In short

2 Kings 5:1-14. Naaman, the commander of a foreign army, is healed of his leprosy (a skin disease) by obeying Elisha, a prophet in Israel, who tells him to dip in the Jordan River seven times.

Why it is important

Naaman, a non-Israelite, has faith in God (reluctantly) at a time when Israel was largely failing in their obedience. This was pointed out by Jesus in Luke 4:27. Also, there is a strong parallel to Christian baptism in this story.

Main characters

  • The king of Syria (or Aram, depending on your translation), who is unnamed in the story, but would be Ben-Hadad*
  • Naaman, the commander of the army of Syria
  • Naaman’s wife’s servant girl, who is an Israelite that was captured and taken to Syria
  • Elisha, “the man of God,” a prophet in Israel
  • The king of Israel (also unnamed, but it’s Jehoram/Joram**)

What is in this story (2 Kings 5:1-14)

The story mostly takes place in Syria (Aram), which is an enemy nation of Israel.

  1. Naaman has leprosy (v. 1)
  2. Naaman’s wife’s servant girl says, Naaman should totally go see the prophet in Israel! He could cure Naaman. (vs. 2-3)
  3. Naaman goes to his boss, the king of Syria, and tells him about this healer (v. 4)
  4. The king of Syria writes to the king of Israel, who thinks that it’s a plot against him (vs. 5-7)
  5. Elisha hears of this and says, I can heal him! (v. 8)
  6. Naaman comes to Elisha’s door, but Elisha doesn’t even come out, and instead sends someone else (vs. 9-10) and this angers Naaman (v. 11)
  7. Elisha’s advice is to wash in the Jordan River (in Israel) seven times (v. 10) which further angers Naaman, since he feels that his country’s rivers are better [probably meaning cleaner and less muddy] (v. 12)
  8. Naaman’s servants convince him to do it anyway, and he does and is healed (vs. 13-14)

Things that are not so well-known

  • Naaman “was a great man with his master and in high favor” (v. 1). That is actually quite the understatement. The fact that the king of Syria was willing to ask an enemy king for help to cure Naaman and pay handsomely as well (v. 5), shows that Naaman was truly invaluable to his king.
  • Verse 1 also says that “the LORD had given victory to Syria.” Think about that. Syria was the enemy – why was the LORD on their side? This happens repeatedly in Israel’s history (and Judah’s), that God’s people lose because they have been persistently disobedient and God forces His people to lose and the enemy to win, in order to teach His people a lesson.

Theology and doctrine

Christians believe that baptism (immersion in water) is for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38). Some religious people argue that this is silly because water cannot take away sins, only God can.

Naaman had the same basic objection. He wanted to be told to do “some great thing” (2Ki 5:13, KJV). But if God choses to work His wonders through ordinary water, why should we fight it so much?

1 Peter 3:21, “Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

True, it wasn’t “removal of dirt from the body” that cured Naaman, but it was the water that cured him. Naaman wasn’t cured when he believed God could heal him. He was cured only when he obeyed the command AND got wet. We aren’t saved when we believe in God. We’re saved when we believe AND obey God’s command to be baptized.

Footnotes

* 1Ki 20:20 and 2Ki 6:24 identify the king of Syria as Ben-Hadad. Some quick Wikipedia research shows there were at least three Ben-Hadads; this one seems to be Ben-Hadad II.

** Before this story, 2Ki 3:1 says that “Jehoram the son of Ahab became king over Israel in Samaria.” Then we get several chapters about Elisha. Then after this story, in 2Ki 8:16, we go back to “Joram the son of Ahab, king of Israel.” So Joram and Jehoram are the same person. If that’s not confusing enough, in that same verse (8:16), a DIFFERENT Jehoram becomes king of the land of Judah (which is not the same place as Israel).

#

No responses yet

Leave a Reply