2 Kings5:15–27

The two bags: the only other satchels in the Hebrew Bible verbal / quotation: confirmed

The word for the bags Naaman ties the silver into, חֲרִטִ֗ים (ḥă·ri·ṭîm, H2754 chârîyṭ), occurs in exactly one other place in the Hebrew Bible. Ellicott states it: “Only here and in Isaiah 3:22, where it means ‘purses.’” Cambridge adds the Greek and the guess at the object: the LXX has θύλακοι, the R.V. renders Isaiah's word ‘satchels’, and since “the root word signifies ‘to engrave’... Perhaps there was some embroidery, or network in its formation.” ⚙ The context of the one parallel is worth weighing. Isaiah 3 is the stripping of the daughters of Zion, an inventory of luxury goods about to be confiscated by judgment, and the satchels stand in that list between the mirrors and the veils. The Verifier confirms the shared lexeme and its rarity; we do not claim the writer of Kings is quoting Isaiah, only that Hebrew has two ornamental money bags and both of them are attached to wealth that is about to become a curse.

Isaiah 3:22

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H2754 chârîyṭ, in 2 vv only (this verse and Isaiah 3:22). Rare-lexeme verbal link; no quotation or literary dependence is claimed in either direction.

A kibrah of ground: the measure that elsewhere marks Rachel's grave verbal / quotation: confirmed

The distance Naaman had gone before Gehazi caught him is כִּבְרַת־ אָֽרֶץ׃ (kiḇ·raṯ ʼā·reṣ, H3530 kibrâh), and Cambridge notes that “It is found only here and in Genesis 35:16; Genesis 48:7.” Both of those stand on the road to Ephrath: Rachel goes into hard labour a kibrah from Bethlehem and dies, and Jacob recites the same measure on his deathbed when he explains where he buried her. Ellicott and Gill both admit nobody knows how far it is; Ellicott only insists it cannot be a parasang, “Had it been a parasang, as the Syriac renders, Gehazi could not have overtaken the company so easily.” ⚙ We record the lexical link and stop there. The idiom is a narrator's vague road measure, and its clustering in two death-and-burial scenes and one theft scene is a fact about a rare word, not an argument.

Genesis 35:16 · Genesis 48:7

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H3530 kibrâh, in 3 vv total (2 Kings 5:19; Genesis 35:16; Genesis 48:7). Rare-lexeme verbal link only; no thematic or citational dependence claimed.

The same lad, the same running, a different errand structural / thematic: confirmed

Gehazi is introduced here not as ʻebed but as נַעַר֮ (na·ʻar, H5288), the title he carries through the Elisha cycle. At 2 Kings 4:12 he is the naʻar summoned to fetch the Shunammite; at 4:31 he is the naʻar who ran ahead with the prophet's staff and laid it on a dead boy's face, and nothing happened. ⚙ The same legs that could not carry power into the Shunammite's upper room carry silver out of Samaria here. Henry sets the contrast the other way, between households rather than errands: “Naaman, a Syrian, a courtier, a soldier, had many servants, and we read how wise and good they were. Elisha, a holy prophet, a man of God, has but one servant, and he proves a base liar.” The Verifier supplies the shared names and titles that hold the three scenes together.

2 Kings 4:12 · 2 Kings 4:31

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H1522 Gêychăzîy (in 12 vv) and H5288 naʻar (in 221 vv) with 2 Kings 4:12 and 2 Kings 4:31. The names recur because it is one narrative cycle; the link recorded here is the shared figure and role, not an allusion.

A blessing you can carry: Jacob presses his present on Esau structural / thematic: confirmed

Four of our commentators independently route Naaman's בְרָכָ֖ה (ḇə·rā·ḵāh, H1293) through the same verse. Ellicott: “Take a blessing of. Accept a present from (Genesis 33:11).” Poole: “A blessing; a thankful acknowledgment. See Genesis 33:11.” K&D: “a present, בּרכה, as in Genesis 33:11; 1 Samuel 25:27, etc.” Cambridge quotes Jacob's words outright, “Take I pray thee, my blessing,” and adds Judges 1:15, 1 Samuel 25:27 and 1 Samuel 30:26. ⚙ In Genesis 33 the man pressing the blessing is the brother who once stole one, buying peace from the brother he stole it from; here the man pressing it has just received one he could not buy. We note the resonance and claim nothing about dependence.

Genesis 33:11 · 1 Samuel 25:27

basis: Recorded basis is the citation of Genesis 33:11 by Ellicott, Poole, Cambridge and K&D for the idiom H1293 Bᵉrâkâh used of a present. The Verifier's candidate list does not include these pairs, so no computed lexeme frequency stands behind this badge.

Leprous as snow: the sign given to Moses, the judgment given to Miriam structural / thematic: confirmed

The closing phrase מְצֹרָ֥ע כַּשָּֽׁלֶג׃ is a fixed formula, and the sources agree on its two other homes. Ellicott: “A leper as white as snow. Comp. Exodus 4:6; Numbers 12:10.” K&D and Poole cite the same pair. In Exodus 4:6 the snowy hand is a sign granted to Moses and instantly withdrawn; in Numbers 12:10 it is a judgment on Miriam for speaking against Moses, and it is lifted after seven days. Here it is a sentence with no time limit attached. Cambridge presses the simile itself: since leprous crusting is often rose-coloured rather than white, “the point of the comparison is not the whiteness only, but that likeness which it bears to a light downlike covering.” ⚙ Read across the three, the formula marks the moment a body is made to testify against its owner's relation to God's servant.

Exodus 4:6 · Numbers 12:10

basis: Recorded basis is the shared idiom 'leprous as snow' as cited for this verse by Ellicott, K&D, Poole and Cambridge. The Verifier's candidate list returns no computed lexeme basis for these pairs, so we do not tier this verbal despite the verbatim phrase.

The gift of God is not purchased with money structural / thematic: confirmed

Two of our commentators reach for the same New Testament scene at v. 16. Barnes: Elisha refused, lest Naaman “imagine that ‘the gift of God might be purchased with money’ Acts 8:20.” Ellicott adds Theodoret's comparison of Matthew 10:8 and cites Acts 8:20 alongside it. At the other end of the unit, Poole and K&D both reach for Acts 5: Gehazi's lie “was in a manner a lying to the Holy Ghost, like theirs, Acts 5:3” (Poole), and Grotius, quoted by K&D, generalises it, “he who seeks to deceive the prophet in relation to the things which belong to his office, is said to lie to the Holy Ghost.” ⚙ The two halves of 2 Kings 5 thus supply the Old Testament shape of both halves of the early church's money problem: Simon trying to buy the Spirit's gift, Ananias lying about the price of a field. This is a cross-Testament link between a Hebrew text and Greek ones, so it cannot rest on shared Strong's numbers and we do not tier it verbal.

Acts 8:20 · Acts 5:3 · Matthew 10:8

basis: Cross-Testament (Hebrew to Greek): shared Strong's numbers are impossible by definition, so no verbal tier is available. Recorded basis is the explicit citation of Acts 8:20 by Barnes and Ellicott, of Matthew 10:8 by Ellicott (following Theodoret) and Pulpit, and of Acts 5:3 by Poole and by Grotius as quoted in K&D.

Rimmon and Remphan: a link the sources themselves distrust flagged: verify source

Two of our commentators record an old identification of the Syrian רִמּוֹן֩ (H7417 Rimmôwn) with the Remphan of Stephen's speech. Poole: “Rimmon; a Syrian idol, called here by the LXX. Remman, and Acts 7:43 Remphan.” Gill reports the same route, that the LXX “calls it Remman, thought by some to be the same with Remphan, Acts 7:43, a name of Saturn,” and then rejects it in his own words: “which is not likely, for the word is certainly of a Syriac signification.” The etymologies offered for Rimmon in our sources do not agree either: Ellicott derives it from the Assyrian Rammânu, “the thunderer”; Pulpit and Cambridge from rûm, “to be high”; JFB from the pomegranate; K&D lists four candidates and declines. ⚙ We record the cross-reference because two named sources make it and one of them immediately disowns it. It is exactly the kind of link that should be flagged rather than asserted.

Acts 7:43

basis: Contested provenance. The link runs Rimmon to LXX Remman to Acts 7:43 Remphan, and rests entirely on a Septuagintal transliteration; Gill reports the identification and then denies it, and our sources give four incompatible etymologies for Rimmon. Cross-Testament (Hebrew to Greek), so no shared Strong's basis is possible in any case.

Freely ye have received, freely give ancient/widely-held

Ellicott reports that Theodoret, reading v. 16, compared our Lord's charge to the Twelve, “Freely ye have received, freely give” (Matthew 10:8), and adds cautiously, “Such may have been Elisha's feeling.” Pulpit is careful about the chronology in the other direction: the refusal “was not compulsory on him so to act; for the precept... had not been yet uttered.” ⚙ Both observations are worth keeping. Elisha is not obeying a rule that does not exist; he is anticipating one, and he anticipates it for the same reason Christ gives it, because the giver has not paid for what he hands out. Cleansed lepers stand among the works that clause is attached to, which is why Theodoret reached for it here, and the one leper cleansed in this chapter is cleansed by a word, in a river, at no charge, to the visible annoyance of a servant who thought there was money on the table. Geneva states the principle from the Reformers' side: “the Lord commands that they that receive freely, should also give freely.”

Matthew 10:8 · Acts 8:20

Naaman the Syrian, and the leper who came back ancient/widely-held

Maclaren opens his exposition of this unit with the comparison: “Like the Samaritan leper healed by Jesus, Naaman came back to give glory to God.” Cambridge makes it independently, “He was a stranger in Israel, like the Samaritan among the ten lepers whom our Lord cured, but like him he also manifested his thankfulness,” and Barnes simply writes, “Naaman was grateful (compare Luke 17:15).” ⚙ The reading is older than any of them: it is Christ's own, since He names this very man in the synagogue at Nazareth, telling them that there were many lepers in Israel in Elisha's day and not one of them was cleansed, only Naaman the Syrian (Luke 4:27). We paraphrase rather than quote, because the Gospel text is not among the sources supplied for this unit. That sermon was aimed at exactly the reflex Gehazi acts out in v. 20, the conviction that a Syrian is the wrong sort of person to receive God's mercy, and the congregation at Nazareth responded to it by trying to throw Jesus off a cliff. The chapter therefore stands in the Gospels as the Old Testament proof that grace crosses the border first and that the household of the prophet may be the last to like it. This is a cross-Testament reading, so it rests on Christ's citation and on the commentators, not on shared lexemes.

Luke 4:27 · Luke 17:15

The leprosy that travels the other way novel

⚙ Offered as this tool's own figural reading, and marked novel. The mechanism of v. 27 is transfer: Gehazi takes what belonged to Naaman, so he receives what belonged to Naaman. Henry states the logic without softening it, “If he will have Naaman's money, he shall have his disease with it,” and the Hebrew is precise about whose disease it is, וְצָרַ֤עַת נַֽעֲמָן֙, “the leprosy of Naaman.” The Pual participle מְצֹרָ֥ע says he was made leprous, passive, by an agent the text does not bother to name. ⚙ The Gospel runs the same machinery in reverse and at cost to the one who initiates it. Christ touches a leper rather than sending him to a river, and the uncleanness that should have travelled up the arm does not; instead the cleanness travels down. Where Gehazi seizes another man's wealth and inherits his plague, the Son seizes nothing (Philippians 2:6) and inherits ours by gift. We mark this novel because none of our twelve commentators draws it: Poole, K&D and Grotius read v. 27 as a just sentence on lying and avarice, full stop, and that is certainly what the verse says. The figural reading is ours and is offered to be tested.

Luke 5:13 · Philippians 2:6 · 2 Corinthians 5:21