UC-NRLF 
 
 BS 
 
 6-60 
 
 $B im fi3fi 
 
8061 12 'HW Itfd 
 •soag pjoTi^Bo 
 
w 
 
 New York University 
 
 Elijah andElisha 
 
 And their part in the politico-religioui crisis 
 in Israel in the ninth century B. C 
 
 Thesis for the Doctorate 
 
 Submitted in partial fulfilment of the require* 
 ments for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. 
 
 By 
 LINDSAY B. LONGACRE 
 
 NEW YpRK 
 1908 
 
New York University 
 
 Elijah andElisha 
 
 And their part in the politico-religious crisis 
 in Israel in the ninth century B. C 
 
 Thesis for the Doctorate 
 
 Submitted in partial fulfilment of the require- 
 ments for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. 
 
 By 
 UNDSAY B. LONGACRE 
 
 NEW YORK 
 1908 
 

 • : . • • 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 The literature is meagre and fragmentary, and is to be 
 found almost exclusively in works of a general character 
 whose scope includes the subjects here discussed. 
 
 Introductions to O. T. Literature: 
 
 Bleek (ed. Wellhausen) ; Cornill; Driver; Kuenen; 
 Wellhausen, Composition of the Hexateuch. 
 
 Commentaries on the books of the Kings: 
 
 Bahr; Keil; Thenius; Klostermann; Kittel; Benzinger. 
 
 Histories of the Jewish People: 
 
 Ewald; Renan; Schiirer; Graetz; Stade; Kittel; H. P. 
 Smith. 
 
 Works of a historical character: 
 
 Wellhausen, Prolegomena to the History of Israel; W. 
 R. Smith, The Old Test, in the Jewish Church, The 
 Prophets of Israel; Cornill, The Prophets of Israel. 
 
 The Religion of the Hebrews: 
 
 Kuenen, The Religion of Israel; Budde, The Religion 
 of Israel to the Exile; Curtiss, Primitive Semitic 
 Religion Today. 
 
 Homiletical: 
 
 P. Cassel, d. Prophet Elisa; Krummacher, Elias; Elisa; 
 W. M. Taylor, Elijah. 
 
 3 
 
Monogr.nplis: 
 
 A. Clemen, Die Wunderberichte uber Elia ii. Elisa; 
 Milligan, Elijah (Men of the Bible) ; Gunkel, Elias, 
 Jahve u. Baal (Religionsges. Volksbticher) ; Erbt, 
 Elia, Elisa u. Jona. 
 
 Bible Dictionaries: 
 
 Jewish Encyclopedia, arts, on Elijah by Konig, L. 
 Grinzberg, M. Seligsohn and K. Kohler; on Elisha by 
 Hirsch and Konig. Encyclopedia Biblica (ed. Cheyne 
 and Black) arts, on Elijah and on Elisha by W. E. 
 Addis. Dictionary of the Bible (ed. Hastings) arts, 
 on Elijah and on Elisha by J. Strachan. 
 
 Unclassified: 
 
 Kautzsch, The Literature of the O. T. (a reprint of the 
 Supplements to the Author's Heilige Schrift des Alten 
 Testaments. ) 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 Introductory: 
 
 Sec. I. The Religious Background: 
 
 a. influence of Polytheism in Israel — the people loyal 
 to JHVH — Elijah and Elisha are supported by the 
 popular faith, pp 9-11. 
 
 b. Ahab and Jezebel — their support of Baal, not neces- 
 sarily antagonism to JHVH. pp 12-14. 
 
 Sec. II. The Scripture Material: 
 
 Its composite character — ^^separation into three groups 
 — their historical value — early reduction to writing — 
 criticism of Gunkel's book, pp 15-22. 
 
 Sec. III. Elijah: 
 
 a. detailed survey of Scriptural material — b. per- 
 sonality — c. aim and method — d. results — e. later 
 tradition, pp 23-41. 
 
 Sec. IV. Elisha: 
 
 a. detailed survey of Scriptural material — b. personal- 
 ity — c. aim and method — d. results — e. relations with 
 Syria, pp 42-54. 
 
 Sec. V. The Work of Elijah and Elisha. 
 
 The two are united in a single work — their success 
 must be judged by their aims — influence on subse- 
 quent history — their work characterized, pp 55.-56. 
 
 2S&2m 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 Microsoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/elijahelishatheiOOIongrich 
 
Elijah and Elisha 
 
 The 9th century B. C. falls between two significant 
 periods in the history of Israel. In the century preceding, 
 under Saul, David, and Solomon, the national life had 
 crystalized into a kingdom which not only was established, 
 but was expanded to an extent, and exalted to a magnifi- 
 cence which it never surpassed. In the century following the 
 ninth, the appearance of Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, and Micah, 
 marks the definite emergence of a factor in the national 
 life, viz, that of the prophets, which is now seen to have 
 been not only more vital but also more enduring, 
 than that of the kings and of the kingdom. Be- 
 tween these two centuries, each of such exceptional 
 significance, the ninth seems, at first, insignificant 
 by comparison. Many of its years are given over to 
 civil wars, ensuing upon the revolt of the main body of the 
 people from, the Davidic dynasty. Foreign wars also occur 
 frequently and are carried on with varied fortune. In one 
 respect, however, this century is conspicuous. It witnesses 
 the begining of a movement whose place in the religious 
 history of Isarel, is of the utmost importance. This move- 
 ment is based upon the principle that worship of any other 
 
God than JHVH^ was disloyalty to JHVH. This idea 
 was by no means taken for granted by a people accustomed 
 from time immemorial, to the recognition and worship of 
 more gods than one. The ninth century was the period In 
 which this issue was definitely raised, and launched on a 
 course which led eventually to the enduring monotheism of 
 the later prophets. This achievement was especially the 
 work of prophets and this century can show no more splen- 
 did name than that of the prophet Elijah. Associated with 
 him, and equal in importance, is the less prominent Elisha. 
 The present study is concerned with the character and work 
 of these two men, especially with reference to the religious 
 crisis which characterizes this century of Hebrew history. 
 
 'This symbol of the divine name Is used in this study. 
 as the most satisfactory reproduction of the Hebrew record 
 and usage. The four English letters correspond to the four 
 Hebrew letters of the Hebrew word. As these letters stand, 
 they cannot be pronounced because no vowels appear. In 
 the Hebrew, the word cannot be pronounced for the same 
 reason. Wherever this Name occurs in the Hebrew text, a 
 different word is always pronounced, viz: ADONAI, the 
 Lord; the Hebrew consonants, when pointed, alwaj'^s being 
 pointed with the vowels of the word ADONAI. In 1518 A. 
 D,. Petrus Galatinus, Confessor of Leo X, proposed to read 
 these vowels and consonants as though they belonged to 
 each other. From this contrivance arose the word, 
 JEHOVAH; but this is no more a real word than the result 
 one might obtain by combining the consonants of the word 
 GERMANY with the vowels of the word PORTUGAL, viz: 
 GORMUNA, which is no word at all. The reverent reluct- 
 ance to pronounce the divine name is of such an early date 
 that the correct pronunciation has long been forgotten. 
 There are good reasons for supposing that JAHVEH 
 approaches the truth, and this pronunciation has found 
 wide acceptance; but the reasons are not final, and the 
 original pronunciation will probably never be recovered. Cf. 
 Moore: Notes on the name niD^I Amer. Jour. Theol. Jan. 
 1908. 
 
 8 
 
I. 
 
 a. THE RELIGIOUS BACKGROUND. 
 
 The western mind finds it difficult to appreciate the 
 religious feeling of the oriental. Eastern life is domin- 
 ated by religious considerations to an extent practically in- 
 credible to an American. A fundamental element in an esti- 
 mate of any period of Oriental life is the recognition of the 
 place held by religious motives and interests. The modern 
 textual, literary, and historical study of the O. T. has done 
 much to explain some of the phenomena of the writings 
 themselves; but such considerations can never supply all 
 the elements necessary for a reconstruction of the history. 
 Pyschologically the Oriental stands on a different eminence 
 from the Westerner, and between the two there is a great 
 gulf fixed, which must at least be recognized, if not bridged, 
 before the one can approach an adequate understanding of 
 the other. 
 
 The religion of JHVH did not begin with the 
 work of Elijah and Elisha; they neither invented nor discov- 
 ered the deity they served. Their religion was that of their 
 compatriots, and their God was JHVH. The monotheism 
 of a later day, however, is by no means to be assumed. 
 JHVH was still but one God among many. The first chapter 
 of Judges shows that the Hebrews settled among the Cana- 
 anites instead of driving them out; and it was inevitable 
 that Canaanite worship should exert a strong influence up- 
 on the invaders.- Such an influence could do no violence to 
 the national conscience, (1) because of the universal belief 
 in many gods, whose worship was not considered mutually 
 exclusive;' and (2) because of the common association of 
 
 *cf. Budde: Religion of Israel to the Exile; Lect. ii. 
 •I Sam. 8:8; ii Ki. 17:24-33; Hos. 2:5; Ezk. 20 passim. 
 
a deity with a particular locality.* Although, under David a 
 habitation for JHVH had been established at Jerusalem, 
 and although JHVH was undoubtedly the God of the He- 
 brews, there is no indication in the narratives of this period 
 that there had ever been any formal and definite question 
 raised as to the impropriety of worshiping other gods, where 
 their worship was customary. Even Solomon's provision for 
 the worship of his foreign wives does not seem to have been 
 a forsaking of JHVH. He did not worship JHVH less 
 because he consented to this other worship. His act is con- 
 demned only from a later point of view. It was not until 
 the days of Ahab, as far as the record goes, that the definite 
 issue was raised of worshipping JHVH exclusively. 
 
 But all this did not make JHVH any less the God of 
 Israel. In the days of Elijah and Elisha he was 
 worshipped by all, not at one shrine but at many shrines. 
 He was the God who had brought the people out of Egypt" 
 It was he whose temple had been built at Jerusalem, con- 
 firming the establishment of his worship and of his worship- 
 pers in Canaan. The two early documents of the Hexateuch, 
 J. and E., bear undoubted testimony to the national de- 
 votion to JHVH in this period. The evening offering 
 (cf i K. 18,^) as witnessed in the narrative under review, 
 was at this time a well established custom. So absolutely 
 was JHVH accepted as the God of the nation, that Jeroboam 
 who led the great revolt felt his tenure insecure until he 
 had provided shrines for JHVH worship within the 
 bounds of the northern kingdom. 
 
 *i Sam. 26:9; i Ki. 20:23; ii Ki. 5:17; cf. Moore: Judges, 
 p. 294. 
 •of. Kautzsch in H. B. D. extra vol. p. 612. 
 
 10 
 
The great documents above mentioned indicate the atti- 
 tude toward JHVH not only among the people at large, 
 but among prophetic circles in particular. It was in this 
 environment that the conception of JHVH's supremacy 
 took deepest root and called out the most enduring expiefa- 
 sion, Elijah and Elisha are often looked upon as though 
 they were separated by a wide gulf from tne religious 
 thought and life of their day; whereas they stand on a veiy 
 sound basis of popular religious feeling, as well as among a 
 circle in which they might be eminent, but not different in 
 kind. Instances of this higher type of prophetic thought and 
 character may be seen in "Nathan, in the days of David, and 
 ^Micaiah ben Imlah in the days of Ahab. 
 
 On the one hand then, Elijah and Elisha, drew their 
 Inspiration from a tradition and fellowship which represent 
 an important element in the life of their time; and, on the 
 other hand, while their work was distinguished by their 
 own strong individualities, it was quite in keeping with 
 the source from which it sprang. 
 
 •ii Sam. 12:1 ff. 
 U Ki. 22:8 ff 
 
 11 
 
b. AHAB AND JEZEBEL. 
 
 In the days of Elijah the prophet, Ahab son of Omri, 
 ascended the throne of Israel. Judged by the political 
 standards of the time he did his duty by the nation, and 
 showed himself a ruler, by no means lacking in ability and 
 courage. He was valiant in battle (i K. 22:32-34); he 
 beautified the capital, Samaria, by the erection of fine build- 
 ings (i K. 16:32, 22:39); he also improved other cities, as 
 well as the capital, (i K. 22:39); he strengthened his posi- 
 tion from time to time by diplomatic alliances. For the firr?t 
 time since the separation of the two kingdoms, peace was 
 established; and Ahab and Jehoshaphat are on friendly 
 terms (i K. 22:2. 44). He was occasionally able to conclude 
 favorable treaties with Syria (i K. 20:3 4.) His best re- 
 membered alliance, however, was with Tyre and Sidon, in 
 the marriage with Jezebel, daughter of Ethbaal, king of 
 Sidon; but this is remembered for its religious, rather than 
 for its political significance. Ahab himself seems to have been 
 quite as sincere in his JHVH worship as probably, the ma- 
 jority of his subjects. His three children bear names com- 
 pounded with ,the divine name.* Prophets of JHVH had 
 their places at court.* His wife Jezebel adheres to the wor- 
 ship of her own native deity, the Tyrian Baal; and to her is 
 ascribed the work of making the worship of Baal such an 
 important movement, that it precipitates the crisis in which 
 Elijah and Elisha are the most conspicious actors. Just 
 
 *Ahaziah, Joram, Athaliah. 
 'i Ki. 22:6. 8. 
 
 12 
 
what Jezebel's part was, is difficult to determine. According 
 to the "prophetic" group of narratives (e. g. i K. 19:14) 
 an effort was being made with fair success, to stamp out 
 JHVH worship in Israel. On the other hand, the "royal" 
 group of narratives indicate that there was no interference 
 with the adherents of JHVH (e g. i K. 20: i:;. 2 S. 22:6. 8). 
 The truth probably lies between these extremes; for, that 
 Jezebel carried on some propaganda in favor of Baal worship, 
 can hardly be doubted. Her antagonism against it may well 
 have been due to mixed motives. Elijah's zeal for JHVH 
 would inevitably involve opposition to foreign support of 
 alien deities. Jezebel's imperious temper is finely suggested 
 in the LXX reading of i K. 19 : 2 ei aif €t HXetov Kxi eycj lesxpeX 
 and her unscrupulous insistence upon all royal 
 preogatives, real or supposed, (e. g. i Ki. 21:7), 
 is convincingly indicated. In order to take the 
 place she now holds in the narrative, she must have 
 been an exceptional woman, of stronger will than her 
 husband, Ahab, and the instigator of a movement of suffi- 
 cient magnitude to awaken not only the suspicions but also 
 the actual opposition of the better class of prophets. Well- 
 hausen^** so far minifies this activity of Jezebel as to deny 
 any trace of a religious disturbance which divided the peo- 
 ple. He cites (1) the existence of JHVH prophets at 
 Bethel, Jericho and Gilgal; (2) the Jehovah prophets in 
 Ahab's court; (3) the names of Ahab's sons; (4) the Syrian 
 wars, which he supposes would absorb the strength of the 
 people. It seems to the present writer that these are by no 
 means conclusive, and for the following reasons: (1) the 
 fact that all the JHVH prophets were not annihilated, by 
 no means indicates inactivity on the part of Jezebel. Her 
 aim seems to have been to naturalize and nationalize the 
 
 'Prol. Eng. Trans, p 289. 
 
 13 
 
worship of Baal in Israel, and to oppose the- prophets only 
 as they opposed this purpose. But even had she begun 
 an aggressive persecution looking toward total suppression 
 of the JHVH worship, the prophetic schools, which had been 
 long established before Jezebel arrived, could not have been 
 wiped out in a moment. The national loyalty to JHVH and 
 his prophets would have made this difficult, even for a 
 Jezebel; (2) the presence of such a prophet as Micaiah in 
 the court, with the obvious friction which existed between 
 him and Ahab, i K. 2 2^), indicates that there was some re- 
 ligious difficulty in the air. And this testimony is the more 
 convincing because found in the "royal" group of narra- 
 tives, which make no mention of Elijah, and which are fav- 
 orable to the King; (3) the names of Ahab's sons proves 
 nothing either way. He also erected a temple for Baal 
 worship; (4) where all wars are religious wars," it is idle 
 to say that war displaces religious interests. It is nearer 
 the truth to say that the Syrian- wars would have quickened 
 the response of the people to just such an appeal as an. 
 Elijah could make. 
 
 In view of these considerations it seems quite justifia- 
 ble to find in Jezebel, if not the sole cause, at least the) 
 chief cause, and certainly the most conspicuous figure, in 
 the Baal movement. When Wellhausen goes on to say that, 
 "It is a fact that the prophet's hatred of Baal succeed- 
 ed at last in overturning the dynasty of Omri," it is difficult 
 to understand his reluctance to connect Jezebel with the 
 movement to any appreciable degree. On purely textrueal 
 grounds this position is permissible; but the psychology of 
 the situation makes it quite untenable. 
 
 ^e. g. i Ki. 20:13.23.28; 22:5; ii Ki. 3:11; and the Moabite 
 Stone. 
 
 14 
 
II. 
 
 THE SCRIPTURAL MATERIAL 
 
 The Scriptural material is found in the two books of 
 the Kings, i K. 16:29 — ii K. 10:36. This passage, which 
 begins with the accession of Ahab to the throne of Israel 
 ( 1. e. of the Northern Kingdom) and closes with the death 
 of Jehu, includes the narratives of Elijah and Elisha. 
 
 The literary character is uneven, but there may be 
 found here passages second to none in the Hebrew Litera- 
 ture for loftiness of style, descriptive power, and dramatic 
 intensity. Such passages are the famous accounts of Elijah 
 i K. 17-19, 21; the story of Ahab's last battle i K. 22; the 
 healing of Naaman ii K. 5; the siege and deliverance of 
 Samaria ii K. 6:24-7; and the revolt and accession of Jehu 
 ii K. 9, 10. 
 
 Upon careful inspection of the whole passage. It be- 
 comes evident that, instead of forming a continuous and 
 homogenous whole, it consists of a collection or compilation 
 of such narratives as those above mentioned, along with 
 passages of quite different style and extent. The composite 
 character appears as follows: At i K. 16:29 where the 
 passage begins, there is found a concise statement of the 
 accession of Ahab to the throne of Israel; the date is syn- 
 chronized with the year of the King then reigning in 
 Judah; the length of Ahab's reign is given, and a criticism 
 or estimate is offered of the religious character of Ahab 
 and his conduct as King. The style is statistical, and the 
 point of view dominated by concern for the sole worship of 
 JHVH. 
 
 With cp. 17, appears abruptly the first of the splendid 
 Elijah narratives. The style is at once graphic and flowing. 
 
 15 
 
The center of interest is the prophet and his work. 
 With the close of cp. 19, the story of Elijah is apparently- 
 closed, and cp. 20 begins with a new subject, quite as 
 abruptly as cp. 17 began with Elijah. In cp. 20, the King, 
 rather than the prophet is the chief figure. Prophets and 
 "men of God" appear, but Elijah himself is absent. Ahab 
 is presented in a light by no means an unfavorable one, in 
 contrast to his characterization in cp 18, and the con- 
 demnation he here incurs is due to political rather than 
 religious considerations. This cp. is not, however, a return 
 to the style observed in cp. 16:29. Cp. 20 contains nothing 
 of the statistical character, nor any thing to indicate the 
 special view of JHVH worship which characterizes the ear- 
 lier passage. 
 
 With cp. 21, Elijah again appears in the chief place and 
 the whole character of the cp. indicates it to be a continua- 
 tion of cp. 19 or at least to belong to the same original 
 source. This view is confirmed by two further considera- 
 tions: (1) cp. 22, in form, matter, and point of view, is 
 seen at once to connect itself directly with cp. 20, of which 
 it is obviously the continuation; (2) in LXX (Vat. and 
 Luc), cpp. 20, 21 of the Hebrew Text stand in inverted or- 
 der. This not only maintains the integrity of the Elijah 
 group, cpp. 17-19, 21, which then becomes cpp. 17-20, but 
 also that of the Ahab group, cpp. 20, 22, which then be- 
 comes cpp. 21, 22. 
 
 W^th cp. 22:39 the style and interest recur, which 
 characterize cp. 16:29, continuing to the end of the chapter 
 and of the book. 
 
 Passing to ii K., similar conditions are found Such 
 passages as 1:18, 3:1-3, 8:16-19, 23-29, 9:29 and 10:28-36, 
 continue the work of the statistician. Such passages as 
 3:4-27, 6:24-7, 9 — 10:27, continue the narratives which, 
 
 16 
 
while Involving the prophets, yet find their center of gravity 
 In their concern with the King and the Kingdom. And 
 finally, the cpp. in i K. which are devoted to Elijah, find 
 their continuation and counterpart in ii K. 1, 2, 4-6:23 
 and 8:1-15, which recount the exploits of Elisha. 
 
 In addition to the facts adduced above, the compiler 
 himself indicates that his book represents his personal 
 selection of material by his frequent references to records 
 which can supply items he has chosen to omit, e. g. i K. 
 16:27, 22:39. 45, ii K. 1:18, 10:34. 
 
 Modern opinion is unanimous in justifying a partition 
 of these cpp. according to probable sources, but no single 
 scheme has been generally accepted in all its details. The 
 separation indicated above is followed in its essential fea- 
 tures by Driver, Kittel, Wellhausen, Keunen, and others, 
 and represents the view most widely accepted. The best 
 established feature of the scheme is that which deals with 
 the statistical passages sometimes called the "Epitome." In 
 regard to these the opinion is practically unanimous. They 
 are looked upon as a kind of literary framework, con- 
 structed by the author from earlier sources, into which he 
 has fitted the various selections made from other docu- 
 ments. This group of passages, however^ has no practical 
 bearing upon the present study, and may be dismissed with- 
 out further elaboration. 
 
 Subtracting this element from the whole section, there 
 remain, (1) the group in which Elijah and Elisha take the 
 chief places, and which may be conveniently designated, 
 prophetic, and (2) the group in which Ahab and Jehu stand 
 first, and which may for convienence be called, royal. Ac- 
 cording to chapters and verses, the groups stand thus: — 
 
 Prophetic, i K. 17-19; 21; ii K. l:l-17a; 2; 4-6:23; 
 8:1-15. Royal, i K. 20; 22:1-3 8; ii K. 3:4-27; 6:24-7:20; 
 9-10:27; (except 9:29). 
 
 17 
 
The textual questions relating to the integrity and the 
 literary relationships of these passages are interesting and 
 important, but do not have, as such, any special bearing 
 upon the present study. The point of importance here, is 
 that of historical reliability. Are these passages trust- 
 worthy? If so, to what degree? To what extent can their 
 trustworthiness be established? While it is inevitable that, 
 as with other ancient historical documents, these questions 
 can never be answered in a way that shall be absolutely 
 final and positive, yet, strangely enough, there exists for 
 the particular period under review, an original, direct, and 
 unimpeachable witness in their favor, in the so-called Moa- 
 bite Stone. This stone is now in the Louvre in Paris. It 
 v/as found in Dibon by Rev. F. Klein, in 1868, and al- 
 though afterwards broken, so as to seem almost beyond the 
 possibiltiy of restoration, it was eventually put together 
 again, and its inscription deciphered. It dates from the 
 middle of the ninth century, and was erected by Mesha, 
 King of Moab, who reigned as a contemporary of Omri 
 and Ahab. The inscription recounts the hostile relation 
 existing between Moab and Israel, and in its confirmation of 
 the parallel accounts in the Biblical records, supplies a 
 valuable presumption in favor of the general trustworthi- 
 ness of these records. Another direct testimony is found in 
 the fragment of a bronze bowl, which bears an inscription 
 containing the words, "Governor of Qarthadasht, Servant 
 of Hiram, King of the Zidonians. Then he gave to Baal 
 Lebanon, his Lord, as the choicest of the bronze. ..." This 
 fragment, now in the possession of the Bibliotheque Nation- 
 ale of Paris, is recognized as being at least as ancient as 
 the Moabite Stone. Many consider it still earlier.'-. The 
 
 "For good accounts of both the Baal Lebanon Inscrip. and 
 the Moabite Stone, see Ball: Light from the East 
 pp 238 ff. 
 
 18 
 
reference is doubtless to a Lebanon shrine of the Tyrian 
 Baal whose worship Jezebel endeavored to introduce in 
 Israel. By means of these two inscriptions, the historical 
 basis of at least some of the elements in the Biblical narra- 
 tive, is at once assured. 
 
 The writings themselves supply sufficient data for 
 reaching a very fair degree of certainty in an estimate of 
 their probable date. First of all, in spite of the oriental 
 coloring throughout, the direct and vivid treatment of the 
 characters and incidents, makes it impossible to remove 
 the origin of the narratives too far from the time of the 
 events referred to. The recollection of the chief characters 
 is too positive and realistic. Even more convincing is the 
 tone of these narratives as compared with that of the writ- 
 ten prophets whose work dates from 750 B. C. onward. In 
 these earlier narratives the existence of numerous JHVH 
 shrines is accepted without question or rebuke.'-' All oppo- 
 sition to the calf-worship instituted by Jeroboam 1 is lack- 
 ing.'* On the other hand, it can hardly be claimed that the 
 narratives as they stand, come from the hands of eye wit- 
 nesses, although the impression of the events is still strong. 
 For these reasons the narrative may be referred to the 
 half century following the circumtances they narrate, say 
 about the year 800 B. C. 
 
 It is further to be borne in mind that these narratives 
 are not isolated and unique fragments of the literary re- 
 mains of the Hebrew people. It appears to the writer that 
 sufficient importance has not been attached to the fact that 
 these stories synchronize closely with the great J and E. 
 documents of the Hexateuch. These, like the Elijah and 
 
 1 Ki. 17:30; 19:14. 
 
 ^Kuenen: Onderzoek, Germ, trans, pp 77f; Wellh: Prol. 
 (4) p 297; Cornill: Introd. (5) Eng. trans, p 214. 
 
 19 
 
iiilisha narratives, indicate a prophetic origin;'" and while 
 it might be possible on the basis of these few chapters from 
 Kings to construct an unfavorable picture of the prophets 
 as a class, one is met on the other hand by the great pre- 
 ponderance of opinion that it is just to this period, i. e., 
 when the Elijah and Elisha narratives were taking shape, 
 that the formation of the literary foundations of the O. T. 
 must be assigned.*" Their assignment, not only to this 
 period, but also to prophetic origins, throws an important 
 light upon the character of the prophetic classes at the 
 time. While these doubtess included many who were 
 slightly, if at all, removed from illiterate religious ecstatic 
 devotees, they must have included as well, a more serious 
 element, deeply concerned in the course of the national life, 
 w.hose literary activity kept pace with that of the official 
 recorders and royal annalists. It is an interesting coinci- 
 dence that the E. document, which is assigned to the North- 
 ern Kingdom," should be characterized by the prominence 
 given to the function of the prophet, and also to the use of 
 "Horeb" instead of "Sinai" for the name of the "Mount 
 of God."*« 
 
 It may be concluded then, on the basis of the reasons 
 here reviewed, that the Elijah and Elisha narratives were 
 reduced to approximately their present form, within the 
 second, or at most third, generation following the events 
 themselves, and that their historical character is both indi- 
 cated and confirmed by the testimony of records from 
 without, as well as from within, the nation. 
 
 'Carpenter and Harford-Battersby: The Hexateuch, vol 1 
 
 pp 108-119. 
 ^''Driver: Introd. (6) p 118. 
 "Dillmann. Kittel, Riehm, Wellhausen, Kuenen. cf Driver: 
 
 Introd. p 122. 
 "i Ki. 19:8. 
 
 20 
 
This does not mean that the historical elementb in 
 the narratives can be thought of as strands of a rope, to 
 be separated by a process of untwisting. They are rather 
 roots from which these stories have sprung, and are to be 
 recognized in the persons, places and principles, which be- 
 came so conspicuous that their recollection was adorned 
 with various details of the striking and marvelous. 
 
 The most conspicuous recent attempt to discover the 
 historical elements in the Elijah narratives is that of Gun- 
 kel.^* No one has seen more clearly, nor appreciated more 
 fully, the legendary character, and the legendary constitu- 
 ents, of many Biblical passages. In his treatment of Elijah, 
 he exhibits both the strength and the weakness of his 
 method. His retelling of the story and his indication of its 
 formal factors, are both carried out with a master hand. 
 But when, taking up the points in detail, he attempts to 
 estimate their historical value, or to show their identity 
 with legends current elsewhere, his interest in these latter 
 phnomena leads him into contradictions. For instance, he 
 discards entirely the scene on Carmel as an event, "Demnach 
 haben wir die Karmelgeschichte zu verstehen nicht als eine 
 wirkiiche Begebenheit aus dem Leben des Elias, aber als 
 den Traum seines gliihenden Herzens oder als den seiner 
 Anhanger.^*" Yet the latter scene on Horeb, which he ac- 
 cepts, is left quite unoccasioned, in the absence of any other 
 indication of Elijah's zeal for JHVH. It is nowhere indicated 
 that the decision at Carmel immediately swept like a wave 
 over the whole nation, nor that all Baal's altars were im- 
 mediately demolished. Gunkel would make so much of the 
 Biblical statement of the event at Carmel, that an irreconcil- 
 ble contradiction shall appear between the two accounts of 
 
 "Elias, Jahve und Baal. 1906. 
 =^op. cit. p 39. 
 
 21 
 
Carmel and Horeb. Such a deduction is neither necessitat- 
 ed nor justified by the Scriptural material. 
 
 Another instance of inconsistency is seen in a com- 
 parison between his description of JHVH on p 24. "Das 
 Charakteristische idieser Theophanie (on Horeb) 
 aber ist, dass die Gottheit hier nicht in den entsetzllchen 
 Naturerscheinungen selber wohnt, sondern in dem leisen 
 Sauseln, das darauf folgt;" and that on p 59: "Der Jahve 
 des Elias ist der Gott der Wiistenzeit, der alten, rauhen Zelt, 
 der furchtbare Gott, der sich in den schreckllchsten Natur- 
 erscheinungen ofCenbart." Further allusions to Gunkel's 
 work will be made in the section here following. 
 
 22 
 
III. 
 
 ELIJAH 
 
 a. Survey of the Scripture material: i K. 17-19, 21; ii 
 K. 1, 2. 
 
 Chapter 17. — The cp. opens with the announcement of 
 a famine. Famines are frequent in the East today, and 
 they were then. In common with other phenomena of 
 nature they were given a religious interpretation, and usu- 
 aiiy looked upon as a divine discipline.^^ As such they were 
 looked upon as being within the jurisdiction, or at least the 
 prevision, of the prophets."' The famine referred to in this 
 chapter may have been the one mentioned by Josephus," 
 who quotes Menander of Ephesus as his authority. The 
 data are not sufficient to decide this. The important his- 
 torical basis of the cp. is to be found in the conception of 
 the character of Elijah. He is a prophet with divine power 
 and authority. The impression he makes everywhere is 
 that God is with him, and he is the servant of JHVH. 
 
 His stay by the brook indicates his out door life. The 
 "sons of the prophets" from whose circle these narratives 
 arose, knew Elijah as one who would have nothing to do 
 with city life. Throughout the whole picture of Elijah, 
 there is conspicuous the free wild atmosphere seen in many 
 of the ancient /'men of God.''^"* The brook Cherith must 
 have been known as one of his retreats. Connecting natur- 
 ally with this recollection of one of his places of shelter, is 
 ^cf. Am 4:6. ' ■' .'..^. 
 
 *'cf. Amos and John the Baptist. 
 
 23 
 
the idea, that he is miraculously supplied with food. This 
 divine provision for the prophet's sustenance must be re- 
 garded as having its chief value in its indication 
 that Elijah was looked upon as being under the 
 special care v/hich JHVH bestows upon his servants. Such 
 conceptions belong not alone to the remoter periods of Bibli- 
 cal story. The early Christian Church believed that Christ 
 could change stones into bread, were he so inclined.^ In 
 the case of Elijah, the incongruity of the story appears, to 
 a Western mind in the circumstance that the divine provi- 
 sion was limited by the water supply, and was unable to 
 sustain Elijah after the brook dried up. Gunkel,^'' charac- 
 teristically, finds in this incident a literary device for deep- 
 ening the impression of the famine's severity: "Wie muss 
 es jetzt — ^^so sollen wir denken — im iibrigen Lande aussehen, 
 wenn selbst in den tiefen Flusslaufen kein Wasser mehr 
 rinnt." Yet, referring to the meeting of Elijah and Oba- 
 diah,^^ Grunkel makes the narrator use the severity of the 
 famine to account for the separation between Ahab and 
 Obadiah.^* Such manipulation of motives reflects Gunkel's 
 ingenuity rather than the art of the prophetic narrator. The 
 scene by the brook is based in the greatness of Elijah's 
 personality, and simply reflects the confidence that he was 
 constantly under divine protection. It is no more conceived 
 with the intention of emphasizing the famine than it is 
 intended to extol the intelligent ol)edience of the ravens. 
 
 The journey to Sidon and the sojourn there supply, in 
 harmony with the preceding, further aspects of the impres- 
 sion made by Elijah upon his generation. The journey it- 
 self reflects one of Elijah's characteristic traits. He was 
 
 ^'IVIt. 4:3f.~~ 
 =*op. cit. p 10. 
 "I Ki. 18:7. 
 *op cit. p 14. 
 
 24 
 
one who not only avoided the artificial life of city and court, 
 but was one whose journeys where as frequent as they were 
 unexpected. He could not and would not stay long in one 
 place. The abruptness of his appearances and disappear- 
 ances, as expressed in the narratives, has long been noticed, 
 but without any very satisfactory explanation. They are 
 ascribed either to textual accidents, or to legendary por- 
 trayal. Psychologically they are quite intelligible. Numer- 
 ous indications show Elijah to have been one of those In- 
 tense, nervous and erratic characters, that must be con- 
 stantly active, that are never content to remain anywhere. 
 The tradition has finely caught and faithfully preserved this 
 temper of the man, and the abrupt way in which he appears 
 and disappears simply reproduces the contemporary impres- 
 sion. 
 
 The two wonders of prolonging the supply of meal 
 and oil, and the restoration to life of the widow's son, 
 must be referred to the popular estimate of Elijah as one 
 endowed with miraculous powers. On the one hand, they 
 cannot be considered characteristic of Elijah in any special 
 sense, for they are closely paralleled, not only in the case 
 of Elisha, but in such later incidents as the feeding of the 
 five thousand,'"** the restoring of the widow of Nain's son,"" 
 the recalling to life of Dorcas by Peter,"'^ and other similar 
 incidents. On the other hand, they are undoubted evidences 
 that Elijah was known as a mighty prophet in his own day, 
 and as one who performed the various wonders expected and 
 believed of prophets, among a people who found no logical 
 nor scientific difficulties in the way of such beliefs. 
 
 ^Lu. 9:10-17. 
 ^Lu. 7:11-17. 
 ^^Ac. 9:36 fC. 
 
 25 
 
Chapter 18. — Elijah's connection with the famine is 
 here continued and completed; his agency in the matter 
 being maintained to the last. For although in v. 1. JHVH 
 says he will send rain, vv 42 ff indicate that in spite of this, 
 the rain would not have come had not Elijah prayed for 
 it,*- Historically considered this coming of the rain in re- 
 sponse to Elijah's prayer must be valued and understood 
 in the way indicated in the survey of cp. 17. 
 
 Enclosed within the references to the rain, with which 
 the cp. begins and ends, is the famous scene on Carmel. 
 Can it be considered in any sense historical? This question 
 has received the most diverse answers; from the acceptance 
 of every detail of the narrative as an actual fact, to Gun- 
 kel's dismissal of the whole as "ein gliihender Traum." The 
 truth here, as in so many cases lies between these extremes. 
 Ahab and Elijah are both historical figures. That they came 
 into religious conflict is also beyond question. It is his- 
 torically certain that one of the most conspicuous aspects of 
 the religious life of Israel is the continuing defection of a 
 considerable portion of the people from the worship of 
 JHVH to that of Baal. Although Ahab's attitude toward the 
 JHVH worship may not have been that of enmity, his un- 
 doubted support of Baal worship is that by which he was 
 most vividly remembered in after years,^ and this attitude 
 toward Baal harmonized well with the disfavor in which 
 he held Micaiah,** a true prophet of JHVH. There is no in- 
 
 '^This notion finds an interesting expansion in the reference 
 to Elijah in Jas. 5:17f, where it is said not only that 
 Elijah prayed for rain at the end of the famine, but 
 also that the famine came in response to a similar 
 prayer of power at the outset. 
 
 '^i Ki. 16:30-33; 21:25f. 
 
 ^"i Ki. 22:7-9. 
 
 26 
 
dication that up to this time the issue had been raised be- 
 tween JHVH and Baal. The conflict, so abundantly wit- 
 nessed in later records, must have had a beginning. This is 
 the only period between the time of Jeroboam. i and the 
 time of the prophet Hosea, where there are any indications 
 of the emergence of such an issue. The simple fact that the 
 issue was defined during Ahab's reign, would, in view of 
 his support of the Baal worship, be quite sufficient reason to 
 connect him positively with an anti-JHVH party. The loca- 
 tion of the incident on Carmel also adds probability to its 
 historicity. That the topography of the place justifies the 
 statem.ents of the narrative has long been recognized. The 
 mention of the altar itself is of equal importance. These 
 shrines and sacred sites are almost invariably connected 
 with some great name or incident. This shrine on Carmel 
 was rehabilitated and rededicated by Elijah. The time 
 elapsing between the incident itself and the written form 
 of the tradition is too short to permit its invention as pure 
 fiction. Something must have occurred to connect a well- 
 known shrine with an equally well-known character. Objec- 
 tion has been made to the possibility of Elijah, or any other 
 man, singlehanded, putting to death 450 men in an hour 
 or two. Gunkel calls this "ein wenig zu heldenhaft."^^ 
 This is inadequate as a basis for denying the whole inci- 
 dent. The putting to death of profaners of a shrine is a 
 matter of common knowledge, and of common consent in 
 the East, even to the present time. Such a performance, it 
 is true, could hardly be accredited to an individual; but it 
 agrees exactly with the other characteristics of Elijah, to 
 find him one who could well excite, and then lead, just such 
 an onslaught as this. The falling of fire from heaven (viz: 
 lightning) at the psychological moment, is of course, neither 
 impossible nor incredible, but the narrative understands it to 
 
 •^op. cit. p 36. 
 
 27 
 
be a direct response to Elijah's prayer, and, as such, !t 
 must be viewed in the light of the wonders already referred 
 to. To uncritical minds, quite ignorant of the discoveriea 
 of modern science, these things are quite within the abili- 
 ties of "men of God." Even in N. T. times, the idea ap- 
 pears, when we are told that James and John said, "Lord, 
 wilt thou that we bid fire to come down from heaven and 
 consume them?'"^ V. 41, with its obscure direction to 
 Ahab"go up, eat and drink," appears to reflect the fact that 
 Ahab had planned a feast to be held on Carmel in company 
 with the Baal prophets. Elijah siezes this opportunity to 
 bring matters to a focus, and the incident follows which 
 supplies the facts out of which the present narrative arose. 
 In view of what has been said, it is to be maintained 
 that this cp. reflects an actual event, viz., a collision be- 
 tween adherents of Baal and adherents of JHVH headed by 
 Elijah. It occurred on Mt. Carmel, at a JHVH shrine. It 
 resulted in a rout of the Baalites. It was connected in time 
 with a storm that closed the period of famine. It was an 
 event of sufficient magnitude to raise a definite issue be- 
 tween the worship of JHVH or of Baal ; and also positively to 
 determine the direction to be taken by succeeding prophets 
 of JHVH. All this does not make it necessary to suppose 
 that a great tide of religious conflict swept over the land. 
 Such an event as this might occur without involving a move- 
 ment of national dimensions. The case does not demand a 
 choice between the Syrian wars, or "a popular religious 
 commotion which divided the people." (Wellh, quoted 
 above.) Neither is the account too far from fact when It 
 places the prophet, rather than the king, in the center of the 
 picture." Even in this very chapter Elijah's attitude toward 
 
 *'Lu 9:54 (some ancient authorities add, "even as Elijah 
 
 did") 
 *'cf Wellh, Prol. p 290. 
 
 28 
 
the king shows full recognition of Ahab's royal position. 
 These naratives originated not only among prophets loyal 
 to a great prophet but they were told by Orientals for Ori- 
 entals, and they are to be understood in the light of all the 
 modifications necessitated by the application of Western 
 standards of accuracy. Here again, the case calls for an in- 
 terpretation which recognizes the psychological factors. 
 
 Chapter 19 when correctly understood, confirms the 
 view above indicated for cp. 18. Gunkel, disposing as he 
 does of cp. 18, naturally must assign to a later hand 
 the two verses introducing cp. 19.^ But Jezebel's retaliation 
 is the most natural consequence of the event which under- 
 lies cp. 18. Chapter 19, like the two preceding chapters. Is 
 an oriental, prophetic, portrayal of an oriental prophet. 
 Underlying it, as its historical foundation, is the explanation 
 current among the "sons of the prophets," for the fact that 
 Elijah's work on Mt. Carmel led to no abiding results among 
 the people. It follows immediatelly and properly, the pre- 
 ceding chapter, and its psychological accuracy confirms its 
 historical value. After the intense excitement of Carmel, 
 which, at the time, carried everything before it, comes the 
 reaction of exhaustion and despondency. Jezebel's anger 
 is aroused and Elijah is unable now to withstand it.. For 
 the moment his courage is gone. He flees southward to 
 Beersheba "which belongeth to Judah."^ As he took refuge 
 by the brook Cherith in the time of the famine, so he takes 
 refuge in the wilderness in the time of personal danger. 
 
 »*op. cit. pp 20 f. 
 
 *"This phrase plainly indicates the northern origin of the 
 narrative; and also has a bearing on the date. A Ju- 
 dean, familiar with his own territory, would have felt 
 no need for such an addition. A writer living later than 
 the fall of the Northern kingdom (722 B. C.) would 
 need to express himself differently. 
 
 29 
 
Here too in Judean territory, he is beyond Jezebel's juris- 
 diction. It is always in this free, wild life that he feels at 
 home and safe. Leaving his servant here at Beersheba, he 
 goes a day's journey into the wilderness. This rather su- 
 perfluous detail of leaving his servant at Beersheba served 
 not only to emphasize Elijah's desire for solitude, but also 
 to indicate that the experiences following were unwitnessed 
 and unshared by any but Elijah himself. Indeed, the scenes 
 which follow can hardly be thought of as reflecting any 
 objective reality. They belong to the same class as Isaiah's 
 vision,"" the temptation of Jesus," Paul's vision of the third 
 heaven" and o'ther similar experiences. These must be con- 
 sidered actual experiences, but subjective ones. Psychologi- 
 cally they are intelligible and credible; and when their Ori- 
 ental origin is considered, their realistic style neither mis- 
 leads nor offends. In the present instance, Elijah himseif may 
 well have told of just some such vision, supplying quite a suf- 
 ficient foundation for the narrative as it now appears. "The 
 sons of the prophets," the original transcribers of the ac- 
 count, have used it to supply a motive of Elijah's flight 
 which might offset the one of simple fear, and give an as- 
 pect to his journey southwards more in keeping with their 
 conception of their great leader. To them, he was too great 
 for comparison with any but Moses; and the similarity be- 
 tween this scene on Iloreb, and that ascribed to Moses in the 
 same place, is obvious. This similarity is the more natural 
 in view of the wide spread contemporary interest in the past 
 history of the nation. The evidence and fruit of this interest 
 are to be found in the great prophetic historical documents 
 known as J. and E. This has been referred to above; but 
 as far as the writer has been able to discover, the important 
 
 *"Isa. 6. 
 "Mt. 4:1-11. 
 "iiCor 12:1-4. 
 
 . 30 
 
Illumination which it throws upon some of the facts of the 
 Elijah narratives, has not been observed, or at least, not util- 
 ized.- In the prophetic circles, from which all these docu- 
 ment emanate, it was inevitable that such comparisons 
 should be made. Some of the details may here be noted. 
 The Mosaic event occurred on Horeb; Elijah's vision is re- 
 ferred to the same locality. As a matter of fact the tradition- 
 al mountain is about forty miles from Beersheba, rather 
 than forty days' journey as indicated in the present ac- 
 count. KitteP' finds here an indication of the ignorance of 
 a north Israelite regarding the geography of the southern 
 territory. Gunkel,'* while acknowledging the possibility of 
 an exaggeration in the number, finds here an indication that 
 Sinai (Horeb) lay far south of the present traditional site. 
 Neither of these conjectures, which fairly represent current 
 opinion, meet the case. The reference to the forty days be- 
 longs to that part of the account which is based upon the 
 tradition concerning Moses, and is not to be considered a 
 literal designation of distance. It belongs with the feature 
 of being forty days without food.'' As to the vision itself, it 
 is not to be denied that its form may have been occasioned 
 for Elijah himself, by his own consciousness of the Mosaic 
 narrative, but its psychological appropriateness is equally 
 indisputable. The wind, the earthquake, the fire, are all 
 prepared for in the recollection of the recent occurrence on 
 Carmel; and the sense of defeat supplies an ideal motive for 
 the feeling that these violent manifestations did not rep- 
 resent God himself, that God was not in them, that at best 
 they were only his servants (cf Psa. 104*; 148'). The climax 
 of the vision comes in Elijah's consciousness that he is in 
 
 *p 152. 
 
 'op. cit. p 23. 
 
 'cf. Ex. 34:28, and Mat. 4:2. 
 
 31 
 
the presence of JHVH; that in spite of the miscarriage of his 
 efforts, JHVH is still the God before whom he stands."** 
 The divine directions which are represented as being given 
 to Elijah at this time, for his future guidance, must be 
 considered as a literary expansion supplied by a later reflec- 
 tion upon subsequent events. What actually occurred after- 
 ward is looked upon as having been verbally commanded by 
 JHVH himself, in personal communication with his prophet. 
 The historical bearings of these commands will be referred 
 to below. 
 
 Chapter 21 narrates Elijah's rebuke of Ahab, for the 
 murder of Naboth. Whether this account comes from the 
 same" hand, or different hands,*^ as the preceding chapters 
 does not weaken its historicity, which there is no good rea- 
 son for doubting. As Samuel rebuked Saul, as Nathan re- 
 buked David, as Amos rebuked Jereboam ii, as Isaiah re- 
 buked Ahaz, as John the Baptist rebuked Herod, so Elijah 
 rebukes Ahab. This kind of thing is so characteristic of the 
 prophets, and so abundantly confirmed in one case after 
 another that the present instance may be accepted as a re- 
 liable contribution to the historical portrait of Elijah. The 
 
 '"This is not the place for the discussion of religious psy- 
 chology, but reference may be made in connection with 
 this vision of Elijah's to two passages in Prof.James'Va- 
 rieties of Religious Experience. The quotation from Lu- 
 ther (p 13 7) is an interesting modern parallel to 
 Elijah's discouragement; and the passage on p 66, from 
 an unnamed correspondent, is equally interesting as a 
 parrallel to the theophany. Turning to the O. T. narra- 
 tives from this modern work, it needs but little allow- 
 ance for oriental rhetoric to establish the actuality of 
 such experiences. Many an element which Gunkel dis- 
 misses as a "Marchenmotiv," would if more carefully 
 considered, be found to rest upon an adequate psy- 
 chological basis 
 
 "Wellh, Driver, Kittel. 
 
 "Kunen. 
 
 32 
 
occasion would be doubly repugnant to a prophet of JHVH, 
 not only because of the murder itself, but also because of 
 its Tiolation of the right of inheritance. 
 
 The remaining references to Elijah (iiK. 1 and 2) are 
 so freely expanded by the narrrator that they yield but lit- 
 tle of historical value. In the first cp. the description of 
 Elijah's appearance (v. 8,) may be accepted without ques- 
 tion, both on account of its fntrinsic probability, and also 
 because it agrees so perfectly with the other aspects of his 
 character. The account of the ascent in a chariot of fire 
 (cp. 2,) yields but one fact, viz; that his burial place is un- 
 known. The "horses and chariots of fire" connect them- 
 selves rather with Elisha than Elijah, and will be referred 
 to below. 
 
 On the basis of these historical materials, it becomes pos- 
 sible to form a fair estimate of Elijah's personality, aims 
 and achievements, 
 b. Personality: 
 
 Elijah comes from the district of Gilead, east of 
 the Jordon, and is called the "Tishbite" from the 
 name of his native town.^* He is an Israelite, a servant of 
 JHVH ("JHVH* * * before whom I stand" i K. 17,^) and 
 identified in his own thought with the faithful servants of 
 JHVH who had lived before him (iK 19") His appearance is 
 described with classical directness in ii K V "a. man wearing 
 a hairy mantel and a girdle of leather." This is his char- 
 acteristic garb, and its primitive character agrees with the 
 elemental force of Elijah's moods and methods. His place 
 is not in king's palaces, as a wearer of soft raiment; he be- 
 
 •^li , as the word stands in the present text means, 
 "of the dwellers in." The LXX reads here. €k Oiapcjv 
 as if the word stood for the name of Elijah's home. 
 This implies the reading, 'i«5i8, n^Q is 
 
 then the name of a town in Gilead. This reading is to 
 be preferred. 
 
 33 
 
longs out of doors. His resort is to the brook Cherith; he 
 retreats to the wilderness, and returns by way of the wil- 
 derness. He has great physical vigor. In iK 18" it is said 
 that, "the hand of JHVH was on Elijah; and he girded up 
 his loins and ran before Ahab to the entrance of Jezreel'"** 
 The text sees in this performance an instance of divine In- 
 vigoration, but back of the text lies the tradition that Elijah 
 was a man physically strong, enduring and vigorous. His 
 physical freedom of life permitted a fitfulness of movement 
 which must have seemed most erratic. His appearances are 
 as abrupt, as his absences are baffling." They are ascribed, 
 however, to the direct action of the spirit of JHVH. Obadiah 
 (i K. 18:7-15) is sent by Elijah to announce his appearance 
 to Ahab. Obadiah fears to go because by the time he re- 
 turns, Elijah may have determined to go somewhere else; 
 or, as he states it, "the Spirit of JHVH will carry thee whith- 
 er I know not." In other words while Elijah is intense and 
 irrestible in action, he is also fitful and moody; and when 
 not engaged in some absorbing project, he cannot always 
 be depended upon. This too is psychologically faithful to 
 the temper of such a character as Elijah. He responds 
 quickly to a fresh impulse. On the other hand, when he 
 gives his word, (v. 15) it may be accepted without question. 
 His movements are so uncertain and so extended that he 
 may be expected to appear anywhere within a circuit includ- 
 ing Sidon, Beersheba, Horeb, and Damascus.^- The motives 
 which according to the narratives, impel him to visit these 
 places, betray the desire to account for his frequent and er- 
 ratic journeys. The fact is, that his was a nature which need- 
 
 'a distance of 12 or 15 miles. (Thompson: Land and Book, 
 
 vol. 2 p. 232.) 
 'i Ki. 18:7-10; 21:17f; ii Ki. 1:3, 7 f. 
 'i Ki. 17: 8; 19:3, 8, 15. 
 
 34 
 
ed constant movement and change; and this characteristic, 
 the tradition has faithfully preserved. The manner in which 
 these narratives have been incorporated in the present 
 book of Kings, reflects well the precipitancy of the prophet. 
 But the accounts themselves contain plain evidence that 
 this impression is due not only to the literary treatment, 
 but equally to the original facts. His most conspicuous and 
 best remembered trait is his intense energy, his zeal. The 
 scene on Carmel reflects a man whose consuming intensity 
 carried everything before him. When praying for rain "he 
 bowed himself down upon the earth, and put his face be- 
 tween his knees,"^ in the utter abandon of his appeal. This 
 trait is also correctly reflected in his own words on Mt. Hor- 
 eb, "I have been very jealous for JHVH.'"* He surrenders 
 himself utterly and without reservation to the matter in 
 hand; and carries it through with a furious urgency that 
 nothing can withstand. Enforced by his physical vigor, his 
 zeal is an irresistible torrent. Looking back upon his 
 career after the lapse of many centuries, the modern Bible 
 student has found Elijah's chief significance in his cham- ^ 
 pionship of JHVH as sole God in Israel. But the impression 
 made upon his contemporaries was due, neither to this pro- 
 paganda as such, nor to any success which accompanied its 
 propagation. It was due primarily to a personality so com- 
 pelling that, in its presence, opposition was futile. It is a 
 trait found in great leaders; an inate energy which com- 
 mands, as naturally as lesser spirits obey. In the case of 
 Elijah this element overpowered not only those about him, 
 but the man himself. It was so isolated by the absence of 
 ability to organize and to establish, so wild in its fury yet 
 Bo weak in its ability to utilize results, that whatever suc- 
 
 "i Ki. 18: 42. 
 "i Ki. 19: 14. 
 
 35 
 
cess followed the movement against Baal, which Elijah so 
 dramatically inaugurated, must be credited rather to his 
 calmer and better poised disciple, Elisha. It is this trait 
 in Elijah which shows its reverse side in the utter exhaus- 
 tion, physical and spiritual, which follows the scene on 
 Carmel. That a prophet so highly esteemed by his contem- 
 poraries, should be pictured by them in such a state of col- 
 lapse and depression,"'^ indicates, in the naive way in which 
 the prophet is set in this unfavorable light, a psychological 
 accuracy which confirms the historicity of the narative. 
 These exaltations and despondencies are characteristic of 
 this temperment; and the account is so close to observable 
 facts, that its trustworthiness is strongly sustained. 
 
 «i Ki. 19: 1-14 
 
 36 
 
c. Aim and Method: 
 
 In spite of the modern association of Elijah with the 
 special championship of JHVH and an aggressive op-* 
 position to Baal worship; and in spite of the propriety of 
 finding in this phase of Elijah's activity its most significant 
 aspect; it is still incorrect to s-ay that ^Elijah had any sin- 
 gle, definite aim which directed his public career. At least such 
 an aim can only be stated in the broadest possible terms. 
 He was a prophet of JHVH and a zealous one. As 
 such he was prompt to act in JHVH's behalf, as he 
 understood it, whenever occasion arose. There is no indi- 
 cation that he premeditated, or definitely planned, a cam- 
 paign against Baal worship in any such thorough going 
 fashion as to justify the idea of its being his life work. 
 His designation of himself as a prophet,^" and as one who 
 "stands before JHVH."" indicates his thought of him- 
 self as a servaqjt and messenger of JHVH 
 without the suggestion, nor the necessity, of 
 identifying himself with any special direc- 
 tion this service might take. "The word of JHVH' 
 comes to him,"'^ and he obeys it implicitly and directly his 
 own thought of his work is not that he is following a plan 
 carefully prepared, nor that he is directed toward some 
 special end, but simply that he is following out .fHVH's 
 commands.^** With reference to any lini l^iliali may be 
 
 ^''i Ki. 18: 22; 19: 10. 
 
 ='i Ki. 17: 1, 15. 
 
 ■^i Ki. 17: 2, 8, 16, 24; 18: 1; 19: 9; 21: 17 et al. 
 
 ^'i Ki. 18: 36. 
 
 37 
 
said to have had, it is not possible to say more than that 
 he had the general one of doing whatever "the word of J. 
 JHVH" directed. The narratives give no indication that 
 the scene on Carmel was the result of planning or fore- 
 thought, nor the culmination of a settled policy. The same 
 is true of his rebuke of Ahab in the matter of Naboth. 
 This latter could not have been anticipated for obvious 
 reasons. As a prophet of JHVH the God of the nation, 
 Elijah is intensely concerned with the people's faithfulness 
 to their God. But Elijah is not a "champion of JHVH" 
 in the sense of finding his sole mission in a propaganda for 
 the exclusive worship of JHVH. Important as this 
 latter movement was, it cannot be asserted on the basis of 
 the narratives now extant, that Elijah himself intention- 
 ally planned it, nor systematically carried It out. This 
 latter work remained for his successor. 
 
 Much stress has been laid upon Elijah's significance 
 as a preacher of righteousness and justice, especially as 
 portrayed in his rebuke of Ahab for the murder of Na- 
 both.*^ But the denunciation of royal misdeeds, and the 
 demand for justice, can by no means be looked upon as 
 peculiar to, nor especially characteristic of Elijah. It is 
 to the honor of the prophetic class that, at least from the 
 days of Samuel, there did not lack prophets who rebuked 
 kings a*s fearlessly as Elijah rebuked Ahab, and who were 
 actuated by principles equally ethical. Elijah's character- 
 istic significance is not to be found in this connection. 
 
 d. Results: 
 
 The primary result of Elijah's career was the indel- 
 ible impression upon his contemporaries of a commanding 
 and magnetic personality. This impression pervades all 
 
 "e. g. Gunkel, op. cit. page 48. 
 
 38 
 
surviving references to this great prophet. His zeal for 
 JHVH would have counted for little had it not been 
 as well the zeal of a compelling personality, actuated by 
 an exalted religious devotion. To his contemporaries, the 
 interests which engaged his activity fell below the level of 
 the interest excited by the man himself. This latter was 
 enough to signalize any movement with which he might 
 connect himself. The result was that the opposition to Baal 
 worship which he initiated thus received an impetus which 
 raised it into immediate prominence, a prominence out of 
 all proportion to the strength or extent of popular con- 
 viction on the subject. During the life time of Elijah the 
 popular response was feeble, and the extent of the move- 
 ment but limited. He never brought it into any effective 
 correlation with the national life. And had it not been 
 immediately taken up by his more capable, though less 
 sensational successor, Elisha, its development must have 
 been indefinitely delayed. 
 
 The second, and accompanying result of Elijah's activ- 
 ity, was the introduction into prophecy of a practically new 
 element. Faithfulness to JHVH had, of course, long 
 existed in the itation. But it had become so seriously 
 threatened, since the great revolt from Judah, that the 
 time was ripe to raise the issue between the worship of 
 JHVH and that of the Baalim. The energy with 
 which Jezebel tried to establish the worship of the Tyrian 
 Baal, furnished just such an occasion as Elijah was con- 
 spicuously qualified to meet. The resulting outbreak 
 brought into such priominence the question of JHVH 
 against the Baalim, that it was accepted by the later pro- 
 phets not only as a legitimate, but as one of the most im- 
 portant, elements of their preaching. After this time the 
 prophetic writings all reflect the issue thus raised by Elijah, 
 
 39 
 
 
and to him must be ascribed the statement of the question 
 in this form. It is true that with Elijah only the beginning 
 of this movement appears; and that, by the later pro- 
 phets the idea was enriched with more exalted spiritual 
 and ethical content. But the proportions to which it de- 
 veloped in later history only emphasize the significance of 
 Elijah's work in originating it. 
 
 The distinction however must be maintained between 
 the advance step which Elijah made for the prophetic point 
 of view, and the development of a movement which could 
 be called national or even popular in its scope. This latter, 
 Elijah did not accomplish. 
 
 e. Later tradition: 
 
 The subsequent allusions to Elijah in the Scriptures 
 confirm the view above indicated. He is looked upon as 
 the classical instance of zeal for JHVH, while the 
 character of the work ascribed to him has little if any 
 relation to his activity as this is presented in the books of 
 Kings. In Mal.3:23, he is to appear as a forerunner of the day 
 of JHVH; but his work here is a matter of a social reform, 
 a work by no means characteristic of the historical Elijah, 
 and one in which such prophets as Hosea, Amos, Isaiah 
 and others, were far more conspicuous. It is rather his 
 famous personal zeal for JHVH which designates him 
 as the one who alone could successfully stir the people to 
 repentance. In the New Testament writings where John 
 the Baptist is compared with Elijah, the similarity is to be 
 found rather in the statement in Mai., where Elijah pre- 
 pares for the "day of JHVH," than with the narra- 
 tives in Kings. The same reference and the same signifi- 
 cance are to be found in the accounts of his appearance 
 with Moses at the scene on the Mount of Transfiguration. 
 
 40 
 
What Elijah bequeathed to posterity was primarily, indeed 
 solely, the impression of a great personality, intense, mas- 
 terful and heroic. Only secondarily, and with respect to 
 but a single thesis, did he make a direct and original con- 
 tribution to the religious history of the nation. 
 
 41 
 
IV. 
 EMSHA. 
 
 a. Survey of the Scripture material. 
 
 Far more than in the case of the Elijah narratives, 
 the passages which deal with Elisha are confused, frag- 
 mentary, and overloaded with details merely marvelous. 
 But here, as there, a firm basis of historical fact may be 
 found, upon which it is possible to reconstruct the general 
 course of events with sufficient fulness to justify an esti- 
 mate, both of the events themselves, and also of Elisha's 
 relation to, and influence upon, them. 
 
 The first reference to Elisha is in iK. 19: 15-21, where 
 it is told that in obedience to JHVH's command, Elijah 
 anoints Elisha to be his successor. Two important facts 
 are here indicated, which are confirmed by the subse- 
 quent narratives, and which may be accepted with con- 
 fidence, viz: 1. Elisha is the associate and successor of 
 Elijah. However they may differ in externals, they are 
 united in their prophetic calling. This fact has been pre- 
 served not only because it is true as a matter of fact, but 
 because it was so recognized by contemporaries. This ac- 
 counts for its preservation in the tradition. Elijah him- 
 self was a character of such imposing proportions himself, 
 and was held in such high esteem by his fellow prophets, 
 that it cannot be supposed that another could be thought 
 of as sharing his place and work, unless this were made 
 necessary by actual fact. 2. Elisha shows, in mode of 
 
 42 
 
life, the most striking contrast to Elijah. Ellsha Is at 
 home in the proprieties of civilization. He knows the 
 meaning of a homestead, and of family ties. He is neither 
 a wanderer nor a man of the wilderness. Yet, with all 
 their differences, he follows with equal sincerity the pro- 
 phetic call. 
 
 These two aspects of Elisha's career find such abund- 
 ant confirmation in the narratives in which he appears, 
 that they must be accepted as the well established his- 
 torical basis upon which the figure of Elisha stands. How- 
 ever extravagant some of the marvels may seem, which are 
 attributed to him, however widely he may differ in manner 
 and method from Elijah, these two elements persist 
 througout the records, and give indispensable aid toward 
 an understanding of his life and work. 
 
 With the exception of the above passage, all the ma- 
 terial referring to Elisha is found in the second book of 
 Kings. The separation of this material into three groups 
 has already been made"' As the passages stand at present, 
 it is evident that they are quite lacking in logical or his- 
 torical order. E. g., according to 5:27, Gehazi is smitten 
 with leprosy, in consequence of which he would no longer 
 be allowed to associate with those who were sound. But 
 in 8:4-6, Gehazi appears without a suggestion of such a 
 disease, and in good standing at court. Again, according 
 to 6: 23, "the bands of Syria came no more into the land 
 of Israel;" while in the next verse it is stated that the 
 Syrian king comes to besiege Samaria. Another instance 
 is in 4: 38, where the famine is mentioned as already ex- 
 isting; while not until 8: 1, is the approach of the famine 
 annouced. These are the most striking indications of the 
 disorder in which the present arrangement has fallen. 
 
 "'See above page 17. 
 
 43 
 
This fact does not necessarily weaken the validity of the 
 various accounts; it means only that each incident must 
 be considered on its own merits. 
 
 The "prophetic" group of passages will first be con- 
 sidered. With it are included the two fragments, 13 : 
 14-20a, and 13: 20b, 21. Several passages may be at once 
 dismissed. They represent the wonder loving folk spirit 
 which is glad to attach to an eminent char- 
 acter the account of deeds he might be supposed to per- 
 form. It should not be overlooked however that the very 
 fact that so many such incidents are told of Elisha, is evi- 
 dence of the impression he made upon his contemporaries. 
 To the people he appeared more sympathetic and approach- 
 able than the forbidding Elijah. He entered more inti- 
 mately into their life, and their imagination. The pass- 
 ages which exemplify this, but which offer nothing of 
 historical moment are: 1. Healing the spring at Jericho, 
 2:19-22; 2. The mocking children, 2:23-25; 3. The 
 poisonous pottage, 4:38-41; 4. Feeding 100 men, 4:42-44, 
 5. The axe head recovered, 6:1-7; 6. The healing power of 
 Elisha's corpse, 18:20b-21. 
 
 Two passages are so similar to what is told of Elijah, 
 that they may be considered imitations of those incidents. 
 Their character was sufficiently indicated in the survey of 
 the material which concerned Elijah.'-^ The passages are: 
 1. The oil increased, 4: 1-7; and 2. The Shunemite woman 
 and her son, 4: 8-37, with its appendix, 8: 1-6. Even if 
 these accounts were original here, they have no historical 
 element to offer. As in the case of Elijah, they simply 
 reflect the popular estimate of Elisha as a prophet and 
 man of God, endowed with all the powers popularly attrib- 
 uted to such persons. 
 
 'pages 23 and 24. 
 
 44 
 
Three of the remaining five sections of this group, 
 although so overlaid with the marvelous as to be of very 
 slight value for historical purposes, are important for their 
 indication of the part Elisha takes in the affairs of the 
 nation. They are: 1. The healing of Naaman, 5: 1-27; 
 2. Deliverance at Dothan, 6:8-23; 3 Elisha's last words, 
 13: 14-20a. Beneath all the accretions of miraculous 
 elements, there is seen clear evidence that Elisha was a 
 factor in the national life, to a degree never approached 
 by Elijah. 
 
 There remains of this group, 2: 1-18, and 8: 7-15. 
 Reference to the latter will be made in the note on Elisha's 
 relations with Syria. The former is important not only as 
 the introduction to the Elisha cycle of narratives, but also 
 as supplying a key. to the understanding of his career, and 
 confirming in the strongest way what was said above, p 42. 
 
 The acceptance of Elisha, by the prophets, as the suc- 
 cessor of Elijah, could not be more strikingly indicated 
 than by this scene. Whatever the actual occurrence may 
 have been, there is here portrayed in the most realistic 
 way, the idea that Elisha is divinely appointed to carry on 
 the v/ork of Elijah. In an age when events were ascribed 
 to the direct action of God, it is only natural that an event 
 of such importance, should be conceived by the prophets 
 who peserved these traditions, in this naive oriental fash- 
 ion. Corresponding to the idea of his divine appointment, 
 is the recognition Elisha receives at the hands of the "sons 
 of the prophets." The frequent mention of these represen- 
 tatives of the prophetic class in connection with Elisha, is 
 significant because of the additional emphasis thus given 
 to a trait of character in which Elijah seems to have been 
 wholly lacking. Throughout the narratives, Elisha is uni-- 
 formly portrayed as one who has a power of authority and 
 
 45 
 
direction which operates through organization. He lives 
 in cities and in royal courts. He advises kings and influ- 
 ences national affairs; and the reference here made to his 
 position among the "sons of the prophets" reflects one of 
 his important characteristics. 
 
 The phrase "the chariots of Israel and the horsemen 
 thereof," here uttered as a tribute to Elijah, appears else- 
 where only in connection with Elisha. In 6: 17, horses and 
 chariots of fire defend him; and in 13: 14 the phrase is 
 used of Elisha himself. It is, of course, not impossible 
 that the phrase should have been used of both; but in view 
 of the fact that such epithets would naturally become at- 
 tached to the more striking character, and on the other 
 hand, considering that Elisha was concerned in Israel's de- 
 fence in a way never suggested of Elijah, the tribute be- 
 longs to Elisha rather than to his more conspicuous prede- 
 cessor. 
 
 The passages belonging to the "royal" group are: 1. 
 The revolt of Mesha, 3: 4-27; 2. The siege of Samaria, 
 6:24 — 7:20; 3. The revolt and accession of Jehu, 9: 1 — 
 10: 27. In the first passage four facts appear which are 
 here important: a. The presence of Elisha with the army; 
 b. The recognition of Elisha as Elijah's successor; c. The 
 opposition indicated between Elisha and the king of Israel; 
 d. The manner in which Elisha seeks inspiration. These 
 are the more convincing because, as the narrative now 
 stands, they are details subsidiary to the main purpose of 
 the account. They show clearly that Elisha had not only a 
 recognized, but an assured place among the king's adher- 
 ents, and that he holds this in spite of his well known op- 
 position to the reigning dynasty. As Micaiah was present 
 in the court of Ahab, so Elisha is here. In both cases they 
 were recognized as independent and fearless, they both 
 
 46 
 
were disliked by the respective kings, yet both were suf- 
 ficiently secure to prevent the king from getting rid of 
 them In any surreptitious way. Elisha, more than Micaiah, 
 was influential in these circles, whose existence is perhaps 
 only obscurely suggested in the narratives. But the con- 
 ditions of oriental courts in modern times, would sufllcient- 
 ly warrant the assumption that such conditions are ancient. 
 Neither prophets nor kings, in matters involving popular 
 co-operation, can act single handed; they must have fol- 
 lowers and support. Such a statement as that of 3:11, 
 that, "one of the king of Israel's servants said, Elisha is 
 here," points clearly to a group loyal to Elisha. 
 
 The connection of Elisha with Elijah is important be- 
 cause most historical studies of these two prophets have 
 exalted the latter and degraded the former. The records 
 at hand, however, look upon them as joint agents In a 
 single issue. The more indefinite the records of Elisha (and 
 it is fully recognized here), the more significant is the 
 fact that all of them persistently associate the two pro- 
 phets in their influence upon their own period. Whatever 
 criticism may be made against the wisdom or ethics of 
 Elisha,*^ it Is none the less due to him that the work of 
 Elijah was brought to any immediate national result. This 
 is further confirmed in the hostile feeling of Elisha and 
 the king toward each other — not between Elisha 
 and the people, but between him and the house of Ahab. 
 The narratives preserve this relation with interesting con- 
 sistency. 
 
 The reference to Elisha invoking divine aid by means 
 of music serves to emphasize his contrast with Elijah. 
 This is the chief value of this item in this connection. 
 
 'cf Wellh: Proe. page 297. 
 
 47 
 
In the account of the siege Samaria, the portrayal of 
 Elisha strengthens the features already indicated. Here 
 again Elisha Is among those who attend the king; the op- 
 position between the two is plainly apparent, and even 
 more noticeable than before, is the suggestion that Elisha 
 has his own circle of adherents, (v. 32.) 
 
 The account of Jehu's revolt compares favorably, in 
 its vividness and power, with the Elijah narratives. It is 
 conceded even by advanced critics, that this passage is either 
 contemporary with the events it relates, or else separated 
 by but a short interval.®* Although its literary unity may 
 not be above suspicion,*"-"' as a historical document it is 
 worthy of the highest confidence, subject necessarily to 
 the corrections which are inevitable in the case of oriental 
 narratives. The following facts however appear with all 
 clearness: a. The dynasty of Omri was overthrown by 
 Jehu, one of the officers in the Israelitish army. After a 
 disastrous battle with the Syrians, in which Joram the 
 king of Israel was wounded,"" Jehu siezed the opportunity 
 to revolt. The army rallied to his support and, following 
 the time honored custom of exterminating the royal house- 
 hold and all male survivors of the ruling family, he was 
 able to establish himself firmly on the throne, b. The up- 
 rising had a religious as well as a political aspect. Here 
 again it must be borne in mind that such conflicts as these 
 almost invariably find a religious sanction. It is only on 
 such grounds that an oriental leader could gain the sup- 
 port of a people to whom the claims of religion are para- 
 mount. To isolate Jehu's treachery, and make it the sole 
 
 "Kuenen: Onderzoek, Germ, trans, page 82. 
 
 "'9:29 is an obvious instance; and 9: 14b 15a is hardly less 
 
 certain. 
 "^8:29. 
 
 48 
 
cause of the revolt," is to ignore the facts of oriental 
 life. Zeal for JHVH from Jehu's point of view, and 
 
 in the view of his contemporaries, would call for just such 
 a performance as Jehu carried out. Indeed, the incidental 
 allusion to Jehonadab the Rechabite (10: 15ff) indicates 
 that the popular support of an outbreak against Baal was 
 more far reaching than Wellhausen seems to think/" 
 c. Elisha was the center and representative of these relig- 
 ious interests. Whatever ends of his own Jehu sought to 
 serve, the narrative leaves no room for the assumption 
 that his revolt would have succeeded without Elisha's 
 support. His influence is felt throughout: directly in the 
 annointing of Jehu; and indirectly, in the connection 
 which the narrative maintains between the revolt and the 
 anti-Baal movement which had occurred during the reign 
 of Ahab. This is recognized by Wellhausen when he says, 
 "It is a fact that the prophets' hatred of Baal succeeded at 
 last in overthrowing the dynasty of Omri. 
 
 b. Personality: 
 
 Prom the survey of the scripture material it has al- 
 ready appeared that the personality of Elisha forms a strik- 
 ing contrast to that of Elijah. Outwardly there was noth- 
 ing in his appearance to correspond to Elijah's rude manner 
 of dress."^ He is always dignified and self contained; he 
 
 "^Wellh: Prol. Eng. tr pages 291 f. 
 
 '^^Ibid page 292. 
 
 «'iiKi. 2:23 is referred byi Stade (Z. A. T. W. 1894 p 307) 
 to a form of tonsure; but this is excluded by the Israe- 
 licish custom. Lev. 19:27 and 21:5. If on the other 
 hand, it had been a prophetic custom in the days of 
 Elisha, the practice of such men as he would have so 
 sanctified it, as to make its condemnation soon after- 
 terwards most improbable. 
 
 ^•'ilKl. 6:32. 
 
 49 
 
lacks the impetuosity and fierce enthusiasm of Elijah. He 
 dwelt with the people, was widely known, easily found, and 
 continually appealed to. He was at home in the royal court 
 at Samaria, and seems to have lived there from time to 
 time. While he lacked the intensities of Elijah, he was 
 steadier and more reliable. He could hold steadily to a set- 
 tled policy, and bide his time until events were ripe for the 
 carrying out of his plans. To accomplish these he 
 worked easily with others. He did not feel it necessary to 
 act singlehanded; he was able to direct. These matters 
 however, concern talent and temperament. 
 
 As far as his prophetic call was concerned, he was as 
 devoted and as steadfast as Elijah. He was equally cour- 
 ageous in his opposition to the king and equally faithful in 
 his obedience to the word of JHVH. In integrity of char- 
 acter, there is no choice between the two. With equal de- 
 votion to JHVH each followed the prophetic call according 
 to the direction marked out for him by the circumstances of 
 his time, and the gifts with which he was endowed. 
 
 c. Aim and method: 
 
 Unlike Elijah, Elisha had a definite aim. He had 
 caught the spirit of the great issue between JHVH and Baal, 
 and had accepted as his great commission the dethronement 
 of the dynasty which had imperilled the nation's faithful- 
 ness to JHVH. It must be remembered that the high ethical 
 conception of the later prophets had not yet been promul- 
 gated, and on the basis of these later developments, to be- 
 little the significance of Elisha, is to violate historical 
 values. Even the prophets of that day, saw no other way 
 to abolish the Baal v/orship they denounced, than by ex- 
 terminating the rulers who introduced and maintained it. 
 this point of view belongs to Elijah as well as Elisha. To 
 
 50 
 
accomplish such a result calls for foresight and direction, 
 Elijah either did not see this, or was unable to under- 
 take it. Yet his zeal and victories for JHVH would have 
 amounted to little, unless the Baal adherents, who were at 
 the same time the rulers of the land, were signally over- 
 come. This was the work Elisha undertook and accom- 
 plished. His attitude toward the house of Ahab is consist- 
 ently antagonistic, and is so recognized by the king." The 
 anointing of Jehu was only the culmination of an opposition 
 long maintained. As such it throws a significant light upon 
 Elisha's career. It is difficult tb suppose, in view of what 
 is told of Elisha in the course of the various narratives, 
 that his selcetion of Jehu was a random choice. Elisha was 
 familiar with the people of the court, he was equally at 
 home with the army," and the probabilities all point to his 
 previous knowledge of Jehu as early as the days of Ahab." 
 Neither is his opposition to the house of Ahab a sudden im- 
 pulse. It too, dates from the same early period. These 
 two facts are linked together in Elisha's plans to accom- 
 plish what he conceives as Elijah's great work. The house 
 of Ahab must be overthrown. Elisha, looking about for a 
 capable instrument, finds him in Jehu. He then waits for a 
 suitable opportunity. This occurs at the battle of Ramoth- 
 Gilead, and there he calls Jehu to action. This view is 
 supported by all the facts of the case; and modern students 
 all agree that it was the prophetic activity which finally ac- 
 complished the downfall of the dynasty of Ahab. This 
 means, however, that Elisha takes a much more important 
 place in the history than is commonly accorded him, and 
 that his relation to Elijah is by no means that of a mere 
 subordinate. His aim was more definite, his method more 
 
 MiKi. 3:11, 13; 6:32. 
 
 ^^ii Ki. 3. 
 
 'cf. ilKl. 9:36 
 
 51 
 
consistent, and his success more complete. He has suffered 
 in comparison with Elijah chiefly because he lacked an en- 
 thusiastic temperament and an adequate biographer. His 
 performances were not sensational, and did not lend them- 
 selves to vivid literary portrayal. But he was a prophet of 
 insight and of power, and well deserves to be coupled with 
 Elijah in the intimate and equal way that appears in all 
 the early records. 
 
 d. Results: 
 
 The end toward which Elisha had steadily advanced 
 was the overthrow of the royal supporters of Baal. It is in 
 view of this intention that his work must be estimated. 
 Wellhausen" finds in Jehu's revolt nothing but the treason- 
 able ambition of a murderous traitor. It is much nearer the 
 truth, however, to suppose that Jehu took himself seriously 
 in the role asigned him." It is due to Elisha then that the 
 movement inspired by Elijah came to any tangible result. 
 His choice of a leader was vindicated by the thorough- 
 going, if cold blooded fashion in which Jehu accomplished 
 his task. Elisha then, must be recognized as the one who 
 brought to successful issue the movement which Elijah in- 
 itiated against the house of Ahab and the Tyrian Baal. 
 That later tradition has practically ignored him, is due to 
 the overwhelming impression made by the personality of 
 Elijah, rather than because Elisha was in any way less suc- 
 cessful, or less important in the course of the Hebrew his- 
 tory than his predecessor. 
 
 e. Relations with Syria: 
 
 In view of the frequent wars between Israel and Syria, 
 it is at first confusing to find suggestions of such intimancy 
 
 "Prol. Eng. tr. pp 291 f. also Cornill, Proph. of Isr. p 33 
 "cf. Smith: O. T. Hist. p. 200. 
 
 .^2 
 
between the two kingdoms, and especially between Elisha 
 and the Syrians as appear in these narratives. Jt is even 
 told that Elisha visits Damascus as one well known there," 
 and announced to Hazael his approaching accession to the 
 Syrian throne." These conditions become intelligible when 
 the following facts are considered. The Israelites and Syr- 
 ians were not always at war; neither did the same side al- 
 ways win when they fought. At other times they united 
 against a common foe." Territorially they were contigu- 
 ous, and Damascus and Samaria were not far distant from 
 each other. According to the fortunes of battle, the Syrians 
 had ''streets" in Samaria, or the Israelites had "streets" in 
 Damascus, presumably neutral ground reserved for pur- 
 poses of trade.^* It was quite natural then that in times of 
 peace, or of confederation, intercourse should be unrestrict- 
 ed and frequent. In the days of Elisha, the average of vic- 
 tory fell to the Syrians, but they were not always victors, 
 and years of peace frequently intervened, so that the pres- 
 ence of Israelites in Damascus, or of Syrians in Samaria 
 would be quite a matter of course. The story of Naaman, 
 questionable as it is in some respects, is trustworthy at least 
 to the extent to which it reflects this fredom of intercourse 
 between the two Kingdoms. 
 
 ^^li Ki. 8:7. 
 "ii Ki. 8:13. 
 "cf. i Ki. 15:19. 
 ^''i Ki. 20:34. 
 
 53 
 
/. 
 
 V. 
 THE WORK OF ELIJAH AND ELISHA. 
 
 Section V. The Work of Elijah and Elisha. 
 
 The work of these two prophets must be considered as 
 one work, whose center of gravity is found in the definite 
 issue raised between the worship of Baal and the worship 
 of JHVH. Elijah's outburst against the priests of Baal had 
 awakened him to the deeper significance of their presence 
 in Israel, and led him to denounce the King who had en- 
 couraged them. Elisha grasps the situation and with equal 
 courage and with greater patience, plans the overthrow of 
 the dynasty. What they sought to accomplish was the abol- 
 ition of Baal worship, and the establishment of the ex- 
 clusive worship of JHVH. 
 
 What they actually accomplished was a political revolu- 
 tion actuated by religious motives. Although they were 
 successful in their plan to overthrow the house of Ahab, 
 it is clear that their efforts were not of a character that 
 could have any lasting spiritual influence. Their conception 
 of JHVH must be judged by the ends they sought in his 
 honor. GunkeP" has laid much emphasis upon Elijah's ac- 
 tivity as a champion of justice. But the movement as a 
 whole, as directed by Elijah and Elisha, leaves no room for 
 this as its characteristic motive. ''^ The championship of 
 JHVH which has been so frequently pointed out by modern 
 
 '*^op. cit. pp 48f. 
 *'cf. also above p 32. 
 
 54 
 
students,*" was but a re-affirmation of the traditional, 
 though neglected, faith, and failed to leave any traces that 
 can now be recognized When the prophets of the following 
 century raised their voices against the Baals, they had ad- 
 vanced to a far more spiritual conception of JHVH; and in 
 consequence sought different ends, and used different 
 means, from those which engaged Elijah and Elisha. Yet 
 their testimony shows beyond question that no lasting re- 
 ligious impression had resulted from the work of these two 
 prophets. The house of Jehu accomplished much in the way 
 of political and material advancement of the Kingdom; 
 but there is no trace of the great religious agitation which 
 succeeded in placing this line upon the throne. By the 
 later prophets Jehu is denounced for his bloody deeds," and 
 the people for their continued worship of the Baals. 
 
 Even more striking is the fact that the later references 
 to either Elijah or Elisha lack any allusion to this cham- 
 pionship of JHVH, as this is currently understood. The 
 reference to Elijah and Elisha in Ecclesiasticus'* contains 
 no indication of this significance of their work. Referen- 
 ces in the N. T. have already been noted.^^ The conclusion 
 cannot be avoided that, whatever religious significance 
 the work of these two prophets possessed, it was so over- 
 shadowed by the political elements involved, that it left 
 no surviving trace. 
 
 Their work stands as a bold and daring effort to re- 
 establish the ancient faith; but their methods were political 
 and their message, although re-affirming one of the strong- 
 est elements in the Mosaic tradition, offered nothing origin- 
 
 *-e. g. Kittel, Gunkel, and many others. 
 
 «^Hos. 1:4. 
 
 "MSil-ie. 
 
 '^See above p 40. 
 
 55 
 
 / 
 
al. Since the days of Moses, however, none had been actu- 
 ated by a more exalted or far-reaching purpose, nor had 
 any stood upon a higher level of consistency and accom- 
 plishment. Upon their awn age they left an ineffaceable 
 impression, and they raised an issue which, taken up by 
 later prophets from a different standpoint, was destined to 
 become one of the most valuable contributions made by the 
 Hebrew people to the religion of the world. 
 
 56 
 
RETURN TO the circulation desk of any 
 
 University of California Library 
 
 or to the 
 
 NORTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 BIdg. 400, Richnnond Field Station 
 University of California 
 
 
 Richmond, CA 94804-4698 
 
 
 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 
 2-month loans may be renewed by calling 
 
 (415)642-6233 
 1-year loans may be recharged by bringing books 
 
 to NRLF 
 Renewals and recharges may be made 4 days 
 
 prior to due date 
 
 . 
 
 DUE AS STAMPED BELOW 
 
 MAY 17 1988 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 A 
 
 I 
 

 E4l 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA IvIBRARY