history, and in the way of history all that remains is that once an Elijah lived and did great things; all besides is insecure and uncertain, is in fact legend presented in a poetic garment.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.

Ver. 1. And Elijah the Tishhite. When under Ahab the falling away from Jehovah in Israel reached a degree never hitherto known (chap. xvi. 30–34), then the prophet Elijah appeared and announced to the king, &c. Thenius is of the opinion that the proper opening of the history of Elijah here is missing, and that the manner of his appearance presupposes an activity in the past. Von Gerlach also says, "the history

has a great gap here, at its beginning," for Elijah appears as one in connection with whom extraordinary occurrences were known for a long time. But this view is not necessary. It is in the highest degree probable that Elijah lived, up to that moment, in retirement, that his prophetic activity first began with his encounter with Ahab, and that then his history, strictly speaking, began, like that of Mark and Matthew, and of John the Baptist his copy. This sudden coming forth corresponds well with the peculiarity of his appearing, hence also Jesus Sirach (Ecclesiasticus xlviii. 1-12) begins his eulogy upon Elijah with the words: "Then stood up Elias the prophet as fire, and his word burned like a lamp. He brought a sore famine upon them,"

&c.

of no moment, but it is certain that he came over into Samaria from the country east of the Jordan.

As the Lord God

Said unto Ahab, &c. It is often maintained that the words of Elijah are the conclusion of a longer conference with Alab, and the Talmud (Sanhed. xxii. 1) states the occasion and the contents of the same, but most arbitrarily. The prophet surely entered into no dispute with Ahab. According to his constantly observed plan, he appeared before the backslider with a short but incisive word, which he understood well enough without any extended reasoning. of Israel liveth is the usual form of an oath, which here at the same time places Jehovah, the only living God, in contrast with Baal, the dead idol. The addition also, the God of Israel, stands out in its full meaning: the true living God is He also who had chosen Israel and made a covenant with them, which With was now shamefully broken by idolatry. the words, before whom I stand (chap. i. 2; x. 5, 8), Elijah designates himself to the king as the servant and ambassador of Jehovah, and that as such he stands before him and announces the impending punishment. This punishment, that there should be no dew nor rain, was not arbitrary and prejudiced, but was threatened in the law for the sin of falling away, and suited the especial circum stances. The fruitful land of Canaan was promised to the people, after their exodus from Egypt, on the condition that they would keep the covenant of Jehovah, and not serve other gods. But in the event of a falling away it was threatened that the heavens should become brass, and the earth iron, i. e., that it should become unfruitful; and this, for an agricultural people, was the direst evil (Lev. xxvi. 19 sq.; Deut. xi. 16 sq.; xxviii. 23 sq.; cf. 1 Kings viii. 35: Amos. iv. 7 sq.). Never hitherto had the covenant been broken, and idol

The name or (2 Kings i. 3 sq.), i. e., not, according to the old interpreters: My strength is Jehovah, but: My God is Jehovah, refers to the life's calling of the prophet, which was to bear witness against Jehovah as the one true God over against Baal. It is not at all likely that he gave this significant name to himself (Thenius). In chap. xxi. 17 he is called the Tish-atry been formally introduced, as under Ahab: if bite without any addition. In Tob. i. 2 only, is Oia 37, a place, mentioned, "which is at the right hand of that city which is called properly Naphtali, in Galilee above Aser." As there is no mention anywhere of a place of that name, this must be the Thisbe. The addition

says that Elijah of Thisbe was born in Galilee, but was living in Gilead, in the land lying over against Ephraim, on the other side of Jordan. Instead of Ewald, Thenius, and Kurtz wish, after the Sept. (ỏ Ocoẞirng ó έK OεσσEẞ The Takaád), to read , so that the sense would be, the Tishbite, namely, of the Thisbe which is in Gilead, but which is not the Thisbe in Galilee, mentioned in Tob. i. 2. But there is no proof that there was a Thisbe in Gilead. Even in does not force us to this reading: for it does not designate a stranger, i. e., a non-Israelite, but one who had wandered off into another tribe, and was

dwelling there, like the still stronger in Judges xvii. 7 of the Levite who was of Bethlehem in Judah, and had settled himself in Ephraim. That the generally plene written in stands here without makes nothing against the Masoretic punctuation (Keil on the place). Whether Elijah came from the unknown Thisbe in Galilee, or from the equally unknown Thisbe in Gilead, is a matter

ever at all, now must the threatening be carried into execution. Such a punishment was at the same time an evidence against the Baal-worship; for since Baal was worshipped conspicuously as the generating Nature-power, so was the impendimpotence and nullity of this idol. It is not to be ing drought and barrenness a tangible proof of the overlooked that Elijah, while he announces the coming of the punishment threatened by Moses, and in a certain degree executes it, places himself, at the outset, in the direct position of a mediator and founder of the covenant, as another Moses, .e., as the restorer of the covenant. The prophet announces the continuance of the drought only in a general way, because it would depend upon the conduct of the king and of the people. He therefore adds, but according to my word, perhaps "in opposition to others, particularly the prophets of Baal" (Keil), certainly for the humiliation of the haughty king, who had set himself up above Jehovah and his commandment, and now must feel he despised, one of his subjects, but who, neverhimself dependent upon the word of a man whom

And the word of the Lord came

theless, "was standing before Jehovali."
Vers. 2-3.
unto him, &c.
How Ahab received the announce-
ment of the prophet, whether angrily or indiffer-
ently, is not stated. Certainly he did not lay hands
upon him, who seems to have disappeared as un-
expectedly as he came. From the more general
direction eastward, which is followed by the more

especial -y of Jordan, Thenius justly concludes | merchant, Elijah was not to eat the ravens, and the

and worshipper of idols, but that she was not in the native land of the prophet. By in "the smallest-sized bread in the form of cake is to be understood (Thenius). It is baked in hot ashes; the Sept. has ¿yxpvoiac (cf. Ps. xxxv. 16). 7 is a little vessel for holding meal. Oil was used in baking. The woman was collecting the wood to have her last baking," for she saw before her death from starvation.

for thee to come to me, &c. As mothers, at the loss of a beloved child, often seek for the reason of it in some definite occasion, so here the troubled is a punishment for her sin, which first becomes woman has the thought that the death of her son known properly before God through the man of God, who, as such, is in a special intercourse with God. We can scarcely find "the presumption" in this thought, that "the appearance of a higher being brings undoubtedly death to the person to whom it happens" (Menken after Hess), but rather the erroneous supposition that by intercourse with the holy man of God, and in contrast with him, her sinful nature first becomes clear and known to the holy God. As in contrast with the holy will of God revealed in the law, man in his sinfulness knows himself, the same is true also in contrast with such men as walk before the holy God, and within whom His holy will lives and works (Luke v. 8). The error lay in this-that the woman supposed that in the degree in which she had God also was then taking cognizance of it, and come to the knowledge and the feeling of her sin, but in this folly what truth of feeling and humi!punishing her. Folly indeed in the thought, ity (Krummacher). This error the prophet sets aside, not by means of a long didactic reply, but her that the distress did not overtake her on acby a rescuing action which must have convinced to the follow-cou, and that "the works of God might be count of her special sin, but ὑπὲρ τῆς δόξης του manifest thereby" (John ix. 3; xi. 4).

Vers. 13-16. And Elijah said unto her, Fear not, &c. The prophet attaches to his word of consolation a demand which was, for the woman, a severe test of her faith. Never would he have made the demand, and still less would she have paid any attention to it (ver. 15), had she been a heathen and worshipped idols. That at the word of Jehovah, the God of Israel (ver. 14), she did what the prophet bade her, certainly shows a faith which could scarcely be found in Israel. n is the infinitive with the syllable in repeated as in chap. vi. 19. The addition, and her house, ver. 15: while in ver. 12 and 13 her son only is mentioned, means that there was so much meat and oil that even her poor relations came to partake thereof. The Sept. in vers. 12 and 13, without any authority, has Toiç Tekvo, and in ver. 15, Tà Tékva, and Thenius would like to make the text to conform to this. The same author, without reason, wishes, with the Vulgate (et ex illa die), to refer

ing verse and from that time the barrel wasted not. It means simply a long while, like Gen. xl. 4; Numb. ix. 22.

Vers. 17-18. And it came to pass after these things, &c. It went so far with the sick son that "there was no breath left in him." The same expression occurs also in Dan. x. 17 (cf. 1 Kings x. 5), but where it does not, however, at all describe death (i. e., being in a state of death). It would be a mistake to maintain that these words can mean only that he died. We must rather conclude, that as the text does not say

it did

"

Vers. 19-23. And he took him out of her bosom, &c. He goes "into his lonely chamber in order to be alone with his God, and to be able to pray all the more freely. Here he pours out his heart, inwardly moved by sympathy at the grief of the mother, and much distressed at the incomprehensibleness and unexpectedness of this divine providence, in humble trustfulness before his God (Menken). Cf. Acts ix. 40; 2 Kings iv. 33. In the question to God (ver. 20) there is no cavil; it is rather the expression of a man wrestling in prayer with God, who does not doubt that God not mean to say it. Vers. 18 and 20 likewise do not will hear him (James i. 6).—And he laid him, compel us to think of a being in a state of death, and &c. How this was done is more fully stated in 2 Josephus, who certainly was not afraid of the mira- Kings iv. 34. Like Christ, the prophet of all proculous, gives our words thus-“óç kaì Tỳν Yuxi phets, when he healed the dumb, and the blind, aĢɛivai kaì đóža vεкpóv. The illness was certainly and the blind from his birth (Mark vii. 33; viii. mortal, and the boy would have remained in a breath- 23; John ix. 6, 7), so Elijah proceeded in this less and lifeless condition, had not Elijah rescued case. He employs rational means for warming him from death. The action of the prophet is and re-vivifying, not with the hope that of themhence miraculous, which he did not perform by his selves they would prove effectual, but in the sure own human power, but which the God who doeth confidence that God, in answer to his weeping wonders achieved through him. The formula - supplication, would impart supernatural, divine, i. e., life-giving, force to the natural human instruments, and this happened.-Three times Elijah stretched himself upon the child, calling upon God, not so much because everything to be thoroughly and completely done must be done thrice (three are the true unit), as rather because the calling upon the name of Jehovah in the old covenant was a threefold act (Ps. lv. 18; Dan. vi. 10); thrice in the high-priestly benediction was the name of Jehovah laid upon Israel (Numb. vi. 22); thrice did the seraphim before the throne of Jehovah cry out holy (Isa. vi. 3).

(cf. 2 Sam. xvi. 10; Judges xi. 12; Kings iii. 13; Matt. viii. 29; John ii. 4) has, according to

the connection, a somewhat different sense. Here

the

it expresses, as the respectful form of address, "Man of God," shows, not strong dislike, or breaking up of outward fellowship and a demand for his departure" (Thenius), but distress and lamentation: Is this the result of my association with thee? Must such sorrow befall me because thou art with me? The words immediately following are to be connected therewith;, &c., which do not convey a positive accusation or objection, but, with the Sept., Vulgate, Thenius, and others, are to be understood interrogatively: Was it necessary

Ver. 24. And the woman said, &c. The sense of her words is not that she had doubted hitherto whether Elijah were actually a man of God, but that now she knew it; for she names him

tire personality and work in his calling bears also supremely an historical character. And as the restoring and rehabilitation of the covenant deval of the idol-worship, already deeply rooted and manded, necessarily, an overthrowing and remo

such in ver. 18, and as such regards him as the cause of her grievous visitation. Rather she explains, now (ny Ruth ii. 7; 2 Kings v. 22), she is convinced anew and most assuredly about it. П at the end is not to be taken adverbial-powerful, not only must glowing zeal and imparly: that thou art truly a prophet and speakest the word of Jehovah, but as a substantive: that which thou, in the name of Jehovah, speakest as His word is truth, upon which one can entirely repose. The experience in ver. 14 is confirmed here to its fullest extent. Menken is incorrect here in understanding by "the whole announcement of the truth, all taken together, which Elijah had said and taught during his stay in her house, concerning truth and error, the worship of idols and the worship of God," &c. The expression never means this, but always simply the word of Jehovah which He Himself speaks or has spoken.

HISTORICAL AND ETHICAL.

tial strictness be combined in this character so devoted to the law, but also a judicial activity itself. Hence his acts often have the appearance of hardness and violence. The period of his appearing was, for the covenant-breaking, idolatrous generation, a day of divine judgment, a time of visitation and chastening. But in so far as the restoration relations, but the ethico-religious relation to Jehoof the covenant did not concern outward, political vah, the Holy One, and aimed to "turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the properly the prophet of repentance. This, indeed, he children to their fathers" (Mal. iv. 6), Elijah was announced by his dress (2 Kings i. 8), which there. after was the official dress of the prophets and preachers of repentance (1 Kings xix. 19; 2 Kings ii. 13; Zach. xiii. 4), and in which he appeared, of 1. The first coming forth of Elijah is in the whom the Lord said, “and if ye will receive it, highest degree characteristic, and, as it were, the this is Elias which was for to come (Matt. iii. 4; superscription, in the way of action, to his entire xi. 14; xvii. 11). And what was his first word appearing; for it throws light, at the outset, upon but a call to repentance? Kurtz is somewhat the peculiarity both of his personality and of his one-sided in his judgment on Elijah's position in public activity. Living until then in the greatest the divine economy. He says: "In his official obscurity and entirely unknown, he stands sud- position the absolute one-sidedness of the exhibidenly there "like one fallen from the clouds, to be tion of law, and the limit of his vision and of compared with the lightning of God, like a light- his activity to the present, which is therewith ed fire-brand hurled by the hand of Jehovah" connected, characterizes him . . . . for the under(Krummacher), and after he had spoken his word, standing of this, his one-sided position as prophet, which "burned like a torch" (Ecclesiast. xlviii. 1), having to deal neither with hopes nor with promihe again disappears, and no one knew whither he ses, we should not lose sight of the fact that he had gone (chap. xviii. 10; cf. 2 Kings ii. 16-18; 1 wrought and lived in the kingdom of Israel, not in Kings ix. 3, 8). Wholly alone, without any pow- the kingdom of Judah. Only there, not here, is er or influence behind him, he encountered the the coming of a prophet like Elijah comprehensimighty king fearlessly and courageously, not like ble. In the kingdom of Judah a prophet like Elia suppliant, but threatening and punishing (cf. jah would certainly have taken a different course chap. xviii. 15; xxi. 20; 2 Kings ii. 15 sq.). His there, all would have worked upon him and speech is brief and pithy, firm and definite. He would have made something else out of him." If delivers no elaborated address; the word he speaks this were so, it is not easy to explain why he, in is like a deed. "There is something great, majes- preference to all other prophets, should have aptic, divine, in the coming forth of this prophet" peared, along with Moses, at the transfiguration (Menken). No less striking is the substance of of Christ, and why the Lord, in the passages alhis first utterance. He announces to the chief of ready cited, should attribute to him such high sigthe kingdom of the ten tribes, carried over into nificance for the Messianic age, just as the proformal idolatry by the sin of Jeroboam, and now phet Malachi had already done (iv. 5, 6). It completely cut loose from the covenant (chap. xix. was not Elijah's calling to refer to the Messiah in 10), the punishment which was threatened in the words and discourses, he had to do only with the covenant (law), that he may forsake his evil ways rehabilitation of the broken covenant, and Messiand turn unto the God of his fathers. But in this anic predictions could follow only upon this. Under he does not bring to light merely one side of his existing circumstances, this could be brought prophetic calling, but the core and heart thereof. about only by great, mighty actions. Elijah, The peculiar, specific place which he occupied in hence, was, as we have already remarked, a prothe economy of grace was to raise up and restore phet of action, "the great hero-prophet of the kingthe covenant which had been communicated and estab-dom of the ten tribes" (Ewald). His whole career lished by Moses, but had become violated. As restor- was active. His person was a living prophecy of er and reformer he stands in immediate relation to him who appeared before the day of the Lord, the Moses, the founder of this covenant. Hence we day of judgment, so also of grace (cf. Hengstenshall see, not only in the course of his history is berg, Christologie III. s. 441 sq.) there much that is analogous with the history of Moses, but he appears also together with Moses at the transfiguration of the Lord (Luke ix. 28-35), and both speak "of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem." They both represent the Old-Testament economy in contrast with Him who, by his "decease," carries it to its end and fulfilment. As another, second Moses, Elijah's en

2. The three wonderful occurrences which follow upon the first coming forth of Elijah are in imme. diate relation to the time in which they took place, and which was a period of general distress in con sequence of the drought, and it was also a time of preparation for the coming activity of the prophet. And the transactions here brought together lose in this way the appearance of being only accider.

3. Elijah's subsistence in the desert is and remains, according to the simple, clear sense of the narrative, miraculous. "It is almost laughable," as Winer rightly says, when many ancient and recent expositors, even Rabbins, make the ravens to be Arabs or merchants; but it is not much better when J. D. Michaelis supposes that Elijah had a hunting-ground for ravens, as well also as young hares, rats, and mice, which they would carry to their nests, or had trained them as hawks for the 5. The narrative represents the fact, that the meal hunt. Others, like Knobel, perceiving the prepos- in the barrel and the oil in the cruse did not fail, to terousness of such explanations, have referred to have been quite as much an extraordinary act of the like cases amongst profane writers:" "Semi- God as the previous support by means of the ramis, exposed as a newly-born infant, was nour- ravens. The grossest prejudice alone can say: ished by doves; a bitch gave suck to Cyrus, a she-"Here there is not a syllable that this was done wolf to Romulus and Remus; the same is narrated by miracle: God gave his blessing so, that by the by Elian, v. 12, 42, of hinds, mares, bears, goats" labor of her hands, assisted perhaps by the pro(Prophet. der Hebr. II. s. 84; cf. Rödiger, Allg. En-phet, she secured for herself the necessaries of life" cyklop. Bd. 33, s. 322). All these myths of chil- (Dinter. Schull. Bib. on the place). In that case dren-nursing animals have grown up upon the soil Elijah's promise, ver. 14. was nothing more than of nature-religion, and are consequently specifically an exhortation to industry, but no prophet was heathen. Their sense is that the power of nature, needed for this. Knobel is equally unsatisfactory revealing itself in the suckling animals, is trans-(as above s. 81), when in the whole narrative he