2 Kings 6:22

2Ki 6:22 And he answered, Thou shalt not smite [them]: wouldest thou smite those whom thou hast taken captive with thy sword and with thy bow? set bread and water before them, that they may eat and drink, and go to their master.

Ver. 22. Thou shalt not smite them.] Though Elisha well knew that they came down to Dothan with bloody purposes toward him. This was "not to be overcome of evil," as the next was to "overcome evil with good."

Set bread and water before them.] Oh, noble revenge I Thus, thus should a prophet punish his persecutors: "If thine enemy hunger, feed him," &c. {Rom 12:20 Pro 25:21} {See Trapp on "Rom 12:20"} {See Trapp on "Pro 25:21"}

And go to their master.] Praising their cheer, and convincing him of thy beneficence, a shame to his malevolence. We should confute the world’s miscarriages by our contrary practices.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Verse 22. Whom thou hast taken captive] Those who in open battle either lay down their arms, or are surrounded, and have their retreat cut off, are entitled to their lives, much more those who are thus providentially put into thy hand, without having been in actual hostility against thee. Give them meat and drink, and send them home to their master, and let them thus know that thou fearest him not, and art incapable of doing an ungenerous or unmanly action.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(22) Thou shalt not.—Or, thou must not.

Wouldest thou smite . . . thy bow?—The Hebrew order is, “An quos ceperis gladío et arcu percussuruses?” (Comp. Gen_48:22.) Elisha says, “These men are virtually prisoners of war, and therefore are not to be slain in cold blood.”

The LXX., Targum, Syriac, and Vulg., ignore the interrogative particle. The Targum and Syriac render, “Lo those whom thou hast taken captive with thy sword, &c., thou dost (or mayst) kill.” (Comp. Deu_20:13.) The Vulg., “neque enim cepisti eos, ut percutias,” and the Arabic, “Didst thou take them captive with thy sword, &c., that thou shouldest slay them?” come to the same thing. These renderings are interesting, as they make Elisha deny the king’s right of disposal of these prisoners of Jehovah. The purpose of the miracle would have been frustrated by killing the Syrians. That purpose was to force their king and them to acknowledge the might of the true God.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22. wouldest thou smite those whom thou hast taken captive] The prophet points out that the men are not even captives whom the king himself has taken. Had they been so, yet the laws of war would have forbidden their slaughter at such a time and in cold blood. Much more is it unlawful to slay these, who are God’s prisoners. Some have preferred to take the sentence as not interrogative. ‘Those whom thou hadst taken prisoners thou mightest be allowed to slay, but not these.’ Deu_20:13 sanctions the slaying prisoners of war; but it is doubtful whether the grammar of the original in this verse can be taken as anything but interrogative.

set bread and water before them] It is manifest that the prophet was setting forth a higher degree of humanity than was usual towards prisoners. We need not therefore be surprised, if in the former clause of the verse he does not speak according to the sterner precept of Deuteronomy, which was laid down in order that the idolaters might be exterminated from Canaan.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And it came to pass after this, that Benhadad king of Syria gathered all his host,.... Still retaining a grudge and enmity against Israel, and not at all softened by the kind and humane treatment his forces had met with, when in the hands of Israel; and finding he could do nothing in a secret way, by ambush, mustered all his forces together, to try what he could by open war:

and went up, and besieged Samaria; Jehoram king of Israel not being able to stop him till he came to his capital, which he laid close siege to.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Wouldest thou smite ... - It is doubtful whether this sentence is really interrogative. Others translate - “Smite those whom thou hast taken captive with thy sword,” etc. A contrast is intended between ordinary captives - those made with the sword and bow - and these particular prisoners who have been given into the king’s hand by God. The former, Jehoram is told, he may slay, if he pleases Deu 20:13, the latter, he is informed, he must not slay (compare the marginal reference).

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

For thou. Hebrew, "Dost thou kill, &c.?" If those who have surrendered themselves in battle be often spared, though they might be slain by the strict laws of war, how much less ought these men to be treated with such severity? (Calmet) --- Sicut bellanti & resistenti violentia redditur: ita victo vel capto misericorida jam debetur. (St. Augustine, ep. 1. ad Bonif.) (Grotius) --- And water, all necessary provisions. (Worthington) --- These men were suffered to live that they might relate the wonders of God. (Theodoret, q. 20.)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

It is against the laws of humanity, and custom of war, to kill captives, though thou thyself hast taken them with thy own sword and bow, which may seem to give thee some colour of right to destroy them; but much more unworthy will it be in cold blood to kill these, whom not thy arms, but God’s miraculous providence, hath put into thy hands.

Set bread and water before them, i.e. give them meat and drink, which may refresh and strengthen them for their charity, in doing good to their enemies, which was much to the honour of the true religion; and of no less prudence, that hereby the hearts of the Syrians might be both mollified towards the Israelites, and afraid to oppose that people who had such an invincible Protector.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

22. Wouldest thou smite — That is, according to many interpreters, thou wouldest not smite those whom thou hadst made prisoners of war, much less these whom God has miraculously delivered into thy hands. But it is a fact that the law authorized the Israelites to destroy their prisoners of war, (Deu_20:13,) and it was often actually done, and in more than one instance they were severely blamed for neglecting to do it. Better, therefore, with the Septuagint, Chaldee, Syriac, and Vulgate versions, not to render it as a question, but thus: That which thou hast captured with thy sword and with thy bow thou mayest smite; set bread and water before these, etc. That is, do not treat these who have been so marvellously delivered into thy hands as ordinary prisoners of war; feast them well and send them back, and thou shalt accomplish a far greater victory. This was an anticipation of the Gospel rule, “If thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.” Rom_12:20.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And he answered, Thou shalt not smite them. The prophet has no doubt. His prohibition is absolute. These prisoners, at any rate, are not to be slain. "The object of the miracle," as Keil says, "would have been frustrated, if the Syrians had been slain. For the intention was to show the Syrians that they had to do with a prophet of the true God, against whom no human power could be of any avail, that they might learn to fear the Almighty God" ("Commentary on 2 Kings," p. 3.27, Eng. trans.). There was also, perhaps, a further political object. By sparing the prisoners and treating them with kindness, it might be possible to touch the heart of the King of Syria, and dispose him towards peace. Wouldest thou smite those whom thou hast taken captive with thy sword and with thy bow? rather, Wouldest thou be smiting those, etc.? i.e. "Wouldest thou, in smiting these persons, be smiting those whom thou hadst made prisoners in war, so as to be able to justify thy conduct by Deu_20:13? No; thou wouldest not. Therefore thou shalt not smite them." Set bread and water before them. "Bread" and "water" stand for meat and drink generally. Elisha bids Jehoram entertain the captive Syrians hospitably, and then send them back to Benhadad. That they may eat and drink, and go to their master.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Wouldest thou smite - It is against the laws of humanity, to kill captives, though thou thyself hast taken them with thy own sword and bow; which might seem to give thee some colour to destroy them; but much more unworthy will it be in cold blood to kill these, whom not thy arms, but God's providence hath put into thy hands. Set bread - Give them meat and drink, which may refresh and strengthen them for their journey. This was an action of singular piety and charity, in doing good to their enemies, which was much to the honour of the true religion; and of no less prudence, that hereby the hearts of the Syrians might be mollified towards the Israelites.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Elisha answered

Elisha was replying to the king of Israel's question.

Would you kill those whom you had taken captive with your sword and bow?

Elisha uses this rhetorical question to rebuke the king and tell him not to kill these men. The words "sword and bow" are a metonym for war in which soldiers use swords and bows and arrows. This can be written as a statement. AT: "You would not kill men whom you had captured in war, so you should not kill these men." (See: Rhetorical Question and Metonymy)

Put bread and water before them, that they may eat and drink

Here "bread" refers to food in general. AT: "Give them food to eat and water to drink" (See: Synecdoche)

go to their master

This refers to the king of Aram.

So the king prepared much food for them

The king ordered his servants to prepare the food. He did not prepare the food himself. AT: "Then the king ordered his servants to prepare a lot of food for them" (See: Metonymy)

Those bands

"Those groups"

did not return for a long time into the land of Israel

This means that they did not attack Israel for a long time. AT: "stopped attacking the land of Israel for a long time" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

translationWords

captive

sword

bow and arrow

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

[Would you slay] those you captured, etc. Is it your custom to slay those whom you bring into captivity (and destroy them)?

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.