should; 3) though she dwelt in a pagan country and a pagan house she did not forget her God and His power; 4) she offered the advice by which those who subjected her could benefit from knowing her God.

When others heard the claim of the little maid, that the prophet in Samaria could heal her master of his leprosy, the word was conveyed to the king of Syria. Upon hearing this, and willing to go to great expense to restore the health of his valuable servant, the captain of the host, the king sent Naaman with a letter to Jehoram, the king of Israel. The letter stated quite plainly and frankly that the king was sending Naaman so the king of Israel could cure him of his leprosy. He seemed not to have thought of the possibility the Israelite king may not have been aware of the power of the prophet. The reward consisted of ten talents of silver, six thousand pieces of gold, and ten changes of fine raiment. The silver has a present day value of over $200,000, the gold more than $2,000,000.

When the king of Israel read the letter he was highly distraught. He never once thought of Elisha and his power with the Lord. The king of Syria had assumed he would know to send for the prophet, but he took the letter to mean that he was expected to personally perform the miracle. So disturbed was he that he accused the king of Syria of thinking he had divine power, or more likely seeking a quarrel so he could go to war with him. He was like the ignorant Gentiles whom Paul described (Eph 4:18).

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

NAAMAN, THE SYRIAN LEPER

CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES.

2Ki. 5:1. Naaman was a great man with his master does not refer to mere physical force, but to the high esteem in which he was held at Court. Lord had given deliverances unto SyriaNot victories only, but national prestige, advantages, and prosperity.

2Ki. 5:2. By companiesMaranding bands. These went out on predatory incursions.

2Ki. 5:3. Would God should be (as in Psa. 119:5), O! that, an optative particle from , which, in Piel, means to caress, to beseech.

2Ki. 5:4. And one went ini.e., he, Naaman, went in.

2Ki. 5:5. Ten talents of silver, &c.The silver would value 3,421; the gold is not definite, but doubtless very considerable. Changes of raimentThese Oriental holiday garments are costly state dresses, worn on festal occasions.

2Ki. 5:7. King of Israel rent his clothesNot from horror at the impiety of the thought; the unbelieving Jehoram was not likely to be so much troubled by the religious side of the case, as by the fear of a misunderstanding which might eventuate in war. And after the closing events of previous chapter, deserted as he then was, he had a barren outlook if war should arise.

2Ki. 5:11. Strike his hand over the place to wave the hand, or to stroke with it.

2Ki. 5:12. Abana and PharparThe former, Amana, coming from the hill Amana, and now called Barady; the latter, also a small stream flowing from the Antilibanus, probably now called Fyjeh.

2Ki. 5:13. My fatherAn address full of respect and regard. How much ratheras in 2Sa. 4:11.

2Ki. 5:15. Take a blessing of thy servanti.e., a giftas in Gen. 33:10-11.

2Ki. 5:17. Shall there not thenShould read literally, And Oh! or, And if not. Two mules burden of earthFor an altar (see Exo. 20:24), under the idea that Jehovah would prefer the soil of His own land, on which sacrifices should be offered to Him by Naaman in Syria.

2Ki. 5:18. House of Rimmon, either from , to be high; or , the pomegranate, the Oriental symbol of fruitfulness.

2Ki. 5:19. A little wayi.e., a length of country, as in Gen. 35:16

HOMILETICS OF 2Ki. 5:1-19

NAAMAN A PICTURE OF THE HEATHEN IN SEARCH OF SAVING TRUTH

The story of Naaman is full of bewitching interest, and is one on which volumes have already been written. It is so suggestive of spiritual analogies that it reads like a page of New Testament doctrine inserted in the midst of Old Testament history. Though dealing with simple facts of history that occurred nearly three thousand years ago, we cannot resist the temptation to interpret it in the light of the Christian ideas of the nineteenth century. It is a testimony to the liberal and impartial spirit of Judaism that does not refuse help to a foreigner, a heathen, and he belonging to a people who were the enemies of Israel. It recognised the religious needs of humanity; it was the bigotry and unfaithfulness of its adherents that made Judaism exclusive and intolerant. There were many Israelitish lepers in Elishas time, but they were not cleansed, because they sought it not from the God of Elisha (Luk. 4:27). Naaman, the heathen, manifests a faith not to be found in Israel, and is cleansed of his leprosy. He thus prefigured the gentiles of a later age, who earnestly sought and found the salvation of God from which many Jews were cut off because of their unbelief. The whole narrative is the scheme of salvation epitomised. It may be viewed as a picture of the heathen in search of saving truth.

I. Like Naaman, the heathen enjoys many worldly advantages (2Ki. 5:1).By his strength and bravery Naaman had won the esteem of his king; he was loaded with honours, and surrounded with affluence and luxury. So the heathen lives among the fairest scenes of earth,

Whose every prospect pleases,

And only man is vile.

He is often raised to the highest dignities of earth, has unlimited command of wealth, and has the resources of commerce, science, art, and refinement ministering to his pleasure. Heathen is not always synonymous with barbarian. Some of the achievements of heathen genius have excelled the best productions of Western civilization. To be a heathen is not to be bereft of honour, of greatness, or of power.

II. Like Naaman, the heathen is suffering from a deadly disease.But he was a leper (2Ki. 5:1).Every man has some but or other in his character, something that blemishes and diminishes him, some alloy to his grandeur, some damp to his joy. He may be very happy, very good, yet in something or other not so good as he should be, nor so happy as he would be. Naaman was as great as the world could make him, and yet, as Bishop Hall quaintly remarks, the basest slave in Syria would not change skins with him. The heathen is smitten with the leprosy of sin. This tarnishes every worldly honour, blights the loveliest scene, dims the brightest prospects, moderates every joy, poisons every cup.

III. Like Naaman. the heathen hears, often through insignificant agencies, of the possibility of cure (2Ki. 5:2-4).A little captive maid, strong in her simple faith in the God of Israel, was the means of directing the proud but afflicted Naaman to the Divine source of healing. When she was borne away from her home and native land, it seemed very unlikely she would be instrumental in bringing the light of a higher truth to illumine the darkness of a heathen court. It has often happened in the history of nations that an obscure prisoner has been the means of acquainting his captors with the knowledge of the only true God; the vanquished has been crowned with a brighter glory than that of the conqueror. Numerous and extensive as are the various agencies of the Christian church in heathen lands, they are but feeble and limited compared with the greatness of the work to be done. But God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things that are mighty (1Co. 1:27-29). The simple words of a solitary missionary, the artless conduct of a child, the stray teaching of a voiceless tract, the impression caused by a passing incident, may be Divinely blessed in leading a soul to light and truth and rest.

IV. Like Naaman, the heathen is intensely in earnest in seeking the means of deliverance (2Ki. 5:5-9). The interest of Naaman is roused, a ray of hope enters his breast, his prejudice is conquered, and, laden with rich presents and attended by an imposing retinue, he journies into the land of Israel, and stands at the door of the prophet. He is conscious of his malady, is distressed with its unsightly ravages, and, sustained with the prospect of recovery, he counts no toil too great, no sacrifice too costly, if he may but gain relief. So the heathen, when convinced of his deplorable condition, and catching a glimpse of the promised remedy, seeks, with all the greedy avidity of need and all the cheering buoyancy of hope, the help that brings deliverance. The cry of awakened and struggling heathendom enters the ear of a merciful and all-powerful Saviour.

V. Like Naaman, the heathen is offended at the method prescribed for obtaining the needed cure (2Ki. 5:10-12). Naaman expected that Elisha would come out to him, and make certain mysterious passes and signs, after the manner of a professional thaumaturge, and that the leprosy would vanish. It was a severe blow to his pride to be asked to bathe his stately though leprous limbs in the turbid waters of the Jordan, rather than in the clear limpid rivers of his native Damascus. The offence of the cross has not yet ceased. Heathens and Christians alike are offended at the simple terms of salvation. If it were necessary to do some exploit that would afford opportunity for the display of personal prowess and skill, thousands more would be eager candidates for salvation. But to repentto confess sinto submit to self-humilationto trust in the power and virtue of another, and the unseen and impalpablethis is too much for vain human nature, and stirs up a spirit of rebellion.

VI. Like Naaman, the heathen, when complying with the prescribed conditions, is cured of his deadly malady (2Ki. 5:13-14). The rage of Naaman passed away, but his leprosy remained. In his cooler moments he began to reflect. The gentle persuasions of those around him prevailed. He obeyed the prophets directions, perhaps doubtfully, almost sullenly, but he did it. He dipped himself seven times in Jordan, and was healed. So when the heathen is persuaded to submit to the Divine terms, he obtains spiritual healing and renewal. Obedience is the pathway to clearer light, to the highest truths, and to the holiest experiences.

VII. Like Naaman, the heathen gratefully acknowledges and adores the power and goodness of God (2Ki. 5:15-19). Who can describe the wonder and gladness of Naaman as he witnessed and felt the marvellous renovation! He hastens to the man of God to express his gratitude, to acknowledge the supremacy of Jehovah, and his determination henceforth to worship Him, to offer gifts, and to seek still further instruction. His ideas of Jehovah are still restricted. He is convinced of His superiority over all the gods of the Syrians, but he has not yet grasped the grand thought of the Divine presence being everywhere. Now I know there is no god in all the earth but in Israel. So the heathen, after witnessing the saving power of God, sees the vanity of the idols in which he had trusted, and renders homage to the only true God. With further instruction his idea of Jehovah are expanded, and his worship is the more fervent and reverent.

LESSONS:

1. Man everywhere is tainted with the moral leprosy of sin.

2. The remedy for human sin is universally available.

3. The eagerness of the heathen in search of saving truth is a significant rebuke to the apathy of multitudes in so-called Christian nations.

GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES

2Ki. 5:1-19. The Divine method of healing sin-smitten souls. I. Is not restricted in its operation to any one nation under heaven. II. Is often revealed by humble instrumentalities. III. Is offensive to human pride and consequence. IV. Is effectual only with the humble and obedient. V. Is an inexhaustible theme for universal gratitude and praise.

LESSONS:

1. Man would fain heal himself, but cannot.

2. Mans only hope of recovery is in believing submission.

3. All the power and glory of human salvation belong alone to God.

2Ki. 5:1-14. Naaman the leper.

1. The captive maid. A prisoner in a strange land. Torn from home and friends. Carried with her both pity and piety. Had compassionate regard for the master who detained her in bondage, and a pious regard for the prophet of Israel. Did not harbour feelings of revenge.

The fairest action of our human life
Is scorning to revenge an injury;
For who forgives without a further strife,
His adversarys heart to him doth tie.
And tis a firmer conquest, truly said,
To win the heart than overthrow the head.

Lady E. Carew.

II. The proud general. A commander of armies, himself the slave of a foul disease, and, worse still, of a proud heart. Must receive instruction of a slave. His visit to Elisha. Ostentatious arrival. His expectation. Gods plans and human thoughts.

Humble we must be, if to heaven we go;
High is the roof there, but the gate is low:
Wheneer thou speakest, look with lowly eye
Grace is increased by humility.

Robert Herrick.

III. The magnanimous prophet. Willing to be the servant of man. Elisha is also a servant of God, can therefore serve man only in Gods way. Is willing to bless Naaman, though an enemy of Israel. Though he knows the restored health of Naaman may be employed against his countrymen. Cures Naaman, but will receive nothing for the cure. Might have exacted conditionspromises of peace. The character and conduct of Elisha an illustration of the mercy of God in a wicked age and amongst rebels. The mercy so luminous in the Old Testament shines in New also. One God of the whole Bible. Would not have any, even rebels perish.

LEARN:

1. To forgive injuries.

2. To pity the unfortunate, even if your enemies.

3. To guard against pride.

4. Our cure is offered without money or price.The Class and Desk.

2Ki. 5:1. The lights and shadows of life. I. There is always something to modify the pleasures of human lifesomething to mar the most brilliant successthe fly in the ointmentthe skeleton in the closet. II. Shows the universal prevalence of sin. III. Teaches the necessity for moderation and humility at all times. IV. May lead to the attainment of the highest good.

Honour with degradation. I. Naamans honours were as varied as they well could be, of war and peace, in the camp and in the palace. He had the admiration of the soldiery and the approval of the king; was the trusted leader in battle and the favoured attendant in the house of Rimmon. Earthly honours may imply real dishonour before God, while real worthiness may involve a present degradation. According to the measure of our self-denial will ultimately be the measure of our honour. According to the excellence of our motives of self-denial will its worthiness be determined at the last; and the value of those motives depends always on and everywhere on the desire to serve and honour Jesus. Great and mainfold as were Naamans honours, he seems to have deserved them.

1. He was a mighty man in valour. Strong and brave the man seems to have been; and bodily strength, and even animal bravery, are not to be despised or lightly esteemed. To speak to young men and women of might and valour, of health and bravery, is a Christian duty; for ominous signs of the lack of both abound. Many ways of living and spending time nowadays are keeping back the young from the might and valour, from the strength of body and fortitude of spirit, that come from God.
2. As a mighty and valorous man Naaman had been Gods instrument in Syrias rise and prominonce. In the front rank of honourable emotions is the love of country and of kin, honour to our race, and the sense of duty to our fatherland. The spirit of righteous patriotism is continually appealed to in the word of God, and sacrifice for the land of ones birth has been crowned by poets praise and exalted by admiration. We may here notice the candour of the writer of this book and the breadth of his conception of the ways of the Lord, in that he ascribes Syrias military success to God; and that, too, at a time when Syria and Israel were continually at war. Every true deliverance of a soul or of a nation is of God.
3. Out of these things came Naamans honours with his king and master. Peace as well as war brought him greatness, for he had the approval of him whom he served. Let us try to bring honour and give honour in all service, in the house or the warehouse, and be more than parts of a machine that works out its daily round and no more. There is room for honour everywhere, if one will give place to it; and, though lowlier than Naaman, we can each have his share of the honour that God gives to the valorous, the patriotic, and the faithful. II. But to this strong, valorous, honoured mans life there was another sideof degradation and disappointment. He was a leper; and though this in Syria had not the same terrible social consequences as in Israel, yet it was a blight and a curse.

1. Most lives have some qualifying, if not vitiating, of earthly joy and human credit. It must be horribly troubling to stand in Gods beautiful world infirm and blemished when we would be strong, humiliated when we might have been exalted, and degraded with bodily weakness in a world where selfasserting strength succeeds.
2. Sometimes these buts, these humiliations of life, are self-made, coming out of the hotbed of our pride and love of consequence and attention. Morbid self-seeking will blight and embitter a life that might be happy and honourable.
3. But of more value is it to notice the sterling worth and bravery of Naaman, in that with the horrid degradation and disadvantage of leprosy he attained to glory and high esteem. To the young his name ought to stand as a bright light of encouragement, he being the man who, with a lepers hand, plucked honour from the red grasp of war, and made it no shame for a king to lean on a lepers shoulder. Think, in your humiliation, of Him who was despised and rejected of men. And if we see shame on mans face, blemish on the body of his humiliation, and the degradation of death on his honour, can we not look up from disease and deformity and death, and see the most suffering and dishonouredeven Jesuscrowned with glory and honour?Condensed from Christian World Pulpit.

But he was a leper. Not from his birth, nor yet to his death. Hence a learned writer compares the whole Church of Christ in all ages to this Naaman the leper. He was first pure and sound, and did many honourable acts, and thereby represented the Primitive Church, pure and clean, without spot or disease appearing; howbeit, there might be some secret seeds of diseases unperceived, which in continuance of time grew to a visible leprosy. In his middle time Naaman became leprous, diseased, and deformed, foully infected in himself, and infecting others; and thereby represented the latter Church of Rome. Afterwards, by the prophets direction, he was washed and cleansed from his leprosy, and his flesh restored to become pure and perfect, like the flesh of a young child; and thereby represented the Reformed Churches. And as Naaman in all these three estates was the same person, and not a new, diverse, or several man, so our Church is not a new Church, but the old Church reformed from errors and corruptions, and restored to her ancient purity and soundness.Trapp.

Everywhere where there is, or seems to be, something great and fortunate, there is also a slight discordant but, which, like a false note in a melody, mars the perfectness of the good-fortune. A worm gnaws at everything pertaining to this world; and everything here below carries the germs of death in itself. We ought to consider all human suffering and misery worthy of consideration, whereever we find it. It is found everywhere; it dwells in the palace and in the hovel; it is interwoven with the life of prince and beggar, and it is inseparable from all worldly happiness. The poor and lowly have no reason to envy the rich and great. That which makes us happy in truth and for eternity does not depend upon rank or upon wealth.Menken.

2Ki. 5:2-4.The power of a child.

1. Unspeakably beneficent when religiously trained.
2. May excite a whole court with religious interest.
3. May be the means of great and lasting good. Naaman cured. God of Israel exalted. Undying interest of mankind in the incident. How much would the world have lost had the story of Naaman been unknown! A small chink may serve to let in much light.

The ministry of little voices. I. The little maids pity. It seems as though the shame and grief of Naaman found opportunity of expression at home. So acutely did the sense of his dishonour show itself in his house, that the little slave maid one day exclaimed, Would God my lord were with the prophet that is in Samaria, for he would recover him of his leprosy! Her young-eyed wonder saw what the strong and valorous soldier hid from all outside his home. Many a mans children see a look on his face and signs of agony that the associates of daily life never think could belong to the strong and vigorous man, who, in their sight, fights the battle of life more manfully then they. There are known those who, honoured in public, in private wish themselves dead. As the joys that we can share with a child are the simplest and the purest, so those are the most blessed griefs that can touch the sympathy of a little maid. Let us try to bring our nature, our experience, our life, nearer the children. It may help us in sad days, if nothing else, just as this pity of the Hebrew girl led to the cure of Naamans leprosy, and the liberation of his soul. The soul that is in sympathy with children will live a truer life because of it; and the man whose grief is pitied by a strange child in his household has some gentleness in him. God teaches us by little voices oftener than we think, and ministers to us by little hands that we seldom associate with the almightiness of God. All our little children are His messengers, and out of their mouths He wishes to ordain strength. Little voices call us home, as well as Gods all-animating voice, or rather God calls us by them. Just as the man whose child was lost in a mist that came suddenly down on one of the American rivers heard the little one calling, This way, Father! was led at last to hear the dead childs call as from heaven, whither, in that night of mist and sorrow, she had gone; so God leads many home by these angels in the clouds, these little ones, dead for awhile to us, but who are ever living unto God. II. Over against the little maids pity we have now to set what looks like her mistresss neglect. The wife of Naaman let the word of the Hebrew girl go unheeded. Had the child more pity than the woman? Was the Hebrew slave more tender than the Syrian wife? Perhaps the child, from her Jewish training, had a pecular horror of leprosy and its shame, that the Syrian woman would not have. May we not, ought we not, to call one anothers hearts to attend to the misery of sin? When God has linked hearts in home life, shall we slightly regard impenitence and uncleanness? Shall the parent cease to hope and pray for the prodigal child, and the goodly child be careless over a father or mother unsaved? If we wonder at the seeming apathy of Naamans wife, what shall we say of many of ourselves, for neglecting the eternal welfare of each others souls? While we wonder at this woman we condemn ourselves. III. The wise listener. Naaman was doubly fortunate in having, not only a pitiful slave girl, but another servant who listened wisely to what the girl said. He was certain of this, that, true or not, it was worth telling. So he went in and told his lord. Our vitiated nature inclines us to speak of others only too readily when there is evil to be reported, too slowly when there is anything good. But here we have one ready to tell helpful news. Naaman must have been more fortunate in his servants and slaves than in his wife. IV. Now we come to the last link in the chain of influence and of persons that ultimately led to Naamans recovery, and this is the king of Syria, the wisely acting king, who, when he heard only the report of a captive girl, said at once, Go, and give a letter to the king of Israel. First there was the child, then the prudently listening servant, and then the wise king. Each was an agent of God in this matter; each was needed, and who shall say which was most necessary? Little hands have brought about great things, and feeble voices have often given its character to history. The boy dreamer Joseph telling his dreams is the occasion of four hundred years of lsraelitish history. The little hand of the child Samuel was lifted by God, and his little voice was charged by God to show to Eli the coming of an awful doom. We know not how delicate is the balance of human affairs; but we know that God in His purposes unites the strong and the weak, and that when He touches the faithful, though they may be feeble, they become mightier than the strong.C. W. P.

2Ki. 5:2-3. The childrens service. The little ladys maid.Syria was a kingdom near to Canaan. For some time a little girl lived in Syria. She may not have been more than eight or ten years old. We wish to say seven things about her.

1. This little girl was a Jewess. Abraham was the first Jew. To him and his descendants God was exceedingly kind. How He spake to them, and what He gave them. This young person, as the text shows, was one of them. She belonged to the best land and the best people. What advantages she had. In this respect you are equal, yea, superior to her; Canaan and the Israelites then compared with England and the English now. A complete Bible and a Saviour who has come. To whomsoever much is given, of them much shall be required.

2. This little girl was a slave. The Syrians were the enemies of the Jews. Accustomed to go by companies to Canaan. Took away grain, cattle, and human beings. This girl was kidnapped on one occasion. Think on her sad condition, forced away from her land, home, friends, and parents.

Many children have been in the same circumstances. Rome, Greece, America, some even in the present dayMadagascar and Africa. Slaves cannot breathe in England. Why? Education, government, above all, the gospel. Should you not believe it and love it?

3. This little girl worked as a slave in the house of Naaman. Naaman was the general of the Syrian army, and a great favourite with the king. He had plenty of money, and lived in a splendid house. He may have bought the little maid, or she may have been his share of the spoils of the war. At any rate, she was in his house, and waited on his wife. A ladys maid. From this we learn that, though young, she was clever, and did all her work well. Imitate her in these things; never be careless about what you do. Try to read, write, and spell, &c., in the best way, so in after-life you will do these things easily and well. This will be a great comfort to yourselves and others.

4. This little girl was very kind. Naaman, her master, had an awful diseaseleprosy. It was painful, loathsome, and incurable by man. But Naaman had captured the little girl, and made her a slave. Had she been like some people, she would have been glad because her master was a leper. Instead of that, she thought about his disease. It was to her a source of sorrow, and she was anxious that he should be delivered from it. Here was kindness to one who had not been kind to her. This was the spirit of Jesus. Hear Him and see Him on the cross. It should be your spirit. You cannot have it without a new heart, any more than there can be a stream without a fountain. Because the little maid had the one, she had also the other. He who gave her a new heart will give you one. Ask Him for it.

5. This little girl was exceedingly intelligent. She spoke with wisdom to her mistress about her master and the prophet in the land of Israel. The prophet had never cured a leper (Luk. 4:27). How, then, did she believe that he would cure her master? Here we see her intelligence. She had heard of other wonderful things which the prophet had done. See the preceding chapter. This is how she reasoned:Elisha, who, by the power of God, could raise a dead body to life, could also, if it pleased God, restore a diseased body to health. Wonderful reasoning for a little girl. Learn to put things together in your minds. Do this with your school lessons; when you are reading books, looking at persons, watching the birds flying and the ships sailing. You will then be not dull, but clever, and so be able to push your way through the world.

6. This little girl did a great amount of good. She moved her mistress, the wife her husband, the husband the Syrian king, the Syrian king the king of Israel, the king of Israel the prophet. Naaman was delivered from his leprosy, and likewise from his heathenism. Besides, the whole narrative has been used by thousands to illustrate the Gospel, by which multitudes have been saved from sin to holiness. Similar results have been produced by a single book, tract, action, or word. You can all do good; do it every day.

7. This little girl was highly honoured. By the attention she received from so many in Syria; by obtaining a place in the Bible; by having thousands speaking well of her, as we have been trying to do. Her case illustrates the text, Them that honour Me, I will honour. Go ye and do likewise. Speak for God like her. Speak for others, and especially the suffering like her.

A. McAuslane, D. D.

2Ki. 5:5-14. Danger in the simplicity of Gods ways.

1. A prophet in Israel. A kindly God in the earth, a healer of men abroad in all the lands, a loving presence with us in dark and troublesome days, a light lighting every man from his infant obscurity and slow ascent to the true vision of life, to the swift descent into the valley of the shadow of death. How few know and believe this! and how few of those who profess that they do can direct weary lives to it as they ought! And yet, if we cannot say more than this king, if we cannot enter into Elishas confidence both for diseased bodies and dead or leprous souls, how sad are we! If for our bodies, and all the more if for our souls, we know no other help than man, and can turn only to one another in our necessities, we are little better than the king who rent his clothes over Naamans leprosy, and knew not what to do. But there is a Divine healer in the earth now as thena prophet and more than a prophet, who speaks to all human disease, and care, and helplessness.

2. The prophets confidence. Elisha had the conviction that through himself Naaman might be healed. What a dignifying confidence in God this is for Gods workers to have! for Elisha to know that God would cleanse by him, would save at his faithful word! We should have a confidence like Elishas, at least the spirit of it. For every calamity that befalls men Jesus has a word of love and hope and deliverance.

3. The lepers expectation. It was just what we might look for from his success and honours and riches and power, and his ignorance. He evidently thought that Elisha would make much of him, since he had and could give so much. It was not so blameworthy in a Syrian heathen as it is now with many who seem to think that God, and the people of God, must make much of them if they come to God. We must not come with prejudices or fancies of our own knowledge and consequence to God and His word and people, for life and purity and health. God will not minister to any souls self-consequence and self-deceiving pride.

4. The process of cure was different from what Naaman expected. It was so absolutely simple, and because it was so simple it was so authoritative. Go and wash in Jordan seven times. A child could understand it, a child could do it. So simple was it that only a proud, and therefore a foolish, man would resent it. God never makes His way hard, difficult, obscure, or involved. His simplicity is our salvation.

5. The lepers pride. There is much danger made by ourselves in the simplicity of Gods ways, and many, like Naaman, stagger at the promise of God through unbelief, their unbelief rising because the way is so light and plain. In this we are exposed to a two-fold danger: that of the love of pleasure in religion, by which anything will pass for religiousness that excites or soothes our emotions enjoyably, and that of mingling our prejudices with our search for purity, and so clouding and hurting our sight of Jesus. These were practically Naamans self-made dangers in the way of his leprosy being cleansed, and they are the old but ever new miseries of seeking after signs and wisdom, when all that God wants is the acceptance of His way and the use of His means of saving grace in our blessed Lord.

6. But Naaman was saved from utter folly by the servants good sense and his own true-heartedness. The servants word showed Naaman that the pride of a soldier was at the bottom of his refusal and rage. If the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldst thou not have done it? That gives the explanation of his passion; there was too much of God in the plan of cure, and too little of self to make it attractive; there was too great a call on unobjecting obedience, and too little of self-pleasing to make it alluring. The same thing holds good of most of us. Do not let the simplicity of Gods way become a hurt to your soul. By loving obedience end the uncleanness of sin for ever.

7. Following upon his trusting obedience came Naamans cure. He was fresh and pure; with new life and new strength, pure life and pure strength. That was the end of his faith, as it will be of ours. Childlike and pure for ever is to be the souls everlasting portion.(C. W. P.)

2Ki. 5:5-7. The ignorance and imbecility of man.

1. Man is slow to apprehend the nature and cause of human suffering (2Ki. 5:5).

2. Believes that money and diplomacy can accomplish anything (2Ki. 5:5-6).

3. Compelled to acknowledge his own powerlessness in dealing with human misery (2Ki. 5:7).

4. Sees more his own danger than the divine teaching in the significant events of life (2Ki. 5:7).

2Ki. 5:8. The counsel of a good man.

1. Valuable to king and court in times of difficulty.
2. Based on a profound faith in the power and goodness of God.
3. Prompted by gracious intentions towards the suffering and needy.
4. Tends to augment the reputation of true piety.

2Ki. 5:9-14. The haughty suppliant. God made the prophet, not the king, the medium of His blessings to Naaman. God selects His own workmen, and His selections sometimes chasten our pride. His ways are not as our ways; neither are His thoughts as our thoughts. It is neither by might nor by power. He chooses the weak things to confound the wise.

Up to this point Elisha lived unappreciated, subsisting upon the hospitality of the Shunammite. And how often do Gods nobility live and die unrecognized? They are men of whom the world is not worthy. They are unknown. And it is the obscure good which is the worlds foundation, the salt of the earth. But by force of circumstances they become recognised. There are crises when we call for the good we have despised. God has many uncrowned kingsheirs of immortality in flesh. He cometh to make up His jewels, and they shall come from many an obscure place. They shall come from the East and the West. The last shall be first, and the first last. Many a Lazarus shall find his home in Gods bosom, while the pampered beast shall become worm-food and fire-fuel.

There is much modern application in these Old Testament circumstances. There is so much humaneness in the Bible, which makes it always a new book. Principles know nothing of years. Truth is not hampered by time. The Scriptures are as old as eternity, and yet as new as every morning. The Gospel in the narrative may thus be developed.

1. The gospel appeals to the man, not his accidents. The prophets message was to the leper, not to the courtier. Naaman came with his horses and with his pageantry. He came in a lordly air, but the prophet did not even meet him. The true man is never moved by glitter. Some of us would have bowed as sycophants; it would have been the reddest-letter day of our lives, if the premier of Syria had stood at our doors. Even if a trinket, or a book, be given to us by a royal hand, we transmit it as an heirloom. When will all this mammon-worship and man-homage, fawning, and cringing end? When will men remember that there is a higher kinglinessthat instead of virtue cringing to vice, she should stand in her God-like form erect? There is a nobility of office, but there is a higher nobility of character. There is a kingliness of name, but there is also a kingliness of nature. We should not judge by appearance, but judge by righteous judgment. The prophet saw through all the haughtiness of Naaman, a leprous man. God sees through all lifes accidentsall our intelligence, parade, wealth, and respectabilitya heart of corruption and sorrow. He sees that the imagination of the thoughts of man are evil continually. The message is to man, not to his circumstances. It speaks to us as sinners. It speaks, not to contingencies, but to the human nature that is in us all. It was man that fell, and to man the message is sent. He came to seek and to save that which was lost.

2. The gospel message and conditions are always simple. It speaks in a language all can understand. It speaks to the heart, and the heart has but one language the wide world over. The tongue speaks many a vernacular, and the lips chatter many dialects, but the hearts voice never varies. The great universal heart beats in us all. The gospel sees us fallen, and it sends forth the common message and a universal welcome, Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden. The message is one, but its emphasis is varied according to our deafness, and its strokes to our hardness. The stone is hard, and the sculptors mallet must be heavy and his chisels sharp. The wound is deep, and the corrosive must burn, and the instrument probe deeply. The jewel is encased in adamant, and the lapidary must select his instruments accordingly. Our prejudices are great, our hearts are haughty, and the conditions are adapted. Christianity is to us what we are. Loving in disposition, it speaks in a still small voice. Impenitent in heart, it speaks in thunder tones. Some are so deaf that they can only hear thunder, others are so divinely sensitive they can hear angels whispers and Gods steps on the wind. According to our heart-life, God is either a father, or a consuming fire. A revengeful God is the creation of a wicked life. The Gospel speaks to the heart, and of necessity must temper its voice to its disposition and difficulties. It is a message so simple that a child can understand it, and yet its inexhaustibleness challenges the highest minds. So plain, that the wayfaring man need not stumble, and yet its sublimity creates a sensation new in angel bosom. Its simplicity reveals its wonders, as its stoop manifests its height.

3. The gospel conditions are repulsive to human prejudices. We might swear that it is night when the sun shines, but the light would only prove our insanity. We may curse the book, but its truth is inviolable. We may blaspheme the Gospel, but the loudness of our voice may only reveal the perfectness of our idiocy. How presumptuous is man!

Man, proud man, dressed in a little brief authority,
Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven,

As make the angels weep.

1. How we presume on Gods ways! I thought he would surely come out to me, &c.
2. How we presume on Gods means! Are not Abana and Pharpar better than all the waters of Israel?
3. How we presume on Gods patience! And he turned away in a rage.
4. How we presume on self-sufficiency! Some great thing, would thou not have done it? The conditions of the Gospel may arouse our resentment, but to resist is to be blind to our best interests. The prophet said: Wash and be clean, and Naaman turned away in a rage. Christ says, Sell all thou hast and give to the poor; and the young man went away sorrowing. The Gospel says, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved; and we are disgusted with the conditions. The answer to all our prejudices isthat it is Gods appointed way. There is no royal road. The conditions are, believe and live; and the authority is, he that believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned. Our prejudices may recoil, and we may turn away in wrath; but we turn our face from the sun only to see our shadow.W. MINCHER in the Study and Pulpit.

2Ki. 5:9-12. Pride.

1. Fond of splendid ostentation.
2. Indulges lofty expectations of notice and deference.
3. Is keenly sensitive to the sting of insult, whether intended or not.
4. Blinds the soul to its best interests.
5. Must be humbled before the soul can be blessed.

2Ki. 5:9-10. The cure of Naaman. I. Illustrative of the influence of humble instrumentality. II. Of the obstructive power of pride. III. Of the value of faithful counsel. IV. Of the blessedness of obedience.

1. Naamans obedience led to his obtaining a perfect cure.
2. Naamans cure wrought in him true humility.
3. Naamans cure led him to God.
4. Naamans cure filled his heart with gratitude.E. Workman.

2Ki. 5:10-12. Naaman, an example of barriers to religious decision. I. The barrier was his own disposition. II. His choosing the means. III. His wanting to do something. IV. His not applying the remedy.H. Bone.

2Ki. 5:11-12. We, knowing much better than Naaman did, the character and claims of Elisha, are apt to be amazed at the petulance and pride of Faaman. Yet, in fact, there are few of usare there any?who have not manifested many times in the course of our career, as much or more resistance to the demands upon our faith, and to the exigencies appointed by God for the humiliation of the proud mind of the flesh, than ever Naaman did, and often with far less reason. Let us rather admit that the demand upon the faith of Naaman, and the extent to which he was required to bend down his natural reason, formed somewhat of a severe exertion from one so raw and inexperienced in the things of God. Yet it is the common course of the Lords dealings with those whom He brings under the operation of His healing grace. The course is paternal. As a father deals with his children, so He deals with us. He demands obedience, exacts submission. He requires faith; and then, the mind being brought into the right state, He teaches, He leads, He heals.Kitto.

2Ki. 5:12. Is there not another way? I. Sinners dislike the plan of the Gospel.

1. Self-abandonment.
2. Salvation by faith. II. They dislike its object.

1. Salvation from sin.
2. The renewal of the heart. III. They dislike the means to be used.

1. Self-denial.
2. Humility.
3. Earnestness.
4. Publicity.

2Ki. 5:13-14. The souls desire and submission.I. A desire is frequently shown to do some great thing to obtain salvation. Illustrate from heathen pilgrims, Fakirs; devotees who used to cast themselves under wheels of Jaggernaut, also Roman Catholic austerities, self-flagellations, crusades, &c. Both

(1) condemn and
(2) approve. The form in which such zeal shows itself superstitious. The motive wrong. But earnest self-sacrificing spirit prompted by love to Christ very admirable. What is not permissible is seeking to do something as procuring cause of salvation. First receive as a free gift, and then give and do as much as the heart will prompt. II. The simplicity of what has to be done, and consequently urgent reason we should do it. (a) Because no act of ours could be allowed to atone for sin(b) the work of Christ complete, needs no addition(c) a free salvation comes within reach of all. Who could say, if otherwise, but that even in our great things, there might be some coming short, and multitudes would be excluded from hope? All the more, then, rejoice that the command is Believe and live, yet, remember, there is wide scope afterwards, especially a daily life of patient piety and godliness, often more difficult than a single act of self-devotion. In this fulfil the desire and glorify God. III. The wisdom and blessedness of obedience. Picture the scene. So when humbled, anxious, submissive, a sinner adopts the means of mercy, there is

(1) a Divine,
(2) an instantaneous,
(3) a lasting effect. From darkness to, light unregeneracy to renewal. How wise the obedience! The only chance of recovery. How blessed! It must have been sweet to feel the past cancelled, heart set right. Men have fabled there is a fountain of youth. Plunge in its waters and the wrinkles fade out of the brow. But it is true we may be made young and happy again in spiritchildren of God.Hom. Quarterly.

2Ki. 5:13. The art of persuasion.I. Knows when to select the right moment to speak. II. Knows how to subdue the most violent temper. III. Appeals to the strongest motive in man. IV. Should be used in turning men from sin to virtue.

2Ki. 5:14. It was not the water either of Jordan or of Abana which could heal, it was the obedience of this haughty general to a mandate which seemed to him frivolous and absurd. In the Gospels faith is the first requisite in similar cases of healing, and so it was here alsofaith and obedience. Naaman came with his mind all made up as to how he was to be healed, and he turned away in anger and disgust from the course which the prophet prescribed. Yet, when he turned back even with a lame and half-doubting faith and a half-unwilling obedience, he was healed. This is the permanent truth which is involved in the story. Naaman was a type of the rationalist whose philosophy provides him with a priori dogmas by which he measures everything which is proposed to his faith. He turns away in contempt where faith would heal him. That is the truth which the story serves to enforce.Editor of Lange.

Not the unjust fury and tetchiness of the patient shall cross the cure; lest while God is severe the prophet should be discredited. Long enough might Naaman have washed there in vain, if Elisha had not sent him. Many a leper hath bathed in that stream, and hath come forth no less impure. It is the word, the ordinance of the Almighty, which puts efficacy into those means which of themselves are both impotent and improbable. What can our font do to the washing away of sin? If Gods institution shall put virtue into our Jordan, it shall scour off the spiritual leprosies of our hearts, and shall more cure the soul than cleanse the face.Bp. Hall.

Gods plan of salvation. We take the narrative as illustrative of the great truth, the necessity of conforming with Gods plan to secure salvation. I. That Gods plan is contrary to the expectations of man. So it was here that Naaman had been thinking within himself how the prophet would act. He merely sent a messenger commanding him to wash in the Jordan. How simple, and so he thought, how foolish! The very simplicity bewildered him and kindled his wrath. But if his own plan would have been sufficient, he might have cured himself without going to the prophet at all. So the salvation which is in Christ Jesus has always been a stumbling block to men on account of its simplicity, and many have dogged the simple Gospel with innumerable ceremonies of mens devising, painting the pure lily, and bringing their own faint rush-light to increase the splendour of the noonday sun. Men would cross ocean and wander in far-off lands in search of wisdom; they would survey the heavens, and descend to the lowermost parts of the earth; but Gods word of life is nigh unto us, in our mouth and in our heart.

O, how unlike the complex works of man
Heavens easy, artless, unencumbered plan!
From ostentation as from weakness free,
It stands like the cerulean arch we see,
Majestic in its own simplicity;
Legible only by the light they give
Stand the soul-quickening words, believe and live.

COWPER.

II. That Gods plan tends to humble the pride of man. Naaman thought there was some royal cure for a royal patient, and an honourable way to deal with such an honourable man. How indignant he felt when the prophet only sent a messenger to him, and the remedy prescribed being so humiliating too. He could not understand going to wash himself in the river Jordan, the river of despised Israel; whilst if it was necessary to apply the waters of any river, could he not have washed himself in the proverbial crystal streams of Damascus? So he turned and went away in a rage. So Gods plan of salvation is mortifying to the pride of the sinful heart. The Pharisees were offended at the Saviour for making no distinction between them and the sinners. They were entangled in the snares and pride of life. Their plan was to glorify self and humble others; but to enter the kingdom of Jesus Christ, the first step required is for a man to deny himself. Faith consists in leaving our own frail vessel and taking our passage on board the ark of God, to deem ourselves nothing and God all in all. We find Peter, having received the consent of the Master, walking on the sea; but the moment he began to trust himself, and feel safe in the power of his own strength, the boisterous winds and the treacherous waves frightened him, and, conscious of his weakness, he with gladness entered the ship and was safe in the arms of Jesus. The gate is strait and the road is narrow, but he who is humble and obedient is led at last to safety and bliss.

3. That he who truly feels his need will accept Gods plan. Though Naaman was at first most seriously disappointed, and turned away in a rage, yet on the counsel of his servants, strengthened by his own need and his inward conviction, he complied with the directions given by the prophet. A sense of need is a propelling power that will work wonders, and, in conjunction with faith, will send the mountain to the sea, and chain the lion that is on the way. This feeling impelled that poor woman to force her way through the crowd and touch the hem of the Saviours garment; and, urged by the same motive, the blind man willingly went to the lake of Siloam. When the sinner really feels sin a burden, and believes that the meek and lowly Jesus is powerful to remove it, he will not quarrel with the method of salvation, but will come at once and cast his burden down; and when he truly feels his guilt he will come to the fountain opened for sin and for uncleanness. When a man is bent upon becoming rich, or learned, or great in the estimation of the world, he is willing to comply with the worlds terms, be they ever so hard. Is it wonderful that the sinner, with his broken heart and contrite spirit, closes in with the overtures of the gospel, and accepts the salvation which is in Christ? IV. That conformity to Gods plan will secure a mans salvation. Naaman obeyed, and he was accordingly cured.

1. Some means are generally used. The miracles of the Old and New Testaments are similar in this, that means were used in bringing about such wonderful deeds. It would have been all the same to God to cure Naaman with a word, but Naaman himself would have lost the valuable lessons he received, and the necessary training he went through.

2. The means were not sufficient in themselves apart from the blessing of God to cure his leprosy, but as it was Gods plan it effected its purpose. The ark was rendered safe from the waters of the Deluge, as it was constructed according to the directions given by God. The waters of Marah lost their bitterness by a tree being thrown into them, because that was the means appointed by the Lord. To encompass the walls of Jericho with rams horns might have seemed very foolish and useless to some, but it was of Divine appointment, and so it succeeded. Men are thus taught to do their duty, and then to wait for the Divine blessing. Naaman could wash himself in the Jordan, though he could not cure himself. We arc to come to the Saviour to be healed, we are to look upon Him, to stretch out our hands, withered as they are, to Him.

3. Naamans cure was instantaneous. What a happy moment for him when he discovered that the cause of his anxiety, trouble, and humiliation was removed! So the man who believes on the Lord Jesus Christ, and flees to Him for refuge, is from that moment free from condemnation.

4. His cure was complete. His flesh was made like the flesh of a little child. He possessed a thoroughly renovated. body. No taint of the malady to east its dark shadow over the future. So he who accepts Gods plan is wholly renewed, created anew in Christ Jesus. True, he retains the marks of the leprosy of sin whilst in this world. As Mr. Joseph Cook remarks, although the particles of the body have been changed many times, still the sears made when the fingers were too young to be trusted with edged tools continue through the years, and are absolutely unchangeable in the changing flesh, so the scars of sin continue after years of reformation; but, thanks be to God, day by day the nature becomes sanctified, and at last the ransomed soul will take its flight to the realms of purity and bliss. The Church will be at last a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing; holy, and without blemish.Hom. Quarterly.

2Ki. 5:15-19. Gratitude to God and earthly policy. Naaman, instead of going straight away to Syria, turned back to Samaria, not this time to the king, but with the same retinue and wealth of gifts he came back to Elishas door. In this act he takes his place with that one Samaritan leper of the New Testament who turned back to Jesus and blessed Him for His mercy in freeing him from the same horrible curse, while nine others went away healed, but ungrateful. I. Naamans journey back was a grateful return to Elisha and an honourable but only dutiful acknowledgment of God. It was an owning of the God of Israel because of Elishas work. This deduction of spiritual truths from bodily blessings shows health of soul and soundness of mind. Naaman recognized God by His mercies, and acknowledged the God of Elisha in the work that Elisha had done. Mercy is the great mark of our God; it is that by which He may be most easily recognized; and works of mercy are the signs of the true and most eminent servants of His pleasure. God is ready to let His claim on our loving recognition be determined by what every heart can easily discover of His merciful kindness. His message and work among us are still the same; His servants and workers now are all, if they are true to Him, workers of mercy, messengers of love and peace and healing. II. Elishas refusal of health. In this, like Abraham with the King of Sodom, and like Paul with the Corinthians, Elisha kept the mercy of God as God intended it to be, without money and without price. The true gift in return for Gods mercy is the offering of ourselves in Christ, and when that is made the silver and the gold will find their proper place. It was noble in Naaman to make the offer; and it would have been wrong in Elisha to have taken the gift. The greatest blessings cost, at first, the least. No one can be paid, no one can pay, for the mercy of God, or for the conferring of spiritual blessings. God gives us His mercy, and He wants ourselves as His right and due. III. Ignorant devotion to the true God. Only a little while ago, in rage and pride, Naaman had sneered at the waters of Israel; but now the soil of the land of the Lord was sacred to him, and he wanted an altar of it in his Syrian home. Nor for this is he to be condemned, as we should be justified in condemning the like spirit when it is foisted upon the purity of Christianity or associated with the faith once committed to the saints. Christianity knows nothing of exclusively holy places and days and services and classes; for now all places and times may be sacramental and holy to the Lord. IV. There was, however, in Naamans case a worse thing than his excusable superstition, and that wasan attempt to mingle the claims of God with the advantages of earthly policy. It is not for us or any to press heavily on the conscience of a man in such a position. The only thing that gives us a right to judge the case at all, for our own caution and guidance, is the evidence that Naaman himself felt that bowing down with his master in the house of Rimmon might be inconsistent with his proposed devotion to the God of Israel. From Naamans easily understood mistake let us learn to hate laxity of principle in ourselves, and to judge gently the weakness and fall of others. V. From Elishas tenderness to a weak convert, learn the more to trust the greater tenderness that Jesus has for our frailties and dangers. Do not think that Jesus does not see the wretchedness of your temptations and the hazard of your position when all things seem to beckon you to sin, and sin hides its vile image under a mask of attractiveness and interest and prosperity.

Then learn to scorn the praise of men,
And learn to lose with God;
For Jesus won the world through shame,
And beckons thee His road,

C. W. P.

I. Gratitude. The mighty Naaman, who had doubtless often bathed without benefit in the waters of Damascus, tried the river Jordan, and was immediately cleansed. He returns to Elisha to thank him. How different now is Naaman, old things passed away! He acknowledges the supreme God as the only God. Does this publicly in the presence of all his company. Would make an acknowledgment to Elisha, not as a recompense, but as a gift of gratitude.

II. Generosity. Elisha by no means a man of great wealth. Dependent on the bounty of Providence. Followed no regular calling. Lived in an age when the servants of God, as such, were ill-rewarded. Yet would not receive a gift at the hands of Naaman. His desire to lay Naaman and the king of Syria his master under an obligation to Israel. This is to preserve peace. Especially he desired to impress them with the greatness and goodness of God; to remind them of those higher blessings which God would freely give. Hence, for the sake of Gods honour, and his countrys welfare, he would take no reward.

III. Superstition. Although thus grateful, and making his confession of the true God, Naaman is not fully enlightened. Still regards God as a local deity. The mightiest God in the world, but limited to Israelitish soil. He would therefore like to carry back with him some of that soil. He thought to worship in any spot on that soil would secure the favour of God. Elisha makes no reply to this request. Certainly cannot approve this course. Sends Noaman back with his blessing. Naaman felt that to worship Rimmon was wrong, but hoped to be forgiven by him on whose consecaated soil he stood. LEARN:

1. To cultivate gratitude.

2. To do good without the hope of any return.

3. Guard against all forms of superstition. The Class and Desk.

2Ki. 5:16. The unselfishness of goodness. I. Cannot be bribed into showing kindness. II. Refuses legitimate offerings when the cause of religion would suffer by accepting them. III. Falls back upon God for all needful supplies.

2Ki. 5:17-18. Imperfect religious ideas. I. Not uncommon at the early stage of religious life. II. Leads to imperfect religious practice III. Attaches too much importance to the externals of worship. IV. Hinders a thorough reformation and forsaking of the old life.

2Ki. 5:17. As Naaman was the type of the converted heathen world, and he carried the soil of Palestine to Aram, so did the heathen carry over into their own lands, together with Christianity, the doctrine, life, disposition, and spirit, which had flourished in the Holy Land, and thereby they established themselves a new home. When we hear, here and there in Christian lands, the names Bethany, Bethlehem, Zion, what are they but holy places transferred, in their spirit, from their original location, into our life, and thought, and feeling? In their religious observances, the main point is not the correctness and truth of thy knowledge, or of the doctrine which thou professest, but the truth and purity of thine own character. What one may do under his circumstances without violating his conscience, the conscience of another, under other circumstances, will forbid him to do. We have no right to judge him: to the Lord each one stands or falls (Rom. 14:1-7).Cassel.

Well did this Syrian find that the man of God had given a supernatural virtue to the water of Israel, and therefore supposed he might give the like to his earth. Doubtless it was devotion that moved this suit. The Syrian saw God had a propriety in Israel, and imagines He will be best pleased with his own. On the sudden was Naaman half a proselyte; still here was a weak knowledge with strong intentions.Bp. Hall.

2Ki. 5:18. The compromises of life. The significant but in the social position of Naaman is to find its counterpart in his religious character. A great man, but a leper; a believer pleading for an inconsistency. Conversion and compromise. When he has found God beyond the sign of water, and come back to the prophet with the confession of his new faith, you expect a complete change in his exterior life, that he will go among his heathen countrymen a full-orbed religious man; but he counts the cost, or perhaps is in some mental perplexity. At least he will put the difficulty to the prophet, and be guided by his decision. We are startled to hear the answer Go in peace. Here was an opportunity to rebuke cowardice, to chastise the poor selfishness that, having received so much from God, asks, And how little need I pay back? An opportunity to discuss an interesting question of casuistry and to decide upon the comparative forces of conscience and necessity. But Elisha accepts his convert, with this exception, whether in the passive non-aggressiveness of that old Hebrew religion, or in the conviction that the man would do his best under the circumstances, we cannot tell. Set Naaman in the light flung back by the cross, and we can soon pronounce judgment. We know our Lord deals with these human buts. Let the dead bury their dead, &c. If a man love father and mother more than me, he is not worthy of me. But the judgment would be unjust. Men are always more or less in subjection to the ideas that govern the age in which they live. It is only the few who draw themselves apart, and press forward to a grand isolation. The Church has ten thousand Naamans where it has one Paul. The very uncertainty in which, spite of Elishas benediction, the incident is left, suggests some remarks on the compromises of life.

I. Religious decision, as it is affected by earthly relationships. This man was a servant, and the conditions of his servitude were not simple, but complex. He was in command of the army, and while this conferred on him a large authority, it imposed a large trust. These had opened to him wide opportunities for loyalty, bravery, and patriotism. It was part of his service to go with his master into the house of Rimmon. Refusal would take on it an ugly air of ingratitude. The king had made him the man he was, and a feeling of indebtedness and obligation may enter very acutely into questions of conscience and right. This to a noble mind would be a far greater difficulty than the loss of position and the imminent death that might result from the wrath of an absolute monarch, unaccustomed and unable to enter into nice questions of religious casuistry; indeed, the line of duty between the obligations imposed by earthly relationships, and our services to God, is not always so distinct as men think. Many at least who, with loud protestations, scorn all compromise, have never found that line. Clear is the right, at all sacrifice, if king or master exact the positive crime; ask me to disown Christ, to give up prayer, to outrage any distinct conscientious conviction, but along this line is a very borderland of mist in which the traveller is often brought to a stand, asking after the right way. It is enough to instance questions of polygamy, of slavery, with which the early Church had to deal. Of course it may be said, if a heathen, having two or more wives, became a convert, he must put away all but one. Which one? What if each were the mother of children? The Christian master must manumit his slaves. Cornelius, says the Peace Advocate, should forsake the Roman service, and take no longer the heathens pay. But these, and a multitude of similar questions, are not decided by inspired authority at all, or are decided in their special instances against the ruling principle. The New Testament has faith in time, in the thousand years of Gods working, in the antagonism of the spirit of the Gospel to every form of injustice and wrong. It cares less to estimate and adjudge the differing shades of darkness in the night of error, so much as to bring in that daybreak before which all the shadows shall flee away. Christianity has entered as a sword into many a worldly home, happy in its own way; it has resulted in wide divisions between parent and child, master and servant, monarch and subject. The records of the Church glow with bright instances of heroic sacrifice, of daring disobedience to man in obeying God. And yet how much has to be borne, how much ought to be borne, before the daughter forsakes her mother, or the son breaks asunder the bond of the household! There is much in Naamans knowledge of the inconsistency. He who sins against that inner light will be scarcely free from sin against God.

II. By society. Naaman does not refer to the difficulty of maintaining a monotheistic faith in a pagan land, to the power of many against the one; but society is full of suggested compromises resulting from these conditions. There is a compulsion in the pressure both of social forces and of civil laws; and many a man discovers that the house of Rimmon is co-extensive with the state in which he lives. He pays the tribute money to Csar, or the temple tax, withholding faith in the lawful government in the one, and really teaching that the other must pass away. He takes up his share of the countrys expenditure, though part of it may go toward objects from which he conscientiously dissents. His plea is the necessity of his position; but his neighbour takes that plea to a far wider field, and justifies many a compromise on the same ground. It is convenient to charge our personal responsibility on an intangible irresponsible something called society. But what society is to supply our code of ethics? Syria or Israel? England or Fiji? Every man shall bear his own burden. The law of truth is in and from the changeless God. Customs, fashions, luxurious living, appearances, amusements, friendships, business, all tempt to compromise and have prophets God never sent, who say to the conformist, Go in peace.

III. By the necessities of life. The plea, we must do this to live. Refer to common practices in trade, the pressure of competition. The worlds practices contrary to the great principle. A mans life consisteth not in the abundance of the things that he possesseth.

IV. By the personal temperament. One mans supreme difficulty is another mans agreeable work. The cost of sacrifice differs with different men. To one it is easier to die on the battlefield than to confess his faithto give largely, even to Gehazi, with generous or grateful subscriptions, than to break with former friendships. There is no open confession of Christs name by secret disciples, to whom One greater than all prophets may say, Go in peace. Let character only be of so pure a transparency that the light of a holy conscience may shine through.

1. God does not take back from men of partial failure the good he has bestowed. The leprosy does not return to the cleansed leper, if one leprous spot be on the soul. The impotent man healed, goes straightway to our Lords enemies to tell them that it was Jesus who made him whole, and the strength ungratefully used remains. We have all need to say, somewhere, The Lord pardon thy servant in this thing.
2. Is the silence of Scripture as to any useful future in Naamans history to be regarded as evidence of a good life hindered by the appearance of evil?
3. We shall destroy no house of Rimmon by worshipping in it on any pretence whatsoever.
4. In the Gospel, this, at least, is clearhe that putteth his hand to the plough, and looketh back, is not fit for the kingdom of God.Hom. Quarterly.

Far, therefore, is Naaman from being a pattern, save of weakness; since he is yet more than half a Syrian; since he willingly accuses himself, and, instead of defending, deprecates his offence. As nature, so grace, rises by many degrees to perfection. It is not for us to expect a full stature in the cradle of conversion. Leprosy was in Naaman cured at once, not corruption.Bp. Hall.

2Ki. 5:19. One does not know what to admire most in Elishas mild and simple answer, the clear and correct insight into a genuine heart experience, which, whatever may surround and obscure the main point, still seizes this quickly and clearly; or the holy moderation which, even in the case where it is its prerogative to urge, limit, bind, loose, or burden, still restrains itself; or the pure humanity of disposition which can so thoroughly sympathize, so completely put itself in the position and at the standpoint of the other. The knowledge of the living God, and the experience of His saving grace, is the fountain of all peace, with which alone a man can go gladly on his way.Menken.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

III. A MIRACLE ON BEHALF OF AN ARAMEAN GENERAL 5:119

The account of the healing of the leprous Naaman moves through three stages which may be labeled (1) Naamans condition (2Ki. 5:1-7), (2) Naamans cleansing (2Ki. 5:8-14), and (3) Naamans conversion (2Ki. 5:15-19).

A. NAAMANS CONDITION 5:17

TRANSLATION

(1) Now Naaman the captain of the host of the king of Aram had become a great man before his master, and was held in honor, because by him the LORD had given deliverance to Aram; and the man was a mighty man of valor, a leper. (2) And the Arameans had gone out in marauding bands, and had taken captive from the land of Israel a young maiden; and she attended the wife of Naaman. (3) And she said unto her mistress, O that my master were before the prophet who is in Samaria, then he would heal him of his leprosy. (4) And he went and told his master, saying, Such and such the maiden who is from the land of Israel said. (5) And the king of Aram said, Go, depart, that I may send a letter unto the king of Israel. And he departed, and took with him ten talents of silver, six thousand pieces of gold, and ten changes of garments. (6) And he brought the letter unto the king of Israel, saying, Now when this letter has come unto you, Behold I have sent unto you Naaman my servant, that you might heal him of his leprosy. (7) And it came to pass when the king of Israel read the letter, that he rent his garments, and said, Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man is sending unto me to heal a man of his leprosy? Surely therefore note, I pray you, and see how he is picking a quarrel with me.

COMMENTS

It seems that Benhadad, who in his younger days had personally led the armies of Aram into the field of battle, had made Naaman[531] the captain of his host. Naaman had successfully led his forces in some of the initial encounters with Assyria which now was threatening the independence of Aram. Naaman did not realize it, but he was being used for this purpose by the Lord, the God of all the earth. The man was held in honor;[532] he was a mighty man of valor, i.e., a good soldier; but he was a leper (2Ki. 5:1). Leprosy had many degrees. Some of the lighter kinds would not incapacitate a man for military service or make him unfit for official court duties. Naamans leprosy (tsaraat) may have been more in the nature of an embarrassing skin disease.

[531] Naaman is attested as a proper name in the administrative texts from Ras Shamra. The name means gracious, pleasant. Gray, OTL, p. 504.

[532] Lit., to lift up the face. The phrase refers to the gesture of the king stretching forth his scepter and touching the face of a suppliant who had bowed to the ground before him, and lifting that face up. Gray, OTL, p. 504.

Hostilities between Israel and Aram had continued after Ahabs expedition against Ramoth-gilead (1 Kings 22) with the Arameans seemingly having the upper hand. Marauding bands of Arameans would make thrusts deep into Israelite territory from time to time for the purpose of capturing slaves and taking other valuables. On one such raid a little maiden was taken captive who eventually passed into the possession of Naamans wife (2Ki. 5:2). With the passing of time, the little maid developed a genuine affection for her kindly captors, and she became genuinely distressed over the grievous affliction of her master. One day in the course of her duties, the little maid expressed aloud the wish that was in her heart, that Naaman might be brought into contact with the powerful and kindly prophet[533] in Samaria. She was confident that Elisha could cure him of his leprosy (2Ki. 5:3). The sacred historian tells nothing of the animated conversation which must have followed this confident assertion of the curability of Naaman. At first the mistress must have been incredulous, attributing the maids confidence to her youth and simplicity. But gentle interrogation led to the revelation of dozens of marvelous stories about this man of God. The mistress concluded that she should share this information with her husband and urge him to pursue this possibility of cure, however remote it might seem.

[533] It should be noted that the maid refers to Elisha as a prophet rather than a man of God. Outside Israel the term prophet would have been more easily understood.

However skeptical Naaman himself might have been, he was finally convinced by his wifes persistence to pursue the matter. He reported the suggestion of the Israelite maid to the king (2Ki. 5:4), and much to the surprise of Naaman, the king took the whole matter seriously. He too was willing to try anything to restore the health of his friend and captain. The king urged an immediate departure, and added that he would send a letter by the hand of Naaman to the king of Israel urging that he do what he could to cure Naaman of his leprosy. So Naaman departed, taking with him an enormous treasure with which he thought he could pay for his cleansing. Ten talents of silver would be roughly equivalent to $20,000. The unit of measure is omitted for the gold, but it is likely that the amount would be six thousand shekels weight which would roughly be equivalent to $60,000. Finally, in addition to the silver and gold, Naaman took ten changes of garments to bestow upon his benefactor (2Ki. 5:5).

That Naaman would be able so easily to enter the court of the king of Israel with the letter from his king suggests that the state of hostilities between the two nations temporarily had been suspended. Possibly some kind of treaty arrangement existed between Aram and Israel at this time. The sacred historian gives only the gist or drift of that letter which, no doubt, was draped with all the diplomatic niceties of that day. The letter in effect demanded that the king of Israel cure Naaman of his leprosy (2Ki. 5:6). No mention was made of the prophet. Benhadad assumed that if such a powerful one existed in the realm of Israel, he would certainly be known to the king and would be at his beck and call. He can hardly be expected to have comprehended the relationship that existed between a king of Israel and a prophet of the Lord. Naturally the king of Israel was upset by the letter. He tore his clothes and cried, Am I God, to kill and make alive, i.e., am I omnipotent? He did not think of Elisha, probably because he gave no credence to the reports circulating about him. The only conclusion he could reach was that Benhadad was making these extravagant demands as a pretext for more hostility (2Ki. 5:7).

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

V.

ELISHA HEALS NAAMAN THE SYRIANS LEPROSY, AND PUNISHES GEHAZI THEREWITH.

(1) Now.The construction implies a break between this narrative and the preceding. Whether the events related belong to the time of Jehoram or of the dynasty of Jehu is not clear. Evidently it was a time of peace between Israel and Syria.

Naaman (beauty).A title of the sun-god. (See Note on Isa. 17:10.)

A great man with his master.Literally, before his lord. (Comp. Gen. 10:9.)

Honourable.In special favour. Literally, lifted up of face. (Comp. 2Ki. 3:14, Note; Isa. 3:3.)

By him the Lord had given deliverance unto Syria.Notice the high prophetic view that it is Jehovah, not Hadad or Rimmon, who gives victory to Syria as well as Israel. (Comp. Amo. 9:7.) It is natural to think of the battle in which Ahab received his mortal wound (1Ki. 22:30, seq.). The Midrash makes Naaman the man who drew the bow at a venture on that occasion. The deliverance was victory over Israel.

He was also a mighty man in valour, but he was a leper.Literally, and the man was a brave warrior, stricken with leprosy. His leprosy need not have been so severe as to incapacitate him for military duties. The victor over Israel is represented as a leper who has to seek, and finds, his only help in Israel (Thenius).

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

THE LEPROSY OF NAAMAN CLEANSED, 2Ki 5:1-19.

Of all Elisha’s miracles of blessing, this cleansing of Naaman’s leprosy was the only one he wrought upon a heathen. His other mighty works of healing or benediction afflicted persons and families in Israel. It was fitting that one famous miracle of healing should be wrought upon a foreigner; a miracle conveying rich moral lessons for all nations and all ages. Naaman’s cure, affected by his meeting the conditions of the word of the Lord through Elisha, is a standing type of salvation from sin by the Gospel.

There were many Israelitish lepers in Elisha’s time, but they were not cleansed, because they sought not unto the God of Elisha. Naaman, the Syrian, manifests a faith not to be found in Israel, and is cleansed. He thus prefigured the Gentiles of a later age, who eagerly asked and received the salvation of God from which many a Jew was cut off because of their unbelief. Compare Luk 4:27.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1. Naaman According to some of the rabbies, he was the man who drew the bow and unintentionally killed Ahab, king of Israel. 1Ki 22:34. Josephus, in giving account of Ahab’s death, makes the same statement, but makes no mention of Naaman’s leprosy, or its cure by Elisha.

Captain of the host of Syria Commander-in-chief of the Syrian army.

A great man with his master That is, greatly prized, loved, and reverenced by his king. In Ben-hadad’s court there was no man so great as Naaman.

By him the Lord had given deliverance unto Syria That is, by some great and famous exploit Naaman had won a memorable victory for the Syrians. Perhaps the very exploit which had secured him this fame and honour with the king was his shooting Ahab.

A mighty man in valour A valiant warrior. He was every inch a soldier, and had gained his honours by valour as well as by fortune.

But he was a leper And this cast a shadow over all his greatness. “Every man,” says Henry, “has some but or other in his character; something that blemishes and diminishes him; some alloy to his grandeur, some damp to his joy; he may be very happy, very good, yet, in something or other, not so good as he should be, nor so happy as he would be. Naaman was as great as the world could make him, and yet the basest slave in Syria would not change skins with him.” In Syria the leprosy was no bar to human society, nor to offices of trust and honour; but in Israel the leper was made to dwell alone, and could not mingle in society. Compare Lev 13:46; Num 5:2 ; 2Ch 26:21. The leprosy is a significant type of sin and spiritual impurity; and how many there are of great worldly honour and power, having all of earth that heart need wish, while in spirit they are lepers!

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

The Healing Of Naaman, The General Of Aram (Syria) And The Smiting Of Gehazi, The Servant Of Elisha ( 2Ki 5:1-27 ).

This is not only a remarkable story in that it recounts the healing by YHWH of an Aramaean general, but also because it indicates the acceptance by YHWH of a foreigner who truly believed, without circumcision. It is a reminder of the unlimited nature of God’s mercy towards all who truly respond to Him. It is also a story of contrasts which demonstrates that God treats all alike, for in contrast to the reception and healing of this foreigner the servant of Elisha was smitten for his great sin of deceit and avarice, in spite of who he was. The greatness of his sin must not be underestimated, for it misrepresented YHWH to one who would have little further contact with the truth, and it was committed by a man of unusual privilege. Furthermore when faced with it he failed to repent, which exacerbated his sin. Repentance and open confession might well have saved him from his fate.

The illness in question was probably not leprosy. Had Naaman had leprosy he would probably not have been able to have such close contact with people, nor enter the king’s presence (compare Lev 13:42-46). It was rather some skin disease that was disfiguring, while still allowing close communication. For Gehazi it would mean being disfigured, and being excluded from close contact with the sanctuary. He obtained his wealth at a cost. It is not certain whether he continued in his favoured position. His presence with the king in 2Ki 8:4-5 may suggest so, but he may have been at court precisely because he was the ex-servant of Elisha.

In the whole account only three people are mentioned by name, Naaman, Elisha and Gehazi. Even the kings are not named. This was in order to put the limelight on the three main characters, without politicising the incident. It was the story of three people.

Overall it is a picture of salvation, for it is a reminder that however spiritually disfigured we may be, God is able and willing to make us wholly clean.

Analysis.

a Now Naaman, captain of the host of the king of Syria, was a great man with his master, and honourable, because by him YHWH had given victory to Syria. He was also a mighty warrior, but he was skin diseased (2Ki 5:1).

b And the Aramaeans (Syrians) had gone out in raiding bands, and had brought away captive out of the land of Israel a little maiden, and she waited on Naaman’s wife (2Ki 5:2).

c And she said to her mistress, “Would that my lord were with the prophet who is in Samaria! Then would he recover him of his skin disease.” And someone went in, and told his lord, saying, “Thus and thus said the maiden who is of the land of Israel” (2Ki 5:3-4).

d And the king of Aram (Syria) said, “Go now, and I will send a letter to the king of Israel.” And he departed, and took with him ten talents of silver, and six thousand pieces of gold, and ten changes of raiment (2Ki 5:5).

e And he brought the letter to the king of Israel, saying, “And now when this letter is come to you, behold, I have sent Naaman my servant to you, that you may recover him of his skin disease.” And it came about, when the king of Israel had read the letter, that he tore his clothes, and said, “Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man sends to me to recover a man of his skin disease? But consider, I pray you, and see how he seeks a quarrel against me” (2Ki 5:6-7).

f And it was so, when Elisha the man of God heard that the king of Israel had torn his clothes, that he sent to the king, saying, “Why have you torn your clothes? Let him come now to me, and he will know that there is a prophet in Israel” (2Ki 5:8).

g So Naaman came with his horses and with his chariots, and stood at the door of the house of Elisha (2Ki 5:9).

h And Elisha sent a messenger to him, saying, “Go and wash in the Jordan seven times, and your flesh will come again to you, and you will be clean” (2Ki 5:10).

i But Naaman was angry, and went away, and said, “See, I thought, he will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of YHWH his God, and wave his hand over the place, and recover the skin disease (2Ki 5:11).

j “Are not Abanah and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? May I not wash in them, and be clean?” So he turned and went away in a rage (2Ki 5:12).

i And his servants came near, and spoke to him, and said, “My father, if the prophet had bid you do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much rather then, when he says to you, Wash, and be clean?” (2Ki 5:13).

h Then he went down, and dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, in accordance with the saying of the man of God, and his flesh came again like the flesh of a little child, and he was clean (2Ki 5:14).

g And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him, and he said, “Look, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel. Now therefore, I pray you, take a present from your servant” (2Ki 5:15)

f But he said, “As YHWH lives, before whom I stand, I will receive none.” And he urged him to take it, but he refused. And Naaman said, “If not, yet, I pray you, let there be given to your servant two mules’ burden of earth, for your servant will henceforth offer neither burnt-offering nor sacrifice to other gods, but to YHWH” (2Ki 5:16-17).

e “In this thing YHWH pardon your servant, when my master goes into the house of Rimmon to worship there, and he leans on my hand, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, when I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, YHWH pardon your servant in this thing.” And he said to him, “Go in peace.” So he departed from him a little way (2Ki 5:18-19).

d But Gehazi the servant of Elisha the man of God, said, “Behold, my master has spared this Naaman the Syrian, in not receiving at his hands what he brought. As YHWH lives, I will run after him, and take somewhat of him. So Gehazi followed after Naaman. And when Naaman saw one running after him, he alighted from the chariot to meet him, and said, “Is all well?” And he said, “All is well. My master has sent me, saying, ‘Behold, even now there are come to me from the hill-country of Ephraim two young men of the sons of the prophets. Give them, I pray you, a talent of silver, and two changes of clothing.” And Naaman said, “Be pleased to take two talents.” And he urged him, and bound two talents of silver in two bags, with two changes of clothing, and laid them on two of his servants, and they bore them before him (2Ki 5:20-23).

c And when he came to the hill, he took them from their hand, and placed them in the house, and he let the men go, and they departed. But he went in, and stood before his master. And Elisha said to him, “From where have you come, Gehazi?” And he said, Your servant went nowhere” (2Ki 5:24-25).’

b And he said to him, “Did not my heart go with you, when the man turned from his chariot to meet you? Is it a time to receive money, and to receive clothing, and oliveyards and vineyards, and sheep and oxen, and men-servants and maid-servants?” ’(2Ki 5:26).

a “The skin disease therefore of Naaman will cleave to you, and to your seed for ever.” And he went out from his presence skin diseased, as white as snow (2Ki 5:27).

Note that in ‘a’ Naaman was skin diseased, and in the parallel the skin disease was affected Gehazi. In ‘b’ the Aramaeans had obtained a maid-servant of Israel, and in the parallel it was not a time for seeking maid-servants (among others). In ‘c’ the maid went to her mistress with a message of truth, and in the parallel Gehazi went to his master with a lie. In ‘d’ Naaman took with him a large gift, and in the parallel a handsome gift was given to Gehazi. In ‘e’ the king of Israel considered the approach in order to cure Naaman to be an attempt to make war, and in the parallel Naaman was sent away cured in peace. In ‘f’ Naaman was to know that there was a genuine prophet in Israel, and in the parallel he demonstrated that he had learned it by his request for the means of worshipping YHWH. In ‘g’ Naaman and his entourage stood at Elisha’s door, and in the parallel he and his entourage again stood at the prophet’s door. In ‘h’ Elisha commanded Naaman to wash seven times in the Jordan, and in the parallel he did so. In ‘i’ Naaman was angry and rode off with no intention of doing what Elisha had said, and in the parallel his servants persuaded him to do it. Centrally in ‘j’ he considered that his country’s own rivers were superior to the Jordan, indicating his view that the gods of Aram were superior.

2Ki 5:1

‘Now Naaman, captain of the host of the king of Aram (Syria), was a great man with his master, and honourable, because by him YHWH had given victory to Aram (Syria). He was also a mighty warrior, but he was a leper.’

As we have already seen the kingdom of Aram had grown strong and powerful and a constant threat to its neighbours. The kingdom consisted of a small number of petty kings over cities under the control of the king in Damascus, plus a good number of tribal chieftains over tribes which had their own semi-independent way of life, but were responsive to the call of the king of Aram whenever he needed men for his warfare.

Naaman was commander over all the hosts of Aram. He was thus a great man, and highly respected because of his continual victories over other nations. To be ‘honourable’ meant literally ‘to have his face lifted up’, something permitted by the king only to those whom he honoured. And he was a great warrior. But he had one problem. He had a disfiguring skin disease. His name was a common local name as testified to at Ugarit.

It is noteworthy that the prophetic author, or his source, imputes his victories to YHWH, just as Isaiah would impute Assyria’s victories to YHWH (e.g. Isa 10:5; Isa 10:15), while Jeremiah would see Nebuchadnezzar as His servant (Jer 27:6). All saw YHWH as God over all the earth.

2Ki 5:2

‘And the Aramaeans had gone out in raiding bands, and had brought away captive out of the land of Israel a little maiden, and she waited on Naaman’s wife.’

These raiding bands would be operating even while there was a period of peace between Israel and Aram, probably being bands from the semi-independent tribes referred to above, who would raid over the border, taking spoils and captives whom they would then sell in the street markets of Damascus. One such captive was a little Israelite maiden who had become servant to Naaman’s wife.

We are left to imagine the sufferings of this young girl. Snatched away from her family, finding herself bundled among strangers, in fear of her life, and sold as a slave in the Damascus street markets. She might well have asked, ‘Why God?’ But God had had a purpose in it which was about to unveil. It was through her witness that the second greatest man in Aram would come to know YHWH, while throughout history her willing helpfulness and love has been an inspiration for millions.

2Ki 5:3

‘And she said to her mistress, “Would that my lord were with the prophet who is in Samaria! Then would he recover him of his leprosy.” ’

One day, the maiden, who was clearly on conversational terms with her mistress, told her how much she wished that ‘her lord’ could be with the prophet in Samaria, who would recover him of his distressing skin disease. It was clearly a great cause of distress, and it was a testimony to Naaman that even his slaves wished him well.

The maiden was clearly familiar with the stories of Elisha’s different miracles and healings, for she was assuming no light thing. It is remarkable evidence of the fame that Elisha had even during his lifetime. Her term for him as a ‘prophet’ (nabi), and she was aware that he was often to be found in Samaria. He appears to have had a house there, from which he would travel to perform his duties to YHWH. This had probably been provided by the king, but he was clearly not a member of the royal court, nor sought to be so. He was YHWH’s man. Indeed the king was seemingly less aware of Elisha’s powers than the common people (2Ki 5:3; 2Ki 8:4), which was to be expected, because it was mainly among the ‘common people’ that he operated.

2Ki 5:4

‘And someone went in, and told his lord, saying, “Thus and thus said the maiden who is of the land of Israel.” ’

The remark was overheard by another well-wisher of Naaman, and that wellwisher went to Naaman and told him what had been said.

2Ki 5:5

‘And the king of Aram said, “Go now, and I will send a letter to the king of Israel.” And he departed, and took with him ten talents of silver, and six thousand pieces of gold, and ten changes of raiment.’

Naaman then clearly went to the king (possibly Benhadad III) who on hearing what he had to say informed him that he should go to Israel with a letter from him to the king of Israel (possibly Jehoram). His assumption was that, as in Aram, prophets would be at the court of the king, and that the king of Israel would know immediately who could do this thing. But he recognised that such prophets did not come cheap (compare Balaam in Num 22:16-17). The deliberate non-mention of the names of the kings confirms that the account comes from prophetic sources, and that the aim was to stress the personal aspect of the incident. The kings are being side-lined.

The gift he took was huge, as befitted a king seeking a huge favour from another king with whom he was at peace (compare the gifts of the Queen of Sheba to Solomon). Omri had bought the hill of Samaria for two talents of silver (1Ki 16:24), thus the silver alone was five times that paid for the hill. (On the other hand it had only seemingly been grazing land). And there was also a lesser amount of gold, presumably coming to less than a talent, and ten changes of expensive clothing (or rolls of cloth for making such clothing). The king recognised that he was asking for ‘supernatural powers’ to be exercised, and knew that they did not come cheap. But the amount was not too exorbitant considering what was being asked for.

Correspondence like this between kings has been well evidenced by the Amarna letters, while inter-state letters on medical matters, often connected with the giving of gifts, have been discovered at Mari, and in Hittite and Assyrian archives.

2Ki 5:6

‘And he brought the letter to the king of Israel, saying, “And now when this letter is come to you, behold, I have sent Naaman my servant to you, that you may recover him of his skin disease.” ’

The ‘he’ was presumably Naaman, while the ‘saying’ refers to the contents of the letter. The king of Aram was assuming that a prophet who could do such wonders would be a leading figure at court, and fully known to the king of Israel. He thus requested that the should arrange (with the prophet) to ‘recover’ Naaman of his leprosy. In his experience, given sufficient payments, such prophets would be quite happy to oblige in whatever was asked of them, assuming that they could.

‘My servant.’ In other words a high official at court.

The word for ‘recover’ (’asaph) was an unusual one to use of healing (compare 2Ki 5:3) and in the letter of a foreign king probably had in mind the asipu, the Mesopotamian ritual physicians.

2Ki 5:7

‘And it came about, when the king of Israel had read the letter, that he tore his clothes, and said, “Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man sends to me to recover a man of his skin disease? But consider, I pray you, and see how he seeks a quarrel against me.” ’

But the king of Israel, on receiving Naaman and on receiving the letter, was distraught, and ripped his clothes symbolically indicating intense feeling. He did not even think of Elisha, (demonstrating how little the Yahwistically unorthodox court knew about him), and therefore could not see how he could possibly oblige his fellow-king. But he knew that he was not God, ‘to kill and to make alive’ (the reader remembers what Elijah and Elisha had done), how then could he cure a man of severe skin disease? He could only see it as an attempt to pick a quarrel with him in order to justify an invasion.

Royalty had in fact a reputation for having healing powers, and no doubt some were psychologically healed by their touch. But it was a gift rarely seen in action, and certainly not one that could be called on at will. He thus felt that the king of Aram was taking things too far.

2Ki 5:8

‘And it was so, when Elisha the man of God heard that the king of Israel had torn his clothes, that he sent to the king, saying, “Why have you torn your clothes? Let him come now to me, and he will know that there is a prophet in Israel.” ’

The news of what had happened reached Elisha in his house in Samaria, probably through an orthodox Yahwist at court (compare 1Ki 18:3). And when he learned that he had torn his royal robes he sent him a message asking him why he had done so, pointing out that if only Naaman would come to him he would soon know that there was a genuine prophet in Israel.

2Ki 5:9

‘So Naaman came with his horses and with his chariots, and stood at the door of the house of Elisha.’

Accordingly Naaman arrived at Elisha’s house with his horses and chariots. He wanted to overawe with his splendour. There was nothing about him that remotely approached a humble seeker after God. The fact that he could do so indicated that Samaria was unusually well laid out, and that Elisha lived near the king’s palace in an ‘expensive’ area where there were wide roads. In most cities of the day chariots and horses would have been unable to move among the houses, which would be straggled together haphazardly. But Samaria had been built by a king who had had horses and chariots in mind, at least with regard to the approach to his own palace. Thus Naaman’s whole entourage found itself at Elisha’s door.

We can see from what follows what Elisha’s thinking was. This great man was arriving in royal authority, he would high-handedly pay a large sum of money, the healing would take place, and he would leave as arrogantly as he came, feeling that he had given YHWH all that He required so that that was the end of the matter (this was why Gehazi’s sin was so serious). Everyone was satisfied.

But Elisha was determined that he should humble himself before YHWH, and that he should go away aware of the gratitude and worship that he owed to Him.

2Ki 5:10

‘And Elisha sent a messenger to him, saying, “Go and wash in the Jordan seven times, and your flesh will come again to you, and you will be clean.” ’

So Elisha did not come out himself but sent word through a messenger. Elisha was no man-pleaser. And he was concerned that all the glory for what was about to happen should go to YHWH. And that Naaman should recognise that while he, Naaman, was a servant of the king of Aram, he, Elisha was a servant of the Supreme King, YHWH of Hosts, and was therefore no whit inferior to Naaman. So instead of coming out and bowing obsequiously, or even as an equal, he sent a note telling Naaman to go to the River Jordan and wash in it seven times. Then his flesh would be restored, and he would be ritually clean. .It was deliberately given as a command from a superior, YHWH of Hosts, with Elisha simply as His messenger. And it was an indication that Naaman must not look to him, but to the God of Israel whose river (in Naaman’s terms) was the Jordan, which lay within His inheritance. The fact that he was called on to do it seven times gave the dipping a deliberately supernatural connection, and was an important part of the message. It would make Naaman recognise that he was dealing with the divine.

2Ki 5:11

‘But Naaman was angry, and went away, and said, “Look, I thought, he will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of YHWH his God, and wave his hand over the place, and recover the skin disease.” ’

Naaman was livid. He felt that he was not being treated properly at all. He had assumed that like all good soothsayers and magicians Elisha would come out, stand in front of him, mutter incantations, wave his hands over him, and heal him of his skin disease. And instead he had dismissed him with a message to go and wash in Israel’s dirty, sluggish river. He did not as yet make the connection between YHWH and the river as His inheritance, and he did not yet realise that Elisha served the living God and had no part in such rituals.

2Ki 5:12

“Are not Abanah and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? May I not wash in them, and be clean?” So he turned and went away in a rage.’

Indeed he was greatly insulted. Were not Abana and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better far that all the waters in Israel? Why could he not wash in them? (The answer unspoken was that then he would give the credit to the gods of Damascus). How dared the prophet send him to wash in a measly Israelite river? And he turned away from Elisha’s house in a rage.

These rivers flowed from the snow covered Amanus mountains (named in Assyrian records) and/or from Mount Hermon. There are still today two ‘rivers of Damascus’. It is true that the particular names used here are unknown, having clearly been altered at a later date, but there is no reason to doubt that they are correct, although the alternative Amana for Abana is possible. The Abana is probably modern Barada. The name of the river Pharpar (now el-‘Awaj) may well have been carried on in a tributary river still called the Wadi Barbar.

2Ki 5:13

‘And his servants came near, and spoke to him, and said, “My father, if the prophet had bid you do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much rather then, when he says to you, Wash, and be clean?” ’

Fortunately for Naaman his followers were wiser than he (they of course did not feel that they had been insulted). They pointed out to him that if Elisha had called on him to perform some difficult feat in order to obtain healing he would have done it. How much rather then should he follow the command to, ‘Wash and be clean.’

The address ‘my father’ is unusual for a man in such a position, but it may indicate the unusual respect and loyalty he received from his followers. Or the speaker may have been a close body servant.

2Ki 5:14

‘Then he went down, and dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, in accordance with the saying of the man of God, and his flesh came again like the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.’

So reluctantly, and still seething, Naaman humbled himself and did what Elisha, ‘the man of God’, had commanded. He dipped himself seven times in the Jordan. And to his amazement, and the amazement of all his servants (even granted their superstitious belief in prophets) his flesh became as smooth as a child’s and he was made ritually clean. For years he had been the talking point of men and women, and had been self-conscious about his appearance, and now it was all over. No one would ever sneer at, or point at, his disfigurement again. It wrought within him a complete transformation. Fury had changed into gratitude, arrogance into humility, confidence in the gods and rivers of Damascus into faith in YHWH. He was a new man.

2Ki 5:15

‘And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him, and he said, “Look, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel. Now therefore, I pray you, take a present from your servant.” ’

What a different man it was who returned to the house of ‘the man of God’. It was the same entourage, but arriving in a totally different manner. It was now he who stood before the man of God, recognising his superiority. Here was a man who was in touch with God. And he cried, “Look, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel.” And he begged him to accept a present from one who was now his ‘servant’, because he, Elisha, represented YHWH. He wanted to demonstrate his wholehearted gratitude liberally.

His words indicate a recognition of at least the superiority of YHWH, as the one who had done this might miracle, and as thus the only God Who counted in all the earth. He had no doubt sought to many gods, but there had been no answer. Here, however, was a God Who answered.

2Ki 5:16

‘But he said, “As YHWH lives, before whom I stand, I will receive none.” And he urged him to take it, but he refused.’

But in spite of Naaman’s continuing urging Elisha refused to accept any gift. To have done so would have served to destroy the new relationship between Naaman and YHWH. Elisha knew how quickly such a relationship might die once Naaman felt that he as YHWH’s prophet had been ‘paid off’. On the other hand while he was the recipient of YHWH’s freely dispensed goodness his heart would remain faithful to YHWH.

2Ki 5:17

‘And Naaman said, “If not, yet, I pray you, let there be given to your servant two mules’ burden of earth, for your servant will henceforth offer neither burnt-offering nor sacrifice to other gods, but to YHWH.” ’

Naaman responded by indicating that he would continue to express his gratitude by worshipping YHWH as the only true God. And in order that he might do this he asked Elisha for two mules’ burden of earth. This request might not be as strange as it first seems. It did not arise because he felt that YHWH the God of the whole earth, could only be worshipped on the soil of Israel (a rather naive idea believed nowhere in Israel. Israelites prayed to Him wherever they were). It was rather because he was aware that the only altar that could be acceptable to YHWH according to Israelite Law, was an altar of earth built where YHWH had recorded His Name (Exo 20:24). And while there was nowhere in Aram where YHWH had recorded His Name, the next best thing would be to worship at an altar built of the material from the earth of the place where YHWH had recorded His Name. This idea no doubt came to him as a result of the teaching that Elisha had given him in their conversation together. (And one of the reasons for Elisha’s later visits to Aram may well have been in order to educate Naaman more fully in the things of YHWH – 2Ki 8:7).

Thus Naaman had the idea of building an altar of Israelite earth which had been taken from the land of YHWH’s inheritance, just as he had been healed by water in the same land.

2Ki 5:18

“In this thing YHWH pardon your servant, when my master goes into the house of Rimmon to worship there, and he leans on my hand, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, when I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, YHWH pardon your servant in this thing.”

The depths of Naaman’s ‘conversion’ comes out in this request. He was aware that he must worship only YHWH. But his duties demanded that he stand next to the king of Aram as his supporter when he was worshipping in the Temple of Rimmon (compare how to some extent Obadiah might have had a similar problem – 1 Kings 18). He asked therefore that he might be forgiven if at such a time he bowed his head so as to show respect to his earthly master. It was not to be seen as really bowing to Rimmon, something which he could now never do, but to YHWH, and he requested that YHWH might pardon him for even appearing to bow to Rimmon. It is clear that Naaman had been thinking things through as he travelled.

Rimmon is probably a variation of Ramman (from Assyrian ‘Ramanu’ – the thunderer), which was a title of the Damascene god Hadad. Note how Ben-hadad I’s father was called Tab-rimmon (1Ki 15:18).

2Ki 5:19

‘And he said to him, “Go in peace.” So he departed from him a little way (literally ‘a region of land’).’

We may presumably assume from the reply given (‘go in well-being’) that YHWH recognised the genuine dilemma and indicated that He would see such an attitude for what it really was, an act of etiquette, and would thus pardon it. The idea behind ‘go in peace’ is that it represents the confirmation of a covenant. All was well between them. And the result was that Naaman went on his way with his heart full of praise to YHWH.

But he had not gone far when he was to witness the duplicity of someone who claimed to be a servant of YHWH.

2Ki 5:20

‘But Gehazi the servant of Elisha the man of God, said, “Behold, my master has spared this Naaman the Aramaean, in not receiving at his hands what he brought. As YHWH lives, I will run after him, and take somewhat of him.” ’

For Gehazi’s thoughts were full of greed. He felt that Elisha had spared Naaman, (‘this Naaman the Aramaean’ indicating his contempt for foreigners) by not accepting the gifts that Naaman had brought, and he thought how nice it would be if he himself could benefit by it. After all Naaman would not miss it. He did not consider the fact that such an act might have a bad effect on Naaman’s new found faith, nor that Naaman was now a new found ‘brother in YHWH’. There is an irony in his words, ‘As YHWH lives’, while at the same time he thought that he could get away with sinning, by keeping it from the same ‘living God’. There was a contradiction in his ideas (and yet how often we do the same). He should have known that there could only be one consequence. But he dismissed such a thought and decided to run after Naaman and ask for a gift.

2Ki 5:21

‘So Gehazi followed after Naaman. And when Naaman saw one running after him, he alighted from the chariot to meet him, and said, “Is all well?” ’

Naaman, moving along at a leisurely pace (the roads were often not suitable for chariots), saw Gehazi running after them and alighted from his chariot to meet him. Gone was the old arrogant Naaman. Now he was the new concerned Naaman. And he was concerned lest something had gone wrong with Gehazi’s master.

2Ki 5:22

‘And he said, “All is well. My master has sent me, saying, ‘Behold, even now there are come to me from the hill-country of Ephraim two young men of the sons of the prophets. Give them, I pray you, a talent of silver, and two changes of clothing.” ’

Gehazi assured him that all was well and then began to spin a story about the unexpected arrival of two young men of the sons of the prophets, who had seemingly come in need. Could Naaman let them have a talent of silver and two changes of clothing?

2Ki 5:23

‘And Naaman said, “Be pleased to take two talents.” And he urged him, and bound two talents of silver in two bags, with two changes of clothing, and laid them on two of his servants, and they bore them before him.’

The unsuspicious Naaman pressed on him two talents of silver, one for each of the fictitious men, as well as the two changes of clothing. He also supplied two men to carry the silver and clothing for Gehazi (‘talent’ is a weight, not a type of coin. Thus the silver would be heavy).

Some see the two men as being servants of Gehazi, but the above seems a more likely scenario to us.

2Ki 5:24

‘And when he came to the hill, he took them from their hand, and placed them in the house, and he let the men go, and they departed.’

Once they came to the hill of Samaria Gehazi took the goods from their hands and sent them on their way. It would never do for Elisha to spot them. And so they departed. We note that Gehazi’s sins are mounting up. First greed. Then taking YHWH’s Name in vain. Then despising a foreigner. Then lying and fraud. And now duplicity. This will be followed by lying to a prophet. But the worst thing of all was that he had interfered in the prophetic process, and misrepresented Elisha. He had been building up judgment on himself.

2Ki 5:25

‘But he went in, and stood before his master. And Elisha said to him, “From where have you come, Gehazi?” And he said, “Your servant went nowhere.” ’

Having bestowed the goods in a safe place hiding place Gehazi went to face his master, secure in the knowledge that he knew nothing. Then Elisha asked where he had been. He was providing an opportunity for Gehazi to confess his fault. But Gehazi replied glibly, “Your servant went nowhere.” He had missed his opportunity.

2Ki 5:26

‘And he said to him, “Did not my heart go with you, when the man turned from his chariot to meet you? Is it a time to receive money, and to receive clothing, and oliveyards and vineyards, and sheep and oxen, and men-servants and maid-servants?” ’

Then Elisha looked at him sternly. He pointed out that prophetically he had been with him ‘in his heart’ when Naaman had climbed down from his chariot. He therefore knew everything that he had done.

Then he asked him whether he really thought that this was a time to be thinking of accumulating wealth and servants, when it was a time when YHWH had wrought a great miracle and an important man’s life had been transformed. It meant that a man had come to know YHWH , and also that Israel would from now on have a firm friend in the counsels of Aram (Syria). The wide sphere covered by his words indicated that they were meant not just for Gehazi, but for all whose emphasis was on increasing wealth. (The prophetic author regularly brings out the dangers of wealth). Elisha’s mind was reaching out beyond Gehazi to the behaviour and attitude of many in Israel (compare Amo 2:6-8; Isa 5:8).

Note the parallel with the maid-servant in 2Ki 5:2. It was indicating that it was not a time for tit for tat. Deeper purposes were at work.

2Ki 5:27

“The skin disease therefore of Naaman will cleave to you, and to your seed for ever.” And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow.’

The chapter began with a man badly skin diseased, and now it ends with a man badly skin diseased. For YHWH’s judgment on Gehazi was that, because of the awful nature of his sin, and the privileged position that he had enjoyed and abused, he would experience Naaman’s skin disease and that it would be passed on in his family continually. And sure enough Gehazi went out from his presence as white as snow. The vividness of the description is taken from Exo 4:6.

It is perhaps possible that the clothing which Naaman had passed on to him had also been a means of his infection with Naaman’s skin disease, and that his family were especially prone to it, although if so the process was speeded up in Gehazi’s case. It is important to recognise that his punishment arose because, being in a privileged position he had allowed his avarice to persuade him to misrepresent YHWH. And that at a crucial time in Israel’s history. No sin could be worse than that.

The Lord Jesus Christ would take this example of Elisha’s healing of Naaman the Aramaean as an illustration of the fact that God’s love reached out to the nations as well as to the Jews (Luk 4:27). It is a reminder to us that God’s love is open to us no matter what our background.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Elisha Miracles (2Ki 2Ki 2:1-25 ; 2Ki 4:1 to 2Ki 6:23 ), His Prophetic Involvement In The Victory Over Moab ( 2Ki 3:1-27 ), And Further Subsequent Events Where YHWH’s Power Through Elisha Is Revealed ( 2Ki 6:24 to 2Ki 8:15 ).

We move away in this section from the annals of the kings of Israel and Judah, to the memoirs of the sons of the prophets, although even then possibly intermingled with further extracts from the official annals (e.g. 2Ki 3:1-27). The events that will follow, in which YHWH’s power through his prophet Elisha is remarkably revealed, were crucial to the maintenance of faith in YHWH at a time of gross apostasy. Just as YHWH through Moses had boosted the faith of Israel at the Exodus with specific miracles, and just as Jesus Himself would evidence His Messiahship by even greater miracles (Mat 11:2-6), followed by miracles which accredited His Apostles (Mar 16:17-18; Act 4:29-30; Act 5:12; Heb 2:3-4) so now in these perilous times for Yahwism (the worship of YHWH, the God of Israel), God encouraged the faithful by miracles, some of which were remarkably similar, although lesser in extent, to those of Jesus. To call them pointless, as some have done, is to ignore the privations and dangers facing the ‘sons of the prophets’ and all true Yahwists, dangers under which the very core of the faithful in Israel were living. Under such circumstances they needed their faith boosting in special ways. It is not without note that similar miracles have been experienced through the ages when Christian men and women have been facing up to particular difficulties and persecutions (as with the Corrie Ten Boom miracle described previously at 1Ki 17:16).

It is also interesting to note that in some ways Elisha’s spate of miracles can be seen as having commenced with his seeing a ‘resurrection’, accompanied by a reception of the Spirit, as Elijah was snatched up into Heaven. It may be seen as a pointer to the future.

Note On The Two Contrasting Scholastic Approaches To These Passages.

Scholars are basically divided into two groups when considering these passages. On the one hand are those who believe that God was ready to perform special miracles in certain circumstances, in this case in view of the parlous situation in which most in Israel had mainly lost their faith, and on the other are those who dogmatically assert that such miracles could not have taken place per se, and that they must therefore be seen as legendary a priori (thus they speak of them as ‘saga’). Clearly the sceptical scholar must then find some way of discrediting, at least partially, the material in question, but when they do, it should only in fairness be recognised on their side, that they often do so on the basis of their dogmatic presuppositions, (which they are, of course, perfectly entitled to in a free world), and not on the basis of the text. Indeed had no miracles been involved it is doubtful whether, on the whole, they would have reached the same literary conclusions as the ones they now argue for (and disagree with each other about, like us all).

For the truth is that there are no grounds in the text for rejecting the miracles. Indeed in view of the soberness with which they are presented we can argue that there are actually grounds for accepting that the miracles did occur in front of eyewitness. The case is thus really settled by these scholars on the basis of external presuppositions and philosophical presumptions, which, of course, we all have (or in some cases even through fear of what their fellow scholars might think).

Unfortunately for these scholars their problem is exacerbated by the quantity and diversity of the miracles, and the differing places where they come in the text. Thus their ‘explanations’ have to become many and varied, one might almost say amusing in their complexity, were it not for the seriousness of the issue involved. For the author was not generous enough to limit his account of miracles to one section alone. Thus they even appear in passages almost certainly taken from the official annals of the kings of Israel and Judah. It must be recognised that many of these scholastic interpretations are based simply on the initial dogmatic position that ‘miracles do not happen’ so that they feel it incumbent on them to find another explanation. The literary arguments are then often manoeuvred in order to ‘prove’ their case. because they are convinced that it must be so. As a result they find what they want to find (a danger with us all). That is not the right way in which to approach literary criticism.

While we ourselves are wary of too glib a claim to ‘miracles’ through the ages, and would agree that large numbers of them have been manufactured for convenience, or accepted on insufficient grounds while having natural explanations, we stand firmly on the fact that at certain stages in history, of which this was one, God has used the miraculous in order to deliver His people. And we therefore in each case seek to consider the evidence. There are no genuine grounds for suggesting that prophetic writers enhanced miracles. Indeed it is noteworthy that outside the Exodus and the Conquest, the time of Elijah and Elisha, and the times of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, such miracles in Scripture were comparatively rare events. It will also be noted that Elisha undoubtedly had a reputation in his own time as a wonderworker (2Ki 5:3; 2Ki 6:12; 2Ki 8:4). We thus accept the genuineness of the miracles of Elijah and Elisha, considering that it is the only explanation that fits the soberness of the accounts with which we are presented, just as we similarly accept the similar miracles of Jesus Christ and His Apostles because of Who He proved Himself to be.

And that is the point. We do not just accept such miracles by an act of optional faith, or because we are ‘credulous’. We accept them as a reality because they were a reality to Jesus Christ, and because we know that we have sufficient evidence from His life and teaching to demonstrate that Jesus Christ was Who He claimed to be, the only and unique Son of God. And we remember that He clearly assumed Elijah’s and Elisha’s miracles to have been authentic (Luk 4:26-27; Luk 9:54-56). Our belief in the miracles of Elijah and Elisha is thus finally founded on our belief in Jesus Christ as the true and eternal Son of God.

(This is not to make any judgments about the genuine Christian beliefs among some who disagree with us. Man has an infinite capacity to split his mind into different boxes).

End of note.

This Elisha material from 2Ki 2:1 to 2Ki 8:15 can be divided into two sections, which are clearly indicated:

1). SECTION 7 (2Ki 2:1 to 2Ki 3:27). After the taking of Elijah into Heaven Elisha enters Canaan as Israel had before him, by parting the Jordan, and then advances on Jericho, where he brings restored water to those who believe, after which he advances on Bethel, where he brings judgment on those who are unbelievers. And this is followed by a summary of the commencement of the reign of Jehoram, and an incident in his life where Elisha prophesies the provision of water for the host of Israel, something which is then followed by the sacrificing, by the rebellious and unbelieving king of Moab, of his son (2Ki 2:1 to 2Ki 3:27). In both these incidents the purpose of his ministry is brought out, that is, to bring blessing to true believers, and judgment on those who have turned from YHWH,

2). SECTION 8 (2Ki 4:1 to 2Ki 8:15). In this section the kings of Israel are deliberately anonymous while the emphasis is on YHWH’s wonderworking power active through Elisha which continues to be effectively revealed (2Ki 4:1 to 2Ki 8:15). The kings simply operate as background material to this display of YHWH’s power. In contrast from 2Ki 8:16 the reign of Jehoram is again specifically taken up, signalling the commencement of a new section with the kings once more prominent.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

SECTION 8. The Wonder-working Ministry Of Elisha ( 2Ki 4:1 to 2Ki 8:15 )

It will be noted that from this point on, until 2Ki 8:15, no king of Israel is mentioned by name, even though, for example, Naaman’s name is given in chapter 5, and Ben-hadad, the king of Aram, is mentioned in 2Ki 6:24; 2Ki 8:7. (The reign of Jehoram then recommences in 2Ki 8:16). It is clear that the prophetic author was concerned at this point that our attention should be taken away from the kings to the wonder-working power of YHWH through His prophet Elisha. The kings (and the chronology) were not considered important. It was the events, and the advancement of God’s kingdom through Elisha that were seen as important in contrast with the failure of the kings.

Overall Analysis.

a A prophet’s widow comes to Elisha in her destitution and Elisha multiplies oil for her (2Ki 4:1-7).

b Elisha raises to life and restores to a Shunammite her only son (2Ki 4:8-37).

c Elisha restores a stew for his followers and feeds a hundred men on twenty small cakes of bread (2Ki 4:38-44).

d The skin of the skin-diseased Naaman of Aram, who comes seeking Elisha in peace, is made pure as a babe’s (2Ki 5:1-27).

e The borrowed axe-head is made to float, a symbol of the need for Israel to have its sharp edge restored by Elisha (2Ki 6:1-7).

d The Aramaeans, who came seeking Elisha in hostility, are blinded (2Ki 6:8-23).

c Elisha restores food to the people at the siege of Samaria, and feeds a large number on Aramaean supplies (2Ki 6:24 to 2Ki 7:20).

b The king restores to the Shunammite her land (2Ki 8:1-6).

a Benhadad of Aram sends to Elisha in his illness and is assured that he will not die of his illness, but Elisha declares that nevertheless he will die, as it turns out, through assassination by Hazael (2Ki 8:7-15).

Note that in ‘a’ Elisha is approached by a prophet’s widow in her need and is provided for, and in the parallel Elisha is approached on behalf of the king of Aram in his need and is reassured, although then being assassinated. Once more we have the contrast between blessing and judgment. In ‘b’ the Shunammite receives her son back to life, and in the parallel she receives her land back. In ‘c’ the stew is restored as edible in the midst of famine and the bread is multiplied to feed the sons of the prophets, and in the parallel food is restored to the besieged in a time of famine, and is multiplied to them. In ‘d’ Naaman an Aramaean comes in peace and is restored to health, and in the parallel Aramaeans come in hostility and are blinded. Centrally in ‘e’ the borrowed axe-head, symbolic of Israel’s cutting edge, is restored to its possessor.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

2Ki 5:1-27 The Healing of Naaman the Syrian 2Ki 5:1-27 records the story of the healing of Naaman the Syrian. Note the proposed acrostic outline for this passage of Scripture:

2Ki 5:1-7 Naaman’s leprosy

2Ki 5:8-14 Naaman’s lesson

2Ki 5:15-19 Naaman’s Lord (YHWH)

2Ki 5:20-27 Gehazi’s lie and leprosy

2Ki 5:5 And the king of Syria said, Go to, go, and I will send a letter unto the king of Israel. And he departed, and took with him ten talents of silver, and six thousand pieces of gold, and ten changes of raiment.

2Ki 5:5 Comments – Note that when this military general wanted to enter the land of Israel, he had the wisdom to follow protocol. Had Naaman went directly to Elisha, the king of Israel might have been suspicious and confronted him in battle; but the act of a Syrian general bringing gifts unto the king testified to a friendly visit.

2Ki 5:10  And Elisha sent a messenger unto him, saying, Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean.

2Ki 5:10 “seven times” – Comments – Note that the Mosaic Law requires that a leper be sprinkled seven times as a part of the cleansing process (Lev 14:7).

Lev 14:7, “And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times , and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose into the open field.”

2Ki 5:11 But Naaman was wroth, and went away, and said, Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the LORD his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper.

2Ki 5:11 Comments – Because Naaman was a proud man, God chose to give him something that was humbling as an act of obedience. Humility is the first step towards obedience.

2Ki 5:11 Word Study on “wroth” Strong says the Hebrew word “wrothrage” ( ) (H7107) literally means, “to crack off,” and figuratively, it means, “to burst out in rage.” The Enhanced Strong says it is used 34 times in the Old Testament, being translated in the KJV as, “wroth 22, wrath 5, displeased 3, angry 2, angered 1, fret 1.”

2Ki 5:12 Are not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? may I not wash in them, and be clean? So he turned and went away in a rage.

2Ki 5:12 Word Study on “rage” Strong says the Hebrew word “rage” ( ) (H2534) literally means, “heat,” and figuratively, “anger, poison.” The Enhanced Strong says it is used 124 times in the Old Testament, being translated in the KJV as, “fury 67, wrath 34, poison 6, furious 4, displeasure 3, rage 2, anger 1, bottles 1, furious + 01167 1, furiously 1, heat 1, indignation 1, wrathful 1, wroth 1.” Strong says it comes from the primitive root ( ) (H3179) meaning, “to be hot, to conceive.”

Comments – Naaman was angry when he began to speak and he was in a rage when he was finished speaking. He was displeased and angry when he began to speak and “hot” after he had finished speaking. How often have we experienced how our words often fuel our emotions rather than bringing them under control. We learn that it is often best to hold our peace when our emotions are stirred and deal with the situation when our emotions are under control.

2Ki 5:13 And his servants came near, and spake unto him, and said, My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it? how much rather then, when he saith to thee, Wash, and be clean?

2Ki 5:14  Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.

2Ki 5:14 “seven times” – Comments – To bow down to someone seven times was a typical Eastern response the represented complete submission. Jacob bowed seven times to Esau his brother in a desperate act of submission (Gen 33:3).

Gen 33:3, “And he passed over before them, and bowed himself to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother.”

2Ki 5:20  But Gehazi, the servant of Elisha the man of God, said, Behold, my master hath spared Naaman this Syrian, in not receiving at his hands that which he brought: but, as the LORD liveth, I will run after him, and take somewhat of him.

2Ki 5:20 Comments – Gehazi was covetous in his heart and could not bear to see this gain be refused by Elisha.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Reign of Jehoram Over Israel (852-841 B.C.) 2 Kings 2Ki 3:1 to 2Ki 8:15 records the reign of Jehoram over the northern kingdom of Israel. However, much of this material discusses the ministry of the prophet Elisha during his reign as a prophet of God.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Testimony of the Slave Girl

v. 1. Now, Naaman, captain of the host of the king of Syria, the commander-in-chief of the Syrian forces, was a great man with his master, he occupied an influential position in the king’s service, and honorable, highly respected, because by him the Lord had given deliverance unto Syria, in gaining the victory over Ahab and his forces, 1Ki 22:35-36. He was also a mighty man in valor, an excellent military chief; but he was a leper, a fact which made him unfit for the fulfillment of many of his duties.

v. 2. And the Syrians had gone out by companies, on expeditions for the purpose of making plunder, and had brought away captive out of the land of Israel a little maid, a young girl; and she waited on Naaman’s wife, performing the work of a house-slave.

v. 3. And she said unto her mistress, Would God my lord, Naaman, were with the prophet that is in Samaria, for Elisha had his home there, for he would recover him of his leprosy, so that be would be healed and could perform his duties as of old.

v. 4. And one, that is, Naaman, went in and told his lord, the king, saying, Thus and thus said the maid that is of the land of Israel. He placed the proposition before the king for his approval or disapproval.

v. 5. And the king of Syria said, Go to, go, and I will send a letter unto the king of Israel. He was very anxious to have Naaman restored to his former health and vigor. And he, Naaman, departed, and took with him ten talents of silver (almost $20,000) and six thousand pieces of gold (estimated at between $36,000 and $44,000) and ten changes of raiment, special festival dresses.

v. 6. And he brought the letter to the king of Israel, who since Ahab’s defeat was in a certain state of dependence upon the Syrian king, saying, Now, when this letter is come unto thee, behold, I have therewith sent Naaman, my servant, to thee that thou mayest recover him of his leprosy. The king of Syria held the king of Israel responsible for this healing, since he probably thought that he had but to summon the prophet and command him to perform the miracle.

v. 7. And it came to pass, when the king of Israel had read the letter, that he rent his clothes, out of fright and sadness, and said, Am I God to kill and to make alive, that this man doth send unto me to recover a man of his leprosy? He demanded something which only God could do, and therefore plainly made the matter an issue. Wherefore consider, I pray you, and see how he seeketh a quarrel against me. Note that the little slave-girl took the opportunity of testifying to Jehovah’s prophet, thus becoming instrumental in leading Naaman to find the truth a fine example for people in our days.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

2Ki 5:1-27

THE CURE OF NAAMAN‘S LEPROSY. HIS GRATITUDE; AND THE SIN OF GEHAZI, The historian continues his narrative of Elisha’s miracles, commenced in 2Ki 2:1-25; and gives in the present chapter a very graphic and complete account of two which were especially remarkable, and which stood in a peculiar relation the one towards the other. One was the removal of leprosy; the other, its infliction. One was wrought on a foreigner and a man of eminence; the other, on a Hebrew and a servant. The second was altogether consequential upon the first, without which the occasion for it would not have arisen. The two together must have greatly raised the reputation of the prophet, and have given him an influence beyond the borders of the laud of Israel; at the same time extending the reputation of Jehovah as a great God through many of the surrounding nations.

2Ki 5:1

Now Naaman, captain of the host of the King of Syria. The name “Naaman” is here found for the first time. It is thought to be derived from that of an Aramaean god (Ewald), and appears in the later Arabic under the form of Noman, in which shape it is familiar to the students of Arabian history. Benhadad, who had been wont in his youth and middle age to lead his armies into the field in person, seems now in his old age to have found it necessary to entrust the command to a general, and to have made Naaman captain of his host. Compare the similar practice of the Assyrian monarchs. Was a great man with his master, and honorablerather, honored, or held in esteem (, LXX.)because by him the Lord had given deliveranceliterally, salvation, or safety (, LXX.)unto Syria. Probably he had commanded the Syrian army in some of its encounters with the Assyrians, who at this time, under Shalmaneser II; were threatening the independence of Syria, but did not succeed in subjecting it. He was also a mighty man in valorgibbor hail, commonly translated in our version by “mighty man of valor,” does not mean much more than “a good soldier”but he was a leper. Leprosy had many degrees. Some of the lighter kinds did not incapacitate a man for military service, or unfit him for the discharge of court duties (2Ki 5:18). But there was always a danger that the lighter forms might develop into the severer ones.

2Ki 5:2

And the Syrians had gone out by companies; or, in marauding bands. No peace had been made after Ahab’s expedition against Ramoth-Gilead. Hostilities, therefore, still continued upon the borders, where raids were frequent, as upon our own northern border in mediaeval times. And had brought away captive out of the land of Israel a little maid. The marauding expeditions of ancient times had for one of their main objects the capture of slaves. In Africa wars are still carried on chiefly for this purpose. And she waited on Naaman’s wife. Either Naaman had led the expedition, and this particular captive had been assigned to him in the division of the booty, or she had merely passed into his possession by purchase, and thus become one of his wife’s attendants.

2Ki 5:3

And she said unto her mistress, Would God my lord were with the prophet that is in Samaria! literally, Oh that my lord were before the prophet who is in Samaria! Elisha had a house in Samaria (2Ki 6:1-33 :82), where he resided occasionally. For he would recover him of his leprosy. The “little maid” concludes from her small experience that, if her master and the great miracle-working prophet of her own land could be brought together, the result would be his cure. She has, in her servile condition, contracted an affection both for her master and her mistress, and her sympathies are strongly with them. Perhaps she had no serious purpose in speaking as she did. The words burst from her as a mere expression of goodwill. She did not contemplate any action resulting from them. “Oh that things could be otherwise than as they are! Had I my dear master in my own country, it would be easy to accomplish his cure. The prophet is so powerful and so kind. He both could and would recover him.” Any notion of her vague wish being carried out, being made the ground of a serious embassy, was probably far from the girl’s thought. But the “bread cast upon the waters returns after many days.” There is no kind wish or kind utterance that may not have a result far beyond anything that the wisher or utterer contemplated. Good wishes are seeds that ofttimes take root, and grow, and blossom, and bear fruit beyond the uttermost conception of those who sow them.

2Ki 5:4

And one went in, and told his lord, saying. “One went in” is a possible translation; but it is simpler and more natural to translate “he went in,” i.e. Naaman went in, and told his lord, Ben-hadad, the King of Syria. Thus and thus said the maid that is of the land of Israel. Being “of the land of Israel,” her words had a certain weightshe had means of knowingshe ought to know whether such a thing as the cure of leprosy by the intervention of a prophet was a possible occurrence in her country.

2Ki 5:5

And the King of Syria said, Go to, go; rather, Go, depart; i.e. lose no time; go at once, if there is any such possibility as the maiden has indicated. “We see,” Bahr says, “from the king’s readiness, how anxious he was for the restoration of Naaman.” And I will send a letter unto the King of Israel. Letters had been interchanged between Solomon and Hiram, King of Tyro (2Ch 2:3-11), a century earlier; and the communications of king with king in the East, though sometimes carried on orally by ambassadors, probably took place to a large extent by means of letters from a very early date. Written communications seem to have led to the outbreak of the war by which the foreign dynasty of the Hyksos was driven out of Egypt, and the native supremacy reestablished. Written engagements were certainly entered into between the Egyptian kings and the Hittites at a date earlier than the Exodus. Benhadad evidently regards the sending of a letter to a neighboring monarch as a natural and ordinary occurrence. And hei.e. Naamandeparted, and took with him ten talents of silverreckoned by Keil as equal to 25,000 thalers, or 3750; by Thenius as equal to 20,000 thalers, or 3000and six thousand pieces of gold. “Pieces of gold” did not yet exist, since coin had not been invented. Six thousand shekels’ weight of gold is probably intended. This would equal, according to Keil, 50,000 thalers; according to Thenius, 60,000 thalers. Such sums are quite within the probable means of a rich Syrian nobleman of the time, a favorite at court, and the generalissimo of the Syrian army. Naaman evidently supposed that he would have, directly or indirectly, to purchase his cure. And ten changes of raiment (comp. Gen 45:22; Hom; ‘Od.,’ 13:67; Xen; ‘Cyrop.,’ Gen 8:2. 8; ‘ Anab.,’ 1.2. 29; etc.). The practice of giving dresses of honor as presents continues in the East to this day.

2Ki 5:6

And he brought the letter to the King of Israel, saying. The hostile relations between Syria and Israel would not interfere with the coming and going of a messenger from either king to the other, who would be invested with an ambassadorial character. Now when this letter is come unto thee. We must not suppose that we have here the whole letter, which, no doubt, began with the customary Eastern formalities and elaborate compliments. The historian omits these, and hastens to, communicate to us the main point of the epistle, or rather, perhaps, its main drift, which he states somewhat baldly and bluntly. Behold, I have therewith sent Naaman my servant to thee, that thou mayest recover himliterally, and thou shalt recover himof his leprosy. The letter made no mention of Elisha. Ben-hadad assumed that, if the King of Israel had in his dominions a person able to cure leprosy, he would be fully cognizant of the fact, and would at once send for him, and call upon him for an exertion of his gift or art. He is not likely to have comprehended the relations in which Kings of Israel stood towards the Jehovistic prophets, but may probably have thought of Elisha “as a sort of chief magus, or as the Israelitish high priest” (Menken), whom the king would have at his beck and call, and whose services would be completely at his disposal.

2Ki 5:7

And it came to pass, when the King of Israel had read the letter, that he rent his clothes. In horror and alarm. He concluded that once more (see 1Ki 20:7) the Syrian monarch was determined to find a ground of quarrel, and had therefore sent to him an impossible request. And said, Am I God, to kill and to make alive? To “kill” and to “make alive” were familiar expressions in the mouth of the Israelites to designate omnipotence (see Deu 32:39; 1Sa 2:6). Recovering from leprosy was equivalent to making alive, for a leprous person was “as one dead” (Num 12:12) according to Hebrew notions. That this man doth send unto me to recover a man of his leprosy. The king evidently does not bethink himself of Elisha, of whose great miracle of raising the dead to life (2Ki 4:35-36) he may not up to this time have heard. Elisha’s early miracles were mostly wrought with a certain amount of secrecy. Wherefore consider, I pray you, and see how he seeketh a quarrel against me. The king misjudged Benhadad, but not without some grounds of reason, if he was ignorant of Elisha’s miraculous gifts. Benhadad, when seeking a ground of quarrel with Ahab, had made extravagant requests (see 1Ki 20:3-6).

2Ki 5:8

And it was soor, it came to passwhen Elisha the man of God (see 2Ki 4:7, 2Ki 4:16, etc.) had heard that the King of Israel had rent his clothes, that he sent to the king, saying, Wherefore hast thou rent thy clothes? The king’s act was public; his complaint was public; he wished his subjects to know the outrageous conduct, as he viewed it, of the Syrian king. Thus the rumor went through the town, and reached the ears of the prophet, who therefore sent a message to the king. Let him come now to me; i.e. let Naaman, instead of applying to thee, the earthly head of the state, the source of all human power, which is utterly unavailing in such a case, apply to me, the source of spiritual power, the commissioned minister of Jeho-yah, who alone can help him under the circumstances. And [then] he shall know that there is a prophet in Israel; i.e. he shall have swift and sure demonstration, that God “has not left himself without witness,” that, “in spite of the apostasy of king and people, the God who can kill and make alive yet makes himself known in Israel in his saving might through his servants the prophets” (Bahr), of whom I am one.

2Ki 5:9

So Naaman came with his horses and with his chariot. The Syrians had had chariots, and used horses to draw them, from a remote date. The Hyksos, who introduced horses and chariots into Egypt, though not exactly a Syrian people, entered Egypt from Syria; and in all the Syrian wars of the Egyptians, which began about B.C. 1600, we find their adversaries employing a chariot force. In one representation of a fight between the Egyptians and a people invading Egypt from’ Syria, the war-chariots of the latter are drawn by four oxen; but generally the horse was used on both sides. Syria imported her horses and chariots from Egypt (1Ki 10:29), and, as appears from this passage, employed them for peaceful as well as for warlike purposes. There was a similar employment of them from a very early time in Egypt (see Gen 41:43; Gen 50:9). And stood at the door of the house of Elisha. Elisha was at this time residing in Samaria, whether in his own house or not we cannot say. His abode was probably a humble one; and when the great general, accompanied by his cavalcade of followers, drew up before it, he had, we may be sure, no intention of dismounting and entering. What he expected he tells us himself in 2Ki 5:11. The prophet regarded his pride and self-conceit as deserving of a rebuke.

2Ki 5:10

And Elisha sent a messenger unto him. Elisha asserted the dignity of his office. Naaman was “a great man” (2Ki 5:1), with a high sense of his own importance, and regarded the prophet as very much inferior to himself. He expected to be waited on, courted, to receive every possible attention. Elisha no doubt intended very pointedly to rebuke him by remaining in his house, and communicating with the great man by a messenger. But there is no ground for taxing him with “priestly pride,” or even with “impoliteness” on this account. He had to impress upon the Syrian noble the nothingness of wealth and earthly grandeur, and the dignity of the prophetic office. He did not do more than was requisite for these purposes. Saying, Go and wash in Jordan seven times. Elisha speaks no doubt, “by the word of the Lord.” He is directed to require of Naaman a compliance with a somewhat burdensome order. The nearest point on the course of Jordan was above twenty miles distant from Samaria. Naaman is to go thither, to strip himself, and to plunge into the stream seven times. The directions seem given to test his faith. They may be compared with that of our Lord to the blind man, “Go, wash in the pool of Siloam,” and, in another point of view, with that given to Joshua (Jos 6:3-5), and that of Elijah to his servant (1Ki 18:43). To repeat a formal act six times with- out perceiving any result, and yet to persevere and repeat it a seventh time, requires a degree of faith and trust that men do not often possess. And thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean. The scaly leprous scurf shall fall off and reveal clean flesh underneath. Thy body shall be manifestly freed from all defilement.

2Ki 5:11

But Naaman was wroth and said. Not unnaturally. As a “great man,” the lord on whose arm the king leant, and the captain of the host of Syria, Naaman was accustomed to extreme deference, and all the outward tokens of respect and reverence. He had, moreover, come with a goodly train, carrying gold and silver and rich stuffs, manifestly prepared to pay largely for whatever benefit he might receive. To be curtly told, “Go, wash in Jordan,” by the prophet’s servant, without the prophet himself condescending to make himself visible, would have been trying to any Oriental’s temper, and to one of Naaman’s rank and position might well seem an insult. The Syrian general had pictured to himself a very different scene. Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the Name of the Lord his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper; rather, take away the leprosy ( , LXX.). Naaman had imagined a striking scene, whereof he was to be the central figure, the prophet descending, with perhaps a wand of office, the attendants drawn up on either side, the passers-by standing to gazea solemn invocation of the Deity, a waving to and fro of the wand in the prophet’s hand, and a sudden manifest cure, wrought in the open street of the city, before the eyes of men, and at once noised abroad through the capital, so as to make him “the observed of all observers, the cynosure of all neighboring eyes.” Instead of this, he is bidden to go as he came, to ride twenty miles to the stream of the Jordan, generally muddy, or at least discolored, and there to wash himself, with none to look on but his own attendants, with no eclat, no pomp or circumstance, no glory of surroundings. It is not surprising that he was disappointed and vexed.

2Ki 5:12

Are not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? may I not wash in them, and be clean? The “rivers of Damascus” are streams of great freshness and beauty. The principal one is the Barada, probably the Abaua of the present passage, which, rising in the Antilibanus range, and flowing through a series of romantic glens, bursts finally from the mountains through a deep gorge and scatters itself over the plain. One branch passes right through the city of Damascus, cutting it in half. Others flow past the city both on the north and on the south, irrigating the gardens and orchards, and spreading fertility far and wide over the Merj. A small stream, the Fidjeh, flows into the Barada from the north. Another quite independent river, the Awaaj. waters the southern portion of the Damascene plain, but does not approach within several miles of the city. Most geographers regard this as the “Pharpar;” but the identification is uncertain, since the name may very possibly have attached to one of the branches of the Barada. The Barada is limpid, cool, gushing, the perfection of a river: It was known to the Greeks and Romans as the Chrysorrhoas, or “river of gold.” We can well understand that Naaman would esteem the streams of his own city as infinitely superior to the turbid, often sluggish, sometimes “clay-colored” Jordan. If leprosy was to be trashed away, it might naturally have appeared to him that the pure Barada would have more cleansing power than the muddy river recommended to him by the prophet. So he turned and went away in a rage.

2Ki 5:13

And his servants came near, and spake unto him, and said, My father. Naaman’s attendants did not share his indignation, or, if they did, since servants in the East are apt to be jealous of their masters’ honor, had their feelings more under control; and they therefore inter-feted with mild words, anxious to pacify him, and persuade him to follow the prophet’s advice. “My father” is a deferential and, at the same time, an affectionate address, not unnatural in the mouth of a confidential servant. There is thus no need of any alteration of the text, such as Ewald ( for ) or Thenius ( for ) proposes. It must be admitted, however, that the LXX. seem to have had in their copies. If the prophet had bid thee do some great thing“had set thee,” i.e; “some difficult task”wouldest thou not have done it? how much rather then, [shouldest thou perform his behest] when he saith to thee, Wash, and be clean? The reasoning was unanswerable, and took effect. Naaman was persuaded.

2Ki 5:14

Then went he down; i.e. descended into the deep Jordan valley from the highland of Samariaa descent of above a thousand feet. The nearest route would involve a journey of about twenty-five miles. And dipped himself seven times in Jordani.e. followed exactly the prophet’s directions in 2Ki 5:10according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little childliterally, of a little ladand he was clean. Not only was the leprosy removed, hut the flesh was more soft and tender than that of a grown man commonly is. It was like the flesh of a boy.

2Ki 5:15

And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company. It is not always seen what this involved. It involved going out of his way at least fifty miles. At the Jordan, Naaman was on his way home, had accomplished a fourth part of his return journey; in three more days he would be in Damascus, in his own palace. But he feels that it would be an unworthy act to accept his cure and make no acknowledgment of it, having turned away from the prophet “in a rage” (2Ki 5:12), now, without apology, or retraction, or expression of regret or gratitude, to return into his own country under the obligation of an inestimable benefit. His cure has wrought in him, not merely a revulsion of feeling from rage and fury to thankfulness, hut a change of belief. It has convinced him that the God of Elisha is the God of the whole earth. It has turned him from a worshipper of Rimmon into a worshipper of Jehovah. He must proclaim this. He must let the prophet know what is in his heart. He must, if possible, induce him to accept a recompense. Therefore he thinks nothing of an outlay of time and trouble, but retraces his steps to the Israelite capital, taking with him all his company, his horses and his chariots, his gold and silver and bales of clothing, and numerous train of attendants. And came, and stood before him; i.e. descended from his chariot, and asked admittance into the prophet’s house, and was received and allowed an audiencea striking contrast with his previous appearance before the house, in expectation that the prophet would come down and wait upon him. And he said, Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel. This is an acknowledgment of the sole supremacy of Jehovah on the part of a heathen, such as we scarcely find elsewhere. The general belief of the time, and indeed of antiquity, was that every land had its own god, who was supreme in itBaal in Phoenicia, Che-mesh in Moab, Moloch in Ammon, Rimmon in Syria, Bel or Bel-Merodach in Babylon, Amun-Ra in Egypt, etc.; and when there is an acknowledgment of Jehovah on the part of heathens in Scripture, it is almost always the recognition of him as a godthe God of the Jews or of the Israelites, one among many (see Exo 10:16, Exo 10:17; 2Ki 17:26; 2Ki 18:33-35; 2Ch 2:11; Dan 2:47; Dan 3:29; Dan 6:20, etc.). But here we have a plain and distinct recognition of him as the one and only God that is in all the earth. Naaman thus shows a greater docility, a readier receptivity, than almost any of the other pious heathens who are brought before us in Scripture. Balaam and Cyrus alone equal him. Now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessingi.e. “a present”of thy servant. Heathens were accustomed to carry presents to the oracles which they consulted, and to reward those from which they received favorable responses with gifts of enormous value (see Herod; 2Ki 1:14, 50, etc.). The Jewish prophets did net generally object to such free-will offerings. Naaman therefore quite naturally and reasonably made the offer. He would have contravened usage had he not done so.

2Ki 5:16

But he said, As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand, I will receive none. Elisha regards it as best, under the circumstances, to refuse the offered recompense. It was not compulsory on him so to act; for the precept, “Freely ye have received, freely give” (Mat 10:8), had not been yet uttered. Pious Israelites commonly brought gifts to the prophets whom they consulted (1Sa 9:7, 1Sa 9:8; 1Ki 14:3). But, in the case of a foreigner, ignorant hitherto of true religion, whom it was important to impress favorably, and, if possible, win over to the faith, Elisha deemed it advisable to take no reward. Naaman was thus taught that Jehovah was his true Healer, the prophet the mere instrument, and that it was to Jehovah that his gratitude, his thanks, and his offerings were due. And he urged him to take it; but he refused. Contests of politeness are common in the East, where the one party offers to give and even insists on giving, while the other makes a pretence of declining; but here both parties were in earnest, and the gift was absolutely declined.

2Ki 5:17

And Naaman said, Shall there not then, I pray thee, be given to thy servant two mules’ burden of earth? Naaman does not state what he intends to do with the earth; and the critics have consequently suggested two uses. Some suppose that he intended to make the earth into an altar upon which he might offer his sacrifices; comp. Exo 20:24, where an altar of earth is spoken of (Bahr and others). But the more general opinion (Thenius, Von Gerlach, etc.) is that he wished to spread the earth over a piece of Syrian ground, and thereby to hallow the ground for purposes of worship. The Jews themselves are known to have acted similarly, transferring earth from Jerusalem to Babylonia, to build a temple on it; and the idea is not an unnatural one, It does not necessarily imply the “polytheistic superstition” that every god has his own laud, where alone he can be properly worshipped. It rests simply on the notion of there being such a thing as “holy ground” (Exo 3:5)ground more suited for the worship of God than ordinary common soil, which therefore it is worth while to transfer from place to place for a religious purpose. For thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt offering nor sacrifice [as meat offerings or firstfruits] unto other gods, but unto the Lord. It is implied that Naaman had been hitherto a polytheist. Not much is known of the Syrian religion, but, so far as can be gathered, it would seem to have been a somewhat narrow polytheism. The sun was the supreme god, and was worshipped ordinarily under the name of Hadad (Ma-crob, ‘Sat.,’ 1.23). There was also, certainly, a great goddess, the “Dea Syra” of the Romans, whom they identified with Cybele and with their own “Bona Dea,” a divinity parallel with the Ashtoreth of the Phoenicians, and the Ishtar of the Assyrians and Babylonians. Whether there were any other distinct deities may be doubted, since Bitumen is possibly only another name of Hadad (see the comment on verse 18). Adonis is simply “Adonai,” i.e. “my Lord,” an epithet of the Supreme Being.

2Ki 5:18

In this thing the Lord pardon thy servant. Naaman is not prepared to be a martyr for his religion. On returning to Damascus, it will be among his civil duties to accompany his master to the national temples, and to prostrate himself before the images of the national deities. If he declines, if (like an early Christian) he will not enter “the house of devils,” much less bow down before the graven image of a false god, it may cost him his life; it will certainly cost him his court favor. For such a sacrifice he is not prepared. Yet his conscience tells him that he will be acting wrongly. He therefore expresses a hope, or a prayer, that his fault, for a fault he feels that it will be, may be forgiven himthat Jehovah will not be “extreme to mark what is done amiss,” but will excuse his outward conformity to his inward faith and zeal. That when my master goeth into the house of Rimmon. Riminon is probably derived from rum (), “to be high,” and means “the exalted god,” according to the gloss of Hesychins . It is wrongly connected with , “a pomegranate,” and should rather be compared with the Arabic Er Rhaman, “the Most High.” The royal name, “Tab-Bitumen” (1Ki 15:18), contains the root, as does also the local name (Zec 12:11), “Hadad-Rimmon.” This last word gives rise to the suspicion that Hadad and Rimmon are merely two names of the same deity, who was called “Hadad” or “Hadar” as bright and glorious, “Rim-men” as lofty and exalted. To worship there, and he leaneth on my hand. Either Naaman’s leprosy must have been recent, and he refers to the king’s practice in former times, or there must have been far less horror of leprosy among the Syrians than there was among the Hebrews. And I bow myself in the house of Rimmonbefore the image, or at any rate before the supposed presence of the godwhen I bow down myself in the house of Rimmon, the Lord pardon thy servant in this thing. The repetition of the clause indicates Naaman’s anxiety on the subject.

2Ki 5:19

And he said unto him; Go in peace. Elisha declared neither that God would nor that he would net forgive Naaman his departure from the path of strict right. He was not called upon to give an answer, since Naaman had not put a question, but had only expressed a wish. His Go in peace is to be taken simply as “wishing the departing Syrian the peace of God upon the road.” So Keil, rightly. So he departed from him a little way. Naaman left the presence of Elisha, quitted Samaria, and had gone a short way on his homeward journey when Gehazi overtook him. 2Ki 5:19 is closely connected with 2Ki 5:20.

2Ki 5:20

But Gehazi, the servant of Elisha the man of God, said (see 2Ki 4:12-36 for the position held towards Elisha by Gehazi), Behold, my master has spared Naaman this Syrian. Gehazi either honestly thinks, or at least persuades himself, that a Syrian ought to be, not spared, but spoiled, as being a foreigner and an enemy. In not receiving at his hands that which he brought (see 2Ki 5:5). Gehazi may not have known how much it was, but he had seen the laden animals, and rightly concluded that the value was great. But, as the Lord liveth, I will run after him, and take somewhat of him. “As the Lord liveth” seems a strange phrase in the mouth of one who is bent on lying and on stealing. But experience teaches us that religious formulae do drop from the lips of persons engaged in equally indefensible proceedings. This is partly because formulae by frequent use become mere forms, to which the utterer attaches no meaning; partly because men blind themselves to the wrongfulness of their actions, and find some excuse or other for any course of conduct by which they hope to profit.

2Ki 5:21

So Gehazi followed after Naaman. A company of travelers in the East, even though it consist of the retinue of a single great man, will always contain footmen, as well as those who ride on horses or in chariots, and will not travel at a faster pace than about three miles an hour. Thus Gehazi, if he went at his best speed, could expect to overtake, and did actually overtake, the cavalcade of Naaman. He probably overtook them at a very short distance from Samaria. And when Naaman saw him running after him. Gehazi was pressed for time. He could not start at once, lest he should make it too plain that he was going m pursuit of Naaman; and he could not absent himself from the house too long, lest his master should call for him. He had, therefore, at whatever loss of dignity, to hurry himself, and actually “run after” the Syrian. Naaman, either accidentally looking back, or warned by some of his train, sees him, recognizes him, and is only too glad to respond to his wishes. He lighted down from the chariot to meet him. An act of great condescension. As Bahr notes, “Descent from a vehicle is, in the East, a sign of respect from the inferior to the superior;” and Naaman, in lighting down from his chariot, must have intended to “honor the prophet in his servant”. But such honor is not commonly paid, and thus the act of Naaman was abnormal. And said, Is all well? The words admit of no better translation. Seeing Gehazi’s haste and anxious looks, Naaman suspects that all is not well, that something has happened since he left the prophet’s house, and accordingly puts his question, Rectene sunt omnia? (Vulgate).

2Ki 5:22

And he said, All is well. Gehazi’s reply was, “All is well.” There has been no accident, no calamityonly a casual circumstance has caused a change in my master’s wishes, which I am sent thus hurriedly to communicate to thee. My master hath sent me, saying, Behold, even now (i.e. just at this time) there be come to me from Mount Ephraim two young men of the sons of the prophets. The details are added to give a greater air of truthfulness to the story. Give them, I pray thee, a talent of silver, and two changes of garments; i.e. a change apiece, and a talent between themrather a large sum in respect of the pretended occasion, but a trifle compared with the amount which Naaman had expected to expend (2Ki 5:5), and probably very much less than he had recently pressed upon the prophet (2Ki 5:16). Gehazi had to balance between his own greed on the one hand, and the fear of raising suspicion on the other. His story was altogether most plausible, and his demand prudently moderate.

2Ki 5:23

And Naaman said, Be content, take two talents; rather, consent, take two talents. Do not oppose thyself to my wishesconsent to receive double what thou hast asked. Naaman is anxious to show his gratitude by giving as much as he can induce the ether side to accept. He suggests two talents, probably because the strangers who are said to have arrived are two. And he urged him. Gehazi must have made some show of declining the offer. And bound two talents of silver in two bagsi.e. put up two talents separately in two bags, closing the month Of the bag in each case by “binding” it round with a stringwith two changes of garmentsas asked for (2Ki 5:22)and laid them upon two of his servants. If the Hebrew silver talent was worth 375 as Keil supposes, or even 300 as Thenius reckons, it would be pretty well as much as an ordinary slave could carry, being somewhat over a hundredweight. And they bare them before him; i.e. theythe servantsbare the two sacks of money before himGehazi.

2Ki 5:24

And when he came to the tower; rather, to the hill (Revised Version). Some well-known eminence at a little distance from the Damascus gate of Samaria must be intended. Here Gehazi stopped the slaves, and took the money from them. It was important for his purpose that they should not be seen re-entering the city, as that would have occasioned remark, and might naturally have led to inquiry. He took themi.e; the bagsfrom their handi.e. from the hands of Naaman’s servantsand bestowed them in the house; i.e. by himself or deputy brought them to Elisha’s house, and there hid them away. And he let the menNaaman’s servantsgo, and they departed. They hastened, no doubt, to rejoin their master.

2Ki 5:25

But he went in, and stood before his master. Gehazi, lest his absence should be noticed, as soon as he had put away the money, sought his master’s presence, entering the room casually, as if he had been busied about the house. He was met at once, however, by the plain and stern question which follows. And Elisha said unto him; Whence comest thou, Gehazi? literally, Whence, Gehazi? A short, stem, abrupt question. And he said, Thy servant went no whither. There was no help for it. One lie necessitates another. Once enter on the devious path, and you cannot say whither it will conduct you. To deceive and plunder a foreigner of a hostile nation probably seemed to Gehazi a trifle, either no sin at all, or a very venial sin. But now he finds himself led on to telling a direct lie to his master, which even he could not have justified to himself.

2Ki 5:26

And he said unto him, Went not mine heart with thee? There is no “with thee” in the original; and the words have been taken in quite a different sense. Ewald regards , “my heart,” as designating Gehazi, and meaning “my loved one, my favorite disciple.” “Thou hast denied that thou wentest any whither; but did not my favorite disciple in truth go forth, when the man turned again from his chariot, as Naaman did?” (2Ki 5:21). But no parallel instance can be adduced of any such use of , which is altogether too strong a term to be applied to a mere favorite servant. The irony, moreover, of the term under the circumstances would be too great. Maurer’s interpretation of by “my prophetic power” (my prophetic power had not departed from me) is no better, since it requires to be taken in two different senses in the two most closely connected clauses of 2Ki 5:25 and 2Ki 5:26. Altogether, our version would seem to be the best rendering that has been suggested. It accords with the Septuagint, with Theodoret, and with the Vulgate; and it gives a satisfactory sense: “Did not my spirit go forth with thee when thou wentest forth, etc.? Was I not present in spirit during the whole transaction?” When the man turned again from his chariot to meet thee? (see 2Ki 5:21). Is it a time to receive money, and to receive garments, and olive yards, and vineyards, and sheep, and oxen, and menservants, and maidservants? The prophet follows Gehazi’s thoughts, which had been to purchase, with the money obtained from Naaman, olive yards, and vineyards, and sheep, and oxen, etc.; and asksWas this a time for such proceedings? Keil well explains, “Was this the time, when so many hypocrites pretend to be prophets from selfishness and avarice, and bring the prophetic office into contempt with unbelievers, for a servant of the true God to take money and goods from a non-Israelite that he might acquire property and luxury for himself?” It was evidently a most unfit time. As Thenius says, “In any other case better than in this mightest thou have yielded to thy desire for gold and goods.”

2Ki 5:27

The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee; i.e. “As thou hast taken his goods, thou shalt also take his leprosy, which goes with them.” A just Nemesis. And unto thy seed forever. The iniquity of the fathers is visited upon the children. Gehazi, however, could avoid this part of the curse by not marrying. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow. There were many forms and degrees of leprosy (Le 2Ki 13:2 -46). Gehazi’s was of the most pronounced kind, And it fell on him suddenly, as her leprosy fell upon Miriam (Num 12:10), complete at once, so that there could he no further aggravation of it. The lesson should be taken to heart, and should be a warning to us, both against lying and against covetousness.

HOMILETICS

2Ki 5:1-19

The lessons taught by the story of Naaman.

“The story of Naaman,” says Menken, “is a worthy part of the history of those revelations and manifestations of the living God which, in their connection and continuation through many centuries, and in their tendency towards one goal and object, were designed to plant upon earth the knowledge and the worship of the true God! But it offers besides to our consideration a rich store of reflections, in which neither heart nor understanding can refuse a willing participation.” Among the lessons, or “reflections,” would seem to be the following.

I. No EARTHLY HAPPINESS WITHOUT ALLOY. Naaman, as far as external prosperity went, had all that he could desire.

1. He was “captain of the host of the King of Syria,” commander-in-chief, i.e; of all the national forces. He held a great position, involving high rank, vast patronage, considerable emolument, and a place in the thoughts of men next to that of the king.

2. He was “a great man with his master”high in the royal favorable to obtain any boon that he desired, and advance all whom he cared to patronize.

3. He was also “a mighty man of valor,” or rather “a good tried soldier,” approved by deeds of arms to the nation, and enjoying his own confidence and self-respect. But on all this there was one drawback. Naaman “was a leper.” And so it is generally. “Everywhere, where there is or seems to be something great and fortunate, there is also some discordant ‘but,’ which, like a false note in a melody, mars the perfectness of the good fortune. A worm gnaws at the root of everything pertaining to this world; and everything here below contains the germs of death in itself” (Menken). Life is full of compensations. There is no misery without alleviation; no low estate without some gleam of joy or hope to brighten and glorify it; and also no happiness without some concomitant annoyance or discomfort. Now it is domestic trouble, now an unhappy turn of mind, now a recollection of some sin in the past, now an anticipation of some calamity in the future. But, perhaps most frequently, it is ill health, some form of bodily suffering. Naaman’s affliction was of the most grievous kindleprosy! a disease at once painful, unsightly, disgusting, and regarded as a disgrace.

II. SOLACE AND HELP COME TO US FROM THE MOST UNEXPECTED QUARTERS. A “little maid,” a foreigner, a captive, a slave, accidentally introduced into his household, and occupying a very humble place in it, perhaps almost unknown by sight to the great lord of the mansion, who has something better to do than to take notice of his wife’s attendantsthis little maid, humble as she is, and apparently of the least possible consequence, initiates the entire series of events which form the substance of the narrative. She sees her master’s sufferings, she is touched by them; she longs to have them assuaged; and she bethinks herself of a possible cure of them. “Would God my lord were with the prophet that is in Samaria!” Perhaps it was a mere vague wish, a thought that rose in the mind, and was uttered without the slightest idea that action would be based on it. But our lightest words may have effects of which we never thought. The “little maid’s” gentle aspiration fell on some ear which took note of it; inquiry was made; hope was aroused; and finally action followed. The small accident of an Israelite maid, who knew of Elisha’s power to work miracles, being a member of his wife’s household, and giving utterance to her feelings of compassion, led on to the great general’s cure, and to the glorification of the Name of Jehovah throughout the Syrian nation. The mouse in the fable gave aid, which was of the most vital importance to the lion. We can never tell from what humble friend or dependant we may not receive help in trouble, by precious hints or suggestions, or by effectual fervent prayers, which may be of inestimable service to us.

III. THE GREAT OF THE EARTH A POOR STAY AND SUPPORT. Neither Benhadad King of Syria, nor Joram King of Israel, were really of any help to Naaman in his trouble. Benhadad meant well; but his letter to the King of Israel confused the plain issue, and was not of the slightest practical service. Joram had to acknowledge himself utterly powerless (2Ki 5:7), and, but for the prophet’s interference, would probably have represented to the King of Syria that there was no more help to be obtained for Naaman in Israel than in his own country. Great civil personages are rarely fit to take the lead in matters, which even touch upon religion. They place far too much trust in the cunning devices of mere human policy, and far too little in the force of religious principle and the overruling providence of God. The Magi did not help Christ by bringing him their gifts of gold and frankincense and myrrh. They did but draw Herod’s attention to him, and bring his infant life into peril. Herod Antipas did not help John the Baptist. He “heard him gladly” (Mar 6:20), but imprisoned him, and ultimately put him to death. The advice of the psalmist is excellent, “Put not your trust in princes for there is no help in them” (Psa 146:3).

IV. OUR BEST HELP FROM RELIGION AND ITS MINISTERS. Naaman might have returned to Damascus in the same condition in which he left it, unhelped, unaided, uncured, but for the existence, and for the action taken by, a minister of God. Men often jeer at ministers, deride them, deny the use of them, call them idlers and supernumeraries, and declare their belief that the world would get on quite as well, or much better, without them; but in times of difficulty and danger, and especially in the time of sickness, they are apt to have recourse to them. A Belshazzar in difficulty seeks to Daniel (Dan 5:13), a Naaman to Elisha, a Theodosius to Ambrose, a guilty sinner to his parish priest or to the nearest godly minister of his acquaintance. Ministers, it is true, do not now heal diseases; and it is fitting that in sickness the physician should be called in, to begin with. But when the physician can do no more, when he declares the resources of his art exhausted, when death draws near us, then there are but few who despise the aid of the previously contemned servant of God, but few who are not glad to have a minister of God at their bedside, and to receive from his hands the last consolations of religion. How many have been brought by ministerial aid to die in peace and joy, who without it would have lain for days tortured with doubts and fears and misgivings! How many have even been snatched at the last moment like brands from the burning, brought through ministerial influence, even on their death-beds, to a repentance not to be repented of! It is well not to trust beforehand to a death-bed repentance, but to set our house in order while we are still in health. But the example of the thief on the cross shows that, even under the very shadow of death, the mercy of God is not exhausted. A death-bed repentance is always possible; and in bringing it about the assistance to be derived from an experienced minister can scarcely be over-estimated.

V. THE NATURAL MAN A POOR JUDGE OF GOD‘S METHODS OF SALVATION. “I thought,” said Naaman, “he will surely come out to me,” etc. Naaman had made up his mind what the prophet’s method would be. He had his own notions concerning the fitness of things, and the mode in which Divine help, if it came at all, would come to him. When his expectations were disappointed, as human expectations on such a subject are likely to be, he was offended, and “turned and went away in a rage” (verse 12). Do not many turn from religion altogether on similar utterly insufficient grounds? They “thought,” if God gave a revelation at all, he would give it in this or that wayby a voice from heaven speaking with equal force to all, with the accompaniment of a continuous display of miracles, by the mouth of an immaculate priesthood, or in some way quite different from that in which it has pleased God to give it; and, being disappointed in their expectation, they reject the whole matter, refuse to have anything to do with it, “turn and go away in a rage.” “I thought” is all-powerful with them. Well does Menken observe, “This ‘I thought’ is the most mighty of all mighty things upon earth, and even if it is not the most ruinous of all ruinous things, it is yet certainly the most unfortunate of all unfortunate ones. This ‘I thought’ brought sin and misery and death into the world; and it prevents redemption from sin and death in the case of thousands! These thousands, if they perish in their opinion, will begin the next life with ‘I thought.'”

VI. SECOND THOUGHTS OFTEN THE BEST. It is never too late to amend. To pride one’s self on absolute consistency and unchangingness is the height of folly in a being who is not, and knows he is not, omniscient. Our first thoughts must often be mistaken ones, and in such cases it is at least possible that our second thoughts may be better. Moreover, second thoughts may be suggested from without, and may come from those who are far wiser than ourselves. Naaman showed his good sense in giving up his original intention and adopting the advice of his servants. To have persisted for consistency’s sake would have been foolish obstinacy, and would have resulted in his remaining a leper and an idolater to the day of his death.

VII. A TIME FOR ALL THINGSA TIME TO GET, AND A TIME TO LOSE. “The laborer is worthy of his hire.” Ministers cannot live on air any more than other people. There is a time when, and there are circumstances under which, it is lawful for them to receive such an amount of this world’s goods as they need, or even such an amount as is offered to them. For any surplus which they receive beyond their needs they are trustees, bound to expend such surplus as they deem best for the honor of God and the benefit of man. Prophets were entitled to accept gifts of those who consulted them (1Sa 9:7, 1Sa 9:8), and Elisha himself took without hesitation the twenty loaves from the man of Baal-shalisha. But when Naaman made his offer, Elisha felt that it was “a time to lose.” He had to show that “the gift of God could not be purchased with money;” he had to impress it on an ignorant but intelligent heathen, that Jehovah was a God not like other gods, and that his prophets were men not like other men. He had to teach the doctrine of free grace. His example should be a lesson to ministers, that not every gift, even though it be offered by a willing heart, ought to be accepted. There are times when a minister should decline a testimonial, an augmentation of stipend, the donation of a new pulpit, or a new organ, and when he should be glad to “lose” them for the furtherance of higher objects.

VIII. GRATITUDE FOR TEMPORAL BLESSINGS BEST SHOWN BY OUR TURNING TO GOD. When Naaman found that the prophet would receive no gift at his hand, he acquiesced, and resolved to show his gratitude for the great blessing which he had received in another way. He would thenceforth offer neither burnt offering nor sacrifice unto any other god, but only unto the Lord (verse 17). It was a noble resolve. It might offend his sovereign, it might hamper his promotion, it might deprive him of court favor. Still, he did not hesitate; he made the resolution, and he proclaimed it. Whether he kept it faithfully or no, we are not told; we know nothing of his after-life; the curtain drops on him as he departs to his own country. But, so far as the history is carried, it shows him faithful and true. He bears off his two mules’ burden of earth. He means no more to worship Rimmon. He will acknowledge and worship one God only, Jehovah. There may be weakness in the compromise with conscience, which he proposes in verse 18; but it is a pardonable weakness in one bred up a heathen. At any rate, he does right, and sets us a good example, in his resolute turning to Jehovah, as the true Source of the blessing, which he has received, and as therefore deserving henceforth of all his worship and all his gratitude.

2Ki 5:20-27

The lessons taught by the sin and punishment of Gehazi.

Gehazi’s is a sad case, but a not unusual one; the case of a person brought into close contact with a high form of moral excellence and spirituality, who, instead of profiting by the example, willfully casts it aside, and adopts a low standard of life and conducta standard which always tends to become lower. The first lesson to be learnt from his case is this

I. IF CONTACT WITH EXCELLENCE FAIL TO RAISE US, IT WILL SINK US, IN THE MORAL SCALE. The two disciples closest to our Lord seem to have been St. John and Judas Iscariot. The one leant upon Jesus’ breast; the other dipped with him habitually ( ) in the dish (Mar 14:20). The one was exalted to a spirituality rarely attained by man; the other sank to such a condition that his Lord said of him, he “is a devil” (Joh 6:70). Both elevation and degradation are equally natural. The one comes from the imitation of the high example before us; the other from resisting the impulse to such imitation. If we resist impulses to good, we do ourselves irreparable harm; we blunt our consciences, harden our hearts, render ourselves less sensitive to good influences forever after. And the longer the contact with goodness continues, the higher the exaltation, or the lower the deterioration, of our nature. Gehazi had been for years Elisha’s servant. He had been on the closest terms of intimacy with him. He had witnessed his patience, his self-denial, his gentleness, his kindness, his zeal for Jehovah. But the only effect had been to harden him in evil. He had grown proud and contemptuous, as shown by his calling Naaman “this Syrian” (verse 20), a swearer (verse 20), covetous, untruthful, careless of his master’s honor, secretive (verse 24), shameless. He had no sense of God’s watchful eye and continual presence, no respect or love for his master, no care for what Naaman and the other Syrians would think of him. He thus did as much as in him lay to ruin his master’s projects, and to lower him in the esteem of those whose good opinion he knew his master valued, Another lesson to be drawn from the narrative is the following:

II. ONE SIN LEADS ON TO ANOTHER BY A SEQUENCE WHICH IS ALMOST INEVITABLE. Gehazi begins with covetousness. He cannot see the great wealth of Naaman, the wedges of silver and gold, and the large bales of rich stuffs, without a keen desire to obtain possession of a portion. He hopes that his master will spoil the Syrian, and not spare him; in that case he may contrive to get a share in the advantage. His master’s refusal, no doubt, seems to him mere folly, quixotismalmost madness. He sets his clever wits to work, and soon frames a scheme by which his master’s intentions shall be frustrated. The scheme, as any scheme must under such circumstances, involves him in lying; nay, in a whole heap of lies. He tells a circumstantial tale in which there is not a single word of truth. The tale runs glibly off his tongue, and easily deceives the foreigner, who is not of a suspicious temper. Gehazi is completely successful, obtains even more than he had ventured to ask; hides it away without any difficulty, and thinks that all is over. But all is not over. “Whence comest thou, Gehazi?” sounds in his ears; and he must either confess all or, directly and unmistakably, lie to his master. Of course, the lie is resolved upon; his previous conduct has so demoralized him, that we cannot even imagine him to have hesitated. The direct falsehood to his master, which he would fain have avoided, has to be uttered: “Thy servant went no whither.” Facilis descensus Averni. The only security against a moral decline as grievous as Gehazi’s is not to enter upon it, not to take the first step. Principiis obsta. Check evil tendencies at once, and the fatal sequence need never be entered upon. Gehazi’s punishment has also its lesson. He had gained his coveted wealth; the prophet could not take it from him. He was a rich man, and might carry out all his far-reaching schemes of proprietorship, and lordship over others. But what will it all profit him, if he is to be, to the end of his days, a leper? The apples of Sodom, so “fair to view,” are felt and known to be worthless, when they “turn to ashes on the lips.” So was it with him; and so is it, commonly, with those who pursue a course similar to his. The prosperity acquired by fraud has within it a taint of rottenness. There is “a little rift within the lute”a drawback of some kind or other, which deprives the prosperity of all its value, and makes the wealthy prosperous man a miserable wretch. If he escape external calamity, he will, at any rate, not escape the worm of remorse, which will cat into his heart, and poison his cup of pleasure.

HOMILIES BY C.H. IRWIN

2Ki 5:1-3

The captive Israelitish maid.

There are four personages that stand out with special prominence in this chapter, from each of which important lessens may be learned. These arethe little Hebrew maid; Naaman, the commander-in-chief of the Syrian army; the Prophet Elisha; and Gehazi, the prophet’s servant. We shall speak first of the little maid.

I. THIS LITTLE MAID DID NOT FORGET HER RELIGION WHEN SHE WENT FROM HOME. We see that, though in a foreign land, she still thought of her fathers’ God and of his prophet. That is an important lesson in these days, when traveling has become so common. The motto with a great many professing Christians seems to be that when they are at Rome, they must do as Rome does. When they travel on the continent, they keep the continental Sunday, just as if the same God was not looking clown upon them there as at home, just as if the Lord’s day was not the Lord’s day everywhere, and as if there were not good Christian people on the continent who valued the day as a day of rest and worship. Mr. Ruskin wrote some pointed words lately in reference to the way Christian people seem to forget their religion when they go abroad. He asked them to count up their expenditure on railway fares and sight-seeing, on guides and guide-books, on luxuries and photographs; and then to ask themselves how much they had spent in donations to the poor Churches of France and Belgium, or of the Waldenses in Italy. Happily, all travelers are not like this. Many Christian tourists like to find a Sunday blessing, and to hear a word of refreshing, in some little country church among the hills of Scotland or of Switzerland, or in the quiet chapel amid the pleasure-seeking crowds of Paris. But how many there are who look up their religion when they turn the key in their house-door, and, however careful they may be of taking guide-books and other provisions for the journey, never dream of putting a Bible in the trunk! No matter where we go, let us take our religion with us, as Joseph took his into Egypt, as Daniel took his into Babylon, as this little Hebrew maid took hers into Syria. This little maid had strong inducements to give up her religion. No doubt it would have pleased her master and mistress if she had worshipped their gods. They might have said that her worship of any other God was an impertinence, a sort of suggestion that they were doing wrong. But she listens to the voice of conscience and of duty rather than to the voice of worldly policy and expediency. It is a message to all who are in the employment of others. Never sacrifice principle for place. Never sacrifice the favor of God for the favor of man. Your employer pays for your labor; he does not buy your conscience. If ever attempts are made to tamper with your conscience, be it yours to answer, “We ought to obey God rather than man.” Trust God for the consequences. Trust him to provide for you. “In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.”

II. THIS LITTLE MAID DID NOT RENDER EVIL FOR EVIL. She had been torn from her home and from her native land by the rude hands of Syrian soldiers. Perhaps her father had fallen beneath the enemy’s sword. Yet we do not find her cherishing a spirit of vindictiveness or revenge. Instead of rejoicing to see her captor suffer, she pities him. She longs that he may be healed of that terrible and loathsome disease. Have we never exulted in the sufferings of others? Have we never felt a secret thrill of gratification when some misfortune has befallen one with whom we were at variance? Such a spirit, the spirit of revenge, however natural it may be, is not the spirit of Christ. He bids us do unto others as we would wish them to do unto us. The Christ-like spirit is to love our enemies, to bless them that curse us, to do good to them that hate us, and to pray for them that despitefully use us and persecute us.

III. THE LITTLE MAID WAS BUT YOUNG; YET, BY DOING WHAT SHE COULD, SHE BECAME A BLESSING TO OTHERS. She did not say to herself, “I am but young; there is nothing I can do” She did not wait for some great thing to do. But she just did the work that lay nearest her. She saw a way in which she might be useful, and she took the opportunity at once. She said to her mistress, “Would God my lord were with the prophet that is in Samaria! for he would recover him of his leprosy.” That was all. She just told of where the blessing of health was likely to be found.

1. This is a lesson for young people, for the children. None of you is too young to do something for Jesus. Jesus has some work for every one of you to do. It may be his work for you that you should conquer some sinful passion, some evil habit. It may be his work for you that you should stand up for him and his Word among bad companions; or that by your own quiet and gentle life, and loving disposition and kind deeds, you should show how good it is to be a Christian. Do the work that lies nearest. If you are at school or college, and find your studies irksome, and long to get free to work at your own will and pleasure; if you are learning your business, and find it a drudgery;remember that just here Christ has a work for you to do. These difficulties have to be mastered. Master them, and then you will show your fitness for mastering far greater difficulties. “He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much.”

2. It is a lesson for young and old. What are you doing to be a blessing to others? Is there not some sick person to whom you might read, some poor family that you might visit occasionally with some of the comforts of life, some tempted one to whom you might speak a word of help and encouragement, some backslider to whom you might speak a word of kindly warning, some careless, godless one whom you might urge to flee from the wrath to come? And if you can do but little for the sinner and the godless yourself, perhaps you can do as the little maid didtell them where blessing is to be found, and invite them to come to the house of God. There is no need for rivalry between different Christian communities. There are godless people enough to fill all the places of worship, if only Christian people would stir themselves and go out into the streets and lanes, into the highways and hedges, and, by the power of irresistible persuasion, compel them to come in. Don’t trouble yourself by thinking of your own fitness or unfitness. Are you willing to be of use in Christ’s work? Are you anxious to be a blessing to others? That is the great question. If so, Jesus will do the rest. He will make you a vessel unto honor, sanctified, meet for the Master’s use.

IV. THE SECRET OF THIS LITTLE MAID‘S FAITHFULNESS AND USEFULNESS WAS HER STRONG AND SIMPLE FAITH. She could be faithful to God, because she believed in God. She believed that God would take care of her when she was faithfully serving him. She could be useful to others because, though she was a captive and had no means to help them, she knew of One who had. She had faith in God. She knew that God was with Elisha, and therefore she had no doubt about Elisha’s success. Yes; it is faith we want, if we are to be useful. We say we believe a great many things. But how do we believe them? Where is our faith in God’s promises shown in our patience under difficulties and trials and discouragements? Where is our faith in God’s promises shown by our liberality to his cause? Where is our faith in God’s promises shown by our work done for Christ? If our faith in God is real, it will show itself in every detail of our daily life; it will overflow in acts of usefulness and love.C.H.I.

2Ki 5:4-19

Naaman the Syrian.

This case of Naaman is an illustration of the imperfection that there is in all things human. Naaman was commander-in-chief of the Syrian army. Not only so, but he had seen service. He had won his spurs in active warfare. He had led his troops to victory. “By him the Lord had given deliverance to Syria” Hence, as we read, “he was a great man with his master, and honorable.” No doubt he had been greeted on his return from battle, as victorious generals were greeted then and are greeted still, with the triumphant shouts of a joyful and exultant multitude. His cup of happiness was almost full. But there was one element of trouble that mingled with his joy. “But he was a leper.” That little word “but,” how significant it is! We should all be happy, but for something. Our plans would all be successful, but for something. We should all be very good, but for some inconsistency, some failing, some besetting sin. Here is a very good man, but he has such a bad temper. There is a very kind woman, but she has such a bitter tongue. Here is a very good man, but he is so stingy and so selfish. Here is a man who would be very useful in the Church of Christ, but he is so worldly minded. Here is a good preacher, but he doesn’t just practice what he preaches. These little “buts” have their uses. They keep us, or they ought to keep us, humble. We ought not to be very proud of ourselves, we ought not to be very hard on others, when we think of that ugly sin of our own. But most of all, these “buts” ought to be the means of driving us, as Naaman’s leprosy was the means of driving him, nearer to God. That almighty hand can alone weed the evil forces out of our nature, and bring us into conformity to his own heavenly likeness.

I. NAAMAN‘S PRIDE. Kings sometimes, like other people, do stupid things. The Hebrew maid had spoken of the prophet that was in Israel, as being able to cure her master of his leprosy. But the King of Syria sends a letter to the King of Israel, saying, “I have sent Naaman my servant unto thee, that thou mayest recover him of his leprosy.” The King of Syria may have meant nothing more than this, that the King of Israel might bring about Naaman’s recovery by sending him to the prophet; but the King of Israel took the words as an attempt to pick a quarrel with him, and rent his clothes in anger and passion. Very often great and destructive wars have arisen from much more trifling causesfrom the folly or incapacity, the rashness or stubbornness, the pride or the passion, of rulers. How thankful we should be for a wise and prudent sovereign, when we think how much harm a foolish sovereign can do! After Elisha heard of the King of Israel’s absurd and childish display of anger and dismay, he sent to him, saying, “Wherefore bast thou rent thy clothes? let him come now to me, and he shall know that there is a prophet in Israel.” So Naaman came with all the pomp and grandeur of a great Oriental general, and stood at the door of Elisha’s house. Elisha is not overawed by this display of magnificence. He does not hasten forth and make a humble obeisance to the man of rank. He knew what respect was due to authority and station; but just then he had to do with Naaman the man, with Naaman the leper, and not with Naaman the general, As the servant of God, it is his duty to benefit Naaman’s soul as well as his body, and the first thing he must do is to humble him. Naaman’s leprosy was an enemy to his happiness. But he had a far worse enemy in his own heart. That was pride. How hard it was to expel it we shall see. Elisha did not go himself to speak to Naaman, but sent a messenger. That was bad enough for Naaman’s pride. And this was the message that he sent: “Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean.” That was worse. How keenly Naaman felt it we see in his action and his words. He turned away from the place in a rage, perhaps swearing at his servants to get out of his way, and said, “Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the Name of the Lord his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper.” His leprosy had not humbled his pride. Here he was-come all the way from Syria just for the one purpose of getting cured; and yet he turns away from the only person who could cure him, because he does not pay him sufficient court, and does not flatter his vanity. How unreasonable was Naaman’s pride! How unreasonable is pride in any one! And yet it is a common failing. There are very few of us without a little of it. Bishop Hooker says, “Pride is a vice which cleaveth so fast unto the hearts of men, that if we were to strip ourselves of all faults, one by one, we should undoubtedly find it the very last and hardest to put off.” What have any of us to be proud of? Has the sinner any reason to be proud? He is walking on the broad way that leadeth to destruction. Not a journey, not a prospect, to be proud of, certainly! Has the saint any reason to be proud? Surely not. It is by the grace of God he is what he is. “Not of works, lest any man should boast.” No true child of God has ever had a proud heart. Look at the humility of the Apostle Paul. Early in his Epistles he speaks of himself as “the least of the apostles;” later on he calls himself “less than the least of all saints;” while the latest description he gives of himself is “the chief of sinners.” Such was Paul’s estimate of his own character, the more he looked at it in the light of God’s holy Law, and in the light of the cross of Jesus. The longer he lived, the more humble he became. “God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble.” Away, then, with pride! Away with pride of riches! away with pride of rank! away with pride of learning! away with pride of beauty in the face that is made of clay! away with pride from every Christian heart! away with pride from the house of God! away with pride from all departments of Christian work! away with pride towards our fellow-men! Let us follow in the footsteps of him who was meek and lowly in heart.

II. NAAMAN‘S CURE. Observe the simplicity of the cure. “Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean.” It was the very simplicity of the cure that was the stumbling-block to Naaman. So it is with the sinner still. The simplicity of the gospel offer prevents many a one from accepting it. The servants of Naaman expressed this weakness of the human heart when they said, “My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it?” The simple thing, strange though it may seem, is often the hardest to do. The great thing, the thing which costs most labor, in which there is most room for our own effort, is the thing which many find it easiest to do. This is one of the reasons why the heathen religions, and the Roman Catholic religion, have so strong a hold upon the human heart. Their religion is justification by works. They afford large scope for human exertions, for penances, for pilgrimages. There is scope for good works in Protestantism too, in true Christianity. “Be careful to maintain good works,” says the ‘apostle. “We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works.” But good works are the result, and not the cause, of our justification. We can never by any pilgrimages, by any penances, by any lastings, work out a salvation, a righteousness, for ourselves. “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior.” Was it not a foolish thing for Naaman, a poor, miserable leper, with his life a burden to him, to be questioning the method of his cure? Is it not a foolish thing for any sinner, with death at every moment staring him in the face, and a dark and hopeless eternity yawning before him, to question God’s plan of salvation? A man who is seized with a dangerous illness does not spend a whole day in discussing what remedies the physician has ordered, but, if he has common sense, he uses the remedies at once. Sinner, the cure for your disease is a simple one. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved” It is the only one. “There is none other Name under heaven given among men whereby we can be saved,” except the Name of Jesus. Naaman, at last, persuaded by his servants’ entreaty, believed the prophet’s promise, and acted in obedience to his instructions. He went and washed in Jordan, and, as the prophet said, he was made whole. God promises to every sinner that if you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ you shall receive everlasting life. Did you ever know God’s promise to fail? Why, then, should you hesitate, as a lost soul, to take the way of salvation provided for you through the mercy of God and the infinite love of Christ?

“There is a fountain filled with blood

Drawn from Immanuel’s veins;

And sinners, plunged beneath that flood,

Lose all their guilty stains.

“The dying thief rejoiced to see

That fountain in his day;

And there may I, though vile as he,

Wash all my sins away.”

III. NAAMAN‘S GRATITUDE. Naaman’s marvelous cure made him a believer in the God of Israel. He returned to Elisha with gratitude in his heart. How different the spirit in which he now approaches the prophet! No longer proud and haughty, waiting at the door for Elisha to come out to him, he enters the prophet’s house, and humbly stands before him. He shows a spirit of gratitude to God and to his prophet. He asks Elisha to give him a quantity of earth, that he may raise an altar unto the God of Israel, saying that he will henceforth sacrifice to no other god. You whom God has raised up again from beds of sickness-have you shown in any practical way your gratitude to him? Do you ever count up your mercies when you calculate how much you will subscribe to some religious object? If you did, there would not be much difficulty in clearing off church debts. We are, all of us, every day we live, dependent on God’s mercy and bounty. In his hand our breath is. “In him we live, and move, and have our being.” Many of us are saved sinners, redeemed through the precious blood of Christ. What have we done to show our thankfulness to God, who called us out of darkness into his marvelous light? Naaman, though a changed man and no longer an idolater, was still wanting in decision. He asked to be pardoned for bowing in the temple of the god Rimmon, when his master, the king, went in to worship there. Some have thought that Elisha’s answer, “Go in peace,” gave permission to Naaman to go through this outward form of idolatry. But the prophet did not mean this at all. His words were but the Eastern form of saying “good-bye.” He neither condemned nor approved Naaman’s action. He left it as a matter for his own conscience. And so it must be in many things. We cannot lay down hard-and-fast lines for others. Beginners in the Christian life, especially, should be tenderly dealt with. But while we make every allowance for Naaman, who had spent all his life in heathenism, let us not imitate him in his want of decision. He owed allegiance to a higher King than to the King of Syria. In matters of conscience, let no man be our master but Christ. Let us never sacrifice principle for expediency, or obey the call of popularity rather than the call of duty. A far higher example is that of John Knox, who, when rebuked for his outspoken words before Queen Mary and her council, said, “I am in the place where I am demanded of conscience to speak the truth; and therefore the truth I speak, impugn it whoso list.”C.H.I.

2Ki 5:20-27

Elision and Gehazi.

We shall, perhaps, derive most profit from the study of these two characters if we look at them together, as they are here set before us, in sharp and striking contrast.

I. CONTRAST THE COVETOUSNESS OF THE ONE WITH THE UNSELFISHNESS OF THE OTHER.

1. Look, first of all, at Elisha‘s unselfishness. It is a sublime picture. We hardly know which to admire mostElijah as he stands forth alone in rugged grandeur to confront the prophets of Baal; or Elisha, as in quiet simplicity and sincere forgetfulness of self he stands there before Naaman, and gently puts away from him the general’s tempting gift. Of the two, I think Elisha’s was the harder and therefore more heroic deed. Look at the temptations which he must have felt. The fame of him had spread into Syria, so much so that this haughty general, the foremost man in all Syria except its king, comes to him to be healed of his leprosy. The King of Syria himself sends a letter with his general. And now, when, at Elisha’s bidding, Naaman has washed in Jordan, and become cured, was it not a strong temptation to the prophet to take glory and honor and reward for himself? Naaman wanted to give him rich remuneration. He presses it upon him. “Now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant.” Listen to the answer: “As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand, I will receive none.” Again Naaman urges him to take the gift, and once more and finally the prophet refuses. And why? Did he think there was any harm in taking a gift? Not at all. At other times he was quite content to be dependent on the bounty of others. St. Paul tells us that” even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel”‘ Elisha had no objection to the gift as such, and even if he did not want it for himself, he could have made good use of it. Why, then, did he refuse it?

(1) In the first place, he thought of the honor of his God. Elisha knew well that it was not by his word or by his power that Naaman had been healed, but by the power of the living God. He wanted Naaman to think, not of the prophet, but of the prophet’s God. So St. Peter acted when he and St. John had healed the lame man at the Beautiful gate of the temple. He said to the people, “Why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk?” and then proceeded to point out to the people the benefit of faith in Christ. So it will be with every true servant of Christ. He will seek to point men to his Master, and not to himself.

(2) Again, he thought of the honor of his religion. He doubtless felt that if he had taken Naaman’s gift, Naaman might afterwards have said, “Well, these prophets of Israel, who call themselves followers of the true God, are no better than our own heathen priests. They follow their calling just for the money that it brings,” Elisha knew that that was not true. He knew that he might lawfully take the gift, and yet be influenced by far higher motives, in the service of God. But he felt that, though all things are lawful, all things are not expedient. Oh that all God’s people were equally solicitous about the honor of Christ’s cause and kingdom! How careful we should be lest by our worldliness, our inconsistencies, our thoughtlessness, we bring reproach upon the religion we profess!

(3) Further, Elisha thought of the honor of his country. Israel had, at that time, been defeated by Syria. Elisha felt that it would be an humiliating thing for hima Hebrewto take a gift from one of the conquering nation, and especially from him who had perhaps been the leading general in the war against the Jewish people. Evidently that was what he meant when he said to Gehazi afterwards, “Is it a time to receive money, and to receive garments, and olive yards, and vineyards, and sheep, and oxen, and menservants, and maidservants?” The time of his country’s disgrace and defeat was not a time for him to indulge in luxury and display. There is room for more Christian patriotism in the present daya patriotism that shall rest the honor of its country on the industry, morality, and uprightness of its people, and that shall see in every departure from these virtues a cause of humiliation and shame.

(4) Finally, Elisha thought also of the good of Naaman. He wanted not only to benefit his body, but his soul also. Therefore he avoided everything that might put a stumbling-block in his way. And we see how well he succeeded. Naaman, from what he had seen of Elisha, the prophet of the true God, and from what he had seen of God’s power, resolved that he would never sacrifice to any other god but to the God of Israel. If we would benefit others, our own hearts must be right with God. There must be no doubt about our sincerity, no uncertainty about our motives. We see in all this how little Elisha thought of self. He had a great opportunity, and he used it well. He had a strong temptation presented to him, and he resisted it. It is a splendid instance of unselfishness, a splendid illustration of the power of Divine grace.

2. How different from all this; the covetousness, the selfishness, of Gehazi! The honor of his God, the honor of his religion, the honor of his country, the good of Naamannone of these things ever cost him a thought. In his mind self is the one all-absorbing, overmastering consideration. Even his master’s honor is of little value in his eyes. Elisha had refused to take Naaman’s gift, yet Gehazi runs after him, and says that his master has sent him to ask for money and clothes, just as if he was so fickle as not to know his own mind, and so mean as now to send and beg that which but a little time before he had sturdily declined. Gehazi’s greed for money had blunted all the finer feelings of his nature. No wonder that our Savior said, “Take heed and beware of covetousness.” No wonder that Paul said, “The love of money is a root of all evil.” All kinds of sins result from the love of money. We have an illustration of it in Gehazi’s case. We have illustrations of it every day. How often men grow rich, but do not grow better! Sometimes increasing wealth has the strange effect of decreasing liberality. Sometimes increasing wealth brings with it increase of pride. Sometimes increasing wealth has made men more worldly. Instead of seeking to serve Christ more with their increased opportunities and increased influence, they serve him less. Thank God if with increasing wealth he has given you increasing grace. Thank God if he has enabled you to give the more, the more you got. Thank God if with increasing wealth you have kept a cool head, a warm heart, a steady hand, a clear conscience, and the friends of your youth. To those who are beginning life we would earnestly say, Beware of covetousness. Don’t imagine that to be rich is the be-all and end-all of life. There are some things which money cannot buy. There are some things which money cannot do. Money can’t keep death away from the door. Money cannot purchase the pardon of sin, or obtain for a single soul admission into heaven. “We brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out” But we are not therefore to despise money. Get all the money you can, provided you get it honestly, provided you do not sacrifice your soul’s interests because of it, and provided that, when you have it, you spend it well. Make a good use of your money in your lifetime. “Make to yourselves friends of the mammon which the unrighteous worship, that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.”

II. CONTRAST THE DECEITFULNESS OF THE ONE WITH THE STRAIGHTFORWARD HONESTY OF THE OTHER. There was nothing two-faced about Elisha. He did not say one thing with his lips, and think the very opposite in his heart. When Jehoram, King of Israel, after his idolatry and his sins, got into difficulties at the time that he and the other two kings went forth against the King of Moab, he then sent for Elisha. But Elisha does not meet him in any fawning, flattering spirit. He at once rebukes him for his sins. He says, “What have I to do with thee? get thee to the prophets of thy father, and to the prophets of thy mother.” In the same way he treats Naaman as one whose pride needs to be humbled. Though he might have offended Naaman by refusing to take his gift, he plainly tells him, “As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand, I will receive none.” What a contrast to this blunt, straightforward honesty is the two-faced deceitfulness of Gehazi! Observe how one sin brings another with it. He first of all coveted the money and the raiment, when he heard Elisha refuse Naaman’s present. Then covetousness leads to deception and lying. He ran after Naaman’s chariot, and invented a false story that some young men had come to Elisha, and that he wanted money and clothing for them. His guilt was doubly great, because he was Elisha’s trusted servant or steward, and because he probably had other servants under him. And then he lies, not only to Naaman, but to his master, when he says,” Thy servant went no whither.” Oh, the baseness, the wickedness, of deceit! And yet how much of it is practiced in the world! How much of it in the social relationships of life! What sham friendships! What hollow civilities! Whitened sepulchers and social shams! How much of it in the commercial world! What barefaced adulteration! What cheating of customers! What false statementsknown to be falseabout the value of goods! Sometimes there are revelationsgreat failures, gross frauds. But what an immense amount of deceit goes on that is never heard of! Many deceive or act dishonestly just up to the limit of detection, just as if God’s eye was not on them all the time. To say, “Every one does it,” as an excuse for deceit or dishonesty in a business, is no reason why a Christian man should do it, why any man should do it. God’s eye sees. His command is clear, “Thou shalt not steal.” Thou shalt not put forth thine hand to take what is not thine own. The man who robs his customers, the man who plunders or purloins from his employers, even though he may be respectable in the eyes of the world, is as much a thief in the sight of God, and perhaps far more guilty, than the poor boy who steals a loaf in his hunger and want. Deceit and dishonesty never can bring a blessing. “Be sure your sin will find you out.” We have many instances in history of the fearful consequences of even a single act of deceit. The one great stain upon the memory of Lord Clive, the hero of Plassey, and one of the greatest men who ever administered British rule in India, is his single act of deception practiced on an Indian prince. The words which Lord Macaulay has written on this subject are so important and so true, that they are well worth repeating: “Clive’s breach of faith,” he says, “was not merely a crime, but a blunder. We don’t know whether it be possible to mention a state which has on the whole been a gainer by a breach of public faith. The entire history of British India is an illustration of this great truth that it is not prudent to oppose perfidy to perfidythat the most-efficient weapon with which men can encounter falsehood is truth. During a long series of years, the English rulers of India, surrounded by allies and enemies whom no engagement could bind, have generally acted with sincerity and uprightness, and the event has proved that sincerity and uprightness are wisdom. English valor and English intelligence have done less to extend and preserve our Oriental empire than English veracity. All that we could have gained by imitating the doublings, the evasions, the fictions, the perjuries, which have been employed against us, is as nothing compared with what we have gained by being the one power in India on whose word reliance can be placed.” Covetousness and deceit are injurious to personal happiness, to the order and peace of society, and to the welfare and prosperity of the nation. It is the gospel of Christ that alone has proved itself capable of grappling with these evils, and banishing these vices from the human heart. It teaches us not to think of self merely, but of others also. It teaches us to “put away lying, and to speak every man truth with his neighbor.” To spread the gospel of Christ is the best way to promote social and commercial morality, to promote confidence between man and man, and to hasten the coming of that time when there shall be peace on earth and good will to men. Let the love of Jesus fill your heart, and flow out into your life, and then you will not intentionally do a wrong to any one, in thought, in word, or in deed.C.H.I.

HOMILIES BY D. THOMAS

2Ki 5:1-27

History of Naaman’s disease and cure, illustrative of certain forces in the life of man.

“Now Naaman, captain of the host of the King of Syria, was a great man with his master,” etc. Naaman, in a worldly point of view, was a great manone of the magnates of his age. But he was the victim of a terrible disease. “He was a leper.” Leprosy was a terrible diseasehereditary, painful, contagious, loathsome, and fatal. In all these respects it resembled sin. Naaman’s disease and his cure, as here sketched, manifest certain forces which have ever been and still are at work in society, and which play no feeble part in the formation of character and the regulation of destiny. Notice

I. The force of WORLDLY POSITION. Why all the interest displayed in his own country, and in Israel, concerning Naaman’s disease? The first verse of this chapter explains it. “Now Naaman, captain of the host of the King of Syria, was a great man.” Perhaps there were many men in his own district who were suffering from leprosy, yet little interest was felt in them. They would groan under their sufferings, and die unsympathized with and unhelped. But because this man’s worldly position was high, kings worked, prophets were engaged, nations were excited, for his cure. It has ever been a sad fact in human history that men magnify both the trials and the virtues of grandees, and think but little of the griefs and graces of the lowly. If a man in high position is under trial, it is always “a great trial,” of which people talk, and which the press will record. If he does a good work, it is always a “great work,” and is trumpeted half the world over. This fact indicates:

1. The lack of intelligence in popular sympathy. Reason teaches that the calamities of the wealthy have many mitigating circumstances, and therefore the greater sympathy should be toward the poor.

2. The lack of manliness in popular sympathy. There is a fawning servility, most dishonorable to human nature, in showing more sympathy with the rich than with the poor in suffering.

II. The force of INDIVIDUAL INFLUENCE. “And the Syrians had gone out by companies, and had brought away captive out of the land of Israel a little maid; and she waited on Naaman’s wife. And she said unto her mistress, Would God my lord were with the prophet that is in Samaria! for he would recover him of his leprosy. And one went in, and told his lord, saying, Thus and thus said the maid that is of the land of Israel.” This little gift, who had been torn from her native country, and carried into the land of strangers by the ruthless hand of war, told her mistress of a prophet in Israel who had the power to heal lepers. This led the King of Syria to persuade Naaman to visit Judea, and to give the leprous captain an introduction to the king, who, in his turn, introduced him to the prophet, who effected his healing. The influence of this little slave-gift should teach us three things.

1. The magnanimity of young natures. Though she was an exile in the land of her oppressors, instead of having that revenge which would have led her to rejoice in the sufferings of her captors, her young heart yearned with sympathy for one of the ruthless conquerors. A poor child, a humble servant, a despised slave, may have a royal soul.

2. The power of the humblest individual. This poor girl, with her simple intelligence, moved her mistress; her mistress, the mighty warrior; then Syria’s king was moved; by him the King of Israel is interested; and then the prophet of the Lord. Thus the little maid may have been said to have stirred kingdoms, life one, not even a child, “liveth to himself.” Each is a fountain of influence.

3. The dependence of the great upon the small. The recovery of this warrior resulted from the word of this captive maid. Some persons admit the hand of God only in what they call great events! But what are the great events? “Great” and “small” are but relative terms. And even what we call “small” often sways and shapes the “great.” One spark of fire may burn down all London.

III. The force of SELF–PRESERVATION. “And the King of Syria said, Go to, go, and I will send a letter unto the King of Israel. And he departed, and took with him ten talents of silver, and six thousand pieces of gold, and ten changes of raiment. And he brought the letter to the King of Israel, saying, Now when this letter is come unto thee, behold, I have therewith sent Naaman my servant to thee, that thou mayest recover him of his leprosy.” It would seem that Naaman at once consulted Beahadad, King of Syria, on the subject suggested by the captive maid, and, having obtained an introduction to the King of Israel, hurried off, taking with him “ten talents of silver,” etc.great wealthwhich he was prepared to sacrifice in the recovery of his health. The instinct of self-preservation is one of the strongest in human nature. “Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life.” Men will spend fortunes and traverse continents in order to rid themselves of disease, and prolong life. This strenuous effort for recovery from disease reminds us of:

1. The value of physical health. This man had lost it, and what was the world to him without it? Bishop Hall truly says of him, “The basest slave in Syria would not change skins with him.” Healththis precious blessingis so lavishly given, that men seldom appreciate it till it is lost.

2. The neglect of spiritual health. This man was evidently morally diseasedthat is, he neither knew of the true God nor had sympathy with him. He was a moral invalid. A worse disuse than leprosy infected his manhood and threatened the ruin of his being. Yet there is no struggling here after spiritual recovery. This is a general evil.

IV. The force of CASTE FEELING. “And the King of Syria said, Go to, go, and I will send a letter unto the King of Israel.” Why did the King, of Syria send Naaman with the letter to the monarch of Israel? Was it because he was given to understand that the king would work the cure? No; for mention was made by the captive girl of no one who could effect the cure but “the prophet that is in Samaria.” Or was it because he thought that Israel’s monarch would discover the prophet, and influence him on behalf of the afflicted officer? life; for in his royal letter he says, “Behold, I have sent Naaman my servant to thee, that thou mayest recover him of his leprosy.” Why, then? Simply because of caste feeling. He, forsooth, was too great to know a prophettoo great to correspond with any one but a king. What was a prophet, though fall of Divine intelligence, and nerved with Divine energy, compared even to a soulless man if a crown encircled his brow?

1. Caste feeling sinks the real in the adventitious. The man who is ruled by it so exaggerates external things as to lose sight of those elements of moral character, which constitute the dignity and determine the destiny of man. He lives in bubbles.

2. Caste feeling curtails the region of human sympathies. He who is controlled by this feeling has the circle of his sympathies limited not only to what is outward in man, but to what is outward in those only in his own sphere. All-out lying his grade and class are nothing to him.

3. Caste feeling is antagonistic to the gospel. Christ came to destroy that middle wall of partition that divides men into classes. The gospel overtops all adventitious distinctions, and directs its doctrines and offers its provisions to man as man.

V. The force of GUILTY SUSPICION. “And it came to pass, when the King of Israel had read the letter, that he rent his clothes, and said, Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man doth send unto me to recover a man of his leprosy? Wherefore consider, I pray you, and see how he seeketh a quarrel against me.” The construction that the monarch put upon the message of his royal brother was, instead of being true and liberal, false and ungenerous. He ascribed evil motives where there were none, and saw malignant intentions where there was nothing but a good-natured purpose. All this springs from that suspicion which is a prevalent and disastrous evil in the social life of this world. Where this suspicion exists, one of the two, if not the two, following things are always found.

1. A knowledge of the depravity of society. The suspicious man has frequently learnt, either from observation, testimony, or experience, or from all these together, that there is such an amount of falsehood and dishonesty in society as will lead one man to take an undue advantage of another. However, whether he has learnt this or not, it is a lamentable fact, patent to all observant eyes.

2. The existence of evil in himself. The suspicious man knows that he is selfish, false, dishonest, unchaste, and he believes that all men are the same. If he were not evil, he would not be suspicious of others, even though he knew that all about him were bad. An innocent being, I trow, would move amongst a corrupt age without any suspicion whatever. Being destitute of all bad motives himself, he would not be able to understand the corrupt motives of others. On the other hand, were society ever so holy, a bad man would still be suspecting all. An unchaste, selfish, fraudulent man would suspect the purity, the benevolence, and the integrity of angels, if he lived amongst them. The greatest rogues are always the most suspicious; the most lustful husbands are always the most jealous of their wives, and the reverse. Well has our great dramatist said, “Suspicion haunts the guilty soul.” A miserable thing truly is this suspicion. Heaven deliver us from suspicious people! Suspicion is the poison of all true friendship; it is that which makes kings tyrants, merchants exactors, masters rigorous, and the base-natured of both sexes diseased with a jealousy that shatters connubial confidence, and quenches all the lights of connubial life.

VI. The force of REMEDIAL GOODNESS. Though the king could not cure, there was a remedial power in Israel equal to this emergency. That power Infinite Goodness delegated to Elisha. God makes man the organ of his restorative powers. It was so now with Elisha. It was pre-eminently so with Christ. It was so with the apostles. The redemptive treasure is in “earthly vessels.” The passage suggests several points concerning this remedial power.

1. It transcends natural power. “When Elisha the man of God,” etc. The monarch felt his utter insufficiency to effect the cure. Natural science knew nothing of means to heal the leper. Supernatural revelation reveals the remedy through Elisha. Herein is an illustration of Christianity. No natural science can cure the leprosy of sin; it tried for ages, but failed.

2. It offends human pride. “So Naaman came with his horses,” etc. Naaman came in all the pomp of wealth and station to the prophet’s door, expecting, no doubt, that Elisha would hurry out to do him honor. But a true man is never moved by glitter. He did not even go out to meet the illustrious visitor, but sent a messenger to bid him go to the Jordan, and there wash. But both the unbending independency of the prophet, and the simple method he prescribed, so galled the proud heart of the Syrian warrior, that he “was wroth, and went away, and said, Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me,” etc. Herein is an illustration of Christianity. It strikes at the root of pride, and requires us to become as “little children.”

3. It clashes with popular prejudices. “Are not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? may I not wash in them, and be clean?” It is common for men to regard that which belongs to themselves and to their country as the “better”our children, our family, our sect, our class, our nation, are “better.” This man’s prejudice said, “Abana and Pharpar;” the prophet said, “Jordan;” and this offended him. “And he went away in a rage.” Herein, again, is an illustration of Christianity. Human prejudices prescribe this river and that river for cleansing, but the gospel says, “Jordan.”

4. It works by simple means. “And his servants came near, and spake unto him, and said, My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it? how much rather then when he saith to thee, Wash, and be clean?” The means to Naaman seemed to be too simple to answer the end he sought. Had there been some severe regimen, or some painful operation, or some costly expenditure, he would have accepted it more readily; but “to wash,” seemed too simple. The means of spiritual recovery are very simple. But men desire them otherwise. Hence vain ceremonies, pilgrimages, penances, prolonged fastings, and the like. “Believe and thou shalt be saved,” says God; man wants to do something more.

5. It demands individual effort. “Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan according to the saying of the man of God.” Naaman had to go down himself to the river, and to dip himself seven times in its waters. His restoration depended upon his individual effort. And so it is in spiritual matters. Each man must believe, repent, and pray, for himself. There is no substitution.

6. It is completely efficacious. “His flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child.” The means employed for this leper’s cure fully answered the end. Every vestige of the disease was gone, and he was restored to more than the vigor of his former manhood. Herein once more, “Believe and thou shalt be saved.”

VII. The force OF A NEW CONVICTION. “And he returned to the man of God,” etc. Observe:

1. The subject of this new conviction. What was the subject? That the God of Israel was the only God. This new conviction reversed his old prejudices and the religious creed of his country. It was not reasoning, it was not teaching; experience had wrought this conviction into his soul. He felt that it was God’s hand that healed him.

2. The developments of this new conviction. A conviction like this must prove influential in some way or other. Abstract ideas may lie dormant in the mind, but convictions are ever operative. What did it do in Naaman?

(1) It evoked gratitude. Standing with all his company before the prophet, he avowed his gratitude. “Now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant.” Just before his cure he had anything but kindly feelings towards the prophet. He was full of “rage.” New convictions about God will generate new feelings toward man.

(2) It annihilated an old prejudice. Just before his cure he despised Israel. Jordan was contemptible as compared with the rivers of Damascus. But now the very ground seems holy. He asks of the prophet liberty to take away a portion of the earth. “Shall there not then, I pray thee, be given to thy servant two mules’ burden of earth?” A new conviction about God widens the soul s sympathies, raises it above all those nationalities of heart that characterize little souls.

(3) It inspired worship. “Thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt offering nor sacrifice but unto the Lord.” His whole nature was so flooded with gratitude to God who had healed him, that his soul went forth in holy worship. Through the force of this new conviction, he felt as St. Paul did when he said, “What things were gain to me, those I counted loss.

VIII. The force of ASSOCIATES. Naaman had been in the habit of worshipping “in the house of Rimmon,” with his master the king. This, probably, he had done for years with other officers of the state. The influence of this he now felt counteracting the new conviction of duty. He felt that, whilst it would be wrong for him to go there any more, yet he could not but go. “In this thing the Lord pardon thy servant,” etc. Loyalty and gratitude towards the king contributed much to prevent him renouncing all connection with the house of Rimmon. How often do our associations prevent us from the full carrying out of our convictions! It ought not to be so. “He that loveth father or mother,” etc. It is somewhat remarkable that the Prophet Elisha, instead of exhorting Naaman to avoid every appearance of idolatry, said to him, “Go in peace.” The prophet, perhaps, had faith in the power of Naaman’s conviction to guard him from any moral mischief.

IX. The force of SORDID AVARICE. Gehazi is the illustration of this. In his case we have:

1. Avarice eager in its pursuits. “But Gehazi, the servant of Elisha,” etc. He saw, as he thought, a fine opportunity for his greed, and he eagerly seized it. “I will run after him.” Avarice is one of the most hungry passions of the soul. It is never satisfied. Had the avaricious man, like the fabled Briareus, a hundred hands, he would employ them all in ministering to himselfDryden calls it “A cursed hunger of pernicious gold.” It is that passion that makes all men like Gehazi “run.” Men are everywhere out of breath in their race for wealth.

2. This avarice is in one associated with the most generous of men. He was the servant of Elisha, who, when Naaman offered some acknowledgment of his gratitude to him, exclaimed, in the most solemn way, “As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand, I will receive none.” One would have thought that association with a generous soul like this would have banished every base sentiment from Gehazi’s heart. But when it once roots itself in the soul, it is the most inveterate of lusts. The history of modern enterprises shows us numerous examples of men who, from early life, have been in association with ministers, churches, religious institutions, and in some cases have themselves been deacons, chairmen of religious societies, and the like, whose avarice has so grown, in spite of all those influences, as to make them swindlers on a gigantic scale.

3. This avarice sought its end by means of falsehood. “My master hath sent me,” etc. This was a flagrant falsehood. Avarice is always false. Its trades are full of tricks; its shops of sophistries. All its enterprises employ the tongue of falsehood and the hand of deceit.

X. The force of DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE. There is justice on this earth as well as remedial goodness, and Heaven often makes men the organ as well as the subject of both. Elisha, who had the remedial power, had also the retributive. Here we see retributive justice:

1. Detecting the wrong-doer. “And Elisha said unto him, Whence comest thou, Gehazi?” etc. Justice has the eyes of Argus; has more than the eyes of Argusit sees in the dark. It penetrates through all fallacies. “The eyes of the Lord run to and fro, beholding the evil and the good.”

2. Reproving the wrong-doer. “Is it a time to receive money,” etc.? An old expositor has quaintly put it, “Couldest thou find no better way of getting money than by belying thy master, and laying a stumbling-block before a young convert?” His avarice was a thing bad in itself, and bad also in seizing an opportunity which should have been employed for other and higher ends.

3. Punishing the wrong-doer. “The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee,” etc. He had money of the leper, but he had his disease too. In getting what he considered a blessing, he got a curse as well. Wealth avariciously gotten never fails to bring a curse in some form or other. If it does not bring leprosy to the body, it brings what is infinitely worse, the most deadly leprosy into the soul, and often entails injuries on posterity.D.T.

HOMILIES BY J. ORR

2Ki 5:1-7

The story of Naaman: 1. The disinterested maiden.

The story of the great Syrian captain, who was healed of his leprosy and brought to the knowledge of the true God through the instrumentality of a captive Hebrew maid directing him to Elisha, is one of the most beautiful, as it is one of the richest in gospel suggestion, of the narratives of the Old Testament. Our Lord refers to it in his discourse at Nazareth, as showing that it is not always the direct possessors of privileges who know best how to take advantage of them. “Many lepers were in Israel,” etc. (Luk 4:27).

I. THE GREAT MAN‘S LEPROSY. The story opens by introducing us to Naaman, the captain of the host of the King of Syria.

1. So much, and yet a cross. On this distinguished man Fortune seemed to have lavished her utmost favors. He was

(1) high in rank, “captain of the host;”

(2) great in honor, “a great man with his master;”

(3) successful in war, “honorable, because by him the Lord had given deliverance unto Syria;”

(4) distinguished for personal bravery, “a mighty man of valor.” The expression quoted above, “The Lord had given deliverance,” etc; shows how far the Hebrews were from regarding Jehovah as a merely national Deity. His providence extended to other nations as well. It was he, not Rimmon, who had given Syria her victories. Naaman had thus wealth, honor, the favor of his sovereign, the admiration of the peopleeverything that men commonly covet. Yet

(5) “he was a leper.” This spoiled all. It was the cross in his lot; the drop of gall in his cup; the worm at the root of his prosperity. It made him such that, as has been said, the humblest soldier in his ranks would not have exchanged places with him. Few lives, even those which seem most enviable, are without their cross. The lady of Shunem has wealth, comforts, a loving husband; but she is childless. It does not take much sometimes to dash our earthly happiness, to take the golden light out of life. Because it is so, we should seek our happiness in things that are enduring. “He builds too low who builds beneath the skies.”

2. The cross a mercy in disguise. As it proved, this grief of Naaman’s became his salvation. It brought him under the notice of the little Hebrew maid, led to his visit to Elisha, ended in his cure and his conversion to the faith of the God of Israel. He was one who could say, “It is good for me that I have been afflicted” (Psa 119:71). How often are seeming crosses and trials thus overruled for good! “Men see not the bright light which is in the clouds: but the wind passeth, and cleanseth them” (Job 37:21). The evangelical application of the story is aided by the fact that leprosy is so impressive a type of sininsidious, progressive, corrupting, fatal.

II. THE SLAVE–GIRL‘S ADVICE. It was God’s design to show mercy to Naaman, for his own glory, as well as for a testimony that the Gentiles were not outside the scope of his grace. The instrument in accomplishing that design was a little Hebrew maid.

1. Her presence in Naaman‘s house. She had been taken in a marauding expedition, and brought to Syria as a captive. Sold, perhaps, like Joseph, in the slave-market, she had been purchased as an attendant for Naanaan’s wife. Her presence in the great captain’s household was thus:

(1) providential, even as was Joseph’s residence in the house of Potiphar;

(2) sad, for she was torn from her own land and friends, and the thought of their sorrow at her loss would add to hers; yet

(3) designed for blessing. It not only gave her the opportunity of doing good to her master, but no doubt ultimately turned to her own great advantage. Another example of how the things which seem all “against us” (Gen 42:36) are often for our good (comp. Gen 1:20).

2. Her helpful suggestion. Slave though she was, the little maid was in possession of a secret which the great Naaman did not know, and which was worth “thousands of gold and silver” (Psa 119:72) to him. She dropped a hint to her mistress, “Would God my lord were with the prophet that is in Samaria!” etc. Her suggestion was indicative of:

(1) Pity. Though a slave, her heart was tender, even towards her master. She was grieved for his affliction. She yearned to see him recovered. Her “would God!” is almost a prayer for his recovery.

(2) Fidelity. It is told of Joseph that he was faithful as a servant in the house of his master the Egyptian (Gen 39:2-6). This little maid, though a “servant under the yoke” (1Ti 6:1), yet “counted her master worthy of all honor” (1Ti 6:1). She served, “not with eye-service, as men-pleasers,” but “in singleness of heart,” “with good will doing service ‘ (Eph 6:5-7), though her lord was an alien, and might seem to have little claim upon her gratitude. As a good servant should, she desired his prosperity in mind, body, and estate. In this was shown

(3) her disinterestedness. In her position it need not have been wondered at if she had secretly rejoiced at her master’s affliction. But her heart cherished no resentment. Anticipating the gospel, she sought to return good for evil (Mat 5:44).

We learn from this part of the story

(1) that even the humblest may be of essential service to those above them. Most of all is this the case when they possess the knowledge of the true God. A hint dropped may guide the spiritual leper to the fountain of healing.

(2) The young, too, should take encouragement. In their several stations they may be greatly used for good.

(3) We should do to others the utmost good we can, even though they are our enemies.

III. THE ARROGANT KING‘S EPISTLE. The news of what the little maid had said soon spread abroad, and came first to the ears of Naaman, then to the ears of the King of Syria (Benhadad?).

1. The King of Syria‘s epistle. The monarch valued his general, and was ready to take any steps to further his cure. Accordingly, he indited a letter, and sent Naaman with it, with much pomp and state, to the King of Israel (Jehoram?). He sends:

(1) With the arrogance of a victor. The tone of his communication to the monarch at Samaria was unmistakably of the nature of command. It haughtily announces that he has sent Naaman to him, and requires that he shall recover him from his disease. There lurks in the letter a reminder of the defeat at Ramoth-Gilead (1Ki 22:1-53.).

(2) With the ignorance of a heathen. He writes to the rival ruler as if it lay in his power to kill and to make alive. He probably thought that the king had only to command, to compel Elisha to serve him in any way he pleased. Hence, without mentioning Elisha, he lays the whole responsibility of seeing that his captain is cured on the shoulders of Jehoram. He has the notioncommon enough to monarchsthat kings should be supreme in religion as in everything else. He thinks that God’s prophets must take their commands from whoever chances to occupy the throne.

(3) With the munificence of a sovereign. If there was haughtiness in the tone of his letter, he did not at least send his officer without abundant rewards. He bore with him ten talents of silver, six thousand shekels of gold, and ten changes of raiment. These enormous sums were, no doubt, thought certain to purchase the cure. Another heathenish idea, akin to the modern notion that anything can be bought with money. Elisha taught him differently when the cure was accomplished (2Ki 5:16). Simon Magus would have bought even the power to communicate the Holy Ghost with gold (Act 8:18, Act 8:19). There are blessings which are beyond the reach of money, and yet can be had “without money and without price (Isa 4:1).

2. The King of Israel‘s distress. When the King of Israel read the communication, he was both indignant and distressed. As he viewed the letter, it was:

(1) A request for the impossible. “Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man doth send unto me to recover a man of his leprosy?” This was, at any rate, a frank acknowledgment of his own helplessness. It sets in a stronger light the Divine character of the cure by Elisha.

(2) An attempt to force upon him a quarrel. His interpretation of the letter was not unnatural. Yet it was mistaken. We do well to be careful in forming judgments and imputing motives.

(3) An attack upon his weakness. It was this that distressed him so much. He did not feel able to make war against the King of Syria, and therefore he resented the more keenly this attempt (as he conceived it) to drive him into a corner.J.O.

2Ki 5:8-19

The story of Naaman: 2. The suggestive cure.

The cure which Naaman came to seek was, nevertheless, obtained by him. We have here

I. THE INTERPOSITION OF ELISHA. Naaman was on the point of being sent away, when Elisha interposed. God’s prophet vindicates God’s honor.

1. Elisha sends to the king. “He sent to the king, saying, Wherefore hast thou rent thy clothes?” etc; His words were:

(1) A rebuke of faithlessness. The king was not God, to kill and to make alive; but was there not a God in Israel who could? Has he already received no proofs of this God’s power? Wherefore, then, had he rent his clothes? How much of our despondency, fear, despair, arises from want of faith in a living God!

(2) An invitation to seek help in the right quarter. “Let him come now to me.” The proof that there was a prophet, and behind the prophet a living, wonder-working God, in Israel, would be seen in deeds. Why does the sinner rend his clothes, and despair of help? Is Christ not able to save? Does he not invite him to come?

2. Naaman comes to Elisha.

(1) He seeks cleansing.

(2) Yet with unhumbled heart.

His horses and chariot drive up to Elisha’s door. The great man has no thought of descending to ask the prophet’s blessing. He waits till he comes out to him. He is the man of rank and wealth, whom Elisha should feel honored in serving. But Elisha does not come out. Not in this spirit are cures obtained at the hand of God. Naaman must be taught that gold, silver, horses, chariots, rank, avail nothing here. To be saved the highest must become as the humblest. Pride must be expelled (Php 3:7, Php 3:8).

II. THE MODE OF CURE.

1. Elisha‘s direction. Instead of himself appearing, Elisha sent a messenger to Naaman, directing him to wash seven times in Jordan, and he would be clean. The means of cure was:

(1) Simplicity itself. Nothing could be simpler or more easy than to bathe seven times in Jordan. Any leper might be glad to purchase cleansing by plunging in a river. God’s way of salvation by Christ is characteristically simple. It involves no toilsome pilgrimages, no laborious works, no protracted ceremonies. “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved” (Act 16:31).

(2) Symbolical. Jordan was the sacred stream of Israel; bathing was the Levitical mode of the purification of a leper (Le 2Ki 14:8, 2Ki 14:9); seven was the sacred number. Leprosy, as the type of sin, was fitly cleansed by these purificatory rites. That which answers to the bathing in the spiritual sphere is “the washing of regeneration, and of renewing of the Holy Ghost” (Tit 3:5).

(3) In its very simplicity, fitted to humble the proud heart. As we are immediately to see, it humbled Naaman. It did not strike him as a sufficiently great thing to do. Thus many are offended by the very simplicity of the gospel. It seems treating them too much like children to ask them simply to believe in the crucified and risen Savior. Their intellectual eminence, their social greatness, their pride of character, are insulted by the proposal to efface themselves at the foot of the cross.

2. Naaman‘s anger. “Naaman was wroth, and went away.” The causes of his anger were:

(1) His expectations were disappointed. He thought the prophet would have shown him more respect; would have employed impressive words and gestures; would have given the cure more eclat. Instead of this, there was the simple command to wash in Jordan. What a down-come from the imposing ceremonial he expected! Men have their preconceived ideas about religion, about salvation, about the methods of spiritual cure, which they oppose to God’s ways. They say with Naaman, “Behold, I thought, He will surely do this or that. The Jews rejected their Messiah because he was” as a root out of a dry ground” (Isa 53:2); they rejected Christianity because its spiritual, unceremonial worship did not accord with their sensuous ideas. Others reject the gospel because it does not accord with the spirit of the age, is not sufficiently intellectual, philosophical, or aesthetical. God reminds us, “My thoughts are not your thoughts,” etc. (Isa 55:8).

(2) He was required to submit to what seemed to him a humiliation. He was told to bathe in the waters of Jordan, a stream of Israel, when there were rivers as good, nay, better, in his own country, to which, if bathing was essential, he might have been sent. “Are not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus,” etc.? It seemed like a studied slight put upon his native rivers, an intentional humiliation put upon himself, to require him to go and bathe in this local stream. How often does wounded pride rebel at the simple provisions of the gospel, because they involve nothing that is our own, that reflects glory on self, or allows glory to self! This is the very purpose of the gospel. “Where is boasting, then? It is excluded” (Rom 3:27). Things are as they are, “that no flesh should glory in his presence” (1Co 1:29). When Christ’s atonement is extolled, the cry is, “Have we not rivers, Abanas and Pharpars, of our own?” “Naaman came with his mind all made up as to how he was to be healed, and he turned away in anger and disgust from the course which the prophet prescribed. He was a type of the rationalist, whose philosophy provides him with a priori dogmas, by which he measures everything which is proposed to his faith. He turns away in contempt where faith would heal him” (Sumner).

3. Naaman‘s obedience. Thus a second time the blessing was nearly missedthis time through his own folly and obstinacy. But, fortunately, a remonstrance was addressed to him, and he proved amenable to reason.

(1) The remonstrance of his servants. They, looking at things through a calmer medium, and with Jess of personal pique, saw the situation with clearer eyes. They addressed him soothingly and affectionately. They touched the core of the matter when they said, “My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it?” It was Naaman’s pride that had been offended. But they pointed out to him, in very plain terms, the folly of his conduct. Was it not a cure he wanted? And if it was, then, surely, the simpler the means prescribed the better. Why quarrel with the conditions of cure because they were so simple? The same reasoning may be applied to the gospel. It is the simplicity of its arrangements which is the beauty of it. If men really wish to be saved, why quarrel with this simplicity? Surely the simpler the better. Would men not he willing to do “some great thing” to obtain peace with God, pardon of sin, renewal and purity of heart? How much more, then, when it is said, “Wash, and be clean”?

(2) The washing in Jordan. Naaman’s ire had cooled. He felt the force of what his servants urged. He might prefer Abana and Pharpar, if he liked; but it was Jordan the prophet had named. If he did not choose to submit to bathe in this river, he must go without the cure altogether. “Neither was there salvation” (Act 4:12) in any other river than this one. This decided him. He went down without further parley, bathed seven times in Jordan as directed, and, marvel of marvels, “his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.” So speedy, sure, and complete was the reward of his obedience. As effectual to procure salvation and spiritual healing is the look of faith to Jesus, the appropriation of the merit of his blood, the spiritual baptism of the Holy Ghost.

III. NAAMAN‘S GRATITUDE AND PIETY. What joy now filled the heart of the newly cleansed Naaman! How clearly he saw his former folly! How glad he was that he had not allowed his anger to prevail against the advice of his servants and his own better reason! At once he returned to Elisha; and it was very evident that his heart was overflowing with gratitude, and that he was a changed man. Like the leper in the Gospel, he returned “to give glory to God” (Luk 17:17, Luk 17:18). Gratitude is most becoming in those who have received great mercies from God. Salvation awakens joy; gratitude prompts to consecrationnot in order to salvation, but as the result of it, man becomes “a new creature” (2Co 5:17). We observe:

1. His acknowledgment of God. “Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel.” This is not a comparative statement, but an absolute one. Naaman is convinced that the gods of the heathen are nullities, and that the God of Israel is the only true God. He was brought to this acknowledgment through the great miracle God had wrought upon him. It is God’s mighty acts in and for men which give the best evidence of his existence.

2. His offer of reward. It was no longer the heathenish notion of purchase, but a pure motive of gratitude, which led Naaman to press the wealth he had brought upon Elisha. The prophet, however, had no desire for his goods. With an emphatic asseveration, he declared that he would accept nothing.

(1) He must keep his act free from the possibility of misconception.

(2) A miracle of God must not be vulgarized by being made the occasion of money presents.

(3) Naaman’s instruction must be completed by teaching him that money gifts do not pay for spiritual blessings. Yet Naaman’s motive was a right one. It is right also that, from the motive of gratitude, we should consecrate our wealth to the Lord’s service.

3. His determination to worship. If he cannot persuade Elisha to accept gifts, he himself will become a suppliant, and ask a favor from the prophet. He entreats that he may be permitted to take with him two mules’ burden of earth of the Holy Land, that he may form an altar for the worship of Jehovah; for he is resolved henceforth to worship him only. This was granted. His altar would connect his sacrifices with the land which God had chosen as the place of his special habitation. Real religion will express itself in acts of worship. It will not content itself with cold recognition of God. It will build its altars to Jehovah, in the home, in the closet, in the church, and in the chief places of concourse.

4. His religious scruple. One point alone troubled him. In attending his royal master, it would be his duty to wait on him in his state visits to the temple of Rimmon, and, as his master leaned on his hand in bending before that idol, he would be under the necessity of seeming to bend before it, and yield it obeisance also. He asked that the Lord might pardon him in this thing. Elisha bade him go in peace.

(1) His act was not really worship, nor did he mean it to pass for such either before the king or the other worshippers.

(2) “An idol is nothing,” and, if he understood that clearly, his conscience would not be “defiled” (1Co 8:4-7). There is need for great care, even in outward acts, lest they expose the doer to misconception, or hurt the consciences of others. Life, however, is woven of intricate threads, and it is impossible but that in public, social, and official positions the Christian will sometimes find himself in situations of all the concomitants of which he can by no means approve. It will not do to say of these that it is his duty at all hazards to come out of them; for it is frequently through his duty that he is brought into them, and to escape them entirely he would require to “go out of the world” (1Co 5:10). If active participation in anything sinful is sought to be forced on himas if Naaman were required actually to bow the knee in worship to Rimmonthen he must refuse (Dan 3:1-30.).J.O.

2Ki 5:20-27

The story of Naaman: 3. Gehazi’s falsehood.

In Elisha’s company we might have expected only honor, integrity, truthfulness. But the society of the good will not of itself make another good. Hypocrisy can cover a foul interior. A fair outward seeming can cloak a heart ruled by very evil principles. In the first apostolic band there was a Judas. In Elisha’s service there was a Gehazi. The sin of both was covetousness. The offspring of covetousness in Gehazi’s ease was hypocrisy and falsehood.

I. COVETOUSNESS PROMPTING FALSEHOOD.

1. His reproach of his master. When Naaman was gone, Gehazi indulged in reflections on his master’s conduct. It did not at all commend itself to him. “Behold, my master has spared Naaman this Syrian, in not receiving at his hands that which he brought,” etc. Such generosity seemed absurd. It was a chance missed which might never come again. Fantastic scruples were all very well, but when they led to the loss of a fortune, they were greatly to be reprobated. What scruple need there have been in any case about spoiling a foreigner? Covetousness generally sees only the money consideration. When great gain is at stake, the man is held to be a fool who allows religious or sentimental considerations, or even ordinary moral scruples, to stand in the way.

2. His covetous determination. If his master has acted foolishly, he will not imitate his example. It is not yet too late, with a little art, to repair the damage. He will hurry after the Syrian, and obtain something from him. “As the Lord liveth”mark the profane mixing up of religion and impiety”I will run after him, and take somewhat of him.” Morality goes down before the greed of gain.

3. His unblushing falsehood.

(1) Naaman beheld Gehazi running after him, and was delighted to think that he might, after all, have the opportunity of serving Elisha. He alights from his chariota different man now than when his stately equipage “stood” at Elisha’s doorand asks eagerly, “Is all well?”

(2) Gehazi, in reply, tells him an unblushingly invented falsehood. There had come two young men of the sons of the prophets from Mount Ephraim, and Elisha had sent to entreat for them a talent of silver and two changes of raiment. The finish of this style of falsehood, and Gehazi’s subsequent hypocrisy, speak to considerable practice in the art of deceit. Such ready audacity, so great perfection in the arts of lying and concealment, are not attained at the first attempt. No man becomes a rogue quite suddenly. Elisha was probably no more deceived in the character of Gehazi than Jesus was in the character of Judas, who was secretly “a thief,” and “had the bag, and bare what was put therein” (Joh 12:6).

II. GRATITUDE DICTATING LIBERALITY. The willing response made by Naaman to what he took to be Elisha’s request is the bright side of this otherwise discreditable incident.

1. He doubled what was asked. “Be content, take two talents.” He was glad to get an opening for forcing some acknowledgment of his gratitude on Elisha.

2. He sent two of his servants back with the sacks of silver and the raiment. What he did, he did handsomely. He gave every token he could of his desire to oblige Elisha.

3. Gehazi relieved the servants when they came near the house, and had the treasure smuggled into the house, and safely hid. This was the part of the business in which there lay some risk of detection; but it was securely managed, and Gehazi no doubt breathed a sigh of relief when he saw the valuables carefully stowed away. His treasure was as safely concealed as Achan’s wedge of gold, and two hundred shekels of silver, and goodly Babylonish garment (Jos 7:21). But it was to prove as great a curse. Meanwhile, light in conscience, glad in heart, and pleased at having been permitted to bestow even this small gift (comparatively) on Elisha, Naaman sped on his way home. He probably never knew how he had been deceived.

III. JUSTICE DECREEING PENALTY. Gehazi’s act, however, skillfully concealed as it was from human view, was not to remain unpunished. God knew it. Gehazi had forgotten this. God is the one factor, which the wicked leave out of their calculations, and he is the most important of all. David was careful to conceal his crime with Bathsheba; but it is written, “The thing that David had done displeased the Lord” (2Sa 11:27).

1. Gehazi‘s hypocrisy. He went calmly in, and stood before his master, as if nothing had happened. There is, as above stated, a perfection in this villainy which shows that it was not a first offence. But there comes a point when men’s sins find them out. They gain courage by repeated attempts, and by-and-by take a step too far. What they think is their master-stroke proves their ruin.

2. Elisha‘s challenge. What had happened had not been “hid” from Elisha. The Lord had showed it to him. His heart had gone with Gehazi, and he had seen Naaman turning from his chariot to meet him. He now challenged him with his conduct. He:

(1) Exposed his falsehood. Gehazi answered boldly to the question, “Whence comest thou?” “Thy servant went no whither.” Then Elisha told him what he knew. We can imagine the servant’s conscience-stricken look and speechless confusion at this discovery. Let sinners consider how they will face the disclosures of the judgment-day, and what they will answer (Ecc 12:14; Rom 2:16; Col 3:25). We have a parallel instance of exposure, with an even severer punishment, in the case of Ananias and Sapphira (Act 5:1-11).

(2) Unveiled his inmost motives. “Is it a time”in connection with a work of God so great”to receive money, and to receive garments, and olive yards, and vineyards,” etc. These were the things Gehazi intended to purchase with his money. His mind was running out in grand plans of what he would do with his treasures. A miracle such as had been wrought should have filled him with very different thoughts. Elisha lays bare the covetous root of his disposition. God reads to the bottom of our hearts (Heb 4:12; Rev 2:23). Gold is valued by covetous men for what it will bring. It is a further development of avarice when it comes to be loved for its own sake.

3. The judgment of leprosy. By a just retribution, the leprosy of Naaman, which had been taken from him from miracle, is now by miracle rut on Gehazi and his seed forever (cf. Exo 20:5). There is a symmetrya relation of fitnessoften observable in God’s retributions (Gen 9:6; Jdg 1:7; Est 7:9, Est 7:10; Mat 7:2; Mat 26:52, etc.), Little would Gehazi’s wealth delight him with this loathsome and accursed disease upon him. Men make a wretched bargain who for wealth’s sake barter away peace with God, purity of conscience, inward integrity, and their soul’s honor, They may obtain gain, but they are smitten with a leprosy of spirit which is their ruin. Covetousness in the heart is already a leprosy. The outward leprosy, in Gehazi’s case, was but the external sign of what internally already existed.J.O.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

B.The healing of Naaman, punishment of Gehazi, and recovery of a lost axe

2Ki 5:1 to 2Ki 6:7

1Now Naaman, captain of the host of the king of Syria, was a great man with his master, and honorable [honored], because by him the Lord had given deliverance unto Syria: he was also a mighty man in valor, but he was a leper. 2And the Syrians had gone out by companies [in marauding bands], and had brought away captive out of the land of Israel a little maid; and she waited on Naamans wife. 3And she said unto her mistress, Would God my lord were with 4the prophet that is in Samaria! for he would recover him of his leprosy. And one [he, i.e., Naaman] went in, and told his lord, saying, Thus and thus said the maid that is of the land of Israel. 5And the king of Syria said, Go to, go, and I will send a letter unto the king of Israel. And he departed, and took with him ten talents of silver, and six thousand pieces of gold, and ten changes of raiment. [,] 6And he brought the letter [omit the letter] to the king of Israel [the letter], saying [which was to this effect]: Now when this letter is come unto thee, behold, I have therewith sent Naaman my servant to thee, that thou mayest recover him of his leprosy. 7And it came to pass, when the king of Israel had read the letter, that he rent his clothes, and said, Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man doth send unto me to recover a man of his leprosy? Wherefore, [Nay! only] consider, I pray you, and see how he seeketh a quarrel against me.

8And it was so, when Elisha the man of God had heard that the king of Israel had rent his clothes, that he sent to the king, saying, Wherefore hast thou rent thy clothes? let him come now to me, and he shall know [learn] that there is a prophet in Israel. 9So Naaman came with his horses and with his chariot, and stood at the door of the house of Elisha. 10And Elisha sent a messenger unto him, saying, Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean. 11But Naaman was wroth, and went away, and said, Behold, I thought, he will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the Lord his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover 12the leper [heal the leprosy]. Are not Abana11 and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? may I not wash in them, and be clean? So he turned and went away in a rage. 13And his servants came near, and spake unto him, and said, My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldst thou not have done it? how much rather then, when he saith to thee, 14Wash, and be clean? Then he went down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.

15And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him: and he said, Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel: now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing [token of gratitude fromomit of] of thy servant. 16But he said, As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand, I will receive none. And he urged him to take it; but he refused. 17And Naaman said, Shall there not then [If not, then let there], I pray thee, be given to thy servant two mules burden of earth? [,] for thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt-offering nor sacrifice unto other gods, but unto the Lord.12 18In this thing the Lord pardon thy servant, [;] that [omit that] when my master goeth into the house of Rimmon to worship there, and he leaneth on my hand, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon: [;] when I bow down myself13 in the house of Rimmon, the Lord pardon thy servant in this thing. 19And he said unto him, Go in peace. So he departed from him a little way [some distance].

20But Gehazi, the servant of Elisha the man of God, said, Behold, my master hath spared Naaman this Syrian, in not receiving at his hands that which he brought: but, as the Lord liveth, I will run after him, and take somewhat of him. 21So Gehazi followed after Naaman. And when Naaman saw him running after him, he lighted down from the chariot to meet him, and said, Is all well? 22And he said, All is well. My master hath sent me, saying, Behold, even [just] now there be come to me from mount Ephraim two young men of the sons of the prophets: give them, I pray thee, a talent of silver, and two changes of garments. 23And Naaman said, Be content, [pleased toomit,] take two talents. And he urged him, and bound two talents of silver in two bags, with two changes of garments, and laid them upon two of his servants; and they bare them before him. 24And when he came to the tower [hill] he took them from their hand, and bestowed them in the house: and he let the men go, and they departed. 25But he went in and stood before his master. And Elisha said unto him, Whence comest thou, Gehazi? 26And he said, Thy servant went no whither. And he said unto him, Went not mine heart with thee, when the man turned again from his chariot to meet thee? Is it a time to receive money, and to receive garments, and oliveyards, and vineyards, and sheep, and oxen, and men-servants, and maid servants? 27The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed forever. And he went from his presence a leper as white as snow.

2Ki 6:1 And the sons of the prophets said unto Elisha, Behold now, the place where we dwell with thee is too strait for us. 2Let us go, we pray thee, unto Jordan, and take thence every man a beam, and let us make us a place there, where we may dwell. And he answered, Go ye. 3And one said, 4Be content [pleased], I pray thee, and [to] go with thy servants. And he answered, I will go. So he went with them. And when they came to Jordan, they cut down wood. 5But as one was felling a beam, the axe-head fell into the water: and he cried, and said, Alas, master! for it was borrowed. 6And the man of God said, Where fell it? And he cut down a stick, and cast it in thither; and [made] the iron did [toomit did] swim. 7Therefore said he, Take it up to thee. And he put out his hand, and took it.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

2Ki 5:1. Now Naaman captain of the host, &c. The with which the narrative begins, is used as in 1Ki 1:1, and does not mark the incident as having occurred immediately after the preceding. We cannot decide certainly whether it belongs to the time of Jehoram or to that of the house of Jehu. In any case it refers to a time when the relations between Syria and Israel were not hostile. That Naaman was the man who fatally wounded Ahab is a mere guess of the rabbis, and it is not strengthened at all by the statement of Josephus: , . Naaman is called a great man in so far as he occupied a high position in the service of the king. The statement: by him the Lord had given deliverance unto Syria, i.e., victory, does not compel us to translate as Thenius does, by a man of great physical strength; the expression marks his military ability. Keil takes it as second predicate: The man was a general though a leper, meaning that, although in Israel lepers were excluded from all human society, in Syria a leper could fill even a high civil office. This is certainly unfounded, for lepers were everywhere physically incapable of performing important duties. is evidently used by contrast, whether the omission of the connective sharpens the contrast (Thenius) or not. He was a mighty military chief, but, on account of his disease, he could not fulfill his duties. It is significant that he who had helped to gain the victory over Israel, is represented as a leper, who must seek help in Israel, and who finds it there (Thenius). [By whom the Lord had given deliverance. In consistency with the standing conception of the Hebrews that Jehovah was the God of all the earth, it is represented as a dispensation of His providence that Naaman had won victories for Syria, cf. 2Ki 19:25-26.W. G. S.] 2Ki 5:3, as in Psa 119:5, utinam. The word i.e., collect, take up, receive, designates the reception into the society of men which followed upon deliverance from leprosy (Num 12:14).

2Ki 5:5. And the king of Syria said, &c. We see, from the kings readiness, how anxious he was for the restoration of Naaman. The treasures which the latter took with him were very valuable; we cannot, however, estimate their value accurately. According to Keil 10 talents of silver are about 25,000 thalers ($18,000), and 6000 shekels of gold (= 2 talents) are about 50,000 thalers ($36,000); according to Thenius the value would be 20,000 thalers and 60,000 thalers ($14,400 and $43,200). On the ten changes of raiment, cf. (Odyss. 8:249). Winer: An Oriental is still fond of frequent changes of apparel (Gen 40:14; 1Sa 28:8; 2Sa 12:20), especially of grand dresses at marriages and other celebrations (Niebuhr, Reise, i. 182). The royal letter is abbreviated in 2Ki 5:6, for it could not begin with Now when. Only the main passage is given here. The letter was simply a note of introduction, and we cannot infer from the words: That thou mayest recover him of his leprosy, that the king of Israel was then in a relation of dependence to the Syrian king. The king probably thought of the prophet, of whom he had heard so great things, as the chief of a sort of magi or as the Israelitish high-priest, who could probably be induced to undertake, on behalf of a foreigner, those ceremonies and functions of his office from which so great results were to be expected, only by the intercession of the king (Menken). The king of Israel, however, so far misunderstood the intention of the letter as to suppose that he himself was expected to perform the cure; he thought that this demand was only a pretext, in order to bring about a quarrel with him. He was thereby so frightened and saddened that he rent his clothes (2Ki 2:12; 1Ki 21:27). The meaning of the words in 2Ki 5:7 is: he demands of me something which God alone can do, so that it is clear that he is only seeking a quarrel. To kill and to make alive is the province of that Divinity alone who is elevated far above the world (Deu 32:39; 1Sa 2:6); leprosy was regarded as the equivalent of death (Num 12:12); to deliver from it was to make alive. It is not probable that the king spoke the words: Wherefore, consider, in the solemn audience in which the letter was delivered to him (Thenius): he uttered this suspicion only in the circle of his most intimate attendants.

2Ki 5:8. And it was so when Elisha the man of God, &c. If the arrival of the celebrated Syrian with his retinue caused a sensation, still more did the fact that the king rent his clothes; the news of it came speedily to the prophet, who was then in Samaria (2Ki 5:3), and not in Jericho (Krummacher). The king, in his fright, either did not think of Elisha, or he did not believe at all that there was any one who could help in such a case. Elisha therefore sends to him to remind him that there is a prophet in Israel, i.e., that the God who can kill and make alive, the God of Israel, in spite of the apostasy of king and people, yet makes Himself known, in His saving might, through His servants the prophets.The house of Elisha, before the door of which Naaman stood (2Ki 5:9), was certainly not a palace, but rather a poor hovel, so that the great man did not go in, but waited for the prophet to come out to him, and receive him in a manner befitting his rank. This, however, the prophet did not do, but sent a message to him to instruct him what he should do. The idea that he did this before Naaman reached his house (Kster) contradicts the words of the text. The reason why Elisha did not come out was not that he was wanting in politeness, or that he was influenced by priestly pride, or that he feared the leprosy, or avoided intercourse with a leper in obedience to the Law (Knobel), but: He wanted to show to Naaman once for all that this princely magnificence, this splendor of earthly honor and wealth, did not affect him at all, and that there was not the least cause in all this why Naaman should be helped. Furthermore, he wished to prevent the foreigner from thinking that the help came from the prophet, and that he had the healing power in himself, and also to prevent him or any other from ascribing the cure to the application of any external means: for the Syrians knew as well as the Israelites that the Jordan could not heal leprosy. Naaman was to understand that he was healed by the grace and power of Almighty God, at the prayer of the prophet (Menken).Thy flesh shall come again to thee, &c. In leprosy raw flesh appears and running sores are formed, so that the diseased person dies at last of emaciation and dropsy (Winer, R.-W.-B. i. s. 115); the cure, therefore, consists in the restoration of flesh.

2Ki 5:11. But Naaman was wroth, &c. Not because he did not meet with becoming honor and attention, but because none of the religious ceremonies which he had expected were performed (Menken). He himself tells what he had expected: Elishas brief answer sounds to him like scorn. The river Abana (2Ki 5:12), or, as the keri has it, Amana, is the of the Greeks, now called Barada or Barady. It rises in Antilebanon, and flows through Damascus itself in seven arms (Winer, R.-W.-B. ii. s. 194). Pharpar, i.e., the swift, is hardly the little river Fidscheh, which flows into the Barada, but the larger, independent stream Avadsch, south of Damascus (see Thenius and Keil on the passage). Both rivers, as mountain streams, have clean fresh water, and Damascus is celebrated to-day for its pure and healthy water; whereas the Jordan is a deep, sluggish, discolored stream (Robinson, ii. 255, ed. of 1841), so that we understand how Naaman could consider the rivers of his native country better (Keil). The address: My father (2Ki 5:13), is at once familiar and respectful, as in 2Ki 6:21, and 1Sa 24:11; the attendants addressed him with mild words and sought to soothe him. Thenius conjecture that is corrupted from , if, is utterly unnecessary. is a conditional sentence without and the object precedes for emphasis (Keil). as in 2Sa 4:11. 2Ki 5:14, means he journeyed down, i.e., from Samaria to the valley of the Jordan.

2Ki 5:15. And he returned to, &c. That which Elisha had aimed at by his direction in 2Ki 5:10, namely, not merely the cure of the leprosy, but Naamans conversion by means of it to the one true God, the God of Israel, was gained, as Naaman himself acknowledges: Behold, now I know, &c. At the same time he desires to show his gratitude to the man of whom God had made use, and he begs him earnestly to accept a gift ( as in Gen 33:11; 1Sa 25:27; 1Sa 30:26). Although Elisha on other occasions accepted gifts for himself, or at least for the body of prophet-disciples (cf. 2Ki 4:42), yet in this case he steadily refused (2Ki 5:16), not certainly from haughty self-assertion in his dealings with the great Syrian, but to show him that the prophet of the God of Israel observed a different conduct from the heathen priests, who allowed themselves to be richly rewarded for their deceitful services; especially, however, in order to establish in the mind of the healed man the conviction that the God of Israel alone, out of free grace and pity, had helped him, and that he owed to that God sincere and lasting gratitude. The refusal of Elisha must have made a deep impression not only upon Naaman, but also upon his entire retinue. As Theodoret observes, there lay at the bottom of this refusal the feeling that our Lord demanded of His disciples: Freely ye have received, freely give.

2Ki 5:17. And Naaman said: If not, let there, then, &c. = , as the Sept. have, not: ut vis (Vulg.), nor: And oh! (Ewald). It was not Naamans object, in his request that he might take a load of earth with him, to sacrifice to Jehovah on this outspread earth, as it were in the Holy Land itself (Thenius), but he wished to build an altar of it. Altars were often made of earth; the altar of burnt-offering even, according to the Mosaic Law, was to be of earth (Exo 20:24; Symbol. des Mos. Kult. i. s. 491). It is almost universally supposed that Naaman was subject to the polytheistic superstition, that each country had its own deity, who could be worshipped properly only in it, or on an altar built of its soil (so the latest commentators: Thenius, Keil, Von Gerlach, &c). But if Naaman had cherished the delusion that every land had its own God, that is to say, that there were other gods by the side of and besides the God of Israel, even though they were not so mighty as He, he would have been in contradiction with his own words in 2Ki 5:15 : I know that there is no God in all the earth but in Israel, and he would not yet have grasped the main point, nor recognized that truth which forms the distinction of the Israelitish religion from all others, viz., that Jehovah alone is God, and that there is no other beside Him (Deu 4:35; Deu 32:39, &c). Moreover, the prophet could have passed over this delusion least of all without combating it, not to say anything of his replying to it: Go in peace. He must, at the very least, have called the Syrians attention to this error. Peter Martyr explains the desire to take away a load of earth quite correctly: hoc signo suam contestatur fidem erga deum, Israelis, et e terr, tanquam symbolo, voluit ejus admoneri. Not because he ascribed to this earth an especial magical power, but because Israel was the land in which the only true God had revealed and vindicated himself to His people, and now finally to him, did he wish to erect an altar of this earth, which should be, in the midst of a heathen country, a sign and monument of the God of Israel, and a memorial of the prophet of that God. This was why he did not take the load of earth, as he might have done, from any indifferent spot, but begged it of the man through whom he had been brought to a knowledge of the one true God. His request was, therefore, the result of a strong and joyful faith rather than of a heathen delusion. if, in a similar manner, according to the narrative of Benjamin of Tudela, cited by Thenius on this passage, the synagogue at Nahardea in Persia was built only of earth and stone which had been brought from Jerusalem, it was so built by the strict monotheistic Jews, certainly not from polytheistic superstition, but for the same reasons for which Naaman wished to build his altar of sacrifice out of Israelitish earth. [See bracketed note at the end of Histor. 1.]

2Ki 5:18. In this thing the Lord pardon, &c. Rimmon is doubtless a designation of the highest Syrian divinity, abbreviated from Hadad-Rimmon (Movers). See above, Exeg. on 1Ki 15:18. It is of little importance for us whether the name is derived from () i.e., to be high, so that it is equivalent to (Psa 9:2; Psa 21:7), or from pomegranate (the well-known symbol of the reproductive power).The expression: And he leaneth on my hand, designates a service, which appertained to a high official (adjutant) of the king, on occasions when the latter bowed down or arose, or performed any similar ceremony. This service was also executed at the court of the Israelitish kings (2Ki 7:2; 2Ki 7:17). The urgency of the request is marked by the repetition of the words: when I bow down. The meaning of the request is: when I, in the execution of any duty, accompany my king to the temple of Rimmon, and bow down when he bows down, then may that be pardoned me, and may I not be regarded as worshipping that divinity. I will not serve, from this time on, any God but Jehovah. Theodoret: , . The word , which is used of prostration before men as well as before God, and so in itself does not signify a purely religious act, cannot here be understood of an act of worship, for, if it could, Naaman would say in 2Ki 5:18 the very opposite of what he had promised in 2Ki 5:17, and Elisha could not have responded to the request that he might worship Rimmon besides Jehovah with the blessing: Go in peace. Some have very unjustly found, in the request that he might take away a load of earth, and also in the prayer that he might be forgiven for prostration in the house of Rimmon, signs that his faith was still wavering, undecided, and weak. It rather shows that he had a tender conscience, which desired to avoid an appearance of denying Jehovah, and which was forced to speak out its scruples and have them quieted. Such scruples would not have occurred to one who was wavering between service of God and service of the gods.According to Keil, Elisha meant by the words: Go in peace, 2Ki 5:19, to wish for the Syrian, on his departure, the blessing of God, without approving or disapproving the religious conviction which he had expressed: or, according to Von Gerlach, without entering into the special questions involved. But the prophet could not return a reply to a request which proceeded from conscientious scruples, such as the new convert here presented, nor give a reply which was at once yes and no, or neither the one nor the other. Naaman was to proceed on his journey in peace, not in doubt or restless uncertainty. If his request had been incompatible with a knowledge of the true God, the prophet would have been forced to show him that it was so; he could not have dismissed him with an ordinary, indifferent formula of farewell. That he omitted the correction and dismissed him in peace, shows beyond question that he acceded to the request.

2Ki 5:19 sq. So he departed from him a little way, &c. Literally: a length of country, as in Gen 35:16, without definite measure. It cannot have been very far (a parasang, according to the Syrian Version, or three and a half English miles, according to Michaelis). If it had been so far Gehazi could not have overtaken the horses (2Ki 5:9).This Syrian, 2Ki 5:20, Vulg.: Syro isti, i.e., this foreigner, from whom he would have had a double right to take some reward. The oath: As the Lord liveth, stands in contrast with that of Elisha, 2Ki 5:16. Blinded by his avarice, Gehazi considers it right before God to take pay, just as Elisha, in his fidelity, considers it right before God to accept nothing.Descent from a vehicle (2Ki 5:21) is, in the East, a sign of respect from the inferior to the superior (Winer. R.-W.-B. i. s. 501); Naaman honored the prophet in his servant. From Gehazis hasty pursuit he infers that something unfortunate for the prophet has occurred (Thenius), and asks, therefore, Rectene sunt omnia? (Vulg.) In reply to Gehazis assertion (2Ki 5:22), he urges him to accept two talents, one for each prophet-disciple, and he causes the money to be borne before Gehazi in two sacks, as a mark of his eager willingness. Whether means open-worked, basket-like sacks, with handles (Thenius), or not, can hardly be determined from the word. (2Ki 5:24) is not a proper name (Luther), but the hill which stood before the house of Elisha, not before the house of anybody else, an acquaintance, for instance (Clericus).

2Ki 5:25-26. And Elisha said unto him, &c. The words of Elisha: , stand in evident contrast with the words of Gehazi: , and mean: Thou sayest that thou didst not go anywhither; neither did I go away any-whither, i.e., I was not absent when Naaman descended from the chariot to come to meet thee. Instead of I, the prophet says , my heart (1Sa 16:7; 1Ki 8:39; Jer 17:10, &c.), because he was not present there, as Gehazi was, bodily and visibly, but in spirit, invisibly (1Co 5:3). Vulgata: Nonne cor meum in prsenti erat quando, &c. Thenius: Did I not go hence in spirit, and was I not present there? It is not necessary to take it as a question, however, as is usually done. The question begins with . Ewald takes my heart to mean my favorite, so that Elisha here rather refers with a severe pleasantry to his most intimate follower, who could so far transgress against his master, although he was his favorite pupil. It is incredible that the prophet could have introduced the hard punishment of Gehazi (2Ki 5:27) with a jesting, scornful question. [This rendering of Ewald: Had not my dear pupil gone forth when some one (i.e., Naaman) turned back from his chariot to meet thee, makes better sense than any other. It is not so much a jest as it is a sarcastic stripping bare of the falsehood, and it is not at all inconsistent with the revulsion of indignation and severity which prompts the condemnation which follows. Against this explanation, however, is the fact that this meaning for cannot be proved. Ewald refers to the Song of Solomon to justify the explanation, but without citing particular passages, and the context is so different in the two cases that the usage could not be established by its occurrence in that book.W. G. S.] The explanation of Bttcher is equally inadmissible: I, according to my convictions, could not have prevailed upon my heart to go. After 2Ki 5:16 Elisha no longer needed to assert this. It was already clear. Maurers explanation: Non abierat, i.e., evanuerat (Psa 78:39), animus meus, h. e., vis divinandi me nequaquam defecerat, falls, because would have to be taken in a very different sense from what it has in 2Ki 5:25, and because the clear reference to Gehazis words would then be lost. [The explanation of Thenius, practically that of the E. V., is the best. The strain put upon the words to make them mean, I did not go away from the interview between thee and Naaman, i.e., I was present at it, is apparent.W. G. S.]Is it a time, &c., i.e., In any other case better than in this, mightest thou have yielded to thy desire for gold and goods (Thenius). Gehazi had not received olive-trees, &c., but he meant to buy them with the money. [The form in which the Vulgate translates the verse is not literally faithful to the original, but it brings out with great distinctness the antithesis between the objects Gehazi had in view, and which, indeed, he had gained, and the other results which must follow: Thou hast indeed received money wherewith thou mayest buy garments, and olive-yards, and vineyards, and sheep and oxen, and men-servants, and maid-servants; but, also, the leprosy of Naaman shall cleave unto thee and unto thy seed forever.] A leper as white as snow (2Ki 5:27), cf. the same expression, Exo 4:6; Num 12:10, where a similar sudden attack of this disease takes place. According to Michaelis this takes place often under great terror or great affliction. The skin around the diseased spots is chalk-white (Winer, R.-W.-B., i. s. 114). Upon the words: Unto thee and unto thy seed (posterity) forever, Menken says: It is the full, strong expression of excited, deep, yet holy and just feeling, which dare not and will not lay its words upon delicate scales, and which, to express the fulness of its abhorrence or its admiration, of its curse or its blessing, seizes upon a formula of the vulgar dialects of the country, even though it may not apply, in syllable and letter, to the case in hand.

2Ki 6:1. And the sons of the prophets said, &c. This story is to be connected with the two in 2Ki 4:38-44, and is a supplement to them. Thenius supposes that it stands here in order to show that what is said here in 2Ki 6:1 did not take place until long after. The connection into which Cassel brings it with chap. 5. is very forced, viz.: that the needy community of the prophets forms a contrast to the rich and mighty military commander; or, that, in spite of Gehazis fall, the number of prophet-disciples had increased so much, that a new house was necessary for them. Theodorets connection is at least more natural: He (Gehazi) sought riches and became a leper; the company of prophet-disciples, on the contrary, loved the greatest poverty. It is hardly possible that the place which had become too small was in Gilgal (2Ki 2:1; 2Ki 4:38), for this lay at a considerable distance from the valley of the Jordan; the same is true of Bethel. It is more likely to have been Jericho. The words: Where we dwell with thee (see on 2Ki 4:38), show that the need was of a larger place of assembly, since the number of prophet-disciples had increased, and amounted at this time to certainly over a hundred (2Ki 4:43). There is no reason to find a reference to dwellings which were to be built for all, as has been done in the interest of monasteries. They wished to go to the Jordan (2Ki 6:2), because its bank is thickly grown with bushes and trees (willows, poplars, and tamarisks. Hitzig on Jer 12:5), so that the building material was conveniently at hand. By the following words they mean: if each one cuts a beam, the work will soon be accomplished. They beg the prophet to go with them, not that he may direct the workhe was no architectbut because they wish to have him in their midst, and promise themselves, from his presence, blessing and success for their labor.

2Ki 6:5. But as one was felling a beam, &c. It has been inferred from , which also occurs in the 3d verse, that it was the same one who is there referred to, but without reason. According to Hitzig and Thenius the before introduces the new, definite subject. According to Keil, it serves to subordinate the noun to the sentence: As for the iron, it fell into the water. In the lament lies also a request for help, which is strengthened by . The person in question had begged for the axe, probably because he was too poor to buy one; hence the loss grieved him more than it would have done if it had come into his possession by gift. Luthers translation [and that of the E. V.], borrowed, is correct in sense, though not exactly the corresponding word. The Vulgate has: et hoc ipsum mutuo acceperam.The words are translated by Luther, following the Sept.: The iron swam, and hence the story, 2Ki 6:1-6, is commonly entitled The swimming iron. Thenius and Keil translate: And he caused the iron to swim. But does not mean swim, like (Isa 25:11), but: overflow (Lam 3:54): Waters flowed over mine head; in the hifil: to cause to overflow; Deu 11:4 : He made the water of the Red Sea to overflow them. The word does not occur out of these two places, in which it is impossible to translate it by swim and cause to swim. Cf. also , honeycomb (Psa 19:10), from the idea of overflowing. Just as Jehovah brought the water over the horses and chariots, so that they were under it, Elisha here brought the axe over the water, so that it was no longer concealed by it. The Sept. translate: , i.e., and the iron aroseappeared upon the surface. Hesychius explains by . If meant swim, it could not, at the same time, have the meaning: to be haughty, to exalt ones self impudently (Plut. Symp. ii. 1, 12). Hence Theodoret, on the passage, says correctly: . , . [The translation swim, meaning simply float, is perfectly allowable for either the Hebrew word or the Greek one, by which the Sept. render it.W. G. S.] The miracle was not, therefore, that the wood which was thrown in sank, while the iron swam upon the surface (Philippson), but, that the prophet, by throwing in the wood, caused the iron to come to the surface, where the young man could get it. Following many of the rabbis, Vatablus and others, including Thenius, have adopted the opinion that Elisha pierced the hole in the axe with the stick, and so raised it out of the water. Of this the text says nothing, it only states that he did bring up the axe, not, however, how he did it; wherefore, it can only be regarded as a guess when Von Gerlach says: He thrust the stick into the water, so that it passed beneath the iron and raised it to the surface.

HISTORICAL AND ETHICAL

1. The first of the two preceding narratives, which fills the whole 5th chapter, is one of the most important in the life and prophetical labor of Elisha, and this is marked, in fact, by the fulness of detail with which it is narrated. Menken, in his excellent homilies upon this chapter (see his Schriften v. s. 77117), says of it with justice: This is a charming testimony to the living God!a worthy part of the history of those revelations and manifestations of the living God, which, in their connection and continuation through many centuries, and in their tendency toward one goal and object, were designed to plant upon earth the knowledge and the worship of the true God! But it offers besides to our consideration a rich store of reflections, in which neither heart nor understanding can refuse a willing participation. There is hardly a single Old Testament story in which the character of the Old Testament economy of salvation is mirrored in any such way; it is a truly prophetical story, that is, an historical prophecy. On the one side it shows the wonderful providence and mode of salvation of God, His saving power and grace, as well as His holy severity, and His retributive justice; on the other, closely interwoven with this, it shows human thought and desire, suffering and action, as well in good as in evil: it is the scheme of salvation epitomized. However, when Krummacher says: We should rather expect to find it upon a page of the Gospel than seek it in an Old Testament book, and affirms: The baptism of the New Testament meets us here already in a type which is full of life, he confounds the economies of the two Testaments. In spite of all its typical force, the story is specifically an Old Testament one. The main point, the proof of the whole, and therefore the thing which is not to be lost sight of, is, that a foreigner, a heathen, who, moreover, belongs to the people by which Israel at that time was most threatened; a mighty commander, by whose instrumentality Jehovah had given victory to the Syrians, finds help from the prophet in Israel (2Ki 6:8), and comes to a knowledge of the one true God, the God of Israel. This is the point, too, which our Lord lays stress upon (Luk 4:25-27) when He, in order to shame and warn His countrymen who were scoffing at Him, refers to the widow of Sarepta, the foreigner, to whom Elijah was sent, and then to Naaman the Syrian, whom Elisha healed. The conjunction of the two is by no means accidental: both these great prophets of action testified, during the time of apostasy in Israel, each of them by an act of assistance towards a foreigner, that Jehovah, with His might and grace, was not confined to Israel; that He takes pity upon the heathen also, and leads them to knowledge, that His great name may be praised among all nations. What the later prophets preached by word, Elijah and Elisha prophesied by acts. As widows and orphans were succored by both (see above on 2Ki 4:1 sq.), so foreigners are helped by both. The story of Naaman, therefore, occupies an essential place in the history of the prophetical work of Elisha; without it one of the chief points of the prophetical calling would be wanting in this work.

[We must endeavor to analyze this story more closely, and to gain a more definite conception of the course of the incidents. Naaman undoubtedly had the religious ideas which were universal throughout ancient heathendom. He regarded the gods of Syria, which he had been educated to worship, as real gods. None of them, or of their priests or prophets, had or could cure him of leprosy. He heard by chance the fame of Elisha, as one who wrought wonders in the name of the God of Israel. No heathen would maintain that his national divinities were the only true gods. Sennacherib declared that he was conquering Judah by the command of Jehovah, whom he recognized as the god of that country. The heathen colonists whom the king of Syria brought to populate Samaria, attributed the ravages of the wild beasts to the fact that the worship of the god of the country was not provided for. It was the notion of the heathen that each country had its god, so that Syrians worshipped Syrian gods, and Hebrews the Hebrew god. To the heathen this seemed perfectly natural and correct. On the other hand, the Hebrews declared that Jehovah was the one only true God of all the earth, and that the gods of the heathen were nullities (vanity, E. V.) Naaman did not violate the principles of his religious education when he went to Elisha; Ahaziah, when he sent to Ekron (chap. 1), did. Naaman came with a letter from the king of Syria to the king of Israel, and he came with gifts, and in pompall according to heathen ideas of the means of inducing the thaumaturge to exercise his power. He was to be armed with the influence of authority and rank; he was to appear as a great man, for whom it was well worth while for the wonder-worker to do whatever he possibly could, and he brought the material means which his experience among wizards, diviners, soothsayers, and priests, had taught him to regard as indispensable. The king of Israel was terrified at the demand; but the prophet intervened. We are surprised at this feature. If Naamans errand was really to Elisha, the literal words of the letter would not have been a demand that the king should heal him (2Ki 5:6), but that he should command his subject, the prophet, to exercise his powers on the Syrians behalf. Thus the king would have simply referred Naaman to Elisha for the latter to do what he could. The story is evidently so much abbreviated at this point that its smoothness is impaired. Naaman comes in all his pomp to the door of Elisha. He receives the prophets command, and his words in 2Ki 5:11-12 bear witness again to wide and deep heathen conceptions. In 2Ki 5:11 he describes graphically the mode of performance of the heathen thaumaturge. I thought, he will stand (take up a ceremonious and solemn attitude) and call upon the name of his God (repeat a formula of incantation), and strike his hand upon the place (with a solemn gesture) and remove the leprosy. Had he come all that journey to be told to bathe? Could water cure leprosy? If it could, was there not the pure water of Abana and Pharpar, better far than the sluggish and muddy water of Jordan? His pomp and state were thrown away: the man of God did not even come to look at them. His high credentials were wasted; the means of cure prescribed for him might have been prescribed for the poorest outcast in Israel. The deep and permanent truth of this feature, and also of the prophets refusal to accept money, is apparent. The difference between the Jehovah-religion and the heathen religions is sharply portrayed by the contrast in each point, between Naamans expectations on the one hand, and the prophets words and actions on the other. The Syrians servants suggested to him the sensible reflection that he ought not to despise the prophets command. He went, bathed, and was cleansed. He then returned to reward the prophet, but found that the prophet did not give his help as a thing to be paid for. The Syrian was not to think that the prophet had used a power which was his own, and which might be paid for, whereby the obligation would be discharged. The service came from God; it was a free act of grace; a special blessing upon this one, and he a foreigner, while many Israelitish lepers remained uncleansed (Luk 4:27). The prophet and his God were not at the service of any one who came and could pay a certain price; they wrought only where and when there was good reason, and, when they did so, the recipient of grace lay under an obligation which he never could discharge. In regard to Naamans words: Now I know that there is no God in all the earth but in Israel, a careful scrutiny shows that the proposition is not strictly accurate, for the God of Israel is and was not only in Israel, but in all the earth. The true proposition would be: The God of Israel is the only true God, and He reigns over all the earth. In the very form of his confession Naaman shows that his mind was still under the bias of the heathen idea of local deities, so that he says that there is no God anywhere else in the world but in Israel. No other had been able to heal him; but Jehovah had done so by apparently very insignificant means, hence he esteemed Jehovah true, and esteemed the others very lightly or not at all. It should be noticed also that the conception which he seems to have reached was that which was held by very many of the Jews, viz.: that Israel alone had any God, and that the rest of the world was godless; their own gods were nullities, and Jehovah did not care for them, so that they had no God at all. He determined to devote himself to the worship of Jehovah for the rest of his days. He therefore very naturally, in accordance with the same idea of local or territorial divinities, asked for earth from Palestine to build an altar for the worship of Jehovah. He also made one further request. His duty at his masters court (although it is difficult to understand how a leper could have had that office) was to attend his master, and support him when he went to worship in the temple of the Syrian God, Rimmon. The idea that Naaman was converted to the worship of Jehovah in such a sense that he went over to the Hebrew idea of the other gods, is without foundation. It is a modern idea, which has no place in this connection. Naaman did not feel bound at all to keep away from the temple of Rimmon, as an early Christian would have kept away from an idol-temple. His last request to the prophet is, that, when he goes into this temple in the course of his official duty, it shall not be regarded as a violation of his vow to pay all his worship, for the future, to Jehovah, to the neglect of all other gods. To this the prophet answers: Go in peace, i.e., your sincere performance of your vow shall be recognized, and. this conduct shall not be interpreted as a violation of it.W. G. S.]

2. The healing of Naaman did not take place at a mere word, but was like all miraculous deeds of the prophet, attached to some corresponding external means, but to such an one that to it, in itself, no healing power could be ascribed. This power must first be conferred upon it by the prophet, so that the cure must necessarily be recognized as an act of God, whose instrument and minister the prophet was. The external means, a sevenfold bath in Jordan, was a very significant one. Evidently the prophet had in mind what the Law prescribed for the purification of a leper. Such an one was to bathe himself in water (Lev 14:8-9), and throughout the entire ceremony of purification, sevenfoldness is the rule (Lev 14:7; Lev 14:16; Lev 14:27; cf. Lev 14:51; Symbol. des Mos. Kult., i. s. 196, and ii. s. 508, 518). The conduct of Elisha was, therefore, in general analogous to the ordinance in the Law, and, in so far, it referred back to the God of Israel, who had given the Law. Naaman had to bathe in the Jordan because that is the chief river of the promised land, which flows through the long and narrow country, so that it is called simply the land of the Jordan (Psa 42:6). As Canaan was the land of Israel, so the Jordan was the river of Israel. Moreover, it had great importance for the history of Israel. From the passage of the chosen people through this water, which is compared directly with the passage through the Red Sea (Psa 114:3; Psa 114:5), dated the existence of the theocracy in Palestine (Winer, R.-W.-B. i. s. 620). The Jordan was witness, and, in a certain degree, pledge and warrant of the might and grace of God, which were revealed in Israel. It was the water, in and at which Jehovah had manifested himself as the almighty, helping, and saving God of Israel. The fact of being healed and purified by bathing in this water, was designed to draw the mind of the heathen to the truth, that it is the God of Israel who alone can help and save, and that He it was who had helped him; that he therefore owed gratitude to this God alone, and not to the prophet who was only His servant. We have, then, in this case another proof that the miracles of the prophet were symbolic acts, and it is remarkable that the immediate significance of Elishas transaction with Naaman, although it lies upon its face and is so easily to be recognized, has been hitherto almost entirely overlooked. The naturalistic method of explanation is at a loss to account for this miracle. According to Knobel (Prophet. ii. p. 9297): Elisha had the reputation of a good physician among the Syrians as well as among the Israelites The bath, taken in obedience to the command of a man of God, was blessed with an extraordinary efficacy. That this, however, was not the entire curative process employed by Elisha is certain (?), though it is not possible to find out what else he did to Naaman. To relegate the entire story to the domain of myth or legend, on account of the miracle, is the least admissible course to pursue. This story bears in itself the impress of historical genuineness, if ever one did, by virtue of its simplicity, its moderate statements, its numerous characteristic details, and its purely objective representation. To invent such a story is impossible; and it can occur to no one who understands the matter that Naaman is a mythical person. The remark of Kster (Die Prophet. s. 89): The whole story is meant to show that miracles were always intended to extend the worship of Jehovah, is unsatisfactory, because this was evidently not the case in many miracles, and especially in all the rest which are recorded of Elisha (cf. chap. 4). [The most important and most instructive feature of the story seems to be overlooked by our author. It was not the water either of Jordan or of Abana which could heal, it was the obedience of this haughty general to a mandate which seemed to him frivolous and absurd. In the gospels faith is the first requisite in similar cases of healing, and so it was here alsofaith and obedience. Naaman came with his mind all made up as to how he was to be healed, and he turned away in anger and disgust from the course which the prophet prescribed. Yet, when he turned back, even with a lame and half-doubting faith, and a half-unwilling obedience, he was healed. This is the permanent truth which is involved in the story. Naaman was a type of the rationalist whose philosophy provides him with a priori dogmas by which he measures everything which is proposed to his faith. He turns away in contempt where faith would heal him. That is the truth which the story serves to enforce.W. G. S.]

3. In the acknowledgment with which Naaman returns to the prophet after being healed, the story reaches its climax: all the ways in which God led this man tended to this end. With the words: Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel, he renounces the fundamental error of heathenism on the one hand, viz.: that every nation had its own god, and on the other hand he acknowledges that there is only one God on earth, and that He reveals himself in Israel. He does not, therefore, exchange one national god for another, but declares that Jehovah is the first and the last, and that there is no God beside Him (Isa 44:6), that the whole earth belongs to Him (Exo 19:5), and that this God has chosen the people of Israel for the salvation of all nations, and revealed himself to them. This is the kernel of Naamans confession, that he does not merely turn from Polytheism to Monotheism, but recognizes the God who has revealed himself to Israel as the one living God. Therefore, also, this land, which God promised and gave to his people, is for him a holy land (cf. Dan 11:16; Dan 11:41; Psa 37:9; Psa 37:29; Pro 2:21 sq.). Therefore he wishes to take earth from this country that he may sacrifice thereon to its God. Such a confession from the mouth of a heathen would be incomprehensible, especially from one who had the disposition which Naaman showed before he was healed (2Ki 5:11-12), if something extraordinary and miraculous had not taken place. For unfaithful, wavering Israel, which had had a far wider experience of the might and glory of its God than Naaman, this confession was a source of shame, of warning, and of reproof.

4. Naamans request (2Ki 5:18) and Elishas reply (2Ki 5:19) have been made the text of extended theological treatises (cf. Buddeus Hist. Eccles. ii. p. 360 sq.). For instance: it has been inferred that, under certain circumstances, it is permitted to participate in the ceremonies of a religion one recognizes as erroneous. Among Roman Catholics the passage has been used to justify the conduct of missionaries who permitted the newly-converted heathen to continue to observe pagan ceremonies; among Protestants, as Starke says, Some have drawn the conclusion that an attendant of a prince or king might accompany him to Mass, and do him service there, if he was in the service of the prince before the latter was converted to a false worship of God. Such a case was that of John of Saxony, whom the Emperor Charles V. asked to carry the sword in procession as Grand Marshal of the empire, when the emperor went in solemn state to Mass. The passage does not, however, give a general rule for all times and all places, because the case of Naaman belongs entirely to the Old Testament, and could not now occur. If Naaman ought not to have continued to exercise his office about the person of his king any longer, then he must have given up, not only his influential position, but also his fatherland and his nationality, and must have become an Israelite, and that too at a time when there was so much apostasy in Israel itself. The entire object of his being healed, viz., that he, in the midst of a heathen nation, which was hostile to Israel, might be a witness and an actual confessor of the God of Israel, and might carry His name into another country, would have been frustrated. Elisha, who had this object before all else in view, does not, therefore, raise any objections to his request: he invokes upon him peace at his departure; and, since he perceives that Naamans purposes are pure, he leaves him to the direction of God, as the one who will guide his conscience (Jo. Lange). Cassel (Elisha, s. 89) not improperly draws attention here to the difference between the conduct of Naaman and that of Themistocles in a similar case. The latter found it necessary to appear before the Persian king, and there prostrate himself before him, according to the Persian custom. As he, however, considered this unworthy of a Greek, he had recourse to the stratagem of allowing his ring to fall, and then, as he picked it up, he bowed before the throne, and so thought that he had given satisfaction both to his conscience and to the king. Naaman did not wish to act thus. He was not willing to deceive or act the hypocrite, for he knew that his God could see through the stratagem, and would not permit himself to be deceived, although men might think that they had concealed their hearts. [There is no reason whatever to suppose that Naaman knew all that; and the heinousness of this stratagem of Themistocles was very different from that of an hypocritical act of worship. Why should we imagine that Naaman, after he was cleansed of leprosy, had the clear conceptions, the pure piety, and the delicate conscience of a modern Christian? Furthermore, it seems that, if the words of the author above are pressed, he will be made to say that any one may engage in hypocritical acts of worship, if he can, by so doing, remain in a position where he can make proselytes! The object of the miracle was not to make a proselyte of Naaman (see above, bracketed note at the end of 1). The Israelites, at this period, made no effort whatever to gain proselytes. The opportunity offered to glorify the God of Israel before a heathen of rank, and it was done. He naturally turned, as a consequence, to the worship of Jehovah, as superior to all other gods. In the addition to 1, it is stated what Naaman meant by this request, and what the significance of the prophets answer was.W. G. S.]

5. Gehazis transgression and its punishment are to be estimated principally from the historical-theocratical, and not alone from the moral standpoint. His act was not a product of mere vulgar avarice, which shrinks back from no falsehood. By it he made his master, all of whose intercourse with him ought to have exercised a purifying influence upon him, a liar, and his oath (2Ki 5:16) an empty phrase. He did not leave Naaman with the undimmed conviction that all the grace he had experienced had come to him gratis, and that there was a prophet in Israel. He did not fear to stain the work which God had done upon a heathen for the glory of His name, and thereby he denied the Holy One, whose might he had just seen manifested upon Naaman. The words which Peter used of Ananias were true of him: Thou hast not lied unto men but unto God (Act 5:4). His act was a betrayal of the prophet, of Naaman, and of Jehovah. A thousand deceits and dishonesties might have been committed, by all of which not one of the dear and holy interests would have been injured, which in this case were in danger, and which, by this act, were criminally and faithlessly betrayed (Menken). Hence it incurred so severe a punishment, which was not arbitrarily or indifferently chosen, but which proceeded out of the transgression, and corresponded to it. The leprosy of Naaman (2Ki 5:27) became the leprosy of Gehazi; as Naaman was a living monument of the saving might and grace of Jehovah, so Gehazi was a monument of the retributive justice of the Holy One in Israel; a living warning and threat for the entire people. By his conversion Naaman was taken up into Gods community of redemption in Israel; by his unfaithfulness and denial of this God, Gehazi brings down upon himself the punishment which excludes him from the society of the prophet-disciples, and of the entire covenant people. Finally, as Naamans cure and conversion was a physical prophecy that God will have pity upon the heathen also, and will receive them into His covenant of grace, so Gehazis leprosy prophesied the rejection of the people of Israel who should abandon the covenant of grace, and persevere in apostasy (Mat 8:11-12; Mat 21:43).

6. The second narrative (2Ki 6:1-7) relates the last of the acts of Elisha which concern individuals. It is distinguished from the two mentioned above, which likewise took place in the circle of the prophet-disciples (2Ki 4:38-44), by the circumstance that here help is given in need to one person, not, as there, to the entire society. The number of the prophet-disciples had become so great, that the construction of another building had become necessary. Here now was to be shown how each separate individual of the company might be consoled by the help of Jehovah even in the slightest need. The loss of the axe, even though it had been begged for, was very slight in itself; but for a poor man, who did not even possess the necessary implements for cutting wood, a greater one than it would be for a rich man, if all his treasures should fall into the water. As before God there is no respect of persons, prince or beggar being all one, so there is also before Him no independent value in things; what is small and insignificant for one person, being great and important for another. The lilies of the field, which bloom to-day and to-morrow are cast into the oven, are as glorious before God as Solomon in all his glory (Mat 6:28-30). His might and goodness are revealed in the smallest detail as well as in the greatest combination. He helps in what are apparently the smallest interests of the individual, as well as in the greatest affairs of entire nations, and He rules with His grace especially over those who keep His covenant, and turn to him in all the necessities of life. That is the great truth which this little story proclaims, and just for the sake of this truth, it was thought worthy to be inserted in the history of the theocracy (Hess). The restoration of the axe, whereby aid was given to the prophet-disciple in his need, strengthened all the others in the faith that the God in whose honor they were erecting the building was with them, and would accompany their work with His blessing; they worked now only the more zealously and gladly.

7. The swimming iron, which is the title ordinarily given to this narrative, is an entirely incorrect designation of it. It has the literal meaning of the text against it, and it misleads to the opinion that the only point of the story is, that Elisha also made iron swim upon water like wood. What significance, however, would such a miracle have under these circumstances? It would not have any proper force, either for the prophet-disciple himself, or for the construction of the building, and would be nothing more than a feat of the divine omnipotence, without either moral or religious foundation, and at most only a thing to excite astonishment. This object has indeed been suggested: the prophet-disciples were to learn here, that God had not only made the forces which have sway in nature, but, also, that He directs them continually; that He makes that easy which is hard, when we only pray him to do so in a just cause (Von Schlsser). In that case, however, every connection with the building of the house would be wanting, and one does not see why so general a truth should be made known to the prophet-disciples precisely on the occasion of the loss of an axe, which its owner had begged for or borrowed. The same objection applies with still more force to the opinion that the miracle of the floating iron proclaimed the following: A light thing raises a heavy thing from the deep The worlds history shows that in the miraculous providence of God, that which is heavy is raised by that which is light. Iron is the symbol of sin; wood, however, serves for peace, reconciliation, sacrifice. He who died upon the wood made all sin powerless; raised it up out of the deep where it lay buried, in history and in the individual man (Cassel, Elisa, s. 100106). This allegorical explanation, which is, to begin with, arbitrary and unfounded, overlooks, from the outset, the fact that it is not a question here of a piece of heavy metal, iron in general, but rather of a definite implement, which was necessary for cutting timber, of an axe which had been lost, and of the poor man who had lost it, after begging for it, and for whom it was to be recovered. In this misfortune the prophet helped him, and this is the main point; not the fact that the iron floated. According to the naturalistic explanation Elisha pierced the hole in the axe with the pointed stick, and so lifted it up (Knobel, Der Proph. ii. s. 98); and Kster (Die Proph. s. 90) says: It was very correctly asserted, even by the Jewish expositors, that this was no miracle. (Buddeus, p. 364, opposes, and maintains the miracle, but cannot tell what was the use of the sharpened stick.) The axe had flown from the handle; Elisha pierced a stick into the aperture of it, and brought it up. The edifying application of it was, that presence of mind becomes a prophet, and is valuable even in the slight affairs of every-day life. But the text says nothing about what would here be the main point, viz.: the sharpening of the stick. (ver 6) does not mean to point, to sharpen, but only to chop off (Gesenius). Besides, it is clear that the narrative is not intended to tell of some ordinary incident, which any one could do in every-day life without especial presence of mind, but of an act which only a prophet, by virtue of the spirit of Jehovah, could do. That he made use for this purpose of an external physical means is true not only here, but also in the case of all his miraculous deeds (cf. 1 Kings 17, Hist. 5).

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

2Ki 5:1-19. The Story of Naaman. (a) His Illness (2Ki 5:1-8); (b) his cure (2Ki 5:9-14); (c) his conversion (2Ki 5:15-19).

2Ki 5:1-8. Bender: Naaman; a consideration (a) of the discipline of suffering under which he was; (b) of the star of hope which arose for him in his misfortune; (c) of the path in which he was led by this hope.

2Ki 5:1. Menken: Everywhere where there is, or seems to be, something great and fortunate, there is also a slight discordant but, which, like a false note in a melody, mars the perfectness of the good-fortune. A worm gnaws at everything pertaining to this world; and everything here below carries the germs of death in itself. We ought to consider all human suffering and misery worthy of consideration, wherever we find it. It is found everywhere; it dwells in the palace and in the hovel; it is interwoven with the life of prince and beggar; and it is inseparable from all worldly happiness. This is to the end that we may perceive and be convinced that there is nothing earthly with which a man should be contented, and in which he can find true rest and the ever-enduring peace of the soul, and therefore that the poor and lowly have no reason to envy the rich and great. That which makes us happy in truth and for eternity does not depend upon rank or upon wealth.Calwer Bibel: God treated this heathen in the way in which He is accustomed to treat His children. Just as He is wont to give to them, together with everything joyful which He grants them, also something incidental to restrain their pride, that they may remain humble, and may learn to seek God, so that He may still further glorify himself in them, so He visited this great military chief, whom He had so magnified in other respects, with a disease, which should make him humble, and teach him to seek further grace. That which seems to us and to all the world to be the greatest misfortune, and which is mourned as such, is often, according to Gods wise counsel, the way to our highest good-fortune and welfare. The Lord says: What I do thou knowest not now &c. (Joh 13:7; Heb 12:11).

2Ki 5:2-3. Krummacher: The Foreign Slave-Girl, (a) The momentous purchase; (b) the development of the seed of true religion in a heathen land; (c) the earnest ray of hope in the dark night of sorrow. The Little Girl from the Land of Israel, (a) Her heavy lot (such an one as that of Joseph and Daniel.Menken: Torn from her friends, led away from her people and her fatherland, sold in a foreign country, slave of a heathen, she was a stranger to the joys of youth and the pleasure of life, and sadness and sorrow overclouded her life. How often may she, seized by yearning for the land of her childhood and youth, by longing for father and mother, have cried out to God. She could endure all this because she had learned in early youth to know the God whose eye overlooks all countries, and who holds His hand over all who heartily depend on Him. How necessary it is that parents should early make their children acquainted with the living God and His holy Word, that they may learn to yield themselves to His ways, and may have a light and staff in the dark valley); (b) her good advice. (It came from a heart which was full of sympathy for the trouble of her master, and which did not, like so many, serve with mere eye-service to please men. It was like a sun arising in a dark night, and it was the first movement towards Naamans salvation in body and soul, and towards the glorification of the living God among the heathen. How great things the little maid brought about without knowing it. God often makes use of the most insignificant instruments (1Co 1:28) for building up His kingdom and for spreading abroad His name. The least important person in the household becomes a living proof of the all-controlling, loving care and providence of God, and of the declaration, Isa 55:9.)

2Ki 5:4. Cramer: One ought not to despise the counsel of even insignificant persons, for God can accomplish great things even by means of these.Cassel: When the great and mighty are so bowed down that they do not know where else to get help, they listen even to a child. Nay: such are we all. When the waves reach to our heads we begin to listen to anything; no advice is too contemptible for us; no person too insignificant for us to be willing to listen.

2Ki 5:4-7. Naamans Journey to Samaria. (a) The equipment for it. (The king gives him a letter of introduction: he departs with great pomp, with horses and chariots, and he takes with him rich treasures for gifts. Provided with all this, he has a firm hope of attaining his object. Rank, might, and wealth, those are the things in which a man hopes who has not yet learned to know the living God; but the Scripture says: Put not your trust, &c., Psa 146:3; Psa 146:5; Psa 118:9; and: A horse is a vain thing, &c, Psa 33:17; and: We brought nothing into, &c, 1Ti 6:7.) (b) The Reception in Samaria. (The king is terrified because he has a bad conscience, Job 15:21; Wis 17:11. Such a man always finds more in a letter than it says. Those who do not trust God do not trust one another. In his terror he is at a loss what to do. The king of Israel does not know what the little maid knew (2Ki 5:3). In matters of the kingdom of God the humble and lowly have often more experience than the great, Mat 11:25; 1Co 1:27-28. Naaman was to be made to feel this, Sir 51:10; Psa 88:5, in order that he might come to Him from whom alone help can come, Psa 3:8; Psa 68:20).

2Ki 5:6. Great men, who are accustomed to find every one ready to do their will, often believe, in their blindness, that they can command that to be done which only God can do.

2Ki 5:7. What good does it do to believe in a God who can kill and make alive, if one does not fear Him and bow before Him; does not seek Him, and therefore does not find Him? (Jam 2:19).

2Ki 5:8-14. The Healing of Naaman. (a) The conduct of the prophet (2Ki 5:8; 2Ki 5:10; 2Ki 5:14); (b) Naamans behavior under it (2Ki 5:9; 2Ki 5:11-13).

2Ki 5:8. Cramer: When faithful servants of God see that the unbelief of the godless redounds to Gods dishonor, they hasten to oppose it. God spoke and made known His mercy by the prophets in Israel many times and in many ways. Last of all, He revealed Himself by His Son, who is the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person (Heb 1:1-3). He speaks to all who have to console the sorrowing or counsel the despairing: Let them come to me that they may learn that a Saviour has come into the world, who restores the sorrowful and heavy-laden, and in whom they can find rest for their souls.Cassel: In Israel a prophet is never wanting; He lives who goes ever with us; He lives who has washed all wounds in His blood; though all the world should fall in ruins, my Saviour and my prophet lives.

2Ki 5:9-10. Horses and chariots, external grandeur and display, must often be employed to conceal internal misery from the eyes of the world, and to impose upon it. A genuine man of God does not, however, allow himself to be deceived, or to be bribed by pomp and display, but he speaks out whatever God commands, whether it pleases the world or not. In human affairs the word of the Apostle applies: Be kindly affectioned one to another, &c., Rom 12:10. In divine matters, however, when the recognition of truth, and the honor of God, and the glory of His name, are at stake, a servant of God ought not to be governed by the rules of worldly politeness, but only to be guided by that which will contribute to the salvation of souls. It often requires far more self-denial to resist the great than to yield to them; not all is priestly pride which seems to the world to be such. That which Naaman believed to be contempt and rudeness really proceeded, in the case of Elisha, from genuine love to him, and humility and obedience to God.

2Ki 5:11 sq. Menken: This man, convinced of the inadequacy of all human and earthly means to relieve his misfortune, seeks divine help, and when he finds it, and it is before him, so that he only needs to reach out his hands and take it, he is dissatisfied, and complains of the divine help, on account of its peculiar form and character: he turns away from it with anger as from something worthless. And why? Simply on account of his prejudice; because he had made up his mind that what was divine must take place in another way, that its form of acting and helping must be different. He did not stop and ask himself whether he had reason and right for his expectation, nor whether the peculiarity of speech, action, and relief, which displeased him, was unbecoming to what was divine. Trusting to his prejudice without scruple or investigation as to its justice, as it were to an oracle, i.e., trusting to himself as possessing an infallible insight, he departs. How faithful and true the old picture is! How fresh and new it is, as if men of to-day had sat for it! Ask thousands, who are devoted to human pursuits with enthusiasm and zeal, and who leave what is holy and divine in contemptuous neglect, why they do so, and they will be able to give but this one answer: I thought that the divine must speak, and act, and will, and work, in a different way from this; I cannot reconcile it with my opinion; if I should accept this I should have to throw away my opinion, and that of the public and the time.Observe this now well, and do not think it of little importance. This I thought! is the most mighty of all mighty things on earth, and even if it is not the most ruinous of all ruinous things, it is yet certainly the most unfortunate of all unfortunate ones. This I thought brought sin and misery and death into the world, and it prevents redemption from sin and death in the case of thousands. These thousands, if they perish in their opinion, will begin the next life with I thought!Calwer Bibel: How common it is for men to prescribe to God the ways of His providence and the modes of His assistance! Just in order to break this self-will, and to awaken and test our faith and our patience, God must act contrary to our prejudice.Richter: How many a one asks in unbelief: how can water do so great things? Water does not indeed do it, but the word of God, which is in and with the water.The Means by which Naaman was made whole. (a) Their apparent insignificance: (b) their real significance (see Histor. 1 and 2).Menken: Blessed is he who is not offended because of me, said once He, in whom and through whom the divine appeared to men in its purest and most glorious form, and in its deepest and directest sense. Thereby He showed conclusively that the divine has a peculiarity on account of which it is and must be opposed to the perverse sense of sinful men. Therefore we call that man blessed who can believe the divine, and to whom the humble form in which it appears here below is no cause of mistake, and whom the simplicity in which it is dressed for the sake of truth, and the humility with which it is clad for the sake of love, offends so little that he admires and honors and loves it all the more exactly on this account.Cf. 1Co 1:20-29.Naaman became angry on account of the message which the prophet sent to him. So now also the message of salvation is received with anger because it opposes the opinion and the pride of the natural man, who is not willing to admit that he is a poor sinner, and diseased, and in need of salvation (Jam 1:21). That which is offered as a means of life and peace, becomes thus all the greater cause of destruction.Luther: The world wants to earn heaven from God, although He proclaims through the world: I will be your God; I will give it to you out of free grace, and I will make you blessed without a price. [Naaman as a Type of the Rationalist. The a priori notions which men form, which become prejudices in their minds, and by which they measure things. They invent a God in their own minds and go to the Bible to see if they find the same God there; if not, they reject Him. They form a priori notions of Christ, of the Bible, of religion, and the way in which religion ought to be presented to them, of prayer, of Providence, of the sacraments, &c. If these are not satisfied they turn away angry. If the diseases of their souls cannot be healed as they have made up their minds that they ought to be healed, then they will not have them healed at all. See Histor 1 and 3, with translators additions.W. G. S.]

2Ki 5:13. The kingdom of God cometh not with observation; it is not in word but in power (Luk 17:20; 1Co 4:20).Menken: Thousands, who are sad and heavy-laden under the consciousness of the spiritual misery of sin and death would be glad if the Word would order them to the utmost end of the earth, and would command them to make the pilgrimage without shoes under their feet, or covering upon their heads, and to give all their goods to the poor, and to brand and torture their bodies with chastisements, because that would correspond to their sensual feeling, and to their preconceived opinion; but they cannot reconcile themselves to the gospel of the grace of God, that He sent His Son into the world as a propitiation for sin (1Jn 4:10).Servants and subordinates cannot better prove their love and fidelity to their masters than by dissuading them from angry and violent steps by friendly and humble wordsnot by falling in with and encouraging their temper. (Pro 15:1).

2Ki 5:14. Krummacher: It is a great thing, when a man is willing from his heart to submit himself to the ordinances which God has established for his salvation.Bender: The divine means of grace of the Church are for us what the Jordan was for Naaman. We are called to profit by them by the Holy Ghost, who will therein enlighten us by His gifts, and sanctify and strengthen us in the faith. As Naaman was healed gratis of his leprosy, which threatened him with death, so that his flesh became like that of a little child, so are we, through the compassion of God, which was revealed in Christ, purified from sin and saved through the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, so that we may be first-fruits of His creatures, and, as such, heirs of eternal life (Tit 3:5 sq.; Jam 1:18).

2Ki 5:14-19. Bender: The Healing of Naaman. (a) The act of God; (b) Naamans confession; (c) his gratitude; (d) his especial request.

2Ki 5:15. He who has come to faith in the living God, who revealed himself to Israel by His prophets, and to us by His Son, feels an impulsion to confess this faith with joy before men. Without faith there is no confession, and without confession there is no faith (Psa 116:10; Rom 10:10).J. Lange: That knowledge of God which is won by experience of the purification of the heart, and which is enjoyed in the sweet and quiet peace of the soul, is the only real, genuine, and saving knowledge.Starke: Nothing is impossible for faith. It can make of a proud and boastful soldier a pious and humble servant of God (Mar 9:23). Naaman gave with joy, and God loveth a cheerful giver. He gave not only because he had been healed, but because he had come to a knowledge of the true God. After God we owe gratitude to none so much as to those who have brought us to a knowledge of God and a recognition of the truth.

2Ki 5:16. Menken: Godly and holy men, who have devoted their lives to the service and witness of the divine truth among men, have always had two peculiarities, which bad men have never been able to imitate: freedom from all love of gain, and, in neglect of the praise and honor of the world, a pure looking-up to the Father, who seeth in secret (Act 8:18-20).Starke: True Godliness knows when to open the hand and when to close it (Sir. 4:36).A servant of God must always firmly ward off whatever might cast the least evil appearance upon the purity and fidelity of his service to his master.

2Ki 5:17-19. Naamans Two Requests, as testimonies to his firm and decided faith (see Historical, 1, 4). (a) The altar built of the soil of Israel in a foreign land was an indicator of the way to Israel and to Israels God; a physical confession which required strong courage, for it might call down persecution, disgrace, and death. So now it is an act of faith when a messenger of the faith sets up the cross in the midst of a mighty heathen people. How deeply does Naaman shame the Christians who, even among Christians and in Christian countries, do not dare to confess Christ by word and deed, (b) The prayer for indulgence came from a fine and tender conscience, which makes an earnest thing of its faith; to which all hypocrisy is loathsome; which is not willing to lean both ways, but demands confidence and certainty as to whether what it does and what it leaves undone are right in the sight of God, and whether it is maintaining the grace it has won. How rare are those in our times who, in matters of religion, are equally scrupulous!

2Ki 5:17. Cassel: As Naaman was the type of the converted heathen world, and he carried the soil of Palestine to Aram, so did the heathen carry over into their own lands, together with Christianity, the doctrine, life, disposition, and spirit, which had flourished in the Holy Land, and thereby they established for themselves a new home. When we hear here and there in Christian lands the names Bethany, Bethlehem, Zion, &c, what are they but holy places transferred, in their spirit, from their original location into our life and thought and feeling. In thy religious observances the main point is not the correctness and truth of thy knowledge, or of the doctrine which thou professest, but the truth and purity of thine own character. What one may do under his circumstances without violating his conscience, the conscience of another, under other circumstances, will forbid him to do. We have no right to judge him: to the Lord each one stands or falls (Rom 14:1-7).Menken: The higher a man stands in the world, and the more important he has made his position, the more is he bound.

2Ki 5:19. When a man has been heartily converted, and earnestly strives to enter in at the straight gate, we ought not to make harder for him what is already hard, and we ought not to make demands of him which, according to the circumstances in which God has placed him, he cannot fulfill, but look to the main point and not the incidental or external things, leaving him with prayer to the gracious guidance of God, who will complete the work of grace which He has begun in him. God makes the sincere to succeed.Menken: One does not know what to admire most in Elishas mild and simple answer, the clear and correct insight into a genuine heart experience, which, whatever may surround and obscure the main point, still seizes this quickly and clearly; or the holy moderation which, even in the case where it is its prerogative to urge, limit, bind, loose, or burden, still restrains itself; or the pure humanity of disposition, which can so thoroughly sympathize, so completely put itself in the position and at the stand-point of the other. The knowledge of the living God, and the experience of His saving grace, is the fountain of all peace, with which alone a man can go gladly on his way.

2Ki 5:19-27 (cf. Histor. 5). Bender: Gehazi, the False Prophet-Disciple, (a) His disposition; (b) his procedure; (c) his punishment.Krummacher: Gehazi. (a) Gehazis heart; (b) Gehazis crime; (c) the judgment which fell upon him.

2Ki 5:20. Let not desire overcome thee. How mighty are the evil inborn lusts of the human heart! Even in the case of those who have for years enjoyed the society of the noblest and most pious men, who have heard and read the word of God daily, and who have had the example of holy conduct daily before their eyes, lusts arise, take possession of them, and carry them captive (Jam 1:13-15; Mat 15:19). Therefore, Be sober, be vigilant, &c. (1Pe 5:8).The avaricious and covetous are always envious; they are discontented when others neglect chances to become rich, or renounce that which they would be glad to have.Calwer Bibel: Gehazi speaks contemptuously of Naaman because he is a Syrian and not an Israelite, although he was far better than Gehazi. So also now-a-days, unwise Christians and Jews contemn one another. It is plain from his unnecessary oath what kind of a man Gehazi was. Those who swear unnecessarily judge themselves. Covetousness is the root of all evil: where there is covetousness and avarice there is also falsehood and deceit, vulgarity and rudeness, and cunning theft and bold theft.

2Ki 5:22. Bender: Gehazi was Elishas servant. Ye servants, how do you conduct yourselves toward your masters? Are ye open, sincere, honest, obedient, as the apostle says Eph 6:5-6? Is the property and good name of your masters as dear to you as your own property and your own honor, or do ye take advantage of them where ye can? My master has sent meso says many an unfaithful servant, who cares for silver and gold, raiment, fields, vineyards, and gardens, but not for the honor of his masterwho cares more for the wool than for the sheep. Hypocrites do more harm to the cause of God than the godless (2Ti 3:5).

2Ki 5:23. He who himself thinketh no evil and is sincere, does not suspect cunning and deceit in others. Good-hearted, noble men, to whom it is more blessed to give than to receive, are easily deceived, and they follow the inclination of their hearts, instead of examining carefully to whom they are giving their benefactions.

2Ki 5:24. That which we must conceal brings no blessing.

2Ki 5:25. Whence comest thou, Gehazi? Happy are they of whom there is no need to ask this question; who can give an account without falsehood of all the paths in which they have walked, and of all the places in which they have been.Menken: This question should have been to Gehazi like the wind-gusts before a storm, which warn the traveler to seek a refuge-where the coming storms and floods cannot reach him.This is the curse which rests upon a lie, that the man seeks to escape from it by new lies, and so involves himself more and more in the net of him of whom the master says: When he speaketh a lie he speaketh of his own (Joh 8:44).

2Ki 5:26. If God himself arms His prophets with the gift to be witnesses of hidden sin, and to bring it to the light, how much more will He, before whose judgment-seat we shall all have to appear, bring that to light which now lies hidden in darkness, and reveal the secret counsels of the heart?

2Ki 5:27. Menken: How did the raiment of Damascus appear to the leper, or the pieces of silver to the wretched outcast? How often must he have desired to buy back again with all his treasures one day of his healthful poverty? Then, too, the lost peace of God. Alas! Most incomprehensible, most depraved, most indestructible and terrible of all deceits, deceit of riches, who fears thee, as we all should fear thee? God have pity upon us all, and help us all, that no one may set his hopes upon uncertain riches, but upon the living God, who gives us all richly to enjoy all His blessings. And yet again: They that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare (1Ti 6:9-12).The story of Naaman and Gehazi is a prophecy of the salvation of the heathen who seek help and grace, and of the rejection of Israel, if it destroys and rejects salvation (Isa 5:25 sq.). [The leprosy of riches. Gold is taintedstrength required to use it aright; right pursuit of wealth; absorbing pursuit of it; curse which cleaves to it when it is ill-gotten or ill-used; this curse crops out most frequently in the children. A father absorbed in pursuit of wealth, and mother absorbed in fashion, will bring up corrupt and neglected children. Parents love gold, and fashion, and display, children will hold these the chief things in life. Thou hast gotten thee gold, but leprosy shall cleave to thee and to thy seed forever.W. G. S.]

2Ki 6:1-7 (cf. Histor. 6 and 7). (a) Sketch of the Community-life of the Prophet-disciples, (a) Their number does not diminish in spite of all contempt and persecution, but increases (2Ki 6:1); (b) they undertake nothing without their master (2Ki 6:2-3); (c) they help and encourage one another in their work (2Ki 6:4); (d) they experience the divine help and blessing (2Ki 6:5-7).

2Ki 6:1. It is a good state of things when a community can say: Behold the place, &c. How many Churches have room and to spare, and might accommodate twice as many hearers, while the room in the buildings devoted to the lusts of the eye and the flesh, and to the pride of life, is too small.

2Ki 6:2. Pfaff. Bibel: Each one should contribute his share to multiply churches and schools as the population increases.

2Ki 6:5. Starke: Pious people are more careful of what is borrowed than of their own property.

2Ki 6:5-7. Wrt. Summ.: We have here an instance where God is touched by even the least misfortune which visits his children. He will not let himself be hindered by natural laws from helping his servants in their need, that they may not despair in adversity, but trust in God, and be only the more diligent in prayer.Krummacher: It often happens that the Lord takes from us some possession, or appears to do so, only with the purpose of returning it after a longer or shorter time in some unexpected way, that it may thus come to us as a gift of divine love, and a pledge of His grace.

Footnotes:

[1]2Ki 6:8.[The first clause expresses a circumstance of the main action, best rendered by the absolute participial construction. The king of Syria, being at war with Israel, held a council of his officers, and decided, in such and such, &c.Ew. Lehrb. 16l, a, explains as a noun in the form of the infinitive, das Sich lagern. Hence the form of the suff.

[11]2Ki 5:12.[Keri, Amana. See Exeget.

[12]2Ki 5:17.[The Sept. join the first two words of the next verse with this one, , because of this thing.W. G. S.]

[13]2Ki 5:18.Thenius proposes to change the last in to , and it certainly does seem better to do so. This is the reading of the Sept. ( ), and of the Vulg. (adorante eo).Bhr.

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

The interesting ministry of Elisha is continued throughout this chapter. The prophet healeth Naaman, the Syrian, of his leprosy. He refuseth the gifts and rewards of the Syrian. Gehazi, his servant, taking them, is in judgment smitten with the leprosy.

2Ki 5:1

How beautiful is the account given by the sacred historian of this Naaman, by way of raising our notions of him. He was a great man; and an honourable man, and though an heathen, and an idolator, yet the Lord had given him success in arms; but in the midst of all these things, the dreadful, loathsome disease of the leprosy, made him a matter of terror to everyone that came near him, lest they should be infected by him. As a commentator once said, in reading this account of Naaman, “there was not a slave in Syria which would have exchanged his skin with him.” Reader! such is sin! Wherever it is, and in whomsoever it reigns, it throws down all other endowments!

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Now Naaman Was a Leper, But

2Ki 5:1

As a rule our interest in the story of Naaman centres round the dramatic incident of his healing in the waters of Jordan. Looking at the story as a whole, and seeing it in its true perspective, it is inevitable that this should be the case. But I am going to ask you to look at the history of Naaman from another point of view. What can we gather from the story of Naaman’s life before there came into it the whisper of hope through the lips of the little captive girl his wife’s lady’s maid? Leprosy, the most terrible disease of the East, had developed in him. It had come in a form that did not involve exclusion from society. It was the white leprosy, which is one of the most slowly developing forms of the disease. In this particular form the leprosy is all under the skin, and the disease, which may run its course for more than twenty years, results in the end in an utter absence of feeling unless it changes its form in the later stages and becomes virulent and loathsome. It is possible that Naaman had been suffering from this incurable disease for a number of years before the light of hope broke into his life. Assuming this to be so, let us read our text in another way.

‘Now Naaman was a leper but he was captain of the host of the King of Syria, a great man with his master, and honourable, a deliverer of his country and a mighty man of valour.’

There is a picture of a man living out his life fully and bravely in spite of a terrible handicap in the form of an incurable disease, which must year after year gain a stronger hold on his body and eventually end his life.

I. I do not think that Naaman in his popularity and success was a much-envied man. There was. the fame and the power and the leprosy. There was the honour and the suffering. It is always so. There is always the other side of things. And if we could change personalities, we should have to be prepared to take not only the joys and the opportunities and the satisfactions of that other man’s life, but also the martyrdoms, the bafflements, the burdens and the uplifting shadows. And remembering this may help to make us less envious and more sympathetic. Naaman the leper may be looked upon as typical of the widest and most familiar range of human experience.

II. And the question comes, How do we face this side of things? Naaman faced it with courage. And it was courage of no mean order. It was not born of hope. We say sometimes, ‘While there is life there is hope’. But that was not true in the case of the leper. He saw the long years of suffering, and knew, humanly speaking, that the way would only get harder the farther he went. Part of the work of life for him was to carry one of the heaviest burdens that a man ever has to carry the burden of a dead hope. He could not say with regard to his disease, ‘While there is life there is hope’; but he found a better and a nobler thing to say, ‘While there is life there is duty.’ There is no braver story in history than the story of them who have had to stoop and lift and bear the hope that might have lifted and borne them, if only both its wings had not been broken. The faith to remove mountains is not a complete equipment for life. We need also the courage and strength to climb them. Of all the luxuries of life, perhaps the most unwarrantable and in the end the most wasteful and costly is the luxury of despair. And how many there are who indulge in it! A man may have to walk in a deep shadow, but he has no right to sit in it. Much less has he the right to assume that that shadow loosens for him the bonds of duty, or absolves him from the claims of the world’s work. Naaman did not let his leprosy spoil his career.

III. Note the thing that was wanting in the courage and endurance of Naaman. His suffering had not sweetened his life. He had borne it; but he had not understood it. He had not been able to interpret a word of it. That was not his fault. And there is a sense in which his brave conquest over a disability which held for him no high or beautiful meaning may well beget in our hearts much shame shame that we for whom the pain of life has been made somewhat intelligible should still find it in nowise bearable. If only Naaman had known that it is not every man who is counted worthy to suffer, if only he could have sat at the feet of St. Paul, and could have heard all which that troubled and yet triumphant life could have told him of the ministry of pain and of the Divine fulfilment that lies concealed in earthly frustration, how much richer would have been the story of those brave years! He did not know these things, and doubtless he was judged according to his knowledge; but we know them, and we shall be judged according to ours.

P. Ainsworth, The Pilgrim Church, p. 184.

The Story of Naaman

2Ki 5:1

It is said that there is a crook in every lot. A wise divine of a good many generations ago has written a very large book to prove that this must be and is so.

I. The Imperfection of the Human Lot. Holy Scripture brings to us many reminders of the imperfection of the human lot. There was Eve planted down in the Garden of Eden under circumstances which might have seemed of the most consummate felicity. She was not, however, altogether happy, for there was one tree the fruit of which she might not pick. There was Rachael, beyond question one of the sweetest and most charming figures in all Scripture history and yet so long childless, the saddest sorrow that could fall upon women of her race. There was Isaiah, a man unquestionably of great personal attainment; yet, judged by the results of his great ministry, he would have been deemed a failure. There was Haman, who rose to the pitch of human ambition as he had supposed it; yet he said, ‘All this availeth me nothing’. And there was Naaman, unquestionably a man of high distinction, but he was a leper. It is often so outside the pages of Holy Writ. God forbid that we should ever read the Bible as though it spoke of human life in a manner remote from our own experience. Have we not heard of a brilliant intellect and a poor shattered frame to carry it about and limit its exercise of vast possessions, yes, and passing away presently to a distant heir, who scarcely bears the name of that long line now almost extinct; of high position and bodily infirmity, and so on. Yet see, the Book of Life and of Holy Scripture tells us this, that as these things come not by accident, they need not be allowed to poison the cup of life for any man or woman. A great poet like Milton hands down his imperishable treasures to subsequent generations, though himself a poor blind man. Bunyan leaves us an immortal allegory, one of the most widely translated books ever written in our language, and yet he was a persecuted tinker. A Darwin devotes himself for long and trying years of experiment and thought to the elucidation, if he can, of some of the mysterious problems of nature, all the while fighting against such pain as left him for the most part only very few hours in every working day. Disraeli rises to be a leader of his country, to control its difficulties in time of peculiar peril, and yet he began life a sneered-at member of an often despised race. Naaman triumphed over his leprosy. There were lands in which it would have been a fatal bar for everything: henceforth he must have gone away. The disease slipped from him like a shell torn from a kernel. But his leprosy had not unmanned him, his mind was not thrown off its balance; his intellectual powers whatever gifts God had given him the use of, these gifts were not soured by the thought of his sore affliction. And though he was a leper he still remained his country’s honoured benefactor.

II. Discipline Meant for our Profit. Here is comfort for those who discover in their daily life something they do not understand. Let us assure ourselves that the very proofs of how noble minds triumphed over difficulties may serve to remind us that God cannot have sent them to us in a cruel and arbitrary spirit. That which comes with His mercies in a guise which at first we cannot believe to be merciful is after all meant for our profit. A man or woman will say, ‘If I had not had this I might have been something better’. What would they have been without it? Many a man laid low by a grievous accident has found God by the pillow of his bed of suffering. He never knew Him in the days of unimpaired strength and vitality, when it seemed as if he was powerful enough for anything. What would he have been without that crook in his lot? Before you and I say ‘If it were not for this we might have been something other,’ let us ask ourselves, What might we have been without it?

III. Affliction no Bar to Usefulness. Shall we not learn, too, through these things that God’s purpose in giving us a crook in our lot cannot possibly be to deprive us of the opportunity of filling our part in life. You know men whose crook has not confined them to idleness, to a wasted life. It must not keep us from fulfilling our path in life. As Naaman watching the cruel spot grow upon his flesh, and thinking perchance of the deadly fate that was creeping surely and certainly over him, still addressed himself to the day’s business, and still met, I suppose, with a gallant countenance those who worked beneath him; so every man and woman with a crook in their lot should believe that God Who sent it did not mean to make them sour or idle, or disappointed, or lost souls in the world. ‘In the love and mercy of Christ I will be up and doing as if I were as free from anxiety as the happiest of God’s creatures.’ If like Naaman they find a prophet they may go out in the spirit which needs must be if we would understand the crosses and trials of life and come to God. Happier we than Naaman. It is not necessary for us to approach the door of the human prophet to supplicate him for us. The Son of God is our Intercessor, and it needs no voice of human priest to declare His pardon. Each of us, with or without prophet and guide, can draw unto our Saviour Christ, and if we find Him Who suffered so sorely for us, we can go out whatever cross we have to bear, still following Him and joyfully declaring as Naaman did that there is no God in all the world like unto the Saviour we have found.

A Nameless Girl Heroine

2Ki 5:1-4

The name of the architect of the fine cathedral at Chartres is unknown, and most of the artists, in stone and colour, wrought with the same anonymous humility. Although they knew much of their work was to be hidden in the shadow of a cavern, they finished it with exquisite care. ‘What artists must they have been to work thus for the glory of God, and for their own satisfaction, creating marvels while knowing that no man would see them.’

There is a tradition (idyllized by Browning) connected with the battle of Marathon, that a peasant fought with great prowess on the side of the Greeks, using a ploughshare as weapon. When the battle was over he was nowhere to be seen, nor would the oracle divulge anything beyond this:

Care for no name at all!

Say but just this: We praise one helpful whom we call

The Holder of the Ploughshare! The great deed ne’er grows small.

References. V. 1. R. D. B. Rawnsley, Village Sermons (3rd Series), p. 186. R. W. Hiley, A Year’s Sermons, vol. ii. p. 126. H. Hensley Henson, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxiv. 1903, p. 169. W. J. Woods, Outlines of Sermons on the Old Testament, p. 74. V. 1-19. C. Perren, Revival Sermons in Outline,, p. 139. V. 2. T. Sadler, Sermons for Children, p. 24. V. 2, 3. A. G. Mortimer, The Church’s Lessons for the Christian Year, part iv. p. 197. Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxxiv. 1908, p. 51.

The Maid of Israel

2Ki 5:4

From this well-known story we may learn valuable lessons about God’s dealings, and about the mutual duties and feelings that different classes of people owe to one another.

I. How Wonderfully God Works for the Good of the World. A little maid is carried captive, and Naaman is thereby healed and brought to the knowledge of the true God. God’s Word has often had free course and been glorified by means of the captivity of its preachers. The captivities of the Jews did a great deal to spread the knowledge of God in the world. Joseph did a great deal of good in a prison, so did St. Paul, so did John Bunyan, and many more. ‘The Word of God is not bound!’ It would be endless to try to show in what strange ways God brings about people’s good. How can we pretend to understand them? If you go into a factory, at what pains must the manager or foreman be to explain to you the steps by which the web of cloth, or sheet of paper, or a common dish is made ready for the market. And after all, you likely come away with a very defective knowledge of it. But you know that somehow the thing is done, and that it needs a great many processes that you would never have thought of, to get it done. ‘Trust also in God, and He will bring it to pass.’

II. Gather Some Lessons from the Part which the Maid Plays Here.

( a ) She does not harbour grudges against her captors. Render good for evil.

( b ) She interests herself in the good of her master. She is not content with merely doing her bit of work. People might call her a slave, but she was not really a slave. Her spirit was not slavish. The apprentice, the scholar, the servant girl, are free when they give themselves with a good will to their work. It is not our outward condition, but our own hearts that make us slaves, or free. A gentleman has a nice brook in his estate. It is his ; but it is free all the same, for it flows just as it is in its nature to do. He calls the trout in it his; but still they are free, for they are just where they want to be, and swim and hide in it as they choose. ‘I have learned in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.’ If we have learned that, we have learned the secret which snaps the strongest fetters as if they were spiders’ threads.

III. Gather Some Lessons from the Part which Naaman Plays.

( a ) He does not despise good advice because it is spoken by lowly lips. People often value opinions according to the wealth or poverty of those who give them.

( b ) He does not think that there is nothing and nobody of any account outside of his own country. It is good to be patriotic; but it is both unchristian and foolish to despise everything that is not English. Learn to be fair to all, large-hearted and ready to learn. ‘The earth is the Lord’s and the fulness thereof.’ God hath made of one blood all nations of men to dwell in the face of all the earth.

References. V. 9-12. G. H. Morrison, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxviii. 1905, p. 93. V. 10. W. H. Hutchings, Sermon-Sketches, p. 235. V. 10, 11. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture 2 Samuel , 1 and 2 Kings, p. 359.

“I Thought”

2Ki 5:11

I. God’s thoughts are not our thoughts. There is no such difference as to make the Divine thought utterly and always unlike and inconceivable. If it were so, we should have no God. But as in earthly relations the father is compelled by love to thwart many times his child’s wishes, so God, Who knows us and knows all, in the very exercise of His love has to deny us what we most set our hearts on, what we most passionately desire. He answers us indeed, but He answers us in a manner at variance with our dreams. The lovely mystical use of the story of Naaman may be recalled. How many times has a human soul agonized over the life of the dearest when it was slipping away! How often those who loved life and saw before them a work to do in this world have prayed to be raised again from the bed of sickness! The life was not denied, but it was given in another fashion. ‘I thought that he would strike his hand over the place, and recover the dying.’ Not so. The True Prophet led the sufferer down to Jordan. In the waters of death the perfect healing was found. This was the true recovery, to wash in Jordan, to climb up the bank, and stand on the eternal shore in the presence of the Lord Himself.

II. There is no prayer more blessed and more availing than the simple, disinterested prayer for guidance. If we have a right to anything, we have a right to an answer when we plead, ‘Show me the way’. Is this prayer answered? Yes, assuredly, but often not answered as we thought it might be. There may be those who always understand the reason of God’s dealings with them. But there are many who think they see, that if at this point and that they had made another choice, they would have had much more sunshine and much more peace. Were they guided? The answer is that often and often the fact of God’s guidance does not become plain until years of pain and disappointment have passed away. Suddenly, it may be, a light flashes on the darkness of past and present. We see in a moment that if we had gone down that path we should have missed the consecration and crown of existence.

III. In the advancement of God’s kingdom our thoughts are often strangely crossed. The temptation is to say, ‘If the methods are right, the results are sure’. We are only to do our best and wisest in dependence on the Divine blessing, and that blessing will come.

The Lord of the Kingdom, Whose name for a while was humbled beneath every name, has taught us the way to victory. He reached the throne by the Cross. This was His thought, not ours. We should have said with His disciple, ‘Be it far from Thee, Lord; this shall not be unto Thee’. But He knew, and amid reviling foes and unbelieving friends, He went on without flinching, without failing, without turning back. ‘If Thou be the Son of God, come down from the Cross.’ But He was doing a great work, and could not come down. We serve Him because He first served us, and He calls us to take up His cross if need be, not for an hour, but for a life.

W. Robertson Nicoll, The Garden of Nuts, p. 189.

Reference. V. 11. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xx. No. 1173.

The Dislike of the Commonplace

2Ki 5:11-12

Following the suggestion of our text, I wish to speak on the commonplace; and I shall cast what I have to say into this shape: First, the dislike of the commonplace is wellnigh universal. Second, there are few things more dangerous than this dislike.

I. The Widespread Irritation at the Commonplace, so clearly manifested in the case of Naaman. I think I need hardly remind you of another Bible story where the same intense dislike makes itself manifest. ‘Is hot this the carpenter’s son? Do we not know His brothers?’ It was with such words that the Jews discredited Jesus. Like Naaman they were intensely irritated at the commonplaceness of the Messiah’s advent.

Are we not all prone to the same irritation? The fact is we are half-savage at the heart yet, and have never lost the savage delight in glaring colours.

I cannot help thinking that much of men’s world-weariness much of the disappointment that unfolding life brings with it is connected, by very real yet subtle ties, with this deep-seated vexation at the commonplace. How many avoid the path where the cross lies, who would tread it tomorrow if there were only some glamour there! It may be hard to follow the ark into the deeps of Jordan. Perhaps it is harder to wash in Jordan seven times.

And in our Christian experience are we not also like Naaman, and have we not known something of Naaman’s disappointment? I think that many men come to Jesus Christ as this commander of Syria came to the Prophet Elisha. He is a thousand times more willing to cure us of our leprosy than Elisha was to cure that curse of Naaman. But when we come and when we cannot see Him, when we only hear a voice that bids us wash, when instead of great deeds there is dull and dreary service, have not men been moved even against Jesus with the very feeling which animated Naaman? To turn away from Elisha in a rage was a very poor and pitiable thing. But to turn away from Christ Jesus in a rage is the one fatal act of a man’s life.

II. There are few things more dangerous than this Dislike. Let me give you three reasons that make it so perilous to nurse this irritation.

1. The commonplace is the warp and woof of life. It is the material out of which our days are made.

2. Then the commonplace is God’s preparation for the great. Simple obedience to a very plain command for us as for Naaman is the path to glorious hours.

3. Then think how Christ insists upon the commonplace. The more I study Christ’s life, the more I am impressed by the value that He set upon the ordinary. Whatever Naaman did, it is clear that Jesus of Nazareth never turned away from the commonplace in a rage.

G. H. Morrison, The Unlighted Lustre, p. 48.

References. V. 11, 12. H. P. Liddon, Sermons on Old Testament Subjects, p. 255. V. 12. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. vi. Nos. 297 and 298. V. 13. Ibid. vol. xv. No. 892. R. J. Campbell, Sermons Addressed to Individuals, p. 107. R. D. B. Rawnsley, Village Sermons (3rd Series), p. 186. V. 14. C. W. Furse, Sermons Preached in Richmond, p. 273. V. 15. W. Redfern, The Gospel of Redemption, p. 101. V. 15-27. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture 2 Samuel , 1 and 2 Kings, p. 368. V. 17-19. G. Salmon, Gnosticism and Agnosticism, p. 158. Simeon, Works, vol. iii. p. 493. Hall’s Contemplations (O.T.), Book xix. ‘Contemplations viii. Kitto, Daily Bible Illustrations, vol. iv. p. 315, etc. Geikie’s Old Testament Portraits, p. 275. Hasell, Scripture Partings, iii., and in Day of Rest, 1881, p. 402. Jacox, Secular Annotations on Scripture Texts (2nd Series), p. 37. Ryley, ‘Gratitude to God and Earthly Policy,’ Christian World Pulpit, vol. v. p. 330. Gasquoine, ‘Modern Hypocrisy,’ Christian World Pulpit, vol. vi. p. 24; and see vol. xi. p. 399. Krummacher’s Elisha, chap. xvii. V. 18. R. W. Hiley, A Year’s Sermons, vol. iii. p. 285. V. 19. J. M. Neale, Sermons Preached in a Religious House, vol. ii. p. 431.

Gehazi

2Ki 5:20

I. Gehazi is the representative of a certain type of character. As Solomon stands to us for the sage, and Daniel for the righteous judge, so does Gehazi stand for the liar. A lie is an exposure of character. It is the deep-seated covetousness of Gehazi that is emphasized. He was determined to get for himself something that belonged to Naaman. He got it; for the leprosy of Naaman was to cleave to him and to his seed for ever.

II. Gehazi was one who made shipwreck of great chances. He was ‘the servant of Elisha’ that is, he was looked upon as the successor designate of the prophet. He belonged to very serious times, and never realized their importance. He had the great example of his master before his eyes, and had wholly missed its significance. Elisha was his paymaster and nothing more.

III. Gehazi’s error has its faithful copyists still. Hidden under fair names, the sordid, selfish spirit works within us. We are called servants of God and soldiers of Christ. It is our redemption by Jesus that has in it the secret of every stimulus and every check, if we faithfully remember that ‘we are not our own,’ and so bound ‘to glorify God in our body and in our spirit, which are God’s.’

W. W. Merry, The Sermon Year Book, 1891, p. 341.

References. V. 20. D. T. Young, Neglected People of the Bible, p. 129. V. 21. H. C. G. Moule, Fordington Sermons, p. 9. V. 25. H. P. Liddon, Sermons on Old Testament Subjects, p. 270.

The Travels of the Heart

2Ki 5:26

Ponder the travels of the heart as suggested by this penetrative inquiry of Elisha’s.

I. The Man of God Says this to the Sinner in His Courses. The man of God must always send forth his heart after the sinner. By God’s grace, it may put an arrest upon his wickedness. It will be as a judgment on his guilty courses.

The heart of the man of God should pursue the sinner with indignation. If we hated sin more intensely, we should strive to save sinners more earnestly.

The heart of the man of God should go pitifully towards sinners.

The heart of the man of God should follow sinners with prayer. Can the heart travel in two directions at once? Can it chase the transgressor, and at the same time ascend in supplication to heaven? It can. And herein it reflects the omnipresence of God. Here is another sign that it is made in the image of God.

The heart of the servant of God should follow the sinner with hope. ‘Despairing of no man’ is a New Testament maxim. Every evangelist must be an optimist.

II. The Man of God Says this to Servants of God in their Errands. The heart of the believer travels after the apostles and prophets of Christ with sympathy.

Our heart should travel with God’s servants in consecrated imagination.

Let your heart travel after the servant of God in his service by means of interested reading.

III. The Man of God Says this to Friends Amid their Career. How wise and good it is to cultivate a travelling heart of sympathy! It was said by one who knew him well that the secret of Bishop Wilberforce’s success was ‘in his power of sympathy’. He was the father of the modern bishops. He was eloquent and brilliant. But the master-secret of his influence was sympathy.

IV. The Man of God Says this to Departed Loved Ones. Project your heart after the departed, and how real and near the better country seems! Moreover, these journeys of the heart prepare us for that grander realm.

V. The Man of God Says this to the Crowned Lord. No words could better express what we ofttimes cry to the Saviour on His holy seat: ‘Went not mine heart with Thee?’ We travel with Him through His Incarnate life, from the rude manger to the bitter Cross. We travel with Him from ‘the purple heights of Olivet’ to the glowing heights of heaven. Our heart is ever with Him as He pleads His powerful blood at God’s right hand.

VI. A Greater than Elisha Says this to Us All.

The travels of the heart of man are great beyond our estimation. But who can follow the travels of the heart of God?

Dinsdale T. Young, The Travels of the Heart, p. 3.

References. V. 27. J. Raines, Sermons, p. 186. VI. 1. J. M. Neale, Sermons Preached in a Religious House, vol. ii. p. 365. VI. 1, 2. W. B. Carpenter, The Anglican Pulpit of To-Day, p. 157. VI. 1-7. John McNeill, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lviii. 1900, p. 275. VI. 3-18. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture 2 Samuel , 1 and 2 Kings, p. 376. VI. 6. T. Champness, New Coins from Old Gold, p. 222. J. M. Neale, Sermons Preached in Sackville College Chapel, vol. iii. p. 93. VI. 15, 16, 17. G. Buchanan Gray, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxv. 1904, p. 387. W. Sinclair, ibid. vol. lxviii. 1905, p. 305. Hall, Contemplations, Book xix. ‘Contemplation ix.’ Charles Simeon, Works, vol. iii. p. 502. Bishop Heber, Sermons Preached in England, pp. 18 and 42. H. Blunt on Elisha. Krummacher, Elisha. Canon Liddon, ‘The Vision Permitted to Elisha’s Servant as Illustrative of the True Faith of the Soul,’ Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i. p. 1. Liddon, ‘The Reality of the Invisible,’ Outlines on Old Testament, p. 77. J. Parker, ‘The King Conquered,’ Expository Sermons and Outlines on Old Testament, p. 134, etc. Momerie, ‘The Supernaturalness of Nature,’ Origin of Evil, p. 247.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

2Ki 5:1-19

1. Now Naaman [“beauty”], captain of the host of the king of Syria, was a great man [Heb., lifted up, or accepted in countenance] with his master, [lit., before his lord (comp. Gen 10:9 )] and honourable, because by him the Lord had given deliverance [victory] unto Syria; he was also a mighty man in valour, but he was a leper. [Lit., and the man was a brave warrior, stricken with leprosy. His leprosy need not have been so severe as to prevent him following his military duties.]

2. And the Syrians had gone out by companies [or, in troops], and had brought away captive out of the land of Israel a little maid; and she waited [Heb., was before] on Naaman’s wife.

3. And she said unto her mistress, Would God my lord were with the prophet that is in Samaria! for he would recover him [then he would receive him back (comp. Num 12:14-15 )] of his leprosy.

4. And one went in, and told his lord, saying, Thus and thus said the maid that is of the land of Israel.

5. And the king of Syria said, Go to, go, and I will send a letter unto the king of Israel. And he departed, and took with him [Heb., in his hand] ten talents of silver [about 3,750 in our money. The shekel was about equal to 2s. 6d. of our money] and six thousand pieces of gold [six thousand gold shekels = about 13,500. The gold shekel was about equal to 45s. of our currency. The total amount appears too large; the figures are probably corrupt], and ten changes of raiment.

6. And he brought the letter to the king of Israel, saying, Now when this letter is come unto thee, behold, I have therewith sent Naaman my servant to thee, that thou mayest recover him of his leprosy.

7. And it came to pass, when the king of Israel had read the letter, that he rent his clothes [as if he had heard blasphemy (comp. Mat 26:65 )] and said, Am I God, to kill and to make alive [Deu 32:39 ; 1Sa 2:6 . Leprosy was a kind of living death (comp. Num 12:12 )], that this man doth send unto me to recover a man of his leprosy? wherefore consider, I pray you, and see how he seeketh a quarrel against me.

8. And it was so, when Elisha the man of God had heard [he was at the time in Samaria ( 2Ki 5:3 )] that the king of Israel had rent his clothes, that he sent to the king, saying, Wherefore hast thou rent thy clothes? let him come now to me, and he shall know that there is [with stress on “there is”] a prophet in Israel.

9. So Naaman came with his horses and with his chariot, and stood [stopped] at the door of the house of Elisha.

10. And Elisha sent a messenger [avoiding personal contact with a leper] unto him, saying, Go and wash in Jordan [Naaman was to understand that he was healed by the God of Israel, in answer to the prophet’s prayer, (comp. 2Ki 5:15 )] seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean.

11. But [And] Naaman was wroth [he thought he was being mocked], and went away, and said [I said to myself], Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the Lord his God, and strike [wave his hand towards (comp. Isa 10:15 , Isa 11:15 )] his hand over the place, and recover the leper.

12. Are not Abana and Pharpar [the], rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? may I not wash in them, and be clean? So he turned and went away in a rage.

13. And his servants came near [comp. Gen 18:23 ], and spake unto him, and said, My father [implying respect and affection (comp. 1Sa 24:11 ; 1Sa 6:21 )], if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done [or wouldest thou not do] it? how much rather then, when he saith [hath said] to thee, Wash, and be clean [ i.e., thou shalt be clean]?

14. Then [And he went down] went he down, and dipped himself seven times [seven was significant of the divine covenant with Israel, and the cure depended on that covenant] in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.

15. And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company [camp, host], and came [went into Elisha’s house. Gratitude overcame awe and dread] and stood before him: and he said, Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel: now therefore [and now], I pray thee, take a blessing [accept a present from ( Gen 33:11 )] of thy servant.

16. But [And] he said, As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand, I will receive none. [Mat 10:8 (compare Act 8:20 ). Elisha’s conduct, so different to ordinary prophets ( 1Sa 9:6-9 ), would favourably impress Naaman]. And he urged him to take it; but [and] he refused.

17. And Naaman said, Shall there not then [If not, let there be given, I pray thee, be given to thy servant two mules’ burden of earth [he wished to worship the God of Israel on the soil of Israel, Jehovah’s own land. (Comp. Exo 20:24 ; 1Ki 18:38 )]? for thy servant will henceforth offer [make] neither burnt-offering nor sacrifice unto other gods, but unto the Lord.

18. In this thing the Lord pardon thy servant, that when my master goeth into the house of Rimmon to worship [to bow down] there, and he leaneth on my hand, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon: when I bow down myself in the house of Rimmon, the Lord pardon thy servant in this thing.

19. And he said unto him, Go in peace. So he departed from him a little way [Heb., a little piece of ground ( Gen 35:16 )].

The Danger of Preconceptions

Behold, I thought, he will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the Lord his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper” (2Ki 5:11 .) Naaman had heard of a man who could cure his leprosy, so he thought out how this would be accomplished. He made a plan in his own mind, as we see in the eleventh verse. Now that thought before the thing happened was what is termed a preconception, and suggests our subject, namely, the mischievousness and absurdity of preconception in religious thinking. Religion must not be a discovery, but a revelation, if it is to have any depth of wisdom, any force of pathos, any riches of comfort if it is to have the infiniteness of redemption which our sin and our necessity require. The great mistake that we have made is, that we thought we could find out a religion we could make one. So we have set our inventiveness to work, and we have said, God must be thus and so. Man must have begun then and there. The connection between God and man must be of this and that nature and limitation. Thus, without the slightest authority beyond what may be involved in our own consciousness, we have constructed a plan of the universe, a method of government, a system of providence, and therefore anything that opposes our preconceptions encounters in all its fulness the action of a personal prejudice. Religion must surprise by showing the unexpected way of doing things. Religion is not a condition of our a priori thinking. The religion of the Bible never professes to meet us half-way, to do half the work if we will do the other half. It comes upon us like a light we never kindled, like a glory which extinguishes all the mean flames of our own lighting. Herein is its power, and herein is the disadvantage to which it exposes itself in the estimation of men who begin their intellectual life by inventing a religion which is not confirmed by the revelation contained in the Bible. What then are we to do? Were we wise men, and burningly in earnest about this matter, we should come with a mind totally unoccupied, without prejudice, without bias, without colour, and should humbly, reverently, and lovingly say, “What wilt thou have me to be and to do?” Instead of that we come with a prejudice seven-fold in thickness, and the first thing the Bible does is to rebuke our pride, and dash our religious imagination to the ground. Man does not like that. He would rather be flattered and commended, and it would be pleasant to him to hear the old prophets say: “Thou art a clever man, and thy astuteness must be most pleasing to God and his angels; thou hast found out the secret of the Almighty; by thine own right hand hast thou captured the prizes of heaven.” Who would not be pleased by such commendation? But it is never given. The Bible pours contempt upon the thought which preoccupies the mind, and has no blessing but for those who are poor in heart, meek, lowly, contrite, broken in spirit, childlike, who say with a tender loving reverence, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to be and to do?” “To this man will I look.” How expectation is excited by that introduction. It is as if God’s finger were stretched out, and pointing to a certain individual, and the eyes of the universe followed the pointing of the finger, and the ears of the universe listened while God gave this testimony concerning the specified man. Who is the man? “To this man will I look, who is of a broken and contrite spirit, and who trembleth at my word.”

Let us apply this suggestion to two or three of the most vital religious inquiries. Apply it to the subject of Inspiration. Instead of coming to the Book without bias and prejudice, simply to hear what the Book has to say for itself, we come with what is termed a theory of inspiration. As if there could be any balance between the terms, as if in any degree or sense they could be equivalent to one another. Theory equal to inspiration inspiration equal to theory. The word theory must be an offence to the word inspiration! Inspiration is madness, ecstasy, enthusiasm, the coronation of the soul, the mind in its widest, grandest illumination. How have the Naamans of the world treated the Bible? Thus: “Behold, I thought the Bible will be artistically arranged; it will move in such and such grooves and currents; the men will be so distinguished from all other men that there will be no mistaking them. They will never fall from their inspiration; they will not live on earth, they will not live in heaven, they will live somewhere midway between these places; they will not speak our language, or, if they do, it will be with a different accent. All the Book contains will have about it the fragrance of an upper and undiscovered paradise.” Now open the Book. The Book is as nearly not that as it is possible for a book to be. What is the consequence? The Book is not inspired, because, forsooth, it does not answer our preconception of inspiration! Where does the Book say that it is inspired? Where does the Book lift itself up and say, “I am not written with the same ink as other books, beware how you touch me; I am inspired; my punctuation was settled by a special angel from heaven, and all my words I have directly from the lips of the Eternal”? The Book comes with an abruptness that startles us, and with a simplicity so simple that it actually bewilders us. The Book is so broadly human, and so graphically historical, taking note of great things and little things; revealing much that we had no expectation of having revealed, and keeping back much that we expected would be revealed; putting in its very centre some three thousand proverbs, terse sentences, utterances that might be graven upon rings, and might form signet mottoes by which to regulate our daily conduct. And the Book which has in its centre proverbs which a mere moralist might have written, has at its end an apocalypse which might dazzle the angels. What does Naaman say about the Book? “Behold, I thought it would be all written in polysyllables; I expected it would be all sublime, with an unprecedented sublimity too grand for our language, and would need a language of its own too superior for our atmosphere, and would need an air created for itself.” And, behold, it is so simple, so graphic, so abrupt, so social. Fascinating as a romance, solemn as a day of judgment, rich in moral maxims, filled with dazzling and bewildering prophecy, and such an appeal to the religious imagination as never was addressed to it before. How is it that you have got so little out of the Bible? Simply because you had a preconception about it which the Bible itself does not confirm, and therefore you have elected to follow your own prejudices, rather than to accept a possible revelation. What you have to do with the Bible is to read it straight through, without saying anything to anybody. You have not to dip into it just as you please, you have to begin at the beginning and read through to the final Amen. In doing so you have to be as fair to the Book as you would be to the meanest criminal that ever stood at the bar of justice. The counsel asks you in considering the evidence to banish all preconceptions, all prejudices, all theories, and to listen to the case without any bias or mental colour of your own. That plea we allow to be just. We ask for nothing more than that in considering the Bible. Do not come with your notions of inspiration, your “Behold, I thought,” but come with a white mind, an unprejudiced understanding, and read the Book, not here and there, but steadily on and on, page by page, historian, prophet, psalmist, evangelist, apostle, and that wondrous Speaker whose words were as the dew of the morning. When you have read the Book thus straight through, there is no reason why you should not form a distinct opinion about it. Nowhere will the Book take away your power of thought, reason, and judgment. It will rather challenge you at the last to say, “Who or what say ye that I am?”

The same suggestion has its application to the great question of Providence. Here, again, we lose much by the indulgence of preconception. Given God and man. God, almighty, all-wise, and man as we know him to be, to find out the course of human history. “Behold, I thought it would be thus. The good man will have a bountiful harvest every year. The praying man will see every day close upon a great victory of life. Honesty will be rewarded, vice will be put down, crushed, condemned by the universal voice. The true man will be king, and the untrue man will be hated and despised. Virtue will lift up her head, and vice will pray some seven-fold night to hide its intolerable ghastliness.” That was your preconception, what is the reality? Sometimes the atheist has a better harvest than the man who prayed in the seedtime, and prayed every day until the autumn came. Sometimes the righteous man has not where to lay his head. Sometimes the true man is put down, and the false man is highly exalted. Sometimes the honest and honourable trader can hardly make both ends meet, and the man given to sharp practice and immoral speculation is a man who retires to affluence and dies in castle or in palace. Sometimes the good are condemned to pain, and sorrow, and loss, and sometimes the wicked have eyes that stand out with fatness, they are compassed about with chains of gold; they are not in trouble as other men. Our preconception is so different from this that we feel the violence of a tremendous shock, and possibly may turn and go away in a rage. Let us consider and be wise. What business have we to invent a theory of Providence? We cannot tell what a day may bring forth. We have already forgotten all the incidents of yesterday, tomorrow we are never sure of: we are of yesterday and know nothing. We cannot tell what is written upon the next page of the book until we turn it over. Who are we that we should invent a theory of the Divine administration of the universe? What ought to be our mental attitude and moral mood? The Christian ought to stand still and say, “Lord, not my will, but thine, be done. What I know not now I shall know hereafter. I am but of yesterday and know nothing. Thou art from everlasting to everlasting, and thou knowest all the system of compensation which thou thyself hast established. In the long run thou wilt justify thy providence to man. I will, therefore, not preconceive or pre-judge, or invent, or suppose, or have any theory that will set itself between me and God. My theories have become idols which hide from me the true divinity. God give me strength to cast these idols to the moles and to the bats.”

What applies to Inspiration and to Providence applies of course to the greater question of Redemption. We had thought that the plan of redemption would be this or that, and all our preconceptions fail to reach the agony of the cross, and the mystery of a sacrificial death. The sublimity of a battle won by weakness. We are lost in wonder. May we also be lost in love and praise! Many persons address themselves to a theory of redemption, in their anti-Christian arguments, who never approach the inner and vital question of redemption itself. We care nothing for any theory of redemption, as such, that was ever heard of. We believe all reasoning about redemption, with a view to find out the secret of the divine meaning, and to trace the mystery of moral law and claim, to be vain and worthless. You see the redemption once and the vision passes, you feel the mystery, and after that the life is transfigured and becomes itself a sacrifice. If the cross has got no further than your invention, your intellect, your range of scheming, and theorising, it is not a cross, it is but a Roman gallows. There is no theory of the heart. There is no theory of love. There is no theory of a mother’s sacrifice for her ailing and dying child. You must feel it, know it by the heart, see it by some swift glance of a similar spirit, and after that you will have an understanding that cannot be put into words and phrases.

What, then, is the sum of the argument thus roughly outlined? It is this. Rid the mind of preconceptions. Do not go to church with some theory which the preacher has to destroy before he can begin his work of construction. When we enter the sanctuary, we ought to enter it without prejudice against the place, against the book, or against the man who, for the time being, officiates in the name of Christ. We should be fair, and honest, and just, we should not be more righteous to a criminal than we are to an equal. We should enter God’s house in this spirit: “Lord, show me thyself as thou wilt. Lord, teach me thy truth. Lord, show me what I ought to be and to do. My selfishness takes the form of religious inventiveness, this is the most subtle temptation of my life. Lord, help me to answer this temptation. I am not tempted to commit murder, or to tell great blasphemous lies to men, but I am tempted to form notions about thyself, and thy book, and thy providence; and my mind is like a chamber full of pegs upon which I have hung a hundred preconceptions, and there I am the victim of my own fancies. Thou hast to crush thy way through a crowd of idols to get at me. Lord, cleanse the chamber of my mind, banish all these idols and come in thyself, and by the shining of thy face I shall be able to identify thy deity.” That is the prayer which ought to rise from every heart when we approach the worship of God and the consideration of his mysteries. As in the case of Naaman, so now. The surprise of Christian revelation is always in the direction of simplicity. Naaman had a programme, Elisha a command. Naaman had a ceremony, Elisha a revelation. Naaman required a whole sheet of paper on which to write out his elaborate scheme, Elisha rolled up his address into a military sentence, and delivered his order as a mightier soldier than Naaman.

Let us burn our theories, inventions, preconceptions, prejudices, and our forecasts about God, Providence, Inspiration, Redemption, and human destiny, and throw ourselves into the great arms, asking only to be and to do what God would have us be and do. Let us live the true, sweet child’s life, and not be the victim of our own prejudices, nor the dupe of our own cleverness. May our prayer be, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? I am ready, by thy Spirit, to go, and stand, and fight, and wait, to suffer, to enjoy, to be rich, to be poor, to be known, to be unknown; not my will, but thine, be done.” And at the last we shall say, “Thou hast done all things well.”

Prayer

Almighty God, how do they praise thee who stand in the unclouded light and sing thy name and do thy service evermore? We wonder, but we cannot tell. We long sometimes to be of their number even but for one moment, that we might return again and praise thee on earth as they do in heaven. How sweet their song, how undivided their thought, how complete their loyalty! Yet may we be growing up toward all this by the grace of thy Holy Spirit, becoming wiser, purer, tenderer, more like thyself at least in our love of holiness. Help us to grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. Save us from foolish and vain notions concerning thyself. Deliver us from the power of superstition, lest we forget how really to pray, and how truly to worship the threefold name. May we know thee as Father, King, mighty one, yet tenderer than a mother, more patient than a nurse who serves for love. We bless thee for all our mental illumination; we thank thee now, whereas once we were blind and could not see afar off; now we seem to know better what the meaning of life is, what are its capacities, and what is its destiny. We cannot tell how the idea grew in our mind, but it was a miracle of thine that we know. We could now tell thy word, because we know what it is in pureness, in wisdom, in righteousness, and in the spirit of hopefulness, so that no man can now deceive us by saying, This is the word of God, when it is not. Behold, thou hast set thy witness in our hearts, which says to us, This is God’s word, and that is a counterfeit gospel: reject it, for there is no blessing in it. This also cometh forth from the Lord of hosts, which is wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working. Help us to read thy book with eyes which thou thyself hast opened, so that we may see not the letter only but the spirit, so that looking upon the letter we see within it chariots and horses of fire, living spirits, gracious angels; and may we yield ourselves to the whole spiritual ministry. Thus shall we show what it is to be in God, to live, and move, and have our being in him, by the loftiness of our judgment and the Christliness of our charity. May we hate sin, which is an abominable thing in thy sight. May we know that sin always means leprosy leprosy for ever: but that in Jesus Christ there is a healing even for the leper in the sweet gospel we have heard. The Lord cleanse us, and we shall be clean. We would that we might be recovered of our spiritual leprosy, that we might be healed with the blood of sacrifice, the precious blood, which speaketh better things than the blood of Abel. We have heard of this gospel of blood, this salvation by atonement: what it all is we cannot tell, but we long to know; by faith we cast ourselves upon it; living or dying our cry shall be, Lord, we believe, help thou our unbelief. Amen.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

IX

ELISHA, THE SUCCESSOR OF ELIJAH

2Ki 2:13-13:21 ; 2Ch 21:1-20

For the sake of unity, this chapter, like the one on Elijah, will be confined to a single person, Elisha, who was the minister, the disciple, and the successor of the prophet Elijah. “Minister” means an attendant who serves another generally a younger man accompanying and helping an older man. A passage illustrating this service 2Ki 3:11 : “Elisha, who poured water on the hands of Elijah.” We may here recall a situation when no wash basin was convenient, and the water was poured on our hands for our morning ablutions. A corresponding New Testament passage is Act 13:5 : “Paul and Barnabas had John Mark to their minister,” that is, the young man, John Mark, attended the two older preachers, and rendered what service he could. Elisha was also a disciple of Elijah. A disciple is a student studying under a teacher. In the Latin we call the teacher magister. Elijah was Elisha’s teacher in holy things. Then Elisha was a successor to Elijah. Elijah held the great office of prophet to Israel, and in view of his speedy departure, God told him to anoint Elisha to be his successor, that is, successor as prophet to the ten tribes.

About four years before the death of Ahab, 800 B.C., Elijah, acting under a commission from God, found Elisha plowing, and the record says, “with twelve yoke of oxen.” I heard a cowman once say that it was sufficient evidence of a man’s fitness to preach when he could plow twelve yoke of oxen and not swear. But the text may mean that Elisha himself plowed with one yoke, and superintended eleven other plowmen. Anyhow, Elijah approached him and dropped his mantle around him. That was a symbolic action, signifying, “When I pass away you must take my mantle and be my successor.” Elisha asked permission to attend to a few household affairs. He called together all the family, and announced that God had called him to a work so life-filling he must give up the farm life and devote himself to the higher business. To symbolize the great change in vocation he killed his own yoke of oxen and roasted them with his implements of husbandry; and had a feast of the family to celebrate his going into the ministry. It is a great thing when the preacher knows how to burn the bridges behind him, and when the family of the preacher recognizes the fulness and completeness of the call to the service of God.

The lesson of this and other calls is that no man can anticipate whom God will call to be his preacher. He called this man from the plow handles. He called Amos from the gathering of sycomore fruit; he called Matthew from the receipt of custom; he called the fishermen from their nets; he called a doctor in the person of Luke. We cannot foretell; the whole matter must be left to God and to God alone, for he alone may put a man into the ministry. I heard Dr. Broadus preach a great sermon on that once: “I thank Christ Jesus, my Lord, for that he hath enabled me and counted me faithful, putting me into this ministry, who was before a blasphemer.”

Elijah served as a prophet fifty-five years. That is a long ministry. There were six kings of Israel before he passed away, as follows: Ahab, Ahaziah, Jehoram, Jehu, Jehoahaz, and Joash. There were five sovereigns of Judah, to wit: Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, Ahaziah, Athaliah (this one a woman) and Joash. Athaliah was queen by usurpation.

God said to Elijah, “Anoint Elisha to be thy successor; anoint Jehu to be king of Israel, and anoint Hazael to be king of Syria.” Now here were two men God-appointed to the position of king, as this man was to the position of prophet, and we distinguish them in this way: It does not follow that because the providence of God makes a man to be king, that the man is conscious of his divine call, like the one who is called to be a preacher. For instance, he says, “I called Cyrus to do what I wanted done: I know him, though he does not know me.” The lesson is that God’s rule is supreme over all offices. Even the most wicked are overruled to serve his general purposes in the government of the world.

The biblical material for a sketch of Elisha’s life 1Ki 19:16 to 2Ki 13:21 . Elisha means, “God the Saviour.” The Greek form is Elisaios; we find it in the Greek text of Luk 4:27 , where our Lord says, “There were many widows in Israel in the days of Elisaios. ” “Elijah” is Hebrew, and “Elias” is the corresponding Greek word; “Elisha” is Hebrew, and “Elisaios” is the corresponding Greek form.

We will now distinguish between the work of Elijah and Elisha, giving some likenesses and some unlikenesses. In the chapter on Elijah attention has already been called to the one great unlikeness, viz: that Elijah did not live in public sight; he appeared only occasionally for a very short time. Elisha’s whole life was in the sight of the public; he had a residence in the city of Samaria, and a residence at Gilgal; he was continually passing from one theological seminary to another; he was in the palaces of the kings, and they always knew where to find him. He had a great deal to do with the home life of the people, with the public life of the people and with the governmental life of the people. There were some points of likeness in their work, so obvious I need not now stop to enumerate them. Elijah’s life was more ascetic, and his ministry was mainly a ministry of judgment, while Elisha’s was one of mercy.

The New Testament likenesses of these two prophets are as follows: Elijah corresponds to John the Baptist, and Elisha’s ministry is very much like the ministry of Jesus in many respects.

There were many schools of the prophets in the days of Elijah and Elisha. Commencing with Jericho we have one; the next was at Bethel; the third at Gilgal not the Gilgal near Jericho but the one in the hill country of Ephraim and there was one at Mount Carmel. These stretched across the whole width of the country four theological seminaries. The history shows us that Elijah, just before his translation, visited every one of them in order, and that Elisha, as soon as Elijah was translated, visited the same ones in reverse order, and there is one passage in the text that tells us that he was continually doing this.

I think the greatest work of Elisha’s life was this instruction work; it was the most far-reaching; it provided a great number of men to take up the work after he passed away. Indeed the schools of the prophets were the great bulwarks of the kingdom of God for 500 years during the Hebrew monarchy. We cannot put the finger on a reformation, except one, in that five hundred years that the prophets did not start. One priest carried on a reformation we will come to it later. But the historians, the poets, the orators, the reformers, and the revivalists, all came from the prophets. Every book in the Bible is written by a man that had the prophetic spirit. Elisha was the voice of God to the conscience of the kings and the people, and when we study the details of his life we will see that as the government heard and obeyed Elisha it prospered, and as it went against his counsel it met disaster.

We have two beautiful stories that show his work in the homes. One of them is the greatest lesson on hospitality that I know of in the Bible. A wealthy family lived right on the path between the Gilgal seminary and the Mount Carmel seminary. The woman of the house called her husband’s attention to the fact that the man of God, Elisha, was continually passing to and fro by their house; that he was a good man, and that they should build a little chamber on the wall to be the prophet’s chamber. “We will put a little table in it, and a chair, and a bed, and we will say to him, Let this be your home when you are passing through.” Elisha was very much impressed with this woman’s thoughtfulness, and the reason for it. He asked her what he could do for her. But she lived among her own people, wanted no favor from the king nor the general of the army. Elisha’s servant suggested that she was childless, so he prophesied to her that within a year she would be the mother of a son. The son was born and grew up to be a bright boy, and, like other boys, followed his father to the field. One hot day when they were reaping and it was very hot in reaping time over there he had a sunstroke and said, “My head! My head!” The father told his servant to take him to his mother as usual, let a child get sick and the daddy is sure to say, “Take him to his mother.” I don’t know what would become of the children if the mothers did not take care of them when they are sick. But the boy died. The woman had a beast saddled and went to the seminary at Mount Carmel. She knew Elisha was there for he had not passed back. It was a very touching story. Anyhow, Elisha restored the boy to life, and to show how it lingered in his mind, years afterward he sent word to her that there would be a famine of seven years, and she had better migrate until the famine was over. She went away for seven years, and when she came back a land-grabber had captured her home and her inheritance. She appealed the case to Elisha, and Elisha appealed the case to the king, and then the kin said, “Tell me, I pray thee, all the great things that Elisha hath done.” When he had heard the full story of this man’s work he said, “Let this woman have her home back again, and interest for all the time it has been used by another.” This is a very sweet story of family life.

There is another story. One of the “theologs ” I do not know how young he was, for he had married and had children the famine pressed so debt was incurred, and they had a law then we find it in the Mosaic code that they might make a bondman of the one who would not pay his debts. The wife of this “theolog” came to Elisha and said, “My husband is one of the prophets; the famine has brought very hard times, and my boys are about to be enslaved because we cannot pay the debt.” Then he wrought the miracle that we will consider a little later, and provided for the payment of the debt of that wife of the prophet and for the sustenance of them until the famine passed away.

These two stories show how this man in going through the country affected the family life of the people; there may have been hundreds of others. I want to say that I have traveled around a good deal in my days, over every county in this state. It may be God’s particular providence, but I have never been anywhere that I did not find good people. In the retrospect of every trip of my life there is a precious memory of godly men that I met on the trip. I found one in the brush in Parker County, where it looked like a “razor-back” hog could not make a living, and they were very poor. I was on my way to an association, and must needs pass through this jungle, and stopped about noon at a small house in the brush, where I received the kindest hospitality in my life. They were God’s children. They fixed the best they had to eat, and it was good, too the best sausage I ever did eat. So this work of Elisha among the families pleases me. I have been over such ground, and I do know that the preacher who is unable to find good, homes and good people, and who is unable to leave a blessing behind him in the homes, is a very poor preacher. I have been entertained by the great governors of the state and the generals of armies, but I have never enjoyed any hospitality anywhere more precious than in that log cabin in the jungle.

The next great work of Elisha was the miracles wrought by him. There were two miracles of judgment. One was when he cursed the lads of Bethel that place of idolatry and turned two she-bears loose that tore up about forty of them. That is one judgment) and I will discuss that in the next chapter. Just now I am simply outlining the man’s whole life for the sake of unity.

The second miracle of judgment was the inflicting on Gehazi the leprosy of Naaman. The rest of his miracles were miracles of patriotism or of mercy. The following is a list (not of every one, for every time he prophesied it was a miracle): 2Ki 2:14 tells us that he divided the Jordan with the mantle of Elijah; 2Ki 2:19 , that he healed the bad springs of Jericho, the water that made the people sick and made the land barren, which was evidently a miracle of mercy. The third miracle recorded is in 2Ki 2:23 , his sending of the she-bears (referred to above) ; the fourth is recorded in 2Ki 3:16 , the miracle of the waters. Three armies led by three kings were in the mountains of Edom, on their way to attack Moab. There was no water, and they were about to perish, and they appealed to Elisha. He told them to go out to the dry torrent bed and dig trenches saying, “To-morrow all of those trenches will be full of water, and you won’t see a cloud nor hear it thunder.” It was a miracle in the sense that he foresaw how that water would come from rain in the mountains. I have seen that very thing happen. Away off in the mountains there may be rain one can’t see it nor hear it from where he is in the valley. The river bed is as dry as a powder horn, and it looks as if there never will be any rain. I was standing in a river bed in West Texas once, heard a roaring, looked up and saw a wave coming down that looked to me to be about ten feet high the first wave and it was carrying rocks before it that seemed as big as a house, and rolling them just as one would roll a marble.. So his miracle consisted in his knowledge of that storm which they could not see nor hear. If they had not dug the trenches they would have still had no water for a mountain torrent is very swift to fall. In that place where I was, in fifteen minutes there was a river, and in two or three hours it had all passed away. But the trenches of Elisha were filled from the passing flood.

The fifth miracle is recorded in 2Ki 4:2-7 , the multiplying of the widow’s oil, that prophet’s wife that I have already referred to. The sixth miracle is recorded in 2Ki 4:8-37 , first the giving and then the restoring to life of the son of the Shunamite. The seventh is given in 2Ki 4:38 , the healing of the poisonous porridge: “Ah, man of God! there is death in the pot,” or “theological seminaries and wild gourds.” The eighth miracle is found in 2Ki 5:1-4 , the multiplying of the twenty loaves so as to feed 100 men. The ninth, 2Ki 5:1-4 , the healing of Naaman’s leprosy, and the tenth, 2Ki 5:26-27 , the inflicting on Gehazi the leprosy of which Naaman was healed.

The eleventh miracle is found in 2Ki 6:1-7 , his making the ax to swim. One of the prophets borrowed an ax to increase the quarters; the seminary was growing and the place was too straight for them, and they had to enlarge it. They did not have axes enough, and one of them borrowed an ax. In going down to the stream to cut the wood, the head of the ax slipped off and fell into the water and there is a text: “Alas, my master, for it was borrowed.” The miracle in this case was his suspension of the law of gravity, and making that ax head to swim, so that the man who lost it could just reach out and get it.

Twelfth, 2Ki 6:8-12 , the revealing of the secret thought of the Syrian king, even the thoughts of his bedchamber. No matter what, at night, the Syrian king thought out for the next day, Elisha knew it by the time he thought it, and would safeguard the attack at that point.

Thirteenth, 2Ki 6:15 , his giving vision to his doubtful servant when the great host came to capture them. The servant was scared. Elisha said, “Open this young man’s eyes, and let him see that they who are for us are more than those who are against us.” What a text! His eyes were opened, and he saw that hilltop guarded with the chariots of God and his angels. We need these eye openers when we get scared.

Fourteenth, the blinding of that Syrian host that came to take him. He took them and prayed to the Lord to open their eyes again. An Irishman reported at the first battle of Manasseh, thus: “I surrounded six Yankees and captured them.” Well, Elisha surrounded a little army and led them into captivity.

Fifteenth, 2Ki 7:6 , a mighty host of Syrians was besieging Samaria, until the women were eating their own children, the famine was so great. Elisha took the case to God, and that night, right over the Syrian camp was heard the sound of bugles and shouting, and the racing of chariots, and it scared them nearly to death. They thought a great army had been brought up, and a panic seized them, as a stampede seizes a herd of cattle, and they fled. They left their tents and their baggage: their provisions, their jewels, and the further they went the more things they dropped, all the way to the Jordan River, until they left a trail behind them of the cast-off incumbrances. The word “panic” comes from the heathen god, “Pan,” and the conception is that these sudden demoralizations must come from deity. I once saw sixteen steers put an army of 4,000 to flight, and I was one of the men. We were in a lane with a high fence on one side and a bayou on the other side, and suddenly, up the lane we heard the most awful clatter, and saw the biggest cloud of dust, and one of the men shouted, “The cavalry is on us! The cavalry is on us!” and without thinking everybody got scared. A lot of the men were found standing in the bayou up to their necks, others had gone over the fence and clear across the field without stopping. I did not get that far, but I got over the fence.

Sixteenth, 2Ki 8:2-6 , the foreseeing and foretelling of the seven years of famine.

Seventeenth, 2Ki 8:11 , the revelation of the very heart of Hazael to himself. He did not believe himself to be so bad a man. Elisha just looked at him and commenced weeping. Hazael could not understand. Elisha says, “I see how you are going to sweep over my country with fire and sword; I see the children that you will slay; I see the bloody trail behind you.” Hazael says, “Am I a dog, that I should do these things?” But Elisha under inspiration read the real man) and saw what there was in the man. One of the best sermons that I ever heard was by a distinguished English clergyman on this subject.

Eighteenth, 2Ki 13:14 , his dying prophecy.

Nineteenth, the miracle from his bones after he was buried. We will discuss that more particularly later.

We have thus seen his great teaching work, his relation to the government, and his miracles.

Now, let us consider some of his miracles more particularly. The Romanists misuse the miracle of the bones of Elisha, and that passage in Act 19:11-12 , where Paul sent out handkerchiefs and aprons, and miracles were wrought by them. On these two passages they found all their teachings of the relics of the saints, attributing miraculous power to a bit of the cross, and they have splinters enough of that “true cross” now scattered about to make a forest of crosses. In New Orleans an’ auctioneer said, “Today I have sold to seventeen men the cannon ball that killed Sir Edward Packenham.” The greatest superstition and fraud of the ages is the Romanist theory of the miracle working power of the reputed relics of the saints. Some of Elisha’s miracles were like some of our Lord’s. The enlargement of the twenty loaves to suffice for 100 men reminds us of two miracles of our Lord, and his curing a case of leprosy reminds us of many miracles of our Lord like that. In the Bible, miracles are always numerous in the great religious crises, where credentials are needed for God’s people, such as the great series of miracles in Egypt by Moses, the series of miracles in the days of Elisha and the miracles in the days of our Lord.

The greatest of Elisha’s work is his teaching work, greater than his work in relation to the government, his work in the families, or his miracles. I think the more far-reaching power of his work was in his teaching. There were spoken similar words at the exodus of Elijah and Elisha. When Elijah went up, Elisha said, “My Father! My Father! The chariots of Israel and the horsemen thereof!” The same words are used when Elisha died. What does it mean? It pays the greatest compliment to the departed: that they alone were worth more to Israel than all its chariots, and its cavalry; that they were the real defenders of the nation.

At one point his work touched the Southern Kingdom, viz: When Moab was invaded, and he wrought that miracle of the waters, filled the trenches and supplied the thirsty armies. Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah was along, and for his sake Elisha saved them.

There are many great pulpit themes in connection with Elisha’s history. I suggest merely a few: First, “Let a double portion of thy spirit be upon me” that was his prayer when Elijah was leaving him; second, “The chariots of Israel and the horsemen thereof”; third, when he came to the Jordan he did not say, “Where is Elijah?” but he smote the Jordan and said, “Where is the Lord God of Elijah?” for it made no difference if Elijah was gone, God was there yet; fourth, “The oil stayed” not as long as the woman has a vessel to put it in; fifth, the little chamber on the wall; sixth, “Ah, man of God! There is death in the pot” or “theological seminaries and wild gourds” radical criticism, for instance there is death in the pot whenever preachers are fed on that sort of food; seventh, “Is it well with thy husband?” “Is it well?” and I will have frequently commenced a meeting with that text; eighth, Elisha’s staff in the hands of Gehazi, who was an unworthy man and the unworthy cannot wield the staff of the prophets; ninth, “Alas, my master, it was borrowed!”; tenth, the Growing Seminary “The place is too straight for us”; eleventh, “Make this valley full of trenches,” that is, the Lord will send the water, but there is something for us to do; let us have a place for it when it comes; twelfth, the secret thoughts of the bedchamber are known to God; thirteenth, “They that be with us are more than those that be against us”; fourteenth, “Tell me, I pray thee, all the great works done by Elisha.”

These are just a few in the great mine of Elijah or Elisha where we may dig down for sermons. The sermons ought to be full of meat; that is why we preach to feed the hungry. We should let our buckets down often into the well of salvation, for we cannot lower the well, and we may draw up a fresh sermon every Sunday. We should not keep on preaching the same sermon; it is first a dinner roast, then we give it cold for supper, then hash its fragments for breakfast, and make soup out of the bones for the next dinner, and next time we hold it over the pot and boil the shadow, and so the diet gets thinner and thinner. Let’s get a fresh one every time.

QUESTIONS

1. Who was Elisha?

2. What is the meaning of “minister to Elijah”? Illustrate and give corresponding passage in the New Testament.

3. What is the meaning of “Elisha, a disciple of Elijah”?

4. What is the meaning of “Elisha, a successor to Elijah”?

5. Give the date, author, manner, and nature of Elisha’s call, his response and how he celebrated the event.

6. What is the lesson of this and other calls? Illustrate.

7. How long his prophetic term of office and what kings of Israel and Judah were his contemporaries?

8. What secular calls accompanied his, how do you distinguish between his and the call of the others and what is the lesson therefrom?

9. What is the biblical material for a sketch of Elisha’s life?

10. What is the meaning of his name?

11. What is the Greek and Hebrew forms of his name? Give other examples.

12. What likenesses and unlikenesses of the work of Elijah and Elisha?

13. What New Testament likenesses of these two prophets?

14. How many schools of the prophets in the days of Elijah and Elisha, and where were they located?

15. What was Elisha’s great teaching work in the seminaries? Discuss.

16. What was Elisha’s part in governmental affairs?

17. What of his work in the families? Illustrate.

18. What two classes of his miracles and what miracles of each class?

19. What is the Romanist misuse of the miracle of Elisha’s bones and Act 19:11-12 ?

20. What miracles were like some of our Lord’s?

21. When and why were Bible miracles numerous?

22. Which of Elisha’s works was the greatest?

23. What words spoken at the exodus of Elijah and Elisha and what their meaning?

24. At what point did Elisha’s work touch the Southern Kingdom?

25. What New Testament lesson from the life of Elisha?

26. Give several pulpit themes from this section not given by the

27. What is the author’s exhortation relative to preaching growing out of this discussion of Elisha?

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

XI

THE STORY OF NAAMAN, THE SIEGE OF SAMARIA,

AND THE DEATH OF JEHORAM (OF JUDAH)

2Ki 5:1-8:24

We commence this chapter with the story of Naaman, recorded in 2Ki 5:1-24 , which is a continuation of the record of Elisha’s miracles. In this passage we have a very graphic and complete account of two miracles which are especially remarkable in their relation to each other. One was the cure of leprosy and the other was the infliction of leprosy. One was wrought on a foreigner and a man of prominence; the other, on a Hebrew and a servant. The second was consequential on the first and the two together must have given Elisha a great reputation at home and abroad, and at the same time extolled Jehovah as the great God in the surrounding nations.

This Naaman was by nationality a Syrian, by position a captain, a great and honorable man. “He was also a mighty man of valor,” one who had rendered valuable services to his country in giving deliverance (Hebrew salvation) from an oppressor. Here arises the question, “What was this deliverance of Naaman?” To this question we find no reply in the Scriptures but there is evidence enough from the Assyrian monuments. Prior to this time an Assyrian monarch had pushed his conquests as far west as Syria bringing this country into subjection, but Syria revolted after a few years and once more gained her independence. It was this deliverance that was wrought by Naaman in which he distinguished himself and won the special favor of the Syrian king.

But Naaman had one serious defect. He was a leper. The way this fact is introduced is most natural, viz.: by the adversative conjunction but. It is true that the conjunction is in italics, showing that the word does not occur in the original, yet the adversative idea is there. It is suggestive of the fact that too often people spoil a splendid recommendation of other people with the introduction of some defect; as, Byron was a great poet but was clubfooted. Or that man is an excellent gentleman but he has one failing, etc. So we go on describing people, saying all the good things we know about them, and then marring their fine reputation by pointing out some fault, altogether unlike the spirit of the inspired historian here in the case of Naaman. This thought is further illustrated in the case of David. Nathan said to him, “Jehovah hath put away thy sin, howbeit,” and then follows with a long list of consequences of the sin which would come upon David. We find the adversative conjunction used to introduce good qualities also, as in 2Ch 19:3 . After Jehu the prophet had rebuked Jehoshaphat for his sin, he said, “Nevertheless there are good things found in thee,” etc. Other examples might be given but these are enough. To sum up what I have said: But may be used adversely to introduce the bad when the good is mentioned first, and to introduce the good when the bad is mentioned first. A fact generally admitted by all, is that both qualities are found in varying ratios in all of us. Therefore we should remember the saying, “There is so much good in the worst of us and so much bad in the best of us that it scarcely behooves any of us to say anything about the rest of us.”

As has already been stated, this defect of Naaman was leprosy, which comes from the Hebrew word meaning a stroke, because the ancients regarded this disease as a stroke from God. Of course it carried with it the idea of penalty for sin committed, just as the three friends of Job reasoned with respect to his case. They said, “This stroke is from God because of your sins.” They thus attributed all afflictions to sin as the cause and to God as inflicting the penalty. The Greek word from which we get our word leprosy means “a scale” and thus indicates a certain characteristic of the disease, viz: that in certain stages of the disease the skin becomes scaly.

There is a most impressive lesson here for us in the instrumentality of this miracle. On some one of their marauding expeditions into northern Israel they had captured a little Jewish maiden who was made servant to Naaman’s wife. The beauty and radiance of her life are seen in the few words here said about her. She expressed a most ardent desire that her master might be healed and pointed out the source of such healing as her God, who would effect such a cure through his servant, Elisha, the prophet in Samaria. All this is an expression of affection, the affection of a servant for her master. How sublime such affection under such conditions! A captive maiden, with the loyalty of a child for a parent, reveals to her master the true source of healing. May we not think of this little Jewish maid in her love for and her loyalty to her oppressors, as a kind of type of Christians in their relation to the world? Surely the human instrumentality in this great divine transaction should not be underestimated. Neither can we fail to recognize the human in God’s plan for the salvation of the world. This little maid played her part and played it well. Are we doing our part in the great plan of God as well as she?

The transactions from this point in the story are rapid and interesting. Naaman appeals to the Syrian king who in turn sends a letter to Jehoram the king of Israel asking for the recovery of Naaman of his leprosy. This royal courtesy of the Syrian king was misunderstood by the king of Israel, who thought that the king of Syria was seeking a quarrel with him. Just here Elisha intervenes to save the day, by offering to do what Jeroboam in his royalty could not do, viz: to heal Naaman of his loathsome disease. But how simple the prescription! Dip in the Jordan seven times. Why seven? Seven was a symbol of perfection and here symbolized the perfect obedience required upon the part of Naaman. But Naaman was wroth and went away saying, “Behold, I thought, he would surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the Lord his God, and wave his hand over the place and recover the leper. Are not . . . the rivers of Damascus better than all the waters of Israel? May I not wash in them and be clean?” This reply shows what was in Naaman’s mind. He expected Elisha to make a great display, and he seems also to have expected an incantation by which the cure would be effected, but the prophet understood human nature too well to be engulfed into violating the law of his God. The captain’s anger was most natural; it was the result of a keen disappointment, but it prepared the way for a hearing from his servants, which resulted in his cure.

There are several lessons here for us: (1) Human nature calls for display. This is true often in the most vital matters, such as the salvation of the soul; (2) May we not find in this incident an illustration of the simplicity of the plan of salvation? Upon this point many stumble. They say, “What shall I do to be saved?” or “What shall I give?” (3) Healing is obtained by taking the remedy: “He that believeth on him is not condemned: he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God” (Joh 3:18 ).

It is noteworthy in this connection that the servants of Naaman interceded with him as children begging a father and this influenced him to try the offered remedy. Their reasoning with him was simple and effective: “If the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldst thou not have done it? How much rather then when he saith to thee, Wash and be clean”? This was sufficient. He went down, dipped himself and was healed. Here arises the question of the virtue of his cure. It was not in the Jordan, nor in the seven dips, but in the power of God. Of course, it came in response to conditions met, just as in the case of all other blessings.

May we not find here a parallel case to the New Testament teaching on baptismal regeneration? Hardly; here the dipping was made a condition of Naaman’s healing, but in the New Testament we do not find baptism a condition of salvation, but the conditions of salvation are repentance and faith. However there is this parallel: that God’s own prescribed conditions must be met before there is any blessing. In this connection it is well to note also that the word for “dip” here, in the Septuagint, is bapto from which comes the New Testament word “baptize,” and that this word means the same as the original Hebrew word, viz: to dip, to immerse. This Old Testament incident is an illustration of the meaning of bapto and baptize and thus confirms the New Testament teaching of baptism by immersion.

Naaman’s gratitude for his healing is very beautifully and impressively expressed: (1) He returned from the Jordan to Elisha, a journey of forty or fifty miles out of his way; (2) he offered the prophet the presents which he had brought from Damascus; (3) he embraced the Jehovah religion and made a vow to renounce all other gods but Jehovah; (4) he honored the request of Elisha (as he thought) by his servant, Gehazi. In all this one is reminded of the incident in the New Testament where the one leper returned to thank our Lord for his healing, evidencing the additional blessing of salvation, yet this act of Naaman involved far more trouble and inconvenience than that of the Samaritan leper..

It should also be noted here that Elisha refused his presents, not because he was not worthy to receive them, but to show this heathen man that not all of God’s prophets were mercenary, as was the case with the priests of other religions. It sets forth Elisha in a beautiful light. We see here the spirit of self-denial which reminds us of Paul’s life and teaching. One could wish that he might always be able to find just such a spirit in the prophets of Jehovah in this twentieth century. Alas, too often the spirit of Gehazi possesses them rather than the spirit of Elisha. But we thank God that the majority are walking in the steps of Elisha.

But what did Naaman mean by wanting “Two mules’ burden of earth”? It cannot be definitely known just what was in his mind, but of all the theories proposed, the context seems to have a great bearing on the one which says that he wanted this earth from the land of Israel to erect an altar to Jehovah in the land of Syria or, perchance, to sprinkle it upon a certain area of his own land, thereby making it “holy ground” and suitable for the worship of Jehovah. History tells us that some of the Jews carried earth from their own land when they were carried into captivity to Babylon. This seems to have been the prevailing idea among the Orientals. Yet another matter should be considered here, viz: If Naaman here embraced the Jehovah religion, why should he bow himself down in the house of Rimmon? This seems to be a reference to his work, as an attendant upon the king of Syria, to perform certain duties relative to his master in the house of Rimmon. He seemed to realize that Jehovah was a jealous God, but he was not strong enough to become a martyr to the Jehovah religion. In this we may not judge Naaman too severely, especially in view of the fact that Naaman was a heathen, reared in a heathen religion, and going back to a heathen environment, and may we not confidently expect to meet Naaman in the “Sweet By and By” as one of God’s jewels gathered out of a foreign land? One could wish that he might greet this Syrian general and this little Jewish maid along with Elijah’s widow of Zarephath, Elisha’s Shunammite woman and our Lord’s Syro-Phoenician woman on the bright shores of everlasting deliverance.

Over against this cheering picture of Elisha and Naaman hangs the blighting picture of Gehazi, a renegade Jew. With the spirit of avarice he seized his opportunity to get the presents offered his master. His sin was manifold. He was guilty of lying, covetousness, and sacrilege. He lied to Naaman outright in the matter of the presents; he was prompted in it all by the spirit of covetousness; and he committed sacrilege in the ill use he made of the name of his master and in his profane oath. But the eye of the seer was there and he was completely caught. May we not rejoice that justice found her own, or shall we revolt at the severity of the penalty inflicted? If the latter, then must we pass by the case of Ananias and Sapphira and a multitude of others like unto them? We will rejoice rather in the prophetic and apostolic judgments since they are strokes of God through his own appointed executioners. But what of the descendants of Gehazi involved in this penalty? Here comes in the law of heredity which he could escape only by denying himself of the privilege of marriage which he may have done; we do not know. One could wish that he might lift the curtain and see further into the course of Naaman and Gehazi, but we must be content with whatever revelation has disclosed, and dare not to intrude into the precincts of the Most Holy uninvited. Here they pass from our view never to reappear.

Turning to the Scriptures we meet again Benhadad II, king of Syria, who was under treaty with Israel twelve years during which time Ahab furnished troops in a league against Assyria, but now he breaks the treaty and invades Israel according to the prophecy given Ahab when he let Ben-hadad go (1Ki 20:35-43 ). What a pity Ahab did not obey the Lord and put an end to him. But we should not have had this great lesson of national sin and its penalty.

This Benhadad comes now, besieges Samaria and causes sufferings in Israel unparalleled in their history. The head of an ass, the most undesirable part of the most undesirable animal, sold for 80 shekels, about $50.00; a kab of doves’ dung sold for 5 shekels, about $3.00; and the women killed their own sons and ate them. Such indicates the horrors of this terrible siege. But this is the fulfilment of the prophecy of Deu 28:56-57 , which has three literal fulfilments in the history of the Jewish people, viz: (1) in this instance, the siege of Samaria by Benhadad; (2) in the siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and (3) in the siege of Jerusalem by Titus, A.D. 70. The story here of the two women and the appeal of one of them to the king is very pathetic. Who can censure the mother for hiding her son? The mystery is that the other one ever gave up hers. All this shows the dire straights into which they had become because of this siege.

For all this the king of Israel proposes a remedy, viz: that the head of Elisha be taken from his shoulders. But we note the fact that this was contrary to law. An Oriental monarch might do such a thing consistently. Beheading was practiced in Egypt, Assyria, and Babylonia, but it was positively forbidden by the Jewish law. Why should he strike for Elisha when such a calamity came? He evidently thought that Elisha was to blame for their condition. He may have associated this instance with the drought which came at the word of Elijah, or he may have thought that Elisha could work miracles at will and that he purposely refused to relieve the people. However the case may be, it is the common plea of the enemies of God’s cause against his agents and ministers. So with an oath he vows to take the head of God’s prophet.

But Elisha was not to be so ill-treated. He was a seer and the Spirit of God in him was sufficient for every emergency. He saw the plan before the messenger of vengeance arrived and made counterplans to defeat the whole purpose of the king. The story of this incident is beautifully told in the record: how Elisha stopped the messenger and even his master, and with keen insight into the future made a most interesting prediction, viz: that on the morrow they would be amply supplied at reasonable prices. The messenger was doubtful but this prediction allowed for Elisha a probation and a respite from the wrath of the king.

The fulfilment of this prediction is found in the incident of the lepers, the story of which is given in the record. The lesson of this incident is illustrative of the condition of the sinner: “Why sit we here until we die? If we say we will enter the city, when the famine is in the city, and we shall die there: and if we sit here, we shall die also . . . if the Syrians kill us, we shall but die.” This pictures the state of the sinner and his reasoning when he faces the question of decision: “I can but die; therefore, will I trust him.” This text has been used by hundreds of preachers to illustrate the point of decision. There is also another fine text in this connection, viz: “We do not well: this day is a day of good tidings, and we hold our peace.” What a good missionary text! They told it and so should we. The world, like Samaria, is perishing for the necessaries of life, and we know where there is plenty. Let us tell it, lest when the blessed light of God’s eternal morning bursts forth upon us our sin of omission will overtake us.

They did tell it, but as is often the case when we preach, they did not believe it. It was received with distrust; they thought the Syrians had set a trap for them and so they sent messengers and chariots after them to ascertain the facts in the case. The report of these messengers was convincing. They pursued the Syrians as far as the Jordan and found garments and vessels scattered all along the way. Evidently the Syrians had gotten a good “scare” but this is easily explained when we take into consideration that it was the Lord’s “scare.” He made them to hear a great noise of chariots, of horsemen and of a great host. It is no wonder that they ran for their lives. In this connection we find the fulfilment of the prophecy of Elisha to the messenger of vengeance in two important aspects, viz: (1) the price of flour and barley became reasonable; (2) the messenger of vengeance was made gatekeeper by the king and was trodden to death, thus fulfilling Elisha’s statement that he should see it with his eyes but should not eat thereof. This must have been a horrible death, to be trampled to death while starving and yet in sight of plenty. We may think of this as illustrating another class of sinners, those who die in sight of plenty and yet because of their previous course in sin are altogether unable to get to the table of God’s kingdom. This man died because of his unbelief, 2Ki 7:2 ; 2Ki 7:19 f.

The next event according to our study of this section is the death of Jehoram king of Judah and his sad funeral. He had a complication of dreadful diseases, which are mentioned in any good commentary. The sad feature of his funeral is the fact that he was not buried in the usual way in which they buried their kings. He had no burning for him, and was not interred in the sepulchers of the kings. It is sad to have such distinction in one’s death. But such must be the lot of those who sin against Jehovah. We may be sure our sins will find us out.

It is well to note that the book of Obadiah falls in this period, and will be studied in the light of this history when we take up the prophets of the Assyrian period.

QUESTIONS

1. Tell the story of Naaman, the leper.

2. Who was Naaman and what was his standing?

3. What was Naaman’s victory for God?

4. What word introduces the defect in Naaman, what play on it and what the lesson?

5. What this defect and why was it considered such a misfortune?

6. What was the instrumentality of his healing and what the lessons?

7. What was Elisha’s prescription, what was Naaman’s reply, and what the lesson?

8. How was he finally induced to take the remedy and in what was the virtue of his healing?

9. What was the word here in the Septuagint translated “dipped,” and what was the bearing on the New Testament usage of the word?

10. What was the effect of this healing on Naaman and how did he show his gratitude?

11. Explain Naaman’s request for “two mules’ burden of earth” and his bowing himself in the house of Rimmon.

12. How did Gehazi get the reward, what was his sin and what was his punishment?

13. Who was Benhadad and what was his relation to Israel at this time?

14. What indicates the great suffering in the siege of Samaria?

15. What was the king’s proposed remedy and what the meaning of it?

16. Give the story of the king’s messenger of vengeance and Elisha’s promise of plenty.

17. Give the story of the four lepers at the gate. What was the lesson?

18. What missionary text in this connection?

19. How was the message of the lepers received, how was it verified, and how were Elisha’s promise and prophecy fulfilled?

20. Describe the awful sickness and death of Jehoram, and his sad funeral.

21. What prophetic book has its setting here?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

2Ki 5:1 Now Naaman, captain of the host of the king of Syria, was a great man with his master, and honourable, because by him the LORD had given deliverance unto Syria: he was also a mighty man in valour, [but he was] a leper.

Ver. 1. Because by him the Lord had given deliverance. ] At that time, probably, when Ahab and Jehoshaphat came against Ramothgilead, 1Ki 22:29 Naaman was commander-in-chief of the Syrian’s army; and the Rabbis tell us that it was he who shot the arrow wherewith Ahab was slain. Hence he is said to have saved Syria, like as afterwards Marius saved Italy, Flaminius Greece, Fabius Rome, Hunniades Hungary, &c.

But he was a leper. ] Not from his birth, nor yet to his death. Hence a learned writer of ours fitly compareth the whole Church of Christ in all her ages to this Naaman the Syrian. He was first pure and sound, and did many honourable acts, and thereby represented the primitive Church, pure and clean, without spot or disease appearing; howbeit, there might be some secret seeds of diseases unperceived, which in continuance of time grew to a visible leprosy. In his middle time he became leprous, diseased, and deformed, foully infected in himself, and infecting others; and thereby represented the latter Church of Rome. Afterwards, by the prophet’s direction, he was washed and cleansed from his leprosy, and his flesh restored to become pure and perfect, like the flesh of a young child; and thereby represented our Reformed Churches. a And as Naaman in all these three estates was the same person, and not a new, diverse, or several man; so our Church is not a new Church, but the old Church reformed from errors and corruptions, and restored to her ancient purity and soundness.

a Cade, Of the Church.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Naaman. Note the five servants in this chapter:

1. The King’s servant (Naaman) 2Ki 5:1.

2. Naaman’s wife’s servant (the maid), 2Ki 5:2.

3. Jehovah’s servant (Elisha), 2Ki 5:8.

4. Naaman’s servants (2Ki 5:13).

5. The Prophet’s servant (Gehazi), 2Ki 5:20.

was = had come to be.

by him. An unconscious instrument.

the LORD. Hebrew. Jehovah. App-4.

deliverance. Probably from the Assyrians.

but, &c. Figure of speech Anesis. App-6.

a leper. Compare Lev 13. Not regarded ceremonially by heathen. Not far gone (2Ki 5:19). Probably only in initial stage. One of nine so afflicted. See note on Exo 4:6. The story of Naaman may be compared with the parallel in John 9.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Now Naaman was the captain of the host of Syria, he was a great man with his master, he was honorable, because the LORD had actually helped him to subdue many nations. He was a mighty man and very brave, but he was a leper. And the Syrians had gone out by companies, and brought away captives out of the land of Israel and a little maid happened to be the servant of his wife. And she said, It’s too bad your husband isn’t with the prophet there in Israel, because he could heal him of his leprosy. And so it was told to Naaman and he told the king that there was a prophet in Israel that could cure him of his leprosy. And so the king of Syria Benhadad sent a formal letter to the king of Israel [and sent Naaman down] ( 2Ki 5:1-5 ).

And in the letter it said, “I want you to heal my general of this leprosy.” So when the king of Israel saw Naaman come in, knew who he was, this captain of the Syrian host and all, and when he gets this note, “I want you to heal this guy of his leprosy,” the king just became excited and concerned.

He said, “Look how this guy is trying to pick a fight. Am I God that I can heal him of his leprosy? The guy is just looking for trouble. He’s trying to start a fight. And so the king had torn his clothes and was all upset.”

And word came to Elisha of how the king was so upset because of this demand. And he said, “Send him down to me, and he will know that there is a God in Israel.” And so Naaman came to Elisha’s house and Elisha didn’t even go out to meet him but sent his servant Gehazi out with the orders, “Go down to the Jordan River and just dip in the Jordan River seven times, and after you’ve dipped seven times, you’ll be cleansed of your leprosy.” So Naaman became enraged. He said, “That guy didn’t even have the graciousness to come out and meet me himself. Sent a servant out to me and then tells me to duck in that Jordan River. We’ve got better rivers up in Damascus.” And he headed home in a rage. Just mad. And as they were going along, one of his servants said to him, “You know, had that prophet told you to do some great deed, you know, go out and slay the dragon and get the seven golden apples, had he given you some great deed to do, you would be glad to do it. Because it’s just such a simple thing, why don’t you try it? What’s it going to hurt?” And so they came to the Jordan River and Naaman dipped himself in the Jordan River, and when he came up the seventh time, his flesh was pink like a baby’s flesh. The leprosy was gone.

He was so excited he headed back to the prophet’s house because he was loaded down with all kinds of gifts that the king of Syria had sent. And he came to Elisha and he sought to give to Elisha some of these gifts that he had brought from Syria and Elisha said, “No, I don’t want your gifts. Keep them.” Now in coming back, he acknowledged that there was no God in all the earth but in Israel. “I know that,” he said. “I pray that you’ll take this blessing.”

But Elisha said, As the LORD lives, before whom I stand, I will receive nothing. And Naaman urged him to take it; but he refused ( 2Ki 5:16 ).

Now I told you that a fellow that would have this kind of a gift would have problems. And unfortunately, some people who have had a ministry of healing or whatever have been guilty of using that to enrich themselves. People become very excited when they see God work. They want to lavish the servant of God with gifts. But here is Elisha refusing the gift. Rightfully so. He didn’t heal Naaman. The Lord healed Naaman. Why should Elisha receive a gift for him? And the guy urged him, but still he refused.

In the healing of Naaman we find some interesting things, and one of them is that typically, we, all of us, really have difficulty with just accepting the grace of God. We would all of us like to do some great wonderful thing for the Lord. You know, I would like to go out and conquer a thousand giants or something. I want to do some great thing for God. Just to receive from God the simplicity with which God gives to me. And the fact that He gives to me so freely and in such a simple way that I can’t get any credit for it. Somehow I would like to deserve or earn God’s blessings. But I can’t. I can only receive by grace the goodness of God.

And salvation is such a simple thing. The Lord says just “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved” ( Act 16:31 ). Oh how simple it is. But we rebel against that simplicity. “Now Lord, I’m going to serve you and I’m going to go out and witness, and I’m going to pray, and I’m going to do this and… ” I’m telling God all of the things that I’m going to do for Him because of what He’s done for me. It’s awfully hard to accept grace gracefully, isn’t it? Just to accept the fact that God loves me and to receive His gifts gracefully.

Now the servant Gehazi, when he saw Elisha turning down these gifts, he began to think, “Wow, what I could do with just a little bit of that loot. I could buy an olive orchard, a vineyard. I can hire me some servants. Man, I could be set up if I just had a little bit of that loot.” And he started thinking of what he could do with some of that reward that Naaman was offering.

And so he went chasing after Naaman. And they said, “Hey, it looks like the servant of the prophet’s coming.” And so he said, “Let’s wait. Maybe something’s gone wrong.” And when Gehazi came up, he said, “Is everything fine?” He said, “Yea, everything’s fine, except that my master had a couple of young prophets come in and they didn’t have much. And so, he’d like a couple of changes of apparel for them and a talent of silver.”

And Naaman said, “Here, take a couple of talents of silver,” and he was happy to give it to him. And in fact, they sent a fellow back carrying a bag. But when they got to the gate of the city, Gehazi said, “That’s great. I’ll take it from here.” And he took it and put it in his house. And came whistling in.

Elisha said, Where have you been? Didn’t go anywhere. And he said, Did not my spirit go with thee, [when you received] when you went out to their chariot and stopped them and you received the money, and you received the garments, and the oliveyards, and the vineyards, and the sheep, and the oxen, and menservants, and maidservants? ( 2Ki 5:25-26 )

Now you see, he starts to read his mind at this point, or he starts to discern what was on his heart. These are the things he thought he would buy with the money: the oliveyards and vineyards, he’s going to have servants of his own. He was going to buy some oxen, and then he’s going to buy some sheep. He’s going to set himself up. And the prophet starts laying out the things that he had in mind to do with this money. And he said,

The leprosy that was upon Naaman is going to be upon you and your family. And so Gehazi went out from his presence a leper ( 2Ki 5:27 ).

“

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

2Ki 5:1-4

Introduction

ELISHA HEALED THE LEPROSY OF NAAMAN; THE GREAT GENERAL

This is one of the most popular stories of the O.T., and it has the distinction of being specifically mentioned by our Lord Jesus Christ (Luk 4:27). It is difficult to find fault with Matthew Henry’s observation that Jesus Christ by that reference made the episode, “Typical of the calling of the Gentiles; and therefore Gehazi’s stroke may be looked upon as typical of the blinding and rejecting of the Jews, who envied God’s grace to the Gentiles, as Gehazi envied Elisha’s favor to Naaman.”

2Ki 5:1-4

A CAPTIVE MAIDEN SPOKE OF GOD’S PROPHET

“Now Naaman, captain of the host of the king of Syria, was a great man with his master, and honorable, because by him Jehovah had given victory unto Syria: he was also a mighty man of valor, but he was a leper. And the Syrians had gone out in bands, and had brought away captive out of the land of Israel a little maiden; and she waited on Naaman’s wife. And she said unto her mistress, Would that my lord were with the prophet that is in Samaria! then would he recover him of his leprosy. And he went in and told his lord, saying, Thus and thus said the maiden that is of the land of Israel.”

The unsung heroine of this whole narrative is this precious little girl who had been captured by the Syrians and made a slave to the house of Naaman. Instead of becoming bitter against her exploiters and harboring an undying hatred of them, she accepted her fate with meekness and exhibited deep friendship and sympathy with her mistress and her husband, Naaman.

It was this captive maiden who enlightened the great lord of the Syrian armies of the existence of a true prophet of God in Samaria and of his ability to cure leprosy.

What an exhortation is this for everyone to seize all opportunities to speak of God and His great power to benefit sinful and suffering humanity! Through the word of this servant girl, the king of Syria received the knowledge of a true prophet of God in Samaria, information which was not even known (because of his own fault) by the king of Israel (Joram).

“By him Jehovah had given the victory unto Syria” (2Ki 5:1). Some scholars have marveled that Jehovah in this expression is accredited with the victory of Syria, but this is in full keeping with Dan 4:25 c. As for which victory is spoken of here, Hammond thought it was probably a victory over an army of Shalmanezer II that had threatened the independence of Syria.

“But he was a leper” (2Ki 5:1). It is rather annoying that a number of commentators go out of the way to tell us that the word “leper” in this passage came from a Hebrew term, “covering a large variety of scabious diseases, being used even of mould in houses.” Such a comment has no utility except that of DOWNGRADING this miracle. One writer even mentioned that Hansen’s disease (the modern name of true leprosy) was rare in those times. However, the king of Israel rated the king of Syria’s request for the healing of Naaman’s disease as the equivalent of God’s ability to “kill and to make alive” (2Ki 5:7); and that states in tones of thunder that Naaman was truly a leper in the current sense of the word.

The absence of any statement indicating that Naaman had become a social outcast because of his leprosy (as would certainly have been the case in Israel) does not mean that his disease was anything different from leprosy, but that the pagan reaction to it was different from that in Israel.

“Would that my lord were with the prophet that is in Samaria” (2Ki 5:3). It is sometimes insinuated that this contradicts other Biblical passages. Montgomery wrote that, “The prophet is presented as having a house in Samaria, and yet he was last seen in Shunem.” So what! Elisha never lived in Shunem, but only stopped overnight there on his occasional passing through the place. Besides that, 2Ki 6:32 indicates clearly that Elisha had a house in Samaria, a fact strongly supported by the offer of the prophet to speak to the king on behalf of the Shunammite woman. Elisha doubtless had access to the presence of the kings both of Israel and of Judah.

E.M. Zerr:

2Ki 5:1. Naaman was commander in chief of the Syrian army. He was honorable which means he ranked high in the esteem of his king. The reason given for this high standing, is the fact that the Lord had given victory to his arms. This favor from God agrees with the declaration made to Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 4:17.) It also should be considered in connection with Rom 13:1-6. Since the existence of human governments is of divine origin, we should not wonder at God’s interest and participation therein. He even has used them in chastising his own people. Naaman was afflicted with leprosy, an incurable disease by any natural remedy.

2Ki 5:2. Syria was just north of Israel, and was frequently engaged in battle with that kingdom. In one of the raids into the territory of the Israelites, the Syrians had captured a little maid who became the attendant of Naaman’s wife.

2Ki 5:3-4. The little maid remembered Elisha and his ability to cure disease. Her interest in the welfare of her master was sweet and unselfish. She had been taken out of her native land, and under the command of this very master. In spite of that, she was desirous of having him cured of the terrible disease. She spoke to her mistress about the matter, and another person revealed the message to the king, who was naturally eager that so valuable a soldier be healed.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

When Elijah had felt that he alone was left loyal to God he had been told of seven thousand who had not bowed the knee to Baal. One of these, or perchance the child of one, stands before us in this narrative in the person of the little maid who, carried captive, yet remembered the prophet of her own land and maintained her coincidence in his ability to work wonders. Through her intervention the leper Naaman was sent by the king of Syria to the king of Israel, but the day of the king in Israel as in any sense representing Jehovah had passed away.

Elisha’s attitude in this chapter was from beginning to end one of dignified loyalty to God. This is seen first in his message to the king, who was filled with fear at the coming of Naaman. It was manifest, moreover, in his command to the wealthy leper calling for his submission, and was finally evidenced in his absolute refusal to take any personal reward for what had been wrought by God.

To Elisha, Gehazi stands in direct contrast. Governed by selfish desire, he obtained advantage for himself, and then lied to his master. His punishment was swift. He who had sought and obtained the reward which Elisha had declined became himself a leper, white as snow.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

the Cure for Leprosy

2Ki 5:1-14

From Assyrian monuments we learn that at this period Syria regained her independence from under the yoke of Assyria, and probably it was during this struggle that Naaman gained his great victories. Note the suggestiveness of the phrase, The Lord had given, which teaches that the hand of God was guiding heathen as well as Hebrew history. The realm of Gods providence is as long as time, and as broad as the earth.

The destruction of this poor childs home and her captivity must, at the time, have seemed to be an unexplainable disaster from which there could be no relief; and yet it enabled her to bring about a great deliverance, which has shone on the page of Scripture, giving inspiration to tens of thousands. She rose above her sorrows, and by faith wrought victory out of defeat. By preferring his own way to Gods, Naaman came dangerously near returning home unhealed. We must adopt Gods method of salvation, however humbling to our pride. I thought, will wreck us; To thee, O Lamb of God, I come, will save us. Note the combination of warriors strength with the flesh of a little child-strength married to purity and simplicity.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

2Ki 5:1

(with 2Ki 5:13)

Consider:-

I. What a fund of wisdom is contained in that remark of the servants of Naaman, “If the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it”! How true is this with reference to a variety of acts, duties, and remedies proposed for us. It is seen in our behaviour in illness, in social domestic intercourse, and in reference to Christ’s holy ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The very easiness and simplicity of these rites should recommend them to our acceptance. Let all who think otherwise turn to the words of the text.

II. Once more look at the greatest lesson of all that this history teaches. Leprosy represents sin, and the leper is the sinner; and so we are all represented by Naaman. Naaman was cured by washing, as he was bidden, in Jordan-a type of the blood of Christ, which cleanseth from all sin. As nothing would avail Naaman till he came and stood like a suppliant at the door of Elisha, so nothing shall avail us till, like humble suitors, we sit at the feet of Jesus Christ; and there is salvation in no other.

R. D. B. Rawnsley, Village Sermons, 3rd series, p. 186.

References: 2Ki 5:1.-C. J. Vaughan, Temple Sermons, p. 379; E. Monro, Practical Sermons, vol. iii., p. 195; G. B. Ryley, Christian World Pulpit. vol. v., p. 280; E. Blencowe, Plain Sermons to a Country Congregation, 1st series, p. 350. 2Ki 5:1-3.-T. T. Munger, Lamps and Paths, p. 173. 2Ki 5:1-7.-A. Edersheim, Elisha the Prophet, p. 137.

2Ki 5:1-14

The little Hebrew maid was torn from her mother and her playmates at the age of seven or eight, and hurried amid all the alarms of war to a foreign land, robbed at once of home, of freedom, and of childhood.

Notice:-

I. Her faith in God. In that land of idols and idolaters she was not ashamed to own her Lord. She had full confidence that Israel’s God could cure the leper.

II. Her faithfulness. She had so much of the true faith that it filled her whole nature, and made her faithful under terrible trials. She was a lonely child in a heathen palace, which often rang with laughter at her religion. Hers was a nobler courage than the hero’s on the battlefield.

III. Her fruitfulness. Seeming the meekest human being in Syria, she proved one of the mightiest. What a treasure she was in the house of Naaman! She directed her master to the waters that healed his leprosy. Through her the true religion was known and respected in Syria, and Naaman became a worshipper of the true God. The humblest people who have faith and faithfulness may hope to be fruitful in good works.

J. Wells, Bible Children, p. 119.

References: 2Ki 5:1-14.-Preacher’s Lantern, vol. iv., p. 242. 2Ki 5:1-19.-Parker, vol. viii., p. 136. 2Ki 5:1-27.-Outline Sermons for Children, p. 48; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. v., p. 87. 2Ki 5:2.-T. Champness, Little Foxes, p. 19; J. W. Burgon, Ninety-one Short Sermons, No. 71. 2Ki 5:2, 2Ki 5:3.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. xii., p. 270. 2Ki 5:2-4.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. vi., p. 107; G. B. Ryley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. v., p. 301. 2Ki 5:4.-New Manual of Sunday-school Addresses, p. 171. 2Ki 5:5-14.-G. B. Ryley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. v., p. 318. 2Ki 5:7-14.-A. Edersheim, Elisha the Prophet, p. 150. 2Ki 5:9.-J. Frere, Sermons for Sundays, Festivals, and Fasts, 1st series, p. 357

2Ki 5:10-11

I. God’s cure puts us all on one level. Naaman wanted to be treated like a great man that happened to be a leper; Elisha treated him like a leper that happened to be a great man. Christianity brushes aside all the surface differences of men, and goes in its treatment of them straight to the central likenesses, the things which in all mankind are identical. In wisdom and in mercy, Christianity deals with all men as sinners, needing chiefly to be healed of that disease.

II. God’s cure puts the messengers of the cure well away in the background. The prophet’s position in our story brings out very clearly the position which all Christian ministers hold. They are nothing but heralds; their personality disappears; they are merely a voice. All that they have to do is to bring men into contact with God’s word of command and promise, and then to vanish.

III. God’s cure wants nothing from you but to take it. Naamans in all generations, who were eager to do some great thing, have stumbled and turned away from that Gospel which says, “It is finished.” “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but by His mercy, He saved us.”

A. Maclaren, Christian Commonwealth, Sept. 24th, 1885 (see also Sermons in Manchester, 3rd series, p. 241).

References: 2Ki 5:10-12.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. iv., p. 146. 2Ki 5:11.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xx., No. 1173.

2Ki 5:11

Naaman represents human nature, anxious to be blessed by God’s revelation of Himself, yet unwilling to take the blessing except on its own terms; for Naaman saw in Elisha the exponent and prophet of a religion which was, he dimly felt, higher and Diviner than any he had encountered before. He was acquainted with the name of Israel’s God, and he expected that Elisha would cure him by invoking that name. In his language we see:-

I. A sense of humiliation and wrong. He feels himself slighted. He had been accustomed to receive deference and consideration. Elisha treats him as if he were in a position of marked inferiority. Elisha acted as the minister of Him who resisteth the proud and giveth grace to the humble. The Gospel must first convince a man that he has sinned and come short of the glory of God.

II. We see in Naaman’s language the demand which human nature often makes for the sensational element in religion. He expected an interview with the prophet that should be full of dramatic and striking incident. Instead of this, he is put off with a curt message-told to bathe in the Jordan, a proceeding which was open to all the world besides. The proposal was too commonplace; it was simply intolerable.

III. Naaman represents prejudiced attachment to early associations, coupled, as it often is, with a jealous impatience of anything like exclusive claims put forward on behalf of the truths or ordinances of a religion which we are for the first time attentively considering. He wished, if he must bathe, to bathe in the rivers of his native Syria instead of in the turbid and muddy brook he had passed on the road to Samaria.

IV. Naaman’s fundamental mistake consisted in his attempt to decide at all how the prophet should work the miracle of his cure. Do not let us dream of the folly of improving upon God’s work in detail. The true scope of our activity is to make the most of His bounty and His love, that by His healing and strengthening grace we too may be cured of our leprosy.

H. P. Liddon, Penny Pulpit, No. 756.

2Ki 5:12

Naaman was a man who stood high in the highest virtues of the heathen world. He was lifted to the proudest eminence of worldly ambition. He had a generous heart; he enjoyed a well-earned reputation; he shared the smile and the favour of the great Benhadad. Such was the prosperity of Naaman.

How affecting are the words which follow: “but he was a leper.” Wherever he went there was a heavy, settled trouble gnawing at Naaman’s heart.

His story teaches us two things: (1) the simpleness of God’s ways and (2) the pride of man’s ways.

I. The first instrument used in providence towards the accomplishing of God’s design was a little servant-girl. God’s ends are gigantic, infinite, unutterable, but His ways are a little child’s. He must have prepared the minds both of the king and Naaman to give implicit trust to the words of the little child. Solitude, and longsuffering, and frequent disappointments had made Naaman patient to take counsel. So God prepares souls for Christ.

II. Observe the natural tendency of man’s heart. The maid had said, “Go to the prophet.” That was simple. They must needs travel by a more royal road. The king of Syria writes a letter to the king of Israel; and with his horses and his chariots, and his silver and his gold, Naaman sets oft and comes to the palace at Samaria. Even when he went to Elisha, four things in the prophet’s conduct seem to have given him offence. (1) He thought he should be treated with more personal consideration. (2) He had expected a too instantaneous cure. (3) He was jealous that contempt was put upon his natural resources. (4) He was incredulous that a means so simple should produce an effect so great. All these causes hinder us from coming to Christ.

Even Naaman’s rebellious spirit was made to yield at last to God’s longsuffering grace. He went and washed, and was clean. Thus we see the triumph of God’s simple ways over man’s proud ways.

J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 8th series, p. 9.

I. There were two ways of cleansing the leprosy: the grand way that Naaman expected; the very simple way which the prophet prescribed. Even so there are two ways of salvation: God’s way and man’s way. Man’s way is unavailing, yet much frequented, because it flatters the pride of man. Man’s way of salvation deals with what it takes to be great things: great works which man himself is to do, great organisations, great gifts, which flatter human vanity and will-worship, but have this trifling defect, that they are of no avail. God’s plan knows nothing of earthly grandeurs, burdensome minutiae, external observances. God’s messages are very short and very few and simple. He says only, “Wash, and be clean;” “Believe and obey;” “Believe and live.”

II. The spirit of doing great things dominates all false religions, because it expresses an instinctive tendency. Satan’s one object is to turn men towards the things which they devise for their own salvation, and away from the things which God requires. God vouchsafes to man His last, His absolute, His eternal revelation. He sent His Son to die for us, His Spirit to dwell in our hearts. We are to use God’s way of salvation, not make it or add to that which is made. The first act is to know what is true of God; the second act is to express it in our lives.

III. It rests with you to take Christ’s service or man’s bondage, Christ’s simplicity or man’s inventions. If the kingdom of God is not within you, then it is nowhere for you. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.”

F. W. Farrar, Family Churchman, Sept. 22nd, 1886.

I. God has provided a remedy for all human ills. This remedy is found in the Gospel of His Son. It is (1) simple; (2) suitable; (3) it has in it the elements of success.

II. God’s method of dealing is frequently offensive to the pride of man. Naaman thought that for such a patrician case of leprosy there could not be the ordinary plebeian method of cure. This preference of the rivers of Damascus to the waters of Israel is as foolish as it is wicked. There is no gospel in nature. It has its Genesis, its Exodus, its Psalms, sweet, plaintive, and beautiful, but it has no gospel. All its resurrections die again. There is no gospel in nature, not one word of recovery for the lapsed, not one announcement of recovery for the erring. The water of Israel is flowing today freely, as when its fountain was first opened in the house of David for sin and for uncleanness. Christ invites us to come and take of the water of life freely.

W. Morley Punshon, Penny Pulpit, No. 324.

References: 2Ki 5:12.-F. G. Lee, Miscellaneous Sermons by Clergymen of the Church of England, p. 69. 2Ki 5:13.-H. Melvill, The Golden Lectures, 1854 (Penny Pulpit, No. 2173); Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xv., No. 892; W. G. Blaikie, Sunday Magazine, 1876, p. 386; C. J. Vaughan, Lessons of Life and Godliness, p. 205; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. xiii., p. 77; R. D. B. Rawnsley, Village Sermons, 3rd series, p. 186. 2Ki 5:13, 2Ki 5:14.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. ii., p. 264. 2Ki 5:13-16.-A. Edersheim, Elisha the Prophet, p. 161.

2Ki 5:14

I. The slaughter of the Innocents suggests a thought on the sufferings of children. A man seems to require suffering or to bring it on himself, or to have remedies, or a recompense, or the self-command to bear it. But the case of childhood is utterly different. Pain, and weariness, and aching limbs, and the slow agonies of death are natural in the close of a laborious, overtasked, sin-defiled life, but that infant features should be so discomposed is a thought that offends our natural reason. The question, Is it just? is it the ordinance of a God of mercy? can only be answered by revelation. (1) Reason knows nothing of original sin; it is revelation that instructs us in it. Death and its preceding sufferings entered by sin; and if even infants suffer, they suffer for sin. If these words implied that actual sin is the cause of children’s sorrow, they would not only be harsh, but untrue; but that children born in sin are heirs to suffering is a true saying, and not unkind. (2) Children’s sufferings imply their need of a redeemer. Christ at His birth drew within the magic circle of His influence representatives of His whole creation. Angels, shepherds, kings, widows, and aged priests are associated with His infancy, and here are infants also. By their death in connection with Christ they seem to signify their acceptance by Him and their seat in His heart.

This thought adds tenfold to the charm and dignity of the age of infancy.

II. This day brings before us in vivid colours the loveliness of the life to come. Children are something like angels to tell us tales of heaven. (1) Their ignorance of evil gives us a faint image of the blessed state of those whose souls are so cleared of sin that they remember it not, and see no trace of it, and feel no breath of temptation. (2) The perfectness of their joy suggests to us of sadder experience something of the security of joy in heaven. Their happiness has something of an unearthly savour. (3) Some of the subtle beauties of heaven are suggested to us by the delight which children have by instinct in glorious colours and musical sounds. (4) We learn, finally, that joy is prepared for the satisfaction of those who suffer in Christ’s spirit and for His sake on earth.

C. W. Furse, Sermons at Richmond, p. 273.

References: 2Ki 5:14.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. iii., p. 113; C. Girdlestone, Course of Sermons for the Year, vol. ii., p. 257. 2Ki 5:15-19.-G. B. Ryley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. v., p. 330.

2Ki 5:17-19

Here we find Naaman making an excuse, it is said, for dissembling his religious convictions, and Elisha accepting the plea. He is convinced that Jehovah is the true God, but is not prepared to make any sacrifice for his faith. What is this but to open a wide door for every species of dissimulation, and to make expediency, not truth, the rule of conduct? To state the question thus is not to state it fairly.

I. Even if Elisha did accept Naaman’s plea, it would not follow that he was right. An inspired prophet is not equally inspired at all times.

II. Did Elisha accept Naaman’s plea? The evidence turns entirely on Elisha’s words “Go in peace.” These words are the common form of Oriental leave-taking. They may have been little more than a courteous dismissal. Elisha may have felt that the permission craved by Naaman involved a question of conscience which he was not called upon to resolve. Hence he would not sanction Naaman’s want of consistency on the one hand nor condemn it on the other. He declines the office of judge. He leaves conscience to do her work.

III. Who shall say this was not the wisest course to adopt? The prophet saw Naaman’s weakness, but he also saw Naaman’s difficulty. Put the worst construction on his words, and you will say he evades the question; put the best, and you will say he exercises a wise forbearance.

IV. We may fairly ask how far Naaman is to be excused in urging the plea of the text. Superstition mingled with his faith. He was a heathen, only just converted, only newly enlightened. We may excuse Naaman, but we cannot pretend as Christians to make his plea ours or to justify our conduct by his.

V. The Christian missionary preaches a religion whose very essence is the spirit of self-sacrifice, the daily taking up of the Cross and following Christ. It is plain therefore that he could not answer the man who came in the spirit of Naaman, “Go in peace.”

VI. Two practical lessons follow from this subject, (1) The first is not to judge others by ourselves; (2) the second is not to excuse ourselves by others.

J. J. S. Perowne, Contemporary Pulpit, vol. vi., p. 168.

References: 2Ki 5:17-19.-G. Salmon, Gnosticism and Agnosticism, p. 158. 2Ki 5:17-27.-A. Edersheim, Elisha the Prophet, p. 173. 2Ki 5:18.-T. Gasquoine, Christian World Pulpit, vol. vi., p. 24; Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i., p. 547. 2Ki 5:18, 2Ki 5:19.-C. A. Heurtley, Oxford and Cambridge Journal, Nov. 1st, 1877. 2Ki 5:20.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. xvii., p. 26; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. iv., p. 154. 2Ki 5:20-24.-G. B. Ryley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. v., p. 349. 2Ki 5:20-27.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. xiii., p. 80; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. iii., p. 180; Parker, vol. viii., p. 146.

2Ki 5:25

There was a stern justice in the penalty which followed on Gehazi’s lie. Naaman’s leprosy should go along with his wealth. In grasping at the one, Gehazi had succeeded in inheriting the other. The justice of the punishment will be more apparent if we consider what it was in Gehazi’s conduct that led up to his lie, and which, from his point of view, made it at the moment necessary for him to tell the lie. Gehazi’s conduct involved:-I. A violation of the trust which his master had reposed in him. Confidence is to society what cement is to a building; it holds all together. Gehazi was not merely Elisha’s servant; he was also, to a great extent, a trusted companion; in a certain sense he was his partner. To use the great position which his relation to Elisha had secured to him for a purpose which he knew Elisha would disapprove was an act which even the pagans of Damascus in their better moments would have shrunk from doing.

II. Gehazi’s act was so wrong in the eyes of Elisha because it involved a serious injury to the cause of true religion. Elisha had been careful to refuse the presents which Naaman offered because he did not wish the blessings which Naaman had received to be associated in his mind with the petty details- of a commercial transaction. Gehazi’s act, as it must have presented itself to Naaman, had all the appearance of an afterthought on the part of the prophet, which would be fatal to his first and high idea of the prophet’s disinterestedness.

III. Notice the blindness of sin, blindness in the midst of so much ingenuity, so much contrivance. No one knew better than Gehazi that Elisha knew a great deal that was going on beyond the range of his eyesight. Sin blinds men to the real circumstances with which they have to deal.

IV. Gehazi’s fall teaches us three practical lessons: (1) to keep our desires in order if we mean to keep out of grave sin; (2) to remember that great religious advantages do not in themselves protect a man against grievous sins; (3) the priceless value of truthfulness in the soul’s life.

H. P. Liddon, Penny Pulpit, No. 1122.

References: 2Ki 5:25.-E. Thring, Uppingham Sermons, vol. ii., p. 228; G. Brooks, Outlines of Sermons, p. 419. 2Ki 5:25-27.-G. B. Ryley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. v., p. 365. 2Ki 5:26.-R. Heber, Parish Sermons, vol. ii., p. 136. 2Ki 5:27.-J. Baines, Sermons, p. 186. 2Ki 5-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. i., pp. 78, 79; A. Macleod, The Gentle Heart, p. 131; A. Saphir, Found by the Good Shepherd, p. 351; H. Macmillan, Sunday Magazine, 1873, p. 417. 2Ki 6:1.-Parker, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxix., p. 274.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

4. Naaman and His Healing

CHAPTER 5

1. Naaman, the leper (2Ki 5:1)

2. The testimony of the maid of Israel (2Ki 5:2-4)

3. The message to the king of Israel (2Ki 5:5-8)

4. Naaman and Elisha (2Ki 5:9-19)

5. Gehazi; His sin and punishment (2Ki 5:20-27)

The story of this chapter is peculiarly rich in its spiritual and dispensational meaning. Naaman, captain of Ben-hadad, the King of Syria, was a Gentile. He was no common man. In all his greatness and might, with all the honors heaped upon him and wealth at his command, he was an unhappy and doomed man, for he was a leper. Leprosy is a type of sin. Here, then, is a picture of the natural man, enjoying the highest and the best–but withal a leper. And then the little captive, taken from Israels land, away from her home and family–what a contrast with the great Naaman! In her captivity she was happy, for she knew the Lord and knew that the prophet in Samaria, the great representative of Jehovah, could heal leprosy. She knew and she believed. The grace which filled the heart gave her also a desire to see the mighty Naaman healed; the same grace gave her power to bear witness.

And how the Lord used the simple testimony! The King of Syria heard of it and addressed a letter to the King of Israel demanding that he should recover Naaman from his leprosy. And Naaman departed with ten talents of silver and six thousand pieces of gold besides ten changes of raiment. And the King of Israel, Jehoram, no doubt, was filled with fear, for he thought the King of Syria was seeking a pretext to quarrel with him. While he readily acknowledged that God alone has the power to heal, he did not look to the Lord nor did he think of the mighty prophet, whose very name declared that God is salvation. In helpless and hopeless terror, in the despair of unbelief he rent his clothes.

It was then that the man of God spoke reproving the King, asking that Naaman come to him. Then Naaman, with his horses and chariot, laden with the treasures, stood at the door of the house of Elisha. The prophet through a messenger told the leper, Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean. Well may we think here of our Lord Jesus, who cleansed the leper, and in doing so manifested Himself as Jehovah. But how He shines above all!

When the leper comes to Him, it is not as with the king, Am I God, that I should heal a man of his leprosy? nor is it as with the prophet, Go wash in Jordan, and be clean. No; but He reveals Himself at once in the place and power of God. I will, be thou clean. Elisha was but a preacher of Jesus to Naaman; the Lord Jesus was the lepers cleansing, the healing God. Elisha did not venture to touch the leper. This would have defiled him. But our Lord put forth His hand and touched him; for He, with the rights of the God of Israel, was above the leper, and could consume and not contract the defilement (J.G. Bellett).

And Naamans wrath and indignation were stirred by Elishas command. The great and mighty captain with his treasures expected a different reception from the prophet. He expected him at least to do what heathen priests with their enchantments did, to call on the name of the Lord his God and strike his hand over the place of leprosy. He rejects the remedy which grace had provided because it humbled him into dust and stripped him of his pride. It is just this the sinner needs. Naaman had to learn that he was nothing but a poor, lost leper. All his silver and gold could not purchase cleansing for him. He needed humiliation and the obedience of faith. And so he learned as his servants reasoned with him, and instead of returning in a rage to Damascus as the helpless leper, he obeyed the given command and dipped himself seven times in Jordan–and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean. Jordan is the type of death, as we saw in the study of Joshua. Our Lord was baptized by John in that river, for He had come to take the sinners place in death. Naaman bathing in Jordan typifies death and resurrection in which there is cleansing and healing for the spiritual leper, but it is the death and resurrection of our blessed Lord. As we believe on Him who died for our sins according to Scripture, and was raised for our justification, we are born again and made clean. It is the one way of salvation, the only way, revealed in every portion of Gods holy Word. Saved by grace through faith (in Him who died for our sins), it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast.

And the blessed results of true salvation are seen at once in Naaman the Syrian. He is fully restored and healed. He stands now before the man of God, no longer the proud, self-trusting Naaman, but an humble believer. He confesses the Lord with his lips. He offers also a gift to Elisha. (A blessing means a gift.) He could not give anything to effect his cleansing, but after the healing he offered willingly. But Elisha refused the reward offered to him. He had freely received and freely he gave (Mat 10:8). Then he requested two mules burden of earth. This was to be used to build an altar unto Jehovah in Syria. It was an outward expression of his faith and would be a testimony among the heathen that there is but one Lord to be worshipped. And there was the tender conscience (verse 18). Finally he departed in peace. Go in peace; the same words our blessed Lord used repeatedly. And Gehazis covetousness earned him the leprosy from which grace had delivered the Syrian Gentile. The story is full of solemn lessons.

Dispensationally Naaman stands for the Gentiles. Through Him who is greater than Elisha salvation has been extended to the Gentiles, while Gehazi, who was closely connected with Elisha, but who had hardened his heart, is a type of Israel.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

am 3110, bc 894

Naaman: Luk 4:27

a great: 2Ki 4:8, Exo 11:3, Est 9:4, Est 10:3

with: Heb. before

honourable: or, gracious, Heb. lifted up, or accepted in countenance

by him: Pro 21:31, Isa 10:5, Isa 10:6, Jer 27:5, Jer 27:6, Deu 2:37, Joh 19:11, Rom 15:18

deliverance: or, victory

a leper: 2Ki 5:27, 2Ki 7:3, Lev 13:2, Lev 13:3, Lev 13:44-46, Num 12:10-12, 2Sa 3:29, 2Ch 26:19-23, 2Co 12:7

Reciprocal: Gen 34:19 – honourable Num 24:23 – when God Jos 8:7 – for the Lord Jdg 3:12 – and the Lord Jdg 11:1 – a mighty 2Sa 23:10 – the Lord 1Ki 8:41 – cometh out 2Ki 14:27 – he saved 1Ch 11:14 – and the Lord 2Ch 13:15 – God smote Psa 144:10 – that giveth Pro 6:35 – regard Dan 2:48 – a great Mat 8:2 – a leper Luk 5:12 – full Act 7:25 – God 1Co 15:57 – giveth

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

THE ONE DRAWBACK

But he was a leper.

2Ki 5:1

I. How often is it seen, in human experience, that a condition, otherwise of perfect prosperity, has one alloy, one drawback, which damages or spoils it for its possessor.We need not confine our observation to lives of great menwritten in history or written in Scripturewho have made peace or war, and left their names as the heirloom of one country, or the common property of alland who yet, scrutinised keenly, have been objects rather of pity than of envy, by reason of some one blessing denied, or by reason of some one sorrow added. A great man and honourable with his master a mighty man of valour yet a lepermight be the inscription, if we knew all, upon many of those celebrities of which (to quote the grand old saying) every land is the tomb.

But is it not so quite in common lives, quite in humble homes? Where is the house in which there is no one element of dissatisfactionsome uncongenial disposition, some unreasonable temper to be borne witha particular thing that cannot be had or that cannot be donea difficult task always recurring, a disagreeable future always menacinga taste that cannot be indulged, or a whim that must be complied witha dead weight of encumbrance always pressing, and a promised relief always a little beyond?

II. I propose the example of Naaman as a wonderful lesson in the treatment of drawbacks.What an excuse had Naaman for a life of idle regret, absolute uselessness, and sinful repining! With what discomfort, with what distress, with what shame and mortification, must each act of his life, social, political, military, have been accomplished! How must he have felt himself the topic of remark or the object of ridicule, amongst all whom he addressed and all whom he commanded! Yet none the less did he do his duty, command his energies, and rule his spirit. Thou who hast in thy health, or in thy work, or in thy home, some like drawbacklittle it must be in comparison with hisgo, and do thou likewise.

III. We take an onward step in our subject when we treat the one drawback as the one fault.Of how many persons within our own circle must we say, he is all this and thathe is industrious, useful, honourable, he is a great man with his master, he is serviceable to his generationbut he has one fault. Perhaps, he is just and upright, but he is unamiable. Perhaps he is kind and affectionate, but he is untruthful. Perhaps he is excellent in every relation except one. Perhaps he is strict with himself, inflexible to evilbut he is also ungenerous, censorious, suspicious, or even cruel. Perhaps he is charitable, indulgent, good to allbut he takes the license which he gives, and his character (in one respect) will not bear investigation. He is like the cake not turned that Hosea speaks ofone side dough, the other side cinder: he was a great man, valorous and chivalrousbut he was a leper.

Yes, the one fault is in all of usand we mean by it, the particular direction in which the taint and bias of evil in the fallen creature works its course and finds its outlet. It is idle, it is ridiculous, to profess ignorance that there is no such thing as perfection in the creature that has once let the devil in and tried to shut out Godand this is the true diagnosis of man, such as we see and show hima broken vessela temple in ruinsin one word (for none can be more expressive) a fallen being. The one fault is in theological language, the besetting sin. Who has not one such?

IV. So, brethren, try this day the healing stream.The disease which is upon us goes very deep and spreads very widelyit is past human cure, our own or our brothersthere is but One Who has the secret of it, but One Who has the virtue. Forgiveness He offers, ere He offers the cleansingforgiveness of the worst possible, ere He so much as inspects the malady. The double curefirst of the guilt, then of the powerthis is the charm of the water which is blood, of the blood which is water.

Dean Vaughan.

Illustrations

(1) Herein is the difference between the natural man and Naaman. Naaman knew himself to be a leper; he loathed his leprosy, and desired to be healed. Alas! how difficult it is to persuade the natural man, first to see, and then to bewail his leprosy; to understand that a creature can only be created to obey his Creator; and that when a creatures nature is so corrupted as to render him unwilling and unable so to obey, then the creature is condemned, and in his unwillingness and inability bears the death-mark upon him.

(2) The frightful disease from which Naaman suffered must have been a terrible drawback to his happiness and prosperity. It was the occasion, however, of his greatest blessing. The special mercy of God flowed to him from that which probably he was accustomed to consider his special curse. And it often happens with ourselves, that the one thing which at one time seemed to mar our happiness is that to which we afterwards have occasion to look back as opening out for us the way of peace.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

2Ki 5:1. Naaman was a great man with his master In great power and favour with the king of Syria; and honourable Highly esteemed, both for his quality and success; because the Lord by him had given deliverance unto Syria He had been victorious in such battles as he had fought, which coming to pass through the permission or appointment of the Divine Providence, the sacred writer would have the Israelites to look upon it as the Lords doing. Let Israel know, that, when the Syrians prevailed, it was from the Lord. He gave them success in their wars, even with Israel, and for Israels chastisement. But he was a leper This did not exclude him from the society of men in that country, where the Jewish law was not in force. But it was a great blemish upon him, and also likely to prove deadly; there being no cure for this disease, a disease very common in Syria.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

2Ki 5:8. When Elisha heard that the king had rent his clothes, he laid the case before the Lord and received his instruction how to proceed.

2Ki 5:10. Elisha sent a messenger, to cure Naaman first of his pride, before he cleansed his leprosy. Faith must act on the promise; the woman believed that she must touch the hem of the Saviours garment.

2Ki 5:12. Abana rises in the mountains of Anti-libanus, and waters Damascus.Pharpar, according to ancient maps, is a branch of the Abana. Those streams are lost in the lake, east of Damascus.

2Ki 5:17. Two mules burden of earth. Nations, lands, cities, and temples were devoted to some fancied divinity. The earth and stones of Syria, being thus devoted, Naaman thought that he must have holy earth in raising an altar to the Holy One of Israel. He was converted from idolatry to worship the Lord alone, as will be seen in the next note.

2Ki 5:18. When my master goeth into the house of Rimmon, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, the Lord pardon thy servant in this thing. The LXX read this in the future tense, which is followed by the Vulgate, and by the English. So Elisha bade Naaman go in peace, and thank Baal for his cure! That being impossible, Dr. Lightfoot, as other critics, reads the Hebrew in the past tense. When I have bowed down myself. The advocates for reading the verb in the future, plead that this worship of Baal, (here called Rimmon because of his elevation) was only a civil homage paid to the idol, or to the king. If this homage were approved, why ask for pardon?

2Ki 5:27. The leprosy of Naaman cleave to thee, not absolutely for ever, but for three or four generations at least. Gehazis covetousness is worse to get out of the heart than leprosy out of the flesh: he altogether stained and dishonoured the name of the Lord. Men who sell advowsons should meditate on this case. Better to die grey-headed curates, than to have Gehazis leprosy.

REFLECTIONS.

This chapter opens with a luminous trait of the glory and purity of the prophetic ministry. While Israel was favoured with so many and great miracles; while God defended revelation against an infidel age, and supported his suffering servants by those signal works; the poor gentiles were permitted to share the grace, that they might also be converted to the knowledge and worship of the true God. The healing of leprous Naaman, was a consequence of the execution of the sentence on Ahab for permitting the bloody Benhadad to escape. This prince constantly committed depredations on the country, and carried away the people captive. Among those was a little maid who waited on Naamans wife; and she spake daily of the prophet Elisha, persisting that he could heal her master of his leprosy. Religious servants, placed in a great family, may learn of this maid, courage to confess the truth, and to support the glory of the christian ministry. The Lord may have sent them into those houses for good to the fellow-servants, or good to their masters: and where luxury, waste and pride are so greatly indulged, a double fidelity is required. Let them pray for their temporal and eternal good, and endeavour to diminish the great wickedness committed in all houses where intemperance abounds.

Naamans case may remind us, that we also have a foul leprosy of sin, as illustrated in the fourteenth and fifteenth of Leviticus; and farther, that neither the honours, the riches, nor the wisdom of this world can effectuate our cure. How long then shall we dally with physicians of no value; how long shall Gods faithful servants exhort us to come for a cure before we obey. Oh that the ever hallowed names of Jesus, of Calvary, of grace, might at last attract our heart, and draw us with confidence to God.

Naaman, in applying for a cure, committed several errors which threatened the frustration of all his hopes. He came to the king of Israel, that he might of course send for the prophet, and command him to be healed. When he waited on the prophet he expected great respect to be paid him, as the enchanters and charmers of Damascus would have done: and when sent to wash seven times in Jordan, for the blood of atonement was seven times sprinkled before the veil, he was offended with the simplicity of grace, and went away in a rage. How many mistakes do ignorant men make, who, suddenly withdrawing from the corruptions of the world, expect at once to become the best of christians. Because the mercy of God, and the healing virtues of grace are rich and free, how many excuses do they make concerning unworthiness, and the necessity of doing something to merit a cure. How often do they stumble at the precepts, Believe, and be saved; wash, and be clean? This mans anger plainly intimates, that sinners under the awakenings of the law, and anguish of conscience, often need a word of persuasion and encouragement. Had the prophet, said one of his more discerning servants, bid thee do some great thing, wouldst thou not have done it? How much rather then, when he saith, wash and be clean. So let us encourage sinners to admire the simplicity of the gospel, as the perfection of glory and beauty. Here is blood to purge the conscience, here are the waters of regeneration to cleanse the heart, here is a Mediator for sinners, here is balm for the wounded, liberty for the captives, and rest for the troubled mind. Here is, in a word, all that a sinner can want, and on terms within his reach. The Lord has not bid him do some great thing, but simply to wash and be clean. How amiable is the Saviour in all his economy of grace. Oh that we could persuade every polluted sinner to try our Jordan of regeneration: then he would have a clean heart, and all his soul would be as a little child. He would no more resemble the haughty and victorious captain-general of Syria, but the humble and grateful Naaman, returning to praise God, and reward his prophet for a cure.

Elishas refusal of the presents, and by an oath too, exhibits the unspotted glory of the ministry, and shows that the gifts of God cannot be purchased with money. The Lord by his divine power had first humbled and then cleansed the captain; therefore Elisha, though it was usual for a prophet to receive a small present of bread or fruit, did not dare to touch his gold; for God in all his works of grace will be sanctified by his servants. Elisha was infinitely paid and honoured in being the instrument or oracle of so great a cure. May we as ministers learn hence the greatest purity and disinterestedness in acting for God, ever remembering that Herod was smitten because he gave not God the glory.

But while we are struck with the glory of grace in the cure, while we admire the purity of the prophet, and see this captain return with the warmest sentiments of grateful approbation, we are shocked with the perfidy and baseness of Gehazi. How little good did he get in attending his illustrious master; and what dishonour did he not bring on the hallowed cause of God. In hopes of buying a spot of land, and procuring a family establishment, he ran after the generous convert; he forged a series of lies, and caused his holy master to appear as a perjured man in the eyes of the heathen. He succeeded in his crimes. He received the money and the raiment; but he received also the curse of his master, and the leprosy of Naaman. God was pleased to make an example of this base man, that by judgment as well as mercy he might be sanctified among the heathen. Let us never acquire wealth by falsehood and deceit; if we do, we shall surely gain a curse on ourselves, and on our children.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

2Ki 5:1-27. Naaman Healed of his Leprosy.This story, familiar to all, presupposes a time of peace between Israel and Syria. As in 1 Kings 20, the king of Syria addresses the king of Israel (unnamed here) as his vassal (2Ki 5:6 ff.). Elisha was living in Samaria, apparently in his own house. Naaman, on being healed, returned to Elisha, who refused to take any present, using Elijahs formula (1Ki 17:1*). Naaman thereupon declared himself a worshipper of Yahweh (it is remarkable that 2Ki 5:1 ascribes his victories to Yahweh), asking pardon if in his official capacity he bows himself before Rimmon (Ramman, the thunder-god of the Assyrians). Readers of Tom Browns Schooldays will remember the not unnatural discussion amongst the boys as to why Elisha bade Naaman go in peace, as though he approved his action. The phrase merely means farewell. Gehazi pursued Naaman and returned to the hill (2Ki 5:24); the word is Ophel, elsewhere in the Bible only applied to Jerusalem (p. 297), but also found on the Moabite Stone (1. 22; Driver, Samuel2, p. lxxxvii. renders the Mound). Elishas rebuke (2Ki 5:26 b) becomes in the LXX and Vulg. and now thou hast received money . . . and the leprosy of Naaman shall cleave to thee. As though the infection of the disease clave to the present which Gehazi had received.

12. p. 33. 2Ki 5:17. cf. 1Sa 26:19 f.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

NAAMAN THE LEPER HEALED

(vv.1-19)

The history continues in this chapter to focus attention, not on the kings, but on Elisha the man of God. When the kings had failed so badly the Lord used a prophet as the real connection between Himself and the people. This was pure grace, as the chapter concerning Naaman shows. Naaman was not an Israelite, but a Syrian army commander. He was indeed an apt candidate for the grace of God, for though he was a great man in the world’s eyes, he was afflicted with the loathsome disease of leprosy (v.1), a figure for sin that afflicts all mankind.

The Syrians had captured a young girl of Israel who was made a slave of Naaman’s wife (v.2). It would be natural that she should be bitter and resentful against Naaman since she was taken from he own home and family, but the knowledge of God had evidently taken possession of her heart, for she showed kind concern for Naaman in desire that he might be cured of his leprosy, telling her mistress that if only Naaman were with the prophet in Samaria (Elisha) he would be healed (v.3). This was remarkable faith, for there were none in Israel who had been healed of leprosy (Luk 4:27). Thus, her confidence was not in the healing, but in Elisha, just as we should have confidence in the Lord Jesus personally, rather than in the blessing He might bring.

In spite of the insignificance of the messenger (the girl), Naaman was impressed enough to tell the king of Syria what he had heard (v.4). The king of Syria, naturally thinking that if anyone in Israel could heal sickness, it must be the king of Israel, then sent with Naaman a letter to the king of Israel, together with silver and gold and clothing. The letter was clear in demanding that the king would cure Naaman of his leprosy.

The king of Israel was shocked when he read the letter, and thought that Syria was only seeking an occasion to engage in war with Israel (v.7). Was he God, to kill or make alive?

Elisha heard of the king of Israel’s predicament and sent word to him to send Naaman to Elisha and he would know there was a prophet in Israel. Of course the king of Israel willingly did this, and Naaman with his horses and chariot came to Elisha’s door (v.9).

Elisha did not even come out to see Naaman, but simply sent a message to him. “Go and wash in the Jordan seven times, and your flesh shall be restored to you, and you shall be clean” (v.10). But Naaman considered this an insult and in furious anger went away. He is a picture of many unbelievers who do not believe in the simplicity of the gospel of the grace of God, and become angry when told they can only be cleansed from their sins (which leprosy pictures) by grace, accepting the Lord Jesus as the One who went into the waters of death for them. Did Elisha not realise that Naaman was a great man? Should he not have had the respect for Naaman that would lead him to come to Naaman himself instead of sending a messenger? Why did he not come out and put on a suitable display of at least waving his hands over the leprosy and heal it?

More than this, there were rivers in Samaria, his own city, that were better than this muddy little Jordan River (v.12). Why could he not at least choose his own river? There are many like Naaman who object to God’s simple plain gospel because it humbles the pride of man. The Jordan River is the river of death, flowing as it does into the Dead Sea, from which there is no outlet. Naaman was virtually told to wash in the death of Christ, which is the only way of salvation. The seven times was a test of his submission. Seven is the number of completeness, and therefore Naaman was called upon to completely submit to the Lord in self-judgment.

However, Naaman had servants who were wise, and they greatly pled with him to change his mind, reasoning with him that if he had been told to do something great, would he not have done it? Why not then do the simple thing he had been told?

Notice the number of means the Lord used to humble the great man. First, a little slave girl’s message, then being sent to a lowly prophet rather than the king, then also a messenger sent to tell him to wash seven times in Jordan; then his servants pleading with him to change his mind, and finally his dipping in Jordan seven times. Those things were all humbling, but led to Naaman’s great blessing.

As he was told, he went down and dipped in the Jordan seven times. After each time he would look at his leprosy and find no change whatever until the seventh time. But then, what an amazing change! The leprosy was gone and his flesh restored like that of a little child (v.14). Beautiful picture of new birth! If Naaman had only known the words of the Lord Jesus in Mat 18:3, how he would have delighted in the truth of them! – “Unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.” Not only was his flesh like that of a little child, but his attitude was changed to that of a little child. He returned to Elisha in true humility, giving every credit to the God of Israel, expressing his deep appreciation to the man of God (v.15).

Naaman was so deeply appreciative of his healing from leprosy that he wanted Elisha to receive a gift to express his appreciation. He had come with willingness to pay for his healing. Now he had gotten this freely, so he simply desired to show his appreciation by a large gift to Elisha.

Elisha answered, “As the Lord lives before whom I stand, I will receive nothing” (v.16). Even receiving a gift after such grace shown, would not rightly represent the God whom Elisha served. He wanted the Gentile to learn that the blessing of God is absolutely and only by grace. Though Naaman urged him to receive it, Elisha refused. What a lesson for every servant of God!

Then Naaman made the request that he might take two mules’ loads of earth from Israel, which he would use to make an altar of earth to the Lord (Exo 20:24), for he would in the future offer sacrifices only to the Lord, and no longer to idols. Already also, his conscience troubled him as regards his role in accompanying his master, the king of Syria, into the temple of Rimmon. He was required to go there, but would be an unwilling participant in this idolatrous worship, so he expressed the desire to Elisha that the Lord would pardon him for this (v.18).

Elisha however neither forbade him to go into the temple of Rimmon, nor encouraged him to do so. He would not put him under bondage, but gave him the encouragement of God, saying only, “Go in peace.” This matter was left to Naaman’s own faith and conscience. We don’t know how the matter turned out. Naaman might have explained his conscientious concerns to the king of Syria, and by this be excused. But there is no doubt that Elisha desired him to have peace in heart and conscience.

THE FOLLY OF GEHAZI

(vv.20-27)

Gehazi, though Elisha’s servant, did not share the faith of Elisha. Instead of appreciating Elisha’s unselfish example, he succumbed to the greed of his own heart when he saw the large gifts that Naaman would have given Elisha, and in coveting these things, he even dared to use the Lord’s name, imitating Elisha’s words, “As the Lord lives,” to justify his pursuing Naaman to enrich himself dishonestly (v.20).

When Naaman saw Gehazi running after him, he got down from his chariot, asking, “Is all well?” (v.21). Gehazi, with cunning deceit, answered yes, but that Elisha had sent him to say that two young men of the sons of the prophets had come to him and needed both money and changes of clothing (v.22). Of course Naaman was glad to give him more than he asked, which required two of Naaman’s servants to carry it. As they came near the house, Gehazi took the goods from the servants and hid them inside the house.

Brazenly he went in to Elisha’s presence and when asked where he had gone, he coolly lied that he had gone nowhere (v.25). Just as Judas thought he could deceive the Lord Jesus when he kissed Him (Mat 27:49), so Gehazi thought he could deceive the prophet of God. Judas had witnessed the Lord’s discerning the thoughts of other people (Mat 12:25; Luk 5:22), but he had no faith to apply such facts to his own conduct. So with Gehazi. He knew Elisha was a true prophet of God, yet thought he could get away with deceiving him. Such is the folly of unbelief. It was greed in both cases, but Judas never used the thirty pieces of silver for himself, and what could Gehazi do with his ill-gotten gains after Elisha had exposed his sin, telling him he knew of Naaman’s turning back from his chariot to meet Gehazi? Was it a time to receive money, clothing or anything else? God’s grace had been shown to Naaman. Was it a time for Gehazi to spoil the pure truth of God’s grace by receiving anything? (v.26).

Then Elisha pronounced the awful judgment of God upon Gehazi, who immediately was inflicted with the leprosy of Naaman (v.27). What a picture this whole history is! A Gentile enemy of Israel was healed and manifestly brought in true faith to God, while a Jewish servant of the prophet suffered the solemn judgment of God. While Elisha’s miracles were more of grace than of judgment, yet just as in the New Testament Ananias and Sapphira were immediately stricken dead for greed and falsehood (Act 5:1-10) at a time when the grace of God in Christ Jesus was being beautifully proclaimed by the apostles, so the judgment of Gehazi was pronounced at a time when grace had been so beautifully shown to Naaman, a Gentile stranger. Gehazi was outwardly near to Elisha, just as the chief priests and elders of Israel were outwardly near to God, but in heart were so far away that the Lord Jesus told them, “tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of God before you” (Mat 21:3).

There are many who think of grace as being the expression of God’s indulgence with evil. But how far is this from the truth! The grace of God is seen rather when men’s hearts are broken down in true self-judgment because of their sins. When this is true, grace lifts them up and gives them blessing infinitely beyond all that they might have asked or thought. Grace teaches us to abhor sin and “to live soberly, righteously and godly in this present age” (Tit 3:11). Naaman himself bears witness to this.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

5:1 Now Naaman, captain of the host of the king of Syria, was a great man with his master, and honourable, because by him the LORD had given {a} deliverance unto Syria: he was also a mighty man in valour, [but he was] a leper.

(a) Here it appears that among the infidels God has his, and also that the infidels esteem those who do good to their country.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

God’s ability to heal and cleanse ch. 5

Naaman (Aram. gracious) was commander of the Aramean army under Ben-Hadad II (cf. 1Ki 15:18; 1Ki 15:20). Some forms of leprosy in the ancient world degenerated the bodies of its victims and eventually proved fatal. At this time no one could cure this disease. In Israel the priests normally isolated lepers from non-lepers because the disease was contagious, at least in certain stages (cf. Leviticus 13-14). Naaman was able to carry on his duties as long as his illness permitted him to do so. Biblical leprosy evidently included modern leprosy, better known as Hansen’s disease, but the Hebrew word translated "leprosy" and the disease it represented covered many afflictions of the skin. [Note: Rebecca and Eugene Baillie, "Biblical Leprosy as Compared to Present-Day Leprosy," Christian Medical Society Journal 14:3 (Fall 1983):27-29.]

The faith of the slave girl (2Ki 5:3) contrasts with the general unbelief that prevailed in Israel at this time (cf. Luk 4:27). This humble girl also contrasts with the great commander whom she helped.

"She is an Israelite, he is an Aramean; she is a ’little maiden’ (na’ara qetanna), he a ’great man’ (’is gadol); she is a captive servant, he a commander; he has fame in the king’s estimation, . . . she has none, for she simply ’waited upon’ . . . Naaman’s wife (cf. Deu 1:38; 1Sa 19:7)." [Note: B. O. Long, 2 Kings, p. 70. Long’s analysis of this chapter’s plots and subplots is very good (pp. 66-77).]

Ben-Hadad’s gift to King Jehoram amounted to 750 pounds of silver, 150 pounds of gold, and 10 changes of royal apparel, or perhaps bolts of cloth. [Note: Wiseman, p. 207.] Ancient peoples considered clothing much more valuable than most modern people normally do. Ben-Hadad probably approached Jehoram rather than Elisha because he reasoned that any prophet with such power must enjoy the personal protection of the king. How ironic it was that Jehoram had no use for Elisha. The king of Israel, who really was Yahweh’s vice-regent, resented Ben-Hadad behaving as though Jehoram was just that (2Ki 5:7). He thought the Aramean king was trying to provoke another quarrel (cf. 1Ki 20:1-3).

Even though Jehoram was not a faithful representative of Yahweh, Elisha was (2Ki 5:8). Elisha treated Naaman as a superior would treat an inferior (2Ki 5:10). Socially Naaman was superior to Elisha, but really Elisha, as God’s man, was superior to the vice-regent of Ben-Hadad. Elisha’s coolness may have sent a message to Naaman that Elisha was not a wonderworker who expected payment or that he wanted no political involvement with Aramea. Possibly he may have been testing Naaman’s faith. [Note: Gwilym Jones, 1 and 2 Kings , 2:416.] Naaman’s cure, of course, was not due to the quality of the Jordan River water but to his obedient trust in God’s promise that His prophet delivered. Overcoming his pride, Naaman obeyed and was washed clean-body and soul (2Ki 5:14). Dipping seven times would have signified to everyone in that culture that his healing that followed was a work of God. [Note: C. F. Keil, The Books of the Kings, p. 319.] His flesh experienced healing from the leprosy and even returned to the texture of a child. Perhaps this reflected Naaman’s child-like faith. Furthermore, God even cleansed the commander of the contagion of this fatal disease.

Naaman’s restoration convinced him that Yahweh’s power was superior. This was a lesson Jehoram had refused to learn (2Ki 5:15). Jesus later made the point that Naaman’s faith condemned most Israelites of his day since they had rejected the true God and embraced gods that could not heal (Luk 4:23-30). Elisha did not accept a present from Naaman probably because to accept one would have implied that he personally had been responsible for the miracle (2Ki 5:16). False prophets were undoubtedly lining their own pockets and thus bringing contempt on the prophetic office. Elisha wanted to avoid conduct that might appear to be self-serving. Many polytheists believed that they had to worship their god in their own land or, if that was impossible, on an altar built on the dirt of that land (2Ki 5:17). [Note: Cf. Montgomery, p. 377.] The chief god of Damascus was Hadad-Rimmon (2Ki 5:18).

Gehazi’s decision to take a reward from Naaman was deliberate, not compulsive, as is clear from his statement, "As the Lord lives" (2Ki 5:20). He had to tell a lie to obtain the gift (2Ki 5:21). A talent weighed 75 pounds (2Ki 5:22). The hill (2Ki 5:24) was the one on which Samaria stood (cf. 2Ki 5:3). Gehazi tried to cover one lie with another (2Ki 5:25). Elisha explained that since many people did not respect Yahweh’s prophets, it was inappropriate to receive gifts as Gehazi had done (2Ki 5:26; cf. 2Ki 5:16). God had removed Naaman’s leprosy from him for his trust in and obedience to the Lord. Now, ironically, leprosy would cling to Gehazi because he did not trust and obey God. His descendants would likewise suffer because of the seriousness of this failure (2Ki 5:27). Gehazi decided to join the ranks of Eli, Saul, and the kings who disregarded Yahweh, and so forfeited what he could have inherited, the privilege of serving God as Elisha’s successor. Elisha had valued that privilege and had consequently succeeded Elijah (ch. 2).

"One man goes away healed because of his obedience, while the other man, indeed the one who should have known what matters most, walks away with leprosy. Yet another Israelite has made the tragic mistake of choosing a substitute for the Lord, while a Gentile convert has discovered that what his servant girl said about the Lord’s prophet is true." [Note: House, p. 274.]

"This text contains one of the great Gentile conversion accounts in the Old Testament. Like Rahab (Jos 2:9-13), Ruth (Rth 1:16-18), and the sailors and Ninevites in Jonah (Jon 1:16; Jon 3:6-10), Naaman believes in the Lord. From Gen 12:2-3 onward in the Old Testament, God desires to bless all nations through Israel. This ideal becomes a reality here due to the witness of the Israelite servant girl and the work of the Israelite prophet." [Note: Ibid., p. 273.]

This story contains many of the motifs we have been observing throughout 1 and 2 Kings: the fertility motif, the sovereignty motif, the faith motif, the reversal-of-fortune motif, and others. The unique contribution of this chapter is that it shows Yahweh’s superiority over Baal in physical healing and ritual cleansing. The worshippers of Baal gave him credit for controlling both of these things. As in 1Ki 17:8-24, we see that, ironically, faith in Yahweh was stronger in some individuals outside Israel than it was in Israelites in whom it should have been the strongest. God blesses those who obey His Word to some extent, regardless of who they are, or what else they may believe, or do, or be.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

THE STORY OF NAAMAN

2Ki 5:1-27

And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.

Mat 8:3

AFTER these shorter anecdotes we have the longer episode of Naaman.

A part of the misery inflicted by the Syrians on Israel was caused by the forays in which their light-armed bands, very much like the borderers on the marshes of Wales or Scotland, descended upon the country and carried off plunder and captives before they could be pursued.

In one of these raids they had seized a little Israelitish girl and sold her to be a slave. She had been purchased for the household of Naaman, the captain of the Syrian host, who had helped his king and nation to win important victories either against Israel or against Assyria. Ancient Jewish tradition identified him with the man who had “drawn his bow at a venture” and slain King Ahab. But all Naamans valor and rank and fame, and the honor felt for him by his king, were valueless to him, for he was suffering from the horrible affliction of leprosy. Lepers do not seem to have been segregated in other countries so strictly as they were in Israel, or at any rate Naamans leprosy was not of so severe a form as to incapacitate him from his public functions.

But it was evident that he was a man who had won the affection of all who knew him; and the little slave girl who waited on his wife breathed to her a passionate wish that Naaman could visit the Man of God in Samaria, for he would recover him from his leprosy. The saying was repeated, and one of Naamans friends mentioned it to the King of Syria. Benhadad was so much struck by it that he instantly determined to send a letter, with a truly royal gift to the king of Israel, who could, he supposed, as a matter of course, command the services of the prophet. The letter came to Jehoram with a stupendous present of ingots of silver to the value of ten talents, and six thousand pieces of gold, and ten changes of raiment. After the ordinary salutations, and a mention of the gifts, the letter continued “And now, when this letter is come to thee, behold I have sent Naaman my servant, that thou mayest recover him of his leprosy.”

Jehoram lived in perpetual terror of his powerful and encroaching neighbor. Nothing was said in the letter about the Man of God; and the king rent his clothes, exclaiming that he was not God to kill and to make alive, and that this must be a base pretext for a quarrel. It never so much as occurred to him, as it certainly would have done to Jehoshaphat, that the prophet, who was so widely known and honored, and whose mission had been so clearly attested in the invasion of Moab, might at least help him to face this problem. Otherwise the difficulty might indeed seem insuperable, for leprosy was universally regarded as an incurable disease.

But Elisha was not afraid: “he boldly told Jehoram to send the Syrian captain to him. Naaman, with his horses and his chariots, in all the splendor of a royal ambassador, drove up to the humble house of the prophet. Being so great a man, he expected a deferential reception, and looked for the performance of his cure in some striking and dramatic manner. “The prophet,” so he said to himself, will come out, and solemnly invoke the name of his God Jehovah, and wave his hand over the leprous limbs, and so work the miracle.”

But the servant of the King of kings was not exultantly impressed, as false prophets so often are, by earthly greatness. Elisha did not even pay him the compliment of coming out of the house to meet him. He wished to efface himself completely, and to fix the lepers thoughts on the one truth that if healing was granted to him, it was due to the gift of God, not to the thaumaturgy or arts of man. He simply sent out his servant to the Syrian commander-in-chief with the brief message, “Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and be thou clean.”

Naaman accustomed to the extreme deference of many dependants, was not only offended, but enraged, by what he regarded as the scant courtesy and procrastinated boon of the prophet. Why was he not received as a man of the highest distinction? What necessity could there be for sending him all the way to the Jordan? And why was he bidden to wash in that wretched, useless, tortuous stream, rather than in the pure and flowing waters of his own native Abanah and Pharpar? How was he to tell that this “Man of God” did not design to mock him by sending him on a fools errand, so that he would come back as a laughing-stock both to the Israelites and to his own people? Perhaps he had not felt any great faith in the prophet, to begin with; but whatever he once felt had now vanished. He turned and went away in a rage.

But in this crisis the affection of his friends and servants stood him in good stead. Addressing him, in their love and pity, by the unusual term of honor “my father,” they urged upon him that, as he certainly would not have refused some great test, there was no reason why he should refuse this simple and humble one.

He was won over by their reasonings, and descending the hot steep valley of the Jordan, bathed himself in the river seven times. God healed him, and, as Elisha had promised, “his flesh,” corroded by leprosy, “came again like the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.”

This healing of Naaman is alluded to by our Lord to illustrate the truth that the love of God extended farther than the limits of the chosen race; that His Fatherhood is co-extensive with the whole family of man.

It is difficult to conceive the transport of a man cured of this most loathsome and humiliating of all earthly afflictions. Naaman, who seems to have possessed “a mind naturally Christian,” was filled with gratitude. Unlike the thankless Jewish lepers whom Christ cured as He left Engannim, this alien returned to give glory to God. Once more the whole imposing cavalcade rode through the streets of Samaria, and stopped at Elishas door. This time Naaman was admitted into his presence. He saw, and no doubt Elisha had strongly impressed on him the truth, that his healing was the work not of man but of God; and as he had found no help in the deities of Syria, he confessed that the God of Israel was the only true God among those of the nations. In token of his thankfulness he presses Elisha, as Gods instrument in the unspeakable mercy which has been granted to him, to accept “a blessing” (i.e., a present) from him” from thy servant,” as he humbly styled himself.

Elisha was no greedy Balaam. It was essential that Naaman and the Syrians should not look on him as on some vulgar sorcerer who wrought wonders for “the rewards of divination.” His wants were so simple that he stood above temptation. His desires and treasures were not on earth. To put an end to all importunity, he appealed to Jehovah with his usual solemn formula-“As the Lord liveth before whom I stand, I will receive no present.”

Still more deeply impressed by the prophets incorruptible superiority to so much as a suspicion of low motives, Naaman asked that he might receive two mules burden of earth wherewith to build an altar to the God of Israel of His own sacred soil. The very soil ruled by such a God must, he thought, be holier than other soil; and he wished to take it back to Syria, just as the people of Pisa rejoiced to fill their Campo Santo with mould from the Holy Land, and just as mothers like to baptize their children in water brought home from the Jordan. Henceforth, said Naaman, I will offer burnt-offering and sacrifice to no God but unto Jehovah. Yet there was one difficulty in the way. When the King of Syria went to worship in the temple of his god Rimmon it was the duty of Naaman to accompany him. The king leaned on his hand, and when he bowed before the idol it was Naamans duty to bow also. He begged that for this concession God would pardon him.

Elishas answer was perhaps different from what Elijah might have given. He practically allowed Naaman to give this sign of outward compliance with idolatry, by saying to him, “Go in peace.” It is from this circumstance that the phrase “to bow in the house of Rimmon” has become proverbial to indicate a dangerous and dishonest compromise But Elishas permission must not be misunderstood. He did but hand over this semi-heathen convert to the grace of God. It must be remembered that he lived in days long preceding the conviction that proselytism is a part of true religion; in days when the thought of missions to heathen lands was utterly unknown. The position of Naaman was wholly different from that of any Israelite. He was only the convert, or the half-convert of a day, and though he acknowledged the supremacy of Jehovah as alone worthy of his worship, he probably shared in the belief-common even in Israel-that there were other gods, local gods, gods of the nations, to whom Jehovah might have divided the limits of their power. To demand of one who, like Naaman, had been an idolater all his days, the sudden abandonment of every custom and tradition of his life, would have been to demand from him an unreasonable, and, in his circumstances, useless and all but impossible self-sacrifice. The best way was to let him feel and see for himself the futility of Rimmon-worship. If he were not frightened back from his sudden faith in Jehovah, the scruple of conscience which he already felt in making his request might naturally grow within him and lead him to all that was best and highest. The temporary condonation of an imperfection might be a wise step towards the ultimate realization of a truth We cannot at all blame Elisha, if, with such knowledge as he then possessed, he took a mercifully tolerant view of the exigencies of Naamans position. The bowing in the house of Rimmon under such conditions probably seemed to him no more than an act of outward respect to the king and to the national religion in a case where no evil results could follow from Naamans example.

But the general principle that we must not bow in the house of Rimmon remains unchanged. The light and knowledge vouchsafed to us far transcend those which existed in times when men had not seen the days of the Son of Man. The only rule which sincere Christians can follow is to have no truce with Canaan, no halting between two opinions, no tampering, no compliance, no connivance, no complicity with evil, even no tolerance of evil as far as their own conduct is concerned. No good man, in the light of the Gospel dispensation, could condone himself in seeming to sanction-still less in doing-anything which in his opinion ought not to be done, or in saying anything which implied his own acquiescence in things which he knows to be evil. “Sir,” said a parishioner to one of the non-juring clergy: “there is many a man who has made a great gash in his conscience; cannot you make a little nick in yours?” No! a little nick is, in one sense, as fatal as a great gash. It is an abandonment of the principle; it is a violation of the Law. The wrong of it consists in this-that all evil begins, not in the commission of great crimes, but in the slight divergence from right rules. The angle made by two lines may be infinitesimally small, but produce the lines and it may require infinitude to span the separation between the lines which enclose so tiny an angle. The wise man gave the only true rule about wrong-doing, when he said, “Enter not into the path of the wicked and go not in the way of evil men. Avoid it, pass not by it, turn from it and pass away.” {Pro 4:14-15} And the reason for his rule is that the beginning of sin-like the beginning of strife-“is as when one letteth out water.” {Pro 17:14}

The proper answer to all abuses of any supposed concession to the lawfulness of bowing in the house of Rimmon-if that be interpreted to mean the doing of anything which our consciences cannot wholly approve-is obsta principiis- avoid the beginnings of evil.

“We are not worst at once; the course of evil

Begins so slowly, and from such slight source,

An infants hand might stem the breach with clay;

But let the stream grow wider, and philosophy,

Age, and religion too, may strive in vain

To stem the headstrong current.”

The mean cupidity of Gehazi, the servant of Elisha, gives a deplorable sequel to the story of the prophets magnanimity. This mans wretched greed did its utmost to nullify the good influence of his masters example. There may be more wicked acts recorded in Scripture than that of Gehazi, but there is scarcely one which shows so paltry a disposition.

He had heard the conversation between his master and the Syrian marshal, and his cunning heart despised as a futile sentimentality the magnanimity which had refused an eagerly proffered reward. Naaman was rich: he had received a priceless boon; it would be rather a pleasure to him than otherwise to return for it some acknowledgment which he would not miss. Had he not even seemed a little hurt by Elishas refusal to receive it? What possible harm could there be in taking what he was anxious to give? And how useful those magnificent presents would be, and to what excellent uses could they be put! He could not approve of the fantastic and unpractical scrupulosity which had led Elisha to refuse the “blessing” which he had so richly earned. Such attitudes of unworldliness seemed entirely foolish to Gehazi.

So pleaded the Judas-spirit within the man. By such specious delusions he inflamed his own covetousness, and fostered the evil temptation which had taken sudden and powerful hold upon his heart, until it took shape in a wicked resolve.

The mischief of Elishas quixotic refusal was done, but it could be speedily undone, and no one would be the worse. The evil spirit was whispering to Gehazi:

“Be mine and Sins for one short hour; and then Be all thy life the happiest man of men.”

“Behold,” he said, with some contempt both for Elisha and for Naaman, “my master hath let off this Naaman the Syrian; but as the Lord liveth I will run after him, and take somewhat of him.”

“As the Lord liveth!” It had been a favorite appeal of Elijah and Elisha, and the use of it by Gehazi shows how utterly meaningless and how very dangerous such solemn words become when they are degraded into formulae. It is thus that the habit of swearing begins. The light use of holy words very soon leads to their utter degradation. How keen is the satire in Cowpers little story:-

“A Persian, humble servant of the sun,

Who, though devout, yet bigotry had none,

Hearing a lawyer, grave in his address,

With adjurations every word impress.

Supposed the man a bishop, or, at least,

Gods Name so often on his lips-a priest.

Bowed at the close with all his gracious airs,

And begged an interest in his frequent prayers!”

Had Gehazi felt their true meaning-had he realized that on Elishas lips they meant something infinitely more real than on his own, he would not have forgotten that in Elishas answer to Naaman they had all the validity of an oath, and that he was inflicting on his master a shameful wrong, when he led Naaman to believe that, after so sacred an adjuration, the prophet had frivolously changed his mind.

Gehazi-had not very far to run, for in a country full of hills, and of which the roads are rough, horses and chariots advance but slowly. Naaman, chancing to glance backwards, saw the prophets attendant running after him. Anticipating that he must be the bearer of some message from Elisha, he not only halted the cavalcade, but sprang down from his chariot, and went to meet him with the anxious question, “Is all well?”

“Well,” answered Gehazi; and then had ready his cunning lie. “Two youths,” he said, “of the prophetic schools had just unexpectedly come to his master from the hill country of Ephraim; and though he would accept nothing for himself, Elisha would be glad if Naaman would spare him two changes of garments, and one talent of silver for these poor members of a sacred calling.”

Naaman must have been a little more or a little less than human if he did not feel a touch of disappointment on hearing this message. The gift was nothing to him. It was a delight to him to give it, if only to lighten a little the burden of gratitude which he felt towards his benefactor. But if he had felt elevated by the magnanimous example of Elishas disinterestedness, he must have thought that this hasty request pointed to a little regret on the prophets part for his noble self-denial. After all, then, even prophets were but men, and gold after all was gold! The change of mind about the gift brought Elisha a little nearer the ordinary level of humanity, and, so far, it acted as a sort of disenchantment from the high ideal exhibited by his former refusal. And so Naaman said, with alacrity, “Be content: take two talents.”

The fact that Gehazis conduct thus inevitably compromised his master, and undid the effects of his example, is part of the measure of the mans apostasy. It showed how false and hypocritical was his position, how unworthy he was to be the ministering servant of a prophet. Elisha was evidently deceived in the man altogether. The heinousness of his guilt lies in the words corruptio optimi pessima. When religion is used for a cloak of covetousness, of usurping ambition, of secret immorality, it becomes deadlier than infidelity. Men raze the sanctuary, and build their idol temples, on the hallowed ground. They cover their base encroachments and impure designs with the “cloke of profession, doubly lined with the fox-fur of hypocrisy,” and hide the leprosy which is breaking out upon their foreheads with the golden petalon on which is inscribed the title of “holiness to the Lord.”

At first Gehazi did not like to take so large a sum as two talents; but the crime was already committed, and there was not much more harm done in taking two talents than in taking one. Naaman urged him, and it is very improbable that, unless the chances of detection weighed with him, he needed much urging. So the Syrian weighed out silver ingots to the amount of two talents, and putting them in two satchels laid them on two of his servants and told them to carry the money before Gehazi to Elishas house. But Gehazi had to keep a look-out lest his nefarious dealings should be observed, and when they came to Ophel-the word means the foot of the hill of Samaria, or some part of the fortifications-he took the bags from the two Syrians, dismissed them, and carried the money to some place where he could conceal it in the house. Then as though nothing had happened, with his usual smooth face of sanctimonious integrity, the pious Jesuit went and stood before his master.

He had not been unnoticed! His heart must have sunk within him when there smote upon his ear Elishas question, –

“Whence comest thou, Gehazi?”

But one lie is as easy as another, and Gehazi was doubtless an adept at lying.

“Thy servant were no whither,” he replied, with an air of innocent surprise.

“Went not my beloved one?” said Elisha-and he must have said it with a groan, as he thought how utterly unworthy the youth, whom he thus called “my loving heart” or “my dear friend,”-“when the man turned from his chariot to meet thee?” It may be that from the hill of Samaria Elisha had seen it all, or that he had been told by one who had seen it. If not, he had been rightly led to read the secret of his servants guilt. “Is it a time,” he asked, “to act thus?” Did not my example show thee that there was a high object in refusing this Syrians gifts, and in leading him to feel that the servants of Jehovah do His bidding with no afterthought of sordid considerations? Are there not enough troubles about us actual and impending to show that this is no time for the accumulation of earthly treasures? Is it a time to receive money-and all that money will procure? To receive garments, and olive-yards and vineyards, and oxen, and menservants and maid-servants? Has a prophet no higher aim than the accumulation of earthly goods, and are his needs such as earthly goods can supply? And hast thou, the daily friend and attendant of a prophet, learnt so little from his precepts and his example?

Then followed the tremendous penalty for so grievous a transgression-a transgression made up of meanness, irreverence, greed, cheating, treachery, and lies.

“The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed forever! Oh heavy talents of Gehazi!” exclaims Bishop Hall: “Oh the horror of the one unchangeable suit! How much better had been a light purse anal a homely coat, with a sound body and a clean soul!”

“And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow.” {Exo 4:6 Num 12:10}

It is the characteristic of the leprous taint in the system to be thus suddenly developed, and apparently in crises of sudden and overpowering emotion it might affect the whole blood. And one of the many morals which lie in Gehazis story is again that moral to which the worlds whole experience sets its seal-that though the guilty soul may sell itself for a desired price, the sum-total of that price is naught. It is Achans ingots buried under the sod on which stood his tent. It is Naboths vineyard made abhorrent to Ahab on the day he entered it. It is the thirty pieces of silver which Judas dashed with a shriek upon the Temple floor. It is Gehazis leprosy for which no silver talents or changes of raiment could atone.

The story of Gehazi-of the son of the prophets who would naturally have succeeded Elisha as Elisha had succeeded Elijah-must have had a tremendous significance to warn the members of the prophetic schools from the peril of covetousness. That peril, as all history proves to us, is one from which popes and priests, monks, and even nominally ascetic and nominally pauper communities, have never been exempt; -to which, it may even be said that they have been peculiarly liable. Mercenariness and falsity, displayed under the pretence of religion, were never more overwhelmingly rebuked. Yet as the Rabbis said, it would have been better if Elisha, in repelling with the left hand, had also drawn with the right.

The fine story of Elisha and Naaman, and the fall and punishment of Gehazi, is followed by one of the anecdotes of the prophets life which appears to our unsophisticated, perhaps to our imperfectly enlightened judgment, to rise but little above the ecclesiastical portents related in mediaeval hagiologies.

At some unnamed place-perhaps Jericho-the house of the Sons of the Prophets had become too small for their numbers and requirements, and they asked Elishas leave to go down to the Jordan and cut beams to make a new residence. Elisha gave them leave, and at their request consented to go with them. While they were hewing, the axe-head of one of them fell into the water, and he cried out, “Alas! master, it was borrowed!” Elisha ascertained where it had fallen. He then cut down a stick, and cast it on the spot, and the iron swam and the man recovered it.

The story is perhaps an imaginative reproduction of some unwonted incident. At any rate, we have no sufficient evidence to prove that it may not be so. It is wholly unlike the economy invariably shown in the Scripture narratives which tell us of the exercise of supernatural power. All the eternal laws of nature are here superseded at a word, as though it were an everyday matter, without even any recorded invocation of Jehovah, to restore an axe-head, which could obviously have been recovered or resupplied in some much less stupendous way than by making, iron swim on the surface of a swift-flowing river. It is easy to invent conventional and a priori apologies to show that religion demands the unquestioning acceptance of this prodigy, and that a man must be shockingly wicked who does not feel certain that it happened exactly in the literal sense; but whether the doubt or the defense be morally worthier, is a thing which God alone can judge.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles