Grace to Naaman (2 Kings 5)

Question: Hey Gary, what's this about? it appears the Lord is forgiving Naaman in advance for bowing to another god.

But may the LORD forgive your servant for this one thing: When my master enters the temple of Rimmon to bow down and he is leaning on my arm and I bow there also—when I bow down in the temple of Rimmon, may the LORD forgive your servant for this. 2 Kings 5:18.

This is an interesting passage, because the rest of the Bible is sharply opposed to any acts of worship towards other gods, especially the second commandment (Exod 20:4-5). Daniel's three friends, for example, are honored because they risk their lives by refusing to bow down to the king's idol (Dan 3). A good look at the whole story of Naaman will help us understand, but there will still be some unresolved tensions.

This section of 2 Kings contains a series of miracle stories about Elisha. Each story shows Elisha as an enforcer and executor of God's covenant with Israel. Most prophets call God's people back to the terms of the covenant (the Torah), and warn them about the consequences of continued disobedience. Elijah and Elisha are different from most other prophets in that they themselves carry out the blessings and curses of the covenant. In this story, Elisha brings a blessing of the covenant to a Gentile convert - and not just any Gentile, but an army captain from Aram, Israel's enemy. (Aram is also called Syria, which is not the same as Assyria.)

Naaman decides to trust Yahweh, the God of Israel, by going to Yahweh's prophet for healing. Elisha heals Naaman through a ritual cleansing in the Jordan (an image that may influence John the Baptist's later baptisms in the Jordan). After the healing, Naaman does three things that illustrate his new devotion to Yahweh.

• He asks for two mule-loads of dirt from Israel. Naaman will probably use this to make an altar to Yahweh in his own country.
• He promises to make no sacrifices to any other god. Monotheism was unique to Israelites, so Naaman has a genuine conversion. He will not just add Yahweh to his list of gods.
• He asks for forgiveness: his official duties require him to lend an arm when his elderly master bows down in the temple of Rimmon, so Naaman will naturally kneel down with him.

Elisha gives his blessing (v. 19) to all three. We can understand that Elisha welcomes the first two, but why permit the third? The key prohibition in the OT is against sacrifices to other gods (Exod 22:20). Sacrifice was the most important act of worship in the ancient world. Naaman has shown his loyalty to Yahweh by vowing not to sacrifice to other gods - a vow that will get him in trouble back in Aram, since sacrifice to national deities was often a mark of national loyalty. Naaman may physically kneel as he supports his master, but he will not worship. The story reveals the principle that God cares about the heart more than the actions.

This story also reveals God's grace to Naaman. (btw, "Grace to Naaman" would be a good name for a band, or maybe "Naaman's Grace.") God brings healing to this Gentile outsider, he welcomes him as a convert, and he even allows Naaman freedom to do something that an Israelite would not be allowed. Naaman recognizes Yahweh's grace: he begins and ends his request with "May the LORD forgive your servant."

Most importantly, Naaman will point Arameans to the glory of Yahweh. An army captain who refuses to sacrifice to Rimmon, but is nonetheless healed of an incurable disease - such a thing would be a shock to Aramean society, and would cause them to ask about Israel's God. They might not even notice Naaman's hesitant kneeling in the courts of Rimmon.

Paul does something similar. He allows believers to eat meat sacrificed to idols, claiming that is not inherently an act of worship (1 Cor 8, 10:23-11:1). But he forbids participation in meals devoted to idols, since it is inherently an act of worship (1 Cor 10:14-22).

Christians today facing similar issues have to make the same decision: is the act in question inherently an act of worship? or is it a morally neutral act, not necessarily worship? Christmas trees originated as part of pagan practices, but using one today is not inherently an act of pagan worship. Christians attending Shinto/Buddhist funerals today face a difficult decision: are particular rituals merely part of honoring the family, or are they inherently acts of Shinto worship?

The picture: Triptych of the Cleansing of Naaman, by Cornelius Engebrech, 1520.

The Kingdom for the Birds? (Matthew 13:31-32)

"The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field; it is the smallest of all (garden) seeds, but when it is grown, it is larger than all the herb plants, and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the sky come and nest in its branches." (Matthew 13:31-32)

Why the birds? Some see the birds as symbolic of Satan, since the birds are "the evil one" in Jesus' first parable (Matt 13:19). However, symbols don't mean the same thing every time they occur. In this case, Jesus is drawing on an Old Testament image to enrich his parable. The picture of a great tree that provides a haven for birds is used three times in the OT (Ezek 17:23, 31:6; Dan 4:12). In each case, the tree is a mighty kingdom and the birds depict the majesty and blessings of that kingdom.

At first look, Jesus could be alluding to any one of these three OT passages. His wording does not perfectly match any of the three passages, which is quite normal when the NT refers to the OT. A closer look shows us that Jesus is probably echoing Ezekiel 17, which contains a provocative parable about the fall of the royal family of Israel in 586 BC. The family is a vine, which is uprooted and withers because of its unfaithfulness to its gardener. But one day, God will take a tiny twig, plant it in Jerusalem, and it will become a great cedar, "and birds of every kind will nest... in the shade of its branches."

Many Jews at the time of Jesus believed that Ezekiel 17:23 described the rule of the messianic king, ruling over a restored Jewish kingdom. The translators of the LXX (the Greek Old Testament) called the cedar "he" to make it clear that the cedar is a person (in Greek, cedar is a feminine word); and the Ezekiel Targum (an Aramaic translation, possibly from the late first century) explained that the cedar was a king from the line of David, and the birds were the "humble who dwell in the shade of his kingdom."

So Jesus ends his parable with an allusion to Ezekiel's older parable. Ezekiel's tiny twig would become a mighty cedar. Jesus' mustard seed would become a great tree. The dusty rabbi from Nazareth and his nondescript band of disciples would become a mighty kingdom, providing blessings to all who recognize the majesty of the king and his kingdom.

The picture: Jesus Teaches His Disciples, in Das Plenarium oder Ewangely Buoch, printed 1516. Courtesy of the Digital Image Archive, Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory University.