What is the meaning of 2 Kings 6:28? “Then the king asked her, ‘What is the matter?’” • The scene unfolds at the city wall of Samaria during a devastating siege by Aram (2 Kings 6:24–25). • The king of Israel, Jehoram, is already mourning—he is wearing sackcloth beneath his royal garments—yet he still tries to project strength to his people (v. 30). • His direct question shows pastoral concern, but also underscores his helplessness. Earthly authority is powerless when a nation’s sin has invited divine judgment (Deuteronomy 28:47–48). • The king’s inquiry invites a revelation of the horror that unchecked rebellion can breed, fulfilling earlier warnings that rejection of God would drive people to desperate acts (Leviticus 26:29). “And she answered,” • Her response is public, raw, and shameless; famine has stripped away normal restraint (Lamentations 4:9–10). • The woman’s willingness to voice such depravity highlights how hardened hearts can become when a society normalizes sin (Romans 1:28–31). • She does not cry for bread or mercy, but for justice against a broken agreement—evidence that sin distorts moral priorities. “‘This woman said to me, “Give up your son, that we may eat him,”’” • Cannibalism was expressly condemned and foretold as a curse for covenant disobedience (Deuteronomy 28:53–55). Samaria’s famine proves the literal fulfillment of that prophecy. • The proposal treats children—divine gifts (Psalm 127:3)—as mere food, showing how sin reverses God’s created order. • The speaker hints at perceived fairness: one child today, the other tomorrow. A depraved sense of “equity” replaces love and protection. • The account also exposes the futility of trusting in human alliances and defenses instead of in the LORD (2 Kings 6:26–27). “‘and tomorrow we will eat my son.’” • The delayed second meal suggests premeditated, mutual consent—a chilling picture of how sin fosters partnership in evil (Proverbs 1:10–16). • That “tomorrow” never came; the other woman hid her child (2 Kings 6:29). Even among the wicked, fallen self-interest reigns. • The king’s subsequent grief and rage (v. 30–31) show that political leaders can identify the symptoms but not supply the cure. Only God’s intervention—announced through Elisha and realized within a day (2 Kings 7:1, 16)—can break the siege and restore hope. summary 2 Kings 6:28 records a real, horrific moment that fulfills covenant warnings and exposes the depths of human depravity when a nation turns from God. The king’s helpless question, the woman’s shocking complaint, and the proposed cannibalism all underline the truth that sin brings judgment, judgment brings desperation, and desperation can erase natural affection. Yet the wider narrative also reveals God’s mercy: even in such darkness He stands ready to deliver those who repent and trust His word. |
    |