II KINGS 8

As a background for this lesson, read what the still, small voice said to Elijah in I Kings 19:14-17. Israel would be punished for her sins through three people that Elijah was to anoint or commission: Elisha (done by Elijah personally), Hazael (Elisha will accomplish this in the current lesson), and Jehu (a follower of Elisha will do this in the following chapter).

2 Kings 8:1-6 Elisha is instrumental in saving the land of the Shunammite woman. However, the rest of the chapter will deal with international affairs. God is intimately concerned with both micro- and macro- issues. As J. B. Phillips said, any other view of God shows that your God is too small.

2 Kings 8:7-8 Historical background: Earlier in I Kings 20, Benhadad II had attacked Israel. Now there is a temporary time of peace. From Assyrian records we know that Benhadad was in power still in 846 BC, but by 842, Hazael was king. The events in this chapter take place somewhere in between those two dates. Naaman was Benhadad's first officer and had probably told the king about Elisha and his own miraculous healing. This is a total reversal of the situation described in II Kings 1:1-4 where a king of Israel had consulted a pagan god about recovering from an accident.

2 Kings 8:9-10 The king tries to influence the answer in two ways: he calls Elisha his father and bribes him with gifts. He treats the prophetic word as magic used by man to manipulate the gods.

There is no Hebrew word for “recover.” It literally says, “Will I die from this illness?”

There is some problem with the text, which is altered in some manuscripts in an attempt to absolve Elisha from any apparent subterfuge. Elisha's comments are best understood to mean, “You will not die from this illness (but you will die from other causes).” The real message was addressed to Hazael.

2 Kings 8:11-12 There are some problems with the translation here as to who is staring at whom. It is probably Elisha either (a) in a prophetic trance looking into the future or (b) reading what is in Hazael's mind. He cries when he sees what Syria's armies under Hazael will do. Jacques Ellul summarizes what will happen: “He will then reign for half a century and will in effect devastate the people of God...He marches across all Israel and wounds Joram the king. He conquers Samaria, destroys its army, overthrows Jehu, and completely subjugates his son Jehoahaz...He also attacks the southern kingdom of Judah. He takes and destroys one of the principal fortresses, that of Gath. He then attacks Jerusalem. Jerusalem is besieged, and astonishingly the king is ready to pay a tribute in order to save the city. But this is set so high that the royal treasury cannot meet it and the temple treasury has to be raided...In other words, the evil done by the king of Syria is not just political and military. He also desecrates all that is considered most holy.”

II Kings 8:13 Naively, Hazael looks upon these atrocities as “great acts,” which they were, to a Syrian, but not to a Jew such as Elisha. Hazael was not the heir apparent. An Assyrian inscription of the time read, “Hazael, the son of a nobody, seized the throne.” We will now see how he did it.

II Kings 8:14-15 Some past commentators read these verses to say that the king was accidentally smothered by the wet cloth use to cool his fever, or even that he committed suicide. Both were attempts to absolve Elisha from being an accomplice to murder. Obviously, it was a murder made to look like an accident. Interestingly, Hazael afterward has a son he names Benhadad, after the man he killed. It is either a case of guilt, or more likely, an attempt to legitimize his family's rule.

What are we to say about Hazael himself? Look at some of the parallels between him and Judas:

1. Both were murderers and betrayers (II Kings 8:14-15; Matthew 27:3-4).

2. Their evil deeds were predicted in advance (I Kings 19:14-17; John 13:18).

3. They were confronted with the consequences of their deeds (II Kings 8:12; John 13:21).

4. There was prior evil in their hearts (II Kings 8:11,13; John 12:4-6; Matthew 26:14-16).

5. They accomplished God's will in spite of themselves (II Kings 10:32; John 13:31).

6. They were condemned by God (Amos 1:3-5; Mark 14:21).

Lessons to Learn:

1. God will accomplish his goals in his own time. It took fifty years in this case to chastise Israel.

2. Our actions as God's people are complementary. Three different prophets were involved. See

I Corinthians 3:6-7: “I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God made it grow.”

3. We should show compassion on those God is judging. Remember Jesus weeping over the city of Jerusalem.

4. We must obey God even if it goes against our feelings.

5. Our relation to worldly powers is to be limited. Jacques Ellul (The Politics of God and the Politics of Man, p. 85) says “The church never has to formulate a commandment of God in relation to political power, which in principle cannot recognize God as the true God. It has never to say to the state: This must be done. It has rather to tell it on God's behalf what will in effect be done...The prophet speaks and that is all. He does not act. He announces this Word of God, but he does not have to make it efficacious or effective. He speaks, and men and events are charged with a kind of force or passion or weight. But the prophet does not lead Hazael.”

It seems to our human perspective somehow unfair that God would pick on someone to do his dirty work and then hold him personally responsible for his actions. The hardening of Pharaoh's heart is a prime example of this, but a close reading of that account demonstrates that Pharaoh hardened his own heart repeatedly before God completed the process. Ellul puts it this way:

“God does not accompany the word with any manifestation of glory or power. This simple word at the everyday level is neither indisputable nor imperative. At no point is man bound to it. God does not work in the heart of Hazael. He simply puts him before the Word. The Word is not a commandment. Hazael might do something very different from what is suggested. God has not traced out an implacable future in which the poor king is involved with no power at all to change anything....It is for him to chose what he will do. And it is within his own autonomy and independence that he will undertake to seize power and conquer kingdoms.”