Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
And the sons of the prophets said unto Elisha, Behold now, the place where we dwell with thee is too strait for us.VI.
THE HISTORY OF ELISHA’S MIGHTY WORKS CONTINUED.
(1-7) The prophet causes an iron ax-head to float ın the Jordan.
(1) And the sons of the prophets said.—The form of the verb implies connection with the preceding narrative; but as the section refers to Elisha’s activity among the sons of the prophets, it was probably connected originally with 2Kings 4:44. The compiler may have transferred it to its present position in order, as Thenius suggests, to indicate the lapse of some time between the events described here and there; and further, to separate the account of the renewed warfare between Syria and Israel (2Kings 6:8, seq.) from that of Elisha’s good deed to Naaman the Syrian.
The place where we dwell with thee.—Rather, the place where we sit before thee: scil., habitually, for instruction. The phrase occurred in 2Kings 4:38. The common hall is meant; whether that at Gilgal or at Jericho is uncertain. Jericho was close to the Jordan (2Kings 6:2), but that does not prove that it is meant here. The prophet’s disciples did not live in a single building, like a community of monks. Their settlement is called “dwellings” (nāyôth) in the plural (1Samuel 19:18); and they could be married (2Kings 4:1).
Too strait.—Their numbers had increased. (Comp. 2Kings 4:43.)
Let us go, we pray thee, unto Jordan, and take thence every man a beam, and let us make us a place there, where we may dwell. And he answered, Go ye.(2) Take thence every man a beam.—The Jordan valley was well wooded. Its present bed is still “overarched by oleanders, acacias, thorns, and similar shrubbery.” If all were to take part in felling the trees, the work would soon be done.
Where we may dwell.—Literally, to sit (or, dwell) there. The reference seems still to be to sitting in the hall of instruction.
And one said, Be content, I pray thee, and go with thy servants. And he answered, I will go.(3) One.—Heb., the one, whoever it was.
Be content.—Consent, or, be willing.
Go with thy servants.—To superintend their work, and help them in case of unforeseen difficulty.
So he went with them. And when they came to Jordan, they cut down wood.(4) Wood.—Heb., the timber: scil., which they required.
But as one was felling a beam, the axe head fell into the water: and he cried, and said, Alas, master! for it was borrowed.(5) But.—Heb., and it came to pass, the one was felling the beam. Not necessarily “the one” of 2Kings 6:3, but the one (whoever it was) to whom the mishap occurred, as presently related.
The ax head fell.—Heb., and as for the iron, it fell. The subject of the verb is made prominent by being put first in the accusative. It is thus implied that something happened to the iron. Perhaps, however, it is better to consider that the particle, which usually marks the object of the verb, in cases like the present has its etymological meaning of “something” (’eth being regarded as equivalent to yath, and so to yēsh). (See Winer, Chaldäische Grammatik, ed. Fischer.)
Master!—My lord, Elisha. He instinctively appeals to Elisha for help.
For it was borrowed.—Heb., and that one was borrowed. Vulg., “et hoc ipsum mutuo acceperam.”
And the man of God said, Where fell it? And he shewed him the place. And he cut down a stick, and cast it in thither; and the iron did swim.(6) Where.—Whereintof? or, Where fell it in?
The iron did swim.—He caused the iron to float. (Comp. Deuteronomy 11:4 for the verb.) The iron ax-head did not swim, but simply rose to the surface. It had fallen in near the bank. Elisha’s throwing in the stick was a symbolical act, intended to help the witnesses to realise that the coming up of the iron was not a natural, but a supernatural, event, brought about through the instrumentality of the prophet. As in the case of the salt thrown into the spring at Jericho, the symbol was appropriate to the occasion. It indicated that iron could be made to float like wood by the sovereign power of Jehovah. The properties of material substances depend on His will for their fixity, and may be suspended or modified at His pleasure. The moral of this little story is that God helps in small personal troubles as well as in great ones of larger scope. His providence cares for the individual as well as the race.
Therefore said he, Take it up to thee. And he put out his hand, and took it.(7) Therefore.—And he said.
(8–23) Elisha baffles several predatory attempts of the Syrians, and strikes with blindness those sent to seize him.
Then the king of Syria warred against Israel, and took counsel with his servants, saying, In such and such a place shall be my camp.(8) Then the king of Syria warred.—Rather, Now the king of Syria (Aram) was warring, i.e., continually. The time intended cannot be the reign of Jehoahaz, for here the Syrians achieve nothing of importance. (Comp. 2Kings 6:32.)
Took counsel with.—Comp. 2Chronicles 20:21.
Such and such.—The compound Hebrew expression (pělônî ’almônî) means “a certain one, I will not mention which;” the Greek, ὁ δεῖνα.
My camp.—Heb., tahănôthî; a difficult expression, found only here. Its form is anomalous, and probably corrupt. The Targum renders “house of my camp:” but the Syriac, “Set ye an ambush, and lurk;” the Vulg., “ponamus insidias:” and similarly the Arabic. This has suggested that the true reading is “hide ye,” i.e., lie in ambush (tēhābû, i.e., tēhābĕ᾽û: Thenius). It is, however, a more obvious change to read, “ye shall go down” (tinhāthû: Psalm 38:3). This agrees better with the construction, “Unto (’el) such and such a place shall ye go down,” i.e., on a plundering incursion.
And the man of God sent unto the king of Israel, saying, Beware that thou pass not such a place; for thither the Syrians are come down.(9) Pass.—Pass over, across, or through.
Such a place.—This place.
Come down.—Coming down. Another anomalous Hebrew form (nĕhittîm). Some would recognise here again a corruption of the same verb as in 2Kings 6:8, and render, “for there the Syrians are about hiding” (nehbîm, i.e., nehbĕ’îm). This is supported by the LXX., “ὅτι ἐκεῖ Συρία κέκρυπται;” the Syriac and Arabic, “are lurking;” the Vulg., “in insidiis sunt;” and the Targum, “are hidden.” But the word (Heb.) is really an irregular participial formation from nahath, “to descend,” and the Authorised Version is therefore correct. The versions have deduced the idea of hiding from that of going down, as if crouching on the ground were meant.
And the king of Israel sent to the place which the man of God told him and warned him of, and saved himself there, not once nor twice.(10) Sent.—A sufficient force to hold the place, so that the Syrians had to return unsuccessful.
Warned.—Ezekiel 3:19; 2Chronicles 19:10.
Saved himself.—Was wary; on his guard (2Kings 6:9).
Not once nor twice refers to the statement of the entire verse. On more than one occasion, and in regard to different inroads of the Syrians, Elisha gave the king forewarning.
Therefore the heart of the king of Syria was sore troubled for this thing; and he called his servants, and said unto them, Will ye not shew me which of us is for the king of Israel?(11) Troubled.—Literally, storm-tost. The phrase is not found elsewhere in the Old Testament. (Comp. the use of the same verb in Jonah 1:11; Jonah 1:13; Isaiah 54:11.)
Which of us is for the king of Israel?—“Which of us?” is an expression only found here (mishshellānû). Pointed differently, the word would give the sense of the LXX., τίς προδίδωσί με βασιλεῖ Ίσραήλ —“Who betrays me to the king of Israel?”—malshînēnû, “our betrayer,” an Aramaic term. (Comp. Prov. XXX. 10.) Better still is Böttcher’s correction: “Who leads us astray unto the king of Israel?” (mashlēnû). This would be the natural supposition of the Syrian king when he found himself unexpectedly confronting an armed Israelitish force, and harmonises well enough with the LXX. and Vulg. The received text, which the Targum, Syriac, and Arabic support, can only mean, “Which of those who belong to us inclines to the king of Israel?” (Comp. Psalm 123:2.) The Syriac follows the Hebrew exactly; the Targum and Arabic add a verb—“reveals secrets”—before “to the king of Israel.”
And one of his servants said, None, my lord, O king: but Elisha, the prophet that is in Israel, telleth the king of Israel the words that thou speakest in thy bedchamber.(12) One of his servants.—The old interpreters thought of Naaman, but Elisha’s fame may have been otherwise known at Damascus.
The words.—The LXX. and Vulg.,”all the words.”
Telleth.—From time to time, as the Hebrew form denotes.
And he said, Go and spy where he is, that I may send and fetch him. And it was told him, saying, Behold, he is in Dothan.(13) Fetch.—Take.
Dothan.—A contracted dual (equivalent to Dothain LXX., Dothaim). It lay on a hill, twelve Roman miles north-east of Samaria, in a narrow pass (Judith 4:5; Judith 7:3; Judith 8:3), on the caravan route from Gilead to Egypt (Genesis 37:17). The old name survives in a Tell, covered with ruins, south-west of the modern Jenîn.
Therefore sent he thither horses, and chariots, and a great host: and they came by night, and compassed the city about.(14) A great host.—Of infantry. Not, however, an army but a company. (See 2Kings 6:23.)
They came by night.—So as to take the city by surprise.
And when the servant of the man of God was risen early, and gone forth, behold, an host compassed the city both with horses and chariots. And his servant said unto him, Alas, my master! how shall we do?(15) The servant of the man of God.—One waiting on (i.e., a minister of) the man of God. Not Gehazi, who is never called Elisha’s minister, and is usually mentioned by name.
Was risen early.—For the Hebrew construction, comp. Psalm 127:2; Isaiah 5:11; Hosea 6:4.
Gone forth.—To the outside of the house, which commanded a view of the valley below, where the Syrians lay.
And his servant said.—On returning into the house. The narrative is contracted.
And he answered, Fear not: for they that be with us are more than they that be with them.(16) They that be with us . . . with them.—Comp. Numbers 14:9; Psalm 3:6, “I will not be afraid of ten thousands of people that have set themselves against me round about”; and 2Chronicles 32:7-8, with Notes.
And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.(17) And the Lord opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw.—Just as the Lord had opened Elisha’s own eyes to see the like vision of unearthly glory when his master was taken away (2Kings 2:10; 2Kings 2:12). (Comp. also Numbers 22:31.)
The mountain.—On which Dothan stood.
Horses and chariots of fire.—Literally, horses and chariots, to wit, fire. Fire was the well-known symbol of Jehovah’s visible presence and protective or destroying might, from the days of the patriarchs onwards (Genesis 15:17; Exodus 3:2; Exodus 13:21, seq., 19:16, seq.; Isaiah 29:6; Isaiah 30:30; Isaiah 30:33; Isaiah 33:14). As fiery chariots and horses parted Elijah from Elisha (2Kings 2:12), so now a similar appearance surrounds and protects the latter. “It is a fine thought,” says Thenius, “that on this occasion the veil of earthly existence was lifted for a moment for one child of man, so as to allow him a clear glimpse of the sovereignty of Providence.” The form of the supernatural appearance was, no doubt, conditioned by the circumstances of the time. Chariots and horses were the strength of the Aramean oppressors of Israel; therefore, Jehovah causes His earthly ministers to see that He also has at His command horses and chariots, and that of fire.
And when they came down to him, Elisha prayed unto the LORD, and said, Smite this people, I pray thee, with blindness. And he smote them with blindness according to the word of Elisha.(18) And when they came down to him.—This would mean that the Syrians came down to Elisha. But the prophet was, to begin with, in the city, which lay on the top of the hill; and the heavenly host intervened between him and his enemies, so that the latter must have occupied the lower position. The reading of the Syriac and Josephus ıs, “and they (i.e., Elisha and his servant) went down to them”—i.e., to the Syrian force; and this is apparently right. The sight of the heavenly host guarding his master had inspired the prophet’s follower with courage to face any danger in his master’s company.
Elisha prayed.—And Elisha; prayed—mentally, as he approached his foes.
This people.—Perhaps in the sense of multitude.
Blindness.—Sanwērîm: the term used in Genesis 19:11, and nowhere besides. It denotes not so much blindness as a dazing effect, accompanied by mental bewilderment and confusion. “They saw, but knew not what they saw” (Rashi). Ewald pronounces the passage in Genesis the model of the present one.
And Elisha said unto them, This is not the way, neither is this the city: follow me, and I will bring you to the man whom ye seek. But he led them to Samaria.(19) This is not the way, neither is this the city.—These words pre-suppose, according to Josephus, that the prophet had asked them whom they were seeking, and that they had replied, “The prophet Elisha.” Thenius and Bähr accept this. Keil says, “Elisha’s words contain a falsehood, and are to be judged of in the same way as every ruse by which an enemy is deceived.” Thenius declares that “there is no untruth in the words of Elisha, strictly taken; for his home was not in Dothan (where he had only stayed for a time), but in Samaria; and the phrase ‘to the man might well mean ‘to his house.’ “ Surely it is easier to suppose that the “dazing” had caused the Syrians to go wandering about in the valley at the foot of the hill, vainly seeking to find the right way up to the city gate. (Comp. Gen. 50100, “They wearied themselves to find the door.”) If the prophet found them in this plight, his words would be literally true.
The man whom ye seek.—An irony.
Bring you.—Lead you.
But he led.—And he led (or, guided). To Samaria.
To Samaria.—Heb., Shômĕrônāh. The Assyrian spelling is Shâmerîna; and this, compared with the Greek Σαμάρειαν, suggests that the original name was Shâmirîn (“the warders”). The final ō in the present Hebrew form may be due to confounding y with w.
And it came to pass, when they were come into Samaria, that Elisha said, LORD, open the eyes of these men, that they may see. And the LORD opened their eyes, and they saw; and, behold, they were in the midst of Samaria.(20) Behold, they were in the midst of Samaria.—Michaelis wonders how such a host could be led into the city without putting themselves on their guard. He overlooks the supernatural bewilderment which had fallen upon them. When their eyes were opened, and they realised their whereabouts, dismay and astonishment would paralyse their energies.
And the king of Israel said unto Elisha, when he saw them, My father, shall I smite them? shall I smite them?(21) My father.—Comp. 2Kings 2:12; 2Kings 8:9 (“Thy son Ben-hadad”), 2Kings 13:14.
Shall I smite them,? shall I smite them?—Or, May I smite? may I smite, my father? The repetition expresses the king’s eagerness to slay his powerless enemies. He asks the prophet’s permission. (Comp. 2Kings 4:7.)
And he answered, Thou shalt not smite them: wouldest thou smite those whom thou hast taken captive with thy sword and with thy bow? set bread and water before them, that they may eat and drink, and go to their master.(22) Thou shalt not.—Or, thou must not.
Wouldest thou smite . . . thy bow?—The Hebrew order is, “An quos ceperis gladío et arcu percussuruses?” (Comp. Genesis 48:22.) Elisha says, “These men are virtually prisoners of war, and therefore are not to be slain in cold blood.”
The LXX., Targum, Syriac, and Vulg., ignore the interrogative particle. The Targum and Syriac render, “Lo those whom thou hast taken captive with thy sword, &c., thou dost (or mayst) kill.” (Comp. Deuteronomy 20:13.) The Vulg., “neque enim cepisti eos, ut percutias,” and the Arabic, “Didst thou take them captive with thy sword, &c., that thou shouldest slay them?” come to the same thing. These renderings are interesting, as they make Elisha deny the king’s right of disposal of these prisoners of Jehovah. The purpose of the miracle would have been frustrated by killing the Syrians. That purpose was to force their king and them to acknowledge the might of the true God.
And he prepared great provision for them: and when they had eaten and drunk, he sent them away, and they went to their master. So the bands of Syria came no more into the land of Israel.(23) He.—The king of Israel.
Prepared great provision.—Or, a great feast. The Hebrew verb (kārāh) occurs nowhere else in this sense. The noun (kērāh) is cognate with it, and the root meaning seems to be union: such as takes place at a common meal. Thenius renders kērāh by “das Gastrund”—i.e., the circle of guests.
So the bands of Syria came no more.—The stress lies on the word “bands.” The Syrians, dreading Elisha, did not make any further clandestine attempts to injure Israel, like those above described, which only involved the despatch of predatory bands. They now resolved to try the fortunes of regular war with the whole strength of their army (2Kings 6:24). It is evident, therefore, that we must not think of any gratitude on their part for the clemency of Jehoram.
Into the land.—Syriac, “into the border;” Targum, “into the border of the land.” (Comp. 1Samuel 7:13.)
And it came to pass after this, that Benhadad king of Syria gathered all his host, and went up, and besieged Samaria.(24-7:20) THE SIEGE OF SAMARIA AND THE FAMINE. THE DELIVERANCE, AS FORETOLD BY ELISHA.
(24) After this.—Afterwards. The term plainly implies chronological sequence.
Ben-hadad.—Ben-hadad II., who had besieged Samaria in the reign of Ahab (1Kings 20:1). He is mentioned on the monuments of Shalmaneser II., now in the British Museum, under the designation of Rammânu-hidri, or idri. Now, as the Assyrians identified their god Rammûnu (Rimmon) with the Syrian deity, Adad, Addu, or Dadi, this title might be equivalent to Adad-idri, or Addu-idri. Further, in three contract tablets in the reign of Nabonidus, Mr. Pinches has read the names Bin-Addu-natânu and Bin-Addu-amara—i.e., “Bin-Addu gave,” and “Bin-Adāu commanded.” Bin (or, Tur)-Addu, “son of Addu,” is clearly the name of a god, like abal Esarra, “son of Esarra,” in the name Tiglath Pileser; and is, in fact, the Assyrian equivalent of Ben-hadad. The Syrian king’s full name, therefore, would seem to have been Ben-hadad-idri, “The son of Hadad is my help” (Syriac adar, “to help”). (Comp. the name Hadad-ezer.) The Assyrians omitted the first element, the Hebrews the last.
And there was a great famine in Samaria: and, behold, they besieged it, until an ass's head was sold for fourscore pieces of silver, and the fourth part of a cab of dove's dung for five pieces of silver.(25) And there was.—There arose. In consequence of the siege.
Besieged.—Were besieging. Fourscore pieces
Fourscore pieces.—Eighty shekels—i.e., about £10. Ass’s flesh would not ordinarily be eaten at all, and the head of any animal would be the cheapest part. Plutarch mentions that during a famine among the Cadusians an ass’s head could hardly be got for sixty drachms (about £2. 10s.), though ordinarily the entire animal could be bought for about half that sum. And Pliny relates that when Hannibal was besieging Casalinum, a mouse was sold for 200 denarii (£6 5s.).
The fourth part of a cab of dove’s dung.—The cab was the smallest Hebrew dry measure. It held, according to the Rabbis, one-sixth of a seah (2Kings 7:1), or a little over a quart (ξέστης.—Josephus, Antt. ix. 4, § 4). The term dove’s dung, in all probability, denotes some kind of common vegetable produce, perhaps a sort of pulse or pease, which was ordinarily very cheap. Such a designation is not unparalleled. The Arabs call the herb kali “sparrow’s dung;” and Assafœtida is in German “devil’s dung.” In some places in England a species of wild hyacinth is called “dead man’s hands,” from the livid markings on the flower. The shape and colour of the species of pulse mentioned in the text may similarly account for its name. It naturally occurs that so long as there were any “doves” left in the city it would not be necessary to eat their dung. When Josephus wrote that dung was eaten in the siege of Jerusalem, he probably had the present passage in his mind.
Five pieces of silver.—Five (shekels in) silver; about 12s. 6d.
And as the king of Israel was passing by upon the wall, there cried a woman unto him, saying, Help, my lord, O king.(26) The king . . . was passing by upon the wall.—On the broad rampart of the city, which was like that which we see at such old places as Chester. The king went round to encourage the garrison and to superintend the defence. A woman in the street below, or perhaps on a housetop near the rampart, appeals to him for justice against her neighbour.
And he said, If the LORD do not help thee, whence shall I help thee? out of the barnfloor, or out of the winepress?(27) If the Lord do not help thee.—This is right. The marginal rendering, “Let not the Lord help thee!”—i.e., “May the Lord destroy thee!” would be possible in another context. Another rendering is, “Nay (i.e., do not supplicate me), let the Lord help thee!”
Out of the barnfloor.—Comp. Hosea ix 2.: “The floor and the winepress shall not feed them, and the new wine shall fail in her.” Jehoram, in the irony of despair, reminds the woman of what she well knows—viz., that the corn and wine, the staple foods of the time, are long since exhausted. The words, “If the Lord do not help thee,” may be compared with 2Kings 3:10, “Alas! that the Lord hath called,” &c. The character of Jehoram is consistently drawn. But perhaps the point is: “Jehovah alone is the giver of corn and wine (Hosea 2:8-9). Appeal not to me for these.”
And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him to day, and we will eat my son to morrow.(28) And the king said.—When she had explained what she wanted. With the hideous facts here recorded, comp. Deuteronomy 28:56, seq. Similar things were done during the sieges of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar (1Samuel 4:10; Ezekiel 5:10), and by Vespasian and Titus (Josephus, Bell. Jud. vi. 3, 4).
So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son.(29) she hath hid her son.—Perhaps to save him. (Comp. 1Kings 3:26.)
And it came to pass, when the king heard the words of the woman, that he rent his clothes; and he passed by upon the wall, and the people looked, and, behold, he had sackcloth within upon his flesh.(30) And he passed.—Now he was passing. The people in the streets below would see him well as he passed along the rampart.
He had sackcloth.—Rather, the sackcloth was. “The sackcloth”—i.e., the well-known garb of penitence and woe (1Kings 21:27). Jehoram had secretly assumed this ascetic garment in order to appease the wrath of Jehovah. That the king should wear sackcloth was a portent in the eyes of his subjects. The prophets wore it over the tunic as an official dress.
Within.—Under his royal robes, “upon his flesh”—i.e., next the skin. (Comp. Isaiah 20:2-3.)
Then he said, God do so and more also to me, if the head of Elisha the son of Shaphat shall stand on him this day.(31) Then he said.—And he (i.e., the king), said.
God do so . . . to me.—Literally, So may God do to me, and so may he add: a common form of oath. (Comp. Ruth 1:17; 1Samuel 3:17; 1Kings 2:23.)
If the head of Elisha . . . this day.—The king’s horror at the woman’s dreadful story is succeeded by indignation against Elisha, who had probably counselled an unyielding resistance to the foe, in the steadfast faith that Jehovah would help His own; and who, prophet though he was, and endued with miraculous powers, had yet brought no help in this hour of urgent need. (Comp. with the oath that of Jezebel against Elijah, 1Kings 19:2.)
But Elisha sat in his house, and the elders sat with him; and the king sent a man from before him: but ere the messenger came to him, he said to the elders, See ye how this son of a murderer hath sent to take away mine head? look, when the messenger cometh, shut the door, and hold him fast at the door: is not the sound of his master's feet behind him?(32) But Elisha sat . . . with him.—Rather, Now Elisha was sitting in his house, and the elders were sitting with him. This shows the important position which the prophet occupied at the time. The elders, who were the nobles and chiefs of Samaria, were gathered round him in his house to learn the will of Jehovah, and to receive comfort and counsel from his lips. (Comp. the way in which Zedekiah and his princes consulted Jeremiah during the last siege of Jerusalem—Jeremiah 21:1-2; Jeremiah 38:14, seq.)
And the king sent a man.—To behead the prophet, according to his oath.
From before him.—Comp. 2Kings 5:16; 2Kings 3:14; 1Kings 10:8. One of the royal attendants—probably a soldier of the guard—is meant.
But ere.—“But” is wanting in the Hebrew. (The conjunction wĕ has, perhaps, fallen out after the preceding w.)
He said to the elders.—Elisha foreknew what was about to happen. (Comp. 2Kings 5:26.) The he is emphatic: “He (the prophet) said.”
This son of a murderer.—Referring to Ahab’s murder of Naboth (1Kings 21:19) and the prophets of Jehovah; as if to say, “The son takes after his father” (filius patrissat). At the same time, we must not forget the idiom by which a man is called a son of any quality or disposition which he evinces. (Comp. “son of Belial,” “sons of pride,” “sons of wickedness;” 2Samuel 7:10; Job 41:34).
Hold him fast at the door.—Literally, press him back with the door. The door opened inwards, and the prophet bade his friends the elders hold the door against the messenger of death.
Is not the sound . . . behind him?—Elisha’s reason for bidding the elders hold the door. He foresaw that Jehoram would hasten in person after his messenger, to see that his savage order was carried out. (Bähr and Keil think, with Josephus, that Jehoram repented, and hurried off to restrain the sword of his minister.)
And while he yet talked with them, behold, the messenger came down unto him: and he said, Behold, this evil is of the LORD; what should I wait for the LORD any longer?(33) Yet talked.—Was still speaking.
The messenger.—Ewalďs correction, “the king” (melek for maľāk), is certainly right. In the rapid progress of the story, the arrival and momentary exclusion of the messenger is understood. The approach of the king may have been seen from the upper part of Elisha’s house.
Came down.—Was coming down, to the prophet’s house, from the ramparts. (Comp. 2Kings 5:24.)
And he said.—That is, the king said.
Behold, this evil is of the Lord.—Rather, Behold, such (this) is the distress from Jehovah. Things have come to this pitch by the will of Jehovah.
What (rather, why) should I wait for the Lord any longer?—As I have hitherto done, at your persuasion. Why should I not now surrender to the Syrians, and slay the prophet who has so long deluded me with vain hopes?