Two ways to live
2 Kings 5:15-27
During my gap year in Israel, a man who came to faith in our sister hostel in Eilat years before came to visit us. He had no Christian background before his conversion, but his newfound faith in God made such a difference that he went round the country in those early days sharing the gospel with anyone who would listen. In his enthusiasm, he would tear out pages from his New Testament and give them to people so they could read about Jesus! He was quite a character even in maturity, but what struck me was the contrast of his beginnings compared to many of us. He had much less to go on than those of us with a long-established Christian upbringing, but he did so much more with it. Not everyone has the gifting of an evangelist, but his all-consuming commitment to the Lord challenged me. How do we respond to the Lord when He saves us to a living faith and later, when He continues to show His love in our circumstances?
No other god but the LORD
For the exiled people of God hearing Naaman’s story, the challenge must have been equally great. They experienced God’s saving grace again and again but could not stay faithful to their God. They had God’s revelation in the law that taught them how to live and the prophets to challenge and teach them, but they repeatedly walked away and worshipped other gods. By contrast this outsider responds to his healing with a staggering confession that Israel’s God is alone to be worshipped (2 Kings 5:15). He even requests some soil to take home (a common practice when gods were thought to be associated with a particular land), so that he can build an altar on it and honour his new-found God with sacrifices (2 Kings 5:17). In that culture, incorporating an extra god or two into one’s worship was common and serving many gods was seen as pious behaviour honouring the spiritual powers behind the material world. To say that other gods had no power or did not even exist was revolutionary yet here is a foreigner, who gets it – more so than God’s own people! While Naaman’s public duties will require him to support the king in worship of Rimmon, god of Aram, the general himself will not offer sacrifices to anyone other than Israel’s God (2 Kings 5:17-18).[1]
Religion as a means to take advantage
If Naaman’s extraordinary faith in Israel’s God holds up a mirror to the Lord’s own people, so does Gehazi’s deception in a striking contrast. It was not wrong for prophets to take payment for services rendered (e.g. E.g. 1 Sam 9:6-8; 1 Kgs 14:3), but Elisha’s refusal here (2 Kings 5:16) underlines that only God can heal.[2] Gehazi, however, wants to take advantage of Naaman’s generosity (2 Kings 5:20). Perhaps greed motivates him or a desire to benefit the poor and needy prophetic group. Yet his actions steal God’s glory and may focus too much on receiving material benefits rather than finding security in God. Moreover, the road to those benefits leads through deceit about a sudden need in the form of visitors (2 Kings 5:22) and lies to the prophet (2 Kings 5:25). Gehazi’s punishment is poetic justice: he coveted what Naaman had and will now receive his leprosy (2 Kings 5:27).
Two ways to live
Israel is confronted with the all-out commitment of a foreigner to their God compared to the greed and deception of one of their own. Money is a particular temptation in a high-trust environment like a Christian context, where needs may be exaggerated and giving can be presented as a way of earning blessings from God. The temptation is equally real not only to the cynical who use religion to get rich, but to genuine Christian workers who may scrape and save to make ends meet. Pointing to the well-to-do while God’s servants struggle financially, Satan may whisper in their ear that their service to God deserves better. As so often, Scripture presents the choice for us in a characteristically black-and-white fashion. Even if money is not our particular temptation, the challenge of commitment to God comes to the fore. Either we serve God and choose life, or we refuse to trust Him for our needs and choose death. In all our varied circumstances, may we be people of Life.
[1] In the ancient world, as in many traditional societies today, religion was a public affair, so that officials spoke of their gods, prayed to them and worshipped them in their public capacity. It was part of the expected norm that underpinned society. Stepping out of line in such a context was serious because it was seen as a subversion of the social order, a form of rebellion that threatened to undo the stability and structure of society and therefore could not be allowed. Thus, Naaman is in a difficult position as a public figure and exclusive worshipper of another nation’s god. Elisha’s tacit concession (‘Go in peace’, 2 Kings 5:19) indicates understanding of his challenges. Naaman also knows that what he must do as a public figure is not ideal, hence his humble request for pardon (2 Kings 5:18). His situation is comparable to those Christians under oppressive regimes who may have to choose their battles wisely. I also remember Japanese and Korean students who came to Christian faith in the UK but faced expectations of ancestor worship as dutiful sons and daughters at home. Naaman’s example, however, should not be treated as a blanket acceptance of such compromises. Those who face these difficult challenges need to consider their motivation, the effects of non-compliance on others and on the gospel and prayerfully seek God’s guidance in their specific circumstances.
[2] There is a parallel here to Paul who believed that those who served God in gospel work should be supported financially by those who benefit (1 Cor 9:3-14). However, he did not always exercise this right either because he wanted to offer the gospel without charge (1 Cor 9:15-18) or because he did not wish to be a burden to a congregation (1 Thess 2:9).
If you enjoyed this post, please share it with others.