The Resilience of the Captive Girl Child in 2 Kings 5

1. The Concept of Resilience

Prior to examining the biblical text, we will consider the notion of ‘resilience’, which has roots in the Latin verb, resilire (to rebound). ⁹ The concept has been adopted in diverse fields, including psychology, social studies, and developmental science, though only marginally in religious studies, where there is much scope for future research. ¹⁰ Resilience may be defined as the process of coping and adapting well in the face of adversity, trauma, tragedy, threats, or significant sources of stress. ¹¹ Relevant to this article are studies on resilience concerning children affected by armed conflict. World War II set the stage for the emergence of resilience science, accentuating the plight of children affected by the devastation. ¹² Today, as wars continue to impact the lives of children globally, investigations on resilience are topical. ¹³ However, the majority of the research on war-affected children has ‘focused on risk factors and subsequent psychopathology, with far less explorations on variables or processes associated with resilient outcomes in children’. ¹⁴ Karadzhov notes, ‘there appear to be relatively under-researched socio-cultural factors as well as coping and adaptive processes that can moderate the effects of potentially traumatizing war-related experiences on psychological well-being’. ¹⁵

Multiple factors at the individual, family, community, and societal levels impact on children’s resilience in war contexts. At the risk of oversimplifying, we may outline some research findings on resilience in war-affected young people. A study on Columbian child soldiers identified six themes which seemed to facilitate their ability to overcome war trauma: a sense of agency; social intelligence, empathy, and affect regulation; shared experience, caregiving features, and community connection; a sense of future, hope, and growth; a connection to spirituality; and morality. ¹⁶ An investigation of Sri Lankan war orphans indicated that religion serves as an important source of cultural identity and a foundation for how both trauma and healing are interpreted. ¹⁷ Researchers on resilience in African cultures have noted that rituals of cleansing and forgiveness appear to aid the recovery of young people from adverse war experiences. ¹⁸ Yet another study showed that values (faith, family unity, service, effort, morals, and honor) play a central role in resilience among Afghan families and their children. ¹⁹

In summary, qualitative research on resilience indicates that socio-cultural values and practices, as well as religion, can significantly strengthen a child’s ability to cope with and rebound from a traumatic war experience. ²⁰ Noteworthy too is the insistence of leading scholars on resilience as a process rather than an innate quality, and their emphasis on resilient outcomes or ‘resilient trajectories in children faced with adversity’. ²¹ Moreover, resilience appears to be aided by agency, whether in the form of external interventions or self-initiated actions/choices. ²² Nevertheless, scholars caution that a resilience perspective is not an antidote for the true horrors of war : ‘[It] offers one way to think about building on naturally occurring strengths . . . but it should not be used to minimize the gravity of war for children and families’. ²³ In discussing resilience, optimism must be tempered with consideration for the devastating effects of war trauma on children. Elkins points out the need for a balanced view, ‘acknowledging that children are both vulnerable and resilient’. ²⁴ We will keep this caveat in mind in examining the situation of the young Israelite girl in 2 Kings 5. Taken captive (שבה‎) during a military raid by enemy forces, and enduring the trauma of exile from her family and her country, the girl qualifies as a war-affected person.

2. Critical Perspectives

The biblical narrative reveals few details about the girl, apart from stating that she hails from the land of Israel and is a war captive at the service of Naaman’s wife (2 Kgs 5.2-3). Jewish and Christian tradition has given little emphasis to the girl’s role or identity. ²⁵ Biblical laws pertaining to foreign female slaves (Lev. 25. 44-46 and Deut. 21.10-14), ²⁶ if extrapolated to Aram, indicate that the girl possessed no rights or control over her destiny, could never return to her native land, and was vulnerable to abuse, particularly sexual exploitation, given her gender. ²⁷ Her menial status as a female slave relegated her to the lowest position of Aramean society. ²⁸ The girl’s emotional suffering may be inferred since ‘she is tragically and permanently separated from her family and her community, as a captive of war . . . Her story points to the precarious situation of children of all ages, who are too often caught in the violence and upset of communal or national conflicts’. ²⁹

The only time she speaks in the narrative, the girl’s words are directed not to her own plight but towards her master Naaman’s condition: ‘If only my lord were before the prophet who is in Samaria, then he would remove him from his leprosy’/ אחלי אדני לפני הנביא אשר בשמרון אז יאסף אותו מצרעתו‎ (2 Kgs 5.3). Her singular statement has been subject to divergent critical interpretations. Menn considers that ‘the little girl’s words express a wish . . . if only (אחלי‎). The girl has a heart full of compassion and wishes only for the enemy commander’s healing’. ³⁰ Similarly, Park notes that the Israelite girl ‘compassionately offers a way to heal Naaman. This is [the] girl’s bravery, faith and wisdom’. ³¹ Kim observes that ‘despite her insignificance and obscurity, the little girl becomes the first instrument of God in the narrative’. ³² Brueggemann comments that the ‘young girl, even in her brief role, is a remarkable model for displaced persons of faith who must always live a bilingual existence’. ³³ Common to the above interpretations is a positive understanding of the young girl’s words, either as revealing her faith, courage, wisdom, or compassion. These scholars do not deny her hardships, but their emphasis lies on viewing the girl as an exemplary character who manifests virtuous/moral qualities, as revealed by her utterance.

Hopkins is skeptical of such critical perspectives. She maintains that ‘interpreters romanticize the little girl in various ways, focusing on her wish in verse 3’, and that ‘the little slave girl is put on a pedestal by most commentators’, who ‘often surrender the little girl to their larger theological point’. ³⁴ Whether or not that is an accurate characterization of scholarly views of the child’s role, Hopkins raises a valid concern that the girl’s ‘trauma is glossed over’ and that ‘the possibility of trauma experienced by the little girl suggests a different reading’. ³⁵ She argues that ‘the little slave girl has no safety in her current situation. We do not know what terrors the little girl faced in Naaman’s household. The text does not say. We do know that war is context for her story’. ³⁶ Hopkins offers her own interpretation of the child’s situation. She maintains that as a captive increasingly dependent on her perpetrator, the girl is ‘traumatized, desperate, and angling for protection’. ³⁷ Hopkins interprets the child’s words in verse 3 as the final step in Naaman’s psychological control of her. ‘The little girl wishes health for the man who ripped her from her family, killed her people, and keeps her captive in a foreign land. . . . Perhaps the little girl’s wish for Naaman expresses her adaptation to an abusive environment’. ³⁸

Hopkins offers a compelling reading, with sensitivity to the dimensions of war trauma which are embedded in the text. However, one limitation of her hermeneutical stance is her dismissal of the possibility of resilience. She maintains that ‘the little girl’s tiny shoulders cannot bear the weight of the expectations we have placed upon them, and that our unrealistic demands for resiliency from those like her who struggle with trauma today can make developing resiliency more difficult’. ³⁹ Nevertheless, resilience studies (as previously cited) indicate that resilience is not an unrealistic expectation, but an observable and verifiable process in children affected by war. As Elkins observes, ‘children, even those that have endured trauma, are remarkably resilient. Their resilience should nuance any attempts to describe children as only vulnerable’. ⁴⁰ Below we will discuss the sole utterance of the Israelite child to determine if her words reflect a resilient trajectory, suggesting an attempt to cope with her adverse situation and perhaps to chart a hopeful future for herself.

3. The Child’s Utterance

When the Israelite girl speaks to her mistress (2 Kgs 5.3), her words serve as an implicit challenge to the beliefs and values of Naaman’s household. If ‘she was angling for protection’ and trying to placate her captors, she would have been safer saying what her master wanted to hear, by recommending that he seek an Aramean healer, or pretending that she did not notice his disfigurement. She risks injuring his pride by mentioning his disease and suggesting that Naaman go meet a foreign prophet in a land he clearly holds in disdain, as is evident from his later comment, ‘Are not Abana and Parpar the rivers of Damascus better than all the waters of Israel’ / הלא טוב אבנה ופרפר נהרות דמשק מכל מימי ישראל‎ (2 Kgs 5.12). To a man who assumes the superiority of his nation, the girl’s suggestion would sound antithetical to his preconceptions. However, instead of trying to appease her master or conform to the expectations of Naaman and his household, the girl’s words reveal that she is affirming her own heritage.

As a native of ‘the land of Israel’/ ארץ ישראל‎, the child confirms her cultural identity by making a reference to ‘Samaria’ / שמרשון‎. While the text does not specify that she is originally from the capital city of the northern kingdom of Israel, her mentioning of the place nevertheless evokes her cultural allegiance. Brueggemann comments, ‘Her forced relocation into Aram has not eradicated or diminished her sense of her true place of belonging . . . she is not, in her self-presentation, a slave girl, but rather a well-rooted child of Samaria’. ⁴¹ By naming the city, the child reveals her attachment to the land of her birth. Despite her exile, Samaria remains etched in her memory. Could it be that in suggesting that her master go, to Samaria, she is also expressing her own longing to return? The word she chooses, אחלי‎, can be taken to mean ‘my wish’. ⁴² It seems evocative not only of a wish for her master’s healing, but her own secret desire to re-connect with her homeland.

Additionally, the girl accentuates her religious beliefs in her statement to Naaman’s wife. She mentions ‘the prophet’ / הנביא‎, a reference to Elisha who enjoyed prominence as a religious figure in Israel. Perhaps the child’s familiarity with some of Elisha’s miracle stories explains her confidence in his ability to heal through divine power. Although she does not mention God overtly (in the MT), ⁴³ she does so implicitly since Elisha bears the title of ‘the man of God’ / איש האלוהים‎ (2 Kgs 5.8; 5.14; 5.15). Perhaps the child is careful in avoiding explicit divine references because of her awareness that her master worships the Aramean deity at the ‘temple of Rimmon’ / בית רמן‎ (2 Kgs 5.18) and probably has no tolerance for Israelite beliefs. Notwithstanding the religious practices in the Aramean household, the girl clings to her own beliefs. As Brueggemann observes, ‘she voices an uncompromising assertion of her Israelite, Yahwistic identity and conviction. To be sure, she does so in a most pragmatic and concrete way, a way calculated to evoke a positive response from her mistress without risking any resistance by making an explicit mention of the deity’. ⁴⁴

Moreover, the child’s words reveal her values when she recommends a cure for Naaman by informing her mistress that the prophet would ‘remove him from his leprosy’/ יאסף אותו מצרעתו‎ (2 Kgs 5.3). Her words demonstrate empathy and well-wishes towards the healing and health of a man who has harmed her young life. However, her response does not count as evidence of her subjection to her captors’ coercive control or her adaptation to an abusive situation as Hopkins has suggested. ⁴⁵ On the contrary, the girl strives to expose the hollowness of the priorities of her master’s world, and to establish the primacy of her own values. Naaman ‘as a successful commander and the king’s right-hand man . . . certainly lives his life more triumphantly and publicly than most people’. ⁴⁶ His life revolves around the royal court of Aram and the temple of Rimmon (2 Kgs 5.18). Instead of being intimidated by the worldly trappings and military honors of the ‘mighty warrior’ / גבור חיל‎ (2 Kgs 5.1), the child perceives Naaman as a diseased figure. She recognizes his affliction and dares to name his illness aloud, צרעת‎. Further, her use of the word אסף‎, which has a meaning of ‘remove’ (in the sense of ‘remove / set free a man from his leprosy)’, ⁴⁷ conveys the idea that Naaman is in need of liberation. Berman posits a link between Naaman’s imperial mentality and his leprosy: ‘If Naaman were to be cured of leprosy, he would have to start by being cured of his preoccupation with greatness’. ⁴⁸ While exposing the faulty principles of Naaman and his milieu, the girl reveals the higher values of the Israelite prophet who shares her inclusive worldview and is willing to extend healing even to an enemy army commander, as Elisha declares: ‘let him come, I pray, to me so he may know that there is a prophet in Israel’ /יבא נא אלי וידע כי יש נביא בישראל‎ (2 Kgs 5.8). Menn notes that ‘the little servant girl had insight into the true power of health and life. She [made] possible the crossing of national boundaries in search of these good gifts, even during a time of war’. ⁴⁹

As analyzed above, the girl’s utterance to her mistress, though brief, contains key words revealing of her affiliations. Her references to Samaria, the prophet, and the healing of Naaman indicate the importance of her cultural identity, beliefs, and values to the girl. Brueggemann comments, ‘She had forgotten nothing, even though her Syrian captivity over time might have lured her away from her Israelite identity . . . . [and] she holds to them in what must have been an environment that was profoundly hostile to all things Israelite’. ⁵⁰ It would have been easier for the child to capitulate to the Aramean practices of her master’s household and to adapt to their way of thinking, instead of adhering to those of her former homeland where she is unlikely to return. Alternatively, she could have kept her thoughts to herself, privately cherishing her loyalties to her native culture and religion, while publicly professing allegiance to Aramean ways, so she could blend into her new environment. Aligning with her captors’ views and practices would have been safer for her. However, the girl chooses the riskier option by openly declaring that the prophet from Samaria could heal Naaman, which inevitably calls into question ‘the credibility of Syrian gods who lack such an effective prophet . . . The boldness of her claim, surreptitiously triumphant, is matched by her readiness of articulation. She is willing to say it!’ ⁵¹ The child’s statement is tantamount to asserting the preeminence of Israelite beliefs and values over those of the Arameans.

What might have prompted the young girl to make such a daring suggestion? Menn remarks that children ‘show themselves willing to take risks and to become involved in situations that adults sometimes find overwhelming or even defeating’. ⁵² And yet, why would the girl, of her own volition, risk rousing her master’s ire? He could have reacted in rage just as he ‘became angry’ / ויקצף‎ when Elisha asked him to bathe in a foreign river, the Jordan (2 Kgs 5.11). While the text does not discuss the girl’s motives, we may infer her reasons by delving into her situation. Alienated from her homeland, the child lives far from her original ‘social ecology’, that is, ‘the nurturing physical and emotional environment that includes, and extends beyond, the immediate family to peer, school and community settings, and to cultural and political belief systems’. ⁵³ Despite the forced uprooting from her social ecology, the girl retains those tenets inculcated into her in her native land. As Brueggemann states, ‘For all of the circumstance of her captivity and subservience, she is deliberately, resolvedly, unashamedly an Israelite’. ⁵⁴ Her convictions are staunch enough that she guarantees to her mistress unhesitatingly that Naaman will be cured should he go ‘before the prophet’ / לפנ׳ הנביא‎ (2 Kgs 5.3) in Samaria. Nevertheless, though the girl cherishes her identity, values, and beliefs, her situation of exile deprives her of the opportunity to worship God freely, celebrate Jewish festivals, and engage in customs which would help her maintain her religious and cultural ties. Within this vacuum, in order to counter the absence, she takes the significant step of giving voice to her allegiances, rather than concealing and silencing her authentic self. By speaking out, she makes present the religious and cultural framework which is important for her own self-definition and psychological survival in a context fraught with conflict and tension. Her strategy seems effective, for when her master Naaman reports her words to the king, he mentions her origins: ‘like this and like this said the girl who is from the land of Israel’ / כזאת וכזאת דברה הנערה אשר מארץ ישראל‎ (2 Kgs 5.4). Naaman evidently understands that regardless of her displacement, the girl remains rooted in her native land.

Another possible reason for her utterance is the need to resist the oppressive culture of the military commander’s household. Having been abducted during an Aramean raid presumably led by Naaman himself, the girl likely witnessed firsthand the violence and brutality of which her master is capable. He embodies ‘the principal attitude behind colonialism – to enrich oneself, to loot and impoverish the conquered and to declare oneself superior while turning others into servants. . . . . Naaman’s job as an army general, and by extension, his greatness, only exist because he murders, enslaves, loots and destroys defenseless innocent nations’. ⁵⁵ Naaman’s arrogance is on display when he is infuriated by Elisha’s refusal to meet with him and give him due honor, as he expects: ‘surely he will come out and stand and call on the name of the Lord his God and wave his hand on the spot / יצא יצוא ועמד וקרא בשם יהוה אליהיו והניף ידו אל המקום‎ (2 Kgs 5.11). Full of his self-importance, Naaman anticipated ‘a personal or direct healing that would harmonize with his status as a great man’. ⁵⁶ Being a slave in the household of a proud, powerful, and volatile man like Naaman is a dangerous context for a young girl. She must ‘find a way to preserve a sense of trust in people who are untrustworthy, safety in a situation that is unsafe, control in a situation that is terrifyingly unpredictable, power in a situation of helplessness’. ⁵⁷ While I share Hopkins’s emphasis on the traumatic situation of the child, I differ from her view that the girl ‘becomes a double self’. ⁵⁸ Rather, the narrative reveals how the Israelite girl resists the oppressive setting within which she finds herself trapped, by directing her captor towards another path that would involve a life-transforming encounter with Elisha. Brueggemann comments that ‘an alternative [becomes] available only because of this bold, resistant young girl who knows who she is and is not afraid to say so’. ⁵⁹

When the girl makes her recommendation that her master should go and meet the prophet from Samaria, she may also have been motivated by the desire to align Naaman and his household with her Israelite beliefs and values. Although her stated intention is the physical healing of Naaman, it is plausible that she may have had in mind that the encounter with the prophet might change the man in other ways, and that he would come to reject the imperial mentality of aggrandizement characteristic of his milieu. If such a transformation were to take place, then her own domestic environment might improve and she could secure a better future for herself. As Brueggemann comments, ‘Perhaps the young girl recognized, beyond the healing of the commander, that his healing would yield a more general well-being. Perhaps she calculated that the shalom of the Syrian commander is the necessary matrix for her shalom’. ⁶⁰

4. The Girl’s Process of Building Resilience

Having considered in-depth the words and motives of the Israelite girl in voicing her utterance, this paper posits that she is engaging in a process of building up her resilience. Her strategy may be viewed as a response to the trauma she has endured as a war captive living in the home of Israel’s arch enemy, the commander of the Aramean army. Faced with the choice of giving up on the tenets central to her existence or affirming the social-cultural traditions which have shaped her young life, she chooses the latter option. We will attempt to determine whether the child in 2 Kings 5 manifests a resilient trajectory, keeping in view the elements previously discussed in the section on resilience.

First, ‘qualitative investigations of resilience assume that children and adolescents are the agents of their lives, that they are resourceful and capable of producing positive social change’. ⁶¹ As we have seen, the Israelite girl displays a sense of agency when she takes the initiative to speak to her mistress, Naaman’s wife. Instead of being silenced by a hostile environment and repressing her authentic identity, the child shows agency by creating an opportunity to make her voice heard and to offer a suggestion which will result in a positive transformation of Naaman and possibly a good outcome for herself too.

A second noteworthy element that resilience studies recognize is ‘the role of culture in healing and coping with the hardships of war’. ⁶² They note that it is important to ‘build upon strengths inherent in cultural beliefs and community processes that traditionally protect and support children’. ⁶³ As discussed, the girl evokes her cultural background through her reference to ‘Samaria’. Her memory of her homeland and its cultural heritage seems to serve as a resource in strengthening her capacity to withstand adverse conditions in the Aramean household where she resides.

A third feature identified by scholars is religion, which ‘may foster resilience in individuals and communities’. ⁶⁴ Research findings show the role of religion in ‘offering structure and helping the children to make sense of and ultimately accept the traumatic past they had survived’. ⁶⁵ We may apply this notion to the child in 2 Kings 5. She demonstrates her religious beliefs by making a reference to the prophet Elisha, and expressing faith in his ability to cure leprosy through divine power. Her words intimate that religion is a core part of her life, probably buttressing her ability to cope with the strains of exile and servitude.

A fourth element noted in resilience research is the importance of values which provide ‘a sense of cohesion and meaning to life’, enabling war victims to overcome their adverse situation. ⁶⁶ Empathy is a value observed among some resilient children. ⁶⁷ Similarly, the Israelite child, despite the trauma she has undergone, and regardless of any feelings of revulsion she may feel towards her captor, displays her capacity for empathy when she comments on Naaman’s diseased condition and recommends a remedy for his healing. It is an indication of her resilience that she maintains her humanity in the dehumanizing context of war and captivity.

In brief, the Israelite girl in 2 Kings 5 manifests some of the key elements identified by researchers on resilience in war-affected children. The girl’s agency, values, cultural identity, and religious beliefs can be regarded as significant strengths in facilitating her ability to cope with the trauma of war and to face the challenges of her captivity. ⁶⁸ Instead of giving up on her authentic self or despairing over her permanent exile, the child draws on her religious and cultural heritage, as revealed by her utterance. These socio-cultural factors likely serve as a reservoir in building up her resilience, and empower her to cope with the vicissitudes of life as a slave in an Aramean household. Given this context, we may confirm that the child’s utterance provides evidence of her resilient trajectory.

In one noteworthy respect, however, the Israelite girl differs from war-affected children who display adaptability and make adjustments to new situations. Studies of resilience and resilient outcomes ‘explore the protective and recovery processes associated with successful socio-emotional adaptation following trauma exposure’. ⁶⁹ The Israelite child, however, does not strive to adapt to her new environment. Instead of following the practices of her Aramean household, the child resists the norms of her master and his people. For instance, while Naaman pays regular homage to Rimmon in the presence of the king of Aram, the girl is clearly not a worshipper of the Aramean deity, as she openly gives credence to the prophet who represents the God of Israel. Her resistance towards assimilating and conforming to the matrix of Naaman’s household is a direct consequence of her fidelity to Israelite culture and religion. Brueggemann casts her resistance as follows: ‘She exposes herself as a dissenter to given reality, for in her utterance she nullifies the presumed world of Syrian despair with a counter assertion of Israelite possibility’ ⁷⁰

Remarkably, while the girl resists adaptation herself, she catalyzes change in Naaman. When the army commander follows the girl’s instructions and goes to meet the prophet in Samaria, the encounter has a dramatic impact on him. Initially offended by Elisha’s refusal to treat him with reverence and the prophet’s apparently demeaning order to bathe in the river Jordan (2 Kgs 5.11-12), Naaman’s preconceptions alter rapidly once he realizes that he has been cured and his skin restored like the flesh of a young boy (2 Kgs 5.14). He returns to meet Elisha, to whom he says: ‘behold now, I know that there is no God in all the earth except in Israel, and now, I pray, take a blessing [present] from your servant / חנה נא ידעת׳ כי א׳ן אלוה׳ם בכל הארץ כי אם בישראל ועתה קח נא ברכה מאת עבדך‎ (2 Kgs 5.15). Notable here is Naaman’s humble demeanor in referring to himself as a ‘servant’ before the prophet. Berman comments that ‘Naaman can be imperial and exalt himself above everyone in the conquered nation . . . but that [stops] when he meets the prophet . . . . There is clear evidence that Elisha had cured Naaman’s leprosies of the body and of character’. ⁷¹ Cohn too speaks in terms of a dual change with regard to Naaman’s physical and spiritual transformation at the hands of the prophet Elisha, and that ‘Naaman may have come like a conquering hero “with his horses and chariot,” but Elisha insists upon his own superiority’. ⁷² Naaman changes instantaneously from being a man besotted with his own grandeur to being ‘cured both of his illness and of his illusions’. ⁷³ Ironically then, it is not the girl who adapts to the Aramean context, but rather it is her master who adapts to Israelite beliefs by acknowledging that ‘there is no God in all the earth except in Israel’.

5. The Resilient Outcome

Finally, we may consider the effectiveness of the girl’s resilient trajectory. According to Karadzhov, ‘a resilient outcome has usually been defined as one of successful coping, recovery and positive adaptation’. ⁷⁴ It is difficult to speak conclusively in terms of the girl’s ultimate recovery and success given the lack of reference to her future in the narrative. We may only ascertain from her utterance that the child’s affirmation of her cultural and religious background, as well as her resistance to Aramean norms, reveals her resilience in coping with the trauma of being a war captive. While she herself does not adapt, the transformation in her master suggests a positive change in her domestic context. Although the text is reticent about the girl’s destiny, we may surmise cautiously about the implications of Naaman’s transformation on the child’s life.

The transformation in Naaman may be described as three-dimensional, involving a change in his beliefs, values, and appearance. After his cure, he undergoes a religious conversion where he asserts a monotheistic view that ‘there is no God except in Israel’ (2 Kgs 5.14). ⁷⁵ Nevertheless, the army commander is realistic enough to admit to the prophet that after he returns to Aram, he would have to conceal his new faith, publicly continuing to accompany his monarch to the temple of Rimmon (2 Kgs 5.18) while privately worshipping and offering sacrifices to the God of Israel (2 Kgs 5.17). Naaman takes back with him some soil representing the land of Israel whose God he will worship from now on. Menn remarks, ‘Naaman’s mule-cart load of earth seems like a small gesture, but it is symbolic of his total allegiance to the God of his wife’s little slave girl. At the end of the narrative, the big Syrian commander and the little girl from Israel recognize the same God’. ⁷⁶

Furthermore, Naaman’s change is reflected in the new values he espouses following his healing. Instead of his usual imperious manner, Naaman conveys an attitude of deference and humility before the prophet by referring to himself five times as ‘your servant’ / עבדך‎ (2 Kgs 5.15; 5.17x2; 5.18x2). Kaplan observes that ‘the transformation of Naaman’s life proceeded from empty power, pomp, and ceremony to a deeper simplicity’. ⁷⁷ Naaman’s self-awareness of his own lowliness like a servant connects him with the Israelite girl. As Cohn comments, ‘Naaman, the lord of the Israelite maiden, has become the “servant” of the Israelite prophet. To the prophet, not to the king, he offers tribute and thereby acknowledges his new status as vassal’. ⁷⁸

Naaman’s transformation also involves a physical change in his appearance, when his skin becomes restored like that of a young boy. The verbal correspondence between the description of Naaman’s flesh as that of a young boy/ נער קטן‎ (2 Kgs 5.14) in juxtaposition with the reference to the little girl as נערה קטנה‎ (2 Kgs 5.2) strongly evokes a nexus between the two of them. Berman observes, ‘the irony is that Naaman becomes what the little girl was both in appearance and attitude. Not only does he look young and clean, but his attitude also changes as witnessed in his humility to Elisha . . . Like the נערה קטנה‎ at the beginning of the story, he takes the place of a little servant’. ⁷⁹

As discussed above, the transformation of Naaman results in close affinities between himself and the Israelite girl. They share a belief in the same deity, the God of Israel. Their status has also grown similar in that they both identify as servants. Their values are more aligned, with an emphasis on humility and a mutual respect for the prophet Elisha. Moreover, each one’s appearance is described in terms of youthful freshness. The relationship between Naaman and the girl appears to have shifted from one of master and servant to a bond based on mutual beliefs and values. ⁸⁰

Does the text hint at a better future for the girl, as she might have hoped for, in directing her master to Elisha? The transformation of Naaman raises the possibility of improved conditions for the child. She would be able to worship her God without hindrance, and to participate in the sacrificial offerings in her master’s household. She could literally touch the soil of Israel brought back by Naaman, giving her some tangible connection to the land of her birth. Instead of being an outcast among a people disdainful of her native traditions, she would dwell within a household which has re-centered its priorities in alignment with her own ethos. Her status might be more elevated, given Naaman’s esteem for Israelite religious beliefs and his newfound sensitivity to servanthood. In her re-telling of this story, Kim envisions a new life for the girl, in which she is set free by Naaman and returns to her native land to serve the prophet Elisha: ‘And the former captive girl stayed with Elisha just as young Samuel had stayed with Eli and she went on to serve God as God’s faithful servant’. ⁸¹

While an idealistic ending is desirable, we need to recall the caution of resilient scholars to ‘not be seduced by the optimism of resilience and miss the undeniable, often long-term mental health consequences of wartime exposures on child mental health’. ⁸² The narrative in 2 Kgs 5 ends with the eventual fate of the girl unknown. To speculate whether she was ultimately set free from her captivity or suffered lingering effects of trauma is to dwell on hypothetical scenarios beyond the purview of the text. It is more pertinent to focus on the Israelite girl from a resilience perspective and to reiterate the significance of her utterance. As portrayed in the text, the child’s achievement lies in her refusal to enable Naaman and his war-mongering milieu to define her or relegate her to perpetual victimhood. Instead of seeing herself in Naaman’s terms as nameless and enslaved, voiceless and powerless, entrapped within oppressive military and royal structures, the girl manifests agency, speaks up, and exposes her captor for who he is, a man disfigured by false values and a rapacious mentality. By refusing to compromise with her master’s world and by upholding her own cultural identity, values, and beliefs, the girl builds up her resilience. She empowers herself, as well as catalyzes Naaman’s transformation. Hers is not an exceptional story. As research shows, ‘in fact, there is often tremendous resilience observed among war-affected children’. ⁸³ The deeper question provoked by this biblical narrative may well be, why accept a world where children endure desperate choices?

Finally, having applied insights from resilience research on war-affected children in interpreting 2 Kings 5, we may briefly consider the future scope of applying a resilience framework within biblical studies. Although a few recent works have explored resilience (see n. 10) in general, the topic ‘has not been examined more closely in biblical studies to this point’. ⁸⁴ Interest has burgeoned in the related field of trauma studies where biblical scholars employ trauma hermeneutics to explore texts with attention to ‘traumatic violence and the disruptive and enduring impacts of those events on individuals and communities’. ⁸⁵ Burt observes the increased conversation among scholars in the fields of biblical studies and trauma studies, but notes that such discussions ‘tend to focus on trauma while largely ignoring resilience’. ⁸⁶ Admittedly, the term ‘resilience’ is referred to in relation to the study of trauma in biblical texts, ‘although generally in passing’. ⁸⁷ Instead of being relegated to secondary status within trauma research, ⁸⁸ the phenomenon of resilience deserves to be a field of study in its own right. It is important to understand that resilience means more than ‘the capacity to bounce back’, and that it is built through a combination of psychological, social, cultural, spiritual, and contextual factors, and is a complex process rather than a static condition. ⁸⁹

Drawing on multidisciplinary research on resilience, biblical scholars would do well to develop a coherent theory of resilience, articulating its concepts, features, and terminology. It would provide the basis for a hermeneutics of resilience which can be employed in analyzing a range of biblical characters and situations, and identifying implications for both ancient and modern readers. The experiences of vulnerable biblical figures could be effectively interpreted through the lens of resilience, like David as a boy soldier, Joseph as a subject of human trafficking, Isaac and Jephthah’s daughter as potential or real victims of child sacrifice, Moses and Miriam as endangered children under an oppressive regime, Hagar with her exposure to domestic abuse, Job who endures despite tragedy, and Esther who faces genocidal threat. Similarly, collective experiences such as exile and restoration, war, violence, slavery, and escape from slavery lend themselves well to readings of resilience. While there may be some overlap with the hermeneutics of trauma, resilience needs to be considered a distinctive approach, warranting its own interpretive frame. This methodology has the potential to yield profound insights, as this article has strived to convey in exploring the resilience of the captive girl child in the narrative of 2 Kings 5.