Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadJohn Kitto Morning Bible Devotions: December 4
Today is: Friday, April 19th, 2024 (Show Today's Devotion)
Select a Day for a Devotion in the Month of December: (Show All Months)
2 Kings 5
It has been asked, Why should Elisha refuse, in so decided a manner, the presents offered by the grateful Syrian, when he returned from the Jordan, cured of his inveterate malady? The reasons for his accepting them were stronger with him, as an Oriental, than they could be to us; for, as we have shown, Note: Thirtieth Week—Thursday. such presents were customary, and to decline them when offered, is regarded as an incivility, if not an affront; and it was only the peculiar position in which he stood, and the high obligation he had conferred, which enabled Elisha to do so without offence. There must have been some special reason; for, on a subsequent occasion, we find him accepting, without hesitation, when he was himself in Damascus, the presents sent to him by the king of Syria. But the onus of the breach of etiquette lies on the side of Naaman himself. He ought to have presented his presents in the first instance, before he had made his request; and to offer it after the request had been granted, divested the presents of their grace, by giving them the aspect of a poor return for one vast obligation conferred by the prophet. The omission in the first instance, was scarcely Naaman’s fault, but arose from the peculiarity of the circumstances—seeing that he went in the first instance to the king of Israel, and was referred by him to Elisha in such a manner, that the prophet already knew his errand before he came, and was thus enabled to send his directions to him the moment he appeared before his door, without giving him time to tender his presents. Offered now, they assumed a different aspect, and Naaman had no longer any right to feel offended at their being refused, and in fact, although pained, was not offended. As the prophet might decline, without offence, presents thus offered, he wisely chose to do so. And why? “Doubtless,” as an old writer remarks, Note: Naaman the Syrian, his Disease and his Cure. By Daniel Rogers, B. in Divinity, and Minister of God’s Word at Wethersf. in Essex. London. Printed by Th. Harper, for Philip Nevil, and to be sold at his Shop in Ivy Lane, at the Sign of the Gun. 1642. “the Lord would not that rewards coming from a novice (whose strength was small, though his wealth great), nor any bruite thereof among heathens (who must have heard of the fee as well as of the cure), should disparage and prejudice the grace and freedom of so miraculous a worke, as the conversion of a soule and the healing of a leper. And therefore he would have all such sinister constructions to be dasht. God’s prophets never stand in such deep needs, that God must be dishonoured.by their supply. God scorned to be thought to send for Naaman to possess his treasure or enrich his prophet.”
But what are we to say respecting the new convert’s request to he allowed to take two mules’ burden of earth away with him? That he asked at all, implies that he desired the prophet’s sanction for the use to which he designed to put it, otherwise it would have been easy for him to have secured what he wanted anywhere on his way home, without wishing any one’s leave. What, then, was that use? It may perhaps be gathered from his own words. He says that this miracle had convinced him that “there was no God in all the earth but in Israel;” and following his request are the words, “for thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt-offering nor sacrifice unto other gods, but unto the Lord.” It will here be observed that Naaman was converted but not yet instructed. He believed in the power and greatness of the God who had healed him, but he still regarded him as the God of Israel, whose power was, if not confined to that land, chiefly exercised there. He would therefore carry a portion of this land with him, that he might, as it were, have an Israel even in Damascus—believing that such worship as he could render would be more acceptable in connection with this sacred soil. Some think he intended to make an altar with it, as the altars of Israel were to be altars of earth. But Naaman was not likely to know this; and Israel did not actually offer the example of any such altars. Besides, local altars were discountenanced by the law, the sacrifices offered at the place of central worship being for and in behalf of all believers; and God might be worshipped, with most true worship, anywhere by proselytes, though not by sacrifices. This, moreover, would have involved the grievous irregularity of the new convert performing a function reserved to the priests—that of offering sacrifice. If this had been his meaning, much harm might have ensued from Elisha’s neglecting to correct the notions and purposes thus indicated. According to the principles of ancient Judaism, the practices here supposed are so exceedingly illegal and dangerous, and might produce so much evil, that the prophet could hardly fail to have pointed out the mistake under which, in his sincere but uninstructed zeal, Naaman labored; and as we do not hear that he did so, we apprehend that something less dangerous, and which might be conceded to the weakness of a novice, must be meant; and there are certainly existing oriental usages, a reference to which may suggest less hazardous explanations. Naaman distinctly intimated his conviction that the land of Israel was a sacred soil, seeing that there alone the true God was to be found; and it was for this reason that he desired to possess a portion of its venerated dust. If, therefore, we look to the uses to which the Easterns apply the soil of places accounted holy, it is possible we may hit upon the right reason for Naaman’s singular request. To the Mohammedans at the present day the sacred soil is that of Mecca; and the man accounts himself happy who has in his possession the smallest portion of it for use in his devotions. He carries it about his person in a small bag; and in his prayers he deposits this before him upon the ground in such a manner that, in his frequent prostrations, the head comes down upon this morsel of sacred soil—so that in some sort he may be said to worship thereon. May it not be that Naaman contemplated forming, with this larger portion of the soil of the sacred land, a spot on which he might offer up his devotions to the God of Israel?
Again, prayer, as among the ancient Jews, is always preceded by ablutions; and under circumstances where water is scanty, earth may be used. May it not be that Naaman, in his compunction at having disparaged the waters of Israel in comparison with those of Damascus, now, since be had been healed by the waters of the Jordan, rushed into the other extreme, and conceived that no water but that of Israel could be fit for ceremonial ablution; and the water of Israel being unattainable in Damascus, it was quite possible for him to conceive that the earth might be used instead?
Then, again, the appreciation of sacred ground is so intense in the East, that there is a craving desire to be buried in it; and corpses are often carried to great distances for interment therein. When this is impracticable, the next object is to secure a portion of it, so that one may be buried representatively in sacred ground, by being laid upon some of it, or having a pillow filled with it under his head, or even by having a small portion of it placed upon his person. The Jews at the present day partake strongly of this feeling. Such as possibly can, strive to go to Jerusalem to die and to be buried there. Those who cannot realize this, resort to the other expedients; but where the distance and consequent expense requires it to be sparingly used, as in England, a very small quantity is made to suffice—as much as will lie upon a shilling being placed upon each eye.
With such diversified uses and applications of soil counted sacred, it is possible that Naaman had some other and less objectionable object for his two mules’ burden of earth than is usually ascribed to him: but these alternatives not being present to the minds of commentators, it was natural enough that they should have perceived no other object than that of making an altar.