Went to a different church to visit this weekend and a young girl came on stage and spoke. She told the Dielli story from the Bible perspective, with “young” being 13 or so. That’s a lot younger than I had envisioned. It was so well done.

Then the preacher got up and spoke on the same topic.

First, a Babylonian statement on what to do if someone got leprosy:
“He has been rejected by his god and so should be rejected by mankind.”

Note that Naaman was not rejected by his king (who was Syrian, not Babylonian, but…).

The servant girl could have been silent, made Naaman pay for his sins. Instead she said, “If only…”

She was the lowest of the low.
A woman.
A slave.
A foreigner.
Young.

And yet Naaman was desperate enough to listen to her.

A talent in money was as much as a man could carry. Naaman brought ten talents of silver. Shekels varied by year. Ten sets of clothing was a LOT. Most people owned one. Some owned two.

By writing the letter to the king of Israel, Naaman’s king was doing the normal thing. Talking to the person at his level. However, healing someone of leprosy was “a bit above the king’s pay grade.”

Naaman went as an important man, a military man, a rich man, to the prophet who did not even come out the door of his house, but instead sent a servant out to talk to him.

I would think that this would insult Naaman. He’s not good enough for the prophet to come out and talk to?

He expected the prophet not just to come out but to personally intervene in his life for his health. What is that saying? Pride. Certainly not the kind of humility the centurion showed to Jesus many centuries later.

The rivers’ listing is really a clash of gods. Gods were place limited. Listing his rivers meant that Rimmone (sp?) was his god.

Naaman listened to his servants (plural) when they advised him to go ahead and bathe in the Jordan.

He got his help from the help…

Naaman wasn’t just cured of his leprosy but his skin became as a young child’s. … I think this might be an interesting addition if Naaman is a lot older than the princess. His body and his life are rejuvenated by the Maker for trusting him enough to follow the directions.

Another point here is that he said he knew that God was the one true god. That means he has rejected the gods of place.

Yet he asks to take dirt back.

Why?

The minister said that he hopes that this means Naaman was thinking of Dielli. That he was bringing her part of her homeland back.

I don’t know why. What would be the point?

However, it would be interesting if there were a point.

Does Dielli come with Nakhaman when he goes to see the prophet? I always assumed she did. Figured she and the future husband were the servants who talked Nakhaman into the plan. If she did, then it wouldn’t be her the dirt was for.

Also, why would Nakhaman think of her enough to bring her dirt when he didn’t think of her enough to offer to free her? That is a very important question. I think it shows that Nakhaman (or Naaman) was still too aware of his own standing. He’s the prince of a country in the book. Why would a young slave want to be away from him? She would have more standing in his home than in her home country. And he’s never lost his standing, even with the leprosy.

So was the dirt to offer sacrifices on? Why would he need to do that when he recognizes God as the only god?

Hmm. I know where I can put dirt in. I can put it in the scene where the slaves are telling god stories. Toban and Dielli ask for dirt because the Maker made everything. So Nakhaman would be thinking of Dielli to bring the dirt back. Just not thinking much.

Interesting ideas.

Thanks, God.