Naaman, the Syrian Commander--2 Kings 5

Looking at the story of Naaman in 2 Kings 5, several gems of truth emerge.   The first is that Naaman was a prideful man, but also he was, in some ways, more open to God than the leadership (Joram) of Israel.  He sought relief from his leprosy and was desperate enough to take a chance on a servant-girl from another nation.   He was willing to take direction from a prophet who treated him coolly, and although he at first refused the advice, he was open enough to take the advice of his servants, and follow out the simple directions Elisha gave him.   Naaman was disgusted and frustrated to think that any good could come out of bathing in a muddy local river, yet it did.

Naaman Washes in the River Jordan circa 1521, Master of St. Severin, Germany

For me, it's interesting to see God work around "the establishment" in this story.  He is not inactive in times when culture has gone bad and leadership has lost its way.  Instead, we see Him working through the faith of this young, female, servant girl.  God patiently works around Joram, honors Elijah and the servant girl, and blessed this Syrian commander...mercy upon mercy in this story, but to the unlikely.

It's also a story of "the losers" amid this mercy.   Elisha's servant clearly  misses the point, and we find him chasing after the physical rewards that Elisha turned away.

On the attention paid to Naaman's case of leprosy (lovely wording and word choice here):

"It has ever been a sad fact in our history that we magnify both the trims and the virtues of the grandees, and think but little of the griefs and graces of the lowly."   -Biblical Illustrator

Quite true.  I think most of us have a subtle prejudice in this regard.  We value the opinions of the more affluent or those in elevated leadership positions over the thoughts of the common man.  In truth, although leaders should be more discerning, many get  lost in their reputation and in the approval of man.   And wealthy men generally seem to be a morally weak lot from my experience.  In contrast, the common sense of the common man has been honed by life and his humbler vision is often the clearest.

2 Kings Introduction

I've recently discovered a Constable's Notes, a commentary by Dr. Thomas Constable who is Department Chairman and Senior Professor of Bible Exposition at Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas, Texas. His notes are available through Bible.org's NET Bible among other places. His expository notes were written over a twenty-year period and are quite comprehensive--twice as voluminous as Matthew Henry's. I find them very readable in contrast to Henry's meandering prose. Don't get me wrong, I love Matthew Henry, but it's also nice to have clear, thorough 20th century prose as a counterpoint.

As an example, here's an excerpt from his introduction on 2 Kings:

"Second Kings is a sequel to 1 Kings. First Kings covers about one and a half centuries 

and 2 Kings about three centuries. In both books the two thrones are in view: the earthly 

and the heavenly. 

First Kings emphasizes the facts of these thrones. The earthly throne consistently failed, 

but the heavenly throne consistently prevailed. Second Kings emphasizes the 

consequences that result from each of these situations. Its major value is its revelation of 

the failure of man and the victory of God. 

The failure of man comes through the content of this book, but the victory of God comes 

through the pre-exilic prophets who wrote during the three centuries covered in 2 Kings. 

These prophets were Hosea, Amos, and Jonah in Israel. In Judah they were Isaiah, 

Jeremiah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah." -Thomas Constable

and later an application and charge:

"The evidence of God's victory is the continued existence of the physical seed of 

Abraham. The Jews still exist today. Arnold Toynbe, the historian, called the Jews a 

fossil race. God has preserved them to fulfill His purposes on the earth. So even though 

they failed Him, He has not failed them. 

I would summarize the message of 2 Kings, therefore, as follows. Though people fail 

God, God will not fail people. This is foundational to the doctrine of eternal security that 

the New Testament expounds more fully. 

The main reason the Israelites failed God was they lost sight of Him. Proverbs 29:18 

says, "Where there is no vision (of God) the people cast off restraint." When people lose 

sight of God their ideals deteriorate. They turn to idolatry to fill the vacuum left by God's 

absence. Also, their purposes suffer defeat. They do not achieve fulfillment or realize 

their destiny. Furthermore their consciences become dead. They become unresponsive to 

the Word of God. You have a high calling. Point people to God." -Thomas Constable

Private Duties--Elisha and the Shunammite Woman

 This commentary in 2 Kings 4 about Elisha and the Woman of Shunem.  I'm thankful for this account---that it affirms that God cares for and recognizes the heart of an everywoman.  It seems to me that this commentator is a bit overly romantic in his perspective on this particular woman's domesticity...but again...I fight my own demons within that resist over romanticizing the home life.  Is there a way that we can resist over idealizing it yet not degrade it either?  Where is the reasonable middle ground?

Yes; this woman of my text was great in her domesticity. When this prophet wanted to reward her for her hospitality by asking some preferment from the king, what did she say? She declined it. She said, “I dwell among my own people”—as much as to say, “I am satisfied with my lot; all I want is my family and my friends around me—I dwell among my own people.” Oh, what a rebuke to the strife for precedence in all ages!"    T. De Witt Talmage, via The Biblical Illustrator

I've been sifting through this idea of private life vs. public life for about  a year now.  This article got me started on my journey.  And, this one has shaped my thoughts a bit more.  Why is the private home so undervalued?  We give lip service to it, but diminish and undermine those women who choose to make homemaking their full time ministry.  We value it in the abstract, but not in the immediate.  We value it if we go overseas to care for orphans but diminish the ordinary call to service in the lives of those around us.

There is a piece of me that feels like I should either be on a rustic farm wearing an apron and teaching my children to care for livestock or I less than enough as a domestic servant.  What if I serve my family in lesser ways--perhaps the less bucolic ministry of encouraging my son to do his math for the third time that morning.
And why don't I just send my kids to school like everyone else does?  I suffer secret debasement for this as well.  Even the 2nd article above---why does it make it more significant that it's a man defending his wife in her duties?  Why is it his "amazing" response--why just not his appropriate response?

I am completely at a loss as to how women let themselves be hoodwinked into working outside the home, seeking a greater wealth and prestige from the outside---more money, more keeping up with the latest in consumer technology--more accolades and respect---as useful and rightfully "contributing" bread winners, as if domestic contributions weren't really contributions enough.  And somehow this empowers a woman--to work outside the home, to receive public praise.  It all troubles me.  It worries me.  It vexes my own choices and self-esteem.  


And let me clarify that each path must be forged for that individual and for that family circumstance.  I dare not suggest that I know the perfect formula to make it all work.  I just wish that my own choices did not always feel so undervalued and freakish....that I didn't always have to begin in the ditch and have to dig myself out through explanations and justifications.  Women who work outside the home don't seem to have the opposite problem and how dare someone suggest that they don't need to work outside the home.  They are providing income and using their talents!

I don't know that elevating any particular choice of a woman is the answer--it's more about restoring value to homelife and homemaking that seems key to me.  Ordinary homemaking is increasingly archaic.  We cook less at home.  We run--even and perhaps especially in homeschooling homes---our children around to be well-rounded as they participate in all kinds of extracurricular activities among virtual strangers.  We value this above dinner and conversation at home among each other--and we sacrifice those things, we trade them off--for the "public" class and the "special" skill.  

I think this thread has been brewing in me for some time....and I certainly haven't come to the bottom of it. Where does bringing wholeness to women end and the dirty word, Feminism, begin?  To me, Feminism is mostly an angry and misguided attempt toward wholeness.  It tears down one false idol only to set up another, when I'd rather keep the idols at bay.

 "This woman was great in her application to domestic duties. Every picture is a home picture, whether she is entertaining an Elisha, or whether she is giving careful attention to her sick boy, or whether she is appealing for the restoration of her property. Every picture in her case is a home picture. Those are not disciples of this Shunammite woman who, going out to attend to outside charities, neglect the duty of home—the duty of wife, of mother, of daughter. No faithfulness in public benefaction can ever atone for domestic negligence. There has been many a mother who, by indefatigable toll, has reared a large family of children, equipping them for the duties of life with good manners and large intelligence and Christian principle, starting them out, who has done more for the world than many a woman whose name has sounded through all the lands and through the centuries."  

This story is also a good reminder to me that the Lord is not anti-wealth.  This was a wealthy woman.

Certainly not done here---more to come back to (note to self)

1. C.S. Lewis and his decision to reply to individual letters.  Also the comment that some view this as the final book he never published.  His decision to put time into this entirely private enterprise is telling of the importance he placed on speaking into individual's lives.

2. The article I read about Facebook and how Facebook is a means of broadcasting in the true sense of the word.  I see the value and function in this...however it is not a replacement for the more individual comments back that are interesting a mix of private/public conversation.

3. Steve Harris' strength and the note I need to write to him thanking him for his ministry is along these lines.  One-on-one evagelism and the way that he touched others' lives is strongest in the private realm as opposed to some other preachers that prefer to ONLY broadcast and would prefer not to tangle themselves with the individual and personal if they had their way.

4. Was Jesus' ministry mostly private or broadcasting?  It seems to me he limited the broadcasting element of his ministry as much as he could and chose to bring along a group of men that he spoke with and taught in very individual ways.

5. This also to me is some of the difference between good homeschooling (notice the qualifier there) and bad public schooling.   There can be a good in between that happens in smaller settings..the broadcasting combined with individual speaking into student's lives.

Lots to ponder indeed.

Elisha and the Widow's Oil--Compassionate Provision

"How often I have excused myself from attempting something because I convinced myself that I did not have the resources to do so! Does our text not teach us that God expects us to use what little we have, trusting Him to provide for all of our needs?

A gem of a reflection by H. Macmillan via The Biblical Illustrator:

Elisha’s first question to her evinced a wonderful knowledge of the human heart, and of the best mode of dealing with poverty and suffering. Instead of volunteering to give her aid at once, as most persons would have done, carried away by an overpowering impulse of compassion at the recital of the tale of sorrow; like a wise and judicious friend, he inquires how far she herself has the power to avert the threatened calamity—“What hast thou in the house?” His assistance must be based upon her own assistance. He will help her to help herself.

Israelite Olive Oil Jar with Dipper Juglet Holder

Iron Age II, 900 B.C.E. - 700 B.C.E.

And this is the only true way to benefit the poor. By reckless and indiscriminate almsgiving, we run the risk of pauperising the objects of our charity. Our assistance should therefore be of such a nature as to call forth the resources which they themselves possess, and to make the most of them. However small these resources may be, they should be used as a fulcrum, by means of which our help may raise them to a better condition.

The first question which we too should ask the widow or the destitute is—“What hast thou in the house?” No help from without can benefit, unless there be a willingness of self-help within. The widow of Obadiah had nothing in the house save a pot of oil. Was this oil grown by Obadiah during his lifetime—the last of the produce of his olive-yard? In all likelihood it was all that remained of the once extensive property of Ahab’s steward. Out of this last pot of Oil—the sign of her uttermost poverty—Elisha furnished the source of her comfort and happiness.

In the fables of all nations we are told that a magician, by a mere wave of his wand, or by pronouncing a certain charm, produces at once wealth and luxuries that had no existence before. Aladdin rubs a ring, and immediately a genius appears, and at his command provides a rich feast for him out of nothing. He rubs an old lamp, and at once a gorgeous palace rises up before him in substantial reality, created out of the formless ether around. By putting on Fortunetus’s wishing-cap the lucky possessors of it can get anything they want, and create things unknown before.

But there is nothing like this in the miracles of the Bible. The Gospel miracle which most nearly resembles the multiplication of the widow’s oil by Elisha, is the miracle of the loaves and fishes. In both cases the properties of the articles remained the same, and their substance only was extended. In both cases the point of departure and the completed result of the miracle were articles in familiar use among the people. Elisha simply multiplied the common olive oil of the widow into the common olive oil of the country, neither better nor worse.

Olive Oil Press, Capernaum, Israel

Jesus simply multiplied the common barley loaves and fishes of the fisher-lad into the common barley loaves and fishes which formed the ordinary fare of the disciples. In both cases the miracle was based upon the ultimate result of man’s labour. The oil in the widow’s pot was the juice expressed, out of berries gathered, from trees planted, grafted, and tended by man’s toil and skill. The bread in the fisherman’s possession was baked by man’s hands, out of barley sown, reaped, gathered, threshed, and ground in the mill by man’s skill and labour; the fishes were equally the produce of human industry and special knowledge.


These examples show to us that even in miracles man must be a fellowworker with God in subduing the earth, and in removing the limitations and disabilities of the curse. In these actions men prepared themselves by the miracle wrought within them—the triumph over natural unbelief and the objections of reason—to believe in and to benefit by the miracle about to be wrought without. The widow of Obadiah might well be astonished at the command of Elisha. If she had stopped to reason about the procedure required of her, she might well hesitate to undertake it.

Taking a common-sense view of the matter, of what use would it be to borrow as many vessels as possible from her neighbours? What answer could she give them if they asked her what she meant to do with these vessels? Would they not laugh at her if she told the prophet’s message, and ridicule the utter folly of the whole story? And yet, in spite of all these apparent absurdities and impossibilities—in spite of all the objections of reason and common sense, the widow hastened to obey the prophet’s command. She stumbled not because of unbelief. Her faith triumphed over all difficulties.

detail of juglet dipper--clever and beautiful

It is a significant circumstance that the prophet should have commanded the widow to shut the door upon herself and her sons, when she poured out the oil into the vessels. There is a reason for, and a meaning in, every detail of the Bible miracles; and doubtless the design of this apparently trivial injunction was to secure to the widow the privacy and calmness of mind necessary for the performance of the miracle, and for its producing the full and proper impression upon her own soul. If she had left the door open, the neighbours doubtless, moved by curiosity to see what she would do with the vessels she had borrowed, would flock around her, and sadly discompose her mind by their laughter, their sneers, and their unsuitable remarks. Reverence, stillness, and solitude are needed for the miracle. But, besides being necessary in order to prepare the widow of Obadiah for receiving the benefits of the miracle, the solitude and secrecy which Elisha enjoined were significant of the mysterious character of the miracle itself. It was withdrawn from sight. It was silent and unimaginable.

The process by which the oil was multiplied we labour in vain to conceive. We cannot explain the phenomenon by the observation of any known laws; and yet in truth the miracle is not more strange, save in the rapidity with which it is effected, than that which is every day going forward in nature in those regions where the olive tree grows. You sow the seed of an olive tree; that seed contains a very small quantity of oil. It grows and becomes a tree and produces an immense quantity of fruit; so that from the little drop of oil in the small vessel of the seed, you have thousands of vessels in the shape of the berries, each filled with oil.

He who makes the olive seed in the course of a few years, or the olive tree every season, to prepare and extract oil from the scanty soil on the arid rocks, and the dry burning air in which the tree delights to grow, concentrated, in the miracle in the widow’s chamber, the slower processes of nature spread over months and years, into the act of a single moment. Of course the natural process does not explain the miracle, but it is a help to our faith. The one sheds light upon the other.

Old Olive Groves, California

"The miracle teaches us that the natural process is not the result of an impersonal law or of a dead course of things, but the working of our Father in heaven; while the natural process in its turn shows to us that God in the miracle is working in the line of the ordinary events and dispensations of His providence. The miracle blends with common life. How strikingly does this wonderful incident show to us that we must be fellow-workers with God throughout, from first to last, in our own deliverance and blessing. How wonderfully it illustrates the whole Divine economy of grace, under which we are enjoined to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling, seeing that it is God that worketh in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure!

We are all in the condition of the poor widow; we are destitute of everything, and are ready to perish. But God is far more tender and considerate to us than Elisha was to the widow. If we have but the feeling of want, but the desire for God’s help, that very want or desire will be to us what the pot of oil was to the widow—the source of an abundant supply of all that we need." (H. Macmillan, D. D.)

******
"How often I have excused myself from attempting something because I convinced myself that I did not have the resources to do so! Does our text not teach us that God expects us to use what little we have, trusting Him to provide for all of our needs?I see this theme repeated over and over in the Bible. Moses makes all sorts of excuses for why he should not go to Egypt, as God commanded. And God says to him, “What is that in your hand?” (Exodus 4:2). It was nothing special; it was just a staff—probably no more than a stick Moses found somewhere, which suited the task of tending sheep. But that staff was used of God in a powerful way to demonstrate that Moses spoke for God. Jesus made the five loaves and two fishes into a meal for thousands (John 6:1-14), and He turned water into wine (John 2:1-11). Paul says that God uses our weakness to demonstrate His power (2 Corinthians 12:7-11). God allows, and often requires, that we participate in His work."  -Bob Deffinbaugh

Crawling...

The last great wall of the hills lay stark above him.  As he left the dreary little station and stared into the greasy lamplight of a country store, Oliver felt that he was crawling, like a great beast, into the circle of those enormous hills to die."  -Thomas Wolfe, Look Homeward Angel

Sometimes there are thin lines between my categories of though and other times no lines at all.  This morning I woke up with a line from Thomas Wolfe's Look Homeward Angel floating around in my mind---something about how his father crawled up into the circle of mountains to die.   Of course, that's a paraphrase, but I know that I will never drive up Black Mountain again without that image in the back of my mind.

I seem to be meandering through an early 20th century through World War II season...

Grace and I read a few chapters of Anne Frank the other day---I had forgotten the immediacy of her diary, the ice cold grip of it.   Adults are built to handle strain, but the injustice of a 15 year old girl's shattered world is a dark place to dwell indeed.wandering through connections between the World Wars and immigration, the movement of generations as they settled into America

Then Briggs told me about a posthumously published short story he's reading of Thomas Wolfe's that mentioned the tension in Germany in the 1930's.  He thought it interesting that Wolfe was so in touch with what was going on in Germany at the time.  Later on, reading about Wolfe, I discovered he made a trip there in 1935.

Also, it sounds stupid, but it's taken me this long to really think about the notion of my father being born in the middle of World War II, but there you have it.  Why do we have such a tendency to put history on a shelf and keep it disconnected from our own "history."  Personal history and public history are more intimately connected than most of us care to believe.  We prefer to view our lives as rising above the tide of public history, but the truth is that we stay drenched with its waves.

Riding another wave, yesterday when reading about Elijah in 2 Samuel, I stumbled across some of Marc Chagall's works.  Although I have a passing familiarity with the name, I was mostly unfamiliar with his heritage and work.
 I'm always on the hunt for sincere Biblical art that speaks to me across the ages and medium.  We visited the Bob Jones University Art Museum back in December, and I wish that early Christian art-- the icons did more for me....most of early Christians and Medieval church art (outside of the gorgeous but impersonal Cathedrals) fail to inspire much in me.  Perhaps that's what rubs me wrong about that art...there is so little of the individual's stamp on it---it's mostly very much someone else's idea of what is holy and beautiful.  But, Tissot speaks to me in his 19th century art, and now Chagall in his 20th.  In the vast tide of church art, it's sad to find only a handful of pilgrim artists that touch me, but it makes their friendship all the dearer.  Chagall's wispy lines, patches of color and sense of movement is lovely, whimsical, and humanizing in the face of the stiff gold-haloed crowd.

Chagall Museum, Nice, France

Chagall had a fascinating life---lived from 1887-1985--what a span!  He was from a small village in Russia which left its stamp on his art throughout his life, yet he also experienced the transitional and bohemian Paris art scene of the late 19th and early 29th centuries--the remnants of Impressionism combined with elements of Cubism and Surrealism all find their home in his art.  As a Jew living in France, he faced persecution during the Second World War and after much prompting and help, escape to New York City with fake documentation.  After a handful of years there, he returned to the warmer coasts of France (not Russia!) and lived out the rest of his life as a naturalized French citizen.  Chagall ignored many of  the expected conventions of an artist, and I appreciate this about him, as I think too many artists these days are arrogant snobs...at least from what I've seen locally.   They seem to tolerate the public as a necessary evil instead of relating to or heaven forbid, enjoying the common people.  Chagall does not strike me as a snob.

He also worked in a variety of mediums--not only in paintings and drawings, but in the brilliant colors of stained glass.  He was a modernist, yet steeped in Jewish tradition and honoring of Christian imagery as well, though I am not clear about his assessment of Christianity itself.  He was not impressed with the Christian response to the Holocaust, didn't think that the artists stuck their necks out enough for the Jews...this is probably true in retrospect, though none of us are very good at sticking out necks out when we need to...are we?

Chagall...Anne Frank...and then reading Thomas Wolfe who paints with a different impressionistic brush.  Yes, I see how James Joyce was one of his heroes---they share the same wandering style.  It reminds me of another Woolf....Virginia, as well.  As a person far from the home city of my birth, I can relate to his longings to trace the lines of how he got to where he was...the desire to link it all together.

City of Buffalo, a steel engraving from a study by A. C. Warren, engraved by W. Wellstood and
published in Picturesque America, D. Appleton & Company, New York, New York 1873.

The journey that his ancestors made from England to Pennsylvania to the Carolinas echos some of the same lines of my own family history.  I think there's some wandering Pennsylvania cock fighters in my mother's family as well. Rough stock.  Connecticut Yankees someone termed them, though I'm still not sure exactly what that means, I suspect it's the Northern version of redneck.
I wish I had time and breathe to trace my family's own path to Buffalo, NY in the mid 19th century.  As Thomas Wolfe's father crawled into the bowl of Asheville, the German carpenters of my line landed on Michigan Avenue in downtown Buffalo.  Nowdays that land is in the middle of a huge hospital district...mostly asphalt, but I like to think of the romance of the handful of facts I do know.  A group of Germans settled on that street and my Great Grandfather Frank, met my Great Grandmother living next door to her there.  Frank crawled out of the city, and Harold crawled farther out again.  My father's generation one circle wider, then his own journey out of Buffalo in his generation holds its own melancholy and ambition.  A story for another day.   A long one, no doubt, as Wolfe would say.

The paths and lines of all this figures floating in my mind....people trying to live out their own personal truth in the midst of larger movements.  For Wolfe---it goes back to a desperate drunk who dreamed of carving angels and climbed into the great bowl of Asheville.  For Anne Frank, it was a young Jewish girl of the cusp of young womanhood who wanted to live out her private life in peace, but was instead drown in the Tsunami of Hitler and World War II.  It is the story Chagall, a Russian Jew who lived through this all somehow imperviously...a man who was gifted with long life to follow his  artistic motions to their end...something Wolfe, and certainly Frank were denied.


Me?  I'm a girl from Buffalo who married a North Carolingian.  Torn from Buffalo in a sense, but in the broader landscape of historical migrations, Buffalo had served its purpose--in retrospect, it was time for my generation to go.  There is little there to keep us---gray skys, a depressed economy, and lake-effect snow?  Meanwhile, I've found my own measure of peace and protection in the same circle as Wolfe's father.  Funny how one generation crawls in and another crawls out....we all have to find our place.

Asheville itself is an interesting puzzle to turn in one's mind.  It grew steadily from 1880 through the 1920's, which Buffalo did as well.  It had a huge fall of banks during the Great Depression and stagnated for decades, even declining a bit.  But unlike Buffalo, Asheville is rising.  As much as Buffalo's geography and disadvantages it, Asheville's recommends it.  There is a story in there for sure...of people and generations yet to be told.

It all does come full circle in the way that Wolfe suspects.  Where Thomas Wolfe felt the hunger to climb out, I longed to climb in.  His roots are here despite his travels and surely my own touch back to Buffalo.  Still, I count my movement good progress in the long line of migration--the timeless nature of the mountains is surely stronger in me than a port city on a flat lake.

"In the haunting eternity of these mountains, rimmed in their enormous cup, he found sprawled out on its hundred hills and hollows a town of four thousand people."  

-Thomas Wolfe, Look Homeward Angel

Historical population
Census	Pop.		%±
1870	1,400		—
1880	2,616		86.9%
1890	10,235		291.2%
1900	14,694		43.6%
1910	18,762		27.7%
1920	28,504		51.9%
1930	50,193		76.1%
1940	51,310		2.2%
1950	53,000		3.3%
1960	60,192		13.6%
1970	57,929		−3.8%
1980	54,022		−6.7%
1990	61,607		14.0%
2000	68,889		11.8%
2010	83,393		21.1%
Est. 2012	85,712		2.8%
Historical Population of Asheville, NC, US Census Data

Elijah & Elisha

"Testimony against evil, and consequent suffering, mark the history of Elijah. Power, and grace in using it for others, mark that of Elisha. Both are seen in the Lord Jesus Christ, whose shadows, of course, they were. In one aspect of His history on earth, we see the suffering, driven, persecuted Witness; the world hating Him, because He testified that its works were evil; in another we see the powerful, gracious, ready friend of others, all that had sorrows or necessities getting healing and blessing from Him.” -JGB, Short Meditations on Elijah

Marc Chagall's mosaic, "The Prophet Elijah"  Nice, France, 1970

“Though having the same objectives in view as Elijah, Elisha’s manner in reaching them was somewhat different. In keeping with this contrasting background [i.e., wealthy rather than poorer], he was more at home in cities and was often in the company of kings. Also whereas Elijah had been more a man of moods, either strongly courageous or despairing to the point of death, Elisha was self-controlled and even-tempered. Elisha never staged dramatic contests nor sulked in a desert. It may be, too, that Elisha was more interested in the needs of people, for many of his miracles were for the purpose of aiding and giving relief to persons in difficulty." Leon J. Wood, The Prophets of Israel

Significantly, Elijah is taken to Heaven in the whirlwind, not the chariot of fire:

"And as they still went on and talked, behold, chariots of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. " 2 Kings 2:11

Why did I think the method of transportation was a chariot?  Perhaps, the chariot just makes more sense to a human used to being transported by concrete things, but God's chosen method was a whirlwind.

I feel sorry for Elisha at this point.  There are many aspects of these prophets that I can relate to.  Earlier, I understood Elijah's sense of "needing to be there for God," the sense that he had that he was the only one left and the only one working on the behalf of God in that context.  It's understandable how he begins to view himself as critical, irreplacable, yet none of us is.  We flatter ourselves when we think that God needs our specific skill set, personality, or placement to get His things done.  It's not that God doesn't value us---He does.   We are His children and precious to Him.  But, He doesn't NEED us to complete his plans.

I think this is where man has gone wrong from the beginning in viewing God.  He doesn't need us to sacrifice animals or to go through religious rituals to make Him behave in certain ways.  Although He chooses to involve us in His providential ways, it is because of His delight, not his necessity.  From the beginning, people have tried to manipulate God through ritual to provide rain, bless the harvest, keep us from sickness, along with an  endless host of physical, emotional, and spiritual needs.  He hears our needs.  He weighs them.  Yet, His action is not bound to them as in a "closed circuit."  God is an open circuit, He operates outside of any dependence on anything.

All the same, it's so very human and tempting for us to think of ourselves as Elijah did---to feel the weight of His plans on us, or perhaps to feel the weight of our own self expectations and fears in addition  to anything God has for us.  Perhaps this is what Jesus meant when he commented that his yoke was easy and his burden light.  God's burdens are not so heavy as our own man-created ones.

In this scene, Elisha's desire to keep Elijah near him resonates with me as well.   I have always felt a sense of this in my life--partially because I've had three sisters before me that I have been chasing or observing in one way or another--while they have been busy setting out with their own lives.   Elisha is not emotionally ready for Elijah to depart.  I was not ready for my older sisters to depart, and certainly, later, completely unready for my father to depart.  I feel the chasm between Elijah and Elisha dearly.    

And yet, in both stories, there is no arguing with the facts that it was God's will for both Elisha and I to set out without them.  Hate that!  For me, it is a sense that I was not ready.  Maybe I would never have been ready....not sure.  I'm intrigued that Elisha senses that Elijah will be  taken from him and doesn't want to talk about it:

"The sons of the prophets who were at Jericho drew near to Elisha and said to him, "Do you know that today the LORD will take away your master from over you?" And he answered, "Yes, I know it; keep quiet." 2 Kings 2:5

*He thinks that Elijah & Elisha travel around the day of Elijah's departure as a kind of final passing of the baton among the prophets, that they would know that Elijah was going on and Elisha would continue his ministry.

Bob Deffinbaugh fleshes out some of the more confusing and compelling aspects of this

Marc Chagall, 1956 lithography
I love the lines in this, esp. of the horses

passage.  Notably:

*He views Elisha as faithful servant in his determination to follow Elijah and not be separated  
from him. Then he slips in this great interjection here on servant-leadership:

"Good leaders begin as good servants; good leaders continue to be servants—servant-leaders." -DB

worth pondering...

*When Elisha asks for a double portion,  Deffinbaugh view this as a humble request---he viewed Elijah as twice the man he was and thus he needed twice the spirit.

*He feels we are all transported to Heaven by angels and references the words used to describe Elisha's death and also the parable of the rich man and poor man that Jesus told which references angels transporting Lazarus to Abraham's side.

Perhaps the strongest piece of his commentary was his point-by-point comparison of Ahaziah's final days and Elijah's.  I also liked the way he contrasted Elijah's earlier self-imposed desire to depart during his deep depression with the what that the Lord chose for him to go.  He's right---God's timing and way is superior--always.  '

********
In the Biblical Illustrator, J. Parker fleshes out our human tendency to avoid death and God's absolute control over the course of our lives:

"God allows us to express our own wishes and wills, He allows us to say what we would like to have done, and trains us to say, “Nevertheless, not my will, but Thine, be done.” 

~~~~~~~
Elijah did not say to Elisha, “I am going to die,” Or “I am going to heaven,” but, “I am going to Bethel—stand there.” You know what we say to one another in view of the great event: we say, “If anything should happen to me”—a form of words we understand. We do not scene to be able to say plainly and with frankness, “Now, if I should die next week” No, but we say, “We do not know what may happen, and in the event of anything happening to me.” We do not like to mention the monster, and to point a long plain finger into the pit, so we say, “If anything should happen to me—in the event of anything happening to me—going to Gilgal, and to Bethel, and to Jericho, and to Jordan, and” The rest is silence. That is the way in the chamber of affliction.

~~~~~
So we let our friends down easily, and prepare them for great events by doing certain intermediate things. Elijah says, “Ask what I shall do for thee.” 
~~~~~

"And so if you look into the perfect law of liberty—look into the Bible, you will find it always new, always a revelation, always something fresh—May bringing its own flowers, June her own coronal ever, August its own largess of vine and wheat."

That is God’s law, that the watching man gets everything, the man who is nearest and looks keenest gets all and sees all—and it is right. The mountain gets the first gleam of the sun, and then the light gets down into the valleys by and by. And so—and so—these great rocks of God are watching men: Elisha was a watching spirit: those who see Christ taken up are endued with power from on high. Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; look, and ye shall see; knock, and it shall be opened. Sir Isaac Newton was once asked why he was so much greater than other workers in his particular science. He said, “I do not know, except that I, perhaps, pay more attention than they do!” Just consider. What is attention? We think anybody can attend. Hardly a man in a hundred can attend to anything. The sluggard gets nothing, the shut eyes see not the morning when it cometh, the slumberer’s closed vision cannot see the first sparklings and scintillations of the coming day. Lord, open our eyes, that we may see! -J. Parker, D. D.

*********************

Matthew Henry's comment on Elijah & Elisha:

"We should do all the spiritual good we can one to another, and get all we can one by another, while we are together, because we are to be together but a little while."

"Note, Those that are going to heaven themselves ought to be concerned for those they leave behind them on earth, and to leave with them their experiences, testimonies, counsels, and prayers."  2 Peter 1:15.  -MH

Therefore I intend always to remind you of these qualities, though you know them and are established in the truth that you have. I think it right, as long as I am in this body, to stir you up by way of reminder, since I know that the putting off of my body will be soon, as our Lord Jesus Christ made clear to me. And I will make every effort so that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things. 2 Peter 1:12-15

"He takes away superiors from our head, inferiors from our feet, equals from our arms; let us therefore carefully do the duty of every relation, that we may reflect upon it with comfort when it comes to be dissolved."  -MH

Keeping Track of the Kings: Part III Ahaziah, Joram

I8 Ahaziah

Ahab's son, began reign in 17th year of Jehoshaphat, reigned 2 years.  After the death of his father Ahab in the war against Aram,  Ahaziah takes the throne.  He fell through the latticework in an upper room injuring himself.  In the beginning of 2nd Kings, Ahaziah is in the process of consulting the prophets of Baal about his future, when Elijah intervenes.  An angel of the Lord told Elijah to meet the messenger going to seek false answers, so he does.  When Ahaziah asks who is intercepting the messenger and learns it is Elijah, he sends three different groups  of 50 prophets to summon Elijah. The first two groups were consumed by fire from Heaven.  The captain of the third group humbles himself before Elijah, and at this point, an angel of the Lord appears to Elijah again and tells him to go to Ahaziah and to not be afraid.

A few intial observations:

Elijah Bringeth Fire from Heaven,
James Tissot, 1896-1900

*Ahaziah's consultation of the false prophets was a natural extension of being raised by Ahab and Jezebel.   Like father, like son.

*Also like Ahab, Ahaziah rejects the words of God's prophets in favor of false yes men...even to the extent that in the face of supernatural miracles (the destruction of the groups of 50) he remains firm in his plans against His prophets, and thus against God.

* It's about God's timing--not man's and about the humility of heart, not orders.  It was certainly not about Ahaziah's timing, but not about Elijah's timing either. 

Nice application from the Biblical Illustrator:

"That calamity or affliction alone is not sufficient to lead,  men to repentance. Sometimes it is thought that by means of adverse circumstances men can be brought to God; but it was not so in the ease of Ahaziah." -T. Cain

Regarding Baal:

"The real name of this Syrian deity was Baal-zebul ('Lord of life'), but the Jews called him Baal-zebub ('Lord of flies') in derision. By the time of Christ, this deity had become a symbol of Satan." -BBC 

A question:  how does the BBC determine that the angel is a "pre-incarnate Christ"? 

1:13-16   Only when the third captain humbly acknowledged Elijah's power and pleaded for mercy was the prophet instructed by the angel of the LORD (Christ in preincarnate appearance) to go and speak with Ahaziah. Elijah fearlessly told the king that he would not recover because he had treated the Lord with contempt by consulting Baal-Zebub. -BBC

References from the BKC regarding the "Angel of the Lord" and the preincarnate Christ: 

The Angel of the Lord found the maidservant in the desert at a spring… beside the road to Shur (cf. Gen_25:18) on the way to her homeland, Egypt. This is the first reference in the Old Testament to “the Angel of the Lord” (lit., “the Angel of Yahweh”). This Angel is identified with Yahweh in Gen_16:13, as well as in Gen_22:11-12; Gen_31:11, Gen_31:13; Gen_48:16; Jdg_6:11, Jdg_6:16, Jdg_6:22; Jdg_13:22-23; Zec_3:1-2. And yet the Angel is distinct from Yahweh (Gen_24:7; 2Sa_24:16; Zec_1:12). Thus “the Angel of the Lord” may refer to a theophany of the preincarnate Christ (cf. Gen_18:1-2; Gen_19:1; Num_22:22; Jdg_2:1-4; Jdg_5:23; Zec_12:8). 

Looking at just a few of these references---I see the point and intricacy of the issue---need more time to think through/research--ha!

And if the slew of J names is not confusing enough:

1:17, 18   When Ahaziah died, he was succeeded by his brother, Jehoram (later referred to as Joram), because he had no son to wear the crown. Judah at this time had a co-regency composed of Jehoshaphat (2Ki_3:1) and his son, who was also named Jehoram.-BBC

I9 Joram/Jehoram

Ahab's son, reigned 12 years (852-841 B.C.)

The war against Moab was fought by three kings--the King of Israel, Jehoram; the King of Judah, Jehoshaphat; and the King of Edom. Moab

On Moab:

Moab, under Mesha its king, rebelled against Israel after Ahab died. The death of the Israelite king encouraged Mesha to throw off the burden of taxation that Omri (Ahaziah’s grandfather) had imposed when he had brought Moab under Israel’s control (cf. comments on 1Ki_16:21-24). This rebellion was not effective at first but the fact that it began in Ahaziah’s reign may suggest that Mesha considered Ahaziah a weaker king than Ahab. -BKC

Mesha Stele

"The stone was discovered intact by Frederick Augustus Klein, an Anglican missionary, at the site of ancient Dibon (now Dhiban, Jordan), in August 1868, having been led to it by a local bedouin. Before it could be seen by another westerner, the next year it was smashed by local villagers during a dispute over its ownership. A "squeeze" (a papier-mâché impression) had been obtained by a local Arab on behalf of Charles Simon Clermont-Ganneau, and fragments containing most of the inscription (613 letters out of about a thousand) were later recovered and pieced together. The squeeze and the reassembled stele are now in the Louvre Museum." -Wikipedia

Detail from the Mesha Stele, "Moabite Stone"
circa 840 BC of King Mesha---Louvre, Paris

It's an odd war of sorts. King Joram (Ahab's son) and King Jehoshaphat again unite forces, along with the King of Edom.   The King of Edom is involved because of their path of travel:

"They decided to march down the west side of the Dead Sea, east through Edom, and north to Moab. Since the king of Edom was a vassal of Jehoshaphat at this time, his help was enlisted in the war."  -BBC

This time against the King of Moab, Mesha, who is a sheepbreeder. They consult Elijah who predicts rain and victory.  The contingent is successful and the Moabites fearfully view the pooled water as blood.   In desperation, Mesha offers his oldest son as a sacrifice unto of the city walls.  At this point, the Bible states:

"When the king of Moab saw that the battle was going against him, he took with him 700 swordsmen to break through, opposite the king of Edom, but they could not. Then he took his oldest son who was to reign in his place and offered him for a burnt offering on the wall. And there came great wrath against Israel. And they withdrew from him and returned to their own land." -2 Kings 3:26-27

It's an odd ending to what would have been a resounding victory. The Mesha stone reports things differently.

Joram & Elisha

Elisha helps the King of Syria's commander, Naaman, recover from leprosy.  At this point, we see that King Joram has little regard for Elisha as he believes Naaman's presence is more about another Syrian attack (2 Kings 5).  Here Joram seems quick to respond in fear:


"And when the king of Israel read the letter, he tore his clothes and said, "Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man sends word to me to cure a man of his leprosy? Only consider, and see how he is seeking a quarrel with me."  2 Kings 5

J5-Jehoram 

Jehoram was Jehoshaphat's son--co-reigned with his father, married to Ahab's daughter, reigned for 8 years. When Jehoshaphat passed away, Jehoram killed all of his brothers and some of the leaders.  All an ominous beginning to the story of this generation.  The text clarifies that his line was allowed to continue because of God's decision to honor the line of David.

"It is significant that the prophet God sent to announce judgment on Jehoram was Elijah (v. 12). Elijah’s ministry was to condemn Baalism in Israel, but God sent him to Jehoram because Jehoram shared the same guilt as the kings of Ahab’s house. This is the only record we have of a prophet from the Northern Kingdom rebuking a king of the Southern Kingdom. All the other prophets God sent to the Davidic kings were from Judah." -Constable's Notes

2 Kings 8 relates how Edom revolted under Jehoram's reign to gain their independence.  Tellingly, when Jehoram leads a night attack, his men desert him and run to their homes.