The Fallible Study Bible

The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible

2 Kings4:38–41

Elisha Purifies the Poisonous Stew

Public-domain source — quoted & attributed AI synthesis — generated, verify

2 Kings 4:38–41 — Elisha Purifies the Poisonous Stew. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.

38

When Elisha returned to Gilgal, there was a famine in the land. As the sons of the prophets were sitting at his feet, he said to his attendant, “Put on the large pot and boil some stew for the sons of the prophets.”

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

we·’ĕ·lî·šā‘ šāḇ hag·gil·gā·lāh wə·hā·rā·‘āḇ bā·’ā·reṣ ū·ḇə·nê han·nə·ḇî·’îm yō·šə·ḇîm lə·p̄ā·nāw way·yō·mer lə·na·‘ă·rōw šə·p̄ōṯ hag·gə·ḏō·w·lāh has·sîr ū·ḇaš·šêl nā·zîḏ liḇ·nê han·nə·ḇî·’îm

Word by word18 · parsed
וֶאֱלִישָׁ֞עwe·’ĕ·lî·šā‘When ElishaH477
√ ʼĔlîyshâʻ — Elisha, the famous prophetConjunctive wawNounpropermasculine singular
שָׁ֤בšāḇreturnedH7725
√ shûwb — to turn back (hence, away) transitively or intransitively, literally or figuratively (not necessarily with the idea of return to the starting point)VerbQalPerfectthird person masculine singular
shûwb: to turn back, return A Qal perfect opening the unit with motion, not chronology. Ellicott: the word “refers to the prophet's annual visit,” and “The story is not put in chronological sequence with the foregoing.” Cambridge agrees there are no notes of time in this narrative. The unit therefore begins by admitting it is placed by theme rather than by date.
הַגִּלְגָּ֙לָה֙hag·gil·gā·lāhto GilgalH1537
√ Gilgâl — Gilgal, the name of three places in PalestineArticleNounproperfeminine singularthird person feminine singular
וְהָרָעָ֣בwə·hā·rā·‘āḇthere was a famineH7458
√ râʻâb — hunger (more or less extensive)Conjunctive waw, ArticleNounmasculine singular
râʻâb: hunger, famine Definite: the famine. Benson says it lasted seven years, “just as long again as that in the time of Elijah,” and reads it as judgment escalating on an unreformed nation; Barnes, Cambridge, Pulpit and K&D connect it with the seven years announced in 2 Kings 8:1. Everything that follows (wild foraging, a single pot, an unknown fruit) is the practical shape of that word.
בָּאָ֔רֶץbā·’ā·reṣin the landH776
√ ʼerets — the earth (at large, or partitively a land)Preposition-b, ArticleNounfeminine singular
וּבְנֵי֙ū·ḇə·nêAs the sonsH1121
√ bên — a son (as a builder of the family name), in the widest sense (of literal and figurative relationship, including grandson, subject, nation, quality or condition, etcConjunctive wawNounmasculine plural construct
bên: son Construct plural: “sons of.” Idiom of guild and membership, not descent.
הַנְּבִיאִ֔יםhan·nə·ḇî·’îmof the prophetsH5030
√ nâbîyʼ — a prophet or (generally) inspired manArticleNounmasculine plural
יֹשְׁבִ֖יםyō·šə·ḇîmwere sittingH3427
√ yâshab — properly, to sit down (specifically as judgeVerbQalParticiplemasculine plural
yâshab: to sit, dwell A masculine plural participle, durative: they were sitting, and kept sitting. Henry's whole reading turns on the tense of the scene: “There was a famine of bread, but not of hearing the word of God.” Cambridge sees in it the ordinary life of the prophetic colleges, where “The members sat at the feet of some elder member.” The school is in session while the land starves.
לְפָנָ֑יוlə·p̄ā·nāwat his feetH6440
√ pânîym — the face (as the part that turns)Preposition-lNouncommon plural constructthird person masculine singular
pânîym: face, presence Literally “to his face.” The same preposition and noun that elsewhere describe standing before a king or before God here describe a classroom. Pulpit cites Ezekiel 8:1 and 33:31 for the idiom; Poole and Gill read it as pupils at a master's feet (Acts 22:3).
וַיֹּ֣אמֶרway·yō·merhe saidH559
√ ʼâmar — to say (used with great latitude)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular
לְנַעֲר֗וֹlə·na·‘ă·rōwto his attendantH5288
√ naʻar — (concretely) a boy (as active), from the age of infancy to adolescencePreposition-lNounmasculine singular constructthird person masculine singular
naʻar: a boy, young man, attendant Not a title of office. Gill guesses Gehazi; Ellicott, Cambridge and K&D all judge it more likely to be one of the sons of the prophets appointed to wait on Elisha. The sources openly disagree, and the text does not settle it.
שְׁפֹת֙šə·p̄ōṯPut onH8239
√ shâphath — to locate, iVerbQalImperativemasculine singular
shâphath: to set (a vessel) on the fire One of only four occurrences in the canon. K&D read it as the exact domestic term (German beisetzen) and cross it with Ezekiel 24:3, where the identical command sets on the pot that is Jerusalem under judgment. A prophet's kitchen order and a prophet's doom oracle share the same rare verb, and in this unit the pot will in fact be found to hold death before it holds food.
הַגְּדוֹלָ֔הhag·gə·ḏō·w·lāhthe largeH1419
√ gâdôwl — great (in any sense)ArticleAdjectivefeminine singular
הַסִּ֣ירhas·sîrpotH5518
√ çîyr — a potArticleNouncommon singular
çîyr: a pot The keyword of the unit: it stands at v. 38, v. 39, v. 40 and twice in v. 41. Nothing is ever said about replacing it. The one great pot of the house, as Pulpit notes (“the one great pot that there would be in the house”), is the single vessel on which a hundred men depend, which is why its contamination is a crisis and its cure is a mercy.
וּבַשֵּׁ֥לū·ḇaš·šêland boilH1310
√ bâshal — properly, to boil upConjunctive wawVerbPielImperativemasculine singular
bâshal: to boil up, seethe Piel imperative, causative and intensive: make it boil. JFB describes the ordinary dish, meat cut small and mixed with meal and vegetables, which is worth holding: meal already belongs in pottage. What Elisha calls for in v. 41 is not an exotic reagent but the missing ordinary ingredient.
נָזִ֖ידnā·zîḏsome stewH5138
√ nâzîyd — something boiled, iNounmasculine singular
nâzîyd: something boiled, pottage A rare noun, six verses in all, and two of them are Jacob's stew in Genesis 25. Poole hears the poverty in it: Elisha “provides no delicious meats, but mere necessaries.” The word arrives carrying an old memory of a boiling pot that cost a birthright.
לִבְנֵ֥יliḇ·nêfor the sonsH1121
√ bên — a son (as a builder of the family name), in the widest sense (of literal and figurative relationship, including grandson, subject, nation, quality or condition, etcPreposition-lNounmasculine plural construct
הַנְּבִיאִֽים׃han·nə·ḇî·’îmof the prophetsH5030
√ nâbîyʼ — a prophet or (generally) inspired manArticleNounmasculine plural
39

One of them went out to the field to gather herbs, and he found a wild vine from which he gathered as many wild gourds as his garment could hold. Then he came back and cut them up into the pot of stew, though no one knew what they were.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

’e·ḥāḏ way·yê·ṣê ’el- haś·śā·ḏeh lə·laq·qêṭ ’ō·rōṯ way·yim·ṣā śā·ḏeh ge·p̄en mim·men·nū way·laq·qêṭ śā·ḏeh mə·lō paq·qu·‘ōṯ ḇiḡ·ḏōw way·yā·ḇō way·p̄al·laḥ ’el- sîr han·nā·zîḏ kî- lō yā·ḏā·‘ū

Word by word23 · parsed
אֶחָ֣ד’e·ḥāḏOne [of them]H259
√ ʼechâd — properly, united, iNumbermasculine singular
ʼechâd: one, united He is never named. Cambridge assumes one of the college, since the members did their own chores.
וַיֵּצֵ֨אway·yê·ṣêwent outH3318
√ yâtsâʼ — to go (causatively, bring) out, in a great variety of applications, literally and figuratively, direct and proximConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular
אֶל־’el-toH413
√ ʼêl — near, with or amongPreposition
הַשָּׂדֶה֮haś·śā·ḏehthe fieldH7704
√ sâdeh — a field (as flat)ArticleNounmasculine singular
לְלַקֵּ֣טlə·laq·qêṭto gatherH3950
√ lâqaṭ — properly, to pick up, iPreposition-lVerbPielInfinitive construct
lâqaṭ: to pick up, glean Piel infinitive construct: the deliberate, repeated gathering of what is left lying in a field. It is the verb of famine economics, and JFB confirms the practice was ordinary in the East, the fields “daily searched for mallow, asparagus, and other wild plants.” The same Piel returns at word 10 when he gathers the gourds, so the sentence has him doing one continuous innocent action.
אֹרֹת֒’ō·rōṯherbsH219
√ ʼôwrâh — luminousness, iNounfeminine plural
ʼôwrâh: luminousness; (here) herbs Four occurrences in the canon, and this is the only one the translators read as vegetation. Ellicott calls it “A rare word” and points to Isaiah 26:19; the other two are Esther 8:16 and Psalm 139:12, both plainly light. Either the same form does double duty, or the meaning here is a guess preserved by tradition. The unit's first uncertainty is at its first concrete noun.
וַיִּמְצָא֙way·yim·ṣāand he foundH4672
√ mâtsâʼ — properly, to come forth to, iConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular
שָׂדֶ֔הśā·ḏeha wildH7704
√ sâdeh — a field (as flat)Nounmasculine singular
sâdeh: a field (as flat) Repeated at words 3, 7 and 11: field, vine-of-field, field-gourds. The open country is where the food had to come from, and it is where the danger came from.
גֶּ֣פֶןge·p̄envineH1612
√ gephen — a vine (as twining), especially the grapeNouncommon singular construct
gephen: a vine (as twining) Israel's covenant plant (Israel as God's vine) used here of a lookalike creeper. Barnes: “Not a real wild vine, the fruit of which, if not very palatable, is harmless; but some climbing plant with tendrils.” The resemblance is exactly what does the damage.
מִמֶּ֛נּוּmim·men·nūfromH4480
√ min — properly, a part ofPrepositionthird person masculine singular
וַיְלַקֵּ֥טway·laq·qêṭwhich he gatheredH3950
√ lâqaṭ — properly, to pick up, iConjunctive wawVerbPielConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular
שָׂדֶ֖הśā·ḏehas many wildH7704
√ sâdeh — a field (as flat)Nounmasculine singular
מְלֹ֣אmə·lō. . .H4393
√ mᵉlôʼ — fulness (literally or figuratively)Nounmasculine singular construct
פַּקֻּעֹ֥תpaq·qu·‘ōṯgourdsH6498
√ paqquʻâh — the wild cucumber (from splitting open to shed its seeds)Nounfeminine plural construct
paqquʻâh: the wild cucumber, from splitting open The plant's identification is genuinely open: Ellicott, Barnes and Pulpit weigh the squirting cucumber (Ecbalium elaterium) against the colocynth; K&D judge the ancient versions right in reading colocynth, chiefly because that fruit's round shape better suits the architectural pᵉqāʻîm ornaments of 1 Kings 6:18. Geneva simply names what the apothecaries sold. All agree only on the bitterness.
בִגְד֑וֹḇiḡ·ḏōwas his garment [could hold]H899
√ beged — a covering, iNounmasculine singular constructthird person masculine singular
beged: a covering, garment “The fullness of his garment,” Barnes: “literally, ‘his shawl full’.” JFB describes the hyke thrown over the left shoulder and fastened under the right arm “so as to form a lap or apron.” The man had no basket. He carried poison home in the clothes he was wearing, which is how much he trusted it.
וַיָּבֹ֗אway·yā·ḇōThen he came backH935
√ bôwʼ — to go or come (in a wide variety of applications)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular
וַיְפַלַּ֛חway·p̄al·laḥand cut them upH6398
√ pâlach — to slice, iConjunctive wawVerbPielConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular
pâlach: to slice, cleave Piel, and rare (five verses). The other occurrences are all wounds: Job 16:13, Psalm 141:7, Proverbs 7:23, Job 39:3. The narrator could have written a common verb for chopping; he wrote the one that elsewhere means to pierce through. The knife-work looks ordinary and is not.
אֶל־’el-intoH413
√ ʼêl — near, with or amongPreposition
סִ֥ירsîrthe potH5518
√ çîyr — a potNouncommon singular construct
הַנָּזִ֖ידhan·nā·zîḏof stewH5138
√ nâzîyd — something boiled, iArticleNounmasculine singular
nâzîyd: something boiled, pottage Now definite, “the stew,” the dish of v. 38. The unknown fruit does not sit apart in a bowl; it is dissolved into the common meal.
כִּֽי־kî-thoughH3588
√ kîy — (by implication) very widely used as a relative conjunction or adverb (as below)Conjunction
לֹ֥אno oneH3808
√ lôʼ — not (the simple or absAdverbNegative particle
יָדָֽעוּ׃yā·ḏā·‘ūknew [what they were]H3045
√ yâdaʻ — to know (properly, to ascertain by seeing)VerbQalPerfectthird person common plural
yâdaʻ: to know, ascertain by seeing Qal perfect, third person plural, with no stated object. Knowledge is precisely the thing the house of the prophets lacks, in a chapter about a man who sees what others do not. Ellicott draws the consequence: they “did not stop the young man from his shredding.”
40

And they poured it out for the men to eat, but when they tasted the stew they cried out, “There is death in the pot, O man of God!” And they could not eat it.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

way·yiṣ·qū la·’ă·nā·šîm le·’ĕ·ḵō·wl way·hî kə·’ā·ḵə·lām mê·han·nā·zîḏ wə·hêm·māh ṣā·‘ā·qū way·yō·mə·rū mā·weṯ bas·sîr ’îš hā·’ĕ·lō·hîm wə·lō yā·ḵə·lū le·’ĕ·ḵōl

Word by word16 · parsed
וַיִּֽצְק֥וּway·yiṣ·qūAnd they poured it outH3332
√ yâtsaq — properly, to pour out (transitive or intransitive)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine plural
yâtsaq: to pour out The serving verb. It is done here toward death and will be commanded again, in the imperative, at v. 41. The pot is not emptied and scrubbed between the two pourings; the same vessel and the same act are repeated after the cure.
לַאֲנָשִׁ֖יםla·’ă·nā·šîmfor the menH582
√ ʼĕnôwsh — a man in general (singly or collectively)Preposition-lNounmasculine plural
ʼĕnôwsh: man in general, mortal The frail-man word, chosen just before the word death enters. Whatever is in the pot, the narrator has already told you what the eaters are made of.
לֶאֱכ֑וֹלle·’ĕ·ḵō·wlto eatH398
√ ʼâkal — to eat (literally or figuratively)Preposition-lVerbQalInfinitive construct
וַ֠יְהִיway·hî. . .H1961
√ hâyâh — to exist, iConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular
כְּאָכְלָ֨םkə·’ā·ḵə·lāmbut when they tastedH398
√ ʼâkal — to eat (literally or figuratively)Preposition-kVerbQalInfinitive constructthird person masculine plural
ʼâkal: to eat Infinitive construct with suffix under the preposition k-: “as their eating,” simultaneous action. The root sounds three times in this verse (words 2, 4, 15): they are poured out to eat, they are in the act of eating, and they are not able to eat. The verse is a meal that fails mid-mouthful.
מֵהַנָּזִ֜ידmê·han·nā·zîḏthe stewH5138
√ nâzîyd — something boiled, iPreposition-m, ArticleNounmasculine singular
וְהֵ֣מָּהwə·hêm·māhtheyH1992
√ hêm — they (only used when emphatic)Conjunctive wawPronounthird person masculine plural
צָעָ֗קוּṣā·‘ā·qūcried outH6817
√ tsâʻaq — to shriekVerbQalPerfectthird person common plural
tsâʻaq: to shriek, cry out Qal perfect, with the independent pronoun וְהֵ֣מָּה in front of it for emphasis: they, they shrieked. K&D read the flavour itself as the alarm: the bitterness “so alarmed the pupils of the prophets when they began to eat of the dish.” Cambridge grants that colocynth would make men sick quickly but doubts there was enough to kill; the cry outruns the evidence, and the prophet does not rebuke it.
וַיֹּֽאמְרוּ֙way·yō·mə·rū. . .H559
√ ʼâmar — to say (used with great latitude)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine plural
מָ֤וֶתmā·weṯThere is deathH4194
√ mâveth — death (natural or violent)Nounmasculine singular
mâveth: death, natural or violent Bare, articleless, in first position. Not “poison,” which is the word Gill and Poole supply in explanation; the men shout the largest word available. In a chapter that has already raised a dead boy (4:32-35), death is named again over a cooking pot, and again it is not allowed to stand.
בַּסִּיר֙bas·sîrin the potH5518
√ çîyr — a potPreposition-b, ArticleNouncommon singular
çîyr: a pot Definite, and identical to v. 38: this is the great pot Elisha himself ordered set on. The accusation lands on the prophet's own instruction.
אִ֣ישׁ’îšO manH376
√ ʼîysh — a man as an individual or a male personNounmasculine singular construct
ʼîysh: a man, an individual Construct, bound to the next word. Note the contrast with word 1: the eaters are ʼănāshîm, mortals; he is ʼîsh hā-ʼĕlōhîm.
הָאֱלֹהִ֔יםhā·’ĕ·lō·hîmof GodH430
√ ʼĕlôhîym — gods in the ordinary senseArticleNounmasculine plural
ʼĕlôhîym: God With the article, “the God”: the title is man of the God, a formal designation rather than piety. It is spoken as a vocative in the middle of an accusation, which is the point. They do not stop trusting him while they tell him he has killed them.
וְלֹ֥אwə·lōAnd they could notH3808
√ lôʼ — not (the simple or absConjunctive wawAdverbNegative particle
יָכְל֖וּyā·ḵə·lū. . .H3201
√ yâkôl — to be able, literally (can, could) or morally (may, might)VerbQalPerfectthird person common plural
yâkôl: to be able Perfect, plural: not a refusal but an incapacity. Pulpit: “they could not continue to eat the pottage, all stopped eating.” The meal in a famine is over, and the famine is not.
לֶאֱכֹֽל׃le·’ĕ·ḵōleat [it]H398
√ ʼâkal — to eat (literally or figuratively)Preposition-lVerbQalInfinitive construct
41

Then Elisha said, “Get some flour.” He threw it into the pot and said, “Pour it out for the people to eat.” And there was nothing harmful in the pot.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

way·yō·mer ū·qə·ḥū- qe·maḥ way·yaš·lêḵ ’el- has·sîr way·yō·mer ṣaq lā·‘ām wə·yō·ḵê·lū hā·yāh wə·lō dā·ḇār rā‘ bas·sîr

Word by word15 · parsed
וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙way·yō·merThen Elisha saidH559
√ ʼâmar — to say (used with great latitude)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular
וּקְחוּ־ū·qə·ḥū-GetH3947
√ lâqach — to take (in the widest variety of applications)Conjunctive wawVerbQalImperativemasculine plural
lâqach: to take Plural imperative with the connective waw, which K&D flag as marking “sequence in thought.” The command is addressed to the company, not to a servant: the men who cried out are the men sent for the remedy. Elisha asks no questions, inspects nothing, and names no diagnosis.
קֶ֔מַחqe·maḥsome flourH7058
√ qemach — flourNounmasculine singular
qemach: flour, meal The theological centre of the verse, and every source in the brief converges on it. Barnes: meal's natural properties “would but slightly diminish either the bitterness or the unwholesomeness.” Cambridge forbids attributing healing virtue to it at all, “any more than we should think that the salt (2 Kings 2:21) was the means of healing the waters at Jericho.” K&D call it “the earthly substratum for the working of the Spirit.” The sign is deliberately the most ordinary food there is, and JFB notes meal already belonged in the recipe.
וַיַּשְׁלֵ֖ךְway·yaš·lêḵHe threwH7993
√ shâlak — to throw out, down or away (literally or figuratively)Conjunctive wawVerbHifilConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular
shâlak: to throw, cast down or away Hiphil: he caused it to be flung in. The same gesture as the salt thrown into the Jericho spring (2 Kings 2:21), which Gill, Cambridge, Ellicott and Pulpit all name as the governing parallel. Note what is not done: the pot is not emptied, the fire is not drawn, the stew is not remade. The poison stays in the vessel and stops being poison.
אֶל־’el-it intoH413
√ ʼêl — near, with or amongPreposition
הַסִּ֑ירhas·sîrthe potH5518
√ çîyr — a potArticleNouncommon singular
çîyr: a pot The fourth appearance of the unit's keyword, and the pot is still the same pot.
וַיֹּ֗אמֶרway·yō·merand saidH559
√ ʼâmar — to say (used with great latitude)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular
צַ֤קṣaqPour it outH3332
√ yâtsaq — properly, to pour out (transitive or intransitive)VerbQalImperativemasculine singular
yâtsaq: to pour out Qal imperative singular, the same root that in v. 40 served out death. The cure is proved by repeating the exact act that failed. Poole notes the men had already ladled some out and it went back in with the meal: “He cast it into the pot, together with the pottage which they had taken out of it.”
לָעָם֙lā·‘āmfor the peopleH5971
√ ʻam — a people (as a congregated unit)Preposition-l, ArticleNounmasculine singular
ʻam: a people, congregated unit The word shifts from ʼănāshîm (v. 40) to ʻam. In a book preoccupied with a covenant nation under judgment, the men who were mortals facing death in a bowl are now named with the word Israel uses for itself.
וְיֹאכֵ֔לוּwə·yō·ḵê·lūto eatH398
√ ʼâkal — to eat (literally or figuratively)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConjunctive imperfectthird person masculine plural
ʼâkal: to eat Conjunctive imperfect after the imperative: “and let them eat,” purpose and result together. The verb that broke off in v. 40 is allowed to finish.
הָיָ֛הhā·yāhAnd there wasH1961
√ hâyâh — to exist, iVerbQalPerfectthird person masculine singular
וְלֹ֥אwə·lōnothingH3808
√ lôʼ — not (the simple or absConjunctive wawAdverbNegative particle
דָּבָ֥רdā·ḇār. . .H1697
√ dâbâr — a wordNounmasculine singular
dâbâr: a word; a thing, matter The idiom means “nothing,” but the noun is word. Hebrew narrative does not distinguish a word from a deed as sharply as English does, and this unit has run on words: an order to set on the pot, a shriek of death, a command to fetch meal. The closing sentence audits the pot in the same vocabulary.
רָ֖עrā‘harmfulH7451
√ raʻ — bad or (as noun) evil (natural or moral)Adjectivemasculine singular
raʻ: bad, evil, natural or moral Not a medical term. Raʻ is the word for evil in the covenant sense as well as the harmful sense, the same root that names the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The verdict on the pot is delivered in moral vocabulary, which is how Henry hears it: “We must acknowledge God's goodness in making our food wholesome and nourishing.”
בַּסִּֽיר׃סbas·sîrin the potH5518
√ çîyr — a potPreposition-b, ArticleNouncommon singular

The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.

Grand Commentary — the unit, read whole

synthesis · verify

AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.

i. The school that kept sitting while the land starved — 4:38

The unit opens with two facts laid side by side and no attempt to reconcile them: וְהָרָעָ֣ב (wə·hā·rā·‘āḇ), the famine, definite, in the land; and the sons of the prophets יֹשְׁבִ֖ים לְפָנָ֑יו, a durative participle, sitting to his face. Cambridge insists on the article (“the clause might well be rendered ‘the famine was in the land’”) and, with Barnes, Pulpit and K&D, refers it to the seven-year dearth of 2 Kings 8:1; Benson gives the seven years and reads them as judgment escalating on an unreformed nation, though his printed chapter citation points elsewhere. Henry's line is the one the grammar supports: “There was a famine of bread, but not of hearing the word of God.” Ellicott and Cambridge both warn against reading the narrative as chronological; it is placed here by theme. And the theme is set by a rare verb. שְׁפֹת֙ (šə·p̄ōṯ, H8239) occurs in four verses of the canon, and K&D send the reader from this kitchen order straight to Ezekiel 24:3, where the same command sets on the pot that is besieged Jerusalem. Poole hears the menu as pedagogy: Elisha “provides no delicious meats, but mere necessaries, to teach them the contempt of worldly delights.”

ii. A man who did not know what he was carrying — 4:39

Every noun in this verse is uncertain and the narrator seems to want it so. אֹרֹת֒ (’ō·rōṯ) is glossed “herbs,” but Ellicott calls it “A rare word” and lists the versions disagreeing: Targum “greens,” LXX keeping the Hebrew, Syriac and Arabic “mallows,” Thenius proposing another root. Strong's root gloss for H219 is luminousness, and in its only other occurrences (Isaiah 26:19; Esther 8:16; Psalm 139:12) the sense is light. The plant is a גֶּ֣פֶן שָׂדֶ֔ה, which JFB renders literally “the vine of the field” and K&D refuse to call a grapevine (“not wild vines, but wild creepers”); Cambridge says plainly it is “named here ‘vine’ for want of knowledge of its true name.” Barnes and Pulpit weigh the squirting cucumber against the colocynth; K&D side with the ancient versions for colocynth on the strength of the fruit's round shape and the architectural pᵉqāʻîm of 1 Kings 6:18; Geneva simply names what the apothecaries sold, “most vehement and dangerous in purging.” Then comes the verb: וַיְפַלַּ֛ח (way·p̄al·laḥ, Piel of pâlach, H6398), five occurrences in the canon and elsewhere always a wound (Job 16:13; Psalm 141:7; Proverbs 7:23). Supper is prepared in the vocabulary of piercing. The closing clause is plural, כִּֽי־לֹ֥א יָדָֽעוּ: Benson spreads the blame as the grammar does, “Neither he that gathered them, nor they that shred them, knew what they were,” and Cambridge records that nobody in the brotherhood had enough knowledge of plants to stop him. The man is not careless. He is hungry, generous, and wrong.

iii. Death named over a cooking pot — 4:40

Two Hebrew words carry the crisis: מָ֤וֶת בַּסִּיר֙, death in-the-pot, no verb, no article, shouted with צָעָ֗קוּ (tsâʻaq, whose root sense Strong's gives as to shriek), the covenant outcry verb. The sources split honestly on whether the fear was warranted. K&D say the bitterness “so alarmed the pupils of the prophets” that they took it for poison, and elsewhere cite Dioscorides that colocynth in quantity could really kill; Cambridge holds that the fruit “would produce sickness very soon, but there is no reason to suppose that there was enough in the pottage to kill”; Pulpit describes them “Rushing, therefore, at once to the worst possible supposition”; Ellicott and Geneva both trace the verdict to the taste alone, Geneva's gloss reading “They feared that they were poisoned because of the bitterness.” So the cry may be an over-reading of a bad flavour. What the text does not do is correct them. The address is worth weighing too: they are אֲנָשִׁים (ʼĕnôwsh, mortals) accusing אִ֣ישׁ הָאֱלֹהִ֔ים, the man of the God, of having ordered the pot that is killing them, and they accuse him by his title. In a chapter where a dead boy has just been raised (4:32-35), death is named a second time, and again over food the prophet commanded.

iv. Meal, and a pot with no evil word in it — 4:41

Elisha does not investigate. K&D note that וּקְחוּ־ carries a connective waw denoting “sequence in thought,” and Pulpit draws the same conclusion from the pace: “Elisha seems not to have hesitated for a moment.” The remedy is קֶ֔מַח, plain meal, which JFB has already told us belongs in ordinary pottage anyway. On its power every source in the brief agrees, and the agreement is the point. Barnes: meal's natural properties “would but slightly diminish either the bitterness or the unwholesomeness,” therefore the change “was by miracle.” Poole: the cure came “not by its natural power, which could do little in so short a time, but by the supernatural blessing of God upon it.” Cambridge forbids crediting the meal at all, “any more than we should think that the salt (2 Kings 2:21) was the means of healing the waters at Jericho.” Gill makes the same Jericho comparison; Pulpit says Elisha “acts, now as always, under Divine direction.” K&D give the formula the others circle: the meal “was only the earthly substratum for the working of the Spirit, which proceeded from Elisha.” Ellicott alone preserves a dissent, reporting Thenius that the meal softened the bitterness, before siding with Reuss that a real poison was neutralised by “an antidote whose natural properties could never have had that effect.” And then the closing audit, in which the narrator's word choice outruns the English: וְלֹ֥א הָיָ֛ה דָּבָ֥ר רָ֖ע בַּסִּֽיר, there was no evil word (dâbâr) in the pot, raʻ being the covenant term for evil. The men, called mortals in v. 40, are called הָעָם, the people, in v. 41.

Read under Sola Scriptura — this tool’s own fallible reading (⚙)

⚙ Read only against the rest of Scripture and nothing else, this is a miracle about a vessel that was not replaced. Everything in the story argues for throwing the pot out: it is the one great pot of the house, the poison is dissolved through every ladleful, and the men have already tasted it. What Elisha does instead is put something wholesome into the ruined thing and command the identical act that had just failed, צַ֤ק (ṣaq), pour it out, the same root as the pouring of v. 40. The pattern is the one the commentators keep reaching for from Jericho, where salt went into the poisoned spring and the spring stayed where it was (2 Kings 2:21), and from Marah, where a tree went into the bitter water and the water was drunk (Exodus 15:25). In each case the carrier of death remains and is made to serve life. We would add, tentatively, what the shift in nouns suggests: the eaters are ʼănāshîm, mortals, before the meal goes in, and ʻam, a people, after it. If that is deliberate, then the healing of the pot is told as a small restoration of the congregation itself, in a land under the famine of 2 Kings 8:1. We hold this loosely; it rests on two words, and the sources do not draw it. What is not loose is the verdict the narrator files: no dâbâr raʻ, no evil word, in the pot. The line offered alongside this reading is our own sentence, not a verse of Scripture, and should be tested as such.

He did not empty the pot; he healed it, and then made them pour from it again.

Canonical Threads — out to the whole of Scripture

cross-refs · verify

AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.

The other pot of stew: a birthright boiled away verbal / quotation: confirmed

The noun נָזִ֖יד (nāzîḏ, H5138) stands in only six verses of the whole canon, and two of them are Jacob's cooking in Genesis 25:29 and 25:34, where Esau sells his birthright for what he eats. Ellicott makes the cross-reference himself at “Seethe pottage,” sending the reader to Genesis 25:29. The Verifier confirms the shared lexeme, and adds sâdeh (H7704, field) to both pairings: Esau comes in from the field faint, and here a son of the prophets goes out to the field to glean. The link is verbal and the contrast is exact. In Genesis a man trades his inheritance for a pot of stew that is perfectly good to eat; in 2 Kings a company that has inherited nothing but a famine is handed a pot of stew that will not feed them at all, and it is repaired for free.

Genesis 25:29 · Genesis 25:34

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H5138 nâzîyd (in 6 vv), a rare noun; plus H7704 sâdeh (in 309 vv). Ellicott independently cites Genesis 25:29 at this verse. No quotation is claimed in either direction; the link is lexical.

“Set on the pot”: the same rare command over Jerusalem verbal / quotation: confirmed

שְׁפֹת֙ (šᵉphōṯ, H8239) occurs in four verses of the canon, and K&D route this one straight to Ezekiel 24:3, glossing the verb by the German beisetzen, the ordinary act of setting a vessel on the fire. The Verifier records both the rare verb and the shared noun çîyr (H5518, pot). In Ezekiel the identical order opens the parable of the boiling pot that is besieged Jerusalem, filled with choice pieces and left to burn until the rust is consumed. Here the command is domestic and kindly meant, and death turns up in the pot anyway. Read together, the two scenes hold the same object in two hands: in Ezekiel the pot is judgment and is not healed; in Gilgal the pot is supper, is found deadly, and is healed. The verbal link is secure; what to make of the pairing is ours, and K&D go no further than the cross-reference.

Ezekiel 24:3

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H8239 shâphath (in 4 vv), a rare verb, with H5518 çîyr (in 32 vv). K&D cite Ezekiel 24:3 for this very word at 2 Kings 4:38.

The rare word the translators could not fix: ’ōrōt verbal / quotation: confirmed

אֹרֹת֒ (’ō·rōṯ, H219) stands in four verses only. Here the traditions render it “herbs”; in Esther 8:16 and Psalm 139:12 it is plainly light, and Strong's root gloss is luminousness. Ellicott flags the rarity and sends the reader to Isaiah 26:19, where the same noun sits inside a promise that the dead shall live, and where translators divide between “herbs” and “light” exactly as they do here. The Verifier confirms the shared lexeme in all three. We record this as a verbal link and nothing more: we are not claiming Isaiah is alluded to, nor that the Gilgal narrator intends light. What the thread does establish is that the one word in this unit that names what a starving man went looking for is also the canon's word for the shining that outlasts death, and that the sources are openly unsure which sense governs here.

Isaiah 26:19 · Esther 8:16 · Psalm 139:12

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H219 ʼôwrâh (in 4 vv), a rare noun, in all three refs. Ellicott names Isaiah 26:19 at this word. Lexical link only; no allusion or quotation is claimed.

Salt in the spring, meal in the pot structural / thematic: confirmed

Four of the sources in this unit reach for the same earlier miracle without being prompted. Gill: the pottage was cured “as the bad waters of Jericho were by salt, in a preceding miracle.” Cambridge: we must not attribute healing virtue to the meal “any more than we should think that the salt (2 Kings 2:21) was the means of healing the waters at Jericho.” Ellicott says the meal here therefore corresponds to the salt of 2 Kings 2:21. Pulpit: Elisha “is instructed to use meal on this occasion, as he used salt in healing the waters of Jericho.” The structure is identical in both: a source of life turned deadly, a common substance cast in by prophetic command, the source left in place and declared clean. We give this a structural tier rather than a verbal one deliberately. The Verifier returned no shared-lexeme basis for the pair, so what we have is a pattern attested by four commentators, not a computed lexical link.

2 Kings 2:21

basis: No Verifier lexeme basis for this pair; the link is a shared narrative pattern (poisoned source, prophetic sign-substance, source healed in place) independently drawn by Gill, Cambridge, Ellicott and Pulpit at this verse. Tiered structural, not verbal, for that reason.

Death and a rare verb of setting: Psalm 22:15 structural / thematic: confirmed

The Verifier pairs this unit with Psalm 22:15 on two words: shâphath (H8239), the rare verb, four verses in the canon, that Elisha uses of setting the pot on the fire; and mâveth (H4194), the bare noun the men shout in v. 40. In the psalm the verb is used of being laid or set down, and the phrase it serves is the dust of death. We tier this structural rather than verbal on purpose: the lexeme is genuinely rare and genuinely shared, but the sense differs (a pot placed over a fire, a sufferer laid in the dust), and no source in this unit draws the connection. What remains is a motif worth noticing rather than a claim to press. The same two words that describe a supper and a panic in Gilgal describe an abandonment in the psalm the Gospels put in Christ's mouth.

Psalm 22:15

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H8239 shâphath (in 4 vv) and H4194 mâveth (in 149 vv). Downgraded from verbal because the sense of shâphath differs between the two passages and no commentator in the brief draws the link.

“If they drink any deadly thing”: a disputed New Testament echo flagged: verify source

The obvious New Testament sentence to set beside “death in the pot, and there was no evil thing in the pot” is the promise in the longer ending of Mark that a deadly draught will not hurt those who drink it. We flag it rather than confirm it, for two reasons. First, the provenance: Mark 16:9-20 is absent from the oldest Greek manuscripts and its canonical standing is disputed, so a thread hung on it is hung on contested ground. Second, the method: this is a Greek text and 2 Kings is Hebrew, so no shared Strong's lexeme can exist between them and no verbal tier is available in principle. Even if the ending were secure, the most that could honestly be claimed is a structural resemblance, protection from poison inside a company of disciples. None of the eleven commentators in this unit makes the connection. Verify the text before building on it.

Mark 16:18

basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew), so shared Strong's numbers are impossible and no verbal tier applies. Additionally the textual provenance of Mark 16:9-20 is disputed. No Verifier basis, no commentator in the brief asserts the link; flagged for the reader to check.

Christ in the Unittypology · verify

AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.

The prophet who feeds in a famine ancient/widely-held

Henry draws this line himself across the whole passage, and draws it carefully: Elisha “made a little food go a great way. Having freely received, he freely gave,” and then, “Christ's feeding his hearers was a miracle far beyond this, but both teach us that those who wait upon God in the way of duty, may hope to be supplied by Divine Providence.” The shape is the same one the Gospels record at the feeding of the multitudes: scarce ordinary food, a word spoken over it, and a company that eats. Note what Henry does not do, and we will not either: he refuses to flatten the two. The greater miracle is not the same miracle. Elisha stands at the head of a line of men who fed Israel out of nothing in a time of judgment, and the line does not end with him. This is the ancient and widely held reading of the Elisha feeding narratives, and Henry states it plainly at these verses.

John 6:35 · Matthew 14:19

What is cast in, and the cup that was not poured away novel

⚙ Our own reading, offered to be tested. The logic of this miracle is not removal but substitution: something wholesome is thrown into the vessel that holds death, and the vessel is then used. Cambridge and Ellicott both tie the meal to the salt of 2 Kings 2:21, and behind both stands the tree cast into the bitter water at Marah (Exodus 15:25), where the LORD names himself the one who heals. The Christian claim is that God's final answer to death in the cup was of this kind rather than the other: not the cup set aside, but a life put into it. The Gethsemane prayer of Matthew 26:39, in which the cup is asked to pass and then is not withdrawn, is the point at which the pattern stops being a figure. We mark this novel, not because the Elisha-to-Christ typology is new, but because this particular reading of the meal as cross-shaped is ours, drawn from the grammar of the passage and not from any of the eleven commentators in this unit.

Exodus 15:25 · Matthew 26:39 · 1 Corinthians 15:54

A fruit no one knew, and a bread given by name novel

⚙ A second reading we hold more loosely still. Death enters this company exactly as it entered the world in Genesis 3:6, through a fruit gathered from a plant, brought into the fellowship, and eaten, with the narrator noting the ignorance in the plural: כִּֽי־לֹ֥א יָדָֽעוּ, for they did not know. The lookalike detail is not decorative; Cambridge says the plant was called a vine “for want of knowledge of its true name,” and Barnes stresses that a true wild vine would have been harmless. What kills is what resembles the good thing. Against that, the Gospel's counter-offer is a food whose name and giver are both declared, taken knowingly and not by mistake (John 6:51; Luke 22:19). We mark it novel: the Eden echo is an interpretive reading of ours, supported by the text's insistence on ignorance but drawn by none of the sources here.

Genesis 3:6 · John 6:51 · Luke 22:19

Apparatus & Provenance

The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.

Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:

  • Albert Barnes, Notes on the Bible (1834)
  • Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, (1880s)
  • Charles Ellicott, Commentary for English Readers (1878)
  • Geneva Study Bible, Marginal Notes (1599)
  • Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory (1871)
  • John Gill, Exposition of the Entire Bible (1746–63)
  • Joseph Benson, Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1810s)
  • Keil & Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1860s)
  • Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible (1706)
  • Matthew Poole, Annotations upon the Holy Bible (1685)
  • The Pulpit Commentary, Spence & Exell, eds. (1880s)

⚙ Honesty notes for this unit. (1) The plant is not identified. Ellicott, Barnes and Pulpit lean toward the squirting cucumber (Ecbalium elaterium) on the etymology of pâqaʻ, to crack or split; K&D judge the ancient versions right in reading colocynth, chiefly on the shape of the fruit and the ornaments of 1 Kings 6:18; Geneva, Poole, Gill and JFB simply name coloquintida. Cambridge objects that a prickly wild cucumber could hardly be thought fit for pottage. Any statement in our synthesis about what was in the pot is a report of this disagreement, not a botanical finding. (2) The word rendered “herbs” is uncertain. Ellicott calls ’ōrōṯ (H219) “A rare word” and records the Targum's “greens,” the LXX's retention of the Hebrew, the Syriac and Arabic “mallows,” and Thenius's proposal of a different root; Strong's root gloss is “luminousness.” We have flagged this rather than resolved it. (3) The famine's date is contested. Barnes, Cambridge, Pulpit and K&D refer it to the seven years of 2 Kings 8:1; Benson's printed citation points to a different chapter. Ellicott and Cambridge both warn that this narrative is not in chronological sequence. (4) The servant is unidentified. Gill says “very probably Gehazi”; Ellicott, Cambridge and K&D think it more likely one of the sons of the prophets. The text does not say. (5) A textual variant at v. 41. Ellicott notes the LXX adds “to Gehazi, his servant” after “Pour out,” and judges it “probably a gloss.” Our synthesis follows the Hebrew. (6) Second-hand citations. Ellicott's note quotes Keil, Thenius and Reuss; Pulpit quotes Keil; where we relay these we are relaying a commentator's report of another scholar, not an independent source. (7) How near death they were is disputed. K&D cite Dioscorides that colocynth in quantity could kill; Cambridge holds there was probably not enough in the pot to kill; Ellicott's Reuss insists a real poison was neutralised. We have not settled it. (8) Scope of our own claims. The ʼănāshîm-to-ʻam shift, the Eden reading, and the cross-shaped reading of the meal are ⚙ synthesis, marked as such, drawn by none of the eleven commentators here. Every Hebrew form, parse, Strong's number and lexeme frequency above comes from the Berean interlinear and the Verifier; the commentary is public-domain and quoted verbatim by anchor.

= human, public-domain source, quoted and named. = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)