- 154-
(^115) The word "messenger" in Hebrew is the same as that for "angel."
(^116) "Thou sendest to inquire" (ver. 6), instead of Elijah's "ye go to inquire" (ver. 3).
(^117) Literally "the judgment." If I mistake not, there is in our northern dialect also such an expression as "the right" of a
man - in the sense of not only his bearing, but that which is behind it.
(^118) The original has here some noteworthy peculiarities. First: the captain addresses Elijah as "man of the Elohim" (with
the definite article) - that is, of the national Deity of Israel - not Jehovah. Secondly: Elijah in taking up the challenge
does not use the term Jehovah - which would have been unfitting in this connection, but in repeating the words of the
captain he omits the definite article before Elohim: "And if man of Elohim I."
(^119) According to ancient arrangement the host was divided into companies of 1000, of 100, and of 50, each with its
leader (comp. Numbers 31:14, 48; 1 Samuel 8:12).
(^120) It is surely a foolish as well as an idle question, how the king had learned the destruction of these companies. Is it
supposed that Elijah was quite alone on Mount Carmel, without any disciples or followers - or that such expeditions
would not attract sufficient notice to lead any one to inquire into the fate of those who went to Carmel, but never
returned?
(^121) * Canon Rawlinson remarks on the words, "fell on his knees:" "Not as a worshipper, but as a suppliant." (Speaker's
Commentary, ad loc.)
(^122) Canon Rawlinson (u.s.) aptly remarks that the phrase: "Let my life... be precious," "is exactly the converse of our
common expression, 'to hold life cheap.'"
(^123) The reference here seems to the captain, not to King Ahaziah.
(^124) The expression (1:17): "in the second year of Jehoram" marks some corruption in the text, which we have not now
the means of clearing up. The same corruption - or rather probably the attempt of the copyist to remove it - appears in
the chronological notice of 1 Kings 22:51, as compared with 2 Kings 8:16. It has been sought to remove the difficulty
by assuming a coregency of either five or two years of Jehoram, king of Judah, with his father Jehoshaphat, and this
suggestion has been indicated in the chronological table appended to Vol. 5. of this History. But there really is no
evidence of such coregency, and much against the assumption of it - while it would still leave some difficulties
unremoved. Under these circumstances it is critically more honest and better to regard these notices as the outcome and
sequence of some corruption in the text.
(^125) Their history may be the more briefly treated in this volume, as a special book on "Elisha the Prophet," by the
present writer, has been published by the Religious Tract Society.
(^126) Probably it was in the beginning of the reign of Joram. We repeat that we prefer calling him so for distinction from
the contemporary king of Judah of the same name. The two names Joram and Jehoram are interchangeably used. In 2
Kings 1:17, and 2 Chronicles 22:6, alike the kings of Israel and of Judah are called Jehoram; in 2 Kings 9:15, 17, 21-
24 (in the Hebrew text), the king of Israel is called Jehoram; in 2 Kings 8:21, 23, 24 the king of Judah is called Joram;
while on comparing 2 Kings 8:16 with 29 we find that the two names are inverted.
(^127) Obvious reasons against either of these views will occur to every thoughtful reader,
(^128) Some have, however, localized this scene in the Gilgal near Jericho.
(^129) So in 1 Samuel 12:17; 2 Kings 4:8; Job 1:6 - in the last two instances, rendered "a day" in our Authorised Version.
(^130) Bahr thinks that the question meant: "What shall become of us, but especially of thee when thy master is taken from
thee?" and the reply of Elisha: "I know and consider it as well as you - only, submit to the will of God, and do not make
my heart heavy." I cannot take this view of it, any more than that Elisha wished to enjoin silence because Elijah in his
humility would not have his translation spoken of (Keil).
(^)