- 32-
The king's was language of respectful affection, indeed, but also of unbelief, as if with
the removal of Elisha's presence from amongst them the defense and might of Israel had
ceased. Very different also from the bearing of Elisha when his master had been taken
from him was that of Jehoash. Then the first act of Elisha had been one of faith that dared
the utmost, when with the mantle fallen from his master's shoulders he smote the waters
of Jordan, and they parted hither and thither. On the other hand, almost the first act of
Jehoash in view of the departure of his master was one of unbelief, that in cowardice
shrunk back, even within sound of the prophet's express directions and of the
accompanying assurance of promised Divine help. So the same words have a very
different meaning in the mouths of different persons, nor is there safety in any mere
formula, however sacred or sanctioned. In this also the letter killeth, but the Spirit maketh
alive.
Alike intrinsically, and in view of the condition of the king, as also for a lasting record to
Israel, it was needful that the prophet should before his departure once more give
emphatic testimony to Jehovah, emphatic confirmation also of His promise, and
encouragement to Israel. So would his dying words become a permanent message to the
people, and not only sum up and seal, but, so to speak, perpetuate his whole mission. It
was in accordance with almost uniform prophetic custom (comp. 1 Kings 11:29- 32;
Isaiah 20:2; Jeremiah 13:1; Ezekiel 4:1, and others), and also best suited to the condition
of the king and the circumstances of the case, that this message should be joined to a
symbolic act as its sign. It would be impossible to misunderstand it, when Elisha bade
Jehoash take bow and arrows and put his hand upon the bow, while the prophet himself
laid his hands upon that of the king. And when this had been done, the window towards
the east was opened, or rather, its lattice removed, and the king at Elisha's command shot
the arrow. Towards the east was Syria; in shooting the arrow thither, the king of Israel
was acting at the direction, and with the symbolically assured helping Presence of the
LORD. And so it meant: "An arrow of salvation [deliverance] of Jehovah [the
deliverance being His] and an arrow of salvation from [against, over] Syria;" to which the
prophetic promise was immediately added' "For thou shalt smite Syria in Aphek to
destruction [complete annihilation]." The latter statement, it need scarcely be said,
referred only to the Syrian host at Aphek, since this first was followed by other victories.
But Aphek was a significant name, marking the locality where by Divine prediction and
Divine help Israel had once before defeated the overwhelming might of Syria (1 Kings
20:26-30).
But the interposition of God, although direct, is not of the nature of magic. If any success
granted by Him is to be complete, it implies moral conditions on our part. To put it
otherwise: the full reception of God's benefits has for its condition full receptivity on the
part of man. This was the meaning of Elisha's further behest to the king; this also the
explanation of Jehoash's failure. The prophet bade him seize "the arrows" which he had
already taken from the quiver,* and "strike (that is, shoot, hit) towards the earth."
(^)