Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

10

Read in isolation, 2 Kings 4:38-41 can be understood as a story about a foul tasting soup that Elisha improved by adding a new flavor. However, the context in II Kings is miracles performed by Elisha to save people from death by famine. From within that context it seems that the "death in the pot," was an actual danger that required Elisha's intervention. ...


9

Rabbi Elchanan Samet has a book called Pirkei Elisha about all the Elisha stories in II Kings. In that book, Rabbi Samet is making one basic argument: there isn't a single Elisha story that is intended to show: "Elisha can do magic." Through a careful literary and historical reading of each story, Rabbi Samet tries to show how broad social implications and ...


8

Before anything, though, I must say that no, king Joash would not know that he must strike the ground five or six times. But, he really should have did that. All verse emphasis mine. First of all, we would have to look at the reason why Elisha would be angry at an answer to a seemingly minuscule command, 2 Kings 13:14 (NKJV) 14 Elisha had become ...


4

The phenomenon described in II Kings 3:20-23 is well known in the area. Rain can fall in the higher areas such as Edom (now Jordan) or in the Judean hills while down in the Jordan valley on either side of the river, the sky is clear and sunny. When this happens, the wadis (gulleys) that drain the uplands erupt suddenly in flash floods that endanger ...


3

The word in Hebrew, verse 40, is maveth. It means death, as in pestilence. It is used in the Bible where death and destruction is conveyed as a meaning. It's not talking about bitterness. The message is, the prophet intervenes for these men due to Yahweh's mercy. Ref.: Gesenius's Lexicon of Hebrew and English and my knowledge of Hebrew.


2

A wild gourd is just that. A gourd which grows in the wild. It would be difficult to say which species of gourd it might be though. "There was no more death in the pot" has also been translated "there was no more bitterness in the pot" or "there was no more harm in the pot". Starch, by my understanding, does have the ability to mitigate certain bitterness ...


2

Arab farmers worked together for social and security reasons, and a single plow was not very effective. However, the fact that the author mentions twelve pairs rather than simply many is a call to the ancient reader to understand the liturgical significance. Numbers are always significant in the Bible because an "accounting" communicates legal ...


2

Oxen were very expensive in biblical times. Few farmers owned even a single team of them. In ancient documents from elsewhere in the Near East, there are records of farmers renting them from wealthy owners or even government officials. My assumption that that Elisha owns both the oxen and the land is that he's in charge of the whole team of and yet he's ...


2

The Idea in Brief The Latin Vulgate appears to qualify and amplify the ambiguous meaning of the Masoretic Text. That is, Elijah gives his blessing for Elisha to return home to bid his family and friends good-bye because of the anointing by Elijah. Thus the Latin Vulgate adds "and return" (i.e., to me, Elijah). The basis for the Latin Vulgate reading may ...


1

Combining Matthew Henry's insight here, Constable's insight here, and perhaps a soupçon of my own insight, I suggest we are safe in saying the following: Elijah's idiomatic expression, and possibly a common Hebraism in Elijah's day, "Go back again, for what have I done to you?" could be paraphrased as follows: "Go ahead. You're free to do as you like." ...


1

The staff was a symbol of authority. Moses lifted his up and the great water parted, Moses hit the rock with it and water gushed out of an actual rock. The prophet's staff was a symbol of the authority of God that was with him and working through him. Elisha sending his staff, was like Elisha sending himself to be there. (similar to Paul sending cloths ...


1

I think Elisha was rebuking not only the actions of Gehazi, but also the attitude of his heart. Gehazi accepted two talents of silver and two changes of clothes. Although opinion varies as to how much a talent weighed (maybe 25-35kg), it was certainly a lot of money. Perhaps, as he walked back, he was thinking about what he could do with such a large sum: ...


1

This story is very profound. It is interesting that manslaughter is typified through the dislocated ax head. That is, we read in the Law of Moses as follows. Deuteronomy 19:4-6 (NASB) 4 Now this is the case of the manslayer who may flee there and live: when he kills his friend unintentionally, not hating him previously— 5 as when a man goes into the ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible