Read 2 Kings 7 and 8 at Bible Gateway.
The Hebrew paragraph divisions:
2 Kin 7:1-2 {p} Elisha: Tomorrow flour + barley will sell for a normal price/ the king’s officer did not believe it
2 Kin 7:3-20 {s} Four lepers discovered the abandoned Syrian camp/ when it was told, Elisha’s word came to pass
2 Kin 8:1-4 {s} The Shunammite woman sojourned 7 years during a famine/ Gehazi told the king Elisha’s great deeds
2 Kin 8:5-6 {p} The woman appealed to the king to restore her land just as Gehazi told the king/ he restored all to her
2 Kin 8:7-15 {p} Elisha in Damascus to fulfill the word to Elijah/ Hazael murdered Ben-Hadad + king in Syria
2 Kin 8:16-24 {p} Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat’s reign in Judah/ he did evil in the Lord’s sight as the kings of Israel
2 Kin 8:25-29 {p} Ahaziah the son of Jehoram’s reign in Judah/ allied with Israel, for his mother + wife was of Ahab
The only strong theme present in today’s reading is 2 Kin 7:3-8:6 {s+s+p}:
2 Kin 7:3-20 {s} Four lepers discovered the abandoned Syrian camp/ when it was told, Elisha’s word came to pass
2 Kin 8:1-4 {s} The Shunammite woman soujourned 7 years during a famine/ Gehazi told the king Elisha’s great deeds
2 Kin 8:5-6 {p} The woman appealed to the king to restore her land just as Gehazi told the king/ he restored all to her
The strong theme once again sets up a puzzle. The account of the severity of the famine ends in a strong paragraph division, concluding a theme, but then the account of the deliverance from the famine ends in a weak paragraph division, indicating the start of a new theme. This new theme continues on with paragraphs completely unrelated to it! So what could the strong theme be?
I worked for a time on the chiastic structure for the strong theme, because the structure will often reveal clues when it is completed. But I was not wise enough to complete it this morning. I considered at first that the strong theme might have something to do with the accuracy of Elisha’s prophecies, for he told the king’s officer the famine would end, and it did; and he told the Shunammite woman the famine would begin, and it did. But if that were the theme, why include the account of Gehazi telling the king about Elisha’s mighty deeds?
I realized the account of Gehazi was included, because the end of the final paragraph, was the fact that the Shunammite’s house and land were restored to her. She suffered no lack because of the famine, in the long run. Then I looked back at the first weak paragraph. The end of it was that the king’s officer did suffer lack because of the famine – he was killed!
So then I looked at the comparison of the reaction of the king’s officer to the word of Elisha, and the reaction of the Shunammite woman to the word of Elisha. And that is the key to the strong theme: the king’s officer believed not the word of Elisha, and suffered loss because of the famine. The Shunammite woman believed the word of Elisha, (we know because she acted on it as if it were a true word) and suffered no loss because of the famine, and in fact was increased at the end of it — for the king restored to her more than she was asking.
So the strong theme is, Two judgments of famine brought upon Israel because of her sins/ the king’s officer suffered loss because he did not believe the prophet’s word + the Shunammite woman suffered no loss because she did believe the prophet’s word.
Leave a Reply