Naaman, his master, and Rimmon

Tek7

CGA President, Tribe of Judah Founder & President
Staff member
1 Naaman, commander of the army for the king of Aram, was a great man in his master’s sight[a] and highly regarded because through him, the LORD had given victory to Aram. The man was a brave warrior, but he had a skin disease.

2 Aram had gone on raids and brought back from the land of Israel a young girl who served Naaman’s wife. 3 She said to her mistress, “If only my master would go to the prophet who is in Samaria, he would cure him of his skin disease.”

4 So Naaman went and told his master what the girl from the land of Israel had said. 5 Therefore, the king of Aram said, “Go and I will send a letter with you to the king of Israel.”

So he went and took with him 750 pounds[c] of silver, 150 pounds[d] of gold, and 10 changes of clothes. 6 He brought the letter to the king of Israel, and it read:

When this letter comes to you, note that I have sent you my servant Naaman for you to cure him of his skin disease.

7 When the king of Israel read the letter, he tore his clothes and asked, “Am I God, killing and giving life that this man expects me to cure a man of his skin disease? Think it over and you will see that he is only picking a fight with[e] me.”

8 When Elisha the man of God heard that the king of Israel tore his clothes, he sent a message to the king, “Why have you torn your clothes? Have him come to me, and he will know there is a prophet in Israel.” 9 So Naaman came with his horses and chariots and stood at the door of Elisha’s house.

10 Then Elisha sent him a messenger, who said, “Go wash seven times in the Jordan and your flesh will be restored and you will be clean.”

11 But Naaman got angry and left, saying, “I was telling myself: He will surely come out, stand and call on the name of Yahweh his God, and will wave his hand over the spot and cure the skin disease. 12 Aren’t Abana and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? Could I not wash in them and be clean?” So he turned and left in a rage.

13 But his servants approached and said to him, “My father, if the prophet had told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much more should you do it when he tells you, ‘Wash and be clean’?” 14 So Naaman went down and dipped himself in the Jordan seven times, according to the command of the man of God. Then his skin was restored and became like the skin of a small boy, and he was clean.

15 Then Naaman and his whole company went back to the man of God, stood before him, and declared, “I know there’s no God in the whole world except in Israel. Therefore, please accept a gift from your servant.”

16 But Elisha said, “As the LORD lives, I stand before Him. I will not accept it.” Naaman urged him to accept it, but he refused.

17 Naaman responded, “If not, please let your servant be given as much soil as a pair of mules can carry, for your servant will no longer offer a burnt offering or a sacrifice to any other god but Yahweh. 18 However, in a particular matter may the LORD pardon your servant: When my master, the king of Aram, goes into the temple of Rimmon to worship and I, as his right-hand man,[f] bow in the temple of Rimmon—when I bow[g] in the temple of Rimmon, may the LORD pardon your servant in this matter.”

19 So he said to him, “Go in peace.”
2 Kings 5:1-19, HCSB

I've always enjoyed the story of Naaman. Here is a man accustomed to power and wealth seeking divine power because of a corruption in his own body, who was pointed to God by a captive Israelite, who nearly refused the solution because of pride, and who was persuaded to continue on the path to healing by his servants. As with so many Old Testament stories, there are many wonderful truths that ultimately point to Christ.

While recently re-reading this story, Naaman's request to Elisha and Elisha's answer struck me as very odd. Idolatry is vehemently forbidden in the Old Testament many times, yet when Naaman asked pardon for bowing to a foreign god (Rimmon, the Syrian god of thunder), Elisha answers, "Go in peace."

"Go in peace" is not "You are pardoned" or "It's okay." The response sounds neutral, though I admit I'm unfamiliar with the culture of that age.

But when Naaman responds to his miraculous healing by asking for pardon from bowing to a false god, I can't help but feel disappointed. Naaman, as the king's right-hand man, was in a position of considerable influence. When he returned to the king, his healing would have been obvious. The king's prompt and favorable responses to Naaman strongly suggests the king trust and even liked Naaman. So why would Naaman not use the opportunity to declare the power of the God who had healed him?

I don't want to immediately assume Naaman's bowing before Rimmon was an act of cowardice, but I don't see how it could have been acceptable to the Lord. Yet Elisha did not condemn the practice as other prophets had condemned idolatry. Certainly Naaman no longer trusted in Rimmon as he had trusted in God, but his outward actions suggested submission to a foreign god.

Naaman stands as an obvious contrast to Esther, who used her position of authority to protect her people. Naaman instead receives his healing then continues on with his life, seemingly without punishment. (If his leprosy returned, I would expect the Bible to report as much.)

So what are we to make of Naaman's bowing before Rimmon and the apparent lack of consequence?

EDIT: I think it's interesting that Naaman repeats the phrase "bow in the temple of Rimmon," almost as if the words were sticking his throat.
 
Last edited:
A very interesting passage and question.

Naaman's conversion to belief in the God of Israel seems real enough. Yet, he does not appear to be ready to sacrifice his position in the king's household and service. Is he right or wrong? At the same time, he wants to begin worshiping the one true God. Can he go back to the king and give up his position? It may well have been a life and death/do or die situation.

One NT passage that may be relevant (that is not often brought up in our 21st century - everything has to change at salvation - thinking):

Each of you should continue to live in whatever situation the Lord has placed you, and remain as you were when God first called you. This is my rule for all the churches...[interlude about reamaining uncircumcised]...Yes, each of you should remain as you were when God called you...[interlude about remaining a slave]...Each of you, dear brothers and sisters, should remain as you were when God first called you. 1 Corinthians 7:17, 20, 24 (NLT)

Would Paul say that Naaman should remain in the king's service? I think he probably would say, "Yes." Would Naaman have to do some spiritual gymnastics to remain in his service? Yeah, probably. Should he get out of there, if it were possible? Again, yeah, probably (much like the slave in the 1 Corinthians passage should choose freedom if he had a chance).

Did Paul ever engage in spiritual gymnastics? Yeah. He says he did. By spiritual gymnastics I mean dropping some of the accepted spiritual walk and talk, not being heretical or blasphemous.

I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings. 1 Corinthians 9:22-23 (NIV)

It is almost a cliche to say, but my guess is that most conservative Christians would not have much to do with Paul - he walked a little too close to the edge and was involved in a little too much spiritual gymnastics.

Just adding to the thought process, here.
 
It's difficult to know the heart of Naaman, especially when the rest of his story is not told by Scripture.

I did note that the king of the same nation that employed Naaman waged war against Israel in 2 Kings 6:8. Is this the same king that appointed Naaman and supported his decision to seek out Elisha? The English translation doesn't make it clear and I haven't yet dug too deep using other resources to answer that question.
 
Yes, a very interesting passage indeed. I've read it before, but never contemplated the part about Naaman's king at the end. I find the translator's decisions interesting as well. The words rendered as "burnt offering" and "sacrifice" are both accurate ("burning or to burn" and "slaughter or sacrifice" respectively). However, the word translated as "bow down" means to bow in reverence as to a king or deity and is also rendered as worship (see Genesis 22:5 where Abraham and Isaak go to worship the Lord on mount Moriah). One on line commentary suggests viewing these stories (four in a series in 2 Kings) as examples of how God uses his Prophets to exert his power outside of the nation of Israel.

I think Paul's discussion of weak and strong faith in Romans 14 may also have baring on this issue as well. Paul is specifically speaking of eating meat which has been sacrificed to idols but the principle holds. One may eat meat which has been sacrificed to an idol knowing the One True God just as Naaman may bow while another offers sacrifices to a false god. I don't know, but that may be another way to look at it.
 
Man, what a tough situation... And such a potential for a slippery slope. Naaman recognizes that he is bowing to a false god as a mechanism for self-preservation. Yet he does not honor the god in his heart.

I agree that God gave us Romans for instances just as this, but hesitate to apply this as "you can commit forbidden or sinful acts, as long as you don't really mean it in your heart."

This is one of those cases that I'm willing to say that I don't completely understand, but instead choose to submit all authority to our Perfect Judge.
 
Back
Top