›

Gehazi Reminisces (2 Kings 8:1-6)

TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
in Kerygmania
I was looking at some of the stories of Elisha and saw a commentator mention this anecdote in 2 Kings 8 which gives a glimpse of the later life of Gehazi and of the Shunammite woman. Why has this little episode been included?

Comments

  • Lamb ChoppedLamb Chopped Shipmate
    edited March 11
    I'd love to know. I notice this occurs in a long list of episodes where the "king of Israel" (unnamed) occurs as a character, and then we get a sudden thump back into the historic named king and the bad stuff that happens to him. I wonder if these aren't a bunch of oral stories about Elisha that the writer collected and put in without bothering to take away the oral characteristics. They're certainly out of order, as Gehazi is otherwise telling this story AFTER developing leprosy, which would be an unlikely disease to be allowed in the king's presence.
  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    The "oral tradition" idea makes sense to me. I'm not sure about "out of order" though. If it's before he develops leprosy (or whatever) then why isn't he busy being Elisha's servant? And it's definitely set well after the episode of the Shunammite woman's son. I take the point about the "unclean" disease not being allowed near the king, but I imagine the king would have sufficient "oomph" to waive this in order to have a conversation with Elisha's former right-hand man.

    What puzzles me is: why put it in at all? What's the point of it?
  • jay_emmjay_emm Kerygmania Host
    There is a seven year gap mentioned and a number of other tales have famine (either direct or as a result of military action). So it makes some sense for the passage to be later.
    However the first account does also have time skips.
    Seven years is time for a missing rehabilitation. Or the stories could be independent.
  • Lamb ChoppedLamb Chopped Shipmate
    Well, off the top of my head (so you know it's feathers), it gives you a follow-up on how that particular family is doing, and people like follow-ups. Where are they now, that sort of thing. It also explains why she got her land back comparatively easily--the way was prepared for her by this gossip session. In another direction, this parallels what happened to Naomi and Ruth after they did a similar thing during a famine in Bethlehem and then came home to poverty. There might be some historical interest there, though the king of Israel is not in fact a direct descendant of that family. All in all, I'm leaning to the "follow-up" theory.
Sign In or Register to comment.