Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadJohn Kitto Morning Bible Devotions: December 6
Today is: Friday, April 26th, 2024 (Show Today's Devotion)
Select a Day for a Devotion in the Month of December: (Show All Months)
2Ki_8:7-15
Still the offering was royal; and we do not find that Elisha declined it, as he had formerly that of Naaman. The circumstances were different altogether. No cure, but only an oracular response, was sought; and the name of the Lord whom the prophet served, would not be in any way dishonored, but rather magnified, by his acceptance of the gifts thus rendered to him in the presence of the heathen. It served to mark the more signally in the eyes of the Damascenes their king’s appreciation of the power and greatness of the God whose prophet Elisha was known to be, and of the comparative disparagement which he cast upon his own idols. He had either sought the assistance of his own gods in vain, or thought it in vain to seek their assistance.
The interview between the prophet and the Syrian general is very remarkable, and it is of some importance to the character of Elisha that it should be rightly understood. The reader must refer to the account in the text, and then may consider the sense conveyed in the following account of it.
Hazael opened his mission thus: “Thy son Benhadad saith, Shall I recover of this disease?” Elisha promptly replied: “Go, say unto him, Thou mayest certainly recover.” That is, the disease which laid him upon his bed was not mortal; he might certainly recover from it, and would recover, if let alone. This was all that was required from him, and he gave it. But he knew more, about which he was not consulted. He read the heart, the purposes, and the future life of the man who stood before him, and was willing to let him know it. So, after a pause, he added—as addressed to Hazael himself and not as part of his response to the king: “Howbeit, the Lord hath showed me that he shall surely die.” Much misapprehension has arisen from regarding this as part of the response to be borne to the sick king—though the change of personal pronouns in the two sentences might alone suffice to show the difference: “Thou,” in the first; “He,” in the second. Having said this, the prophet looked steadfastly at Hazael, until the latter quailed beneath that searching gaze; and then the man of God turned his head aside and wept. Why wept he? Hazael himself respectfully asked that question. Elisha answered that he wept because he clearly saw the misery and desolation which this man would hereafter inflict upon Israel. On hearing this, the Syrian exclaimed, “But what is thy servant—a mere dog—that he should do this great deed!” He was not offended, as the current version would seem to imply, or he would not have called it a great deed. But he asked how could a person of comparatively low condition like himself have such high influence upon the fate of nations. The prophet answered that the Lord had disclosed to him that he should become king over Syria.
Hazael then returned to his master, and in reply to his anxious inquiries, delivered the message the prophet intended for him, but suppressed the intimation given to himself that he should really die. But the very next day, it would seem that Hazael accomplished the purpose he had probably long contemplated, and which the prophet had detected. He put his master to death, and in such a manner that the crime remained undiscovered, and the king was supposed to have died of his disease and dying apparently childless, the wicked and unscrupulous general was enabled to secure the object of his ambition.
The mode in which this regicide was committed is very singular, and has been variously understood. It is said, “He took a thick cloth, and dipped it into water, and spread it upon his face, so that he died.” We have interpreted this as Hazael’s act, as is commonly done; but there is an ambiguity in the original which renders it really uncertain whether this was done by the king’s order for the purpose of allaying his burning fever, and so caused his own death, or that Hazael did it either violently, so as to smother him, or by making what he knew would prove a fatal application, under pretence of affording relief. From the mere circumstances of preparation (supposing it Hazael’s act, the latter seems to us to have been the case; and it consists entirely with his presumed object, of destroying the king without leaving any marks of violence that might lead to detection.
What our translator calls “a thick cloth,” seems to mean some part of the bed furniture—probably the thick quilted coverlet still in use. It is an eastern practice in some kinds of fever to wet the bedding, and it is in such cases often done with good effect; while in other kinds of fever such an application would be dangerous, if not fatal. With reference to fevers of the former class, Bruce, speaking of the disorders common in the region of the Red Sea, says—“Violent fevers, called there nedad, make the principal figure in the fatal list, and generally terminate the third day in death. If the patient survive till the fifth day, he very often recovers, by drinking water only, and throwing a quantity of cold water upon him, even in his bed, where he is permitted to lie without any attempt to make him dry, or to change his bed, until another deluge adds to the first.” We have ourselves received exactly this treatment, under the orders of a native physician, in a fever that seemed likely to be fatal, and we certainly recovered—though whether by reason of this treatment or in spite of it, we know not. Now, it may be supposed that Benhadad’s fever was not of the sort to which such treatment can bring relief; but Hazael recommended this mode of treatment with the knowledge that it was likely to be attended with fatal results; or else that the complaint was of this description, and was thus treated, and that Hazael took the opportunity of smothering or strangling the king, under the pretence of laying over him a coverlet fresh dipped in water. The coverlets used in the East, where blankets are unknown, being thickly quilted with wool or cotton, become of great weight when soaked in water; and it thus became the fittest instrument for such a purpose that could be found about an eastern bed; while the use of wet bed-clothes in fever would prevent any suspicion arising from the coverlet being found saturated with moisture.
It grieves us to find some right-minded men—such as Dr. Chalmers—assenting to the notion that Elisha put it into Hazael’s mind to murder his master. But, in the first place, there is no clear evidence that he did murder him, or had any hand in producing his death; and, in the second place—and supposing that this crime was wrought by his hand the tone of the narrative suggests that the prophet was rather intimating his knowledge of a purpose Hazael had already formed, than that he was suggesting anything new to his mind. All we can allow is, that Hazael was watching the turn of his master’s disease, in the expectation that it would prove mortal, and that he would thus be spared the murder—but with a secret determination that his lord should never rise from that bed; and that the prophet’s intimation that the king would recover, led him at once to execute his purpose—being now aware of the result of the disease.