2 kings 8 commentary

2 KI GS 8 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
The Shunammite’s Land Restored
1 ow Elisha had said to the woman whose son he
had restored to life, “Go away with your family
and stay for a while wherever you can, because
the Lord has decreed a famine in the land that
will last seven years.”
BAR ES, "The famine here recorded, and the conversation of the monarch with
Gehazi, must have been anterior to the events related in 2 Kings 5 since we may be sure
that a king of Israel would not have entered into familiar conversation with a confirmed
leper. The writer of Kings probably col ected the miracles of Elisha from various sources,
and did not always arrange them chronologically. Here the link of connection is to be
found in the nature of the miracle. As Elisha on one occasion prophesied plenty, so on
another he had prophesied a famine.
Called for a famine - A frequent expression (compare the marginal references).
God’s “calling for” anything is the same as His producing it (see Eze_36:29; Rom_4:17).
CLARKE, "Then spake Elisha - As this is the relation of an event far past, the words
should be translated, “But Elisha had spoken unto the woman whose son he had
restored unto life; and the woman had arisen, and acted according to the saying of the
man of God, and had gone with her family, and had sojourned in the land of the
Philistines seven years.” What is mentioned in these two verses happened several years
before the time specified in the third verse. See the observations at the end of the
preceding chapter, 2Ki_7:17 (note).
GILL, "Then spoke Elisha unto the woman (whose son he had restored to
life),.... His hostess at Shunem, 2Ki_4:8 the following he said to her, not after the
famine in Samaria, but before it, as some circumstances show:
saying, arise, and go thou and thine household, and sojourn wheresoever

thou canst sojourn; with the greatest safety to her person and property, and with the
least danger to her moral and religious character:
for the Lord hath called for a famine, and it shall also come upon the land
seven years: which Jarchi says was the famine that was in the days of Joel; it was,
undoubtedly, on account of the idolatry of Israel, and was double the time of that in the
days of Elijah.
HE RY 1-6, "Here we have,
I. The wickedness of Israel punished with a long famine, one of God's sore judgments
often threatened in the law. Canaan, that fruitful land, was turned into barrenness, for
the iniquity of those that dwelt therein. The famine in Samaria was soon relieved by the
raising of that siege, but neither that judgment nor that mercy had a due influence upon
them, and therefore the Lord called for another famine; for when he judgeth he will
overcome. If less judgments do not prevail to bring men to repentance, he will send
greater and longer; they are at his beck, and will come when he calls for them. He does,
by his ministers, call for reformation and obedience, and, if those calls be not regarded,
we may expect he will call for some plague or other, for he will be heard. This famine
continued seven years, as long again as that in Elijah's time; for if men will walk contrary
to him, he will heat the furnace yet hotter.
II. The kindness of the good Shunammite to the prophet rewarded by the care that
was taken of her in that famine; she was not indeed fed by miracle, as the widow of
Sarepta was, but, 1. She had notice given her of this famine before it came, that she
might provide accordingly, and was directed to remove to some other country; any
where but in Israel she would find plenty. It was a great advantage to Egypt in Joseph's
time that they had notice of the famine before it came, so it was to this Shunammite;
others would be forced to remove at last, after they had long borne the grievances of the
famine, and had wasted their substance, and could not settle elsewhere upon such good
terms as she might that went early, before the crowd, and took her stock with her
unbroken. It is our happiness to foresee an evil, and our wisdom, when we foresee an
evil, and our wisdom, when we foresee it, to hide ourselves. 2. Providence gave her a
comfortable settlement in the land of the Philistines, who, though subdued by David, yet
were not wholly rooted out. It seems the famine was peculiar to the land of Israel, and
other countries that joined close to them had plenty at the same time, which plainly
showed the immediate hand of God in it (as in the plagues of Egypt, when they
distinguished between the Israelites and the Egyptians) and that the sins of Israel,
against whom this judgment was directly levelled, were more provoking to God than the
sins of their neighbours, because of their profession of relation to God. You only have I
known, therefore will I punish you, Amo_3:2. Other countries had rain when they had
none, were free from locusts and caterpillars when they were eaten up with them; for
some think this was the famine spoken of, Joe_1:3, Joe_1:4. It is strange that when there
was plenty in the neighbouring countries there were not those that made it their
business to import corn into the land of Israel, which might have prevented the
inhabitants from removing; but, as they were befooled with their idolatries, so they were
infatuated even in the matters of their civil interest.
III. Her petition to the king at her return, favoured by the seasonableness of her
application to him. 1. When the famine was over she returned out of the land of the
Philistines; that was no proper place for an Israelite to dwell any longer than there was a
necessity for so doing, for there she could not keep her new moons and her sabbaths as
she used to do in her own country, among the schools of the prophets, 2Ki_4:23. 2. At

her return she found herself kept out of the possession of her own estate, it being either
confiscated to the exchequer, seized by the lord, or usurped in her absence by some of
the neighbours; or perhaps the person she had entrusted with the management of it
proved false, and would neither resign it to her nor come to an account with her for the
profits: so hard is it to find a person that one can put a confidence in in a time of trouble,
Pro_25:19; Mic_7:5. 3. She made her application to the king himself for redress; for, it
seems (be it observed to his praise), he was easy of access, and did himself take
cognizance of the complaint of his injured subjects. Time was when she dwelt so securely
among her own people that she had no occasion to be spoken for to the king, or to the
captain of the host (2Ki_4:13); but now her own familiar friends, in whom she trusted,
proved so unjust and unkind that she was glad to appeal to the king against them. Such
uncertainty there is in the creature that that may fail us which we most depend upon and
that befriend us which we think we shall never need. 4. She found the king talking with
Gehazi about Elisha's miracles, 2Ki_8:4. It was his shame that he needed now to be
informed concerning them, when he might have acquainted himself with them as they
were done from Elisha himself, if he had not been wiling to shut his eyes against the
convincing evidence of his mission; yet it was his praise that he was now better disposed,
and would rather talk with a leper that was capable of giving a good account of them
than continue ignorant of them. The law did not forbid all conversation with lepers, but
only dwelling with them. There being then no priests in Israel, perhaps the king, or some
one appointed by him, had the inspection of lepers, and passed the judgment upon
them, which might bring him acquainted with Behazi. 5. This happy coincidence
befriended both Behazi's narrative and her petition. Providence is to be acknowledged in
ordering the circumstances of events, for sometimes those that are minute in themselves
prove of great consequence, as this did, for, (1.) It made the king ready to believe
Gehazi's narrative when it was thus confirmed by the persons most nearly concerned:
“This is the woman, and this her son; let them speak for themselves,” 2Ki_8:5. Thus did
God even force him to believe what he might have had some colour to question if he had
only had Gehazi's word for it, because he was branded for a liar, witness his leprosy. (2.)
It made him ready to grant her request; for who would not be ready to favour one whom
heaven had thus favoured, and to support a life which was given once and again by
miracle? In consideration of this the king gave orders that her land should be restored to
her and all the profits that were made of it in her absence. If it was to himself that the
land and profits had escheated, it was generous and kind to make so full a restitution; he
would not (as Pharaoh did in Joseph's time) enrich the crown by the calamities of his
subjects. If it was by some other person that her property was invaded, it was an act of
justice in the king, and part of the duty of his place, to give her redress, Psa_82:3, Psa_
82:4; Pro_31:9. It is not enough for those in authority that they do no wrong themselves,
but they must support the right of those that are wronged.
JAMISO "2Ki_8:1-6. The Shunammite’s land restored.
Then spake Elisha unto the woman — rather “had spoken.” The repetition of
Elisha’s direction to the Shunammite is merely given as an introduction to the following
narrative; and it probably took place before the events recorded in 2Ki_5:1-27 and 2Ki_
6:1-33.
the Lord hath called for a famine — All such calamities are chastisements
inflicted by the hand of God; and this famine was to be of double duration to that one
which happened in the time of Elijah (Jam_5:17) - a just increase of severity, since the
Israelites still continued obdurate and incorrigible under the ministry and miracles of

Elisha (Lev_26:21, Lev_26:24, Lev_26:28).
K&D, "Elisha's Influence Helps the Shunammite to the Possession of her House and
Field. - 2Ki_8:1, 2Ki_8:2. By the advice of Elisha, the woman whose son the prophet had
restored to life (2Ki_4:33) had gone with her family into the land of the Philistines
during a seven years' famine, and had remained there seven years. The two verses are
rendered by most commentators in the pluperfect, and that with perfect correctness, for
they are circumstantial clauses, and ‫ם‬ ָ‫ק‬ ָ ַ‫ו‬ is merely a continuation of ‫ר‬ ֶ ִ , the two together
preparing the way for, and introducing the following event. The object is not to relate a
prophecy of Elisha of the seven years' famine, but what afterwards occurred, namely,
how king Joram was induced by the account of Elisha's miraculous works to have the
property of the Shunammite restored to her upon her application. The seven years'
famine occurred in the middle of Joram's reign, and the event related here took place
before the curing of Naaman the Syrian (2 Kings 5), as is evident from the fact that
Gehazi talked with the king (2Ki_8:4), and therefore had not yet been punished with
leprosy. But it cannot have originally stood between 2Ki_4:37 and 2Ki_4:38, as Thenius
supposes, because the incidents related in 2Ki_4:38-44 belong to the time of this famine
(cf. 2Ki_4:38), and therefore precede the occurrence mentioned here. By the words, “the
Lord called the famine, and it came seven years” (sc., lasting that time), the famine is
described as a divine judgment for the idolatry of the nation.
BE SO ,"2 Kings 8:1. Then spake Elisha — There is nothing in the Hebrew for
this particle of time, then. It is literally, And Elisha spake, or, as Houbigant renders
it, had spoken. So 2 Kings 8:2, The woman had arisen, and done, &c. He
conjectures, from 2 Kings 8:4, that this event happened before Gehazi was struck
with the leprosy: this, however, is by no means certain. On the other hand, most
commentators seem to be of opinion that it took place in the order in which it is
recorded in the history, after the events related in the former chapter, and some
think several years after. Unto the woman whose son he had restored to life —
Manifesting his gratitude for her former kindness, by taking special care for her
preservation. Go thou, and sojourn, &c. — In any convenient place out of the land
of Israel. For the Lord hath called for a famine — Hath appointed to bring a famine
upon the country, or a great scarcity of provisions. The manner of speaking
intimates that all afflictions are sent by God, and come at his call. Seven years — A
double time to the former famine under Elijah, which was but just, because they
were still incorrigible under all the judgments of God, and under the powerful
ministry of Elisha, who confirmed his doctrine by so many astonishing miracles.
COFFMA , "The big problem in this paragraph is the mention of Gehazi. Unless
he had providentially been healed of his leprosy, this episode would necessarily have
had to happen PRIOR TO the healing of aaman, because it would be quite
unlikely that the king of Israel would be talking freely with a leper. This problem
has resulted in different opinions of scholars regarding which king restored the
Shunammite's properties. Hammond believed it was Jehoram,[1] and Martin wrote

that it was Jehu.[2] (See our introduction regarding the uncertainties regarding the
chronologies in 2Kings.) The very fact of the sacred author's omitting the
information that men seek regarding such questions underscores their lack of
importance. It really does not make any difference which king it was. The big point
of the narrative is that of the Shunammite's trust of the prophet's word and her
reward in doing so.
"She went with her household and sojourned in the land of the Philistines" (2 Kings
8:2). The coastal plain of Palestine was usually spared from droughts that came to
Israel, and even when it was not spared, supplies were readily available by sea from
Egypt and the ile Delta. Of course, during the woman's seven years' absence, her
properties were appropriated by someone else, hence, her appeal to the king. Also, it
would appear that during her sojourn in Philistia her husband had died.
"The king was talking with Gehazi ... and as he was telling the king ... behold, the
woman ... cried to the king" (2 Kings 8:4,5). othing is more wonderful than the
timing of the providences of God. " ote the coincidence. God times incidents with
precision; `things work together' (Romans 8:28); they interweave."[3] Another
example is found in the reading to the king of Persia of the honors due Mordecai
just before his asking Haman what should be done for the man whom the king
delighted to honor (Esther 6:1-14).
"The king appointed unto her a certain officer, saying, Restore all that was hers" (2
Kings 8:6). "The primary meaning of the word officer here is eunuch, and the
secondary meaning is court minister."[4] "Eunuch is the preferred meaning here
for propriety's sake when a man accompanied a lady."[5] The introduction of
eunuchs into the social structure of the royal families of Israel was due to their
shameful harems. David possessed eunuchs (1 Chronicles 28:1), and presumably
Solomon also; and afterward "Eunuchs were common in the Samarian court of
Israel; but there is no record of them in the kingdom of Judah until the times of
Hezekiah (Isaiah 56:3-4)."[6]
"What happened here shows that Elisha's previous offer to speak to the king for the
Shunammite woman (2 Kings 4:13) had not been an idle one."[7]
COKE, "2 Kings 8:1. Then spake Elisha, &c.— Elisha had said, &c. So 2 Kings 8:2.
And the woman had arisen, and done, &c. Houbigant: who conjectures from the 4th
verse, that this event happened before Gehazi was stricken with leprosy.
ELLICOTT, "(1-6) How the kindness of the Shunammite woman to Elisha was
further rewarded through the prophet’s influence with the king.
(1) Then spake Elisha.—Rather, ow Elisha had spoken. The time is not defined by
the phrase. It was after the raising of the Shunammite’s son (2 Kings 8:1), and
before the healing of aaman the Syrian, inasmuch as the king still talks with

Gehazi (2 Kings 8:5).
Go thou.—The peculiar form of the pronoun points to the identity of the original
author of this account with the writer of 2 Kings 4. Moreover, the famine here
foretold appears to be that of 2 Kings 4:38, seq., so that the present section must in
the original document have preceded 2 Kings 5. Thenius thinks the compiler
transferred the present account to this place, because he wished to proceed
chronologically, and supposed that the seven years’ famine came to an end with the
raising of the siege of Samaria.
For a famine.—To the famine. The sword, the famine, the noisome beasts, and the
pestilence were Jehovah’s “four sore judgments,” as we find in Ezekiel 14:21.
And it shall also come upon.—And, moreover, it cometh into.
Seven Years.—Perhaps not to be understood literally, any more than Dante’s
“O caro Duca mio che più di sette
Volte m’hai sicurtà. renduta.”—Inferno 8. 97.
EBC, "THE SHU AMMITE A D HAZAEL
2 Kings 8:1-15
(Circa B.C. 886)
"Our acts still follow with us from afar,
And what we have been makes us what we are."
-GEORGE ELIOT
THE next anecdote of Elisha brings us once more into contact with the Lady of
Shunem. Famines, or dearths, were unhappily of very frequent occurrence in a
country which is so wholly dependent, as Palestine is, upon the early and latter rain.
On some former occasion Elisha had foreseen that "Jehovah had called for a
famine"; for the sword, the famine, and the pestilence are represented as ministers
who wait His bidding (Jeremiah 25:29; Ezekiel 38:21). He had also foreseen that it
would be of long duration, and in kindness to the Shunammite had warned her that
she had better remove for a time into a land in which there was greater plenty. It
was under similar circumstances that Elimelech and aomi, ancestors of David’s
line, had taken their sons Mahlon and Chillon and gone to live in the land of Moab;
and, indeed, the famine which decided the migration of Jacob and his children into
Egypt had been a turning-point in the history of the Chosen People.

The Lady of Shunem had learnt by experience the weight of Elisha’s words. Her
husband is not mentioned, and was probably dead; so she arose with her household,
and went for seven years to live in the plain of Philistia. At the end of that time the
dearth had ceased, and she returned to Shunem, but only to find that during her
absence her house and land were in possession of other owners, and had probably
escheated to the Crown. The king was the ultimate, and to a great extent the only,
source of justice in his little kingdom, and she went to lay her claim before him and
demand the restitution of her property. By a providential circumstance she came
exactly at the most favorable moment. The king-it must have been Jehoram-was at
the very time talking to Gehazi about the great works of Elisha. As it is unlikely that
he would converse long with a leper, and as Gehazi is still called "the servant of the
man of God," the incident may here be narrated out of order. It is pleasant to find
Jehoram taking so deep an interest in the prophet’s story. Already on many
occasions during his wars with Moab and Syria, as well as on the occasion of
aaman’s visit, if that had already occurred, he had received the completest proof
of the reality of Elisha’s mission, but he might be naturally unaware of the many
private incidents in which he had exhibited a supernatural power. Among other
stories Gehazi was telling him that of the Shunammite, and how Elisha had given
life to her dead son. At that juncture she came before the king, and Gehazi said,
"My lord, O king, this is the very woman, and this is her son whom Elisha recalled
to life." In answer to Jehoram’s questions she confirmed the story, and he was so
much impressed by the narrative that he not only ordered the immediate restitution
of her land, but also of the value of its products during the seven years of her exile.
We now come to the fulfillment of the second of the commands which Elijah had
received so long before at Horeb. To complete the retribution which was yet to fall
on Israel, he had been bidden to anoint Hazael to be king of Syria in the room of
Benhadad. Hitherto the mandate had remained unfulfilled, because no opportunity
had occurred; but the appointed time had now arrived. Elisha, for some purpose,
and during an interval of peace, visited Damascus, where the visit of aaman and
the events of the Syrian wars had made his name very famous. Benhadad II,
grandson or great-grandson of Rezin, after a stormy reign of some thirty years,
marked by some successes, but also by the terrible reverses already recorded, lay
dangerously ill. Hearing the news that the wonder-working prophet of Israel was in
his capital, he sent to ask of him the question, "Shall I recover?" It had been the
custom from the earliest days to propitiate the favor of prophets by presents,
without which even the humblest suppliant hardly ventured to approach them. The
gift sent by Benhadad was truly royal, for he thought perhaps that he could
purchase the intercession or the miraculous intervention of this mighty
thaumaturge. He sent Hazael with a selection "of every good thing of Damascus,"
and, like an Eastern, he endeavored to make his offering seem more magnificent by
distributing it on the backs of forty camels.
At the head of this imposing procession of camels walked Hazael, the commander of
the forces, and stood in Elisha’s presence with the humble appeal, "Thy son
Benhadad, King of Syria, hath sent me to thee, saying, Shall I recover of this
disease?"

About the king’s munificence we are told no more, but we cannot doubt that it was
refused. If aaman’s still costlier blessing had been rejected, though he was about to
receive through Elisha’s ministration an inestimable boon, it is unlikely that Elisha
would accept a gift for which he could offer no return, and which, in fact, directly or
indirectly, involved the death of the sender. But the historian does not think it
necessary to pause and tell us that Elisha sent back the forty camels unladen of their
treasures. It was not worthwhile to narrate what was a matter of course. If it had
been no time, a few years earlier, to receive money and garments, and olive-yards
and vineyards, and men-servants and maid-servants, still less was it a time to do so
now. The days were darker now than they had been, and Elisha himself stood near
the Great White Throne. The protection of these fearless prophets lay in their utter
simplicity of soul. They rose above human fears because they stood above human
desires. What Elisha possessed was more than sufficient for the needs of the plain
and humble life of one whose communing was with God. It was not wonderful that
prophets should rise to an elevation whence they could look down with indifference
upon the superfluities of the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, when even sages of
the heathen have attained to a similar independence of earthly luxuries. One who
can climb such mountain-heights can look with silent contempt on gold.
But there is a serious difficulty about Elisha’s answer to the embassage. "Go, say
unto him"-so it is rendered in our Authorized Version-"Thou mayest certainly
recover: howbeit the, Lord hath showed me that he shall surely die."
It is evident that the translators of 1611 meant the emphasis to be laid on the
"mayest," and understood the answer of Elisha to mean, "Thy recovery is quite
possible; and yet"-he adds to Hazael, and not as part of his answer to the
king-"Jehovah has shown me that dying he shall die,"-not indeed of this disease, but
by other means before he has recovered from it.
Unfortunately, however, the Hebrew will not bear this meaning. Elisha bids Hazael
to go back with the distinct message, "Thou shalt surely recover," as it is rightly
rendered in the Revised Version.
This, however, is the rendering, not of the written text as it stands, but of the
margin. Every one knows that in the Masoretic original the text itself is called the
K’thib, or "what is written," whereas the margin is called Q’ri, " read." ow, our
translators, both those of 1611 and those of the Revision Committee, all but
invariably follow the Kethib as the most authentic reading. In this instance,
however, they abandon the rule and translate the marginal reading.
What, then, is the written text?
It is the reverse of the marginal reading, for it has: "Go, say, Thou shalt not
recover."
The reader may naturally ask the cause of this startling discrepancy.

It seems to be twofold.
(I) Both the Hebrew word, lo, " not" (alo), and the word lo, to him, have precisely
the same pronunciation. Hence this text might mean either "Go, say to him, Thou
shalt certainly recover," or "Go, say, Thou shalt not recover." The same identity of
the negative and the dative of the preposition has made nonsense of another passage
of the Authorized Version, where "Thou hast multiplied the nation, and not
increased the joy: they joy before Thee according to the joy of harvest," should be
"Thou hast multiplied the nation, and increased its joy." So, too, the verse "It is He
that hath made us, and not we ourselves," may mean "It is He that hath made us,
and to Him we belong." In the present case the adoption of the negative (which
would have conveyed to Benhadad the exact truth) is not possible; for it makes the
next clause and its introduction by the word "Howbeit" entirely meaningless.
But-
(II) this confusion in the text might not have arisen in the present instance but for
the difficulty of Elisha’s appearing to send a deliberately false message to
Benhadad, and a message which he tells Hazael at the time is false.
Can this be deemed impossible?
With the views prevalent in "those times of ignorance," I think not. Abraham and
Isaac, saints and patriarchs as they were, both told practical falsehoods about their
wives. They, indeed, were reproved for this, though not severely; but, on the other
hand, Jael is not reproved for her treachery to Sisera; and Samuel, under the
semblance of a Divine permission, used a diplomatic ruse when he visited the
household of Jesse; and in the apologue of Micaiah a lying spirit is represented as
sent forth to do service to Jehovah; and Elisha himself tells a deliberate falsehood to
the Syrians at Dothan. The sensitiveness to the duty of always speaking the exact
truth is not felt in the East with anything like the intensity that it is in Christian
lands; and reluctant as we should be to find in the message of Elisha another
instance of that falsitas dispensativa which has been so fatally patronized by some of
the Fathers and by many Romish theologians, the love of truth itself would compel
us to accept this view of the case if there were no other possible interpretation.
I think, however, that another view is possible. I think that Elisha may have said to
Hazael, "Go, say unto him, Thou shalt surely recover," with the same accent of
irony in which Micaiah said at first to the two kings, "Go up to Ramoth-Gilead, and
prosper; for the Lord shall deliver it into the hand of the king." I think that this
whole manner and the tone of his voice may have shown to Hazael, and may have
been meant to show him, that this was not Elisha’s real message to Benhadad. Or, to
adopt the same line of explanation with an unimportant difference Elisha may have
meant to imply, "Go, follow the bent which I know you will follow; go carry back to
your master the lying message that I said he would recover. But that is not my
message. My message, whether it suits your courtier instincts or not, is that Jehovah

has warned me that he shall surely die."
That some such meaning as this attaches to the verse seems to be shown by the
context. For not only was some reproof involved in Elisha’s words, but he showed
his grief still more by his manner. It was as though he had said, "Take back what
message you choose, but Benhadad will certainly die"; and then he fastened his
steady gaze on the soldier’s countenance, till Hazael blushed and became uneasy.
Only when he noted that Hazael’s conscience was troubled by the glittering eyes
which seemed to read the inmost secrets of his heart did Elisha drop his glance, and
burst into tears. "Why weepeth my lord?" asked Hazael, in still deeper uneasiness.
Whereupon Elisha revealed to him the future. "I weep," he said, "because I see in
thee the curse and the avenger of the sins of my native land. Thou wilt become to
them a sword of God; thou wilt set their fortresses on fire; thou wilt slaughter their
youths; thou wilt dash their little ones to pieces against the stones; thou wilt rip up
their women with child." That he actually inflicted these savageries of warfare on
the miserable Israelites we are not told, but, we are told that he smote them in all
their coasts; that Jehovah delivered them into his hands; that he oppressed Israel all
the days of Jehoahaz. {2 Kings 10:32; 2 Kings 13:3; 2 Kings 13:22} That being so,
there can be no question that he carried out the same laws of atrocious warfare
which belonged to those times and continued long afterwards. Such atrocities were
not only inflicted on the Israelites again and again by the Assyrians and others,
{Isaiah 13:15-16 Hosea 10:14; Hosea 13:16 ahum 3:10} but they themselves had
often inflicted them, and inflicted them with what they believed to be Divine
approval, on their own enemies. {See Joshua 6:17-21 1 Samuel 15:3 Leviticus 27:28-
29} Centuries after, one of their own poets accounted it a beatitude to him who
should dash the children of the Babylonians against the stones. {Psalms 137:9}
As the answer of Hazael is usually read and interpreted, we are taught to regard it
as an indignant declaration that he could never be guilty of such vile deeds. It is
regarded as though it were "an abhorrent repudiation of his future self." The lesson
often drawn from it in sermons is that a man may live to do, and to delight in,
crimes which he once hated and deemed it impossible that he should ever commit.
The lesson is a most true one, and is capable of a thousand illustrations. It conveys
the deeply needed warning that those who, even in thought, dabble with wrong
courses, which they only regard as venial peccadilloes, may live to commit, without
any sense of horror, the most enormous offences. It is the explanation of the terrible
fact that youths who once seemed innocent and holy-minded may grow up, step by
step, into colossal criminals. "Men," says Scherer, "advance unconsciously from
errors to faults, and from faults to crimes, till sensibility is destroyed by the habitual
spectacle of guilt, and the most savage atrocities come to be dignified by the name of
state policy."
"Lui-meme a son portrait force de rendre hommage,
Il fremira d’horreur devant sa propre image."

But true and needful as these lessons are, they are entirely beside the mark as
deduced from the story of Hazael. What he said was not, as in our Authorized
Version, "But what, is thy servant a dog, that he should do this great thing?" nor by
"great thing" does he mean "so deadly a crime." His words, more accurately
rendered in our Revision, are, "But what is thy servant, which is but a dog, that he
should do this great thing?" or, "But what is the dog, thy servant?" It was a
hypocritic deprecation of the future importance and eminence which Elisha had
prophesied for him. There is not the least sense of horror either in his words or in
his thoughts. He merely means "A mere dog, such as I am, can never accomplish
such great designs." A dog in the East is utterly despised; {1 Samuel 24:14; 2
Samuel 9:8} and Hazael, with Oriental irony, calls himself a dog, though he was the
Syrian commander-in-chief-just as a Chinaman, in speaking of himself, adopts the
periphrasis "this little thief."
Elisha did not notice his sham humility, but told him, "The Lord hath showed me
that thou shalt be King over Syria." The date of the event was B.C. 886.
The scene has sometimes been misrepresented to Elisha’s discredit, as though he
suggested to the general the crimes of murder and rebellion The accusation is
entirely untenable. Elisha was, indeed, in one sense, commissioned to anoint Hazael
King of Syria, because the cruel soldier had been predestined by God to that
position; but, in another sense, he had no power whatever to give to Hazael the
mighty kingdom of Aram, nor to wrest it from the dynasty which had now held it
for many generations. All this was brought about by the Divine purpose, in a course
of events entirely out of the sphere of the humble man of God. In the transferring of
this crown he was in no sense the agent or the suggester. The thought of usurpation
must, without doubt, have been already in Hazael’s mind. Benhadad, as far as we
know, was childless. At any rate he had no natural heirs, and seems to have been a
drunken king, whose reckless undertakings and immense failures had so completely
alienated the affections of his subjects from himself and his dynasty, that he died
undesired and unlamented, and no hand was uplifted to strike a blow in his defense.
It hardly needed a prophet to foresee that the scepter would be snatched by so
strong a hand as that of Hazael from a grasp so feeble as that of Benhadad II. The
utmost that Elisha had done was, under Divine guidance, to read his character and
his designs, and to tell him that the accomplishment of these designs was near at
hand.
So Hazael went back to Benhadad, and in answer to the eager inquiry, "What said
Elisha to thee?" he gave the answer which Elisha had foreseen that he meant to
give, and which was in any case a falsehood, for it suppressed half of what Elisha
had really said. "He told me," said Hazael, "that thou shouldest surely recover."
Was the sequel of the interview the murder of Benhadad by Hazael?
The story has usually been so read, but Elisha had neither prophesied this nor
suggested it. The sequel is thus described. "And it came to pass on the morrow, that
he took the coverlet, and dipped it" in "water, and spread it on his face so that he

died: and Hazael reigned in his stead." The repetition of the name Hazael in the last
clause is superfluous if he was the subject of the previous clause, and it has been
consequently conjectured that "he took" is merely the impersonal idiom "one took."
Some suppose that, as Benhadad was in the bath, his servant took the bath-cloth,
wetted it, and laid its thick folds over the mouth of the helpless king; others, that he
soaked the thick quilt, which the king was too weak to lift away. In either case it is
hardly likely that a great officer like Hazael would have been in the bath-room or
the bedroom of the dying king. Yet we must remember that the Praetorian Praefect
Macro is said to have suffocated Tiberius with his bed-clothes. Josephus says that
Hazael strangled his master with a net; and, indeed, he has generally been held
guilty of the perpetration of the murder. But it is fair to give him the benefit of the
doubt. Be that as it may, he seems to have reigned for some forty-six years (B.C.
886-840), and to have bequeathed the scepter to a son on whom he had bestowed the
old dynastic name of Benhadad.
PARKER, "Elisha and Hazael
A difficulty will be found as to the king"s conversation with Gehazi, who has just
been driven out, according to the narrative, from the presence of the prophet "a
leper as white as snow." We follow the criticism, however, which does not regard
the narrative as in strict chronological order. We have here a gathering up of
invaluable historical memoranda, each one of which may be fully relied upon as to
accuracy, but we are not to understand that the events occurred in immediately
successive days. It is in this way that we overcome the difficulty of the conversation
which is reported in the fourth verse.
"The Lord hath called for a famine." ( 2 Kings 8:1.)—What is the meaning of that
expression? Simply, the Lord hath produced it—ordered it; it is part of his
providence. "God said, Let there be light: and there was light." A wonderful thing
is this we find in the whole Bible—God calling for circumstances as if they were
creatures which could hear him, and respond to his call; as if famine and plenty,
pestilence and scourge of every name, were so many personalities, all standing back
in the clouds: and God said, Famine, forward! and immediately the famine came
and took away the bread of the people; but then next door to famine stands plenty,
and God says to abundance, Forward! and the earth laughs in harvest; the table is
abundantly spread, and every living thing is satisfied. Take Ezekiel ( Ezekiel 36:29),
as presenting the pleasant side of this call by the voice divine: "I call for the corn,
and will increase it, and lay no famine upon you." Hear how the divine voice rolls
through all this sphere of revelation. If we proceed to Romans 4:17, we find in the
last clause of the verse words often overlooked: "God... calleth those things which be
not as though they were." God is always creating, calling something out of nothing,
amazing the ages by new flashes of glory, unexpected disclosures of grace. Calling
for a famine is a frequent expression. We find it, for example, in the Psalm ,
"Moreover he called for a famine upon the land: he brake the whole staff of bread"
( Psalm 105:16); and we find it in so out-of-the-way corner as the prophecy of
Haggai , "And I called for a drought upon the land, and upon the mountains, and

upon the corn, and upon the new wine, and upon the oil, and upon that which the
ground bringeth forth, and upon men, and upon cattle, and upon all the labour of
the hands" ( 2 Kings 1:11). The earth is the Lord"s and the fulness thereof. So there
are men who still believe that plague, and pestilence, and short harvest, and things
evil that are of a material kind, have a subtle and often immeasurable relation to a
divine thought, to a new disclosure of divine providence; that all these things round
about us are used as instruments in the chastening, and education, and
sanctification of the human race. We cannot be laughed out of this citadel.
Sometimes we have half left it under the joke of the giber, because we had no
answer to the mocker"s laugh; but presently we began to see how things are related,
how mysteriously earth belongs to heaven, and how the simplest, meanest flower
that grows draws its life-blood from the sun; then we have returned into the
sanctuary, and said, Be the mysteries dark as they may, and all but innumerable,
there is a comfort in this doctrine that there is in none other—and not a quieting
comfort after the nature of a soporific, but an encouraging, stimulating, rousing
comfort, that lifts our prayer into a nobler elevation, and sharpens our voice by the
introduction of a new accent. So we abide in this Christian faith, and await the
explanation which God has promised.
This call for a famine was made known by Elisha unto the woman whose son he had
restored to life. There are people who have intimations of coming events. Account
for it as we may, one man does see farther than another. We may content ourselves
by saying, This is due to intellectual capacity; this prescience is a mere freak of
talent or of genius; it is one of the phenomena not yet brought within the reach of
any recognised law. We may talk nonsense of that kind to ourselves in our lowest
moods, but again the spirit is suddenly lifted to the right point of observation, and
we come to this solemn fact: "The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him."
We cannot tell on grounds philosophical or merely rational how we did what has
saved us from a thousand troubles. How did the idea occur to us that if we
introduced such and such a line into our covenant it would be better? At the time
nothing seemed less likely than that such a line would be either needed or operative;
and now we find that the insertion of that one line has been to us liberty, perhaps
wealth, perhaps comfort. The prophetic spirit has never been withdrawn from the
world, but the prophetic spirit has always been punished by the world. The
prophets have always had to sleep outside, and get the hairy garment where they
could for the covering of their bare shoulders. The world hates to live the future
within a day, when that future is declared by a prophetic voice, which not only
announces comforts but pronounces judgments. In the way of anxiety the world will
live any number of days at a time; in the spirit of apprehension some men are living
seven years ahead of themselves at this moment: but not in the prophetic sense of
anticipation, which sees a great reconcilement of all contradictions, the uplifting of
clouds from covered mountains, and the incoming and downpouring of heaven"s
radiant morning that shall clothe all things with the glory of God. We cannot,
therefore, tell how it is that some men have intimations of what is coming, and how
those intimations are passed on even to the humblest class of the population.
Hearing this word, "The woman arose, and did after the saying of the man of God:

and she went with her household, and sojourned in the land of the Philistines seven
years" ( 2 Kings 8:2). Here is a wonderful fact—that there should be plenty in
Philistia, and nothing in the land which we call promised and holy. This is a
circumstance not easily to be understood, that the enemy should have abundance,
and that those who are supposed to have special relations to the divine throne
should be left empty-handed. There was always plenty in the low-lying land or
valley inhabited by these Philistines; or, if they had not plenty of themselves, they
could easily import it by sea from Egypt. Behold, the Philistines had the best of it!
They have today, if the terms "the best of it" are to be measured by wheat, and oil,
and wine, and gold. We should not be surprised, if these standards be erected, if the
"world," as we understand that word, should be in a superior condition of comfort
to those who are spiritually-minded and whose house is in heaven. How long shall
we be learning the lesson that "a man"s life consisteth not in the abundance of the
things which he possesseth"? how long also in learning that man shall not live by
bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God? When
shall we be made to understand that this world is but a beginning, a symbol, an
alphabetical hint of a great literature to us yet unpublished and unknown? Until
Christians learn that lesson they will often be chafed and exasperated by
appearances which seem to point in the direction that worldly-mindedness or
worldly-wisdom furnishes the true security and reward of life. When they seek first
the kingdom of God, and his righteousness, the world will believe that they are at
least consistent with their faith, even though that faith be found at last to be a
delusion. "Ye cannot serve God and mammon."
The famine is now over. "The woman returned out of the land of the Philistines:
and she went forth to cry unto the king for her house and for her land" ( 2 Kings
8:3). Immediate access to the king was permitted in Oriental countries; so we read
in 2 Samuel 14:4 : "And when the woman of Tekoah spake to the king, she fell on
her face to the ground, and did obeisance, and said, Help, O king,;" and in 1 Kings
3:16 : "Then came there two women, that were harlots, unto the king, and stood
before him;" and in 2 Kings 6:26 : "And as the king of Israel was passing by upon
the wall, there cried a woman unto him, saying, Help, my lord, O king." That is a
remarkable circumstance that the people should be permitted to speak to the king.
It is so in a limited sense now: but in a sense so limited as to be painful to those who
care for it The king should hear the sufferer himself if he would understand the
petition. The written petition the king might read in his own tone, and the king
might be in an evil humour or in a frivolous mood; he might hasten over the lines as
if they contained nothing; but when the petitioner stands before the king, and says,
"Help, O lord, the king," the king is in a position to know by the very voice how far
the person addressing him is animated by a spirit of profound and rational
earnestness. What is impossible under many human conditions is possible as
between the soul and God. When shall we learn this fact, accept it, and rest in it?
Then should we know the meaning of the words, "Pray without ceasing;" "Wait on
the Lord;" "Rest in the Lord, and wait patiently for him." Let your own voice be
heard in heaven. Do not pray by proxy. Go, hasten to the King and say, Help, O
King of heaven! God be merciful to me a sinner! Let every soul, in the priesthood of
Christ, plead its own case—point to the void that makes its heart so empty. Let

every sinner state his own circumstances, and pray, if not in his own words—for he
may have no gift of words—yet in his own tone. By the tone God judges. Your
words may be made of gold, your sentences built up with stars, and yet be but a
fabric made by the hand; but the tone comes from the heart, and interprets the
spirit"s need, and impresses the infinite ear of the listening God.
We have not spared the kings of Israel or of Judah up to this point. ow an
opportunity is afforded to remark upon the good qualities of one whom we have
condemned in no measured terms. The king asked the woman what she wanted, she
told him, and the king at once "appointed unto her a certain officer, saying, Restore
all that was her"s, and all the fruits of the field since the day that she left the land,
even until now" ( 2 Kings 8:6). The king was bad, but there was this good feature in
his case, and it ought to be pointed out. But remember that the hand may be the
hand of an assassin though there gleams upon it a diamond of the first water. The
king of Israel generously responded to the poor woman"s cry. Let that be set down
to his credit. We do but repel men if we do not recognise whatever may even seem to
be good about them. If there is one spot of light in all the dark cloud, look at it as if
it were of infinite value. Encouragement may help some men towards piety.
Elisha discovers the old form of his character when he proceeds to Damascus. ote
his boldness. We have seen how he baffled the king, how the king sent after him,
and could not find him. The king might as well have sent after the wind,
commanding the charioteer to bring it back. Who can seize a spirit? Who can arrest
a soul? Who can encage a thought? Elisha had been identified with a retreat of
which Syria could only think with humiliation. The Syrians heard a "noise," and
away they ran, as if a flock of sheep had seen a wolf descending on the fold. It was
but a "noise." Who can measure a noise? Who knows what it means? Is it the tramp
of an army? Is it the descent of a cloud filled with spirits? Is it an intimation of the
day of judgment? What does it represent? The king of Syria knew not, and we have
already reminded ourselves that "the wicked flee when no man pursueth." But
Elisha is very bold. He will go down into the king"s own country. Why? Because he
has a message. You cannot have a missionary until you have a gospel. You may have
a man who will run an errand for you on certain specified terms, and the man will
be very particular to have the bond fulfilled. But the man of God will go anywhere,
everywhere, at any time. What makes this Elisha so bold? The message that burns
within him makes him courageous. It is the truth that makes heroes. Given a
conviction that seizes the whole soul, and it will burn its way out into language. Why
have we such dainty preaching; such accommodations to human infirmity and social
circumstances? Because our message is a recitation; because it begins and ends
within mechanical boundaries; because it admits of formulation and of criticism:
whereas the real message of God—the outgoing of the soul in truth and judgment—
defies criticism; is not above it or below it, but away from it, in infinitely higher
spheres, unpolluted, undebased by the pedantry of men who have a trick of seeing
flaws, but no genius for the understanding of entireties and perfect harmonies. We
shall have men hesitating about going to small settlements and to heathen countries,
and to undertaking very difficult work, just in proportion as they have no message.
Given the right message, and all things fall down before it.

When the king heard that the man of God had come, he addressed a message to him
and sent all manner of temptations to the prophet—rich robes, precious metals, the
luscious wines of Helbon, the drink of the Persian kings, the soft white wool of the
Antilibanus, the damask coverings of couches, a procession of forty camels"
burden—all to be offered to Elisha. ow Elisha was above all these things,—we may
not be. Shame upon those who report how many carriages stand at their church-
doors! Shame upon shame to those who wearing a prophet"s mantle of their own
manufacture, have to ask what is the congregation before they can deliver their
message! How independent were these men of old! You could never do them any
favour. They had no "expectations." What the Lord teacheth me, that will I surely
say, though I go home to my salary, which consists of two figures—bread of
affliction, and water of affliction; it is a poor income, but I must deliver God"s
message. The times die for want of that heroic spirit.
The prophet looked upon Hazael—fixed those wondrous eyes upon him; and the
tears came and ran down his furrowed cheeks. "And Hazael said, Why weepeth my
lord? And he [Elisha] answered, Because I know the evil that thou wilt do unto the
children of Israel: their strong holds wilt thou set on fire, and their young men wilt
thou slay with the sword, and wilt dash their children, and rip up their women with
child" ( 2 Kings 8:12). And the prophet cried for the sufferings of Israel. Sometimes
the answer of Hazael is read as though he himself were shocked. He was not
shocked. He gloried in the prophecy. Read the thirteenth verse thus: But what, thy
servant only a dog—is it possible that Hebrews , so mean, can do this great thing?
He gloried in his wickedness. When he heard of this cruelty he was like a man who
heard his native tongue in a far-off land. Elisha told no lie to Hazael when he said,
"Go, say unto him, Thou mayest certainly recover: howbeit the Lord hath shewed
me that he shall surely die": equal to—Go, and perform your trick, tell your
customary lies, flatter the dying man that he is better today than he was yesterday;
but know this, he is to die, and all the physicians in Syria cannot heal the king.
What wonder that Elisha wept? Who would not weep if he could see what is coming
upon his country? Whose heart would not pour out itself in blood to know what is
yet to be done in the land of his birth or the country of his adoption? If the men of
long ago could have seen how civilisation would be turned into an engine of
oppression, how the whole land would groan under the burden of drunkeries, and
breweries, and houses of hell of every name; if they could have seen how the truth
would be sold in the market-place, and how there would be no further need of
martyrdom, surely they would have died the violent death of grief. The heart can
only be read in the sanctuary. You cannot read it through journalism, or criticism,
or political comment, or combinations of any kind which exclude the divine element;
to know what Hazael will do, let Elisha read him. The journalist never could have
read him; he might have called him long-headed, intrepid, sagacious, a statesman;
but the prophet said, "Their strong holds wilt thou set on fire, and their young men
wilt thou slay with the sword, and wilt dash their children, and rip up their women
with child:" thy course is a course of havoc. It is only in the sanctuary that we know
what things really are. When the pulpit becomes a very tower of God, a very fort of
heaven, then the preacher will be able to say, as no other man can say, what the

heart Isaiah , and what the heart will do under circumstances yet to be revealed. But
whence has the preacher this power? He has it as a divine gift. Then did God know
the world before he sent his Son to save it? It was because he knew it that he loved it
and pitied it. Whilst we were yet sinners Christ died for us. He did not catch us on
the return, seeing that we were about to amend, gathering ourselves up for a
supreme effort at amelioration; it was not then that Christ died for us, but whilst we
were yet sinners, whilst both hands were outstretched in rebellion, and then thrown
down to cruelty, and then put out in cupidity and oppression and wrong of every
form. When the heart had gone astray, then Christ died for us! Amazing love—pity
infinite! We have heard of this famine in the land of Israel: "Behold, the days come,
saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor
a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord." O pitiful One, take our
bread, our cattle, destroy our fields, burn our forests; but take not thy Holy Spirit
from us!
GUZIK, "A. The restoration of the Shunammite’s land.
1. (2 Kings 8:1-3) The Shunammite returns to Israel after seven years.
Then Elisha spoke to the woman whose son he had restored to life, saying, “Arise
and go, you and your household, and stay wherever you can; for the LORD has
called for a famine, and furthermore, it will come upon the land for seven years.” So
the woman arose and did according to the saying of the man of God, and she went
with her household and dwelt in the land of the Philistines seven years. It came to
pass, at the end of seven years, that the woman returned from the land of the
Philistines; and she went to make an appeal to the king for her house and for her
land.
a. Elisha spoke to the woman whose son he had restored to life: 2 Kings 4 describes
Elisha’s previous dealings with this woman. She and her husband were godly,
generous people who helped the prophet. Through Elisha’s prayer they were blessed
with a son, who was also brought miraculously back to life.
b. She went with her household and dwelt in the land of the Philistines seven years:
On the advice of the prophet, the woman and her family left Israel because of a
coming famine. In the land of the Philistines, they were spared the worst of the
famine.
c. She went to make an appeal to the king for her house and for her land: Upon
leaving Israel and going to the land of the Philistines, the woman forfeited her claim
to her ancestral lands. She made this appeal so she would not be a loser for listening
to God’s prophet and for saving her family from famine.
ISBET, "FAMI E—GOD’S MESSE GER
‘The Lord hath called for a famine.’

2 Kings 8:1
I. What is the meaning of this expression?—Simply, the Lord hath produced it—
ordered it; it is part of His Providence. ‘God said, Let there be light: and there was
light.’ A wonderful thing is this we find in the whole Bible—God calling for
circumstances as if they were creatures which could hear Him and respond to His
call; as if famine and plenty, pestilence and scourge of every name, were so many
personalities, all standing back in the clouds, and God said, Famine, forward! and
immediately the famine came, and took away the bread of the people; but then next
door to famine stands plenty, and God says to abundance, Forward! and the earth
laughs in harvests; the table is abundantly spread, and every living thing is satisfied.
Take Ezekiel 36:29 as presenting the pleasant side of this call by the voice Divine: ‘I
will call for the corn, and will increase it, and lay no famine upon you.’ Hear how
the Divine voice rolls through all this sphere of revelation. If you proceed to Romans
4:17 you will find in the last clause of the verse words often overlooked: ‘God …
calleth those things which be not as though they were.’ God is always creating,
calling something out of nothing, amazing the ages by new flashes of glory,
unexpected disclosures of presence and grace. Calling for a famine is a frequent
expression. You find it, for example, in Psalms 105:16 : ‘Moreover He called for a
famine upon the land: He brake the whole staff of bread’; and you find it in so out-
of-the-way a corner as the prophecy of Haggai 1:11 : ‘And I called for a drought
upon the land, and upon the mountains, and upon the corn, and upon the new wine,
and upon the oil, and upon that which the ground bringeth forth, and upon men,
and upon cattle, and upon all the labour of the hands.’
II. The earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof.—So there are men who still
believe that plague, pestilence, and short harvest, and things evil that are of a
material kind, have a subtle and often immeasurable relation to a Divine thought, to
a new disclosure of Divine Providence; that all these things round about us are used
as instruments in the chastening, and education, and sanctification of the human
race. We cannot be laughed out of this citadel. Sometimes we have half left it under
the joke of the jiber, because we had no answer to the mocker’s laugh; but presently
we began to see how things are related, how mysteriously earth belongs to heaven,
and how the simplest, meanest flower that grows draws its life-blood from the sun;
then we have returned into the sanctuary, and said, ‘Be the mysteries dark as they
may and all but innumerable, there is a comfort in this doctrine that there is in none
other’—and not a quieting comfort after the nature of a soporific, but an
encouraging, stimulating, rousing comfort, that lifts our prayer into a nobler
elevation, and sharpens our voice by the introduction of a new accent. So we abide
in this Christian faith, and await the explanation which God has promised.
PETT, "The Shunammite, ow A Widow, Has Her Land Restored To Her By The
King Of Israel (2 Kings 8:1-6).
The prophetic author has two purposes in this incident. Firstly to emphasis the
miraculous powers of Elisha, and secondly to bring out that YHWH watches over
those who are faithful to Him.

The incident involves the Shunnamite woman mentioned in 2 Kings 6:8-33. We are
probably to see that her husband has since died, for he is not mentioned in the
narrative. Thus the inheritance now belonged to the son. But Elisha foresaw a
lengthy (‘seven year’ ) famine which was coming and advised her to take her
household and seek refuge outside the land. Obediently she sought refuge in
Philistia, and waited for the famine to be over. We have no information on what if
any procedures would be followed in a case like this. It is possible that the house and
land came under the protection of the crown. But no doubt those who took
possession of it would not be desirous of returning it.
So on her return at the end of the period she presumably discovered that her son’s
inheritance had been taken over by someone, who had also presumably occupied the
house, and her intention was therefore to appeal to the king for her son’s rights to
be restored. The author probably intends us to see that it was in the will of YHWH
that this happened precisely at that time that the king was asking Gehazi, Elisha’s
servant, to recount to him some of Elisha’s miracles, and Gehazi was telling him
about the raising from the dead of the Shunnamite’s son. And when Gehazi saw the
woman coming for an audience with the king he pointed her out as the Shunnamite
whose son Elisha had healed. The king accordingly spoke with the woman and
arranged for her house and lands to be restored to her, along with the produce of
the land during the famine.
It is important to note that the king obtained his information about the miracles of
Elisha directly from an eyewitness, and may well have had them recorded. There is
absolutely no reason for doubting Gehazi’s accuracy, or for suggesting that he
exaggerated. There is no evidence of it whatsoever. Any such idea is all in the mind
of the doubters.
Analysis.
a ow Elisha had spoken to the woman, whose son he had restored to life,
saying, “Arise, and go, you and your household, and sojourn wherever you can
sojourn, for YHWH has called for a famine, and it will also come on the land seven
years.” And the woman arose, and acted in accordance with the word of the man of
God, and she went with her household, and sojourned in the land of the Philistines
seven years (2 Kings 8:1-2).
b And it came about at the end of the seven years, that the woman returned out
of the land of the Philistines, and she went forth to cry to the king for her house and
for her land (2 Kings 8:3).
c ow the king was talking with Gehazi the servant of the man of God, saying,
“Tell me, I pray you, all the great things that Elisha has done” (2 Kings 8:4).
b And it came about, as he was telling the king how he had restored to life him
who was dead, that, behold, the woman, whose son he had restored to life, cried to
the king for her house and for her land (2 Kings 8:5 a).
a And Gehazi said, “My lord, O king, this is the woman, and this is her son,
whom Elisha restored to life.” And when the king asked the woman, she told him.

So the king appointed to her a certain officer, saying, “Restore all that was hers, and
all the fruits of the field since the day that she left the land, even until now” (2 Kings
8:5-6).
In ‘a’ ‘the woman whose son Elisha had restored to life’ took refuge in Philistia,
leaving her land behind, and in the parallel ‘the woman whose son Elisha had
restored to life’ received her land and produce back from the king. In ‘b’ the
woman went to the king to cry for her house and land, and in the parallel she cried
to the king for her house and land. Centrally in ‘c’ Gehazi recounted to the king
some of the miracles performed by Elisha.
2 Kings 8:1
‘ ow Elisha had spoken to the woman, whose son he had restored to life, saying,
“Arise, and go, you and your household, and sojourn wherever you can sojourn, for
YHWH has called for a famine, and it will also come on the land seven years.” ’
The reason why the Shunnamite woman had left her house and land was because
Elisha had advised her to do so in view of a ‘seven year famine’ (a lengthy, drawn
out famine) which ‘YHWH was calling for’ on the land, that is, a period when the
rains would fail. Any such natural event would have been seen by the prophets as
‘called for by YHWH’, and no particular reason is given for it. We have no means
of knowing how it connected with other famines mentioned earlier. Elisha’s advice
was that she find a suitable place to ‘sojourn’ (be a short term resident alien). Being
wealthy she would be able to afford to stay at a suitable place.
BI 1-6, "Then spake Elisha unto the woman.
The potent influence of a good man
I. His counsel is valuable, and gratefully acted upon. Here we see how the kindness
shown by the Shunammite receives still further reward. There is nothing so fruitful in
blessing as kindness. In the great dilemmas of life we seek counsel, not from the
frivolous and wicked, but from the wise and good. A good man has the destiny of many
lives in his hands; a word from him has great weight.
II. His beneficent acts are the theme of popular conversation (2Ki_8:4). A good action
cannot be hid. Sooner or later it will emerge from the obscurity in which it was first
done, and become the talk of a nation, until it reaches even royal ears. All good actions
do not attain such distinguished popularity. There were many good things that Elisha
said and did of which history takes no notice. A good act may be remembered and
applauded for generations, while the name of the actor is unknown.
III. His holy and unselfish life is a testimony for Jehovah in the midst of national
apostasy. In the darkest night of national apostasy, Israel was favoured with an Elisha,
whose divinely-illumined life threw a bright stream of light across the gloom. How
deplorable the condition of that nation from which all moral worth is excluded!
IV. His reputation is the means of promoting the ends of justice (2Ki_8:5-6). There was
surely a Divine providence at work that brought the suppliant Shunammite into the
presence of the king at the very moment when Gehazi was rehearsing the great works of

Elisha. Justice triumphed; her land and all its produce for the seven years were restored
to her. It requires power to enforce the claims of justice, and the highest -kind of power
is goodness. The arrangements of justice are more likely to be permanent when brought
about by the influence of righteous principles, than when compelled by physical force.
The presence of a holy character in society is a powerful check upon injustice and wrong.
(G. Barlow.)
Beneficence of the Christian life
The other summer, says Dr. Abbott, while sailing along the shores of the Sound, I landed
at a little cove; there was a lighthouse tower and a fog-bell, and the keeper showed us the
fog-bell, and how the mechanism made it strike every few minutes in the darkness and in
the night when the fog hung over the coast; and I said, “That is the preacher; there he
stands, ringing out the message of warning, ringing out the message of instruction,
ringing out the message of cheer; it is a great thing to be a preacher.” We went up into
the lighthouse tower. Here was a tower that never said anything and never did
anything—it just stood still and shone—and I said, “That is the Christian. He may not
have any word to utter, he may not be a prophet, he may not be a worker, he may achieve
nothing, but he stands still and shines, in the darkness and in the storm, always, and
every night.” The fog-bell strikes only on occasion, but all the time and every night the
light flashes out from the lighthouse; all the time and every night this light is flashing out
from you if you are God’s children.
Permanent effects of godliness
Sir Wilfred Laurier has recently given a very striking testimony to the powerful influence
of the Puritan spirit. He was asked why he was absolutely, in the best sense of the word,
an Imperialist. Sir Wilfred replied that when he was a boy he was brought up in the
home of a God-fearing Scottish farmer, at whose family worship he was present every
morning and night. He was struck by the catholicity of spirit of the farmer, but still more
by the fact that the farmer took the affairs of his house, his neighbourhood, and all his
country in the presence of the Almighty, and sought His blessing upon all. This
experience implanted in Sir Wilfred’s heart an abiding conviction that an empire based
on such community of spirit was made by God to lead the world. Here is the influence of
a humble family worship determining the destinies of an empire. The lowly farmer in
Scotland little realised how far-reaching the ministry of his family altar would be. Little
did he know that while he was praying and worshipping in apparent obscurity he was
moulding the thoughts and feelings of a great statesman, and so shaping the policy of
states. What a dignity this gives to the home altar, and what solemnity surrounds the
lowly acts of family worship! It can be said of these humble ministries that “their lines
are gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.” (Hartley
Aspen.)
2 The woman proceeded to do as the man of God
said. She and her family went away and stayed in

the land of the Philistines seven years.
BAR ES, "The country of the Philistines - the rich low grain-growing plain along the
seacoast of Judah - was always a land of plenty compared with the highlands of
Palestine. Moreover, if food failed there, it was easily imported by sea from the
neighboring Egypt.
GILL, "And the woman arose, and did after the saying of the man of God,....
Whose words she had reason to believe; she having a son given to her according to his
word, and this restored to life, when dead, through his intercession:
and she went with her household, and sojourned in the land of the
Philistines; which was not far from her native place, and where there was plenty of
food, and she could have as free an exercise of her religion as in the idolatrous kingdom
of Israel.
JAMISO "she ... sojourned in the land of the Philistines seven years —
Their territory was recommended to her from its contiguity to her usual residence; and
now that this state had been so greatly reduced, there was less risk than formerly from
the seductions of idolatry; and many of the Jews and Israelites were residing there.
Besides, an emigration thither was less offensive to the king of Israel than going to
sojourn in Judah.
BE SO , "2 Kings 8:2. The woman arose, and sojourned in the land of the
Philistines — Which, though bordering upon Israel, was free from the famine: by
which it appeared, that the special hand of God was in that calamity, and that it was
a judgment from him upon the Israelites for their idolatry, and abuse of the means
of grace, which they now enjoyed in such abundance through Elisha and many
other prophets.
ELLICOTT, "(2) After the saying.—According to the word.
In the land of the Philistines.—The lowlands of the coast were not so subject to
droughts as the limestone highlands of Israel. (Comp. Genesis 12:10; Genesis 26:1.)
The Philistines, besides, dealt with foreign traders who put in to their shores.
(Comp. Joel 3:4-6.)
PETT, "2 Kings 8:2
‘And the woman arose, and acted in accordance with the word of the man of God,

and she went with her household, and sojourned in the land of the Philistines seven
years.’
In accordance with Elisha’s instructions as ‘a man of God’ she took her household
and sojourned in the land of the Philistines for the seven year period. The non-
mention of her husband may suggest that he was dead.
3 At the end of the seven years she came back
from the land of the Philistines and went to appeal
to the king for her house and land.
BAR ES, "During the Shunammite’s absence in Philistia, her dwelling and her
grain-fields had been appropriated by some one who refused to restore them. She
therefore determined to appeal to the king. Such direct appeals are common in Oriental
countries. Compare 2Ki_6:26; 2Sa_14:4; 1Ki_3:16.
GILL, "And it came to pass, at the seven years end, that the woman returned
out of the land of the Philistines,.... Either hearing that the famine was over, or
believing that it was, the time being expired the prophet fixed for it:
and she went forth to cry unto the king for her house, and for her land; which
her nearest relations in her absence had seized upon, as heirs to them; or those in whose
hands she had intrusted them refused, upon her return, to deliver them to her; or the
king's officers had seized upon them for him, as forfeited to the crown by her going out
of the land without leave; and now she needed a friend to speak for her to the king,
which, in time past, she had no occasion for, and thought she never should, see 2Ki_
4:13.
JAMISO "she went forth to cry unto the king for her house and for her
land — In consequence of her long-continued absence from the country, her
possessions were occupied by her kindred, or had been confiscated by the crown. No
statute in the law of Moses ordained that alienation. But the innovation seems to have
been adopted in Israel.
K&D, "When the woman returned to her home at the end of the seven years, she
went to the king to cry, i.e., to invoke his help, with regard to her house and her field, of
which, as is evident from the context, another had taken possession during her absence.

BE SO , "2 Kings 8:3. She went to cry unto the king for her house and land —
Which, having been forsaken by her, were possessed by her kindred or others, who
probably had obtained a grant of them from the king, and now intended to keep
possession of them.
ELLICOTT, "(3) At the seven years’ end.—Omit the.
She went forth.—From Shunem to Samaria.
For her house and for her land.—Literally, with regard to her house, &c. She found
them in the possession of strangers. The State may have occupied the property as
abandoned by its owner; or, as is more likely, some neighbouring landowner may
have encroached upon her rights. She therefore appealed to the king.
PETT, "2 Kings 8:3
‘And it came about at the end of the seven years, that the woman returned out of the
land of the Philistines, and she went forth to cry to the king for her house and for
her land.’
At the end of the lengthy period, no doubt having learned that the famine was over,
the woman returned from Philistia, and went to put in her official request for her
home and land to be restored to her. Land and property in the countryside belonged
to its original Israelite owners in perpetuity. ‘To cry out --’ was probably a legal
expression for putting forward an official claim.
4 The king was talking to Gehazi, the servant of
the man of God, and had said, “Tell me about all
the great things Elisha has done.”
CLARKE, "The king talked with Gehazi - This is supposed to have happened
before the cleansing of Naaman, for is it likely that the king would hold conversation
with a leprous man; or that, knowing Gehazi had been dismissed with the highest
disgrace from the prophet’s service, he could hold any conversation with him concerning
his late master, relative to whom he could not expect him to give either a true or
impartial account?

Some think that this conversation might have taken place after Gehazi became
leprous; the king having an insatiable curiosity to know the private history of a man who
had done such astonishing things: and from whom could he get this information, except
from the prophet’s own confidential servant? It agrees better with the chronology to
consider what is here related as having taken place after the cure of Naaman. As to the
circumstance of Gehazi’s disease, he might overlook that, and converse with him,
keeping at a reasonable distance, as nothing but actual contact could defile.
GILL, "And the king talked with Gehazi the servant of the man of God,....
Elisha's servant, just at the same time the woman made her application to him; so that
this was before he was dismissed from the service of the prophet, and consequently
before the affair of Naaman's cure, and so before the siege of Samaria:
saying, tell me, I pray thee, all the great things that Elisha hath done; the
miracles he wrought, as the dividing of the waters of Jordan, and healing those near
Jericho; the affair of procuring water for the armies of the three kings in Edom he
needed not to relate, since Jehoram was an eyewitness thereof; the next was the
multiplying the widow's cruse of oil, when he in course came to those that were done for
the Shunammite woman.
JAMISO 4-6, "the king talked with Gehazi — Ceremonial pollution being
conveyed by contact alone, there was nothing to prevent a conference being held with
this leper at a distance; and although he was excluded from the town of Samaria, this
reported conversation may have taken place at the gate or in one of the royal gardens.
The providence of God so ordained that King Jehoram had been led to inquire, with
great interest, into the miraculous deeds of Elisha, and that the prophet’s servant was in
the act of relating the marvelous incident of the restoration of the Shunammite’s son
when she made her appearance to prefer her request. The king was pleased to grant it;
and a state officer was charged to afford her every facility in the recovery of her family
possession out of the hands of the occupier.
K&D, "And just at that time the king was asking Gehazi to relate to him the great
things that Elisha had done; and among these he was giving an account of the
restoration of the Shunammite's son to life.
BE SO , "2 Kings 8:4. The king talked with Gehazi, the servant of the man of God
— Or, who had been his servant formerly. The law did not forbid conversing with
lepers at a due distance, but only the dwelling with them. Thus aaman conversed
with Elisha’s family at a distance; and the lepers called to our Lord, as he went
along the highway.
ELLICOTT, "(4) And the king talked.—And the king was speaking unto.
Gehazi.—He, therefore, was not yet a leper (2 Kings 5:27). So Keil and some earlier

expositors. But lepers, though excluded from the city, were not excluded from
conversation with others. (Comp. Matthew 8:2; Luke 17:12.) aaman was
apparently admitted into the royal palace (2 Kings 5:6). The way, however, in which
Gehazi is spoken of as “the servant of the man of God” (comp. 2 Kings 5:20) seems
to imply the priority of the present narrative to that of 2 Kings 5.
Tell me, I pray thee, all the great things.—“The history of Elijah and Elisha has a
distinctly popular character; it reads like a story told by word of mouth, full of the
dramatic touches and vivid presentations of detail which characterise all Semitic
history that closely follows oral narration. The king of Israel of whom we read in 2
Kings 8:4, was, we may be sure, not the only man who talked with Gehazi, saying,
‘Tell me, I pray thee, all the great things that Elisha hath done.’ By many repetitions
the history of the prophets took a fixed shape long before it was committed to
writing, and the written record preserves all the essential features of the narratives
that passed from mouth to mouth, and were handed down orally from father to
child.” (Prof. Robertson Smith, The Prophets of Israel, p. 116.)
GUZIK, "2. (2 Kings 8:4-6) Her land is restored.
Then the king talked with Gehazi, the servant of the man of God, saying, “Tell me,
please, all the great things Elisha has done.” ow it happened, as he was telling the
king how he had restored the dead to life, that there was the woman whose son he
had restored to life, appealing to the king for her house and for her land. And
Gehazi said, “My lord, O king, this is the woman, and this is her son whom Elisha
restored to life.” And when the king asked the woman, she told him. So the king
appointed a certain officer for her, saying, “Restore all that was hers, and all the
proceeds of the field from the day that she left the land until now.”
a. Then the king talked with Gehazi: This was the same servant of Elisha who was
cursed with leprosy in 2 Kings 5:20-27. It seems strange that a severely afflicted
leper would be a counselor to a king, so it seems that either Gehazi was granted
healing from his leprosy or that this actually took place before the events of 2 Kings
chapter 5.
i. Of course, it is still possible that the king had this conversation with Gehazi when
the former prophet’s assistant was a leper and the king simply kept his distance.
“Some think that this conversation might have taken place after Gehazi became
leprous; the king having an insatiable curiosity to know the private history or a man
who had done such astonishing things: and from whom could he get this
information, except from the prophet’s own confidential servant?” (Clarke)
b. Tell me, please, all the great things Elisha has done: Perhaps his motive was
nothing more than curiosity, yet it was still a significant testimony to the King of
Israel. He knew that God was with the actions of Elisha, giving evidence that He was
also with the word of Elisha.

c. As he was telling the king: The woman came to make her request at the exact time
Gehazi told the king about the miracles associated with her life. This was perfect,
God-ordained timing.
d. Restore all that was hers, and all the proceeds of the field from the day that she
left: The king understood that if God was obviously supportive of this woman, then
it also made sense for him to support her and to answer her request. In the end, her
obedience to God’s word was not penalized.
i. “This act was in striking contrast to the notorious land-grabbing of Jehoram’s
father, Ahab.” (Dilday)
PETT, "2 Kings 8:4
‘ ow the king was talking with Gehazi the servant of the man of God, saying, “Tell
me, I pray you, all the great things that Elisha has done.” ’
Meanwhile, not knowing about this (although we are intended to see that YHWH
knew) the king had summoned Gehazi in order to receive an eyewitness account of
what miracles Elisha had performed. It may well have been an official summons
with the intention of recording them for the future. It indicates clearly that Elisha
had an outstanding reputation for the miraculous. We do not know which king this
was, but it indicates an official interest in the miracles..
The fact that Gehazi was allowed in the king’s presence indicates that the skin
disease from which he suffered was not leprosy. Compare also how aaman had
been able to serve the king of Aram having the same disease. It would, however,
prevent Gehazi from entering the court of the Sanctuary.
5 Just as Gehazi was telling the king how Elisha
had restored the dead to life, the woman whose
son Elisha had brought back to life came to
appeal to the king for her house and land.
Gehazi said, “This is the woman, my lord the
king, and this is her son whom Elisha restored to
life.”

CLARKE, "This is the woman, and this is her son, whom Elisha restored to
life - This was a very providential occurrence in behalf of the Shunammite. The relation
given by Gehazi was now corroborated by the woman herself; the king was duly affected,
and gave immediate orders for the restoration of her land.
GILL, "And it came to pass, as he was telling the king how he had restored a
dead body to life,.... Which was the Shunammite's son:
that, behold, the woman whose son he had restored to life cried to the king
for her house, and for her land; came and presented her petition to the king at that
very instant:
and Gehazi said, my lord, O king, this is the woman, and this is her son,
whom Elisha restored to life; the very person I am speaking of.
BE SO , "2 Kings 8:5-6. As he was telling the king, &c., the woman cried to the
king, &c. — By the order of Providence she came to present her petition, and
brought her son with her, in that very instant of time when Gehazi was telling the
story of Elisha’s restoring him to life, that the king might be more fully satisfied of
the truth of what he related from her own mouth, and that it might make the deeper
impression upon him. Providence ought to be carefully observed, and devoutly
acknowledged, in ordering the circumstances of events; for sometimes, as here, those
that are minute of themselves, prove of great consequence. And when the king asked
the woman, she told him — That is, she confirmed what Gehazi had said. Thus did
God even force him to believe, what he might have had some colour to question, if
he had only had Gehazi’s word for it. So the king appointed, saying, Restore all that
was hers — ot only her house and land, but all the profits that had been made of
them, and brought into his treasury. This was a high act of justice, and an argument
of some goodness left in a bad man.
ELLICOTT, "(5) A dead body.—The dead.
Cried.—Was crying. Literally, the Hebrew runs, And it came to pass, he (emphatic)
was telling . . . and behold the woman was crying, &c. The woman came in, and
began her prayer to the king, while he was talking with Gehazi about her and her
son.
This is her son.—Who was now grown up, and came as his mother’s escort.
PETT, "2 Kings 8:5

‘And it came about, as he was telling the king how he had restored to life him who
was dead, that, behold, the woman, whose son he had restored to life, cried to the
king for her house and for her land. And Gehazi said, “My lord, O king, this is the
woman, and this is her son, whom Elisha restored to life.” ’
And even while Gehazi was in the middle of recounting details of how Elisha had
raised the son of a Shunnamite from the dead the woman herself approached the
king for an audience, in order to put forward her official appeal. It was one of those
God-ordained coincidences. And Gehazi pointed out the woman was the one he was
speaking about.
6 The king asked the woman about it, and she told
him.
Then he assigned an official to her case and said
to him, “Give back everything that belonged to
her, including all the income from her land from
the day she left the country until now.”
BAR ES, "A certain officer - literally, “a certain eunuch” (margin). Eunuchs were
now in common use at the Samaritan court (compare 2Ki_9:32). They are ascribed to
the court of David in Chronicles 1Ch_28:1; and we may conjecture that they were
maintained by Solomon. But otherwise we do not find them in the kingdom of Judah
until the time of Hezekiah Isa_56:3-4.
GILL, "And when the king asked the woman, she told him,.... The whole affair;
how that she had a son according to the word of Elisha, when she had been barren, and
her husband old; that this child was struck with sickness, and died; and that the prophet,
through his prayers, restored it to life:
so the king appointed unto her a certain officer; the word signifies an "eunuch":
him he ordered to attend upon her, and assist her, and see to it that she was put into the
possession of her house and land:
saying, restore all that was her's, and all the fruits of the field, since the day
that she left the land, even till now; not only her house and land, but all the rent,
profits, and dues arising from thence during the time of her absence: the Jews except the

rent of her house.
ELLICOTT, "(6) Told.—Related to him, i.e., the story. So in 2 Kings 8:4-5.
Officer.—Literally, eunuch (sârîs). (Comp. ote on Genesis 37:36; 1 Chronicles
28:1.)
Fruits.—Literally, revenues, produce in kind, which must have been paid out of the
royal stores. This seems to imply that her land had been annexed to the royal
domains.
PETT, "2 Kings 8:6
‘And when the king asked the woman, she told him. So the king appointed to her a
certain officer, saying, “Restore all that was hers, and all the fruits of the field since
the day that she left the land, even until now.” ’
The king asked the woman about the matter, and then he called on a ‘high official’
to ensure the restoring to the woman of her house and lands, together with all the
produce grown over the seven years, which may well have gone to the crown. Due to
the famine it would not be a very large amount, although the fields may have been
extensive.
Hazael Murders Ben-Hadad
7 Elisha went to Damascus, and Ben-Hadad king
of Aram was ill. When the king was told, “The
man of God has come all the way up here,”
BAR ES, "The hour had come for carrying out the command given by God to Elijah
(marginal reference “e”), and by him probably passed on to his successor. Elisha,
careless of his own safety, quitted the land of Israel, and proceeded into the enemy’s
country, thus putting into the power of the Syrian king that life which he had lately
sought so eagerly 2Ki_6:13-19.
The man of God - The Damascenes had perhaps known Elisha by this title from the

time of his curing Naaman. Or the phrase may be used as equivalent to “prophet,” which
is the title commonly given to Elisha by the Syrians. See 2Ki_6:12. Compare 2Ki_5:13.
CLARKE, "Elisha came to Damascus - That he might lead Gehazi to repentance;
according to Jarchi and some others.
GILL, "And Elisha came to Damascus,.... On what account, and when, is not
certain, whether to convert Gehazi, as say the Jews (d); or to confirm Naaman in the true
religion he professed, for which he might be dismissed from his office, since another
man was made general of the Syrian army; or on account of the famine; or rather it may
be to anoint, or, however, to declare that Hazael would be king of Syria; see 1Ki_19:15,
and Benhadad the king of Syria was sick; at the time he came thither, where his
palace was, and now a Mahometan temple; a very extraordinary building, according to
Benjamin the Jew (e):
and it was told him, saying, the man of God is come hither; the famous prophet
in Israel, Elisha, through whom Naaman his general had been cured of his leprosy, of
whom he had heard so much.
(d) T. Bab. Sotah, fol. 47. 1. (e) Itinerar. p. 55.
HE RY, "Here, I. We may enquire what brought Elisha to Damascus, the chief city
of Syria. Was he sent to any but the lost sheep of the house of Israel? It seems he was.
Perhaps he went to pay a visit to Naaman his convert, and to confirm him in his choice
of the true religion, which was the more needful now because, it should seem, he was not
out of his place (for Hazael is supposed to be captain of that host); either he resigned it
or was turned out of it, because he would not bow, or not bow heartily, in the house of
Rimmon. Some think he went to Damascus upon account of the famine, or rather he
went thither in obedience to the orders God gave Elijah, 1Ki_19:15, “Go to Damascus to
anoint Hazael, thou, or thy successor.”
II. We may observe that Ben-hadad, a great king, rich and mighty, lay sick. No honour,
wealth, or power, will secure men from the common diseases and disasters of human
life; palaces and thrones lie as open to the arrests of sickness and death as the meanest
cottage.
III. We may wonder that the king of Syria, in his sickness, should make Elisha his
oracle.
1. Notice was soon brought him that the man of God (for by that title he was well
known in Syria since he cured Naaman) had come to Damascus, 2Ki_8:7. “Never in
better time,” says Ben-hadad. “Go, and enquire of the Lord by him.” In his health he
bowed in the house of Rimmon, but now that he is sick he distrusts his idol, and sends to
enquire of the God of Israel. Affliction brings those to God who in their prosperity had
made light of him; sometimes sickness opens men's eyes and rectifies their mistakes.
This is the more observable, (1.) Because it was not long since a king of Israel had, in his
sickness, sent to enquire of the god of Ekron (2Ki_1:2), as if there had been no God in
Israel. Note, God sometimes fetches to himself that honour from strangers which is
denied him and alienated from him by his own professing people. (2.) Because it was not

long since this Ben-hadad had sent a great force to treat Elisha as an enemy (2Ki_6:14),
yet now he courts him as a prophet. Note, Among other instances of the change of men's
minds by sickness and affliction, this is one, that it often gives them other thoughts of
God's ministers, and teaches them to value the counsels and prayers of those whom they
had hated and despised.
JAMISO "2Ki_8:7-15. Hazael kills his master, and succeeds him.
Elisha came to Damascus — He was directed thither by the Spirit of God, in
pursuance of the mission formerly given to his master in Horeb (1Ki_19:15), to anoint
Hazael king of Syria. On the arrival of the prophet being known, Ben-hadad, who was
sick, sent to inquire the issue of his disease, and, according to the practice of the
heathens in consulting their soothsayers, ordered a liberal present in remuneration for
the service.
K&D 7-9, "Elisha Predicts to Hazael at Damascus the Possession of the Throne. -
2Ki_8:7. Elisha then came to Damascus at the instigation of the Spirit of God, to carry
out the commission which Elijah had received at Horeb with regard to Hazael (1Ki_
19:15). Benhadad king of Syria was sick at that time, and when Elisha's arrival was
announced to him, sent Hazael with a considerable present to the man of God, to inquire
of Jehovah through him concerning his illness. The form of the name ‫ל‬ ֵ‫הא‬ָ‫ז‬ ֲ‫ח‬ (here and
2Ki_8:15) is etymologically correct; but afterwards it is always written without .‫ה‬ ‫דם‬
‫ל־טוּב‬ ָ‫כ‬ְ‫ו‬ (“and that all kinds of good of Damascus”) follows with a more precise
description of the minchah - “a burden of forty camels.” The present consisted of
produce or wares of the rich commercial city of Damascus, and was no doubt very
considerable; at the same time, it was not so large that forty camels were required to
carry it. The affair must be judged according to the Oriental custom, of making a grand
display with the sending of presents, and employing as many men or beasts of burden as
possible to carry them, every one carrying only a single article (cf. Harmar, Beobb. ii. p.
29, iii. p. 43, and Rosenmüller, A. u. N. Morgenl. iii. p. 17).
BE SO , "2 Kings 8:7. Elisha came to Damascus — Either to the city so called, or
rather, as it seems from 2 Kings 8:9, to the kingdom of Damascus; as Samaria,
which properly was the name of a city, sometimes means the kingdom of which that
city was the capital. Some have thought that Elisha went thither to avoid the famine;
but it is more probable that he was sent by God, on the errand following. Ben-
hadad, the king of Syria, was sick — For neither honour, wealth, nor power will
secure men from the common diseases and disasters of human life: palaces and
thrones lie as open to the arrests of death as the meanest cottage. It was told him,
saying, The man of God is come hither — Which doubtless had rarely, if ever, been
the case before; and his having cured aaman had raised a great opinion of his
power with God in that country.
COFFMA , "That Elisha was honorably received in Damascus at that time might
have been due to his fame that resulted from the healing of aaman. Certainly,

something had changed from that situation in which Benhadad sought to capture
him (2 Kings 6:13ff). " ot only in Israel, but also in the neighboring nations, Elisha
was well known and respected as God's man."[8]
"And the king said unto Hazael" (2 Kings 8:8). This character should not be
confused with the father of Benhadad, who was called the son of Hazael (2 Kings
13:3). This Hazael was the "son of a nobody,"[9] who murdered Benhadad and
seized his throne.
"Hazael ... took a present with him ... forty camels' burden ... Shall I recover of this
sickness?" (2 Kings 8:9). "One camel's burden is six hundred pounds";[10] but,
"This affair must be judged according to Oriental custom of making a grand
display with the sending of presents, employing as many men or beasts of burden as
possible to carry them, each one of them carrying only a single article."[11]
"Shall I recover of this sickness?" That the king of Syria would bring such a
question before Elisha is a strong indication that the Gentiles, generally, throughout
that whole era, were aware of the True God's existence and of the worthlessness of
the pagan deities of the peoples.
The exact date of this event is not known; however, "The inscriptions of
Shalmanezer III, record his victory over Benhadad in 846 B.C. and another victory
over Hazael, whom he described as `a nobody who seized the throne,' in the year
842 B.C. This would have been during the reign of Jehoram in Judah, about three
years before Jehu seized the throne of Israel."[12]
A number of scholars suppose that Elisha anointed Hazael king over Syria on this
trip, but there is nothing here to support such a view. God had commanded Elijah
at Horeb to anoint Hazael (1 Kings 19:15); and there are two ways of understanding
what happened: (1) Either Elijah went to Damascus and anointed him without any
Scriptural record of it being recorded, or (2) Elijah transferred the obligation to
Elisha who anointed him without any record of it being placed in the Bible. LaSor
assumed that, "Elisha's doing so was the purpose of this visit."[13] Honeycutt also
wrote that, "The anointings, both of Hazael and of Jehu, were fulfilled by
Elisha."[14] The Lord has not revealed to us everything that happened, because
such information, if we had it, would be of no value. The purpose of the sacred
author was that of revealing the manner of God's triumph over paganism.
ELLICOTT, "(7) And Elisha came to Damascus.—In the fragmentary condition of
the narrative, why he came is not clear. Rashi suggests that it was to fetch back
Gehazi, who had fled to the Syrians (!), an idea based upon 1 Kings 2:39, seq. Keil
and others think the prophet went with the intention of anointing Hazael, in
accordance with a supposed charge of Elijah’s. (Comp. 1 Kings 19:15, where Elijah
himself is bidden to anoint Hazael). Ewald believes that Elisha retreated to
Damascene territory, in consequence of the strained relations existing between him
and Jehoram, owing to the latter’s toleration of idolatry. Obviously all this rests

upon pure conjecture. It is clear from 2 Kings 8:7 that Elisha’s visit was not
expected in Damascus, and further, that there was peace at the time between
Damascus and Samaria. We do not know how much of Elisha’s history has been
omitted between 2 Kings 7:20 and 2 Kings 8:7; but we may fairly assume that a
divine impulse led the prophet to Damascus. The revelation, of which he speaks in 2
Kings 8:10; 2 Kings 8:13, probably came to him at the time, and so was not the
occasion of his journey.
Ben-hadad . . . was sick.—According to Josephus, on account of the failure of his
expedition against Samaria (?).
The man of God.—As if Elisha were well known and highly esteemed in Syria.
Is come hither.—This certainly implies that Elisha had entered Damascus itself.
GUZIK, "B. A new king in Syria.
1. (2 Kings 8:7-9) Elisha is questioned by Ben-Hadad.
Then Elisha went to Damascus, and Ben-Hadad king of Syria was sick; and it was
told him, saying, “The man of God has come here.” And the king said to Hazael,
“Take a present in your hand, and go to meet the man of God, and inquire of the
LORD by him, saying, ‘Shall I recover from this disease?’ “ So Hazael went to meet
him and took a present with him, of every good thing of Damascus, forty camel-
loads; and he came and stood before him, and said, “Your son Ben-Hadad king of
Syria has sent me to you, saying, ‘Shall I recover from this disease?’ “
a. The man of God has come here: The leaders of Syria once tried to capture or kill
Elisha. Since God miraculously delivered the prophet so many times, he was now
respected and welcomed in the courts of the Syrian King. He was especially welcome
on account of the king’s illness.
b. Take a present in your hand: Wanting to know the outcome of his present illness,
the king of Syria asked the prophet - and with his extravagant gift did whatever he
could to prompt a favorable message.
i. “Whether the prophet received it or not, is not here mentioned; but it is most
probable that he did not, from his former practice, chapter 5, and because the
reasons which then swayed him were still of the same force.” (Poole)
ISBET, "BE HADAD
‘Benhadad the king of Syria was sick.’
2 Kings 8:7
The life and death of Benhadad has much to say to us—

2 kings 8 commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to 2 kings 8 commentary

Similar to 2 kings 8 commentary (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

2 kings 8 commentary