Bible Commentary

Expositor's Bible Commentary 2 Kings 8:1 Then spake Elisha unto the woman, whose son he had restored to life, saying, Arise, and go thou and thine household, and sojourn wheresoever thou canst sojourn: for the LORD hath called for a famine; and it shall also come upon the land seven years. THE SHUNAMMITE AND 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 Naomi, 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 Naaman’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 Naaman 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 Naaman’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." Now, 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. {2Ki 10:32; 2Ki 13:3; 2Ki 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, {Isa 13:15-16 Hos 10:14; Hos 13:16 Nah 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 Jos 6:17-21 1Sa 15:3 Lev 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. {Psa 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; {1Sa 24:14; 2Sa 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. 2 Kings 8:16 And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel, Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign. (1) JEHORAM BEN-JEHOSHAPHAT OF JUDAH B.C. 851-843 (2) AHAZIAH BEN-JEHORAM OF JUDAH B.C. 843-842 2 Kings 8:16-29 "Bear with the Turk, no brother near the throne." -POPE. THE narrative now reverts to the kingdom of Judah, of which the historian, mainly occupied with the great deeds of the prophet in Israel, takes at this period but little notice. He tells us that in the fifth year of Jehoram of Israel, son of Ahab, his namesake and brother-in-law, Jehoram of Judah, began to reign in Judah, though his father, Jehoshaphat, was then king. The statement is full of difficulties, especially as we have been already told {2Ki 1:17} that Jehoram ben-Ahab of Israel began to reign in the second year of Jehoram ben-Jehoshaphat of Judah, and {2Ki 13:1} in the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat. It is hardly worth while to pause here to disentangle these complexities in a writer who, like most Eastern historians, is content with loose chronological references. By the current mode of reckoning, the twenty-five years of Jehoshaphat’s reign may merely mean twenty-three and a month or two of two other years; and some suppose that, when Jehoram of Judah was about sixteen, his father went on the expedition against Moab, and associated his son with him in the throne. This is only conjecture. Jehoshaphat, of all kings, least needed a coadjutor, particularly so weak and worthless a one as his son; and though the association of colleagues with themselves has been common in some realms, there is not a single instance of it in the history of Israel and Judah-the case of Uzziah, who was a leper, not being to the point. The kings both of Israel and of Judah at this period, with the single exception of the brave and good Jehoshaphat, were unworthy and miserable. The blight of the Jezebel marriage and the curse of Baal worship lay upon both kingdoms. It is scarcely possible to find such wretched monarchs as the two sons of Jezebel-Ahaziah and Jehoram in Israel, and the son-in-law and grandson of Jezebel, Jehoram and Ahaziah, in Judah. Their respective reigns are annals of shameful apostasy, and almost unbroken disaster. Jehoram ben-Jehoshaphat of Judah was thirty-two years old when he began his independent reign, and reigned for eight deplorable years. The fact that his mother’s name is (exceptionally) omitted seems to imply that his father Jehoshaphat set the good example of monogamy. Jehoram was wholly under the influence of Athaliah, his wife, and of Jezebel, his mother-in-law, and he introduced into Judah their alien abominations. He "walked in their way, and did evil in the sight of the Lord." The Chronicler fills up the general remark by saying that he did his utmost to foster idolatry by erecting bamoth in the mountains of Judah, and compelled his people to worship there, in order to decentralize the religious services of the kingdom, and so to diminish the glory of the Temple. He introduced Baal-worship into Judah, and either he or his son was the guilty builder of a temple to Baalim, not only on the "opprobrious mount" on which stood the idolatrous chapels of Solomon, but on the Hill of the House itself. This temple had its own high priest, and was actually adorned with treasures torn from the Temple of Jehovah. So bad was Jehoram’s conduct that the historian can only attribute his non-destruction to the "covenant of salt" which God had made with David, "to give him a lamp for his children always." But if actual destruction did not come upon him and his race, he came very near such a fate, and he certainly experienced that "the path of transgressors is hard." There is nothing to record about him but crime and catastrophe. First Edom revolted. Jehoshaphat had subdued the Edomites, and only allowed them to be governed by a vassal; now they threw off the yoke. The Jewish King advanced against them to "Zair"-by which must be meant apparently either Zoar, {2Ki 11:18; 2Ch 21:11; 2Ch 24:7} through which the road to Edom lay, or their capital, Mount Seir. There he was surrounded by the Edomite hosts; and though by a desperate act of valor he cut his way through them at night in spite of their reserve of chariots, yet his army left him in the lurch. Edom succeeded in establishing its final independence, to which we see an allusion in the one hope held out to Esau by Isaac in that "blessing" which was practically a curse. The loss of so powerful a subject-territory, which now constituted a source of danger on the eastern frontier of Judah, was succeeded by another disaster on the southwest, in the Shephelah or lowland plain. Here Libnah revolted, {Jos 10:29-39} and by gaining its autonomy contracted yet farther the narrow limits of the southern kingdom. The Book of Kings tells us no more about the Jewish Jehoram, only adding that he died and was buried with his fathers, and was succeeded by his son Ahaziah. But the Book of Chronicles, which adds far darker touches to his character, also heightens to an extraordinary degree the intensity of his punishment. It tells us that he began his reign by the atrocious murder of his six younger brothers, for whom, following the old precedent of Rehoboam, Jehoshaphat had provided by establishing them as governors of various cities. As his throne was secure, we cannot imagine any motive for this brutal massacre except the greed of gain, and we can only suppose that, as Jehoram ben-Jehoshaphat became little more than a friendly vassal of his kinsmen in Israel, so he fell under the deadly influence of his wife Athaliah, as completely as his father-in-law had done under the spell of her mother Jezebel. With his brothers he also swept away a number of the chief nobles, who perhaps embraced the cause of his murdered kinsmen. Such conduct breathes the known spirit of Jezebel and of Athaliah. To rebuke him for this wickedness, he received the menace of a tremendous judgment upon his home and people in a writing from Elijah, whom we should certainly have assumed to be dead long before that time. The judgment itself followed. The Philistines and Arabians invaded Judah, captured Jerusalem, and murdered all Jehoram’s own children, except Ahaziah, who was the youngest. Then Jehoram, at the age of thirty-eight, was smitten with an incurable disease of the bowels, of which he died two years later, and not only died unlamented, but was refused burial in the sepulchers of the kings. In any case his reign and that of his son and successor were the most miserable in the annals of Judah, as the reigns of their namesakes and kinsmen, Ahaziah ben-Ahab and Jehoram ben-Ahab, were also the most miserable in the annals of Israel. Jehoram was succeeded on the throne of Judah by his son Ahaziah. If the chronology and the facts be correct, Ahaziah ben-Jehoram of Judah must have been born when his father was only eighteen, though he was the youngest of the king’s sons, and so escaped from being massacred in the Philistine invasion. He succeeded at the age of twenty-two, and only reigned a single year. During this year his mother, the Gebirah Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, and granddaughter of the Tyrian Ethbaal, was all-supreme. She bent the weak nature of her son to still further apostasies. She was "his counselor to do wickedly," and her Baal-priest Mattan was more important than the Aaronic high priest of the despised and desecrated Temple. Never did Judah sink to so low a level, and it was well that the days of Ahaziah of Judah were cut short. The only event in his reign was the share he took with his uncle Jehoram of Israel in his campaign to protect Ramoth-Gilead from Hazael. The expedition seems to have been successful in its main purpose. Ramoth-Gilead, the key to the districts of Argob and Bashan, was of immense importance for commanding the country beyond Jordan. It seems to be the same as Ramath-Mizpeh; {Jos 13:26} and if so, it was the spot where Jacob made his covenant with Laban. Ahab, or his successors, in spite of the disastrous end of the expedition to Ahab personally, had evidently recovered the frontier fortress from the Syrian king. Its position upon a hill made its possession vital to the interests of Gilead; for the master of Ramah was the master of that Trans-Jordanic district. But Hazael had succeeded his murdered master, and was already beginning to fulfill the ruthless mission which Elisha had foreseen with tears. Jehoram ben-Ahab seems to have held his own against Hazael for a time; but in the course of the campaign at Ramoth he was so severely wounded that he was compelled to leave his army under the command of Jehu, and to return to Jezreel, to be healed of his wounds. Thither his nephew Ahaziah of Judah went to visit him; and there, as we shall hear, he too met his doom. That fate, the Chronicler tells us, was the penalty of his iniquities. "The destruction of Ahaziah was of God by coming to Joram." We have no ground for accusing either king of any want of courage; yet it was obviously impolitic of Jehoram to linger unnecessarily in his luxurious capital, while the army of Israel was engaged in service on a dangerous frontier. The wounds inflicted by the Syrian archers may have been originally severe. Their arrows at this time played as momentous a part in history as the cloth-yard shafts of our English bowmen which "sewed the French ranks together" at Poictiers, Crecy, and Azincour. But Jehoram had at any rate so far recovered that he could ride in his chariot; and if be had been wise and bravely vigorous, he would not have left his army under a subordinate at so perilous an epoch, and menaced by so resolute a foe. Or if he were indeed compelled to consult the better physicians at Jezreel, he should have persuaded his nephew Ahaziah of Judah-who seems to have been more or less of a vassal as well as a kinsman-to keep an eye on the beleaguered fort. Both kings, however, deserted their post, -Jehoram to recover perfect health; and Ahaziah, who had been his comrade-as their father and grandfather had gone together to the same war-to pay a state visit of condolence to the royal invalid. The army was left under a popular, resolute, and wholly unscrupulous commander, and the results powerfully affected the immediate and the ultimate destiny of both kingdoms. The Expositor's Bible Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com . Used by Permission.

Then spake Elisha unto the woman. 2 Kings 8:1-6 The potent influence of a good man G. Barlow. 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 (ver. 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 (vers. 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 Hartley Aspen. 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. ) And the King talked with Gehazi. 2 Kings 8:4-6 The special providence of Jehovah illustrated G. L. Glyn. We approach, in this chapter, the end of Elisha's wondrous but most useful career. His days are now perceptibly numbered, and one more recorded event, and he passes from the scene of this world. The text presupposes that the reputation of Elisha was established as a great and holy man "Tell me all the great things that Elisha hath done." The question of the king is introductory to an interesting illustration of the working of Divine providence, in bringing together persons and things in a most unexpected manner, to the furtherance of the ends of justice and the promotion of honesty. We are here also recalled to an old acquaintance, of whom we have heard nothing in the prophet's history for some years, namely, the pious Shunammite; but, although we find no record of herself and family during this interval, it is clear that her acquaintance with Elisha had been kept up, and that he may have been her counsellor and guide in many a difficult position. A prolonged famine of seven years is approaching. Elisha knows it; for "the Lord had called for it" (ver. 1). A partial famine for a brief space had already been endured at the hands of man — the Syrian enemy during the siege of Samaria. It does not appear to have worked any good effect in humbling tim nation. As the smaller judgment is unheeded, the Lord will send a greater. And let us not omit to observe how partial this visitation is to be. The good land, the most fruitful of all lands, is to be blasted with its desolating evidence, while, but a few score miles away, in the country of the Philistines, there is plenty. Surely "the Lord doth make a fruitful land barren, for the wickedness of them that dwell therein" ( Psalm 107:34 ); and His providence can as easily give plenty here and want there, as the day succeeds the night and the night the day, even as He teaches by Amos ( Amos 4:7 ). Thus it was here; for Elisha, summoning the Shunammite to his presence, forewarns and advises her concerning the coming straitness, "Arise, and go thou and thine household, and sojourn wheresoever thou canst sojourn" (ver. 1). And we can readily see what an advantage the foreknowledge of Elisha would have secured. It would enable the family to make a suitable disposition of property, while plenty was still in the land, and the coming famine hidden from the people at large; and thus she could take enough with her for their support in the land of the Philistines during that lengthened period. And thus we may again notice how the Lord repaid her faith and affection for His servant ( Matthew 10:41 ). Well, time, that never stands still, pursued its course — and the seven years had passed. What happened during that period we do not learn. How her son had grown to man's estate, and was now probably her stay and comfort in the land of the stranger; " It came to pass at the seven years' end, that 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" (ver. 3). And now the remarkable providence of Jehovah meets our eyes. The king, we may charitably hope, had profited by the Divine visitation, and he who cared little for the Lord and his servants during comparative prosperity is anxious to hear about the great prophet in "the day of his distress." Or, if we would take the more unfavourable view of ibis proceeding, we may suppose that mere curiosity, in an idle moment, prompted the king to request of Gehazi the leper an account of "all the great things Elisha had done." And was Gehazi, though now a leper in body, a penitent in heart, and clean in soul? Had the fearful correction administered to his sin wrought a salutary end? It is an interesting thought that "the destruction of the flesh may have been the salvation of the spirit" ( 1 Corinthians 5:5 ); but it can only be a thought, for the Scripture is silent. How manifest are the leadings of a special providence! that just at the moment when Jehoram is listening attentively to this surprising account from Gehazi's lips, and is perhaps wanting a confirmation of the wonder in his heart — just at this precise moment, when he was telling the king "how the prophet had restored a dead body to life" (ver. 5) — the Shunammite herself enters the Court: "Behold, the woman, whose son be had restored to life, cried to the king for her house and for her land." There are two inquiries on which a few words may here be said: — I. WAS IT A MATTER OF CHANCE? and I reply in the negative — It was not a matter of chance. No converted man would for an instant yield to such an imagination; but there are many nominal Christians who think and speak of such events as if they were but a lucky or unlucky combination of accidents, as the case may touch them. Why was it not a matter of chance? Because to cherish the supposition is to dethrone Jehovah from His supreme seat of absolute control over all things, as well as all creatures, living. If we calmly reflect awhile on the point, such an argument at once places all secondary causes, such as the elements, the seasons, the maladies, and other external movements affecting outwardly .the human family, as well as the motives and influences bearing upon the internal economy of man, beyond the inclination of the almighty God over all. It is much the same in probability as if an individual were to argue that the works of a watch would go forward, and the wheels run their regular course, without any mainspring to set them in motion. As opposed to such a view, nothing that happens can possibly be a matter of chance in a believer's eye. His own experience would contradict the opinion, if he had not the word of Jesus to sustain it ( Luke 12:6, 7 ). II. BUT WAS THIS UNEXPECTED MEETING AN EVENT IN ANY WISE IMPROBABLE AND UNWORTHY OF CREDIT? A brief examination of the narrative may anticipate such a thought, and prevent its entertainment. There are many here who have experienced, to say the least, occurrences quite as improbable as this. All the circumstances are natural and consistent. What more natural than the Shunammite, finding on her return to her own country that her "house and her land" had been appropriated by another, should at once seek the king's presence, and "cry unto him" for the restoration of her rights? .and what more consistent than the fact of such a presence being sought, and such a petition being offered, at a time when, as we have seen, his majesty was probably holding a Court, and Gehazi was admitted for some like end? The result may be viewed as almost a necessary, consequence. The king, arrested by the singular coincidence, and struck by this unexpected confirmation, is at once predisposed to lend a favourable ear to the Shunammite's prayer, and so, with the characteristic decision of a despotic judgment, commands officer to see not only "her house and her land" restored, but even "all the fruits of the field since the day that she had left" (ver. 6). The decision was in accordance with the instructions given to Israel's judges: "Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy. Deliver the poor and needy from out of the hand of the wicked" ( Psalm 82:3, 4 ). This happy result is calculated to strengthen the faith of all who can feel, with the apostle, that "the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness" ( 1 Corinthians 3:19 ). One who can grasp this fact in his inmost heart can indeed realise the persuasion of the Psalmist ( Psalm 91:1 ), "He that dwelleth in the secret place of the Most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty." He feels that whatever seems to make against him is really working for him. Cherish such a trust in the living God. It will sanctify every event of your life; it will moderate its joys; it will mitigate its sorrows; it will quicken activity, while it will temper hastiness; it will arouse indolence, while it will moderate zeal; above all, it will ever impart contentment with results, whatever may be the disappointment by the way. But again: this happy end to the Shunammite will not, I fear, correct the error of those who are sceptical and incredulous of a special providence. The very circumstance of the means by which it was compassed being natural and probable will, strange to say, often have the effect of hardening the mind against better impressions. It is thus that extremes so frequently meet, and exhibit a character of most perplexing inconsistency. The incredulous in what is probable will be the most credulous in what is improbable; and the man who rejects the workings of Divine providence in natural and common events will be the foremost to receive, aye, and to contend for, those workings in unnatural and uncommon events. Thus, a heathen will, as Ezekiel describes, "use divination at the parting of the way, at the head of the two ways, to know which to take; he will make his arrows bright, he will consult his images, he will look in the liver" ( Ezekiel 21:21 ); and thus an ignorant and superstitious but nominal Christian will have recourse to the turning of a pack of cards, or the winding of tea-leaves round a teacup, or the lines in the hand, sagely pronounced upon by a mysterious operator, while they would openly scoff at, or in heart ridicule, the notion of immediate direction being given to man at a throne of grace in answer to effectual, fervent prayer. ( G. L. Glyn. ) The defrauded widow; or, coincidences in file F. Hastings. God is always unwilling to allow us to suffer, and yet if He constantly checked suffering great evil would follow. If Israel had not been visited during the reign of Jehoram with famine, a worse evil would have befallen the nation; it would have sunk into a deeper state of idolatry; a plague of corruption and darkness would have stolen over the people and there would have been a famine of the Word. National calamities fell, but alas! the innocent had to suffer with the guilty. The woman of Shunem had done what she could to honour God and His servants, and yet she was involved in the general distress. One thing.she gained by her piety — a prophet's warning. He told her to go and sojourn in a strange land. Intense longing at length merges into actual movement. Her face is turned homewards. Her weary steps bring her at length within the walls. None salute her. A kinsman passes, and she hails him, but he, alas! declares that he has not the pleasure of knowing her. To the very door of her own home she comes. In the spot from whence she had often given a welcome to the wayfarer she is questioned by a hireling and coldly met by another kinsman. To whom shall she go for redress? She goes to the gateway, the place of justice, and seeks, after the manner of Boaz, to gather a jury to decide between her and the men who have appropriated her property. All refuse, for one and another had filched from her something. They are afraid they will have to disgorge. They are trembling at her reappearance. Let her go again to Philistia or starve in Shunem. Treatment such as this was, for the poor widow, harder to bear than famine. She could have borne it from strangers, but from relatives it is bitter indeed. To whom can she have recourse? Who will execute judgment for the oppressed? Were Elisha living she knew that he would help. Had he not once offered to speak for her to the king, or the captain of the host ( 2 Kings 4:13 )? "Why should I not go direct to the king?" is her sudden thought. She mentions it to her son. "He will not have time to listen to us, mother; our cause will be such a trifling affair to a great king." "Ah, my son, you are right. We are doomed to poverty. Once I was an honoured woman in Shunem and could help others, now I can only crave help. Position or possessions are not for us again." Thus pondering, and perhaps murmuring, she comes into the presence of the king. She trembles, and is ready to turn back. Yet she knows Jehoram by his attire and his staff. He is talking with some aged man, doubtless on weighty matters of state. As she approaches, and glances again at the companion of the king, she fancies she recognises those features. Yes, it is Gehazi, the one who had been attendant on Elisha, the mighty prophet. Jehoram has just asked Gehazi to tell him something concerning the doings of Elisha, the man to whom he owed his success in the beginning of his reign. Through him he repulsed the Syrians. He wishes he had acted subsequently more in harmony with the prophet's principles. Hence he is wishful to know more of them. "Who is that?" Gehazi gazes with astonishment. Can this be the very woman and son of whom he had been speaking? Yes, but how changed, the woman, and aged. And that young man? 'Tis the child of prophetic promise and miraculous restoration. 1. We have in this an illustration of certain coincidences that come to us in life, and which have oftimes great effect in determining our future. Some men get into a certain course and then life runs on smoothly to the end, like a locomotive on a level line. Others are swept into a current and are turned hither and thither like the stream or torrent that is checked, narrowed and tossed by, the rocky inequalities over Which it has to flow or over which it has to leap. There are certain points in life where We turn completely for good or evil, for time and for eternity. We may not notice these points. There are moments when life appears to turn as on a pivot.. The slightest action, most trifling event, may suffice to give the turn, the complexion, the change of direction to the life. I remember when in great mental perplexity on one of the most important doctrines of the New Testament, that I casually met, at Naples, Dr. Symington of Scotland, and in an afterdinner conversation, and during a stroll along under the castle of St. Elmo, words and thoughts were uttered that make me to-day a Christian worker instead of a mere agnostic. 2. God's hand should be traced in the minutiae of life. The mighty God of Israel cared for her — a poor lone, rejected, oppressed widow woman. Her houses and lands were speedily restored. The king acted with alacrity. The unjust were rebuked. The removers of the ancient landmarks were punished. The land filchers were frustrated in their scheme. The woman of Shunem could only exclaim, "Truly there is a God that judgeth." "He is the father to the fatherless, and a husband to the widow." And all who are in any trouble, sorrow, perplexity, or who have to suffer through the wrong-doing of others, may always be sure of access to the King of kings, and of the fact that there is an Advocate with the Father. The Bible is full of hints of the special working of God. The silver thread of Providence runs through the whole. Christ taught us that the very hairs of our head are numbered, and that not a sparrow falls to the ground without the Divine notice. Since Christ's death all history shows that God has been working for the welfare of men and the advancement of His kingdom of goodness in all hearts. Men specially fitted for great works are born at different periods. All things shall converge towards His great end. Everything, even that which seems most adverse, — as with the Shunammite woman seeking her lands — shall coincide to the restoration to Christ of all the kingdoms of the world to Him. His right it is to reign. The usurpers shall not only have to give up their usurpation, but shall have to do homage to Him who hath brought in victory. 3. Now although we believe in the converging of circumstances under the direction of God, and although we urge upon all the need of looking for Divine direction and of following the indications of the providence, we would also utter a warning against always looking for coincidences to guide us in every circumstance. We might err and be only leaning on an arm of flesh. It is always best to do that which the heart suggests when acting under the consciousness of earnest prayer to God. We may not look for signs. We are to act as though all depended on ourselves, but, at the same time, rest in God's power by simple prayer. 4. Sometimes there is a convergence of misfortunes, a coincidence in sorrow. We have a familiar saying that misfortunes never come singly. There are periods that try faith severely. A man may lose his situation, fail in business, be called upon to pay some guarantee for one he trusted, and have at the same time wife ill, children stricken down with fever. Or he meets with some accident and is prostrate. Wave of trouble succeeds wave, until it seems as though there were no more to come, and he exclaims, "All thy waves and thy billows are gone over me." Well for him if at such times he, like the Shunammite, seeks help from the king, and lays hold of that mercy which is never withdrawn from the most erring, or fails the feeblest. ( F. Hastings. ) Elisha came to Damascus. 2 Kings 8:7-15 Striking characters Homilist. We have here — I. A DYING KING. 1. This dying king was very anxious. "Shall I recover of this disease?" This was the question he wanted Elisha to answer. Not, you may be sure, in the negative. Knowing some of the wonders that Elisha had performed, he in all likelihood imagined he would exert his miraculous power on his behalf, and restore him to life. All men more or less fear death, kings perhaps more than others. If ungodly, they have more to lose and nothing to gain. Observe, 2. His anxiety prompted him to do strange things.(1) It was strange for him to ask a favour from the man whose death he had ravenously sought. What a change is this! Dying hours reverse our judgments, revolutionise our feelings, bring the lofty down.(2) It was strange for him to ask a favour of a man whose religion he hated. Ben-hadad was an idolater.(3) It was strange for him to make costly presents to a poor lonely man. What is the wealth, the grandeur, the crown, the sceptre of the mightiest monarch to him when he feels himself dying? He will barter all away for a few short hours of life. We have here — II. A PATRIOTIC PROPHET. "And Elisha said unto him, Go, say unto him (Ben-hadad), Thou mayest certainly recover: howbeit the Lord hath showed me that he shall surely die." "There was no contradiction in this message. The first part was properly the answer, to Ben-hadad's inquiry. The second part was intended for Hazael, who, like an artful and ambitious courtier, reported only as much of the prophet's statement as suited his own views." We have here — III. A SELF-IGNORANT COURTIER. "And Hazael said, But what, is thy servant a dog, that he should do this great thing?" The conduct of this man as here recorded suggests two general remarks. 1. The germs of evil may exist in the mind of a wicked man, of which he is utterly unconscious. 2. By the force of circumstances these germs become developed in all their enormity. ( Homilist. ) Thou mayest certainly recover. 2 Kings 8:10 Ignorance of the future J. E. Rankin, D. D. The subject which I propose to discuss is the moral effect of ignorance of the future. I. THE AVIDITY WITH WHICH MEN SEEK TO KNOW THE FUTURE. People are almost always ready to believe that something unusually good is to befall them; that their lot is to be exceptional; that their future is somewhere to be discovered by divination, by the lines on their hands, by the courses of the heavenly bodies. Take your stand by the fortune-teller, to whom has betaken herself a young girl, who, in her ignorance and simplicity, wants to know what human lot is coming to her; whether she is to marry or not; whether her husband is to be rich or poor; what is his complexion, the colour of his hair and eyes, his occupation, and all those minutiae about him with which her teeming fancy busies itself. Recall the little simple devices, such as pulling in pieces a daisy as certain sentences are repeated, to which children and young folks resort; they all arise from a curiosity about the future, and an impression that lodged somewhere in the earth, or air, in daisy or constellation, is the secret that we wish to know. There is no doubt about the influence of good and evil supernatural agencies in our lives; there is no doubt, too, that the events of our lives are closely watched by the inhabitants of two worlds. If good spirits, why not bad? There are two ways in which a man may confront the future; one, looking into God's face, trusting in God's promises, asking the support of the Everlasting Arms; and the other, turning to invoke the spirits of darkness; making a league with the devil to get counsel and help from the infernal world. And I look upon all this desire to penetrate the veil of mystery which encompasses the future — except as we walk by faith with the Invisible One, as we believe in God and link our destiny with God by keeping His laws — as immoral and unchristian. II. IGNORANCE OF THE FUTURE, IF THAT FUTURE IS TO BE DISASTROUS, IS ALWAYS A BLESSING TO US; WHILE, IF IT IS TO BE ADVANTAGEOUS, IT IS AN INSPIRATION. And it is between this possible disaster and advantage that men make all the progress, whether intellectual or spiritual. In all motion which is artificially produced, such as the movement of a carriage or land, or on rails, or the movement of a vessel through the water, there are always two elements; two forces acting and reacting. There is that which propels — the motive power; and that which resists it, and the result is motion. When the driving-wheels of a locomotive do not take hold of the rail — that is, when the rail is covered with frost or ice so that there is no resistance to their revolution — there can be no progress: the great iron sinewed horse is but a plaything, whirling his wheels like a top. These two elements are in the flight of the bird: the stroke of the wing and the resistance of the air. When inventors are making efforts to find some machine which will navigate the air, they seek first lightness. But it is the weight of the bird, as well as the stroke of the wing, that gives it power to make such beautiful evolutions in the air. The air is to the body of the bird what the water is to the hull of the vessel — a medium of resistance. As the wheels of the steamer, as the screw of the propeller, as the oar or the paddle of the rower is resisted by the water, progress is made. It is just so in human life. The patriarch Job says: "What! shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil?" It is encountering a mixture of good and evil that makes character. It is the contingency of good and evil; the uncertainty whether it shall be one or the other, that is the mainspring of human action. People ask, why did not God make man so that he could not sin? It is like asking why God did not make matter so that an object could move without meeting resistance; why God did not make the bird so that it could fly without breasting the powers of the air. Walking is only falling forward and regaining one's self. The regaining prevents the accident. The babe begins with the first motion, but is not yet competent to the second. And no man walks with God without finding a leverage for his soul in the evil that is in the world; only he wants none of it in him. In one sense we are forewarned respecting the future. We have general principles given us. These principles are often cast into the form of maxims. For example, we say that "Honesty is the best policy," with primary reference to business; that let a man make ever so much money by dishonest dealing, he is injuring his business all the time; he is only getting rope to hang himself. The young lad who is studying at school hears this; he does not think it applies to his relations to his teacher and his books, but it does. When, in after life, he confronts business questions or business interests, and finds he cannot solve queries which were solved by his neglected text-books, or his faithful teacher, he discovers it. It is no time to dismount and tighten the saddle-girth when the battle is on us. There is not one of us who would not have been a sadder man in life to know beforehand the calamities that came to him the last twelvemonths. Let him take up his cross daily, it is not to-morrow's cross that we can take up to-day, even if we would take it up. And what is called borrowing trouble is taking up to-morrow's cross — always an imaginary one — before to.morrow comes. The Saviour says, "Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof," meaning that if we manage to grapple with the evil of to-day and overcome that, it is all God expects of us; it is victory. And then, on the other hand, the certainty of good fortune is always enervating. God helps the men who help themselves. They fall into the line of His purposes; they see the tide which, taken at its flood, leads on to fortune. Tell a young man that at the age of forty he will be worth a million dollars, and you have done him an injury. III. IGNORANCE OF THE FUTURE IS A PROTECTION AGAINST TEMPTATION TO EMPLOY INDIRECT AND SINFUL METHODS OF SECURING WHAT WE HAVE BEEN ASSURED WILL TAKE PLACE. Take this case of Hazael to illustrate the temptation that comes to a man who knows that he is to occupy a high position. You would say he would argue in this manner: Well, if I am to be King of Syria, let the God, whose prophet predicts it, make me king; I will not lift a finger; least of all will I try to find a short cut to the throne. This was the way Macbeth deliberated: — "If chance will make me king, why chance may crown me, Without my stir."A man's aspirations and capacities are often prophecies of what God means to do by him. If he should say to himself, "I deserve such and such position, and it matters not how I get it"; if then he should address himself to the work of supplanting such another occupant of the place, or aspirant for it, he may secure the position indeed, but he has introduced into his cup of life that which will embitter it for ever. There is no moral greatness in having place. Place without fitness for it; place with the recollection of dishonour or misdirection in seeking it, is really a disgrace to a man. Hazael became King of Syria as Macbeth became King of Scotland, by attempting to accomplish by crime what was already written down in the future. But what was Hazael as King of Syria, what was Macbeth as King of Scotland, with the predecessor of each assassinated to make open the path to the throne? The very night of Duncan's death, while he still lay there, the murder undiscovered, and there came some one knocking at the castle gate, Macbeth says: — "Wake Duncan with thy knocking; I would thou could'st!"For example: there is an achievement, a possession that I wish, I think I deserve it, have fitness for it, could honour my Maker if I were gratified in my desire, could benefit my fellow-men. Now comes the test of my character. If I am willing to fulfil the conditions of merit, to serve God where He has placed me, up to my best ability; to wait His time for recognition and promotion; if promotion should come, then it has sought me; I have entered into no unholy alliances, I have not broken the golden rule. I have coveted no man's silver, gold, or place. If, on the other hand, I say to myself, God intended this for me, and I mean to have it, and I begin to clamber over the heads of people, as men sometimes try to get out of a crowd, I carry with me the sense of my own unworthiness. IV. IGNORANCE OF THE FUTURE ON OUR PART DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH GOD'S CERTAINTY RESPECTING IT. It should bring us to confide in that certainty. Only certainty somewhere can bring us security. It is usual to put this in the other way, as though God's certainty respecting a future event might possibly prevent the exercise of our freedom when putting out our force to compass or defeat it. But in man's sphere, man is just as free as God is in His sphere. And without some certainty, what is the use of freedom? Hazael is to be King of Syria. This should c

8:1-6 The kindness of the good Shunammite to Elisha, was rewarded by the care taken of her in famine. It is well to foresee an evil, and wisdom, when we foresee it, to hide ourselves if we lawfully may do so. When the famine was over, she returned out of the land of the Philistines; that was no proper place for an Israelite, any longer than there was necessity for it. Time was when she dwelt so securely among her own people, that she had no occasion to be spoken for to the king; but there is much uncertainty in this life, so that things or persons may fail us which we most depend upon, and those befriend us which we think we shall never need. Sometimes events, small in themselves, prove of consequence, as here; for they made the king ready to believe Gehazi's narrative, when thus confirmed. It made him ready to grant her request, and to support a life which was given once and again by miracle. 8:7-15 Among other changes of men's minds by affliction, it often gives other thoughts of God's ministers, and teaches to value the counsels and prayers of those whom they have hated and despised. It was not in Hazael's countenance that Elisha read what he would do, but God revealed it to him, and it fetched tears from his eyes: the more foresight men have, the more grief they are liable to. It is possible for a man, under the convictions and restraints of natural conscience, to express great abhorrence of a sin, yet afterwards to be reconciled to it. Those that are little and low in the world, cannot imagine how strong the temptations of power and prosperity are, which, if ever they arrive at, they will find how deceitful their hearts are, how much worse than they suspected. The devil ruins men, by saying they shall certainly recover and do well, so rocking them asleep in security. Hazael's false account was an injury to the king, who lost the benefit of the prophet's warning to prepare for death, and an injury to Elisha, who would be counted a false prophet. It is not certain that Hazael murdered his master, or if he caused his death it may have been without any design. But he was a dissembler, and afterwards proved a persecutor to Israel. 8:16-24 A general idea is given of Jehoram's badness. His father, no doubt, had him taught the true knowledge of the Lord, but did ill to marry him to the daughter of Ahab; no good could come of union with an idolatrous family. 8:25-29 Names do not make natures, but it was bad for Jehoshaphat's family to borrow names from Ahab's. Ahaziah's relation to Ahab's family was the occasion of his wickedness and of his fall. When men choose wives for themselves, let them remember they are choosing mothers for their children. Providence so ordered it, that Ahaziah might be cut off with the house of Ahab, when the measure of their iniquity was full. Those who partake with sinners in their sin, must expect to partake with them in their plagues. May all the changes, troubles, and wickedness of the world, make us more earnest to obtain an interest in the salvation of Christ.