Jehoram reigned 12 years in Israel (852-841 B.C.). His reign overlapped with Jehoshaphat and Jehoshaphat's son Jehoram's coregency (853-848 B.C.) as well as Jehoram of Judah's sole reign (848-841 B.C.). During these 12 years Elisha, whose name means "my God is salvation,"was very active in Israel. In keeping with his theological purpose the writer of Kings again emphasized incidents of spiritual significance that took place at this time (cf. 1 Kings 17-19, the Elijah narrative).9
The Gilgal in view may have been the one between Jericho and the Jordan, or it may have been one about seven miles north of Bethel since Elijah and Elisha went down to Bethel (v. 2).10This account presupposes previous revelation, not in Scripture, that this day was to be Elijah's last on earth (v. 3). By granting Elisha permission to remain behind (v. 2, et al.) Elijah was testing Elisha's commitment to himself and to his calling as Elijah's successor (cf. Matt. 4:1-11; Luke 22:31-62; John 21:15-27). Elisha's refusal to speak of Elijah's departure (vv. 3, 5) probably reflects Elisha's sorrow at the prospect of losing his friend and mentor. It was not uncommon for prophets to give a valuable parting blessing (cf. Gen. 49; Deut. 33), and Elisha did not want to miss that. A prophet's mantle (cloak) was the symbol of his authority as God's spokesman (cf. 1 Kings 19:19). As Moses had parted the Red Sea with his rod, so Elijah parted the Jordan River with his mantle (v. 8; cf. Exod. 14:21-22). Israel's God was as able as ever to lead His people out of bondage and into promised blessing.
The double portion that Elisha requested was the privilege of God's richest blessing on his life that customarily went to the first-born son in the ancient Near East (cf. 1 Kings 3:3-9). It would be a hard thing for Elijah to guarantee this double portion since blessing with His Spirit was God's prerogative (v. 10). Evidently Elijah intended to reward Elisha's continued faithful commitment to him with this blessing, but if Elisha turned back from following him he would not get it (v. 10). The eldest son, whose role Elisha filled, was responsible to carry on his father's name and work.
The chariot and horses of fire symbolized God's powerful heavenly army (cf. 6:17). This display of the instruments of spiritual warfare separated the two prophets and apparently could have frightened Elisha into running away and losing his desired blessing (v. 11). The chariot and horses of fire had polemic value since the Canaanites called Baal "the rider of clouds."11The whirlwind (shekinah?) took Elijah miraculously into heaven, not the fiery horses and chariot (v. 11). Elijah had thought he was indispensable to God at one time (1 Kings 19:10, 14), but God had told him that he would remove him and work through others (1 Kings 19:11-18). Elijah's translation to heaven was a blessing for him since he entered heaven without dying.
"The contrast between the deaths of Elijah and his enemies could hardly be any more stark. Elijah, the faithful servant of God, ascends to heaven. Ahab and Jezebel, the sworn enemies of Yahwism and the prophets, die at the hands of their foes."12
Elijah had been Elisha's spiritual father and mentor (v. 12). Elisha mourned the departure of one of Israel's great spiritual warriors (v. 12). By referring to Elijah as "the chariots of Israel and its horsemen"(v. 12), Elisha probably meant that Elijah's prophetic powers and spiritual depth were the nation's true strength.13By asking, "Where is Elijah's God?"(v. 14) Elisha was calling out to Yahweh to demonstrate His power through him as he had done through Elijah.
Had Elijah still been alive on the earth Elisha could not have exercised authority as his successor. In this chapter note the parallels between the succession of the prophets and the succession of the kings that the writer recorded elsewhere in Kings. Elisha gave the skeptics opportunity to verify Elijah's departure (cf. 1 Kings 18:12). After all, Elijah had been known to disappear and reappear suddenly (cf. 1 Kings 18:12). The same Spirit that had empowered Elijah now rested on Elisha (v. 15).
The miracle that attested God's messenger and his message evidently took place at Jericho (v. 15). The physical condition in the town was symbolic of the spiritual condition of the nation (v. 19).14Refreshment and fertility had suffered as a result of apostasy. Elisha was a new vessel in God's hand similar to the new jar he requested (v. 20). Salt seemed like the worst thing to add to brackish water to make it pure just as return to Yahweh must have appeared to be a backward step to many idolatrous Israelites. Nevertheless since salt is what God ordered it was effective. The use of salt may have symbolized a break with the past since this is what rubbing certain sacrifices with salt to sanctify them indicated (Lev. 2:13; Num. 18:19; Ezek. 43:24).15Yahweh, not Baal, could restore blessing and fertility to His people. This miracle was another polemic against Baal worship (cf. 1 Kings 18; et al.). Baal's worshippers credited him with ruling over the waters on and beneath the earth including underground springs and fountains.16God's permanent healing of the spring would have served as a continuing reminder of Yahweh's ability to bring fruitfulness and blessing out of the deadly sterility of idolatry.
Bethel was a center of idolatry in Israel, one of the golden calf sites (v. 23). Evidently Elisha's approach triggered a mass demonstration against him by many young men. The Hebrew word na'artranslated "lads"in 2:23 describes young men, not boys, in many other places in the Old Testament.17"Baldhead"was and is a term of disrespect. The idolaters challenged Elisha to "go up"to heaven as Elijah had done if Elisha could.18These youths were typical of a nation that "mocked the messengers of God, despised His words and scoffed at his prophets"(2 Chron. 36:16). Not motivated by personal pride but by a desire for God's glory, Elisha pronounced God's curse on them for their disrespect for His prophet and Himself (v. 24; cf. 1 Peter 3:3-7). As before, God used wild animals to judge the rebels (cf. 1 Kings 13:24). Wild bears were common in ancient Israel.19These early miracles identified Elisha as God's spokesman who possessed His power to bless or to curse.
These two miracles set the tone of Elisha's whole ministry. He would be a source of blessing to the needy, but he would be a source of judgment to those who did not respect Yahweh.
Even though Jehoram was better spiritually than Ahab (v. 2) he was still so much of an idolater that Elisha had no use for him (vv. 13-14).
Mesha had rebelled against Israel earlier (v. 3), but he continued to do so. This uprising led to the alliance and battle the writer described in this chapter. The southern approach to Moab through Edom apparently did not have as strong defenses as Moab's northern border (v. 8). Edom was now under Judah's authority. Jehoram regarded the water shortage as a judgment from Yahweh (v. 10). Elisha used to serve Elijah by pouring water on his hands as Elijah washed them, a menial task, as well as in other ways (v. 11; 1 Kings 19:21).
Music sometimes facilitated prophetic revelations (cf. 1 Sam. 16:23).
"It is more likely amid these calamitous circumstances Elisha simply wanted soothing music played so that he might be quieted before God and thus to be brought to a mood conducive for God to reveal to him his will."20
Elisha conceded to help because Jehoshaphat had humbled himself by seeking Yahweh's assistance (v. 12). God provided water (refreshment) supernaturally to His people, but He brought defeat and lack of fertility and productivity on Moab for opposing Israel. He began the deliverance at the time of the Israelites' daily sacrifice when they symbolically dedicated themselves anew to God (v. 20). God's deliverance was supernatural (vv. 22-23) and showed everyone present that Israel's victory was not her own doing.
"The dried-up river bed (probably the Wadi Hesa; River Zered) was to have many trenches (Heb. trenches trenches') dug to retain the flash-flood (Arab. sayl) which would result from rain falling out of sight on the distant Moabite hills. This form of irrigation is still common in central and southern Arabia."21
Kir-hereseth (modern Kerak) stood on an easily defended hill. In the ancient Near East nations generally viewed defeat in battle as a sign that they had offended their gods who were punishing them. For this reason Mesha offered the supreme sacrifice, his heir to the throne, to Chemosh, the Moabite god (v. 27). Mesha's sacrifice of his son was an integral part of an age-old Canaanite tradition of sacral warfare. It virtually guaranteed, from his point of view, that his god would save the lives of the entire population under siege.22
This sacrifice expressed Mesha's great wrath against Israel. The battle meant everything to him. Nevertheless it was not that important to the members of the alliance that opposed him. All they wanted to do was keep Moab from revolting. Therefore the allies departed from Mesha and returned home having won the battle even though they could not take Mesha's stronghold.
"The object of the campaign had been attained; the power of Moab was broken, the rebellion suppressed, and the country again placed under the scepter of the king of Israel."23
The Moabite Stone, a significant archaeological find, contains Mesha's own record of this battle and other battles with Israel. On it he claimed to have won with Chemosh's help. Though he lost the battle he did not lose his life or his capital.
This chapter shows that God was willing to give Israel victory because she allied with Jehoshaphat who humbled himself under God (cf. 2:23-25). God in His grace sometimes allows His blessings for obedience to spill over to those who are less worthy (cf. 1 Cor. 7:14).
It was common in the ancient Near East for creditors to enslave the children of debtors who could not pay. The Mosaic Law also permitted this practice (Exod. 21:2-4, Lev. 25:39). However servitude in Israel was to end on the Year of Jubilee. God provided miraculously for the dire needs of this family that had put God first in contrast to the majority who did not do so in Israel (cf. Matt. 6:33). God's miraculous multiplication of oil symbolized the adequacy of God's Spirit to provide all the widow needed. This seems clear from the significance of oil elsewhere in Scripture. It is a symbol of the Holy Spirit (cf. Lev. 8; 1 Sam. 10:1; 16:13; Luke 11:13; et al.).24
In contrast to the incident above, this one shows God's blessing on a wealthy woman. She was not the marriage partner of a prophet but a simple faithful believer in Yahweh (cf. vv. 8-10, 16, 21-22, 24-25, 27, 30, 37). She was living among unbelievers in Israel (cf. Rahab, Ruth, et al.). Her husband appears to have been only a formal participant in Yahweh worship rather than thoroughly dedicated to Him (vv. 19, 23). His words may imply that he expected Elisha to be available only on holy days, but he showed genuine concern for his son's health.25
The story illustrates the great blessing (fertility) God will bring on those who award Him the place He deserves (cf. Hannah). He went as far as giving this infertile woman (v. 14) a son and then restoring him to life when he died. Her respect for Yahweh is clear from her respect for His prophet (vv. 9-10, 13, 30, 37).
Shunem stood in the Jezreel Valley. Gehazi (v. 12) had become Elisha's servant as Elisha had been Elijah's. As such he was the potential successor to his ministry. "I live among my own people"(v. 13) translates an idiom that meant, "I am content."At first the woman found it hard to believe that God would reward her with a child (v. 16; cf. Sarah).
Evidently the woman concluded that it was better if her husband did not know about their son's death for some reason that the writer did not state (vv. 22-23). Though she had respect for Gehazi (v. 26) she had much more confidence in Elisha's ability to help her.
"Disciples can be an obstacle to the needy reaching the master (Mt. 19:13-14)."26
Grasping his feet (v. 27) showed her desperate dependence on his power, her humility, and her veneration for Elisha (cf. Matt. 28:9). Perhaps Elisha told Gehazi to go and heal the lad to test the woman's faith (v. 29). The staff was a symbol of his power. However, she said in the strongest terms that her confidence was in Yahweh and in Elisha (v. 30). The phrase "As the Lord lives"occurs seven times in 1 Kings and seven times in 2 Kings. It is always the testimony of true faith in Yahweh. Elisha probably intended that Gehazi's failure would teach him this lesson: God works in response to fervent, persistent prayer, not in response to some fetish or some formal act (v. 31; cf. Matt. 7:14-21).
Only God's power made active by petition could restore the boy's life (v. 33). Elisha's physical contact with him connected the power of God through the prophet and the miracle unmistakably (v. 34; cf. 1 Kings 17:21-23). Seven sneezes, not more or less, would have signified an act of God to ancient Near Easterners (cf. Gen. 1; 2 Kings 5:14).
"In our pericope Elisha acts as a sort of intermediary for childbirth, analogous to Baal's role in the Ugaritic tablets. YHWH, not Baal, not Elisha for that matter, grants the Shunammite a child. The child dies, bringing to mind the story of Elijah in 1 Kings 17. Prayer raises the child to life, illustrating not only that YHWH gives children, but that he can take them to himself or restore them to life."27
If God could create new life and then revive it as He did here, He could also give Israel life (at the Exodus) and revive it (in Elisha's day). This story, as many others in Kings, is another powerful polemic against Baal and for Yahweh.
"This scene also shows that prophets not only are preachers of sin and repentance; they also are agents of God's healing mercy and kind compassion."28
God again disciplined Israel by withholding fertility from the land and producing a famine (v. 38). The people were not only hungry for bread but also for what would truly satisfy their spiritual hunger, namely, the Word of God. The wild gourds were similar to Baalism. They looked attractive but proved disgusting and deadly when imbibed. Scripture compares meal or bread to the Word of God because it is what satisfies people's most basic needs (cf. Deut. 8:3; Matt. 4:4).
In Elisha's day the people of Israel had turned from God and His Law. This had resulted in a spiritual famine. The people were hungry spiritually and to satisfy their need had swallowed Baalism. It looked harmless enough, but it proved fatal. God's prophets helped counteract the deadly effects of Baalism by making the Word of God available to the people. People need the Word of God (Deut. 8:3; Matt. 4:4).
"This event shows the power to make the harmful innocuous (cf. Lk. 10:19) as well as God's care and provision for his own."29
Archaeologists debate the site of Baal-salishah. In obedience to the Mosaic Law the man in view brought Elisha his offering of first-fruits to honor God by giving this offering to His servants (Num. 18:13; Deut. 18:4). This simple act of obedience resulted in God miraculously multiplying these limited resources that the man committed to Him to produce enough for everyone in need (v. 43; cf. Matt. 14:16-21; 15:32-38). The people of Israel thus saw again God's ability to provide food in contrast to Baal. The people also learned that God's blessing is much greater than what people dedicate to Him.
Naaman (Aram. gracious) was commander of the Aramean army under Ben-Hadad II (cf. 1 Kings 15:18, 20). 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. Lev. 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.30The Hebrew word translated "leprosy"and the disease it represented covered many afflictions of the skin.
The faith of the slave girl (v. 3) contrasts with the general unbelief that prevailed in Israel at this time (cf. Luke 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. Deut 1:38; 1 Sam 19:7)."31
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.32Ancient peoples considered clothing much more valuable than modern Americans 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's behaving as though Jehoram was just that (v. 7). He thought the Aramean king was trying to provoke another quarrel (cf. 1 Kings 20:1-3).
Even though Jehoram was not a faithful representative of Yahweh, Elisha was (v. 8). Elisha treated Naaman as a superior would treat an inferior (v. 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.33Naaman'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 enjoyed cleansing (v. 14). Dipping seven times would have signified to everyone in that culture that his healing that followed was a work of God.34His flesh experienced healing from the leprosy and even returned to the texture of a child. Perhaps this was an evidence of Naaman's child-like faith. Furthermore God even cleansed the commander of the defilement of this fatal disease.
Naaman's restoration convinced him that Yahweh's power was superior. This was a lesson Jehoram had refused to learn (v. 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 (Luke. 4:23-30). Elisha did not accept a present from Naaman because to accept one would have implied that he personally had been responsible for the miracle (v. 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 his own land or, if that was impossible, on an altar built on the dirt of that land (v. 17).35The chief god of Damascus was Hadad-Rimmon (v. 18).
Gehazi's decision to take a reward from Naaman was deliberate, not compulsive, as is clear from his statement, "As the Lord lives"(v. 20). He had to tell a lie to obtain the gift (v. 21). A talent weighed 75 pounds (v. 22). The hill (v. 24) was the one on which Samaria stood (cf. v. 3). Gehazi tried to cover one lie with another (v. 25). Elisha explained that since many people did not respect Yahweh's prophets it was inappropriate to receive gifts as Gehazi had done (v. 26; cf. v. 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 (v. 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."36
"This text contains one of the great Gentile conversion accounts in the Old Testament. Like Rahab (Josh 2:9-13), Ruth (Ruth 1:16-18), and the sailors and Ninevites in Jonah (Jonah 1:16; 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."37
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 1 Kings 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.
"In contrast to Gehazi who had received the reward of his unfaithfulness, the account unfolded here is a demonstration of the reward of faithful labor."38
The expensive39iron ax head was similar to Israel since it was an instrument used for constructive and destructive purposes (cf. Exod. 19:5-6). Like the ax, Israel had belonged to another, Egypt, but God used it for a temporary job He had to do since the Exodus. Unfortunately Israel had gone its own way (flown off the ax handle) and appeared lost to any further usefulness. Perhaps the water symbolized the nations among whom Israel had sunk since water often represents the Gentile nations elsewhere in the Old Testament. Nevertheless God was able to restore His people to a place of usefulness again even as Elisha restored the ax head to its user. I suspect that around the fireside that night, after this incident took place, Elisha explained the significance of this miracle for the sons of the prophets. From then on they passed this story along until it became part of the folklore of Israel.
The king of Aram was probably Ben-Hadad II though the writer did not mention him by name (v. 8). Perhaps since he only identified Elisha and Yahweh by name, he wished to focus attention on them as the main characters in this drama. Dothan was about 12 miles north of Samaria (v. 13).40Here is another vain attempt by a king to silence prophecy (cf. 1 Kings 17:1-24; 18:1-15; 19:1-18; 2 Kings 1:1-15). The Aramean king tried again to surprise the Israelites (v. 14) after having failed many times in his previous attempts to do so (vv. 8-12). This shows that he did not really believe Elisha could predict his movements. The events that followed proved him wrong.
The Arameans surrounded Dothan (v. 15; cf. v. 13). Elisha realized that God's angelic army was in control (v. 17; cf. 2:11; Ps. 34:7). His protégé, whoever he may have been, needed to learn to see with the eyes of faith as Elisha could (v. 17). Elisha led the temporarily blinded Aramean army into Samaria because Dothan was not the city where God wanted them (v. 19).
King Jehoram referred to Elisha as his father (v. 21) because he realized this great victory had come from Elisha who was superior to him for accomplishing it. It was not God's purpose to kill the Arameans but to deliver the Israelites and to teach them a spiritual lesson (v. 22). In the ancient Near East eating together under one's roof constituted making a covenant of peace.41Social custom now bound the Arameans not to attack the friend who had spared their lives and had extended the honor of hospitality. Consequently the Arameans did not invade Israel for some time (v. 23; cf. vv. 8-10; v. 24). Perhaps we should understand verse 23 to mean that the Arameans never again sent small companies of troops against Israel.42
What the Israelite army could not have accomplished without much fighting and loss of life God did peacefully through one man. This should have been a clear lesson to everyone in Israel that Yahweh was her strong deliverer as well as her sovereign. God did not provide this victory because of the Israelites' obedience but to teach them lessons.
Aram's cessation of hostilities resumed after some time (v. 24; cf. v. 23), perhaps between 845 and 841 B.C.43The famine in Samaria resulted from the siege that was a punishment from the Lord for Israel's apostasy (cf. Lev. 26:27-29; Deut. 28:52-53, 57; Ezek. 5:10). "Dove's dung"(v. 25) is probably a better translation of the Hebrew word hiryyownimthan "seed pods"(NIV).44The two mothers who approached King Jehoram recall the two mothers who asked King Solomon for justice (1 Kings 3:16-28), but now the situation was more serious. Individuals could always appeal directly to the king.45Yahweh forced Jehoram to acknowledge His superiority over him (v. 27), but the king did not submit to God's authority. The Mosaic Law had warned of the extreme distress the Israelites were experiencing (v. 29; cf. Lev. 26:29; Deut. 28:53). The sackcloth Jehoram wore represented repentance, but that repentance was very superficial (v. 30; cf. vv. 31, 33). As Jezebel had threatened to kill Elijah, her son now threatened Elisha (v. 31; cf. 1 Kings 19:2).
Jehoram planned to murder Elisha as his father Ahab had murdered Naboth (v. 32; cf. 1 Kings 21:1-16). He also grew impatient with the Lord as Saul had grown impatient with Samuel (v. 33; cf. 1 Sam. 15:11). We see the king's real wickedness in his behavior.
Jehoram's officer did not believe Yahweh could, much less would, do what Elisha predicted (7:1-2). In this he represented many others in Israel who had abandoned Yahweh for Baal.
The four lepers likewise represented many in Israel whose hopeless destiny was death because of their uncleanness (v. 3). They were, however, the undeserving recipients of God's grace. They became the source of blessing (life) to others when they reported what God had graciously provided for all the hopeless Samaritans (vv. 9-10). Understandably many preachers have used them as examples of sinners saved by grace.
God dispersed the besieging Aramean army supernaturally (v. 6; cf. 2:11; 6:17). He accomplished this deliverance through no work of those whom He saved.
Rather than asking Elisha what was going on (v. 12; cf. 6:21) Jehoram relied on his own wisdom, but that gave him no comfort. The writer concluded this story by emphasizing the judgment the royal officer experienced for his unbelief (vv. 17-20). His fate as God had previously announced happened exactly as predicted (vv. 17-18). Such would be the destiny of all in Israel who refused to believe what God had said in His Law and through His prophets.
Chapter 7 is one of many sections in Scripture composed in a chiastic literary structure that stresses a particular point in the story. We could outline it as follows.
AThe royal officer's unbelief vv. 1-2a
BElisha's prediction of relief v. 2b
CThe lepers' decision vv. 3-5
DYahweh's salvation v. 6
C'The leper's deliverance vv. 7-10
B'The fulfillment of Elisha's prediction vv. 11-15
A'The royal officer's judgment vv. 16-20
This structure emphasizes the central element, Yahweh's salvation, and teaches other lessons in concentric circles of significance. These points include the role of the lepers in bringing news of deliverance to the doomed Samaritans. They were evangelists in the truest sense. The value of God's revelation is another lesson as is the folly of rejecting that revelation.
Several details in this incident hinge on timing that God supernaturally controlled to bring blessing on the woman as God had promised. God directed her away from the famine before it came on Israel for the nation's apostasy (v. 1; cf. Deut. 11:16-17; 28:38-40; 1 Kings 18:2; et al.). The timing of the length of the famine showed it was an act of God (v. 1; cf. 4:38; 6:25; 7:4). Evidently the woman had sold her property before she left Israel and now wished to buy back her family inheritance. This was a right that the Mosaic Law protected (Lev. 25:23-28; Num. 36:7; cf. 1 Kings 21:3). Another view is that the woman had left her property and the crown had taken it over. In such a situation the state held the land until the legal owner reclaimed it (Exod. 21:2; 23:10-11; Deut. 15:1-2).46Her position was similar to that of Naomi in the Book of Ruth. She had fled a famine, lost her male supporter, and was at the mercy of the political system.47Jehoram was responsible to enforce the Law, and he did so in this case. What God used to move him to grant the woman's request was the story Gehazi happened(!) to tell him about this woman (v. 5).48God blessed her for her obedience to God's instructions that came to her through Elisha (v. 1). He not only restored her house and land but also the produce of her land (its fertility; v. 6). Thus the Israelites saw that Yahweh is the lord of time who brings blessing on the faithful.
"Elisha wields as much political influence as any biblical prophet."49
Hazael was the governor of Damascus.50The Gentile King of Aram had more interest in inquiring of Yahweh than Jehoram's predecessor did (v. 8; cf. 1:2). It was customary in the Near East to make a great show of giving gifts. It was also common to have one camel carry only one gift to make the present appear even greater.
Ben-Hadad would have recovered (v. 10) if Hazael had not murdered him (v. 15). Elisha probably knew Hazael would murder him. The prophet fixed his gaze steadily on Hazael perhaps hoping to embarrass him out of doing the deed (v. 11). Hazael evidently became ashamed because he felt Elisha could read his mind (v. 11). Hazael would be God's instrument of judgment on Israel (v. 12; cf. 1 Kings 19:15). He referred to himself humbly as a mere dog incapable of such a feat (v. 13). Hazael did come from lowly stock. On one Assyrian record Shalmaneser referred to him as "the son of a nobody."51
Like Saul, David, and Solomon, Hazael learned he would be king by special revelation from the Lord (v. 13). Whether this announcement accompanied Elisha's anointing by Elijah (1 Kings 19:15) or whether that took place at another time we do not know. Rather than waiting for God to place him on Aram's throne at the proper time, as David so admirably did, Hazael murdered Ben-Hadad. He did so in a manner that made it look as though the king had died of natural causes (v. 15).
Ben-Hadad II died in 841 B.C. and Hazael ruled from 841-801 B.C. during the reigns of Jehoram, Jehu, and Jehoahaz of Israel, and Ahaziah, Athaliah, and Joash of Judah.
The incidents in this Elisha narrative (2:1-8:15) give us many insights into Jehoram and his reign over Israel. Like Ahab and Ahaziah before him he had little regard for Yahweh. Consequently he did not enjoy much blessing from God personally, and Israel experienced severe discipline in the form of famines, invasions by foreign neighbors, and lack of influence. Nevertheless there were a few in Israel who remained faithful to the Lord including the prophets (about 7,000 individuals; 1 Kings 19:18).
The meanings of the miracles Elisha performed that I have suggested rest on standard principles of historical grammatical interpretation. I have sought to understand what the original readers of Kings would have seen these miracles as signifying. The meanings of the words in the text, the relationship of the miracle to its context, and the meaning of symbols as biblical and extrabiblical references reveal are key interpretive factors. Commentators differ, of course, in their understandings of these matters as well as the interpretive problems. However on the basis of the study I have done the views expressed above seem to me to be what these miracles signified when they occurred.53
