Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Quote of the Day: Naaman’s Request
After being healed of leprously, Naaman is set to return to his own country. He says to Elisha (ESV):
. . . from now on your servant will not offer burnt offering or sacrifice to any god but the Lord. In this matter may the Lord pardon your servant: when my master goes into the house of Rimmon to worship there, leaning on my arm, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, when I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, the Lord pardon your servant in this matter.
Elisha’s only reply is:
Go in peace.
I can almost hear the sermons that have no doubt been preached on this, giving a negative assessment:
Naaman held something back! He didn’t fully commit to G-d! Even the great prophet Elisha failed to advise Naaman to radically commit his whole life to G-d!
And so on.
I can also imagine some positive assessments have been made. Maybe some subtle distinctions along these lines:
Naaman isn’t bowing in worship to the false god Rimmon; he’s just helping the aged king of Syria get around; it’s an act of kindness; it’s totally fine.
I think those interpretations both seem plausible and edifying enough. They don’t bother me. The worst I can say about them is that they might be wrong.
My own inclination at present is to take the incident along these lines:
It’s not giving us a judgment on what Naaman should do, but affirming that he is supposed to think for himself. It’s not Elisha’s job to spell out everything for him. He’s making an honest effort to figure out what is right in a complex situation. Maybe G-d will guide him to more wisdom later, but for now, he does not get any further prophetic instruction; he’s reoriented his life towards a better religion, and he may go in peace and think through the details for himself.
What do you think?
Published in Religion & Philosophy
I like to wait for the Author’s notes with things like this.
Or maybe “Go in peace” is an idiom meaning something like “Ok, that sounds fine.” Maybe Elisha is actually granting this request (or telling Naaman that G-d grants it).
Also, Naaman is a pagan, so anything to accede to the law of G-d is good.
What you say makes a lot of sense. Naaman honored God as God, showing God both respect and gratitude.
I like your other interpretation. But any time I try to elaborate on it, I find it lacks something in comparison to Elisha’s simple words of advice and blessing.
This parallels the command Jesus gave to the woman who had the flow of blood in Luke 8:48.
I think this is a great question and a provocative post.
***
This is the Quote of the Day. July’s sign-up sheet is here, and we’re off to a rather slow start so far this month, so there are plenty of dates available. Please sign up today!
If you’re new at this game, it’s a easy way to get your feet wet and start a conversation; if you’re an old-timer, you already know the ropes. Either way, please sign up to speak up.
Another ongoing project to encourage new voices is our Group Writing Project. July’s theme is “We Hold These Truths (or Fictions).” If you’d like to weigh in, please sign up for Group Writing too!
Not that I know anything about Syrian rituals for worshipping Rimmon at the time. I guess it’s possible that some information on that would clarify whether such an interpretation is likely.
Great questions. The American bishops offer this footnote:
I agree, that isn’t entirely satisfactory.
If I’ve learned nothing else, it is that Rabbinic scholars have been at this sort of thing several thousand years (at least) longer than even your namesake. Have you not consulted any of them? Not that unanimity is any more likely than it is amongst Christians, but you never know what such an inquiry may uncover.
Not on this, no. There is a Talmud reading I should get back to on my Kindle app. On different matters though.
On further reflection, perhaps the “leans upon my arm” is the key. Naaman is not assisting someone in pagan worship so much as helping an old man stand, there and elsewhere.
FWIW, John MacArthur says this in his commentary:
“As an aide to Syria’s king, Naaman’s duty demanded that he accompany the king to religious services at the temple of Rimmon in Damascus. Naaman requested that the Lord forgive this outward compromise of his true faith in and commitment to the Lord.”
Nothing on Elisha’s response, though.
Here’s what Matthew Henry has to say:
“The whole work was from God, in such a manner, that the prophet would not give counsel when he had no directions from the Lord. It is not well violently to oppose the lesser mistakes which unite with men’s first convictions; we cannot bring men forward any faster than the Lord prepares them to receive instruction. Yet as to us, if, in covenanting with God, we desire to reserve any known sin, to continue to indulge ourselves in it, that is a breach of his covenant. Those who truly hate evil, will make conscience of abstaining from all appearances of evil.”
Another thought I read about from John Gill is that it may be a past tense thing, and Namaan is asking forgiveness for his former idolatry.
This reminds me of the ‘serenity prayer’, which is less than canon and more than useful. It brings to mind as well the difference between a cloistered monk and a friar.