2 Kings 8 Study Notes

8:1-6 This incident almost certainly occurred at an earlier time and under an earlier king. Because Gehazi was serving Elisha and had an audience with the king, it is likely that this event took place before Gehazi became leprous (chap. 5). Though obviously related to the earlier incident of the healing of the Shunammite woman’s son (4:32-37), this material may have been recorded here because it also dealt with issues of government and beneficial rule. Certainly beginning with 6:26, and perhaps earlier with 6:8, this section has dealt with the king’s failure to perform his proper duties. This portion deals with justice for a woman who had abandoned her land in a time of distress and then had difficulty getting her land back. The prophet’s influence helped her to get a just settlement of the issue. Though out of chronological order, this account is topically suited for this context.

8:7-15 Earlier (1Kg 19:15-16), God had instructed Elijah to choose his successor and to anoint two kings. Up to this time, only one of those tasks—choosing his successor—had been accomplished. The other two anointings were to be done by Elisha “in the spirit and power of Elijah” (Lk 1:17). This would have had the same validity as the appearance of John the Baptist as Elijah (Mt 11:14). Apparently, Elisha’s designation of these two kings was sufficient to fulfill the Lord’s original command to Elijah.

8:7-8 Once again the prophet was presented as an international celebrity. God’s mighty deeds gained influence even among foreigners, though such deeds did not always lead to faith.

8:9-11 Elisha gave a devious answer to Ben-hadad’s request for an oracle. If one takes Elisha’s message as meaning only that Ben-hadad’s current illness was not terminal, it was true, but God also used Hazael’s visit to Elisha to incite Hazael to commit murder and start a revolution.

8:12-13 Then Elisha shared his prophetic vision that Hazael would devastate Israel. From the perspective of covenant theology, Israel and Israel’s king deserved such brutal judgment. This message ended with Elisha stating unambiguously that Hazael would become king. In giving that message, God and Elisha either instigated Hazael’s treason or encouraged the initiation of a treason that was already planned.

8:14-15 Hazael did, in fact, repeat the prophet’s words to Ben-hadad, but then he proceeded to murder his king and take the throne.

8:16 With this record the data is again arranged chronologically. For a parallel account of Jehoram, see 2Ch 21:4-20.

8:17-18 After the formal opening, the evaluation reports that Joram was a bad king and observes that the corrupting influences of Ahab and Jezebel had reached into Judah. The ways of the kings of Israel probably refers to the worship of Baal-melkart (see note at 1Kg 16:25). It was unlikely that the good king, Jehoshaphat, anticipated this outcome when he allowed his son Jehoram to enter into a marriage alliance with Ahab.

8:19 Again, as in the case of the wicked king Abijam (1Kg 15:4-5), God tolerated and preserved a wicked king and his kingdom because of David’s character. The paradigm of Jeroboam I was an evil force that destroyed his successors. The faithful example of David preserved even wicked successors and a wicked kingdom from destruction.

8:20-21 During the reigns of Ahab and Jehoshaphat, both kingdoms could make claims of empire, though Ahab was clearly the senior member of the alliance. These verses record the loss of Judah’s last pretense to empire for this cycle as both kingdoms moved into a period of idol worship and weakness.

The brief description of the night attack against surrounding Edomites could be translated in two ways. The critical sentence could be either “at night he and his chariot officers attacked the surrounding Edomites” or “at night he attacked the surrounding Edomites and their chariot officers.” The first option is more likely because, even in decline, Judah was more likely to have a small chariot division than Edom was. Then the next sentence, “The people (his troops) fled to their tents (homes),” is also ambiguous. “The people” could be the Edomites, who fled so that the rebellion was not crushed, or they could have been Jehoram’s chariots, who went home without subduing the rebellion. This time the second option is more likely. By losing control of Edom, Judah lost control of the caravan routes to the south. Judah also lost Libnah on the border of the former Philistine territory.

8:22 Today refers to the date of the writing of an earlier document that was incorporated into the canonical version of 2 Kings. The final composer of 2 Kings incorporated parts of this earlier document into his finished work.

8:23-24 The closing statements for Jehoram’s rule are completely formulaic.

8:25-27 The corrupting relationship with the house of Omri and Ahab is highlighted: his mother was from that family. The ways of . . . Ahab probably alludes to bringing the worship of Baal-melkart into Judah (see note at 1Kg 16:25).

8:28-29 The notice about the continued conflict with Hazael of Damascus informs the reader that Israel, with Judah as an ally, could still contest control of Gilead with Hazael, the new, more aggressive ruler of Damascus. The big step in the decline of Israel’s political power would come with Jehu’s widespread massacres. There is no notice for the end of Ahaziah’s reign since his death is recorded later as part of Jehu’s massacres.