pes

Pees
a

LiUe0 -

UA
s

|
43 A Se § .
| 7ie
4
4

4
:
°
:
ee
(4
. Re a
ero
he 4 - 7
. Y .
isAf
aa) g a
2 i

Bl
|
oes

.
CISD ODO >

Baker
Encyclopedia
of the Bible
VOLUME 2 P=]

Walter A. Elwell
General Editor

Associate Editors Assistant Editors

Peter C. Craigie Barry J. Beitzel
H. Douglas Buckwalter
J. D. Douglas Walter R. Hearn
. Virginia K. Hearn
Robert Guelich James S. McClanahan
: Robert L. Morrison
R. K. Harrison Stephen Taylor
A R. Milton Winter
Thomas E. McComiskey | Ronald F. Youngblood
Lm Baker Books
A Division of Baker Book House Co.
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49516
ACEDONIA

os
 LIBRARY
CLAREMONT SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY
1325 N. COLLEGE AVE.
CLAREMONT, CA 91711-3199
© 1988 by Baker Book House Company

Published by Baker Books

a division of Baker Book House Company
P.O. Box 6287, Grand Rapids, MI 49516-6287

2-volume edition first published 1988

4-volume edition first published 1997

Portions of the text of this volume were originally prepared by Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., and have been
used with permission.

Printed in the United States of America

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible.

Contents v. 1. A-I—v. 2 J-Z

1. Bible—Dictionaries. I. Elwell, Walter A. II. Encyclopedia of the Bible.
BS440.B26 1988 220.3 88-19318
ISBN 0-8010-3447-7 (2-vol. set)
ISBN 0-8010-2139-1 (4—-vol. set)

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means—for example, electronic, photocopy, recording—without the prior written
permission of the publisher. The only exception is brief quotations in printed reviews.

For information about academic books, resources for Christian leaders, and all new releases available from
Baker Book House, visit our web site: :
http://www.bakerbooks.com
 Contributors
*Alden, Robert L. Ph.D., Hebrew Union College.
S. Kalland Chair of Old Testament Studies,
Denver Seminary, Denver, Colorado.
Alexander, Ralph H. Th.D., Dallas Theological
Seminary. Director of Educational Develop-
ment and Advanced Training, Church Leader-
ship International, Kritzendorf, Austria.
Allen, Leslie C. Ph.D., University of London. Pro-
fessor of Old Testament, Fuller Theological
Seminary, Pasadena, California.
Allen, Ronald B. Th.D., Dallas Theological Sem-
inary. Professor of Bible Exposition, Dallas
Theological Seminary, Dallas, Texas.
Archer, Gleason L. Ph.D., Harvard University.
Professor Emeritus of Old Testament and
Semitic Languages, Trinity Evangelical Divin-
ity School, Deerfield, Illinois.
Aune, David E. Ph.D., University of Chicago.
Professor of New Testament and Early Chris-
tianity, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago,
Illinois.
Babcock, James F. M.Div., Trinity Evangelical
Divinity School. Senior Technical Training
Instructor, Gould Inc., Information Systems
Computer Systems Division, Greenbelt, Mary-
land.
Barber, Cyril J. D.Min., Talbot Theological Sem-
inary. Counselor, Insight for Living, California.
Barker, Kenneth L. Ph.D., Dropsie College for
Hebrew and Cognate Learning. Executive
Director, New International Version Transla-
tion Center, Lewisville, Texas.
Bass, Clarence B. Ph.D., University of Edin-
burgh. Professor of Theology, Emeritus, Bethel
Theological Seminary, St. Paul, Minnesota.
*Deceased
Baylis, Albert H. Th.D., Dallas Theological Sem-
inary. Professor of Theology, Bible, Multnomah
Biblical Seminary, Portland, Oregon.
Beckman, L. David. Th.D., Dallas Theological
Seminary. Chancellor, Colorado Christian Uni-
versity; Pastor, Windsor Gardens Community
Church, Denver, Colorado.
Beitzel, Barry J. Ph.D., Dropsie University. Asso-
ciate Academic Dean and Professor of Old Tes-
tament and Semitic Languages, Trinity Evan-
gelical Divinity School, Deerfield, Illinois.
Benton, W. Wilson, Jr. Ph.D., University of Edin-
burgh. Senior Minister, The Kirk of the Hills
Presbyterian Church, St. Louis, Missouri.
Bilezikian, Gilbert. Th.D., Boston University.
Professor of Biblical Studies Emeritus,
Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois.
*Blaiklock, E. M. Ph.D., University of Aukland.
Professor Emeritus of Classics, University of
Auckland, New Zealand.
Blankenbaker, George. Ph.D., Claremont Grad-
uate School. Vice President and Academic
Dean, Westmont College, Santa Barbara, Cal-
ifornia.
Bodey, Richard Allen. D.Min., Trinity Evangel-
ical Divinity School. Formerly Professor of
Practical Theology, Trinity Evangelical Divin-
ity School, Deerfield, Illinois.
Borchert, Gerald L. Ph.D., Princeton Theologi-
cal Seminary; LL.B., University of Alberta Law
School. Professor of New Testament Interpre-
tation, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary,
Louisville, Kentucky.
Brauch, Manfred T. Ph.D., McMaster Univer-
sity. President and James A. Maxwell Profes-
sor of Biblical Theology, Eastern Baptist The-
ological Seminary, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Brown, Colin. Ph.D., University of Bristol. Asso-
ciate Dean for the Center for Advanced Theo-
Contributors
logical Studies; Professor of Systematic Theol-
ogy, Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena,
California.
*Bruce, F. F. M.A., Universities of Aberdeen,
Cambridge, Manchester. Emeritus Professor,
University of Manchester, England.
Buckwalter, H. Douglas. Ph.D., University of
Aberdeen. Assistant Professor of New Testa-
ment, Evangelical School of Theology, Myers-
town, Pennsylvania.
Buehler, William W. D.Theol., University of
Basel. Professor Emeritus of Biblical and The-
ological Studies, Gordon College, Wenham,
Massachusetts.
Burge, Gary M. Ph.D., King’s College, Univer-
sity of Aberdeen. Professor of New Testament,
Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois.
Bush, Frederic W. Ph.D., Brandeis University.
D. Wilson Moore Professor of Ancient Near
Eastern Studies, Fuller Theological Seminary,
Pasadena, California.
Campbell, Donald K. Th.D., Dallas Theological
Seminary. President Emeritus, Dallas Theo-
logical Seminary, Dallas, Texas.
Cannon, George E. Ph.D., Fuller Theological
Seminary. Professor of New Testament, Emer-
itus, Bethel Theological Seminary, St. Paul,
Minnesota.
Carlson, David C. Ph.D., University of Aberdeen.
Professor of Philosophy and Religion, Franklin
College, Franklin, Indiana.
Carr, G. Lloyd. Ph.D., Boston University. Pro-
fessor Emeritus of Biblical and Theological
Studies, Gordon College, Wenham, Massa-
chusetts.
Chamblin, J. Knox. Th.D., Union Theological
Seminary. Professor of New Testament,
Reformed Theological Seminary, Jackson, Mis-
sissippi.
Congdon, Roger Douglass. Th.D., Dallas The-
ological Seminary. Formerly Professor of
Bible, Multnomah School of the Bible; Pastor,
Emmanuel Baptist Church, Portland, Oregon.
Coppenger, Mark T. Ph.D., Vanderbilt Univer-
sity. President, Midwestern Baptist Theologi-
cal Seminary, Kansas City, Missouri.
*Craigie, Peter C. Ph.D., McMaster University.
Dean, Faculty of Humanities, University of Cal-
gary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Culver, Robert D. Th.D., Grace Theological Sem-
inary. Adjunct Professor of Theology, South-
ern Evangelical Seminary, Charlotte, North
Carolina.
Davids, Peter H. Ph.D., University of Manches-
ter. Director of Studies, Schloss Mittersill
Study Center, Schloss Mittersill, Austria.
de Vries, Paul H. Ph.D., University of Virginia.
Executive Director, New York Evangelical
Seminary Fund; Executive Director, New York
Christian Higher Education Consortium,
Ossining, New York.
DeVries, Carl E. Ph.D., University of Chicago.
Formerly Research Associate, The Oriental
Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, IIli-
nois.
DeYoung, James C. Th.D., Free University of
Amsterdam. Formerly Professor of New Tes-
tament, Reformed Theological Seminary, Jack-
son, Mississippi.
Demarest, Bruce A. Ph.D., University of Man-
chester. Professor of Systematic Theology, Den-
ver Seminary, Denver, Colorado.
*Dillard, Raymond B. Ph.D., Dropsie Univer-
sity. Professor of Old Testament Language and
Literature, Westminster Theological Seminary,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Douglas, J. D. Ph.D., Hartford Seminary Foun-
dation. Editor and author.
Dunn, James D. G. Ph.D., Cambridge Univer-
sity. Lightfoot Professor of Divinity, University
of Durham, England.
*Earle, Ralph. Th.D., Gordon Divinity School.
Distinguished Professor Emeritus of New Tes-
tament, Nazarene Theological Seminary,
Kansas City, Missouri.
Ecklebarger, Kermit A. Ph.D., University of
Chicago. Vice President and Academic Dean,
Denver Seminary, Denver, Colorado.
Elwell, Walter A. Ph.D., University of Edin-
burgh. Professor of Bible and Theology,
Wheaton College Graduate School, Wheaton,
Illinois.
Erickson, Millard J. Ph.D., Northwestern Uni-
versity. Distinguished Professor of Theology,
Truett Seminary of Baylor University, Waco,
Texas, and Western Seminary, Portland, Ore-
gon.
Ericson, Norman R. Ph.D., University of
Chicago. Professor of New Testament Studies,
Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois.
Fackler, Mark. Ph.D., University of Illinois. Pro-
fessor of Communication, Wheaton College,
Wheaton, Illinois.
Farrell, Hobert K. Ph.D., Boston University. Pro-
fessor of Biblical Studies, LeTourneau Uni-
versity, Longview, Texas.
*Feinberg, Charles L. Th.D., Dallas Theological
Seminary; Ph.D., Johns Hopkins University.

Dean Emeritus and Professor Emeritus of Old
Testament, Talbot Theological Seminary, La
Mirada, California.
Field, David H. B.A., University of Cambridge.
Vice-Principal, Oak Hill College, London, En-
gland.
Finley, Harvey E. Ph.D., Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity. Professor Emeritus of Old Testament,
Nazarene Theological Seminary, Kansas City,
Missouri.
Fisher, Milton C. Ph.D., Brandeis University.
Professor of Old Testament, Emeritus,
Philadelphia Theological Seminary, Philadel-
phia, Pennsylvania.
Foulkes, Francis. B.D., Oxford. Formerly War-
den, St. John’s Theological College, Auckland,
New Zealand.
Fowler, Paul B. Ph.D., University of Edinburgh.
Dean of Faculty and Professor of New Testa-
ment, Knox Theological Seminary, Colorado
Springs, Colorado.
Gaffin, Richard B., Jr. Th.D., Westminster The-
ological Seminary. Professor of Biblical and
Systematic Theology, Westminster Theologi-
cal Seminary, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Gerig, Wesley L. Ph.D., University of Iowa. Pro-
fessor of Bible, Taylor University, Fort Wayne,
Indiana.
Goldberg, Louis. Th.D., Grace Theological Sem-
inary. Formerly Professor of Theology and Jew-
ish Studies, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago,
Illinois.
*Guelich, Robert. D. Theol., University of Ham-
burg. Professor of New Testament, Fuller The-
ological Seminary, Pasadena, California.
*Guthrie, Donald. Ph.D., University of London.
Visiting Lecturer, London Bible College, Lon-
don, England.
Haik, Paul S. Th.D., Dallas Theological Sem-
inary. Formerly Professor of Bible Moody Bible
Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
Harris, J. Gordon. Ph.D., Southern Baptist Sem-
inary. Director of Doctoral Studies and Pro-
fessor of Old Testament, North American Bap-
tist Seminary, Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
*Harrison, R. K. Ph.D., University of London;
D.D. (Hon.), Huron College, University of
Western Ontario. Emeritus Professor of Old
Testament Studies, Wycliffe College, Univer-
sity of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Hearn, Virginia K. B.A., Otterbein College. Edi-
tor; Author; Professor of Communications,
New College Berkeley, Berkeley, California.
Hearn, Walter R. Ph.D., University of Illinois.
Editor; Author; Professor of Science and Chris-
Contributors
tianity, New College Berkeley, Berkeley, Cali-
fornia.
Helm, Paul. B.A., Oxford University. Professor,
Department of Theology and Religious Stud-
ies, King’s College, London, England.
Henry, Carl F. H. Ph.D., Boston University. Vis-
--iting Professor of Biblical and Systematic
Theology, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School,
Deerfield, Illinois.
Hensley, C. L. V. Ph.D., University of Liverpool.
Hensley, Carl Wayne. Ph.D., University of Min-
nesota. Professor of Speech Communication,
Bethel College, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Hill, Andrew E. Ph.D., University of Michigan.
Professor of Old Testament, Wheaton College,
Wheaton, Illinois.
Hoehner, Harold W. Ph.D., Cambridge Univer-
sity. Chairman and Senior Professor of New
Testament Studies; Director of Ph.D. Studies,
Dallas Theological Seminary, Dallas, Texas.
Hoffmeier, James K. Ph.D., University of
Toronto. Chair and Professor of Archaeology,
Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois.
Holloman, Henry W. Th.D., Dallas Theological
Seminary. Professor of Systematic Theology,
Talbot School of Theology, La Mirada, Cali-
fornia.
Holmes, Arthur F. Ph.D., Northwestern Uni-
versity. Professor of Philosophy Emeritus,
Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois.
Hopper, Mary. D.M.A., University of Iowa. Asso-
ciate Professor of Music, Wheaton College,
Wheaton, Illinois.
House, H. Wayne. Th.D., Concordia Theologi-
cal Seminary; J.D., O:W. Coburn School of
Law. Academic Dean, Michigan Theological
Seminary, Plymouth, Michigan.
Houston, James H. D.Phil., Oxford University.
Board of Govenors’ Professor of Spiritual
Theology, Regent College, Vancouver, British
Columbia, Canada.
Howe, E. Margaret. Ph.D., University of Man-
chester. Professor of Religious Studies, West-
ern Kentucky University, Bowling Green, Ken-
tucky.
Huey, F. B., Jr. Ph.D., Southwestern Baptist The-
ological Seminary. Professor of Old Testament,
Emeritus, Southwestern Baptist Theological
Seminary, Fort Worth, Texas.
*Hughes, Philip Edgcumbe. Th.D., Australian
College of Theology; D.Litt., University of Cape
Town. Visiting Professor, Westminster Theo-
logical Seminary, Philadelphia; Associate Rec-
tor, St. John’s Episcopal Church, Huntingdon
Valley, Pennsylvania.
Contributors
Huttar, David K. Ph.D., Brandeis University.
Chair of the Division of Christian Studies and
Professor of Bible and Greek, Nyack College,
Nyack, New York.
Inch, Morris A. Ph.D., Boston University. Pro-
fessor of Biblical Studies Emeritus, Wheaton
College, Wheaton, Illinois.
James, Edgar C. Th.D., Dallas Theological Sem-
inary. Professor of Bible and Theology, Moody
Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
Jewett, Paul K. Ph.D., Harvard University. For-
merly Professor of Systematic Theology, Fuller
Theological Seminary, Pasadena, California.
Johnson, Alan F. Th.D., Dallas Theological Sem-
inary. Professor of Biblical Studies, Wheaton
College, Wheaton, Illinois.
Jordan, Gregory D. Ph.D., Hebrew Union Col-
lege-Jewish Institute of Religion. Dean of the
Faculty and Professor of Bible and Religion,
King College, Bristol, Tennessee.
*Kaufman, Paul L. M.A., Wheaton College. Pro-
fessor of New Testament Language and Liter-
ature, Western Conservative Baptist Seminary,
Portland, Oregon.
Kistemaker, Simon J. Th.D., Free University of
Amsterdam. John and Frances Gwin Professor
of New Testament, Reformed Theological Sem-
inary, Orlando, Florida.
Klotz, John W. Ph.D., University of Pittsburgh.
Director of Graduate Studies, Concordia Sem-
inary, St. Louis, Missouri.
Klug, Eugene F. A. D.Theol., Free University of
Amsterdam. Professor Emeritus of Systematic
Theology, Concordia Theological Seminary,
Fort Wayne, Indiana.
Knight, George W., III. Th.D., Free University
of Amsterdam. Adjunct Professor of New Tes-
tament, Greenville Presbyterian Theological
Seminary, Greenville, South Carolina.
*Ladd, George E. Ph.D., Harvard University.
Professor Emeritus of New Testament Theol-
ogy and Exegesis, Fuller Theological Seminary,
Pasadena, California.
Lake, Donald M. Ph.D., University of Iowa.
Associate Professor of Bible, Wheaton College,
Wheaten, Illinois.
Lane, William L. Th.D., Harvard University. Paul
T. Walls Chair in Wesleyan and Biblical Stud-
ies and Professor of Biblical Studies, Seattle
Pacific University, Seattle, Washington.
*LaSor, William Sanford. Ph.D., Dropsie Col-
lege; Th.D., University of Southern California.
Professor Emeritus of Old Testament, Fuller
Theological Seminary, Pasadena, California.
Vili
Liefeld, Walter L. Ph.D., Columbia University.
Distinguished Professor Emeritus of New Tes-
tament, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School,
Deerfield, Illinois.
Lindsey, F. Duane. Th.D., Dallas Theological
Seminary: Librarian, Arizona College of the
Bible, Phoenix, Arizona.
Long, John E. Ph.D., Brandeis University. Asso-
ciate Professor of Religion, Western Kentucky
University, Bowling Green, Kentucky.
Lyon, Robert W. Ph.D., St. Andrews University.
Professor of New Testament Interpretation,
Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Ken-
tucky.
MacDonald, William Graham. Th.D., Southern
Baptist Theological Seminary. Freelance
author, Front Royal, Virginia.
Mare, W. Harold. Ph.D., University of Pennsyl-
vania. Professor Emeritus of New Testament,
Covenant Theological Seminary, St. Louis,
Missouri.
Marshall, I. Howard. Ph.D., University of
Aberdeen. Professor of New Testament Exege-
sis, University of Aberdeen, Scotland.
Mason, James L. Ph.D., University of Southern
California. Professor of Pastoral Ministries, ©
Emeritus, Bethel Theological Seminary, St.
Paul, Minnesota.
Mattingly, Gerald L. Ph.D., Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary. Professor of Bible,
Johnson Bible College, Johnson, Tennessee.
McAlister, Paul K. D.Min., Bethel Theological
Seminary. Professor of Theology, Missions, and
Social Ethics, Minnesota Bible College,
Rochester, Minnesota.
McClanahan, James S. Th.D., Union Theologi-
cal Seminary in Virginia. Chair of the Human-
ities Division and Assistant Professor of Bible
and Religion, King College, Bristol, Tennessee.
*McComiskey, Thomas E. Ph.D., Brandeis Uni-
versity. Professor of Old Testament and Semitic
Languages, Trinity Evangelical Divinity
School, Deerfield, Illinois.
McConville, J. Gordon. Ph.D., Queen’s Univer-
sity, Belfast. Professor of Old Testament and
Hebrew, Wycliffe Hall, Oxford, England.
McDonald, H.D. Ph.D., D.D., University of Lon-
don. Formerly Vice-Principal, London Bible
College, London, England.
McNeely, Richard I. Th.D., Dallas Theological
Seminary; Ph.D., University of Southern Cali-
fornia. Pastor, Spring Hill Community Pres-
byterian Church, Bozeman, Montana.

McRay, John R. Ph.D., University of Chicago.
Professor of New Testament and Archaeology,
Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois.
Merrill, Eugene H. Ph.D., Columbia University.
Professor of Semitics and Old Testament Stud-
ies, Dallas Theological Seminary, Dallas, Texas.
Mickelsen, A. Berkeley. Ph.D., University of
Chicago. Formerly Professor Emeritus of Bib-
lical Interpretation, Bethel Theological Sem-
inary, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Miller, Douglas J. Ph.D., Claremont Graduate
School and University Center. Professor of
Christian Social Ethics, Eastern Baptist The-
ological Seminary, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Morris, Leon L. Ph.D., University of Cambridge.
Formerly Principal, Ridley College, Mel-
bourne, Australia.
Morrison, Robert L. Ph.D., Boston University.
Writer and researcher, Arlington, Massachu-
setts.
Motyer, Alec. B.D., University of Dublin. For-
merly Principal and Dean, Trinity College, Bris-
tol, England.
Motyer, Stephen. Ph.D., King’s College. Lecturer
and Tutor, London Bible College, Northwood,
Middlesex, England.
Mounce, Robert H. Ph.D., University of
Aberdeen. President Emeritus, Whitworth Col-
lege, Spokane, Washington.
Norman, James Garth Gifford. B.D., M.Th.
Studied at Spurgeon’s College, London. Min-
ister of the following Baptist churches: Stour-
port-on-Severn, Worcestershire, England;
George Road, Erdington, Birmingham, Eng-
land; Shettleston, Glasgow, Scotland; Rosyth,
Fife, Scotland.
Osborne, Grant R. Ph.D., University of
Aberdeen. Professor of New Testament, Trin-
ity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, Illi-
nois.
Patterson, Richard. Ph.D., University of Cali-
fornia—Los Angeles. Professor Emeritus of
Biblical Studies, Liberty University, Lynch-
burg, Virginia.
Perkin, Hazel W. M.A., McGill. Principal, St.
Clement’s School, Toronto, Canada.
Piper, John. D.Theol., University of Munich.
Senior Pastor, Bethlehem Baptist Church, Min-
neapolis, Minnesota.
Potts, Austin H. Ph.D., Dropsie College. Profes-
sor of Bible, Philadelphia College of Bible,
Langhorne, Pennsylvania.
Powell, Ralph E. Th.D., Northern Baptist The-
ological Seminary. Formerly Distinguished
Professor of Theology Emeritus, North Amer-
Contributors
ican Baptist Seminary, Sioux Falls, South
Dakota.
Price, James D. Ph.D., Dropsie College for
Hebrew and Cognate Learning. Professor of
Bible, Tennessee Temple University, Chat-
tanooga, Tennessee.
Rainey, Anson F. Ph.D., Brandeis University.
Professor of Ancient Near Eastern Cultures
and Semitic Linguistics, Tel Aviv University,
Ramat Aviv, Israel.
*Ramm, Bernard L. Ph.D., University of South-
ern California. Professor of Christian Theol-
ogy, American Baptist Seminary of the West,
Berkeley, California.
Reymond, Robert L. Ph.D., Bob Jones Univer-
sity. Professor of Systematic Theology, Knox
Theological Seminary, Fort Lauderdale,
Florida.
Rupprecht, Arthur. Ph.D., University of Penn-
sylvania. Professor of Classical Languages,
Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois.
Sacks, Stuart D. Th.D., Southwest Theological
Seminary.
Sailer, William S. S.T.D., Temple University. Pro-
fessor Emeritus of Systematic Theology, Evan-
gelical School of Theology, Myerstown, Penn-
sylvania.
Scaer, David P. Th.D., Concordia Seminary, St.
Louis. Professor of Systematic Theology and
New Testament, Concordia Theological Sem-
inary, Fort Wayne, Indiana.
Scott, J. Julius, Jr. Ph.D., University of Man-
chester. Professor of Biblical and Historical
Studies, Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois.
Scott, Jack B. Ph.D., Dropsie University. Pro-
fessor of Biblical Studies, Belhaven College,
Jackson, Mississippi.
Shepherd, Norman. Th.M., Westminster Theo-
logical Seminary. Pastor, Cottage Grove Chris-
tian Reformed Church, South Holland, Illinois.
Shipps, Kenneth W. Ph.D., Yale University.
Provost, Dean of Faculty, and Professor of His-
tory, Whitworth College, Spokane, Washing-
ton.
Sider, John W. Ph.D., University of Notre Dame.
Professor of English, Westmont College, Santa
Barbara, California.
Silva, Moisés. Ph.D., University of Manchester.
Mary French Rockefeller Distinguished Pro-
fessor of New Testament Studies, Gordon-Con-
well Theological Seminary, South Hamilton,
Massachusetts.
*Smick, Elmer B. Ph.D., Dropsie College for
Hebrew and Cognate Learning. Professor of
Contributors
Old Testament, Gordon-Conwell Theological
Seminary, South Hamilton, Massachusetts.
Smith, Albert J. Ph.D., University of Chicago.
Professor of Biology, Wheaton College,
Wheaton, Illinois.
Smith, Ralph L. Th.D., Southwestern Baptist
Theological Seminary. Distinguished Profes-
sor of Old Testament, Emeritus, Southwestern
Baptist Theological Seminary, Forth Worth,
Texas.
Snodgrass, Klyne R. Ph.D., University of St.
Andrews, Scotland. Paul W. Brandel Chair of
New Testament Studies and Professor of Bib-
lical Literature, North Park Theological Sem-
inary, Chicago, Illinois.
Spender, Robert D. Ph.D., Dropsie University.
Professor of Biblical Studies, Lancaster Bible
College, Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
Stein, Robert H. Ph.D., Princeton Theological
Seminary. Professor of New Testament, Bethel
Theological Seminary, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Taylor, Stephen. Ph.D. University of Pennsylva-
nia. Assistant professor of New Testament,
Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadel-
phia, Pennsylvania.
Thompson, John S. Ph.D., University of Cam-
bridge. Formerly Reader and Chairman of the
Department of Middle Eastern Studies, Uni-
versity of Melbourne.
Thomson, J. G. S. S. Ph.D., University of Edin-
burgh. Minister Emeritus, Church of Scotland.
Tolar, William B. Th.D., Southwestern Baptist
Theological Seminary. Distinguished Profes-
sor of Biblical Backgrounds, Southwestern
Baptist Theological Seminary, Fort Worth,
Texas.
Toon, Peter. D.Phil., Oxford University. Presi-
dent, The Prayer Book Society of the Episco-
pal Church, USA, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Travis, William G. Ph.D., New York University.
Professor of Church History, Bethel Theologi-
cal Seminary, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Turner, George A. Ph.D., Harvard University.
Formerly Professor of Biblical Literature,
Emeritus, Asbury Theological Seminary,
Wilmore, Kentucky.
Van Groningen, Gerard. Ph.D., University of
Melbourne, Victoria. Adjunct Professor of Old
Testament, Covenant Theological Seminary, St.
Louis, Missouri.
Van Reken, David E. M.D., University of Illinois
College of Medicine. Clinical Associate Pro-
fessor of Pediatrics, Indiana University School
of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
VanGemeren, Willem A. Ph.D., University of
Wisconsin. Professor of Old Testament and
Semitic Languages, Trinity Evangelical Divin-
ity School, Deerfield, Illinois.
Vannoy, J. Robert. Th.D., Free University of
Amsterdam. Professor of Old Testament, Bib-
lical Theological Seminary, Hatfield, Pennsyl-
vania.
Vos, Arvin G. Ph.D., University of Toronto. Pro-
fessor of Philosophy, Western Kentucky Uni-
versity, Bowling Green, Kentucky.
Vos, Howard F. Th.D., Dallas Theological Sem-
inary; Ph.D., Northwestern University. For-
merly Professor of History and Archaeology,
The King’s College, Briarcliff Manor, New York.
Walker, Larry Lee. Ph.D., Dropsie College for
Hebrew and Cognate Learning. Professor of
Old Testament and Semitic Languages, Mid-
America Baptist Theological Seminary, Mem-
phis, Tennessee.
Waltke, Bruce K. Ph.D., Harvard University;
Th.D., Dallas Theological Seminary. Marshall
Sheppard Professor of Old Testament Studies,
Regent College, Vancouver, British Columbia,
Canada.
Walton, John H. Ph.D., Hebrew Union College.
Professor of Bible, Moody Bible Institute,
Chicago, Illinois.
Wead, David W. D.Theol., Basel University.
Senior Consultant for Curriculum Develop-
ment, Oosting and Associates, Franklin, Ten-
nessee.
Webber, Robert Eugene. Th.D., Concordia. Pro-
fessor of Theology, Wheaton College, Wheaton,
Illinois.
Weigelt, Morris A. Ph.D., Princeton Theological
Seminary. Professor of New Testament,
Nazarene Theological Seminary, Kansas City,
Missouri.
Wenham, Gordon J. Ph.D., King’s College, Uni-
versity of London. Professor of Old Testament,
Cheltenham and Gloucester College of Higher
Education, Cheltenham, England.
Wheaton, The Reverend Canon David H. M.A.,
St. John’s College, Oxford. Principal, Oak Hill
College, London, England.
White, R. E. O. B.D., University of London. For-
merly Principal, Scottish Baptist Theological
College, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
White, William, Jr. Ph.D., Dropsie College for
Hebrew and Cognate Learning. President,
Nitech Research Corporation, Warrington,
Pennsylvania.

Whitlock, Luder G., Jr. D.Min., Vanderbilt Uni-
versity. President, Reformed Theological Sem-
inary.
Wilcock, Michael J. B.A., University of Durham.
Vicar, St. Nicholas’ Church, Durham, England.
Winter, R. Milton. Ph.D. Union Theological
Seminary in Virginia. Pastor, First Presbyter-
ian Church, Holly Springs, Mississippi.
Wolf, Herbert M. Ph.D., Brandeis University.
Professor of Theological Studies, Wheaton Col-
lege, Wheaton, Illinois.
*Woudstra, Marten H. Th.D., Westminster The-
ological Seminary. Formerly Professor of Old
Testament Emeritus, Calvin Theological Sem-
inary, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Contributors
Yamauchi, Edwin M. Ph.D., Brandeis Univer-
sity. Professor of History, Miami University,
Oxford, Ohio.
Yarbrough, Robert W. Ph.D., University of Aber-
deen. Associate Professor of New Testament,
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield,
_, dllinois.
Young, Warren C. Ph.D., Boston University. Dis-
tinguished Professor of Theology and Chris-
tian Philosophy Emeritus, Northern Baptist
Theological-‘Seminary, Lombard, Illinois.
Youngblood, Ronald F. Ph.D., Dropsie College
for Hebrew and Cognate Learning. Professor
of Old Testament and Hebrew, Bethel Theo-
logical Seminary West, San Diego, California.
Warr eeitess x

“eS — (eS tt eee i eitiiupcrcittel

ve aw ieeese ene jars Coes * :

ane
tots oak4 sgeletee “tee
rik
hi a

seed iiaake
s
seep
bein atseget toate fa
ne icoel intemeee aay

bare
=e « arates

bop anh oy Tacuner J‘ae aeceiaiet a

Pmertias, dea Tieiageke: Reet
iteretae, Kenbevke

Vas Cronies, Gaver. ty

ee nea tahoe? i. -
Bheeo; npgicatt |
Reiter seer

Re
van se pueda tt, t :
Celtesue ot auny, Siest

op
RL
’
 Abbreviations

General Abbreviations 1 Sm 1 Samuel

2Sm 2 Samuel
Cc: about, approximately 1 Kgs 1 Kings
ek compare 2 Kgs 2 Kings
ch chapter (pl. chs) 1 Chr 1 Chronicles
ed edition, editor (pl. eds) 2 Chr 2 Chronicles
e.g. for example Ezr Ezra
et al. and others Neh Nehemiah
etc. and so forth Est Esther
f. and following (pl. ff.) Jb Job
Gr. Greek Ps(s) Psalms
Heb. Hebrew Prv Proverbs
i.e. that is Eccl Ecclesiastes
km. kilometers Sg Song of Solomon
lit. literal(ly) Is Isaiah
LXX Septuagint Jer Jeremiah
m. meters Lam Lamentations
mg. margin Ez Ezekiel
MS manuscript (pl. MSS) Dn Daniel
MT Masoretic Text Hos Hosea
N,NE north, northeast Jl Joel
N,NW north, northwest Am Amos
NT New Testament Ob Obadiah
OT Old Testament Jon Jonah
Pp page (pl. pp) Mi Micah
S,SE south, southeast Na Nahum
S,SW south, southwest Hb Habakkuk
TR Textus Receptus Zep Zephaniah
Vv verse (pl. vv) Hg Haggai
vol volume (pl. vols) Zec Zechariah
Mal Malachi

Books of the Bible New Testament

Mt Matthew
Old Testament Mk Mark
Gn Genesis Lk Luke
Ex Exodus Jn John
Lv Leviticus Acts Acts
Nm Numbers Rom Romans
Dt Deuteronomy 1 Cor 1 Corinthians
Jos” Joshua 2 Cor 2 Corinthians
Jgs Judges Gal Galatians
Ru Ruth Eph Ephesians

xili
Abbreviations

Phil Philippians ; Dead Sea Scrolls

Col Colossians CD Cairo (Genizah text of the)
1 Thes t Thessalonians Damascus (Document)
2 Thes 2 Thessalonians 1 QM War Scroll
1Tm 1 Timothy 1 QS Manual of Discipline
2Tm 2 Timothy 1 QSa Rule of the Congregation
hi Titus
Phlm Philemon Early Christian Writings
Heb Hebrews
Jas James 1 Clem 1 Clement
ret 1 Peter 2 Clem 2 Clement
2a 2 Peter
1 Jn 1 John Bible Versions and Other Sources
2Jn 2 John
3 Jn 3 John Antiq. Josephus, Antiquities of the
Jude Jude Jews
Rv Revelation Dio Cassius Dio Cassius, Roman History
Ep Fest Athanasius, Festal Letters
HE Eusebius, Historia
Extracanonical Literature
Ecclesiastica
Apocryphal Books KJV The King James Version
NASB The New American Standard
Ecclus Ecclesiasticus Bible
1 Esd 1 Esdras NEB The New English Bible
Jth Judith NIV The New International
1 Macc 1 Maccabees Version
2 Macc 2 Maccabees Prol Gal Jerome, Prologue to Galatians
Wisd of Sol Wisdom of Solomon RSV “The Revised Standard Version
Strabo Strabo, Geography
Pseudepigraphal Books Tacitus, Hist. Tacitus, Histories
2 Bar Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch War Josephus, The Jewish War
1 Enoch Ethiopic Book of Enoch
4.EZr 4 Ezra
Life AE Life of Adam and Eve
Pss of Sol Psalms of Solomon

XIV
 Baker
Encyclopedia
of the Bible

Volume 2
D-I
Dabareh. sv spelling of the town Daberath to him seeking a sign from heaven in order to
in Joshua 21:28. test him. After his answer that ‘‘no sign shall
See DABERATH. be given to this generation” (Mk 8:12), he de-
parted from there.
Dabbesheth, Dabbasheth. Designation for The word ‘‘Dalmanutha”’ is present in the
a camel’s hump (Is 30:6). The name also refers best manuscripts, although other sources re-
to a town (“‘camel’s hump hill’”’) situated on the cord Magadan or Magdala. The parallel pas-
western border of the land allotted to Zebu- sage in Matthew 15:39 cites Magadan. Because
lun’s tribe for an inheritance (Jos 19:11, KJV of this, the exact name and location have been
Dabbasheth). Its exact location is unknown. difficult to pinpoint. Probably the various
names are meant to designate the same site or
at least two places in the same area.
Daberath. Town in Issachar’s territory given
to the Levite family of Gershon (Jos 21:28, KJV See MaGApDAN; MAGDALA.
Dabareh; 1 Chr 6:72). It was located west of
Mt Tabor on the Issachar-Zebulun border, Dalmatia. Mountainous region on the east-
and has been identified with the modern ern shore of the Adriatic Sea, across from It-
Debuyiyeh. aly. The Dalmatians were an Illyrian (Greek)
See LEVITICAL CITIES. tribe, or group of tribes banded together, com-
ing from the area around the town of Delmion
Dagger. Short sword. (or Delminium). Their piracy gave the Ro-
See ARMS AND WARFARE. mans considerable difficulty until Octavian
thoroughly subjugated them in 33 Bc.
Dagon. Deity worshiped throughout the At the time of Paul, Dalmatia was the name
Mesopotamian world. In the OT, Dagon is the of the Roman province; its southern boundary
principal god of the Philistines (Jgs 16:23; 1 was Macedonia, and its northern boundary is
Sm 5:2—7; 1 Chr 10:10). Shrines to Dagon were not clearly known. There is one reference to
found in Israel’s territories (Beth-dagon, Jos the province in the NT: Titus is mentioned as
15:41; 19:27). going there in 2 Timothy 4:10. We are not told
why he went. It may be that Paul had orga-
See PHILISTIA, PHILISTINES; CANAANITE DEITIES AND nized some churches there, or Titus may have
RELIGION.
been opening up a new mission field.
Dalaiah. ksv spelling of Delaiah, Elioenai’s
son, in 1 Chronicles 3:24. Dalphon. Haman’s son killed by the Jews in
See DELAIAH #1.
the aftermath of the plot against Mordecai
(Est 9:7).
Dalmanutha. Area on the west side of the
Sea of Galilee near the southern end of the Damaris. Woman mentioned (Acts 17:34) as
plain of Gennesaret. Its exact location is uncer- one of the first converts in the city of Athens,
tain. Jesus and his disciples stayed there following Paul’s preaching there. Since Luke
briefly after the incident of the feeding of the singles her out by name, she may have been a
four thousand (Mk 8:10). The Pharisees came person of importance (see Acts 13:50; 17:12).
566

Damascus, Damascenes. Syrian oasis city
protected on three sides by mountains, and
situated on trade routes about 160 miles north-
east of Jerusalem. The name Damascus can
also refer to the surrounding area and to the
southern Syrian state. Though close to the des-
ert, the district is rich in almonds, apricots,
cotton, flax, grains, hemp, olives, pistachios,
pomegranates, tobacco, vineyards, and wal-
nuts. These crops grow well because the land
is watered by two rivers, the Nahr Barada,
“the Cool” (biblical Abana), which runs from
the northwest mountains through a deep ra-
vine to the city, and the Nahr el-A waj, ‘‘the
Crooked” (biblical Pharpar), which flows west
to east. Together the two rivers irrigate 400
square miles of land. Their beauty and impor-
tance in biblical times is conveyed by the
haughty words of Naaman, a resident of the
area, who almost refused to wash his leprosy
away in the Jordan, as Elisha had prescribed,
because it was such a poor river in compari-
son with the Abana and Pharpar (2 Kgs 5).
Of the several trade routes which con-
verged in the area, one led to Tyre and down
the Mediterranean coastline, another to Me-
giddo and eventually to Memphis and Egypt,
and a third to the Gulf of Aqaba.
Though Damascus is thought to be one of
the oldest cities in civilization, a precise date
for its founding is unknown. According to the
Jewish historian Josephus it was Uz, son of
Aram, grandson of Shem and great-grandson
of Noah, who was the founder. Scripture does
record that the name “Aram” was applied to
the Syrian area (Nm 23:7), and especially to
the northern Syrian-Mesopotamian district.
This lends some credibility to Josephus, since
it is quite likely that Aram’s son would have
moved south along natural travel routes.
The name “‘Damascus’”’ is first used in geo-
graphical lists compiled about the 16th cen-
tury Bc by Thutmose III, and it is mentioned
several times in the Amarna tablets (c. 15th
and 14th centuries Bc). Damascus was a king-
dom of some importance, and the tablets indi-
cate that the ruler was frequently seeking to
throw off the yoke of Egyptian domination.
Nevertheless Damascus remained generally
under the control of Egypt until about the
12th century Bc. Abraham may have passed
through Damascus while traveling the cara-
van routes, and it is possible that he acquired
Eliezer as his chief steward there. Eliezer be-
came heir apparent to Abraham until the
birth of his son Ishmael (Gn 15:2). It is possi-
ble that Eliezer was the servant sent to Nahor
to find a bride for Isaac.
The first biblical mention of Damascus (Gn
14:15) refers to the city in connection with
Abraham’s successful attack upon the confed-
567
Damascus, Damascenes
eration of kings who kidnapped Lot and his
family. The Bible does not refer to the city
again until the time of David (c. 1000 Bc).
Israel occupied a strategic position along
the trade routes between Mesopotamia and
Egypt, and although in the time of Joshua and
the judges Israel was in conflict with its imme-
‘diate neighbors, the Amorites, Moabites, Philis-
tines, Ammonites, and Midianites, there was
relatively little opposition from Syria.
By the time of Saul, Zobah, an Aramaean
kingdom to the north of Damascus, was men-
acing the Israelites. Damascus was possibly
in alliance with Zobah at this time, and the
Israelites fought a defensive action (1 Sm
14:47). David subsequently defeated Hadade-
zer of Zobah and gained control over south-
ern Syria and Damascus, where he garrisoned
his troops. David’s forces under Joab contin-
ued to be successful, and tribute was sent
from Damascus to Israel. One of Hadadezer’s
officers, Rezon, deserted and formed a guer-
rilla band in the Damascus area. Subse-
quently in Solomon’s reign he eroded even
the Israelites’ economic control of the region
and set himself up as king in Damascus
around g4o BC (1 Kgs 11:23-25).
In the reign of Ben-hadad I, about 883-843
Bc, soldiers from Damascus besieged Samaria
and sent reasonable terms to Ahab, which
were accepted swiftly. Ben-hadad replied with
new terms that included the unconditional sur-
render and plundering of the city. Ahab re-
jected this move and turned a seemingly sure
Damascene victory into a resounding defeat. A
second Syrian campaign was equally unsuc-
cessful, and Ben-hadad and Damascus were at
the mercy of the Israelites. In setting terms
Ahab was concerned mainly with trading prof-
its and not with the total destruction of Syria.
When Assyria reappeared menacingly in the
north, Ahab and Ben-hadad formed a coali-
tion, but were defeated by Shalmaneser III.
Alliances were soon reshuffled, and Ben-hadad
faced a Hebrew coalition of Ahab and Jehosha-
phat of Judah. Ben-hadad assumed correctly
that if Ahab were killed, the coalition would
collapse. Despite a disguise, Ahab was killed
at the battle of Ramoth-gilead, around 851 Bc
(1 Kgs 22:34-36).
Damascus was at the height of its power
when Ben-hadad was campaigning success-
fully against the Assyrians. At this time, when
Jehoram, Ahab’s son, was king of Israel, Naa-
man the leper, a Syrian captain, was healed
by the prophet Elisha when he accepted hum-
bly the prescribed cure.
The strategy of overcoming the kingdom by
killing the king had been successful for Ben-
hadad in his fight with Ahab, and he contin-
ued to follow the same policy. Shortly after-
Damnation
ward, in a further effort to subdue Samaria,
he sent assassination squads to murder either
Jehoram or the prophet Elisha. The Lord pre-
served the lives of the pursued, and the Syri-
ans attacked without success. Several years
later, Elisha, who had gained the respect of
the Syrians, entered Damascus boldly and an-
nounced that Ben-hadad’s illness was not fa-
tal but that his death was imminent. Ben-
hadad was thereafter murdered by Hazael,
who then succeeded him. Although Damascus
was soundly defeated by Assyria about 838 Bc,
Hazael rebounded quickly, and by 830 Bc other
predictions of Elisha were fulfilled. Dama-
scene troops then controlled large areas of Pal-
estinian territory, and the temple treasure was
used to bribe the Syrians and save Jerusalem
(2 Kgs 12:17,18).
Planning to continue the subjection of Is-
rael, Ben-hadad IJ, probably the son of Hazael
(2 Kgs 13:3), found himself having to contend
instead with resumed attacks from Assyria. In
803 BC Damascus became a tributary of As-
syria, but the northern forces were unable to
hold the area. After a further campaign in
which Assyria again proved dominant, a weak-
ened Damascus was unable to quash an Israel-
ite rebellion in 795 Bc. By the time of Jero-
boam II the Damascenes were forced to pay
tribute to Samaria (2 Kgs 14:28).
About 738 Bc the Syrians, led by their new
leader Rezin, joined forces with Pekah, king of
Israel, to subjugate Judah. Much land was cap-
tured, although their siege of Jerusalem was
unsuccessful (2 Kgs 16:5,6; 2 Chr 28:5). At this
time of seeming success for Damascus the
city’s doom was predicted by Isaiah (8:4; 17:1),
Amos (1:3—5), and Jeremiah (49:23—27). Reject-
ing God, Ahaz of Judah turned for protection
to an alliance with the Assyrians, whom he
bribed with the temple treasure. The Assyrian
king Tiglath-pileser III (“Pul”) agreed and
marched against the Syro-Israelite confedera-
tion. After defeating Israel he attacked Damas-
cus, plundered the city, deported the popula-
tion, and replaced them with foreigners from
other captured lands. Damascus was no longer
an independent city-state.
Due to its key location Damascus re-
mained important, and the Assyrians used
the city as a provincial capital. Their records
mentionsit in 727, 720, and 694 Bc, and in the
days of Ashurbanipal (669-627 Bc). Assyrian
world dominance succumbed to that of Neo-
Babylon, which was later replaced by that of
Medo-Persia. During the period of Persian con-
trol Damascus was a noted administrative
center. Under the regime of Alexander the
Great the importance of Damascus was dimin-
ished by the rise in commercial significance
of Antioch.
568
_ During intertestamental times Damascus
passed from one ruler to another. Following
the death of Alexander, the city was controlled
by the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucids of
Babylon. Somewhat before 100 Bc Syria was
divided, with Damascus becoming the capital
of Coele-Syria. Its non-Syrian kings were con-
stantly in trouble at home with the economy
and abroad with the Parthians, Hasmoneans,
and the Nabataeans, who under Aretas con-
trolled Damascus from 84 to 72 Bc. Subse-
quently authority passed to the Hasmoneans,
descendants of the Maccabees, and then to the
Idumeans (the Herods). The area was sub-
jected to Roman dominance after the defeat of
Syria by the Romans in 65 Bc.
Shortly after the death of Christ the Naba-
taeans regained control of the area, ruling Da-
mascus from Petra through an ethnarch. It
was under the control of an Arab appointee,
probably Aretas IV, when Saul of Tarsus
sought Jewish authority to purge Damascus of
its Christians (2 Cor 11:32). Luke’s report in
Acts g, corroborated by Paul’s own confession
(Acts 22:5—-21; 26:11—23), relates Saul’s vision,
blinding, and subsequent conversion “on the
road to Damascus.” This may have been close
to the place where Syrian soldiers were
blinded when planning to assassinate Elisha
(2 Kgs 6:18—23). After Saul’s sight was restored
in a house on the street called “Straight,” he
preached Christianity. Apparently the uproar
in the Jewish quarter concerning his preach-
ing was so great that the ethnarch was willing
to condone Saul’s murder by orthodox Jews.
Acts 9:23-25 describes his escape to Jerusalem.
Damascus is not mentioned thereafter in bibli-
cal history. HAZzEL W. PERKIN
See SYRIA, SYRIANS.
Damnation. See HELL; JUDGMENT.
Dan (Person). Fifth son of the Jewish patri-
arch Jacob. Dan’s mother was Bilhah, maid of
Jacob’s wife Rachel (Gn 30:1—6). Dan’s descen-
dants settled in Israel overlooking the Huleh
plain, in territory actually assigned to Naph-
tali, Dan’s full brother (Gn 30:7,8; 35:25; Jos
19:32—48). The two brothers are mentioned to-
gether in a number of references (e.g., Ex 1:4).
Dan’s name was given him not by Bilhah
but by Rachel, who considered the child her
own. Rachel had long been childless—a shame
to women in ancient cultures—and she was
jealous of Jacob’s other wife, Leah, who had
already borne him four sons. Rachel viewed
the birth of Bilhah’s son as averting her
shame and as God’s vindication of her status
as wife. The name Dan (“he judged”) meant
that God had judged her and had vindicated
her through the child’s birth (Gn 30:6).
 Dan

An area of the wall of Damas-

cus where Paul was let down
and made his escape (Acts
9:25).

Evidently Dan had only one son to continue site was attractive because of the numerous
his line, Hushim (Gn 46:23; Shuham, Nm springs and its location on the trading route. A
26:42,43). In Jacob’s patriarchal blessing Dan strong fortified city was uncovered at Middle
was promised the role of ‘‘judge’’ among his Bronze Age levels, and this is undoubtedly the
people but was also spoken of as one who one mentioned in the annals of Thutmose III
would be stealthy and dangerous, like a ser- (c. 1490-1436 BC) as Ra-wi-sa. The Middle
pent (Gn 49:16,17). How that blessing worked Bronze Age city was also mentioned in the
out in the life of his descendants is unknown. 1gth-century Bc Egyptian execration texts, as
The small amount of information given about well as in cuneiform records recovered from
Dan himself parallels the insignificance of his Mari in Mesopotamia. To the Canaanites, Dan
tribe in later times. was known as Leshem (Jos 19:47) or Laish (Jgs
See DaN (PLACE); DAN, TRIBE OF. 18:7), and the Iron Age levels have produced a
large number of Canaanite pottery artifacts as
Dan (Place). 1. Phoenician city, originally well as some Philistine containers from the
named Leshem (Jos 19:47) or Laish (Jgs 18:7), middle of the 12th century Bc. At that time the
which was conquered by Dan’s tribe when it city was fortified by means of a solid earthen
migrated northward. The city lay a day’s jour- rampart. Of archaeological interest was the
ney from Sidon in the valley near Beth-rehob presence of a Mycenaean tomb containing the
(Jgs 18:28) at the southern base of Mt Hermon. remains of 45 skeletons of adults and children.
It was the most northerly point of the ancient Locally made containers and stone imple-
Israelite kingdom, and was used as a topo- ments competed with various types of im-
graphical marker in the phrase “from Dan to ported Mycenaean pottery vessels. This ce-
Beersheba” (cf. Jgs 20:1; 1 Sm 3:20). ramic evidence indicates that the tomb was
The site of Dan guarded a major trading
route running between Damascus and Tyre,
and was therefore an important commercial
center. The Nahr el-Leddan, one of the princi-
pal sources of the Jordan, rose in the area, and
this made the Huleh valley below Dan lush
and fertile, even in the heat of summer. Conse-
quently the territory around the city produced
grain and vegetable crops in abundance, as
well as supplying the needs of flocks and herds
adequately.
It is possible to identify the site of an-
cient Dan quite confidently with Tell el-Qadi
(“mound of the judges’), a large quadrangular
area occupying about 50 acres. Excavations at
the site commenced in 1966 and indicated that
the locality had been settled during the Early
Bronze Age, perhaps even by 3500 Bc. The One of the sources of the Jordan River, near Tel Dan.

569
Dan, Tribe of
used for about 60 years from the middle of the
14th century Bc.
In the Early Iron Age Dan was a prosperous
city, as indicated in Judges 18:7, but by the
middle of the 11th century Bc it had been de-
stroyed, evidently as a result of occupation by
the Danites. When Jeroboam I became king of
the separate northern kingdom of Israel, Dan
was one of two shrines where the golden
calves were worshiped. The high place at Tell
el-Qadi (Tell Dan), a square masonry platform
some 61 by 20 feet, has been excavated, but by
1977 no trace of the golden image had been
found.
The cultic worship of Baal at Dan survived
even Jehu’s drastic purge (2 Kgs 10:28—31), but
during Ben-hadad’s reign the city fell under
Syrian control (cf. 2 Kgs 10:32). When the Syri-
ans were attempting to ward off Assyrian at-
tacks on their eastern border during the time
of Jeroboam II (793-753 Bc), Dan was recon-
quered by the northern kingdom. It did not
remain in Israelite hands for long, however,
for its inhabitants were deported to Assyria (2
Kgs 17:6) by Tiglath-pileser III (745-727 Bc).
Nevertheless, the site continued to be inhab-
ited (cf. Jer 4:15; 8:16), and its high place or
acropolis at the northern extremity of the
mound was used for worship. This particular
area was enlarged periodically in both Greek
and Roman times, and it is from the latter
period that a statue of Aphrodite came. In NT
times Dan was eclipsed by Caesarea, which
was only four Roman miles distant. Josephus
(War 4.1) recorded that Titus crushed a revolt
at Dan in AD 67.
See DAN (PERSON); DAN, TRIBE OF.
2. KJV rendering of an obscure Hebrew
word in Ezekiel 27:19, alternately translated
“wine,” a commodity from Uzal, in the Rsv.
See UZAL (PLACE).
Dan, Tribe of. Israelite tribe named for the
patriarch Jacob’s fifth son. The tribe of Dan,
descended from Dan’s only known son, Hu-
shim (cf. Shuham in Nm 26:42,43), had little
distinction in its early years. Some Danites
are mentioned in the wilderness narratives:
Oholiab, a craftsman of the tabernacle (Ex
31:6; 35:34; 38:23); another whose mother mar-
ried an Egyptian and who blasphemed God
(Lv 24:11); and Ahiezer, chief prince of Dan
during the exodus (Nm 1:12). . the Israelite kingdom at the end of King Solo-
Dan was the second largest tribe at the first
census taken in the wilderness (62,700 war-
riors, Nm 1:38,39). They were instructed to en-
camp on the north side of the Israelite’s camp
along with Asher and Naphtali (Nm 2:25-31),
and were to bring up the rear in the line of
march (Nm 2:31; 10:25). At the second census
40 years later, just before entering the Prom-
579
ised Land, they had grown only to 64,400 (Nm
26:42,43), still second in size. The tribe does
not stand out in the conquest narratives (Dt
2:16-3:29; Jos; Jgs 1). Dan is listed among the
tribes who reminded Israel of the covenant
curses at Mt Ebal (Dt 27:13; cf. Jos 8:30—33).
The tribe is called a “lion’s whelp” in Moses’
blessing (Dt 33:22). Some believe that the refer-
ence to ‘“Bashan”’ in that blessing prefigured
the Danites’ migration to the northern terri-
tory where they eventually settled.
One of the most significant references to
Dan’s tribe is the account of its northward mi-
gration (Jos 19:40—48; Jgs 18). The Danites had
been allotted a portion of Canaan between Ju-
dah and Ephraim bordering the Mediterra-
nean seacoast (Jos 19:40—46; cf. Jgs 5:17), but
were unable to occupy their territory except
for the valley at Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 13:25;
18:2), the rest being retained by the Amorites
and later by the Philistines. As a result a
group of Danites, discouraged with their sit-
uation, marched north and captured Laish,
located about 25 miles north of the Sea of Gali-
lee and just below Israel’s northernmost bor-
der. Laish was renamed Dan at that time (Jgs
18:27—29). Their association with that north-
ern territory eventually gave rise to the expres-
sion “from Dan to Beersheba”’ (Jgs 20:1; 1 Sm
3:20) as designating Israel’s northern and
southern borders.
Southern Dan continued for some time, as
illustrated in the exploits of Samson of the
tribe of Dan (Jgs 13-16). Evidently the south-
ern Danites gradually merged into the tribe of
Judah, and no historical reference to the south-
ern Danite tribe is made in the rest of the OT.
The Danites were mentioned in King David’s
time as mustering a considerable army loyal
to David (1 Chr 12:35; 27:22).
The Danites were among the tribes who did
not drive the Canaanites from their territory
(Jos 13:4,5; cf. Jgs 1:34,35). Joshua had to prod
them into the task at the Shiloh assembly (Jos
18:14; 19:40—48). Eventually the Danites gave
up the effort and sought other lands in the
north, where conquest was easier. Their dis-
obedience was further manifested in their
open sin of setting up a “graven image” and
establishing a rival priesthood, even though
their priest was a Levite (Jgs 18:30,31). The re-
sult of that idolatry was that, at the division of
mon’s reign, King Jeroboam of the northern
kingdom of Israel chose the city of Dan as one
of the idol shrines in which to set up the
“golden calves’’ (1 Kgs 12:28,29). The Danites’
apostasy, and that of the other northern
tribes, continued throughout their history (2
Kgs 10:29), and because of it they were eventu-
ally carried captive to Assyria (2 Kgs 17:1-23).
 Daniel

The tribe name is mentioned in the prophet

Ezekiel’s idealized description of the restored
land and Jerusalem (Ez 48:1,2,32). In the NT,
the apostle John omitted the tribe from a list
of Israel’s tribes (Rv 7:4—8).
See IsRAEL, HIsToRY OF; DAN (PERSON); DAN
(PLACE).

Dance. Form of artistic expression incorpo-

rated into Israel’s worship, used especially dur-
ing times of celebration.
See Music AND Musical INSTRUMENTS.

Daniel (Person). 1. David’s second son, the

first. by his wife Abigail (1 Chr 3:1). Also called
Chileab (2 Sm 3:3).
See CHILEAB.
2. Priest, descendant of Ithamar. He signed
Ezra’s covenant of faithfulness to God with Ne-
hemiah and others after the exile (Ezr 8:2; Neh
10:6).
3. Jewish statesman and seer in the Babylo-
nian court whose career is recounted in the
Book of Daniel. Daniel’s early life is cloaked in
silence. Nothing is known of his parents or
family, though he was probably descended
from Jewish nobility (Dn 1:3). If born during
the time of King Josiah’s reforms (c. 621 Bc),
Daniel would have been about 16 when he and
his three friends—Hananiah, Mishael, and Aza-
riah—were deported from Jerusalem to Bab-
ylon by King Nebuchadnezzar. They may have
been hostages to assure the cooperation of the
royal family in Judah.
Daniel, renamed Belteshazzar (meaning
“may [god] protect his life’), was trained for
court service. He quickly established a reputa-
tion for intelligence and for absolute fidelity
to his God. After three years of instruction he
began a court career which lasted nearly 70
years (Dn 1:21). Daniel had hardly finished his
training when he was called on to interpret
one of Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams, in which a
great image collapsed and disintegrated when
struck by a stone. God revealed its meaning to
Daniel, who explained it to the king. In grati-
tude Nebuchadnezzar offered him the post of
governor of Babylonia, but Daniel requested
that the honor be conferred on his three com-
panions in captivity.
Near the end of Nebuchadnezzar’s life Dan-
iel was able to interpret a second dream (Dn
4). That dream intimated the king’s impend-
ing insanity. Daniel urged the king to repent
(4:27), but he did not, and subsequently for a
period of time he became deranged.
After the death of Nebuchadnezzar in 562
BC, Daniel dropped from public view and evi-
dently occupied an inferior position in the
royal court. Although he received visions (Dn
Balances, reminiscent of part of the interpretation of the hand-
writing on the wall—“weighed in the balances and found want-
ing” (Dn 5:27).
7,8) in the first and third years of the Babylo-
nian regent Belshazzar’s reign (555 and 552
BC), it was not until 539 Bc that Daniel made
another public appearance. During a banquet
hosted by Belshazzar, the king profaned the
sacred vessels pillaged from the Jerusalem
temple. A disembodied hand suddenly ap-
peared and wrote on the palace wall the myste-
rious words, “Mene, Mene, Tekel, Parsin.”
Summoned to explain the message, Daniel in-
terpreted it as a forecast of the imminent end
of the Babylonian kingdom. That same night
Belshazzar was killed by the Persians, who at-
tacked and successfully overran the capital
city (5:30).
Under Darius the Mede, Daniel became one
of three “presidents” of the realm (6:2). Dan-
iel’s rank, along with his capable and distin-
guished management, infuriated his political
enemies. They persuaded Darius to pass a de-
cree forbidding petition to any god or man but
the king, under penalty of being cast into a
lions’ den. Daniel’s religious integrity forced
him to violate the law. Thrown to the lions,
he remained miraculously unscathed. Vindi-
cated, he was restored to office (6:17—28).
The latter part of the Book of Daniel de-

Byes
Daniel, Book of
scribes several visions he received of future
events. The visions dealt with four beasts (7:1—
28), future kingdoms (8:1—27), the coming of
the Messiah (9:1-27), and Syria and Egypt
(11,12). The prophet Ezekiel alluded to Dan-
iel’s great wisdom (Ez 28:3) and ranked him in
righteousness with Noah and Job (Ez 14:14,20).
DONALD K. CAMPBELL & R. K. HARRISON
See DANIEL, BOOK OF; EXILE; PROPHET,
ESS.
Daniel, Book of. Fourth book of the Major
Prophets in the OT, characterized
symbolism and reflecting heroic historical
events during the Babylonian exile of the Jew-
ish people. Because Daniel is not an easy book
to understand, its interpretation requires care-
ful study and reflection. Daniel himself wrote,
when reflecting on the meaning of one of his
visions, “But I was appalled by the vision and
did not understand it” (Dn 8:27).
In the old Jewish division of the OT Daniel
is part of the third section, called the Writings,
along with such books as Psalms, Proverbs,
and Job. It was not included in the second sec-
tion of the OT, called the Prophets. Although
portions of his book may be interpreted from a
prophetic perspective, Daniel is never explic-
itly identified as a prophet. The book’s two
major divisions are narratives about Daniel’s
life (1-6), and Daniel’s visions (7-12).
Author. In terms of having a known au-
thor, the Book of Daniel is anonymous, as are
many books coming from the ancient world.
The existing text bears only a title, “Daniel,”
identifying the key subject matter of the book:
the man himself.
The first six chapters of the book contain
information about Daniel written in the third
person; beginning in Daniel 7:2, however, the
book purports to contain words written by
Daniel in the first person. Although the tradi-
tional view within Judaism, later adopted by
Christianity, was that Daniel wrote the entire
book named for him, there is little confirming
evidence. Jesus’ words about things “spoken of
by the prophet Daniel” (Mt 24:15) do not clar-
ify who wrote the whole book, since the words
in question appear in the second half of the
Book of Daniel, explicitly identified
words. Thus the problem of who wrote the
first part remains.
Whether or not Daniel wrote the entire
book, he is definitely the key character. The
only source of information about him is the
book itself. Daniel was a Hebrew from Judah,
probably of royal lineage, born late in the sev-
enth century Bc. As a young boy he was taken
from his homeland to Babylon (in what is now
southern Iraq) around 605 Bc. There,
three years of formal education in language
and literature (Dn 1:4,5), he became an official
in the royal household. The first six chapters
tell of particular incidents in Daniel’s life but
do not provide a comprehensive biography of
his life and times.
Daniel’s name means “God is my judge.” As
a foreign resident in Babylon, he was given
PROPHET- another name, Belteshazzar, which may have
meant “(let god) protect his life” in the Babylo-
nian language.
Date. Uncertainty about the authorship of
the Book of Daniel naturally contributes to un-
by vivid certainty about the date of its writing. If Dan-
iel was the author of the whole book, a date in
the second half of the sixth century Bc is likely.
If he was not the author, a later date is possi-
ble. The conservative interpretation has usu-
ally been that the book was written in the
sixth century Bc. The most widely held alterna-
tive maintains that the book was written
about 165 BC.
Evidence exists to support both the early
and late dates of Daniel. Those who argue for
a late date and non-Danielic authorship nor-
mally use two lines of argument, one histori-
cal and the other linguistic.
Historical Argument. According to the his-
torical argument, the writer was thoroughly
familiar with the history of Near Eastern impe-
rial power from the sixth to the second centu-
ries, but had an incomplete, erroneous view of
the historical details in the second half of the
sixth century, Daniel’s era. Such an imbalance
in knowledge implies a late date of writing.
The first part of the historical argument
must be conceded by those holding a more con-
servative view. The Book of Daniel does pre-
sent a remarkable knowledge of Near Eastern
history. The critical question is whether that
knowledge was normal human knowledge,
gained after the events, or special knowledge
revealed to Daniel beforehand. That question
is answered in different ways by different peo-
ple, depending on their view of prophecy and
other factors.
The second part of the historical argument
is technically more complex. Was the writer’s
knowledge of history in the late sixth century
Bc really erroneous? The most significant
as his problem is that of the identity of Darius the
Mede (Dn 5:30,31). The Book of Daniel says
that Darius the Mede conquered Babylon and
was succeeded at a later date by Cyrus. Exter-
nal historical sources contain no reference to a
Darius at that time, but show clearly that it
was Cyrus who conquered Babylon. Advocates
of a late date consider that strong evidence.
Those who advocate an early date have no sim-
ple solution to the problem. One proposed so-
after lution is that Darius and Cyrus are two names
572

for the same person. A basis for that Hypothe-
sis is that Daniel 6:28 can be translated: ‘“‘Dan-
iel prospered in the reign of Darius, even [that
is] the reign of Cyrus the Persian.’”’ An analogy
appears in the use of the names Pul and
Tiglath-pileser in 1 Chronicles 5:26. In sum-
mary, the dating of Daniel on the basis of
the writer’s historical knowledge is difficult,
whether one suggests an early or late date.
Linguistic Argument. The linguistic argu-
ments for the date of Daniel are also complex,
especially for a person not familiar with the
original languages of the book (Hebrew and
Aramaic). Advocates of a late date use three
related arguments: (1) the Aramaic language
of the book is typical of late Aramaic (second
century Bc and later); (2) the presence of Per-
sian loan words is a further indication of the
late date of the book’s Aramaic; and (3) the
presence of Greek loan words in the Aramaic
shows that the language must be dated after
the time of Alexander the Great’s conquest of
the Orient (c. 330 Bc). For many advocates of a
late date for the book’s composition, the last
argument is most compelling. It would be im-
possible, they affirm, to find Greek loan words
in Aramaic two centuries before Alexander’s
time.
Although the arguments are at first convinc-
ing, on closer examination they are less persua-
sive to those who hold the conservative view.
Each of the three parts of the argument has
been answered.
(1) Aramaic was in common use in the Near
East from about the ninth century Bc, being
recognized as an official language in Assyria
from the eighth century Bc. Ninety percent of
the Aramaic words in Daniel were used in that
older language, in both the Old and Imperial
Aramaic dialects. The remaining 10 percent,
known only in later texts in the light of pres-
ent evidence, might indicate a late date, but
they could equally be early uses of the words
in question.
(2) The evidence of Persian loan words in
Aramaic can function like a boomerang. It is
true that later Aramaic has many Persian loan
words (about 19 appear in Daniel), but one can
give an alternative explanation for Persian
loan words in Daniel at an early date. The
story of Daniel is set, in part, in the context of
life in a Persian-controlled court. The Persians
used Aramaic in their administrative control
of the empire, and their own language inevita-
bly penetrated Aramaic. If one assumes an
early date for the Book of Daniel, then it was
being written in precisely the period when Per-
sian would be having its greatest influence on
Aramaic.
(3) The evidence of Greek words in Daniel’s
Aramaic (a total of three) is not altogether com-
573
Daniel, Book of
pelling. Greek (or ‘‘Tonian’’) traders traveled in
various parts of the Near East from the eighth
century Bc onward. Greek mercenaries fought
for Near Eastern states in and after the seventh
century Bc. In Daniel’s lifetime King Nebu-
chadnezzar is known to have employed Greek
artisans in the city of Babylon. Thus it is unnec-
‘éssary to limit the possibilities of Greek pene-
tration of the Aramaic language to the period
after Alexander. The conqueror was by no
means the first Greek to set foot in the Orient.
Conclusion. The historical and linguistic
arguments for the date of Daniel are inconclu-
sive for either an early or late date of writing.
To a large extent, dating the book depends on
other matters, such as authorship, intention,
and the extent to which one takes a “pro-
phetic” interpretation of portions of the book.
To postulate that Daniel was the author is con-
sistent with the evidence currently available.
Further, evidence provided by some of the
Daniel material from the Dead Sea Scrolls at
Qumran does not support a late date for the
book. All Daniel manuscripts and fragments
are second century Bc copies, thus requiring
an earlier date for the original. One manu-
script, related paleographically to the large
Isaiah Scroll, must have come originally from
the same period—estimated to be several cen-
turies before the Qumran copy of Isaiah. Other
manuscripts from Qumran show that -no OT
canonical material was composed later than
the Persian period. Thus no evidence exists for
a second-century Bc date for Daniel.
Language. One of the most curious fea-
tures of the Book of Daniel is not immediately
evident to a reader of the English Bible. The
book is bilingual. Daniel 1:1-2:4a and Daniel
8—12 are written in Hebrew, the language of
the other OT books. The middle section (Dn
2:4b—7:28), however, is written in Aramaic, a
different but related language. Various expla-
nations have been offered. Some have sug-
gested that an original Aramaic book was ex-
panded by a Hebrew writer, with additions to
the original book at the beginning and the
end. Others suggest that a portion of the origi-
nal Hebrew book was lost, so the missing sec-
tion was replaced from a surviving Aramaic
translation. More complex and ingenious sug-
gestions have also been made, but none has
been commonly accepted.
Another suggestion is possible. The Book of
Daniel (whatever date one prefers) may sim-
ply reflect the bilingual character of its cul-
tural setting. (As a modern example, consider
the many written materials in Canada that ap-
pear in both English and French.) Finally, one
can regard the bilingual character as another
of the mysterious aspects of the book which
make its interpretation difficult.
Daniel, Book of
Background. The background of the Book
of Daniel can be examined from two perspec-
tives. It may be viewed from the perspective
of the Babylonian exile, of which Daniel was
a part (early sixth century Bc), or in the light
of future historical events (second century
BC), toward which the visions in the book’s
second half seem to point.
The Babylonian Exile. Although Daniel him-
self was exiled about 605 Bc, the major phase
of the Babylonian exile began in 586 Bc, follow-
ing the defeat of the kingdom of Judah and the
destruction of Jerusalem. The account extends
through the reigns of Nebuchadnezzar (prop-
erly Nebuchadrezzar) and Belshazzar, culmi-
nating in the early years of the Persian king
Cyrus, who took over the city of Babylon in
539 BC. For the Jews the exile was a time of
hardship, but also a time of renewed theologi-
cal understanding. Both aspects are reflected
in the Book of Daniel.
The Seleucid Period in Palestine. Daniel's vi-
sions in the latter half of the book appear to
refer to the Seleucid period in Palestine, spe-
cifically the time when the Jews were ruled by
Antiochus Epiphanes, a member of the Seleu-
cid dynasty (175-163 Bc). Whether the visions
were prophetic anticipations of future events
or reflections of contemporary culture, the
Seleucid period is important to a full under-
standing of the book.
Under Antiochus, Palestinian Jews experi-
enced a time of considerable hardship. The an-
cient faith was severely undermined, the high
priesthood in Jerusalem was sold to the high-
est bidder, and the temple was desecrated in
several ways. Pressure was exerted on the
Jews to adapt their lives and faith to Hellenis-
tic (Greek-influenced) culture. Although some
capitulated, others refused and steadfastly
held firm to the old faith. A rebellion against
the oppressive measures of Antiochus began in
168 Bc. By 164 the rebels had largely succeeded
in getting rid of the objectionable practices.
But the Seleucid period was generally a bad
time for faithful Jews, when all the forces of
history seemed to work against the true faith.
Part of the Book of Daniel’s greatness lies in
its theological understanding of history, which
enabled men and women to continue living in
faith through a time of terrible crisis.
Purpose and Theological Teaching. The
scriptural section called the Writings served a
variety of purposes. The psalms, for example,
were used primarily in Israel’s worship. The
proverbs may have been part of Israel’s school
curriculum. The Book of Job addressed a spe-
cific human and theological problem.
The purpose of the Book of Daniel is not so
easy to determine, since it is essentially a
story, a partial biography of Daniel. It is not
Se
strictly a prophetic book, nor is it history in
the modern sense. Much of it is concerned
with dreams and their interpretations.
Nevertheless, the word “history” provides a
clue to its purpose. Daniel seeks to provide
theological understanding of history. The first
six chapters tell about Daniel and his compan-
ions, not merely to satisfy historical curiosity
but to teach the reader. OT theology insisted
that the God of Israel participated in human
life and history. To read biblical history, there-
fore, is to discover God’s participation in hu-
man affairs, and to learn how God and human
beings relate to each other. In the opening
chapters of Daniel one reads of events in the
life of a man of remarkable faith, the kind of
history from which one may learn how to live.
The last six chapters focus on Daniel’s
dreams. Although neither the dreams nor the
interpretations are easy to understand, it is
possible to see the theme of history emerging
again. The emphasis in chapters 7-12 is not on
history as a record of past events, but on the
meaning of history and the world’s future. In
the biblical perspective the movements of hu-
man societies in the present and future matter
as much as past history. Though Daniel’s vi-
sions are dominated by nations and superpow-
ers, they have a more basic theme: God’s
power over human beings and nations. His-
tory often appears to be a conglomeration of
chaos and human conflict. Yet God ultimately
controls history and moves it toward a goal.
In spite of ambiguous details at the end of the
book, Daniel provides hope for people living in
a time of crisis. Even if what is said about the
“time of the end” cannot be understood now
(Dn 12:9), the end of history is full of hope for
those with faith in God (12:13). The purpose of
the Book of Daniel thus has to do with the
meaning of history, both what can be learned
from the past and what can be hoped for in
the present and future.
The book also contains specific theological
statements on such matters as human faith,
divine salvation, and the nature of revelation.
One theological matter in Daniel deserves par-
ticular attention: the doctrine of resurrection.
The NT’s clear doctrine of resurrection fol-
lowed by judgment is not a central theme in
the OT. For the most part the Hebrews’ faith
was fixed on the realities of earthly life. Hope
for life beyond the grave is hinted at in many
texts but remains implicit. Only in the later
writings of the OT, especially those of Ezekiel
and Daniel, does a more explicit doctrine of
resurrection develop.
The focal point of that doctrine in the Book
of Daniel is 12:2: “And many of those who
sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,
some to everlasting life, and some to shame

and everlasting contempt.” The doctrine of
personal resurrection provides a basis for indi-
vidual hope within an understanding of pres-
ent and future history. Nations move against
nations in apparent turmoil. God is believed
to be in ultimate control, but what becomes of
all the people who die while history is still in
motion? The dead shal! rise again, says Dan-
iel, and in resurrection bodies shall be judged
according to their deeds. Some will be re-
warded with everlasting life, but others will
be condemned to shame.
The kind of life beyond death depicted in
Daniel’s words is not merely immortality
of the soul, a concept common among the
Greeks. The Jews understood a full person to
comprise both body and soul, both outer and
inner life. The continuity of a disembodied
soul, acceptable to the Greeks, would for the
Jews have to mean physical life beyond the
grave, a concept full of mystery.
To the readers of the Book of Daniel the
doctrine of resurrection provided hope in an
otherwise bleak and hopeless world. It was a
reminder that the actions of earthly life are
important: they form the basis of future judg-
ment. The world has a larger horizon of life
beyond the body’s death. Ultimately there will
be justice, even though justice is rarely seen in
the present existence. Evildoers may live with-
out ever being punished. Yet beyond the death
of the body lies a final judgment characterized
by God’s justice.
So the Book of Daniel is about history and
hope. Life must be lived now; for that, the
book offers in the first six chapters the insight
of Daniel’s experience. Life is lived in the con-
text of war and international chaos; for that,
chapters 7-12 depict God’s sovereignty and
his purposes in history. Individual life moves
toward death; for that, the writer speaks of
resurrection and judgment.
Content: Stories About Daniel (1-6). Dan-
iel and His Companions (1:1—21). Daniel and
his companions, Hananiah, Mishael, and Aza-
riah, were exiled to Babylon some 19 years
before the main exile following the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem. The four healthy young
men, selected from among many Jewish ex-
iles, were at the command of King Nebuchad-
nezzar assigned to a special three-year train-
ing program to make them court aides.
As soon as the four Jewish youths entered
Babylon’s high society, they faced a dietary
problem. The king provided them with the
best food and wine from the royal kitchens,
but a Jew’s diet was restricted by the laws of
God: (see Dt 14). The four asked for a diet of
vegetables and water, not to be fussy or un-
grateful, but to remain faithful to their God.
The story tells how the dietary situation
575
Daniel, Book of
worked out and sees them through their edu-
cation and Daniel’s appointment as a royal
counselor.
The first episode thus focuses on a key issue
faced by all Jewish exiles. How could one live
in a foreign land, with foreign food and cus-
toms, yet remain faithful to God and his laws?
‘Daniel provided a model. He was courageous
enough not to compromise, but wise enough
to seek a solution acceptable to all. His faith-
fulness was rewarded by God. By the end of
the episode Daniel is seen as a person with
special wisdom and gifts from God. The rest of
his life was marked by the exercise of those
gifts.
Nebuchadnezzar's Dream (2:1—49). The king
had a dream and, although he could not re-
member its substance, it weighed heavily on
his mind. When his corps of professional inter-
preters could do nothing for him, he ordered
that they be executed. The king’s order in-
cluded Daniel and his companions, whose
training qualified them as interpreters. Daniel
obtained a stay of execution by offering to in-
terpret the dream. After prayer, Daniel re-
ceived from God both the substance of the
dream and its interpretation, which he re-
layed to the king. The grateful Nebuchadnez-
zar promoted Daniel and his companions to
important positions in Babylon.
Although the writer recorded both the
king’s dream and Daniel’s interpretation, the
problem for a modern reader is how to inter-
pret the interpretation. The king saw in his
dream a statue, with head of gold, chest and
arms of silver, belly and thighs of brass, legs
of iron, and feet of part iron and part clay.
The interpretation identified Nebuchadnezzar
as the head of gold. His kingdom would be
followed by three other kingdoms, each repre-
sented by the statue’s parts and substances.
At that point modern interpretations begin to
diverge.
A common interpretation of the four se-
quential kingdoms is as follows: Chaldean
empire (gold), Medo-Persian empire (silver),
Greece (brass), Rome (iron and clay). Others
suggest an alternative interpretation: Chal-
dean empire (gold), Media (silver), Persia
(brass), Greece (iron and clay). To focus too
much attention on identifying the four king-
doms can result in failure to see the chapter’s
key feature. From the midst of those human
kingdoms, “the God of heaven will set up a
kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor
shall its sovereignty be left to another people”
(2:44). The Babylonian king’s dream antici-
pated the coming of a greater kingdom, that of
Jesus Christ.
The Furnace (3:1—30). The story continues,
focusing on Daniel’s three friends and using
Daniel, Book of
their Babylonian names, Shadrach, Meshach,
and Abednego. King Nebuchadnezzar con-
structed a massive golden statue, go feet high.
At its dedication ceremony everyone was re-
quired to bow down and worship as a band
began to play. The three young Hebrews, who
refused to worship, were summoned before
the king. Their continued firm refusal led to a
sentence of execution, and they were thrown
into a fiercely burning furnace. Remarkably,
they did not burn, and a fourth being ap-
peared with them in the furnace. As they
emerged unharmed from the ordeal, the king
acknowledged God’s power of salvation and
rewarded them.
The story illustrates a second dilemma of
the Jews in exile. Faithfulness to God's first
commandment, ‘You shall have no other gods
before me” (Dt 5:7), could lead to death. The
three young men were faithful—not out of con-
fidence that God would rescue them, but
whether or not he chose to spare their lives
(3:17,18). As it happened, God delivered them;
they were tossed into the furnace bound, but
they came out free men. The message was pro-
found: certainly the Jews should believe in a
God able to deliver from the flames of persecu-
tion, but they should believe and hold fast
even if no deliverance could be seen beyond
the trial.
Nebuchadnezzar's Second Dream and Mad-
ness (4:1—37). On two occasions Nebuchad-
nezzar had confessed faith in the living God:
when Daniel had interpreted his dream of the
statue (2:47), and on the release of Daniel’s three
companions from the furnace (3:28). Nonethe-
less, the king’s faith was shallow. The story in
chapter 4 recounts a lapse of faith that brought
terrible consequences. After eight years, when
those consequences had run their course, the
king again acknowledged God (4:37).
The entire story is presented in the form of
a proclamation, written by Nebuchadnezzar
and widely circulated after the events in the
story had transpired. The king dreamed of a
tall tree growing in a field to ever greater
heights. A divine messenger ordered the tree
cut down, with only a stump and roots left in
the ground. The stump and roots then took
the form of a man, but the man’s mind was
replaced with that of an animal. For seven
years that semihuman creature behaved like
a beast.
Daniel showed the king how the dream ap-
plied to the king himself. Nebuchadnezzar
was the great tree that would be cut down; he
would behave like a beast in the field for seven
years. One year after the king had been told
that interpretation, the judgment came. For
seven years he behaved like an animal until
his sanity returned.
576
_The moral of the king’s story is that his
madness was no accident but rather divine
judgment. His arrogant belief that he had the
power of God led to heavy retribution (4:30).
The king was afflicted with a rare and pecu-
liar form of mental illness today called ‘“‘boan-
thropy.” The true meaning of the story lies at
a deeper level: to think that one is God, having
absolute power and control of one’s own life,
is madness. That kind of madness can be
cured and overcome only with the realization
that absolute power and authority belong to
God alone.
Belshazzar’s Feast (5:1—31). The scene
shifts to the reign of a later king in Babylon.
Belshazzar, son of Nabonidus, was probably
co-regent with Nabonidus (555?—539 Bc), with
special authority in the region of Babylon. The
theme of his story is similar to that of chapter
4. Belshazzar, in the course of an enormous
feast, called for the sacred vessels captured
from the temple in Jerusalem. With the sacred
vessels the Babylonians toasted the local gods,
a sacrilegious act that invited divine judg-
ment. It came in the form of words written on
the wall by a finger, which Daniel interpreted
for the king as words of judgment (5:26—28).
Although he praised Daniel for the interpreta-
tion, the king missed both the true meaning of
the words and the lesson taught to Nebuchad-
nezzar, his predecessor (5:18—22). Belshazzar
was killed that very night when Darius the
Mede entered the city and captured it. The
theme continues remorselessly: human pride
and arrogance do not pass unnoticed by the
God of history, who controls and directs
human events toward the fulfillment of his
purpose.
The Den of Lions (6:1—28). The theme of
chapter 6 is similar to that of chapter 3, but
with Daniel as the story’s central figure. He is
portrayed as one unwilling to compromise,
fully obedient to Darius as long as that was
possible, but unwilling to disobey the law of
God. Hence Daniel knowingly disobeyed a
royal decree that prohibited prayer to any
other than the king himself. Although he was
aware of the consequences, Daniel remained
faithful to God. The immediate outcome,
when his enemies reported him, was an order
of execution; Daniel was thrown to the lions.
He was delivered from the hungry cats, and
the king, relieved of a terrible predicament,
had the plotters punished.
A double message emerges from the story.
On the one hand, God’s servant must be faith-
ful in prayer and worship, regardless of the
outcome; God delivers, and in that case did
deliver Daniel from disaster. On the other
hand, the effect of Daniel’s faithfulness was
that the king, who had ordered his subjects to

worship him, learned about true worship
(6:25-27). The effects of faithfulness, like rip-
ples from a pebble tossed in a pool, spread far
beyond the one who is faithful.
Content: Daniel’s Visions (7-12). With
the beginning of chapter 7 the chronological
sequence of the Book of Daniel changes; Dan-
iel’s first vision goes back to the first year of
Belshazzar (7:1), but subsequent visions take
place as late as the reign of Cyrus, the Persian
king (10:1). Chapters 7-12 emphasize the mean-
ing of history and God’s sovereignty in history,
expressed in the mysterious symbolism of
dreams. The whole section can be divided as
follows: (1) vision of four beasts (7:1—28); (2)
vision of the ram and the goat (8:1—27); (3)
Daniel’s prayer (9:1—27); (4) vision of the end
times (10:1—12:13).
The first vision again takes up the theme of
four kingdoms, already seen in Nebuchadnez-
zar’s dream (ch 2). In the second vision the
focus is narrowed down to two kingdoms, Per-
sia and Greece. Much of the final vision of the
end times deals with events occurring during
the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes in the sec-
ond century sc. All the visions play on the
same theme. Although human kingdoms may
exert their might in a chaotic world, the sover-
eign God acts through history’s apparent
chaos toward an ultimate goal of salvation.
The primary interpretation of the visions
can be perceived in past historical events, but a
further messianic dimension can be seen in the
light of the NT. That dimension is most evident
in chapter 7. In the context of the four king-
doms a divine court of judgment is established,
presided over by the “Ancient of Days—the Al-
mighty God” (7:9). Then Daniel sees the arrival
of “one like a son of man” (7:13). Though the
phrase “Son of man” was later perceived to be
a messianic title, it did not technically have
that meaning in the Book of Daniel. Daniel 7:13
is a principal source for the title “Son of man,”
which Jesus commonly used to designate him-
self. His most significant use of that term was
at his trial, where he directly associated his
title with Daniel 7 (Mt 26:63,64).
Earthly kingdoms dominate Daniel’s vi-
sions but Jesus established the kingdom of
God. That kingdom, however, has only par-
tially come, and will reach its fullness in
Christ’s second advent. The message of Daniel
speaks within that tension of a kingdom al-
ready come and yet still to come in its full-
ness. The modern world reveals not the uni-
versal kingdom of God but the clamorous
kingdoms of humanity. They are powerful
and: often appear to hold the world’s future
firmly in their hands. Daniel’s message is
that they do not: God is sovereign, and his
kingdom will finally come in its full power.
577
Darius
To say more than that with respect to Dan-
iel’s visions is a delicate business. Trying to
identify the nations of Daniel’s dreams with
modern nations misses the intention of the
book. If Daniel, even with the help of angelic
interpreters, found it difficult to understand
his own visions, caution is appropriate for the
‘modern reader. Yet Daniel ended his mysteri-
ous book with a note of hope: “But go your
way till the end; and you shall rest, and shall
stand in your allotted place at the end of the
days” (12:13). PETER C. CRAIGIE
See DANIEL (PERSON) #3; EXILE; PROPHECY; ISRAEL,
HISTORY OF; PROPHET, PROPHETESS.
Bibliography J.G. Baldwin, Daniel; D. Ford, Daniel; C.F.
Keil, Biblical Commentary on the Book of Daniel; J.A. Mont-
gomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of
Daniel; R.S. Wallace, The Lord Is King; D.J. Wiseman, et al,
Notes on Some Problems in the Book of Daniel; E.J. Young,
The Book of Daniel and Daniel’s Vision of the Son of Man.
Danite. Member of Dan’s tribe (Jos 19:47; 1
Chr. 127 35).
See DAN, TRIBE OF.
Dan-jaan. Geographical landmark denoting
the northern limit of David’s kingdom (2 Sm
24:6 KJv). Joab’s census-taking stopped here.
Some feel that this is a copyist’s error, because
no town with a similar name is known to have
existed in that area. Others believe that it
means “Dan in the wood,” referring simply to
Dan (rsv). Still others think it refers to a town
within Dan, perhaps Jaan, of which all traces
have vanished.
Dannah. Town located in the hill country of
Judah between Socoh and Kiriath-sepher (De-
bir) (Jos 15:49).
Darda, Dara. Mahol’s son (1 Kgs 4:31), a
Judahite of the family of Zerah (1 Chr 2:6).
With Ethan the Ezrahite and Heman and Cal-
col, also sons of Mahol, Darda is mentioned as
the proverbial type of wisdom, though he is
surpassed by Solomon (1 Kgs 4:31,32). First
Chronicles 2:6 gives the name as Dara, proba-
bly the error of a copyist, and includes a fifth
man, Zimri. That there are two different fa-
thers (Mahol and Zerah) mentioned in the two
passages may be explained by making Mahol
the natural father and Zerah the Ezrahite an
earlier ancestor.
Daric. Persian gold coin.
See COINS.
Darius. Name of three emperors in the Per-
sian dynasty of the legendary King Achae-
menes. A Darius appears in the biblical books
of Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah as
Darius
a Persian king, and in the Book of Daniel as a
Mede “who became king over the realm of the
Chaldeans” (Dn 9:1).
Darius I (521—486 Bc). Also known as Da-
rius Hystaspes and Darius the Great, Darius I
seized the throne of the Persian empire after
the death of Cambyses II. Although he was an
Achaemenid, he was from a different branch
of the royal family than Cyrus and Cambyses,
and his authority was not accepted in all the
provinces. After Darius quelled several revolts,
however, his power was firmly established,
and he turned his attention to expanding the
empire. His military campaigns extended Per-
sian borders to the Danube River in the west
and to the Indus River in the east, making him
ruler of the largest empire the world had
known. Greco-Persian conflict, which contin-
ued until Alexander the Great conquered the
empire in 330 Bc, began when Darius launched
two invasions of Greece after conquering
Thrace and Macedonia. The first expedition
was destroyed by a storm in the Aegean Sea;
the second was defeated by the Athenians in
the famous battle of Marathon in 490 Bc.
An able administrator, Darius did much to
promote trade and commerce. He instituted a
uniform system of weights and measures. Dur-
ing his reign a canal from the Nile River to the
Red Sea was completed, and a sea route from
the Indus River to Egypt was explored.
During Darius’ reign, Persian architecture
developed a style that continued until the end
of the Achaemenid dynasty. Darius built at
Babylon, Ecbatana, and Susa, his capital. A
great royal road was constructed from Susa to
the Lydian capital of Sardis. His greatest ar-
chitectural accomplishment was the founding
The palace stairway of Darius.
of Persepolis, a new royal city to replace the
emperor's residence at Pasargadae. Darius
also allowed temples to be built in Egypt and
in Jerusalem, continuing Cyrus’ policy of re-
specting the religious customs of his subjects.
Darius I is, the Darius, king of Persia, men-
tioned in the books of Ezra, Haggai, and Zecha-
riah. Ezra 5—6 record that Zerubbabel and
Jeshua, with the help of Haggai and Zecha-
riah, finished rebuilding the temple during
Darius’ reign while Tattenai was governor of
the province “Beyond the River” (Syria-
Palestine). Zerubbabel and Jeshua had re-
turned to Jerusalem under Cyrus II about 538
Bc (Ezr 2:2). They completed the temple in the
sixth year of Darius (Ezr 6:15). That must have
been the sixth year of Darius I (516 Bc), since
the sixth year of Darius II (417 Bc) would cer-
tainly be too late. That identification was con-
firmed by discovery of a Babylonian docu-
ment, dated June 5, 502 Bc, which refers to
Tattenai as “the governor of Beyond the
River.”
In chapter 4 of Ezra three Persian rulers are
mentioned: Darius (vv 5,24); Ahasuerus (proba-
bly Xerxes I, v 6); and Artaxerxes (probably
Artaxerxes I, vv 7-23). The chapter is a brief
record of resistance to Jewish efforts to re-
build the city of Jerusalem and the temple.
Verse 24 states that work on the temple
“ceased until the second year of Darius”; yet
the temple was completed in the sixth year of
Darius I. Obviously work on the temple could
not have stopped in the second year of Artax-
erxes’ son, Darius II (421 Bc), if it had already
been finished in 515 Bc. Therefore Ezra 4:24
should be understood not as a chronological
continuation of the first 23 verses but as an

introduction to the next two chapters; which
discuss the building of the temple.
Darius II (423—404 Bc). Also known as
Ochus (his real name) and Darius Nothus
(“Darius the bastard’’), Darius II was the son
of Artaxerxes I by a Babylonian concubine.
Before he became emperor, Ochus was a sa-
trap (governor) of Hyrcania, a region on the
southeast coast of the Caspian Sea. In 423 Bc
his half brother, Sogdianus (or Secydianus),
killed Xerxes II. Ochus then seized the throne
from Sogdianus, whom he executed, and
adopted the name Darius II. His reign was
plagued with revolution and corruption. His
own full brother, Arsites, revolted soon after
Darius seized the throne, and Darius had him
executed.
After an alliance with Sparta was formed
against Athens, Persia joined the Peloponne-
sian War. Several successful military cam-
paigns succeeded in recovering the Greek coas-
tal cities of Asia Minor and breaking Athenian
power in the Aegean area. Darius II died in
Babylon in 404 Bc, the year the Peloponnesian
War ended.
The Darius mentioned only once in the
Book of Nehemiah probably refers to Darius
II. The passage states that Jewish priests were
recorded “until the reign of Darius the Per-
sian” (Neh 12:22b); descendants of Levi were
recorded “until the days of Johanan son of Eli-
ashib” (Neh 12:23). An Aramaic document
found in Elephantine (Egypt) refers to Joha-
nan the high priest in Jerusalem. The docu-
ment was written in 407 Bc, thus placing Joha-
nan in the reign of Darius II.
Darius III (336—330 Bc). This Darius,
also known as Darius Codomannus, was the
grandson of Ostanes, who was the brother of
Artaxerxes II. Darius was governor of Armenia
when the eunuch Bagoas, who had poisoned
Artaxerxes III and placed Arses on the throne,
then poisoned Arses and placed Darius on the
throne. Bagoas later attempted to poison Da-
rius when the king broke from the eunuch’s
control; Darius, however, forced Bagoas to
drink his own poison. Yet Darius did not enjoy
control of the empire for very long. In 334 BC
Alexander the Great crossed the Hellespont
and defeated the Persians at Granicus. After
his defeat in a crucial battle at Issus (333 BC),
Darius III attempted to form an alliance with
the Greeks, who were rapidly subduing Phoe-
nicia, Palestine, and Egypt. Having refused all
offers of an alliance, in 331 Bc Alexander again
met the Persians in battle at Gaugamela, just
west of Nineveh. Darius, soundly defeated,
fled to Ecbatana. Alexander took Babylon and
Susa and burned Persepolis, then pursued Da-
rius to Ecbatana and into Hyrcania. In July of
330 Bc Darius III was killed by Bessus, the
579
Darius
rebellious governor of Bactria. His death
brought an end to the Achaemenid dynasty,
which had ruled Persia and most of the Mid-
dle East for more than two centuries.
The Jewish historian Josephus, in the first
century AD, wrote that an old man named
Jaddua was high priest when Alexander the
Great invaded the Persian empire. If Jose-
phus’ account is accurate, that Jaddua could
be the Jaddua of Nehemiah 12:22; if so, and
if “Darius the Persian’’ was meant to be read
as a contemporary of Jaddua rather than Jo-
hanan in that verse, then Nehemiah’s Darius
may have been Darius III instead of Darius
Il.
Darius the Mede. Unknown in historical
documents of the period of the Babylonian
and Persian empires, this biblical Darius has
been identified with several known figures.
The most important efforts have identified Da-
rius the Mede as another name for Cyrus II
(“Cyrus the Persian,’’ Dn 6:28); for Cambyses
II, Cyrus’ son; or for Gubaru, who was gover-
nor of Babylon and the province Beyond the
River during the reigns of Cyrus II and
Cambyses II.
According to the Book of Daniel, “Darius
the Mede received the kingdom” when Bel-
shazzar, king of Babylon, was slain (Dn 5:30,
31). Darius was about 62 years old (Dn 5:31)
and was ‘‘the son of Ahasuerus, by birth a
Mede”’ (Dn 9:1). Daniel never suggested that
Darius was king of Media or of the whole Per-
sian empire, only of the Chaldean (Babylo-
nian) kingdom. The Babylonian empire in-
cluded Mesopotamia (Babylonia and Assyria)
and Syro-Palestine (Syria, Phoenicia, and Pal-
estine). In the Persian empire that huge area
became known as the province of Babylon
(Mesopotamia) and Beyond the River (Syro-
Palestine). Daniel also recorded that Darius ap-
pointed governors in the kingdom. By the
third year of Cyrus the Persian (536 Bc), the
first year of Darius the Mede had already
passed (Dn 10:1—11:1).
According to Nabonidus’ Chronicle and the
Persian Verse Account of Nabonidus, two cu-
neiform documents from Nabonidus’ reign,
Nabonidus was in Tema until Cyrus’ invasion
of Babylonia. While away he “entrusted the
kingship” to his son Belshazzar. On October
12, 539 BC Babylon fell to Ugbaru, general of
Cyrus’ army. Cyrus entered Babylon on Octo-
ber 29, 539 BC and appointed a person named
Gubaru governor of Babylon. Gubaru then ap-
pointed other governors under him. General
Ugbaru died on November 6, 539 BC.
Clearly there is no place for Darius the
Mede between the reigns of Nabonidus/Bel-
shazzar and Cyrus II. Thus Darius the Mede
must be either Cyrus, or a subordinate of Cy-
Darkness
rus, or Cambyses, crown prince under Cyrus.
But Cyrus II is mentioned as a separate per-
son (Dn 6:28; r0:1—11:1), and it seems unlikely
that the author would name the same figure
both “Cyrus the Persian” and “Darius the
Mede.” Cambyses II could not have been 62
years old; and since he was not made king of
Babylon until he became king of the empire
in 529 Bc, Cambyses’ first year could not pre-
cede Cyrus’ third year (536 Bc). Further, nei-
ther Cyrus nor Cambyses had an Ahasuerus
anywhere in his ancestry. Although they may
have had Median mothers, both Cyrus and
Cambyses traced their ancestry paternally to
Achaemenes, founder of the dynasty of Per-
sian emperors. They considered themselves
Persians, not Medes.
Darius the Mede was thus probably a subor-
dinate of Cyrus who was made ruler of “the
realm of the Chaldeans” after Belshazzar and
who could have been considered a king by his
subjects. Accordingly, the reign of Darius (Dn
6:28) should be understood as simultaneous
with that of Cyrus, not as a preceding reign.
Thus, Gubaru was made governor of Babylon
immediately following the reign of Belshazzar,
and he appointed governors as did Darius the
Mede. There is no record of Gubaru’s age, na-
tionality, or ancestry. He may well have been a
62-year-old Mede whose father was named
Ahasuerus. The Ahasuerus of the Book of Es-
ther and of Ezra 4:6 must be identified with a
later king, probably Xerxes I.
Many Babylonian texts record that Gubaru
was governor of Babylon and the province Be-
yond the River for about 14 years (539-525
Bc). The documents attribute much power to
him. His name is a final warning to officials
who might disobey the laws. In documents
that mention Cyrus IJ or Cambyses II, crimes
in Babylon are stated to be sins against
Gubaru, not against Cyrus or Cambyses. The
province of Babylon and Beyond the River
was the richest and most populous in the Per-
sian empire, encompassing many nations and
languages. For a powerful governor of such a
region to be called “king” by his subjects
seems only natural.
The case for Gubaru is admittedly circum-
stantial, but it remains the best solution to the
problem. Until further evidence ;comes to
light, it is safe to assume that Darius the
Mede, “king over the realm of the Chaldeans”
was actually Gubaru, the known governor of
that realm.
JOHN R. McRay
See PERSIA, PERSIANS; MEDES, MepiA, MEDIAN.
Darkness. Absence of light or brightness. Al-
though the Bible seldom refers to literal dark-
580
ness, a number of words translated “darkness”
are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense.
When God created the world, there was no
light until he commanded that light appear.
He then made a distinction between light and
its opposite, darkness, which he called night
(Gn 1:2,4,5,18). Literal darkness is also men-
tioned in the account of the plagues God in-
flicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an
intense darkness that could be “felt” (Ex
10:21—23). That darkness lasted three days and
was selective; wherever Egyptians were, it
was dark, but where the Israelites were, there
was light. The Israelites left Egypt accompa-
nied by a cloud that separated them from
their enemy, evidently giving light to the Isra-
elites but making darkness for the Egyptians
(Ex 14:20). The Bible notes that thieves or adul-
terers are likely to do their evil deeds in the
dark or at night (Jb 24:16,17). “
In the NT “darkness” is used twice in its
literal sense. At the crucifixion of Jesus, for a
three-hour period from noon to three o’clock,
there was no light (Mt 27:45; Mk 15:33; Lk
23:44). The other reference is to Christ’s second
coming, when “the sun will be darkened, and
the moon will not give its light” (Mt 24:29).
Several biblical passages speak of a dark-
ness surrounding God, evidently moving from
a literal sense of absence of light to a more
profound meaning. God spoke to Moses on Mt
Sinai in a dense, black cloud (Ex 20:21; Dt
4:11) or from the darkness (Dt 5:23). Darkness
is pictured as a shelter or cloak around God (2
Sm 22:12; Pss 18:11; 97:2). God sets a boundary
for light and darkness (Jb 26:10), brings dark-
ness (Pss 104:20; 105:28), and creates light and
darkness (Is 45:7). God dwells in thick dark-
ness (1 Kgs 8:12; 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness
is under his feet (2 Sm 22:10; Ps 18:9).
Most figurative references to darkness ap-
pear in poetic material, such as Job, Psalms,
and Isaiah. Generally, such darkness depicts
ignorance about God’s will. Knowledge of God
is “light”; hence lack of such knowledge is
“darkness” (Jb 12:24,25; Mt 4:16; Jn 1:5; 8:12;
1235.40}: md. 1:53:24850,11):
Job spoke of darkness as equivalent to noth-
ingness in referring to the day of his birth (Jb
3:4-6). In other references darkness stands for
death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwell-
ing place of the dead far from the light of day
(Jb es 15:23). 17212543; 18718; Ecel! 6:45
11:8).
Darkness frequently stands for distress and
anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction
experienced by the wicked (Gn 15:12; Jb 5:14;
12:25; 15:22,30; 19:8; 22:11; Pss 35:6; 107:10,14;
Eccl 5:17; Is 5:30). Moral depravity is some-
times described as darkness (Prv 2:133(4:19; )Is
5:20; 60:2). In the NT darkness is generally a

metaphor of moral depravity and spiritual ig-
norance (Mt 4:16; 6:23; Lk 1:79; 11:35; 22:53;
Rom 2:19; Col 1:13).
A major theme of OT prophets was the Day
of the Lord, often associated with darkness
(Ez732:8) J] s123317°Am 15:18;20; Zep 1:15); the
NT also links darkness with judgment in con-
nection with Christ’s second coming (Mt 8:12;
22:13} 25:30; 2 Pt 2:17; Jude 6,13). Those who
come to know God are said to come out of
darkness (Is 9:2; 29:18; 42:7); darkness cannot
be a hiding place from God (Jb 34:22; Ps
139:11,12; Is 29:15).
The apostle John’s emphasis on the conflict
between darkness and light depicts the con-
tinuing struggle between the evil one (Satan)
and Jesus. The light has come and the dark-
ness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5). The world is
a realm of darkness into which Jesus
brought light (Jn 3:19; 8:12; 12:46). God him-
self is light (x Jn 1:5). True light comes only
through Jesus (Jn 1:9). Anyone, therefore, who
does not know God remains in darkness,
spiritual ignorance.
The conflict of light against darkness was
carried further by the people at Qumran, the
Dead Sea Scrolls community. They developed
a dualism of two spirits: a spirit of truth anda
spirit of perversity. According to their Manual
of Discipline, both spirits were given in equal
measure, and both were created by God. Any-
one who practiced righteousness was con-
trolled by the “Prince of Light,”” but one who
acted perversely was dominated by the “Angel
of Darkness.”
See LIGHT; PLAGUES UPON EGyPT.
Darkon. Ancestor of a group of people that
returned to Judah with Zerubbabel after the
exile (Ezr 2:56; Neh 7:58).
Dart. Sharp, pointed weapon used as an ar-
row or light spear for thrusting.
See ARMS AND WARFARE.
Date, Date Palm. Fruit and tree mentioned
only once in the Bible (Sg 7:7).
See PLANTS (PALM).
Dathan. Reubenite, son of Eliah and brother
of Abiram; one of the leaders of Israel who,
with Korah, rebelled against Moses during the
wilderness wanderings (Nm 16:1—27; 26:9; Ps
106:17).
Daughter. See Famity LiFe AND RELATIONS.
Daughter-in-law. See Famity LIFE AND RE-
LATIONS.
David
David. Israel’s most important king. Da-
vid’s kingdom represented the epitome of Isra-
el’s power and influence during the nation’s
OT history.
The two books in the OT devoted to David’s
reign are 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. His ear-
lier years are recorded in 1 Samuel, beginning
at’ chapter 16. Almost half of the biblical
psalms are ascribed to David. His importance
extends into the NT, where he is identified as
an ancestor of Jesus Christ and as a forerunner
of the messianic king.
Early Years. Family. David was the youn-
gest son in Jesse’s family, part of Judah’s
tribe. The family lived in Bethlehem, about six
miles south of Jerusalem. His great-grand-
mother was Ruth, from the land of Moab (Ru
4:18—22). Genealogies in both the OT and NT
has trace David’s lineage back to Judah, son of the
patriarch Jacob (1 Chr 2:3-15; Mt 1:3—-6; Lk
3133)
Training and Talents. Little is known about
in David's early life. As a boy he took care of his
father’s sheep, risking his life to kill attacking
bears and lions. Later David publicly acknowl-
edged God’s help and strength in protecting
the flocks under his care (1 Sm 17:34-37).
David was an accomplished musician. He
had developed his ability as a harpist so well
that, when a musician was needed at the royal
court of King Saul, someone immediately rec-
ommended David.
In Jesse’s family David was regarded as un-
important. When the nationally known proph-
et Samuel visited Jesse’s home, all the older
sons were on hand to meet him; David was
tending the sheep. Samuel had been in-
structed by God to anoint a king from Jesse’s
family, not knowing beforehand which son to
anoint. Sensing divine restraint as seven broth-
ers passed before him, he made further in-
quiry. When he learned that Jesse had one
othér son, David was immediately summoned.
David was anointed by Samuel and endowed
with the Spirit of the Lord (1 Sm 16:1—13).
Whatever Jesse and his family understood by
that anointing, it seems to have made no im-
mediate change in David’s pattern of living.
He continued to tend the sheep.
Preparation for Kingship. During his
youth David was willing to serve others even
though he had been anointed king. It was his
willingness to take supplies to three of his
older brothers in the army that gave him his
opportunity for national fame.
As a young man David was also sensitive
toward God. While greeting his brothers on
the battlefield he was disturbed by the Philis-
tine Goliath’s defiance of God’s armies. Al-
though rebuked by his brothers, David ac-
cepted the challenge to take on Goliath. He
581
David
had a reasonable confidence that God, who
had helped him encounter a lion and a bear,
would aid him against a champion warrior.
So, with faith in God and using his ability
to sling stones, David killed Goliath (1 Sm
17:12—58).
National Fame. Killing Goliath made Da-
vid a hero to the nation of Israel. It also
brought him into close relationship with the
royal family of Saul. But success and national
acclaim brought on the jealousy of Saul and
ultimately resulted in David’s expulsion from
the land of Israel.
In the Royal Court. After promising David
his oldest daughter, Merab, in marriage, Saul
went back on that promise and offered David
another daughter, Michal. The dowry of tro-
phies from dead Philistines demanded by Saul
was designed to bring about David's death at
Philistine hands. But again David was victori-
ous. Women sang praises of his exploits, inten-
sifying Saul’s jealousy and further endanger-
ing David’s life (1 Sm 18:6—30).
In the meantime David and Saul’s son Jona-
than developed an intimate friendship. When
they made a covenant, Jonathan gave David
his choicest military equipment (sword, bow,
and belt). Although Saul tried to turn Jonathan
against David, the friendship deepened. Be-
cause Saul was trying to kill him, David had to
flee from the court and live as a fugitive.
After Jonathan had warned David of Saul’s
continuing designs on his life, David went to
Ramah to see the prophet Samuel. Together
they went to Naioth, near Ramah. After send-
ing several groups of men after David, Saul
finally went with them himself. All his at-
tempts to seize David were thwarted by the
Spirit of God, who caused Saul and his men to
prophesy all night in religious fervor (x Sm
1g).
Conferring again with Jonathan, David real-
ized that Saul’s jealousy had developed into
hatred. Jonathan, aware that David would be
the future king of Israel, requested assurance
that his descendants would receive protection
under David's rule (1 Sm 20).
Life as a Fugitive. Fleeing from Saul, Da-
vid stopped at Nob. By deceiving Ahimelech,
who was officiating as priest there, David ob-
tained food supplies and Goliath’s sword (kept
as a trophy). An Edomite named Doeg, chief of
Saul’s herdsmen, saw what happened at Nob.
David continued his flight, taking refuge tem-
porarily in Gath with King Achish (1 Sm 21),
then finding shelter in the cave of Adullam,
located 10 miles southwest of Bethlehem.
There his relatives and about 400 fighting men
joined him. He went to Mizpeh in Moab, ap-
pealing to the Moabite king for protection, es-
pecially for his parents. When the prophet
582
Gad warned him not to stay there, David
moved back to Judah to the Hereth woods (1
Sm 22:1-5).
David’s freedom of movement enraged
Saul, who charged his own people with con-
spiracy. When Doeg reported what he had wit-
nessed at Nob, Saul executed Ahimelech and
84 other priests, then massacred all of Nob’s
inhabitants. One priest named Abiathar es-
caped to report Saul’s atrocities to David, who
assured him protection (1 Sm 22:6—23).
The Philistines were always ready to take
advantage of any weakness in Israel. David's
reprisal after a Philistine raid on Keilah, 12
miles southwest of Bethlehem, gave Saul an
opportunity to attack David, who escaped to
the Wilderness of Ziph, a desert area near He-
bron. David and Jonathan met for the last
time in that wilderness. Pursued by Saul’s
army, David fled still farther south. He was
almost encircled in uninhabited country near
Maon when Saul had to march his army off to
respond to a Philistine attack (1 Sm 23).
At his next place of refuge, En-gedi, on the
western shore of the Dead Sea, David was at-
tacked by Saul with 3,000 soldiers. David had
an opportunity to kill Saul but refused to
harm the ‘‘Lord’s anointed” king of Israel.
Learning of David’s loyalty, Saul confessed his
sin in seeking David’s life (1: Sm 24).
During the years they roamed the wilder-
ness in the Maon—Ziph—En-gedi area, David's
band provided protection for Nabal, a rich
man living in Maon with large flocks of sheep
at Carmel. In exchange for that protection Da-
vid proposed that Nabal share some of his
wealth. Nabal’s scorn angered David, but Na-
bal’s wife Abigail appealed to David not to
take revenge. When Abigail told Nabal of his
narrow escape, he was evidently so shocked
that he had a heart seizure. He died 10 days
later, and Abigail later became David's wife (1
Sm 25).
Once more Saul came with an army of 3,000
men into the Ziph desert. Entering Saul’s
camp during the night, David once again
passed up an opportunity to harm the king.
Realizing the folly of seeking David’s life, Saul
finally abandoned pursuit (1 Sm 26).
Refuge in Philistia. David continued to feel
unsafe in Saul’s kingdom. Returning to Gath
in Philistine country, he was welcomed by
King Achish. His followers were allotted the
city of Ziklag, where they lived for about 16
months, attracting new recruits from Judah
and the rest of Israel (1 Sm 27; 1 Chr 12:19—22).
The Philistine army marching up to the
Megiddo valley to fight Saul’s army was un-
easy with David’s guerrillas in their rear col-
umn, so the commanders put pressure on
Achish to dismiss David. When he returned to

Ziklag, David found that the city had just
been raided by the Amalekites. He pursued
the enemy, rescued his people and goods, and
divided the spoils with those who had re-
mained behind to guard the supplies (1 Sm
29,30). Meanwhile the Philistines routed the
Israelites at Mt Gilboa, killing Jonathan and
two of Saul’s other sons in a fierce battle.
Saul, badly wounded, killed himself with his
own sword (1 Sm 31).
David as King. David ruled over Israel for
about 40 years, although the accounts of his
reign do not contain enough information for an
exact chronology. He began his rule at Hebron,
and reigned over Judah's territory for seven or
eight years. With the death of Saul’s successor,
Ish-bosheth, David was recognized as king by
all the tribes and made Jerusalem his capital.
During the next decade or so he unified Israel
through military and economic expansion.
Then came approximately 10 years of disrup-
tion in the royal family. The last years of Da-
vid’s reign seem to have been devoted to plans
for the Jerusalem temple, which was built in
the reign of his son Solomon.
The Years in Hebron. David was subjected
to an unusually rugged period of training for
his kingship. Serving under Saul he gained ex-
perience in military exploits against the Philis-
tines. Then during his fugitive wanderings in
the desert area of southern Judah he ingrati-
ated himself with the landholders and sheep
raisers by giving them protection. Being recog-
nized as an outlaw of Israel even enabled him
to negotiate diplomatic relations with Moab
and Philistia.
David was in Philistine country when news
came to him that both Saul and Jonathan had
been slain. In a beautiful elegy he paid tribute
to his friend Jonathan as well as to King Saul
(2 Sm 1).
Sure of God’s guidance, David returned to
his home, where the leaders of Judah anointed
him king at Hebron. He sent a message of com-
mendation to the men of Jabesh for providing
a respectable burial for King Saul, probably
also bidding for their support.
Hebron, David's first capital.
583
David
Confusion probably swept through Israel
when Saul was killed, because the Philistines
occupied much of the land. Various leaders
gathered whatever fighting men they could
find, as old tribal loyalties reasserted them-
selves. David had most of Judah’s tribe firmly
behind him.
_*A kind of civil war broke out between the
followers of David and those of Saul, with
David gaining the allegiance of more and
more people. Saul’s general, Abner, eventu-
ally negotiated peace with David, who re-
quested the restoration of Michal as his wife,
indicating that he held no animosity toward
Saul’s dynasty. With the consent of Saul’s son
Ish-bosheth, whom Abner had enthroned as
king, Abner went to Hebron and pledged Isra-
el’s support for David. But Abner was killed
by Joab, one of David’s captains, in a family
vendetta, and soon afterward Ish-bosheth was
assassinated. David publicly mourned Abner’s
death and had Ish-bosheth’s two murderers
executed. Thus when Saul’s dynasty ended,
David was seen by the people not so much
as a challenger as a logical successor. Hence
he was recognized as king by all Israel (2 Sm
2-4).
Consolidation in Jerusalem. When the Isra-
elites turned to David as king, the Philistines
became alarmed and attacked (2 Sm 5; 1 Chr
14:8-17). David was strong enough to defeat
them and thus unify the people of Israel.
In search of a more central location for his
capital, David turned toward the city of Jeru-
salem, a Jebusite stronghold. Joab responded
to his challenge to conquer the city and was
rewarded by being made general of David's
army. Jerusalem became known as the “city of
David” (1 Chr 11:4-9).
In the same way that he had organized his
earliest followers into an effective guerrilla
band (1 Chr 11:1—12:22), at Hebron David be-
gan organizing the whole nation (1 Chr 12:23—
40). Once established in Jerusalem, he quickly
gained recognition from the Phoenicians, con-
tracting for their artisans to build him a mag-
nificent palace in the new capital (1 Chr
14:1,2). He also made sure that Jerusalem
would become Israel’s religious center (2 Sm
6; 1 Chr 13-16). His abortive attempt to move
the ark of the covenant by oxcart (cf. Nm 4)
reminded the powerful king that he still had
to do things God’s way to be successful.
With Jerusalem well established as the na-
tion’s capital, David intended to build God a
temple. He shared his plan with the prophet
Nathan, whose immediate response was posi-
tive. That night, however, God sent a message
via Nathan that David should not build the
temple. David’s throne would be established
eternally, the prophet said, and, unlike Saul,
David
Warren's shaft (which goes down to Hezekiah’s Tunnel and
the Gihon Spring); David’s captain took the city of Jerusalem
through this tunnel and shaft.
King David would have a son to succeed him
and perpetuate the kingdom; that son would
build the temple (2 Sm 7; 1 Chr 17).
Prosperity and Supremacy. Little is re-
corded about the expansion of David’s rule
from the tribal area of Judah to a vast empire
stretching from the Nile River of Egypt to re-
gions of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. Nothing
in secular history negates the biblical perspec-
tive that David had the most powerful king-
dom in the heart of that “Fertile Crescent”’
about 1000 BC.
It is likely that skirmishes with the Philis-
tines to the west were frequent until they fi-
nally became subservient to David and paid
him tribute. In Saul’s day the Philistines had
enjoyed a monopoly on the use of iron (1 Sm
13:19-21)..The fact that David freely used iron
near the end of his reign (1 Chr 22:3) hints at
profound economic changes in Israel.
David’s kingdom expanded southward as
he built military garrisons in Edomite terri-
tory. Beyond Edom he controlled the Moabites
and Amalekites, who paid him tribute in silver
and gold. To the northeast, Israelite domina-
tion was extended over the Ammonites and
584
the Aramaeans, whose capital was Damascus.
David’s treatment of both friends and enemies
seemed to contribute to the strength of his
kingdom (2 Sm 8,10).
Although he was a brilliant military strati-
gest who used all the means and resources
available to bring Israel success, David was
humble enough to glorify God (2 Sm 22; see Ps
18). He continued to show kindness toward Me-
phibosheth, a son of Jonathan (2 Sm 9).
Sin in the Royal Family. A lengthy section
of the Book of 2 Samuel (chs 11-20) gives a
remarkably frank account of sin, crime, and
rebellion in David’s family. The king’s own im-
perfections are clearly portrayed; the king of
Israel himself could not escape God’s judg-
ment when he did wrong.
Although polygamy was then a Near East-
ern status symbol, it was forbidden for a king
of Israel (Dt 17:17). David practiced polygamy,
however; some of his marriages undoubtedly
had political implications (such as his mar-
riages to Saul’s daughter Michal and to prin-
cess Maacah of Geshur). Flagrant sins of in-
cest, murder, and rebellion in his family
brought David much suffering and almost cost
him the throne.
David’s sin: of adultery with Bathsheba,
committed at the height of his military suc-
cess and territorial expansion, led him further
into evil: he planned a strategy to have Bath-
sheba’s husband Uriah killed on the front line
of battle.
David seems to have excluded God from
consideration in that segment of his personal
life. Yet when the prophet Nathan confronted
the king with his sins, David acknowledged
his guilt. He confessed his sin and pleaded
with God for forgiveness (as in Pss 32 and 51).
God forgave him, but for nearly 10 years Da-
vid endured the consequences of his lack of
self-restraint and his failure to exercise dis-
cipline in his family. Although unsurpassed
in military and diplomatic strategy, David
lacked strength of character in his domestic
affairs. Evil fermented in his own house; the
father’s self-indulgence was soon reflected in
Amnon’s crime of incest, followed by Absa-
lom’s murder of his brother.
Having incurred his father’s disfavor, Absa-
lom took refuge in Geshur with his mother’s
people for three years. Joab, David’s general,
was eventually able to reconcile David with
his alienated son. Absalom, however, having
taken advantage of his position in the royal
family to gain a following, went to Hebron,
staged a surprise rebellion, and proclaimed
himself king throughout Israel. His strong fol-
lowing posed such a threat that David fled
from Jerusalem. David, still a master strate-
gist, gained time through a ruse to organize
 David

his forces and put down his son’s rebellion. Some Psalms from
Absalom was killed while trying to flee; his David’s Experiences
death plunged David into grief.
On his return to Jerusalem, David had to Psalm Historical Reference
work at undoing the damage caused by Ab-
salom’s revolt. His own tribe of Judah, for ex- 59 (1 Sm 19:11)
ample, had supported Absalom. Another rebel- 56 (1 Sm 21:10)
lion, fomented by Sheba of Benjamin’s tribe, "34 (1 Sm 21:13)
had to be suppressed by Joab before the na-
tion could settle down. 142 (x Sm 22:1)
David's Last Years. Although David was 52 (x Sm 22:9)
not permitted to build the temple in Jeru- 54 (1 Sm 23:19)
salem, he made extensive preparations for
that project during the last years of his 57 (1 Sm 24:1)
reign. He stockpiled materials and organized * (1 Sm 24:11,12)
the kingdom for efficient use of domestic and 18 (2 Sm 7:1;22)
foreign labor. He also outlined details for re- 32 (2 Sm 12:13,14)
ligious worship in the new structure (1 Chr
21-29). 51 (2 Sm 12:13,14)
The military and civic organization devel- 3 (2 Sm 15:16)
oped by David was probably patterned after 63 (2 Sm 16:2)
Egyptian practice. The army, rigidly con-
trolled by officers of proven loyalty to the
king, included mercenaries. The king also ap- David probably compiled Book I of the
pointed trusted supervisors over farms, live- Book of Psalms (1-41) and Book IV (go—106),
stock, and orchards in various parts of his em- since most of those psalms were written by
pire (1 Chr 27:25—31). David himself. Other psalms of his (Ps 51-71)
David took, or at least began, a census of are in Book II (42-72), which was probably
Israel (2 Sm 24; 1 Chr 21). The incompleteness compiled by Solomon. As those psalms were
of the accounts leaves unanswered such ques- used for worship in later generations, various
tions as the reason for God’s punishment. The people added others until the time of Ezra.
king overruled Joab’s objection and insisted David’s psalms provided much of the po-
that the census be taken. Since David later etry that was set to music for Israel’s worship.
seemed keenly aware that he had sinned in His organization of the priests and Levites and
taking the census, it may be that he was moti- his provision of instruments for worship (2
vated by pride to ascertain his exact military Chr 7:6; 8:14) set the pattern for generations to
strength (approximately one and a half mil- come in the religious life of Israel.
lion men). God may also have been judging Prophets. David, recognized as the great-
the people for their support of the rebellions of est Israelite king, is often mentioned as a stan-
Absalom and Sheba. dard of comparison in the writings of the OT
Through the prophet Gad, David was given prophets. Isaiah (as in Is 7:2,13) and Jeremiah
a choice of punishments for his sin. He chose a often referred to their contemporary kings as
three-day pestilence. As David and the elders belonging to the ‘‘house” or ‘‘throne”’ of Da-
repented, they saw an angel on the threshing vid. Contrasting some of David’s descendants
floor of the Jebusite Ornan (Araunah). David who did not honor God, both Isaiah and Jere-
offered sacrifice there and prayed for his peo- miah predicted a messianic ruler who would
ple. Later he purchased the threshing floor, establish justice and righteousness on the
located just outside the city of Jerusalem, con- throne of David forever (Is 9:7; Jer 33:15).
cluding that it should be the site for the tem- When Isaiah described the coming ruler, he
ple to be built by his son Solomon (1 Chr identified him as being from the lineage of Jes-
21-20-2250). se, David’s father (Is 11:1—-10). Predicting a pe-
David’s Influence. Psalms. The OT Book riod of universal peace, Isaiah saw the capital
of Psalms became one of the most popular in ‘‘Zion,” identified with the city of David (Is
books in ancient Israel, and has remained so 2:1—4).
among countless millions of people through- Ezekiel promised the restoration of David
out the centuries. These words of praise pre- as king in an eschatalogical and messianic
pared by David were intended for use in the sense (Ez 37:24,25), and of “my servant David”
temple worship (2 Chr 29:30). The 73 psalms as Israel’s shepherd (Ez 34:23). Hosea likewise
ascribed to David generally grew out of identified the future ruler as King David (Hos
his own relationship to God and to other 3:5). Amos assured the people that God would
persons. restore the ‘‘tabernacle’”’ of David (Am 9:11) so

585
David, City of

that they could again dwell in safety. Zecha- tle Paul, even though the full revelation of God
riah referred five times to the “house of David” in Jesus Christ was still in the future.
(in Zec 12,13), encouraging the hope of a resto- SAMUEL J. SCHULTZ
ration of David’s glorious dynasty. The con- See ISRAEL, History OF; MESSIAH; CHRISTOLOGY;
cept of the eternal throne promised to David KING, KINGSHIP; KINGDOM OF Gop (HEAVEN); CHRONOL-
during his reign was delineated in the mes- oGy, OLD TESTAMENT.
sage of the prophets even while they were an- Bibliography. W.G. Blaikie, David, King of Israel; R.E.
nouncing judgments to come on the rulers and Clements, Abraham and David; G. de S. Barrow, David: Shep-
people of their time. herd, Poet, Warrior, King; D.M. Gunn, The Story of King Da-
New Testament. David is frequently men- vid; W.O.E. Oesterley and T.H. Robinson, A History ofIsrael,
vol I, pp 200-238; D.F. Payne, David: King in Israel; A.W.
tioned by the Gospel writers, who established Pink, The Life of David.
Jesus’ identity as the “son of David.” The cov-
enant God made with David was that an eter- David, City of. 1. In the OT, the city of Jeru-
nal king would come from David's family (Mt salem. “City of David” referred originally to
I:I; 9:27; 12:23; Mk 10:48; 12:35; Lk 18:38,39; the old Jebusite stronghold captured by King
20:41). According to Mark 11:10 and John 7:42, David (2 Sm 5:6-9). David, Solomon, and
Jews of Jesus’ day expected the Messiah many of their descendants who ruled over Ju-
(Christ) to be a descendant of David. While dah were buried in the city of David (1 Kgs
stating that Jesus came from the lineage of 2:10; 11:43). Solomon considered it a holy
David, the Gospels also clearly teach that Je- place because of the presence of the ark of the
sus was the Son of God (Mt 22:41-45; Mk Lord. He therefore moved his pagan wife, Pha-
12:35—-37; Lk 20:41-44). raoh’s daughter, away from the city of David
In the Book of Acts, David is recognized as and built a house for her in another place (2
the recipient of God’s promises that were ful- Chr 8:11).
filled in Jesus Christ. David is also seen as a After Solomon's time the term “city of Da-
prophet whom the Holy Spirit inspired to vid” was also used in a larger sense to describe
write the psalms (1:16; 2:22—36; 4:25; 13:26—39). the entire city of Jerusalem, including the
In the Book of Revelation, Jesus is desig- newly built temple area. The old section of
nated as having the “key of David” (3:7), and Jerusalem below the temple site was still spe-
as being “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the cifically designated as the “city of David,” how-
Root of David” (5:5). Jesus is quoted as assert- ever (Neh 3:15). David’s tomb was close to
ing that “I am the root and the offspring of
David, the bright morning star” (22:16).
Theological Significance. David, one of
the most gifted and versatile individuals in
the OT, is second only to Moses in Israel’s
history. He was keenly conscious that God
had enabled him to establish a kingdom (Ps
18; cf. 2 Sm 22); it was in that context that he
was given the messianic promise of an eter-
nal kingdom.
From David’s own suffering, persecution,
and nearness to death came prophetic psalms
that portrayed the suffering and death of the
Messiah (e.g., Pss 2; 22; 110; 118). Even the
hope of the resurrection is expressed in Psalm
16, as the apostle Peter noted on the day of
Pentecost (Acts 2:25—28).
Awareness of a vital personal relationship
with God is expressed more consistently by
David than by any of the faithful men and
women who preceded him. He knew that it
was not legalistic observance of rules or ritu-
als that made him acceptable to God. Offering
and sacrifice could not atone for sin if one had
no accompanying contrition and humility.
Many of David's prayers are as appropriate for
Christians as they were for God-fearing people
in the OT.
David's writings show that “knowing God”
was as real in OT times as it was for the apos- Excavations at the City of David.

586

the pool of Siloam and to the staircase that
descended from the city of David (Neh 3:15,16).
King Hezekiah was concerned about that
area when he prepared to defend Jerusalem
against the Assyrian king Sennacherib in 702
Bc. Having plugged up the water sources out-
side the city, Hezekiah repaired the city wall
and the great tower ‘‘Millo in the city of Da-
vid” (2 Chr 32:5). After the angel of the Lord
had destroyed the Assyrian army besieging Je-
rusalem (2 Chr 32:21), Hezekiah wisely pro-
vided a new waiter source for the city of David.
A spring in the cliff beneath the east wall of
the city had flowed into the Kidron Valley. To
remove that water supply from future enemies
and to make it available for his own defenses,
Hezekiah “‘closed the upper outlet of the wa-
ters of Gihon and directed them down to the
west side of the city of David” (2 Chr 32:30).
That required a remarkable engineering feat.
Two crews, working from opposite sides, pene-
trated the rocky Ophel ridge. When they met,
they had completed a wandering tunnel one-
third of a mile in length through solid rock.
The tunnel carried water from the spring, un-
derneath the city of David, and into the pool
of Siloam, which was within the city wall.
See JERUSALEM; ZION.
2. In the NT, the town of Bethlehem. Bethle-
hem was David's birthplace and home until he
went to Saul’s palace as a musician (1 Sm
16:16—23). When David became Judah's king,
he chose Hebron to be his capital, as the Lord
had instructed him (2 Sm 2:1—11). Bethlehem
was the birthplace of Jesus, who was a descen-
dant of David (Mi 5:2—4; Lk 2:11).
See BETHLEHEM #1.
David, Root of. Phrase applied to Jesus
Christ in the Book of Revelation (Rv 5:5;
22:16). Though “root’’ usually means “‘source,”
the metaphor depicts Jesus as David’s royal
descendant, as indicated by the parallel word
“offspring” in Revelation 22:16. That is, Jesus
came from King David’s family as a branch
grows from a rooted tree (cf. Is 11:1).
See JESSE, ROOT OF.
David, Tower of. 1. Fortress built by Da-
vid, with a thousand shields hung on it, com-
memorated in Song of Songs 4:4 but otherwise
unknown.
2. David’s Tower in Jerusalem, near the
Jaffa gate, built in medieval times.
See JERUSALEM.
Day. Most literally, a period of time delim-
ited by the earth’s rotation around its axis,
such as the period between two consecutive
sunrises; also, the portion of that period in
587
Day
which the sun is visible, the other portion be-
ing called “night.” The word “day” occurs
over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in
the NT. The Hebrew word for day is used in a
variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense.
The Hebrew day began in the evening and con-
tinued until the following evening, a reckon-
.iifg presumably based on the Torah (cf. Gn
1:14,19). That kind of literal solar (24-hour) day
is known as a civil day. Among other ancient
Near Eastern nations the civil day began at
different times. Greek custom agreed with
that of the Hebrews; the Babylonians started
their day at sunrise; the Egyptian and Roman
day stretched from one midnight to the next.
Biblical Days and Weeks. Commonly rec-
ognized units of the visible (12-hour) day were
morning, noonday, and evening (Ps 55:17).
Those divisions were sometimes defined by
terms for dawn (Jb 3:9), the heat of the day
(1 Sm 11:11), noon (Gn 43:16), the cool of the
day (Gn 3:8), and evening (Ru 2:17). The He-
brew phrase “between the two evenings” (Ex
16:12) probably referred to dusk, the dark part
of twilight. Division of days into consecutive
hours did not take place until the time of
Christ. The closest OT approximation to such
a unit was division of the day into quarters
(Neh 9:3), perhaps a counterpart of the preex-
ilic division of the night into watches.
The ancient Hebrews did not name the
days of the week other than the sabbath.
Rather, they referred to them numerically, a
practice carried over into NT times (Lk 24:1).
Because of the traditional Hebrew emphasis
on the sabbath it was important for the Jews
to know the exact time when the sabbath be-
gan. The Pharisees therefore decided that the
appearance of three stars following sunset
would determine the sabbath day’s beginning.
Days of Creation. Many people believe
that the days mentioned in the Genesis creation
narrative were 24-hour periods. The phrase
“there was evening, there was morning” is used
to support that idea. That expression, however,
is actually a Sumerian literary figure that pairs
opposites together to describe totality. Thus
“evening-morning”’ means a complete phase of
time within the total creative cycle; it empha-
sizes the completeness or comprehensiveness of
the process, not the specific period of time in
which that process was accomplished. The to-
tality of creation, phase by phase, may have
been thus depicted without any necessary refer-
ence to a defined time period.
Since the Sumerian civil day included only
the visible (12-hour) period, a legal day of
other nations was actually a ‘‘double day” (24
hours). If the early Genesis material reflects
Sumerian culture, the use of “evening-morn-
ing’ would preclude current concepts of a
Day of Atonement
day and point instead to a phase or general
time period.
Old Testament. In the OT, “day” fre-
quently has a figurative meaning—for exam-
ple, the “day of the Lord” (J] 1:15; Am 5:18),
the “day of trouble” (Ps 20:1), and the “day of
God’s wrath” (Jb 20:28). The plural form is
sometimes used to describe a king’s reign
(1 Kgs 10:21) or the extent of an individual’s
life (Gn 5:4; 1 Kgs 3:14; Ps go:12). God is de-
scribed in the Book of Daniel as the “Ancient
of Days” (Dn 7:9,13).
In addition to the sabbath (Gn 2:3; Ex 20:8—
11), which was reserved for rest and worship,
“day” was applied to the Passover celebration
each spring (Ex 12:14; Lv 23:5) and the Day of
Atonement (Lv 16:29-31) each autumn. As
with the sabbath, no work was performed on
those occasions; prescribed religious rituals
were observed.
New Testament. In the NT the use of
“day” followed Semitic usage to some extent,
although the four military night watches were
of Greek and Roman origin. The 12-hour day
of NT times was a legacy of Babylonian astron-
omy (cf. Jn 11:9).
In addition to the literal usage of “day,” NT
authors sometimes employed it figuratively, as
in such expressions as the “day of salvation” (2
Cor 6:2) and the “day of Jesus Christ” (Phil
1:6). Or they described specified periods of
time, as in the “days of his Temple duties” (Lk
1:23 LB). Special feasts mentioned include the
Passover (Jn 12:1), the days of unleavened
bread (Acts 12:3), and the day of Pentecost
(Acts 2:1).
As in the OT, the period of human life is de-
scribed as days (Jn 9:4). Christians are called
“sons of light and sons of the day” (1 Thes 5:5).
Longer periods or eras are referred to as days (2
Cor 6:2; Eph 5:16; 6:13; Heb 5:7). The ominous
note struck by the Hebrew prophets about a
day of judgment is matched by NT stress on a
day of final divine judgment when the Son of
man (Jesus) will reveal himself as Lord (Lk
17:30; Jn 6:39-44; 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Thes 5:2; 2 Pt 2:9;
3:7,12; 1 Jn 4:17; Rv 16:14). The “day ofeternity”
marks that point at which time will become
eternity (2 Pt 3:18). The new Jerusalem, dwell-
ing place of God’s people, is described as a
place of perpetual day (Rv 21:25).
R. K. HARRISON
See CALENDARS, ANCIENT AND MODERN; Day OF THE
Lorp; ESCHATOLOGY.
Day of Atonement. See ATONEMENT, Day oF.
Day of Christ. Phrase used by the apostle
Paul in reference to the second advent of
Christ (Phil 1:10; 2:16).
See DAY OF THE LorRD.
588
Day of the Lord. Expression used by OT
prophets (as early as the eighth-century BC
prophet Amos) to signify a time in which God
actively intervenes in history, primarily for
judgment. Thus “the day of the Lord” is also
called “the day of the Lord’s anger” (Zep 2:2
KJV). i
Sometimes “the day of the Lord” is used in
the OT to speak of a past judgment (Lam 2:22).
More often an impending future judgment is
in view (Jl 2:1-11). Ultimately, though, the
term refers to climactic future judgment of the
world (Jl 3:14—21; Mal 4:5). Often prophecy of
a near-future event and an end-time prophecy
are merged, the immediate judgment being a
preview of the final day of the Lord. The
prophecy of Isaiah against Babylon is an exam-
ple (Is 13:5-10). Jesus combined events de-
scribed there with other prophecies to explain
his second coming (Mk 13:24-37). Another ex-
ample is Joel’s prophecy of the day of the Lord
(Jl 1:15-2:11). Though the prophet initially
spoke of God’s judgment on Israel by a locust
plague, that judgment prompted further pro-
nouncements about a final day of the Lord far
beyond Joel’s time (Jl 2:31; 3:14-17). That day
of the Lord extended even beyond the outpour-
ing of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost predicted
by Joel’s prophecy (J] 2:28-32; Acts 2:16—21;
Rv 6:12,13). The NT uses the term exclusively
to mean the end time.
The final day of the Lord is characterized in
the Bible as a day of gloom, darkness, and
judgment. Associated with God’s judgment is
language depicting changes in nature, espe-
cially a darkening of the sun, moon, and stars
(Is 133103 Jl2:37; 3:15; Mt, 24:29; RW 6:12) Na-
tions will be judged for their rebellion against
God’s anointed people and king (Jl 3:19; cf. Ps
2). Israel is counseled not to be eager for that
day, because it will also include judgment on
the chosen nation (Am 5:18—20). But the proph-
ets promise that a believing “remnant” will be
saved by looking to the Messiah they once re-
jected (Jl 2:32; Zec 12:10).
Following the judgment, the future day of
the Lord will be a time of prosperity, restora-
tion, and blessing for Israel (J] 3:18—21).
The more explicit NT expressions—“the day
of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:8), “the day of
the Lord Jesus” (1 Cor 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14), and “the
day of Christ” (Phil 1:10; 2:16)—are more per-
sonal and more positive. They point to final
events related to Christian believers, who will
not experience the wrath of God (1 Thes 5:9).
When the day of the Lord comes, the earth
will be renewed and purified through a judg-
ment of fire (2 Pt 3:10—13). In the Book of Reve-
lation the final purging seems to come after
the millennium—that is, the 1,000-year reign
of Christ (Rv 21:1).

Evangelical scholars differ about the begin-
ning point of the day of the Lord in relation to
other prophesied future events. Various views
suggest it will start: (1) at the beginning of a
seven-year period preceding Christ’s coming
to earth, when a ‘“‘man of lawlessness”’ is to be
revealed and make a covenant with Israel (2
Thes 2:3; cf. Dn 9:27); (2) following an ‘‘abomi-
nation of desolation,” in which the “man
lawlessness” will pose as God (Mt 24:15 KJV; 2
Thes 2:4) at the middle of the seven-year pe-
riod; or (3) later in the seven years at the out-
pouring of God’s wrath (Rv 16:1).
Concerning the future day of the Lord as it
is prophesied in the Scriptures, one should
note: (1) biblical passages mentioning the im-
pressive celestial signs of that day (Is 13:10; J]
2:31; 3:15; Mt 24:29; Rv 6:12); (2) the sequence
of the judgments that focus on seals, trumpets,
and bowls in the Book of Revelation; (3) the
relationship of the wrath of Revelation 6:16 to
the series of “seal” judgments; and (4) the reve-
lation of the ““man of lawlessness” in 2 Thessa-
lonians 2:3.
See ESCHATOLOGY; Last JUDGMENT; Last Days.
Day’s Journey. Way of estimating distances
in Bible times. A day’s journey approximated
20 miles, but depended on such things as
mode of travel, the terrain, and the weather.
Scripture refers both to a day’s journey (Nm
11:31; 1 Kgs 19:4; Lk 2:44) and to a sabbath
day’s journey (Acts 1:12). A sabbath day’s jour-
ney was probably about 3,500 feet.
See SABBATH Day’s JOURNEY.
Day Star, Dayspring. kJv translations
Job 38:12 (dawn, Rsv), Luke 1:78 (day, Rsv), and
2 Peter 1:19 (morning star, RSv) referring to
Venus, the star that heralds the dawn, or to
first light of dawn itself.
In Isaiah 14:12 Day Star is a designation for
the haughty king of Babylon (Lucifer, kKsv)
who, having aspired so high at the cost of Is-
rael, will surely be brought down in shame
and disappointment by God.
See MORNING STAR.
“D” Document. Designation used by some
biblical critics for the Book of Deuteronomy.
According to a number of proponents of the
documentary hypothesis (a critical theory that
attributes the five books of Moses to several
authors and redactors), the Book of Deuteron-
omy was written in the time of Judah’s king
Josiah (reigned 640-609 Bc) and not by Moses,
as traditionally believed by Jews and Chris-
tians. According to the critical view, the ‘book
of the law of the Lord”’ found in Josiah’s time
about 621 BC (2 Kgs 22:8; 2 Chr 34:14,15) was
Deacon, Deaconess
written by a group (possibly under the direc-
tion of the high priest Hilkiah) who then bur-
ied the document in the basement of the tem-
ple and later claimed to “discover” it there.
The “D” document was supposedly written
to defend the prophetic positions that true re-
ligion was love for God (Dt 6:5), that moral
righteousness was as important as offering
of sacrifices to God, and that worship should be
centralized in Jerusalem.
See DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS.
Deacon, Deaconess. Terms designating an
officer in a local church, derived from a Greek
word meaning “servant’’ or “minister.’’ The
term ‘‘diaconate’”’ is used for the office itself or
for the collective body of deacons and deacon-
esses. As with many other biblical words used
today in a technical sense, the words ‘‘deacon”’
and “‘deaconess” began as popular, nontechni-
cal terms. Both in secular first-century Greek
culture and in the NT, they described a vari-
ety of services.
Origins of the Concept. Greek Usage. Refer-
ences have been found in extrabiblical writ-
ings where the Greek word “deacon” meant
“waiter,” “servant,” “steward,” or ‘‘messen-
ger.” In at least two instances it indicated a
baker and a cook. In religious usage the word
described various attendants in pagan tem-
ples. Ancient documents show ‘‘deacons”’ pre-
siding at the dedication of a statue to the
Greek god Hermes. Serapis and Isis, Egyptian
deities, were served by a college of ‘‘deacons”
presided over by a priest.
General NT Usage. The same word was
in used by biblical writers in a general sense to
describe various ministries or services. Not un-
til later in the development of the apostolic
church was the term applied to a distinct
body of church officers. Among its general us-
ages ‘‘deacon” refers to a waiter at meals (Jn
2:5,9); a king’s attendant (Mt 22:13); a servant
of Satan (2 Cor 11:15); a servant of God (2 Cor
6:4); a servant of Christ (2 Cor 11:23); a servant
of the church (Col 1:24,25); and a political
ruler (Rom 13:4).
The NT presents servanthood in the sense
of ministry or service as a mark of the whole
church—that is, as normative for all disciples
(Mt 20:26—-28; Lk 22:26,27). Jesus’ teaching on
the final judgment equates ministry with feed-
ing the hungry, welcoming strangers, clothing
the naked, and visiting the sick and impris-
oned (Mt 25:31—46). The entire NT emphasizes
compassionate care for individuals’ physical
and spiritual needs as well as the giving of
one’s self to meeting those needs. Such service
is ultimately a ministry to Christ himself (Mt
25:45).
589
Deacon, Deaconess
Ministry in church life is based on spiritual
gifts distributed to ““members of the body”
(1 Cor 12:12). The apostles Paul and Peter in
their treatment of spiritual gifts made refer-
ence to “‘service” as a form of the Holy Spirit’s
ministry (Rom 12:7; 1 Pt 4:11).
Origin of the Office. There is little question
that before the end of the first century the gen-
eral term for service or ministry became a kind
of title for a position or office in the church.
That development evidently went through sev-
eral stages.
Some biblical scholars emphasize a rela-
tionship between the hazzan of the Jewish
synagogue and the Christian office of deacon.
The hazzan opened and closed the synagogue
doors, kept it clean, and handed out the books
for reading. It was to such a person that Jesus
handed the scroll of Isaiah after finishing his
reading (Lk 4:20).
Other NT scholars give considerable atten-
tion to the choosing of the seven (Acts 6:1—6);
they see that action as a historical forerunner
of a more developed structure (Phil 1:1; 1 Tm
3:8-13; the two specific references to an “of-
fice’’ of deacon). Luke devoted considerable at-
tention in Acts to the selection of a new set of
church leaders. Overworked with a variety of
responsibilities, the 12 apostles proposed a di-
vision of labor to ensure care for the Hellenist
(Greek-speaking) widows in the church’s daily
distribution of food and alms. ‘““Seven men of
good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom”
(Acts 6:3) subsequently became prominent
the Jerusalem congregation, doing works of
charity and caring for physical needs.
Some scholars caution that the diaconate
should not be exclusively linked with charita-
ble works, since the Greek word used in Acts
6:2 is related to the word translated “‘ministry
The west wall of Samaria, the
city where Philip the deacon
evangelized.
of the word” in verse 4. Those chosen to over-
see the care for physical needs were people of
spiritual stature. Stephen, for instance, ‘‘full
of grace and power, did great wonders and
signs’ (Acts 6:8). Philip, appointed as one of
the seven in Acts 6, “preached good news
about the kingdom of God and the name of
Jesus Christ” (Acts 8:12). Philip also baptized
(Acts 8:38) and is referred to as an evangelist
(Acts 21:8).
Deacons in the Early Church. Preliminary
Stage. Those who cite Acts 6 as a preliminary
stage of the office of deacon refer to the spread
of the practice from, the church in Jerusalem
to the gentile congregations sprouting else-
where. Many churches probably took the ap-
pointing of “the Jerusalem seven’ as a pattern
to follow, some even adopting the number
seven. In a letter of the third-century pope Cor-
nelius, for example, the church of Rome was
said to have maintained seven for the number
of deacons.
By the time the church of Philippi received
its instructions from the apostle Paul (c. ap
62), and Timothy had Paul’s first letter in
hand, “deacon” had become a technical term
referring to a specific office in the churches. In
Philippians 1:1 Paul addressed the church in
general and then added “with bishops and dea-
cons.’ Some interpreters consider that to be a
clear establishment of two distinct groups
within the larger church body, though no fur-
ther description is given. Possibly the deacons
in of that congregation were responsible for col-
lecting and then dispatching the offerings re-
ferred to (Phil 4:14—18).
In 1 Timothy 3:8—13 instructions are given
about qualifications for the office of deacon.
Although that is the most detailed treatment
of the subject in the NT, it is actually quite
59°

sketchy. Most of the qualifications, dealing
with personal character and behavior, are simi-
lar to those for a bishop. For instance, a dea-
con is to be truthful, monogamous, “not ad-
dicted to much wine,” and a responsible par-
ent. Verse 11, requiring that “the women like-
wise must be serious, no slanderers, but tem-
perate, faithful in all things,” may refer not to
deacons’ wives but to deaconesses, as several
translations note (NIV, NEB). In any event, it is
clear that women participated in the work of
the diaconate.
In contrast to the office of bishop (1 Tm
3:2), deacons are not described as providing
teaching or hospitality. In fact, no mention is
made of any functional qualifications to clar-
ify deacons’ or deaconesses’ roles in the early
church. The character qualifications listed are
appropriate for those with monetary and ad-
ministrative responsibilities (as Acts 6:1—6 sug-
gests). Timothy is told that good deacons will
not go unrewarded; not only will their faith
increase, but also their good standing among
those whom they serve (1 Tm 3:13).
The NT writings indicate that to be chosen
as a deacon or deaconess is a high compliment
and affirmation. Named as “deacons” were
Timothy (1 Thes 3:2; 1 Tm 4:6), Tychicus (Col
4:7), Epaphras (Col 1:7), Paul (1 Cor 3:5)—and
even Christ (Rom 15:8, “servant”). Biblical
“deaconing” is not characterized by power and
prominence but by service to others. In imita-
tion of Jesus’ life, the deacon or deaconess fol-
lowed the servant pattern. The Christian dia-
conate thus contrasted sharply with the pre-
vailing Greek thought of service, which was
considered unworthy of the dignity of free
men. (The Greek philosopher Plato wrote,
“How can man be happy when he has to serve
someone
?”)
The office of deacon differed from the office
of elder, which was adapted from a definite
Jewish pattern in the OT (see Nm 11:16,17; Dt
29:10). The diaconate, on the other hand, devel-
oped from the strong, personal, historical ex-
ample of Jesus, the servant who compassion-
ately met concrete human needs.
Later Developments. As the office of deacon
became more firmly established, its duties
could be defined as those of pastoral care. The
poor and the sick received their service, not
only physically but also with instruction and
consolation. The homes of church members be-
came familiar territory to a deacon or deacon-
ess. A pattern of visitation was established to
discover and then meet the needs of the
church body at large. Although that included
the: administration of funds, it went far be-
yond it. Those who served as deacons and dea-
conesses undoubtedly became symbols of lov-
ing care for the church in general.
Dead, Abode of the
Where the office of deacon fits into the
larger pattern of church order within the NT
is difficult to determine because of the obvious
variety present during the formative years.
Some church historians conclude that as eccle-
siastical structure developed, elders provided
congregational leadership. Deacons assisted
them, especially in social services and pasto-
ral care. The late first and early second centu-
ries witnessed a distinctive threefold ministry
of deacons, elders (presbyters), and bishops.
Bishops or “overseers” began to exercise au-
thority over areas or groups of churches.
Deaconess. Where did women fit into the
ministry of the early church? Paul’s inclusion
of references to women in ministry is striking
when compared with the role of women in gen-
eral in the first century. He commended
Phoebe for her service in the church at Cen-
chreae, using the word “deacon” to describe
her (Rom 16:1). He praised her as a “helper”
(Rom 16:2), a word that denotes leadership
qualities (cf. Rom 12:8; 1 Tm 3:4,5). Some
scholars have used that reference as an exam-
ple of early development of the office of dea-
coness. Others have interpreted it in a nontech-
nical sense, meaning that Phoebe functioned
in a generally serving role and thus was wor-
thy of recognition at Rome. Whether “deacon”
was used technically or descriptively, ministry
for both women and men in the NT was pat-
terned after the example of Jesus, who “came
not to be served but to serve” (Mk 10:45). Be-
cause of the large number of female converts
(Acts 5:14; 17:4), women functioned in such ar-
eas of ministry as visitation, instruction in
discipleship, and assistance in baptism. Dea-
conesses are mentioned in third-century docu-
ments as administering baptism to female
converts.
Considering the rigid separation of the
sexes in the Near East at that time, female
participation in church ministry stands out in
bold relief. A governor of Bithynia, Pliny the
Younger (d. 113?), in his Correspondence with
Trajan verified women officeholders in the
church. Pliny also mentioned two deaconesses
who were martyred for the cause of Christ.
MANFRED T. BRAUCH
See BisHop; ELDER; PASTOR; PRESBYTER; SPIRITUAL
GIFTS.
Bibliography. J.M. Barnet, The Diaconate; F.J.A. Hort,
The Christian Ecclesia; EM. Howe, Women and Church Lead-
ership; J.B. Lightfoot, “The Christian Ministry” in Philippi-
ans; C. Robinson, The Ministry of Women; E. Schweizer,
Church Order in the NT.
Dead, Abode of the. Term covering a num-
ber of descriptive biblical images of the where-
abouts of those who have died. Those images
include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus
Hades, Gehenna, Paradise, and “Abraham's
Dead, Abode of the
bosom” in the NT. As their understanding of
God advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what hap-
pens at death changed from rather hazy begin-
nings to a developed concept found in the NT.
Old Testament. The OT contains meager
information about the dead. At death, accord-
ing to some OT passages, one descends to She-
ol (often translated as ‘“‘grave,” “hell,” ‘‘pit,”
or simply “the dead’’), which at times means
merely that one is laid in a grave (Nm
16:30,33), but more often indicates an under-
world. The abode of the dead is pictured as a
place beneath the earth to which one “goes
down” (Gn 42:38; Prv 15:24; Ez 26:20) and as a
place of gloomy darkness (Jb 10:21,22), silence
(Pss 94:17; 115:17), and forgetfulness (Ps 88:12).
God is not remembered there and his praises
are never sung (Pss 6:5; 30:9; 115:17). Even God
himself, it was believed, does not remember
those who are there (Ps 88:5,11; Is 38:18). The
dead were seen as permanently cut off from
contact with the Lord and from participating
in his activity in history. Even though the bor-
der between life and death was considered
fluid (as shown by a resurrection in 2 Kgs
4:32-37 and by Samuel’s ghost in 1 Sm 28:7—
25), communication with the dead was forbid-
den to the Jews (Dt 18:11). Worshiping the
dead was a common practice in the nations
surrounding Israel.
Although one’s fate in the underworld
could not properly be called life, it was a kind
of existence, perhaps even in the company of
one’s countrymen and ancestors (Gn 25:8; Ez
32:17-30). The realm of the dead was not be-
yond the reach of God’s power (Ps 139:8; Am
9:2; Jn 2:2). Although Sheol was pictured as a
hungry monster wolfing down the living (Prv
27:20; 30:16), God’s power could save one from
its grasp (Pss 49:15; 86:13). By the end of the
OT period there was even hope that one would
finally be delivered from Sheol, although only
Daniel expressed that hope clearly (Jb 14:13-
22; 19:25—27; Pss 49:15; 73:23-28; Dn 12:1,2). So
although the ancient Hebrews never looked
forward to death in the same way that the
apostle Paul could in the NT (2 Cor 5:1—8; Phil
1:21-23), nevertheless they did come to under-
stand that death was not a hopeless state.
Intertestamental Writings. Between the ex-
ile and the beginning of the NT period (586
BC-AD 30, overlapping with the end of the OT),
contact with the religions of Persia and Greece
stimulated the Jews to clarify their ideas
about life after death. When the OT was trans-
lated into Greek, the Greek name for the under-
world, ‘‘Hades,’’ was used to translate the He-
brew ‘‘Sheol.” In the NT, Hades was carried
over to become the common name for the
abode of the dead.
Along with new names came new ideas.
594
Many different notions circulated about the
place of the dead. A common one appears in
the pseudepigraphal 1 Enoch 22, where the
dead are said to be kept in hollow places in a
great mountain waiting for the final judg-
ment. One relatively pleasant section was de-
scribed as for the righteous and one full of
torments for the wicked. Other writers contin-
ued the OT concept of Hades or Sheol as a
place of separation from God and from happi-
ness (Ecclus 14:12,16; 17:27,28).
During that period the Jews also began to
use a new term, ‘““Gehenna’”’ (Hebrew “Hin-
nom’’), the name of a valley south of Jerusa-
lem. The valley was noted in the OT period for
the abomination of child sacrifices (2 Kgs 16:3;
21:6; 23:10) and in the NT period for its smol-
dering garbage. Gehenna became a designa-
tion for the final place of the wicked dead, a
place of fiery torment (1 Enoch go:20—27; 2 Esd
7:70). Over against that place of punishment
stood Paradise (a Persian name for a pleasure
garden), a place where the righteous would en-
joy blessedness.
All those concepts—Hades, Gehenna, Para-
dise—were molded by NT writers into forms
most appropriate to the revelation of Christ.
New Testament. Although the NT uses a
variety of terms for the abode of the dead, it
contains surprisingly few references to it—
about 35 verses in all. Those passages are con-
centrated in the Gospels and the Book of Reve-
lation. The apostle Paul said a lot about
heaven, but only Jesus and John said much
about hell.
The word “Hades” is attributed to Jesus
only once, in the parable of the rich man and
Lazarus (Lk 16:23). In that parable Hades is a
place of torment where the wicked go at
death. The torment is described as a ‘‘flame”
that afflicts a person physically despite bodily
death. All comfort is refused to those in agony.
Although the wicked go to Hades as soon as
they die, their ultimate destination is Ge-
henna, a place of fire and worms, both indicat-
ing corruption (Mt 5:22,29,30; 18:9; Mk 9:48,
quoting from Is 66:24; Jas 3:6). Jesus also re-
ferred to Gehenna as ‘‘the outer darkness”
where there will be ‘““weeping and wailing and
gnashing of teeth” (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30). Evi-
dently, after the final judgment the wicked are
sent there at the command of Christ (Jn
5:22,27; Acts 10:42; 17:31; 2 Tm 4:1). That place
of torment picks up the negative side of the
OT concept of Sheol as a place of separation
from God.
As a preacher of repentance, Jesus stressed
the danger of Gehenna. He had much less to
say about the place of the righteous when they
die. Ultimately, though, the righteous would
enter into “the kingdom” instead of Gehenna

after the last judgment (Mt 25:34). Jesus twice
indicated that the righteous enter a blessed
state immediately at death. Luke 16:22 refers
to the dead Lazarus as being in “Abraham’s bo-
som,” a place of comfort and peace. Luke 23:43
calls the same place Paradise in a promise
that the dying thief would join Jesus there at
death. Paul later added that Paradise is in fact
in heaven (2 Cor 12:2,3), a fact that John also
confirmed (Rv 2:7).
Paul and other writers of the NT epistles
had little to say about the abode of the
wicked dead. Paul spoke only in passing of
“the abyss,” his term for the pit of Sheol
(Rom 10:7). His reference to Christ’s descent
to the “lower parts of the earth” (Eph 4:9) is
probably only his way of saying that Christ,
having died, went to the place of the dead.
(“The lowest earth” was a term used by Jew-
ish rabbis for Sheol/Hades/Gehenna.) Peter
spoke of Christ’s going in “spirit” after his
death to some “prison” where he “preached to
the spirits” (1 Pt 3:18—20). Interpretations of
that passage differ. Some think that Christ en-
tered Hades and preached to the fallen angels
of Noah’s day (“sons of God,” Gn 6:1—4), not
that he preached to imprisoned human spir-
its. In 2 Peter 2:4 the prison for spirits (trans-
lated “hell” in rsv) is called “Tartarus,” an-
other Greek name for the underworld.
Paul had much to say about the abode of the
righteous dead. In his earliest letters he never
mentioned their location, only that they would
be resurrected (1 Cor 15; 1 Thes 4:13—17). After
facing almost certain death himself (2 Cor 1:8—
11), he began to discuss where the dead “went.”
To die means to be with Christ, Paul said, and
thus is better than life (Phil 1:23). To be “absent
from the body” is to be “at home with the Lord”
(2 Cor 5:8). Paul probably meant that the righ-
teous dead went directly to Paradise to be with
Jesus (cf. 2 Cor 12:2—4, where Paul called Para-
dise “the third heaven”). Death has absolutely
no power to separate Christians from Christ
(Rom 8:38,39). Instead, it brings them into the
presence of God.
The Book of Revelation contains much
about the abode of the dead, especially the
wicked dead. It uses two names for that place:
“the abyss,” the home or prison of all evil spir-
its, and “Hades,” the name for the place of the
human dead. From the abyss (or bottomless
pit) come the demonic forms that torment hu-
manity (Rv 9:1-11) and the satanic “beast,”
who kills the two witnesses and carries the
“great prostitute” on its back (11:7; 17). There
Satan himself will be imprisoned (20:2,3). Je-
sus: described it as a place prepared for the
devil and his angels (cf. Mt 25:41). The good
news for Christians is that the abyss or Hades
is not an autonomous realm. The Book of Reve-
593
Dead Sea
lation begins with Jesus’ announcement that
he has the keys to Hades (1:18), and in the end
he will force it to give up its dead (20:13). Until
then, the key to the abyss is not in the hand of
Satan, but hangs on a heavenly key ring to be
distributed only to the messengers of God (9:1;
20:1). In the end, Hades, Death, and the
wicked will be cast into the lake of fire (Ge-
henna), where they will suffer eternal torment
(19 :20)-20!20)49)1'5 7278):
John, the writer of the Revelation, agreed
with Paul that the righteous will not share the
fate of the wicked at death. Instead of going to
Hades, they go to heaven. The martyrs appear
under the altar, calling to God to avenge them
(Rv 6:9-11). In another image innumerable
Christians appear before the throne of God
praising him (Rv 7:9-17). Those believers,
shepherded by Christ himself, suffer no hun-
ger, thirst, discomfort, or sorrow.
Conclusion. In summary, the abode of the
dead began in the OT as an undifferentiated,
hazy idea of a place of separation from life
and God. Later writers came to see that in-
stead of one place for all (Sheol), there must
be two. According to Christian teaching, the
wicked enter the underworld, Hades, a place
of torment, where they suffer until the time of
judgment; ultimately they will be cast into Ge-
henna, the lake of fire. Christ, however, rather
than the devil, is in control of Hades as he is of
the rest of creation. The righteous do not go to
Hades, but go directly to Paradise (“Abra-
ham’s bosom” or heaven). There they are with
Christ; faith has become sight, suffering has
become blessedness, and prayer has become
praise. Christians believe that death, although
fearful as the “last enemy,” has no torment for
them. It has no power to separate them from
their Lord. Rather, it brings them face to face
with the One they love.
PETER H. Davips
See GEHENNA; HADES; HEAVEN; HELL; INTERMEDI-
ATE STATE; PARADISE; SHEOL.
Dead Sea. A large salt-water lake into
which the River Jordan empties. Since the
Greek era Western civilization has referred to
this mysterious body of water as the “Dead
Sea.” However, the frequent OT term for this
sea is the “Salt Sea” (Gn 14:3; Nm 34:3,12; Dt
3:17; Jos 3:16; 12:3; 15:2,5; 18:19), the name de-
riving from that most important and valuable
commodity traded in antiquity. It is also desig-
nated the Sea of the Arabah (ksv “Plain”; Dt
3:17; 4:49; Jos 3:16; 12:3; 2 Kgs 14:25) and the
Eastern Sea (Ez 47:18; J] 2:20; Zec 14:8). Apoc-
ryphal, classical, and Talmudic authors make
reference to the Sea of Sodom, Sea of Asphalt,
and Sea of Lot. The NT makes no reference at
all to the sea.
Dead Sea
Location and Description. The sea lies in
the great trough of the Jordan Valley, known
also as the Rift Valley. This valley forms part
of the longest and deepest crack in the earth’s
crust, extending from the Taurus mountains in
southern Turkey, through Syria, Lebanon, Pal-
estine, the Gulf of Aqaba, the Red Sea, and
East Africa to Mozambique (there called the
Great African Rift Valley). The chasm mea-
sures between 2 to 15 miles wide, and in its
deepest spot, along the shoreline of the Dead
Sea, it plummets to about 1,300 feet below sea
level, marking this as the lowest area on the
earth not covered by water. The sea itself is
oblong in shape, measuring approximately 53
miles from the mouth of the Jordan River in
the north to the Sebkha region in the south,
and some 1o miles in width, enclosed on both
sides by steep, rocky cliffs. It is divided into
two basins by the 8¥-mile Lisan peninsula,
which juts out from the eastern shore. The
northern basin is larger, and at its deepest
point (in the northeast sector), a water depth
of about 1,300 feet has been measured by W. F.
Lynch. The southern basin is flatter, and its
water depth ranges between 3 and 30 feet.
The forces of nature seem to have conspired
against the Dead Sea. Fed by the Jordan River,
four or five perennial streams, and numerous
wadis (an average daily inflow totaling some
seven million tons has been computed by J.
Neumann), the sea possesses no outlet for this
water except evaporation. This condition, cou-
pled with aridity (with an average annual pre-
cipitation of two to five inches) and enormous
heat (with the mercury sometimes soaring as
high as 125° F in the summer), quite often cre-
ates an extremely high rate of evaporation anda
dense haze virtually impenetrable to human
eyesight. Most of the streams that feed the Dead
Sea are unusually saline, flowing through ni-
trous soil and sulphurous springs. At the same
time, springs under the waters of the sea pump
chemicals (especially bromine, magnesium,
and calcium) into the sea. And along its shores
are extensive sulphur deposits and petroleum
springs. In the southeast corner there is a 300-
foot-thick rock-salt ridge, which is only the tip
of an estimated 4,500-foot salt plug stretching
some five miles. Finally, the bed of the sea con-
tains salt crystals. All these factors combine to
produce a total salinity of approximately 26
percent, the average ocean salinity being only
3-5 percent. This makes the Dead Sea the
earth’s most saline water body, completely de-
void of marine life, with an ever-increasing so-
lidity.
Mineral Extraction. In ancient times the
Dead Sea was valued for its salt and bitumen
(a commodity prized for waterproofing proper-
ties, consisting of petroleum hardened by eva-
594
poration and oxidation). During the NT era
the Dead Sea bitumen trade was apparently
controlled by the Nabataeans, who also ex-
ported the product to Egypt for use in em-
balming. It has been suggested that Cleopa-
tra’s desire to govern the Dead Sea region was
stimulated by her desire to regulate the bitu-
men trade.
The 20th century has witnessed the impor-
tance of yet another mineral in the Dead Sea:
potash (an essential element in the production
of chemical fertilizer). In ,1932 the Palestine
Potash Ltd. began extracting potash from the
northern shore of the sea. In 1937 a second
factory, constructed along the southern shore,
began production. But the obstacles of intense
heat and aridity, limited fresh water supply,
and transportation inaccessibility hindered
large-scale production. Then in the 1948 War
of Independence, both plants were seized.by
Jordanian forces, and all potash operations
ceased. However, in 1952, the State of Israel
decided to resume potash extraction, founding
the Dead Sea Works and undertaking to con-
struct a highway from Beersheba to the Dead
Sea. This undertaking has signalled both the
revitalization of potash production at the sea
and the foundation of numerous new towns in
the Negeb, Israel’s last frontier. In this context
it may be stated that the Dead Sea is coming
to life for the first time in its modern history.
Historical Role. The ominous desolation
and barrenness of the Dead Sea apparent to
the gaze of the modern onlooker is also re-
flected in the pages of history. The events of
Genesis 19, the destruction of Sodom and Go-
morrah, transpired in this vicinity. Mt Sedom,
the salt plug located at the southeast corner of
the sea, obviously reflects the name Sodom.
The archaeologist Nelson Glueck affirms that
the region surrounding Sedom was occupied
by as many as 70 towns dating back to about
3000 BC. The exact nature of the destruction
rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah is vari-
ously interpreted either as a volcanic eruption
or as the spontaneous explosion of subsurface
pockets of bitumenous soil. Karstic salt pil-
lars, known as “Lot’s wife,” are a frequent phe-
nomenon in this locality.
The howling wilderness which surrounds
the sea provided a suitable refuge for the fugi-
tive David (1 Sm 23:29—24:1ff), the contempla-
tive company of Qumran Essenes, and the dis-
enfranchised Jewish insurgents of the second
Jewish rebellion. On the other hand, Ezekiel
envisioned (47:1-12; cf. Zec 14:8) a time when
even the brinish waters of the Dead Sea would
be re-created afresh and the stark, lifeless char-
acter of the sea would issue forth in life.
Barry J. BEITZEL
See PALESTINE.

Rolled scrolls, part of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Dead Sea Scrolls. Collection of biblical
and extrabiblical manuscripts from Qumran,
an ancient Jewish religious community near
the Dead Sea. The discovery of the scrolls in
caves near the Dead Sea in 1947 is considered
by many scholars to be the most important
manuscript discovery of modern times.
Before the Qumran find, few manuscripts
had been discovered in the Holy Land. The
early church father Origen (third century aD)
mentioned using Hebrew and Greek manu-
scripts that had been stored in jars in caves
near Jericho. In the ninth century a patriarch
of the eastern church, Timothy I, wrote a let-
ter to Sergius, metropolitan (archbishop) of
Elam, in which he too referred to a large num-
ber of Hebrew manuscripts found in a cave
near Jericho. For over 1,000 years after that,
however, no other significant. manuscript dis-
coveries were forthcoming from caves in that
region of the Dead Sea.
Discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The
history of the Dead Sea manuscripts, both of
their hiding and of their finding, reads like a
mystery-adventure story.
Discovery by Scholars: February 1948. The
modern drama of the Dead Sea Scrolls began
with a telephone call on Wednesday afternoon,
February 18, 1948, in the troubled city of Jerusa-
lem. Butrus Sowmy, librarian and monk of St.
Mark’s Monastery in the Armenian quarter of
the Old City of Jerusalem, was calling John C.
Trever, acting director of the American Schools
of Oriental Research (ASOR). Sowmy had been
preparing a catalog of the monastery’s collec-
tion of rare books. Among them he found some
scrolls in ancient Hebrew which, he said, had
been in the monastery for about 40 years. Could
595
Dead Sea Scrolls
the ASOR supply him with some information
for the catalog?
The following day Sowmy and his brother
brought a suitcase containing five scrolls (or
parts of scrolls) wrapped in an Arabic newspa-
per. Pulling back the end of one of the scrolls,
Trever discovered that it was written in a
clear square Hebrew script. He copied several
lines from that scroll, carefully examined
three others, but was unable to unroll the fifth
because it was too brittle. After the Syrians
left, Trever told the story of the scrolls to Wil-
liam H. Brownlee, an ASOR fellow. Trever fur-
ther noted in the lines he had copied from the
first scroll the double occurrence of an un-
usual negative construction in Hebrew. Trans-
lating the passage with the use of a dictionary,
he discovered it was from Isaiah 65:1:
I revealed myself to those who did not ask for
me;
I was found by those who did not seek me.
To a nation that did not call on my name,
I said, ‘“Here am I, here am I” (N1v).
The Hebrew script of the scrolls was more ar-
chaic than anything he had ever seen.
Trever then visited St. Mark’s Monastery.
There he was introduced to the Syrian arch-
bishop Athanasius Samuel, who gave him per-
mission to photograph the scrolls. Trever and
Brownlee compared the style of handwriting
on the scrolls with a photograph of the Nash
Papyrus, a scroll inscribed with the Ten Com-
mandments and Deuteronomy 6:4 and dated
by scholars in the first or second century BC.
The two ASOR scholars concluded that the
script on the newly found manuscripts be-
longed to the same period. When ASOR direc-
tor Millar Burrows returned to Jerusalem
from Baghdad a few days later, he has shown
the scrolls, and the three men continued their
investigation. Only then did the Syrians reveal
that the scrolls had been purchased the year
before, in 1947, and had not been in the monas-
tery for 40 years as first reported.
Discovery by Bedouin: Winter 1946—47. How
did the Syrians come to possess the scrolls?
Before that question could be answered, many
fragmentary accounts had to be pieced to-
gether. Sometime during the winter of 1946—47
three Bedouin were tending their sheep and
goats near a spring in the vicinity of Wadi
Qumran. One of the herdsmen, throwing a rock
through a small opening in the cliffs, heard the
sound of the rock evidently shattering an earth-
enware jar inside. Another Bedouin later low-
ered himself into the cave and found 10 tall jars
lining the walls. Three manuscripts (one of
them in four pieces) stored in two of the jars
were removed from the cave and offered to an
antiquities dealer in Bethlehem.
Dead Sea Scrolls
marrn ws AT
aa Swen ebony
The War Scroll of the Sons of
: sien paren punt y
prpbor neds pur
Light and the Sons of Dark-
ness, produced by the Qum-
ran community.
Several months later the Bedouin secured
five more scrolls from the cave and sold them
to another dealer in Bethlehem. During Holy
Week of 1947, St. Mark’s Syrian Orthodox Mon-
astery in Jerusalem was informed of the
scrolls, and Metropolitan Athanasius Samuel
offered to buy them. The sale was not com-
pleted, however, until July 1947, when the
scrolls were bought by the monastery. They
included the complete Book of Isaiah, a com-
mentary on Habakkuk, the Genesis Apoc-
ryphon (originally thought to be the apocry-
phal book of Lamech, but actually an Aramaic
paraphrase of Genesis), and two scrolls mak-
ing up a manual of discipline of an ancient
religious community.
Discovery by Other Scholars: November 1947.
In November and December of the same year
an Armenian antiquities dealer in Jerusalem
informed E. L. Sukenik, professor of archaeol-
ogy at the.Hebrew University in Jerusalem, of
the first three scrolls found in the cave by
the Bedouin. Sukenik then secured the three
scrolls and two jars from the antiquities dealer
in Bethlehem. They included an incomplete
scroll of Isaiah, the Hymns of Thanksgiving
(containing 12 columns of original psalms), and
the War Scroll. (That scroll, also known as
“The War of the Children of Light and the Chil-
596
TUM « Nt:
dren of Darkness,” describes a war, actual or
spiritual, of the tribes of Levi, Judah, and Ben-
jamin against the Moabites and Edomites.)
Publication: April 1948. On April 11, 1948,
the first news release appeared in newspapers
around the world, followed by another news
release on April 26 by Sukenik about the manu-
scripts he had already acquired at the Hebrew
University. In 1949 Athanasius Samuel brought
the five scrolls from St. Mark’s Monastery to
the United States, where they were exhibited
in various places. Finally, on July 1, 1954, they
were purchased in New York for $250,000 by
Sukenik’s son for the nation of Israel and sent
to the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Today
they are on display in the Shrine of the Book
Museum in Jerusalem.
Further Discoveries. Wadi Qumran. Be-
cause of the importance of the initial discov-
ery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, both archaeolo-
gists and Bedouin continued their search for
more manuscripts. Early in 1949 Lankester
Harding, director of antiquities for the king-
dom of Jordan, and Roland de Vaux, of the
Dominican Ecole Biblique in Jerusalem, exca-
vated the cave (designated Cave I or 1Q) where
the initial discovery was made. Several hun-
dred caves were explored the same year. So
far 11 caves in the Wadi Qumran have yielded

treasures. Almost 600 manuscripts have been
recovered, about 200 of which are biblical ma-
terial. The fragments number between 50,000
and 60,000 pieces. About 85 percent of the frag-
ments are leather; the other 15 percent are pa-
pyrus. The fact that most of the manuscripts
are leather has contributed to the problem of
their preservation.
Probably the cave next in importance to
Cave I is Cave IV (4Q), which has yielded
about 40,000 fragments of 400 different manu-
scripts, 100 of which are biblical. Every book
of the OT except Esther is represented in those
manuscripts.
In addition to the biblical manuscripts the
discoveries have included apocryphal works
such as Hebrew and Aramaic fragments of To-
bit, Ecclesiasticus, and the Letter of Jere-
miah. Fragments were also found of pseudepi-
graphal books such as 1 Enoch, the Book of
Jubilees, and the Testament of Levi.
Many sectarian scrolls peculiar to the reli-
gious community that lived at Qumran were
also found. They furnish historical back-
ground on the nature of pre-Christian Judaism
and help fill in the gaps of intertestamental
history. Manuscripts of the Zadokite Frag-
ments, or the Damascus Document, a writing
which had first come to light in Cairo, have
now been found at Qumran. The Manual of
Discipline was one of the scrolls found in Cave
I; fragmentary manuscripts of it have also
been discovered in other caves. The document
ae
Cave 4 at Qumran (just to the left of the center of the picture).
597
Dead Sea Scrolls
gives the group’s membership requirements,
plus regulations governing life in the Qumran
community. The Thanksgiving Hymns include
some 30 hymns, probably composed by one
individual. There were also many commentar-
ies on different books of the OT. The Habak-
kuk Commentary is a copy of the first two
chapters of Habakkuk in Hebrew, accompa-
nied by a verse-by-verse commentary. The
commentary gives many details about an
apocalyptic figure called the “Teacher of Righ-
teousness,” who is persecuted by a wicked
priest.
A unique discovery was made in Cave III
(3Q) in 1952. It was a scroll of copper, measur-
ing about 8 feet long and a foot wide. Because
it was so brittle, it was not opened until 1966,
and then only by cutting it into strips. It con-
tained an inventory of some 60 locations
where treasures of gold, silver, and incense
were hidden. Archaeologists have been unable
to find any of this. Those treasures, perhaps
from the Jerusalem temple, may have been
stored in the cave by Zealots (a revolutionary
Jewish political party) during their struggle
with the Romans in AD 66—7o.
During the Six-Day War in June 1967, Su-
kenik’s son, Yigael Yadin of the Hebrew Uni-
versity, acquired a Qumran document called
the Temple Scroll. That tightly rolled scroll
measures 28 feet and is the longest scroll
found so far in the Qumran area. A major por-
tion of it is devoted to statutes of the kings
and matters of defense. It also describes sacri-
fices, feasts, and rules of cleanliness. Almost
half of the scroll gives detailed instructions for
building a future temple, supposedly revealed
by God to the scroll’s author.
Wadi Murabba‘at. In 1951 Bedouin discov-
ered more manuscripts in caves in the Wadi
Murabba‘at, which extends southeast from
Bethlehem toward the Dead Sea, about 11
miles south of Qumran. Four caves were exca-
vated there in 1952 under Harding and de
Vaux. They yielded biblical documents and im-
portant materials, such as letters and coins,
from the time of the Second Jewish Revolt un-
der Bar Kochba in AD 132-35. Among the bibli-
cal manuscripts was a magnificent Hebrew
scroll of the Minor Prophets, dating from the
second century AD.
Khirbet Mird. Another watercourse, lying
between the Wadi Qumran and the Wadi Mur-
abba‘at, is the Wadi en-Nar, a continuation of
the Kidron Valley extending southeast toward
the Dead Sea. There about nine miles south-
east of Jerusalem lie the ruins of a Christian
monastery of the Byzantine period called Khir-
bet Mird. In 1952 the same Bedouin discovered
further manuscripts having a later date than
the documents found in the other valleys. The
Dead Sea Scrolls
Khirbet Mird fragments were written in Ara-
bic, Syriac, and Greek, and date from the fifth
to the eighth centuries ap. They include Greek
fragments of Mark, John, and Acts, and Syriac
fragments of Matthew, Luke, Acts, and Colos-
sians. All of the biblical fragments found there
were of Christian origin, whereas those found
at Qumran and Murabba‘at were of Jewish
origin.
Date of the Scrolls. Early conclusions
about the antiquity of the first scrolls were not
accepted by everyone. Some scholars were con-
vinced that the scrolls were of medieval ori-
gin. A series of questions relate to the dating
problem. When were the nonbiblical texts at
Qumran composed? When were the biblical
and nonbiblical manuscripts copied? When
were the manuscripts deposited in the caves?
Most scholars believe the manuscripts were
placed in the caves by members of the Qum-
ran community when Roman legions were be-
sieging Jewish strongholds. That was shortly
before the destruction of Jerusalem in aD 70.
Internal Evidence. Careful study of the con-
tents of a document sometimes reveals its au-
thorship plus the date when it was written. An
example of internal evidence for dating the
nonbiblical works is found in the Habakkuk
Commentary. It reveals the people and events
in the days of the author of the commentary,
not in the days of the prophet Habakkuk. The
commentator described the enemies of God’s
people as “the Kittim.” Originally that word
denoted Cyprus, but later came to mean more
generally the Greek islands and the coasts of
the eastern Mediterranean Sea. In Daniel 11:30
the term is used prophetically, and most schol-
ars seem to identify the Kittim with the Ro-
mans. Thus the Habakkuk Commentary was
probably written about the time of the Roman
capture of Palestine under Pompey in 63 BC.
External Evidence. An important item to
consider is when a manuscript was copied. Al-
though the vast majority of manuscripts are
undated, it is often possible to use paleolo-
graphy, the study of ancient handwriting, to
determine the date a manuscript was written.
That was the method initially employed by
Trever when he compared the script of the Isa-
iah Scroll with the Nash Papyrus. His conclu-
sions were confirmed by William F. Albright,
then the foremost American archaeologist.
During the time of the Babylonian captivity,
the square script became the normal style of
writing in Hebrew (as well as in Aramaic, a cisterns may have been built during the reign
cousin of Hebrew). The evidence of paleogra-
phy clearly dates the majority of the Qumran
scrolls in the period between 200 Bc and ap
200.
Archaeology provides another kind of exter-
nal evidence. The pottery discovered at Qum-
598
ran dates from the late Hellenistic and early
Roman periods (200 BC-AD 100). Earthenware
articles and ornaments point to the same pe-
riod. Several hundred coins were found in jars
dating from the Greco-Roman period. A crack
in one of the buildings is attributed to an
earthquake that, according to Josephus, a
first-century AD Jewish historian, occurred in
31 BC. The excavations at Khirbet Qumran in-
dicate that the general period of occupation
there was from about 135 BC to aD 68 (the year
the Zealot revolt was crushed by Rome).
Finally, radiocarbon analysis has contrib-
uted to the solution of dating the finds. (Radio-
carbon analysis is a method of dating material
from the amount of radioactive carbon remain-
ing in it; the process is also known as carbon-
14 dating.) Applied to the linen cloth in which
the scrolls were wrapped, the analysis gave a
date of aD 33 plus or minus 200 years. A later
test bracketed the date between 250 Bc and AD
50. Although there may be questions concern-
ing the relation of the linen wrappings to the
date of the scrolls themselves, the carbon-14
test agrees with the conclusions of both paleog-
raphy and archaeology. The general period in
which the Dead Sea Scrolls can be safely
dated is from about 150 BC to AD 68.
The Qumran Community. On the north
side of the Wadi Qumran, about one mile
south of Cave I, lie the ruins of a Jewish mon-
astery known as Khirbet Qumran. The ruins
had been noted by travelers for years.
Excavations at Khirbet Qumran. Prelimi-
nary investigations of Khirbet Qumran were
made in 1949 by Harding and de Vaux. System-
atic excavations were carried out, beginning
in 1951, under the auspices of the Jordanian
Archaeological Museum and the Ecole Bib-
lique. They uncovered the main building in
the complex, concluding that it was the center
of a well-organized community. An estimated
200 to 400 people lived at Qumran at one time,
most of them in tents outside the buildings
or in nearby caves. A large cemetery, with
smaller secondary graveyards, was located to
the east toward the Dead Sea. De Vaux con-
cluded that Khirbet Qumran was the head-
quarters of a Jewish sect called the Essenes.
Investigations at the site have shown that it
had been occupied at various times in antiq-
uity. The earliest level of occupation dates
back to the eighth and seventh centuries Bc.
Some have suggested that the buildings and
of King Uzziah (cf. 2 Chr 26:10). Evidence of
occupation of the site in the Greco-Roman pe-
riod is abundant. A major settlement began
shortly before 100 Bc, probably in the time of
Hyrcanus I (the first ruling priest of the Has-
monean dynasty, 134-104 Bc), and ended with

an earthquake in 31 Bc. The site was probably
reoccupied about the time of the death of Her-
od the Great (4 Bc). That occupation ended
when the area was captured by the Romans in
AD 68. A Roman garrison remained there until
about aD go. Finally, Jewish rebels used the
site in the second revolt against the Romans
(under Bar Kochba in aD 132-35).
The largest building was the main assem-
bly hall, with adjoining rooms. Pottery was
found in abundance, not only for kitchen use,
but also probably for housing the scrolls,
which were copied in the writing room, or
scriptorium. Although no manuscripts were
found in the ruins of Khirbet Qumran, the pot-
tery was similar to that in which the scrolls
were found in Cave I, thus establishing a link
between the ruins and the manuscripts. Low
plaster tables or benches, together with ink
wells dating from Roman times, were found in
the scriptorium.
An interesting feature of the area was an
elaborate water system, with many round and
rectangular cisterns supplied with water from
the mountains to the west. The cisterns were
probably used for ritual purification and bap-
tismal ceremonies of the Qumran sect. Hun-
dreds of coins from the Greco-Roman period
have also helped in dating the various layers
of occupation. An oasis and spring known as
‘Ain Feshka, about two miles to the south, ap-
pears to have been an agricultural outpost of
Khirbet Qumran.
Identity of the Qumran Sect. The Qumran
community was a sectarian group of Judaism.
It originated in the second century Bc, proba-
bly as a result of the imposition of Greek cul-
ture on the Jews by rulers of the Seleucid dy-
nasty. The community repudiated the temple
at Jerusalem and withdrew into the desert.
“Damascus” was probably the designation of
their community at Qumran. As the ““commu-
nity of God,” the members believed they were
obedient to God’s will and were keeping his
covenant.
The sect has been identified with various
groups, including the Hasidim, Pharisees, Sad-
ducees, Zealots, Ebionites, and others. The
best identification seems to be with the Es-
senes, a sect mentioned by such first-century
writers as Josephus, Philo, and Pliny the El-
der. They described the Essenes as an ascetic
group then living along the western shores of
the Dead Sea. In addition to the geographical
and chronological arguments in favor of that
identification, a more important argument is
based on similarities in beliefs and practices
between the Qumran community and the Es-
senes. Both had a probationary period of
about two years for entrance into the group,
ranked the members in their community, held
599
Dead Sea Scrolls
their property and wealth in common, ate
communal meals, practiced immersion and rit-
ual cleansings, and were subject to the disci-
pline and examination of overseers.
The Qumran sect was composed of both
priests and laity. The council of the commu-
nity consisted of 15 men: 3 priests and 12 lay-
men. A superintendent or examiner was over
the whole group. There are some discrepan-
cies and alleged differences between the Qum-
ran sect and the Essenes. Unlike the Essenes
the Qumran members were allowed to marry,
and women were permitted entrance into the
sect. Although the Essenes were pacifists, the
people of Qumran were not.
Beliefs of the Qumran Sect. Like both ortho-
dox Jews and Christians, the Qumran sect
held the Scriptures in high esteem. Consider-
ing themselves God’s covenant people, they
separated themselves from the mainstream of
Jewish life to study the Law of God and pre-
pare the way of the Lord. As Jews they be-
lieved in the God of the OT: the Lord of cre-
ation, sovereign over all things, predestining
human beings to either salvation or condemna-
tion. Angels played an important role in their
theology as spiritual creatures who would
fight beside the ‘‘elect” in a final war against
evil and darkness. The sect strongly empha-
sized knowledge and, within their basic frame-
work of monotheism, viewed the world as evil
and good, but God as the author of both.
Qumran teachings pictured humans as frail
creatures of dust who were utterly sinful and
who could be saved only by God’s grace.
Cleansing came only as one obeyed God's ordi-
nances and the community’s teachings as given
by the Teacher of Righteousness. The anony-
mous Teacher of Righteousness described in
the Habakkuk Commentary and other scrolls
was not the founder of the sect, but had been
raised up by God to teach the community the
neg
Sicaet es me
SANE YrOL OEY5 SP
The Manual of Discipline of the Qumran sect.
Dead Sea Scrolls

way of life. He had been given special insight

into God’s purposes, which would be accom-
plished in the end times. He was a priest who
had received understanding from God to inter-
pret the words of the prophets, but he was not
the Messiah. The Teacher was opposed and per-
secuted by a ‘“‘Wicked Priest.’ Attempts to iden-
tify the Teacher of Righteousness and the
Wicked Priest with specific historical figures,
as some scholars have tried to do, are purely
conjectural.
The Qumran sect had a strong messianic
hope. They believed that they were living in
the last days before the coming of the Messiah
(or Messiahs) and the final battle with wicked-
ness. The Damascus Document used the ex-
pression “‘the anointed ones [messiahs] of
Aaron and Israel.’’ Many scholars see in the
expression a reference to two messiahs: a supe-
rior priestly messiah (descended from Aaron)
and a lesser kingly messiah (descended from
Israel). Some scholars even see three messi-
anic figures: one descended from David, a mes-
sianic king; one from Aaron, a messianic
priest; and one from Moses, a messianic
prophet (cf. Dt 18:18). The Teacher of Righ-
teousness may even have had the role of the
anticipated prophet. Members of the commu-
nity believed in the resurrection of the dead
and the immortality of the righteous. The
wicked, they taught, would be punished and A writing table and bench from the Qumran scriptorium.
annihilated by fire. The righteous would enjoy
God’s blessings, which they regarded as essen-
tially ‘‘this-worldly” and material. vowels). Some scholars dated the origin of the
Significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Impor- consonantal Masoretic text to the editorial ac-
tance for OT Studies. Before the Qumran dis- tivities of Rabbi Akiba and his colleagues in
coveries the oldest existing Hebrew manu- the second century AD. The discoveries at Qum-
scripts of the OT dated from about aD goo. The ran, however, proved them wrong, by showing
oldest complete manuscript was the Firko- that the Masoretic text went back several
witsch Codex from aD roro. The greatest impor- more centuries into antiquity and had been
tance of the Dead Sea Scrolls, therefore, lies in accurately copied and transmitted. Although
the discovery of biblical manuscripts dating there are some differences in spelling and
back to only about 300 years after the close of grammar between the Dead Sea Scrolls and
the OT canon. That makes them 1,o00 years the Masoretic text, the differences have not
earlier than the oldest manuscripts previously warranted any major changes in the substance
known to biblical scholars. The most fre- of the OT. Yet they have helped biblical schol-
quently represented OT books are Genesis, ars gain a clearer understanding of the text.
Exodus, Deuteronomy, Psalms, and _ Isaiah. A second line of transmission of the OT text
The oldest text is a fragment of Exodus dating has been the Greek translation of the Hebrew
from about 250 Bc. The Isaiah Scroll from OT known as the Septuagint. The majority of
Cave I dates from about 100 Bc. OT quotations in the NT are from the Septua-
The Dead Sea Scrolls show that the OT text gint. That translation was made about 250 BC
has been handed down along three main lines and ranks second in importance to the Maso-
of transmission. The first is the Masoretic text, retic text for reconstructing an authentic OT
which was preserved in the oldest Hebrew text. Some scholars used to attribute differ-
manuscripts known before the Qumran discov- ences between the Septuagint and the Maso-
eries. The Masoretes, whose scholarly school retic text to imprecision, subjectivity, or laxity
flourished between AD 500 and 1000 at the city on the part of the Septuagint’s translators.
of Tiberias, standardized the traditional conso- Now it seems that many of those differences
nantal text by adding vowels and marginal resulted from the fact that the translators
notes (the ancient Hebrew alphabet had no were following a slightly different Hebrew
600

text. Some Hebrew texts from Qumran corre-
spond to the Septuagint and have proved help-
ful in solving textual problems. Septuagint
manuscripts have also been found among the
Dead Sea Scrolls.
A third line of OT transmission has been in
the Samaritan preservation of the Hebrew
text of the Pentateuch dating from the second
century Bc. The copies of the Samaritan Penta-
teuch were written in the same script used in
some of the Qumran documents. Some of the
Hebrew biblical texts found at Qumran have
closer affinities with the Samaritan version
than with the one handed down by the Mas-
oretic scholars. All of the manuscripts have
shed new light on grammatical forms, spell-
ing, and punctuation.
Whatever differences may have existed be-
tween the community at Qumran and the
mainstream of Jews from which they sepa-
rated, it is certain that both used common bib-
lical texts. The discovery of the Dead Sea,
Scrolls is thus a witness to the antiquity and
accurate transmission of the biblical text.
Importance for NT Studies. Continuing in-
vestigations around the Qumran area have be-
come increasingly important for NT studies.
Because Qumran was a Jewish, not a Chris-
tian community, scholars were not expecting
to find NT documents there. The 1955 discov-
ery of Cave VII (7Q), therefore, caused some
surprise.
The contents of Cave VII, not made known
until 1962, were unique in that they yielded
only Greek fragments, whereas most of the
fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls were writ-
ten in Hebrew. Of the 19 papyrus fragments
found in Cave VII, only two—one from the
Book of Exodus and the other from an apocry-
phal book known as the Letter of Jeremiah—
had been deciphered and identified by 1962.
The remaining 17 unidentified fragments were
assumed to belong to the OT. In 1972,
however, José O’Callahan, a Spanish Jesuit
scholar and papyrologist from the Pontifical
Biblical Institute in Rome, suggested that cer-
tain fragments found among the scrolls should
be identified with various NT writings. Using
the science of paleography he deciphered nine
NT fragments, including four from Mark’s Gos-
pel and one each from Acts, Romans, 1 Timo-
thy, James, and 2 Peter. The dates assigned to
those fragments are in the range AD 50—100. O’-
Callahan’s report has shaken the scholarly
world. If true, it means that the fragments are
the oldest NT documents so far discovered.
(The earliest, before that announcement, was
the John Rylands fragment of the Gospel of
John, dating from about aD 130.)
One problem is how to account for the
scrolls’ presence in Cave VII if the Qumran
601
Dead Sea Scrolls
community disbanded about ap 68. One possi-
ble explanation is that they were placed there
by someone fleeing from the Romans during
the Second Jewish Revolt (ap 132-35). There is
no evidence that the NT fragments are neces-
sarily connected with the Qumran community
or its scrolls found in other caves.
--” Many suggestions and widely differing opin-
ions have been offered on the relationship of
the earlier Qumran discoveries to Christianity.
Most scholars agree that some NT references
give evidence of a background similar to that
furnished by the documents from Qumran.
Because of John the Baptist’s ascetic life in
the wilderness (Lk 1:80; 3:2), his use of OT
Scripture (Lk 3:4—6; cf. Is 40:3—5), and his rite
of baptism by water, some have suggested that
he was a member of the Qumran community.
In spite of such comparisons, no evidence
proves that John had any contact with Qum-
ran. One clear difference is that John’s baptism
was a single rite, whereas the Qumran sect
practiced repeated washings and baptisms.
Comparisons have been made of the Teach-
er of Righteousness with Jesus Christ, but
more differences than similarities exist. Qum-
ran was an ascetic, separationist, and legalis-
tic group. Christ’s teaching, on the other hand,
struck at the religious formalism and hypoc-
risy of the religious leaders. Far from being
separatist, Jesus sent his disciples into all the
world to preach the gospel (Mk 16:15). No evi-
dence from Qumran suggests that the sect re-
garded their Teacher of Righteousness as di-
vine, as having redeemed humanity from their
sins by his death, or as having been the Meés-
siah who was also a priest ‘‘after the order of
Melchizedek” (Heb 7:17). There is no indica-
tion of crucifixion, burial, resurrection, or as-
cension. Parallels can be made between the
teachings of Christ and the Qumran teachings,
but there are serious gaps and differences be-
tween the two.
Many parts of the NT have received new
light from the Qumran discoveries. Some
scholars have thought that John’s Gospel
owed some of its alleged dualistic language
(e.g., its “light versus darkness” imagery) to
Hellenistic influences; consequently they have
dated the book in the second or third century
AD. Now it can be shown that the same kind of
language appears in 1st-century anti-Hellenis-
tic Jewish writings. Thus John’s ideas and
writings can now be confidently placed in a
rst-century Palestinian Jewish background.
Some similarities also surface between the
writings of the apostle Paul and the Qumran
texts. They include baptism, Communion (the
Lord’s Supper), the concept of the “new cov-
enant,’’ and elements of interpretation of bib-
lical ideas of sin, the flesh and the spirit, the
Deaf, Deafness

sabbath, and so on. In the life of the early

church, similarities to Qumran may be seen
in the communal society’s life, order, and
discipline.
The Dead Sea Scrolls provide a new back-
ground against which one can study the NT
and the beginnings of Christianity with greater
understanding. They also furnish valuable ma-
terial for the study of a sectarian Judaism at
Qumran. Many similarities between the two
may be accounted for largely by their common
environment and by the fact that both drew
from a common source, the OT. Yet the differ-
ences outweigh the similarities, leaving a defi-
nite chasm between Qumran and the Christian
faith. Paul S. Halk
See ESSENES; BIBLE, TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF THE,
BIBLICAL CRITICISM, OLD TESTAMENT.
Bibliography. M. Burrows, The Dead Sea Scrolls; and
More Light on the Dead Sea Scrolls; F.M. Cross, The Ancient
Library of Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies; J. Daniélou,
The Dead Sea Scrolls and Primitive Christianity; R. de Vaux,
Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls; J.T. Malik, Ten Years of
Discovery in the Wilderness of Judea; H. Ringgren, The Faith
of Qumran; G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English.

Deaf, Deafness. Inability to hear; term

used in Scripture to describe both a literal,
physical inability and a figurative, spiritual de-
fect. The spiritually deaf were those who ei-
ther refused to hear the divine message or
were rendered incapable because of their lack
of spirituality (Ps 38:13). The prophet Isaiah
forcefully addressed both types of deaf persons
(the figurative in Is 42:18; 43:8; the literal in Is
29:18; 35:5). In the OT, although the condition
was considered the result of God’s judgment
(Ex 4:11; Mi 7:16), it was wrong to curse a deaf
person (Lv 19:14). In the NT the deaf were
among those Jesus healed (Mt 11:5; Mk 7:32—
37; Lk 7:22). An epileptic boy whom Jesus
healed was afflicted with a “deaf and dumb
spirit” (Mk 9:25). Such healings authenticated
Jesus’ role as Messiah.
See MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE.

Death. Cessation of life (physical death) or

separation from God (spiritual death).
Old Testament View. In the OT death
was accepted as the natural end of life. The
goal of an Israelite was to live a long and full
life, produce many descendants, and die in
peace with the children and grandchildren
gathered about. The OT contains many pro-
tests against an early death (e.g., Hezekiah’s,
2 Kgs 20:1-11). An early death might appear
to be the result of God’s judgment; hence Job A restored jar from Qumran, used for storing scrolls.
saw in the possibility of an untimely death a
need to vindicate his character (Jb 19:25,26).
Only in Ecclesiastes 3:19,20 is outright pessi-
602

mism expressed in the face of death—and
that book probably shows considerable non-
Hebraic influence.
Death, although a natural ending to life,
was never viewed as pleasant. Death cut one
off from human community as well as from
the presence and service of God. God may
offer comfort in the face of death (Ps 73:23-
28), but he is rarely portrayed as present
with the dead, and that only in later biblical
literature (Ps 139:8). For that reason, suicide
iszrare\in /the OT )(a..Sm,31:4,5;. 2 Sm 17:23).
Death was never viewed as the threshold to
a better life.
The relationship of sin to death is seen in
the death penalty in the Law of Moses. A seri-
ous offender was put to death. The punitive
phrase ‘‘He shall be cut off” implied that al-
though the nation went on living, the criminal
was separated from it by death. The Israelites
were warned that to disobey God’s command-
ments could bring premature death as a conse-
quence of breaking fellowship with God (Dt
30:15—20; Jer 21:8; Ez 18:21-32).
In the intertestamental period, as Jewish
ideas of afterlife and resurrection developed
more explicitly, so did Jewish thinking about
death. Death itself, not just a premature
death, came to be seen as an evil result of sin
(2 Esd 3:7; Ecclus 25:24; 2 Bar 54:19). Some-
times all death is depicted as the result of the
“first sin’? (Adam and Eve’s disobedience). In
other references everyone dies as a result of
his or her own sin. The first clear indication in
Scripture of a resurrection of the dead and a
final judgment or punishment occurs in the
Book of Daniel (Dn 12:2), one of the last OT
books to be written. That teaching is echoed
throughout the intertestamental period (2 Esd
7:31-44). During that time it was believed that
the soul survived death either in some immor-
tal form (Wis of Sol 3:4; 4:1; 4 Mc 16:13; 17:12)
or awaiting the resurrection (1 Enoch 102).
Some of those extrabiblical writings incorpo-
rated Greek ideas that the body was a burden
to be gotten rid of, a notion foreign to Hebrew
thought.
The concept of resurrection and a life re-
deemed from death, however, set the stage for
the NT revelation focusing on Christ’s resurrec-
tion and his conquest of death.
New Testament View. In the NT death is
seen more as a theological problem than as a
personal event. Death goes beyond the simple
ending of physical life, which the authors ac-
cept.almost without difficulty. Death is seen
as affecting every part of a person’s life. God
alone.is immortal, the source of all life in the
world (Rom 4:17; 1 Tm 6:16). Only as human
beings are properly related to God’s life can
they live. But it has been unnatural for people
603
Death
to be in personal communion with the divine
source of life since sin was introduced into the
world (Rom 5:12,17,18; 1 Cor 15:22). When
Adam separated himself from God, that sepa-
ration brought death. Each human being has
followed in Adam’s footsteps (Rom 3:23; 5:12),
bringing death for everyone as the absolutely
necessary result (Rom 6:23; Heb 9:27). Death,
then, is not merely something that happens to
people at the end of their lives; it is also the
living out of their lives apart from fellowship
with God.
The extent of death’s domination is vast. It
affects every aspect of culture. All of human
life is lived under the shadow of the fear of
death (Rom 8:15; Heb 2:15). Death reigns over
all that is “of the flesh” (Rom 8:6). Anyone not
living in relationship to Christ lives in a state
of death (Jn 3:16—18; 1 Jn 5:12). The devil, who
rules the world, is the lord of death (Heb 2:14).
Death is sometimes personified as a demonic
power at large in the world, but finally
brought to bay by Christ himself, the only one
who could master it (1 Cor 15:26,27; Rv 6:8;
20:13,14).
Christ died, was buried, and rose again on
the third day (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:3,4; 1 Thes
4:14). Through that historic event the power of
death was broken. The NT in various ways ex-
presses Christ’s subjection to death in pay-
ment for sin. He “became obedient unto
death” (Phil 2:8); he died as a sacrifice for the
sins of all (1 Cor 5:7; 2 Cor 5:15); he descended
into Hades, the place of the dead (1 Pt 3:18,19).
The major point of all such passages is that he
did not remain dead but defeated the devil,
took the power (keys) of death, and ascended
in victory (Heb 2:14,15; Rev 1:17,18). Jesus
Christ worked not for his own benefit, but for
those who commit themselves to him (Mk
10:45; Rom 5:6—8; 1 Thes 5:9,10). By accepting
a death he did not deserve, Christ has broken
the power of death for his followers.
The Christian is thus delivered from “this
body of death” (Rom 7:24) by the power of
Christ. Salvation comes through being “‘bap-
tized into his death” (Rom 6:3,4), and ‘dying
with Christ’”’ to the world and the law (Rom
7:6; Gal 6:14; Col 2:20). That is, the death of
Christ is counted by God as the believer’s
death. The rebellious world’s sin (Rom 6:6)
and self-idolatry (living for oneself; 2 Cor
5:14,15) become things of the past. The death
of Jesus for his people is the means by which
his life is given to them (2 Cor 4:10). The result
is that believers are separated from the world
just as they were once separated from God.
From the world’s point of view they are dead;
Christ is their only life (Col 3:3).
The apostle John expressed it somewhat dif-
ferently. Jesus came into the world to give life
Death, The Second
to the dead (Jn 5:24). That life-giving will not
happen at the resurrection; it is already hap-
pening. All who commit themselves to Jesus
pass immediately from death to life. Or, to put
it another way, those who keep (obey)
words will never see death (Jn 8:51,52). The
point is that all who are outside Christ are
already dead, and those trusting in Christ are
already enjoying life. The radical difference be-
tween the Christian and the non-Christian is a
difference between life and death.
Naturally, the NT writers knew that Chris-
tians die; their problem was to find words
to explain the difference from non-Christian
death. Believers who die physically are said to
be “dead in Christ” (1 Thes 4:16). Or they are
not dead at all, but merely “asleep” (1 Cor
15:6,18,20,51; 1 Thes 4:13—15; cf. Jesus’ words,
Jn 11:11-14). Although their bodies are dead,
deceased believers are not separated from
Christ; that is, they are not really dead. All the
powers of death and hell cannot separate be-
lievers from Christ (Rom 8:38,39). For them,
death is not a loss but a gain; it brings them
closer to Christ (2 Cor 5:1-10; Phil 1:20,21).
What is more, believers will share in Christ’s
victory over physical death as well. Because
he is the “first fruits” of those rising from the
dead (1 Cor 15:20; Col 1:18), those “in Christ”
will rise “on the last day” to be with him,
whole and complete.
On the other hand, for those who do not
belong to Christ there is a final, total separa-
tion from God. At the last judgment all whose
A Roman sarcophagus from
Jerusalem.
names “were not written in the book of life”
are consigned to a lake of fire, in the company
of death itself and Hades. That final separa-
tion from God is the “second death” (Rv 20:14).
his Christians, however, have been saved from
death (Jas 5:20; 1 Jn 3:14). The second death
has no power over those who are faithful to
Christ (Rev 2:11; 20:6). Instead they will live
with God, in whose presence there can be no
death, for he is life itself (Rv 21:4).
PETER H. Davips
See DEAD, ABODE OF THE; ‘INTERMEDIATE STATE;
WRATH OF GOD.
Bibliography. O. Cullmann, Immortality of the Soul or
Resurrection of the Dead?; O. Kaiser and E. Lohse, Death
and Life; L. Morris, The Wages of Sin; K. Rahner, On the
Theology of Death.
Death, The Second. Term used in the NT
only in the Book of Revelation, to describe
God’s eternal judgment on sin. Originally a
rabbinic expression, the second death will be
experienced by those whose names are not
written in the “book of life” (20:15). The second
death is equated with the “lake of fire” (20:14),
or the lake that burns with “fire and brim-
stone” (21:8 KJv), and is described as the lot of
“the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted,...
murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters,
and all liars” (Rv 21:8). Those who are victori-
ous in this life have nothing to fear from the
second death (Rv 2:11).
See DEATH; ESCHATOLOGY; FALL OF MAN; Last JupcG-
MENT.

Death of Christ. See ATONEMENT; CRUCIFIX-
ION; JESUS CHRIST, LIFE AND TEACHING OF.
Debir (Person). One of the kings of Eglon
who became an ally of Adoni-zedek, the king
of Jerusalem. Debir was executed by Joshua
(Jos 10:22—27).
Debir (Place). 1. Canaanite city originally
held by the Anakim before being conquered by
the Israelites (Jos 11:21; 15:15). There are two
accounts of the conquest of Debir (Jos 10:38,39;
15:13—17). One of these lists Joshua as the con-
queror, and the other lists Othniel as the con-
queror (by request of Caleb). It is possible that
the Othniel account is simply a further elabo-
ration of the Joshua account, or it is possible
that Debir was retaken by the Canaanites and
the Othniel-Caleb account tells of the subse-
quent recapture by the Israelites. The latter
explanation, however, does not seem to accord
well with the apparent finality of the Joshua
account. Thus, it would seem that the former
explanation is more probable.
Debir, with its pasture lands, was finally
given to the priestly descendants of the Aaron-
ites (Jos 21:15; 1 Chr 6:58). This might seem
fitting since prior to its capture by the Israel-
ites, Debir was known for its pagan temple.
Debir was also known as Kiriath-sannah (ksv
Kirjath-sannah), meaning “‘city of the scribes”
(Jos 15:49), and Kiriath-sepher (kKsv Kirjath-
sepher), meaning ‘“‘city of the books’ (Jos
15:15). Its exact location is disputed among
scholars, but most likely it was located near
Khirbet Rabdd in the southern Judean hill
country.
2. Gadite town east of the Jordan
near the Sea of Galilee (Jos 13:26). It is possi-
bly the same site as Lo-debar (2 Sm 9:4,5;
17:27; Am 6:13), where Mephibosheth once
lived before David summoned him.
3. Town on the northern border of Judah
some 1o miles northeast of Jerusalem
15:7). The name may be the same as Tugret el-
Debr, 8 miles northeast of Jerusalem.
Deborah. Name of two OT women.
word in Hebrew means “‘honeybee’”’ (Ps 118:12;
Is 7:18).
1. Rebekah’s nurse (Gn 35:8). Deborah died
as she was traveling to Bethel with her master
Jacob’s household. She was buried in a spot
remembered as Allon-bacuth (‘‘the oak of weep-
ing’’), indicating that she had been well loved.
She was probably Rebekah’s longtime com-
panion (see Gn 24:59—61).
2. Prophetess and judge (Jgs 4,5). Deborah’s
position as a prophetess, indicating that her
message was from God, is not unique in the
Bible, but it was unusual. Other prophetesses
Debt
included Miriam (Ex 15:20), Huldah (2 Kgs
22:14), and Anna (Lk 2:36). Deborah was
unique in that only she is said to have “‘judged
Israel” before the major event that marks her
narrative (Jgs 4:4). Her husband, Lappidoth, is
otherwise unknown.
Deborah, heralded as a “mother in Israel”
(Igs 5:7), remained in one location and the peo-
ple came to her for guidance. Evidently over
200 years later, when the Book of Judges was
compiled, a giant palm tree still marked the
spot. Though residing within the boundary of
Benjamin (Jgs 4:5; cf. Jos 16:2; 18:13), Deborah
was probably from the tribe of Ephraim, the
most prominent tribe of northern Israel. Some
scholars, however, place her in the tribe of Issa-
char (Jgs 5:14,15). At that early time the tribes
were loosely organized and did not always oc-
cupy the territory they had been allotted.
Under Deborah’s inspired leadership the
poorly equipped Israelites defeated the Ca-
naanites in the plain of Esdraelon (Jgs 4:15);
flooding of the Kishon River evidently inter-
fered with the enemy’s impressive chariotry
(Jgs 5:21,22). The Canaanites retreated to the
north, perhaps to Taanach near Megiddo (Jgs
5:19), and never reappeared as an enemy
within Israel. The Song of Deborah (Jgs 5) is a
poetic version of the prose narrative in Judges
4.
See JUDGES, BOOK OF; BARAK.
Debt. Something owed to another person
such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible,
righteous conduct is something one ‘‘owes”’ to
God; hence, in theology, sin is described figura-
tively as being “‘in debt.”
River In Hebrew culture debt was usually con-
nected with usury (the business of lending
money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describ-
ing usury picture a painful situation. One
word for usury means “‘to bite,’ a vivid image
for the way high interest ‘ate up” any kind of
(Jos business transaction so that borrowers never
received the full value of the money. People
could be ruined financially by heartless exac-
tion of interest (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Another verb is
The usually translated as “increase” or “profit’’
(Lv 25:37), since lenders profited from others’
labor. Ancient Near Eastern interest rates on
produce and goods might be as much as 30
percent of the loan per year, on money as
much as 20 percent. Clay tablets from Nuzi, a
town in northeastern Mesopotamia, indicate
interest rates of even 50 percent.
The Law of Moses. The Mosaic covenant
given to Israel immediately after the exodus
sought to eliminate extortionist practices from
Hebrew life. Thus God’s revelation had many
rules and restrictions relating to debt and
credit in Israel.
605
Debt
Protection for the Poor. Portions of the leg-
islative sections of the Pentateuch (the first
five books of the Bible) regulated the practice
of lending in a way that protected the poor
and secured each person’s right to earn a liv-
ing and support a family. Many popular He-
brew proverbs dealt with that theme. The
positive thrust of the biblical laws was to en-
sure help for the financially needy, without
interest. No personal profit was to be made
at the expense of the poor (Ex 22:25; Dt
23:19,20); God was their special advocate.
Thus by lending without interest, the Israel-
ites could demonstrate their reverence for
God (Lv 25:35—37).
That point was reemphasized 40 years later
when Moses renewed the covenant with Israel
just before their entrance into the Promised
Land. God was the landlord, and his tenants
were to respect his Word. God promised the
Israelites that if they would lend so as to allevi-
ate human misery, they would be unusually
blessed by the Lord (Dt 15:6; 23:19,20; 28:12).
Interest could be charged to a foreigner not
living under the Mosaic Law, however, a situa-
tion parallel to commercial treaties prevalent
in the ancient Near East.
In ancient Israel, financial ruin was fre-
quently brought about by poor harvests. Often
they were taken as an indication that the rela-
tionship between God and his people was not
right (Lv 26:14,20). The wealthy were expected
to help, not to add more burdens to those who
suffered from poor harvests.
Violation of the Law. The law was so of-
ten violated that eventually exorbitant inter-
est became a social plague, making the situa-
tion of debtors hopeless. Many of the fighting
men who rallied around David early in his
military career were “outlaws” unable to re-
pay their loans and interest (1 Sm 22:2). The
prophet Ezekiel called people to task for their
failure to observe God’s commands about
usury (Ez 18:5—18; 22:12). When Nehemiah re-
turned from the exile to rebuild the walls of
Jerusalem, he brought charges against the
government officials whose interest rates had
enslaved the people (Neh 5:6—13).
The Wisdom Literature, which included
Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, added that
those who acquired riches by usury would
not profit in the long run because God would
give their profits to others who looked after
the welfare of the poor (e.g., Prv 28:8). The
prophet Amos gave a similar warning to cor-
rupt merchants in Israel: ‘Because you tram-
ple upon the poor and take from him exac-
tions of wheat, ... you have planted pleasant
vineyards, but you shall not drink their wine’
(Am 5:11). In spite of such warnings the law
was often ignored, and burdensome interest
606
charges were laid on borrowers who were al-
ready poor.
Pledges and Surety. When it was necessary
to borrow, the law provided alternatives to
the unfair practice of usury. When taking out
a loan, a borrower would surrender some mov-
able property as collateral to ensure repay-
ment. That “pledge” represented a tangible
sign of the debtor’s intention to repay the
loan. Certain restrictions applied to such
pledges. For example, a creditor could not
take a widow’s clothes (Dt 24:17). Tools (such
as millstones) or animals (such as oxen) neces-
sary for daily life were forbidden as pledges
(Dt 24:6). Clothing absolutely essential to the
borrower (to keep warm, e.g.) could be tempo-
rarily offered as a pledge, but the temporary
token had to be returned before nightfall (Ex
22:26,27; Dt 24:10-13).
In drastic circumstances, where there was
no collateral, a debtor could pledge a son,
daughter, or slave. The value of the child’s or
slave’s labor could then be credited against
both interest and principal. An account in the
Bible of a widow’s two sons about to go into
slavery shows how cruel the custom could be
(2 Kgs 4:1-7). Pledging labor or their chil-
dren’s labor was the only way slaves could
pay off a debt when they had to borrow.
A borrower could also have a wealthy
friend assume responsibility as a cosigner on a
loan and thus become the pledge or surety.
The Book of Proverbs cautioned against stand-
ing surety for others, however, especially for
strangers (Prv 6:1-3; 11:15; 17:18; 22:26; 27:13).
Sabbatical and Jubilee Years. Two legal
provisions to curb the enslavement of people
by longstanding debts were the sabbatical
year and the jubilee year. The sabbatical year,
or ‘‘year of release,’ took place every seventh
year. At that time debts were cancelled and
slates wiped clean (Dt 15:1-12; cf. Ex 21:2;
23:10,11; Lv 25:2-7). The law clearly forbade
lenders to withhold loans to those in desperate
need during a sixth year. Jewish tradition held
strict injunctions against a lender trying to col-
lect on a loan that should have been forgiven
in the sabbatical year. The idea of acquitting
certain debts in the seventh year after they are
contracted is still seen in certain legal prac-
tices. For example, in some states a savings
account inactive for seven years is considered
to be abandoned and the money becomes the
property of the state.
Every 50 years Israel had its year of jubilee.
In that year land reverted to its original owner
if it had not already been redeemed by some
relative. That provision prevented the buildup
of landed estates by the wealthy few while the
many poor suffered in slavery (Lv 25:13—17).
Although the Mosaic law could not guarantee

economic utopia, it sought to curb the greedi-
ness in human nature. It also aimed at provid-
ing everyone with an equal opportunity and a
fresh start every 50 years.
Debt in the New Testament. The NT
shows how various cultures handled the mat-
ter of loans and debts. There were Jewish
people who adhered strictly to the Mosaic
law and refused to charge their fellow Jews
high interest. Hellenistic and Roman legal
practices, however, penetrated parts of Jewish
society.
Jesus’ Parables. Jesus alluded to non-Jew-
ish economic practices in his parable of a ser-
vant who jailed a fellow slave for not repaying
a loan (Mt 18:23-35). The parable illustrates
the ordinary Hellenistic and Roman custom of
jailing or restraining such a person as surety.
That practice forced a debtor to sell his prop-
erty, to ask family and friends to cover the loss,
or to sell himself into slavery. The parable of
the talents (Mt 25:14—28) and the parable of the
pounds (Lk 19:12-24), speaking allegorically
about the kingdom of God, mention earning in-
terest on money invested with bankers.
Economic and Theological Instruction. The
apostle Paul instructed Christians to “owe
nothing to anyone” (Rom 13:8 Nass), which
means at the very least that Christians should
make good promptly on loans. On the other
hand, a Christian’s economic activity should
be characterized by kindness toward those in
need, generosity, and willingness to help (Mt
5342; Lk'6:35):
The NT also presents a number of lessons
in doctrine based on a figurative use of “debts”
and “debtors.” Jesus once referred to sinners
(Lk 13:2) with a word literally meaning “debt-
ors” (Rsv offenders, Lk 13:4). In the Lord’s
Prayer “debts” is paralleled with “sins” (Mt
6:12; Lk 11:4).
Sin is seen as an enslavement (Jn 8:34), and
all men and women as debtors to God. Re-
demption can be made only by God, who
“gave his only Son” to set people free (Jn 3:16—
18). The writer to the Hebrews showed that
Jesus was made the “surety of a better cove-
nant” (Heb 7:22).
The apostle Paul felt indebted to all people
because of his own salvation, a debt he could
pay by preaching the gospel (Rom 1:14,15).
The NT teaches that all who receive the gospel
are likewise in debt, and therefore should de-
vote themselves to serving others as a way of
serving God (cf. Rom 15:26,27).
Louis GOLDBERG
See MONEY AND BANKING.
Decalogue. Greek term meaning “ten
words,” referring to the Ten Commandments.
See TEN COMMANDMENTS, THE.
607
Dedan
The theater at Sythopolis (Beth-shan), a city of the Decapolis.
Decapolis. Group of city-states where
Greeks settled following Alexander the Great’s
conquest of the area in the fourth century Bc.
They were located to the southeast of the Sea
of Galilee, with the exception of Scythopolis,
which was west of the Jordan River. About AD
77 Pliny gave what is the earliest known list of
the cities: Canatha, Damascus, Dion, Gadara,
Gerasa, Hippos, Pella, Philadelphia, Rephana,
and Scythopolis.
With the rise of Jewish nationalism in the
second century Bc, the Jewish king Alexander
Jannaeus seized control of a few of these cit-
ies; they remained in the hands of Israel until
they were recaptured by Pompey in 63 Bc.
During the lifetime of Jesus the cities of
the Decapolis, which had become moderately
prosperous trade centers, were consolidated
into a Roman alliance against a possible Jew-
ish uprising.
The Decapolis is mentioned three times in
the NT. The first is in Matthew 4:25, where
great crowds (mostly Greeks and Canaanites)
followed Jesus during his early ministry. In
Mark 5:20 the demoniac who was healed by
Jesus went and proclaimed Jesus throughout
the Decapolis region. Finally, in Mark 7:31 Je-
sus passed through the Decapolis region on
his way from Tyre and Sidon to the Sea of
Galilee.
Decision, Valley of. Place mentioned in
Joel 3:14, where the Lord will judge the hea-
then nations gathered against Judah. It is the
same as the Valley of Jehoshaphat (see J] 3:2).
See JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY OF.
Decrees of God. See ForEORDINATION.
Dedan (Person). 1. Grandson of Cush in the
list of Noah’s descendants. His father was Raa-
mah, and his brother’s name was Sheba (Gn
tor7; 1 Chrrig).
2. Grandson of Abraham through Keturah
(Gn 25:3). His father was Jokshan, his brother
was Sheba, and his sons were Asshurim, Le-
tushim, and Leummim.
Dedan
Dedan (Place). Region located in the Ara-
bian peninsula. The Dedanites were listed
among those who rejoiced at the downfall of
Israel during the time of the Babylonian cap-
tivity. Jeremiah and Ezekiel foretold Dedan’s
approaching destruction ‘“‘by the sword” (Ez
25:13; 38:13; Jer 25:23; 49:8). Apparently the
Dedanites were merchants who traveled by
caravan and dealt in “precious clothes for
chariots” (Is 21:13; Ez 27:20 kJv). Some schol-
ars interpret the “‘precious clothes’’ as simply
being saddlecloths and various garments asso-
ciated with riding. Dedan is believed to have
been located at or near an oasis called El-‘ula
in the central portion of the Arabian penin-
sula. This oasis was part of the ancient trade
routes, and undoubtedly played a role in the
Dedanites’ mercantile way of life.
Dedication, Feast of. Designation by the
apostle John for the feast of lights, or Hanuk-
kah (Jn 10:22). The feast lasts eight days and
begins on the 25th day of Kislev (November to
December).
See FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL.
Deer. Hoofed, cud-chewing mammal, consid-
ered clean by the Law.
See ANIMALS.
Defile. To make ethically or ritually
unclean.
See CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, REGULATIONS
CONCERNING.
Deformity. Any obvious physical abnormal-
ity. In the OT sacrificial system both the ani-
mal to be sacrificed (Lv 1:3; 4:3) and the priest
who performed the sacrifice (Lv 21) had to be
perfect physical specimens, without defect or
blemish. By being perfect, they are both OT
types of Christ.
Of the 11 defects that would exclude a man
from becoming a priest (Lv 21:17—20), 7 are in
the musculoskeletal system, 2 are in the eye,
1 is of the skin, and 1 is in the reproductive
system.
The deformity of the “flat nose” (Ksv) or
“disfigurement” (NIv) in Leviticus 21:18 does
not refer to a normal variant, but to a severely
diseased nose. There are a large number of ge-
netic syndromes and inherited diseases that
feature very deformed noses. Likewise, the ac-
quired infectious diseases of syphilis, tubercu-
losis, and leprosy can cause destruction of the
bone and cartilage support of the nose. With
the support gone, the skin of the nose sinks
inward. This is referred to today as a ‘‘saddle-
shaped” deformity of the nose. The individual
with a serious nasal deformity would not have
608
the sense of smell that may have been neces-
sary for a priest to perform his duties prop-
erly. The Babylonian Talmud numbers at least
11 ingredients in the incense used in the sanc-
tuary. In Babylon, Assyria, and Egypt prison-
ers of war and some criminals were some-
times mutilated by having their noses cut off
(cia Bz 23:25).
Both the OT and the NT describe an in-
stance where a man has a defect of a “with-
ered” (KJv) or “shriveled” (NIv) arm or hand.
Such a defect occurs when the nerves supply-
ing an extremity are damaged and the mus-
cles atrophy. An injury from a sword striking
an arm can cause this (Zech 11:17). From the
NT we learn that Jesus had the power to in-
stantly heal a man with a chronically para-
lyzed hand (Mt 12:10; Mk 3:1; Lk 6:6). Note
that only the physician, Luke, bothers to rec-
ord that the defective hand was the right hand.
While handedness is not important to the lay-
man, it is very important to a medical person.
See MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE; DISEASE.
Degrees, Song of. Superscription of Psalms
120-134 (KJV).
See Sonc oF AscENTS, SONG OF DEGREES.
Dehavites. Group of people among those
colonized in Samaria by the Assyrian king
Ashurbanipal (Ezr 4:9 ksv). The Dehavites,
whom some scholars associate with the Daoi (a
Persian tribe originating near the Caspian
Sea), wrote to Artaxerxes to protest the rebuild-
ing of Jerusalem by the returning Jewish ex-
iles. Some interpreters suggest that the word
translated ‘‘Dehavites’” could mean ‘“‘that is,”
so that the phrase would read “the Susaites,
that is, the Elamites”’ (Rsv).
Dekar. «sv spelling of Deker, one of King
Solomon’s officials, in 1 Kings 4:9.
See BEN-DEKER.
Delaiah. 1. Son of Elioenai who traced his
line of descent through Zerubbabel to David (1
Chr 3:24, KJv Dalaiah).
2. Priest in the time of David (1 Chr 24:18).
3. Head of a postexilic family that returned
with Zerubbabel to Judea. The group was un-
able to prove true Israelite descent (Ezr 2:60;
Neh 7:62).
4. Father of a 5th-century Bc man named
Shemaiah. Shemaiah opposed Nehemiah (Neh
6:10).
5. Counselor in the reign of Jehoiakim (609—
598 Bc) who urged the king not to destroy Jere-
miah’s scroll which Baruch had just read (Jer
36512,25))-

Delilah. Samson’s mistress, who betrayed
him to his Philistine enemies (Jgs 16). Be-
cause Philistia held southern Israel in vassal-
age at the time (c. 1070 Bc), Samson was
chosen by God to begin the delivery of Israel.
His success prompted the five Philistine rul-
ers to offer Delilah a bribe if she would help
capture him by discovering the secret of his
enormous strength.
Delilah was from the valley of Sorek, in the
southeast corner of Dan’s territory, only a few
miles from Samson’s home in Zorah. Whether
she was a Philistine or an Israelite is unclear,
although the large reward she accepted (5,500
pieces of silver) implies that her motivations
were other than Philistine loyalty. Her unhin-
dered contact with men probably indicates
that she was a prostitute.
On her fourth attempt Delilah finally
tricked Samson into revealing his secret. His
strength was from God, and his long hair,
which signified that he was under a Nazirite
vow (see Nm 6:1—8) and thus “set apart” by
God for special service (Jgs 13:5), was never to
be cut. Delilah lulled him to sleep, shaved his
head, and delivered him (still unsuspecting)
into the hands of his enemies.
Probably no painting more brutally depicts
the theme of betrayal than that of the 17th-
century Dutch artist Rembrandt. Delilah is
hurrying out of her room, scissors and her lov-
er’s streaming hair in hand, while Samson’s
captors gouge out his eyes. The Bible makes
no further mention of Delilah after the be-
trayal.
See SAMSON.
Deliverance, Deliverer. Rescue or redemp-
tion and the agent of such a rescue. Scripture
teaches that God’s ultimate goal in history is
to rescue people from the curse of sin, death,
Satan, and hell. The OT depicts God as deliv-
ering his chosen people from Egyptian slav-
ery, from Babylonian captivity, and from op-
pression at the hands of various Palestinian
tribes. To Christians those deliverances fore-
shadow the coming of Jesus Christ as su-
preme deliverer.
The noun ‘‘deliverer’”’ occurs a number of
times in the OT. Three times the word refers
to a human being. Othniel delivered Israel
from subjugation to Cushan-rishathaim, king
of Mesopotamia (Jgs 3:8—-10). Ehud delivered
Israel from Eglon, king of Moab (Jgs 3:15,30).
Judges 18:27—29 states that ‘‘there was no de-
liverer’”’ to protect Laish from conquest by
Dan’s tribe. Other uses of “‘deliverer’’ refer to
God himself as personal deliverer of his people
(2 Sm 22:2; Pss 18:2; 40:17; 70:5; 144:2).
The basic OT concept of deliverer is ex-
609
Demetrius
pressed in a Hebrew word for ‘“‘next of kin.” A
close relative was responsible to aid an indi-
vidual in distress and to redeem him or her
from slavery. God sent deliverance when his
people were in danger, or God himself acted
as deliverer, uniquely and forcefully in the exo-
dus from Egypt (Ex 3:7,8).
In the NT, Jesus quoted a messianic pas-
sage (Is 61:1,2) as describing his own mission
‘to proclaim release to the captives” (Lk 4:18,
KJV deliverance). The Kv also has ‘‘deliver-
ance” instead of “release” in Hebrews 11:35,
where certain “heroes of the faith’ are said to
have accepted torture because of their faith,
“refusing to accept release.” In Acts 7:35 Mo-
ses is called a “deliverer” of Israel. In Romans
11:26 the apostle Paul used the term in place
of “Redeemer” to paraphrase Isaiah 59:20
(‘The Deliverer will come from Zion’’), refer-
ring to Jesus Christ.
See MESSIAH; REDEEMER, REDEMPTION.
Deluge, The. See Foon, THE.
Demas. One of Paul’s associates who was
with him during one of his imprisonments. Lit-
tle is known about Demas beyond the brief
information given in the NT. Initially he sup-
ported Paul’s ministry and was mentioned in
the salutations of Paul’s letters to the Colos-
sians (4:14) and to Philemon (v 24). However,
in 2 Timothy 4:10 Paul writes that Demas de-
serted him because of his love for the present
world.
Demetrius. Name (‘son of Demeter’’) of five
persons in biblical times: three Syrian kings
and two NT figures.
1. Successor to Antiochus V Eupator. Deme-
trius I was king (160-151 Bc) when the Jewish
uprising led by Judas Maccabeus was under
way. He attempted several unsuccessful cam-
paigns against the Jews (1 Mc 7:1-10; 2 Mc
I4:1-15; 15:25—28). Toward the end of his reign
Demetrius was challenged by Alexander Balas
and was killed in battle (1 Mc 10:46—50).
2. Son of Demetrius I. After his father’s de-
feat and death, Demetrius II sought refuge in
Crete, then challenged Alexander Balas by in-
vading Syria with an army of foreign merce-
naries. Demetrius eventually concluded a
treaty with the Jews and gained the Syrian
throne in 145 Bc (1 Mc 11:32—37). The Jews also
helped Demetrius against another rival, Try-
pho, until he broke his word to them (1 Mc
11:54,55). In the subsequent contest between
Demetrius and Trypho, the Jews, under Jona-
than’s brother Simon Maccabeus, achieved in-
dependence (1 Mc 13:35—-42). Demetrius was
captured by Arsaces VI (Mithridates I), king of
Demon, Demon Possession
Ephesus, one of Turkey's most important cities of antiquity.
Marble streets, known as the arcadian way, lead to the Celsus
Library (2nd century AD), with its elaborate facade.
Parthia, around 138 Bc (1 Mc 14:1—-3). He re-
turned to the Syrian throne io years later and
reigned briefly until his assassination (125 Bc).
3. Grandson of Demetrius II. Demetrius HI
ruled Syria (gs5—88 Bc) in the turbulent years of
the Seleucid era. One ruling party in Israel,
the Pharisees, unsuccessfully enlisted his aid
in their contest with the priest-king Alexander
Jannaeus.
4. Pagan silversmith in the city of Ephesus.
He provoked a riot against Christian evange-
lists whose preaching had detrimental effects
on his trade (Acts 19:23—41). The city of Ephe-
sus was a center of the worship of Diana (La-
tin counterpart of Greek Artemis), the goddess
of hunting. A huge temple, one of the seven
wonders of the ancient world, had
erected there for her worship. Among the com-
mercial enterprises connected with the cult of
Diana was the making of religious images out
of various materials, including silver.
Demetrius, speaking for the silversmiths,
said that both his business and the worship of
Diana were threatened by the preaching of the
apostle Paul and his companions. Gathering
the other silversmiths together, he denounced
Paul. The meeting caused a general uproar,
and a mob dragged three of Paul’s compan-
ions to the amphitheater. Finally the town
clerk, who was responsible to the Roman au-
thorities for maintaining civic order, was able
to quiet the mob, persuading them to take any
grievances they might have to the courts.
5. Christian believer whom the apostle John
commended in his third NT letter (v 12). Deme-
trius may have been the bearer of that letter.
See JoHN, LETTERS OF.
Demon, Demon Possession. Demons
fallen angels, divinely created supernatural be-
ings who, under the leadership of Lucifer (Sa-
tan), rebelled against God. Demonism is the
activity of demons, while demonology is the
study of demons and their activity, for the pur-
pose of knowing the tactics of the enemy (2
Cor 2:11) in order to properly exercise author-
ity over them (Lk 10:19).
Who Demons Are. The English word “de-
mon” is derived from the Greek daimén,
which essentially means ‘‘a divinity, a deity’
(i.e., a false deity, a demon; cf. 1 Cor 10:20).
Any deity other than the one true God is a
spirit opposed to him; therefore such a spirit
is an evil spirit or demon. The word ‘‘demon’’
does not appear in the kJv, which mistrans-
lates daimon as ‘‘devil.”’ There is only one devil
(Greek diabolos), who is known by a variety of
names, titles, and epithets in the Bible. He is
the prince or ruler of all the other demons,
who are subject to him.
Often in the Bible the word “‘spirit” is used
for demon, along with a descriptive or identify-
ing phrase; for example, “evil spirit’’ (Acts
19:12,13), ‘unclean spirit” (Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23,26;
Acts 5:16), “spirit of infirmity’ (Lk 13:11),
“dumb and deaf spirit’ (Mk 9:25). Spirits may
be identified by their specific role or function,
such as a spirit of murder, suicide, lust, depres-
sion, fear, lying, etc., associating them with
various sins or attitudes contrary to God, the
kinds of things that the Bible lists under the
“works of the flesh”’ (Gal 5:19—21).
Demons may have personal names which
sometimes are strange or foreign in sound. An
instance is known of a demon whose name is
derived from that of the ancient Egyptian
scorpion goddess (Selket, Pselchis), who ap-
been
pears as a protective deity on the shrine of
Tutankhamen.
In the Hebrew OT there is no word for ‘‘de-
mon.” The term “evil spirit” occurs (Jgs 9:23;
1 Sm 16:14—23; 18:10; 19:9). There is reference
to ‘‘a lying spirit” (1 Kgs 22:22,23; 2 Chr 18:20—
22). Others are “familiar spirit’ (1 Chr 10:13; 2
Chr 33:6 KJv), “spirit of confusion” (Is 19:14),
“spirit of deep sleep” (Is 29:10), and ‘‘spirit of
harlotry’’ (Hos 4:12; 5:4).
A specific powerful demon referred to by
title in the OT is “the prince of the kingdom of
Persia,” who hindered the archangel Gabriel
from coming to bring information to Daniel,
so that the archangel Michael came to Gabri-
el’s assistance (Dn 10:13).
The number of demons is unknown; it ap-
pears that it is a vast number, perhaps incalcu-
lable. From Revelation 12:4 it is inferred that
one-third of the angels were led astray by Sa-
tan. This means that the hosts of heaven out-
number Satan’s minions by two to one. Ephesi-
are ans 6:12 suggests an order or rank of demons:
“principalities,” ‘‘powers,” ‘world rulers of
this present darkness,” “spiritual hosts of
wickedness in the heavenly places.”
Demons are created beings, personal, immor-
tal, and incapable of reconciliation with God.
They have great power as compared with hu-
610

mans, but little power as compared with God.
God has given us authority over them, so that in
the name of Jesus they must obey God’s people,
even as they must obey the Lord himself.
What Demons Do. Angels were created to
worship and praise God, to serve him, and to
act as his messengers. The Bible states that
they are ‘‘ministering spirits sent forth to
serve, for the sake of those who are to obtain
salvation” (Heb 1:14). The fallen angels have a
similar function, but a different master. Their
allegiance is to the devil, whom they serve out
of fear and delusion. They desire to work with
human beings, but their purpose is to carry
out the schemes of Satan and to oppose God.
They tempt, deceive, and delude people so as
to bring them to eternal damnation. In oppos-
ing God they attack, oppress, hinder, and ac-
cuse the people of God.
Since Satan is not omnipresent, he uses his
demonic hosts to execute his will; for exam-
ple, in the parable of the sower (Mt 13:3—9; Mk
4:1-20; Lk 8:4-15) they snatch away the Word
before it can take root (Mk 4:15). By persecu-
tion Satan causes some to fall away before
they have made a genuine commitment (Mk
4:17). By “‘the cares of the world, and the
delight in riches, and the desire for other
things,’’ he chokes the Word, so that little or
no fruit is produced (Mk 4:19).
How Demons Operate. Basically, demons
operate according to the pattern set by Satan
in his threefold approach with Eve: (1) they
deny the truth of the Word of God and chal-
lenge its statements; (2) they deny the reality
of death (typically they substitute something
like reincarnation); and (3) they appeal to hu-
man vanity and pride by telling men and
women that they can become like God or be
gods (Gn 3:1—5). These also are the basic meth-
ods and teachings underlying most cults and
false religions.
Demons work by lying, deceit, and oppres-
sion, and when the opportunity arises they en-
ter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in or-
der to control the individual’s thoughts and
actions. Sometimes a distinction is made be-
tween demonic oppression and demonic pos-
session; this supposedly differentiates an at-
tack from without and control from within.
Although a non-Christian may be said to be
“possessed” by a demon, the Christian cannot
be so possessed, for he belongs to Christ and
his human spirit has been sealed by the Holy
Spirit (Eph 1:13). Demonic spirits somehow
know and acknowledge this seal.
The term “‘possession”’ is misleading and is
not the best translation for the Greek word
daimonidzomai, which literally means “‘to be
demonized” and can often best be translated
as ‘‘to have a demon.”
Demon, Demon Possession
Demons can also enter the bodies of ani-
mals, as in the case of the swine in Mark 5:13.
Demons are associated with books of magic
(Acts 19:19), idols (1 Cor 10:19—21), fetishes,
and amulets. Demons often cause illness or
physical disability; Luke 13:11 tells of a
woman who had a “‘spirit of infirmity” for 38
years but was delivered and healed by Jesus.
Since evil spirits often attack the mind and
the emotions, many symptoms of mental ill-
ness may be attributed to their activity. The
boy whom Jesus delivered just after the trans-
figuration exhibited symptoms of epilepsy.
Paranoia may be the work of a spirit of fear.
Some individuals suffering from schizophre-
nia (split or multiple personality) may in real-
ity be demonized by a number of spirits. It is
possible for a person to have many demons.
Jesus cast seven of them out of Mary Magda-
lene (Lk 8:2). The spirit in the Gerasene demo-
niac gave his name as Legion, “for we are
many’ (Mk 5:9; Lk 8:30); in the time of Augus-
tus a Roman legion consisted of 6000 foot sol-
diers, usually accompanied by an equal num-
ber of auxiliary troops.
A “familiar spirit” is a demon who mas-
querades as the spirit of a person who is dead.
(There is no such thing as a “ghost.” The spir-
its of the dead are confined to their places [Lk
16:26] and are not able to come or go. In the
case of Samuel [1 Sm 28:8—25], God sent him
to convey a message to Saul. The medium of
Endor did not call him up, nor could she have
done so.)
Demonization occurs in various ways. Some
people are demonized by a hereditary curse,
which may continue to the third or fourth gen-
eration (Ex 20:5). The curse against illegiti-
macy was particularly strong, for the bastard
could not enter the congregation of Israel until
the tenth generation (Dt 23:2). Curses may also
be placed upon someone by spells, incanta-
tions, or similar practices such as voodoo or
other forms of witchcraft. Galatians 3:13
speaks of redemption from the curse of the law
through Christ’s having become a curse for us.
Usually believers are immune from curses
made against them, unless they have given
grounds to the devil (Eph 4:27). Such grounds
may be provided through drugs, illicit sex, the
occult, or any other avenue forbidden in the
Bible. Involvement with tarot cards, horo-
scopes, or any other form of fortune-telling
may give demons opportunity to enter. Such
contacts may seem innocuous, but Satan uti-
lizes the smallest foothold to gain advantage
over people.
Manifestation. Often demons prefer to
hide rather than to make their presence
known, for then they can exercise control with-
out hindrance. When they do manifest, often
Demythologization
when challenged, all sorts of strange and
frightening things may occur. They possess su-
pernatural powers (cf. Rv 16:14) which they
exhibit outright or through their victims. The
Gerasene demoniac had superhuman physical
strength, so that he could not be bound with
fetters or chains (Mk 5:4,5); he lived in tombs
and went about night and day screaming and
injuring himself with stones.
The spirit in the demonized boy in Mark 9
rendered him dumb and deaf, threw him on
the ground, and caused him to roll about and
to foam at the mouth (vv 18,20). The demon
caused him to grind his teeth and become
rigid; he had tried to kill the boy by throwing
him into the fire and into the water on various
occasions (vv 18,22). Before leaving at the com-
mand of Jesus, the demon cried out (cf. Mk
1:26), convulsed the boy terribly, and left him
lying like a corpse. Jesus took him by the hand
and raised him up (v 27). Similar manifesta-
tions take place today.
Exorcism. Casting out demons, or exor-
cism, was a regular and frequent part of the
ministry of Jesus, and he taught and com-
manded his followers to do the same. This
command has never been abrogated, and the
ministry of deliverance should be even more
important today, when the forces of evil are so
rampant. The following principles are derived
from the practice of Jesus, the Scriptures, and
personal observation and involvement.
(1) Jesus spoke to demons and commanded
them to come out (Mk 1:25; 9:25). He cast them
out “with a word” (Mt 8:16). Jesus gave his
followers authority to use his name in casting
them out and used this as a sign of the be-
liever (Mk 16:17). His name is not a magical
formula, and its use depends on the relation-
ship between the Lord and the person using
his name, as the sons of Sceva found out to
their dismay (Acts 19:11—18).
(2) Jesus cast out demons by “the Spirit of
God” (Mt 12:28). “God anointed Jesus of Naza-
reth with the Holy Spirit and with power’;
Jesus healed all who were oppressed by the
devil, “for God was with him” (Acts 10:38).
(3) The Lord gave clear teaching about “the
binding of the strong man” in deliverance (Mt
12:29; Mk 3:27) and about binding and loosing
(Mt 18:18).
(4) Prayer is an important weapon in spiri-
tual warfare. When the disciples asked (Mk
9:28) why they could not cast out a demon,
Jesus replied that this kind comes out only
with prayer. Other ancient manuscripts add
“with fasting.” Fasting is often coupled with
prayer in waiting upon God.
(5) Revelation 12:11 testifies to the power of
“the blood of the Lamb” in overcoming Satan.
Demons do not like to hear of the blood of
612
Jesus and often become agitated at the men-
tion of it.
(6) The same verse speaks of the effective-
ness of the testimony of the saints in defeating
the devil. He does not like to be reminded of
his failures and shrinks from hearing praise to
the Lord.
(7) God has equipped the believer with ar-
mor for defense in spiritual battle (Eph 6:10—
17).
(8) The Lord answered Satan with correctly
applied texts from the Bible. We have been
given the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God
(Eph 6:17; Heb 4:12), as a means of defense
and for attack against the enemy.
(9) Followers of Jesus must use the spiritual
gifts in spiritual warfare (1 Cor 12-14). These
are divine enablements for combating powers
far superior to our human capabilities.
(10) We must come against the hosts of hell
from our position “in the heavenly places”
(Eph 2:6), not from our limited earthly station.
(11) We must recognize that the ultimate
victory has already been won by Jesus, who
came to destroy the works of the devil (1 Jn
3:8) and to destroy him who has the power of
death (Heb 2:14—16). When Jesus cried out on
the cross, “It is finished,” he meant that the
redemptive work was done; and when he
arose from the dead, he demonstrated his
power over death. We win only as we enter
into his victory.
The Final Destiny of Demons. It is writ-
ten concerning the angels who sinned that
God “cast them into hell and committed them
to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the
judgment” (2 Pt 2:4). The Lord spoke of “the
eternal fire prepared for the devil and his an-
gels,” into which the cursed among humans
are also to go (Mt 25:41). Eventually Satan and
his host will be thrown into the lake of fire (Rv
20:10), which is also the place of eternal tor-
ment for all whose names are not written in
the book of life (Rv 20:12-15).
CaRL E. DEVRIES
See SATAN; ANGEL.
Bibliography. E. Langton, Essentials of Demonology and
Good and Evil Spirits; S.V. McCausland, By the Finger of
God; H. Schlier, Principalities and Powers in the NT; M.
Unger, Biblical Demonology and Demons in the World Today.
Demythologization. | Hermeneutical pro-
gram proposed and followed by the German NT
theologian Rudolf Bultmann. Speaking toa pas-
tors’ conference in 1941, Bultmann challenged
the theological world to take up the task of free-
ing the NT message from the mythological
worldview of the first century. Similar chal-
lenges had been issued by others before; but
Bultmann’s call, especially in its developed
form, was unique in several crucial respects.

Prior proposals for “demythologizing”’ re-
garded myth as the product of a discredited,
prescientific way of thinking, which simply re-
quired elimination. Applied to the NT, this
“demythologizing”’ was essentially a surgical,
rather than a hermeneutical, procedure: every-
thing unacceptable to rational, Enlightenment
man was cut away in hopes of salvaging a resi-
due of religious or ethical principles. It was
understood that the gospel itself, based as
it was on such fantastic notions as incarna-
tion, atonement, and resurrection, could not
be salvaged.
Bultmann incorporated aspects of this ear-
lier outlook on myth and the NT into his own
program. He too regarded myth as the prod-
uct of outmoded, prescientific ways of think-
ing and agreed that it was precisely in its for-
mulation of the gospel that the NT betrayed
its dependence on myth most clearly. But here
Bultmann parted company, for he was also
committed to other philosophical and theologi-
cal positions not even articulated until the
late 19th and 2oth centuries. Influenced by the
history of religions school early in his career,
Bultmann rejected liberalism’s reduction of
Christianity to a set of tame and timeless ethi-
cal principles. Moreover, his own form critical
studies led him to conclude that the only thing
we really have in the NT is the preaching of
the early church. Thus, if being a Christian (in
any historical sense of the word) was impor-
tant, the gospel could not be thrown out, no
matter how myth-encrusted. For the next de-
cade Bultmann struggled with a problem that
occupied many other young scholars of the
post—World War I period: how could a myth-
imbued message about God's grace still speak
to modern, scientific man?
Bultmann’s answer to that question was
shaped decisively by an even more basic, life-
long commitment. This commitment gradu-
ally led him to redefine not only the question,
but also the key terms, “myth” and “gospel.”
Bultmann inherited from his professors at the
University of Marburg a peculiar amalgam of
rgth-century Lutheranism and Marburg Neo-
Kantianism. The brand of Neo-Kantianism
that was the rage at Marburg during Bult-
mann’s student days there posited mathemati-
cal physics and logic as the pattern for explain-
ing all valid forms of “knowing.” Knowing,
they argued, was not (logically, as Kant main-
tained, or otherwise) dependent on sensory
data, but was solely the activity of reason as it
“objectifies,’’ that is, forms objects, in accor-
dance with universal laws. As a knower, man
objectifies or creates the world but loses his
individuality, since with all men he is part of
a transpersonal, infinitely rational system de-
termined by the universal laws of reason—a
613
Demythologization
system that does not admit freedom and
uniqueness. Individuality was not completely
disinherited, however; the Neo-Kantians also
posited a qualitatively distinct realm of “‘feel-
ing,’ “immediate experience,” or religion on
the fringes of the realm of “objectifying knowl-
edge.’ As the subject of religious experience,
man, though passive, is an individual—utterly
unique, free, and unbound by the claims of
reason.
The Neo-Kantians abandoned this epistemo-
logical theory after World War I, but Bult-
mann, following the lead of his teacher Wil-
helm Herrmann, clung to it as essential for
understanding the doctrine of justification by
faith over against works. For Bultmann all
knowing (scientific, theological, etc.), inas-
much as it is essentially ‘‘objectifying in accor-
dance with the principle of law,” falls under
the category of “works.” It is an activity
whereby man alone forms, manipulates, and
systematizes the world, God, and even himself
with reference to laws. Categorically opposed
to knowing is religious experience, which man
receives ‘‘by grace’’ and to which he can only
respond in faith and loving obedience.
From the point of view of this peculiar epis-
temology the problem with NT mythology is
not so much its prescientific picture of the
world as its objectifying representation of the
gospel. If the NT is taken at face value, the
gospel is about a direct relationship between
a God spatially above and man spatially be-
low, made possible by the theoretically verifi-
able life, death, and bodily resurrection of a
miracle-working Jew in Palestine two thou-
sand years ago. This fantastic story is cer-
tainly nonsense to modern man, Bultmann ar-
gued, but much more importantly, it cannot
be the gospel. The NT story reduces God’s act
in Christ to a series of past events subject to
man’s objectifying knowledge. Man cannot at
the same time be a creator, researcher, veri-
fier, and the recipient of grace. Even if fully
verified, the NT version of the gospel could
only call men to confidence in human works,
not to faith in the transcendent God.
Thus for Bultmann the original problem
was broken down into two: it was necessary
not only to make the gospel intelligible to mod-
ern man, but also to recapture and safeguard
its character as a message of grace. To solve
the latter, all forms of objectifying thinking,
not only myth, had to be avoided. Restating
the gospel in terms compatible with a scien-
tific picture of the world might, therefore,
solve the first problem but never the second;
the scientific picture, even though correct, was
as much the product of man’s objectifying
thinking as any other understanding of the
world, including the mythological. Bultmann
Demythologization
found himself in a hermeneutical dilemma—
the gospel must be restated in a form abso-
lutely independent of any understanding of
the world, yet it must speak to men whose
thinking is always determined by some such
understanding. It was clear that a new con-
ceptuality for understanding and communicat-
ing the gospel was needed, a conceptuality
free of objectification.
The answer to Bultmann’s dilemma came
to him by way of the philosopher Martin Hei-
degger, a faculty colleague from 1923 to 1927.
Heidegger was attempting to elucidate the
meaning of “being” in a way that, among
other things, avoided objectifying thinking. He
believed he could do this by first analyzing
“human being,” not in order to formulate
some new psychological or anthropological
theory, but to disclose that mode of existence
in the world which humans experience prior
to any objectifying analysis or thought. Hei-
degger wanted to spell out our “self-under-
standing.” Taking certain cues from Heideg-
ger’s existential analysis, Bultmann argued
the gospel must also concern man’s self-
understanding. When the preacher preaches
about God’s decisive act in Christ, the hearer
is challenged to make a decision between an
old self-understanding based on his own abil-
ity to attain security and manipulate the
world (“works”) and a new self-understanding
based on the revelation that there is no secu-
rity except that which is received by faith in
the transcendent God. The second choice
made repeatedly at each point of decision
leads to the “new life” of freedom.
But how could anyone be sure that Bult-
mann’s existential gospel had anything to do
with the gospel found in the NT? Bultmann ap-
pealed at this point to the work of Hans Jonas,
one of Heidegger’s students. Jonas applied some
of Heidegger’s insights to the gnostic myths of
antiquity and concluded that the central pur-
pose of those myths was not to describe the uni-
verse as it really is, but to express a gnostic self-
understanding. Bultmann, in effect, general-
ized Jonas’ findings by incorporating them into
his final, comprehensive definition of myth:
myth is the prescientific, objectified repository
of an authentic self-understanding that can be
unlocked by an existential hermeneutic. By defi-
nition, then, the gospel mythology in the NT
was intended to be interpreted existentially. In
fact, Bultmann claimed, within the NT itself we
already find sporadic attempts at existential,
deobjectifying interpretations—for example,
when Paul eschews a futuristic eschatology in
favor of a personal, “in Christ” understanding of
the last things.
Thus, unlike earlier proposals for “demy-
thologizing,” Bultmann’s program was truly a
614
hermeneutical one. It did not aim at the im-
“mediate elimination of myth, but at the inter-
pretation of myth prior to its elimination.
Bultmann was supremely confident that the
residual meaning salvaged by this hermeneu-
tical step was the gospel—faithful to the real
intent of the NT, free of myth, and intelligible
to modern man.
Few have shared Bultmann’s confidence,
however. Insofar as greater intelligibility for
modern man was one of his goals, his program
must be judged a failure.,Only the theological
and philosophical intelligentsia has been able
to understand his demythologized gospel—
and this with great difficulty and debate. So if
the ability to elicit widespread response and
to change lives are accepted as criteria of intel-
ligibility, the “objectified” gospel of the NT
continues to bridge the hermeneutical gap far
more effectively than Bultmann’s version. To
be sure, Bultmann’s existential gospel is re-
markably free of “myth,” but only trivially so,
since Bultmann has repeatedly reshaped the
problem by redefining all the principal terms.
The demythologization program is, therefore,
not so much a solution to the original herme-
neutical problem as it is a testament to Bult-
mann’s consistency as a thinker. Yet even
Bultmann’s consistency has been questioned;
some of his more radical critics have pointed
out that his system logically has no place for a
crucified Jewish rabbi. Bultmann’s insistence
on the preaching of the cross of Jesus as the
only catalyst for a new self-understanding is
seen by them as a last-minute capitulation to
the mythology of the NT. For the evangelical
this is a happy inconsistency, but one which,
unfortunately, does not mitigate the crucial
problem posed by Bultmann’s hermeneutical
program. His program (despite his appeal to
Jonas) does not translate the gospel; it trans-
forms it, and thus betrays the trust of a respon-
sible hermeneutic. At too many crucial points
Bultmann was more committed to ultimately
unworkable philosophical positions than to a
careful restatement of the NT message. This is
not to deny the enduring value of some of
Bultmann’s interpretive insights (e.g., into
Pauline anthropology); it is simply to rec-
ognize that his program, viewed from the
perspective of his uncritical philosophical com-
mitments, comes across as a contrived solu-
tion to a series of false problems.
STEPHEN TAYLOR
See DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS; FORM CRITICISM;
REDACTION CRITICISM; SOURCE CRITICISM; TRADITION
CRITICISM; BIBLE, INTERPRETATION OF THE.
Bibliography. R. Bultmann, “New Testament and My-
thology” and “Bultmann Replies to His Critics,” in Kerygma
and Myth, ed H.W. Bartsch, and “Religion and Culture,” in
The Beginnings of Dialectic Theology, ed J.M. Robinson; R.A.

Johnson, The Origins of Demythologizing; R.C. Roberts, Ru-
dolf Bultmann’s Theology: A Critical Interpretation; A.C. Thi-
selton, The Two Horizons.
Denarius. Roman silver coin, equivalent to
one day’s wage.
See CoINs.
Deputy. 1. Official of superior rank whose
authority is normally granted by a king (1 Kgs
22:47; ler 51528).
See GOVERNOR.
2. KJV translation for “proconsul,’ an offi-
cer appointed over provinces by the Roman
senate, in Acts 13:7—12; 18:12; and 19:38.
See PROCONSUL.
Derbe. A city of Asia Minor located in the
district of Lycaonia (Ac 14:6) in the province of
Galatia. Derbe was the last city on Paul’s first
missionary journey (14:20), the first city on his
second journey (16:1), and likely one city he
revisited on his third journey (18:23). Gaius,
one of Paul’s missionary companions on his
third journey, was from Derbe (20:4).
Desert. Empty waste place, often arid,
sandy, and incapable of sustaining vegetable
life, as for example the Negeb of southern Pal-
estine. A desert frequently includes local areas
where marginal life is possible. The most com-
mon Hebrew term for desert means “wilder-
ness,” and is perhaps related to a verb mean-
ing ‘‘to drive,” as a shepherd drives sheep to
pasturage. The Greek word commonly used in
the NT and in the Septuagint (ancient Greek
translation of the OT) implies an unenclosed,
uncultivated area where wild beasts roam (Dt
32:10; Jb 24:5). The wilderness is also some-
times a place of pasturage (Ex 3:1; Ps 65:12;
Jer 23:10; 35 2322):
The churches of Derbe, Lystra, and Iconium were located in
this general area. The Taurus mountain range dominates this
section of modern Turkey.
615
Desert
The Bible often refers to wilderness regions
(e.g., Gn 16:7; 21:20; 1 Sm 17:28; Mt 3:1; Mk
1:13; Lk 15:4). ‘“Wilderness”’ is usually a place
with no settled population (Nm 14:33; Dt
32:10; Jb 38:26; Prv 21:19; Jer 9:2) but is the
dwelling place of wildlife: the vulture (Ps
102:6, KJV pelican), wild asses (Jb 24:5), jackals
(Mal 1:3), and ostriches (Lam 4:3). The term is
also used figuratively (Hos 2:3; Jer 2:31).
Another Hebrew term for desert, from a
root meaning “‘to be arid,” refers to an infer-
tile, desolate, bare steppe (Jb 24:5; Is 33:9; Jer
51:43). The plural form of that word describes
topographical features of the desert plains of
Moab (Nm 22:1; 26:3,63; Dt 34:1) and of Jericho
(Jos 4:13; 5:10; 2 Kgs 25:5). With the definite
article, that word (the Arabah) is the plain of
the Jordan Valley and of the environs of the
Dead Sea. The geography of that region con-
tains sharp contrasts; the Jordan Valley, dense
with jungle-like forest sheltering wild beasts
(including lions in biblical times), gives way
to the steppe lands of the Dead Sea area which
have always been desert. The rsv identifies
“the Arabah”’ in certain references to desert
lands (2 Sm 2:29; Ez 47:8).
Two other Hebrew terms, meaning ‘‘waste”’
and “ruin,” refer to districts or settlements
once inhabited but later devastated (Is 1:7;
5:9; 6:11; Jer 42:18; Ez 35:7). They are also used
more generally for any desolate or waste place
(Lv.(26:31,33):0 bya: 143 (Pss9:6;: 109:10;: 1s 953275
44:26; 51:3; 52:9; Jer 7:34; Ez 5:14). One of them
is also used once for the wilderness of the exo-
dus (Is 48:21). Another word meaning waste
(Ps 78:40; Is 43:19,20) when prefixed with the
definite article, is a proper name for Jeshi-
mon, a tract of land west of the Dead Sea (Nm
21:20; 1 Sm 23:24; 26:1).
In the NT the noun for ‘“‘wilderness’’ and
the adjective ‘‘desert’”’ (Mt 3:1; 24:26; Lk 5:16;
Jn 6:31; Acts 8:26) come from the same Greek
root.
The whole of biblical history has been inter-
preted as having a desert or wilderness motif.
It can be seen in the realm of disobedient hu-
man experience outside the garden of Eden; in
the wandering of Israel in the exodus; in the
struggle between pure faith in the desert and
soft, idolatrous city life. The desert is viewed
as a realm of demons and death (Dt 32:17; Is
34:13,14); its demonic wildness resembles the
primeval chaos of the creation (Gn 1:2; Jb
26:7). Several moving passages of Scripture
deal with renewal of life in a desert valley (Ez
37), or with transformation of arid land into a
productive garden (Is 41:18—20).
The desert is also a place where God is
close to his people (Dt 32:10-12), both watch-
ing over them and testing their obedience (Jer
2:2; Hos 2:14,15). Finally, the desert is a place
Desire
of refuge, cleansing, and consecration. The des-
ert fathers of the early church and the hermits
of the Middle Ages emulated the prophet Eli-
jah and John the Baptist (1: Kgs 19:4-8; Mt
3:1-6). In the Gospels the desert theme of the
exodus recurs in the 4o days and nights in
which Jesus was tempted in the wilderness
(Mk 1:13; cf. Ps gt).
See PALESTINE; NEGEB; WILDERNESS.
Desire. To long for, want, or covet; also the
object so desired. The word “‘desire’’ occurs
many times in the kJv. As a noun it translates
12 Hebrew words and 3 Greek words. As a
verb it represents about 12 each of Hebrew
and Greek verbs. Some of the original words
simply mean “ask”’ or “‘seek,’’ and are trans-
lated that way in modern versions.
Desire is a basic part of life, neither good
nor bad in itself. The important moral issue is
how one responds to his or her desires. It is
possible to let them control one’s conduct, or
to control one’s desires and use them to serve
their God-appointed purposes.
Christians have differed on the appropriate
reaction to desire. Ascetics have claimed, for
example, that the desire for food and the en-
joyment of eating is sinful. But Jesus’ example
in the Gospels shows that he enjoyed good
meals—so much so that his critics called him
a glutton (Lk 7:34). His first miracle in John’s
Gospel was performed at a wedding in Cana of
Galilee, where the feasting probably went on
for several days (Jn 2:1-11).
Many think that sexual desire is bad, but it
is of itself no more evil than the desire for
food. God created people with both desires,
and they both must be kept under control, in
obedience to God’s Law.
How does one distinguish between good de-
sire and bad desire? Ultimately there is one
basic issue: Is a person’s desire self-centered
or a desire for God’s will? The Bible teaches
that the essence of sin is a determination to
have one’s own way. Although King Saul
never committed the dual crimes of adultery
and murder that King David did, David was
honored and Saul was reproached. The reason
given by the Bible is that David was ‘“‘a man
after [God’s] heart,’’ who wanted to do God's
will (Acts 13:22). But Saul was stubborn and
self-willed, and he was rejected for that reason
(x Sm 15:23).
Evil desire, therefore, is not necessarily a
desire for something that one might label as
wicked. It is essentially the desire to have
one’s own way. As such it is idolatry, putting
self in place of God. Without desire, nothing
is accomplished in life. But one’s actions
must always be in accord with God’s will as
616
it is revealed in his Word. The Bible even
promises that if one takes ‘delight in the
Lord,” then God will ‘“‘give you the desires of
your heart” (Ps 37:4; cf. Ps 145:16,19; Prv
10:24; Mt 6:33). When God is one’s greatest
desire, all other desires become properly ori-
ented and can thus mirror God’s own desires
for his people’s well-being.
Destiny. 1. Pagan god (Meni) mentioned in
connection with another pagan god (Gad); pre-
sumably a deity of good luck or fortune (Is
65:11).
See MESOPOTAMIA.
2. Foreordination of the Hebrews as God’s
elect people (Ex 19:5,6). In the NT eternal des-
tiny depends upon one’s relationship with
Christ (Acts 17:30,31; 1 Jn 5:1-5).
See ELECT, ELECTION; FOREORDINATION.
Destroyer, The. 1. Divine agent sent to
carry out a sentence of destruction. The de-
stroyer killed Egypt’s firstborn, culminating
the plagues and releasing the Hebrews from
slavery (Ex 12:23; cf. Heb 11:28). The apostle
Paul used the term for God’s judgment on the
rebellious Israelites in the wilderness (1 Cor
10:10; cf. Nm 16:44—50).
2. In plural form, “destroyers’”’ implies de-
struction carried out by a group of agents,
whether angelic or human (Jb 33:22 KJv; Jer
227):
3. In a broader sense, any agent of destruc-
tion (Jb 15:21; Jer 4:7).
4. Samson was called a destroyer by his Phi-
listine captors (Jgs 16:24 KJV).
Destruction, City of. Phrase in Isaiah
19:18 (KJv), generally taken as a reference to
Heliopolis.
See HELIOPOLIS.
Deuel. Eliasaph’s father. Eliasaph led the
tribe of Gad during the Israelites’ wilderness
wanderings (Nm 1:14; 7:42,47; 10:20). In Num-
bers 2:14 the name is spelled Reuel in most
manuscripts (KJv, RSV) and Deuel is some oth-
ers, due to a confusing similarity between the
Hebrew letters ‘“‘d” and “r.”
Deutero-Isaiah. Alleged second author of
the Book of Isaiah. Since the 18th century cer-
tain Bible critics have questioned the unity of
the Book of Isaiah. Late in the 19th century a
theory emerged that ascribed chapters 40-66
to an unknown prophet—a deutero (‘‘second’’)
Isaiah presumably living among the exiles in
Babylon. Some scholars have even posited the
existence of a third author (Trito-Isaiah), limit-

ing the extent of Deutero-Isaiah to chapters
40-54.
The theory was first prompted not by prob-
lems of stylistic unity but by the issue of
whether OT prophets could really foretell fu-
ture events, especially with Isaiah’s amazing
accuracy. Rationalist critics doubted that Isa-
iah could have possibly foretold the fall of Je-
rusalem, the later restoration of Palestine, and
especially the name of the Persian king (Cyrus,
see Is. 45:1) who would permit the Jews to re-
turn to their homeland from exile—events
that did not occur and a person who was not
even born until well over 100 years after the
prophet had died.
Most conservative biblical scholars, how-
ever, affirm with ancient Jewish tradition the
unity of the book, its single authorship, and the
supernatural origin of its prophetic passages.
See IsalAH, BOOK OF.
Deuteronomist. Name assigned by adher-
ents of the Documentary Hypothesis of OT ori-
gins to the supposed author or compiler of an
ancient document roughly corresponding to
the Book of Deuteronomy. Julius Wellhausen
(1844-1918), a chief exponent of the hypothe-
sis, taught that King Josiah’s religious reforms
in Judah (621 Bc) formed a necessary backdrop
for the Deuteronomic material. Josiah’s book
of the law (2 Kgs 22:3—23:25) would thus be a
basic part of Deuteronomy.
See DOCUMENTARY HyPoTHESsIs; FORM CRITICISM.
Deuteronomy, Book of. Fifth book of the
OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books
of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people
of Israel various laws and precepts of the cove-
nant which God had revealed to them at Mt
Sinai. Thus the book has become known in
Greek and. Latin tradition as Deuteronomy
(‘second law’’). That name has led some to
misinterpret the significance of its contents as
secondary. The book makes an important con-
tribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his
purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ remind-
ers of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten
Commandments, plus his instructions for life
in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the
OT covenant literature.
Date and Authorship. Two basic views
(with variations) on the date and authorship
of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern bib-
lical scholars. Those who consider Moses the
author date the book in the 14th or 13th cen-
tury Bc. Others believe that it was composed
by an unknown author in the 7th century Bc,
when Josiah was king in the southern king-
dom of Judah.
The Case for a 7th-Century Date. As early
as 1805 W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deu-
617
Deuteronomy, Book of
teronomy was used by Josiah in his 7th-
century reforms, and that it was written
shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Well-
hausen adopted that view, which has been ad-
vocated by many scholars ever since S. R.
Driver publicized it in his Introduction to the
Literature of the Old Testament (1891). Accord-
fg to that view the book was written late but
ascribed to Moses.
Many modern scholars, such as Gerhard
von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as
the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that
whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was
transmitted orally until about the 7th century
Bc. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuter-
onomy, they attribute its present form to nu-
merous writers and editors over an extended
period of centuries.
The Case for Mosaic Authorship. In recent
decades studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties
from the 2nd millennium sc have yielded in-
teresting comparisons between those treaty
forms and the Books of Exodus and Deuteron-
omy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the
form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same
literary form used by Hittites in treaties with
Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th
centuries Bc. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that
idea to the Book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as
a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlin-
ing its structure as a literary unit reflecting
the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.
The Book of Deuteronomy does contain cer-
tain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a
rene-val treaty it appeals to the covenant of
God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the
Book of Exodus.
(1) The “preamble” in ancient Hittite trea-
ties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In
Deuteronomy 1:1—5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the
speaker represents God the King of Israel. As
his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal
for the renewal of the covenant.
(2) In the “historical prologue” the suzerain
usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on
his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6—4:49 (Ex 20:2)
Moses declares what God has done for Israel
since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses re-
minds the people of Israel of God’s faithful-
ness even when they had been unfaithful.
(3) The “‘stipulations’ were usually stated
by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division.
In Deuteronomy 5:1—26:19 Moses outlines the
stipulations for Israel in their covenant rela-
tionship to God. The basic requirement in Deu-
teronomy 5:1—11:32 (Ex 20:3—-17) is exclusive,
wholehearted love for God. In the following
chapters, Deuteronomy 12:1—26:19 (Ex 21-23;
25-31), the basic principle of exclusive love for
God is applied to specific areas of cultic-cere-
monial consecration (Dt 12:1-16:17), judicial
Deuteronomy, Book of
justice in government (16:18—21:23), the sanc-
tity of God’s order (22:1—25:19), and public ac-
knowledgment of God as their Redeemer and
King (26:1—19).
(4) “Covenant ratification’’ usually con-
tained a provision for treaty renewal and a
formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteron-
omy 27 provision is made for Joshua to con-
clude the renewal of the covenant after the
Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the di-
vine threat and promise are expressed in bless-
ings and curses as Israel swears its oath of
allegiance on the plains of Moab.
(5) ““Sucession arrangements’’ were usually
the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal trea-
ties. In chapters 31-34 Joshua is designated as
Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited
in the sanctuary with the song of witness and
a testamentary blessing by Moses. The Book of
Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documen-
tary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes
with the death of Moses.
The fact that the literary structure of Deu-
teronomy parallels the legal forms characteris-
tic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the tra-
ditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of
Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as
the mediator between God and Israel in the Si-
naitic covenant, it is significant that the Book
of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of
the covenant in the literary form current in
the culture of his day.
Historical Setting. Moses led the Israel-
ites from Egypt through the wilderness to the
plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus
I-19 gives an account of the enslavement of
the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and prepara-
tion of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh,
the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and
eS es
The Dead Sea, with the moun-
tains of Edom in the back-
ground. It was in this region
that Israel camped while Mo-
ses addressed them with the
contents of what is now the
Book of Deuteronomy.
618
the journey to Mt Sinai (also known as Mt
Horeb).
In that desert area God’s great revelation
came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20-40; Lv 1—
27; Nm 1-9). At Mt Sinai, God identified him-
self as the one who had delivered the Israel-
ites. There he established an agreement by
which they would be exclusively devoted to
him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle
was built and the priesthood established. In-
structions were given for making sacrifices
and offerings, and for observing feasts and sea-
sons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would
show that they were God’s holy people. The
tribes were also organized for encampment
around the tabernacle and for the march to
Canaan, the Promised Land.
Numbers 1o—21 is an account of 38 years
the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11
days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-
barnea, about 40 miles south of Beersheba.
From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan.
Their report produced a crisis in the form of a
revolt against God. Subsequently Israel wan-
dered in the wilderness for 38 years, during
which those who had been at least 20 years old
when they left Egypt died. The new generation
moved to the plains of Moab, located east of
the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River.
Numbers 20-36 tells of the conquest and occu-
pation of the land east of the Jordan River.
The Book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’
address to the new generation of Israelites. In
Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks
to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking
at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4;
5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books,
Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in
which Moses admonishes the new generation

about their responsibility in view of the pre-
ceding generation’s failures. Whatever repeti-
tion occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully se-
lected, with the specific purpose of warning
the new generation so that they will not fail to
conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is
not primarily retrospective; its outlook is opti-
mistic about the future, offering hope for ful-
filling the promises God made to the Israelites
in Egypt.
Importance of Deuteronomy. Deuteron-
omy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is
among the most frequently quoted books in
the early Christian centuries. More than 80
OT quotations in the NT are references to
Deuteronomy.
Jesus focused attention on Deuteronomy
when he summarized the essence of the entire
OT Law and Prophets in two great command-
ments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37;
see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteron-
omy (6:13,16; 8:3) in his temptation experience
(Mt 4:4—10).
Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what
God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuter-
onomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the
core of God’s revelation without repeating de-
tails of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He
expounds the character of Israel’s faith and
nationhood. Most important is their relation-
ship with God, Moses says, repeatedly empha-
sizing his concern that they faithfully main-
tain that relationship. An exclusive devotion
to God expressed in everyday life is the key to
a lifetime of blessing.
The primary need of love toward God and
neighbor eventually became a basic require-
ment for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk
10:25—28). The Book of Deuteronomy is thus
crucially important to the Christian concern
to maintain‘a vital relationship with God.
Deuteronomy and the Law. To designate
the Book of Deuteronomy as a “‘second law”’ or
a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’
emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship
and ritual are not repeated or delineated to
any great extent. Although the Ten Command-
ments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the
first commandment, explicitly requiring exclu-
sive devotion to God. Moses is primarily con-
cerned with Israel’s relationship with God and
their determination to maintain it in their
own and their children’s lives.
The NT reveals that a legalistic interpreta-
tion of the Mosaic revelation was held by the
Jews of the 1st century aD. Such legalism devel-
oped in Judaism especially during the inter-
testamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT
times has in modern times been ascribed
wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the neces-
sity of keeping all of God’s Law (Dt 28:1,58),
619
Deuteronomy, Book of
but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole
makes it clear that he was not exclusively con-
cerned about legalistic observance. Rather,
the central theme of Deuteronomy is the
unique relationship that had been established
by a unique God with a unique people, the
Israelites.
‘Content of Deuteronomy. Brief Historical
Review (1:1—4:43). Moses is identified as the
speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains
of Moab during the last year of his life. The
Israelites were on the verge of entering the
Promised Land of Canaan.
Moses began with a reference to Mt Sinai,
scene of the greatest revelation in OT times.
He focused attention on God’s explicit com-
mand for them to move up to Canaan and oc-
cupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judg-
ment, so the conquest of Canaan had been de-
layed 38 years while an entire disobedient gen-
eration died in the wilderness.
Instructed by God not to molest the Edom-
ites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites
to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River.
The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite
king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The
tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of
Manasseh appropriated the territory east of
the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the
basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Josh-
ua to believe that God would aid him and the
Israelites in the conquest of the land of Ca-
naan west of the Jordan River.
The Israelites should learn from the mis-
takes of the generation that died in the wilder-
ness (Dt 4:1-49). They should consider the fact
that the Word of God had been spoken to
them. The revelation that had come to them
through Moses was unique, and the most im-
portant thing was for them to revere the God
who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of
Israel’s God among the nations that worship
idols should never be forgotten.
Moses reminded the Israelites that they had
entered into a contractual agreement with
their unique God. That covenant was men-
tioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had
ever experienced anything like it. If Israel
obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and
favor.
Hortatory and Legal Application (4:44—26:19).
The circumstances in which Moses addressed
the Israelites are reported in a short transi-
tional passage (4:44—49). From the slopes of Mt
Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the
valley opposite Beth-peor, where they could
partially view the land already conquered, Mo-
ses made his appeal to the people before they
crossed the Jordan River.
Moses’ exposition of the “great command-
Deuteronomy, Book of
ment” is centered in the agreement made be-
tween God and Israel. He repeated the Ten
Commandments as the essence of God’s revela-
tion at Sinai. As Moses explained what God
expected of Israel, he elaborated the first com-
mandment: “I am the Lord your God, who
brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of
the house of bondage” (5:6). Their relationship
with God was of basic importance, since God’s
wrath will be against those who worship other
gods (5:9).
Love is the key word in the relationship be-
tween God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted,
“The Lord our God is one Lord; and you shall
love the Lord your God with all your heart,
and with all your soul, and with all your
might” (6:4,5). All other commandments are
significant because they bear on that relation-
ship (as spelled out in chs 5—11).
Exclusive love and devotion to God are es-
sential. In a relationship of wholehearted love,
no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet
Moses wanted Israel to convey its conscious~
ness of God to future generations by many ex-
ternal things: signs on their hands, frontlets or
“phylacteries’’ on their foreheads, Scripture
verses on their doorposts, and so on. By pre-
cept and example they should convey to their
children that they love God (6:1—25).
The Israelites should never forget that God
had chosen them to be his people (7:1—26).
They were to execute God’s judgment on the
Canaanites, who had been spared judgment
since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the
Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love,
in love and mercy he had redeemed them out
of Egypt.
Moses appealed to the people to remember
what God had done for them (8:1—20). To
God’s sustaining provisions they should re-
spond with thankfulness, recognizing that the
power to achieve anything they had done had
been God's gift.
The Israelites had repeatedly failed in their
faith and commitment to God (g:1—10:11).
Through Moses’ intercession they had been
spared. It was for no merit of their own that
they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gra-
cious provision for them.
Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commit-
ment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12—
11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, re-
spect, love, and obedience to God (see also
6:5,13,24).
The God whom the Israelites must love sin-
cerely and without reservation is Lord of the
cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules
supreme over all nature and history. God
loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He re-
deemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslave-
ment and gave them his covenant. He mani-
fested himself in helping the orphans, widows,
and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as
numerous as the stars of the heavens.
Moses gave two basic instructions to apply
in daily life to maintain their relationship
with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore
the foreskin of your heart’’ (10:16); “‘love the
sojourner” (10:19). He did not refer to physical
circumcision, a sign of the covenant between
God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision,
which was not observed during the years of
wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted un-
der Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jor-
dan River (Jos 5:2—9). Moses referred to “‘spiri-
tual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40,41; Jer 4:4;
9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict,
interfere with, or negate total devotion to God
were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the
Israelites would continue to love God “with
all [their] heart.” ,
“Love the sojourner”’ ranks second in impor-
tance to wholehearted love for God. Love for
the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other
human obligations (see Lv 19:9—18). Social ob-
ligations issue out of a person’s relationship
with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the
Israelites were to love others. They were to
remember Gdd’s love for them when they
were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves
the stranger, the widow, and the orphan;
therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is
under obligation to love other people. God is
concerned about justice and righteousness; a
person who professes to love God must be con-
cerned about just treatment for other people.
The Israelites were to be known for their
concern for people whose social position ex-
posed them to exploitation and oppression.
The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mo-
saic Law stands in unique contrast to the
Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the As-
syrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In
those codes human relationships reflected no
vital consciousness of a love relationship with
deity.
In the 1st century aD Jesus Christ came into
conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had
lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legal-
ism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment
was to love God; the second was to love one’s
neighbor. Those two commandments (which
constitute the essence of the entire OT revela-
tion) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis
for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29—-31; Lk
10:27,28). Christians believe that the climax of
God's revelation of love came in Jesus Christ.
For them, responding to God’s love means to
accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion,
and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exempli-
fied in his life.
In Deuteronomy 12:1-26:19 Moses gave in-

struction in practical living for a God-related
people when they resided in the land God had
promised to them. Having once survived on
manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan
they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the
land. They would also encounter a culture per-
meated by Canaanite religion.
In worshiping God in their new setting they
were cautioned to maintain due sanctity
(12:1-14:21). They were not to worship at pa-
gan shrines. They should bring their offerings
to divinely appointed places for fellowship
and rejoicing together “before the Lord.”
Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form.
Any prophet who deviated from the Law of
Moses in advising the worship of other gods
should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God
was to be daily practice.
Canaan’s abundant blessings should be
shared with neighbors (14:22-15:23). Tithes
should be brought to the central sanctuary
where Levites assisted the priests in religious
ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings
and opportunities was to characterize Israel's
pattern of living.
Moses prescribed three annual pilgrimages
(16:1-17). The people should remember their
deliverance out of Egypt by observing the
feast of Passover and unleavened bread. Seven
weeks later, when the grain harvest was com-
pleted, they should spend time rejoicing be-
fore the Lord in a one-day festival called the
feast of weeks. When the vintage as well as the
grain harvest was completed, they were to ob-
serve the feast of ingathering (or booths), a
time of thanksgiving and sharing with others.
Every seven years the Law was read at the
feast of ingathering.
In human relations justice was to prevail
among the Israelites (16:18—21:23). The book of
the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their
divine authority, providing God’s instructions
for them. The king was to have a copy of this
law and govern his life in accordance with it.
Prophets and priests played an important role
as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judi-
cial authority was vested in the priests. In con-
trast to the brutality of other nations, humani-
tarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s
warfare. Fathers were responsible for their
own family households.
In domestic and social relationships the
law of love was to prevail (22:1—26:19). Many
regulations governed family life. In matters of
sustenance, wages, and business dealings the
Israelites were admonished to be compassion-
ate and just. Promises and warnings raised
their consciousness about using the resources
of land and animals entrusted to them so that
their stewardship would please God.
In Deuteronomy 26:1-19 Moses instructed
621
Deuteronomy, Book of
the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and
a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowl-
edging that God was the giver of all they had,
and by confessing before God that they shared
his gifts with others, they confirmed their cov-
enant with God.
Alternatives: Blessings and Curses (27:1—
30:20). Moses set before the Israelites the al-
ternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua
they were to renew the covenant publicly. At
Mt Ebal a stone was to be erected for inscrib-
ing the Law and an altar constructed for offer-
ing sacrifice. The curses were to be read from
Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim.
Conditional self-curses were read regarding of-
fenses against God and other human beings
(27:15—26). Thus they acknowledged their ac-
countability to God. Though their sins might
be hidden from people, it was God to whom
they were primarily and ultimately account-
able. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a
way of death were clearly set before the Israel-
ites (28:1-68). Setting them in the perspective
of history, Moses appealed to the new genera-
tion to take advantage of their present oppor-
tunity (29:1-29). Warning that should they fail
to love God they would ultimately be sub-
jected to dispersion, Moses admonished them
to choose the way of life and good rather than
the way of death and evil (30:1—20).
Transition: Moses to Joshua (31:1—34:12).
When the life and ministry of Moses were near-
ing completion, and transfer of leadership was
near (31:1—34:12), Joshua had already been des-
ignated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses
assured the Israelites that God would be the
same with Joshua in charge. The revelation
given through Moses had been put in writing
and now was committed to the priests, the cus-
todians of the Law. Joshua, who had already
distinguished himself in responsible leader-
ship, was publicly confirmed at the door of the
tabernacle (31:1—29).
The “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s docu-
ment of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke
with prophetic understanding as he recounted
Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the conse-
quences of their attitude toward God, he as-
sured the people of restoration if in the future
they again failed. He encouraged them to fix
their hearts on what God had revealed to
them and to impress it on their children. Keep-
ing the covenant by maintaining a whole-
hearted love for God would be important for
all future generations as well as for those then
listening to Moses.
After final brief instructions (32:48—52) Mo-
ses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites,
whom he had led for 40 years (33:1—29). In his
final blessing, also called the ‘Testament of
Moses,” the greatness of God and his special
Devil, The

relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel

is unique among all the nations of the world.
The Book of Deuteronomy appropriately
ends with an account of the death of Moses,
the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).
SAMUEL J. SCHULTZ
See Moses; ISRAEL, History OF; SHEMA, THE; Docu-
MENTARY HyPorHESIS.
Bibliography. P.C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy; A.
Harper, The Book of Deuteronomy; A.H. McNeile, Deuteron-
omy, Its Place in Revelation; A.C. Welch, Deuteronomy: The
Framework to the Code.

Devil, The. See Satan.

Devoted Things. Persons, animals, or ob-
jects that God forbade the children of Israel to
possess (Lv 27:28,29; Nm 18:14).
See CURSE, CURSED.

‘Dew. Moisture condensed from warm air

during a cool night, usually found as small
droplets on surfaces the next morning. Dew
was an important source of moisture for the
people of the ancient Near East, replacing
some of the moisture lost during the hot days
in that region. It was important to the growth
of plants and a successful harvest (Hg 1:10). In
the Bible dew and rain are spoken of together
as of great value (1 Kgs 17:1). During the exo-
dus, dew was a source of sustenance (Ex
16:13—-21; Nm 11:9). Figuratively “dew” was
sometimes used as a symbol of blessing; for
example, Isaac blessed Jacob by asking that
“the dew of heaven” be given to him (Gn 27:28;
cf. Dt 33:13 KJv; Mi 5:7). Dew was also a sym-
bol of refreshment, renewal, or prosperity (Jb
29:19; Hos 14:5). A king’s favor was said to be
“like dew upon the grass” (Prv 19:12). Dew
Diana of the Ephesians.
could represent stealth, coming silently by
night (2 Sm 17:12); it also depicted circum-
stances that could change rapidly, since it mother had suffered in bearing her, and re-
evaporated so quickly in the morning (Hos mained the unattainable virgin goddess. Al-
6:4). A passage in one of David’s messianic though goddess of the moon, Diana was more
psalms declares of the Lord that his strength often portrayed as the huntress with two dogs
will be renewed like the morning dew (Ps beside her.
ri0!3)! The temple of Diana at Ephesus was one of
the seven wonders of the ancient world. The
Diadem. See Crown. impressive building was supported on roo
large columns. The local legend was that there
Diamond. Precious gem, usually colorless, her statue fell from the sky (Acts 19:35). This
consisting of crystalized carbon. In the Bible may have been a reference to a meteorite.
“diamond” seems to indicate hardness, rather Pliny described a large stone over the door-
than the actual identification, of the stone. way, which, according to tradition, had been
See MINERALS, METALS, AND PRECIOUS STONES. put in place by Diana. Ceremonies and ser-
vices of worship in her honor were conducted
Diana. Roman name for the mythological by eunuch priests.
Greek goddess Artemis, daughter of Jupiter Among the statues that have been exca-
and Latona and the twin sister of Apollo. She vated some show Diana as a multibreasted fe-
renounced all idea of marriage, supposedly be- male; others show a shrine with the goddess
cause she was appalled at the birth pains her attended by lions. Models of the temple were

sold as souvenirs by the silversmiths, who
were reluctant to see any slackening of this
lucrative trade when Paul began his preaching
in Ephesus (Acts 19:23—20:1). The discontent
and agitation of the silversmiths led to the riot
of the crowd, culminating in the roar ‘‘Great is
Diana of the Ephesians” (Acts 19:28,34 KJv). In-
scriptions in the British Museum refer to the
goddess as “Artemis the Great.’’ If the silver-
smiths are to be believed, she was worshiped
throughout the known world. The form of wor-
ship is not known for certain, but the worship
of the goddess Diana may have been associ-
ated with a fertility cult.
Diaspora of the Jews. Dispersion of Jewish
people from Israel to foreign lands. Diaspora,
a Greek noun meaning a “sowing” or “‘scatter-
ing,” is regularly used in the Septuagint to
mean “‘exile” (Jer 25:34; cf. Is 11:12; Ez 20:23;
Zep 3:10). The word occurs twice in the NT
(Jas 1:1; 1 Pt 1:1), referring to Christian Jews
residing outside Palestine as a result of the
several dispersions in Israel’s history. Dias-
pora sometimes refers to the exiled people,
sometimes to the place of exile.
Causes of Jewish Dispersions. Israel's dis-
persions were at times a result of its political
or economic successes and at other times a
result of its religious failures.
Voluntary Dispersion. Military, political,
and commercial gains necessitated a certain
amount of outward movement. Israel’s ambi-
tion led to expansion. David expanded his
kingdom northward to Damascus (Syria) and
eastward to the Euphrates River. In order to
occupy and supervise that new territory he
“put garrisons in Aram of Damascus; and
the Syrians became servants to David and
brought tribute” (2 Sm 8:6). Solomon ex-
tended Israel’s borders even farther. He “ruled
over all the kingdoms from the Euphrates to
the land of the Philistines and to the border of
Egypt; they brought tribute and served Solo-
mon all the days of his life” (1 Kgs 4:21). Mili-
tary occupation provided bases for a series of
colonial expansions and commercial ventures.
After a military presence in a tributary nation
was no longer necessary, political supervision
generally continued.
Commerce provided a number of occasions
for dispersion of the Israelites. Shipbuilders at
Ezion-geber, a port at the tip of the Red Sea,
produced the ships of King Solomon’s mer-
chant marine centered there. The ships sailed
on three-year voyages to trading centers along
the African coast and perhaps as far as India
and: Ceylon (1 Kgs 9:26—-28). The Cilicians,
Egyptians, Hittites, and Syrians bought from
Solomon’s traders and sold horses to them (1
Kgs 10:28,29). A hundred years later the Syrian
623
Diaspora of the Jews
king Ben-hadad II bargained for his life by
promising commercial rights in Damascus to
King Ahab of the northern kingdom of Israel
(874-853 Bc). To make the most of that oppor-
tunity in a city over 100 miles from Israel’s
capital, a sizable colony had to be established
in Damascus (1 Kgs 20:34).
-* Jewish merchants sometimes moved to a
foreign city for a year to trade (Jas 4:13). Ini-
tially having planned to return to Israel, they
might be kept in “voluntary exile” by commer-
cial success. Distance might make the trader
nostalgic, but success held him in the trade
city. Periodic pilgrimages often replaced per-
manent return.
Forced Dispersion. Dispersion also came
to the Israelites as a divine judgment, always
prophesied long before the dispersion took
place. When Moses forewarned Israel of exile,
he delivered the Lord’s promise of blessing for
obedience: “I will give peace in the land, and
you shall lie down, and none shall make you
afraid” (Lv 26:6). But disobedience would
bring destruction and dispersion. God warned,
“Tf you will not hearken to me, and will not do
all these commandments, ... and if your soul
abhors my ordinances, so that you will not do
all my commandments, but break my cov-
enant, I will do this to you” (Lv 26:14-16).
Crops would fail, “sudden terror’? would
strike, disease would waste, wild beasts would
ravage, and even enemies would be amazed at
Israel’s desolation. Ultimately God would dis-
perse his people among the gentile nations (Lv
26:16—33). Forty years later, when Canaan was
about to be conquered, Moses solemnly re-
peated the warning against religious unfaith-
fulness. If Israel forsook God, they would be
scattered until they repented (Dt 4:27,30,31;
28:64—68; 30:1—5).
When the forcible dispersion of exile finally
came, God’s prophets pointed not to enemy
superiority as the cause, but to God’s sentence
on Israel’s sinfulness. Greed, oppression, dis-
honesty, pride, idolatry, and a catalog of other
crimes against God, and especially against the
poor, had called forth divine judgment (Is
3:16; 5:8; Jer 5:28; Ez 8; Am 2:7; 4:1; 8:4—-6; Mi
DiBPRt2 AONLT):
Major Diasporas. From the end of the
8th century Bc onward, Jewish history was
marked by several major dispersions.
Diaspora of the Northern Kingdom. After Sol-
omon’s death his kingdom broke in two. The
northern kingdom of Israel sunk deeper into
idolatry and immorality (2 Kgs 17:14—18). Jero-
boam, the first king of the divided Israel, estab-
lished a pattern of apostasy (‘‘falling away”
from faith). Epitaphs for succeeding kings regu-
larly recorded that the deceased ruler “did not
turn from the sins of Jeroboam”’ (2 Kgs 10:31;
Diaspora of the Jews
13:11} 14:24; 15:9,18,24,28). Assyria conquered
the northern kingdom in 722 Bc and took over
27,000 Israelites into exile, as had been pre-
dicted (2 Kgs 17:23). They were settled in cities
along the tributaries of the Euphrates River
and in Media. Assyrians from cities around
Babylon in turn colonized Israel (2 Kgs 17:6,24).
Diaspora of the Southern Kingdom. The
southern kingdom of Judah suffered exile to
the east in Babylonia and to the south in
Egypt. The Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar
captured Judeans in several expeditions from
605 BC to the fall of Jerusalem in 586 Bc. The
first deportation to Babylon took Jerusalem's
treasures from the temple and palace, and “‘all
the princes, and all the mighty men of valor,
ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen
and the smiths; none remained, except the
poorest people of the land” (2 Kgs 24:12—14; cf.
2 Chr 36:10; Jer 52:29,30).
A year later a second expedition focused on
the rebellious Jewish vassal king Zedekiah
and his sons (2 Kgs 25:1,6,7; Jer 52:4-11). In the
tgth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, Babylo-
nia struck Judah a third time, destroyed the
temple and the king’s palace, and broke down
the city’s walls. All but the very poorest peo-
ple were carried away captive (2 Kgs 25:8—21;
Jer 52:12—16).
Shishak, king of Egypt, deported exiles
from Judah as early as the roth century Bc.
Judah lost people and also temple gold at that
time (1 Kgs 14:25,26; 2 Chr 12:9). About
years later Johanan, a Judean, thought he
could escape from Nebuchadnezzar by fleeing
to Egypt. Johanan forced Jeremiah and a
group of other Jews to go with him; they set-
tled at Migdol, Tahpanhes, and Memphis. Nev-
ertheless the Babylonians pursued them, took
control of Egypt, and executed many of the
Jews there (Jer 43:5-44:30). Records of prop-
erty ownership and artifacts of an altar sug-
gest that the few surviving exiles established
permanent colonies in Egypt (Is 19:18,19).
Other Dispersions. The Egyptian king Ptol-
emy I (323-285 Bc) captured many Jews and
carried them off to Egypt about 300 Bc. Those
exiles populated Alexandria, a city thereafter
noted as a center of both Greek and Jewish
scholarship. Elsewhere large colonies of Jews
were exported from Babylonia to Phrygia and
Lydia by Antiochus III (the Great) of Syria
(223-187 Rc). The Romans transplanted a siz-
able group of Jews to Rome. The Roman gen-
eral Pompey took many there as slaves in the
1st century BC.
How widely the Jews were scattered is sug-
gested in the NT Book of Acts, where
listed Jerusalem’s visitors: ‘Parthians and Me-
des and Elamites and residents of Mesopota-
mia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia,
Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts
ef Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors
from Rome... , Cretans and Arabians” (Acts
2:9-11). Those Jews of “the diaspora’ were in
Jerusalem to celebrate the feast of Pentecost.
Other Jewish communities were located in
the Macedonian cities visited by the apostle
Paul on his missionary journeys: Thessalonica,
Beroea, and Corinth (Acts 17:1,10; 18:2—-4).
Around the middle of the rst century Ap the
Roman emperor Claudius ‘‘commanded all
Jews to leave Rome” (Acts 18:2). Scholarly esti-
mates of the Jewish population in Palestine at
the time of Jesus’ birth range from about 4 to 6
million. The dispersion population numbered
several times that of Palestine; communities
with more than 1 million each flourished in
Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, and Alexandria. To-
day, with a national homeland, far more Jews
still live outside Israel than inside.
Conditions Among Diaspora Jews. Jews
‘of “the diaspora’ over the centuries have
known suffering and rejection, but also pros-
perity and blessing.
Social Status. Although Jews often suf-
fered discrimination in foreign lands (Dn 6:5—
17; Heb 11:37,38), positions of influence and
favor came to certain scattered individuals.
For instance, a young Jewish woman named
Esther was chosen to be queen by the Persian
king Ahasuerus, also known as Xerxes I (485—
465 BC), because of her beauty and wisdom.
400 “The king loved Esther more than all the
women, ... so that he set the royal crown on
her head and made her queen” (Est 2:17). She
precipitated the downfall of Haman, an anti-
Semitic Persian prime minister. To replace Ha-
man she requested the elevation of her uncle
Mordecai, another pious Jewish exile (Est 7:3—
63832):
Later the Persian king Artaxerxes I (464-424
Bc) awarded Nehemiah, a Jew, the position of
cupbearer, a powerful and highly esteemed of-
fice in the Persian court (Neh 2:1—8). Daniel,
another Jewish exile, rose to political power in
Babylonia (Dn 1:19,20; 2:48).
Historically, dispersed Jews have made a
cultural name for themselves as scientists, phi-
losophers, musicians, and statesmen. But they
have also been the persecuted victims of racial
and religious hatred under kings, popes, czars,
and dictators.
Jewish Unity. In spite of their scattering
Jews of various diasporas retained a basic
unity with Palestinian Jews through several
practices, (1) The great national feasts—Pass-
over, harvest, and tabernacles (Ex 23:12-17;
Luke Dt 16:1-17)—continued to be observed abroad.
(2) The temple tax used for the temple’s up-
keep (Ex 30:11-16) was collected in foreign
Jewish communities, even after the temple
624

had been destroyed. (3) All Jews everywhere
recognized the authority of the Sanhedrin (the
Jewish religious council) over them.
Positive Aspects. In exile the Jews tended
to abandon the idol worship that had in part
alienated them from God. Their exile led them
to establish synagogues as institutions for
prayer and education. Alexandrian Jews trans-
lated the OT Scriptures into Greek, at that
time the international language. The result,
called the Septuagint, was the version often
cited by NT writers.
From the Christian point of view, the net-
work of dispersed Jewish communities had a
special significance. They provided strategic
bases for the spread of Christianity, which
quickly broke out of those communities and
into the surrounding gentile world. Thus God
used the dispersions to bring the gospel to the
Gentiles (Rom 1:11—15; 1 Cor 10:11,12; cf. Ps 67;
3:28,29; 4:34-37).
Finally, the arts, sciences, and humanities
have been greatly enriched by the Jews scat-
tered throughout Western culture. Few other
peoples have endured so much ferocious eth-
nic bigotry as the Jews, yet rewarded that re-
jection with cultural gifts and graces of such
excellence. Although the church of Jesus
Christ has become a “new Israel’’ and the
“chosen race” (1 Pt 2:9), the testimony of his-
tory and of Scripture indicates that God still
has a unique interest in the Jews.
" JaMEs L. Mason
See ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; POSTEXILIC PERIOD,
JUDAISM; JEW; EXILE.
Dibon
Center medallion in the mo-
saic floor of the synagogue in
Tiberias, showing pagan influ-
ence in Jewish religion by de-
picting what is probably Sol
Invictus or Helios.
Diblah, Diblath. Asv and kJv forms of Rib-
lah, the name of the place from which King
Nebuchadnezzar directed operations against
Jerusalem in 588-86 Bc (Ez 6:14; cf. Jer 52:9—
27).
See RIBLAH.
Diblaim. Father of Gomer, Hosea’s wife
(Hos 1:3). The name Diblaim is thought by
some to be an allusion to Gomer’s harlotry,
since the name means “‘raisin cakes”’ and rai-
sin cakes were used in ancient fertility-cult
rites.
Dibon. 1. City in Moab, east of the Dead Sea
and north of the Arnon River. It was located
on the King’s Highway in Amorite territory
and was a camping station for the Israelites
during the exodus (Nm 33:45). Israel asked per-
mission of Sihon, the Amorite king, to pass
through his territory, but he refused. Israel
then fought and defeated Sihon, thus gaining
control of Dibon. Following the Hebrew con-
quest of Palestine and its division among the
12 tribes, Dibon was given to Gad (Nm 32:3,
34), being also referred to as Dibon-gad (Nm
33:45,46). One biblical reference assigns it to
Reuben (Jos 13:17).
During the period of the judges, Moab un-
der King Eglon oppressed Israel and appar-
ently retook Dibon. It was probably recovered
under the leadership of Ehud (Jgs 3:12—30).
Subsequently Dibon was ruled by Israel under
THE; King David (2 Sm 8:2).
In the preexilic period Dibon was again un-
625
Dibon-gad
der Moabite influence (Is 15:2; Jer 48:18,22). Isa-
iah condemned Dibon (Dimon) as chief among
the wicked cities of Moab (Is 15:9). Dimon is
probably a play on words (from the root
“blood’’) predicting Dibon’s bloody and disas-
trous fate.
In 1868 excavations uncovered the famous
Moabite Stone at Dibon, erected by Mesha,
king of Moab, who built ‘“‘Qarhah” as his capi-
tal. This may have been a new capital city
replacing Dibon, or a renaming of Dibon by
Mesha. Most likely Qarhah referred to the fact
that Dibon was built on two elevations. The
higher one was Qarhah, the defensive citadel
of the city, surrounded by a wall and possess-
ing a water reservoir, several cisterns,
royal palace, and a shrine (“high place,” Is
15:2) to Chemosh, the principal god of Moab.
Excavations conducted in 1950-56 at Dibon
(modern Dhiban) uncovered remains of the
city from a period about 3000 Bc. Evidence in-
dicated that it contained only a nomadic popu-
lation in the period 2100-1300 Bc and that it
was settled again about 1300 Bc. The earliest
excavations found five city walls, the oldest
dating to about 3000 Bc. The heaviest wall was
from 7% to almost 11 feet thick, built with
large, well-squared blocks, and is considered
to have been built in Mesha’s time.
2. Town in the Negeb of Judah inhabited by
Babylonian exiles who returned to Palestine
during Nehemiah’s time (Neh 11:25).
Dibon-gad. Alternate name for Dibon,
Moabite city, in Numbers 33:45,46.
See DIBON #1.
Dibri. Father of Shelomith from Dan’s tribe.
Shelomith married an Egyptian man, and her
son by this marriage was stoned in the wilder-
ness for blaspheming the name of God
24!10,11).
Dichotomy. See Man, DocrrINE oF.
Didrachma. Greek silver coin worth 2 drach-
mas and equivalent to the Jewish half-shekel.
Every Jew was required to pay this amount as
the annual temple tax (Mt 17:24, KJv tribute).
See CoINs.
Didymus. Greek word for “twin” and an-
other name for the apostle Thomas in John
11:16; 20:24; and 21:2.
See THOMAS, THE APOSTLE.
Dietary Laws. Regulations of food prepara-
tion and consumption provided by God for his
people in OT times. The dietary laws formed
part of broader regulations on “cleanliness”
which were designed to maintain Israel’s sta-
tus as a holy people.
The Meaning of Holiness. Biblical laws
concerning diet and cleanliness were based on
the idea of holiness. The underlying meaning
of the Hebrew word for “holiness”’ is difficult
to ascertain*but most probably was “‘to cut,”
or ‘‘to be separate,” or ‘‘to set apart.” The
Lord told Israel, ““You shall be holy to me, for
I the Lord am holy, and have separated you
from the peoples, that you should be mine”
(Lv 20:26). God is the supreme example of holi-
ness; he is the one uniquely separate in his
character and being (Is 6:3). But God wanted
his covenant people to be holy, too. One of the
the ways that God made the Israelites different
from the other peoples of the world was by
giving them dietary laws: “I am the Lord your
God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, be-
cause I am holy” (Lv 11:44 NIv). Keeping the
dietary laws did not automatically make the
people ‘“‘holy” (i.e., separated to God); rather,
it was one of the ways OT believers could
show their gratitude to God for his deliver-
ance and hence could demonstrate their faith
in him.
Before Moses. From the creation, God ap-
proved all varieties of fruit and vegetables as
legitimate, clean food (Gn 1:29). After the fall
of humanity God distinguished between clean
and unclean animals. At the time of Noah,
God directed that additional specimens of
clean animals be taken aboard the ark (Gn 7:2;
a 8:20). After the flood, God prohibited the eat-
ing of blood because blood represented life
(Gn 9:4). To commemorate the patriarch Ja-
cob’s wrestling with the angel of the Lord, Ja-
cob’s descendants refrained from eating a cer-
tain hip muscle (Gn 32:32), though that was
not a command from God.
(Lv The Mosaic Law. The primary revelation
of the Lord’s dietary standards for Israel was
given through Moses. Dietary laws are found
among the ceremonial regulations received at
Mt Sinai (Lv 11). Moses repeated many of
those laws 39 years later, shortly before the
people entered the Promised Land (Dt 14:3—
21). The dietary laws concerned only animal
products, except for the prohibition of wine to
certain people (Lv 10:9; Nm 6:3,4; cf. Jgs 13:14;
Jer 35:6).
Five categories of living things were regu-
lated for food. To be edible an animal had to
have cloven (divided) hooves and had to chew
its cud. That requirement ruled out camels,
horses, rabbits, and pigs (Lv 11:2—8). Sea life
had to have fins and scales (11:9—-12). Birds
were edible if they were not predatory (11:13-
19); Moses went on to list 20 species specifi-
cally prohibited because they were birds of
prey or scavengers. Winged insects were for-
626

bidden (11:22-23) except for certain:
of locusts and grasshoppers (food commonly
eaten by desert nomads). Finally, “the animals
that move about on the ground,” including
reptiles and rodents (11:29—31 NIV), were ruled
out.
Further prohibitions were made about food
that otherwise would have been considered
clean. For example, nothing found “already
dead”’ (Dt 14:21 NIV) or that had been ‘‘torn by
beasts” (Lv 17:15) was to be eaten. Food could
become defiled by contact with some other
thing that was unclean, like a dead mouse that
happened to fall into a food container
11:32—34). A young goat was not to be boiled in
its mother’s milk (Ex 23:19; 34:26; Dt 14:21).
When clean animals were slaughtered,
blood was to be drained out (Lv 17:14). All
pieces of fat (Lv 3:16; 7:23), especially a sheep’s
fat tail (Ex 29:22; Lv 3:9), were restricted for
use only in sacrifices to the Lord. Through Mo-
ses the Lord reiterated the prohibition against
eating blood (Lv 17:10; 19:26; Dt 12:16; 15:23).
Several reasons, stated in or inferred from
Scripture, account for the dietary laws and ap-
ply to the Bible’s cleanliness regulations in
general. Some seem to be natural reasons; oth-
ers may be symbolic or relational.
Hygiene. Some dietary laws, such as those
against eating vermin or decomposing flesh,
circumvented obvious health hazards and
were given for the people’s protection. But hy-
giene alone cannot account for all the regula-
tions; in fact, some foods that might have been
acceptable from a hygienic viewpoint, such as
rabbit or clams, were excluded.
Aversion. Worms and snakes are generally
considered loathsome, whatever their actual
food value. Such animals were not kosher
(proper).
Relationship to Pagan Practice. Boiling a
young goat in its mother’s milk has now been
documented as a pagan rite among Moses’ con-
temporaries, the Canaanites. God’s people
were not to imitate the practices of the peo-
ples around them (Dt 18:9).
Symbolism. Certain food products were
ruled out because of something they symbol-
ized. God said not to eat blood: “Be sure that
you do not eat the blood; for the blood is the
life, and you shall not eat the life with the
flesh” (Dt 12:23). Blood had a ritual function.
It was used to make atonement on God’s al-
tar and therefore was not to be eaten
17:11,12). The NT writers recognized the sacri-
ficial blood of the OT as a “type” or foreshad-
owing of the blood of Jesus Christ shed on the
cross as a sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:1,4,12; 1 Pt
1:18,19). A symbolic regard for maternal life
may explain why one who came upon a bird’s
nest was allowed to take the eggs or the
Dietary Laws
types young but had to leave the mother bird un-
harmed (Dt 22:6,7); the need to preserve a
fragile desert ecosystem may also have been a
factor.
Expression of Holiness. The basic idea of
holiness is separation. God selected certain
means, sometimes seemingly arbitrary, by
which his people could demonstrate their de-
votion to him. Some of the choice parts of a
sacrifice, such as the fat tail, were thus re-
served for the Lord and were offered in visible
dedication on the altar.
The dietary regulations were rigorous, but
(Lv their simplicity provided God’s people with a
practical basis for maintaining good eating
habits while they sojourned in a harsh environ-
their ment or a strange land.
After Moses. The dietary laws given at Mt
Sinai continued to be recognized throughout
Israel’s history. Before the birth of Samson,
the child’s mother was warned, “Now see to it
that you drink no wine or other fermented
drink and that you do not eat anything un-
clean” (Jgs 13:4,7 NIv). During the Philistine
wars of the next century (c. 1041 Bc) King
Saul’s soldiers sinned by disregarding require-
ments about the proper draining of blood
from animals (1 Sm 14:32-34).
Later, when the Israelites were exiled in
heathen lands, they were faced with situations
in which the selection of food and its prepara-
tion could render it unclean (Ez 4:12—14). Dan-
iel’s refusal to be defiled by pagan delicacies
at Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylonian court (605
BC) illustrated his loyalty to God (Dn 1:8).
From the prophet Isaiah’s day (740 Bc) on-
ward, the most abhorrent food to the Israelites .
was the meat of swine (Is 65:4; 66:3,17). In the
Maccabean period the “‘abomination of desola-
tion,’ which the Jewish hero Judas Maccabeus
and his followers resisted to the death, in-
cluded sacrifices of pigs on the temple altar in
Jerusalem by the pagan ruler Antiochus Epi-
phanes (1 Mc 1:54,62,63; 2 Mc 6:5; 7:1).
Relevance Today. In principle the dietary
laws that were based on hygienic reasons con-
tinue to be relevant for Christians today. A per-
son’s body deserves care: ‘“Your body is a tem-
ple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you
have from God” (1 Cor 6:19). But according to
the NT the dietary laws that were based on
ceremony and “typology” are no longer bind-
ing. ‘Therefore do not let anyone judge you by
(Lv what you eat or drink, or with regard to a
religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a
Sabbath day” (Col 2:16,17 NIv). Jesus stressed
moral cleanliness; the thoughts that come out
of a person, not the food that goes in, are defil-
ing (Mt 15:17,18; Mk 7:15). To Pharisees who
criticized him for not ritually washing before
eating, Jesus said, ‘“‘Give that which is within
627
Diklah
as charity, and then all things are clean for
you” (Lk 11:41 NASB).
Contemporary Orthodox Judaism continues
to observe the kosher laws of the OT, though
many of its practices are based on later tradi-
tions. For example, rules about two sets of
dishes, one for meat and the other for dairy
products, were developed to prevent any possi-
ble contact between meat from a young goat
and its mother’s milk.
At first the early church, with its Jewish
background, found it difficult to break away
from Hebrew dietary traditions. The apostle
Peter was given a vision, repeated three times,
about no longer calling either non-Jewish food
or the non-Jews who ate it “unclean” (Acts
10:9-16; 11:1-10). Later, a council at Jerusa-
lem officially decided not to retain Moses’ cere-
monialism in the church, except that gentile
Christians should abstain ‘“‘from food polluted
by idols, from sexual immorality, from the
meat of strangled animals and from blood’”’
(Acts 15:20,29 NIV) in order not to offend Jewish
Christians. That was an application of the NT
teaching of consideration for those with sensi-
tive consciences. “Do not destroy the work of
God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but
it is wrong for a man to eat anything that
causes someone else to stumble.... But the
man who has doubts is condemned if he eats,
because his eating is not from faith; and every-
thing that does not come from faith is sin”
(Rom 14:20—23).
Jewish dietary laws also have relevance to
Christians because of certain OT promises.
God promised, first to Abraham and, by reit-
eration or allusion, throughout the OT, that
the Gentiles would be included in his cov-
enant. By preserving the health of the Hebrew
people, God was ensuring their continuation
as a nation. According to the NT the salvation
of both Jews and Gentiles was achieved by
Christ, a Jew. The nation through which
Christ came was protected in order that God’s
promise could be fulfilled. Thus the dietary
laws need not be seen as burdensome restric-
tions of the Law; they were part of God’s way
of working out his redemptive plan.
See Leviticus, Book OF; CLEANNESS AND UNCLEAN-
NESS, REGULATIONS CONCERNING; CiIviL LAW AND Jus-
TICE.
Diklah. Son of Joktan in the list of nations
descended from Noah’s sons (Gn 10:27; 1 Chr
1:21); perhaps the name refers to an Arabian
tribe or territory, living in or near a palm-
bearing area, as the name suggests.
Dilean. Obscure Judean village near La-
chish. It is mentioned only once in the OT (Jos
15:38), and its site is unknown today.
628
Dill. Herb from an annual plant known in
Bible times. Dill has been widely used as a
seasoning, especially for pickles, and for cer-
tain medicinal purposes. The kJv translation
of ‘‘anise’’ instead of ‘dill’ is considered incor-
rect by most scholars.
See PLANTS.
Dimnah. Alternate name for Rimmon, a
Levitical city in Zebulun’s territory, in Joshua
2s
See RIMMON (PLACE) #2.
Dimon. sv translation of a Moabite city in
Isaiah 15:9, alternately named Dibon in the
large Dead Sea Isaiah Scroll. The site of Di-
mon is identified with Khirbet Dimneh, nearly
3 miles northwest of Rabbah.
See DIBON #1.
Dimonah. Town mentioned in Joshua 15:22
as being located in the Judean Negeb close to
Edomite territory. It was one of 29 towns in
the general area of Beersheba, and some
scholars have identified it with the Dibon
mentioned in Nehemiah 11:25. Its actual site
is unknown.
Dinah. Daughter born to Jacob and Leah
(Gn 30:21), whose name means “judgment.”
Living with her family in Shechem, a Canaan-
ite city (Gn 33:18), Dinah went out to visit
some neighboring pagan women (Gn 34:1).
Shechem, the Hivite prince of the area, saw
her and, while Dinah’s brothers were away in
the fields tending their herds, he raped her.
Shechem then requested Dinah from Jacob as
a wife.
Jacob’s sons, enraged at the dishonor done
to their sister, plotted revenge. They agreed to
the marriage on the terms that all the Hivite
males be circumcised. Hamor, Shechem’s fa-
ther, consented. While the Canaanite men
A vat, a storage jar, and a platter unearthed in a residential
district of Shechem, the city where the incident over Dinah
occurred.
 Disciple

were still incapacitated from their surgery, Di- Discerning of Spirits. See SprriruaL Girts.
nah’s brothers Levi and Simeon led a massa-
cre in the city and killed every male. Dinah Disciple. Someone who follows another per-
was retrieved and the city plundered. The son or another way of life and who submits
brothers excused their action as a just retribu- himself to the discipline (teaching) of that
tion for one of the Canaanites having treated leader or way. In the Bible the term ‘‘disci-
their sister as a harlot (Gn 34:27,31). For their ple” is found almost exclusively in the Gos-
use of ‘‘weapons of violence” (Gn 49:5) Simeon .pels and the Book of Acts, the only exceptions
and Levi were later cursed by Jacob. being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4
and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is
Dinaite. Postexilic group involved in a pro- translated ‘“‘learned’’ and “‘taught,’”’ respec-
test to Artaxerxes about the rebuilding of the tively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher
Jerusalem temple (Ezr 4:9 KJv). The name is and those taught, the idea of discipleship is
evidently an Aramaic title, “judge” (Rsv); such present.
judges are mentioned in sth century Bc Ara- In the Gospels the immediate followers of
maic administrative papyri. Jesus, called by his authority from a wide vari-
ety of circumstances, not only the 12 but all
Dinhabah. Capital city of Edom before the those who were sympathetic to his teaching
time of Israel’s monarchy, whose king Bela is and committed to him, are called “disciples.”
mentioned in the Bible (Gn 36:22; 1 Chr 1:43). The calling of these disciples took place at a
Its site is unknown. time when other teachers had their disciples,
most notably the Pharisees (Mk 2:8; Lk 5:33)
Dion. One of the cities of the Decapolis, and John the Baptist (Mt 9:14). It is evident
built after the death of Alexander the Great by from the practice of John the Baptist that dif-
some of his soldiers. The city (not mentioned ferent leaders called for different disciplines
in the Bible) was culturally Greek, attracting from their followers. John’s way was consider-
many Greek immigrants; it was also a mercan- ably more ascetic in character than that of Je-
tile center of exchange. Dion was one of only sus (Mt g:14); but it too involved not only
two Decapolis cities having a Macedonian teaching regarding conduct and manner of life
name (the other being Pella). It was located in but also a distinctive pattern of praying (Lk
Palestine east of the Jordan, possibly near the risa)!
Yarmuk River and the town of Gadara. The disciples of Jesus were in a unique if
See DECAPOLIS. rather anomalous position. Not only did they
benefit from the immediate teaching of Jesus,
Dionysius. Prominent citizen of Athens; a his looks and tones of voice (Mk 10:21) as well
member of the Areopagus, the Athenian su- as his words; they were also witnesses of the
preme court, and one of Paul’s few converts unfolding drama of redemption which had
during his brief ministry at Athens (Acts Christ as its center. They followed a teacher
17:34). who embodied the substance of that teaching.
The first disciples could be taught by Christ
Dioscuri.. Twin sons of Zeus known as Cas- only little by little, not only because of the
tor and Pollux. In Greek mythology they were need to remove their misconceptions (Mt
the patron deities of navigation and repre- 16:21), but also because the full significance of
sented in the constellation Gemini. The Dios- what Jesus said and did could not be most
curi (the ‘‘Twin Brothers”) were the figure- fully appreciated until after the events of his
head of the Alexandrian ship on which Paul death and resurrection (Mt 28:9). It is not sur-
sailed to Rome (Acts 28:11). prising that the period of ‘‘discipling”’ covered
the time before and after Christ’s death and
Diotrephes. A church member whom John resurrection, and also after Pentecost, when
reprimanded for his contentious behavior (3 the Holy Spirit taught the disciples about mat-
Jn g). He spoke against John “with evil words” ters which they could not ‘“‘bear’’ while Jesus
(v 10); had resisted John’s authority by refus- remained on earth (Jn 16:12).
ing to receive an earlier letter; and refused to Groups of Jesus’ first disciples, both the 12
show Christian hospitality, urging others to do and the 7o (Mt 26:20; Lk 10:1), received his
likewise. He may have been an official in the teaching, taught others in turn (Lk 10:1~11),
church who abused his position since he liked and were given power to heal (Mt 10:1). They
“to put himself first”’ (v 9). were also to proclaim the message of salvation
through Christ. Yet the 12 were given special
Diphath. Alternate spelling of Riphath, Go- prominence and, with the exception of Judas
mer’s son, in 1 Chronicles 1:6. Iscariot (whose place was taken by Matthias,
See RIPHATH. Acts 1:26), they became the foundation teach-

629
Disciple
ers of the newly emerging Christian church.
Their authority in the church, given by Christ
(Mt 16:19; 28:16—20), was to be characterized
by a unique style of self-giving service (Lk
22:24-30). To this group of disciples, who
came to be known as the apostles (though this
term is occasionally given to a wider applica-
tion), Saul of Tarsus was added. At his conver-
sion on the road to Damascus he saw the risen
Lord and was immediately commissioned by
Christ (Gal 1:12,16) as the apostle to the Gen-
tiles (Acts 9:15).
At the time of his ascension Christ commis-
sioned the first disciples to “make disciples of
all nations” (Mt 28:19); hence, the term “‘disci-
ple” is also used in the Book of Acts to de-
scribe believers, those who confess Christ
(6:1,2,7; 9:36; 11:26). Though they have not
been directly called by Christ himself, such dis-
ciples are called by Christ’s Spirit through the
message delivered by the first disciples; disci-
ples called later are not in any sense inferior
to the first disciples, even though they are less
privileged.
The discipline of the Christian disciple is
whatever is involved in being a follower of
Christ (Mt 16:24,25). In the case of the first dis-
ciples this involved literally going where
Christ went, sharing in his privations and joys
(Lk 22:28) and, beyond this, conforming minds
and wills to his teaching (Phil 2:5). Such ser-
vice was not a matter of following a set of
abstract moral principles enunciated by a
leader; much less was it a discipleship based
on gaining the favor or goodwill of the master
by righteous obedience. It was a discipleship
of loving obedience based on gratitude for
Christ’s work as the Messiah, service that was
made possible by the strength and motivation
that come from union with Christ in his death
and resurrection secured by faith and by the
indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
NT Christian discipleship is firmly rooted
in the OT, in the idea of the forming and call-
ing of Israel out of the nations to be God’s
peculiar treasure (Ex 19:5) and to bear testi-
mony to his name among the nations (Dt 4:6—
8). The call was buried in Jewish exclusivism
until the advent of the desire of all nations (Hg
2:7) and the commissioning of the worldwide
preaching of the gospel (Mt 28:19). The NT is
also emphatic that, viewed from the perspec-
tive of the-history of redemption, the Israelite
disciple under the OT was immature and pre-
paratory (Gal 3:19—4:7).
Although the word “disciple’’ occurs infre-
quently outside the Gospels and Acts, it would
be a mistake to think that the idea of disciple-
ship is either absent or less dominant in the
remainder of the NT. Rather it is filled out
and enriched, the emphasis falling not on fol-
630
lowing Jesus but on being united to him,
though the idea of following Jesus is by no
means absent (1 Pt 2:21-23). As Christ called
both for self-denial (Mk 8:34) and for following
his example (Jn 12:26), so Paul wrote of the
need for those who are in Christ to mortify
their old nature and to yield themselves to
God in consecrated obedience (Rom 8:13). As
Christ spoke of the need for his disciples to be
separate from the world, to be light and salt
(Mt 5:13,14), so Paul spoke of Christians as
lights in a dark world (Eph 5:8), as awake and
sober (1 Thes 5:6). As Christ taught his disci-
ples to pray (Lk 11:2), so Paul and the other
disciples insisted on the need for prayer (1
Thes 5:17). As Christ laid down the pattern of
righteous obedience through the true under-
standing of the Law of God (Mt 5), so Paul
frames the rule of Christian obedience in
terms of the Law (Rom 13:9). Yet while the
Gospels refer to ‘“‘disciples,”’ the apostles refer
to those who are “saints” (1 Cor 1:2), “the
called” (Eph 4:4), “in Christ” (2 Cor 5:17), “‘pil-
grims” (1 Pt 2:11 KJv), and “servants” (1 Pt
2:16). This variety of expression is evidence of
the richness of the idea of discipleship in the
full NT conception.
The discipline of the Christian disciple in-
volves other people in human society, espe-
cially those who are in Christ, and more imme-
diately those who make up the fellowship of
the local church. Such churches are to con-
sider themselves as under the discipline of
apostolic authority, the Word of God, and indi-
viduals are open to rebuke and even to excom-
munication if the discipline is flouted to the
point of impenitence. Yet such a regime is to
be exercised in a spirit of mutual submission
to the rule of Christ (Eph 5:21), with caution
and restraint (Gal 6:1), by ministry and the
use of reason and not by undue force (2 Cor
4:2), and with the aim and desire of recovering
those disciplined (1 Cor 5:5). At the same time
the NT is equally emphatic on the place in the
church of individual differences in gifts, per-
sonality, and temperament, and of liberty in
behavior regarding those matters that are “‘in-
different,’ neither commanded nor forbidden
by God.
In the history of the Christian church the
ideals and even the practice of Christian dis-
cipleship have tended to veer between ex-
tremes. For some being a Christian disciple
has amounted to nothing other than a care-
fully cultivated and controlled worldliness.
Others have identified discipleship with the
adoption of an ascetic discipline. This has
been a feature of medieval Catholicism and of
certain Anabaptist communities, and has been
a recurrent tendency in Protestant’ pietism
and fundamentalism. More recently disciple-

ship has come to be thought of by some in
wholly secular terms, as involving emancipa-
tion from “religion’”’ in any of its forms. Such
extremes indicate that the balance between a
Christian disciple being in the world (Jn 17:15;
1 Cor 5:10) but not of the world (Jn 17:16) is
difficult to achieve and to sustain.
PAUL HELM
Bibliography. E. Schweizer, Lordship and Discipleship.
Discipline. Learning that molds character
and enforces correct behavior; from a Latin
word meaning “‘instruction” or “‘training.’”’ To
discipline a person or a group means to put
them in a state of good order so that they func-
tion in the way intended. Discipline, in spite
of a popular misconception, is not inherently
stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disci-
ple’”” as an appropriate term for one who
learns by following.
Biblical Teaching. Although used only
once in the KJv (Jb 36:10), the word “‘disci-
pline,” in various noun and verb forms, occurs
frequently in modern versions of the Bible. The
Hebrew and Greek words commonly rendered
“discipline” are sometimes translated as ‘‘re-
proof,” “warning,” ‘‘restraint,” “correction,”
or (especially in kJv) ‘““chastisement.”’ More pos-
itive synonyms include “upbringing,” “‘train-
ing,” “instruction,” and “education.”
OT usage of “‘discipline”’ is noticeably more
negative than in the NT, principally because
of the legal aspect of God’s approach to Israel
under the old (Mosaic) covenant. The “new
covenant”’ approach to the church leads to a
more positive language of discipline in the
NT. Yet both covenants had the same goal:
righteousness. Considered in that light, even
the OT emphasis on punishment proceeds
from a positive motive toward a constructive
goal. Where the OT emphasized retaliation, it
was to teach offenders the nature of their of-
fense by showing them an effect like the one
they had caused. Vindication of a wronged per-
son’s rights also vindicated God’s righteous-
ness. Vindication was an important way of
upholding God’s justice. Retribution was also
important. Covenant-breaking brought on the
covenant curse (Dt 27:26) in the form of puni-
tive discipline. Retribution reestablished the
authority of God’s law and taught respect for
his standards of righteousness.
Complementary to punitive discipline, posi-
tive discipline can be thought of as reinforcive
discipline. God always disciplines; he does so
punitively when necessary, but reinforcingly
when possible.
Discipline is frequently spoken of as being
exercised by God over Israel (Lv 26:23; Dt 4:36;
8:5; Jer 31:18), over the nations (Ps 94:10), or
631
Discipline
over individuals (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:10,12; Heb 12:5—
11; Rv 3:19). In Israel parental responsibility to
discipline children was taken seriously (Dt
21:18). Fathers were solemnly charged to disci-
pline their sons (Prv 13:24; 19:18; 22:15; 23:13;
29:17; cf. Eph 6:4; Heb 12:7—10). In the church,
disciplining was a pastoral responsibility (2
‘Tm 2:25).
It is understandable that people fear disci-
pline from God (Ps 6:1), but it is his wrath that
should be feared. His wrath is directed only
against those who have proved themselves by
their actions to be God’s enemies (Dt 11:2,3).
God’s discipline is different from his wrath
and should not be despised (Prv 3:11) or taken
for granted (Heb 12:5). Only a fool or wicked
person hates it (Ps 50:17; Prv 5:12; Jer 31:18).
God disciplines his people as a loving father
disciplines a beloved son (Dt 8:5; Prv 3:11,12;
Heb 12:5—7). In fact, according to Scripture, a
wise person loves discipline (Prv 12:1; 13:24; 2
Tm 1:7; Heb 12:5,9).
The fruit of discipline is knowledge (Prv
12:1) and parents’ delight (Prv 29:17). One who
is disciplined can be spoken of as “‘blessed”’
(Jb 5:17; Ps 94:12). Where the purpose of disci-
pline is left unspecified, the discipline is never-
theless understood as good and righteous (Dt
4:36; Jb 36:10; Prv 13:24; Rv 3:19). Specifically,
discipline is called ‘“‘the way of life’ (Prv 6:23).
It saves one from destruction (Prv 19:18) and
allows one to escape both folly (Prv 22:15) and
God’s condemnation of the world (1 Cor 11:32).
It eventually leads to sharing God’s holiness
(Heb 12:7), and yields “the peaceful fruit of
righteousness” (Heb 12:11).
In contrast, the consequences of a lack of
discipline are stipulated to be abandonment
by God (Lv 26:23,24), death (Prv 5:23), and de-
struction (Prv 19:18).
The Book of Proverbs speaks of discipline as
necessary to avoid sexual immorality (5:12—23;
6:23,24). Loose or wicked women probably sym-
bolize many kinds of deceptive and enticing sit-
uations. To be able to act maturely and respon-
sibly in such situations requires that young
people respond to wise and loving parental dis-
cipline so that they learn to live disciplined
lives. They then do by “‘bent of nature’ what is
right because their nature has been shaped to
what is right. Evil can then be shunned even
when it is encountered unexpectedly.
Both Proverbs and the Book of Hebrews
urge their readers to respond to discipline
rather than to react against it. In Hebrews two
harmful reactions are stipulated and the help-
ful response is identified. On the one hand, no
individual should “regard lightly’’ (Heb 12:5)
or ‘“‘despise” (Prv 3:11) “the discipline of the
Lord.”’ Discipline should be regarded neither
as worthless nor as being of little value. On
Discipline
the other hand, one should not “lose courage
when you are punished by him” (Heb 12:5) or
“be weary of his reproof” (Prv 3:11). That is,
preoccupation with the negative aspect of the
disciplinary procedure must not obscure its
goal or demoralize persons being disciplined.
Rather, they are to be aware that “it is for
discipline that you have to endure” (Heb 12:7).
There is a purpose for what happens, which
should be sought and realized: “it yields the
peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who
have been trained by it” (Heb 12:11). The ex-
hortation is not to reject discipline or be de-
jected by it, but to accept it and be instructed
by it.
Self-discipline. Jesus’ ethics of righteous-
ness both fulfill and surpass the stringent code
of the old covenant (Mt 5:17—48). Yet Chris-
tians are not therefore inherently more legalis-
tic than were the Pharisees. Set free from “the
law of sin and death,” Christians have “the
law of the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ’’ (Rom
8:1-8) to provide a built-in dynamic to fulfill
the will of God. Beyond slavish obedience to
the letter of the law, believers are enabled by
the indwelling Spirit of God to exercise self-
discipline. Spiritual transformation is accom-
panied by renewal of the mind (Rom 12:2),
which brings fresh understanding of oneself,
one’s motivations, and one’s attitudes.
Over the centuries the church has realized
the value of certain ‘spiritual disciplines” en-
couraged in the NT. In the Roman Catholic
tradition they formed the basis for the way of
life of “‘the religious” (priests, nuns, monks,
etc.). Prayer (cf. Lk 6:12; Acts 6:4; Rom 12:12;
1 Pt 4:7), fasting (Mt 6:16—18), study of Scrip-
ture (Acts 17:11; 2 Tm 2:15; 3:16,17), and char-
ity or almsgiving (Mt 6:1—4; Acts 11:29,30; 2
Cor 9; 1 Tm 6:17~-19) have always been in-
cluded among the spiritual disciplines. Protes-
tants have been less inclined to establish reli-
gious orders or communities based on the
spiritual disciplines, more often trusting the
Holy Spirit to produce self-discipline in indi-
vidual lives and seeking fellowship and exhor-
tation in the context of the church. Among
evangelicals there seems to be a new apprecia-
tion of the need for spiritual discipline. A
well-ordered, wholesome, liberated life that
releases the Christian for service is almost al-
ways a self-disciplined life.
Such ideals and the lifestyle they engender
run counter to much of the prevalent per-
missiveness in Western culture. Young people
are surrounded by superficial commitments,
short-term relationships, instant gratification,
the quest for freedom without responsibility,
and obsession with self-centered indulgence.
Christian parents need to help their children
develop the self-discipline to stand against
632
such pressures. Adult self-discipline often has
its roots in a biblical pattern of discipline and
an appreciation for the desirability of such dis-
cipline inculcated in childhood.
Parental Discipline. The family consti-
tutes the basic unit of the human community.
Within that cell of intimate relationships par-
ents are entrusted with the responsibility of
guiding and correcting their children (Dt 6:7;
Prv 22:6). The biblical view is essentially pes-
simistic about the perfectibility of human na-
ture. Hence parents are urged not to leave
children at the mercy of their own natural
tendencies. Undisciplined children are poten-
tial victims of the powerful conditioning ex-
erted by a predominantly pagan culture. To
exercise their responsibilities properly, par-
ents must model values, practices, and atti-
tudes to their children, besides teaching them
through instruction and correction.
The parents’ educational task is best accom-
plished through positive means such as ad-
vice, exhortation, counseling, family devo-
tions, and Christian training in church and
Sunday school. But it also may require nega-
tive measures such as prohibitions and disci-
plinary action. When verbal admonitions are
not heeded by small children, corporal pun-
ishment becomes an effective form of persua-
sion (Prv 13:24). Physical discipline, however,
should be administered on the basis of clearly
stated and understood principles. Christian
parents must avoid punishing out of anger or
personal animosity, and must never cause in-
jury to a child. Physical discipline should be
viewed as a last resort intended to obtain
maximum educational results with minimum
outrage to children (Eph 6:4).
Human fallenness (Gn 3) means that self-
centeredness infects even children (cf. Ps 51:5).
Somehow children must learn respect for
themselves and for others. Left on their own
and then battered by a fallen society, they can
become rebellious social misfits leaving a trail
of heartache in their own lives and in the lives
of other people. Love for one’s children does
not preclude the use of negative disciplinary
measures. As distasteful as they may seem to
both parents and children, genuine love may
require them. A family environment regulated
by consistent and loving firmness will en-
hance the chances for children to mature as
responsible and considerate individuals.
Church Discipline. The church is basi-
cally a large family of which each believer is a
member. The nature of the church—as a com-
munity intended to reflect in the faith, wor-
ship, and lives of its members the true char-
acter of God—distinguishes it from all other
groups.
At the same time, the church is called to be

an open community of concern, reaching out
in compassion to desperately needy human be-
ings. Christian lifestyles clearly differ from pa-
gan lifestyles. That difference often creates a
barrier isolating the “lost” from the very peo-
ple who could extend to them God’s deliver-
ance from loneliness, addictions, disorienta-
tion, broken relationships, and so on. The
church has a responsibility not to place un-
scriptural obstacles in the way of its outreach
to unbelievers; yet the tension between open-
ness and purity is difficult to resolve. Without
a careful balance, a church can easily become
unduly restrictive or overly permissive. In ei-
ther extreme its witness is impaired.
The solution to the dilemma lies in formu-
lating church discipline that is authentically
biblical. The Scriptures provide the church
with ample guidance for the formulation of
standards of conduct (e.g., Ex 20:1-17; 1 Cor
5:11; 6:9-11; Eph 4:25—32; 5:1-21; Col 3:5-11).
As those standards are spelled out, however, it
is necessary to differentiate between biblical
absolutes and cultural norms. For instance,
though drunkenness is expressly forbidden in
the NT, there is no scriptural prohibition on
the drinking of wine. Some churches allow
drinking but decry drunkenness, others recom-
mend abstinence to their members, and still
others make abstinence from alcoholic bev-
erages a condition of membership. The NT,
recognizing that conflict sometimes occurs be-
tween Christian liberty and Christian responsi-
bility, gives guidelines for resolving such con-
flicts (1 Cor 8).
For the sake of scriptural consistency and
in order to be credible, church discipline
should oppose sins of attitude with the same
severity as for “gross sins.” The NT condemns
immorality, murder, and drunkenness—but
along with them envy, jealousy, anger, selfish-
ness, complaining, and criticism. Each of
those vices is an impediment to entering the
kingdom of God (Gal 5:19g—21). Unbelievers are
often made to feel unwelcome in the church
because of secondary matters such as smoking
or drinking. Yet gossiping, complaining, and
selfishness among church members are sel-
dom exposed and properly disciplined. A more
consistent position would promote the purity
of the church and would also enhance its min-
istry as a supportive, accepting center of Chris-
tian love.
In addition to affirming the necessity for
discipline within the church, the NT delin-
eates.a procedure for carrying out disciplinary
action (Mt 18:15—18; 1 Cor 5:3—13; Gal 6:1). Of-
fenders are first to be approached and admon-
ished privately. If they refuse to repent or
mend their ways, the case is to be presented
before the leadership of the church and then,
633
Disease
Oenochoes (wine pitchers or jugs) from Corinth, the location of
the church that needed much discipline by Paul.
if necessary, before the whole congregation.
Should offenders persist in their error, they
are to be ostracized, not out of vindictiveness
but with the hope of bringing them to repen-
tance and restoration (2 Thes 3:14,15).
The Bible’s emphasis on the necessity for
self-discipline, parental discipline, and church
discipline seems underscored by the moral de-
cline evident in many areas of modern society.
God’s love, as depicted in the Bible and exem-
plified in Jesus Christ, is intended to teach all
people how to live. Those who spurn God's
“positive reinforcement” encounter the nega-
tive aspects of his discipline. Christians who
discipline themselves, their children, and each
other in a loving way honor Christ and model
his way of life, thus helping others to under-
stand God’s purposes.
GILBERT BILEZIKIAN
Disease. Term used in Scripture synony-
mously with sickness, infirmity, illness, plague,
and pestilence. However, plague and pestilence
are generally used when there are large num-
bers of victims, as in epidemics. “Pestilence”
literally means “destruction” and usually de-
scribes an epidemic with a high mortality rate.
“Affliction” and “torment” are other terms that
may include disease, but are broader and are
not used synonymously with disease.
Biblical Concept of Disease. During the
time the Bible was written people did not
have a detailed concept of anatomy or of how
the specific organs of the body functioned. Dis-
ease was thought of as abnormal, something
that limits one’s ability to function with
strength and vitality. The Hebrew word trans-
lated “sickness” as a noun means “to be weak”
in its cognate verb form. The ill man by the
pool of Bethesda is described as being “impo-
tent” (Jn 5:7 KJv), being unable to get around
by himself.
Additional insight into the concept of dis-
ease can be obtained by looking at what the
Bible says about health. To be healthy means
to be whole, and to be healed means to be
Disease
restored to wholeness (Mt 12:13). Central
this idea of health is the concept that a person
exists as a unity, one single person, but has
several parts. Each part or member has a spe-
cific function, and all must work together in
concert with the other parts. When Paul de-
scribes how a group of believers should func-
tion, he utilizes this concept of the healthy hu-
man body (1 Cor 12). Paul perceptively points
out that the smaller, hidden parts of the body
are more vital to life and health than some of
the larger, more obvious members (1 Cor
12:22—25).
But the biblical concept of health does not
stop with properly functioning physical parts.
The key to health for a person is right relation-
ships with oneself, with others, and with God.
Jesus taught that one’s relationship with God
was more important than having eyesight (Mt
5:29). He also taught his disciples not to fear
those who can kill the body but to fear the one
who can send people to hell (Lk 12:4,5). The
Bible clearly places greater value on a per-
son’s spiritual condition than on physical or
mental condition in evaluating the person’s
overall wholeness or health.
Origin of Disease. The etiology of disease
has four sources: (1) God, (2) Satan, (3) sins
of ancestors, and (4) breaking of physical,
mental/emotional, or moral laws of nature.
God. All early peoples attributed events
and phenomena to the supernatural, either to
various gods or to evil spirits. The Hebrews
were different by being strong monotheists, at-
tributing all phenomena to the one true God
who had revealed himself to them (Is 45:21).
God was responsible for everything, including
disease and evil (Is 45:7). This same God could
also give material blessings, health, and heal
all diseases (Ps 103:3). To the Hebrews, God
could give health or sickness, and in either
case he had his purpose or reason.
One purpose of disease was punishment for
wrongdoing (2 Sm 24:1,12-16; 1 Cor 10:8). In
the Hebrew mind, even when the immediate
cause of the disease and death was obvious—
as many poisonous snakes biting people in the
camp—the response was not to kill all the
snakes but to pray to God for forgiveness (Nm
21:4-9). Leprosy, which literally means “‘a
smiting,’ was a devastating disease sent by
God to punish individuals who sinned (Nm 12;
2 Kgs 5:27).
God also sent disease to demonstrate his
power or to protect his people. The ten
plagues in Egypt illustrate the former; the
elimination of Sennacherib’s army the latter
(2 Kgs 19:34—-36).
Satan. Satan and other evil spirits could
also be responsible for disease. In the biblical
scheme of things Satan’s ability to bring dis-
to ease is in the permissive will of God. The re-
Striction on Satan’s capacity for harm is
clearly spelled out in the case of Job (Jb 1:12).
The message of the NT is also clear, that de-
spite cases of demon possession and of people
acting under Satan’s influence, Satan’s time is
finite and hi ultimate total defeat and destruc-
tion are certain.
Sin of Ancestors. Sickness could also come
about because of the sins of one’s ancestors
(Ex 20:5; Lv 26:29; 1 Kgs 17:18; Jb 21:19; Lam
5:7). The most striking example of this is the
death of David’s son as a result of his sin with
Bathsheba (2 Sm 12:15). This concept of the
origin of disease continued into NT times and
was familiar to the disciples of Jesus (Jn 9:2).
Breaking of Natural Laws. This idea is piv-
otal, for it sets the Hebrews apart from
the other peoples of their day. With the un-
derstanding that disease can follow the viola-
tion of fixed physical, mental/emotional, and
moral laws comes the idea of personal account-
ability in obeying these laws and avoiding dis-
ease. A person is responsible for his and the
community’s health and is not merely a pas-
sive victim of supernatural forces.
Based on this concept the books of Moses
set up elaborate codes of behavior to maintain
personal health and the health of the commu-
nity. The Mosaic law covers the areas of diet,
personal hygiene, sabbath observance, sani-
tary regulations in the camp, cleanliness, and
sexual relations. In following these natural
laws established by God the Hebrews could
expect freedom from disease (Ex 15:26) and
long life (Prv 3:1,2). These health laws of Moses
make a lot of sense from a public health point
of view even today, and are far more rational
than the approach of any other ancient people.
Another major consequence of understand-
ing that disease can follow the breaking of the
laws of nature is the shift away from the priest
and toward physicians in looking for cures. As
long as diseases were of supernatural origin,
there was no basis for attempting to learn
about disease processes in the search for
cures. The Hebrews were familiar with physi-
cians in Egypt (Gn 50:2), where they seem to
have functioned as embalmers. Physicians
were practicing in Israel throughout its his-
tory, but only gradually developed the capac-
ity to be of much help (2 Chr 16:12; Jer 8:22;
Mk 5:26; Col 4:14). While validating the use of
physicians for sick people (Mt 9:12) and of
drugs for medicinal purposes (Prv 31:6; 1 Tm
5:23), the Scriptures emphasize the role of the
Christian community and its elders in minis-
tering to the sick (Jas 5:14).
Jesus Christ and Disease. Christ’s ap-
proach to people with disease is distinctly dif-
ferent than that of the OT. He was nonjudg-
634

mental, interacting with them as people of
worth, not as social outcasts. He was full of
genuine compassion for them as suffering peo-
ple, touching them, comforting them, healing
them, and speaking normally and naturally
with them.
Jesus evidently thought of disease as a hin-
drance that prevented people from being the
whole persons they were created to be. When
confronted by a woman with a severe back
deformity of 18 years duration, he healed her,
saying she had been “bound by Satan” (Lk
13:16). His healing of incurable diseases was
one of the proofs he offered that he was the
Messiah (Lk 7:19-23). His ministry was di-
rected toward releasing men and women to
live life more abundantly (Jn 10:10). He did
not fully subscribe to the punitive concept of
disease (Jn 9:3). When a leper mentioned the
possibility that it might not be God’s will for
him to be well, Jesus healed him instantly (Mk
1:40; Lk 5:12,13).
Jesus was always concerned with the per-
son’s total health or wholeness, rather than
merely the symptoms of disease. He fre-
quently dealt with spiritual issues first, even
though the sick person was brought to him for
a physical problem. His conversation with the
Samaritan woman at the well focused on the
basic conflicts in her disturbed personality (Jn
4:5—-30). And the Sermon on the Mount, which
basically deals with right attitudes and mo-
tives for human behavior, would greatly re-
duce personal and social suffering if it were
followed. To Jesus, health is more than the
mere absence of physical and mental disease;
it is whole persons being all that they were
meant to be.
Davi E. VAN REKEN
See MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE; PESTILENCE;
PLAGUE.
Dish. A vessel, usually made of baked clay
or metal, used in everyday life and in religious
ceremony. Dishes were to serve or preserve
food (Jgs 5:25; Mt 26:23; Mk 14:20). They had to
be wiped and left to dry (2 Kgs 21:13), but
later the Pharisees added a ritual cleansing as
well (Mt 23:25—26; Lk 11:39). Dishes were used
in connection with the meal offering (Nm 7:13)
and with the table of showbread for worship
in the OT tabernacle and temple (Ex 25:29;
37:16; Nm 4:7).
Dishan. Chieftain in the land of Seir, a
mountainous area southwest of the Dead Sea.
Dishan’s father was Seir the Horite (Gn 36:21;
1 Chr 1:38). The Horites were driven out of
their territory by the Edomites (Dt 2:12). La-
ter OT references often use Seir and Edom
synonymously.
635
Divorce
Dishon. 1. Seir’s fifth son and a Horite
leader in Edom (Gn 36:21; 1 Chr 1:38), whose
people were eventually displaced by the
Edomites.
2. Grandson of Seir and son of Anah, a Ho-
rite leader. This Dishon was also the brother
of Oholibamah, Esau’s wife (Gn 36:25; 1 Chr
1:41).
Dispersion of the Jews. See Diaspora oF
THE JEWS.
Dives. Traditional name of the rich man
in Christ’s parable about the beggar Lazarus
(Lk 16:19—31). It came from the Latin term
dives, translating a Greek word for “rich,”
“wealthy.” Though the rich man was not
named in the parable, this name was already
well accepted in the church by the 3rd century.
See LAZARUS #1.
Divination. See Macic.
Divine Presence. See Gop, BEING AND ATTRI-
BUTES OF; PRESENCE OF Gop, THE.
Diviners’ Oak. Place apparently near She-
chem (Jgs 9:37); mistakenly called ‘‘the plain
of Meonenim” in the kjv. The Diviners’ Oak
may have been associated with those who
practiced divination, hence the name.
Division of the Land. Assignment of por-
tions of the Promised Land to the 12 tribes of
Israel following the conquest.
See CONQUEST AND ALLOTMENT OF THE LAND.
Divorce. Biblical provisions regulating di-
vorce are closely bound up with the various
definitions given to marriage within the suc-
cessive phases of God’s progressive revelation
in history.
In the Genesis creation account, marriage
is defined as the “‘one flesh’’ union established
by God in the context of a sinless environment
(Gn 2:24). Given such conditions, the dissolu-
tion of the marriage relationship was incon-
ceivable. During his ministry Jesus affirmed
this aspect of God’s original design: for mar-
riage. He described the implications of the
“one flesh” relationship as the abrogation of
the separatedness of the spouses and the cre-
ation of an inviolable union (Mt 19:6).
Old Testament Regulations. The disrup-
tions brought about by the fall had grievous
consequences for the male/female relation-
ship. Having allowed sin to sever their pri-
mary dependency on God, man and woman
became respectively subject to the elements
from which they had been originally made.
Divorce
Man became subject to the dust of the ground
whence he had come (Gn 2:7; 3:19),
woman became subject to the man
whom she had been formed (Gn 2:22; 3:16).
Prior to the fall man and woman had enjoyed
a relationship of equality as cosharers in the
divine image (Gn 1:27) and as partners in the
divine mandate to exercise dominion over cre-
ation (Gn 1:28). After the fall man became
ruler over woman, and woman became sub-
ject to man (Gn 3:16).
As a result of these new conditions man
assumed rights of disposition over woman
that he did not possess prior to the fall. The
“one flesh” relation was violated when the
right of rulership opened the way for the
male ruler to multiply the number of his fe-
male subjects. This disparity between male
and female resulted in the practice of polyg-
amy (Gn 4:19; 16:3; 29:30) and of serial monog-
amy, which required the termination of each
successive marriage by an act of divorce (Dt
24:1-4). Thus, the emergence of the practice
of divorce appeared as the inevitable conse-
quence of the principle of male rulership. Nei-
ther rulership nor divorce was part of God’s
original design for the marriage relationship.
The Mosaic regulation on divorce was a con-
cession made by God to the fallen condition
of mankind (Mt 19:8). Characteristically,
option of divorce was a right available only
to the male rulers. As subjects of their male
rulers, wives became the victims of divorce.
Men could divorce their wives; women could
not divorce their husbands.
As unfair as it may seem, the Deuteronomic
provisions for divorce were actually intended
to offer a modicum of protection for its female
victims. A husband had to justify a divorce
action against his wife by citing something in-
decent about her. He was to give his divorced
wife a bill of divorce that accounted for her
marriage to him (Dt 24:1). Moreover,
vorced husband was forbidden to remarry his
ex-wife after her subsequent marriage,
his original divorce was viewed as a defile-
ment of her (Dt 24:4).
Although the Mosaic dispositions on di-
vorce were granted as a divine concession
the ‘“‘hardness of heart,” the OT emphatically
states that God hates divorce (Mal 2:16). The
right of divorce was grudgingly granted as an
accommodation to the principle of male ruler-
ship that had resulted from the fall. But God’s
original design, reflected in the “one flesh”
marital relation, remained the standard for
the union of man and woman in marriage.
Jesus’ Teaching on Divorce. Inasmuch as
Christ’s ministry of redemption signaled a re-
turn to God’s original purposes in creation,
the old covenant regulations on divorce were
abrogated in the Christian community. In or-
and der to justify the inviolability of the marriage
from bond among his followers, Jesus directed
them to the creational model. Referring nega-
tively to the intervening Mosaic allowance for
divorce, Jesus upheld God’s original creation
order by stating that “from the beginning it
was not so” (Mt 19:8). Christ repudiated the
fall and affirmed the creation design.
In Matthew 5:31,32 Jesus explicitly abro-
gated the Mosaic legislation that allowed men
to divorce their wives. He yiewed the practice
as a violation of the integrity of women. Adul-
terous men who divorce their wives reduce
them to the status of whores, using them as
commodities to be passed around through the
expedient of easy divorce. By divorcing their
wives, men treat them as adulteresses. By mar-
rying a woman discarded from a previous mar-
riage, a man perpetuates the demeaning pro-
cess and becomes guilty of adultery.
Jesus deliberately withdrew from men the
ruler’s right of discarding a wife at will and
reinstated the creational pattern of the lifelong
“one flesh” union. His disciples understood his
intent accurately. But the principle of male
privilege was so deeply ingrained in their men-
tality that they declared the freedom available
in celibacy preferable to a commitment to life-
the long monogamous marriage (Mt 19:10).
Not only did Jesus reaffirm the validity of
the “one flesh” union for the community of
redemption, but the NT reinforced the inviola-
bility of the marriage bond by defining it as
an earthly copy of the relationship between
Christ and the church (Eph 5:25).
Despite such strong sanctions for the perma-
nency of the marriage bond, the NT permits
divorce as an exception intended to protect
the innocent spouse in the case of immorality
and desertion. Jesus made exceptions that es-
tablished the right of a spouse wronged by an
a di- unfaithful mate to press for divorce (Mt 5:32;
19:9). Obviously the wronged spouse has the
since option of maintaining the marriage bond de-
spite the breach of commitment by the unfaith-
ful mate. But in view of the exception allowed
by Scripture, the obligation to maintain or re-
to instate the disrupted marriage may not be im-
posed upon the innocent spouse.
The other exception that justifies divorce
according to the NT is desertion. Although the
provisions of 1 Corinthians 7:15 refer primar-
ily to desertion by an unbelieving spouse, it
should be noted that a believer guilty of deser-
tion is to be treated as an unbeliever (1 Tm
5:8). Behavior equivalent to the abandonment
of the marriage relationship constitutes a
breach of conjugal commitment and becomes
subject to the provision stated in 1 Corinthi-
ams 7:15.
636

In either case, adultery or desertion, the ag-
grieved party has the right to seek divorce from
the offending spouse and, having obtained it,
becomes again a single person. Should repen-
tance and reconciliation fail to restore the vio-
lated union, the aggrieved spouse is not bound
to the marriage. According to Scripture, a per-
son who is not bound is free to remarry, but
only “in the Lord,” meaning to another Chris-
tian (1 Cor 7:39). The injunction for a single
person who does not have the gift of celibacy to
marry (1 Cor 7:9) applies to a person formerly
married but who has become single by a scrip-
turally legitimate divorce. In keeping with
Christ’s teaching in Mark 1o:11,12 and Luke
16:18, the remarriage of believers may not be
approved when the divorce has been used as a
means of changing mates, since such intent
makes the divorce adulterous.
Many factors usually combine to destroy a
marriage; therefore it behooves the church to
deal with each case of divorce and remarriage
on an individual basis, taking into account
God’s inexhaustible capacity to forgive sin and
to restore broken lives. Obviously, the scrip-
tural restrictions on divorce do not apply to
believers whose broken marriages predate
their conversion, since God’s forgiveness wipes
clean the sins of their pre-Christian past and
makes them new creatures in Christ.
Divorce is a devasting experience that com-
monly leaves its victims broken and scarred.
The church has a special opportunity to minis-
ter in love and compassion to divorced persons
by reaching out to surround them, support
them, and integrate them into the redemptive
fellowship of the new community, and thus
provide favorable conditions for their healing
and restoration. GILBERT BILEZIKIAN
See Civit Law aNnp JUSTICE; MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE
CusTOMS; SEX; SEXUALITY; ADULTERY.
Bibliography. D. Atkinson, To Have and to Hold; L.
Boettner, Divorce; R.H. Charles, The Teaching of the NT on
Divorce; S.A. Ellisen, Divorce and Remarriage in the Church;
K.E. Kirk, Marriage and Divorce; J. Murray, Divorce.
Divorce, Certificate of. A document declar-
ing the separation of a husband and wife man-
dated by Mosaic law (Dt 24:1-4; see Mt 5:31;
19:7; Mk 10:4). The certificate of divorce pro-
tected the woman’s rights, providing evidence
of her freedom and ensuring that her husband
could not claim her dowry. An example of the
wording of such a certificate is Hosea 2:2:
“She is not my wife, and I am not her hus-
band.” The OT prophets used this statement
figuratively to portray God’s desire to sepa-
rate himself from his rebellious people (Is
50:1; Jer 3:8).
See Civic Law anp Justice; Divorce; MARRIAGE,
MARRIAGE CUSTOMS.
637
Documentary Hypothesis
Di-zahab. Name, listed along with Paran,
Tophel, Laban, and Hazeroth, meant to desig-
nate the locale of Moses’ final address to Israel
(Dt 1:1). Its precise location is unknown,
though it was east of the Arabah.
Doctor of the Law. xsv for Teacher of the
‘Law in Luke 2:46; 5:17; and Acts 5:34.
See PHARISEES; TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS (TEACH-
ER); GAMALIEL #2.
Documentary Hypothesis. A critical at-
tempt to explain the present composition of
the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bi-
ble. The Pentateuch is analyzed as a compos-
ite of four documents (JEDP), each of which
had its own background and development be-
fore it was edited into the five books. The
hypothesis arose from a serious concern with
the duplications, stylistic differences, seeming
contradictions, various names for Deity, and
different perspectives in the books of the Pen-
tateuch. Apart from several post-Mosaic pas-
sages, Jewish and Christian scholars had gen-
erally assumed the essential Mosaic origin of
the Pentateuch.
Though it was not the intent of Jean
Astruc to father a critical approach, his work
on Genesis (1753) made a distinction between
pre-Mosaic and Mosaic sources (A and B).
Eichhorn (1780), Geddes (1800), Vater (1802—
05), de Wette (1806-07), Ewald (1823), Vatke
(1835), and Hupfeld (1857) each contributed
significant critical analyses, which led to a
consensus under the influential writings of
Graf, Kuenen, and Wellhausen. Graf’s thesis
proposed a postexilic date for the Levitical
legislation. The order and dates of the docu-
ments were established: J (Yahwist, early
monarchy, c. 850 Bc); E (Elohist, shortly be-
fore Israel’s exile, c. 750 Bc); D (Deuteron-
omist, 621 Bc); and P (Priestly, time of Ezra,
450 BC). The documentary sources were seen
as having been edited in stages by redactors
from 650 to 4oo Bc. All the material of the
Pentateuch and Joshua could now be divided
according to source documents, hence the
name “Documentary Hypothesis.”
Graf’s thesis was later supported by Kue-
nen and Wellhausen. Wellhausen further devel-
oped the Documentary Hypothesis by inter-
twining the analysis of the documents with a
reconstruction of Israel’s history along evolu-
tionary lines. J and E represent the beginning
of Israel’s awareness of God, their world, and
their distinct place, when Israel was com-
posed of many clans with different traditions
and local temples. Through the impetus of the
prophets, ethical monotheism gradually devel-
oped; but it was not until Josiah’s reform (621
Documentary Hypothesis
Bc) that a synthesis of the cultic traditions and
the prophets took place. Out of this synthesis
arose a concern with centralization of the cult
and cohesiveness of the people (Deuterono-
mist). Israel’s history was written largely from
the perspective of the Deuteronomist and
hence gives the impression of unity. The cultus
developed especially after the exile, and to
this process we owe the Priestly additions and
codes. Thus, the Documentary Hypothesis had
been transformed into a model for historical
reconstruction.
Development of the Hypothesis. The dog-
matic attitude of those who embraced the
Documentary Hypothesis facilitated the en-
thronement of documentary and _ historical
investigation along the lines proposed by Well-
hausen. There was little internal criticism; in-
stead, Wellhausen’s views were hailed as a Co-
pernican revolution and accepted as dogma.
The doctrinaire spirit and the antagonism to
conservative approaches were sure to arouse a
reaction from those who held to the essential
Mosaic authorship (W. H. Green, O. T. Allis,
E.J. Young, G. C. Aalders) or to the unity of
the Pentateuch (Umberto Cassuto).
The gulf between conservative and critical
scholarship widened as research focused on
further fragmentation of the critical sources
(O. Eissfeldt, R. H. Pfeiffer) and called into
question more tenets of Israel’s history and
faith (A. Alt, M. Noth, G. von Rad). Other schol-
ars questioned the existence or the dating of
certain documents (A. C. Welch, G. von Rad, Y.
Kaufmann).
In 1951 H. H. Rowley (The Old Testament
and Modern Study) observed that the history of
each document had proved to be as complex
as the history of all four documents together.
This was due to the highly speculative studies
on the development of the oral traditions, the
life situation (geographical, cultic, wisdom,
prophetic, etc.), and the redactional stages.
Current Debate. Criticism arose along
three major lines. First, the “documentary” as-
pect was criticized from a religio-historical
perspective. Hermann Gunkel argued that it
was not enough to analyze the sources behind
the biblical writings, as each literary piece
must be understood in its original life setting
(Sitz im Leben). The different accounts reflect
different settings, the study of which provided
Gunkel and his form-critical school insight
into the development of Israel’s faith. A re-
lated development is the traditio-critical ap-
proach, which has shown great interest in the
development of the oral traditions behind the
written materials (I. Engnell). Dependent on
the insights of form criticism, redaction criti-
cism arose.
Second, archaeological evidence has necessi-
638
tated a historical reevaluation. The Albright, or
American, school of archaeology has done
much to establish the essential correctness of
biblical history. Rather than assuming that all
of Israel’s history was open to question and sub-
ject to the analytic knife of source criticism,
W.F. Albright, J. Bright, and G. E. Wright,
among others, wrote significant volumes on Is-
rael’s history and faith, aiding in establishing a
more comprehensive framework.
Third, comparative literary evidence (from
Ugarit, Mari, Nuzi, and Ebla) has thrown light
on the literary development of the Bible. Dis-
coveries at Ugarit have called for significant
alterations in the use of literary evidence. Ma-
terials that on linguistic and stylistic grounds
had been assumed to be late occur in early
documents. Names, customs, and _ phrases
which caused problems more than 100 years
ago have been explained from the ancient
Near Eastern background.
More recently, B. Childs has introduced the
approach of canonical criticism, according to
which the Mosaic authorship of the Penta-
teuch as a theological affirmation stands side
by side with an openness to critical investiga-
tion of the origins. Childs’ approach begins
with an openness to further investigation with-
out leaving the student of the Pentateuch with
the bits and pieces resulting from critical
analysis. “Because the present shape of the
Pentateuch offers a particular interpretation
of how the tradition is to be understood, the
critical task at hand is both to describe the
actual characteristics of the canonical shape
and to determine the theological significance
of that shape” (Childs, p. 128).
Evaluation. The assumption of criticism
has been that the critical method establishes
historical facts and that the facts thus estab-
lished illuminate biblical faith. Evangelicals
welcome refinement of literary methods and
historical reconstruction, but reject the his-
toric factuality as the model for developing
their faith. The last roo years have resulted in
a splintering of methods, conclusions, and the-
ologies. The canonical approach offers an open-
ness to continued exploration and research; it
suggests creative ways of approaching the
theological contribution of each biblical book
and encourages a deeper understanding of the
hermeneutical relationship between the an-
cient books and the modern reader.
Evangelicals have made significant contribu-
tions in the study of the ancient Near East (K. A.
Kitchen, D. J. Wiseman), the covenant form
(M.G. Kline), and the question of post-Mosaic
material (Aalders). Their criticism, however,
has had little if any impact on the direction of
critical thinking (for a summary, see R. K. Harri-
son, Intreduction to the Old Testament, pp. 516—
 Doorkeeper

41). Positively, the defense for the unity and the 11:12). Dodo is perhaps identifiable with Do-
essentially Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch has dai the Ahohite in 1 Chronicles 27:4.
established a firm foundation for evangelical See Donal.
OT scholarship. Negatively, in response to the 3. Father of Elhanan, one of David’s mighty
dogmatism of critical scholars, the evangelical men known as “the 30” (2 Sm 23:24; 1 Chr
position may have been overstated. Regretta- 11:26). Dodo lived at Bethlehem.
bly, the cautious approach of Aalders has not
stirred much interest. Now that evangelicalism Doe ° Female deer (Prv 5:19).
has come toa period of relaxation and growth, it
See ANIMALS (DEER).
is most urgent to intensify the study of the Penta-
teuch with openness to the text and to its canoni-
cal shape. Doeg. Official of Saul who was commanded
Though the Documentary Hypothesis has to slay the innocent priests at Nob (1 Sm
undergone significant shifts in the last 100 21,22). An Edomite, he was either a proselyte
years, Wellhausen’s approach has vindicated or a prominent Edomite chieftain captured by
itself in critical circles. The subsequent devel- Saul (1 Sm 14:47). He was subsequently given
opment of form criticism and redaction criti- supervision over Saul’s flocks (1 Sm 21:7; cf. 1
cism is considered complementary and correc- Chr 27:30, where David had a foreign head
tive, rather than destructive, of the hypothesis. over his herd). The reason for his presence at
The grand gulf between evangelical and criti- the sanctuary at Nob (1 Sm 21:7) is not clear,
cal scholars is likely to remain and deepen. As though he had some religious purpose in being
confidence in the archaeological consensus and there, maybe being detained while in a purifi-
skepticism of the literary materials erodes the cation process (e.g., a Nazirite vow, Nm 6:13).
relatively conservative results of the Albright Possibly he secretly hid there as a spy for
school, evangelicals will be challenged to re- Saul. Whatever the case, it is evident that he
spond to the issues rather than react in fear of saw an opportunity to gain favor with Saul
the slippery slopes of criticism. when he observed David hospitably treated by
WILLEM A. VANGEMEREN the priests, who even supplied him with a
weapon—the sword of Goliath (1 Sm 21:9).
See REDACTION CRITICISM; SOURCE CRITICISM; TRADI-
TION CRITICISM; FORM CRITICISM; DEUTERONOMIST.
Shortly thereafter he had occasion to report
this to Saul (22:9,10; Ps 52 title), hoping
Bibliography. B.S. Childs, Introduction to the OT as thereby to demonstrate his loyalty. His brutal
Scripture; R.E. Clements, One Hundred Years of OT Interpre-
tation; K.A. Kitchen, The Ancient Orient and the OT; M.G. slaying of the priests and the inhabitants of
Kline, Treaty of the Great King: The Covenant Structure of the city of Nob (1s Sam 22:18,19) show his ruth-
Deuteronomy; G. Maier, The End of the Historical-Critical less character and intimate further that he
Method. was not an Israelite.
Dodai. Ahohi’s descendant and a com-
mander of one of Israel’s 12 contingents of sol-
Dog. See ANIMALS.
diers (24,000 men each) during David’s reign (1
Chr 27:4). Dodai is perhaps alternately called Doleful Creature. Designation for animal
Dodo, Eleazar’s father, in 2 Samuel 23:9 and 1 of uncertain identity in Isaiah 13:21 (kKsv), bet-
Chronicles 11:12. ter rendered “howling creature.” The context
implies such beasts are unclean; hence sug-
See Dopo #2.
gested creatures include the horned owl, hy-
ena, jackal, and leopard.
Dodanim. Descendants of Noah’s son Ja-
pheth (Gn 10:4). The name is emended to Roda- See ANIMALS; BIRDS.
nim in 1 Chronicles 1:7 (Rsv).
See RODANIM. Domitian. Roman emperor (AD 81—96) who
persecuted both Jews and Christians. Tradi-
Dodavahu, Dodavah. Inhabitant of Mare- tion says that under Domitian the apostle
shah and father of Eliezer the prophet. Eliezer John was banished to Patmos, where he wrote
spoke against King Jehoshaphat of Judah be- the Book of Revelation (Rv 1:9).
cause of his alliance with King Ahaziah of Is- See CAESARS, THE.
rael (2 Chr 20:37, KJv Dodavah).
Donkey. Domesticated ass.
Dodo. 1. Grandfather of Tola, a minor judge
See ANIMALS (Ass).
who judged Israel from his native city Shamir
(Jgs 10:1).
2. Father of Eleazar, one of David’s mighty Doorkeeper. See TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS
men known as “the 30” (2 Sm 23:9; 1 Chr (GATEKEEPER).

639
Dophkah
Dophkah. Name of an area near the Wilder-
ness of Sin where the Israelites camped on
their way to Mt Sinai (Nm 33:12,13). Its site is
perhaps identical with Serabit el-Khadem, an
Egyptian turquoise mining center.
See WILDERNESS WANDERINGS.
Dor. Fortified Palestinian city (modern
Burj) situated along the Mediterranean coast,
south of Mt Carmel and eight miles north of
Caesarea. It is mentioned occasionally in con-
nection with events in the period of the judges
and the united monarchy (Jos 17:11; Jgs 1:27; 1
Chr 7:29). Dor is probably the same city as
Naphath-dor (Jos 12:23; 1 Kgs 4:11) and
Naphoth-dor (Jos 11:2). During the days of the
conquest the king of Dor joined Jabin’s confed-
eracy against Joshua (Jos 11:2), but was de-
feated (12:23). The city was assigned to Manas-
seh’s tribe, but the tribe failed to dispossess its
inhibitants (Jgs 1:27).
Dorcas. Christian woman in Joppa of Judea,
noted for her acts of charity (Acts 9:36—41).
Dorcas is called a disciple in verse 36, which is
the only instance where the feminine form of
the word is used in the Greek NT. Her ethnic
origins are not known, since Dorcas, her Greek
name, was in common use among both Jews
and Greeks. The Aramaic equivalent, Tabitha,
meant ‘‘gazelle.”
When Dorcas died, the apostle Peter was
nearby at Lydda. In response to news of his
healing ministry there, two men were sent to
bring Peter to Joppa. When he arrived, the
body had been prepared for burial and placed
in an upper room. Peter sent the mourners
Aerial view of Jaffa, showing
the old town. In the center is
the Church of St. Peter the
Apostle, where tradition says
Peter brought back Dorcas
from the dead.
from the room, knelt to pray, and raised Dor-
cas back to life. Her restoration was the first
of such miracles performed by an apostle.
Dothan. Ancient city located about 60 miles
north of Jerusalem, 13 miles north of the city
of Samaria, and about 5 miles southeast of Me-
giddo. The two cities of Engannim (modern
el- Jenin) and Ibleam guarded a narrow pass on
the road leading to Dothan and on to the
coastal plain.
The mound of Tell Dotha, site of Dothan,
rises 200 feet above the surrounding plain to a
height of 1,200 feet above sea level. The top of
the mound comprises some 1o acres. From
there one can today look out upon fertile land
boasting good crops. Flocks pasture here as
they did in biblical times, drawn to the area in
part by the adequate water supplied by its
springs. ;
Dothan was the place where Joseph’s broth-
ers sold him to a caravan of Ishmaelites (Gn
37). A millennium later the city was sur-
rounded by Syrian forces in an attempt to cap-
ture Elisha, who lived there and who was
thought to be betraying the Syrian plans to
the Israelite king (2 Kgs 6:8—14). Dothan was
mentioned also in the lists of places conquered
by Thutmose III and, in the intertestamental
period, in connection with the military cam-
paigns of Holofernes (Jud 39,46,73).
Dothan was excavated from 1953 to 1964 by
Dr. and Mrs. J. P. Free. The site was occupied
from the Early Bronze Age (3000—2000 Bc), and
was fortified by a large city wall. Its base was
11 feet thick with a vertical exterior face and
sloping interior face. The wall was 9g feet wide
at its existing 16 feet height, and may have
640

The mound of Dothan.
measured 25 feet high in its original state.
Next to the large city gate was found a gray-
cream bowl of the same type as that found in
first Egyptian dynasty tombs (c. 3000 BC).
The city was heavily fortified in Abraham’s
day. Free discovered a ten-room fortress con-
structed inside the city wall. This Middle
Bronze Age (1950-1550 Bc) building had walls
four feet thick. In the Late Bronze Age (1550—
1200 BC) this citadel was destroyed in the Isra-
elite occupation of Canaan. A tomb from this
period was used continuously with four sepa-
rate burial levels until about 1100 Bc. Pieces of
jugs, jars, bowls, and other fragments repre-
senting Cypriote and Mycenaean ware were re-
covered from the various levels, along with
daggers, spear points, lamps, and over
skeletons.
Dating from Iron Age I (1200-1000 BC), corre-
sponding to the last of the judges and begin-
ning of the monarchy, two walls were discov-
ered which marked the two sides of a street
the archaeologist named “Wall Street.”
Excavations of the Iron II period (1000—600
BC), that of the Hebrew monarchy, gave indica-
tions that Dothan was an administrative cen-
ter under Solomon. A street from this period
was also unearthed, measuring 4 feet wide and
excavated a distance of 111 feet. Houses had
been built on either side of the street. From
the ruins came more imported pottery, toys,
and a large 14-handled bowl. Other houses ex-
cavated from this period contained the usual
domestic remains.
Dothan was destroyed by fire at the end of
the ninth century Bc, perhaps by Ben-hadad or
Hazael of Syria. The city was rebuilt, but it
was destroyed again by Tiglath-pileser III (2
Kgs 15:29). A fourth city, built about 700 Bc,
lasted for over a century.
Very little evidence was found from the Per-
sian period (500-300 Bc). The few metal bowls
and pottery samples discovered may reflect a
declining occupation during this time of the
exile and after. In the Hellenistic age (300-50
BC), however, a settlement was established, at
Dreams
least on the top of the mound. Hellenistic
lamps, glazed ware, Rhodian jar handles, and
a coin bearing the name “‘Antiochus the King”
all give evidence of a Greek settlement at Do-
than. During the Roman period the site was
also occupied, as attested by a stamp found
with the letters SC, ““Senatus Consultus,” not-
-ing the approval of the Roman Senate.
Dove. Small pigeon.
See BirDs (PIGEON).
Dove’s Dung. Source of food eaten when Sa-
maria was besieged by Ben-hadad, king of Syr-
ia (2 Kgs 6:25). Taken literally as pigeon excre-
ment, the reference indicates how desperate
conditions were in the famished city.
Some scholars suggest that dove’s dung re-
fers to the small, edible bulb of the star-of-
Bethlehem plant, also known as bird’s milk or
bird’s dung. The bulb could be boiled or
roasted to make flour for bread. The “kab’”’ in
verse 25 is a unit of measure approximating
1.3 quarts.
Dowry. Gift of property or goods from the
bride’s family to the bride or groom prior to
marriage.
See MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS.
160 Drachma. Greek coin made of silver, rough-
ly equivalent to the Roman denarius.
See Coins.
Dragon. Term indicating a number of mon-
strous land or sea creatures.
See ANIMALS.
Dragon Well. See Jackat’s WELL.
Dram. ksv for daric, a Persian gold coin, in
1 Chronicles 29:7; Ezra 2:69; 8:27; and Nehe-
miah 7:70—72.
See COINS.
Dreams. Dreams have always fascinated
people; the events experienced in dreams are
too vivid and real to be ignored.
Scientific Explanation. Many supersti-
tiously believe that dreams are a strange fore-
warning of serious trouble. On the other hand,
psychological research has given many new in-
sights into the nature and causes of dreams.
Brain scanning equipment which records un-
usual mental activity during sleep has enabled
scientists to determine the occasions and fre-
quency of dreaming.
To the child a dream is what you look at
when you are sleeping. But dreams consist
641
Dreams
also of ideas and emotions. The sensations of
happiness, fear, sorrow, or excitement are so
lifelike that the dreamer believes the dream is
actually happening.
The details of a dream usually follow a
relatively meaningful sequence. The dream
may seem to last a long time, but its actual
duration is very brief. Dreams often bring to-
gether people or events totally unrelated in
one’s past. Childhood acquaintances may ap-
pear vividly in random grouping with friends
from adult life. Whereas it is a relief to wake
up from a nightmare, there is often disap-
pointment when a pleasant dream is abruptly
interrupted.
Dreams are the combined product of mem-
ory and sensation. They project information
recorded and stored in the mind since earliest
childhood, open the window of the mind, and
give a glimpse of a person’s unconscious self.
A dream may be triggered by anything—
perhaps a noise, odor, or touch—that physi-
cally disturbs the sleeper. Indigestion or an
emotional state can produce dreams. Worry
and fear often give rise to nightmares.
Ancient Understanding. From the earliest
times people viewed dreams as a mystery,
provoking speculation about another actual
sphere of existence in which the person lived
and acted while the body slept. Dreams, espe-
cially those of emperors and kings, were held
to be messages from the gods.
Ancient recorded dreams focused on three
main areas: religion, politics, and personal des-
tiny. Religious dreams called for piety and de-
votion to the gods. Political dreams suppos-
edly forecast the outcome of battles and the
future destiny of nations. Personal dreams
guided family decisions and presaged serious
crises.
Sometimes the god took the initiative and
forewarned the person about something unex-
pected. Sometimes the ruler or general would
go to a pagan temple or holy place and sleep
there, hoping to bring on a dream that would
help him cope with some serious problem. In
some dreams the message was clear; more of-
ten it had to be discovered by individuals who
specialized in dream interpretation. Records
were kept concerning specific dreams and the
subsequent events.
Old Testament Use. Dreams played an im-
portant part in the lives of God’s people. Of
the 116 references to dreams listed in Young’s
Concordance, 52 come in Genesis during the
early patriarchal period and 29 in the Book of
Daniel. In reality, however, only 14 specific
dreams are recorded in the OT. Most of them
are in Genesis and reflect God’s direct revela-
tion to the patriarchs. Even Daniel tells about
only two of Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams—the
642
large manlike image and the gigantic tree
chopped down—and his own dream about the
four beasts and the Ancient of Days.
The OT understanding of dreams had sev-
eral significant features. Like the rest of the
ancient world, people of God believed that God
communicated in dreams. Yet there is in the
OT accounts a reserve lacking in the perverse
and obscene scenes often described in pagan
dream records. Another distinction is that God
is the initiator; he gives the revelatory dreams
when, where, and to whom he pleases—a truth
painfully learned by Saul (1 Sm 28:6,15). More
significantly, the secular approach to interpre-
tation was specifically rejected. Understanding
of dream symbols came not by research in
dream books or by natural human ability.
When Joseph interpreted the dreams of his two
Egyptian fellow prisoners and later of the pha-
raoh himself, he insisted on giving full credit to
God (Gn 40:8; 41:7,25,28,39).
Similarly Daniel informed Nebuchadnezzar
that the ‘God in heaven that revealeth se-
crets’ would make known the king’s dream
and its meaning, in which task professional
dream interpreters had failed (Dn 2:27,28).
Unlike their neighbors, the OT saints knew
that a dream was a mere “‘vision of the night”’
(Jb 33:15), and figuratively represented unreal-
ity (Jb 20:8; Pss 73:20; 126:1; Is 29:7,8).
God used dreams in OT days to protect his
servants (Gn 20:1—18); to reveal himself to peo-
ple in a special way (Gn 28:12); to provide guid-
ance in specific circumstances (Gn 31:10—13);
and to forewarn about personal future events
(Gn 37:7-19). Dreams were also used to pre-
dict the history of nations (Gn 40,41) and to
foretell the four great successive world em-
pires that would be replaced by God’s eternal
kingdom (Dn 4:19—27).
During the approximately 1,000 years be-
tween Joseph and Daniel, only two dreams are
recorded. One assured Gideon that God would
defeat the Midianites (Jgs 7:13-15); the other
concerns how Solomon became so wise after
his humility and unselfish request for ‘“‘an un-
derstanding heart” (1 Kgs 3:9) thoroughly
pleased God.
In the final OT dreams God gave Nebuchad-
nezzar an overview of future world history
(Dn 2:31—45) and a prediction of the king’s tem-
porary insanity (Dn 4:19—27). Daniel’s dream
of the 4 beasts was similar to the king’s first
dream, but added details concerning future in-
ternational relations (Dn 7:13,14).
Dreams were seen as one means by which
God would speak to prophets (Nm 12:6). But
how could the people of God distinguish true
prophet from imposter? God gave two tests:
ability to predict the immediate future (Dt
18:22) and consistency of message with previ-

ously revealed truth (Dt 13:1—4). False prophets
were put to death (Dt 13:5). False prophecy was
a serious problem in the days of Jeremiah
(23:25-32) and Zechariah (10:2). Despite re-
peated warning by Jeremiah (23:32; 27:9,10;
29:8,9), the people preferred to listen to the false
prophets with their empty messages of hope.
Dreams also were a part of Israel’s pro-
phetic hope (J] 2:28).
New Testament Use. The few specific
dreams in the NT all come from Matthew, five
of these in the first two chapters. They empha-
size the divine care and protection of the baby
Jesus. First there was God’s provision that Je-
sus would grow up in a home with a father
and mother and thus avoid the cruelty and
shame of being unjustly called an illegitimate
child (Mt 1:19—23). The wise men were in-
structed in a dream not to tell Herod where
Jesus was living (Mt 2:12). Jesus was further
protected from jealous King Herod by the
dream that told Joseph to flee to Egypt with
Mary and the child (Mt 2:13). On Herod's
death, Joseph was divinely advised in a dream
to return home from Egypt (Mt 2:20). Finally,
God warned Joseph to avoid Judea, where Her-
od’s evil son Archelaus reigned, and to settle
in Galilee instead.
The only other specific dream mentioned in
the NT prompted Pilate’s wife to warn her hus-
band, “Don’t have anything to do with this
innocent man” (Mt 27:19).
KERMIT A. ECKLEBARGER
See PROPHECY; VISION.
Dress. See FASHION AND DRESS.
Drink Offering. See OFFERINGS AND SACRI-
FICES.
Dromedary. Swift-footed camel of the Ara-
bian species.
See ANIMALS (CAMEL).
Dropsy. Old medical term for excessive ac-
cumulation of watery fluid in any tissue or
space of the body. Dropsy, mentioned in Luke
14:2, is a symptom of several serious disorders
such as heart, kidney, or liver disease; Jesus
healed a man “who had dropsy” but whose
underlying illness is not described. The word
“dropsy” has generally been replaced with
more specific medical terms: excessive ab-
dominal fluid is now referred to as ascites, cu-
taneous or subcutaneous dropsy as edema,
and pleural dropsy as hydrothorax. Dropsy is
not mentioned directly in the OT. A reference
to swollen feet (Dt 8:4) could refer to pedal
edema or simply to the formation of blisters.
See MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE.
643
Dumbness
Drusilla. Third and youngest daughter of
Herod Agrippa, king of Judea. A Jewess, Dru-
silla was born about aD 38 and had two sisters,
Bernice and Mariamne. She became engaged
to Epiphanes, prince of Commogene, but the
engagement was broken as a result of his re-
fusal to convert to Judaism.
’ Drusilla’s brother, Agrippa II, then ar-
ranged for her to marry Azizus, king of Emesa,
who agreed to be circumcised. Soon after her
marriage Felix, a gentile governor of Judea,
fell in love with the 16-year-old Drusilla.
Around ap 54 he persuaded her to break the
Jewish law and leave her husband to marry
him.
Drusilla and Felix heard the apostle Paul’s
proclamation of the gospel while Paul was
held in custody at Caesarea (Acts 24:24). Their
son, Agrippa, perished when the Italian vol-
cano Vesuvius erupted in AD 79.
Dulcimer. «sv mistranslation for bagpipe in
Daniel 3:5,10,15.
See Music AND MusIcAL INSTRUMENTS (PSANTRIN).
Dumah (Person). Ishmael’s son who founded
an Arab tribe (Gn 25:14; 1 Chr 1:30). Perhaps his
descendants lived in the el-J6f area, but this is
difficult to establish.
Dumah (Place). 1. Region of the 12 tribes of
Ishmael (Gn 25:14; 1 Chr 1:30) where there
were a number of oases; identified with el-J6f,
modern Dumat el-Jendel. This place was lo-
cated about three-fourths of the way from Da-
mascus to Medina.
2. Town in the highlands allotted to Judah’s
tribe for an inheritance (Jos 15:52). Its site is
probably identifiable with ed-Domeh, 10 miles
southwest of Hebron.
3. Hebrew term referring to the land of si-
lence or death; that is, the place of graves (Pss
94:17; 115:17).
4. Perhaps a designation for Edom or Idu-
maea in Isaiah ar:11.
Dumbness. The inability to speak. Dumb-
ness (now generally called muteness or apha-
sia) can be a momentary phenomenon or a per-
manent handicap. It may result from mental
retardation, brain lesion, or deafness.
The Bible records several examples of
dumbness. Zechariah was “struck dumb” by
the angel Gabriel for not believing he would
become the father of John the Baptist (Lk
1:18—22). That condition persisted at least nine
months until the baby was born and named
(Lk 1:62—64).
Inability to speak is usually associated with
neurological diseases or severe structural de-
Dung Gate
formities. When Jesus healed people who were
thus afflicted, or “hearing-impaired” (Mt 9:32,
33; 12:22,23; 15:30,31; Mk 7:32-37; 9:17-27; Lk
11:14), observers were understandably aston-
ished.
Other scattered biblical passages refer to
muteness in people (Prv 31:8; Is 35:6) and in
animals (Is 56:10; 2 Pt 2:16). The fact that false
gods and idols cannot speak (Hb 2:18—20; 1
Cor 12:2) was frequently pointed out by the
prophets, who contrasted them with the living
God of Israel.
See MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE.
Dung Gate. One of the 11 gates in the Jeru-
salem wall in Nehemiah’s time (Neh 2:13;
3:14). It was located near the southwest cor-
ner of the city and led to the Valley of Hin-
nom, where rubbish and refuse were dumped.
This particular gate had been reconstructed
by Malchijah, son of Rechab (Neh 3:14), and
was situated between the Fountain Gate and
the Valley Gate. When the restored walls of
Jerusalem were completed, the ceremony of
dedication took place near this gate. Josephus
knew it as the Essene Gate.
See JERUSALEM.
Dura, Plain of. Location in “the province
of Babylon” where Nebuchadnezzar set up the
great image of gold which all his subjects
were ordered to worship (Dn 3:1). Its exact lo-
cation is uncertain. It may be situated to the
southeast of Babylon, or perhaps even located
within the great outer wall of the city itself.
The image was doubtless in a prominent
place, probably in an open area used for pub-
lic gatherings. Since dur means “rampart,”
the phrase should probably be read as “‘the
plain of the rampart” within Babylon.
Dwarf. See DEForRMITY.
Dye, Dyer, Dyeing. Method of coloring tex-
tiles practiced in the Near East with natural
materials even before the time of the patriarch
Abraham. The Bible mentions four colors of
dyes: purple, blue (actually a shade of violet),
crimson, and scarlet. The purple and blue dyes
were extracted from small murex shellfish
found along the Phoenician coast. The dye, a
glandular secretion of the mollusk, changed
color on exposure to air from whitish-yellow to
red, violet, or purple, depending on how it was
treated. Because that dye was costly to pro-
duce, only the rich could afford purple cloth-
ing; purple, therefore, became a symbol of roy-
alty and luxury. The dye was commonly known
as “Tyrian purple’ because the Phoenician cit-
644
ies of Tyre and Sidon were the major suppliers
{Ez 27:16).
Crimson and scarlet were among several
shades of bright red obtained from the kermes
insect, a grub that feeds on a species of oak
growing in southern Europe and Asia Minor.
Some Syrian dyers still use the kermes in
spite of the availability of artificial European
dyes. The “‘tanned rams’ skins’’ mentioned in
Exodus 25:5 are still made in Syria. The
tanned skin is rubbed with dye made by boil-
ing the kermes in water. When dry, the skin is
oiled, polished, and used for Bedouin slippers
and other beautiful leather articles.
The “purple goods,” sold by Lydia of Thya-
tira (Acts 16:14) was actually a dull red, now
sometimes called “Turkey red.” It was pro-
duced from the root of the madder plant,
both for export to Europe and for local use in
dyeing cotton and wool for rugs and clothing.
Cultivation of madder was a major industry
in Cyprus and Syria. A father customarily
planted a new madder field for each son
born, which would eventually be that son’s
inheritance. Thyatira had a dyers’ guild.
Although not mentioned in the Bible, an
“indigo blue” dye produced from pomegran-
ate rind may have been familiar to the Israel-
ites. Egyptian tombs have been discovered
that contain cloths dyed with that blue and
with yellows and browns of uncertain origin.
The Jews, who learned the dyeing trade from
the Phoenicians, evidently produced only reds
and purples. The Jewish dyeing trade flour-
ished in Asia Minor at least through the rath
century AD.
Yellow was obtained from the petals and
flower heads of the Carthamus tinctorius,
while saffron was derived from the stigmas of
the crocus, which grew in large quantities in
Syria and Egypt. Green was usually concocted
from a mixture of other dyes.
Excavations at Tell Beit Mirsim (Debir)
have uncovered the remains of domestic dye-
ing vats, basins, and drains dating from the
Iron Age. The size of the vats indicates that
yarn rather than woven cloth was dyed. Stor-
age jars containing agents for stabilizing the
colors of the dyes were also found. The ancient
processes of dyeing are not clearly understood,
but excavations indicate that dyeing was a
flourishing industry throughout Bible times.
See CLOTH, CLOTH MANUFACTURING; INDUSTRY AND
COMMERCE.
Dysentery. Diarrhea caused by parasitic
bacteria, protozoa (amoeba), or worms in con-
taminated food or drink. Dysentery is accom-
panied by intestinal spasms and ulceration,
with the appearance of blood and pus in the

excrement. On the island of Malta the apostle
Paul miraculously cured a person of dysentery
(Greek dysenteria, Acts 28:8). As the verse indi-
cates, high fever accompanies acute dysentery,
epidemics of which still plague Malta. A dis-
ease described in the OT was probably amoe-
bic dysentery, in which intestinal tissue can
645
Dysentery
be sloughed off “day by day” (2 Chr 21:14~19).
A sporadic form of dysentery occurs when the
body is able to tolerate the disruptive organ-
ism for the most part. Chronic dysentery can
be protracted over many years.
See MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE.
°

Eagle. Large, carnivorous bird of the falcon
family noted for its strength, keen eyesight,
and graceful flight.
See Birbs.
Earring. See FASHION AND DREss.
Earth. Term used for our inhabited planet;
the world, as distinguished from heaven and
hell; land; soil; and in several other ways. Bib-
lical usage is as broad as modern usage.
One Hebrew word translated “earth” is
also used generically for “man,” or Adam (Gn
2:7,19). That word refers to reddish soil from
which Adam’s body was made. Another He-
brew word translated “earth” or “land” can
refer to a country (Gn 21:21). A word trans-
lated ‘‘dust’’ can mean simply earth or dry
ground (Gn 3:19). In the NT one Greek word
translated “‘earth”’ can refer to a land or coun-
try (Mt 27:45). The Greek word from which
“ecumenical” is derived refers to the whole
inhabited earth (Lk 21:26) or the Roman Em-
pire of those days (Lk 2:1).
In the beginning “‘God called the dry land
Earth, and the waters that were gathered to-
gether he called Seas.... And God said, ‘Let
the earth put forth vegetation’ (Gn r:10,11).
In some passages “the earth” is used in essen-
tially the modern sense for the whole planet
(Jb 1:7), hanging in empty space (Jb 26:7). Ref-
erences to the earth’s four corners (Is 11:12; Ez
7:2) allude to the points of a compass, not to
the earth’s shape. The circle of the earth proba-
bly refers to the circumference of the horizon
(Is 40:22; cf. Jb 38:13). The earth is sometimes
pictured as supported on pillars (Jb 9:6; Ps
75:3) or foundations (Ps 104:5; Prv 8:29; Is
24:18; Jer 31:37). Since many of the biblical
usages are found in figurative passages of po-
etry or prophecy, they reveal little about the
Hebrews’ cosmological understanding.
646
ec
“Earth” sometimes refers to the soil or
ground that a farmer works (cf. 2 Kgs 5:17).
According to the Bible the original condition
of the earth (Gn 2:6) was affected by the curse
of human sinfulness (Gn 3:17-19); modern
ecologists seem to agree that the earth suffers
because of human greed and arrogance. After
Abel’s blood was spilled on the ground, Cain’s
difficulty in making the soil produce for him
was a constant reminder that he had mur-
dered his brother (Gn 4:8—12).
The Israelites, who lived as tenants on
God’s land (2 Sm 20:19), were instructed to let
the land be at rest every seventh year (Ex
23:10-12; Lv 25:4,5), allowing the soil to replen-
ish nutrients used up by crops. After seven
such “‘sabbath years,’ in the s5oth “jubilee
year’ the land reverted back to original family
holdings (Lv 25:10-17). That provision not
only reminded the people of God’s ultimate
ownership but kept potential “land barons”
from amassing huge estates.
The Mosaic law instructed the Israelites
that the land’s condition would be a spiritual
barometer of their relationship with God.
Drought or lack of productivity was a sign
that the relationship had been broken (Lv 26;
Dt 28). Israel was warned that their wicked-
ness could become so great that the Lord
would evict them from his land (cf. Lv 26:37;
Dt 28:64). Even if that happened, however,
God would eventually restore his people so
they could again be ‘“‘wedded”’ to the land (Is
62:4).
In the NT the earth, or world, is said to lie
in the power of the evil one (1 Jn 5:19), a re-
minder that many of the earth’s inhabitants
are living outside of fellowship with God (cf.
Eph 2:1,2). Jesus emphasized the fundamental
difference between “earthly” and “heavenly”
things (Jn 3:1-12), a theme repeated by James
(Jas 3:13-17) and Paul (Col 3:1—5). Earthly wis-
dom is natural and cannot comprehend the
 Ebal, Mount

things of God (1 Cor 1:20,21). A Christian’s Actium in which many animals and more than
earthly body, although a “temple of the Holy 30,000 people were killed. Eusebius recorded
Spirit within you” (1 Cor 6:19), is hardly to be the destruction of Caesarea and Emmaus by
compared with the future immortal body (1 an earthquake during the reign of Hadrian. In
Cor 15:40—44; 2 Cor 5:1—4). spite of much ancient and modern earthquake
Many passages point to a “coming age,” activity in Palestine, Jerusalem has remained
when the earth will be set free from its “bond- relatively undamaged.
age to decay,” a deliverance for which the
whole creation is said to be “groaning” in an- East, People of the; Children of the.
ticipation (Rom 8:19—23). The Bible pictures a Phrases used in reference to those nations that
period of prodigious renewal of the earth’s fer- were east of Israel.
tility (Ez 47; Jl 3:18,19; Am 9:13—15; Zec 14:6—
See PEOPLE OF THE EAST.
g). One day, however, “the heavens will pass
away with a loud noise, and the elements will
be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the Eastern Sea. Alternate name for the Salt
works that are upon it will be burned up” (2 Pt Sea, or Dead Sea, derived from the sea’s loca-
3:10). Yet in the apostle John’s apocalyptic vi- tion on the eastern boundary of the land of
sion, when “the first earth had passed away, Israel (Ez 47:18; Jl 2:20; Zec 14:8).
and the sea was no more,” he looked up and See DEAD SEA.
saw “a new heaven and a new earth” (Rv 21:1).
LouIs GOLDBERG East Gate. Gate in the walled city of Jerusa-
lem (Neh 3:29). “East gate” also refers to the
Earth, New. See New HEAVENS AND NEw gate of the temple mentioned in Ezekiel 10:19;
EARTH. 11:1; and 43:1.
See JERUSALEM.
Earthenware. See Pottery.
Earthquake. Frequent geologic disturbance East Sea. ksv name for the Eastern Sea, an
in Palestine due mostly to the volcanic nature alternate name for the Dead Sea, in Ezekiel
of the regions around the Dead Sea and the 47:18.
Sea of Galilee. The primary centers of earth- See DEAD SEA.
quakes in Palestine are upper Galilee, the Sa-
maritan country near Shechem, and the west- East Wind. Wind coming mostly in May,
ern edge of the Judean mountains near Lydda. September, and October. This scorching wind,
The Hebrew word for earthquake indicates also called a sirocco, destroyed vegetation (Gn
a great noise or a tremendous roaring, suggest- 41:6; Ez 17:10; Jn 4:8), withered flowers (Ps
ing that the Israelites were impressed with the 103:16), and dried up fountains and springs
rumbling connected with earthquakes. (Hos 13:15). With an east wind the Lord drove
Instances of earthquakes are (1) at Mt Sinai back the waters of the Red Sea for the Israel-
in connection with God’s giving the Law to ites to cross (Ex 14:21). The east wind also de-
Moses (Ex 19:18); (2) during the wilderness picts God’s judgment (Is 27:8; Jer 4:11; 18:17).
wandering of the Israelites, when Korah and An east, northeast wind drove the apostle
his followers rebelled against Moses and were Paul’s ship off course (Acts 27:14, KJV Eurocly-
destroyed as punishment for their rebellion don). That wind, which is frequent in the west-
(Nm 16:31—33); (3) among the Philistines on ern Mediterranean, is called a “levanter.”
the occasion when Jonathan and his armor
See PALESTINE.
bearer fought a garrison of Philistines (1 Sm
14:15); (4) after Elijah killed the prophets of
Baal and fled Jezebel’s wrath, when he sat un- Ebal. 1. Shobal’s son and descendant of Seir
der a juniper tree feeling sorry for himself (1 the Horite (Gn 36:23; 1 Chr 1:40).
Kgs 19:11); (5) in the reign of King Uzziah (Am 2. Joktan’s son and descendant of Shem (1
1:1); (6) at the death of Jesus on Calvary (Mt Chr 1:22). He is called Obal in Genesis 10:28.
27:51—-54); (7) at the resurrection of Jesus (Mt
28:2); and (8) at Philippi while Paul and Silas Ebal, Mount. Mountain just over 3000 feet
were in jail (Acts 16:26). Earthquakes are also high in the central hill country of Israel. Mt
mentioned as one of the phenomena in connec- Gerizim is usually mentioned with it (Dt
tion with the “Day of the Lord” (Zec 14:4,5) 11:29; 27:13; Jos 8:33). There is no certain
and the consummation of this age (Rv 6:12—24; known meaning to the word. It is quite un-
11:19; 16:18). likely that it was connected in any way witha
The Jewish historian Josephus described a son of Shobal, whose name is spelled the same
quake that occurred during the battle of as the mountain (Gn 36:23; 1 Chr 1:40; cf. 1 Chr

647
Ebed
1:22, where Ebal is a variant of the spelling
Obal of Gn 10:28).
Years before the entrance into the Promised
Land, God, through Moses, designated the
twin mountains Ebal and Gerizim as the place
for the recitation of the curses and blessings of
Deuteronomy 27, 28. According to Deuteron-
omy 27:12 six tribes of Israel were to stand on
Gerizim and shout the blessings. These were
Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Joseph,
Benjamin. Joseph here would mean the tribes
of Ephraim and Manasseh in whose territory
these two mountains belonged. The other six
tribes, Reuben, Gad, Asher, Zebulun, Dan, and
Naphtali, were to recite the curses from Mt
Ebal. It is interesting that Ebal is north of the
east-west valley that separates the two moun-
tains and it is the more northerly tribes that
stand on it.
The fulfillment of the divine directive is re-
corded in Joshua 8:33. Joshua also obeyed in
another matter—that of building on Mt Ebal
an altar of unhewn stones (Jos 8:30) as Moses
had commanded (Dt 27:4).
Ebed._r. Gaal’s father (Jgs 9:26—35). Gaal led
the men of Shechem in an unsuccessful revolt
against Abimelech, judge of Israel.
2. Adin’s descendant and son of Jonathan.
Ebed was the head of a family that returned to
Judah with Ezra after the exile (Ezr 8:6).
Ebed-melech. Ethiopian eunuch in King Ze-
dekiah’s court. He secured the king’s permis-
sion to rescue the prophet Jeremiah out of a
cistern where he had been thrown to die (Jer
38:6-13). For this righteous act Ebed-melech
was promised God’s safety at the fall of Jerusa-
lem (Jer 39:16).
Ebenezer. 1. Site where the Israelite army
encamped before a battle with the Philistines
(1 Sm 4:1~-11). It is thought to have been near
Aphek, where the Philistines were encamped.
The Israelite army was badly defeated in the
battle, and 4,000 of its men were slain on the
field. The elders of Israel tried to change their
fortunes by bringing the ark of the covenant
into their camp; but Israel was again defeated
with a loss of 30,000 foot soldiers, and the ark
of God was captured (1 Sm 4:3-11; 5:1).
2. Site near Mizpah, where God gave Israel
a great victory over the Philistines. To com-
memorate the victory Samuel set up a stone
between Mizpah and Jeshanan “and called its
name Ebenezer; for he said ‘Hitherto the Lord
has helped us’”’ (1 Sm 7:12). The location of
this site is unknown.
Eber. 1. Abraham’s ancestor (Gn 10:21-25;
11:14-17; 1 Chr 1:18—25; Lk 3:35, KJv Heber)
from whom the word “Hebrew” may be de-
rived. Eber lived 464 years and was the ances-
tor of the “sons of Eber,’”’ a phrase possibly
equal to the ‘Hebrews,’ as “‘sons of Heth’’
equals the “Hittites’’ (Gn 23:10 NASB). How-
ever, the term ‘‘Hebrew”’ may be an indication
of social class rather than of descent from
Eber. Eber had a son in whose time the earth
was divided, a division possibly into nomadic
and and sedentary groups.
2. Gadite leader registered during the
reigns of Jotham, king of Judah (g50—932 Bc),
and Jeroboam II, king of Israel (993-953 BC; 1
Chr 5:13, KJv Heber).
3. Benjamite and Elpaal’s descendant (1
Chr 8:12).
4. Benjamite and Shashak’s descendant (1
Chr 8:22, kJv Heber).
5. Head of Amok’s priestly family during
the days of the high priest Joiakim (Neh
12:20).
Ebez. City in the plain of Esdraelon, allot-
ted to Issachar’s tribe for an inheritance (Jos
19:20, KJV Abez). Its site is unknown.
Ebiasaph. Kohathite Levite, Elkanah’s son
and the father of Assir (1 Chr 6:23,37; 9:19);
alternately called Abiasaph in Exodus 6:24.
Ebla. Ancient Syrian city-state identified
with the contemporary site of Tell Mardikh.
According to one text discovered there, Ebla
was a huge city, with a population of 260,000.
That a quarter of a million people could crowd
into a city the size of Old Jerusalem is ex-
plained by the fact that many of the farmers
and workers lived in the surrounding area in
tents or possibly in beehive houses made of
clay brick. Such beehive villages are found
even today in the vicinity of Tell Mardikh. Only
the palace, the treasury, the storerooms, and
A part of the king’s palace at Ebla. The podium for the royal
throne is at the lower left.
¢
648

the essential facilities and personnel for opera-
tion of the city-state, would as a rule be located
within the city walls. Even so, the population
density in the city would be extremely high.
Ebla was a commercial center, manufactur-
ing items of textiles, wood, ceramics, gold,
silver, and other metals. A large number of
the clay tablets unearthed are economic
documents, recording transactions with many
other cities, stretching from Asia Minor
Egypt and from Cyprus to Iran (Persia). Thou-
sands of cities are named in these documents,
according to archaeologist Giovanni Pettinato.
Included are many familiar biblical names,
such as Hazor, Megiddo, Dor, Joppa, Gaza,
and Uru-salim (Jerusalem, or possibly “city of
Salem’’). In one text Ur is described as “‘in the
territory of Haran” (cf. Gn 11:31). Most amaz-
ing is Pettinato’s reference to the “cities of the
plain” (Gn 13:10), reportedly in the same order
in which they occur in the Bible: Sodom, Go-
morrah, and Zoar. Zoar is described as “in the
territory of Bela’ (cf. Gn 14:2). According to
the biblical account, Sodom and Gomorrah
were destroyed in the days of Abraham (Gn
19:24—29); hence the details recorded in Gene-
sis 14 and 1g could not have been recon-
structed at a later date unless there was a liv-
ing tradition recording the events. This claim
has been denied by a later epigrapher at Ebla.
The date of the Eblean documents is a very
important question; the answer is a bit com-
plex, but nevertheless quite certain. For one
thing, the pottery from Tell Mardikh IIB-1 is
contemporary with the pottery from Amuq I
(a well-known site in the plain of Antioch on
the Orontes in Turkey, not far from Tell Mar-
dikh), and Amugq-I pottery is contemporary
with the dynasty of Akkad (c. 2360-2180 Bc).
Furthermore, the royal palace was found
burned to. the ground, and Naram-Sin (c.
2269-2234 BC) boasts of his conquest of Arman
and Ebla, ‘‘cities uncaptured since the cre-
ation of man.” The archaeologists conclude
that Naram-Sin burned Ebla about 2250 Bc.
Still another line of evidence is found in a text
from Tell Mardikh, dated in the reign of
Ebrum, where Sargon of Akkad is mentioned.
Sargon and Ebrum were therefore contempo-
raries, and Sargon is dated about 2350-2295
Bc. Igrish-Khalam was the first king of Ebla,
so the archaeologists conclude that he built
the royal palace about 2400 Bc, possibly a few
years earlier. It should be mentioned that
other scholars lower the dates for the Akka-
dian dynasty by about r1o years. In any sys-
tem, the period covered from the beginning of
the reign of Sargon to the end of the reign of
Naram-Sin is about 120 years, an average of 30
years per reign. On the basis of known datable
dynastic successions (from father to son), this
Ebla
seems a bit high—the first son was usually
born when the father was 20 years old or
thereabouts—but it is not unreasonable. If we
work from this figure, it would put the begin-
ning of the known kings of Ebla around the
year 2430 BC.
, KingsofEbla Dynasty of Akkad
Igrish-Khalam
to
Ar-Ennum
Ebrum Sargon
Ibbi-Sipish Rimush
Dubukhu-Ada Manishtusu
Irkab-Damu Naram-Sin
The name Ebrum is remarkably similar to
Eber, the ancestor of Abraham. According to
Genesis 11, the genealogy consists of Eber, Pe-
leg, Reu, Serug, Nahor, Terah, and Abram
(Abraham). The suggestion has been made
that since Ebrum was such a mighty king, he
may well be the Eber of Genesis 11. According
to the figures in Genesis 11, the birth of Abram
occurred 191 years after the birth of Peleg, at
which time Eber was 34 years old. Since
Ebrum was contemporary with Sargon, this
could suggest a date of about 2180 Be for Abra-
ham’s birth—which is remarkably close to the
date given in older biblical chronologies. This,
however, is not proof that Ebrum and Eber
are the same person; it merely demonstrates
that the identification lies within the realm of
chronological possibility.
Many other personal names appear in the
tablets from Tell Mardikh. Included in those
mentioned by Pettinato are many biblical
equivalents—e.g., Abram (ab-ra-mu), Israel
(ish-ra-ilu), Saul (sha-u-lu), and David (da-u-
du). To some, this fact raises questions, while
others find it to be a confirmation of the bibli-
cal record. For example, it might be asked
how the name “Israel” could be found four or
more centuries before God gave the name to
Jacob. The Bible does not suggest that the
name was new. Names in those days were of-
ten composed of the name of a deity plus a
verbal form (e.g., Isaiah = “Yah is salvation”).
It is entirely conceivable that parents named
their children ish-ra-ilu, ‘““E] (God) has pre-
vailed (or shall prevail)’ before the days of
Jacob. What was new in the biblical experi-
ence was the personal encounter with God
and the blessing that it brought on Jacob.
A number of the names from Ebla seem to
appear in two forms, one compounded with -ilu
(El), the other with -ya (Yah). Thus the names
mi-ka-ya (Micaiah, Micah) and mi-ka-il (Mi-
chael) are reported by Pettinato, along with
other theophoric (God-bearing) names. The ap-
pearance of the ending -ya, if it has been prop-
649
Ebony
erly interpreted as a divine name (Yah, the
Lord), raises an important question. Accord-
ing to Exodus 6:3, God told Moses that he ap-
peared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as
El Shaddai, “but by my name Yahweh I did
not make myself known to them.” This seems
to say that the name Yahweh was not known
prior to the revelation to Moses at Sinai. On
the other hand, the name Yahweh is found
many times in Genesis, not only in narrative
portions (where a later author or editor
might have inserted a name, such as was
done with certain place names), but also in
oaths taken in the name of Yahweh and in
quotations that imply that the name of Yah-
weh was actually in use. This problem has
long been recognized, and biblical scholars
have divided into two groups: those who held
that the name was not known prior to the
time of Moses, and those who held that the
name was known, but that it took on a new
meaning in the light of the Sinai-exodus
event. If the interpretation of the Eblean ma-
terials proves to be correct—namely that -ya
is a divine-name element in personal names—
then we shall have to conclude that the name
Yah(weh) was known in patriarchal times,
but its true significance, that Yahweh is the
ever-living and life-giving God, only began to
be fully revealed in his deliverance of his peo-
ple from Egyptian bondage.
The whole problem becomes moot, how-
ever, since scholars (some of whom seem to be
apprehensive of displeasing the Syrian govern-
ment) are now inclined to reject many of Pet-
tinato’s earlier claims. Even Pettinato seems
to have retracted some of them.
The Eblean texts contain many other names
of gods and goddesses, most of them already
known to us. According to Joshua 24:2, Abra-
ham’s ancestors “worshiped other gods.” Yah
may have been one of those gods whom they
worshiped in ignorance. The revelation that
he was not just another god among many was
given to Abram when the Lord called him out
of Mesopotamia and sent him to Canaan to
become the father of the people of faith in
Yahweh.
The Eblean materials have certainly opened
a new door to a rich storehouse of knowledge.
It will be many years—well into the 21st cen-
tury—before all the implications of this discov-
ery are fully realized. But certain facts are al-
ready clear, and among these is this very impor-
tant truth: the patriarchal stories in Genesis
11-35 can no longer be ascribed to 8th- or 7th-
century authors. To assume that such an au-
thor could have included hundreds of names of
places and persons, items of trade, and
many details that are found in these chapters,
and then to suggest that it is mere coincidence
A cylinder seal from Ebla.
that has brought to light the same names,
places, trade relationships, and countless other
details through modern archaeological discov-
eries, is simply unreasonable. Ebla has deliv-
ered the coup de grace to such theories.
The discoveries at Tell Mardikh, astound-
ing as they are, do not “‘prove’’ the Bible, for it
does not need the proof of archaeology or of
any other human skill. The Bible is God’s
Word. Any attempt to “prove” it only exhibits
our doubts (Jn 5:41-47). The discoveries at
Ebla will help us to see, as other archaeologi-
cal discoveries have done, what kind of men
and women God was dealing with, what kind
of world they were living in, and how much he
must have loved them to want to deliver them
from the ways of the world to walk in his way.
We still have much to learn, and Ebla will
supply some of the background for that learn-
ing process.
WILLIAM SANFORD LASOR
See INSCRIPTIONS; ARCHAEOLOGY.
Bibliography. P. Matthiae, Ebla: An Empire Rediscov-
ered; G. Pettinato, The Archives of Ebla: An Empire Inscribed
in Clay.
Ebony. Dark black wood, highly prized in
antiquity for use in home furnishings.
See PLANTS.
Ebron. Town belonging to Asher’s tribe (Jos
19:28, KJV Hebron). Its location has not been
identified. Ebron may be a copyist’s error for
Abdon (Modern Abdeh), a levitical city located
some 15 miles south of Tyre and inland from
Achzib on the Mediterranean coast.
Ebronah. xv form of Abronah, an Israelite
the stopping place in the wilderness, in Numbers
33°34.35-
See ABRONAH.
650

Ecbatana. Greek name for the capital.of the
ancient Median empire, later one of the capi-
tal cities of the Persian and Parthian empires.
It is often spelled Achmetha (Ezr 6:2 KJv), ap-
proximating its Aramaic name. The Old Per-
sian name, Hangmatana, may have meant
“place of assembly.’’ Modern Hamadan covers
most of the ruins of the ancient city.
The city is at 6,300 feet on the eastern slopes
of Mt Orontes (Alvand), a granite peak reach-
ing to a height of 12,000 feet above sea level,
part of an impassable range broken only by
the pass leading to Ecbatana. Major trade
routes converged on this pass and gave Ecbat-
ana its strategic importance.
The altitude of the city also accounted for
its popularity as the summer residence of Per-
sian and Parthian kings. In the winter, bliz-
zards pile snow several feet deep and tempera-
tures plummet below zero, but the summer
climate is cool and comfortable; mountains
shade the afternoon sun while melting snows
bring ample water. Greek general Xenophon
reported that the Persian king Cyrus annually
spent three months of spring in Susa, seven
months of winter in Babylon, ‘‘and in the
height of summer two months in Ecbatana.”
Greek historian Herodotus recorded that
the city was established by Deioces, founder of
the Median dynasty early in the 7th century
Bc. In 550 Bc Cyrus captured the city from a
Median king, Astyages. It was from Ecbatana
that Cyrus issued his 538 Bc degree that all
Jews throughout his kingdom might return to
Jerusalem to rebuild the temple of the Lord
(Ezr 1:2-4). Later an Aramaic memorandum
regarding this decree was found in the records
at Ecbatana after a fruitless search of the ar-
chives in Babylon (Ezr 6:1—12). After Darius I
(522-486 Bc) quelled a revolt in securing the
throne, he had the famous Behistun inscrip-
tion carved in the side of Mt Orontes high
above the city. The city was taken and pil-
laged by Alexander the Great in 330 Bc.
Although Ezra 6:2 is the only explicit bibli-
cal reference to the city, Ecbatana could have
been one of the Median cities receiving exiles
from the northern kingdom (722 Bc), if the city
were in existence before fortification by Dei-
oces (2 Kgs 17:6). The apocryphal book of To-
bit places Jewish exiles in Ecbatana in the 7th
century (Tob 3:7; 7:1; 14:14), though that is of
questionable historical worth. The apocryphal
book of Judith records a battle between a Me-
dian king Arphaxad and an Assyrian king
Nebuchadnezzar in which the Assyrians cap-
ture Ecbatana (Jth 1:1,2,14), but the account is
dubious because the identity of those kings
is unknown. Antiochus Epiphanes may have
died there in 164 Bc (2 Mc 9:1-3, 19-28).
Ecbatana is the only one of the three Per-
651
Ecclesiastes, Book of
sian capitals that has yet to be excavated. An-
cient Greek authors gave elaborate descrip-
tions of the city and its wealth. Polybius, for
example, reported that it “greatly exceeded all
the other cities in wealth and the magnifi-
cence of its buildings.” Incidental archaeologi-
cal discoveries of two foundation inscriptions
in-silver and gold from the time of Darius I
and column bases from Artaxerxes II suggest
the great promise of excavations there. Excava-
tions have been forestalled, however, because
extensive demolition of modern Hamadan
would be necessary for access to much of the
ancient city below.
The tomb of Esther and Mordecai is alleged
to be at Ecbatana, but it is probably the tomb
of the wife of a Sassanid (Persian) king of the
5th century AD.
See PERSIA, PERSIANS.
Ecclesiastes, Book of. OT book of wisdom
literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in char-
acter, posing deep questions about the mean-
ing and nature of human existence.
“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the
book and has come into English from the
Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In
keeping with an early Jewish practice of
adopting the first few words of a book as the
title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The
Words of Qoheleth, the Son of David, King
in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as
“Qoheleth.”
The term “Qoheleth” is the author’s title
for himself throughout the book (1:1, 2, 12;
7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial
form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and
thus it seems to designate one who speaks in
an assembly. The word has often been trans-
lated “the preacher” in English. Because of
the philosophical nature of the book, however,
the title possibly indicates the author’s func-
tion or station as a leader in the community of
wise men.
Author. The authorship of Ecclesiastes
presents complex questions, on which biblical
scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was
divided over the issue, ascribing the book to
King Hezekiah and his school as well as to
King Solomon.
Internal evidence is often appealed to for
support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesias-
tes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of
the book to ‘‘the son of David.’ Other passages
(e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6—7). also seem to refer to Solo-
mon, who succeeded David as king of the unit-
ed kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solo-
monic authorship interpret such references as
literary devices, written by a later unknown
author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to
Ecclesiastes, Book of
wisdom as a context for his own ideas about
life’s purpose and meaning.
A number of passages in the book have
been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic
authorship. Some scholars allege that if the
book had been written by Solomon, he would
not have used the past tense about his reign
“over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents
of Solomonic authorship point out, however,
that the Hebrew verb “was’’ can also mean
“became,” thus stating that Solomon had be-
come king in Jerusalem.
It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of
writing by an author who lived much later than
Solomon. They say that Solomon could not
have said that he was wiser than “‘all who were
over Jerusalem before me,” for that would
point to a long succession of kings before him.
But the author may have meant prominent
wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kings 4:31).
One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic
authorship is the fact that OT history does not
record a period of spiritual revival in Solo-
mon’s life as a context for the Book of Ecclesi-
astes. That is not a conclusive argument, how-
ever, for the thoughts recorded in the book are
intensely personal in nature. The historical
books of the OT deal primarily with historical
developments, mentioning personal aspects of
human life only where they bear upon God’s
purposes as reflected in the national history. It
would in fact be surprising if the extremely
personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes
were cited by the historical writers.
The question of authorship is a difficult one,
but there seems to be no conclusive evidence
against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.
Date. The majority of scholars who hold
to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes
date the book in Solomon’s final years as king
(c. 940 BC). The book would then have been
written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom,
by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom
teaching.
Those who deny Solomonic authorship dis-
agree among themselves as to when the book
was written, but most date it in the postexilic
period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 BC) is some-
what difficult to maintain, because fragments
of the book, dated in the 2nd century Bc, have
been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran.
Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus,
probably written in the early 2nd century Bc,
was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such
factors would allow little time for the writing
and circulation of the book in the Maccabean
period.
A number of conservative scholars, such as
F. Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a
5th-century date to the book. Many others con-
sider it a 3rd-century document.
652
Internal Evidence. Attempts have been
amade to determine the date of the Book of Ec-
clesiastes from alleged historical allusions.
But the somewhat gloomy observations found
in such passages as 1:2—-11 and 3:1-15 need be
nothing more than the author’s conclusions
about the emptiness of life. They do not neces-
sarily indicate that the book was written in a
time of national decline or social decay within
Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign
of Solomon.
It is also alleged that the book contains allu-
sions to Greek philosophical concepts. That
would indicate that it was written sometime
after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian
world effected by the conquests of Alexander
the Great (356-323 BC).
One of those philosophical concepts is the
“golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The
golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the
pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is re-
flected in Ecclesiastes 7:14—18. The same con-
cept is found in Egyptian Wisdom Literature
(Instruction of Amen-em-opet 9.14), as well as
in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of
the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, The
Words of Ahigar, the golden mean is expressed
in the words. ‘‘Be not (too) sweet, lest they
[swallow thee]: be not (too) bitter [lest they
spit thee out].’’ But the golden mean concept
need not indicate one particular period of
thought; it may simply represent a basic kind
of wisdom shared by people of all times and
ethnic backgrounds.
Linguistic Considerations. The most criti-
cal issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of
the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesias-
tes is unique, differing stylistically and linguis-
tically from such s5th-century OT books as
Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.
Some scholars maintain that the language
of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Ara-
maic, and thus the book was written at a
time when the Aramaic language was influen-
tial in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others
have argued that the peculiarities of the He-
brew should be understood as affinities with
Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.
It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the
book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, par-
ticularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet
the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to
the Mishna in other ways.
The linguistic evidence could point to a late
date for the book, but it is also possible that
Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heav-
ily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a
style may have become a standard for the liter-
ary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During
the reign of Solomon, contacts between Pales-
tine and Phoenicia were quite common.

Purpose and Theological Teaching. The
Book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the mean-
inglessness of a world view that does not
press beyond the limits of human experience
to include God. It seeks to show that meaning-
ful satisfaction may be attained in a universe
that seems to be nothing more than a succes-
sion of wearying cycles—a universe in which
people are locked with no apparent means of
escape. According to Qoheleth, freedom can
be achieved by fearing God and believing
that God will ultimately judge everything
fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that
it will reach, although in the course of history
and. the processes of the physical world it
may not look that way.
The book’s chief theological tenet is that
God is not disinterested in the course of hu-
man events with its gross injustices. He will
judge every deed. Life therefore has a purpose,
and human deeds have meaning, for they will
be judged by the ultimate standard—the mind
of the Creator himself.
Qoheleth is often accused of having a pessi-
mistic view of life. One cannot read such pas-
sages aS 1:12-14,18 and 2:1~-9,18-23 without
feeling his helplessness as he viewed what
seemed an empty existence. But Qoheleth’s
pessimism had to do with life apart from God.
To him such a life had no meaning.
A positive good emerges from the book,
however, which is often overlooked. Qoheleth
speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his
argument. There is an absolute good for peo-
ple as they live in a seemingly meaningless
world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s
gifts to his people. Thus Qoheleth is not an
utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of
his world view to include the hand of God at
work in the world, he becomes an optimist.
But when he looks at life without God he
is pessimistic, for such a view offers only
despair.
Qoheleth’s “theology of contentment” is
clear in such passages as 2:24,25, 3:10-13, and
3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedo-
nistic view of life, making eating and drinking
the main purpose. The expression “eat and
drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to ex-
press the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer
22:15; Lk. 17:27,28): Qoheleth's use of the
phrase, then, simply means that one should
enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be
enjoyed, not endured.
In 3:10-13 Qoheleth sets forth the great
enigma of humankind: God has put the knowl-
edge of eternity in the human mind. That is,
he has made the mind able to go beyond the
limits of physical existence. Yet even that abil-
ity to conceptualize the eternal does not ex-
plain all of God’s purposes. So it is good for a
653
Ecclesiastes, Book of
person simply to accept human limitation and
enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.
Ecclesiastes 3:22 is part of a difficult sec-
tion of the book, for 3:16-22 seems to present
an agnostic view of life. There Qoheleth ob-
serves the inequities of life and concludes that
God allows such things for the purpose of “‘sift-
ing” people to show them that they are no
more than beasts. The same principle appears
in 8:11, where Qoheleth observes that when
evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encour-
aged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts
that injustice is present in the world to distin-
guish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew
in that assertion should be translated ‘“‘in and
of themselves.’”’ That is, viewed alone, apart
from God, humankind is no better than ani-
mals. If one adopts a world view that omits
God, there can be no way of knowing what lies
beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that
Qoheleth observes will be corrected only in
the day of judgment. Thus it is best for a per-
son to be content with God’s providence and
not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).
The key to understanding the Book of Eccle-
siastes is the recurring phrase “under the
sun.” That phrase defines Qoheleth’s perspec-
tive. He is not judging all human experience
as vain. Rather, he is observing life ‘““under the
sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle
Paul rendered the same verdict on the created
world in Romans 8:20—23, but went on to say
that God uses all things in his world to work
out good results for his people (Rom 8:28).
Qoheleth’s viewpoint is similarly hopeful.
Qoheleth has often been interpreted as ex-
pressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating
and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In
2:1—-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it
futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an
absolute good. The passages that speak of eat-
ing and drinking refer only to the enjoyment
of those good and necessary things that come
from God’s hand.
Content. The Vanity of the Cycle of History
and Nature (1:1—11). Qoheleth begins his re-
cital of the vanity of life by observing its emp-
tiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the
processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless
(1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history
is meaningless (1:4—-11).
The Vanity of Qoheleth’s Own Experience
(1:12—2:26). In this dramatic section Qohe-
leth looks back to observe the futility of as-
pects of his life that some might have re-
garded as possessing great value. He recalls
his search for wisdom, but pronounces human
philosophy futile (1:12—18). His search for plea-
sure (2:1—-11) also ended in futility. In the light
of this conclusion, Qoheleth hardly sets forth
the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest
Eclipse

good. The search for valid philosophical veri- wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction,
ties is wearisome and futile in its outcome and folly can lead to ruin.
(2:12-17). Human toil is also vain (2:18—23), Qoheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1-
because one can never be sure who will inherit 12:14). The Book of Ecclesiastes began with
the reward of one’s toil (2:21). Qoheleth con- a pronouncement of vanity on all creation,
cludes that the greatest good is to accept and it ends with Qoheleth looking beyond his
God’s providence joyfully (2:24—26), an opti- gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins
mistic note in his message. with a statement of human inability to under-
The Plight of Humanity Apart from God stand the ways of God. Though people are
(3:1—22). Qoheleth’s familiar statement that meant to enjoy life, they must remember that
everything in life has its time (3:1—9) has often the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9,10).
been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But After a beautiful description of old age (12:1—
those verses more probably set forth the unal- 8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in
terability of life’s circumstances. Humankind youth, Qoheleth states his conclusion. A per-
is locked into a continuum from which there is son’s whole duty is to fear God (12:13,14). The
no escape, yet people are able to think in pleasures of youth will burst like a bubble
terms that go beyond the physical (3:11). That and, without God, one will finally have noth-
is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart ing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears
from God, people really are no better than ani- God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.
mals (3:19,20). THomas E. McCoMIsKEY
Conclusions Resulting from Qoheleth’s Obser- See WISDOM, WISDOM LITERATURE; SOLOMON (PER-
vations (4:1-16). The author begins with a SON).
gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to Bibliography. G.A. Barton, A Critical and Exegetical
draw conclusions of permanent value. He Commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes; F. Delitzsch, Com-
points out, for example, that life’s difficulties mentary on the Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes; R. Gordis,
are better faced with a partner than alone Koheleth—The Man and His World and The Wisdom of Eccle-
siastes; AHH. McNeile, An Introduction to Ecclesiastes; A.L.
(4:9-12). Williams, Ecclesiastes.
The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1-
6:12). Qoheleth gives a powerful denuncia- Eclipse. Total or partial obscuration of the
tion of a self-seeking life by focusing on God sun as a result of the passing of the moon be-
(5:1,2,4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of tween the sun and the earth; thus the possible
riches and his concern for the poor (5:8—6:9) explanation for certain unusual astronomical
are themes later emphasizes in the NT. events in the Bible.
Wisdom for Living (7:1—8:17). This fine ex-
ample of OT Wisdom Literature uses a prover- See ASTRONOMY.
bial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references
(7:23-29) to give insight into how one may Ed. Name of an altar built in God’s honor
find true satisfaction. The whole passage up- by the Reubenites, Gadites, and the half tribe
holds the virtue of godly wisdom. Qoheleth’s of Manasseh (Jos 22:10,34) when these tribes
theology of contentment underlies his obser- took possession of Gilead. The tribes west of
vation that God is the source of adversity as the Jordan opposed the erection of the altar (v
well as prosperity (7:14). He affirms that one 11). The Hebrew Masoretic text and the Greek
should accept both as coming from God. Ap- Septuagint do not contain the word, but the
plying wisdom to governmental authority KJv and Rv insert it on the authority of a few
(8:2-9), Qoheleth counsels the reader to obey manuscripts.
the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the
same advice in Romans 13. Qoheleth strikes Edar. KJv spelling of Eder in Genesis 35:21.
an optimistic note (8:13), exalting the fear of See EDER (PLACE) # 1.
God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for
he shows that fearing God leads to genuine Eden. 1. Place where Adam and Eve lived
satisfaction. until their sin against God (Gn 2:8,15; 3:23,24).
Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices See GARDEN OF EDEN.
(9:1-18). “Under the sun,” apart from God, 2. Alternate form of Beth-eden in Ezekiel
there are no apparent differences among hu- 27s 2an
man beings (9:1—6,11,12). Great deeds often go See BETH-EDEN.
unnoticed and unthanked (9:13—16). A person
should nonetheless be content, for life does of- Eder (Person). 1. Member of Benjamin’s
fer certain benefits (9:7—10). tribe and the son of Beriah, a leader in the
Wisdom and Folly (10:1—20). Wisdom in town of Aijalon (1 Chr 8:15, Ksv Ader).
the OT basically means knowing God, and 2. Levite of Merari’s clan and the son of
folly is rejection of God. Qoheleth shows how Mushi (1 Chr 23:23; 24:30).

654

Eder (Place). 1. First camping place of Jacob
between Ephrath (Bethlehem) and Hebron fol-
lowing Rachel’s death. The tower of Eder,
meaning “the tower of the flock,’”’ was perhaps
a watchtower constructed for shepherds to
guard their flocks (Gn 35:21, kKJv Edar). It was
located a short distance from Bethlehem. Its
exact location is unknown.
2. One of the 29 cities located near the bor-
der of Edom in the southern extremity of the
land allotted to Judah’s tribe for an inheri-
tance. It is listed between Kabzeel and Jagur
in Joshua 15:21. Its site is unknown.
Edom, Edomites. Land and its inhabitants
found on the high plateau to the south and
southeast of the Dead Sea. The biblical term
Edom, meaning “red,” denotes either the
name of the land or the name of Esau, in re-
membrance of the red pottage for which he
exchanged his birthright (Gn 25:30; 36:1,8,19).
The country of Edom was also known as Seir
(Gn 32:3; 36:30; Nm 24:18).
Geography. The northern boundary of
Edom was the Wadi Zered, the “Brook of the
Willows” (Is 15:7). In ancient geological times
the area was thrust up to a considerable
height, and dark red sandstone cliffs were ex-
posed along the western side where the land
falls steeply into the Arabah, the southern ex-
tension of the deep depression in which the
Dead Sea and the Jordan Valley lie. The Edom
plateau rises to over 5000 feet, reaching over
5600 feet in places. The area divides into two
unequal parts. The region of Punon forms
something of a valley between the smaller
northern part and the longer southern part.
The northern section is not quite so high,
655
Edom, Edomites
though in a limited area near Rashadiyeh it
reaches 5300 feet. The southern section is
longer and generally higher, being over 5000
feet throughout the central ridge and touching
5687 feet at one point. To the east the escarp-
ment does not fall below 4000 feet except in
the north. The desert lies beyond and limits
expansion eastward. To the west the land falls
away rather steeply into the Arabah. The ex-
tent of Edom to the west varied from time to
time. It was comparatively easy to gain access
to the Negeb of southern Judah in this area,
and Edomite encroachments were made from
time to time. The southern frontier was
marked by an extensive limestone scarp at the
southern edge of the plateau. This ran east-
ward from Ain Gharandal in the Arabah. Be-
yond this barrier to the south lay rocky unin-
habitable desert, through which merchants
must have journeyed to the port at Ezion-
geber for trade.
The land of Edom was, on the whole, inhos-
pitable though there were areas where farm-
ing could be undertaken, particularly in the
northeast. Here too herds of animals could be
grazed. Edom’s wealth, however, came largely
from the caravan trade which came up from
the south and brought goods from India and
South Arabia to the Mediterranean coast and
Egypt. The important King’s Highway (Nm
21:22) passed through Edom on its way north.
History. Biblically, the name Edom does
not appear in the genealogy in Genesis ro. It
first appears in the story of Esau in Genesis
25:30. Esau was called Edom from the red
color of the pottage for which he sold his birth-
right to his brother Jacob. In Genesis 36 there
is reference to an Edomite kingdom at a time
The Wadi Tubgha and the
mountains of Edom, looking
north from the Snake Monu-
ment at Petra.
Edom, Edomites
well before the appearance of an Israelite king-
dom, though it is possible that the “‘chiefs’’ of
Edom were tribal chieftains or nondynastic
leaders like the Israelite judges.
The earliest nonbiblical references come
from Egypt and seem to confirm this. Amarna
Letter No. 288 (early 14th century Bc) refers to
the ‘‘lands of Seir,” the crossing of the Shashu
tribes of Edom into Egypt is mentioned by
Seti II (1214-1208 Be) and Rameses III (1198-
1166 BC). There are no Egyptian references to
towns or rulers, only to tribal Bedouin from
Seir-Edom. There is some evidence that Rame-
ses II was in Transjordan about 1280-1270 BC,
but there is no clear evidence that there was a
centralized government before the 13th cen-
tury Bc. Rather, the land was occupied by
mainly seminomadic people. From then on,
permanent settlements began to appear, a fact
that has relevance for the date of the exodus.
The Song of Moses in Exodus 15 refers to the
“chiefs of Edom.” By the time of the exodus
there appears to have been a kingdom of
Edom (Nm 20:14,18,20—23; 33:37; 34:3). The Is-
raelites skirted round Edom on their journey
to the Promised Land (Jgs 5:4; 11:17,18).
At the time of the rise of the Israelite monar-
chy Saul fought successfully against Edom (1
Sm 14:47). Doeg the Edomite was the chief of
Saul’s herdsmen (1 Sm 21:7; 22:9,18,22). At the
beginning of the roth century Bc David de-
feated Edom in the Valley of Salt and slew
many Edomites (2 Sm 8:13; 1 Chr 18:12). There-
after David placed garrisons in Edom and the
Edomites became his subjects (2 Sm 8:14). It is
not clear whether David saw in these people a
military threat or whether he was interested in
the supply of copper from their land and the
potential wealth that would flow from the cara-
van traffic passing through Edom. David's suc-
cesses resulted in the flight of a certain Hadad,
who was “‘of the royal house of Edom” to Egypt
(1 Kgs 11:14-17), where he married a member
of the Egyptian royal family (1 Kgs 11:18—20).
On David’s death Hadad returned to Edom,
where he became king. It would seem that a
monarchical form of government had devel-
oped by David’s time. Solomon continued to
exert influence in Edom. He had access to the
port of Ezion-geber (1 Kgs 9:26). It is not clear
how strong the government was in Edom.
The biblical records provide no information
about Edom from the end of Solomon’s reign
until the days of Jehoshaphat of Judah (872—
848 Bc). Jehoshaphat was able to occupy the
port of Ezion-geber, although his ships were
wrecked there, possibly by the Edomites (1
Kgs 22:48; 2 Chr 20:36,37). Israel combined
with Judah and Edom in an unsuccessful cam-
paign against King Mesha of Moab (2 Kgs 3:4—
27). Edom was able to throw off Judah's au-
656
thority under King Jehoram (853-841 Bc) and
set up a king of its own (2 Kgs 8:20—22). It
remained independent until the days of King
Amaziah of Judah (796-767 Bc), who con-
quered Edom as far south as Sela, defeating a
large army of the Edomites in the Valley of
Salt (2 Kgs 14:7; 2 Chr 25:11-13). This gave
Judah control of the copper mines in the Pu-
non area. King Uzziah of Judah (792-740 Bc)
was able to push his control south to Elath
(Ezion-geber; 2 Kgs 14:22; 2 Chr 26:1,2). Before
the end of the 8th century Bc, in the days of
Ahaz (735-715 BC), Edom defeated Judah and
recovered Elath (2 Kgs 16:6). Thereafter Judah
lost control over Edom.
During the 8th century Bc the Assyrians be-
gan to move into Transjordan. About 800
Adad-nirari III (810—782) claimed to have con-
quered several of these western states and to
have imposed tribute. Then Tiglath-pileser III
(745-727) received tribute from Qaus-Malaku
of Edom. Sargon II (722—705) spoke of an un-
named ruler of Edom who was involved in
the rebellion of Ashdod in 713. Sennacherib
(705-681) spoke of a certain Aiarammu, who
brought gifts from Edom. Esar-haddon (681—
669) referred to Qaus-Gabri king of Edom,
who came to Nineveh with 22 vassals to
swear allegiance. Under Ashurbanipal (669—
627) Edom appears on Assyrian records. There-
after Assyria itself was defeated by the Baby-
lonians. Under the Babylonians Edom seems
to have remained a subservient vassal, al-
though in 594 it joined other small nations in
discussing rebellion (Jer 27). When Nebuchad-
nezzar attacked these, however, Moab and
Edom were not involved. In the overthrow of
Jerusalem in 586 Edom remained neutral and
even allowed some refugees from Judah to
shelter there for a time (Jer 40:11). The
prophet Obadiah castigated Edom for not as-
sisting Judah at the time of the Babylonian
invasion (Ob 11). Instead, they raided Judah,
handed over captives to Babylon, and pos-
sessed lands in the Negeb area to the south
(Ez 35).
A long history of enmity existed between
Judah and Edom, and several prophets spoke
unfavorably about Edom (Is 11:14; 34:5—17;
Ez 32:29; Jl 3:19; Am 1:11,12; Mal 1:2—4). In
the 6th century Bc Edom entered a period of
decline. Several cities were abandoned. At the
same time Edomite colonies west of the Ara-
bah in the southern hill country of Judah
emerged, and by Roman times there was a
province of Idumaea, which was the descen-
dant of the Persian province of Edom, with
its administrative center at Lachish. In the
old Edomite homeland Arab groups began to
move in. Finally, ancient Edom became the
home of the Nabataeans.

eT pg IEE
The urn tomb, located in the southern part of the city of Petra.
Archaeology. Limited archaeological re-
search has been carried out in Edom. Tawilan,
Tell el-Kheleifeh, Umm el Biyara, Petra, and
some small border fortresses have been ex-
cavated, and an extensive surface
has been undertaken. The Edomites proper
emerged at the end of the Late Bronze Age,
about 1300 Bc, and from the Early Iron Age on-
ward evidence of settled towns has been found.
Some aspects of Edomite culture have become
clear. A few pieces of writing, notably a seal
from Tell el-Kheleifeh, have shown
Edomites used a script not unlike the Hebrew
and Moabite scripts. A number of ostraca have
produced personal names and names of deities,
such as Qaus, which appears as an element in
personal names. Artifacts such as pottery,
tools, and ornaments are becoming available
in increasing quantities, and architectural fea-
tures are becoming known. At present, how-
ever, archaeological information is compara-
tively sparse.
Edrei. 1. City of residence for Og, king of
Bashan (Dt 1:4; 3:10; Jos 12:4; 13:12). It was
located on the southern branch of the Yarmuk
River, which was the southern border of Ba-
shan. At this strategic point Og could look
over the neighboring region for invaders from
the south or from the east, where the land
turned into a desert. At Edrai, Moses was able
Education
to defeat Og before destroying the city (Nm
21:33-35; Dt 3:1-6). The territory was allotted
to the Machirites, the eastern clan of the tribe
of Manasseh (Jos 13:31). The modern site for
Edrei seems to be Derba, a town of 5,000 in
Syria. Many important remains from antiq-
uity survive in this town, including shops, cis-
_terns, streets, and underground caves.
2. Fortified city allotted to Naphtali (Jos
19:37). It was near Kadesh, and may possibly
be identified with the modern Tell Khureibeh.
JoHN A. THOMPSON
Education. The original purpose of Jewish
education was to teach children to know and
understand their special relationship with
God, to teach them to serve him, and to edu-
cate them in “holiness.” Later Jewish educa-
tion included character development and the
history of God’s people (particularly through
rehearsing his acts of deliverance). Because of
that education, the Jews knew the Mosaic law
and their own history, and during periods of
subjection to foreign powers they were able to
maintain their national pride. In modern
times they have reestablished themselves as a
BF nation (1948).
Education in the Home. The priority
given to education stemmed from the value of
children in the Jewish family. Children were a
great joy and reward (Ps 127:3-5). Education
in the home began soon after a child could
talk, and certainly by the age of three. Parents
taught prayers and songs which children
survey learned by repetition, just as children today
learn nursery rhymes.
At home, children became aware of certain
religious items and symbols. They were en-
couraged to ask about the meaning of the an-
nual Passover ritual (Ex 12:26), which served
throughout Hebrew history as a fundamental
that the means of instruction about the nature and sig-
nificance of God’s power in human life. Chil-
dren undoubtedly had questions about objects
they encountered, whether sacred vessels, or-
naments, or clothing used in the tabernacle or
temple worship, or more mundane things of
everyday life.
Parental responsibility for education was
clearly defined. A father was expected to give
his son instruction in religion and in the his-
tory of the Hebrew people. He was also spe-
cifically required to teach his son a trade, of-
ten his own, since a boy without a trade was
thought to have been trained for life as a
thief. A father’s other responsibilities in-
cluded finding his son a wife and teaching
him to swim.
Rabbis held that women could not study the
Law because they were “of light mind.” Influen-
tial women in the Bible include Deborah (Jgs
657
Education
4:4,5), Jael (JIgs 4:18—24), the wise woman of Te-
koa (2 Sm 14:2—20), the wise woman of Abel (2
Sm 20:16—22), Lois, Eunice, and Priscilla (Acts
18:2; Rom 16:3; 1 Cor 16:19; 2Tm 1:5).
The Jewish mother played a considerable
role in a child’s education, particularly in the
earliest years. A mother was expected to assist
in teaching her sons, but her major responsibil-
ity was to train her daughters. Since daugh-
ters were less highly esteemed than sons, a
girl’s education took place entirely in the
home. The mother was responsible for educat-
ing her daughters to be successful homemak-
ers: obedient, capable, and virtuous wives.
Girls learned the skills of cooking, spinning,
weaving, dyeing, caring for children, and man-
aging slaves. They learned how to grind grain
and at times helped with the harvest. Occa-
sionally they were expected to help guard the
vineyard or, if they had no brothers, to help
care for the flocks.
Girls probably learned music and dancing
and were expected to have good manners and
high moral standards. They were taught to
read, and some learned to write and reckon
weights and measures. In exceptional circum-
stances a girl might receive an advanced edu-
cation privately at home from a tutor.
Even when education was entirely home-
centered, it is probable that most wealthy and
especially royal children were instructed by a
tutor, following a tradition established by
other Near Eastern peoples.
Religious Education. At an early age chil-
dren accompanied their parents to religious
services. At the great festivals they were intro-
duced to important episodes in Jewish history.
The Jews, an agricultural people, believed that
agricultural knowledge had been revealed by
God and that tending the ground was a basic
human responsibility. Like some other Near
Eastern nations, they believed that the land
belonged to God. They were merely tenants. If
a crop failed, it was because God withheld
rain, but he would do that only if the people
were sinful.
The celebrations of the Passover, Pentecost,
and the feast of tabernacles were associated
with the harvest. Throughout the biblical pe-
riod those festivals remained closely identified
with the growing season. Such occasions be-
came educational opportunities for children.
They learned that the Passover commemo-
rated the deliverance of their ancestors from
slavery in Egypt. At Pentecost the Jewish peo-
ple remembered God giving the Law to Moses
on Mt Sinai. The feast of tabernacles, with its
green booths made from tree branches, com-
memorated God’s faithfulness to the Jews on
their seemingly endless journey to the Prom-
ised Land.
658
. An example of a ceremony used as a teach-
ing tool is the Passover ritual, which of the
three great festivals was the least directly con-
nected in origin with the harvest. That feast,
which was immediately followed by a seven-
day period known as the feast of unleavened
bread (Lv 23:6), was associated with the begin-
ning of the barley harvest in April. (The exo-
dus from Egypt had taken place at that time
of year.)
In the Passover ceremony the priest would
take one of the first sheaves of the barley har-
vest and wave it before the Lord (Lv 23:9—11).
Before that, the men would choose a barley
field at random and bind some of the best
sheaves, leaving them standing. The following
evening three men would go out to that field
with sickles and baskets to reap those spe-
cifically prepared sheaves. As onlookers, in-
cluding the children, gathered to observe the
ceremony, the reapers would ask the crowd
certain traditional questions. Year by year the
children saw that ritual and heard the an-
swers. The barley was cut and taken to the
temple court, where it was threshed and win-
nowed. Some of it was mixed with oil and in-
cense, and used as an offering. The remainder
went to the priests.
Formal Education. Jewish education dur-
ing the biblical period consisted of acquiring
an intimate knowledge of the Law, studying
the history of the Jewish people, and becom-
ing proficient in reading, writing, and a cer-
tain amount of arithmetic. To that, incidental
information such as the medicinal value of cer-
tain herbs (see 1 Kgs 4:33) might sometimes be
added.
Teachers. As one of their functions priests
had from the time of Moses instructed the
people in the knowledge of God. As officers of
the synagogue the Levites also performed a
teaching role (cf. Dt 33:10; 2 Chr 35:3). Before
the exile the prophets assumed the role of in-
structors, teaching the historical heritage of
the people and acting as critics of injustice
and improper social behavior. Their responsi-
bility was to interpret the Law for contempo-
rary society. By the 4th century Bc the proph-
ets’ role as instructors had passed to the
scribes and to others designated as teachers.
In the centuries before Christ, scribes not
only transcribed and preserved the traditions
in written form but were students and inter-
preters of the Law. The scribes were known as
doctors of the Law (Lk 5:17 KJv), lawyers (Mt
22:35), and rabbis (Mt 23:8). All higher educa-
tion was in their hands, and they developed a
complex system of instruction known as “the
tradition of the elders” (Mt 15:2—6). Although
the scribes needed leisure for their scholarly
pursuits, they did not despise workers. Most of

them, in fact, when necessary practiced
trade as a means of support.
Although the scribes were influential in the
time of Christ (Mt 23:1,2), they undoubtedly
found, like the prophets before them, that
their words were not always heeded.
scribes, who exercised an important influence
over contemporary life and morals, were nota-
ble for their fierce opposition to Jesus (Mk 2:6)
and to the early church (Acts 4:5; 6:12).
By the NT era the entire community was
expected to establish and maintain elemen-
tary schools. The community was also respon-
sible for financing the education of poor or
orphaned children. Out of high regard for ear-
lier priests, prophets, and scribes, and be-
cause of the eminent position given to educa-
tion, teachers were highly esteemed by the
Jewish people. Because God had given them
the Law, it was of greatest importance.
who worked as God’s servant expounding the
Law was therefore the most important person
in the community. To be a teacher was life’s
highest privilege, the most significant task a
man could perform.
Teachers were expected to demonstrate ex-
ceptional character along with their academic
qualifications. They were expected to keep
children from having contact with anything
harmful. They were not to show bitterness or
give preference to one child over another.
Rather than threatening, they were to explain
right and wrong and the harmfulness of sin.
Teachers were expected to keep promises to
children lest the students grow accustomed to
broken words and lies. Teachers were to be
even tempered, never impatient or lacking in
understanding, always prepared to repeat ex-
planations. It was said that children should be
treated like young heifers, with their burdens
increased daily. Yet any teacher who was too
severe was dismissed.
A teacher was warned not to jeopardize the
dignity of his position by familiarity with stu-
dents, such as joking, eating, or drinking in
their presence.
Subject Matter. Early education consisted
of learning the Law through listening and oral
repetition, along with the study of the written
text. The content of the Law covered three
main areas: ceremonial, civil, and
Students needed to master these, preparing
themselves to take responsibility for observing
the Law as adults.
The Scriptures contained such a variety of
writings that pupils learned about religion,
history, law, morals, and manners, plus read-
ing; writing, and arithmetic. They
from great literature; along with the Law they
used the books of Psalms, Proverbs, and Eccle-
siastes extensively as texts. The Dead Sea
Education
a Scrolls have shown that some classical He-
brew was still being spoken in NT times. Stu-
dents who commonly spoke Aramaic or Greek
were faced with a difficult situation when
learning the Hebrew of the OT. The problem
The was especially complex because the Hebrew
was written without any vowel sounds. Those
‘had to be memorized in association with the
consonants of the text.
Since the ancient Hebrews were generally
regarded as the most proficient musicians and
singers in the Near East, it is probable that
basic instruction in singing and playing instru-
ments, such as the pipe and harp, was re-
ceived at home. Even in later times it is un-
likely that music formed part of the regular
academic education of Jewish boys, although
persons who served as temple musicians and
singers must have received some formal in-
One struction. Although no Hebrew hymns have
survived in musical form, temple singers
would almost certainly have been familiar
with the kind of music theory known among
the Canaanites. (A musical text recovered
from Ugarit [Ras Shamra] consisted of a bal-
lad or a hymn inscribed on clay with curious
musical symbols that long defied identifica-
tion. Dating to perhaps 1800 Bc, that Canaan-
ite text has been described as the “‘oldest sheet
music in the world.’)
During the exile especially, great emphasis
was placed on recording and preserving an-
cient customs and ceremonies in order to
maintain the distinctiveness of Hebrew cul-
ture. The captives recognized the importance
of keeping alive their national heritage and
the Law during the years they were living in
an alien culture.
The synagogue developed during the exile
as a place for the study of religion and for
prayer, becoming the center of instruction in
the Jewish faith. Previously the temple at Jeru-
salem had been the only place for sacrifice.
Because that ritual could not be performed in
Babylon, it was natural for the synagogue to
increase in importance in worship as well as
in education.
The exile brought about fundamental
changes in Jewish life in areas other than the
purely religious. Education received consider-
criminal. able stimulation from the Jewish exiles’ con-
tact with the more sophisticated culture of
the Babylonians. The Babylonian law code
was a precise and well-established feature of
life. Schools and libraries in Babylonia had
been in existence for many centuries. Mesopo-
tamian knowledge of medicine, astronomy,
studied mathematics, architecture, and engineering
was far superior to that of the Jews. In that
intellectual environment the literature of the
Jews took on new meaning; it was from that
659
Education
period that the books of Ezekiel and Daniel
emerged.
In the postexilic period, teaching was based
extensively on Proverbs and the apocryphal
books of Ecclesiasticus and the Wisdom of
Solomon. From those works the Jews received
practical training for a successful life. The
scribes taught that wisdom came from God
and that those who obeyed the command-
ments would bring joy and honor to others.
Under Persian rule in the 6th century Bc the
Jews had been encouraged to return to Jerusa-
lem and rebuild the temple. After 332 Bc, when
Alexander the Great defeated the Persian king
Darius, strong efforts were made to Hellenize
the conquered peoples. The Greek language
was introduced along with Greek religion, po-
litical procedures, and educational methods.
The drive for Hellenization continued under
the rule of the Ptolemies (a Macedonian family
line that ruled Egypt) and the Seleucids (a Syr-
ian dynasty). Coincident with the establish-
ment of foreign rule came the dominance of
the Jewish priesthood in Judean political mat-
ters. Greek influence was seen in the enriched
aesthetic appreciation typical of certain Jew-
ish rulers.
Although Greek philosophy and sports re-
mained outside the realm of Jewish education,
there was a noticeable decline in Jewish reli-
gious and moral standards in the Hellenistic
period. Some Jews were eager to obtain ad-
vancement from the foreign masters by adopt-
ing the Greek culture. Others fought desper-
ately to preserve their Jewish heritage. During
Roman times the foreign influence was again
ignored by faithful Jews whenever possible.
Teaching Methods. Teaching methods, de-
veloped from memorizing the Law, stressed
the importance of retentiveness and recollec-
tion. Children were taught to memorize as
soon as they could talk, and were trained to
repeat the exact words so that no nuance of
meaning would be altered. The alphabet was
taught and memorized by being repeatedly
written and drilled. Students copied and re-
copied passages from the written Law in pre-
cise, neat handwriting. Any piece of writing
containing a mistake was considered danger-
ous, since it might imprint the wrong word or
spelling on the learner’s mind. Reading aloud
was recommended as an aid to memorization.
To aid learning, each boy was also given a
personal text beginning with the first letter of
his name and ending with the last. As soon as
he demonstrated his ability to read, he re-
ceived a scroll which contained the first words
of Deuteronomy 6:4: ‘‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord
our God is one Lord.” That was recited every
morning and evening in postexilic times,
along with the Hallel (or psalm of praise), the
660
story of creation, and the main part of the
Law contained in Leviticus.
Teachings also came in the form of prov-
erbs or parables, a device later used by Jesus
(Mk 4:1,2). An open sharing of knowledge oc-
curred in ‘‘question and answer’’ periods (for
example, the visit of the 12-year-old Jesus to
the temple in Jerusalem, Lk 2:46,47).
Very little information is available on edu-
cation in the early Christian era. We know
that Jesus could read and expound the Scrip-
tures and was knowledgeable enough to dis-
cuss theology with the learned men in the
temple. He probably learned at home and re-
ceived the elementary education common to
most Jewish boys at that period.
Discipline. Discipline, almost always an
important element in education, was impor-
tant to the ancient Hebrews. A system of re-
ward and punishment was used in which cor-
poral chastisement was normal. Punishment
was considered to be an outward symbol of
God’s love and concern for the instruction of
his people (Ps 94:8-13), although the Jews as a
people did not always learn from those correc-
tions (Jer 5:3; Am 4:6—13). A child was thought
to need “breaking’’ like a horse: “A horse that
is untamed turns out to be stubborn, and a
son unrestrained turns out to be wilful’
(Ecclus 30:8).
Adult Education. When Ezra the scribe re-
turned from Babylon with a copy of the Law,
he taught it to the Levites and to the people.
That material, together with the Book of Prov-
erbs and literature from both the preexilic and
exilic periods, became basic in Jewish educa-
tion. In the postexilic period, priests traveled
to the towns, addressing people in the syna-
gogue on the sabbath and in the square on
market days, when a large crowd would be
gathered. Some individuals may have ex-
tended their learning through discussion with
the elders (cf. Ez 8:1).
For those who continued their education,
the next phase was probably instruction by
scribes. The scribes, leaders of a Jewish sect
called Pharisees, had developed Ezra’s princi-
ples into strict rules on tithing, ritual purity,
and synagogue worship. As a young man,
Saul of Tarsus came to Jerusalem to study
with Gamaliel, an honored rabbi (Acts 22:3).
At that time the curriculum was an advanced
study of theological law, both written and
oral, along with the rites and ceremonies of
Jewish culture.
School Buildings. By NT times some
schools operated in special buildings and oth-
ers in the teachers’ own houses, but most were
attached to the synagogue. When a separate
building was designed, it was considered inad-
visable to construct it in a crowded area. In a
 Education

large town the community was expected to

provide two schools, especially if a river di-
vided the town. A school did not operate in the
heat of the day (between ro am and 3 pm), and
would meet only four hours a day in July and
August. Class size was expected to be 25, with
a teacher and an assistant for 40 students and
two teachers for 50. At school the boys sat on
the ground at the teacher’s feet and learned
from the Scriptures. Thus the school became
known as the ‘“‘House of the Book.”
Education in Surrounding Cultures. The
theological emphasis of Hebrew education con-
trasted sharply with the aims of education in
Greece and Rome. Those societies, however,
were also concerned to develop a particular
type of character.
In Sparta the purpose of educational train-
ing was to develop young men to be fighters
who would subject themselves to the welfare of
the state. Character development was achieved
by eliminating luxuries and by systematically
disciplining mind and body through physical
activity. Survival techniques encouraged re-
sourcefulness and initiative. Girls received the
same education, since it was considered impor- bash
SAV
dey
fee
tant to develop women who could give birth to
strong watriors. Egyptian uniconsonantal sign list.
In Athens education was deemed essential
to life. Because transmission of culture would
enable boys to become perfect citizens, they back,” following up that conviction with fre-
were taught letters, music, morals and man- quent use of a cane.
ners, mathematics, and gymnastics (develop- Literacy Among the Jews. The extent of
ment of a healthy body). Education was ide- literacy among Jews over the centuries is diffi-
ally a noble pursuit, a training of the mind, cult to determine, but indications can be
the birthright of every citizen; but in practice found from specific examples. The Book of
it was restricted to a small section of the aris- Joshua describes three men chosen from each
tocracy. Earning a living was despised by the tribe who had to prepare a written report
educated as a way of life suitable only for about the land of Canaan (Jos 18:4,8,9). Later,
slaves. Women received no education. The Gideon captured a youth who was able to
teacher in elementary schools was a lowly make a written list of the important men of
individual. the city (Jgs 8:14). Writing was probably a
Roman education prepared a boy mentally common skill since the Israelites were ex-
and physically for farm, battlefield, or wher- horted to use it frequently (Dt 6:9; 27:2—-8).
ever his services were required by the state. Simple mathematical terms could be written
Education was a family responsibility, the boy and understood by boys, and there are indica-
learning first from his mother, then from his tions of familiarity with the geometrical rela-
father. Basic reading, writing, arithmetic, lan- tionship of a circle’s radius and circumference
guage structure, and debating skills were (the concept of pi; 2 Chr 4:2). The development
taught, sometimes by private tutors. When of cursive script implies widespread use of
schools were developed, they seem to have writing from at least the 8th century Bc. It is
been noisy, storefront activities operated by noteworthy that a synagogue service could be
poorly paid teachers. Girls were taught house- performed by any ro men in the congregation,
keeping skills at home. which presupposes that there were more than
Egyptian boys attended the ‘‘House of the ro men in any synagogue who were literate
Books” for their studies and learned reading enough to fulfill that duty.
and elementary arithmetic. Writing in hiero- When fears of Hellenism were strong and
glyphs on papyrus was the most difficult task. the existence of Judaism was threatened in
Like students in other cultures, boys were sub- the 1st century BC, it was decreed that every
ject to corporal punishment. Egyptian teach- Jewish boy should attend elementary school.
ers considered that “a boy’s ears are in his Since such a system probably already ex-

661
Eduth
isted, that decree merely made attendance
compulsory for all males up to 16 or 17 years
of age. No doubt the reason was that thor-
ough knowledge and careful observance of
the Law were vital to the survival of the
Jewish heritage.
Joshua ben-Gamala (high priest, AD 63-65)
is considered the founder of universal educa-
tion. His instructions for setting up schools in
towns and villages were precise, requiring at-
tendance of boys from the age of six or seven
years. The community was responsible for set-
ting up a school and maintaining a teacher in
any town where there were 10 Jewish families.
Fathers were required to see that their sons
attended school. When a family lived in an
isolated area, a teacher often lived with the
family. Teachers were probably paid either by
the family or from a community tax, although
scribes were not paid directly for the instruc-
tion they gave. It is difficult to know how far
the goal of universal elementary education
was attained. HAZEL W. PERKIN
Bibliography. J.A. Grassi, The Teacher in the Primitive
Church and the Teacher Today; G. Hodgson, Primitive Chris-
tian Education; H.I. Marrou, History of Education in Antiq-
uity; N. Morris, The Jewish School; FH. Swift, Education in
Ancient Israel.
Eduth. Hebrew word usually translated
“testimony,” “witness,” or “commandment.” It
is used with reference to the tabernacle (Nm
17:7,8; 18:2; 2 Chr 24:6), the ark (Ex 25:16), the
Ten Commandments (Ex 31:18), and the Law
of God in general (Ps 19:8).
The transliterated form appears only in
the title of Psalm 60 in the Hebrew phrase
Shushan Eduth. The phrase means “Lily of
Testimony.”
See Music aNnp Musica INSTRUMENTS.
Eglah. One of King David’s wives and
mother of Ithream (2 Sm 3:5; 1 Chr 3:3). Born
while David was still in Hebron, Ithream was
the 6th son.
Eglaim. Town mentioned in Isaiah 15:8. It
cannot be located with certainty, but it was
probably in southern Moab. A village called
Aigaleim was mentioned by Eusebius and an-
other called Agalla by Josephus (Antiq. 14.1.4)
However, their identification with Eglaim is
uncertain.
Eglath-shelishiyah. Place in Moab men-
tioned in Isaiah 15:5 and Jeremiah 48:34 in pro-
nouncements of judgment. The name means
literally “the third Eglath.” It was probably
near Zoar at the southern end of the Dead Sea,
but its exact location is uncertain.
662
Eglon (Person). Moabite king who captured
Jericho and held it for 18 years, exacting a trib-
ute from Israel. Ehud, an Israelite judge pre-
tending to bring tribute, killed Eglon (Jgs
312-30).
See MoaB, MoaBIrTeE.
Eglon (Place). Town situated 7 miles south-
west of Lachish, assigned to Judah’s tribe for
an inheritance (Jos 15:39). It is generally identi-
fied with the modern Tell el-Hesi.
Egypt, Brook of. See Brook oF EcypT.
Egypt, Egyptians. Egypt figured signifi-
cantly as a stage on which the biblical narra-
tive was enacted. Here Abraham lived in time
of famine. Joseph, his great-grandson, was
sold into slavery in Egypt and rose to a posi-
tion equivalent to that of prime minister.
Through Joseph’s intercession, Jacob and the
rest of the Hebrew patriarchal family living in
Palestine came to reside in the eastern delta
region of Goshen, again as a result of famine.
Initially treated favorably, they were later re-
duced to bondage; crying to God, ultimately
they were released through the ro plagues.
Thereafter for 40 years they wandered in the
Egyptian Sinai, where they received the Law,
specifications for building the tabernacle, and
instructions for the priestly and sacrificial sys-
tems.
After the destruction of Jerusalem in 586, a
group of Jews forced Jeremiah to go with them
to Egypt (Jer 43:6,7), where they became nu-
merous during the intertestamental period
and gradually forgot their Hebrew. At Alexan-
dria, Jews translated the OT into Greek (the
Septuagint) between about 250 and 150 BC.
This became the Bible of the early church, es-
pecially of those outside Palestine.
When the NT opened, Egypt served as a ref-
uge for Joseph, Mary, and Jesus as they fled to
escape the assassination attempts of Herod
the Great (Mt 2:13—23). At several other points,
Hebrew and Egyptian history intersected—for
example, when Shishak I invaded Palestine in
the days of Rehoboam (1 Kgs 14:25—28).
Geography. Egypt is the gift of the Nile,
without which it could not exist. From time
immemorial the Nile has deposited a thin
layer of rich silt each year as it overflowed its
banks. This ribbon of loam along its course
contrasts vividly with the sterile sands which
stretch from the river valley often as far as one
can see. Then, having deposited this soil, the
Nile provides water for its irrigation. This is
necessary in a land that receives only 6 to 8
inches of rainfall per year along the Mediterra-
nean, 2 inches or less per year at Cairo, and
less than that farther south.

The Nile valley is a tube, shut in on either
side by cliffs and corked up at the southern
end by cataracts, six places where
has failed to cut a clear channel and where
rocks are piled in irregular masses in the
stream bed. From cliff to cliff the Nile valley
ranges from about 10 to 31 miles in width be-
tween Cairo and Aswan. But the cultivated
area along this stretch is only about 6 to 1o
miles wide, and narrows to 1 or 2 miles in
width around Aswan. This cultivated tract is
only about 5,000 square miles.
But Egypt is more than the valley. It is also
the delta, a pie-shaped area north of Cairo also
deposited by the Nile over the millennia. The
delta measures some 125 miles north and
south, and 115 miles east and west. Its more
heavily populated southern region provided
ancient Egyptians with some 5,000
miles of farmland—making the total of valley
and delta about 10,000 square miles, roughly
equal to the state of Maryland.
West of the Nile extends a chain of oases,
the largest of which is the Fayum, about 70
miles southwest of Cairo. In the center of the
Fayum is Lake Qarun, which today covers go
square miles and is about 17 feet deep. It is
surrounded by about a half million acres of
good farmland.
Ancient Egypt extended some 125 miles
from the Mediterranean to Cairo
Egypt) and another 600 miles from Cairo to
Aswan (Upper Egypt). At the height of its
power, Egypt also controlled the valley from
the rst cataract at Aswan south to the 4th
cataract (Nubia). Thus its domain
a total of some 1,100 miles south from the
Mediterranean.
Egypt’s most important resource
rich loam along the Nile. On it in antiquity
farmers raised grains, such as barley, emmer,
and wheat. Onions, leeks, beans, and lentils
were common vegetables. Dates, figs, and
grapes were the most widely grown fruits. Oil
came from castor-oil plants and sesame rather
than from the olive, as in other Mediterranean
lands. Flax provided linen for clothing. Domes-
ticated animals included oxen, cattle, sheep,
goats, pigs, donkeys, and horses.
Another important resource was
dant supply of stone. Granite mountains rise
between the Nile and the Red Sea, and depos-
its of alabaster and other fine stone are found
in the same region. South of Aswan stand the
granite mountains of Nubia. The quarries of
Syene at Aswan are famous for their ex-
tremely hard and durable red granite. Gold
was reasonably plentiful in the Nubian moun-
tains, and gold-bearing quartz veins were
found in the mountains east of the Nile. Egyp-
tians controlled the copper and turquoise
Egypt, Egyptians
mines of the Sinai during much of their impor-
tant historical periods. In early antiquity
the river some timber was available in Nubia for build-
ing the barges that carried the huge loads of
stone for construction of pyramids, temples,
and other magnificent structures.
_* The Nile itself was an all-weather highway.
One could float northward with the current
and sail southward against the weak current
(3 miles per hour) by means of the prevailing
northerly winds. In fact, the Nile was the road
of ancient Egypt. Land routes normally con-
ducted traffic only to the river’s edge. In addi-
tion to the massive north-south commerce,
ferry boats regularly moved from shore to
shore.
Along the river grew papyrus reeds, from
which writing material could be made. And
square along the Nile, clay was deposited from which
could be made pottery and sun-dried bricks
for the houses of the poor.
The ancient Egyptians lived in comparative
isolation and peace in their valley home. The
cataracts on the south, the deserts on east and
west, and the harborless coast of the Mediter-
ranean protected them from invasion and left
them free to develop a homogeneous culture.
Outside influences could sift in chiefly at the
two northern corners of the delta. There were
Semitic incursions from the east and Libyans,
(Lower possibly of European origin, from the west. De-
fenses were erected to protect against both.
The security of their valley home and the regu-
lar provision of the sun and the Nile gave the
Egyptians a sense of confidence and well-
extended being that was not the lot of other peoples of
the ancient Near East.
History. It is wrong to think of the con-
was the temporary rulers of Egypt as descendants of
the pharaohs or the present inhabitants of the
land as Egyptians in any but a geographic
sense. Egypt as an area of distinctive civiliza-
tion ended with the Arab conquest in the 7th
century and was greatly diluted during the
several preceding centuries by Greco-Roman
influences.
Origins. Though the origins of the ancient
Egyptians are imperfectly understood, physi-
cally they show affinities to Hamites, Semites,
an abun- and Mediterraneans. Hamites with negroid
characteristics moved north from Nubia. Asia-
tics migrated across the isthmus of Suez into
the delta, and the small, brown, finely boned
Mediterranean people dominated the Nile val-
ley from early times. However diverse their
origins may have been, Egyptians of the an-
cient period were conscious of themselves as a
nation, a distinctive people. Men stood about 5
feet 6 inches in height and women about 5
feet. They were slight but strong-boned, with
round heads and oval faces. The men had little
663
Egypt, Egyptians

face or body hair, and throughout antiquity

they were commonly smooth-shaven while
Semites were bearded.
Archaeologists list a series of successive pre-
dynastic cultures—Fayumic, Merimdian, Ta-
sian, Badarian, Amratian, Gerzean, and Sem-
ainean—who mastered basic techniques and
learned how to build a civilization with mini-
mal resources. Of course, they developed an
irrigation system for the maintenance of an
effective agricultural program. At a very early
time they discovered how to turn flax into
linen and thus to produce clothing. Boats were
made from papyrus reeds and trees that grew
along some of the stream beds in the south.
Sun-baked bricks provided building material,
and clay was available for pottery. The latter
was made by hand; the pottery wheel did not
appear until dynastic times.
Writing appeared in Egypt about the end of
the predynastic period. Their hieroglyphs, or
sacred signs, were called ‘“‘the words of God”
and were believed to be of divine origin. By
2700 BC they had learned how to make “paper’’
by crisscrossing strips cut from the pith of the
papyrus plant and forming them into sheets.
About the same time they developed tech-
niques for cutting stone from the quarry. Com-
monly they cut a groove along a line where a
block was to be split off. There they drove in
wedges of dry wood and wetted them to swell
the wood and split the block off. Sometimes
they lit a fire along the groove to heat the
stone and then poured water over it to split it Stone pillars with papyrus and lotus representing Upper and
Lower Egypt respectively.
away from the main rock.
Unification of Egypt. In the period just be-
fore about 3100 Bc Egypt consisted of the two century Bc, who compiled a list of kings down
separate kingdoms of Lower Egypt and Upper to the Persian period and divided it into 30
Egypt. Then about 3100 apparently the king dynasties; later others added a 31st dynasty.
of Upper Egypt conquered Lower Egypt and The ancients did not use such terms as “‘Old
unified the two lands under his sole rule. But Kingdom” and ‘“‘Middle Kingdom”’ either, but
the division was never quite forgotten, and modern scholars find them a convenient way
Egypt was referred to as the ‘““Two Lands” of organizing Egyptian history.
throughout its history. The pharaohs wore a Early Dynastic Period (3100-2700). Kings
double crown, a combination of the low red of the first two dynasties ruled at This, or
crown of Lower Egypt and the white crown Thinis, some 300 miles south of Cairo, but they
of Upper Egypt. The king’s palace was called built Memphis as another administrative cen-
the “double palace,” and even the royal gra- ter. They consolidated their hold over the land
nary was double. The Hebrews recognized and developed the theory that the king was
this duality, for throughout the OT they divine. Contacts with the outside world were
called Egypt Mitzrayim—a word with a dual considerable, and there are many indications
ending. in Egypt of influences from Mesopotamia at
The pharaoh who was credited in the an- this time.
cient sources with the unification of Egypt Old Kingdom (2700-2200; Dynasties 3-6).
was sometimes called Narmer and sometimes The Old Kingdom is especially remembered
Menes; presumably these were merely differ- for its building operations. The great monu-
ent names for the same person. Narmer-Menes ments known as the pyramids were erected at
began the rst dynasty of united Egypt. Though that time. The capital was located at Memphis
the ancient Egyptians did not reckon in dynas- (biblical Noph), southwest of modern Cairo.
ties, modern historians follow the practice of Contacts with Phoenicia were numerous, and
Manetho, an Egyptian priest of the mid-third some believe Egyptians were so heavily in-
664

volved there and elsewhere that it is proper to
speak of the “Old Empire.” Artistic standards
were being developed, and literary and medi-
cal beginnings were significant. Egypt was
an absolute monarchy. The divine king was
served by an army of officials; the whole popu-
lation might be regimented during his lifetime
to prepare his tomb.
The first king of the 3rd dynasty was Djo-
ser, who built the step pyramid at Saqqara.
The earliest great stone structure in the world,
it consists of six layers or steps rising to a
height of 204 feet. The architect was Imhotep,
his vizier or prime minister, who later was
deified and credited with the beginnings of ar-
chitecture, literature, and medicine, and iden-
tified by the Greeks with the god of medicine,
Asklepios.
The 4th dynasty pharaohs were the great
pyramid builders. They were responsible for
erecting the three great pyramids at Giza be-
tween about 2600 and 2500 Bc. The greatest of
these, attributed to Khufu, covers 13 acres,
originally rose to a height of 481 feet, and con-
tains about 2,300,000 blocks of limestone aver-
aging 2” tons each. The second pyramid
stands 447% feet high and is accompanied by
the sphinx, a couchant lion with the face of
the king. The third pyramid is 204 feet high.
These pyramids are not isolated examples.
Several more small pyramids were built at
665
Egypt, Egyptians
Giza, and there were 9 pyramid fields in all
scattered along the western bank of the Nile
south of Memphis. During the sth and 6th dy-
nasties appeared the pyramid texts, carved
and painted inscriptions, magical spells, and
hymns which were supposed to aid the de-
ceased in the afterlife.
The artistic standards of Egypt were estab-
lished during the Old Kingdom. The king and
the gods were portrayed in a stylized form. Art
tended to be conceptual rather than percep-
tual; that is, instead of reproducing what he
saw, the artist painted what he knew to be
there. For example, a school of fish became
individual fish painted whole instead of being
pictured naturally with one fish obscuring
part of the fish next to it. In a similar manner
the saddlebags on a donkey were shown with
the one facing the viewer reproduced in a natu-
ral way; the other one, known to be behind the
donkey’s back, was flipped up in the air above
the donkey’s back.
The importance of an individual deter-
mined his size in a pictorial representation. In
a battle scene the pharaoh would be the larg-
est figure, his commanding officers next in
size, the common soldiers smaller yet, and en-
emy troops smallest of all.
Egyptian art was intended to tell a story;
much of it was more like a motion picture
than a snapshot. A wine-making scene might
Egypt, Egyptians
include picking the grapes, treading out the
juice (normally done by stomping with bare
feet), and storing the juice in jars.
Evidently Egyptian medical knowledge was
also developing during the Old Kingdom.
Though the sources for knowledge of Egyptian
medicine are the great papyri of the Middle
Kingdom, there is some indication that medi-
cal knowledge claims far greater antiquity. Nu-
merous archaic expressions appear in the
texts. Perhaps Egyptians knew something of
the circulation of the blood; they talked about
feeling the “voice of the heart.’’ Egyptian medi-
cal practice combined a hodge-podge of home
remedies, charms and incantations, and scien-
tific expertise. The Edwin Smith Surgical Pa-
pyrus is a remarkable study dealing especially
with the treatment of broken bones.
During the 6th dynasty the Old Kingdom
began to break up as a result of poor rulers,
aggressive nobles, fiscal difficulties, Nubian in-
cursions in the south, and Asiatic attacks in
the northeast.
First Intermediate Period (2200—2050; Dynas-
ties 7-11). During the Old Kingdom there
was political stability and prosperity. The
Nile flood came predictably and not devastat-
ingly. There was enough for all to eat. If one
behaved himself and worked hard and studied
diligently in school, he could count on the
proper promotions and general success in life.
Familiar social, political, economic, and re-
ligious institutions remained constant and
could be counted on to assume their regular
place in the rhythm of life.
Now the old aristocracy had fallen. The cen-
tral government had broken down; nobles
ruled many districts and took the title of
kings. It was no longer true that if one did
certain things he could count on success. The
collapse of the whole philosophy of life of the
Old Kingdom brought a spiritual upset and
spawned attempts at reevaluation of life.
Some of the literature of the time advocated
the hedonistic approach of drowning one’s
problems in pleasure; some recommended a
stoical approach—to steel oneself against the
hardships of life; and some anticipated the
coming of a messiah who would right the
wrongs of society and become the ideal shep-
herd of all.
Middle Kingdom (2050-1780; 12th Dynas-
ty). Late in the 11th dynasty princes of
Thebes (440 miles south of Memphis) struggled
to restore order and royal control and were
partially successful. The Middle Kingdom was
the period of the 12th dynasty, native Thebans
who made their capital at Lisht in the Fayum.
The six rulers of this dynasty took the names
of Amenemhet and Sesostris. Each of them
ruled some 30 years, and most of them took
666
their sons on the throne as co-regents before
death. Thus the danger of a usurper was elimi-
nated. Since these kings did not dare to de-
prive the nobles of their largely independent
power, a feudal condition existed during much
of the period.
Unable to function as absolute kings, these
pharaohs had to rule by persuasion and the
development of good will. Their rendering of
ma‘at (social justice) was constantly empha-
sized; and if a person could not obtain ma‘at
at the hands of the nobles; he was promised it
at the hands of the king. Their propaganda
program also portrayed the pharaoh as con-
cerned with responsible leadership instead of
merely exercising authority. The pharaoh was
the shepherd of his people. The art of the time
represented the king with a worn look on his
face—a result of constantly bearing the ur.
dens of his people.
Middle Kingdom pharaohs were wise
enough not to exhaust the treasury on great
pyramids; instead, they undertook public
works such as a massive effort to increase cul-
tivable acreage in the Fayum, construction of
a defensive wall across the isthmus of Suez,
and systematic working of the Sinai copper
mines. Trade was extensive with Crete, Leba-
non, Syria, and the legendary land of Punt.
Scholars debate whether Middle Kingdom
pharaohs dominated Palestine and Syria by
means of military action or as part of their
economic imperialism. There is no debate,
however, about their conquest of Nubia south
to the 2nd cataract.
The Middle Kingdom was a time when
Amon began to emerge as the great god of
Egypt. He was grafted onto the sun god Re as
Amon-Re and came to supersede the gods who
had formerly stood for Thebes. As god of the
nation, he was to become the great imperial
god under the empire and thus to assume a
universal quality. Religious texts, which had
graced the walls of the pyramids during the
Old Kingdom, now were inscribed on coffins
instead, and their use was available to nobles
as well as kings.
A literary flowering occurred during the
Middle Kingdom. Scientific literature is repre-
sented by such outstanding works as the
Rhind Mathematical Papyrus and the Smith
Surgical and Ebers Medical Papyruses. The
“Instructions of Merikare” portrays something
of the Wisdom Literature of the period, and
the ‘‘Tale of Sinuhe” introduces the genre of
entertainment literature.
If one holds to the early date of the exodus
(c. 1446) and adds 430 years for the period of
Israelite sojourn in Egypt (Ex 12:40), he will
conclude that the Israelites entered Egypt
about 1876. This would be early in the reign of

Sesostris III (or Senwosret or Sen-Usert; 1878—
1840). Sesostris was a vigorous king who ex-
tended Egyptian control south to the 2nd cata-
ract and campaigned up into Syria. He was
also able to reverse the feudalistic conditions
of the earlier period; he took away the power
of the nobles and appointed royal officials in
their stead. Possibly this achievement was
somehow related to famine in Joseph’s day
and Joseph’s use of that famine to fasten royal
control on all the populace of the land (Gn
47:13-26).
Second Intermediate Period (1780—1570; Dy-
nasties 13-17). With the passing of the
strong 12th dynasty, Egypt relapsed once
more into a period of disintegration. The Hyk-
sos (“rulers of foreign lands’’), Semites from
Syria and Palestine, gradually infiltrated into
the delta region and took control there about
1730, Maintaining their capital at Tanis, or
Avaris, in the eastern delta. Meanwhile The-
ban princes ruled weakly in the south and
were commonly vassals to the Hyksos.
Apparently as a result of Egyptian hatred of
the Hyksos.and stringent efforts to obliterate
their memory, the Hyksos are a very shadowy
people. Little remains on which to base a re-
construction of their history. Presumably they
were responsible for introducing new kinds of
bronze swords and daggers, the powerful com-
pound bow, and above all the horse and char-
iot. The Egyptians adopted these with good
success and used them to overthrow Hyksos
power and then to build an empire in Pales-
tine and Syria. The struggle of Theban princes
to gain release from Hyksos control was pro-
longed and apparently fierce at times. The ef-
fort began late in the 16th century Bc and was
completed by Ahmose I (1570-1546).
The Empire Period (1570-1090; Dynasties
18-20). Ahmose launched the 18th dynasty,
and may be viewed as initiating the Empire,
or New Kingdom, period as well. After defeat-
ing the Hyksos in Egypt, he carried on suc-
cessful campaigns against Nubia and Sharu-
hen in southern Palestine. Subsequently he
was forced to subdue nobles who had man-
aged to gain independence from the central
government during the Hyksos era. Amen-
hotep I (1546-1525) was also forced to fight
the Nubians in the south and Libyans in the
northwest.
Dying without a son to succeed him, Amen-
hotep was followed on the throne by his sister
Ahmose, who married a Thutmose (Thutmose
I, 1525-1508), probably a relative. Thutmose
had to resubjugate rebellious Nubians during
the first year of his reign and in subsequent
campaigns considerably expanded Egypt's Nu-
bian holdings. Between those two Nubian at-
tacks he mounted an offensive in Syria; thus
667
Egypt, Egyptians
he could claim an empire that stretched from
the Euphrates to the third cataract of the Nile.
Moses may have been born early in his reign.
Thutmose began the practice of carving out
royal tombs in the Valley of the Kings west of
Thebes.
_° Evidently the only surviving child of the
union of Thutmose and Ahmose was a daugh-
ter, Hatshepsut, who was married to Thut-
mose II (1508-1504), a son of Thutmose I by a
secondary princess. Thutmose II had to quell
rebellious Nubians, but little else is known of
his reign. Since his marriage to Hatshepsut
produced two daughters but no sons, he de-
cided to marry his daughter Marytre to a son
by a minor wife (Thutmose III, 1504-1450).
Hatshepsut continued to rule during the mi-
nority of Thutmose III and refused to step
aside when he came of age. She dominated
Egypt from 1504 to 1482. During her reign
Egypt enjoyed economic prosperity. Her build-
ing activities were considerable; not the least
of her achievements was the erection of two
great obelisks at the Temple of Karnak at
Luxor. The one remaining shaft stands 97”
feet high and weighs about 700,000 pounds.
She also conducted trade expeditions to the
Land of Punt. Hatshepsut is sometimes identi-
fied as the pharaoh’s daughter who rescued
Moses from the Nile (Ex 2:5).
Finally, in 1482, Hatshepsut met an un-
timely end, probably at the hands of Thut-
mose III as he burst his bonds and assumed
rule over the realm. Within 75 days he had
assembled an army and was leading it north
into Palestine-Syria to subjugate rebellious
princes there. A great initial victory at Me-
giddo and a sack of the city after a 7-month
siege cowed northern Palestinians but did not
break their will to resist. Thutmose found him-
self campaigning in Palestine or Nubia almost
annually for the next 2 decades.
What started out as an Egyptian impulse to
punish the Hyksos turned into a spirit of impe-
rialism, which enjoyed a sense of power in vic-
tory. As the frontiers expanded, there was al-
most always a peril to attend to somewhere
during subsequent generations; some of them
were real and some remote. Thus the sense of
security which Egyptians had enjoyed during
earlier centuries when they were shut up in
their valley home gave way to a feeling of inse-
curity. And as the god Amon-Re smiled on
Egyptian military efforts, he was rewarded
with quantities of booty and handsome gifts.
In time the temples gained so much wealth
and power that they came to exercise great
clout in political and economic circles. Espe-
cially great was the power of the priesthood of
Amon at the temple of Karnak.
Thutmose III was one of the greatest of
Egypt, Egyptians

Egypt’s ancient pharaohs. A conqueror and

empire builder, he is often called the Napo-
leon of ancient Egypt. There was hardly a city
of any size in the kingdom where he did not
engage in building activities. With him began
an effort to glorify the pharaoh as sportsman,
athlete, and warrior that was to last for sev-
eral generations; he had the powers of a god in
conducting the affairs of men. If one accepts
the early date of the exodus, Thutmose III is
often considered to have been the pharaoh of
the great oppression of the Hebrews.
Thutmose was succeeded by his son Amen-
hotep II (1452-1425 Bc), who then may have
been the pharaoh of the exodus. Serving
briefly as co-regent with his father, he en-
joyed an easy transition to sole rule over the
empire. Though forced to conduct 2 cam-
paigns into Syria and Palestine to subdue re-
bellious towns, he seems generally to have en-
joyed a peaceful reign. Like his father he
sought to be known for his prowess as a
sportsman and his ruthlessness as a warrior.
After the little-known reign of Thutmose
IV (1425-1412), Amenhotep III (1412-1375) as-
cended the throne of Egypt. Frequently called
“the magnificent,’ he reveled in the wealth
that poured in from the empire. Once, in the
brief space of only 14 days, he had excavated
for his wife a lake 6,400 feet long and 1,200
feet wide. Here on the west bank of the Nile
at Thebes a royal barge could float about
while musicians aboard provided entertain-
ment for the king and queen. Amenhotep
built several temples, including a mortuary
temple at Thebes, to which were attached the
famous colossi of Memnon, seated statues of Amenhotep Ill, 18th-dynasty ruler of the New Empire.
the king about 70 feet high. Though obsequi-
ous priests dutifully represented him as a
great conqueror on temple walls, he seems to the reign of Thutmose IV. Amenhotep IV took
have engaged in stifling only one uprising in the name Akhnaton (‘spirit of Aton’’).
Nubia and probably never set foot in Pales- Akhnaton paid no attention to numerous ap-
tine or Syria. peals (the Amarna letters) from loyal princes
Just as Amenhotep III made no effort to of Palestine and Syria for help to repel invad-
maintain the empire, neither did his son Amen- ers, and the empire disintegrated. Acceptance
hotep IV (1387-1366). Because of ill health of the early date of the exodus would place the
Amenhotep III made his son co-regent in 1387, Hebrew conquest and the subsequent settling
but the son paid little attention to the affairs of in process during the reigns of Amenhotep III
state. Of a mystical bent, he devoted himself to and IV, precisely when Egyptian power over
the establishment of the cult of the sun god Palestine disappeared. However, the Habiru,
Aton at a new capital named Amarna. Aton which some of these appeals name as attack-
worship was almost monotheistic (the king be- ers, should not be identified as Hebrews.
ing worshiped along with the god) and thus Much of what is said about them could not
constituted a virtual religious revolution, but it have been true of Hebrews.
had few adherents outside the court. Religious When Amenhotep IV died, Tutankhamon
changes, political changes connected with the (1366-1357) succeeded to the throne. A young
move of the capital, and artistic changes were 3 boy of 8 or 9, he was associated with Eye, a
of the main elements of the so-called ‘‘Amarna favorite of Akhnaton, as co-regent. When Tu-
Revolution.” The loose naturalism in art, al- tankhamon died g years later, Eye continued
most bordering on caricature, was not new, to rule until 1353. Because of the discovery of
however, since it had been accepted as early as his magnificently furnished, unrifled tomb in
668
 Egypt, Egyptians

Se es LS

Akhenaton, his wife Neferti, and his daughter presenting offer-

ings to the sun-god, Aton.

1922, Tutankhamon has received attention out

of proportion to his significance in antiquity.
The thousands of objects from his tomb il-
lustrate the wealth, grandeur, and artistic
achievements of ancient Egypt and help to
demonstrate what it meant for Moses to turn
his back on the riches of Egypt (Heb 11:26).
When Eye died, Harmhab, commander-in-
chief of the army, succeeded to the throne
(1353-1319). He reorganized the state and rees-
tablished a strong government. Dying child-
less, Harmhab designated as his successor
Rameses I, commander of the army and vizier,
or prime minister. Rameses (1319-1318) and
Seti I (1318—1299) made valiant attempts to re-
store the Asiatic empire lost by Akhnaton. In
connection with their efforts the capital was
moved to Tanis in the delta, from which mili-
tary campaigns could be more effectively
launched.
Rameses II (1299—1232) continued the effort
to restore Egyptian control in Palestine. In the
5th year of his reign he met the Hittites in
battle at Kadesh on the Orontes in Syria and
narrowly missed destruction of his forces. Sub- sa
sequently he fought battles all the way from Colossal statue of Tutankhamun (from c. 1360 BC).
669
Egypt, Egyptians
southern Palestine to northern Syria. If the He-
brews were then in the land, as an early date
of the exodus requires, they probably never
made contact with the Egyptians because they
were shepherds and vinedressers in the hills
of Palestine, and Rameses moved along the
coastal road. Finally, in his 21st regnal year,
Rameses made a peace treaty with the Hittites
and kept it to the end of his days. He built
massively all over Egypt, notably at his capi-
tal of Tanis, at Thebes, at Abu Simbel (south
of Aswan), and at Memphis. Many believe he
was the pharaoh of the exodus.
Rameses’ 13th son, Merneptah (1232-1222),
was the only Egyptian king who claimed to
have defeated the Hebrews in battle. But some
scholars argue that he never invaded Asia and
that this statement is to be interpreted as a
customary claim of victory over the king’s op-
ponents in surrounding lands, whether or not
he ever met them in battle. Merneptah did
turn back a Libyan invasion in his 5th regnal
year, however.
Rameses III (1198—1164) also fought off Lib-
yan invasions of the delta in his 5th and 11th
regnal years, and in his 8th year repulsed an
invasion of Sea Peoples, among whom were Phi-
listines. He was the last ruler of the empire
period to maintain outposts in Palestine and
Syria. In his later years the Egyptian economy
deteriorated, and inflation and breakdown of
the government’s ability to meet the public pay-
roll brought great suffering. Hunger marches
resulted.
During the reigns of Rameses IV—XI (1167-—
1085) there was a steady decline of the state.
Graft and inflation increased. During the reign
of Rameses IX (1138-1119) unpaid mercenary
troops seem to have roamed as marauders in
the delta, and tomb robbery reached epidemic
proportions. Finally Herihor, viceroy of Nubia
and commander of military forces in the
south, seized control of upper Egypt and made
himself high priest of Amon in Thebes. The
empire had come to an end.
The Postempire Period. In the postempire
period, Egypt came under the rule of Libyan
kings (945-712) and Ethiopian kings (712-670).
After a brief period of Assyrian domination
(670-663) a native dynasty asserted itself (663—
525). Then the Persians conquered and held
the land until Alexander the Great marched
through in 331. Thereafter the Ptolemies ruled
Egypt until the death of Cleopatra in 30 Bc. At
that point the Romans took over. They con-
trolled the land when Mary and Joseph fled
there after the birth of Jesus. During the
Greco-Roman period Hellenistic culture domi-
nated Egypt.
During the early postempire period, when
Egyptian culture was still dominant, several
670
kings figured in biblical history. During the
sth year of Rehoboam, king of Judah (proba-
bly 926 Bc), Shishak I of Egypt invaded Judah
and wrought great havoc there (1 Kgs 14:25,
26). He even marched into the territory of
Israel, as archaeological discoveries show.
About 700 Bc, in the days of King Hezekiah
and the prophet Isaiah, Tirhakah of Egypt led
an army into Palestine to help the Jews
against invading Assyrians (2 Kgs 19:9). Near
the end of the seventh century Bc, Pharaoh
Neco led an army through Judah to come to
the aid of weakened Assyria. When King Jo-
siah tried to stop him, the Hebrew monarch
lost his life (2 Kgs 23:28-30). During the last
days of the kingdom of Judah, while Nebu-
chadnezzar was besieging Jerusalem (588-86),
Pharaoh Hophra invaded Palestine in a vain
effort to aid the Hebrews and defeat the Baby-
lonians. Jeremiah predicted the Egyptians’ de-
struction (Jer 44:30).
Social Life. Social Classes. In theory and
in practice the king owned all the land of
Egypt. He was divine, and the gods had as-
signed to him the deeds to all the land. Of
course, he made gifts—to the gods for the sup-
port of the temples, to his most loyal support-
ers, and to maintain his own worship cult af-
ter his death. Thus large parts of the kingdom
slipped from his hands, but much remained as
the possession of the crown. Although by the
beginning of the Middle Kingdom nobles held
great tracts of land, the king managed to
sweep aside their power and repossess a con-
siderable amount of acreage. During the Em-
pire the king made large grants to the tem-
ples, especially the temple of Amon at Thebes.
This generosity enhanced the power of the
priesthood at the expense of the crown.
As increasing amounts of land passed out of
the control of the crown, and as social and
economic life became more complex, a compli-
cated class structure developed. The major di-
vision in Egyptian society was between the
educated elite and the uneducated masses, but
such an observation is too simplistic. At the
top were the royal family and the great no-
bles. Below them was a group of lesser nobles
and officials. Lower yet was a class of crafts-
men who served both of the upper classes.
Then, at least during the Empire, there were
farmers who owned small plots which they
worked themselves. At the bottom of the social
structure were free serfs and slaves. Slavery
became common only under the Empire,
when slaves were obtained as prisoners of
war, primarily in Palestine and Syria to the
north and Nubia to the south. Some slaves
found their way into domestic service at the
palaces and on the large estates, but most of
them worked on the land and some served in

the mines. Slavery was never as necessary and
important in Egypt as in other Near Eastern
countries. Also during the Empire a class of
professional soldiers appeared on the scene;
probably these should be rated just below the
lesser nobles and officials.
Family Life. Egyptians apparently married
in early adolescence. Children were weaned at
3. Boys were circumcised between the ages of 6
and 12. Although education was designed for
boys of the upper classes, girls—especially of
royal families—frequently received some for-
mal education. Egyptian women evidently en-
joyed much greater freedom and prestige than
women of other Near Eastern countries. They
went about rather freely; they accompanied
their husbands in the conduct of business and
even at social events. The family might even
accompany the husband and father on an out-
ing when he went fishing or hunting, though
they did not take part in the action. Egyptians
normally were not monogamous, the size of the ° cially enjoyed wrestling. Soldiers participated
harem being dictated by economic consider-
ations. But the status of the chief wife was pro- drill. A game on the order of checkers was the
tected, and her first son was her husband’s
heir. Professions open to women included the
priesthood, midwifery, mourning, dancing,
and perhaps scribal activity (there was a femi-
nine word for scribe).
Furniture was meager in an Egyptian house.
Beds, chairs, stools, footstools, and stands for system by new edicts. Procedure in the courts
water jugs seem to have been the main items.
Dining tables do not appear to have been used;
there were stands on which trays of food might
be placed. The poor simply sat on the floor,
slept on mats on the floor, and spread out their extract a confession.
meals on the floor.
Houses were normally built of mud brick.
Those of the wealthy were set amid gardens
and frequently had decorative pools. Rooms
might be color-washed on the inside and even
decorated with frescoes. Roofs were flat and
provided a second bedroom in the hottest
months. Houses sometimes had a second story.
Though remains of 2 or 3 villages of workmen
on government projects have been found, virtu-
ally nothing is known of the layout or size of ishment for minor offenses. At least during the
the important cities of ancient Egypt.
Dress. Women wore long linen garments
extending from the armpits to the ankles and
held up by straps over the shoulder. During
the Empire period the skirt was made fuller
and pleated. Men wore loincloths fastened
with a belt and extending to the knee. The
upper classes often wore it pleated in front.
During the Middle Kingdom and the latter
part of the Empire the loincloth was extended
to mid-calf, and men sometimes also wore a
short-sleeved tunic. As a result of Asian influ- glyphs in 1822, primarily with the help of the
ence, Egyptians of the upper classes fre-
quently wore colored clothing during the Em-
Egypt, Egyptians
pire, instead of the prevailing white of other
periods.
Men were clean-shaven, but the king and a
few top officials wore false beards for ceremo-
nial purposes. Both men. and women wore
wigs, and both men and women used eye
paint for medicinal and decorative purposes.
Women wore lipstick and rouge, and applied
henna to their nails, the palms of their hands,
and the soles of their feet. Men and women of
the upper classes wore a variety of jewelry.
People of all classes applied oils and fats to
their skin to protect them in the hot, dry cli-
mate. The use of perfume was also universal.
Entertainment. There were no organized
games in ancient Egypt. Sportsmen went out
alone or with their families. They might hunt
in the desert with bows and arrows and dogs,
go fishing, try to knock down birds with a boo-
merang in a marsh, or go driving in a chariot.
Boys and young men among the peasants espe-
in war dances, which were a sort of physical
chief indoor game of men and women alike.
Law and Punishment. The king was viewed
as the source of all law, and apparently there
was no written code to which all could appeal.
Courts followed precedent set in past cases,
and periodically the king modified the legal
involved administering an oath to tell the
truth, speeches by accuser and accused, judg-
ment of the court, and note-taking by a court
recorder. In some cases torture was used to
Treason, murder, and perjury were among
the capital crimes. The latter was so serious
because the court oath was taken “‘by the life
of Pharaoh’’; thus, swearing falsely meant in-
jury to the king. Other serious crimes were
punishable by mutilation (cutting off nose or
ears) or hard labor in the mines and quarries
(a living death). A person convicted of theft
might be sentenced to repay double or triple
what he had taken. Beating was the usual pun-
Empire, Egypt had a kind of police force with
a contingent in each town.
Cultural Affairs. Language and Writing.
Ancient Egyptian was related to both Semitic
and Hamitic languages. By about 3100 Bc both
hieroglyphics (pictorial characters used in in-
scriptions and more formal writing) and hiera-
tic (a more running hand) were in use. Hiero-
glyphs may stand for a letter, a syllable, a
sound, a word, or an idea. Francois Champol-
lion cracked the decipherment of the hiero-
Rosetta Stone. About 700 Bc a more rapid
script called demotic came into being, and con-
671
Egypt, Egyptians

The Rosetta Stone, the

trilingual inscription (Egyptian
hieroglyphic, Egyptian
demotic, and Greek) that con-
tained the key to the decipher-
ment of hieroglyphics; it con-
tained a decree in honor of
Ptolemy V, Epiphanes, voted
by the priests of Egypt assem-
bled at Memphis. It was dis-
covered in 1799 at Rashid in
the Egyptian delta.

tinued to be written until early Christian
times. Thereafter Coptic, the ancient Egyptian
language, came to be written down in a Greek
script with a few extra letters.
Education. Egyptian education, available
almost exclusively to upperclass boys, was de-
signed to provide trained personnel for the
priesthood, government offices, or the profes-
sions. Very few had a chance to obtain any
educatien at all. Boys began their training at a
very early age, commonly about 4. Classes
started early in the morning and normally
ended about noon, in order to avoid the heat
of the day. Reading, writing, and arithmetic
were the standard fare. Good handwriting and
the ability to compose letters were essential
for all leaders in society. Eloquence was also
valued. Learning by imitation was achieved
through copying handwriting samples and
672
model letters. Pieces of stone and potsherds
provided inexpensive writing tablets, with pa-
pyrus being reserved for final drafts of impor-
tant compositions. Knowledge of arithmetic
was especially important for workers in gov-
ernment offices where taxes were collected in
kind.
The highest form of education was priestly
training, and a prince might enroll in a
school for priests. But often he was educated
by tutors in classes held at the palace. Such
classes normally were designed for children
of the harem; princesses and nonroyal chil-
dren might also attend them.
After lower school a boy might attend a
“House of Life,” a kind of academy or senior
college. There outstanding persons might lec-
ture on a variety of subjects (including medi-
cine). Presumably resembling Plato’s academy

in Athens, such ‘“‘Houses”’ did not have a pre-
scribed curriculum or regular examinations.
They were equipped with libraries.
Religion. All of Egyptian life was bound
up with religious considerations. As the “gift
of the Nile,”” Egypt worshiped the great river
as Hapi. The sun, which gave life to all things,
was deified under such names as Amon-Re
and Aton. The king was the offspring of the
gods and was in some sense god incarnate.
Thus it is obvious that the 10 plagues in Mo-
ses’ day were an attack on the gods of the
Egyptians. Turning the Nile into blood, bring-
ing intense darkness on the land, and smiting
the firstborn of the divine pharaoh involved a
discrediting of Egyptian gods, as did the other
plagues in various ways.
The greatest concern of all individuals was
immortality and the blessing of the gods upon
them in the next life. Egyptians were not mor-
bid in that they were preoccupied with death;
they sought to project or continue as many of
the pleasant aspects of this life as possible into
the next life.
Ancient Egyptians, unlike modern Western
peoples, had no concept of an inanimate
world. All natural phenomena were personal-
ized, and acted as friendly or unfriendly be-
ings whenever they affected human activity.
The gods were looked on as patrons of various
activities or functions. Thus Bes, a bandy-
legged dwarf, was the patron of music and con-
ception, and the goddess Taurt (a combination
of hippopotamus, lioness, and crocodile) was
associated with childbirth. Charms of both
were made in abundance, and these two seem
to have been more widely regarded among the
masses than the chief gods of Egypt.
Most important of all the gods was Re or
Ra, the sun god. The pharaoh was his physical
son and earthly embodiment. When he died,
he rejoined his divine father in the sky. Re
generated the god Shu, personification of air,
and the goddess Tefnut, personification
moisture. These gave birth to two children,
Geb the earth god and Nut the sky goddess.
Mankind came into being variously according
to the legends; one has Re generating them
with his tears, another has Khnum forming
them on his potter’s wheel. During the Emp.re
the god of Thebes, Amon, was identified witn
Re, and the sun god henceforth became known
as Amon-Re. The great triad of Thebes was
Amon, his consort Mut, and their son Khonsu
(the moon god).
Rivaling Amon-Re in importance was
Osiris, apparently originally a king of the delta
city of Busiris. Murdered by his brother, Osiris
was brought back to life by his son Horus
through various magical devices; thereafter he
ruled in the west as king of the blessed dead.
Egypt, Egyptians
Eventually the experience of Osiris became
that of every human being. Through magical
formulas of the sort used by Horus, the individ-
ual could come to Osiris and even in some
sense become Osiris. In addition to the knowl-
edge and pronouncement of such formulas, the
individual had to appear at a judgment for the
weighing of his heart in the balance of righ-
teousness. If declared innocent of wrongdoing,
he was allowed to enter the kingdom of Osiris
and enjoy a blessed hereafter.
Some of these formulas connected with
transit into the next life began to appear on
the walls of pyramid tombs in the Old King-
dom (‘Pyramid Texts’’); during the Middle
Kingdom they were recorded on coffins (‘‘Cof-
fin Texts’’); during the Empire they were com-
piled as the “Book of the Dead.” Portions con-
tinued to be inscribed on the walls of tombs
from the Empire period to about AD 300.
Countless other Egyptian gods could be
mentioned. A few of the more important in-
clude Anubis, jackal-headed patron of embalm-
ing and guardian of the tomb; Hathor, a sky
goddess, patroness of love and the necropolis;
Imhotep, patron of learning (especially of
medicine); Ptah, patron of arts and crafts and
creator of man; Sekhmet, woman with a head
of a lioness representing the destructive pow-
ers of the sun; Thoth, a man with a head of an
ibis, inventor of hieroglyphic writing, god of
scribes, and lord of wisdom and magic.
Science. The ancient Egyptians excelled in
applied mathematics, astronomy, and medi-
cine. The annual flood of the Nile required an
early development of the ability to resurvey
the land rapidly after waters receded. Engi-
neering skills were necessary to produce the
irrigation system on which all Egyptian life
depended. Moreover, their massive building
projects necessitated a knowledge of mathe-
matics. Egyptians could add and subtract but
had cumbersome procedures for multiplica-
of tion and division. They could calculate the
area of a square, a triangle, a rectangle, anda
The Egyptian god Amon.
673
Egypt, Egyptians
Ey 8
UU U
aes
UU
A frieze from the Temple of Denderah Tentyris in Egypt.
ae
circle and could do simple exercises in geome-
try. It is thought that experience rather than
mathematical reasoning ability was responsi-
ble for most of their mathematical successes.
They understood that the calendar must have
365¥, days in it, and they divided the year into
12 months and the months into three 1o-day
weeks. They invented an adequate water clock
by 2000 BC.
With their elaborate practice of embalm-
ing, one would expect their knowledge of anat-
omy to be superior. They distinguished be-
tween injuries and diseases and performed
some amazing surgery. Treatment was a curi-
ous combination of scientific and superstitious
efforts, however. Egyptian scientists, with a
practical rather than theoretical motivation,
amassed a vast collection of facts about astron-
omy, chemistry, geography, medicine, sur-
gery, mathematics, and natural history.
Architecture. As the ancient Egyptians built
their great temples, they were most concerned
with stability and enduring qualities. They
were to last forever. Thus they were made of
stone (commonly limestone or sandstone) and
roofed with great stone slabs supported on mas-
sive columns. The capitals generally were lo-
tus, papyrus, or palm leaf in design. Great stat-
ues of a king were placed inside these temples;
as mere architectural decoration, these sculp-
tures appear stiff and formal. Light entered the
temple through windows in the side of the
raised central hall; the side aisles were lower.
Though .the roofs of these temples were flat,
Egyptians knew how to construct a round arch
at least by 2700 Bc. Greatest of the remaining
temples is the temple of Karnak at Luxor. The
hypostyle hall there, built by Rameses II, has a
forest of 134 sandstone columns, the central ave-
nue of which has 12 columns which soar to a
height of 70 feet, the tallest columns in the an-
cient world.
Pharaohs of the Old Kingdom built great
674
Yb ies
<>
LU
|
Seek ut 7
pyramids as burial places along the west bank
of the Nile south of Memphis. Pharaohs of the
Middle Kingdom constructed smaller pyra-
mids in the Fayum area. During the Empire
they carved tombs out of the cliffs west of
Thebes. Pharaohs as divine beings covered the
walls of their tombs at Thebes with religious
scenes. The nobles had their tombs decorated
with scenes of everyday life—a life which they
wished to perpetuate beyond the grave.
Houses were constructed of sun-dried brick
and have generally disappeared; a few remain
at Amarna and in a couple of abandoned work-
ers’ camps.
Music. All that is known of Egyptian mu-
sic must be gleaned from musical instruments
found in tombs or representations of musical
instruments painted on tomb walls. Three in-
struments used in religious exercises were the
sistrum, tambourine, and castanets. The sis-
trum was a metal loop fastened to a handle.
Holes were cut in the sides of the loop so that
three metal rods could be loosely fastened in
it. When the sistrum was shaken, the rods
would rattle. This is the instrument referred
to in 2 Samuel 6:5. Miriam used the Egyptian
timbrel or tambourine in the celebration after
crossing the Red Sea (Ex 15:20).
Stringed instruments in ancient Egypt in-
cluded the harp, lyre, lute, and a kind of gui-
tar. Wind instruments included the single and
double flute and the trumpet, the latter appar-
ently used only for military purposes. At first,
instruments were used singly to accompany a
singer or dancer. Orchestras existed during
the Empire period, when Israel escaped from
Egyptian bondage.
Commerce and Crafts. Long before Egypt
became a united nation trade was extensive,
both along the Nile and with foreign coun-
tries. Timber and other forest products, espe-
cially from Lebanon, were chief among the im-
ports during the 4th millennium Bc. Copper

and turquoise came from Sinai, lapis lazuli
from Western Asia, gold from Nubia, gold and
silver from Asia Minor, and perfumes from
Asia or Africa. Trade contacts with India and
Mesopotamia were also established. During
the Old Kingdom, Crete was added to the list.
During the Middle Kingdom, trade was wide-
spread, including Mediterranean lands and
Black Sea, Red Sea, and Indian Ocean regions.
With the advent of the Empire, trade was even
more fully developed. Much of the commerce
was carried on as a government monopoly and
with government protection. Trade continued
to be extensive during the Ptolemaic and Ro-
man periods.
It was not always necessary for Egypt to send
commodities in exchange for goods from
abroad. It simply sent expeditions to the Sinai,
overpowered the Nubians and Palestinians, and
exacted tribute. And it extracted quantities of
gold from the region between the Nile and the
Red Sea; this added to the gold of Nubia, could
purchase many foreign commodities.
Egyptian craftsmen produced endless quan-
tities of quality goods that could have been
sent abroad. Jewelry production was unsur-
passed; metallurgy and carpentry reached lev-
els of excellence at an early date. Manufacture
of linen cloth, pottery, and stone vessels pro-
vided abundant supplies for the home market
and some to spare for export. Beer and wine
production was also extensive.
Howarbp F. Vos
See Exopus, THE; PLAGUES UPON EGypT; PHARAOH.
Bibliography. J.H. Breasted, A History of Egypt from the
Earliest Times to the Persian Conquest; J. Cerny, Ancient Egyp-
tian Religion; H. Frankfort, Ancient Egyptian Religion; K.A.
Kitchen, The Joseph Narrative and its Egyptian Background;
S. Moscati, The Face of the Ancient Orient; T.E. Pect, Egypt
and the OT; S. Sauneron, The Priests of Ancient Egypt.
Egyptian, The. Unidentified antagonist of
Rome who led a revolt into the wilderness
with a host of barbarous assassins (Sicarii).
After an uproar at the Jerusalem temple, the
tribune Claudius Lysias challenged the apostle
Paul, asking if he was the Egyptian insurrec-
tionist (Acts 21:38). According to Josephus, the
Egyptian led a Jewish rebellion that was sup-
pressed by the procurator Felix. Accounts vary
as to the number of assassins involved, but all
point to a revolt led by an Egyptian who ap-
parently escaped.
Ehi. Benjamin’s son (Gn 46:21); perhaps a
scribal error for Ahiram.
See AHIRAM.
Ehud. 1. Judge of Israel from Benjamin’s
tribe who delivered Israel from Eglon, king of
the Moabites (Jgs 3:12—30). He was notable be-
675
Ekron, Ekronites
cause he was left-handed (Hebrew “hindered
in the right hand”). Before taking Israelite trib-
ute to Eglon, he made an iron dagger, with
which he assassinated the unsuspecting Eglon
during a private audience. He then rallied the
Israelites west of the Jordan to encircle the
Moabite troops before they could return south
to Moab. When the 18-year rule of Eglon over
the Israelites ended, an 80-year period of peace
began. Some scholars have supposed that
Judges 3:18,19 is an insertion into the main
deliverance narrative, but this is difficult to
prove.
2. Bilhan’s son, a member of Benjamin’s
tribe (1 Chr 7:10; 8:6).
Eker. Jerahmeelite and the son of Ram from
Judah’s tribe (1 Chr 2:27).
Ekron, Ekronites. Most northerly city
among the major Philistine settlements. Dur-
ing the Hebrew conquest of Palestine, Ekron
was not taken by Joshua (Jos 13:3). When the
land was divided among the 12 tribes, Ekron
was given first to Judah and then to Dan (Jos
15:11,45,46; 19:43). It was eventually taken by
Judah (Jgs 1:18), but subsequently fell back to
the Philistines.
Ekron played a prominent role in the story
of the capture of the ark of the covenant. After
the ark brought disaster to Ashdod and Gath,
it was taken to Ekron (1 Sm 5:1~10). The
Ekronites did not want the ark, so they con-
sulted with the “lords of the Philistines” and
proposed that the ark be sent back to Israel (1
Sm 5:11).
After David killed Goliath, the Israelites
pursued the Philistines to the gates of Ekron,
which at that time apparently was the nearest
walled city in which fugitives could take ref-
uge (1 Sm 17:52).
Ekron was apparently the center of the wor-
ship of the god Baal-zebub. When Ahaziah in-
jured himself and lay ill, he preferred to con-
sult with Baal-zebub rather than with God.
Elijah was sent by God to denounce Ahaziah
and tell him that he would die (2 Kgs 1:2—18).
Baal worship may have been increasing in Is-
rael at this time. Ekron is included in the
denunciations of several prophets: Jeremiah
(25:20), Amos (1:8), Zephaniah (2:4), and Zecha-
riah (9:5—7).
Assyrian records inform us that Ekron re-
volted against Sennacherib in 701 Bc. The reb-
els deposed Padi, the ruler of Ekron who was
loyal to Assyria, and handed him over to Heze-
kiah in Jerusalem for imprisonment. Sennach-
erib moved against Ekron, and Ekron called
for aid from the king of Mutsri (either Egypt
or a district of northwestern Arabia). Sennach-
erib lifted his siege of Ekron long enough to
El
defeat the army of Mutsri, and then returned
to take Ekron. He executed the rebels, made
captives of their followers, forced Hezekiah to
release Padi, and restored Padi as ruler of the
city. Padi also received some territory taken
from Judah. Padi’s successor, Ikausu, was not
so fortunate. He, along with Manasseh of Ju-
dah, was forced to pay heavy tribute to both
Esar-haddon and Ashurbanipal.
In 147 Bc the king of Syria, Alexander
Balas, gave Ekron to Jonathan Maccabeus as
a reward for his loyalty (1 Mc 10:89). In the
4th century ap it still had a large Jewish
population.
Archaeologists disagree concerning the ex-
act location of Ekron. Three places are sug-
gested: ‘Aqir, Qatra, and Khirbet el-Muqannav.
See PHILISTIA, PHILISTINES.
El. Ancient Semitic name for deity, perhaps
meaning ‘“‘power’”’ (cf. Gn 17:1); used by the
Hebrews generally in a poetic sense to denote
the true God of Israel. The same word was
used for the senior Canaanite god and the god
in Ugaritic mythology. The “Il” or “El” of an-
cient Canaanite mythology (before 3500 Bc in
the region of Syria) was not as active as the
god Baal, who struggled with Death and tri-
umphed over Chaos. But II was the father god
of the Canaanite pantheon. OT critics have sug-
gested that the Hebrews adopted the clan gods
of the Canaanites, including I]. Yet both Phoe-
nician and Ugaritic literature use II in the
feminine form for the names of goddesses. The
Hebrew avoids such usage. El is combined
with other adjectives to describe the numer-
ous attributes of God; for example, God Most
High (Gn 14:18-24), the seeing God (Gn 16:13),
the jealous God (Ex 20:5), the forgiving God
(Neh 9:17), and the gracious God (Neh 9:31).
See CANAANITE DEITIES AND RELIGION; Gop, NAMES
OF.
Ela. Father of Shimei, one of the 12 officers
appointed to requisition food for King Solo-
mon’s household (i Kgs 4:18, kyv Elah).
Eladah. xsv form of Ele-adah, Ephraim’s de-
scendant, in 1 Chronicles 7:20.
See ELE-ADAH.
Elah. 1. Esau’s descendant and a chief of
Edom (Gn 36:41; 1 Chr 1:52).
2. KJV rendering of Ela, Shimei’s father, in 1
Kings 4:18.
See ELA.
3. Baasha’s son and 4th king of Israel. Elah
reigned for only two years (886—885 Bc). While
in a drunken stupor he was murdered by one
of his generals (1 Kgs 16: 8-14).
See ISRAEL, History OF.
676
_ 4. Father of Hoshea, the last king of the
northern kingdom of Israel (2 Kgs 15:30; 17:1;
18:1,9).
See ISRAEL, HISTORY OF.
5. Caleb’s 2nd son and father of Kenaz (1
Chi #its).9
6. Uzzi’s son, descendant of Benjamin (1
Chr 9:8). Elah was among the first to resettle
in Jerusalem after the Babylonian exile. He is
not mentioned in the parallel list of Nehemiah
Iie
Elah, Valley of. Southernmost valley in
the Shephelah, starting at Hebron and de-
scending in a northerly direction before turn-
ing west. At the Wadi al-Sant it comes to-
gether with other valleys, and at this juncture
there is a wide, level valley about one-half
mile wide. It was here that the great struggle
between David and Goliath took place, with
the Philistine army camped on the southern
hills and Saul’s army on the north or north-
east (1 Sm 17:2,19; 21:9).
Elam (Person). 1. Firstborn son of Shem and
a grandson of Noah (Gn 10:22; 1 Chr 1:17).
2. Benjamite and the son of Shashak (1 Chr
8:24). ;
3. Korahite Levite and the 5th son of Kore
from the house of Asaph (1 Chr 26:3).
4. Forefather of 1,254 descendants who re-
turned with Zerubbabel to Judah following
the exile (Ezr 2:7; Neh 7:12). Later 71 members
of Elam’s house accompanied Ezra back to Pal-
estine during the reign of King Artaxerxes I of
Persia (464-424 Bc; Ezr 8:7). In postexilic Ju-
dah, Shecaniah, Elam’s descendant, urged
Ezra to command the sons of Israel to divorce
their foreign wives (Ezr 10:2); a number from
Elam’s house eventually did so (Ezr 10:26).
5. Another forefather of 1,254 descendants
who returned with Zerubbabel to Judah (Ezr
2:31; Neh 7:34).
6. One of the chiefs of Israel who set his seal
on Ezra’s covenant (Neh 10:14).
7. One of the priestly musicians who per-
formed at the dedication of the Jerusalem wall
(Neh 12:42).
Elam (Place). Occupying an area roughly
the size of Denmark, Elam was located in
southwest Asia, east of Babylonia and north of
the Persian Gulf, on a plain known to the Irani-
ans since the Middle Ages as Khuzistan. The
region today corresponds to southwest Iran.
Mountainous areas to the north and east,
known as the Anshan range, formed a periph-
eral part of Elam. The land’s fertility was
linked to several waterways, the most signifi-
cant of which—the Karkheh—forms Elam’s
western boundary. It was probably this river

of which Daniel speaks when he says, “and I
heard a man’s voice calling from across the
river’ (Dn 8:16 LB).
History. A people with a culture and his-
tory spanning more than 2000 years, the Elam-
ites seem to have lived in constant strife with
the Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians, and fi-
nally the Persians, by whom they were ab-
sorbed. As a race, the Elamites were a mixture
of dark-skinned aboriginals of questionable ori-
gin and Semites who had spilled over into the
land from Mesopotamia. In Genesis 10:22
Elam appears as a descendant of Shem, attest-
ing to the presence of Semites in the region.
Some scholars have suggested that Elam’s
link to Shem has more geographical than ge-
nealogical significance; the Elamites were of-
ten ruled and to some degree colonized by
Semites. The Semitic influence on Elamite cul-
ture in the time of Sargon I (24th century Bc)
is well attested by archaeological evidence.
Elamites established a substantial dynasty
at Susa several hundred years before God
called Abraham out of Ur, a city 100 miles to
the west of Elam. With the ascendency of Sar-
gon of Akkad (a region northwest of Elam)
open hostility resulted in the absorption of
Elam and its adjacent northerly area, Warah-
shi, into his empire. A subsequent Elamite
revolt was crushed by Sargon’s grandson,
Naram-Sin (2291-2255 Bc), who managed to re-
press Elamite power until his death. After
nearly a century of submission to the Akka-
dians, Elam asserted its strength once again
during the reign of Sharkalisharri, Naram-
Sin’s heir. Around 2000 Bc a militant, autono-
mous Elam invaded and conquered several cit-
ies in Babylonia, reducing Ur and its Sume-
rian overlords to subservience. It is probably
at this time that the Elamite Chedorlaomer (in
Elamite Kuter-Lagamar, meaning “the [god-
dess] Lagamar is protectress”) undertook his
Transjordan tribute-collecting expedition (Gn
14:1—7). Although the Babylonian Hammurabi
expelled the Elamites approximately ten years
later (c. 1760 Bc), both Elamite and Babylo-
nian forces were eclipsed by the mighty Kas-
sites, a people of Asiatic stock, who swooped
down invincibly from the northerly Zagros
mountains. The pendulum of power, which
had swung back and forth between Elam and
its Mesopotamian adversaries for centuries,
now came to a full stop as the Kassites
launched what would ultimately be a 400-year
dynasty.
Elam does not become historically signifi-
cant again until around 1300 Bc, when a resur-
gence of power under the Elamite Pahirish-
shan enabled the country to exert political
influence in the Near East. For the following
200 years the Elamite dynasty was unrivaled
677
Elam
in power, controlling the Tigris Valley, includ-
ing most of the area of the Persian Gulf as well
as the Zagros mountain range. During this pe-
riod the famous codified law of Hammurabi
(inscribed upon an upright pillar called a
stela) was taken as a trophy to the chief Elam-
ite city of Susa.
From about 1000 Bc until the campaigns of
Sargon the Assyrian (c. 721-705 Bc) Elamite
history is obscure. Their complete subjugation
to Assyria in the time of Sennacherib (705—681
Bc) marked the end of their historical signifi-
cance. When Ashurbanipal’s Assyrian empire
collapsed, Elam was annexed by the Indo-
European Persians. With the subsequent rule
of Cyrus II (539-530 Bc) Elam vanished from
the scene.
Religion. Like virtually all of their neigh-
bors, the Elamites were polytheistic. Archaeo-
logical finds reveal innumerable deities, both
male and female. Chief among their goddesses
was Pinikir, who was somewhat on the order
of the Mesopotamian Ishtar (Ashtaroth in bibli-
cal references). The male consort of this mis-
tress of heaven was called Humban. In Elam-
ite religion it was possible for one deity to
gain prominence over others during the course
of time. Inshushinak, once known simply as
“father of the weak’’ was eventually addressed
as “the Lord of Susa.’’ It was commonplace
for gods to have two or three mothers, also the
objects of adoration.
An elaborate priesthood apparently exer-
cised most of their functions in sacred groves
and temples. Snake worship and the deifica-
tion of the sun and the moon were also essen-
tial to Elamite religion.
Law. Certain idiosyncrasies mark Elamite
law as unique. Civil proceedings were handled
exclusively by secular judges; priests could
serve only as witnesses in court. Such dissocia-
tion seems strange in view of the fact that the
trials were held within the sacred temples.
Witnesses were of extreme importance in
Elamite law. The majority of texts show that
between 5 and 20 witnesses appeared during
an average trial. Criminal law called for the
severe mutilation of certain offenders. Who-
ever committed perjury had his hand and
tongue cut off. In spite of polygamy, Elamite
women were highly favored by the law, enjoy-
ing both elevated social and administrative
positions.
Biblical Significance. Western civilization
would know virtually nothing of Elam were it
not for the biblical witness. Elam is men-
tioned in conjunction with Shem’s progeny
(Gn 10:22), and in the Book of Acts it is re-
ported that among the Israelites present in Je-
rusalem for the feast of Pentecost were some
from the old area of Elam (2:9). Isaiah proph-
Elasah
esied that the Jews carried away in the Babylo-
nian exile would return from such places as
Elam (Is 11:11); however, these were
likely Aramaic-speaking Jews who had de-
cided not to return to their homeland follow-
ing the repatriation edict of Cyrus of Persia
(Ezr 1:1-4). The name Chedorlaomer, king of
Elam (Gn 14:1), is demonstrably an authentic
Elamite name, thereby lending additional sup-
port to the accuracy of the historical narrative
in Genesis. Daniel’s vision at Shushan in the
province of Elam (Dn 8:2) reveals
knowledge of the geography of the area and its
waterways. In such accounts the Bible shows
itself to be a valuable adjunct to extrabiblical
literature.
In the 8th century Bc Isaiah summoned
Elam to participate in the shattering of Baby-
lon as an act of Yahweh’s judgment (Is 21:2);
there is little information, however,
Elam’s role in the overthrow of Babylon in 540
Bc. Elam, with other rebellious nations, would
eventually experience the cup of God’s wrath
(Jer 25:15—-26). Even its world-renowned ar-
chers would prove to be no match for the Lord
of Hosts (Is 22:6—12; Jer 49:35; Ez 32:24). Eze-
kiel’s dirge over Elam dramatically illustrates
the horror of a godless grave (Ez 32:24,25). Jere-
miah warns the Elamites that they cannot es-
cape the judgment of God, made certain by
the presence of his throne among them
49:38). Yet Elam’s destruction, though politi-
cally complete in Persia’s conquest, would not
be altogether irremediable (Jer 49:39). Though
its dislocation would rival those of its contem-
poraries, Jeremiah spoke of a time when God
would extend mercy to descendants of the
Elamites. Such an expectancy, following the
phrase, “in the latter days,” may point to the
messianic age. The prophet may well have en-
visioned that momentous day of Pentecost,
when many from Elam would be among those
in Jerusalem upon whom the Spirit of the
Lord fell. Stuart D. SAcks
Elasah. 1. Priest of Pashur’s clan who
obeyed Ezra’s exhortation to divorce his pa-
gan wife after the exile (Ezr 10:22).
2. Shaphan’s son and King Zedekiah’s en-
voy to King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. On
his trip to Babylon, Elasah also carried a let-
ter of encouragement from the prophet Jere-
miah to the Jewish exiles there (Jer 29:3).
Elath. Edomite city (also spelled Eloth), at
the head of the Gulf of Aqaba (Dt 2:8; 1 Kgs
9:26), on the eastern border of the wilderness of
Paran (Gn 14:6, where it is alternately called El-
paran). It probably owed its name (which
means “grove of trees”) to the many palm
trees in the area and may have been located in
most
precise
Elath, seaport on the Gulf of Aqaba.
a grove of sacred trees. Elath was strategically
located along a primary trade route running
from southern Arabia and Egypt to Phoenicia,
making it a valuable city to possess.
about Elath was taken by Chedorlaomer from the
Horites (Gn 14:5,6). Later the chief of Edom
lived there (Gn 36:41), and it was regarded as
the southern limit of the territory of Edom (Dt
2:8). David no doubt captured it when he con-
quered Edom (2 Sm 8:14). During the reign of
Joram, Jehoshaphat’s son, revolt restored it to
the Edomites-(2 Kgs 8:20—22). A few years later
it was recaptured and rebuilt by Judah’s King
Uzziah (2 Kgs 14:22). It remained under Ju-
dah’s rule until the time of Ahaz, when it was
(Jer taken by Rezin of Syria and occupied by Syri-
ans (2 Kgs 16:6). From about 753 Bc onward it
remained an Edomite city until it was aban-
doned sometime between the 6th and 4th cen-
turies Bc. Then the Nabataeans, who con-
trolled the area, built a city a little farther
east of the original site and renamed it Aila.
See EL-PARAN.
El-berith. Local god worshiped at Shechem
(Jgs 9:46). He is usually identified with the god
Baal-berith (Jgs 8:33; 9:4).
El-bethel. Name Jacob gave to the place at
Luz (Bethel) where he built an altar after he
returned from Haran with his family (Gn
35:7).
See BETHEL, BETHELITE (City).
Eldaah. Midian’s 5th son and a descendant
of Abraham and his wife Keturah (Gn 25:4; 1
Chr-rega)
Eldad. One of the 70 elders of Israel who
were commissioned to assist Moses in govern-
ing the people (Nm 11:26,27). Though Eldad
and another elder, Medad, were not among the
68 elders who had gathered around the taber-
nacle at Moses’ command, they too received
the Spirit and prophesied. When Joshua, out
678

of concern for Moses’ authority, asked Moses
to stop them, Moses showed great humility
and sensitivity to God’s will by answering, ‘I
wish that all the Lord’s people were prophets”
(Nm 11:29 NIV).
Elder. Person who, by virtue of position in
the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of per-
sonality, prowess, stature, or influence;
through a process of appointment and ordina-
tion, exercised leadership and judicial func-
tions in both religious and secular spheres in
the ancient world, both among biblical
nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the develop-
ment of the presbytery (group of elders) in the
NT and postapostolic church originate in Juda-
ism and the OT, though the figure of the elder
or groups of elders can also be found in the
world surrounding ancient Israel and in the
Greco-Roman world of the NT period.
In the Old Testament. The elder, or the
institution of elders, is closely linked with the
tribal system. Tribes were composed of clans,
and clans of large, extended family units. By
virtue of age and function in a patriarchal soci-
ety, the father of a family ruled. This fact of
age, as well as the wisdom and maturity in-
vested in older persons, is undoubtedly the ori-
gin of the authority that these elders exer-
cised. A clan was ruled by the heads of the
families constituting it, forming a council of
elders. In time of war, each clan furnished a
contingent; these were led by a chief, probably
chosen from the ranks of the elders.
In Israel’s premonarchy period local admin-
istration and judicial action was largely in the
hands of those elders. In the exodus narrative
it was the elders of Israel (heads of families)
who were instructed by Moses concerning the
first Passover meal (Ex 12:21,22). It was these
elders who, in Exodus 18:12, met with Jethro,
Moses’ father-in-law, and from whose ranks
were chosen worthy representatives to assist
Moses in the interpretation of the Law of God
and the administration of justice (Ex 18:13-
23). Similarly, according to Numbers 11:16,17,
Moses was instructed by God to select 70 men
from among the elders of Israel to assist him
in leadership of the people. In this latter
account the elders were marked by a special
endowment of God’s Spirit. In the former
the elders—chosen as co-administrators with
Moses—were those known to be trustworthy,
who “‘hate a bribe.”
A central function of elders was the admin-
istration of justice. They were the “judges,”
who sat “‘in the gate,” the traditional court-
room of ancient villages and towns. Here dis-
putes and trials were settled by the elders, and
community affairs were discussed and deci-
sions made (Gn 23:10,18; Jb 29:7; Prv 24:7;
Elder
31:23). The preservation and application of the
Law was clearly in the hands of “‘elders at the
gate of the town” (Dt 21:19; 22:15) or ‘elders of
the town”’ (Dt 19:12; 21:3,6; 25:7—10). Ruth 4:1—
12 provides an excellent description of such a
process.
_ During the period of the monarchy, local
administration and judicial authority contin-
or ued to be invested in councils of elders. At end
of Saul’s reign David sent messages and gifts
to the elders of the towns of Judah (1 Sm
30:26), obviously recognizing that his efficient
and rule would depend on their goodwill and alle-
giance. In the time of Jehu (2 Kgs 10:5) we
hear of elders in Samaria, side by side with a
governor and master of the palace. To facili-
tate her plot against Naboth, Jezebel wrote in-
structions to the elders and nobles of Yizreel
(1 Kgs 21:8—11). Again, Josiah convened the el-
ders of Judah and Jerusalem to hear the read-
ing of the Law and to enter with him into a
new covenant of obedience (2 Kgs 23:1). It is
clear that the elders of Israel were now respon-
sible for the application of the Law within
their jurisdictions. Beside administrative and
judicial functions, elders also assumed cultic
roles (Ex 24:1,9; Lv 4:15) and were participants
in the royal covenant with David (2 Kgs 19:2).
The institution. of the elders survived the
collapse of the royal institutions. Elders were
present during the exile (Ez 8:1; 14:1; 20:1—3)
as well as after the return (e.g., Ezr 10:16).
In Judaism of the New Testament Period.
While use of the title “elder’’ to designate of-
ficers of various Greek cult associations and
village magistrates may have influenced the
development of community structure in the
gentile churches, the Christian office (or func-
tion) of elder stems in the main from a very
similar institution within Judaism. In the first
three Gospels and in Acts there are numerous
references to elders as functionaries within the
communal and religious life of Judaism. Gen-
erally they are mentioned together with one or
more other groups of functionaries: ‘elders
and chief priests and scribes’ (Mt 16:21);
“chief priests and elders of the people’ (Mt
21:23; 26:3,47,57); ‘‘scribes and elders” (Mt
26:57); “chief priests and elders” (27:1,3,12,
20,41); “rulers and elders and scribes” (Acts
4:5); “rulers of the people and elders” (Acts
4:8). From these NT passages we cannot deter-
mine what exactly their functions were, or
how they differed from rulers or scribes. How-
ever, the duties of Jewish elders are clearly
described in the tractate Sanhedrin in the
Mishna, as well as in the community rule
books of the Qumran ascetics, discovered
among the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Each Jewish community had its council of
elders, who had general administrative over-
679
Elder
sight and represented the community in rela-
tions with Roman authorities. Their primary
duty was judicial. They were custodians of
the Law and its traditional interpretations
(see Mt 15:2) and were charged with both its
enforcement and the punishment of offenders.
The most important of these councils of el-
ders was the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, a group
of 71 men who acted as the final court for the
entire nation.
In the Christian Community. Since the
primitive church eventually regarded itself as
the new Israel (Mt 21:43; Gal 6:16) it is easy to
see why it should gradually adopt the institu-
tion of elders. Though it is difficult to make out
the order that prevailed in the first Christian
communities, because it apparently varied ac-
cording to place and time in both form and
extent, the presence and functioning of elders
was part of the reality of early church life.
In Luke’s account of the origin and spread
of Christianity the elders are already present
in the church at Jerusalem. In Acts 11:30 we
find Christians at Antioch sending famine re-
lief “‘to the elders [of the Judean churches] by
Barnabas and Saul.” On their first missionary
journey Paul and Barnabas appoint elders in
every church (14:23). Later, Paul and Barnabas
are sent from Antioch to Jerusalem “to the
apostles and elders’ about the question of cir-
cumcision of gentile Christians (15:2), and are
“welcomed by the church, and the apostles,
and the elders” (15:4) who gathered to hear
the case and resolve the issue (15:6—23).
Who these elders were, and how they were
chosen, we are not told. It seems possible to
argue, on the basis of Jewish precedent, that
age and prominence gave them the privilege
of rendering special service within the commu-
nity. Veneration for age was a deeply rooted
sentiment among Jews, and the name “‘pres-
byter’” (elder) was derived from Jewish usage.
It is also possible that, like the appointment of
“the seven” for special service by the laying
on of hands (Acts 6:1—6), the first elders in the
Jerusalem church were appointed by the apos-
tles. Apparently they functioned in the Chris-
tian community in ways comparable to elders
in the Jewish communities and the Sanhedrin
(Acts 11:30; 15:2,4,6,22,23; 16:4; 21:18).
Paul apparently continued the practice
among the gentile churches, though elders are
not mentioned in the earliest Pauline writings.
They are mentioned only in the pastoral epis-
tles ( Tm 5:17, 19; Ti 1:5). On his last journey
to Jerusalem, Paul summons the elders of the
church at Ephesus to Melitus (Acts 20:17) to
bid them farewell, and to instruct them to be
faithful in their task of overseeing and caring
for the Christian flock, the church of God
(20:28).
680
Although elders are not explicitly men-
tioned in Paul’s early letters, they may be
among the leaders who presided over the con-
gregations in pastoral functions (Rom 12:8; 1
Thes 5:12,13). It is probably wrong, as many
interpreters have done, to draw a sharp line of
distinction between the so-called ‘“‘charismat-
ic’ leadership in the Pauline churches (e.g., 1
Cor 12) and a more hierarchial structure in
Jewish Christian congregations. Philippians
1:1 certainly reveals a definite stratification of
leadership (‘overseers and, deacons’) within a
young Pauline congregation. And 1 Timothy
5:17, reflecting what is often considered a later
phase in the development of church govern-
ment, attributes the more “charismatic’’ func-
tions of preaching and teaching to the ruling
elders. Further, that Christian elders exercised
pastoral functions may be inferred from 1 Pe-
ter 5:1-5 and James 5:14.
There is only one passage where we find a
possible identification of an apostle and el-
ders: “I exhort the elders among you, as a fel-
low elder and a witness of the sufferings of
Christ’’ (1 Pt 5:1a). This text may indicate that
elders were appointed and functioned as exten-
sions of apostolic servanthood. Paul’s practice
of appointing élders in the churches before his
departure may support such a suggestion. The
fact that in the tradition of the later church
the “elder” of 2 and 3 John was identified as
the apostle John points in a similar direction.
Though such an identification is implicit, apos-
tles and elders were never confused.
The matter of distinction between elders
and other officers in the church is not so easy.
Though in Paul’s listing of gifts and functions
(1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11) a distinction is made
between prophets, evangelists, pastors, teach-
ers, etc., it is clear that in practice two or
more of these functions were often invested in
the same individual. For example, 1 Timothy
5:17 speaks of elders as involved in preaching
and teaching; James 5:14 sees them involved
in a healing ministry; 1 Peter 5:2 exhorts them
to tend the flock. Thus, the prophets and teach-
ers who led the church at Antioch (according
to Acts 13:1-3) may well have been the elders
of this community. ;
The diaconate, too, whose roots are to be
seen in the selection of ‘‘the seven” for service
to those in need (Acts 6:1-3), was not re-
stricted to purely external service. Two of
these men, whom Luke introduces to us as dea-
cons, appear at the same time as evangelists
who were particularly effective as preachers of
the Word, performers of miracles, expounders
of the Scriptures (Stephen, Acts 6:8—10; Philip,
Acts 8:4—13,26—40).
Whereas in the later church bishops and el-
ders were clearly distinguished, the NT reflects

an early period when these offices were virtu-
ally synonymous. In Paul’s farewell speech at
Melitus (Acts 20), addressed specifically to the
Ephesian church elders (20:17), he tells them
that the Holy Spirit has made them “overseers
to care for the church of God” (20:28). Whether
“overseer” is used here in the later technical
sense of bishop or the more general sense of . -(Nm 20:25—28; Dt 10:6). He was then considered
guardian is not clear. However, in Titus 1:5—7,
the elders of verse 5 are clearly the same per-
sons as the bishops of verse 7. Again, the bish-
ops of Philippians 1:1 are likely to be under-
stood as the elders appointed by Paul upon
leaving this mission station.
It is clear that church government in the NT
period was still relatively fluid, but the seeds
for the later structures were surely planted.
The institution of the elders, on the basis of bank (Jos 14:1; 17:4; 19:51; 21:1).
Jewish precedent, was central. The episcopate
(overseers/bishops) probably emerged out of and memorialized in the land of Ephraim (Jos
the presbytery (elders), one elder being ap-
pointed as overseer by the entire council of priest.
elders. MANFRED T. BRAUCH
See BisHop; PAsToR; DEACON, DEACONESS; PRES-
BYTER; SPIRITUAL GIFTS.
Bibliography. G. Berghoef and L. DeKoster, The Elder's
Handbook; T.M. Lindsay, The Church and Ministry in the
Early Centuries; 1.M. Ross, What Is an Elder; B.H. Streeter, In King Solomon’s time the priests of Zadok
The Primitive Church.
Elead. Ephraim’s descendant who was killed
in a raid against the Philistine city of Gath (1
Chr 7:24):
Ele-adah. Ephraim’s descendant (1 Chr 7:20,
KJV Eladah).
Elealeh. Town in the Transjordan northeast
of Heshbon conquered by Reuben and Gad
(Nm 32:3,37). It was taken back by the Moab-
ites and is associated with Heshbon in the pro-
phetic denunciations of Moab (Is 15:4; 16:9; Jer
48:34).
Eusebius refers to it in the 4th century AD as
a large village. It is identified with the modern
el-‘Al, a village 2,986 feet above sea level in a
region rich in vineyards. The remains of walls
from the prepatriarchal period have been un-
covered by archaeologists.
Eleasah. 1. Helez’s son and member of Ju-
dah’s tribe (1 Chr 2:39,40).
2. Raphah’s son and descendant of King
Saul (1 Chr 8:37; 9:43).
Eleazar. 1. Third of Aaron’s four sons (Ex
6:23). Eleazar (“God has helped”) was conse-
crated as a priest with his brothers and Aaron
in Sinai (Ex 28:1; Lv 8:2,13). When his brothers
Nadab and Abihu were slain by God as they
offered “unholy fire” to the Lord (Lv 10:1—-7),
681
Elect, Election
Eleazar and Ithamar took leading positions as
Aaron’s sons (Nm 3:1—4).
Eleazar is described as “chief of the leaders
of the Levites” (Nm 3:32). Under his supervision
were the sanctuary and its vessels (Nm 4:16;
16:37,39; 19:3,4). Eleazar was installed as high
priest by Moses when Aaron died on Mt Hor
Moses’ assistant (Nm 26:1,3,63; 27:2,21). Joshua
was commissioned by Moses in the presence of
Eleazar (Nm 27:18—23). In the conquest of Ca-
naan, Joshua and Eleazar served together as
leaders. It was Eleazar’s function as Joshua’s
counselor to inquire of the Lord (Nm 27:18—22).
He also had his share in the census-taking at
Shittim. He took part in the partitioning of Ca-
naan, the east bank (Nm 34:17), and the west
When Eleazar died he was highly regarded
24:33); his son Phinehas followed him as high
In the oversight of the priests 16 divisions
were assigned to Eleazar’s descendants and 8
to Ithamar’s (1 Chr 24). The ancestry of the
prominent priests Zadok and Ezra is traced to
Eleazar (1 Chr 6:3-15,50-53; 24:3; Ezr 7:1-5).
replaced Abiathar, a descendant of Ithamar
(1 Kgs 2:26,27,35). The descendants of Eleazar
would be the only ones permitted to minister
in Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 44:15).
See AARON.
2. Abinadad’s son charged with caring for
the ark by the people of Kirjath-jearim, when
it was brought from Beth-shemesh and placed
in the “house of Abinadad on the hill” (¢ Sm
7:1).
3. Dodo’s son, one of the three mighty men
whose exploits against the Philistines gained
him great fame (2 Sm 23:9; 1 Chr 11:12).
4. Merarite Levite, son of Mahli. Eleazar
died without sons, so his daughters were mar-
ried to their first cousins (1 Chr 23:21,22;
24:28).
5. Priest descended from Phinehas. This
Eleazar helped inventory the temple treasure
on returning from the exile with Ezra (Ezr
8:33).
6. Parosh’s son, listed with others who di-
vorced their foreign wives in the reform under
Ezra (Ezr 10:25).
7. Priest in attendance at the dedication of
the rebuilt walls of Jerusalem following the
exile (Neh 12:42).
8. Person in the lineage of Joseph, husband
of Mary (Mt 1:15).
See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.
Elect, Election. In modern English, terms
referring to the selection of a leader or repre-
Elect, Election
sentative by a group of people. An element of
choice is involved, since usually there are sev-
eral candidates out of whom one must be
chosen.
When the verb “elect” is used theologically
in the Bible, it usually has God as its subject.
In the OT it is used for God’s choice of Israel
to be his people (cf. Acts 13:17). Israel became
God’s people, not because they decided to be-
long to him, but because he took the initiative
and chose them. Nor did God’s choice rest on
any particular virtues that his people exempli-
fied, but rather on his promise to their forefa-
ther Abraham (Dt 7:7,8). God also chose their
leaders, such as Saul and David (1 Sm 10:24; 2
Sm 6:21), apart from any popular vote by the
people. The word thus indicates God’s preroga-
tive in deciding what shall happen, indepen-
dently of human choice.
The same thoughts are found in the NT.
God’s people are described as his “elect” or
“chosen ones,” a term used by Jesus when
speaking of the future time when the Son of:
man will come and gather together God’s peo-
ple (Mk 13:20,27). He will vindicate them for
their sufferings and for their patience in wait-
ing for his coming (Lk 18:7). In 1 Peter 2:9
God’s people are called an “‘elect nation.” This
phrase was originally used of the people of Is-
rael (Is 43:20), and it brings out the fact that
the people of God in the OT and the Christian
church in the NT stand in continuity with
each other; the promises addressed to Israel
now find fulfillment in the church.
In Romans 9-11 Paul discusses the problem
of why the people of Israel as a nation have
rejected the gospel, while the Gentiles have
accepted it. He states that in the present time
there is a “remnant” of Israel as a result of
God's gracious choice of them. This group is
called ‘‘the elect.’’ They are the chosen people
who have obtained what was meant for Israel
as a whole, while the greater mass of the peo-
ple have failed to obtain it because they were
“hardened” as a result of their sin (Rom
“IG5,7)5
Nevertheless, God’s choice of Israel to be
his people has not been cancelled. Most Jew-
ish people have aligned themselves against the
gospel, so that the Gentiles may come in and
receive God’s blessings in their place; but they
still remain beloved by God, and God will not
go back on his original calling of them (Rom
11:28). Consequently Paul is confident that in
due time there will be a general return to God
by the people of Israel.
The word translated “elect’”’ is generally
found in the plural and refers either to the
members of God’s people as a whole or to
those in a particular local church (Rom 8:33;
Gol-3:12; rsThes 1:4; z: Im 2ep Traira aii:
682
2 Pt 1:10; Rv 17:14; Rom 16:13 and 2 Jn 13 have
the singular form). The use of the plural may
partly be explained by the fact that most of
the NT letters are addressed to groups of peo-
ple rather than to individuals. More probably,
however, the point is that God’s election is con-
cerned with the creation of a people rather
than the calling of isolated individuals.
The use of the word “election” emphasizes
that membership of God’s people is due to
God’s initiative, prior to all human response,
made before time began (Eph 1:4; cf. Jn
15:16,19). It is God who has called men and
women to be his people, and those who re-
spond are elect. God’s call does not depend on
any virtues or merits of humankind. Indeed,
he chooses the foolish things by worldly stan-
dards to shame the wise, the weak to confound
the strong, and the low and insignificant to
bring to nothing those who think that they are
something (1 Cor 1:27,28). The effect of election
is to leave no grounds whatever for human
boasting in achievement and position. What-
ever the elect are, they owe entirely to God,
and they cannot boast or compare themselves
with other people.
God’s elect are a privileged people. Since
they now have God to uphold them, no one
can bring any accusation against them that
might lead to God’s condemnation (Rom 8:33).
They constitute a royal priesthood; they are
God’s servants with the right of access to him
(x Pt 2:9). It is for their sake that the apostles
endured hardship and suffering, so that they
might enjoy future salvation and eternal glory
(2 Tm 2:10).
The elect are distinguished by their faith in
God (Ti 1:1), and they are called to show the
character that befits God’s people (Col 3:12).
They must make their calling and election
sure; that is, they must show that they belong
to God by the quality of their lives (2 Pt 1:10).
They must continue being faithful to the One
who called them (Rv 17:14).
The relationship between God's call and hu-
man response is explained in Matthew 22:14:
“For many are called, but few are chosen.”
Although God calls many through the gospel,
only some of those respond to the call and be-
come his elect people. The text sheds no light
on the mystery of why only some become
God's people. Certainly, when a person does
respond to God’s call, it is because the gospel
comes to him or her “in power and in the Holy
Spirit and with full conviction” (1 Thes 1:4,5).
When men and women refuse the gospel, it is
because they have become hardened as a re-
sult of sin and their trust in their own works.
Scripture does not go beyond that point in ex-
planation, and neither should Christians.
“Election” can also be used of God’s choice

of people to serve him. Jesus chose the 12 disci-
ples out of the larger company of those who
followed him (Lk 6:13; Acts 1:2). The same
thought reappears in John’s Gospel; Jesus com-
mented that although he chose the 12, one of
them turned out to be a devil (Jn 6:70; 13:18).
When a replacement was needed for Judas,
the church prayed to Jesus and asked him to
show them which of the two available candi-
dates he would choose to fill the gap in the 12
(Acts 1:24). Peter attributes his evangelism
among the Gentiles to God’s “election”of him
for that purpose (Acts 15:7). Similarly, Paul
was an elected instrument for God’s mission
to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15). The initiative in
Christian mission rests with God, who elects
people to serve him in particular ways.
Jesus is called “God’s Chosen” (Lk 9:35; cf.
the taunt in Lk 23:35). The heavenly voice at
Jesus’ transfiguration spoke in language that
echoed Isaiah 42:1 and identified Jesus as
God's Servant, chosen to do his work of bring-
ing light to the nations. In the same way, Jesus
is a “chosen cornerstone” (1 Pt 2:4,6; cf. Is
28:16).
In the teaching of Augustine and Calvin, the
doctrine of election is of fundamental impor-
tance. They taught that God had chosen before
the creation of the world to save a number of
specific individuals from sin and judgment
and to give them eternal life. Those whom he
chose did nothing to deserve it; their merits
are no better than the rest of humankind who
will be judged for their sins. But in his mercy
God decided to save some; therefore, he chose
them and sent Jesus to be their Savior. The
Holy Spirit regenerates and brings to faith
through an “effectual calling” those whom
God has elected. God’s Spirit effectively per-
suades each of them to submit to the gospel,
so they are guaranteed recipients of eternal
life.
This choice by God selectively to save some
may seem unjust. But in fact, God is not
obliged to show mercy to anybody; he is free
to show mercy as he pleases. People cannot
protest that because they were not the elect,
they never nad a chance of being saved. They
never deserved that chance anyway. But any-
body who hears the gospel and responds to it
with faith can know that he is one of the elect.
Whoever rejects the gospel has only his own
sinfulness to blame.
Many Christians reject that explanation of
God’s election. They maintain that although it
appears to be logically consistent with Scrip-
ture, it makes God the prisoner of his own
plan. His predestination of certain individuals
to salvation commits him personally to a de-
tailed, predetermined, unilateral course of ac-
tion that reduces human action to a charade
683
Elect Lady
and renders it insignificant. God ceases to be a
person dealing with persons.
The Augustinian and Calvinist view of elec-
tion, according to its critics, also makes God
out to be arbitrary in his choice of the elect. In
effect, chance becomes the arbiter of human
destiny rather than a holy and loving God.
Those difficulties arise because, they say, the
teaching of Scripture has been pressed into an
artificial logical system that distorts it.
Some Christians avoid the difficulties by
saying that God elects “those whom he fore-
knew” (Rom 8:29), that is, those whom he
knew beforehand would respond to the gospel
in faith. Augustine briefly held that view but
eventually rejected it. Many believe that the
“solution” produces even greater logical prob-
-lems and undermines the sovereignty of God.
Karl Barth has proposed an alternative so-
lution. Instead of teaching that God has
chosen to save some of mankind and has
passed by the others or chosen to reject them,
Barth has noted how Jesus is spoken of in
Scripture as “the elect One.” Jesus is the ob-
ject both of God’s rejection and of his election.
In him the human race was rejected and en-
dured judgment for its sins, Barth argued, but
in him also the race is chosen and appointed
to salvation. It is thus in Jesus Christ that we
are chosen by God (Eph 1:4). Barth’s interpre-
tation could conceivably lead to universalism
(that is, the view that all humagity will be
saved), but Barth explicitly rejected that as a
necessary conclusion. He insisted that a per-
son may reject his or her calling and election.
Nevertheless, difficulties remain. It has been
argued that Barth’s view places too much
weight on one text and also that it confuses
God’s election of Jesus for service with his elec-
tion to salvation of the whole human race.
The teaching of Scripture should not be
overly systematized. In the words of the West-
minster Confession, election is a “high mys-
tery ... to be handled with special prudence
and care, that men attending the will of God
revealed in his word, and yielding obedience
thereunto, may, from the certainty of their ef-
fectual vocation, be assured of their eternal
salvation” (3:8). I. Howarp MARSHALL
See FOREKNOWLEDGE; FOREORDINATION.
Bibliography. G.C. Berkouwer, Divine Election; F. David-
son, Pauline Predestination; P.K. Jewett, Election and Predesti-
nation; J. Jocz, A Theology of Election: Israel and the Church;
H.H. Rowley, The Biblical Doctrine of Election; B.B.
Warfield, “Predestination” in Biblical Doctrines.
Elect Lady. Greeting found in 2 John 1:1.
The phrase has been interpreted two ways.
Some interpreters regard 2 John as ad-
dressed to a particular woman. Ancient Greek
manuscripts show that the word kuria (trans-
El-Elohe-Israel
lated as ‘“‘lady” or ‘“‘mistress’’) was used by let-
ter writers as a personal term for family mem-
bers or close friends of either sex. Thus, the
phrase could be translated, “to my dear
friend, Eklete.”” Some scholars associate the
elect lady with Martha of Bethany (whose
name in Aramaic also means “‘mistress’’).
Other interpreters regard the phrase as sig-
nifying a local congregation. John possibly por-
trayed this Christian community as a mother,
the members as her children, and other congre-
gations as sisters (v 13; cf. 1 Pt 5:13). The
phrase could thus be translated, “the lady
élects’:
See JOHN, LETTERS OF.
El-Elohe-Israel. Name of an altar built by
the patriarch Jacob on land he purchased
from the ‘‘sons of Hamor,’near Shechem (Gn
33:20). Jacob used the Canaanite deity’s name,
El, as a designation for Israel’s God.
Some scholars, thinking this a strange
name for an altar, have suggested that the
combination of names reflects later scribal
emendations of the scriptural texts. They ar-
gue that the Septuagint corrects the difficulty
by saying that Jacob had called ‘“‘upon”’ the
God of Israel. Others speculate that Jacob
built a pillar, not an altar (cf. Gn 35:14,20).
See Gop, NAMES OF.
El-elyon. Hebrew for “God Most High” (Gn
14:18).
See Gop, NAMES OF.
Elemental Spirits, Elements. Alternative
translation of a Greek word used in the NT,
“elemental spirits’ being spiritual forces at
work in the world, and ‘“‘elements’’ being ei-
ther the basic constituents of the physical
world or of human life or the basic principles
of a system of thought. In three passages the
meaning is clear (Heb 5:12; 2 Pt 3:10,12). The
other four passages, however, have caused con-
siderable debate. The difficult phrase ‘‘the ele-
ments of the world” appears in three of the
four passages (Gal 4:3; Col 2:8,20). The mean-
ing of ‘“‘elements’’ in the fourth passage (Gal
4:9) is probably the same as in the other three
because of its similar context.
Range of Meanings. The basic meaning
of the Greek word is ‘“‘basic or fundamental
component.” The word, however, occurs fre-
quently in ancient Greek literature and takes
on a variety of connotations in the different
contexts in which it appears. Most frequently
it was used literally to refer to the physical
elements of the world: earth, air, water, and
fire. This is probably the meaning of the term
in 2 Peter 3:10,12, which state that the world’s
684
elements, the physical matter, will be de-
stroyed by fire.
In antiquity the word also commonly re-
ferred to the letters in a word, notes in music,
the ‘‘elementary’”’ rules of politics, or the foun-
dations or basic principles in science, art, or
teaching (particularly logical propositions ba-
sic to the proof of other propositions). The last
is clearly the meaning of the word in the Epis-
tle to the Hebrews (5:12), which describes peo-
ple’s need to have someone teach them the ba-
sic principles or elementary truths of God’s
Word.
In the 3rd century aD another meaning of
“elements’’—elemental spiritual beings—be-
came current. The development of this mean-
ing has led to the current debate over its suit-
ability in Paul’s context.
Elementary Spirits. A difficulty with Paul’s
use of “‘elements”’ is that any of three possible
meanings makes sense. One can understand
“elements” to mean spiritual beings and view
Paul’s reference as similar to his mention of the
principalities and powers (e.g., in Eph 6:12).
Paraphrasing Galatians 4:3 according to this
view (adopted by rsv), Paul would have been
saying that before conversion a person is en-
slaved to spiritual forces who rule this world.
In 4:9, he asks how the Galatians could wish to
be enslaved to these forces again. The refer-
ences to ‘beings that by nature are no gods”
(Gal 4:8) and to angels through whom the law
was mediated (Gal 3:19) are both used to sub-
stantiate the meaning “‘elemental spirits.”
Similarly, Colossians 2:8 would be warning
Christians against being led away captive
through the philosophical speculations and
empty deceit that are perpetrated by human
traditions and the elemental spirits. Only two
verses later Paul declares that Christ is the
head of every principality and power (Col
2:10). Many commentators now believe that
Paul intended “‘principalities and powers’’ to
refer to demons who temporarily ruled vari-
ous spheres of life in the world. Paul an-
nounces that Christ has conquered them and
displayed them publicly as captives in his tri-
umphal procession (Col 2:15). Thus Colossians
2:20 might mean that Christians have “died”
to those elemental spirits as elsewhere Paul
wrote of “dying” to sin (Rom 6:2).
However, despite the fact that Paul spoke
of the principalities and powers as spiritual
forces, and despite the ease with which this
meaning fits Paul’s use of ‘elements of the
world,” many scholars regard this interpreta-
tion as the least likely of the three possibili-
ties. The earliest certain evidence for the use
of “elements” to mean spirits is from the 3rd
century aD, which is far too late to reflect
common usage in Paul’s day. In addition, no-

where else did Paul speak of Christians being
in bondage to angels or having died to de-
monic powers.
Elementary Principles. Some scholars un-
derstand “the elements of the world” to refer
to elementary religious teaching (as in Heb
5:12). Paul may have been appealing to the
“ABC’s of religion’—perhaps the elementary
character of the Law (cf. Gal 3:24; 4:1—4) or
pagan religious teaching (Gal 4:8). The “weak
and beggarly elements” may be explained by
the fact that the Galatians were legalistically
observing special days, months, seasons, and
years as if their righteousness before God de-
pended on it.
Similarly, in Colossians the elements of the
world seem to be parallel to human traditions
(Col 2:8). The problem again is the same as in
Galatians, legalism (Col 2:16,20—23). In both
contexts the bondage warned against is bond-
age to elementary religious thinking that
comes merely from humans and would be
equivalent to contrasting a kindergarten level
of thought with the advanced teaching that
comes in Christ. Some scholars believe that
this interpretation has more in its favor than
the meaning “elemental spirits,” but others ar-
gue that it is not precise enough.
Elementary Existence. By far the most fre-
quent use of “elements” in ancient literature is
literal, referring to the physical elements of
the world, which were usually considered to
be earth, air, water, and fire. The third inter-
pretation, which many scholars prefer, draws
on this understanding of “elements of the
world.” The meaning of the phrase “of the
world” determines how the passages in ques-
tion are to be interpreted. In the NT writings
“world” was not merely physical. Frequently
“world” was viewed in an ethical sense, stand-
ing for human life apart from God or even
lived in opposition to God and Christ. The
world often represented unregenerate human-
ity with its culture, customs, worldview, and
ethics—the part of creation that had not yet
been redeemed and was helpless to save itself.
Thus, the elements of the world, in this view,
are the “basics” of.a merely human existence.
According to this interpretation, Paul warned
the Colossian Christians against being led
away captive by philosophical speculation
and empty deceit that were in accord with hu-
man traditions and with the basics of a merely
human existence and not in accord with what
they had in Christ (Col 2:8). They had died
from the basics of a merely human life (Col
2:20), and being no longer bound to that level
of existence, they possessed a life that came
from Christ (Col 3:1—4).
This interpretation still leaves the precise
meaning of Galatians 4:1-3 uncertain. Was
685
Eli
Paul addressing both Jews and Gentiles or only
Jews (the “we” in Gal 4:3)? No doubt Paul
viewed both Jews and Gentiles as being in
bondage to a merely human existence. Even
though the Jews possessed God’s Law, it was
ineffectual for salvation. Christ’s coming broke
that bondage and brought the Holy Spirit, who
‘would give Christians a completely new qual-
ity of human life. Therefore Paul warned
against becoming enslaved again to such weak
and poverty-stricken basics of a merely human
existence (Gal 4:9).
In this view, then, the elements of the world
are the “basics” of existence before and out-
side of Christ. Paul nowhere recorded specifi-
cally what he included in those basics. The
contexts of both Galatians and Colossians,
however, seem to imply that the basics at least
included the Law and “the flesh” (that is, life
lived ethically apart from God). Such a view
of “elements” accords well with the wider con-
text of these passages and with other passages
(especially Rom 6-8; Gal 3:2,3,23-25; 4:1-10).
KLYNE R. SNODGRASS
Eleph. kv translation for the town Haeleph
in Joshua 18:28.
See HAELEPH.
Eleven, The. Designation for the 12 disci-
ples after the resurrection of Jesus (Mk 16:14;
Lk 24:9,33), and at Pentecost (Acts 2:14), Judas
Iscariot having committed suicide.
See APOSTLE, APOSTLESHIP.
Elhanan. — 1. Hebrew soldier who distin-
guished himself by killing a Philistine giant.
In one passage he is named as the son of Jaare-
oregim of Bethlehem, and is said to have
killed Goliath the Gittite (2 Sm 21:19). In an-
other passage he is named as the son of Jair,
and is said to have killed Lahmi, the brother
of Goliath (1 Chr 20:5).
2. Dodo’s son and warrior among King Da-
vid’s mighty men (2 Sm 23:24; 1 Chr 11:26).
Eli. Priest in the sanctuary of the Lord at
Shiloh in the period of the judges (1 Sm 1:3,9).
Shiloh, about 10 miles north of Jerusalem, was
the central shrine of the Israelite tribal confed-
eration. Eli had two sons who were priests,
Hophni and Phinehas (which are Egyptian
names; 1 Sm 1:3). No lineage is recorded for
Eli, but there are two possible suggestions: he
is a descendant of Ithamar, Aaron’s younger
son (1 Sm 22:20; 1 Kgs 2:27; 1 Chr 24:3); or he
comes from the house of Eleazar (Ex 6:23,25; 2
Esd 1:2,3). In 1 Samuel 1, Eli blessed the child-
less Hannah, Elkanah’s wife, after learning of
her prayer for a son (v 17). Subsequently Sam-
Eli, eli, lama sabachthani
Ag ides
A tomb at Shiloh.
uel was born, and when weaned was brought
by his mother to Eli for service and training in
the sanctuary, according to her promise to the
Lord (vv 27,28).
Hophni and Phinehas were corrupting the
Israelites despite Eli’s protests, and for this
sin God promised judgment upon Eli’s family
(1 Sm 2;27,36). The sons of Eli were to die on
the same day (1 Sm 2:34), and the fulfillment
came in a battle with the Philistines at Aphek
(1 Sm 4:11,17). Eli too died when he heard of
the defeat and the loss of the ark of the cove-
nant to the Philistines. At his death he was 98
years old, and besides being priest he also had
judged Israel for 40 years (1 Sm 4:15,18). Eli’s
daughter-in-law, Phinehas’ wife, died in child-
birth, brokenhearted over the loss of her hus-
band and the ark. She named her son Ichabod
because she felt that there was no more hope
(1 Sm 4:19—22).
Eli was not characterized by a firm person-
ality. He was no doubt sincere and devout, but
he was also weak and indulgent.
Eli, eli, lama sabachthani. One of Jesus’
cries from the cross, properly translated “My
God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’
That form of the “cry of dereliction” (Mt 27:46)
is slightly different from its other recorded
form, “Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani?” (Mk
15:34). Both versions are adaptations of Psalm
22:1 into Aramaic, the common language of
first-century Palestine. The only difference in
the two accounts is that Mark’s version is com-
pletely Aramaic whereas Matthew retains the
Hebrew word for God (which was not uncom-
mon for Aramaic-speaking Jews). The fact that
some of Jesus’ hearers thought he was calling
Elijah indicates that Matthew’s version is
probably the original. Elias (Elijah) could
have been confused with “Eli” more easily
than with “Eloi” (Mt 27:47; Mk 15:35).
The textual variants that exist suggest the
difficulties copyists and interpreters have had
686
with Jesus’ words. After meditating on the pas-
sage, Martin Luther exclaimed, “‘God forsaken
of God! Who can understand it?’’ Luther’s
statement of the major theological problem,
that Jesus was forsaken by God, is not the only
possible understanding of the text. Debate has
focused on two questions: whether in fact
abandonment by God was expressed by Jesus’
use of the psalmist’s words, and why the on-
lookers spoke of Elijah.
Meaning of the Cry. At one extreme, many
have been struck by the ‘starkness of Jesus’
words. Some have even seen in them a realiza-
tion on the cross that he had failed and that
all hope was lost for the coming of God’s king-
dom. From that perspective Jesus’ words were
a cry of despair over a lost cause. Such a view
hardly fits the rest of the NT presentation of
Jesus, however.
At the opposite extreme, some interpret the
words as neither stark nor negative in any
sense. They view the cry as an affirmation of
Jesus’ faith in committing himself to God (Lk
23:46). To such interpreters the fact that Jesus
began his question with “My God, my God”
and used a biblical quotation indicates reli-
gious reverence and continued faith. In Jewish
practice sometimes the first line of a psalm or
song would be quoted to refer to the whole
work. Hence Jesus might have been quoting
Psalm 22:1 as a way of referring to the whole
psalm. Psalm 22 is clearly the lament of a righ-
teous sufferer. Psalms of lament always ex-
pressed a prayer of confidence in God and
praise to God as well as a prayer for help from
God. Thus, from a certain point of view the
cry from the cross can be seen as a confident
prayer.
Many biblical scholars find the second ex-
treme view as unconvincing as the first. The
Gospel writers did not clarify the meaning of
the cry. Yet if the words were an expression of
confidence or praise, some indication would
be expected in the text. As they stand, the
words are hardly an expression of religious
reverence. The words themselves and the fact
they were expressed in a loud cry do not sug-
gest a prayer of confidence or praise.
Another approach views the words as ex-
pressing Jesus’ feeling of isolation in a mo-
ment of extreme anguish but rejects the no-
tion that he was actually forsaken by God.
The interpretation that has become ‘“‘tradi-
tional” is that Jesus was actually forsaken by
God. In that view the context of the garden of
Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32—42; Lk
22:39-46) indicates the kind of conflict ex-
pressed in Jesus’ cry on the cross. Jesus’ identi-
fication with sinners was so real that taking
on their sin broke the closeness of his commu-
nion with the Father. Thus Jesus’ abandon-

ment by God is seen as an important aspect of
the atonement. Although stressing that Jesus
was actually forsaken, the traditional view
goes on to stress that the unity of the Trinity
remained unbroken.
The explanation of such a paradox is not
easy. Some view it as a divine mystery and
make no attempt to explain it at all. Others
attempt to make some kind of distinction be-
tween what happened on the cross and the re-
ality of God’s being. For example, in the early
centuries of the church the view was ex-
pressed that only Jesus’ humanity was af-
fected by the separation, so that his deity
remained intact with God. Others argue that
Jesus was separated from the Father “function-
ally” in the work of salvation but not “really”
with respect to his existence.
The refusal of the Gospel writers to explain
Jesus’ cry should make scholars hesitate to
give precise or dogmatic explanations. At the
least, one can confidently state (1) that the cry
reflects the reality of Jesus’ humanity in the
face of death, (2) that the particular kind of
death (“even death on a cross,” Phil 2:8) was
especially scandalous, and (3) that Christ’s
identification with sinners was a horribly pain-
ful experience. Thus, although the cry is some-
how related to the atonement, the biblical
texts do not discuss whether Jesus was abso-
lutely abandoned. Further, they do not explain
how God could recoil from sin at the same
time that “in Christ God was reconciling the
world to himself” (2 Cor 5:19). In doing justice
to the depth of emotion expressed in the cry,
one should be cautious not to force the text to
say something the author did not intend.
Elijah and the Cry. Various possibilities of
connections between the cry and Elijah have
been offered. If the cry refers to the whole of
Psalm 22, mention of Elijah by the bystanders
would show that they understood Jesus’ words
as expressing confidence in salvation. A salva-
tion mediated by Elijah would have seemed
natural to the Jews, who often saw Elijah as a
deliverer of the righteous oppressed. Others
claim that the bystanders were willfully and
maliciously distorting Jesus’ words in order to
mock him. Still others view the mention of Eli-
jah as an honest misunderstanding because of
the similarity of the words. The view that one
adopts will depend to some extent on how Je-
sus’ cry is understood.
KLYNE R. SNODGRASS
See SEVEN Last WorDs, THE; CRUCIFIXION.
Eliab. 1. Heron’s son and leader of Zebu-
lun’s tribe when the Israelites were roaming
in the Sinai wilderness after their escape from
Egypt (Nm 1:9, 2:7; 10:16). As leader he pre-
687
Eliakim
sented his tribe’s offering at the consecration
of the tabernacle (Nm 7:24,29).
2. Member of Reuben’s tribe and son of
Pallu. Eliab was the father of Nemuel, Dathan,
and Abiram. Dathan and Abiram rebelled
against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness
(Nm 16:1,12; 26:8,9; Dt 11:6).
* 3. Jesse’s eldest son and brother of King Da-
vid. An impressive person physically, he was
rejected by God for the kingship in favor of
David (: Sm 16:6; 1 Chr 2:13). Eliab served
King Saul when Goliath defied Saul’s army (1
Sm 17:13,28). He was appointed leader of Ju-
dah’s tribe during David's reign (1 Chr 27:18,
Elihu). His granddaughter Mahalath married
King Rehoboam of Judah (2 Chr 11:18).
4. Variant name for Elihu in 1 Chronicles
67273
See ELIHU # 1.
5. Warrior from Gad’s tribe who joined Da-
vid at Ziklag in his struggle against King Saul
(1 Chr 12:9). Eliab was an expert with the
shield and spear (1 Chr 16:5).
6. Levite musician assigned to play the
harp in the procession when King David
brought the ark to Jerusalem (1 Chr 15:18). He
was assigned permanently to service in the
tabernacle (1 Chr 16:5).
Eliada. 1. One of King David’s sons, born in
Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:16; 1 Chr 3:8). He is also
called Beeliada in 1 Chronicles 14:7.
2. Father of Rezon, the king of Damascus
and an adversary of Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23, KJV
Eliadah).
3. General under King Jehoshaphat. Eliada
and the 200,000 warriors he commanded were
from Benjamin's tribe (2 Chr 17:17).
Eliadah. uv spelling of Eliada, Rezon’s fa-
ther, in 1 Kings 11:23.
See ELIADA # 2.
Eliah. xksv form of the name Elijah in 1
Chronicles 8:27 and Ezra 10:26.
See ELIJAH # 2,4.
Eliahba. Warrior among David’s mighty
men who were known as “the 30” (2 Sm 23:32;
Yr Chr 17°37).
Eliakim. 1. Hilkiah’s son and a royal officer
in the household and court of King Hezekiah
(2 Kgs 18:18,26,37). His position had increased
in importance since Solomon's reign (1 Kgs
4:2—6) until he was second only to the king. As
such Eliakim had absolute authority as the
king’s representative.
When Sennacherib of Assyria moved against
Jerusalem in 7or Bc, Eliakim was one of the
Eliam

diplomatic emissaries who conferred with the Eliathah. Son of Heman appointed to assist
Assyrian officers on behalf of Hezekiah (2 Kgs in the temple service during David’s reign (1
18:18,37). He was also sent by Hezekiah in sack- Chr 25:4,27):
cloth to Isaiah to ask for prayer on Jerusalem's
behalf(2 Kgs 19:1—5). Elidad. Benjamite, of the sons of Chislon,
2. King Josiah’s second son. When Eliakim appointed to work under Eleazar and Joshua
was made king of Judah by Pharaoh Neco, his in allotting Canaanite territory west of the Jor-
name was changed to Jehoiakim (2 Kgs 23:34; dan to the ro tribes (Nm 34:21).
2 Chr 36:4).
See JEHOIAKIM. Eliehoenai. 1. Korahite Levite who, with
3. One of the priests who assisted at the his 6 brothers and his father, Meshelemiah,
dedication of the Jerusalem wall after it was served as a temple doorkeeper during David's
rebuilt by Zerubbabel (Neh 12:41). reign (1 Chr 26:3, KJv Elioenai).
4. Abiud’s son in Matthew’s genealogy of 2. Zerahiah’s son, who came to Jerusalem
Jesus (1:13). with Ezra, bringing his family and others
See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST. from Babylon (Ezr 8:4, KJv Elihoenai).
5. Melea’s son in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus
(3:30). Eliel. 1. Warrior and head of a family of the
See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST. half tribe of Manasseh that lived east of the
Jordan River (1 Chr 5:24).
Eliam. 1. Alternate name for Ammiel, Bath- 2. Tola’s son, a Kohathite who was one of
sheba’s father, in 2 Samuel 11:3. the Levitical singers in the time of David (1
See AMMIEL # 3. Chr 6:34); possibly the same as Elihu son of
2. Alternate name for Ahijah the Pelonite in Tohu (1Sm 1:1) and Eliab (1 Chr 6:27).
2 Samuel 23:34. See ELIHU # 1.
See AHIJAH # 7. 3. Shimei’s son and a chief of Benjamin’s
tribe (1 Chr 8:20).
Elias. «sv rendering of the prophet Elijah’s 4. Shaahak’s son and a chief of Benjamin’s
name in the NT. tribe (1 Chr 8:22).
5. Warrior among David's mighty men
See ELIJAH # 1. (1 Chr 11:46), called a Mahavite.
6. Another warrior among David’s mighty
Eliasaph. 1. Leader of Gad’s tribe appointed men (1 Chr 11:47).
by Moses. He was the son of Deuel (Reuel) (Nm 7. Warrior from the Gadites who joined Da-
LitAwetid, 9142.47 510320)" vid at Ziklag in his struggle against King Saul.
2. Gershonite Levite and the son of Lael. Eliel was one of those “experts with shield
His responsibility in the tribe was to take and spear.” Whether the Eliel of 1 Chronicles
charge of the tabernacle coverings, the cur- 12:11 should be equated with either of the two
tains of the court, and the main altar (Nm Eliels of 1 Chronicles 11:46,47 is impossible to
3:24). say.
8. Levite and chief of the family of Hebron,
Eliashib. 1. Elioenai’s son and a descendant who was involved in bringing the ark to Jeru-
of Zerubbabel in the royal lineage of David (1 salem in David's time (1 Chr 15:9).
Chr 3:24). g. Priest who assisted in bringing the ark to
2. Aaron’s descendant chosen by David to Jerusalem (1 Chr 15:11); possibly the same as
head the 11th of the 24 courses of priests tak- # 8 above.
ing turns in the sanctuary services (1 Chr 10. Levite who assisted Conaniah in the ad-
24:12). ministration of the tithes, contributions, and
3. High priest in the second succession from dedicated things given to the temple during
Jeshua (Neh 12:10). Eliashib assigned a cham- Hezekiah’s reign (2 Chr 31:13).
ber of the temple to Tobiah the Ammonite, a
relative by marriage. When Nehemiah re- Elienai. Benjamite and the son of Shimei (1
turned frém exile, he had Tobiah removed Chr 8:20). His name may be a contraction of
from his temple lodge (Ezr 10:6; Neh 3:1,20; Elioenai (see 1 Chr 26:3 KJV).
13:4,7,28).
4. Levite and temple singer. He pledged to Eliezer. 1. Native of Damascus and Abra-
put away his foreign wife at Ezra’s command ham’s servant, who according to custom was
(Ezr 10:24). the adopted heir before Ishmael and Isaac
5, 6. Two men, a son of Zattu and a son of were born (Gn 15:2).
Bani, similarly persuaded by Ezra to put away 2. Moses and Zipporah’s second son (Ex
their foreign wives (Ezr 10:27,36). 19:47 C hin 23.06. a7).
688

3. Benjamite and Becher’s son (1 Chr’7:8).
4. One of the seven priests who blew a trum-
pet before the ark of the covenant when David
moved it to Jerusalem (1 Chr 15:24).
5. Zichri’s son and a chief officer in Reu-
ben’s tribe (1 Chr 27:16).
6. Son of Dodavahu-of Mareshah, who
prophesied against King Jehoshaphat of Ju-
dah because of his alliance with Ahaziah, king
of Israel (2 Chr 20:37).
7. One of the leaders sent by Ezra to Iddo at
Casiphia to request Levites for the house of
God (Ezr 8:16).
8, 9, 10. Three men of Israel—a priest, Le-
vite, and Israelite—who were encouraged by
Ezra to divorce their foreign wives during the
postexilic era (Ezr 10:18,23,31).
11. Ancestor of Christ (Lk 3:29).
See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.
Elihoenai. xksv spelling of Elichoenai, Zera-
hiah’s son, in Ezra 8:4.
See ELIEHOENAI # 2.
Elihoreph. Prominent official in the time of
Solomon (1 Kgs 4:3) who, with his brother Ahi-
jah, was a royal secretary. Attempts to regard
Elihoreph as the title of an official and not a
personal name find no support in the Hebrew
text.
Elihu. 1. Ephraimite, Tohu’s son and an an-
cestor of Samuel the prophet (1 Sm 1:1); per-
haps also called Eliab and Eliel in 1 Chroni-
cles 6:27,34, respectively.
2. One of the soldiers of Manasseh’s tribe
who joined up with David’s army at Ziklag
(2 Chr 12:20).
3. Korahite Levite and a gatekeeper of the
tabernacle. during David’s reign (1 Chr 26:7).
4. Alternate name for Eliab, David’s eldest
brother, in 1 Chronicles 27:18.
See ELIAB # 3.
5. One of Job’s friends, a Buzite, the son of
Barachel (Jb 32:2). He spoke about suffering as
a form of discipline after three of Job’s friends
failed to answer Job’s arguments (chs 32-37).
Elijah. 1. Ninth-century Bc prophet of Is-
rael. Elijah’s name means “my God is the
Lord’’—appropriate for a stalwart opponent of
Baal worship. The Scriptures give no informa-
tion regarding his family background except
that he was a Tishbite who probably came
from the land of Gilead on the east bank of the
Jordan River. He lived primarily during the
reigns of kings Ahab (874-853 Bc) and Ahaziah
(853-852 Bc) of Israel. The biblical account of
Elijah runs from 1 Kings 17 to 2 Kings 2.
Elijah was called by God at a critical pe-
689
Elijah
riod in Israel’s life. Economically and politi-
cally the northern kingdom was in its strong-
est position since its separation from the
southern kingdom. Omri (885-874 Bc) had ini-
tiated a policy of trade and friendly relations
with the Phoenicians. To show his good faith,
Omri gave his son Ahab in marriage to Jeze-
.bel, the daughter of Ethbaal, king of Tyre.
She brought Baal worship with her to Israel,
a false religion whose rapid spread soon
threatened the kingdom’s very existence. Eli-
jah was sent to turn the nation and its lead-
ers back to the Lord through his prophetic
message and miracles.
Warning of drought. Elijah began his re-
corded ministry by telling Ahab that the na-
tion would suffer a drought until the prophet
himself announced its end (1 Kgs 17:1). He
thus repeated Moses’ warning (Lv 26:14—39; Dt
28:15—68) of the consequences of turning away
from God.
Elijah then hid himself in a ravine on the
east bank of the Jordan River by the brook
Cherith (possibly the valley of the Yarmuk
River in north Gilead). There he had sufficient
water for his needs, and ravens brought him
food twice daily. When the brook dried up,
Elijah was directed to move to the Phoenician
village of Zarephath near Sidon. A widow took
care of him from her scanty supplies, and her
obedience to Elijah was rewarded by a miracu-
lous supply of meal and oil that was not de-
pleted until the drought ended.
While Elijah was staying with the widow,
her son became ill and died. By the power of
prayer, the child was restored to life and good
health.
In the drought’s third year the Lord told
Elijah to inform Ahab that God would soon
provide rain for Israel. On his return, Elijah
first encountered Ahab’s officer, Obadiah, who
was searching for water for the king’s live-
stock. Elijah sent Obadiah to arrange a meet-
ing with Ahab. At first Obadiah refused. For
three years Ahab had searched Israel and the
neighboring kingdoms in vain for the prophet,
no doubt in order to force him to end the
drought. Obadiah was certain that while he
went to bring Ahab, Israel’s most wanted “‘out-
law’ would elude them again, thus enraging
the king. When Elijah promised him that he
would stay until he returned, the officer ar-
ranged for Ahab to meet the prophet.
In the subsequent meeting Elijah rejected
the king’s allegation that he was the ‘‘troubler
of Israel’’ (1 Kgs 18:17). He was only obeying
God, he insisted, in pointing out Ahab’s idola-
try. Ahab had even permitted Jezebel to subsi-
dize a school of Baal and Asherah prophets.
Elijah then requested a public gathering on
Mt Carmel as a contest between the prophets
 Elijah and Elisha:
A Comparison of the Lives and Ministries
Elijah Elisha

OT references 1 Kgs 17-19; 21; 2 Kgs 1-2; 2 Chr 1 Kgs 19; 2 Kgs 2-9; 13:21
21:12-15; Mal 4:5
.
NT references Mt 11:14; 16:14; 17:3-4,10—12; 27:47— Lk 4:27
49; Mk 6:15; 8:28; 9:4—5, 10-13;
15:35—-36; Lk 1:17; 4:25—26; 9:8,30—
33; Jn 1:21,25; Rom 11:2—4; Jas
5117-18
Meaning of the name “My God is the Lord” “God is salvation”
OT parallel Moses Joshua
NT parallel John the Baptist
Call Through Elijah (1 Kgs 19:16,19—21)
Theme of Ministry Yahweh vs. Baal Yahweh's sovereignty
Nation to which his Israel (the northern 10 tribes) Israel (the northern ro tribes)
ministry was directed
Rulers during ministry Ahab and Ahaziah Ahab, Ahaziah, Jehoram, Jehu, Jehoa-
haz, and Jehoash
Object of the wrath King Ahab and Queen Jezebel (1 Kgs King Joram (2 Kgs 6:31)
of rulers 18:10; 19:1—2)
Association with chariots a chariot of fire and horses of fire his servant saw hills full of horses
of fire separated Elijah from Elisha at Eli- and chariots of fire all around Elisha
jah’s translation to heaven ina (2 Kgs 6:17)
whirlwind (2 Kgs 2:11)
Tone of prophecies generally negative generally positive
Prophecies 3-year drought (1 Kgs 17:1) victory of Judah, Israel, and Edom
God's judgment on Ahab for murder- over Moab (2 Kgs 3)
ing Naboth (1 Kgs 21:17—24) Syrian army’s plans (2 Kgs 6:8—23)
Ahaziah’s death (2 Kgs 1:4,16) much food; a prince’s dying without
eating any (2 Kgs 7:1-2,17—20)
a 7-year famine (2 Kgs 8:13)
the death of Ben-Hadad, Syria’s king,
Israel’s enemy (2 Kgs 8:7—15)
Jehoash’s defeat of the Syrians (2
Kgs 13:14—20)
Similar miracles multiplication of flour and oil (1 Kgs multiplication of oil (2 Kgs 4:1-7)
17:16)
feeding of Elijah by ravens (1 Kgs feeding of 100 people (2 Kgs 4:42—44)
17:26)
resuscitation of son of widow of Zare- resuscitation of the Shunammite’s
phath (1 Kgs 17:17—24) son (2 Kgs 4:8-37)
parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:8) parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:14)
two companies of 50 soldiers each 43 youths cursed by Elisha are con-
are consumed by fire from heaven sumed by 2 bears (2 Kgs 2:23—25)
(2 Kgs 1:10,12,13)
Other miracles fire on Mt Carmel (1 Kgs 18) healing of waters (2 Kgs 2:19—22)
wind, earthquake, and fire at Mt Ho- purifying of food (2 Kgs 4:38—41)
reb (1 Kgs 19) healing of Naaman (2 Kgs 5)
leprosy on Gehazi (2 Kgs 5)
the floating ax head (2 Kgs 6:5—7)
Syrian soldiers’ loss and recovery of
sight (2 Kgs 6:18—20)
Final miracle associated translation to heaven in a whirlwind resuscitation of a dead man when his
with him (2 Kgs 2:11) bones touch Elisha’s (2 Kgs 13:21)
Appointment of the appointing of Elisha to succeed sends a young prophet to anoint Jehu
successor(s) him (i Kgs 18:10; 19:1-2) to succeed Joram (2 Kgs 9:1-13)

of Baal and the prophets of the Lord to deter-
mine who was the true God.
Confrontation on Carmel. One of the high-
lights of Elijah’s ministry was the contest on
Mt Carmel. Ahab assembled all Israel along
with 850 prophets of Baal and Asherah. The
famous challenge was issued: “How long will
you go limping with two different opin-
ions? ... If the Lord is God, follow him; but if
Baal, then follow him” (1 Kgs 18:21). Sacrifi-
cial animals were to be placed on two altars,
one for Baal and one for the Lord, and the
690
prophets representing each were to ask for fire
from their God.
All day long the pagan prophets called in
vain on Baal. They danced a whirling, frenzied
dance, cutting themselves with knives until
their blood gushed. But there was no answer.
Finally Elijah’s turn came. He repaired the de-
molished altar of the Lord and prepared the
sacrifice. For dramatic effect, he built a trench
around the altar and poured water over the
sacrifice until the trench overflowed. Then he
said a brief prayer, and immediately fire fell

from heaven and “consumed the burnt offer-
ing, and the wood, and the stones, and the
dust, and licked up the water that was in the
trench” (1 Kgs 18:38).
When the people saw it, they fell on their
faces in repentance, chanting, “The Lord, he is
God; the Lord, he is God” (1 Kgs 18:39). At
Elijah’s command the people seized the proph-
ets of Baal and killed them by the brook Ki-
shon. Then Elijah, at the top of Carmel, began
to pray fervently for rain. Dramatically, the
sky became black with clouds and rain began
to pour, ending the long drought. Ahab rode
back in his chariot to Jezreel, 20 miles to the
east. God’s Spirit enabled Elijah to outrun
Ahab, and he arrived in Jezreel first.
Jezebel, furious over the massacre of the
Baal prophets, sent a message to Elijah: ‘So
may the gods do to me, and more also, if I do
not make your life as the life of one of them by
this time tomorrow” (1 Kgs 19:2). When Elijah
received her message, he panicked and fled to
Beersheba. His greatest defeat followed his
greatest triumph.
Experience at Horeb. Elijah left his ser-
vant in Beersheba, going another day’s jour-
ney into the desert alone. There he lay down
under a broom tree and, in despair and exhaus-
tion, asked God to take his life. Instead an
angel appeared, nourishing him twice with
bread and water. After he had slept, Elijah con-
tinued on his way.
After 40 days Elijah arrived at Mt Horeb,
where he found shelter in a cave. There the
Lord spoke to him, asking what he was doing
there. The prophet explained that he was the
only prophet of God left in Israel, and now even
his life was threatened. In response, the mighty
forces of nature—a great wind, an earthquake,
and fire—were displayed before Elijah to show
him that the omnipotent God could intercede
on his behalf with a powerful hand. Finally
God encouraged Elijah in a “still small voice.”
The Lord had further tasks for him to accom-
plish. God also told Elijah that he was not the
only faithful person in Israel, but 7,000 others
remained true to the Lord.
Since Elijah had faithfully delivered God's
message to Ahab, the Lord commissioned him
to deliver another message, one of judgment
on Israel’s continuing failure to listen to God.
The instruments of retribution were to be Haz-
ael, who would become king in Syria (c. 893-
796 Bc), and Jehu, who would become king of
Israel (841-814 Bc). Elijah was instructed to
anoint both of them. He was also told to
anoint his successor, Elisha, to be his under-
study until it was time for Elisha’s full minis-
try to begin.
Naboth. After his return to Israel one of
Elijah’s boldest confrontations with King
691
Elijah
Ahab was over Naboth’s vineyard. Although
Ahab wanted Naboth’s property, he was sensi-
tive to the law regarding ownership of land.
Further, Ahab never completely abandoned
the faith of his fathers (1 Kgs 21:27—29). Jeze-
bel, however, had no regard for the Mosaic
law and conspired to have Naboth put to
-death on a false charge.
When Ahab then took possession of the vine-
yard, Elijah branded him as a murderer and a
robber. He predicted divine judgment—the
fall of Ahab’s dynasty and Jezebel’s horrible
death (1 Kgs 21:17—24). Ahab repented, how-
ever, and the judgment was postponed.
Ahaziah’s folly. The Lord’s judgment on
Ahab was finally executed when the king was
killed in a battle with Syria in 853 Bc. The
dogs licked up Ahab’s blood, as the prophet
had predicted (1 Kgs 21:19). Shortly after Aha-
ziah had succeeded his father as king, he suf-
fered a crippling fall. While lying ill, he sent
messengers to ask Baal-zebub, the god of Ek-
ron, whether he would recover. The Lord sent
Elijah to intercept them and give them a mes-
sage for the king: a rebuke for ignoring the
God of Israel and a warning of the king’s im-
pending death.
Ahaziah angrily sent a captain with 50 sol-
diers to arrest Elijah. They were consumed by
fire from heaven at Elijah’s words. A second
captain and another 50 soldiers were sent but
met the same fate. The third captain who
came begged the prophet to spare his and his
soldiers’ lives. Elijah went with this captain
and delivered God’s message to the king per-
sonally. The king would not recover but would
die, because he had inquired from pagan gods
rather than from the true God.
Warning to Jehoram. Elijah had been
called primarily to minister to Israel, but he
also delivered God’s word of warning to Jeho-
ram, king of Judah, rebuking him for follow-
ing Israel in its idolatry and for not walking in
the godly ways of his father and grandfather (2
Chr 21:12—-15).
Elijah’s Translation. When the end of Eli-
jah’s ministry drew near, Elisha refused to
leave him. After a journey which took them to
schools of the prophets at Bethel and Jericho,
the two crossed the Jordan River miraculously;
Elijah struck the waters with his mantle and
they parted. Elisha requested a double portion
(the firstborn’s share, cf. Dt 21:17) of his mas-
ter’s spirit, for he desired to be Elijah’s full suc-
cessor. Elisha knew his request was granted be-
cause he saw Elijah pass into the heavens in a
whirlwind bearing a chariot and horses of fire.
The young prophets who had accompanied Eli-
sha searched in vain for Elijah in the moun-
tains and valleys around the Jordan, but God
had taken his faithful prophet home. Elijah
Elika

thus joined Enoch as the only other man in the
Bible who did not experience death.
Elijah’s Message and Miracles. As the
Baal worship of Tyre made inroads into Israel
through Jezebel, Elijah was sent to check its
spread by emphasizing again that Israel’s God
was the only God of the whole earth. He began
a vital work that was continued by Jehu, who
slaughtered many of the Baal worshipers
among Israel’s leaders (2 Kgs 10:18—28). Eli-
jah’s specific mission was to destroy heathen
worship in order to spare Israel, thus prepar-
ing the way for the prophets who were to fol-
low in his spirit.
Miracles were prominent in Elijah’s minis-
try, given as a sign to confirm him as God's
spokesman and to turn Israel’s kings back to
God. Some scholars have rejected these mira-
cles or tried to explain them away. The OT,
however, clearly testifies to their validity, and
the NT affirms them.
Elijah and the New Testament. Malachi
named Elijah as the forerunner of the “great
and terrible day of the Lord” who will “turn
the hearts of fathers to their children and the
hearts of children to their fathers” (Mal 4:5,6).
Jewish writers have often taken up the same
theme in their literature: Elijah will “restore
the tribes of Jacob” (Ecclus 48:10); he is men-
tioned in the Qumran Manual of Discipline of
the Dead Sea Scrolls; he is the central sign of
the resurrection of the dead according to the
Mishna, the collection of Jewish oral law; and
he is the subject of songs sung at the close of
the sabbath.
In the NT, Malachi’s prophecy was inter-
preted in the angelic annunciation to Zecha-
riah as pointing to John the Baptist, who was
to do the work of another Elijah (Lk 1:17; kJv
Elias) and was confirmed by Jesus himself (Mt
11:14; 17:10—13).
Jesus also alluded to Elijah’s sojourn in the
land of Sidon (Lk 4:25,26), and the apostle Paul
referred to the prophet’s experience at Mt Ho-
reb (Rom 11:2). The apostle James used Elijah
to illustrate what it means to be a righteous
man and a man of prayer (Jas 5:17).
Elijah appeared again on the mount of
transfiguration with Moses as they discussed
Jesus’ approaching death (Mt 17:1-13; Lk
9:28—36). Some Bible scholars believe that Eli-
jah will return as one of the two witnesses of
the end times (Rv 11:3-12), in fulfillment of
Malachi’s prophecy that he is to come before
the dreadful judgment day of God.
See IsRAEL, HISTORY OF; PROPHECY;
PROPHETESS.
2. Chief of Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:27, Ksv
Eliah).
3. Priest who married a gentile wife (Ezr
10:21).
4. Layman who also married a foreign wife
(Ezr 10:26, KJv Eliah).
RICHARD L. SCHULTZ
Bibliography. W. Milligan, Elijah: His Life and Times;
H.H. Rowley, Men of God; R. Wallace, Elijah and Elisha.
Elika. Harodite, listed as one of David’s
mighty men (2 Sm 23:25). His name is not in-
cluded in a similar list in 1 Chronicles 11:27.
Elim. Early encampment of the Israelites af-
ter their passage through’the Red Sea (Ex
15:27; 16:1). Elim was situated between Marah
and the desert of Sin. It had 12 springs of wa-
ter and 70 palm trees (NM 33:9,10).
Most scholars identify Elim with the Wadi
Gharandel, 63 miles from Suez. At this wadi
the vegetation consists of palm trees, tama-
risks, and acacias. But if Mt Sinai is to be lo-
cated somewhere in Arabia, Elim would be
much closer to the Gulf of Aqaba.
See WILDERNESS WANDERINGS.
Elimelech. Man from Bethlehem who took
his wife, Naomi, and his sons, Mahlon and
Chilion, to sojourn in Moab because of famine
in Judah (Ru r:2,3). While in Moab, he died;
then his sons also died; and Naomi decided to
return to Judah. One daughter-in-law, Orpah,
preferred to remain in Moab; the other, Ruth,
chose to accompany Naomi. Boaz, a kinsman
of Elimelech, bought Elimelech’s land and
married Ruth (4:9,10). From this union came a
great-grandson, David, and the royal line in
which the Messiah would eventually be born.
See RUTH, Book oF.
Elioenai. 1. Postexilic descendant of Solo-
mon and the father of Hodaviah (1 Chr
323,24).
2. Simeonite chieftan (1 Chr 4:36).
3. Head of a Benjamite family (1 Chr 7:8).
4. KJV spelling of the Levite Eliehoenai in
1 Chronicles 26:3.
See ELIEHOENAI # 1.
5. Man of the priestly family of Pashhur
who divorced his foreign. wife in Ezra’s day
(Ezr 10:22).
6. Zattu’s son, who was encouraged by Ezra
to divorce his foreign wife during the post-
exilic era (Ezr 10:27).
7. Postexilic priest who assisted in the dedi-
cation of the rebuilt Jerusalem wall (Neh
12:41).
PROPHET,
Eliphal. Ur’s son and one of David’s mighty
men (1 Chr 11:35); alternately called Eliphelet,
son of Ahasbai, in 2 Samuel 23:34.
See ELIPHELET # 2.

692

Eliphalet. kv spelling of Eliphelet, David’s
son, in 2 Samuel 5:16 and 1 Chronicles 14:7.
See ELIPHELET # 1.
Eliphaz. 1. Oldest son of Esau and his wife passed by and placed his cloak on Elisha’s
Adah (Gn 36:4-16; 1 Chr 1:35,36). He was the
ancestor of a number of Edomite clans.
2. One of Job’s friends, called the Temanite .-Sion. The nation needed a prophet, for it was
(see Jer. 49:7). Teman was traditionally associ-
ated with wisdom; hence Eliphaz’s speech de-
picts the orthodox view of sin and punish-
ment. His three addresses (Jb 4,15,22) failed to
grapple with the essence of Job’s problem be-
cause he assumed previous major sin in Job’s
life.
See JoB, Book oF.
Eliphelehu, Elipheleh. Levitical musician
who played the lyre when the ark was brought
to Jerusalem in David's time (1 Chr 15:18,21;
KJV Elipheleh).
Eliphelet. 1. One of David’s nine sons born
in Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:16; 1 Chr 3:8; 14:7; KJV
Eliphelet).
2. Ahasbai’s son and one of David’s mighty
men (2 Sm 23:34); perhaps the same as Eli-
phal, Ur’s son, in 1 Chronicles 11:35.
See ELIPHAL.
3. Another of David’s sons born at Jerusa-
lem but perhaps earlier than # 1 above (1 Chr
3:6; 14:5, KJV Elpalet, rsv Elpelet).
4. Eshek’s son and a descendant of Saul and
Jonathan (1 Chr 8:39).
5. One of Adonikam’s three sons who re-
turned with Ezra from Babylon (Ezr 8:13).
6. Hushum’s son whom Ezra persuaded to
divorce his foreign wife during the postexilic
era (Ezr 10:33).
Elisabeth. kv spelling of Elizabeth, John
the Baptist’s mother.
See ELIZABETH.
Elisha, Eliseus. Prophet in Israel during
the gth century Bc.
Background and Call. Elisha is first men-
tioned in 1 Kings 19:16, where he is described
as the son of Shaphat, who lived at Abel-
meholah. That place has been tentatively iden-
tified with the modern Tel Abu Sifri, west of
the river Jordan, though many scholars place
it to the river’s east. The prophet Elijah had
been ordered by God to anoint Elisha as his
successor, but the narrative does not make it
clear whether Elisha was already one of Eli-
jah’s disciples. When the two met, Elisha was
busy plowing a field, and he does not seem to
have greeted Elijah with the respect that a dis-
ciple would normally show to his teacher.
Elisha, Eliseus
Elisha’s use of 12 yokes of oxen in his agri-
cultural work has been taken as a sign that he
was wealthy, for normally two yoked oxen
would be handled by one person. When Elijah
shoulders, the latter man knew it was a sign
that he should inherit the great prophet’s mis-
increasingly indulging in Canaanite idolatry
with the encouragement of King Ahab and his
Phoenician wife Jezebel.
After Elijah commissioned him symboli-
cally and strode away, Elisha hurried after the
prophet to request a brief interval of time to
announce his new vocation to his parents be-
fore leaving home. The prophet’s reply, ‘Go
back again; for what have I done to you?”
(1 Kgs 19:20), helped Elisha to make up his
mind immediately. Delay in implementing his
vocation would almost certainly have been fa-
tal for Elisha (cf. 2 Kgs 8:21,22; Lk 9:61,62).
To mark the change in his way of life, Eli-
sha made a great feast for his neighbors, roast-
ing two oxen, another hint that he came from
a wealthy family. From that time he was no
longer a farmer; by associating with Elijah he
began to prepare for his own ministry. There
is no record of Elisha being anointed to the
prophetic office, but the transfer of prophetic
authority by means of the cloak would leave
no doubt in anyone’s mind that Elisha was the
next official prophet in Israel.
“Sons of the Prophets.” That there could
have been some question of Elisha’s authority
is implied by the existence of groups of people
known as “‘sons of the prophets.’”’ The phrase
meant that those persons were heirs of the pro-
phetic teachings and traditions, though appar-
ently none of them was a major prophet. The
prophet Amos even denied any connection
with such groups, which seem to have died
out in the 8th century Bc (Am 7:14). In the time
of Elisha the “sons of the prophets’’ were lo-
cated in Gilgal, Bethel, and Jericho, and seem
to have exercised a primarily local ministry.
They may have gone out under the instruc-
tions of Elijah and Elisha to teach people
God’s Law and to pronounce divine revela-
tions, as in the days of Saul (cf. 1 Sm 10:5,10).
Just before Elijah was taken to heaven he
and Elisha visited such prophetic groups, and
Elijah tried in vain to persuade Elisha to stay
behind at Gilgal and at Bethel (2 Kgs 2:1—4).
The prophetic group at Bethel may have been
warned by God that Elijah would be taken
from them, for they questioned Elisha about
the matter and ascertained that he also was
aware of the situation.
Successor to Elijah. After miraculously
parting the waters of Jordan, Elijah asked his
successor what he might do for him (2 Kgs
693
Elisha, Eliseus

2:8). Elisha requested a ‘‘double share” of his
spirit as they parted, the share of an inheri-
tance normally given to a firstborn son (Dt
21:17). His request was granted when Elisha
saw his master taken up to heaven in a fiery
chariot, and it took immediate effect when Eli-
sha parted the Jordan’s waters and crossed
over (2 Kgs 2:14).
His prophetic authority now recognized,
Elisha began his ministry to Israel at approxi-
mately the end of King Ahab’s reign (c. 853
Bc). His work lasted for half a century, and, in
contrast with the harried, austere, and some-
times dramatic ministry of Elijah, the activi-
ties of Elisha were mostly quieter and took
place among the ordinary people of Israel. But
he also addressed the royal court, though not
in conflicts with Canaanite priests such as Eli-
jah had experienced.
Miracles. The miraculous element was
prominent in Elisha’s ministry. When the peo-
ple of Jericho reported that the local spring
water was brackish, Elisha purified it with
salt (2 Kgs 2:19—22), and to this day it is the
only significant fresh-water spring in the area
(Tell es-Sultan).
As the prophet left for Bethel, he encoun-
tered a group of youths who mocked his bald-
ness (2 Kgs 2:23,24). He cursed them in the
name of the Lord, and two bears came from
the woods and mauled the offenders. What at
first sight seems to be an immoral act on
God’s part was actually full of foreboding for
the nation. The youths at Bethel were a genera-
tion of Israelites who had so absorbed the im-
moral, pagan culture of their city that they
rejected both the person and the message of
God's prophets. They were not merely irreli-
gious but also unbelievably discourteous, ac-
cording to ancient Near Eastern standards, in
ridiculing a bald man instead of respecting his
seniority.
The curses Elisha pronounced “‘in the name
of the Lord” were not his own reactions to the
treatment he had received, but instead were
covenant curses (Dt 28:15—-68) that would
come upon all who rejected the Sinaitic laws
and went back on their promises to God (see
Ex 24:3—8). The two bears were also symbolic
of Assyria and Babylonia, which would tear
apart the nation at different times. One small
incident was thus a somber forecast of what
the future ‘held for a wicked and disobedient
people.
In one of his contacts with royalty Elisha
gave a message (although unwillingly) from
God to King Jehoram of Israel (852-841 Bc).
The king had allied with King Jehoshaphat of
Judah (872-848 Bc) and the Edomite ruler
against Mesha, king of Moab. The allied forces
were deep in Edomite territory when they ran
out of water, and in despair they turned to
Elisha, the local prophet. He refused to say
anything at first, but finally predicted ample
supplies of water and victory for the coalition.
Both occurred on the following day (2 Kgs
11-27).
; Miracles of Charity. The kind of work for
which Elisha was justly renowned was usually
performed for people who could not help them-
selves. Such a person was a poor widow who
had almost pledged her two children to a
creditor. Her only asset was a jar of oil. Elisha
instructed her to borrow empty jars from her
neighbors and fill them with the oil from her
own jar. In a miraculous manner every jar
was filled. Elisha then told her to sell the oil,
pay her debts, and use the balance of the
money for living expenses (2 Kgs 4:1—7).
A similar act of charity was performed for a
Shunammite woman, who had persuaded her
husband to provide a room where the prophet
could stay when in the area. In return for her
kindness Elisha predicted that the woman,
previously childless, would have her own son.
About a year later it happened (2 Kgs 4:8-17).
The boy later contracted a severe ailment,
perhaps meningitis, and died suddenly. His
mother laid the body on Elisha’s bed while
she hurried to Mt Carmel to seek the prophet.
Elisha was apparently unaware of the situa-
tion until the distraught mother informed him
of the boy’s death. As an emergency measure
Elisha dispatched his servant Gehazi to put
the prophet’s staff on the child’s face. That did
not revive the child, but when Elisha arrived
An oil storage jar (in the museum in Jaffa). The result of the
miraculous multiplication of oil in the jars was that “the vessels
were full’ (2 Kgs 17:6).

694

and lay down on the body, the boy was healed
and returned to his parents (2 Kgs 4:18—37).
Another beneficial incident was the cor-
rection of a potentially disastrous situation.
When some poisonous gourds were acciden-
tally cooked and served, Elisha rendered
mixture harmless by adding meal to the con-
tents of the cooking pot (2 Kgs 4:38—41). A
miracle similar to Christ’s multiplying the
bread loaves (see Mt 14:16—21; 15:32—38) oc-
curred when someone brought the prophet sev-
eral loaves of bread and fresh ears of corn.
Elisha instructed his servant to set the food
out for 100 people, presumably the inhabitants
of the area, and when that was done the peo-
ple ate and had food left (2 Kgs 4:42—44).
The healing of Naaman, a Syrian com-
mander, came through the influence of a He-
brew maid in the man’s household, who per-
suaded Naaman’s wife that Elisha could heal
her husband. The Assyrian king sent his gen-
eral to the Israelite ruler with instructions for
Naaman to be healed. The afflicted man was
sent to Elisha, who ordered him to wash in the
Jordan River. Reluctant at first, Naaman
nally obeyed and was cured of his affliction. In
gratitude the Syrian leader acknowledged the
power of Israel’s God (2 Kgs 5:1—19).
Elisha’s periodic association with the “sons
of the prophets” proved helpful to them on one
occasion when they were expanding their build-
ings. Needing additional wood, they went to
the Jordan River to cut down trees, and in the
process one of the workers lost a borrowed ax
head in the water. Elisha remedied the situa-
tion by throwing in a stick, whereupon the ax
head came up to the surface and was retrieved
(2 Kgs 6:1—7).
Encounters with Royalty. When Syria at-
tacked Israel, Elisha revealed the movements
of the Syrians to the Israelite king. Syrians
tried to capture the prophet at Dothan, but
God blinded them and Elisha led them to the
Israelite capital of Samaria. Their sight re-
turned, and Elisha advised the Israelite king
to spare the captives, feed them well, and send
them home. Because their evil was rewarded
with good, the Syrians did not attack Israel
for a while(2 Kgs 6:8—23).
When the Syrian king Ben-hadad besieged
Samaria years later, famine conditions there be-
came so severe that the king threatened to exe-
cute Elisha. In response, the prophet promised
an abundance of food the following day. The
Syrians fled from their camp for some unspeci-
fied reason, and the prophecy was fulfilled (2
Kgs 6:24—7:20). In an unusual encounter with
the ailing king of Syria, Elisha was visited by
Hazael, servant of Ben-hadad, who had been
sent to ask about the prospects for his master’s
improvement. Elisha sent back a reassuring re-
Elishama
ply, but at the same time said that Hazael would
shortly succeed Ben-hadad (2 Kgs 8:7—13). On
another occasion Elisha sent a prophet to
Ramoth-gilead to anoint Jehu, son of Jehosha-
phat, as king of Israel to replace Joram, whom
the Jehu proceeded to kill in battle (2 Kgs 9:1—28).
, Elisha’s final contact with Israelite rulers
‘came at the time of his own death, when Joash
the king visited him to lament the prophet’s
illness. On that occasion, by the symbolic han-
dling of arrows, the dying prophet promised
Joash that he would defeat the Syrians in bat-
tle but would not exterminate them (2 Kgs
13:14—19).
The prophet also intervened a second time
on behalf of the Shunammite woman whose
son he had healed, instructing her to move her
household into Philistine territory during a
seven-year famine in Israel. When she came
back, her house and property had apparently
been occupied by others, so she appealed to
the king for help in recovering it. Elisha’s ser-
vant Gehazi told the ruler about her, and on
interviewing her himself the king ordered all
fi- her property to be returned (2 Kgs 8:1—6).
Continuing Influence. Elisha’s final mira-
cle occurred after his death, when a corpse
that was tossed hurriedly into the prophet’s
tomb came abruptly to life (2 Kgs 13:21;
Ecclus 48:14). Jesus mentioned Elisha once in
connection with the healing of Naaman, de-
claring that God’s mercy was not restricted to
the Israelites (Lk 4:27, kJv Eliseus).
R. K. HarRRISON
See ELIJAH; ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; PROPHECY; PROPH-
ET, PROPHETESS.
Elishah. Javan’s son (Gn 10:4; 1 Chr 1:7).
The Hebrew term for Greece is Javan, hence
Elishah could designate the western Aegean
islands or coastlands (cf. Gn 10:5) that sup-
plied dye stuffs to the inhabitants of Tyre (Ez
27:7). The Jewish historian Josephus identified
Elishah with the Aeolians; other suggestions
are Carthage in North Africa, Hellas, Italy, and
Elis. A Mediterranean site seems probable
from the context of Ezekiel 27:6,7, perhaps an
area of Cyprus which exported copper. This
location may be the Alashia of cuneiform and
hieroglyphic texts.
Elishama. 1. Ammihud’s son and leader of
the Ephraimites at the beginning of the jour-
ney in the wilderness (Nm 1:10; 2:18; 7:48,53).
His was the seventh tribe in line during the
wilderness march (Nm 10:22). Elishama was
the father of Nun and grandfather of Joshua (1
Chr 7:26).
2. One of David’s nine sons born in Jerusa-
lem to a legitimate wife (2 Sm 5:16; 1 Chr 3:8;
ry):
695
Elishaphat
3. Ishmael’s ancestor. Ishmael killed Geda-
liah, the governor of Israel appointed by Nebu-
chadnezzar (2 Kgs 25:25; Jer 41:1).
4. Man of Judah, descended through Jerah-
meel and Sheshan (1 Chr 2:41).
5. Another of David’s sons (1 Chr 3:6); alter-
nately called Elishua in 2 Samuel 5:15 and
1 Chronicles 14:5.
See ELISHUA.
6. Priest sent by Jehoshaphat to instruct the
Judeans in the Law of God (2 Chr 17:8).
7. Prince and scribe in Jeremiah’s time (Jer
36:12). He heard Baruch read the words
God, and later the scroll of the Lord remained
in Elishama’s chamber until the king re-
quested it to be read (Jer 36:20,21).
Elishaphat. Military commander in Judah
who supported Jehoida the priest in over-
throwing Queen Athaliah and making the
young Joash king (2 Chr 23:1).
Elisheba. Wife of Aaron (Ex 6:23), who bore
him Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. Her
father was Amminadab and her brother was
Nahshon, the leader of Judah (Nm 1:7; 2:3),
the tribe to which Elisheba also belonged.
After Aaron died (Nm 20:28), Moses in-
vested Eleazar, Elisheba’s third son, with the
office of chief priest.
Elishua. One of the 13 children fathered by
David during his reign in Jerusalem (2 Sm
5:15; 1 Chr 14:5). In the parallel passage of 1
Chronicles 3:6 the name Elishama appears in
Elishua’s place.
Eliud. Achim’s son, Eleazar’s father, and an
ancestor of Jesus Christ according to Mat-
thew’s genealogy (1:14,15).
See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.
Elizabeth. Woman of priestly descent (Lk
1:5) and a relative of Mary, mother of Jesus
(Lk 1:36). The name Elizabeth (ksv Elisabeth),
which derives from the same Hebrew word as
Elisheba, wife of Aaron (Ex 6:23), means “my
God is an oath.” Only Luke’s Gospel, which
characteristically focuses greater attention
upon the role of women, mentions Elizabeth
and her-husband, Zechariah.
Luke emphasized Elizabeth and Zechari-
ah’s godly character and blameless conduct
(Lk 1:6) before stating that the elderly couple
had not been favored with children. Although
in Jewish culture childlessness was regarded
as a reproach (Gn 30:22,23; Lk 1:25), the devout
pair continued to steadfastly worship and
serve God. Unexpectedly, an angel of the Lord
appeared to Zechariah with the announce-
ment that Elizabeth would conceive and bear
a son, who would be the forerunner of the
promised Messiah (Lk 1:13-17). When Eliza-
beth conceived, she withdrew from public life
for five months, during which time her kins-
woman Mary visited her.
See JOHN THE BAPTIST.
Elizaphan. 1. Kohathite Levite and Uzziel’s
son (Nm 3:29,30), who assisted in removing the
bodies of Nadab and Abihu from the camp (Lv
10:4). Elizaphan’s descendants were responsi-
of ble for caring for the ark, the table, the lamp-
stand, and vessels of the sanctuary (cf. 1 Chr
15:8; 2 Chr 29:13). His name is alternately
spelled Elzaphan (Ex 6:22; Lv 10:4).
2. Parnach’s son and a leader from Zebu-
lun’s tribe, who helped Eleazar and Joshua di-
vide the Canaanite territory west of the Jor-
dan among the 10 tribes (Nm 34:25). ;
Elizur. Shedeur’s son and leader of Reu-
ben’s tribe at the start of Israel’s wilderness
journey (Nm 1:5; 2:10; 7:30,35; 10:18).
Elkanah. 1. Levite of Korah’s family (Ex
6:24) and the head of Izhar’s house (v 25). He
was Assir’s son, and fathered Ebiasaph (1 Chr
6:23).
2. Father of the prophet Samuel (1 Sm
1:19). He was the son of Jeroham of Ephraim,
from Ramathaim-zophim (v 1). Elkanah had
two wives, Hannah and Peninnah, the former
being barren (v 2). Hannah begged God re-
peatedly for a son whom she would give to
the Lord’s service. Samuel was subsequently
born, and after weaning was brought to the
aged priest Eli for training. Elkanah had
other sons and daughters by Hannah (2:21),
and became the forefather of Heman, a singer
in David’s time.
3, 4. Name of two Kohathite Levites de-
scended from Korah’s line and ancestors of He-
man the singer (1 Chr 6:26,27,34,35).
5. Levite who dwelt in the village of the
Netophathites and later lived in Jerusalem in
the postexilic era (1 Chr 9:16).
6. Benjamite warrior who joined David's
mighty men at Ziklag (1 Chr 12:6).
7. Gatekeeper for the ark of the covenant
during David’s reign (1 Chr 15:23). He is per-
haps the same as # 6 above.
8. One who held an authoritative post in
King Ahaz’s court. Elkanah was slain by
Zichri, an Ephramite, for having forsaken the
Lord (2 Chr 28:7).
Elkosh. Home or birthplace of the prophet
Nahum (Na 1:1). Different places have been
suggested:
696

(1) Al-Qush, about 50 miles north of modern
Mosul. This was a medieval tradition, but evi-
dence from the Book of Nahum does not sup-
port it.
(2) Hilkeesei, a village in Galilee, perhaps
corresponding to modern el-Kauzeh.
(3) Capernaum near the Sea of Galilee,
where Jesus frequently taught.
(4) Beit Jebrin in southern Judea.
Ellasar. Place in Babylonia; a few scholars
have suggested that Arioch was its king. He
joined a coalition which included Chedorlao-
mer, king of Elam, and together they raided
the Jordan Valley during the time of Abraham
(Gn 14:1,9). Some Near Eastern scholars identi-
fied Arioch with a king of Larsa known as Eri-
Aku, a name subsequently read as Warad-Sin.
This was conjectural at best, and has now
been abandoned. To the present it has not
been possible to identify either Ellasar or Ari-
och with any confidence.
Elm. KJV mistranslation for terebinth,
large Palestinian tree, in Hosea 4:13.
See PLANTS (TEREBINTH).
Elmadam, Elmodam. Ancestor of Jesus
Christ according to Luke’s genealogy (3:28, KJV
Elmodam).
See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.
Elnaam. Father of two mighty warriors in
David’s army, Jeribai and Joshaviah (1 Chr
11:46).
Elnathan. 1. Grandfather of King Jehoia-
chin. His daughter, Jehoiachin’s mother, was
Nehushta (2 Kgs 24:8).
2, 3, 4. Three Jewish leaders whom Ezra
sent to Iddo at Casiphia to obtain Levites and
temple servants for the caravan of Jews return-
ing to Palestine from Babylonia (Ezr 8:16).
5. Achbor’s son, who was ordered by King
Jehoiakim to bring back Uriah from Egypt to
be executed for prophesying against the king
(Jer 26:22,23). ElInathan was present with other
princes when Baruch read the Lord’s words of
warning written at Jeremiah’s dictation on a
scroll (36:12); he tried unsuccessfully to pre-
vent Jehoiakim from burning the scroll (v 25).
Eloah. Hebrew name for God which stresses
that he alone is deserving of worship.
See Gop, NAMES OF.
Elohim. General name for God in the OT.
The etymology of Elohim is uncertain, but it is
generally agreed that it is based on a root that
means ‘‘might” or “power.” The word is plu-
Elpaal
ral in form, but when applied to the true God
it is used in a singular sense and most fre-
quently with verbal elements. The most com-
mon explanation for the plural form of Elohim
as applied to God is that it is “plural of maj-
esty,” that is, all the majesty of deity is encom-
passed by him.
Elohim also occurs as a designation of deity
in other languages, such as Assyrian and Ugari-
tic; it is used of other nations’ gods, thus dem-
onstrating its more general sense. It seems to
be used in a general sense in the OT, particu-
larly the Pentateuch (the five books of Moses),
denoting God’s transcendence and capacity as
Creator of the universe. It is thus somewhat
different from the designation Yahweh, which
usually connotes God in his personal relation-
ships to people.
Elohim is used as a designation of Israel’s
rulers and judges (Ps 82:1,6), perhaps denoting
their function as God’s earthly representatives
(Ex 21:6). That meaning of the word was used
by Christ (Jn 10:34—-36) in a defense against his
a detractors.
The word is also used of angelic beings (Ps
8:5 KJv; cf. Heb 2:7), and in the expression
“sons of God” (Jb 1:6).
See Gop, NAMES OF.
Elon (Person). 1. Hittite who was the father
of Basemath (perhaps also called Adah, Gn
36:2), one of Esau’s wives (Gn 26:34).
2. Second of Zebulun’s three sons (Gn 46:14)
and the founder of the Elonite family (Nm
26:26).
3. Judge from Zebulun who judged Israel 10
years. He was buried in Aijalon (Jgs 12:11,12).
Elon (Place). Village near Timnah, the home
of Samson’s first wife. Elon was included in
the inheritance allotted to Dan’s tribe in Josh-
ua’s distribution of the Promised Land (Jos
19:43; cf. 14:1,2). It is generally identified with
Khirbet Wadi ‘Alinm near ‘Ain Shems.
Elonbeth-hanan. Administrative district in
Dan during the reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 4:9). It
is perhaps identifiable with the Danite town of
Elon.
Elonite. Descendant of Elon, Zebulun’s son
(Nm 26:26).
See ELON (PERSON) # 2.
Eloth. Alternate spelling of the Edomite
town Elath, in 1 Kings 9:26; 2 Chronicles 8:17;
and 26:2.
See ELATH.
Elpaal. Benjamite and one of Shaharaim’s
sons (1 Chr 8:11,12,18).
697
Elpalet

Elpalet. xsv spelling of Elpelet, an alternate Elyon. Hebrew name for God meaning
name for David’s son, Eliphelet in 1 Chroni- “Most High.”
cles 14:5. See Gop, NAMES OF.
See ELIPHELET # 3.
Elzabad. 1. Military leader from Gad’s tribe
El-paran. Place located on the edge of the who joined David at Ziklag (1 Chr 12:12).
wilderness of Paran, probably at the southern 2. Korahite Levite from Obed-edom’s fam-
tip of the mountains of Seir in the Sinai penin- ily, and a gatekeeper of the sanctuary (1 Chr
sula, present-day Arabia. It was the farthest 26:7).
point south to which King Chedorlaomer and
his allies pushed their punitive raid against Elzaphan. Alternate spelling of Elizaphan,
the rebellious kings of Sodom and Gomorrah a Levite chief, in Exodus 6:22 and Leviticus
(Gn 14:5,6). Presumably El-paran was later 10:4.
called Elath, which was near or at Ezion- See ELIZAPHAN # I.
geber on the northern tip of the Gulf of Agaba.
See ELATH. Embalm. See Buriat, BURIAL CUSTOMS.

Elpelet. Alternate name for David’s son Eli-
phelet in 1 Chronicles 14:5.
See ELIPHELET # 3.
El Shaddai. Hebrew for ‘God
(Ps 68:14).
See Gop, NAMES OF.
Elteke, Eltekeh. City allotted to Dan’s tribe
for an inheritance (Jos 19:44, where it is
spelled Eltekeh); it was later assigned to the
Kohathite Levites (Jos 21:23). An
battle was fought near Elteke between King
Sennacherib of Assyria and the Egyptians. The
Egyptians were subsequently routed, and the
city was captured by the Assyrians. From here
Sennacherib went on to invade Judah (2 Kgs
18:13). Eltekeh was located north of Ekron and
west of Timnah, but its exact site is uncertain.
Eltekon. Town located in the hill country of
Judah. It was assigned by Joshua to Judah’s
tribe (Jos 15:59), and may be the modern Khir-
bet ed-Deir, west of Bethlehem.
Eltolad. Town assigned to Simeon’s tribe in
the southern portion of Judah’s inheritance
(Jos 15:30; 19:4). It is alternately called Tolad
in 1 Chronicles 4:29. Its site is unknown.
Elul. Hebrew month corresponding to mid-
August to mid-September (Neh 6:15).
See CALENDARS, ANCIENT AND MODERN.
Eluzai. One of the men of Benjamin who
came to join David in Ziklag (1 Chr 12:5). Elu-
zai was an ambidextrous slinger and bowman.
Elymas. Another name for Bar-Jesus, a Jew-
ish magician and false prophet, in Acts 13:8.
See BAR-JESUS.
Embroidery, Embroiderer. See FasHIon
AND DRESS; TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS.
Emekkeziz. City allotted to Benjamin’s tribe
for an inheritance; it was mentioned between
Almighty” Beth-hoglah and Beth-arabah (Jos 18:21, KJV
valley of Keziz). Its location is uncertain.
Emerald. Rich green variety of beryl, re-
garded as a precious stone.
See MINERALS, METALS, AND PRECIOUS STONES.
important Emerod. 1. Ksv rendering of ulcer in Deuter-
onomy 28:67.
See SORE.
2. KJV rendering of tumor in 1 Samuel 5:6—
12 and 6:4-17.
See TUMOR.
Emim. Name given to the original inhabit-
ants of Moab (Gn 14:5) by the Moabites who
ousted them from their land. They were a tall
people, known also as Rephaim (Dt 2:10,11),
and were compared with the Zuzim, Avim,
and Horim for size. This phenomenon is evi-
dently an indication of genetic isolation.
See GIANTS.
Emmanuel. Alternate spelling of Immanuel
in Matthew 1:23.
See IMMANUEL.
Emmaus. Town in Judea which appears
only once in Scripture (Lk 24:13). It was the
destination of two disciples to whom Jesus ap-
peared after the crucifixion. Following the res-
urrection, Cleopas and a friend were going to
Emmaus when they encountered another trav-
eler. They walked the road and talked to-
gether, but the disciples did not recognize that
the stranger was Jesus. Jesus asked them the
nature of their conversation, and was told of
the crucifixion, the empty tomb, and their dis-
698

couragement that things had not worked out
as they hoped. Jesus then rebuked them (v 25),
and ‘“‘beginning with Moses and. all the proph-
ets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures
the things concerning himself” (v 27). When
they reached their destination, Jesus accepted
an invitation to spend the night. As they ate
the evening meal, he blessed the bread, broke
it, and gave it to them to eat. At that moment
they recognized him. After Jesus vanished
from their sight, they returned to Jerusalem to
report the event to the apostles.
Though Emmaus, which means “warm
wells,” was near Jerusalem, its exact location
has never been determined. Several locations
have been suggested:
699
Emmaus
A garden of old olive trees in
Emmaus.
(1) Colonia (Qaloniyeh), about four miles
west of Jerusalem on the main road to Joppa.
(2) El-Qubeibeh, about seven miles north-
west of Jerusalem on a Roman road passing
by Nebi Samwil. Its identification with Em-
maus dates back to aD 1099, when the Crusad-
ers found a Roman fort there named Castel-
lum Emmaus.
(3) Abu Ghosh, about nine miles west of Je-
rusalem. Identified with the OT Kiriath-
jearim, it is also known as Kiryat el-Enab,
where a Crusader church was built over a Ro-
man fort. This site appears to be too far from
Jerusalem to be the biblical Emmaus.
(4) Amwas, also known as Nicapolis, about
20 miles west of Jerusalem on the Jaffa road.
Emmor
This is the Emmaus of 1 Maccabees 3:40,57.
This site has the earliest claim to being Em-
maus and also has two “warm wells.’’ Euse-
bius and Jerome accepted it as the site. The
primary objection to its being the NT Em-
maus is its distance from Jerusalem, which ex-
ceeds the distance given by Luke.
(5) El Khamsa, southwest of Jerusalem.
(6) Artas, south of Bethlehem.
No conclusive evidence has been offered to
substantiate the claim for any of these sites as
being Emmaus; hence, its location remains un-
known.
Emmor. kJv rendering of Hamor, Shechem’s
father, in Acts 7:16.
See HAMoR.
Emperor. Official designation of the Ro-
man sovereign beginning in 27 Bc with the
reign of Caesar Augustus; a derivation of
imperator, an honorary title of supreme com-
mand conferred by the Roman Senate upon
one of its victorious generals. Nero is the only
Roman ruler addressed as emperor in Scrip-
ture (Acts 25:21,25).
See CAESARS, THE; EMPEROR WORSHIP.
Emperor Worship. Exaltation of human
rulers as divine, especially the Roman emper-
ors, a practice that included dedicating tem-
ples and offering sacrifices to them.
Emperor worship had its origins in the
Near Eastern practice of considering the king
divine. The Egyptian pharaoh was considered
a descendant of the sun god Ra, and Meso-
potamian legends speak of kingship ‘‘descend-
ing from heaven.” Alexander the Great and
other Greek heroes were worshiped after their
deaths. The idea of a ruler’s divinity was en-
couraged by the central place of the king in
pagan cults. Israel was directly affected by
such worship during the Babylonian exile
(see Dn 3).
Such a background set the pattern for the
Seleucid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who be-
lieved himself to be an incarnation of the
Greek god Zeus. He desecrated the temple in
Jerusalem by setting up an altar to Zeus in it
(167 Bc). That event, which the Jews never for-
got, triggered the Maccabean war for the lib-
eration of Palestine.
Roman generals and emperors likewise
picked up the trappings of godhood as soon as
they penetrated Asia Minor, especially after
Augustus Caesar came to full power (27 Bc).
Augustus saw his reign as the inauguration of
a new age of peace for Rome and the world.
Although the Romans acclaimed him as ‘“‘sav-
ior,’ he claimed for himself only the high
700
priesthood. In the eastern provinces coins
were minted with a double temple for Rome
and Augustus. In Antioch coins depicted Au-
gustus as the incarnate Zeus or ‘“‘worship-
worthy Son of God,” and altars were erected
in his honor. Augustus encouraged the cult as
a unifying element in his diverse empire and
as a type of patriotism. After his death tem-
ples were built in his honor and the symbols
of divinity were transferred to succeeding em-
perors. For decades all new temples were for
the imperial cult. (In Mk 12 and parallel -pas-
sages about paying taxes, the coin was proba-
bly inscribed ‘‘Tiberius Caesar ... Son of the
Divine Augustus.’)
Gaius Caesar, nicknamed Caligula (aD 37—
41), was the first emperor to be worshiped in
Rome during his own lifetime. On hearing of a
dispute between Jews and Gentiles over wor-
shiping him in Jamnia, he ordered a statue of
himself placed in the temple in Jerusalem. His
plan, which would surely have caused a gen-
eral revolt, was averted only by the interces-
sion of Herod Agrippa I. Under the succeeding
emperors, Claudius (AD 41-54) and Nero (aD
54-68), the cult reached ridiculous extremes.
Later emperors varied in how seriously they
took the imperial cult, but it remained a test
of loyalty to the empire, similar to loyalty
oaths or pledging allegiance to the flag. For
the sake of the empire’s unity other religions
had to accommodate emperor worship one
way or another.
Emperor worship naturally caused prob-
lems for Christians, since the titles given to
the emperor (“Lord,” “Prince of Peace,” ‘Son
of God,” “Savior’’) were the same as those
used for Christ. The confession “Jesus is Lord”
(Rom 10:9) was bound to conflict with the
claim “Caesar is Lord.” Christians who would
not sacrifice to the emperor were charged
with treason. The conflict between emperor
worship and Christianity remained a focal
point for the persecution of the church until
the time of Constantine (AD 306—337).
Enaim, Enam. Obscure Hebrew term used
only in Genesis 38:14,21, translated ‘‘open
place” in the ksv. It was probably the name of
a place located in the hill country of Judah,
southeast of Jerusalem, between Timnah and
Adullam. It may have been a variant form of
Enam (Jos 15:34), a location in the Judean She-
phelah. Its location is unknown.
Enan. Ahira’s father. Ahira was appointed
by Moses as the commander of the tribe of
Naphtali during the first census of Israel in
the desert of Sinai (Nm 1:15; 2:29; 7:78;83;
10:27). The name is apparently preserved in
the name Hazar-enan (-enon), a town some-

where between Damascus and Hauran (Nm
34:9; Ez 47:17; 48:1).
Enchantment. Act of casting charms or in-
cantations to influence others or to obtain
knowledge. Balaam could place no enchant-
ment upon Israel, but could only bless them
(Nm 23:23). Enchanters were present among
the wise men of Nebuchadnezzar’s court; how-
ever, Daniel and his three friends were found
to be ten times wiser than they (Dn 1:20). The
enchanters were unable to recall King Nebu-
chadnezzar’s forgotten dream (2:2—27) or to in-
terpret his second one (4:7); later, under Bel-
shazzar, they could not read or interpret the
handwriting on the palace wall (5:7—-15). Ac-
cording to the prophet Isaiah, even the great
powers of Babylon’s enchantments would not
save it from eventual destruction (Is 47:9,12).
In a more figurative sense the psalmist writes:
wickedness ‘‘does not hear the voice . . . of the
cunning enchanter’”’ (Ps 58:5).
See Macic; SORCERY.
End of the World. See Day oF THE Lorp;
EscHATOLOGY; LAST JUDGMENT.
Endor. Ancient Canaanite city, four miles
south of Mt Tabor, assigned to the tribe of Ma-
nasseh though never fully taken by them (Jos
17:11). The city witnessed the defeat of Jabin
and Sisera by Barak (Ps 83:9,10). Endor is not
actually mentioned in Judges; despite this
omission, it is not necessary to alter ‘““Endor’”’
(Ps 83:10) to ““En-harrod”’ (cf. Jgs 7:1). Endor is
best known as the dwelling place of the fa-
mous witch who was called upon by King
Saul (1 Sm 28:7). On that occasion Saul dis-
guised himself because his journey to Endor
took him near the Philistine army encamped
at Shunen.
Today there is a kibbutz located at or near
the ancient city of Endor which bears that
name.
En-eglaim. Place mentioned in Ezekiel 47:10
where, in a description of the millennial age,
it is said that ‘‘fishermen will stand beside the
sea; from En-gedi to En-eglaim it will be a
place for the spreading of nets; its fish will be
of very many kinds, like the fish of the Great
Sea.” This condition will be in sharp contrast
to the present lack of marine life in the Dead
Sea. The location is on the shore of the Dead
Sea, probably south of Khirbet Qumran, per-
haps ‘Ain Feshkha.
Engagement. Act of binding oneself to an-
other by a pledge to marry.
See MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS.
7O1
Enhaddah
Engannim. 1. Village in the lowland of Ju-
dah near Beth-shemesh (Jos 15:34). Some iden-
tify it with the modern Beit Jemal, but this is
doubtful.
2. Town on the boundary of Issachar (Jos
19:21). It was a levitical city of the Gershonites
(21:29) and the Anem of 1 Chronicles 6:73,
‘which may be a copyist’s mistake. It seems to
be the Ginaea of Josephus (Antiq. 20.6.1). Its
site is the modern Jenin, a village on the south-
ern edge of the plain of Esdraelon, 5 miles
northeast of Dothan and about 68 miles north
of Jerusalem.
See LEVITICAL CITIES.
En-gedi. A vital oasis on the west side of the
Dead Sea about 35 miles southeast of Jerusa-
lem. Allotted to Judah’s tribe for an inheri-
tance (Jos 15:62), En-gedi contained a _hot-
water spring coming from the side of a lime-
stone cliff, producing semitropical vegetation.
The area became known for its palms, vine-
yards, and balsam (Sg 1:14; Josephus, Antiq.
20.1.2). The ancient site was southeast of the
oasis at Tell ej-Jarn near modern ‘Ain Jidi.
En-gedi was called Hazazon-tamar in 2
Chronicles 20:2, and figured in several OT
events. There Chedorlaomer conquered the
Amorites (Gn 14:7); David sought refuge from
Saul (1 Sm 23:29); and in Ezekiel’s vision of
Israel’s restoration, fisherman would catch
fish from the Dead Sea from En-gedi to En-
eglaim (Ez 47:10).
Engines of War. Mechanical devices used
in war, such as battering rams.
See ARMS AND WARFARE.
Engraver, Engraving. See TRADES AND Oc-
CUPATIONS (STONECUTTER).
Enhaddah. City allotted to Issachar’s tribe
for an inheritance, mentioned between Engan-
A wadi at En-gedi in Judea near the Dead Sea.
En-hakkore
nim and Beth-pazzez (Jos 19:21). Its location is
uncertain.
En-hakkore. Spring of water that burst
forth when Samson cried to the Lord after he
had slaughtered the Philistines (Jgs 15:19).
Though many have attempted to locate this
spring, using Lehi, the battle site, as a geo-
graphical key, it still has not been found.
En-hazor. Fortified city of the OT (Jos
19:37). Of several Hazors in the OT, En-hazor
was probably located in Galilee. Its exact loca-
tion, however, is uncertain.
Enmishpat. Early name for Kadesh, men-
tioned in the account of Chedorlaomer’s bat-
tles (Gn 14:7).
See KADESH, KADESH-BARNEA.
Enoch (Person). 1. Cain’s son and grandson
of Adam (Gn 4:17,18).
2. Jared’s son among the descendants of
Seth; Methuselah’s father (Gn 5:18—24; 1 Chr
1:3, KJV Henoch). He lived in such close rela-
tionship to God that he was transferred
heaven without having died.
Enoch (Place). City which Cain named
his first son, Enoch (Gn 4:17). Its location is
unknown.
Enosh, Enos. Seth’s son and the grandson
of Adam (Gn 4:26; 1 Chr 1:1). He became the
father of Kenan at go years of age, after which
he fathered other sons and daughters, dying at
the age of 905 (Gn 5:6—11). He is mentioned as
Jesus’ ancestor in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:38,
Enos).
See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.
En-rimmon. Town assigned first to Judah
and then to Simeon (Jos 15:32; 19:7, KJV Rem-
mon; 1 Chr 4:32). These verses refer to two
places, Ain and Rimmon, but this was proba-
bly a scribal error for the one town, En-
rimmon (see Jos 19:7). It was resettled after
the exile (Neh 11:29), and is perhaps the Rim-
mon south of Jerusalem mentioned in Zecha-
riah 14:10. En-rimmon is thought to be the
modern. Khirbet Umm er-Rumamin, 9 miles
north of Beersheba.
En-rogel. Spring which was an important
landmark identifying the boundary line be-
tween the tribes of Judah and Benjamin (Jos
15:7; 18:16). Jonathan and Ahimaaz hid at En-
rogel when they were spying on Absalom’s
troops for King David (2 Sm 17:17), and from
there a maidservant delivered their messages
to the king. Here also Adonijah sacrificed
sheep, oxen, and goats when he anticipated
David’s death and wished to set himself up as
king (1 Kgs 1:9).
Of the two suggested locations for En-rogel,
the older identifies it with a spring in a cave
near Siloam, on the west side of the Kidron
Valley, known as the Virgin’s Fount. There is
strong evidence, however, that this is actually
the Gihon spring (1 Kgs 1:33), which is men-
tioned as distinct from En-rogel. A more likely
suggestion is another spring south of Jerusa-
lem known as the Well of Job.
Enrollment. Registration of people accord-
ing to tribe, family, and position.
See CENSUS.
En-shemesh. Place mentioned only in Josh-
ua 15:7 and 18:17 as a boundary marker
between Judah’s northern border and Benja-
min’s southern border. The usual identifica-
tion is with ‘Ain el-Hod, about 3 miles east of
Jerusalem on the road to Jericho. On the basis
of a tradition that the apostles drank there, it
to is sometimes referred to as the Spring of the
Apostles.
for En-tappuah. Canaanite town located on the
border between Ephraim’s and Manasseh’s ter-
ritory (Jos 17:7). It is usually identified with
the modern Sheikh Abu Zarad, about 8 miles
south of Shechem.
See TAPPUAH (PLACE) # 2.
Enuma Elish. Title of the Babylonian cre-
ation epic found during excavations at Nine-
veh (1848-76). The words enuma elish mean
“when on high” and are the first two words of
the epic, introducing the reader to a time
when the heavens ‘“‘on high” had not been
named and the earth did not yet exist. The
cuneiform tablets containing the epic were
found in the library ruins of the Assyrian king
Ashurbanipal. The epic was probably com-
posed in the time of the Babylonian king Ham-
murabi (1792?—1750? BC). One of the chief pur-
poses of the epic is to show the sovereignty of
the Babylonian god Marduk.
See ASHURBANIPAL; CREATION, DOCTRINE OF; CRE-
ATION MyTHs.
Epaenetus. Believer greeted by Paul in Ro-
mans 16:5 as ‘‘my beloved” and “‘the first con-
vert in Asia for Christ.” It is not known if Epae-
netus was a personal convert of Paul. Mention
of his name has been used to promote the hy-
pothesis that the letter was written for the
Ephesians, but contrary evidence has refuted
this.
702
 Ephai

A theater at Hierapolis.

Epaphras. Co-worker with the apostle Paul. with all joy” (2:29). Epaphroditus’ devoted ser-
Epaphras, a native of Colossae, was responsi- vice endeared him to the Philippian believers
ble for the city’s evangelization, as well as and to Paul, who termed him “‘brother, fellow
that of Laodicea and Hierapolis. Through him worker, fellow soldier” (2:25).
Paul learned of the progress of the Colossian See PHILIPPIANS, LETTER TO THE.
church and thus wrote his letter to the Colos-
sians. Paul’s high regard for Epaphras was evi- Ephah. Measure of grain, about half a
denced by his use of such terms as ‘‘beloved bushel.
fellow servant,” ‘faithful minister of Christ”
(Col 1:7), and “‘servant of Christ” (4:12), a title See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
of esteem Paul bestowed only on one other per-
son (Timothy in Phil 1:1). Epaphras was in Ephah (Person). 1. Son of Midian, an off-
prison with Paul at the time the letter to Phile- spring of Abraham through his concubine Ke-
mon was written (Phlm 23). turah (Gn 25:4; 1 Chr 1:33). Isaiah mentions
See COLOSSIANS, LETTER TO THE.
him as a gold trader (60:6). Some manu-
scripts mention two sons of Midian with the
Epaphroditus. Leader in the Philippian same name, Ephah, but that is an error of
church. Epaphroditus was sent to the apostle misspelling.
Paul during Paul’s first Roman imprisonment 2. Caleb’s concubine, who bore him three
to déliver gifts (Phil 4:18) and to assist the sons (1 Chr 2:46).
apostle in his work (Phil 2:25). While in Rome, 3. Jahdai’s son from Judah's tribe (1 Chr
Epaphroditus became seriously ill and nearly 2:47).
died. After a period of convalescence he re-
turned to Philippi with Paul’s letter instruct- Ephai. Netophathite (resident of the town
ing the church to “receive him in the Lord Netophah, near Bethlehem), whose sons fought

793
Epher
against the Babylonian army (Jer 40:8). They,
with others, approached Gedaliah, the gover-
nor of Judah appointed by Babylon, and re-
quested his protection. They died, along with
Gedaliah, in an uprising led by Ishmael, the
son of Nethaniah (Jer 41:3).
Epher. 1. Son of Midian and grandson of
Abraham through his concubine Keturah,
whose tribe was sent to the east. Some were
supportive of Abraham’s descendants and oth-
ers became enemies (Gn 25:4; 1 Chr. 1:33).
2. Son of Ezrah from Judah’s tribe (1 Chr
4:17).
3. Head of a household and a great warrior
in the half tribe of Manasseh. He lived be-
tween Bashan and Mt Hermon (1 Chr 5:24).
Ephes-dammim. Location between
and Azekah in Judah (1 Sm 17:1) where
Philistines encamped. It was called Pas-dam-
mim in 1 Chronicles 11:13. The reference to
blood (dammim) in the name probably has to
do with the number of battles fought there, or
it may refer to the red earth of the area. Tradi-
tionally identified with the ruins of Damun,
about 4 miles northeast of Socoh, the exact
location of the site is unknown. A recent sug-
gestion identifies it with Beit Fased, southeast
of Socoh.
Ephesians, Letter to the. Letter to the
Christians in the great city of Ephesus and vi-
cinity written with a magnificence that both
instructs and inspires the reader. It provides a
sweeping view of the role of the church as his-
tory moves toward the ultimate recognition of
the universal headship of Christ.
Author. The writer of the letter identifies
himself as the apostle Paul (1:1; 3:1). He also
describes his own ministry in terms that re-
flect what we know of Paul (3:7,13;
6:19,20). There are some characteristics of the
letter, however, that have caused many schol-
ars to question its clear claim to Pauline au-
thorship. Some of these characteristics would
be a problem only if the letter were intended
exclusively for people in Ephesus, but such
was probably not the case. Otherwise it would
be hard to understand why, after establishing
the church there over a three-year period, Paul
would write as though author and recipients
had only a secondhand knowledge of each
other. It would also be strange that the warm
personal words of greeting to various individu-
als which are found in other Pauline letters
are missing here. There is instead only a gen-
eral greeting to “the brothers’’ (6:23).
For these reasons, and assuming that this
letter was written to the Ephesians, some
scholars have felt compelled to reject the Pau-
line authorship of the work. Further reasons
were advanced to support the theory that
someone other than Paul had written the
work, drawing on the ideas and vocabulary of
Paul’s other letters. For example, it was noted
that the author spoke of the apostles and
prophets as the foundation of the church, refer-
ring to them in the third rather than the first
person, as though the writer were not one of
them (2:20). Also he called this group “‘holy”’
(3:5), a term which was thought would be used
only by a later Christian’ who held the early
apostles in special awe. Yet Paul himself
wrote in the third person of the “saints” (Col
1:26), although he certainly counted himself as
one of them. The biblical writers used the
words “‘saints” and ‘“‘holy” (which are linguisti-
cally related to each other) in a way different
Socoh from our usage, to refer to those especially set
the apart for God. ;
It was also thought that the great apostle
Paul would not write so deprecatingly of him-
self as to say he was “‘less than the least of all
God’s people” (3:8 NiIv). This, however, is pre-
cisely the way Paul did humbly view himself,
conscious of his sinfulness and former opposi-
tion to the gospel.
There are several other arguments that
have been employed to disprove Pauline au-
thorship. Some of these call for careful study;
others are more subjective and unpersuasive.
A survey of the vocabulary of Ephesians re-
veals many words that do not otherwise occur
in the Pauline letters. Also some words found
both in the other letters and in Ephesians are
used in the latter with somewhat different
meanings.
But statistical studies have shown that
each of Paul’s letters typically contains unique
words, and many scholars therefore do not
consider these arguments substantial. Where
4:1; similar words are used in a different sense,
one must decide whether or not it is likely
that an author will vary and enrich his own
concepts, with consequent expansion of mean-
ing, and whether or not differing contexts call
for differing aspects of word meaning.
An example of a term which is allegedly
used with a unique meaning in Ephesians is
“mystery” or “secret plan.’”’ In Ephesians it
refers to God’s plan to have Jews and Gentiles
brought together in one body, the church. Co-
‘lossians, which has many ideas similar to
those in Ephesians, refers to Christ, rather
than the church, as the “secret” (1:27; 2:2).
However, Romans 16:25,26 does apply it to the
inclusion of Gentiles in the church. Actually
the word has a slightly different application
each time it is used throughout the NT.
Detailed studies also include a comparison
of literary style and of concepts in Ephesians
704

with those in the other letters attributed to
Paul. Although there are some unique con-
cepts, the basic theological themes of Ephesi-
ans, such as the grace of God, are typically
Pauline. Discussion of the authorship of Ephe-
sians thus takes into account many factors.
Since resolution of the various problems
mentioned is possible, it is reasonable to ac-
cept the clear testimony of leading figures in
the early history of the church that Paul is the
author. This has always been the position of
those who consider the Bible to be without
error. There is no doubt that the letter itself
contains the name of Paul twice, along with
other indirect evidence that he is the author.
Unless one can justify the use of Paul’s name
by a later anonymous Christian, the issue be-
comes one of truth or error in the biblical text.
Date, Origin, and Destination. Ephesians
4:1 and 6:20 indicate that the letter was writ-
ten while Paul was a prisoner. Since he was
imprisoned several times, it is necessary to
narrow the options. The first major imprison-
ment may have been at Ephesus itself, but this
is obviously not in consideration. The second
was at Caesarea for two years (Acts 24:27; cf.
23:23,24,33; 24:2). It is possible that Paul wrote
some letters at that time, but most scholars
think that Ephesians (along with Colossians,
Philemon, and probably Philippians) was writ-
ten during Paul’s imprisonment at Rome (Acts
28:16,30). This probably took place sometime
between AD 59 and 63 and lasted for two years.
This period of time, following about 25 years
of spiritual growth and 12 years or so of mis-
sionary experience, gave Paul a splendid op-
portunity for reflection and writing. Written at
approximately the same time as Colossians,
Ephesians displays both striking similarities
and significant differences in comparison with
that letter. By studying these, some knowl-
edge can be gained about the composition of
Ephesians.
There are many words and phrases which
appear in almost identical form in the two let-
ters. This is often more obvious in the Greek
text than in modern translations. One exam-
ple is found in Ephesians 1:4 and Colossians
1:22, where at the end of each verse Paul states
that God will not charge the believer with any
fault. There are also longer passages that are
parallel to one another. These include teach-
ings on adopting a new way of life (e.g., Eph
4:22-24; Col 3:8-10), singing praise (Eph 5:19,
20; Col 3:16,17), and living together in har-
mony (Eph 5:22—6:9; Col 3:18—4:1).
These similarities are not absolute, how-
ever. In the passages just cited on human rela-
tionships, Ephesians has a detailed section on
husbands and wives that is lacking in Colos-
sians. Also, in Ephesians some unique sections
795
Ephesians, Letter to the
are interspersed that are thought to have a
liturgical character (1:3; 3:20,21; 4:5,6; 5:14).
Others sound as though they were intended
for public exhortation, some think at a bap-
tism or for renewal of dedication (4:17—5:2;
5:3-21).
, Further, some verses in Ephesians seem to
‘be conflations of verses from various parts of
Colossians. For example, Ephesians 1:7 seems
to combine thoughts found in Colossians 1:14
and 20. The ideas of Colossians 1:3, 4, and g
seem to be brought together in Ephesians
1:15-16. A similar instance is Ephesians 2:1—s,
which combines two widely separated verses,
Colossians 2:13 and 3:6.
Theories abound to account for such simi-
larities and differences. A few have proposed
that Ephesians was written first; most grant
priority to Colossians. Some think that a pre-
liminary version of one was used in the other,
and was then expanded into its present form.
According to one popular theory, which as-
sumes that Paul is not the author, Ephesians
was written by a later Christian who prepared
it as an introduction to a collection of Paul’s
genuine writings, drawing material from Co-
lossians and other Pauline letters.
The most satisfying reconstruction is that
Paul wrote Colossians to meet the specific
needs of the church at Colosse, planning to ask
his friend Tychicus to take the letter there (Col
4:7). Meanwhile, Paul was reflecting on several
of the themes touched on in Colossians. He
thought also about the ultimate goals of his
missionary endeavors. God had revealed to
Paul his comprehensive plan for the church
and the universal headship of Christ. Paul
wrote Ephesians by drawing on some of the
phrases and sentences that were fresh in his
mind from Colossians.
This reconstruction also explains why some
of the terms are used in a somewhat diffferent
way than they are in Colossians. Paul’s pur-
poses were different. Colossians is polemical,
dealing with the problem of false teachers and
teaching. Ephesians is reflective, dealing with
the general subject of the church. There are
other topics that are distinct in Ephesians but
barely touched on in Colossians.
It is then clear why, in the example cited
earlier, the term ‘‘mystery”’ is applied differ-
ently. In Colossians, where the issue revolves
largely around the person of Christ, the “mys-
tery” is applied to the Lord himself. In Ephesi-
ans, with its emphasis on the church, the term
is applied to the unity of Jews and Gentiles in
the church. Neither usage exhausts the com-
prehensive meaning of the term.
If this is an accurate understanding of the
relationship between the two letters, and if
Paul is the author of both, why does Ephe-
Ephesians, Letter to the
sians give the impression that Paul did not
have a recollection of, and regard for, indi-
viduals in Ephesus? First, the very nature of
the letter—a comprehensive treatment of ex-
pansive themes—does not lend itself to this
as much as do his other letters. Second, it is
not certain that the letter was intended spe-
cifically for the Ephesians. Since the time
when the KJv was prepared, a great deal has
become known about the early manuscripts
of the NT. It is now known that the words “‘at
Ephesus” did not appear in two of the earli-
est manuscripts (Vaticanus; Sinaiticus),
did it appear in an early papyrus (P47), or in
early copies of some citations of early Chris-
tian writers.
Since the words do appear in later manu-
scripts, the letter must have had some connec-
tion with Ephesus. The fact that this letter,
like Colossians, was to be delivered by Tychi-
cus (Eph 6:21; Col 4:7) suggests that it may
have been intended for several churches along
the way, the most notable being at Ephesus.
Ephesians 6:23 implies some limitation of read-
ership, while verse 24 is more general. The
words ‘“‘at Ephesus’”’ could then be accounted
for if it were a circular letter with an original
copy sent there, or with one copy left there,
which was later identified with those words.
This would account both for the lack of per-
sonal references and for the inclusion of the
words “at Ephesus” in many later manu-
scripts and versions. It has also been theorized
that the letter went to Laodicea, among other
places, and is the letter that was to be for-
warded from there to Colossae (Col 4:16).
Background. Ephesus was the most im-
portant city in Asia Minor, located on the
Cayster River, with a harbor on the Aegean
Sea. With this location it became a center for
commercial travel, and major trade routes led
One of the marble streets of Ephesus.
to it from several directions. A great pagan
temple dedicated to the goddess Artemis (Di-
ana) was located in Ephesus. Paul made the
city a center of evangelistic and church-
building ministry (Acts 19), spending three
years there (20:31). It was very natural, there-
fore, for a letter intended for a wide reader-
ship in that part of Asia Minor to have Ephe-
sus as its main destination.
Purpose and Theological Teaching. It
may be said that the purpose of Ephesians is
“‘doxological”’; that is, it should cause the read-
nor ers to glorify God, both in grateful praise and
in manner of life. This is seen in the opening
section, which is like a hymn in style: ‘‘Praise
God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1:3;
cf. the Doxology often sung in church). Paul
says three times in the first chapter that the
result of God’s blessings should be praise (vv
6,12,14). :
While the letter contains much doctrinal
and moral instruction (with the latter solidly
based on the former), its purpose is not only
teaching or exhortation, important as these
are. It is rather to lift its readers up to a new
vantage point that will help them to identify
with the risen, ascended Christ and to share
his perspective on the church and its role in
the world.
In this connection a significant term occurs
in 1:3 and elsewhere. It is perhaps best trans-
lated ‘‘heavenly realms.” It is different in form
from the usual word for ‘‘heaven’”’ and seems
to have a special significance in Ephesians as
the realm of Jesus’ victorious reign in the pres-
ent age. This is seen in 1:20, read in the con-
text of verses 19-23. Whatever beings there
may be, Christ is above them all. The believer,
although obviously on earth physically, “‘sits
with Christ” in the heavenly realms (2:6) and
is “blessed”’ (1:3), while drawing on the unlim-
ited resources of heaven for his daily life. It is
also in this realm that the spiritual conflict
takes place (6:12).
Paul thus makes it clear that Christians are
not to have a limited or merely earthly view-
point. Those who do will mistakenly think
that our enemies are people (6:12) and our re-
sources human (2 Cor 10:3—4). With this orien-
tation to the heavenly world of the Lord’s pres-
ent exaltation, the reader is prepared to un-
derstand that the church does not function
merely to carry out routine activities here, but
that it displays the wisdom of God to beings
who exist in the heavenly realms (3:10). Even
the function of church leaders is discussed in
terms of the gifts of the Christ who has as-
cended to the heavens (4:8—10).
There is a strong sense of ultimate purpose
in Ephesians. The first chapter contains a num-
ber of different expressions of purpose. The
706

great goal of history is expressed in 1:10. The
sense of purpose is never lost. The church is
even seen, in chapter 3, as the expression of
God’s ancient secret plan. There is also a move-
ment throughout the letter, from (1) reconcilia-
tion of individuals to God to (2) their reconcil-
iation to each other to (3) their life together in
the church. There is no arguing of points along
the way, such as one finds in most of the let-
ters, but rather a connected series of affirma-
tions, each leading the reader on to the next.
Paul discusses a number of topics from this
heavenly perspective and the sense of purpose
this provides. These topics will be discussed
below in such a way as to show their intercon-
nection, rather than necessarily in the order of
their importance or prominence in Ephesians.
The Church. Paul employs a number of fig-
ures of speech to describe the church, includ-
ing a household, a temple, and a body (1:22—
23; 2:19-22). Actually it may be insufficient to
call the word “‘body”’ a figure of speech, be-
cause it seems to be more than that. There is a
sense in which Christ and the church have an
actual organic relationship, in which he func-
tions as the head and believers as parts of his
body.
The church is the result of the reconciling
work of Christ, whose death has made peace
between mutually hostile Jews and Gentiles
(2:11-18). The ensuing unity was long planned
by God (3:2—-6), and is furthered by a proper
attitude and mutual ministry (ch 4).
An especially remarkable feature of Ephesi-
ans is the parallel drawn between the relation-
ship between a husband and wife and that be-
tween Christ and the church (5:22—33). In this
comparison the prior reality is not marriage,
with the relationship of Christ and the church
only providing an illustration. Rather, the es-
sential reality is Christ and the church.
The Headship of Christ. Not only is Christ
the head of the church, but he is head over all
things to the church’s benefit (1:22). The mean-
ing of 1:10 is that the presently disparate parts
and beings of the universe will be brought into
order under the headship of Christ. This uni-
versal headship is anticipated in the ascension
and present exaltation of Christ. The expres-
sion of universal domination—God has put
all things under his feet’’ (1:22, from Ps 8:6)—
fortifies this expectation.
The “Mystery” or “Secret Plan.”" The Greek
word “mystery” has a special meaning in
early Jewish and Christian literature. It refers
to the private eternal decisions of God concern-
ing his saving work and his ultimate purposes
in history, which are revealed stage by stage.
The term is used in connection with the king-
dom in the Gospels (Mt 13:11), with the preach-
ing of the gospel in 1 Corinthians 1:18-2:16,
TG
Ephesians, Letter to the
with the destiny of Israel in Romans 11:25, and
elsewhere with differing applications. Finally,
Revelation 10:6—7 declares that there will be
no more delay, but that God’s ‘‘mystery,” ini-
tially announced by the prophets, will reach
its completion.
. The aspect of God’s plan that Paul presents
‘in Ephesians 3:3—6 is not only the inclusion of
Gentiles among God’s people but their com-
plete integration with Jews in the church. The
extent of this was not revealed prior to the
time of Paul’s ministry.
The Trinity. Each member of the Trinity is
mentioned several times in chapter 1. God is
described as the ‘‘glorious” Father in 1:17. The
first member of the Trinity is both the God
and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (1:3), but
at the same time Father and Son are equally
the source of grace and peace (1:2). The essen-
tial fatherhood of God is the basis for the exis-
tence of family relationships among humans,
especially, of course, of the family of believers
(3:14). In the passage just cited, Paul prays to
the Father, in accordance with the pattern of
the Lord’s prayer (Mt 6:9; Lk 11:2).
The believer’s relationship to God as Father
is possible only through Jesus Christ (1:5), who
is described as “‘his beloved Son” (7:6; cf. Col
1:13). This expression recalls the words spoken
from heaven at the baptism and the transfigu-
ration of Christ, “This is my beloved Son” (Mt
3:17; 17:5). The believer becomes the recipient
of the same love given the Son by the Father.
Many of the topics in chapter 1 are said to be
accomplished, or are imparted to the believer
“in Christ” (vv 3,10,12; cf. vv 7,14). The phrase
“in Christ” is common throughout Paul’s writ-
ings. The entire second chapter expands on
the fact that redemption is through the death
and resurrection of Christ.
Chapter 1 also contains a section that cen-
ters on the work of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit
marks a believer as belonging to Christ, just as
someone in the 1st century would use an im-
pressed wax seal to identify a scroll or other
item (v 13). The Spirit is also a guarantee (v
14, i.e., a deposit or down payment) of God’s
ownership of the believer. Paul further de-
scribes the believer’s relationship to the Holy
Spirit by indicating that a bad attitude to-
ward others, expressed for example in intem-
perate language, brings sorrow to the Spirit
(4:30). This fact is indirect evidence that the
Holy Spirit is capable of what we would call
feelings, thus not an impersonal being.
Perhaps the most noteworthy mention of
the Spirit in Ephesians is in 5:18. Here Paul
teaches that rather than losing control of one’s
behavior by imbibing too much liquor, the be-
liever should submit to the filling—that is, the
control—of the Holy Spirit. Colossians has a
Ephesians, Letter to the
similar statement: ‘‘Let the Word of Christ
dwell in you richly’ (Col 3:16) instead of ‘“‘be
filled with the Spirit.” Assuming that the
same basic truth is taught in both passages,
one may conclude that the Spirit-filled Chris-
tian is the one who obeys the Lord Jesus.
Content. The Divine Purpose: The Glory
and Headship of Christ (1:1—14). This whole
section constitutes a ‘‘doxology.” Paul re-
minds readers, by expressing his own prayer
of praise, of all the blessings God has given
believers. These include being chosen to live
in God’s presence without guilt (v 4), being
given the destiny of full sonship (v 5), and be-
ing forgiven because Christ died for them.
But Paul is not only giving a recitation of
what God has done. He interweaves a number
of words and phrases indicating why God has
acted, that is, what God’s purposes are. Vari-
ous translations use different English words to
represent Greek expressions of purpose, such
as ‘‘chose,” “predestined,” “plan,” “will,” “se-
cret reason,” ‘‘good pleasure,” “purpose” (vv
4-10). Perhaps the most comprehensive state-
ment is in verses 11-12.
It is clear from this that the ultimate pur-
pose of God’s saving work is not merely the
happiness of believers but the glory of God
through the Lord Jesus Christ. The Spirit is
given to guarantee not only the believer’s secu-
rity, but God’s investment, so to speak, in the
believer.
Prayer That Christians May Realize God’s
Purpose and Power (1:15—23). Paul’s prayer is-
sues from his opening section, constituting a
request that believers may appropriate all
that is contained in that statement. It is here
that the fact of Jesus’ death, resurrection, and
ascension is cited as the basis for the believ-
er’s present vantage point and power.
Steps Toward the Fulfillment of God’s Pur-
pose (2:1—3:13). The first step was the death
of Christ in order to save individuals from sin
and death (2:1-10). Since this was at God’s
initiative, not man’s, and since man was spiri-
tually “dead” and helpless, salvation can only
be by grace.
The second step was the reconciliation of
people not only to God but to each other
(2:11—18). Paul thus moves from the individual
to the corporate aspect of salvation. This was
particularly significant for Gentiles, who previ-
ously did not have even a formal relationship
with God. One of the key words in this section
is “peace’”’ (vv 14,15,17).
Step three goes beyond reconciliation to the
actual uniting of Jews and Gentiles in one
“household” (2:19-22). God has not only
brought people individually to himself, and to
each other as individuals, but has formed a
new corporate entity, a new society that is de-
708
scribed both in political and family terms. Ulti-
mately believers together form a corporate
body in whom God is exalted, a living temple.
This third step is amplified in a fourth step,
the revelation of God’s eternal purpose in the
formation of this one body, the church (3:1-
13). Using the biblical concept of the “mys-
tery,” Paul shows how the church displays the
wisdom of God to all who may be looking on
throughout the universe. This immediately
gives the believer a new awareness of the rea-
son for his salvation and participation in the
church. Self-centeredness and boredom with
the routine of church activity give way to a
sense of meaning and purpose.
These steps are now summarized in a sec-
ond prayer (3:14—21). An exalted series of peti-
tions culminate in another “doxology.’” This
expresses Paul’s awe over the infinite power of
God to accomplish all that he has described in
the epistle thus far, and his desire that this
will indeed result in great glory to God both in
the church and in Christ.
Practical Ways to Fulfill God’s Purpose in the
Church (4:1—6:20). Doctrine and life are
never separated in Paul’s thinking, but in
Ephesians the connection is even more vital
than usual. The believer’s life is to be lived in
a manner worthy of the great purposes of God.
The believer’s “calling” is not merely to be
saved or eternally happy, but to participate
with the entire body, the church, in bringing
glory to God. This contributes to the realiza-
tion of the prayer in 3:20—21.
The first way to fulfill God’s purpose is to
maintain the unity he established in the
church. This is accomplished by recognizing
the strong basis for unity (“one Lord, one
faith,’”’ etc., vv 5—6). Then believers must ac-
knowledge diversity in that unity, remember-
ing that God has given each one special abili-
ties (vv 7-8). These abilities are to be used to
bring the church both individually and corpo-
rately to maturity. This diversity in unity con-
stitutes the second way in which God’s pur-
pose is fulfilled. Christian maturity enables
the individual members of the church to relate
to each other in love (v 26).
The third way to accomplish the purposes
of God is by renewal of personal life (4:17—
5:21). Paul emphasizes the kind of life-style
that is expected of a Christian by contrasting
the behavior patterns which had character-
ized the believers before their conversion. But
the new life of the believer is not simply struc-
tured as a reaction against the old. Rather, the
Lord has given both his teachings and the ex-
ample of his own sacrifical love (4:20-21,32;
5:1-2). The believer should cast off his old way
of life, his old self or character. (The actual
term is {old man” in Paul’s wording, not, as is

often thought, “old nature.”) He should at the
same time put on the “new man,” which, in
Paul’s words in verse 24, is “created according
to God” (Niv, “created to be like God”). The
section closes with the important exhortation
to be filled with the Spirit (5:18).
The expression of the new character in in-
terpersonal relations is the fourth way in
which believers can forward the purposes of
God in the church. Unity is either achieved or
broken in accordance with the presence or ab-
sence of the proper submission described in
5:22-6:9. The basic principle of submission is
first expressed by verse 21 as a result of the
Spirit’s full control.
Marriage then provides the first example of
mutual submission. The wife submits to the
husband, and this in turn is an expression of
her submission, along with that of the whole
church, to the Lord. The husband loves his wife
as Christ loved the church. While the hus-
band’s love is not described as submission, in
effect love does cost the lover his freedom. Je-
sus thus expressed his love for the church by
his death (5:25). Further, husband and wife are
bound together in a unity, just as God intended
at the time of creation (Gn 2:24, quoted here in
5:31). This unity portrays that spiritual unity
that exists between Christ and the church.
It should be noted that this list of examples
is similar to a pattern used elsewhere in the
NT (e.g., Col 3:18—4:1; 1 Pt 3:1-7). Thus, follow-
ing the example of marriage, Paul turns to the
relationship that should exist between parent
and child. The child obeys the father; the fa-
ther refrains from excessive reactions (6:1—4).
The last example is that of slaves and masters.
The final way in which believers forward
God’s great purposes is to carry on the spiri-
tual conflict by depending on spiritual re-
sources (6:10—20). Drawing on imagery both
from the OT and from contemporary Roman
warfare, Paul shows that the heavenly per-
spective is essential for victory. This includes
dependence on God as expressed in prayer
(6:18—20). He acknowledges his own need in
this respect.
The conclusion to the letter (6:21-24) is a
word of encouragement and an explanation of
Paul’s decision to send the letter in the good
hands of Tychicus. One of the concluding
words is “grace,” a word which underlies the
entire divine process described in Ephesians.
WALTER L. LIEFELD
See PauL, THE APOSTLE; COLOSSIANS, LETTER TO
THE; EPHESUS.
Bibliography. FF. Bruce, The Epistles to the Colossians,
to Philemon, and to the Ephesians; D. Guthrie, Epistles from
Prison; C. Hodge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephe-
sians; C. Leslie Mitton, Ephesians; E.F. Scott, The Epistles to
the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians; J.R.W.
Stott, God’s New Society.
799
Ephesus
Ephesus. Most important city of the Roman
province of Asia, located on the western shore
of Asia Minor (modern Turkey). Ephesus was
built on a natural harbor whose waves, accord-
ing to the Roman writer Pliny the Elder, “used
to wash up to the temple of Diana.” Ephesus
was described by Strabo, an early Greek geog-
‘rapher, as the largest commercial center west
of the Taurus mountains. It was also well
known as the “guardian” of the temple of Arte-
mis or, as the Romans called her, Diana (Acts
£0:35).
Christianity’s threat to that pagan temple
and to the commerce it produced for the mak-
ers of idols almost cost the apostle Paul his life
(Acts 19:24,30,31). Priscilla and Aquila were as-
sociated with the early preaching in Ephesus
(Acts 18:18,19), as were Timothy (1 Tm 1:3) and
Erastus (Acts 19:22). According to Irenaeus, an
early Christian writer, the apostle John, after
his exile on the island of Patmos (Rv 1:9), re-
turned to live in Ephesus until the time of the
emperor Trajan (AD 98-117). The commendable
practices of the Christian community de-
scribed in the letter to the Ephesians had been
largely abandoned by the time John wrote the
Book of Revelation (Rv 2:4).
Ephesus was founded by Ionian Greeks at a
location where the Cayster River emptied into
a gulf of the Aegean Sea. It had been a city for
about a thousand years when Paul arrived
there on his third missionary journey. The wor-
ship of Artemis in Ephesus was as ancient as
the city itself. The temple, built in the middle
of the 6th century Bc, was the largest edifice in
the Hellenistic world and the first of monu-
mental size ever to be constructed entirely of
marble. Two excavated images of Artemis,
magnificently sculpted in marble, date to the
period of emperors Domitian and Hadrian
(the lifetime of the apostle John). The temple
of Diana, “mother of the gods,” was considered
one of the seven wonders of the ancient world.
Although persistent effort by British archaeolo-
gist J. T. Wood resulted in the temple’s discov-
ery in 1869, its great altar was not found until
recently. Excavation has shown the altar to be
larger than the later altar of Zeus at Perga-
mum. The original temple was partially de-
stroyed in 356 Bc but was later rebuilt on its
original plan.
Excavations have also uncovered the thea-
ter mentioned in Acts 19:29. Situated next to
the main shopping area (agora), it is known
to have seated 24,000 people in three tiers.
The theater was 495 feet in diameter with two
doors opening to the most impressive street
in Ephesus. That street, leading to the har-
bor, was about 35 feet wide and was flanked
by tall columns. It passed through a magnifi-
cent monumental gateway on its western end.
Ephlal
View down from the seats of
the Grand Theater (seating
about 25,000), the most spec-
tacular monument of Ephesus.
This is where the riot occurred
and the crowd shouted, “Great
is Diana of the Ephesians.”
In the other direction the road continued
around the theater and marketplace, making
its way southeast between Mt Koressos and
Mt Pion. It became narrower and was bor-
dered by lovely fountains, civic buildings,
houses, shops, a library, baths, and a small
theater which probably doubled as a council
chamber for city officials.
Ephesus was a wealthy city. The multi-
storied residences of its upper-middle-class
society rested on the north terraces of Mt
Koressos. Some homes had mosaic floors and
marble walls. Two were found with heated
bathrooms. Many had running water. The
moral status of the city can be partially ascer-
tained from a centrally located house of prosti-
tution and gambling tables; fertility motifs
are evident in the exaggerated sexual features
of the Diana statues.
The impact of Christianity was felt in
Ephesus for centuries. The 3rd ecumenical
council was held there in ap 431 (in the
Church of Mary northwest of the theater), a
council that established Mary’s place as the
“Mother of God’’ in Western Catholic theol-
ogy. By that time Diana, whose temple had
been burned by the Goths in ap 262, was no
longer influential among the Ephesians. The
truth of Paul’s message that ‘“‘gods made with
hands are not gods’’ (Acts 19:26) had to some
extent been realized.
See EPHESIANS, LETTER TO THE.
| was often misused, as by Gideon (Jgs 8:27),
Ephlal. Jerahmeel’s descendant, who could
trace his ancestry through Perez to Judah
(vChriawy).
Ephod. Upper garment worn during reli-
gious services associated with the tabernacle
or temple. ‘“Ephod” generally referred to the
ornamented vest that the high priest wore
over a blue robe (Ex 28:31). Included with the
710
ephod were the Urim and Thummim, the sa-
cred lots. Sometimes “‘ephod’”’ meant the com-
plete dress of the high priest (1 Sm 2:28; 23:6,9;
30:7) or similar garments worn by lesser
priests.
Made of dyed material and fine linen, the
garment was embroidered in blue, purple,
scarlet, and gold. At the upper end were at-
tached two shoulder straps, each having an
onyx stone inscribed with the names of Isra-
el’s 12 tribes. The breastplate, also containing
the tribal names, was bound to the ephod by
an elaborate series of cords and chains (Ex
28; 39).
Jewish writers suggest various appearances
for the ephod: (1) apronlike, covering the body
from the chest to the heels; (2) enveloping the
body only from the waist down, the upper
body covered by the breastplate; or (3) sleeved
and jacketlike, with the middle of the breast
uncovered so the breastplate could be inserted
easily.
Prior to the Babylonian exile the ephod
served as a means of revelation from God, es-
pecially concerning military operations. Abia-
thar the priest brought the ephod into David’s
camp on one occasion for consulting the Lord
(1 Sm 23:6—g; 30:7). It is uncertain whether the
priest donned or held the ephod while seeking
counsel from the Lord by means of the Urim
and Thummim.
During the period of the judges the ephod
Micah (Jgs 17:5), and Jonathan, grandson of
Moses (Jgs 18:30; cf. vv 14,17,20). Either the
garment itself or an image that represented
God, on which the garment was placed, was
worshiped as the people sought revelation in a
manner condemned by God. Household idols
(teraphim) were also associated with this un-
godly practice (Igs 17:5; Hos 3:4).
Besides the high priest, other priests wore

an ephod for certain religious services (1 Sm
22:18), and even Samuel (1 Sm 2:18) and David
(2 Sm 6:14) wore one. By the postexilic period,
and perhaps as early as Solomon, the ephod
was no longer consulted (Ezr 2:63; Neh 7:65).
There was no need for ephod or Urim reve-
lation once there was the more complete reve-
lation of the prophetic ministry promised by
Moses (Dt 18:15—22). However, the high priest
continued to wear this vestment until the de-
struction of Jerusalem in aD 70.
See PRIESTS AND LEVITES.
Ephod (Person). Father of Hanniel, the
prince of the children of Joseph (Nm 34:23).
Hanniel was responsible for distributing Ca-
naanite territory among the Israelite tribes.
Ephphatha. Transliteration in the impera-
tive voice of the Aramaic expression “be
opened,’ used by Jesus in the healing of a deaf
mute (Mk 7:34). No attempt at establishing a
magical word formula was intended; the au-
thor apparently desired simply to preserve the
actual wording. A connection with Isaiah 35:5
may have been implied.
Ephraim (Person). Joseph’s younger
born of Joseph and Asenath before the 7 years
of famine in Egypt (Gn 41:52). He was the an-
cestor of an Israelite tribe, and his name came
to designate the northern kingdom of Israel (Is
7:5,8; Jer 31:18,20; Hos 5:3,5). Ephraim’s boy-
hood overlapped the last 17 years of his grand-
father, the patriarch Jacob, who migrated to
Egypt during the years of plenty. Thus Eph-
raim could learn of God’s promises and bless-
ings directly from Jacob. After Jacob exacted
an oath to bury him in Canaan from his grand-
sons Ephraim and Manasseh, he adopted
them. That adoption gave the two brothers the
position and legal rights equal to Jacob’s el-
dest sons, Reuben and Simeon (Gn 48:5).
See EPHRAIM, TRIBE OF.
Ephraim (Place). 1. Area allotted to Ephra-
im’s tribe for an inheritance (Jos 16:5—8; 17:7—
11). Ephraim and Manasseh originally were
recognized as ‘‘the people of Joseph” (Jos
16:4). Together they occupied the central high-
lands area between Jerusalem and the plain of
Esdraelon. Ephraim’s territory lay to the
south of Manasseh. The area was relatively
high, and the expression ‘‘the hill country of
Ephraim” (1 Sm 1:1) was an apt description.
In places the hard rocks form steep and diffi-
cult slopes, and the valleys leading to the west
are steep. Roads followed the spurs between
the valleys rather than the valleys themselves.
Movement between Ephraim and the coastal
Ephraim
plain along the edge of the rocky Sarida valley
was not easy, but it was possible. Another
road followed by the Philistine invaders (1 Sm
4) led up from Aphek. Because of their relative
inaccessibility the Ephraimites became a lead-
ing tribe in Israel very early. The expression in
Joshua 16:9, “the towns which were set apart
‘for the Ephraimites within the inheritance of
the Manassites,” suggests that there had once
been a disputed boundary; however, Ephraim
was evidently able to strengthen itself and to
emerge as a dominant force in Israel. Indeed
the name Ephraim is sometimes used as the
equivalent of Israel (Hos 4:17; 5:3,11-14; 6:4,10,
etc.)
The extent of the tribal area of Ephraim is
given in Joshua 16:5—8 and 17:1-11. It would
appear from the abundant detail given in these
passages that the main topographical features
of Ephraim’s boundaries would be easy to de-
termine. Yet the precise identification of anum-
ber of the places mentioned is uncertain. The
eastern boundary began at Michmethah, tenta-
tively identified with Khirbet en-Nabi. It con-
tinued south through Taanath-shiloh, Janoah,
Ataroth, and Naarah to a point near Jericho.
The southern boundary seems to have passed
westward toward Bethel, Beth-horon, and Ge-
son, zer to the Mediterranean Sea. The western
boundary is not defined and probably en-
croached on Canaanite areas in early times.
The northern boundary separating Ephraim
from Manasseh went from Michmethah, which
was “before Shechem,” toward Tappuah and
then ran along the Wadi Qana to the Mediterra-
nean Sea north of Joppa. But it must be
stressed that the precise definition of the
boundaries is by no means clear. Immediately
to the south of Ephraim lay the tribal area of
Benjamin.
The rainfall in the hill country of Ephraim
is greater than in Judea, which lay further
south, and the soil is reddish in color, rich and
fertile. Because of this Ephraim was very pro-
ductive. Today the country is dotted with or-
chards, and olive trees are abundant. The de-
scription in Deuteronomy 33:14-17 of an area
which yielded ‘‘the choicest fruits of the sun,
and the rich yield of the months, with the fin-
est produce of the ancient mountains, and the
abundance of the everlasting hills, with the
best gifts of the earth” gives an excellent pic-
ture of the general nature of the region.
See EPHRAIM, TRIBE OF.
2. Town near Baal-hazor to which Absalom
invited his half brother Ammon in order to
have him put to death (2 Sm 13:23-29) for in-
cest with Absalom’s sister Tamar. The town
lay to the north of Jerusalem and was possibly
identical with Ephron (2 Chr 13:19).
3. Town near the wilderness to which Jesus
711
Ephraim, Forest of
retired after raising Lazarus from the tomb
(Jn 11:54). It is generally identified with et-
Taiyibeh, 13 miles northeast of Jerusalem and
4 miles northeast of Bethel.
Ephraim, Forest of. Rocky, wooded stretch
of country east of the Jordan in the area of
Mahanaim. It was here that David’s army de-
feated Absalom (2 Sm 18:6, KJv wood of Eph-
raim). The connection of this location with the
territory of Ephraim is difficult. The most
probable explanation is that Ephraim once ex-
tended farther to the east, but was lost by the
tribe after its defeat by Jephthah and the
Gileadites near Zaphon (Jgs 12:1-6). The name
may have been used while the Ephraimites
held the land, or perhaps been given at a later
date as a reminder of Ephraim’s defeat. Some
speculate that Ephraimites once established a
colony in the area (Jos 17:14—18).
Ephraim, Gate of. Gate in the Jerusalem
wall positioned about 600 feet east of the Cor-
ner Gate (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 25:23). It was re-
built in Nehemiah’s day (Neh 12:39) and was
situated close to the Water Gate and courts of
the temple.
See JERUSALEM.
Ephraim, Mount. xkjJv expression referring
to the hill country in central Palestine where
Ephraim’s tribe was located (Jos 20:1; Jgs
19:1,16,18; r Sm r:1, etc.). The area was one of
the most productive in Palestine.
See EPHRAIM (PLACE) # 1.
Ephraim, Tribe of. Tribe descended from
the patriarch Joseph’s second son. Both Ephra-
im and his brother Manasseh were regarded
as sons also by their grandfather Jacob and
became his heirs.
Many Bible commentators think that in
naming his son Ephraim (Gn 41:52), Joseph
was making a play on words based on a He-
brew root meaning “to be fruitful.” In support
of this theory they note that the hill country
later assigned to Ephraim’s tribe was one of
the most fertile areas in Palestine, and at pres-
ent is still planted with vines and fruit trees
such as Olive, pomegranate, and carob. Prior
to Israelite settlement, the area was wooded
(Jos 17:18). During the monarchy wild animals
still roamed there (2 Kgs 2:24).
It is difficult to determine the exact limits
of Ephraim’s territory, since it is often men-
tioned with Manasseh’s tribe. Ephraim was al-
lotted land in the heart of Canaan, the Prom-
ised Land, between the Jordan River and the
712
Mediterranean Sea. One half of Manasseh’s al-
lotment formed Ephraim’s northern boundary
(Jos 16:5-9).
Ephraim became a great tribe, and its mem-
bers often held prominent positions. The first
census taken in the wilderness lists the total of
Ephraimite Soldiers as 40,500 (Nm 1:33). After
the wilderness wanderings the number of war-
riors dropped to 32,500 (Nm 26:37). In Israel’s
encampment around the tabernacle, Ephraim
was the leader of the western camp, supported
by the tribes of Manasseh and Benjamin (Nm
2:18—24).
Joshua the son of Nun, one of the 12 spies,
was descended from Ephraim (Nm 13:8, Ho-
shea). Under Joshua’s leadership Ephraim and
the other tribes conquered Canaan and re-
ceived their promised inheritance (Jos 16).
In the days of the judges the Ephraimites
felt slighted when they were not called upon
to assist others in their battles. They quar-
reled with Gideon because of his belated invi-
tation to help against the Midianites (Jgs 8:1-
6) as well as with Jephthah of Gilead, who
defeated the Ammonites (Jgs 12:1-6). The
judge Abdon came from Ephraim’s tribe (Jgs
12:13). The idolatrous Micah (Jgs 17:1) as well
as the prophet’ Samuel lived in Ephraim (1 Sm
1:1). The military and political importance of
the Ephraimites is reflected in the Song of
Deborah (Jgs 5:14), an ancient biblical poem.
Judah was Ephraim’s main rival, and even
under David that animosity was evident (2 Sm
18; 19:41—-20:22). Discontent in the north with
Solomon’s rule (1 Kgs 11:26—40), combined
with a foolish decision by Rehoboam, Solo-
mon’s son, brought about the division of the
kingdom. The 1o northern tribes (Israel) were
then ruled by Jeroboam I.
After the northern tribes seceded, the capi-
tals of the northern kingdom—Shechem, Tir-
zah, and Samaria—were situated in Ephraim.
The establishment of Samaria by King Omri
of Israel gave the Ephraimites more direct ac-
cess to the great north-south trunk road (Via
Maris) through the western plain. This con-
tact with trade routes gave the northern king-
dom greater world consciousness and brought
greater temptation to depart from God and
his commands.
The prophets proclaimed that Ephraim and
the other northern tribes would one day be
reunited with the southern kingdom of Judah
in the messianic kingdom (Hos 1:11). The divi-
sion introduced by Jeroboam I would be
healed when a king descended from David
would rule over Judah, Ephraim, and all the
tribes of Israel (Ez 37).
AusTIN H. Potts
See ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; EPHRAIM (PERSON); EPHRAIM
(PLACE) # 1.

Ephrain. ksv form of Ephron, a town near
Bethel, in 2 Chronicles 13:19.
See EPHRON (PLACE) # 2.
Ephrath, Ephrathah, Ephratah (Person).
Mother of Hur and Caleb’s second wife (1 Chr
2:19; alternately spelled Ephrathah, ksv Ephra-
tah, in v 50).
Ephrath, Ephrathah, Ephratah (Place).
1. Town in the Judean hill country later
named Bethlehem. It was on the road to Eph-
rath (also spelled Ephrathah, ksv Ephratah)
that Rachel died while giving birth to Benja-
min (Gn 35:16,19). This town was the home of quality, having little to do with the important
Naomi’s family, who identified themselves as
Ephrathites (Ru 1:2). Ephrath was the dwell-
ing place of Ruth and Boaz (Ru 4:11), the child-
hood home of David (1 Sm 17:12), and the an-
nounced birthplace of the Messiah (Mi 5:2).
See BETHLEHEM # 1.
2. District in which the city of Kiriath-
jearim was situated and where the ark of the
covenant was kept (Ps 132:6).
Ephrathite. Inhabitant of the town of Eph-
rath (Bethlehem) in Judah (1 Sm 17:12).
See EPHRATH, EPHRATHAH, EPHRATAH (PLACE) # 1.
Ephron (Person). Hittite from whom Abra-
ham purchased the cave of Macpelah with its
adjoining field for 400 shekels of silver (Gn
23:8—17). Sarah was buried there, as was Abra-
ham (Gn 25:9) and Jacob (Gn 50:13).
Ephron (Place). 1. Mountainous district on
the northern edge of Judah (Jos 15:9).
2. City near Bethel, captured by Abijah (2
Chr 13:19, KJV Ephrain); perhaps the Ophrah
of Joshua 18:23.
Epicureans. Those who followed the teach-
ings of the Greek philosopher Epicurus (342—
270 BC). Paul encountered some of them while
in Athens (Acts 17:18).
Epicurus spent his childhood on the island
of Samos near the western coast of what is
today Turkey. In his late teens he moved to
Athens for military service. After his tour of
duty, he devoted his time to the study and
teaching of philosophy. This work took him
from Athens, but he returned in 307 Bc to
found a school. He attracted a considerable
following, and his disciples spread his mes-
sage throughout the civilized world. The fact
that Paul met Epicureans over 3 centuries af-
ter. the death of Epicurus shows both the at-
tractiveness of his teachings and the commit-
ment of his disciples. In the 1st century Bc
these teachings found expression in the writ-
Epicureans
ing of the Roman poet Lucretius. His On the
Nature of Things is a helpful guide to under-
standing Epicurus, especially since only frag-
ments of Epicurus’ writings remain.
The Epicureans were empiricists; they re-
lied upon sense experience for knowledge. This
put them in opposition to those who chose to
--mnake statements about the world on the basis
of reason alone, distrusting or rejecting the
data of the senses. Epicureans were concerned
with natural evidence and with practicalities,
thus showing a somewhat scientific character.
They were unenthusiastic about mathematics
because of what they took to be its abstract
matters of living. Ethics, the study of right be-
havior, was their focus.
The Epicurean judged the value of an ac-
tion or thing in terms of the pleasure or pain it
brought, a position called hedonism. It was
egoistic hedonism because the person sought
his own pleasure rather than the pleasure of
others. This description can bring to mind the
image of an irresponsible glutton or lover of
wild parties; but the image, encouraged by the
modern sense of the word “epicurean” is mis-
leading. Epicurus rejected just such behavior.
He realized that momentary pleasure can lead
to enduring pain and that some pain can be
beneficial. He viewed pleasure more as a qual-
ity of life than a series of thrills. What he
sought is better called happiness. Basing his
counsel on experience, he urged moderation,
calm, friendship, a simple life. He avoided
feasting, sexual passion, and strife. In fact, he
avoided pain more than he sought pleasure.
The pleasure of tranquility, of peace, could be
found in the absence of pain, and this was his
aim. To ensure tranquility, a man must tend
to his stomach; but he must also attend to his
mind, directing it toward wisdom.
Epicurus saw belief in gods as a serious
threat to tranquility. Gods were generally
viewed as emotional, meddling, and power-
ful beings who terrified ordinary mortals—
sources of insecurity, not peace and happi-
ness. Epicurus taught that the gods were not,
in fact, like this but were tranquil hedonists
who stayed away from men. They avoided the
strife involved in contact with people on
earth. In short, they were nothing to fear.
Epicurus taught that we, and everything in
our world, are made up of atoms of different
qualities. For example, the atoms of the hu-
man soul are smooth and round. Although
atomic theories often lead to the conviction
that all human actions are determined by the
laws that rule the motion of atoms, Epicurus’
theory did not. He allowed for human freedom
by claiming that some atoms spontaneously
leave their straight paths, thus setting off an
773
Epilepsy
unpredictable chain of collisions. Man's behav-
ior is then free and not machinelike.
In spite of his freedom, man is still a collec-
tion of atoms, and when the atoms separate,
the man ceases to exist; he is not immortal.
Epicurus saw this as reason no longer to fear
death. For after death, all experience ceases.
There will be no pain, and so there is no cause
for anxiety.
Epicurean themes can be found in the
Bible—for example, moderation (Phil 4:5) and
the peace that comes from the exercise of wis-
dom (Prv 3:13-18). But the differences are
clear. The Bible reveals a God who is inti-
mately involved in the world; the immortality
of man’s soul; and the truth that genuine hap-
piness depends upon communion with and ser-
vice to God. (Rom 8:6; Phil 4:6—7).
See PHILOSOPHY.
Epilepsy. Disease of the central nervous
system characterized by unconsciousness and
convulsions. Seizures can be either “petit
mal” (twitching of the face or hands,
but sharp abdominal pain, and possible mo-
mentary unconsciousness) or “grand mal”
(convulsions, foaming at the mouth, and un-
consciousness lasting from 5 to 20 minutes).
Although the causes of epilepsy are still not
known, drugs are available to prevent or con-
trol the seizures.
In biblical times epilepsy, known as the
“falling sickness,’”’ could not be treated effec-
tively. Jesus healed a boy evidently suffering
from that affliction (Mt 17:14-18; Mk 9:17—27;
Lk 9:37—42). The ksv description of the boy as
a “lunatic” (from Latin luna, ‘“‘moon’’) is an
incorrect usage. The Greek word in Matthew
(literally ““moonstruck’’) reflected anicent be-
lief in a connection between certain diseases
and the lunar phases. According to the biblical
account, the youth was healed when Jesus
called forth a demon or “unclean spirit” from
him.
See MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE.
Epistle. See LETTER WRITING, ANCIENT.
Er. 1. Eldest son of Judah and Bath-shua, a
Canaanite woman (Gn 38:3). The Lord killed
him before he and his wife Tamar could have
any children (Gn 38:7; 46:12; 1 Chr 2:3).
2. Grandson of Judah and father of Lecah
(1 Chr 4:21); a nephew of # 1 above.
3. Joshua's son and an ancestor of Joseph,
the husband of Mary (Lk 3:28).
See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.
Eran. Grandson of Ephraim and the oldest
son of Shuthelah (Nm 26:36), from
Erastus inscription (Rom 16:23).
came the Eranite family. In 1 Chronicles 7:20,
Eran was replaced by Ele-adah, which may be
a copyist’s error.
Erastus. Name mentioned three times in
the NT. Whether only one individual is being
referred to cannot be ascertained, although in
each case Erastus is an associate of Paul. The
brief mentions include: (1) a helper of Paul sent
with Timothy into Macedonia (Acts 19:22); (2)
the city treasurer of Corinth (a steward of fi-
nancial affairs, possibly a slave or freedman of
some wealth and an important man in the Co-
rinthian community), who sends greetings
with Paul to the church in Rome (Rom 16:23);
(3) a friend of Paul’s who “‘remained at Cor-
inth” (2 Tm 4:20).
Erech. Important Sumerian city, located at
what is now called Warka near the Euphrates
river, 40 miles northwest of Ur and 160 miles
south of Baghdad. Genesis to:1o refers to
Erech as the second of four cities founded by
Nimrod. Partial excavations have uncovered
the city walls, 6 miles in circumference, ca-
nals, and the remains of elegant buildings
with fluted walls decorated with colored cones
and inscriptions. Two ziggurats are among the
oldest ever discovered, and several temples
date back to the late 4th or early 3rd millen-
nium Bc. The use of clay cylinder seals began
in Erech, and from the same period have come
hundreds of pictographic inscriptions.
Ancient inscriptions indicate that Erech
and its surroundings were regarded as ex-
tremely beautiful and fertile. Its religious pan-
theon centered around the aggressive goddess
of love, Inanna, who was supposed to have
brought to Erech the ‘‘divine laws”’ to which it
owed its greatness. She helped Erech to subju-
gate its enemies and married King Dumuzi to
ensure the fertility and prosperity of Sumar.
Dumuzi, in turn, was identified with Tammuz,
the fertility god widely worshiped in Mesopo-
tamia and Palestine.
whom Among Erech’s rulers in the 3rd millen-
714

nium was Gilgamesh, hero of the great Akka-
dian epic. From the time of Hammurabi,
Erech became part of Babylonia, and contin-
ued to flourish until after 300 Bc. Ezra 4:9 re-
fers to ‘‘Archevites,’”’ or men of Arku, the Assyr-
ian name from which the Hebrew “‘Erech”’ is
derived. Strabo, Ptolemy, and Pliny mention
its renown as a center of learning, chiefly as-
tronomical. They refer also to the practice of
banking the waters of the Euphrates, forcing
them to flow into the Tigris.
Eri. Gad’s 5th son (Gn 46:16) and founder of
the Erite family (Nm 26:16).
Eruption. See Sore.
Esaias. «Jv form of Isaiah, the prophet, in
the NT.
See ISAIAH (PERSON).
Esar-haddon. King of Assyria (681—669 BC).
Though probably not the eldest son of Senna-
cherib, he was the eldest surviving son follow-
ing several internecine murders. Sennacherib
was assassinated by his sons Adrammelech
and Sharezer, and civil war ensued between
their supporters and those who accepted the
youthful newly proclaimed king, Esar-haddon.
As the threat from the brothers was elimi-
nated by death or exile, Esar-haddon solidi-
fied his position. He ruled from Nineveh and
proclaimed his twin sons, Ashurbanipal and
Samas-sum-ukin, crown princes of Assyria
and Babylonia. His attempt thus to ensure a
smooth changeover of rule at his own death
was frustrated.
Esar-haddon’s immediate task was to settle
the rebellious border areas, which he did by
launching .military campaigns. He installed
governors he could rely on, and increased sub-
stantially the level of tribute required. Some
kings were replaced and others subsequently
restored. Of the latter, Manasseh (2 Chr 33:11),
taken in chains to Babylon, later continued to
reign in Jerusalem, although this incident
may not have taken place until the reign of
Ashurbanipal. Of the strong cities, Sidon was
finally subdued, but Esar-haddon was forced
to come to terms with Baslu, king of Tyre.
In 675 Bc, Esar-haddon invaded Egypt and
destroyed the royal city of Memphis together
with many other towns and cities. Prince
Taharga, who had fled to Nubia on the initial
invasion, continued to rule over Egypt, and sub-
sequently led a rebellion against Esar-haddon.
During his second Egyptian campaign Esar-
haddon succumbed to a fatal sickness.
Esar-haddon was a strong, cruel, and fear-
less ruler who was proud of his achievements.
TES
Esau
A stele of Esar-haddon that shows a seed plow and other
implements.
He maintained dominion over a vast area,
claiming control not only of Babylonia and
Syria but also of Egypt and Ethiopia, the
lands bordering on Assyria, and some of the
islands of the eastern Mediterranean. He built
a palace at Kar-esarhaddon near Nineveh and
restored the fabled temple of Ashur originally
constructed by Shalmaneser I about 1250 Bc.
He commemorated the deeds of his reign on
numerous stelae and prisms. Esar-haddon is
mentioned in 2 Kings 19:37; Isaiah 37:38; and
Ezra 4:2 (v. 10 is possibly also a reference).
See AssyRIA, ASSYRIANS.
Esau. _Isaac’s son, and the older twin brother
of Jacob (Gn 25:24-26), who was given this
name because of the hair on his body at birth.
The reddish color of the baby together with the
color appearing in the episode of the lentil soup
(Gn 25:30) led to the use of the term Edom, or
“red.’’ The Edomites claimed to be descended
from Esau, and naming their land Seir may
have been an attempt to retain an association
with the word sair, meaning “‘hairy.”’
A proficient hunter, Esau brought tasty
wild meat to his father, who enjoyed its
stronger flavor much more than that of the
mild meat provided from the family flocks by
Jacob. When hungry one day following an un-
successful hunting expedition, Esau was per-
suaded to surrender his right of primogeniture
in return for food (Gn 25:29—-34). Archaeologi-
cal information from Nuzi shows that giving
up the birthright to another member of the
family was not unknown. Esau’s marriage to
two local women who were not descendants of
Abraham made life extremely difficult for his
parents (Gn 26:35). This may have been the
reason why his mother, Rebekah, decided to
tutor Jacob in the means of obtaining the pa-
Eschatology
triarchal blessing rightly belonging to his el-
der brother Esau (Gn 27).
Esau’s anger on discovering the perfidious
deception of his brother prompted Jacob
to leave for Haran, though 20 years later,
through the generous forgiveness of Esau, the
brothers were reunited (Gn 33:4—16).
At birth Jacob had come into the world
grasping the heel of Esau, an omen that was
interpreted to show that the Edomite descen-
dants of Esau would be subject to the off-
spring of Jacob. The subservient relationship
between the Edomites and the Israelites in the
time of David (2 Sm 8:11—14; 1 Chr 18:13) con-
tinued until the time of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20—
22; 2 Chr 21:8—10). Following a rebellion in 845
Bc the Edomites gained their independence for
a while but were reconquered by Amaziah
(796-767 BC). Regaining their freedom in 735
BC, they subsequently remained independent
of Judah.
See EDoM, EDOMITES.
Eschatology. Branch of systematic theol-
ogy concerned with the study of the last
things, whether in relation to the individual or
the world.
Topics of Eschatology. Death. The Bible
teaches that all humans will die (Heb 9:27).
The only exceptions will be those who are still
alive when Christ returns (1 Thes 4:17). Physi-
cal death, or the “first death,” is the separa-
tion of the soul from the body. Because of the
presence of sin in the world, death has come
upon everyone (Rom 5:12).
The Intermediate State. This refers to the
condition of the person between the time of
death and the resurrection. The traditional or-
thodox view is that believers experience a
state of conscious bliss in the presence of the
Lord, while unbelievers are tormented by sepa-
ration from the presence of God. This, how-
ever, is a relatively incomplete state when
compared with the final destiny of each. Some
groups, such as Seventh-day Adventists, have
held a belief in a type of “‘soul sleep,” or uncon-
sciousness, between death and resurrection.
Still others, notably Roman Catholics, believe
in a place of purging in preparation for the
future life.
The Second Coming. Scripture teaches that
at the end of time Christ will return in a per-
sonal, bodily form (Acts 1:11). No one knows
exactly when this will occur, and it will conse-
quently catch some by surprise, coming as a
thief in the night (Lk 12:39,40). Although the
time is not known, the fact that it will occur is
very definite. Many of Jesus’ parables (esp. in
Mt 24,25) refer to this fact and to the appropri-
ateness of alert, faithful, and intensive activity.
716
The Resurrection. All who have died will
tome to life. This will be a bodily resurrection,
a resumption of bodily existence of each per-
son. For believers this will take place in con-
nection with the second coming of Christ, and
will involve the transformation of the body of
this present flesh into a new, perfected body (1
Cor 15:35—56). The Bible also indicates a resur-
rection of unbelievers, unto eternal death (Jn
5:28,29).
The Judgment. There will be a time of judg-
ment, in which the Lord, will determine the
spiritual condition of all who have lived,
based on their relationship to him. On these
grounds some will be sent off to everlasting
reward and others to eternal punishment.
Some theologians distinguish between the
time when believers and unbelievers will be
judged. Some see as many as seven different
judgments occurring. t
The Final States. The Bible teaches the ex-
istence of heaven, a place of eternal joy, where
Christians are in the presence of God, and of
hell, a state of anguished separation of unbe-
lievers from the presence of God. These are
fixed states, determined by the decisions made
within this life.
The Millennium. Many Christians believe
there will be an earthly reign of God, called
the millennium, immediately preceding the fi-
nal judgment. This belief is based on Revela-
tion 20:4-7. Those who hold that Christ will
return personally to inaugurate this period are
called premillennialists. Others, who teach
that the kingdom will be established through
the progressive successful preaching of the gos-
pel, are termed postmillennialists. Still others,
called amillennialists, do not believe that
there will be any earthly reign of Christ at all,
interpreting the 1,000 years of Revelation 20
symbolically.
The Great Tribulation. The Bible speaks of
a time of great anguish or tribulation, which
will come upon the earth, exceeding anything
that has ever occurred before. Some, identify-
ing this with the 7oth week of Daniel 9:24—27,
believe it will be of seven years duration.
Some believe the church will be present to ex-
perience this, the Lord not returning until the
end of the period. These are termed posttribu-
lationists. Others, known as pretribulationists,
believe that the Lord’s second coming will be
in two stages, or phases—that, in addition to
his public second coming, Christ will come for
his church, to remove them from the world, or
“rapture” them, before the great tribulation.
Still others, known as midtribulationists, be-
lieve that the church will be present for the
first half of the seven years but will be re-
moved before the severe part of the tribulation
begins.

Recent History. In recent years there has
been an increased interest in eschatology.
Some have defined it in such a way that it is
almost all-inclusive, rather than merely a part
of theology. Since the Christ-event was the in-
troduction of the new age, much of the NT
must be considered eschatology.
Some have carried this so far as to suggest
that the supposedly future events were al-
ready accomplished. Thus, the second coming
of Christ took place at Pentecost. There is no
future event to look forward to. This view is
termed “realized eschatology.”
The theology of hope has extended this es-
chatological conception into all areas of theol-
ogy, even into the doctrine of God. Thus,
whereas the transcendence of God had been
thought of as the God who has his being above
or beyond us, these people think of him as ly-
ing before us. He is the God who is to be. His
transcendence is thought of in relation to
time, not to space.
Conservatives have: retained a more tradi-
tional conception of eschatology. There has
been great interest in the predictive prophetic
passages of Scripture, as indicated by the
popularity of books like The Late Great Planet
Earth (1973). Many have seen a correlation be-
tween current events in the Middle East and
passages such as Daniel 9, Matthew 24,25,
Thessalonians, and Revelation.
Cautions. Sometimes eschatology has been
a divisive force within Christian circles, as be-
lievers quarreled over minor points. In some
cases denominations in which there was agree-
ment on the major doctrines of eschatology
have split over a minor point, such as the
tribulational views. Another danger to be
avoided is date setting. While we are to be
alert to the “signs of the times,” we must re-
member that God has not revealed the exact
time of our Lord’s return to any human being,
or even to the angels (Mt 24:36). Some have
believed that they could determine the exact
time of the Lord’s return. When their calcula-
tions proved incorrect, these believers had
their faith jeopardized as a result.
Practical Values. Properly understood and
applied, eschatology has a powerful positive
significance for Christians. It is to be a source
of comfort (1 Thes 4:18), of encouragement
Cor 15:58), of challenge to watchfulness and
faithful service, and the assurance of reward
(Mt 25:14-30). Because the time is limited,
Christians are to use faithfully the opportuni-
ties that are theirs. Because of the certainty of
our Lord’s return, we are to be filled with
hope and courage. MILLARD J. ERICKSON
See DEATH; SECOND COMING OF CHRIST; TRIBULA-
TION; MILLENNIUM; HEAVEN; HELL; RESURRECTION; IN-
TERMEDIATE STATE; JUDGMENT; ETERNAL LIFE; LAST
Esh-baal
JUDGMENT; Day OF THE LorpD; Last Days; WRATH OF
Gop; APOCALYPTIC; SEVENTY WEEKS, DANIEL’S,
Bibliography. G.R. Beasley-Murray, Jesus and the Fu-
ture; J.A. Beet, The Last Things; O. Cullmann, Christ and
Time; T.F. Glasson, The Second Advent; A.A. Holkema, The
Bible and the Future; G.E. Ladd, The Presence of the Future;
A.T. Lincoln, Now and Not Yet; J.D. Pentecost, Things to
Come; H. Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom; G. Vos,
The Pauline Eschatology; L.J. Wood, The Bible and Future
Events.
Esdraelon, Plain of. Greek name, in the
Apocrypha, for a portion of the valley of Jez-
reel, which separates the hills of Galilee and
the hills of Samaria.
See JEZREEL, VALLEY OF.
Esek. Name Isaac gave to a well dug by his
servants in the valley of Gerar (Gn 26:20).
When the herdsmen of Gerar claimed it be-
longed to them, Isaac relinquished Esek and
another well, called Sitnah, to induce the men
of Gerar to allow him to live peacefully in the
land.
Eshan. Town in the hill country of the terri-
tory allotted to Judah’s tribe for an inheri-
tance (Jos 15:52, KJV Eshean). Its exact location
is unknown.
1
Esh-baal. King Saul’s fourth son, who be-
came Israel’s king after his father’s death.
Esh-baal literally means “man of Baal,” or
“Baal exists” (1 Chr 8:33; 9:39). During the pe-
riod of the judges and the early monarchy
many Hebrew names were compounded with
“baal,” a word that can mean “master” or “pos-
sessor.” Later generations were reluctant to
speak the name “baal,” so “bosheth” (shame)
was substituted (cf. Hos 2:16,17). Thus Esh-
baal was altered to Ish-bosheth (2 Sm 2:8),
which means “man of shame.” Perhaps later
copyists changed the name in the Book of Sam-
uel because it was read aloud in synagogue
services, whereas Chronicles was not.
After the death of Saul and his older sons,
Abner, commander of Saul’s army, installed
Ish-bosheth as Israel’s king (2 Sm 2:8,9). Ju-
dah’s tribe, however, followed King David,
(1 who struggled with Ish-bosheth for leadership
of all the tribes. The conflict lasted a long
time, but the house of David gradually over-
whelmed the house of Saul (2 Sm 3:1). Abner
deserted Ish-bosheth and was murdered by
Joab, one of David’s men (2 Sm 3:27), thus re-
moving an important leader of Israel and caus-
ing the people to despair (2 Sm 4:1). Soon after-
ward Ish-bosheth was murdered by two of his
captains (2 Sm 4:7). Although David disap-
proved of the deaths of Abner and Ish-bosheth,
TET
Eshban

the last obstacles to his kingship over all the Eshton. Mehir’s son and the grandson of
tribes were now removed. Chelub from Judah’s tribe (1 Chr 4:11,12).
See Davin; ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; SAUL # 2.
Esli. Naum’s father and ancestor of Jesus,
according to Luke’s genealogy (3:25).
Eshban. Dishon’s second son and grandson
of Seir the Horite (Gn 36:26; 1 Chr 1:41). See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.

Eshcol (Person). Amorite who, with his broth-

“E” Source. Designation used by propo-
nents of the Documentary Hypothesis (a criti-
ers Mamre and Aner, helped the patriarch Abra-
cal theory that attributes the five books of Mo-
ham defeat the forces of Chedorlaomer and res-
ses to several authors and redactors) for those
cue Lot and his family (Gn 14:13,24).
portions of the Pentateuch:supposedly written
or edited by someone who preferred the name
Eshcol (Place). Valley near Hebron from Elohim, one of the Hebrew names for God
which the spies sent by Moses brought back used in the OT.
pomegranates, figs, and a large cluster of
grapes (Nm 14:23,24; 32:9; Dt 1:24). This site See DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS.
may be identifiable with ‘Ain Eshkali, just
north of Hebron. Espousal. See MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS.

Esrom. xJv rendering of Hezron, Perez’s

Eshean. ksv spelling of the town Eshan in
son, in Matthew 1:3 and Luke 3:33.
Joshua 15:52.
See HEZRON (PERSON) # 2.
See ESHAN.

Essenes. Jewish sect or community in Pales-

Eshek. Descendant of Jonathan, Saul’s son.
Eshek’s grandsons were “mighty men of valor”
in the tribe of Benjamin (1 Chr 8:38—40).
Eshkalonite. Inhabitant of the Philistine
city Ashkelon (Jos 13:3 KJV).
See ASHKELON.
Eshtaol. Lowland town on the border be-
tween Judah and Dan (Jos 15:33; 19:41), al-
ways mentioned along with nearby Zorah. In
this area the young Samson began to be
moved by the Spirit of the Lord (Jgs 13:25),
and here he was later buried (Jgs 16:31). Dan’s
tribe sent out five brave men from Zorah and
Eshtaol to seek additional land for tribal ex-
pansion. When they reported the vulnerability
of the city of Laish, 600 men from Zorah and
Eshtaol attacked it, opening the area for occu-
pation by the Danites (Jgs 18).
Eshtemoa (Person). 1. Ishbah’s son from Ju-
dah’s tribe (1 Chr 4:17).
2. Ma-acathite from Judah’s tribe (1 Chr
4:19).
Eshtemoa, Eshtemoh (Place). City south of
Jerusalem allotted to Judah when Palestine
was divided among the 12 tribes (Jos 15:50,
Eshtemoh). Eshtemoa was assigned to the Le-
vites (Jos 21:14; 1 Chr 6:57). After an Amalekite
victory David sent booty to his allies in Eshte-
moa (1 Sm 30:26—31). The site may be modern
al-Samu’a, 8 miles south of Hebron.
See LEVITICAL CITIES.
tine in the last century Bc and the rst century
AD.
The Name.* The sect is called Esseni, Os-
seni, Ossaei, Essaeans, and other variations;
sometimes two different forms are found in
the same author. No satisfactory explanation
of the name has been given, but a number of
scholars tend to prefer ‘healers’ (Heb.
‘issiyim, Aram. ‘dsiya), which hardly seems
likely since the term describes _ the
Therapeutae (“‘Healers’’), a sect that was only
distantly related to the Essenes, if at all.
Sources of Information. The principal
sources of information about the Essenes are
(1) Philo of Alexandria, a Jew who lived in
Egypt from about 30 Bc to some time after AD
40, in his works, Let Every Good Man Be Free
and Apology for the Jews; (2) Flavius Josephus,
a Jew of Palestine and later of Rome, who
lived from aD 37 to about aD roo, in his works
War of the Jews and Jewish Antiquities—our
most extensive sources; (3) Pliny the Elder, a
Roman who died in aD 79 and who may have
been in Palestine with Titus during the Jewish
War, in his Natural History; and (4) Hippolytus
of Rome, in his work A Refutation of All Here-
sies, written about AD 230 and largely depen-
dent on Josephus. Other writers sometimes
mentioned are: Hegesippus, who was at Rome
sometime in the 2nd century, known only
through quotations by Eusebius; Epiphanius
(310-403; bishop of Constantia, Cyprus); and
Porphyry (347-420; bishop of Gaza). Nothing
significant is added by these last three, and
indeed little of reliable value is added by
Hippolytus, so we are principally dependent

on Philo, Josephus, and Pliny. Josephus tells
us that he determined to know the three Jew-
ish “sects” intimately, so he joined the Es-
senes when he was 16. But since he was a
Pharisee by the time he was 19, and since it
took at least three years for the initiatory rites
of the Essenes, we must conclude that he did
not have time or opportunity to learn much
about the inner life of the Essenes.
Origin and History. The first mention of
the Essenes, as well as that of the Pharisees and
the Sadducees, is in the time-of Jonathan (160-—
143 BC), successor of Judas Maccabeus (see Jose-
phus, Antiq. 13.5.9). Josephus calls these groups
“sects’’ (Greek haireseis), a term that some-
times connotes heretical movements, but this
is a later meaning of the word. Luke uses the
very same term for Pharisees (Acts 15:5; 26:5),
Sadducees, (Acts 5:17), and Christians (Acts
24:5,14; 28:22).
The Maccabean revolt began in 167 Bc. The
background of the uprising had been a strug-
gle between the Seleucid Greeks and the Ptole-
maic Greeks, with Palestine as the object of
the struggle. The Seleucids won in 198 Bc, but
there were pro-Syrian and pro-Egyptian par-
ties in Judea. Moreover, Hellenism, which was
strongly promoted by the Seleucids, had taken
a deep hold on many Jews. In order to partici-
pate in the athletic games, some Jews even
resorted to operations to obliterate the sign of
circumcision (1 Mc 1:15). The Seleucid king An-
tiochus IV Epiphanes sold the Jewish high
priesthood to the highest bidder, Menelaus, in
168; and when this was rejected by the Jews,
violent persecution broke out. Somewhere
along the line a group of pious Jews came into
existence, and they joined the Maccabees in
the revolt. We know them as the Hasidim (or
Hasideans, Assideans, “pious ones”; cf. 1 Mc
2:42).
Because of numerous similarities in doc-
trine it is generally accepted that the Phari-
sees are either the direct descendants of the
Hasidim or one of two or more groups of de-
scendants. It is further generally accepted that
the Essenes are a group that split either from
the Pharisees or from the Hasidim. Qumran
(the community of the Dead Sea Scrolls) is
looked upon either as a branch of the Essenes
or as another closely related group of separa-
tists whose origin was at approximately the
same point in time.
Josephus speaks of only three Jewish sects:
Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes (Antiq.
18.1.2). Therefore it is often concluded that
these were the only Jewish sects at that time.
This is a false conclusion. We know of at least
seven Jewish sects, and perhaps as many as
12. There is probably some overlap, and it is
not always clear whether a particular group
Uo)
Essenes
ibis
Ruins at Qumran, with a mill in the foreground.
should be described as a religious party (e.g.,
the Zealots). But we can argue against Jose-
phus’ number of sects by other data he sup-
plies. According to Josephus, there were 6,000
Pharisees (Antiq. 17.2.4), 4,000 Essenes (Antiq.
18.1.5; cf. Philo, Every Good Man 75), and the
Sadducees were fewer in number than the
Pharisees (cf. War 2.8.14). This would account
for, at most, 16,000 persons, and the pop-
ulation of Judea was well beyond that fig-
ure. Moreover, Josephus himself speaks of a
“fourth philosophy” (Antig. 18.1.6), which
some scholars identify with the Zealots, al-
though Josephus never does so. We can only
conclude that in Josephus’ view there were
three principal or significant sects or groups
of Jews.
The Essenes left the cities of Palestine and
lived in the towns and villages. Pliny locates
them west of the Dead Sea and says, ‘Below
them was En-gedi” (Natural History 5.15.73), a
statement which could mean either that En-
gedi was at a lower elevation or that it was to
the south. Scholars are not unanimous in the
interpretation of this statement.
Admission to the Sect. Admission to the
Essenes was a long, complicated process, con-
sisting of one year as a postulant and two addi-
tional years of limited participation in the
community. The novice took solemn oaths,
which included his relationship to God and to
his fellow members. He swore to hate the
wicked and to love truth, to conceal nothing
from the community and to reveal nothing to
outsiders, and to transmit doctrines exactly as
he received them. Until he took these oaths he
could not touch the common food.
Community Life. When a new member
joined the Essenes, he turned over all property
to the community. The individual members
were without goods, property, or homes. They
lived frugally, having only what was necessary
for life. They despised riches, had no slaves,
and did not engage in commerce. They worked
Essenes
in fields or at crafts that contributed to peace,
and would not make instruments of war. They
dwelt in brotherhoods, ate together, held prop-
erty in common, had a common purse and a
common store of clothing. They always wore
white clothing.
Evidence is somewhat confusing about
their views on marriage. They either banned it
entirely or disdained it, counting continence
as one of their virtues. There were Essenes
who did marry, but these looked upon the mar-
riage relationship as existing only for the pur-
pose of raising children so that the race might
continue.
There is also mixed evidence concerning
children. According to Philo, they had no chil-
dren, no adolescents, not even young men. Jo-
sephus, on the other hand, tells us that they
adopted children, and the Essenes who mar-
ried raised children of their own.
The Essenes were divided into 4 lots or
ranks, and would do nothing unless ordered
by superiors, except for works of mercy. They
obeyed their elders. When 10 sat, one would
not speak if the 9 were opposed. They re-
frained from spitting in assembly or spitting
to the right. Justice was dispensed at an assem-
bly of 1o0 members or more. For serious of-
fenses the penalty was expulsion from the com-
munity, and the expelled member usually
starved to death because of the tremendous
oaths he had taken.
A Typical Day. Josephus describes a typi-
cal day in the life of the Essenes. They rose
before dawn and recited prayers to the rising
sun (which probably is not to be interpreted
as sun worship). Then each man worked at his
craft until the 5th hour (11 aM). At that time
the community assembled, put on linen loin-
cloths, bathed in cold water, and then went to
the building that was restricted to members,
to a dining hall that was further restricted to
those who were pure. Each Essene received
bread and one bowlful of food. The priest said
a prayer before anyone was permitted to
touch the food, and another prayer after the
meal. Then the members laid aside their sa-
cred garments and resumed their work until
evening. The evening meal was in the same
manner as the noon meal. They ate quietly
and spoke only in turn, eating and drinking
only what they needed to satisfy them.
Religious Beliefs. It is somewhat risky to
attempt to reconstruct Essene theology from
Josephus and Philo, for both of these writers
thought in philosophical rather than theologi-
cal forms.
The Essenes were not concerned with logic
or natural philosophy, but rather devoted
themselves to ethics. Josephus likens them to
the Greek Pythagoreans (Antiq. 15.10.4), but he
720
does not explain this further. The Essenes
were concerned with purity and holy minds.
They rejected oaths (apparently excepting the
tremendous oath they took upon entering the
sect), and considered their word sufficient.
They observed the 7th day, going to syna-
gogues and sitting according to age. One
would read and another explain, making use
of symbols and the triple use of definitions
(which may be a reference to the rabbinic
method of exegesis). They would do no work
on the sabbath. There is confusion concerning
the matter of sacrifices; either they did not
offer sacrifices (Philo, Every Good Man), or
they sacrificed among themselves and did not
send sacrifices to the temple (Josephus, Antiq.
18.1.5). They sent offerings to the temple, ac-
cording to this same passage in Josephus. The
name of the lawgiver (Moses? or God siphecae
was an object of great veneration.
The Essenes studied holy books and were
skilled at predicting the future. Josephus tells
of one Essene, Menahem, who foretold that
Herod would be king (Antiq. 15.10.5). They
also studied the works of the ancients (which
appears to mean works other than the Scrip-
tures), and became proficient in the knowl-
edge of healing, of roots, and of stones. The
Essenes believed that their souls were immor-
tal; but, as Josephus seems to have under-
stood this doctrine, the body was “‘corrupt-
ible and its constituent matter impermanent”
(War 2.8.11), which may imply a denial of the
resurrection.
The material available to us is hardly satis-
factory for reconstructing Essene theology. It
is clear, however, that they were Jews, de-
voted to the Law, but with certain emphases
or aberrations that set them apart from both
the Pharisees and the Sadducees. They were
ascetic, although some of them married, and
they were pacifists, although Josephus tells of
an Essene named John who was a general in
the army (War 2.20.4). Above all, they were
exclusivistic, withdrawing from other Jews
and living a communal or communistic type
of life.
The Essenes and the Qumran Commu-
nity. There are many similarities between
the Essenes and the people of the Dead Sea
Scrolls. Both were Jewish sects. Both were
communal groups that had withdrawn from
the common stream of Judaism. Both were lo-
cated west of the Dead Sea. Both had long and
rigid processes for admission of new members.
Both had an oath of admission. Both hated the
wicked and loved the members of the commu-
nity. Both required handing over all property
to the sect. Both kept their secrets to their
own group. The daily life—prayers, ritual bath-
ing, common meals, the study and interpreta-

The Manual of Discipline from Qumran.
tion of the Bible, and concern with purity—is
markedly similar. Scrupulous observance of
the sabbath, the division into ranks or lots,
and the authority of elders and superiors are
features of each group. Both had injunctions
against spitting in assembly. Both had a mini-
mum group of ro. Both had laws of expulsion
for serious offenses.
The differences are also noteworthy, and
not as often pointed out. Obviously the Qum-
ran community could not have constituted all
of the Essenes, but were at most a small frac-
tion (perhaps 200) of the 4,000 Essenes. More-
over, they were at best only one of the towns
and villages of the Essenes. If Qumranians
worked at crafts, we know nothing of it either
from their texts or from the archaeology of
Qumran. Similarly, we know nothing of their
attitude toward war or the implements of war.
But we do know from the War Scroll (10M)
that they had an elaborate concept of the final
war, with an army, weapons, maneuvers, and
the like, and they do not sound like pacifists
(cf. 1OS 9:16,22,23; 10:18; 10Sa 1:19—21). It ap-
pears that the Qumranians did engage in com-
merce (CD 13:14,15). We have no information
about any common store of clothing at Qum-
ran. From the Dead Sea literature we know
that there were provisions for marriage, for
young children, adolescents, and young men.
Of course, the Qumranians may have been the
marrying Essenes to whom Josephus refers.
Admission to the Qumran group was a two-
year process; to the Essenes it was three years.
We know nothing of Qumran prayers to the
sun or of daily bathing, although some of the
“cisterns” were probably immersion pools. Un-
like the Essenes, the Qumranians did use
oaths, and there are extended sections on
oaths in their literature (CD 9:8—12; 15:1—10;
16:6—18). The Qumran attitude toward sacri-
fices is not entirely clear, but there is provi-
sion for sending sacrifices to the temple. We
know of no aversion to oil among the Qumra-
nians such as is described for the Essenes.
721
Essenes
There is no evidence that the Qumranians
used triple definitions in their biblical inter-
pretation. There is a minimum use of symbols
in their writings. There is no evidence that
they studied the knowledge of healing, roots,
or stones. If they were experts at predicting
the future, we have no record of it.
” The seating arrangement at Qumran was
by rank and not by age, as among the Essenes.
Rank was altered by an annual examination
at Qumran. There is no indication that justice
at Qumran was handled by 100 men; rather, it
seems to have been administered by a council
of 15 (1QS 8:1) or 10 (CD 9:4,5).
In view of the similarities we must con-
clude that there was some kind of relationship
between the Essenes and the Qumran commu-
nity. In view of the differences we are forced
to the conclusion that they were not exactly
the same. There are several possible explana-
tions: (1) The Essenes and the Qumranians
may have started out as the same split-off
from the Hasidim, and then later split again.
In fact, the Dead Sea Scrolls, particularly the
Damascus Document (CD), hint at some kind
of split in the earlier period of the group. (2)
The Essenes of Josephus and Philo are about a
century later than the literature of the Qumra-
nians, and may have altered somewhat during
that period of time. (3) The Essenes were lo-
cated in a number of towns and villages, and
may have developed significant local varia-
tions, so that Josephus may have drawn his
description from one location, Philo and Pliny
from others, while the Qumran group repre-
sents yet another local variant form. There is
little to guide a preference for any one of these
explanations.
The Essenes and Christianity. From time
to time there have been attempts to show that
Jesus and the early Christians were Essenes. A
full treatment of the discussion can be found
in J.B. Lightfoot, St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colos-
sians and to Philemon (London: Macmillan,
1875), pp. 82-95, 114-179. There is nothing to
be gained in reopening this discussion, unless,
of course, we substitute the Qumran materials
for what Philo, Josephus, and Pliny have told
us about the Essenes, a methodology that
would be highly objectionable.
It is possible to take certain sayings of Je-
sus in the Gospels, certain passages in Acts,
and certain statements in Paul’s epistles, and
construct a fantasy Christianity that is ascetic,
communal, and legalistic. Point by point we
could demonstrate parallels with Essene be-
liefs and practices. But such techniques are a
denial of true scholarship. Taken as a whole,
the teachings of Jesus exalt marriage and the
family, and place the rights and proper use of
property in the conscience of the owner, while
Esther
legalism is strongly rejected. The same can cer-
tainly be said for the early church as por-
trayed in Acts and for the teaching of Paul in
his epistles. By no proper use of the materials
can Christianity be equated with Essenism, or,
for that matter, with Qumranism.
This is not to deny, however, that there are
elements of Essenism that can be compared
with elements of Christianity. We should not
object to the theory that some Essenes may
have heard the gospel and become Christians.
Nor is there any sufficient reason to reject the
notion that certain Essene ideas could have
been influential in the early church. A careful
study of the NT will show that there were
many currents and crosscurrents in the early
church. The differences between Peter and
Paul provide only one example out of many. If
the ultimate redemptive purpose of God is to
remove the divisions that man has erected, to
make one those who are divided (cf. Eph 2:14),
then we may properly conclude that the
church on earth must be the mixing bowl
where all kinds of ingredients are brought to-
gether, to be sifted, blended, and purified by
God's Spirit (cf. Eph 4:13).
The Essenes were a part of God’s people
who were following a way which they believed
to be the right way. Some of their beliefs were
good, such as the sanctity of their word, their
concern for works of healing and deeds of
mercy, and their self-denial and devotion to
honest work. Some of their beliefs were not
good, such as their exclusivism, their low view
of the place of women, and their legalistic atti-
tude toward God’s Law. But is it not so with
all man-made systems? Only the Scriptures of
the OT and NT are the Word of God, the infalli-
ble rule of faith and life; and only as we let the
Spirit apply God’s Word to our faith and life
can we develop into representative members
of the community of God.
WILLIAM SANFORD LASOoR
See DEAD SEA SCROLLS; JUDAISM; PHARISEES.
Bibliography. C.D. Ginsburg, The Essenes; D. Howlett,
The Essenes and Christianity; K. Kohler, “Essenes,” Jewish
Encyclopedia; W.S. LaSor, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the NT,
pp 131-41; R. Marcus, “Pharisees, Essenes, and Gnostics,”
Journal of Biblical Literature 73 (1953): 157-61.
Esther (Person). One of two names borne by
the Jewish queen of Persia. Hadassah (Hebrew
“Myrtle”) apparently was her Jewish name
(Est 2:7) and Esther (Persian “Star”) her name
as queen of Persia. Some scholars speculate a
connection with the Babylonian goddess Ish-
tar, since exiled Jews were occasionally given
pagan names (see Dn 1:7).
Esther was an orphan from the tribe of Ben-
jamin who lived with the Jewish exiles in Per-
sia. She was reared by her cousin Mordecai, a
minor government official and covert leader of
722
the Jewish community (see Est 3:5,6) in Susa,
capital of the Persian kingdom. Esther became
queen after King Ahasuerus (Xerxes) became
displeased with Queen Vashti when she re-
fused to obey his command to attend a festival
(Est 1:11,12).
After Esther’s coronation she discreetly
won Xerxes’ confidence by informing him of
an assassination plot (Est 2:21—23). The favor
she won in the king’s eyes enabled her to de-
liver her family and her people from a massa-
cre by Haman, a high official to the king.
The feast of Purim was instituted to cele-
brate God’s deliverance of his people through
Esther and Mordecai. This festival is still ob-
served annually by Jews.
See ESTHER, Book OF.
Esther, Book of. OT book telling the story
of a Jewish woman’s protection of her people
after her marriage to a gentile king.
Author. The Book of Esther is an anony-
mous composition. The reference in 9:20 that
Mordecai “recorded these things” implies that
part, if not all, of the book was written by him.
The absence of God’s name in the Book of Es-
ther may be due to the fact that the author
intended the book to become part of the official
Persian court record. The use of God’s name
might have prevented that from happening.
The author of the book had considerable
knowledge of Persian court life and customs.
Thus, Mordecai might be identified with a
Morduka, mentioned as a Persian court official
in the reign of Darius I (521-486 Bc) and Xer-
xes (485-465 BC).
Date, Origin, and Purpose. Immediate
impressions favor a date for the Book of Es-
ther shortly after 465 Bc, if Ahasuerus is iden-
tified with Xerxes, who died that year. Many
contemporary scholars, however, favor a later
date. The apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus,
written about 180 Bc, refers to that period.
Jewish heroes are mentioned there, but Es-
ther and Mordecai are not included. Some
also suggest the period of the Maccabees as
the time of the book’s writing. Others have
identified it with a cultic story from ancient
Babylon, associating Esther with the goddess
Ishtar and Mordecai with the god Marduk.
The earliest postbiblical reference to the feast
of Purim is 2 Maccabees 15:36, probably writ-
ten around 75 BC.
The Book of Esther claims to record events
in Persia sometime during the 5th century Bc,
surrounding the selection of Esther as queen.
If a later date is preferred, the book can be
viewed as written to encourage Jews during a
time of persecution. One definite purpose of
the Book of Esther is to explain the origin of
the Jewish feast of Purim (9:16—28). The term
 Esther, Book of

“purim” is probably related to the Assyrian viewed the records of “memorable deeds,” and
word puru, meaning a small stone discovered that Mordecai’s earlier help had
used for
casting lots. gone unrewarded. When Haman arrived to ini-
Teaching and Canonicity. The major theo- tiate his plot against the Jews, the king ordered
logical problem with the Book of Esther is the him to honor Mordecai (6:1-14). When Ha-
absence of any mention of God and the lack of man’s plot was then discovered, the schemer
even an intimation of divine providence. As a was hanged (7:1—10). The king honored Morde-
result, some scholars in both Jewish and Chris- ‘cai and sent out an edict protecting the Jews
tian circles question its canonicity. But closer from harm (8:1—17). The Jews, by the king’s per-
observation reveals an obvious providential di- mission, slew the soldiers who would earlier
mension in the book. The reference to “fasting” have killed them in Haman’s plot (9:1—16). To
in 4:16, for example, implies prayer as well as celebrate their national deliverance the Jews
abstinence from food. Esther’s being in the right planned a great celebration (9:17—10:3). That
place at the right time is no accident. The fall of celebration became the festival of Purim, a
Haman is also not accidental. On the negative time of feasting and distribution of gifts to all,
side, the extreme measures taken in hanging Ha- especially to the poor.
man’s sons reflect a collective view of guilt that Historical Background. A number of his-
is probably not acceptable today (9:13,14). Im- torical problems have been noted: (1) Xerxes’
plicit too is the theme of God’s protection of his known wife was named Amestris, according to
covenant people even in times of persecution. the historian Herodotus; but it is possible and
That fact has made the Book of Esther a favorite likely that the king had more than one wife.
of Jews throughout history. (2) The implication that Mordecai went into
Its practical implications, however, have exile in 597 BC would have made him about
not kept some from questioning the book’s 120 years old during the reign of Xerxes; but
genuineness as a part of the Bible. The Book of the text of 2:5,6 might mean that Mordecai’s
Esther appears in the third part of the Jewish great-grandfather was the original exile rather
canon, as part of the five scrolls known as the than Mordecai. (3) Various details seem fanci-
Megilloth; its companions there are Ruth, ful to some modern readers: a banquet lasting
Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, and Lamenta- 180 days; Esther’s 12-month beauty treatment;
tions. The Septuagint (Greek version of the a gallows 83 feet tall; the Jews killing 75,000 of
OT) contains 107 extra verses in the Book of Xerxes’ subjects. But what appears mythologi-
Esther. These additions form part of the Apoc- cal sometimes turns out to be truly historical
rypha in English versions of the Bible. Even as (see 1:4; 2:7,12; 7:9; 9:16).
late as the Reformation era Esther’s canonici- Several elements in the Book of Esther
ty was being debated, and some contemporary point to a genuinely historical setting for the
evangelicals have raised doubts about its book. Ahasuerus is usually identified with Xer-
value. Its canonicity is favored by (1) its his- xes. Xerxes’ father was Darius, from whom
tory of acceptance in both Judaism and the have come some notable inscriptions and re-
Christian church, and (2) its illustrative value lief sculptures, one of them showing Darius
for teaching God’s providential care of the Jew- seated on his throne with Xerxes standing be-
ish people (see Rom g—11; Rv 7,14). hind him. Xerxes is believed to have been a
Content. The Book of Esther portrays the weak-willed man in domestic affairs, easily in-
reign of King Ahasuerus, whose empire fluenced by flattering and scheming courtiers.
stretched from India to Ethiopia (1:1-9). The On the field of battle, however, he was a vigor-
center of his empire was in Susa (Shushan), in ous leader who ferociously pursued his objec-
Persia. Because Queen Vashti disgraced the tives. His energetic suppression of a revolt in
king by refusing his order to appear in court, Egypt was a prelude to mustering a navy to
she was removed, and a search began for a new attack Athens. Only the skill and daring of the
queen (1:10—22). A young Jewish woman named Greek forces at the naval battle of Salamis
Hadassah, without parents and living with her (480 Bc) saved Greece from complete Persian
kinsman Mordecai, was selected to replace occupation. Xerxes eventually lost the war
Queen Vashti (2:1-18). Early in her reign Es- and retired to his elegant palaces at Persepolis
ther and Mordecai helped to save the king's life and Susa. He rejected the traditional gods of
(2:19—23). A man named Haman, who was pro- Egypt and Babylon and became a devotee of
moted to an influential position in the palace Ahuramazda, the Persian spirit of good.
court, plotted to kill the Jews because he hated DONALD M. LAKE
Mordecai (3:1-15). Mordecai intervened See ESTHER (PERSON); PERSIA, PERSIANS.
through Queen Esther, and the queen called on
Bibliography. S.B. Berg, The Book of Esther; C.F. Keil,
the Jews in Susa to fast for deliverance (4:1— The Books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther; L.B. Paton, A Criti-
17). Esther’s intervention with the king led to a cal and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Esther; A. Ra-
sleepless night for Ahasuerus (5:1—6:1). He re- leigh, The Book of Esther; A.W. Streane, The Book of Esther.

u23
Etam
* The kingdom of God is not simply a future
Scene south of Bethlehem and presumably near Etam.
Etam. 1. Rocky area in western Judah
where Samson hid from his pursuers (Jgs
pyi8)i2):
2. Unknown site located in Simeonite terri-
tory (1 Chr 4:32).
3. Town in the Judean uplands near Bethle-
hem fortified by Rehoboam of Judah after the
division of the kingdom (2 Chr 11:6). It is iden-
tified with Khirbet el-Khokh, just southwest
of Bethlehem. The spring at Etam supplied Je-
rusalem with additional water in the Greek
and Roman periods.
Eternal Life. Mode of existence referred to
in Scripture characterized by either timeless-
ness or endlessness, and especially by a quali-
tative difference from mortal life. The per-
spective of the biblical writers flowed from
an understanding of a living God who existed
prior to the world’s creation, and will con-
tinue to exist when the end of time arrives.
God’s gift to those who are obedient and re-
sponsible to him is designated as eternal life
or some such synonym. John’s Gospel pro-
vides the most definitive material on such
eternal life.
The phrase “eternal life” occurs only once
in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with
the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” desig-
nating the life of the age beyond the resurrec-
tion from the dead). The primary meaning of
“life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-
being in earthly existence.
In the intertestamental period, the rabbinic
distinction between “this age” and “the age
which is to come” emphasized that the con-
cept of life in the new age consisted of a quali-
tative, rather than simply a quantitative, dis-
tinction from the present age.
The Greek word translated “eternal” is de-
rived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The
setting of the NT within the context of Juda-
ism, with its concept of a living God and the
consequent promise of “the age which is to
come,” gives depth and color to the meaning
of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s com-
ing as God’s definitive revelation brings the
724
possibility of the qualities of life in the future
messianic age into present reality.
The rich young ruler came to Jesus and
asked for directions on how to inherit eternal
life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of
resurrection in the age to come. Jesus an-
swered in the’same terms (Mk 10:30).
In his response to the rich young ruler Jesus
equated the reception of eternal life with en-
trance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25).
event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life,
ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift
of life available while the follower still lives
within the present age. Many of Jesus’ para-
bles emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13).
The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount
(Mt 5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present
blessedness that includes salvation, forgive-
ness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a
present blessing available to those who sub-
mit to God’s reign and are enjoying the bless-
ings of this new era of salvation before the
final consummation at the present age’s end.
The apostle Paul’s summary of eternal life
is found in 2 Corinthians 5:17: “Therefore, if
any one is in Christ, he is a new creation; the
old has passed away, behold, the new has
come.” God’s redemptive activity in Christ at
Calvary provided full reconciliation with God.
The new life is life “in the Spirit” or “in
Christ.” The quality of life anticipated in OT
prophecy has now become a reality. The “new
creation” is the climax and goal of God's re-
demptive activities through the ages.
The presence of the new life—the eternal
life—is vividly described in 2 Corinthians 3:18:
“And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the
glory of the Lord, are being changed into his
likeness from one degree of glory to another;
for this comes from the Lord who is the
Spirit.” The transforming presence of God
through Christ is a “treasure in earthen ves-
sels, to show that the transcendent power be-
longs to God and not to us” (2 Cor 4:7).
It is surprising that Paul never clearly re-
ferred to “eternal life” in the way John did, but
he was describing the same experience in dif-
ferent metaphors. Paul’s usages of “eternal
life” (Rom 2:7; 6:22; Gal 6:8; 1 Tm 1:16; Ti 1:2;
3:7) have primary reference to the consumma-
tion of all things at the end of history as we
know it. The numerous passages in which Paul
speaks of walking “in newness of life” (e.g.,
Rom 6:4), however, clearly indicate that he un-
derstood that eternal life must not be limited
to the hereafter.
The definitive discussions of eternal life
come from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delin-
eates the crucial significance of the concept:
“But these are written that you may believe

that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and
that believing you may have life” (Jn 20:31).
The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life Son is the model for the relationship of the
is found in John 3:15.
John clearly shared in the Jewish expecta-
tion of the age to come with its anticipated
blessings “(e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29,39;) 6:27; 1x8; ¢f. 14°27).
12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special-- ” Closely related to the concept of knowledge
gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at of God as the definition of eternal life is
consummation. Lazarus’ resurrection (Jn 11)
was a living parable demonstrating the future
life available to those who trust in Christ. Mar- (Jn 8:32). Again the primary content of “truth”
tha, before her brother’s actual resurrection,
asserted her belief that Lazarus would be
raised on the last day (Jn 11:24). Jesus re-
sponded that he himself is the. resurrection
and the life, and that those who believe in him
will never die, even if they die physically (Jn
11:25,26).
The central emphasis of John’s Gospel, how-
ever, does not lie in the anticipated future, but
in the present experience of that future life.
The life of the age to come is already available
in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with
which Jesus defined his own mission empha-
size the present new life: living water that is
“a spring of water welling up to eternal life”
(Jn 4:14); living bread that satisfies the world’s
spiritual hunger (Jn 6:35—40); the light of the
world who leads his followers into the light of
life (Jn 8:12); the good shepherd who brings
abundant life (Jn ro:10); the life giver who
raises the dead (Jn 11:25); the way, the truth,
and the life (Jn 14:6); and the genuine vine
who sustains those who abide in him (Jn 15:5).
Jesus was very careful to note that the ac-
complishment of his mission did not rest. in
his own nature and ability, but in the Father
who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father
highlights again the fact that life is a gift of
God. Those who are obedient to the Father
through Christ are recipients of the life that
God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the prom-
ise of resurrection for all believers, made ex-
plicit in Lazarus’ resurrection and guaranteed
in Christ’s resurrection as the “first fruit” (in
Pauline terminology), is the natural conse-
quence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26—29).
Jesus added further content to the concept
of eternal life by connecting it with knowing
the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought knowI-
edge referred to the result of either contempla-
tion or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however,
knowledge meant experience, relationship, fel-
lowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This con-
notation of knowledge as intimate relation-
ship is underlined by the usage of the verb
form to designate sexual relations between
male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I
am the good shepherd; I know my own and
my own know me, as the Father knows me
Eternity
and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14,15). The inti-
mate and mutual relationship of Father and
Son and his disciples. This knowledge does
not come by education or manipulation of the
mind, but by revelation through the Son (Jn
Jesus’s reference to truth: “And you will know
the truth, and the truth will make you free”
in the OT is faithfulness, reliability, and stabil-
ity. Truth is frequently used to describe God's
essential character. God’s continuing covenant
love for Israel was now definitively revealed in
Christ. Knowledge of that utterly trustworthy
God brings freedom and eternal life. Thus Je-
sus is the “true light” (Jn 1:9) who spoke of the
“true God” (Jn 17:3). From that base doing the
truth (Jn 3:21) is the proper response to the
faithful God.
A brief survey. of the primary elements in
the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it
is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Al-
though there are no final boundaries to eter-
nal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the
quality of life, especially its redemptive ele-
ments. Eternal life is the importation of the
qualities of the age to come into the present
through the revelation of a faithful God in
Christ, and brings knowledge of God's relation-
ship with him. Morris A. WEIGELT
See LIFE; MAN, OLD AND NEw; NEw CREATION, NEW
CREATURE; REGENERATION; SALVATION.
Bibliography. J. Baillie, And the Life Everlasting; L.
Berkhof, Systematic Theology; L. S. Chafer, Systematic Theol-
ogy, IV, 24-26, 389, 400-401; VII, 142, 227; P.T. Forsyth, This
Life and the Next; A.H. Strong, Systematic Theology.
Eternity. Duration of time that cannot be
measured.
The OT does not have a clearly worked out
concept of time; it simply records sequences of
events without struggling to understand the
philosophical implications of that record. God
has revealed himself within the historical
realm, implying his control of history and lead-
ing to the understanding that there is a goal
and purpose in the historical process. Out of
this complex of ideas arose the necessity to
express the endless duration of time com-
monly designated as eternity.
The OT does not have a single word corre-
sponding to our English word “eternity.” The
concept grows out of such expressions as
“from generation to generation” and “from age
to age.” The understanding of God as the Cre-
ator and controller of history very early led to
the understanding of his endless life span.
Thus God himself is designated by the adjec-
725
Etham
tive “eternal” (cf. Gn 21:33; Is 26:4; 40:28). The
Hebrews simply understood that God is the
God of the past and the God who will always
be, in stark contrast to humans whose days on
earth are specifically limited. Before the world
was created God obviously was being the Cre-
ator. His purposes and promises for the future
frequently include the word “forever.”
The NT picked up these concepts from Juda-
ism and the OT. In Greek the same root word
is used to describe the ages of time and God's
agelessness. For example, the word “eternal”
used in Romans 16:26 comes from the Greek
root transliterated into English as “eon.” The
God who rules the ages or eons is himself the
ageless one who brings continuity and stabil-
ity into the human life so severely bounded by
this age. The clear understanding that time
will come to an end, provided by NT revela-
tion, added to the OT’s vivid understanding of
creation, serves to underline and clarify the
concept of an eternal God. God’s preexistence
and postexistence is yet another way of ex-
pressing his eternal being.
The NT regularly spoke of the temporal se-
quences of God’s revelation in Christ in much
the same way as the OT spoke of God’s self-
revelation to Israel. The NT usage of preposi-
tions with “eon” is particularly instructive: for
example (translated literally) “out of the age”
(Jn 9:32), “from the age” (Lk 1:70; Acts 3:21),
“into the age” (Jude 13), “into the ages” (Jn
4:14). The first two phrases reflect an indefi-
nite time preceding the present moment, and
the last two point to a future indefinable time
(often translated as “forever’”).
The biblical concept of eternity stands in
contrast to other cultures of the time, which
often thought in cyclical terms. The Greek
world particularly thought of time in the anal-
ogy of a circle—an ever-recurring sequence of
events—and redemption was to find an exit
from that vicious cycle, thus being freed from
time in order to experience timelessness. The
biblical concept pictures time as a line with
beginning and end guaranteed by the eternal
God. Thus for the Greeks salvation could not
occur within a designated sequence; it only
occurs in the experience of the individual and
moves on to the historical consummation di-
rected by the eternal God.
The contrast between the Greek and bibli-
cal ways of viewing time raises the question of
the exact nature of eternity. Is it to be under-
stood as merely unlimited time or, in direct
contrast to present time, as timelessness? The
biblical view seems to be that eternity is not
timelessness and does not stand in contrast to
present time as its opposite, since present
time and eternity share basic qualities.
The NT (following Judaism) uses “eon” or
726
“age” to divide time into “this present eon”
and “the eon that is about to be” or “the com-
ing eon.” The contrast is not simply between
time and timelessness, for the “eon that is
about to be” is future and shares a specific and
identifiable character. The biblical picture of
the start of the “coming age” is dramatically
painted with broad sequential brush strokes.
The new age is not simply a restoration to the
primitive and naive innocence of the earliest
stage, but a consummation according to the
purposes of “him who is and who was and
who is to come” (Rv 1:4). Thus it is designated
as the new creation.
The NT clearly teaches that the “age that is
to be” has now begun in the life and ministry of
Christ, although there is a definite overlap in
the two ages. The frequency of such terms as
“the first fruits,” “the earnest of the Spirit,” and
“the last days,” reflects this understanding
(e.g., Heb 6:5: “and have tasted ... the powers
of the age to come”). The believer enjoys the
blessings of the future age imported into the
present through Christ’s redemptive work.
The concept of eternity, then, does not
stand in opposition and contrast to time as
timelessness. Eternity is the unlimited and in-
calculable space of time bounded at its begin-
ning by the introduction of the kingdom of
God in Christ and stretching out into the un-
limited future. Both time (“the present evil
age,” Gal 1:4) and eternity are governed by
God as the Lord of all time, the one who gives
content and meaning to both. For the believer
the midpoint of time (even though the second
coming of Christ and the consummation of the
present eon have not yet occurred) is found in
the first Easter. It is not the consummation
that brings eternity; eternity is the accomplish-
ment of God’s sovereign and eternal purpose
in Christ for the whole universe.
Morris A. WEIGELT
See AGE, AGES; Gop, BEING AND ATTRIBUTES OF.
Etham. First encampment of the Hebrews
after leaving Succoth (Ex 13:20), perhaps lo-
cated on the border of the wilderness of Shur
(Ex 15:22; Nm 33:6-8). The suggestion that it
was an Egyptian fortress is improbable.
See WILDERNESS WANDERINGS.
Ethan. 1. Wise man comparable to Solomon
(1 Kgs 4:31) and probably the author of Psalm
8g. It is uncertain if he was a contemporary of
Solomon.
2. Descendant of Judah and son of Zerah
(1 Chr 2:6), perhaps the same man as # 1
above. However, they are given different fa-
thers in the two passages.
3. Son of Zimmah, a descendant of Ger-
shon, Levi's oldest son (1 Chr 6:42).

4. Descendant of Levi through his son Me-
rari, and the son of Kishi (1 Chr 6:44) or Kusha-
iah (1 Chr 15:17). He was one of three outstand-
ing musicians, along with Heman and Asaph,
appointed by David (1 Chr 15:16—19). It was
probably this Ethan whose name is ascribed
to Psalm 39 (as “Jeduthun,” which he is called
in 1 Chr 16:41; 25:1) as ‘‘chief musician”; it is
likely that he composed the music for the
psalm.
Ethanim. Early name for the seventh month
in the Jewish calendar (1 Kgs 8:2).
See CALENDARS, ANCIENT AND MODERN.
Ethbaal. King of Sidon whose daughter Jeze-
bel entered into a political marriage with Ahab
of Israel (1 Kgs 16:31). Ethbaal was credited
with building Botrys in Phoenicia and found-
ing the colony of Auza in Libya. He also estab-
lished commercial relations with Damascus.
Ether. 1. City situated in the Shephelah of
the territory allotted to Judah for an inheri-
tance, listed between Libnah and Ashan (Jos
15:42). Its site is perhaps that of Khirbet el-
‘Ater.
2. City located in the land given to Simeon
within the borders of Judah’s inheritance,
mentioned between Rimmon and Ashan (Jos
19:7). Its location is probably identifiable with
Khirbet ‘Attir, northeast of Beersheba.
Ethiopia. In the OT, Ethiopia was generally
referred to as Cush (Gn 10:6; 1 Chr 1:8; Is rr:11
KJV), which is a transliteration of the only He-
brew word used to describe the land lying to
the south of Egypt. The Greek version, how-
ever, spoke of this territory as Ethiopia, and
Ethiopia
kept the name Cush for the lists of peoples in
Genesis 10:6-8 and 1 Chronicles 1:8—10. En-
glish translations have generally followed the
Greek, except in cases where Cushi appears as
a personal name (2 Sm 18:21—23,31,32).
Location. The Hebrew name Kush is actu-
ally an old Egyptian loanword that came into
use in the early Middle Kingdom period. At
that time it was used of a small area between
the Second and Third Cataracts of the Nile.
Later on, in the New Kingdom period (c. 1570—
1160 BC) it was applied to a larger area which
extended some distance to the south. This
broader designation corresponds geographi-
cally to the modern lands of Nubia and the
northern Sudan. It is misleading to think that
the Ethiopia of Scripture is the same territory
as the Ethiopia of modern times, which in an
earlier period was called Abyssinia. The name
Ethiopia was of Greek origin, and according to
some interpreters meant “burnt-faced’’ (cf.
Acts 8:27). This tradition has been perpetuated
by the Arabic name Beled es Sudan, or “land
of the blacks,” from which the designation Su-
dan comes.
The use of Cush by the OT writers seems to
have paralleled the Egyptian geographical ter-
minology in thinking of an arid land stretch-
ing south of Aswan, the Syene of Ezekiel 29:10.
The borders of Ethiopia were never clearly de-
fined, even by the Egyptians, so the territory
may be regarded as extending to some indeter-
minate point in the Sudan beyond Meroé.
Ethiopia consisted predominantly of desert
lying east of the Nile, and the topography of
the region made travel hazardous. Even the
river itself presented obstacles to navigation
in the form of cataracts. Outcroppings of hard
stone forced the Nile down narrow channels
The ruins of a crusader castle
built by the sea at the city of
Sidon, on the coast of Leba-
non, where Ethbaal was king.
Ethiopia
and produced rough water that swamped
boats easily. Such forbidding natural obsta-
cles protected Egypt against invasion from the
south, but also gave an inhospitable character
to Ethiopia. Nowadays the Nubian desert is
crossed by a railway running from Wadi Halfa
to Abu Hamed and on to Khartoum. Wadi
Halfa is situated just below the Second Cata-
ract of the Nile, and was one of the places to
be affected when the High Dam at Aswan, the
Sadd el Aali, was constructed. Almost all the
land suitable for farming in Egyptian Nubia
and part of northern Sudan was inundated,
and the Nubians were compelled to move be-
low Aswan to Kom Ombo.
Since the area covered by Nubia is predomi-
nantly desert, it is hardly surprising that the
rainfall is minimal, except for the upstream
areas. The territory around Meroé, which was
the capital during the Meroitic period, experi-
ences seasonal rains: and an area bordered on
the west and north by the Nile and the Atbara,
the so-called “island of Meroé,’’ was appar-
ently quite fertile in antiquity and may have
been heavily forested.
History. The First Intermediate period (c.
2200-2000 BC) saw some attempt by the Egyp-
tians to exert influence over Kush as a means
of protecting the southern approach to Egypt.
In the Middle Kingdom period (c. 2000-1780
BC) they gained control over the territory, the
extent of which in the time of Sesostris I (c.
197I—1930 BC) comprised an area stretching
from Aswan to the Second Cataract. The rath
dynasty rulers established their frontier far-
ther south, at Semna, where fortifications
were erected as part of a defensive chain reach-
ing into northern Nubia. The rath dynasty pha-
raoh Sesostris III was perhaps the best-known
Egyptian ruler in Nubia, and after his reign
the connections between the two countries be-
came less marked until the end of the Second
Intermediate period. Under Thutmose I in the
New Kingdom period (c. 1570-1150 BC), Egyp-
tian influence extended into lower Nubia and
probably as far as Meroé. Amenhotep III built
a magnificent temple at Soleb, while the splen-
did structure at Abu Simbel was carved out of
the Nubian sandstone cliffs in the days of Ram-
ses II. During this period Ethiopia was gov-
erned by a series of viceroys who were known
by the title “king’s son of Kush.” These peo-
ple controlled territory which stretched from
Nekhen (Hierakonpolis) to Napata in the Su-
dan. One such governor whose activities were
illustrated pictorially in his tomb at Gurnet
Murai was a man named Huy. Egyptian offi-
cials stationed in Ethiopia during the New
Kingdom period were frequently buried there
instead of in Egypt. Their graves consisted of
deep rectangular shafts with burial chambers
728
excavated at one or both ends. Multiple buri-
als occurring over a period of time have been
encountered by excavators.
Towards the close of the New Kingdom pe-
riod Egyptian power declined, and about 1100
Bc Kush became independent, establishing its
capital at Napata near the Fourth Cataract.
The Ethiopians launched an expedition into
Palestine during the time of Asa of Judah, but
were defeated (2 Chr 14:9—15). In the 25th dy-
nasty a Kushite family came to power in
Egypt under Kashta and Pi-ankh, and for the
next 60 years Ethiopian rulers controlled the
Nile valley. One member of this dynasty,
Taharga, the Tirhakah of the OT, apparently
allied with Hezekiah in an effort to stop the
advance of Sennacherib’s forces (2 Kgs 19:9;
Is 37:9). Kushite power waned when Esar-
haddon and Ashurbanipal made Egypt and
Ethiopia tributaries to Assyria, and the-end
came with the destruction of Thebes by Ashur-
banipal in 663 Bc (cf. Is 20:2-6; Nah 3:8—10).
The Kushites continued to control the Su-
dan, however, and when the Egyptians suf-
fered defeat at Carchemish (605 Bc), they con-
sidered regaining control over Egypt. This ex-
pectation ended permanently when the con-
quests of Cambyses (525 Bc) brought both
Egypt and Ethiopia into the Persian empire.
Biblical References. In Esther 1:1 and 8:9
Ethiopia is described as the most distant
southwesterly province in the Persian empire.
Its “rivers’’ were presumably the Nile and the
Atbara (cf. Is 18:1; Zep 3:10). The products of
Kush were referred to in Job 28:19 and Isaiah
45:14, which according to Egyptian lists in-
cluded semiprecious stones, animal and agri-
cultural products. Some prophets expected ex-
iled Jews in Ethiopia to return (Ps 87:4; Is
11:11), while others foresaw divine judgment
coming upon the land (Is 20:3; Ez 30:4; Zep
2:12). But since Kush was under God’s sover-
eignty, it could hope for divine blessing as
well as punishment; hence the expectation in
Psalm 68:31; Isaiah 45:14; and Zephaniah 3:10
that its peoples would be converted to the He-
brew faith. The Ethiopia of Acts 8:27 was the
kingdom of Candace (“queen”), who ruled
from Meroé, where the capital of Kush had
been moved about 300 Bc.
Archaeology. A good deal of excavation
has taken place at Meroé. Large slag heaps
indicate the extent of the iron-processing in-
dustry in antiquity, while Egyptian culture is
reflected in the ruins of pyramids, cemeteries,
temples, and other structures. As the result of
an international movement to preserve the
monuments of Nubia, the famous rock-cut tem-
ples of Abu Simbel were preserved from de-
struction when the Aswan High Dam was
built. There were also significant deposits of

gold in Nubia, and it was this source that en-
riched the Egyptian kings of the Amarna Age.
Gold was still being mined in Kush during the
Roman period. When Meroé became capital of
Kush, its location provided better trading op-
portunities with other nations than had been
the case previously, and the Meroitic territory
was mentioned by several classical writers.
The people were slow to accept Roman rule,
but were eventually subdued by Petronius in
23 BC. Excavations show that the Kushites
used hieroglyphs and also an alphabetic
script, but far less study has been made of
Kushite than other Near Eastern languages.
R. K. HARRISON
See CusH (PLACE).
Eth-kazin. One of the towns marking the
eastern boundary of Zebulun’s tribe (Jos 19:13,
KJV Ittah-kazin). Its exact location is unknown,
but the context indicates that it was probably
in the vicinity of Gath-hepher and Rimmon.
Ethnan. Member of Helah’s family from Ju-
dah’s tribe (1 Chr 4:7).
Ethni. Alternate name for Je-atherai, Ze-
rah’s son, in 1 Chronicles 6:41.
See JE-ATHERAI, JEATERAI.
Eubulus. Roman believer who sent greet-
ings to Timothy during Paul’s second Roman
imprisonment (2 Tm 4:21). His Greek name in-
dicates his probable gentile origin.
Eucharist. See Lorp’s Supper, THE.
Eunice. Timothy’s mother, daughter of Lois
(2 Tm 1:5), and the wife of a pagan Greek; a
“Jewish woman who was a believer” (Acts
16:1). She apparently taught her son the OT
Scriptures “from childhood” (2 Tm 3:15) and
was converted to Christianity during Paul’s
first trip to her home in Lystra, previous to his
visit mentioned in Acts 16:1.
Eunuch. Officer or chamberlain in the court
or household of a ruler, often assigned to the
women’s quarters. Many of these men were
emasculated, though not always (cf. Gn 39:1,7
NEB). Eunuchs were public officials in Israel (1
Sm 8:15 NEB; 1 Chr 28:1 NEB), Persia (Est 2:3),
Ethiopia (Jer 38:7; Acts 8:27), and Babylon (Dn
1:3). Eunuchs were not included in public wor-
ship in Israel (Dt 23:1), but the prophet Isaiah
referred to their restoration in the messianic
kingdom (Is 56:3—5; see Acts 8).
The Ethiopian eunuch of Acts 8:27—39 was
probably minister of the treasury, and has
been credited with founding Christianity in
Ethiopia.
779
Euphrates River
Jesus mentioned three classes of eunuchs
(Mt 19:12), including those “who have made
themselves eunuchs for the sake of the king-
dom.” This is generally understood in a meta-
phorical sense of voluntarily foregoing mar-
riage in order to serve the kingdom (e.g., John
the Baptist, Jesus, and the apostle Paul).
See TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS (CHAMBERLAIN).
Euodia, Euodias. Prominent woman in the
Philippian church whom Paul asked to resolve
her differences with Syntyche (Phil 4:2, kJv
Euodias). The nature of their disagreement is
not known, but it was of enough severity to
reach Paul in Rome. Both women had labored
with him in the work of the gospel (4:3).
Euphrates River. Largest river in western
Asia, formed by the union of two rivers in Asia
Minor, the Kara-Su and the Murat-Suyu. Its
source is in central Armenia. The river flows
generally in a southeasterly direction for some
1,800 miles until it reaches the Persian Gulf. At
Korna, about 100 miles from the Gulf, it joins
with the Tigris River. The Euphrates is shal-
low until it combines with the Tigris and can
be navigated for about 1,200 miles by small
boats only. After the union of the Tigris and
Euphrates, ocean liners can proceed as far as
Basra. Melting snows at the source cause the
river to rise about from the middle of March
until about June. Control and storage of water
in flood canals during the overflow of the river
made possible abundant harvests that sus-
tained large populations in antiquity.
Some have suggested that there were two
branches of the Euphrates that began near
Sippar. One, the Arachtu, flowed through
Babylon, but after about 1000 Bc became the
main portion of the Euphrates. The older
course ran south from Sippar to Kish, capital
of the first dynasty of Mesopotamia before
3000 BC. From Kish it flowed on to Nippur, city
of the sun god Enlil, the main religious center
of Sumer which is dated earlier than 3000 Bc.
After Nippur the river passed through
Shuruppak (modern Fara). According to my-
thology Ziusudra, the Sumerian counterpart
of Noah, built his ark there. The river then
flowed south to ancient Erech, famous as the
city of Ishtar. The Enuma Elish epic describes
this center as home of the mythical hero
Gilgamesh. The river then continued to Ur,
birthplace and early home of the patriarch
Abraham.
The Euphrates was one of four branches is-
suing from the river that watered the garden
of Eden (Gn 2:14). In the promises made to
Abraham, the northern boundary of the land
of Israel was to be the upper division of the
Euroclydon
river (Gn 15:18; Dt 1:7; 11:24). These bound-
aries were approximately reached during the
period of kings David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:3;
10:16; 1 Kgs 4:24). The Euphrates is called “the
River” (Nm 22:5; Dt 11:24; Jos 24:3,14) or “the
great river’ (Jos 1:4). People living east of the
Euphrates referred to Israel and its surround-
ing territories to the west as ‘‘beyond the
river” (Ezr 4:10; Neh 2:7,9). It was to this river
that Jeremiah sent Seraiah with a book of
prophecies relating to the destruction of Baby-
lon. After reading them Seraiah was to throw
the book into the Euphrates as a symbol of the
way Babylon would sink to rise no more (Jer
51:63).
Two NT references to the Euphrates figure
in the message of the Book of Revelation (9:14;
16:12).
See BABYLON, BABYLONIA; MESOPOTAMIA.
Euroclydon. «sv transliteration of the Greek
word for the northeasterly wind mentioned in
Paul’s journey to Rome in Acts 27:14.
See NORTHEASTER.
Eutychus. Common slave name, mentioned
only in Acts 20:9. It was Eutychus’ misfortune
to become sleepy while sitting on a windowsill
listening to the apostle Paul preach at Troas.
He sank into a deep sleep and fell from the
ledge, which was in the third loft. Though he
was ‘‘taken up dead,” the apostle declared
him alive, giving great comfort to the people
(Acts 20:7—12).
Evangelist. NT term referring to one who
proclaims the gospel of Jesus Christ. There are
only three occurrences of the word in the
NT. The apostle Paul exhorted the Ephesian
church to walk worthy of their calling (Eph
4:1-12). The exhortation stressed the gifts
given to each within the unity of the Spirit.
Paul explained that the ascended Christ has
given ‘“‘some as apostles, and some as proph-
ets, and some as evangelists, and some as pas-
tors and teachers” (4:11 NASB). Paul was saying
that Christ calls persons to these ministries
and gives them to the church. The evangelist
is one of Christ’s gifts to the church. The mean-
ing of the term indicates that the task of such
a person is to function as a spokesperson for
the church in proclaiming the gospel to the
world. An evangelist is similar to an apostle in
function, except that being an apostle in-
volved a personal relationship to Jesus during
his earthly ministry (Acts 1:21,22). The evange-
list stands in contrast to the pastor and
teacher. The former makes the initial procla-
mation, and the latter provides continuing
follow-up ministry that develops maturity in
the believer. The reference to Philip the evan-
139
gelist (Acts 21:8) supports the idea of evange-
lism as a gifted ministry to which Christ calls
some in the church.
More than one gift or ministry may be per-
formed by the same person. Paul charged
Timothy with his responsibilities as a pastor
and teacher, and also exhorted him to ‘‘do the
work of an evangelist” (2 Tm 4:5). Therefore,
evangelist can refer to a person called to that
distinct ministry, and also to a function that
may be performed by others.
See SPIRITUAL GIFTS.
Eve. First woman, “the mother of all liv-
ing” (Gn 3:20). The Book of Genesis recounts
that after God had finished his creation, he
saw that it was not good for Adam to be
alone. He decided to create “a helper fit for
him” (Gn 2:18). The woman is called ezer (in
Hebrew literally “‘help’’), a word that appears
elsewhere in the OT in reference to God as
Israel’s help (Dt 33:7,26,29; Pss 33:20; 70:5;
115:9,10,11; 146:5). Causing Adam to fall into a
deep sleep, God took one of his ribs and used
it to fashion Eve (Gn 2:18—25).
Eve was given two names by Adam. The
first was ““‘woman,” a generic designation with
theological connotations that denote her rela-
tionship to man (Gn 2:23). The second, Eve
(‘life’), was given after the fall and refers to
her role in the procreation of the human race
(3:20).
Adam and Eve are pictured as living in
Eden, serving God and fulfilling each other’s
needs. Then evil entered. Eve was tempted by
the serpent to disobey God’s command, which
forbade their eating the fruit of the ‘tree of
the knowledge of good and evil” (Gn 2:17; 3:3).
Tricked by the serpent’s subtle persuasion,
Eve transgressed God’s will by eating the
fruit. Adam did the same when she brought
some to him, although he was not deceived as
she had been. Both then recognized their na-
kedness and made garments of fig leaves.
When God came to commune with them,
they hid from him. When he demanded an ac-
count, Adam blamed Eve and Eve blamed the
serpent. God told Eve that as a result of their
sin, childbirth would be a painful experience
and her husband would rule over her (Gn 3:16).
Eve later became the mother of Cain, Abel,
Seth, and other children (Gn 4:1,2,25; 5:4).
Eve is mentioned twice in the NT. In his
letter to Timothy the apostle Paul referred to
her when discussing whether or not women
could teach (1 Tm 2:13). He said that woman
could not teach or have authority over man
because of man’s priority in creation and
Eve's responsibility for the original transgres-
sion (see2 Cor 11:3).

Several early church fathers, including Jus- Evil Spirit. Another name for demon.
tin and Irenaeus, compared Eve with Mary the See DEMON, DEMON POsSESSION.
mother of Jesus. They pictured Mary as the
“new Eve,” contrasting the disobedience and
Ewe.
sin of the first Eve with the obedience and
faith of the second. They regarded Eve as re- See ANIMALS (SHEEP).
stored to wholeness in Mary. Since Protestants
are strongly opposed to the Roman Catholic “Execution.
veneration of Mary, and see newness and
wholeness as totally centered in Christ (Gal
3:28), they have not developed that particular
typology.
See ADAM (PERSON); GARDEN OF EDEN.
Evening. See Day.
Evening Sacrifice. See OFFERINGS AND SAc-
RIFICES.
Everlasting Life. See ETERNAL LIFE.
Everyday Life in Bible Times. See Acri-
CULTURE; BURIAL, BURIAL Customs; CiviL LAw
AND JUSTICE; CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, REG-
ULATIONS CONCERNING; CRIMINAL LAW AND PUN-
ISHMENT; COURTS AND TRIALS; DIETARY Laws;
EDUCATION; FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS; FASH-
ION AND DRESS; FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF Is-
RAEL; FOOD AND FOOD PREPARATION; FURNITURE;
HOMES AND DWELLINGS; INDUSTRY AND Com-
MERCE; INHERITANCE; MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE Cus-
TOMS; MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE; MONEY
AND BANKING; Music AND MusIcAL INSTRU-
MENTS; OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES; SLAVE, SLAV-
ERY; TOOLS; TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS; TRAVEL
AND TRANSPORTATION; WAGES.
Evi. One of five Midianite kings killed in a
battle against Israel under the leadership of
Moses (Nm 31:8). Apparently God directed Mo-
ses to go to battle against Midian because the
Midianites had led the Israelites into pagan
religious practices. In Joshua 13:21 Evi is
called a prince of Sihon, the Midianite king.
Evil. See Sin.
Evil-merodach. Son and successor of Nebu-
chadnezzar as king of Babylon, who reigned
for two years (561—560 Bc). During his reign he
released Jehoiachin, former king of Judah,
from imprisonment (2 Kgs 25:27—30; Jer 52:31-
34). Aside from this fact, little is known about
his reign. He was killed by his brother-in-law
Neriglissar, who succeeded him to the throne.
See BABYLON, BABYLONIA.
Evil One. NT designation for Satan.
See SATAN.
73%
Exhortation
Female sheep.
See CriminaL LAW AND PUNISH-
MENT.
Exhortation. Translation of a Greek word
literally meaning ‘‘a calling of someone along-
side to help.” Its primary meaning in the NT
is the urging of someone to do something,
more specifically some ethical course of ac-
tion. In some contexts the same Greek word
may also include the idea of comforting and
consoling. The given context will determine
which meaning to use.
A passage that most clearly illustrates ‘“‘ex-
hortation” in the sense of inciting or spurring
people on to action is Luke 3:7—18. John the
Baptist exhorts (v 18) his Jewish hearers to
bring forth fruits in keeping with repentance
(v 8), to stop resting on descent from Abraham
as protection from punishment for sin (v 8),
and to share clothing and food (v 11). He ex-
horted tax gatherers to collect no more money
than they had a right to take (v 13), and sol-
diers not to take money from anyone by force,
not to accuse anyone falsely, and to be content
with their wages (v 14).
The ability to exhort is said to be a spiri-
tual gift that God has given to some in the
church for the benefit of the whole (Rom 12:8).
In addition, exhortation is one of the results of
a proper use of the gift of prophecy as seen in
1 Corinthians 14:3,31. It was also one of the
responsibilities that Paul commanded of Timo-
thy: “Give attention to the public reading of
Scripture, to exhortation and teaching (1 Tm
4:13 NASB). The writer to the Hebrews also re-
fers to an exhortation addressed to the readers
lest they regard lightly the discipline of the
Lord or faint when they are reproved (Heb
12.6):
In 2 Corinthians 1:3—-7 the Greek word is
used in the sense of consolation or encourage-
ment. The context is one in which serious suf-
fering for Christians is evident. Paul writes
that God encourages us in our times of testing
so that we may be able to do the same for
those experiencing similar trials. Acts 15:31 re-
fers to the encouragement and consolation
which came to the church at Antioch when the
decree of the Jerusalem council was read in
their hearing. They had been fearful that the
Judaizers might have their way and that Chris-
tians would be required to become circum-
cised in order to be saved. Another clear illus-
tration of this word meaning ‘“‘comfort”’ is in 1
 Exile
Thessalonians 4:18, where Paul instructs the
believers that those who die in Christ will not
miss out on the blessings of the day of Christ;
he then exhorts them to “comfort one another
with these words.”
See SPIRITUAL GIFTS.
Exile. Mass deportation of large population
groups practiced in ancient times usually for
political purposes, frequently to destroy the
power of an enemy nation and to prevent re-
bellion. Sometimes the exile of a conquered
people was carried out to colonize an area, to
create a cultural fusion. Captivity removed
people from familiar associations and patri-
otic memories and put the defeated under the
eye of the central government. Deportation
was generally resorted to as an extreme mea-
sure when other means, such as the imposing
of tribute, failed.
“Exile” and “captivity’’ have the same
meaning in the OT and are used interchange-
ably. The principal allusions are to the Assyr-
ian captivity of 722 Bc, in which Israel was
transported to Mesopotamia by the Assyrians,
and the Babylonian exile of 605-582 Bc, in
which a similar fate overtook the inhabitants
of Judah. There are references in preexilic writ-
ings to other captivities of peoples (Am 1:6,9),
as well as predictions that Egypt (Is 20:4; Jer
46:19), Ethiopia (Is 20:4), Moab (Jer 48:7), Rab-
bah (Jer 49:2,3), and Nineveh (Na 3:10) would
themselves be exiled. An apocalyptic reference
to the final captivity of Jerusalem occurs in
Zechariah 14:2.
Assyrian Exile. As early as 842 Bc King
Jehu of Israel paid tribute to Shalmaneser,
king of Assyria. But it was not until 734 Bc, in
the reign of Tiglath-pileser III (745-727 Bc),
that the first deportation recorded in the OT
Try
Ue
My
Se,
NAY
A relief of Assyrian court officials.
occurred. Tiglath-pileser had received tribute
from King Menahem of Israel (2 Kgs 15:19),
but later had marched against King Pekah of
Israel and King Rezin of Syria (734-732 BC)
because together they had made war against
his vassal, King Ahaz of Judah. Tiglath-pileser
punished Israel by carrying some of its inhabit-
ants, especially from Naphtali’s tribal terri-
tory, into exile (2 Kgs 16:7—9). During this cam-
paign Gilead, a region just east of the Jordan
River, was devastated, and the Israelite lead-
ers in the Transjordan were deported (1 Chr
5:6,26). A fragmentary cuneiform inscription
from Tiglath-pileser lists several thousand
male captives whom he exiled from eight cit-
ies around the Sea of Galilee. The Israelites
avoided a worse fate by assassinating their
hostile king, Pekah, before Tiglath-pileser
came. A new king, Hoshea, was elected, who
immediately submitted to the Assyrians. That
timely action helped to preserve part of the
kingdom of Israel.
Nevertheless, insurrection in Israel came
soon after Tiglath-pileser was succeeded by
his son Shalmaneser V (727-722 Bc). Hoshea
refused to pay the annual tribute to Assyria
and by that act tested the new monarch’s
power early in his reign. In 724 Shalmaneser
marched on Israel (2 Kgs 17:36). Hoshea was
taken captive, and the Assyrian armies moved
up to surround the capital, placing Samaria
under siege. Since Israel’s king was already
imprisoned, it was expected that Samaria
would fall quickly, but it stubbornly resisted
from 724 to 722. Finally Samaria fell; the days
of Israel as a sovereign nation were over, and
many more captives were taken into exile. The
Bible attributes Samaria’s capture to Shal-
maneser V, but in his inscriptions Shalmane-
ser’s successor Sargon II (722—705) boasted of
his conquest of the city and the removal of
a
LN
iHT)e
ay“
e.
/
Sess
sat
| RENEE
TYNAN DSSS SSS
Smanooees
LJ
WVVVVV
ac
SJ >)
132
 Exile

27,290 captives. Evidently Shalmaneser began The second Babylonian invasion of Judah
the siege, but his successor, Sargon, finally occurred in 597 Bc. By withholding tribute
took Samaria and carried out the exile. from Babylonia, King Jehoiakim invited ca-
The exiles were transplanted to sparsely lamity. Since Nebuchadnezzar was involved
populated areas in the provinces of Halah, Go- elsewhere, he urged the surrounding nations
zan, and Media (2 Kgs 17:6), where apparently to make a number of raids against Jerusalem.
they were permitted to live fairly normal Jehoiakim may have been killed in one of the
lives. The Assyrian records state that there “attacks, leaving the throne of Judah to Jehoi-
were 27,290 captives, which was probably only achin, his 18-year-old son. Jehoiachin’s reign
a fraction of the Israelite population. ended after 3 months. Nebuchadnezzar came
Assyrian documents dating from the end of to punish Judah for renouncing allegiance to
the 8th to the 7th centuries Bc are of particu- Babylonia, and Jehoiachin and his mother
lar significance, since they record what may were taken captive along with 7,000 soldiers
be Israelite names. There are traces of Israel- and thousands of craftsmen, smiths, chief offi-
ite captives and possibly exiles from Judah in cials, princes, together with temple and pal-
the lists of personal names on an 8th-century ace treasures (2 Kgs 24:10-16). Babylonian
Bc Aramaic ostracon (potsherd) found at Ca- sources confirm that this invasion took place
lah on the Tigris River, then capital of As- in March of 597 Bc. The Lachish letters and the
syria. Included are common names in Israel excavations of such fortress towns as Beth-
such as Elisha, Haggai, Hananel, and Mena- shemesh and Lachish give graphic illustration
hen. Various other Assyrian documents con- of Judah’s defeat at that time. Further evi-
tain Hebrew names, but it is difficult to deter- dence of this phase of the exile was found by
mine that they belong to descendants of the German archaeologists who discovered cunei-
Israelite captives. form tablets naming “Yaukin (Jehoiachin)
Babylonian Exile. History. Around 705 Bc king of Judah” with those who received ra-
King Hezekiah of Judah tried to restore the tions of grain in captivity. Though Jerusalem
religious unity of Israel and Judah by inviting maintained some form of government for an-
the people of Samaria to worship in Jerusa- other 11 years, the siege of 597 had a devastat-
lem. His attempt, however, was nullified by ing effect.
the invasion of Judah by King Sennacherib of Nebuchadnezzar left Zedekiah, Jehoiachin’s
Assyria. Later King Josiah of Judah took ad- uncle, on the throne. Though warned by
vantage of the decline of Assyrian power to the prophet Jeremiah, Zedekiah was easily
extend his rule and religious reformation into swayed by popular opinion. This weakness
regions formerly belonging to the kingdom of proved his undoing and made inevitable Jeru-
Israel (621 Bc). Further evidence of expansion salem’s utter desolation and a third deporta-
of the kingdom under Josiah is seen in his at- tion. For a few years, Zedekiah remained in
tempt to prevent Egypt’s advance under Pha- submission to Babylonia, and in the 4th year
raoh Neco at Megiddo, but he was killed in of his reign journeyed to Babylonia, evidently
battle in 609 Bc (2 Kgs 23:29,30). to renew his pledge of loyalty Jer 51:59). Later
The overthrow of the Assyrian empire he negotiated alliances with neighboring na-
brought only temporary relief to the kingdom tions, especially Egypt (Jer 37:6—10). Eventu-
of Judah. The newly established Neo-Babylo- ally Judah was invaded, and the temple, the
nian dynasty (626 Bc) joined forces with Media palace, and private homes were destroyed.
to destroy Nineveh (612), and after the battle The temple treasuries were confiscated and
of Carchemish in 605 Nebuchadnezzar of Baby- more people were deported. The siege of the
lon became the new world leader. As he city lasted from January, 587, to July, 586,
marched south through the newly conquered when the Babylonians breached the city wall.
lands, he demanded that the large cities sub- Archaeological excavations show clear evi-
mit and that the finest young men be relo- dence of destruction in Judah at sites such as
cated in Babylon as prospective government Lachish, Beth-shemesh, and Beth-zur. On the
personnel. From Jerusalem, Daniel and _ his other hand, the evidence thus far shows that
three friends, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, the land of Benjamin was not attacked. Judah
were sent (Dn 1:1—7). While subjugating Judah was added to the province of Samaria, and
in this way, Nebuchadnezzar was interrupted ceased to exist as a national state.
by the death of his father, Nabopolassar. In Tyre and other lands of western Asia re-
August of 605 Nebuchadnezzar quickly re- sisted Babylonia’s supremacy. Tyre preferred
turned to Babylon to secure the crown. The an alliance with Egypt to submission to Baby-
carrying away of captives at that time was the lonia. Nebuchadnezzar besieged Tyre for 13
first of four times during Nebuchadnezzar’s years (585-573). Finally Tyre was overrun, but
reign when prisoners were taken from Jerusa- the Babylonians found only an empty shell;
lem to Babylonia. the people and wealth had been evacuated to

733
Exile
an island off the coast and probably to Egypt.
Pharaoh Hophra was defeated, deposed, and
replaced by Amasis, an Egyptian general. For
a few years there was peace; then in 568
Amasis revolted against Nebuchadnezzar, who
returned and occupied part of the land of
Egypt.
A fourth deportation from Judah occurred
in 582 (Jer 52:30). After vengeance had been
taken for the revolt under Zedekiah, Nebu-
chadnezzar appointed Gedaliah as governor
over the sadly reduced territory of Judah.
Gedaliah opposed the pro-Egyptian policy; he
set up his administration at Mizpah, and he
had the prophet Jeremiah in his entourage.
The irreconcilable resistance party considered
Gedaliah a traitor to the national cause. Ish-
mael, a disappointed member of the royal fam-
ily, ruthlessly assassinated Gedaliah and his
supporters. Since the assassins could not re-
main in Judah and face Nebuchadnezzar’s re-
venge, they fled to Egypt, compelling Jere-
miah and the people of Mizpah to accompany
them. The prophet warned that they could not
escape the Babylonians, because Nebuchad-
nezzar would soon attack Egypt, including the
frontier city (Tahpanhes) settled by the fleeing
Jews.
The total number of captives taken in all
the deportations from Judah probably did
not exceed a total of 70,000 men, women, and
children.
Effects of Exile. Of the many crises Judah
experienced, none presented greater danger
than the Babylonian exile. It was an event
that challenged the faith of the most orthodox
Jew. The Lord who worked so mightily for Ju-
dah before had now apparently gone down in
defeat, or so it seemed. Battles among nations
in ancient times were thought of as reflecting
a parallel warfare among the gods. When Jeru-
salem was destroyed and the temple vessels
seized, many concluded that Marduk, Baby-
lonia’s god, had proved himself stronger than
Judah’s God. Yet Jeremiah prepared Judah for
the crises of exile with words of hope (Jer
29:10,14). God would use the Babylonians to
chasten his people, and in turn would punish
the Babylonians. Those who were weak in
faith were destined to be absorbed among the
Gentiles; however, the remnant that believed
in God’s_power and purposes, even in captiv-
ity, would someday return and rebuild the
temple and Jerusalem.
The internal religious causes of the exile
were lack of faith in God and his covenant,
disregard of the admonitions of the prophets,
turning to idolatry, and trust for the nation’s
sustenance not in the provision of God but
rather in their own industry and wisdom. De-
spite the danger of falling into idolatry in
734
Babylonia, the great effect of the exile lay in
the anchoring of the Jews in the Law and in
their trust in God. The contrast between mono-
theism and polytheism was sharpened. The re-
newed dedication to monotheism later helped
the Jews withstand the bewitching fascination
of Greek culture and the repeated onslaught of
Seleucid power. The exile brought desires for
revenge and stirrings of repentance (Jer 51;
Lam). The sabbath and festivals continued
to be observed, and regular commemorative
fasts were initiated (Zec 7:1—3; 8:18,19).
Life in Exile. The lot of the captives was
one of servitude, at least at the beginning;
they were forced to supply labor for many of
Nebuchadnezzar’s building projects. Some-
times the work was made harsh by false proph-
ets who provoked the Babylonians to cruel
acts of repression (Jer 29:21—23). After the first
shock of expatriation was past, however, the
exiles’ life became more a liberal internment
than a concentration camp. The experience of
Daniel and his colleagues portrays the gener-
ally favorable treatment accorded the cap-
tives. Education, position, and responsibility
were given to many.
While in captivity the Jews could no longer
observe the sacrifices that had been made at
the central sanctuary in Jerusalem. As a re-
sult, there was a renewed emphasis on reading
and observing the Law, an emphasis that led
to the development of the synogogue as a
place of worship. The institution of the proph-
ets and priests, however, continued to func-
tion; that is evident in Jeremiah’s address to
the captives, naming first the elders, then the
prophets, priests, and people (Jer 29:1).
The captives were permitted, within limits,
to come and go as they pleased and to marry
and establish families. There was liberty for
correspondence with the homeland; Jeremiah
wrote letters to the exiles and he mentioned
correspondence by the captives (Jer 29:1,25).
Not only did the Jews engage in skilled slave
labor for the Babylonians, but clay tablets
give evidence of activity in business—buying,
selling, and renting. Many were so successful
financially that they were able to send money
to Jerusalem; and when the Jews were al-
lowed by the Persian king Cyrus to return
home, large numbers refused because they
were unwilling to leave the possessions they
had acquired. Another favor granted the Jews
was permission to settle as a large community
on fertile, irrigated land (Ez 1:1,3; 3:15,23).
Calendar. While in Babylonia the Jews
adopted a Babylonian calendar that is still the
basis for the Jewish year. The Babylonians
had a lunar calendar with 12 months, each
numbering 30 days. Early in history they
learned that it was necessary to add an extra

HUES
Maurice Bardin’s concept of ancient Babylon. The painting
shows a procession moving along Marduk’s Way and entering
the precincts of Nebuchadnezzar's palace through the Ishtar
Gate. The hanging gardens are in the upper right.
(intercalary) month every six years to make
the lunar and solar years coincide. Both Baby-
lonians and Hebrews reckoned their days from
sunset to sunset (Gn 1:5). The use of the Baby-
lonian calendar is especially found in post-
exilic writings (the month of Nisan in Neh 2:1;
Est 3:7; and the month of Adar in Ezr 6:15).
Before the exile, years were reckoned accord-
ing to the year of the Jewish monarch (2 Kgs
22:3). In postexilic times the years were desig-
nated according to the year of the gentile mon-
arch, whether Neo-Babylonian or Persian (Jer
25 os ESZE airy O:¥s))
Language. When Sennacherib besieged Je-
rusalem in the days of Hezekiah, Aramaic was
the language used in international diplomacy.
The leader of the Assyrian forces challenged
the defenders of Jerusalem in the Hebrew lan-
guage, much to the dismay of Hezekiah’s offi-
cials who knew the official Aramaic. Sennache-
rib’s rabshakeh (cupbearer), however, wished
to undermine the morale of the defenders by
issuing the ultimatum in language all the peo-
ple could understand, so he spoke in the He-
brew vernacular (2 Kgs 18:26).
139
Exile
While in exile the Jews learned Aramaic as
a means of communication with their non-
Jewish neighbors. When they returned to Pales-
tine they brought the Aramaic language with
them. By the time Ezra read the Law to the
people of Jerusalem, it was necessary to give
an interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures,
‘probably in the Aramaic tongue (Neh 8:8). Ara-
maic letters to and from kings Artaxerxes and
Darius may have been copies of the original
texts kept in the Persian archives (Ezr 4:11—22;
5:7-17; 6:6—-12; 7:11—26). In addition the Israel-
ites from the northern kingdom, who were al-
ready in Mesopotamia, undoubtedly were flu-
ent in both Hebrew and Aramaic. Hebrew con-
tinued to be used as a living language; the
postexilic books of Haggai, Zechariah, and
Malachi were written in Hebrew, as was the
later literature from a community at Qumran,
the source of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Most of the
people, however, spoke only Aramaic in Syria
and Palestine during NT times and until the
Arab conquest of the 7th century ap.
Conditions in Judah After the Exile. Unlike
the Assyrians, who repopulated the northern
kingdom after its fall in 722 Bc (2 Kgs 17:24),
the Babylonians did not resettle areas from
which captives had been taken. Only the poor-
est Jewish people remained in the land, truly
sheep without a shepherd, pressed between
the Edomites and Arabians edging in from
the south, Ammonites and other tribes from
the east, and the Samaritans from the north.
The Jews who remained in the land, in com-
mon with their Samaritan neighbors, ac-
cepted the Mosaic law and worshiped Israel’s
God. Sacrifices were still offered on the tem-
ple hill, but amid the prevailing gloom and
poverty superstitions and crude religious be-
liefs flourished anew. Judging by the prob-
lems Ezra and Nehemiah faced in a later day,
the Jews and Samaritans got along well to-
gether, and intermarriage became quite com-
mon (Ezr 10:18—44, Neh 13:23-28).
Ezekiel spoke often of the spiritual condi-
tions in Judah during the exile. He was taken
in the spirit to Jerusalem, where he was
shown an idol, the “image of jealousy,” in the
inner temple court (Ez 8:1-6). Then he was
taken to the temple wall and ordered to dig
until he came into an inner secret room. The
walls of the room were adorned with serpents
and wild beasts similar to the Procession Way
in Babylon, which was adorned with lions,
bulls, and dragons. Seventy elders were seen
burning incense to the idols (Ez 8:11—13). At
the temple’s north gate Ezekiel saw women
weeping for Tammuz, the Babylonian god of
vegetation whose death was mourned annu-
ally (Ez 8:14,15). The worst offense of all was
the sight of 25 people worshiping the sun (Ez
Exodus, Book of
8:16). Finally, Ezekiel saw God’s departure
symbolized by the departure of the divine
glory (Ez 11:23).
Release from Exile. While the Jews were
held captive, Babylonia was conquered by the
Persians under Cyrus in 539 Bc. The edict of
Cyrus, issued in 538, released the Jews to re-
turn home to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem
(Ezr 1:1-4). Cyrus showed greater kindness
than most rulers to conquered and subject peo-
ples. Some say that he favored the Jews be-
cause he saw some similarity between Juda-
ism and Persian religion. Probably permission
was freely given to the Jews so that eventually
a strengthened Judean province would serve
as a buffer between Persia and Egypt. In addi-
tion an economic factor was the hope that the
restored province would soon contribute taxes
to Persia’s treasury.
Exile and Judaism’s Future. The exile was
the watershed between Israel as a political
unit and the religion known as Judaism. Na-
tional life came to an end; the Jews were
gradually scattered throughout the ancient
world and became identified with a religion
and a tradition rather than a nation. The rem-
nant that lingered in Palestine was governed
by Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome suc-
cessively, and never achieved independence ex-
cept for a short time under the Maccabees dur-
ing the 2nd and rst centuries Bc. Thus the exile
proved the people; their religious and racial
consciousness was intensified to prevent as-
similation into their heathen environment.
Hence a more spiritual remnant emerged, de-
tached from local limitations and physical
structures. During the exile an “Israelite”
came to be called a “Jew,” and the idealization
of Zion began among the people.
The prophets spoke of the Babylonian exile
as divine retribution and judgment for Ju-
dah’s rejection of their message and for persis-
tence in sin and idolatry. If this judgment
were accepted, it would eventually lead to res-
toration and a revelation of divine love for
Israel (Is 54:9,10; Jer 31:3—6). Out of the experi-
ence would come a new covenant (Jer 31:31-
34). The exile brought a more profound com-
prehension of the Law and the prophets.
There came also a deeper understanding of
God’s universality and sovereignty. The exile
is one of the primary historical incidents
upon which the hope for the Messiah’s com-
ing was established.
AUSTIN H. Potts
See CHRONOLOGY, OLD TESTAMENT; POSTEXILIC PE-
RIOD, THE; DIASPORA OF THE JEWS; ISRAEL, HISTORY OF;
JUDAISM; JEw.
Exodus, Book of. Second book of the Bible,
containing the story of God’s liberation of the
736
people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few
books of the OT are as important historically
and theologically as the Book of Exodus.
Historically, the exodus event was the birth
of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of
tribes who were descendants of Abraham be-
came a nation ruled by God. The Book of Exo-
dus explains how the Israelites were able to
resettle the land God had promised to Abra-
ham and gives the basis for this religious, po-
litical, and social life.
Theologically the Book of Exodus is so fre-
quently referred to in the OT and NT that theo-
logians speak of an “exodus motif.” In Psalm
37, for example, David received assurance in
remembering that his God was the same one
who rescued Israel from Egypt. The prophet
Jeremiah compared the future regathering of
Israel to their exodus from Egypt as an even
more miraculous event (Jer 16:14,15). The re-
turn of Jesus and his parents from Egypt is
associated with the exodus in Matthew 2:13-
15. The deliverance of the Jewish people from
Egypt was interpreted as a prototype for
God’s freeing of all his people, both Israel
and the church. Thus the message of the Book
of Exodus is foundational to understanding
God’s plan of salvation throughout the Bible.
The English title “Exodus” comes from the
Septuagint, a pre-Christian translation of the
OT into Greek. The word means “a way out”
or “departure,” and refers to Israel’s rescue
from Egypt. The Hebrew title is Shemoth
(“these are the names”), from the book’s open-
ing words, referring to the names of the sons
of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt.
Author. According to tradition, Exodus
and the entire Pentateuch (first five books of
the Bible) were written by Moses. Exodus was
probably written at Mt Sinai or shortly after
the events there, according to this view. There
is much to support that claim:
(1) The book states that Moses wrote God’s
words in at least one book (Ex 17:14; 24:4,7}
34:27,28). According to Deuteronomy 31:9,24,
Moses incorporated God’s Law in a book that
was deposited beside the ark of the covenant
as a witness for God.
(2) Many OT writers referred to portions of
Exodus as the “law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Chr
34:14; Neh 8:1; 13:1). The NT, including the tes-
timony of Jesus, calls Moses the author (Mk
710;12:26) In 134559219),
Various other theories about the origin of
Exodus have been proposed. Some scholars
credit Moses with writing nearly the entire
book. One writer claims that Moses was an
unknown desert sheikh who never even met
the Israelites. Some critics think they detect in
the book several documents from various peri-
ods in Israel’s history that were finally put to-

gether by an editor, centuries after Moses’
death. Others have isolated various literary Joshua, it would place the exodus around
forms, such as the “Song of Moses’ (Ex 15),
and traced their development. Another inter-
pretation says that the exodus story was
passed on by word of mouth for many genera-
tions before being written.
Although such theories are held by biblical --pharaoh of the oppression was Thutmose III
scholars, they deny what the text of the book
repeatedly affirms: that Moses wrote Exodus.
The Book of Exodus contains evidence of be-
ing written by an eyewitness. Only such a per- and the conquest would have begun around
son would recall, for example, that there
were 12 fountains and 70 palm trees at Elim
(Ex 15:27). The author shows a _ thorough
knowledge of Egyptian court life, customs,
and language. Some of the materials used to of Jephthah was 1100 Bc, then the 300 years of
construct the tabernacle, such as acacia wood
for its furniture (Ex 25:10) and rams’ skins for
the outer covering (Ex 25:5), are found in
Egypt and the Sinai peninsula, but not in Pal-
estine. The book thus seems to have had a
desert setting.
Moses was not only commissioned by God
to write the Book of Exodus, but he was also
well qualified. He was “‘instructed in all the
wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty
in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22). In addi-
tion, the 40 years spent in the wilderness of
Midian and Sinai gave him a thorough knowl-
edge of the geography and wildlife of the re-
gions through which the Israelites traveled.
The events of the exodus—deliverance from
the Egyptians and God’s giving of the Law—
were so central to the history of Israel that
Moses took special care to preserve the record
so it could be passed on to following genera-
tions.
Date. If one accepts the traditional view
that Moses wrote Exodus, then the book is to be
dated in the time of Moses. Two dates are gen-
erally suggested for the exodus from Egypt.
The “Late Date’ View. This view says that
the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelites was
Seti I (Sethos, c. 1304-1290 Bc) and the pha-
raoh of the exodus was Rameses II (Ramses, c.
1290-1224 BC). The exodus would thus have oc-
curred in 1290, and the conquest of Canaan
would have begun in 1250. The two principal
arguments for this view are: (1) According to
Exodus 1:11, the Israelites were forced to build
the store city of Rameses; therefore Rameses
II must have been ruling at the time. But the
city of Rameses could have existed earlier un-
der a different name and then been renamed
after Rameses II when he rebuilt it. Or there
could have been an earlier monarch named
Rameses who commissioned its construction.
(2) There is archaeological evidence of move-
ments of people and widespread destruction
in Canaan around 1250 Bc. If this destruction
Exodus, Book of
was caused by the Hebrew conquest under
1290. But it could just as easily have been the
result of social turbulence and anarchy in the
period of the Israelite judges, or of the mili-
tary activities of neighboring peoples.
The “Early Date’ View. This says that the
(c. 1504-1450 BC) and the pharaoh of the exo-
dus was Amenhotep II (c. 1450-1424 Bc). Thus
the exodus would have occurred about 1440,
1400. Chief arguments supporting that view
are: (1) If the 4th year of King Solomon was
966 Bc, then the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1
would place the exodus at 1446. (2) If the time
Judges 11:26 would date the conquest at 1400.
(3) The late date would not leave enough time
for the period of the judges, which most chro-
nologies indicate lasted between 300 and 400
years. On the basis of such biblical references
to the date of the exodus, the early date ap-
pears preferable.
Background. Some events in Egypt dur-
ing the period covered by the Book of Exodus
shed additional light on the biblical record.
Exodus 12:40 records that the Israelites lived
in Egypt for 430 years. That would place the
settling of Jacob and his family in Goshen (Gn
47:4,11) at about 1870 Bc, during the powerful
12th dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom.
Around the turn of the century two weaker
dynasties followed. Semite invaders from Asia
began to infiltrate northern (or Lower) Egypt.
Those outsiders, known as the Hyksos, were
able to displace the native dynasty with their
own king around 1730. That was the “new
king” who “did not know Joseph” (Ex 1:8). Be-
ing foreigners themselves, they were naturally
concerned about the Israelites, who were ‘“‘too
many and too mighty” for them (1:9). In event
of war the Israelites might ‘“‘join our enemies
[the Egyptians] and fight against us” (1:10).
Enslavement was thus the easiest solution to
the problem of the Israelites. The Hyksos
kings could use the new source of labor to en-
large Rameses, at that time the capital of
Lower Egypt.
Not until about 1580 Bc were the Egyptians,
led by Ahmose, able to drive out the Hyksos
and reestablish an Egyptian line of kings. Be-
cause the Israelites were still multiplying de-
spite their hard labor, the pharaohs of the 18th
dynasty continued their bondage and decreed
that all male children must be killed. When
Moses was born (c. 1560 Bc), that edict was
still in effect. Thutmose I (1539-1514), the
great empire builder and third of that dy-
nasty, was pharaoh.
Thutmose I’s only surviving legal heir was
WOT
Exodus, Book of
The temple of Queen
Hatshepsut
at Deir el-Bahri
a daughter, Hatshepsut. Her husband as-
sumed the name Thutmose II (1514-1504).
When he died, another of the pharaoh’s descen-
dants was named successor—Thutmose III
(1504-1450), who was 1o years old at the time.
Hatshepsut took the kingdom from the young
ruler and controlled it for 22 years (1503-1482).
Such a strong-willed woman could have the
nerve to disobey her father’s command by sav-
ing the life of a Hebrew baby and raising him
in the palace at Thebes.
Hatshepsut, who continued to rule despite
Thutmose III’s coronation, possibly intended
for Moses to have the throne, or at least a high
position in the realm. Thutmose III, once he
had full power after Hatshepsut’s death, would
have been eager to do away with Moses. Moses’
hurried flight into the wilderness after slaying
the overseer fits well with such historical possi-
bilities. Thutmose III's death in 1450 Bc opened
the way for Moses to return and confront Pha-
raoh Amenhotep II with God’s command, “Let
my people go.”
An interesting inscription has been found
on a granite column between the paws of the
great Sphinx of Gizeh. The god Horus is said
to have promised the throne of Egypt to Thut-
mose IV (1424-1417), Amenhotep II’s succes-
sor. Thus Thutmose IV was possibly not the
rightful heir to the throne. If so, then the bibli-
cal account that the pharaoh’s eldest son died
in the tenth and final plague is verified (Ex
r2i20)) 2"
Purpose and Theological Teaching. The
purpose of the Book of Exodus is to show how
God’s promise to Abraham (Gn 15:12—16) was
fulfilled when the Lord rescued the Israelite
descendants of Abraham from Egyptian bond-
738
age. It also explains the origin of the Passover
festival, the beginning of the nation by God’s
establishment of a covenant with Israel, and
the giving of the Law on Mt Sinai.
The Book of Exodus tells the moving story
of a mighty God, Creator of the universe, be-
yond all limitations of time and space, who
intervenes in history on behalf of a helpless
group of slaves. God defeats the ruler of the
greatest empire on earth, and leads his op-
pressed people from that land to freedom. Exo-
dus is the story of a single family that provi-
dentially grows into a multitude. Through
God’s covenant a nation is formed, and
through his Law the nation is given stability
and set apart from all its neighbors. The Book
of Exodus tells of an unusual man, whose 80
years of preparation are equally divided be-
tween the palace of a king and the pasture of a
nomadic priest. Moses is a reluctant leader,
but he defies the pharaoh, speaks with God
face to face, and writes nearly one-fourth of
the Hebrew Scriptures.
The God of Exodus is above all faithful. He
makes promises and keeps them. Genesis
15:13-16 records an amazing prophecy: “Then
the Lord said to Abram, ‘Know of a surety
that your descendants will be sojourners in a
land that is not theirs, and will be slaves
there, and they will be oppressed for four hun-
dred years; but I will bring judgment on the
nation which they serve, and afterward they
shall come out with great possessions. ... And
they shall come back here in the fourth genera-
tion.” In response to this promise, Joseph,
“at the end of his life, made mention of the
exodus of the Israelites and gave directions
concerning his burial” (Heb 11:22).

That promise provides a background for
the drama of redemption on which the Book of
Exodus focuses. Redemption can be defined as
“deliverance from the power of an alien do-
minion, and enjoyment of the resulting free-
dom.” It speaks of a deliverer and what he
does to achieve deliverance. The Book of Exo-
dus is full of the vocabulary of redemption. It
tells of the God who “‘remembers” his promise
to the Hebrew patriarchs (2:24; 6:5). God
“comes down to deliver” the Israelites (3:8), or
“save” them (14:30; 15:2), in order to “bring
them” out of the land of Egypt (3:10—12).
(1) The Lord is the author of redemption. In
Exodus 6:1—8, as God answered Moses’ prayer
to deliver his people, he used the pronoun “T’’
18 times to emphasize that he was the one ini-
tiating the action. The Hebrew descendants of
Abraham had known God primarily by the He-
brew name “El,” a common title in the an-
cient Near East for the supreme deity. But in
Exodus Israel learned that God is “Jehovah”
or “Yahweh.” That is his personal name, a re-
minder that he is the God of the covenant who
personally cares for his people’s welfare. In
Exodus 3:14, God told Moses, “I am who I am”’
or “I will be who I will be.” Some scholars
think that statement shows that the name
“Yahweh” comes from the Hebrew verb “‘to
be.” In any case, the concept of ‘‘name’”’ in the
Hebrew culture is synonymous with ‘‘char-
acter.’ To know the name of God is to know
something of his character. Israel knew God as
the one who is eternally self-existent, yet pres-
ent with them wherever they would go, acting
on their behalf (Ex 3:12; 33:14—16).
(2) The reason for redemption was God's
promise to the forefathers of the Israelites.
When God heard the groaning of the people of
Israel, he ‘“‘remembered his covenant with
Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob” (Ex
2:24; cf. 6:5). In response to their need he se-
lected an agent of redemption, the unwilling
Moses. Moses exhausted every possible excuse,
but God would not take “no” for an answer.
Moses is a vivid example of how God prepares,
empowers, and sustains his chosen servants,
and uses them to accomplish his purpose.
(3) The motive of redemption was God's
grace and love (Ex 15:13; 20:6; 34:6,7). The pur-
pose of redemption was that Israel and the
Egyptians might know God (Ex 6:7; 7:5; 8:10;
14:18). The Lord worked so that all who were
involved—Moses, the Israelites, Pharaoh, and
the Egyptians—would be sure that he alone is
God.. The Hebrew understanding of knowl-
edge is not primarily intellectual but experi-
ence oriented. The desired response to God’s
action is not mere mental assent, but also
faith and obedience.
(4) Redemption is achieved in Exodus by
739
Exodus, Book of
miracles (4:21), natural processes controlled su-
pernaturally by God. They are variously de-
scribed as “signs and wonders” (7:3), “great
acts of judgment” (6:6; 7:4), and ‘‘the finger of
God” (8:19). Such miracles were not frivolous
“fireworks,” but purposeful works of God.
Some of the miracles prove that Moses was
sent by God. The miraculous plagues proved
that God is supreme, for each of them was a
direct challenge to one of the gods of Egypt:
Osiris the river god, Yeqt the frog god, Ra the
sun god, Athor the cattle god. The miracles in
the wilderness proved that God fulfills all the
needs of his people.
(5) The pharaoh was the villain in redemp-
tion, a picture of rebellious humanity con-
fronted by God’s command (Ex 4:21—23). Ten
times the pharaoh hardened his heart, and 10
times it was God who hardened it, in effecting
the king’s decision to defy him.
(6) The Passover marked the purchase of re-
demption (Ex 12:23-27; 15:16). It was a clear
example of salvation by substitution. When the
death angel saw the blood on the doorposts and
lintels, he passed by. The word used for re-
demption (Ex 6:6; 15:13) means to “act as a kins-
man redeemer,’ as God prescribed in Leviticus
25:25-37 (cf. Ru 3:12,13).
(7) The recipients of God’s redemption in
Exodus were the Israelites. God took them as
his own special people (6:7), and they were no
longer free to do as they pleased. Even before
the exodus he had claimed them, telling Pha-
raoh, “Israel is my first-born son, and I say to
you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me’ ”’
(4:22,23).
(8) The demand of redemption was obedi-
ence. On the basis of his deliverance of the
Israelites from bondage, God set forth the Ten
Commandments (20:1-17) and the rest of the
Law for them to obey. The people, though
quick to pledge their obedience (Ex 19:8; 24:3),
were even quicker to disobey (32:8). Because
the Lord is holy and wants his people holy and -
wholehearted in devotion (34:14), he must pun-
ish iniquity. But, being compassionate, he also
forgives. Throughout the centuries of Israel’s
history God pleaded with his people through
the prophets to remember the exodus and re-
pent (see Mi 6:3,4). The faithful responded in
gratitude with Moses’ “song of redemption”
(Ex 1s}iciyRv 151954):
Content. The Book of Exodus can be di-
vided into four sections, each describing one
aspect of God’s dealings with the Israelites
during the 15th century Bc.
The God Who Descends: Revelation (Ex 1-
6). The Book of Exodus begins with the 70
descendants of Jacob who joined Joseph in
Egypt for the duration of a famine that was
afflicting their land (cf. Gn 46-50). After more
Exodus, Book of
than a century of prosperity for the Israelites
in the land of Goshen, a new dynasty is estab-
lished in Egypt whose leaders are not friendly
toward Israel. In order to stem the rapid
growth of the Hebrew people, the Egyptians
force them to do hard labor, building storage
cities for the pharaoh.
A further command requires all Israelite
male children to be killed at birth. The super-
intendents of the midwives do not comply,
however, and God rewards them, not to show
his approval of their lie but because they fear
and obey God rather than the pharaoh. A new
command calls for all male Israelite babies to
be drowned in the Nile River. One special
child, who escapes when Pharaoh’s daughter
has his basket fished out of the Nile, is Moses.
Ironically, Moses’ mother is paid by the prin-
cess to raise her own child, who grows up in
the palace as the princess's adopted son.
As an adult, Moses chooses to identify with
his Hebrew kin, a tribute to the early instruc-
tion given him by his godly parents (see Heb
11:24—26). He sets out to liberate Israel from
the Egyptians, one man at a time. But he has
to flee to Midian, at the eastern edge of the
Sinai peninsula or in Arabia beyond the north-
ern top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Moses marries
into the household of Jethro, also named
Reuel. Reuel (‘‘friend of God’’) is probably the
man’s personal name, and Jethro (“excel-
lence’”’) his title. Because he is called a “priest
of Midian” (Ex 2:16), some scholars have main-
tained a ‘“‘Kenite hypothesis,” suggesting that
Moses adopted the religion of his father-in-law
and taught it to the Israelites. The Bible states
that Moses received his religion by a direct
revelation from God. Jethro seems to believe
only after he sees that God has rescued Israel
from the Egyptians (Ex 18:10,11).
While their future deliverer is in Midian,
the Israelites continue to be oppressed and
cry out to God in their misery (2:23-25). God
responds by descending to his people. He
“comes down to deliver” (3:8), to intervene on
Israel’s behalf. He appears to Moses in a burn-
ing bush and identifies himself as the same
God who promised the patriarchs a land
“flowing with milk and honey” (3:17). Moses
will lead the Israelites there, assisted by his
brother Aaron.
Assured that God’s presence and miracu-
lous signs will accompany him, Moses takes
his wife Zipporah and his two sons and de-
parts for Egypt. On the way, the Lord meets
him and seeks to put him to death (4:24). That
is probably the Hebrew way of saying that
God strikes him with a mortal illness. Moses,
who is going to deliver God’s people, has ne-
glected the sign of the covenant in failing to
circumcise one of his sons (Gn 17:14). Moses
740
recovers after the rite is performed and contin-
ues on to Egypt, meeting Aaron at Mt Sinai.
Their reception by the Israelites is more cor-
dial than that of Pharaoh, who refuses to
honor. the God who sent Moses. Instead of re-
leasing the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their
God in the wilderness, he increases their bur-
dens. The people complain to Moses, and Mo-
ses complains to God. God appears again to
Moses (Ex 6), reassuring him that Israel will
be delivered by divine power. God’s plan is
not a failure—he is just beginning to put it
into action.
The God Who Delivers: Redemption (Ex 7—
19). Chapters 7-12 record 10 plagues with
which God afflicts the Egyptians. Even before
the first of them the pharaoh has hardened his
heart to defy God (7:13). There are three cycles
of three plagues each:
Ist 2nd 3rd
cycle cycle cycle
Announced blood flies hail
in the
morning,
Announced frogs cattle locusts
before
Pharaoh
Unannounced gnats boils darkness
The first three plagues affect both the Egyp-
tians and the Israelites; the Israelites are pro-
tected from the final six. The Egyptian magi-
cians are able to duplicate the first two
plagues, but when the third strikes, they ad-
mit, “This is the finger of God” (8:19). After
the plague of flies covers the land, the pharaoh
offers Moses the first of four compromises, but
Moses refuses all of them (8:25—29; 10:8—11,24—
29). The first plagues are merely unpleasant,
but the final ones are destructive and inflict
much suffering. Since all of the plagues are
common to that area, they themselves are not
miraculous. The miracle is how the phenom-
ena are multiplied, the exact prediction of
their beginning and end, and their limitation
to just the land of Egypt.
The nine plagues only serve to further
harden the pharaoh’s heart, so God prepares
one final stroke. The death of every firstborn
male, among both animals and humans, will
be the fatal blow. God warns the Israelites to
get ready to leave. To avert the death angel,
they must put blood from an unblemished
yearling male sheep or goat on their door-
ways. While they are eating the Passover
meal, the death angel begins moving through
the land of Egypt. In anguish the pharaoh

drives the Israelites from the land; the slaves
are free at last. The Passover must be cele-
brated annually as an eternal reminder of
God’s deliverance. Just as he has promised,
the Lord goes before the children of Is-
rael (about 2 million in number, Nm 1:46),
in a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by
night.
Once again the pharaoh’s heart is hardened
and he gives pursuit. God parts the waters of
the sea with a great wind. The literal meaning
of the name given that body of water is ‘‘sea of
reeds.”’ It could refer to any shoreline where
the water is sufficiently shallow for such
plants to grow (see 1 Kgs 9:26, where the same
term refers to the Gulf of Aqaba near Eloth).
Whatever the location, there God hands the
Egyptians their final defeat; the deliverance is
complete.
Moses and the Israelites respond with re-
newed faith in the Lord and with a song of
victory and praise (Ex 14:31—15:21). Soon, how-
ever, thanksgiving turns into grumbling be-
cause of bitter water (15:22—26), lack of meat
and bread (16:1-15), and lack of water (17:1-
7). In each situation God provides for their
need. He also gives them victory over the Ama-
lekites (17:8—16). As the Israelites approach Mt
Sinai, Moses’ family rejoins him, accompanied
by Jethro. Jethro now confesses his faith in the
God of the Israelites and shares in a fellowship
meal with the leaders. He also assists Moses in
reorganizing the judicial system before return-
ing to Midian (Ex 18).
The Israelites arrive at Mt Sinai, also called
Horeb (3:1), and prepare to meet the Lord who
has rescued them in fulfillment of his promise
to Moses (3:12). The Lord establishes his cov-
enant with Israel, taking them as his own pos-
session, a ‘‘kingdom of priests and a holy na-
tion.”” They: quickly respond, “‘All that the
Lord has spoken we will do” (19:5—8).
The God Who Demands: Instruction (Ex 20-
24). The God who redeems a people, who lit-
erally ‘‘buys them back from slavery,” has a
right to make certain demands of them. The
commandments God gives to Israel at Sinai
are not burdensome requirements, but protec-
tive guidelines for demonstrating their grati-
tude and obedience (Ex 20:2,3).
The Law (or Torah, “‘instruction’’) revealed
at Sinai consists of three parts: (1) The Ten
Commandments (Ex 20), addressing a person’s
relationship to God and other people. Based
on God’s nature, and therefore permanent, the
Ten Commandments are unique in the history
of the nations. (2) The judgments (Ex 21-23),
social regulations for governing the people as
a theocracy, similar in many ways to the law
codes of Israel’s neighbors. (3) Ordinances (Ex
24-31) regulating religious ceremonies. All of
741
Exodus, Book of
the laws are given to Moses during the weeks
he spends with God on the mountain.
The Ten Commandments form the basis of
all other laws in Israel (20:1-17). The first five
deal with honoring the Lord, the second five
with respecting one’s neighbor. The last com-
mandment deals with one’s thoughts and in-
tentions, rather than with specific actions. It
thus forms a safeguard against all sins not in-
cluded in the first nine. The people are terri-
fied as nature responds to the Lord’s presence,
and they ask Moses to intercede on their be-
half (20:18—20).
The judgments recorded in chapters 21-24
deal with master-slave relationships (21:1—11),
offenses punishable by death (21:12—17), com-
pensation for injury to persons or damage to
property (21:18—22:15), various interpersonal
relationships (22:16—23:9), and sabbaths, feasts,
and the offering of firstfruits (23:10—19). Many
of the judgments would not take effect until
Israel settled in the Promised Land. Accord-
ingly, that section of the Law closes with a sol-
emn warning against being rebellious and
adopting pagan ways. It also contains a bright
promise that God will drive out Israel’s ene-
mies, protect his people from sickness, and
grant them prosperity, “if you... do all that I
say’’ (23:22).
Exodus 24 records a reaffirmation of the
covenant between God and Israel, as Moses
seals it with the blood of a sacrifice. In
response, God appears to the leaders of the
people, giving them a glimpse of his splendor.
Then Moses ascends the mountain one more
time to receive the stone tablets containing
the commandments, as well as further instruc-
tions regarding the meeting tent (tabernacle),
the priesthood, and worship.
The God Who Dwells: Fellowship (Ex 25-—
40). The Lord told Moses that after he re-
deemed the Israelites, “I will take you for my
people, and I will be your God” (6:7). Moses
has seen that wonderful promise fulfilled, yet
one further step remains to be taken. “Let
them make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell
in their midst‘ (25:8). God’s dwelling among
his people is possible because God has de-
scended to deliver the people and because
they have pledged to meet his demands. God
calls for a contribution from all whose hearts
are willing to give, and he shows Moses a de-
tailed pattern of the tabernacle and its furni-
ture. Aaron and his sons are set apart to serve
in the tent. Stipulations for the various offer-
ings, including the Day of Atonement, are
given. God tells Moses that he has chosen Beza-
lel and Oholiab to build the tabernacle and to
craft its furnishings, having filled them with
his Spirit.
In the meantime the Israelites, who so re-
Exodus, The
cently promised total obedience, grow impa-
tient as Moses lingers for 40 days on the moun-
tain. They demand that Aaron make an idol
for them. Under pressure, Aaron complies and
forms a molten calf, a representation of a pa-
gan deity. “These are your gods, O Israel, who
brought you up out of the land of Egypt,” he
tells them (32:4).
The Lord informs Moses of the people’s
idolatry, revelry, and immorality, and says that
he is angry enough to destroy all of them and
start again with Moses’ offspring. Moses
pleads for Israel until the Lord relents, then
descends from the mountain to punish the peo-
ple. He pleads again for forgiveness for Israel,
and God in mercy pardons their terrible sin
(34:8-10).
Once more God offers to make a covenant
with the people (34:10). Moses spends another
40 days with the Lord, writing the command-
ments on tablets to replace those smashed
when he saw the golden calf. When he returns
to the people, his face shines from being in
God’s presence, and he must keep it veiled.
Now that Israel has been restored to God's
favor, the construction of the tabernacle can
begin. The contributions are so generous that
Moses must restrain the people from bringing
any more. Finally, all is ready. Moses examines
the tabernacle, and it is erected on the first
day of the first month, nearly a year after the
first Passover. The priests are consecrated, the
lamps are lit, and the first burnt sacrifice is
offered. A cloud descends, filling the taberna-
cle with the glory of the Lord. God dwells
among his people, the goal of redemption has
been attained, and the drama of the Book of
Exodus has come to an end.
KENNETH L. BARKER & RICHARD L. SCHULTZ
See Exopus, THE; FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL;
ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; PLAGUES UPON EGYPT; TABERNA-
CLE, TEMPLE; TEN COMMANDMENTS, THE; MoOsEs;
EcypT, EGypTIANS; DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS; CHRO-
NOLOGY, OLD TESTAMENT.
Bibliography. H. Alford, The Book of Genesis and Part of
the Book of Exodus; S.R. Driver, The Book of Exodus; J.G.
Murphy, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book
of Exodus.
Exodus, The. Departure of Israel from
Egypt led by Moses. The exodus was one of the
most significant events in the history of the He-
brews. It was a unique demonstration of God’s
power on behalf of his people, who were work-
ing under conditions of forced labor for the
Egyptians. So dramatic were the circum-
stances in which the exodus occurred that they
were mentioned frequently in subsequent OT
periods. When the Hebrews were oppressed,
they looked back to that great historical event
and trusted God for their future liberation.
The historicity of the exodus from Egypt is
742
beyond question, being one of the pivotal his-
torical and religious points of the Jewish tradi-
tion. It is quite another matter, however, to
assign a firm date to the event, partly because
certain scriptural references can be _ inter-
preted in various ways, and partly because lit-
tle archaeological evidence from Egypt exists
that bears on the question. Since the Egyp-
tians regularly ignored defects in their records
and defaced inscriptions belonging to unpopu-
lar fellow countrymen, it is improbable that
anything approaching an Egyptian literary rec-
ord of the exodus will ever be obtained. Much
of the information regarding the date of the
exodus is therefore inferential in character,
and that presents biblical historians with one
of the most complex problems of chronology.
Date of the Exodus. The Problem of Dat-
ing. Determining the date of the exodus has
long been a problem for biblical scholars. At
the beginning of the 2oth century many schol-
ars, both liberal and conservative, placed the
date toward the end of the 13th century Bec.
Not all of them agreed that the exodus was a
single event, however, some believing that the
Hebrews entered Palestine twice at widely
separated times. Such a view, which occasion-
ally resulted’ in Joshua being placed before
Moses chronologically, could only be main-
tained by disregarding completely the bibli-
cal tradition.
According to Exodus 12:40 the length of
time that Jacob’s descendants resided in the
land of Egypt was 430 years. God had already
predicted that interval of time to Abram (Gn
15:13). The Genesis prophecy, however, did not
indicate when that occupation would begin.
The Septuagint (the first Greek translation
of the OT), in its version of Exodus 12:40, re-
duced the period of occupation in Egypt to 215
years. That may mean that two traditions of
exodus history existed. A stay of four centuries
may have been reckoned from the period
when an Asiatic people known as the Hyksos
invaded Egypt (1720? Bc) and governed it for
about a century and a half. The period of 215
years preserved in the Septuagint may be the
interval of time between the expulsion of the
Hyksos and the exodus itself.
More specific information from Israel’s
early monarch, however, has a bearing on the
time when the Hebrews escaped from Egypt.
Solomon, says 1 Kings 6:1, constructed the
temple in Jerusalem 480 years after the Israel-
ites were led out of Egypt by Moses. Taking
that figure at face value, and allowing a date
of 961 Bc for the reference to Solomon, the exo-
dus would have occurred about 1441 Bc. On
the basis of such biblical data some scholars
argue for a 15th-century Bc date for the exo-
dus, connecting it with the reign of Pharaoh

ve. ae
Amenhotep II, who many think was the pharaoh of the Exodus,
stands in his chariot and shoots arrows at a copper target.
Amenhotep II (c. 1450-1425 BC) as the time of
Israel’s oppression. Other scholars feel equally
persuaded that the exodus occurred in the
13th century BC.
Early Date Theory. The early date received
support from archaeologist John Garstang’s ex-
cavations at OT Jericho (Tell es-Sultan). Gar-
stang identified several levels of debris there,
indicating that the city had been rebuilt a
number of times. He concluded that the one
built about 1500 Bc was the Jericho over-
thrown by Joshua’s forces (Jos 6). Garstang’s
statement that Jericho had fallen before 1400
appeared to support the time frame of 1 Kings
6:1, and was received enthusiastically by sup-
porters of the 15th-century Bc date.
Garstang also stated that diplomatic con-
nections between Jericho and Egypt had been
severed under Pharaoh Amenhotep
1377 BC), thus making Amenhotep II the pha-
raoh of the exodus and Thutmose III the ruler
during the oppression period. A mural from
the tomb of Rekhmire, vizier (minister of
state) under Thutmose III, showed a brick-
making scene, complete with Egyptian over-
seers, bearing the inscription ‘The rod is in
my hand; be not idle,” all of which seems to
suggest the Hebrews in captivity. Further evi-
dence for the early date theory came from the
discovery of the Tell el-Amarna letters, a body
of correspondence addressed to Pharaoh
Amenhotep IV and his father, Amenhotep III,
between 1400 and 1360 Bc. Proponents of the
early date theory assume that references in
the letters to invading “Habiru’”’ allude to the
conquering Hebrews under Joshua, since the
term ‘‘Habiru’” is thought by some to be
equivalent to “Hebrew.” The letters, which
contain pleas from native Canaanite rulers to
Egypt for help against the marauding Habiru,
are taken as a Canaanite account of Joshua’s
Exodus, The
invasion and are offered in support of a 15th-
century Bc exodus date. The most direct evi-
dence for the early date, however, remains the
literal interpretation of 1 Kings 6:1.
Late Date Theory. Arguments for a 13th-
century Bc date take Exodus 1:11 as referring
to the time when the Egyptian cities of Pithom
‘and Rameses (or Raamses) were being en-
larged or rebuilt with the help of Hebrew
slaves. Pharaoh Rameses II (c. 1290-1224 BC)
moved the Egyptian capital from Thebes to
Avaris, the old Hyksos capital, which was
known to the Hebrews as Rameses. Late-date
theorists argue that, since the Exodus account
used the name by which the city was known
for about two centuries only (c. 1300-1100 BC),
the Hebrew tradition of the exodus must also
date from that period. In such an event Rame-
ses II would have been the pharaoh of the op-
pression, and his son Merneptah (1224?—1214
BC) the pharaoh of the exodus.
Archaeological surveys by Nelson Glueck in
Transjordan indicated that during the time of
Isaac and Jacob, the population of Edom and
Moab declined until about the middle of the
13th century Bc. Thus, it was argued, the diffi-
culties experienced by the invading Hebrews
in Transjordan (Nm 20,21) could not have oc-
curred until the 13th century Bc, when Edom
was a strong nation. In support of a late date
for the exodus appeal is also made to the
Merneptah stela, a stone slab inscribed about
1220 BC recording a list of conquered peoples.
Among the names listed, Israel’s is the only
one to be written in such a manner as to imply
a people rather than a territory, suggesting
that although the Hebrews were in Canaan
(the Promised Land) at the time, they were not
III (1412— in complete occupational control of the terri-
tory.
Difficulties with Early and Late Dates. Both
15th- and 13th-century Bc dates, however,
meet with difficulties. The 480 years men-
tioned in 1 Kings 6:1 are open to a symbolic
interpretation if the number is regarded as the
product of 12 (tribes) and 40 (wilderness
years). If the 480-year figure is symbolic in na-
ture, it is of no help in determining the date of
the exodus.
A 15th-century Bc date presents problems
for the chronology of Abram. Archaeological
evidence relating to the overthrow of Sodom
and Gomorrah seems to date Abram’s arrival
in Canaan around 1900 Bc. The Genesis narra-
tives place Jacob’s migration to Egypt about
215 years later. On the basis of the 430 years of
Exodus 12:40 it would seem that Abram came
to Canaan about 2086 Bc, some 645 years be-
fore the exodus. That would date his birth (cf.
12:4) about 2161 Bc. If the Sodom and Gomor-
rah evidence is correct, Abram’s arrival in Ca-
743
Exodus, The
naan would harmonize with a 13th-century Bc
date.
Garstang’s discoveries at Jericho have been
modified seriously by the subsequent work of
another archaeologist, Kathleen Kenyon. She
found no trace of Late Bronze Age walls, which
indicates that the city Garstang thought to
have been conquered by Joshua was consider-
ably earlier than his time. Unfortunately, the
mound has been so ravaged by erosion and hu-
man pillaging that it reveals almost nothing
about the Jericho of Joshua’s day, and thus
does not help to simplify matters.
Archaeological evidence from Canaanite
sites such as Bethel, Debir, Lachish, and Ha-
zor indicates destruction at 13th-century BC
levels, a fact generally regarded as relating to
the Hebrew occupation under Joshua. Schol-
ars who maintain an early date for the exodus
think of Bethel falling to Joseph’s tribe (Jgs
1:22), while Debir’s collapse would be de-
scribed first in terms of its inhabitants (Jos
10:38), and second of the city proper under Oth-
niel (Jgs 1:11). Evidence from Philistine sites
tends to favor a late rather than an early date
for the exodus. Against that, however, must be
set the fact that the major Philistine occupa-
tion of the southern Palestinian coastlands
only occurred around 1175 Bc, in the time of
Rameses III.
The relationship between the “Habiru’”’ of
the Amarna letters, the “Apiru”
century Bc Egypt, and the biblical Hebrews
has been examined minutely by scholars.
Widely differing opinions have been offered.
Some believe that the three are variations of
the name of one people. To others, however, it
seems far from clear that there was any signifi-
cant relationship between the names. Such dis-
agreement also tends to intensify the problem.
Some scholars have criticized Glueck’s
statements about the sparse Transjordanian
population in the 15th century Bc, arguing on
the basis of excavations at Amman,
and elsewhere that there were more people in
the locality than Glueck imagined. Such a posi-
Beni Hasan tomb painting that
shows Semites entering Egypt
during the 19th century BC.
tion would tend to support a 15th-century BC
date for the exodus.
Other scholars have argued that the refer-
ence in Exodus 1:11 is to the original construc-
tion of the Hyksos capital of Avaris about 1720
BC, not to its reconstruction as Rameses under
Rameses II.°A stela recovered from Rameses
and dated about 1320 Bc recorded that the city
had been founded 400 years earlier, thus au-
thenticating its establishment. Such a view as-
sumes that the Hebrews entered Egypt in the
Middle Kingdom period (2000-1780 BC), per-
haps about 1870 Bc, and that their oppression
commenced under Hyksos rule. This view has
to contend with the unlikely prospect of the
Hebrews being treated preferentially by Egyp-
tians, who heartily disliked the “hated Asiat-
ics,” but being enslaved by the Hyksos, who
were fellow Semites.
As is evident from such a range of opinion,
the date of the exodus is one of the most com-
plex problems of Hebrew history. Understand-
ably enough, the exodus has been correlated
with the pattern of Egyptian history, but the
lack of conclusive data from Egypt precludes a
ready solution to the difficulties. Only if new
information is forthcoming from an unfore-
seen area is thére any prospect of resolving the
problem satisfactorily.
Route of the Exodus. The biblical data
concerning the route of the exodus placed the
in 13th- beginning of the flight at Rameses (Ex 12:37).
This place was identified with Tanis (San el
Hagar) by early investigators; but more recent
work suggests Qantir, about 17 miles south-
west of Tanis, as the preferred site. It now
seems certain that the monuments at Tanis
apparently erected by Rameses have been mis-
understood. None of those monuments seems
to have originated at Tanis but were brought
there by later kings who reused them. Thus
the primary evidence for identifying Tanis
with Rameses has proved to be misleading.
Heshbon, Excavations at Qantir, on the other hand,
have revealed indications of palaces, temples,
and houses, all of which were local in origin.
744

Such evidence suggests that Qantir, not Tanis,
was the Rameses from which the exodus com-
menced. In addition, Rameses, unlike Tanis,
was located beside a body of water (the “Wa-
ters of Re’’ mentioned in Egyptian sources),
which again conforms to the biblical account.
From Rameses the Israelites moved to Suc-
coth (Nm 33:5), generally identified with Tell
el-Maskhuta, a fortification in the eastern area
of the Wadi Tumeilat, west of the Bitter Lakes.
From Succoth they journeyed to Etham (Ex
13:20), which was probably a fortress on the
frontier of the wilderness of Shur. The He-
brews were then instructed to return north-
westward in order that the stage might be set
for the events of the exodus proper. Accord-
ingly they encamped between Migdol and the
“sea,’’ close to two sites called Pi-hahiroth and
Baal-zephon. Pi-hahiroth may have been a
lake, the ‘““Hi-waters,”” mentioned in Egyptian
documents. Baal-zephon has been identified
with the later Tahpanhes (Tell Defenneh) near
Qantara. Both identifications lack certainty,
but these places were probably located in the
northeast part of the Nile River delta area
near Lake Menzaleh. The “‘sea”’ was a lake of
papyrus reeds, described in Exodus 15:22 as
the ‘“‘reed sea,” the English equivalent of an
Egyptian phrase meaning “papyrus marshes.”
In most English translations from the time of
the kJv onward the Hebrew for “reed sea” was
rendered as ‘‘Red Sea.”
Sources from the 13th century Bc mention
the existence of a large papyrus marsh in
the area of Rameses which could be the one
referred to in Scripture. Other suggestions
equate the reed sea with the southeast exten-
The Nile delta—with the Mediterranean Sea to the left, the
Suez Canal and the Red Sea at the top right.
745
Exodus, The
sion of lake Menzaleh, or with some body of
water just to the south, perhaps Lake Ballah,
all of which are reasonably close to each
other. The topography can never be deter-
mined with complete accuracy, since the con-
struction of the Suez Canal drained a series of
lakes and swamps, of which the reed sea was
probably one.
At the camp at Migdol the Hebrews were
overtaken by the pursuing Egyptians and ap-
peared to be trapped hopelessly. Then the
Lord worked one of the great miracles of his-
tory. He prevented the Egyptians from encoun-
tering the Hebrews that night by means of a
pillar of cloud (Ex 14:19,20). Moses raised his
rod over the reed sea, and a strong east wind
blew on the water all night. By morning a
strip of the ‘“‘sea’’ bottom had been exposed
and dried out, enabling the Israelites to flee
across it. When the Egyptians pursued their
former slaves, Moses again raised his rod, the
wind ceased, and the waters returned to nor-
mal levels, trapping the Egyptian chariots and
soldiers and causing heavy losses. A victory
song (Ex 15:1—21), typical of ancient Near East-
ern customs in warfare, was the liberated cap-
tives’ immediate response to God.
The parting of the waters is a phenomenon
that has been observed periodically in various
parts of the world. It always occurs in the
same manner and involves a strong wind dis-
placing a body of water. Shallow lakes, rivers,
or marshes are parted readily under such con-
ditions. The scriptural reference to the east
wind indicates that God miraculously em-
ployed that natural phenomenon to rescue his
people.
Having escaped successfully from the Egyp-
tians, the Hebrews journeyed to the wilder-
ness of Shur, three traveling days away from
the bitter waters of Marah (Ex 15:22—25). In
Numbers 33:8 the wilderness of Shur is identi-
fied with Etham, which the Israelites had al-
ready left. Thus it appears that they had
moved north from Migdol, after which they
moved south again to the wilderness in the
area of Etham. The Israelites were not able to
go into the Sinai peninsula along the normal
routes, which were guarded by Egyptian for-
tresses. In addition, they had been instructed
not to travel along the northward road going
to the ‘‘way of the land of the Philistines” (Ex
13:17) into Canaan. Consequently, the best
means of satisfying both conditions was to
move southeastward to Sinai as unobtrusively
as possible, taking care to avoid the access
routes to Serabit el-Khadem in the central pen-
insula region, where the Egyptians mined tur-
quoise and copper.
The narratives of Numbers 33:9-15 show
that the Israelite camps were located in an
Exorcism, Exorcist
area south of the reed sea, proving that the
refugees had not taken the northerly, or “Philis-
tine,” route, as earlier liberal scholars had sug-
gested before the discovery of Rameses and its
identification with Tanis.
The Exodus Theme in Scripture. Old Testa-
ment. The motif of deliverance from captiv-
ity in Egypt became etched indelibly upon the
Hebrew mind, particularly since it was re-
inforced each year by the celebration of the
Passover meal, at the institution of which all
the Egyptian firstborn had died (Ex 12:12-
14,29). At each celebration thereafter the He-
brews were made aware that they had once
been captives, but by the provision and power
of God they were now free people, favored
with his choice as an elect nation and a holy
priesthood (Dt 26:19).
In later periods psalms were written re-
counting Israel’s history in the light of the
great liberating event of the exodus (Pss
105;106;114;136). Those compositions resound
with triumph and thanksgiving. Hebrew ac-
counts of the bondage in Egypt depict the rig-
orous life, the oppression, and the hard labor.
It is now known that there were a number of
foreign groups in Egypt at the time, and that
the corporal punishment suffered by the He-
brews was a normal feature of everyday Egyp-
tian life. In short, there was no discrimina-
tion against the Hebrews as a group; instead,
they enjoyed the dubious distinction of being
treated like ordinary Egyptian workers. Ever
after, when they were oppressed, the Hebrews
could look back to the great miracle of the
exodus and believe that what God had done
once he could do again. That was of great con-
solation to the faithful exiles weeping by the
waters of Babylon (Ps 137:1) as they looked
forward to another exodus when God would
lead them in triumph from a destroyed Baby-
lon (Ps 137:8) back to Palestine.
New Testament. God’s mighty work at the
time of the exodus was recalled on a few occa-
sions by NT writers, even though Christ had
been sacrificed as “our Passover lamb” (1 Cor
5:7 NIv) by that time. In his speech before the
Jerusalem council Stephen gave a traditional
recital of OT history, mentioning the event of
the Red Sea (Acts 7:36) as part of a demonstra-
tion of God’s power to change human affairs.
The apostle Paul used the experience of the
exodus to*remind his hearers that many who
were delivered from oppression at that time
never reached the Promised Land (1 Cor
10:1,2,5). Instead of committing themselves
wholly to God in trust and obedience, the Isra-
elites fell victim to temptations of various
kinds in the wilderness. Though all of them
were called to be part of a holy nation, few
were actually chosen. Thus Paul stressed that
746
since it is possible for Christians to become
castaways (1 Cor 9:27), they should cling to
Christ the Rock and take their spiritual respon-
sibilities seriously. In Hebrews 11:27—29 an-
other historical recital lists the heroes of faith,
mentioning especially Moses and his role at
the exodus. ~ R. K. HARRISON
See Exopus, Book oF; CHRONOLOGY, OLD TESTA-
MENT.
Exorcism, Exorcist. Art of expelling de-
mons and evil spirits, and’ the practitioner of
this art.
See DEMON, DEMON POSSESSION; TRADES AND Occu-
PATIONS.
Expiation. Atonement, purification, or re-
moval of sin or its guilt. The term occurs in
some English translations for kJv “reconcilia-
tion” (Heb 2:17) or “propitiation” (Rom 3:25; 1
Jn 2:2; 4:10). “Expiation” also appears in
some English translations of some OT pas-
sages (Nm 35:33; Dt 32:43; 1 Sm 3:14; Is 27:9).
The word does not appear in the more recent
Bible translations.
The Hebrew family of words translated by
“expiation” speaks fundamentally of a solution
for sin, and the most common association is
with the idea of atonement. Expiation has to
do with the blot of sin, and hence the term is
related to such words as “forgive,” “purge,”
“cleanse,” or “atone.”
All NT references to expiation have to do
with the sacrifice of Christ for human sin. In
the Bible both expiation and propitiation are
part of God’s atoning work. Christ’s sacrifice
both propitiates (turns away) the wrath of
God and expiates (covers) human sin. God’s
redemptive work is both personal, or rela-
tional, and objective. When a biblical context
concentrates on God’s wrath, propitiation is
involved; when human sin is the focus, then
redemption provides expiation.
The best solution to the problem of relating
expiation and propitiation is not to choose be-
tween them—both terms are proper biblical
concepts—but to read the prominent idea or
ideas in context. In Romans 3:25, for example,
both wrath and sin are part of the context (see
Rom 1:18; 2:5,8; 3:5). Thus the broader term
“atonement,” which can include both ideas, is
preferable (cf. Ntv).
The biblical writers sought to do justice to
every aspect of God’s redemptive work, and so
a number of related expressions were used to
describe it. That expiation means “removal of
sin” underscores a fundamental dimension of
redemption: “as far as the east is from the
west, so far does he remove our transgressions
from us” (Ps 103:12).

See OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES; PROPITIATION;
ATONEMENT; WRATH OF Gop.
Bibliography. C. Brown, ed., New International Dictio-
nary of New Testament Theology, vol. 3, pp. 151-60. L. Morris,
The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross; RVG. Tasker, The Bibli-
cal Doctrine of the Wrath of God.
Eye Paint. See FasHion AND DREss.
Ezar. kv spelling of Ezer, Seir’s son,
1 Chronicles 1:38.
See EZER # 1.
Ezbai. Father of Naarai, one of David’s elite
force known as “the 30” (1 Chr 11:37). In 2 Sam-
uel 23:35 he is called Paarai the Arbite. This
has led some interpreters to suggest that “the
son of Ezbai” in the 1 Chronicles passage is a
corruption of “the Arbite” and that the correct
reading of his name should be Naarai the Ar-
bite.
Ezbon. 1. Gad’s son (Gn 46:16), called Ozni
in Numbers 26:16; perhaps an eponym of a
Gadite family.
2. Benjamin’s grandson (1 Chr 7:7). It has
been proposed that 1 Chronicles 7:6—-11 is a
genealogy of Zebulun assigned to Benjamin by
error, and that Ezbon suggests Ibzan (Jgs
12:8—10), a minor judge of Bethlehem.
Ezekias. «Jv spelling of Hezekiah, Judah’s
king, in Matthew 1:9,10.
See HEZEKIAH # 1.
Ezekiel (Person). Priest and prophet during
Israel’s Babylonian exile. Ezekiel was a descen-
dant of the influential priestly family of Zadok
(Ez 1:3). He was probably reared in Jerusalem
and was familiar with the temple ritual,
though whether he served as a priest there is
not known. All that is known of his personal
life is obtained from the OT Book of Ezekiel.
Ezekiel was married (24:16—18) and lived at
Telabib in Babylonia (3:15), in his own house
(3:24; 8:1). Most of the Judean captives had
settled by the Chebar canal (1:3), which went
from Babylon by Nippur to Erech. The elders
of Israel there sought out Ezekiel for counsel
(8:1; 14:1; 20:1). In the fifth year of the exile,
when Ezekiel was between 25 and 30 years old,
he received God’s call to the prophetic office
(1:1-3:11). His wife died suddenly during the
exile, but he was forbidden to mourn for her
in public (24:16-18). Her sudden death was
meant to convey a striking and solemn warn-
ing of what would occur in the captives’ home-
land (24:15—27).
The time of Ezekiel’s ministry was unusual
in many ways. It was a period of great pro-
Ezekiel, Book of
phetic activity. With the prophets Jeremiah
and Daniel, Ezekiel spoke to the nation’s
needs at the time of the Babylonian captivity.
It was an era of upheaval and uprooting for
the southern kingdom of Judah, and a time of
persistent apostasy, idolatry, and general dis-
obedience to the Mosaic law. It was also a pe-
riod of international conflict and shifting
power balances throughout the Middle East.
in Ezekiel’s ministry seems to have extended
from 592 Bc to at least the 27th year of the
exile (29:17), and falls into two main periods.
During the first period (592-587 Bc) his mes-
sages were repeated warnings, in prose dis-
course and symbolic acts, intended to lead the
exiles to repentance and faith in God. During
the second period (586-570 Bc) after Nebuchad-
nezzar’s destruction of Jerusalem and the tem-
ple, the prophet comforted the exiles and en-
couraged them to look to the future in hope
(chs 33-48). There were 13 years in which no
prophetic utterances were delivered, namely
585 BC (32:1,17; 33:21) to 572 BC (40:1). The
prophet learned of the fall of Jerusalem while
in Babylon (33:21,22).
The burden of Ezekiel’s message was that
Judah was ripe for judgment. His preparation
for speaking God’s message is given in the pic-
ture of his eating the written prophecies (2:8—
3:3). At first the messages were not accepted,
but later his prophecies were vindicated as
they began to come true and as the nation was
purged of its idolatry. Ezekiel has been called
“the father of Judaism” because of his sup-
posed influence on Israel’s later worship. His
greatest contribution to postexilic Jewish wor-
ship consisted in establishing the basis of the
synagogue. He stressed the teaching of per-
sonal immortality, resurrection, and the ritual
law, a unique feature among the prophets.
Ezekiel carried out his messages with vivid
and dramatic acts of symbolism (e.g., 4:1—8;
5:1-17). His style has been characterized as
heavy and repetitious, but it was designed
with the themes of apostasy and subsequent
judgment in view. The place and circum-
stances of his death are unknown, Ezekiel is
not mentioned elsewhere in the OT.
CHARLES L. FEINBERG
See EZEKIEL, Book OF; EXILE; PROPHET, PROPHET-
ESS.
Ezekiel, Book of. Prophetic book of the OT,
originating in the time of the Babylonian ex-
ile.
Author. Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3),
a member of a priestly family. It is unclear
whether he actually served in the temple as a
priest, but such was his training. His writings
show that he knew the regulations for sacri-
fices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations
747
Ezekiel, Book of
of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke
God’s word about the future of the temple to
his fellow exiles. Settled at Telabib, on the ca-
nal of Chebar, the thousands of deportees eked
out a meager existence. They hoped for a
speedy return to Judah and a change for the
better in the international situation. Their
hope was flamed by the spirited preaching of
false prophets, likened to foxes among the
ruins (13:4). They piously said, “The Lord
declares...,” but they were actually
commissioned (13:6). They deceived the people
with a message of peace at a time when God's
judgment was about to be poured out on his
people (13:10). They had led the people to dis-
trust prophecy to such an extent that a prov-
erb circulated among the people that “the
days grow long, and every vision comes to
nought”’ (12:22). Much time had passed since
visions of God’s judgment had been given to
the people, and nothing could be interpreted
as a fulfillment of those visions. Ezekiel was
called to serve his community by symbolic
acts, visions, and verbal messages in order to
convince the people that God’s judgment was
imminent (12:23).
Background. The ministry of the prophet
Ezekiel can be understood best against the
backdrop of his time. If, as the church father
Origen believed, the vague reference “in the
thirtieth year” (1:1) marks the prophet’s age
at the time of his first vision, Ezekiel was
born during the rule of King Josiah of Judah
(c. 640-609 BC). Josiah was the grandson of
King Manasseh, whose sacrilegious acts had
brought God’s judgment on the kingdom
Judah (2 Kgs 21:10-15).
Though Judah’s political situation was per-
ilous, Josiah led the nation in a radical refor-
mation that began with the finding of the
“book of the law” (2 Kgs 22) in the year that
Ezekiel was born (c. 621 Bc). Idolatry was done
away with and the people turned back to God,
but God’s judgment on Judah was unchange-
able (2 Kgs 23:26,27). Josiah erred in trying to
make Judah a kingdom with which other
states had to reckon. He was threatened when
the Egyptian pharaoh Neco passed through Ju-
dah, to aid the weakened Assyrian kingdom.
Josiah marched to meet the Egyptian forces,
but his troops were unable to stand against
the Egyptians, and he died in battle (2 Kgs
23:29). Egypt took control of Judah, and Pha-
raoh Neco placed Jehoiakim in power over Je-
rusalem. Egyptian control did not last long,
however, for in 605 Bc Egypt and Assyria were
defeated by Babylonia’s king Nebuchadnezzar
at Carchemish. The Babylonians then pushed
south to Jerusalem, and the first deportation
of Judean leaders, among them the prophet
Daniel, took place.
self-
whee ae
Although Scripture contains no record of the death of Ezekiel
or of the location of his grave, tradition suggests that he died
in Babylon during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar and that he
was buried at this spot—Kefil, near Babylon, between the
Chebar and the Euphrates.
Jehoiakim was permitted to continue. rul-
ing over Judah as a vassal king of Nebuchad-
nezzar. His dealings with Egypt brought him
the emperor’s wrath. Before the Babylonians
could address the Judean situation, Jehoiakim
died and his son Jehoiachin was crowned.
When the Babylonian forces arrived at the
gates of Jerusalem, Jehoiachin and thousands
of the aristocracy were taken to Babylon (2
Kgs 24:10-17). Among those deportees was Eze-
kiel, then about 25 years old.
Although the book says otherwise, many
scholars think that Ezekiel lived and taught in
Judah for the duration of the siege and the fall
of Jerusalem (586 Bc). They conclude this from
Ezekiel’s familiarity with idolatry in the tem-
of ple and his vivid descriptions of Jerusalem’s
last days (Ez 8:11). Others believe that Ezekiel
ministered both to the exiled community and
to the Judeans living in Judah. Neither inter-
pretation does full justice to the claims of the
book itself. Ezekiel was exiled in 597 Bc. He
was called to bring God’s word to the de-
portees at Telabib; he was granted a vision of
the horrible practices in the temple court; and
he was familiar with Jerusalem and Judah
from having lived there and from reports on
affairs in Jerusalem coming to the exiles
through messengers. Jeremiah, Ezekiel’s con-
temporary, was prophesying in Jerusalem, but
there is no evidence that Jeremiah and Ezekiel
knew of each other’s ministry. If Ezekiel had
brought God’s word to Jerusalem during the
siege, some reference to Jeremiah might ap-
pear in his writings. If Jeremiah was sup-
ported by Ezekiel’s ministry in Jerusalem, he
probably would have included a positive word
for his colleague in his book. The Book of
Ezekiel plainly says that Ezekiel lived and
preached in exile (see 1:1,3; 11:24,25).
Content. The prophecy of Ezekiel is easily
outlined by subject matter and chronology.
748

The chronology of the period permits a division
before and after 586 Bc (the fall of Jerusalem).
Chapters 1-24 cover the pre—586 ministry of
Ezekiel, whereas chapters 33—48 represent his
post—586 ministry. Chapters 25-32 (oracles
against the foreign nations) function as a tran-
sition between the book’s two major divisions.
The book’s outline according to subject mat-
ter divides into four parts: Ezekiel’s call (1:1-
3:21); prophecies of judgment against Israel
(3:22-24:27); oracles against the nations (25:1—
32:32); and proclamation of hope (33:1—48:35).
Ezekiel’s Call (1:1—3:21)._ The prophet’s call
in one sense was similar to that of Isaiah and
Jeremiah. Isaiah received his mission in a vi-
sion of God’s glory in the temple (Isa 6:1—13).
Jeremiah was called unexpectedly in his
youth, and received signs which solemnly set
forth the nature of his mission (1:11-15). The
call of Ezekiel combined those two elements.
Revelation of God’s glory to the prophet at the
same time revealed the nature of the prophet’s
mission. Ezekiel’s call contained a uniquely
full description of God’s glory. Isaiah briefly
stated that he saw the Lord enthroned in the
temple, and concentrated on the seraphim rep-
resenting and magnifying God’s glory. Ezekiel
elaborated on the revelation of the Lord’s
glory as well as on the ministering angels who
went before the Lord as part of his royal en-
tourage. The vision of God’s glory, though diffi-
cult, is the key to the Book of Ezekiel.
Ezekiel, as a priest, was concerned about
the future of the temple. That sacred place
had been ordained by God as his home among
his people. The glory, presence, and holiness
of God were symbolized in the temple (see 1
Kgs 8:10,11). In exile Ezekiel could not serve
his people as a priest, for they were far from
Jerusalem, the city God had chosen. Against
all expectations the Lord revealed himself to
Ezekiel in the land of Babylon. In calling Eze-
kiel to a prophetic ministry, God assured his
servant that he had not forsaken his people,
even though they had been banished from the
Promised Land.
Ezekiel’s vision of God’s glory has been in-
terpreted in various ways. In the pseudepi-
graphical writings of the intertestamental pe-
riod, pious Jews made mystical speculations
on the “chariot chapter’ (Ez 1). Some modern
readers interpret the vision of God’s glory as
an appearance of an unidentified flying object,
an idea that in no way appreciates God’s
glory.
‘The prophet’s vision began with a storm. As
a large cloud approached from the north, Eze-
kiel saw a brightness surrounding the cloud,
four creatures, and four wheels. The combina-
tion of creatures and wheels suggests that the
Lord appeared in a chariot. God’s chariot is a
749
Ezekiel, Book of
familiar OT representation of his coming in
judgment (see Is 66:15,16). The wheels within
wheels and the position of the four living crea-
tures may signify God’s total control over the
whole earth, as he could move his “chariot of
judgment”’ in any direction. It is also possible
that the living creatures with their four faces,
‘and the wheels full of eyes, may be separate
symbols showing that God sees all that hap-
pens, that he knows the plight of the exiles. In
the vision the prophet’s attention was drawn
to a throne above the heads of the creatures.
On the throne was ‘‘the appearance of the like-
ness of the glory of the Lord” (1:28). In his
vision of God’s coming in judgment, Ezekiel
received his call to the prophetic ministry:
“Son of man, I send you to the people of Is-
rael, to a nation of rebels who have rebelled
against me” (2:3). During a dark hour of Isra-
el’s history, Ezekiel had to prophesy, rebuke
his fellow exiles (3:11), and be responsible as a
watchman over the house of Israel (3:17; cf.
33:1-9). Symbolic of his mission was a scroll
filled with lamentations and woe (2:9,10),
which when eaten became sweet as honey
(3:1-3). Difficult as the mission was, God's
presence and the certain fulfillment of the
prophecies sweetened Ezekiel’s task. Such en-
couragement was intended to take away any
fear of the rebellious Israelites (2:6,7). Instead
of being elated with his mission, however, Eze-
kiel became despondent.
A week later the word of the Lord came to
Ezekiel to remind him of his important role as
a watchman (3:16,17). Ezekiel became responsi-
ble for Israel as a nation, not just for individu-
als. His witness to Israel had the express aim
of national repentance (3:18,19).
Ezekiel was confined to his house by God
(3:25). The house ministry was to be carried on
only with those Israelites who sought God’s
Word and will, for the Lord had abandoned
those who continued in their apostasy. The
prophetic word would not help the apostates
(3:26). The principle of Ezekiel’s ministry is
found in 3:27: ‘‘He that will hear, let him hear;
and he that will refuse to hear, let him refuse;
for they are a rebellious house” (cf. 3:11; also
see Mt 11:15; 13:43).
Prophecies of Judgment Against Israel (3:22—
24:27). Symbolism figures prominently in
Ezekiel’s writing. His priestly background and
preparation probably suited him to receive
and communicate God’s word in symbolic
acts and speech. Chapters four and five con-
tain four symbolic acts. (1) Jerusalem’s siege is
portrayed on a brick (4:1-3); (2) Israel’s iniq-
uity is represented by Ezekiel’s lying on his
sides (4:4—-8); (3) Jerusalem’s grief and horror
in the last days of the siege are represented by
Ezekiel’s food and drink (4:9—17); (4) Jerusa-
Ezekiel, Book of
lem’s fate is represented by the prophet’s hair
being cut off (5:1—4).
Ezekiel’s instructions were further illumi-
nated by God’s explanation of Israel’s apos-
tasy (5:6,7) and his judgment on Israel (5:8—
12). The judgment will last until the Israelites
admit that in covenant faithfulness their Lord
has inflicted righteous judgment on them
(5:13).
God would direct his judgment first against
the people and the city of Jerusalem. Next in
line were the mountains of Israel (ch 6) and
the land (ch 7). God’s wrath included the cities
and cultic sites in the hill country of Judah,
leaving no protection for the people (6:3-6).
Abominations that were practiced throughout
the land caused God’s judgment to fall on the
land as well as on the people (7:2,3,10,11,23).
But because God is righteous, he judged the
people according to their ways of life, desiring
that they would once more acknowledge him
as their God (7:27).
The prophet then (chs 8—11) focused on the
abominations practiced in Jerusalem, particu-
larly idolatry in the temple courts, which
caused the judgment announced in chapters
1-7. An idol had been erected in the inner
court (8:3,5). By the wall of the court, elders of
the city were paying homage to the idols that
surrounded the court (8:11,12). Closer to the
temple, women were weeping for Tammuz
(8:14), and men were worshiping the sun
(8:16). In preparation for the ultimate judg-
ment on the land, the prophet placed a mark
on the foreheads of the few faithful Israelites
so that they would survive (g:4—6). Then (ch
10) the glory of God, which had filled the tem-
ple from the time of Solomon, gradually left,
until it “went up from the midst of the city,
and stood upon the mountain which is on the
east side of the city’’ (11:23). The people, now
without divine protection, were being handed
over to the Babylonians (11:9).
The message of doom for Jerusalem con-
tains four elements of hope: restoration of the
people (11:17); restoration of the land (11:17);
purification of the people (11:18); renewed fel-
lowship between God and his people (11:19,20).
The prophet develops those four themes in
chapters 33-48.
The visions of chapters 10 and 11 made
clear that when God removed his presence
from Jerusalem, the exile was approaching.
Those who were already in Babylon were un-
willing to believe that such an extensive devas-
tation of Jerusalem would happen or that the
people would all be exiled and the land be-
come desolate.
Ezekiel acted out the certainty of God’s
word of judgment by packing his bags and
showing the baggage to his fellow exiles. First,
152
he placed the bags in the courtyard outside his
modest home. Next, he went out by making a
hole through the wall. Finally, the prophet
walked about the settlement with his bags in
full view. Skeptical observers did not under-
stand Ezekiel, and probably thought he was
crazy. The believers who saw him understood.
His strange actions dramatized how the king’s
aides would do all they could to help King
Zedekiah escape just before the fall of Jerusa-
lem. Second Kings 25 tells how the king and
his soldiers left Jerusalem for the wilderness,
to be overtaken by the Babylonians at Jericho
and brought before Nebuchadnezzar at Rib-
lah. As a captive, Zedekiah witnessed the mur-
der of his sons; then his eyes were pierced, and
he was sent into exile with the other Judeans
(cf. Ez 12:13). The prophet’s explanation con-
cluded with a word of comfort. Because of his
covenant with Abraham, God promised not to
destroy the people completely. A remnant who
overcame the sword, famine, and pestilence,
would live to tell the story of God’s judgment
(12:15,16).
Ezekiel further illustrated the nation’s
plight by eating as though full of fear, suggest-
ing the great trauma that all of Judah’s inhab-
itants would soon undergo.
Both symbolic acts, packing his belongings
and eating, emphasized the truthfulness of
God’s Word. The people needed to face the na-
ture of their God: He is magnificent; and when
he speaks, his words are powerful and come to
pass. Thus, the devastation of the land and the
people’s exile were a fulfillment of God’s Word
through the prophets. The judgment was
meant to produce a recognition of the Lord,
repentance, and return to God. Some in Judah
doubted the efficacy of God’s prophecies, say-
ing, “The days grow long, and every vision
comes to nought?” (12:22). Others thought
God’s Word would come true in the distant
future (12:27). The prevailing attitude of dis-
trust in God’s Word had been stimulated by
the popular preaching of false prophets (ch
13). Never commissioned by the Lord, they
deceived God’s people by lying and misdirect-
ing them with messages of peace (13:8,10).
Wickedness, lying, and deceit were encour-
aged among the people by such false prophets
(13:22). The magnitude of their sin and their
great responsibility for Judah’s fall would be
matched by the Lord’s heavy judgment. God
will save his people from such evil and will
prepare a righteous nation with whom to
maintain his covenant (13:23).
The certainty of the judgment has been con-
nected with the truthfulness of God’s Word.
Ezekiel’s difficult task of affirming the doom
of Jerusalem to stubborn hearers was intensi-
fied by the.people’s idolatry. Their whole way

of life denied the existence of God. They prac-
ticed idolatry in their worship, and they had
‘taken their idols into their hearts’ (14:3). Be-
fore the covenant with God could be restored,
they had to be purified from their idolatry.
Even so, repentance would not guarantee im-
munity from judgment. Sword, famine, wild
beasts, and plagues would ravage the popula-
tion (14:21). After the execution of his judg-
ment God would take back those survivors
who had turned to him for mercy. God would
surely accomplish all that he intended for his
people’s good (14:23).
In chapters 15-17 Ezekiel uses three para-
bles to set forth the apostasy, present useless-
ness, and judgment of Israel. Jerusalem and
Judah are compared to a piece of charred
wood, an adulterous woman, and a vine.
Chapter 15 reviews Jerusalem’s case. Jerusa-
lem is compared to a piece of wood, both ends
of which have been charred with fire, so that
the wocd is of no value. As the whole piece of
wood is burned instead of being saved, so Jeru-
salem would undergo complete devastation
(15:7,8).
Chapter 16 presents God's case against Jeru-
salem from a different perspective, stressing
his care for Jerusalem in the past. The begin-
nings of her history are compared to the birth
of a female child, left abandoned by her mother
(16:3-5). God adopted the child, washed and
clothed her (16:6,7). He made a covenant with
her (16:8), making her his own possession. He
generously gave her all the fine things of life
(16:9—13). In the height of her development Je-
rusalem’s fame spread to the nations (16:14).
Her self-reliance made her a spiritual prosti-
tute as she took up the religious practices and
way of life of the nations (16:15—34). The cities
of Sodom (Gn 19) and Samaria (2 Kgs 17:6),
known for their immorality, are called Jerusa-
lem’s sisters (v 46). They had been judged by
God, but the corruption of those cities was lit-
tle compared to the lewdness of Jerusalem
(16:48—51). Thus, Jerusalem also would surely
fall and become desolate. Yet Ezekiel antici-
pates the judgment’s final outcome: Jerusalem
will be restored to covenantal blessing
(16:62,63).after her repentance.
The third parable (ch 17) brings in the di-
mension of God’s sovereignty over political
developments. Assyria was no longer a power
to be reckoned with. Babylonia and Egypt
both exercised dominion, although the bal-
ance of power was veering in favor of Baby-
lon. Their extension of power is likened to an
eagle. Nebuchadnezzar, ‘‘a great eagle with
great wings and long pinions, rich in plum-
age of many colors,” took control over the
affairs of Judah by removing Jehoiachin, “the
top of the cedar,” from office and by exiling
Tos
Ezekiel, Book of
him with young leaders of the Judean state,
“the topmost of its young twigs” (17:3,4). Eze-
kiel was among them. Nebuchadnezzar let
the Judeans control their own affairs under
Zedekiah, but expected them to be subject to
Babylon and not to any other power. But Ju-
dah (likened to a vine) tried to ally itself with
‘Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt, ‘‘another great ea-
gle with great wings and much plumage’
(17:7), against Nebuchadnezzar. Zedekiah’s
folly in turning to Egypt would cause Nebu-
chadnezzar to pull up the vine by its roots
and make it wither (17:9,10). In explaining the
parable, God told the exiles that Judah’s fall
was a result of its unfaithfulness to king
Nebuchadnezzar, to whom Judah owed alle-
giance by covenant (17:13—18). Judah’s un-
faithfulness thus extended to all of its rela-
tionships: religious, cultural, and_ political.
After the exile, God promised, he would re-
store his people to their land under a Mes-
siah, ‘‘a tender one” (17:22). The messianic
rule is signified by the young twig, which
when planted in the land will become a mag-
nificent cedar, giving shade and protection to
the birds. Chapter 17 is an inspiring affirma-
tion of the sovereignty of God in human af-
fairs (“I the Lord bring low the high tree, and
make high the low tree,” 17:24).
Chapters 18—22 contain Ezekiel’s oracles to
Judah, its leaders, and the exiles. First he
enunciates God’s standard of righteousness:
“The soul that sins shall die’ (18:4). The peo-
ple are charging God with injustice, for they
believe themselves to be under God’s judg-
ment for the sins of their ancestors (18:25,29).
Although the Ten Commandments do say that
God may punish “the iniquity of the fa-
thers... to the third and the fourth genera-
tion’’ (Ex 20:5), the prophet vindicates God’s
justice, telling the people that they are not be-
ing punished merely for their ancestors’ sin.
Each person must be directly accountable to
God; the sinner will die in wickedness, and the
righteous will live by righteousness. A life of
faithfulness to God’s moral and civil law will
be rewarded (18:5—9). Even if one’s father was
a sinner, the father’s sin is not transferable (vv
14-18). God is ready to forgive any sinner who
repents (18:27). The prophet’s vindication of
God's justice becomes a call to repentance.
The sinners in Judah and in exile were thus
warned of the consequences of their evil, and
exhorted to return to their God and his stan-
dard of right and wrong (18:31,32).
Chapter 19 contains two parables in the
form of a lamentation. The first portrays a li-
oness and her two cubs. The lioness is Hamu-
tal, the wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31), who
bore two sons: Jehoahaz and Zedekiah. Jehoa-
haz is referred to in verses 3 and 4 as a cub
Ezekiel, Book of
An artist's reconstruction of Babylon, showing the sacred quar-
ter and the Euphrates River in the foreground.
who grew up and was taken to Egypt (by Pha-
raoh Neco in 508 Bc; see 2 Kgs 23:31-34). Zede-
kiah succeeded to the throne to years later. In
the lamentation the prophet imaginatively rep-
resents Zedekiah as a young cub who is ulti-
mately taken to Babylon as a rebellious ruler
(19:7—-9). The second parable changes the imag-
ery to a vine, representing Israel (v 10). In its
early days God blessed Israel with strong rul-
ers, but now the vine was wilting as Zedekiah
irresponsibly led Judah to its last days. Eze-
kiel’s lamentation stresses the lack of a good
candidate for the throne and the lack of life in
the vine (19:13,14).
In chapter 20 the prophet concludes God’s
argument against his people. He reviews the
history of Israel’s past, starting with God’s
self-revelation in Egypt (vv 5,6). He took to
himself a stubborn nation, tied to idolatry
(20:8) and prone to apostasy (20:13,21). Israel
wanted to be one of the great nations (v 32)
instead of a sanctified people (v 12). As a result
of its spiritual hardness, Israel is dispersed to
live among the nations (20:35). Yet God had a
solemn covenant with Israel, made by oath to
the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. On
the basis ef that covenant God will reach out
with compassion to those who repent of their
sinful ways (20:37—40,43,44). In Israel’s judg-
ment and restoration the nations will see the
holiness of God, which does not tolerate un-
faithfulness in Israel (v 41).
Ezekiel’s prophecies alternate between
God’s judgment on Israel's sin and his restora-
tion of Israel, spanning the bridge between Is-
152
rael’s past and future. In view of the people’s
doubts of the coming judgment on Jerusalem,
he stresses the necessity of judgment and the
need for repentance. Still, the future restora-
tion of a remnant is touched upon here and
there as the counterpart of his message of judg-
ment. After announcing the fall of Jerusalem,
the prophet shifts from a message of judgment
to one of hope.
The prophet returns to the proclamation of
judgment in four oracles (20:45—21:32). He
speaks against the Negeb desert area (20:45—
49), Jerusalem and the land of Israel (21:2—
17,20-27), and against the Ammonites (21:8,28—
32). God permitted the sword of Nebuchadnez-
zar to be his instrument of judgment upon the
Judeans (21:19). He would see to the judgment
on the Ammonites. The Judeans would recover
their previous glory, but the memory of the
Ammonites would perish (21:27,32). The oracle
against the Ammonites anticipates a larger
treatise on Israel’s other neighbors: Moab,
Edom, Philistia, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt (Ez
25-29).
Chapters 22-24 contain a renewed series of
indictments against Jerusalem. Jerusalem's re-
ligious and civil leadership (the prophets,
priests, and princes) are corrupt, and the peo-
ple have followed their example (22:25—30).
The parable of the two sisters, Oholah and
Oholibah, is a variation of the parable of adul-
terous Jerusalem (ch 23; cf. 16). It differs in
that the comparison drawn between Jerusa-
lem, soon to be exiled, and Samaria, already
in exile, is more explicit in the parable of Oho-
lah and Oholibah. In chapter 16 Jerusalem
was charged with greater sins than Sodom
and Samaria, but was promised restoration.
Only the adulterous nature of the two sisters
and God’s judgment on them is emphasized in
chapter 23, with no word of restoration. This
parable is a fitting introduction to that of the
boiling pot (ch 24), in which Jerusalem is com-
pared to a rusty pot boiling with water. The
Jerusalemites, likened to pieces of meat in the
boiling pot, will die in the city. The parable
was pronounced on the day of Nebuchadnez-
zar’s siege of Jerusalem. Thus, the exiles were
divinely forewarned of God’s intent to destroy
the temple (24:21) and were prepared for mes-
sengers bringing the bad news of Jerusalem’s
fall.
Those oracles and parables conclude the
first division of the book. Ezekiel has stated
God’s case against the rebellious house of Ju-
dah in many ways. His metaphors have lik-
ened Judah to a burnt piece of wood, to an up-
rooted vine, to a baby who grew up to be an
adulteress, and to Oholibah, the adulterous
woman. He has countered arguments against
the fulfillment of God’s Word and against the

justice of God. He has reassured the exiles that
God will not leave the righteous and that the
future of Israel begins with a righteous rem-
nant. The pendulum of Ezekiel’s writing has
swung from judgment to restoration, while
the clock was bringing Judah closer to the
hour of its fall.
Oracles Against the Nations (25:1—32:32).
Ammon, Moab, and Edom were Israel’s neigh-
bors to the east. Because they were ethnically
related to Israel, they were not attacked by the
Israelites on their march to the Promised
Land. Ammon and Moab were descendants of
Lot, Abraham’s nephew, and the Edomites de-
scended from Esau, the brother of Jacob. Al-
though God forbade war with them, relations
between Israel and its eastern neighbors were
always tense. Israel had been overrun by the
Ammonites, but whenever Israel was strong,
the other three nations suffered domination.
But Israel was never successful in controlling
the Edomites’ competitive trade relations.
Those neighboring nations joined the Babylo-
nian attack against Jerusalem, and rejoiced
when Jerusalem fell and the temple was devas-
tated (Ez 25:3,6,8,12). They were ready to take
over and loot Judah’s cities, and to instigate
trouble in the hour of Jerusalem’s distress.
Therefore, says Ezekiel, God’s judgment will
also extend to Ammon, to Moab, and to Edom
(vv 4,9,13,14).
The Philistines had been Israel’s enemy to
the southwest. During the period of the judges
and the united monarchy, the Philistines had
controlled much of Israel’s territory. King Da-
vid successfully limited the Philistine threat
by confining them to their own territory. But
in Ezekiel’s day they were still considered Isra-
el’s “everlasting” enemy (25:15), possibly inten-
sified by Philistine support of the Babylonian
invasion of Judah.
The city of Tyre had received reports of the
overthrow of Jerusalem and was ready to ex-
ploit the opportunity for its own advantage
(26:2). Tyre’s trade position was unrivaled; its
ships crossed the seas to exchange goods with
many distant lands (Ez 27). But Tyre would
soon be broken by the Babylonians, its wealth
dried up with the destruction of the fleet and
the murder of its sailors (27:26).
The prince of Tyre is singled out in chapter
28, but verse 12 refers to the “king” of Tyre.
Interpreters disagree whether they are one per-
son or two. Those who distinguish between
the two understand the prince of Tyre to be
the ruler of that city, but they consider the
“king” of Tyre to represent Satan (28:13—15).
The garden of Eden with all its splendor is an
appropriate setting for the original glory of an
angelic Satan before his fall. But there is no
reason within the context to distinguish be-
193
Ezekiel, Book of
tween the prince and the king of Tyre. Each is
said to have exalted himself, and both took
authority over men as if they were gods and
enjoyed all the splendor and royalty that be-
long to God. And both prince and king fall
from their high position. The passage is a mag-
nificent example of Ezekiel’s literary ability.
‘He draws a glorious picture of the garden of
Eden, reworking the same theme as he depicts
the glory and fall of the king of Tyre. Ezekiel
presents him as a cherub, in accordance with
the local belief that the king was divine. He
wore the finest clothing, with nine kinds of
precious stones (28:13). Though God had ele-
vated him to the royal throne (28:13,14), the
king’s heart turned to materialism and to reli-
gious and judicial corruption (vv 16-18). Ina
sense the king (prince) represents the people of
Tyre. They were all guilty of corruption, injus-
tice, and violence. If God judged his covenant
people for their perversion of justice and for
their sins, his judgment would surely come
also on the city of Tyre (vv 18,19). When the
Babylonians marched on Tyre, they labori-
ously built a jetty from the mainland to the
city. At the same time Tyrian ships loaded
with goods and treasures sailed out across the
Mediterranean, so that when Nebuchadnez-
zar’s troops finally breached the walls, little
loot could be taken (29:18).
The city of Sidon also cheered at Jerusa-
lem’s destruction. Sidon was a port city in
Phoenecia, to the north of Tyre. By pestilence
and war, the inhabitants of Sidon would learn
the justice of Israel’s God.
Six nations (Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philis-
tia, Tyre, and Sidon) scorned Israel at the fall
of Jerusalem. Because God had invested his
holiness in the temple of Jerusalem and in his
people, the temple’s destruction and the peo-
ple’s exile signified to the nations that Israel’s
God was impotent. They did not realize that
the reason for Israel’s fate was God’s intoler-
ance of his people’s sin. God’s holiness re-
quired the punishment of sin, and it also re-
quired vindication for his name (28:22,23).
God was still concerned for his people, that
Israel might know he had removed the scorn
of their neighbors (28:24). In the restoration of
Israel the Lord would further manifest his ho-
liness before the nations. Israel would receive
back the land, vineyards, and houses, and
would enjoy the bounty of the Lord in peace
(vv 25,26).
Egypt had convinced the people of Israel
and Judah that with its help the Assyrians and
the Babylonians could not stand their ground
in Canaan. In 722 Bc the Assyrian troops took
the northern capital of Samaria, and in 586
the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem, while
Egypt remained passive. The Egyptians had
Ezekiel, Book of
A limestone relief of the head of an 18th-dynasty princess from
Tell el-Amarna.
desired control over Canaan for economical
reasons, but not at the expense of their own
welfare. Egypt, too, would lose its leadership
under God’s judgment (29:9,10,12,14—16). Re-
duced to dependence on foreign powers, Egypt
would no longer be a stumbling block for Is-
rael. First, Babylonia was permitted to break
Egypt’s power (30:1—32:21); and later the Per-
sians, Greeks, and Romans would incorporate
Egypt as a province. The fall of Egypt coin-
cided with the fall of several great and small
kingdoms: Assyria (32:22,23), Elam (32:24,25),
Meshech-Tubal (32:26—28), Edom (32:29), and
Sidon (32:30).
Proclamation of Hope (33:1—48:35).
the visions of God’s judgment on the surround-
ing nations, Ezekiel returns to the future hope
of Israel. In the first major section of his book
he dealt with the reasons for Judah's exile and
the destruction of the temple, alluding often to
the future of Israel. But the prophet’s organiza-
tion of his material included, between prophe-
cies of Israel’s judgment and restoration, the
oracles of.God’s judgment on Israel’s neigh-
bors who had encouraged and rejoiced in its
fall. Throughout its history Israel had allowed
foreign nations to influence its religion, cul-
ture, and form of government. The reduction
of their powers meant Israel, restored to the
Promised Land, would be more free for faith-
fulness to God. Before taking up the theme of
the restoration, Ezekiel reviews the emphases
of chapters 1-24. (1) He was called to be a
watchman over Israel (33:1-9; cf. 1-3:21). (2)
Israel had sinned against the Lord and had to
receive a righteous judgment (33:10). (3) Jerusa-
lem was to be taken by the Babylonians
(33:21). (4) Israel’s repentance is necessary for
restoration (33:11,14—16).
Thus far his ministry had not met with suc-
cess. The exiles who had heard his messages
were full of appreciation for Ezekiel’s rhetori-
cal and literary abilities (33:32). They readily
accepted Ezekiel as a watchman who warned
the people of the impending catastrophe at
Jerusalem, and they may have admitted that
their sin was the reason for God’s judgment
on Israel and Jerusalem. But they were slow
in applying the prophetic word to their own
lives. God was ready to forgive their sins if
they repented, acknowledged him, and demon-
strated their renewed spirit by practicing the
Law of God (33:32). Now that the news of Je-
rusalem had been reported to the exiles
(33:21), the necessity for the people to act re-
sponsibly was even more urgent. The Lord
had demonstrated that Ezekiel was a true
prophet (33:33).
The success of Ezekiel’s ministry was not
measured in riumbers. He faithfully declared
the Word of God in word, sign, and parable.
_The exiles had followed the false hopes pro-
claimed by false ‘“‘shepherds” (Ez 13,34), who
had fattened themselves at the expense of the
flock (34:2,3). They did not take care of those in
need (34:4), and they allowed the flock to be
scattered (34:5,6). God promised his people
that he would be the faithful shepherd, to
bring the sheep together, feed them, and care
for them (34:11-15; cf. Ps 23). God would also
distinguish between the sheep and the goats,
to find out whose hearts were right with him,
so that the true sheep could be restored to
God’s flock (34:20-22). God’s promise included
the restoration of the land and the restoration
After of the divinely appointed Davidic dynasty
(34:24). The renewed fellowship between the
Lord and Israel under the messianic ruler
would be sealed with a new covenant, the
“covenant of peace.” That covenant assured
the people of God’s blessing on their labor,
bringing them abundant harvests (34:26,27).
The people would not be forced to fight
against nature in their pursuits (34:25,28).
They would not have to struggle against other
peoples who might try to share in their bless-
ings by force (34:27—29). The prophetic vision
telescoped the events of the restoration of Is-
rael after the exile, the coming of Jesus the
Messiah (cf. Jn 10), and the full restoration of
the sin-cursed world.
It is possible to forget in reading the follow-
ing chapters that the prophet has set the prop-
754

er stage for interpretation. Chapter 34 is the
key to the messages of restoration. The empha-
ses include the outworking of the frequently
repeated verse “They shall be my people, and
I will be their God” (11:20; cf. 34:30; 36:28).
The most significant aspects of the restoration
theme include (1) God’s gracious restoration of scribes the temple’s revived worship (40—
his people to covenant blessing (36:20—36; - 46:24). His vision of the glory of God, so im-
37:23,26; 39:25); (2) God’s restoration of the na- portant in the messages of God’s judgment on
tion of Israel to the land (36:1—15,24; 37:14-23; Jerusalem (chs 1,10,11), now assures the rem-
39:27); (3) God’s new covenant, giving his
Spirit to his people (36:25—-27; 37:14; 39:29),
and his blessing on his people (36:8—12,29—
30,33—35,37,38; 39:9,10,26), assuring them of vic- interpreters believe that the temple, with its
tory over their enemies (35:1—15; 36:36; 37:28;
38—39:24); (4) God’s appointment of a Davidic
king, the Messiah, over his people (37:24,25);
and (5) God’s temple restored among his peo-
ple (37:26,27).
(1) The People of God. The rejection of the
exiles did not last forever. Based on the Abra-
hamic covenant, the Lord promised to bless
the faithful remnant and to make of them a
new people. The imagery of a valley of dry
bones is particularly fitting. The dry bones rep-
resent God’s people without hope (37:11). Eze-
kiel proclaims to them the good news that
God will renew and restore them (37:11,12).
The Lord’s purpose for his people is that all
the nations may honor his holy name through
his people (39:7,25,27).
(2) The Land. The promise also extends to
the land, originally given to Abraham and his
descendants. The Abrahamic covenant includ-
ed a messianic element, for through the family
of Abraham living in the Promised Land all
nations would receive God’s blessing (Gn
12:3). In a vision Ezekiel saw the boundaries
and described the division of the land (Ez
47,48). The royal city of Jerusalem is the cen-
tral symbol of God’s presence among his peo-
ple; its name will be “The Lord is there’’
(48:8—35).
(3) The New Covenant. The Abrahamic cov-
enant is renewed, a gracious covenant that ex-
presses the restored relationship. “Covenant of
peace” fittingly describes its nature and bene-
fits. The restless people of God are promised
rest from their searching, their enemies, and
their toil. The change in relationship is further
emphasized by God’s sending of his Spirit,
who will add a new dimension to the life-style
of his people. Obedience to God will be no
longer constrained, for God’s Spirit helps his
people to do his will. A new heart, controlled
by the Spirit of God, is given to the Lord’s
people (36:26,27). The presence of the Spirit
also signifies a new life for the people (37:14;
see Jn 3:8,16; Acts 2:38; Rom 8:2,4,15).
(4) The Messiah. The OT hope of a messi-
anic king is crystalized in Ezekiel’s message.
Ezekiel, Book of
His rule will be everlasting (37:25), over all
God’s people who have new hearts (37:15—25).
(5) The Temple. As a priest, Ezekiel re-
mained keenly interested in the temple, priest-
hood, sacrificial regulations, and festivals. A
large section of the prophecy’s last division de-
nant that God did not forsake his people (43:2—
5). He will dwell among them, for the temple
is a symbol of God’s presence (37:27). Some
ritual as described in Ezekiel 40-46, will be
restored in the messianic era before the last
judgment. Others believe the promises about
the temple provide a positive symbolic answer
to Ezekiel’s greatest concern: whether God
will return to be with his people (48:35; see Jn
2 2T REZ 22)
There are various interpretations of chap-
ters 34-48. As a watchman to Israel, Ezekiel
had a message for the exiled Jewish commu-
nity. Thus the prophecy’s fulfillment must
have begun with the decree of Cyrus I (538 Bc),
permitting the Jews to return to their land
(Ezr 1:1-3). Two rival schools of interpretation
exist on how the prophecy is fulfilled beyond
Israel’s restoration to the land. Those who in-
terpret Israel as simply the nation view the
modern return of Jewish people to the land of
Israel as a continuation of God’s prophetic
promise. They believe that God’s plan for Is-
rael is being fulfilled along with, and in addi-
tion to, his plan for the Christian church. The
fulfillment of those prophecies will be inaugu-
rated by the coming of the messianic king,
who will give earthly peace to the Jewish peo-
ple. The temple worship (Ez 40-48) will be re-
stored in some way during the period of the
messianic kingdom. The church will enjoy a
small share in all the events centered on the
Jews. The promises of Ezekiel’s vision are thus
limited to the nation of Israel and must be
fulfilled before the coming of a new heaven
and earth.
Other interpreters believe that Ezekiel
wrote for the benefit of spiritual descendants
of Abraham who believe, as Abraham did, in
God’s promises (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:11,13; Gal
3:6-9,29). All who have faith like Abraham,
whether Jews or Gentiles, are regarded as
Abraham’s offspring (Gal 3:28,29). Ezekiel’s
message thus would include all of God’s gra-
cious work among Christian Gentiles, who
have become the recipients of God’s prom-
ises and benefits. It is possible, on the basis
of 1 Peter 1:10,11, to interpret Ezekiel’s lan-
guage as a prophetic expression of how
God’s grace would come to all those who be-
755
Ezel
come reconciled to God through faith in the
gospel. WILLEM A. VANGEMEREN
See EZEKIEL (PERSON); EXILE; PROPHECY.
Bibliography. G.A. Cooke, A Critical and Exegetical Com-
mentary on the Book of Ezekiel; W. Eichrodt, Ezekiel; H.L.
Ellison, Ezekiel, the Man and His Message; P. Fairbairn, An
Exposition of Ezekiel; C.F. Keil, Biblical Commentary on the
Prophecies of Ezekiel, 2 vols.; J. Skinner, The Book of Ezekiel.
Ezel. Hebrew word designating a stone
where Jonathan and David met prior to Da-
vid’s departure from the court of Saul (1 Sm
20:19, RSV stone heap).
Ezem. City alloted to Judah’s tribe (Jos
15:29, KJV Azem), then later to Simeon’s tribe,
for an inheritance (Jos 19:3, KJv Azem;
4:29). Joshua 15 locates the city in the extreme
southern part of Canaan (v 21). Its exact loca-
tion is in question, but Umm el-‘Azem near
Beersheba has been suggested.
Ezer. 1. Chieftain of a Horite tribe (Gn 36:21;
1 Chr 1:38, kJv Ezar).
2. Descendant and probably the son of Eph-
raim. He was killed while making a raid on
the cattle of the Philistines (1 Chr 7:21).
3. Man of Judah, descended from Hur (1
Chr 4:4).
4. Gadite who joined David at Ziklag (1 Chr
12:9).
5. Jeshua’s son, who ruled Mizpah and re-
paired the Jerusalem wall (Neh 3:19).
6. Priest who took part in the ceremony at
the dedication of the Jerusalem
F2°42):
Ezion-geber, Ezion-gaber. Important port
near some significant ruins at the head of the
Gulf of Aqaba. Ezion-geber (kjv Ezion-gaber)
was one of the stations where the Israelites
encamped while on their way to the plains of
Moab (Nm 33:35,36; Dt 2:8). The city is not
mentioned again until Solomon’s time. From
this port Solomon and Hiram, king of Tyre,
carried on a profitable commercial venture.
Solomon had copper (mined in the Arabah at
Timna, 15 miles north of Ezion-geber),
oil, and possibly products bought from Egypt,
linen and chariots (1 Kgs 10:28,29). The “ships
of Tarshish” with the ships of Hiram made a
round trip of three years from Ezion-geber to
many ports along the coasts of Africa, and Ara-
bia, and possibly even as far as India (1 Kgs
10:22). In exchange the fleet brought back gold
from Ophir, along with precious stones, almug
wood (1 Kgs r1o:11,12), silver, ivory, apes, and
peacocks (1 Kgs 10:22). Solomon’s
with the Phoenicians of Tyre gave him a port
on the Mediterranean (which he himself did
not have). The alliance also gave Hiram
1 Chr
Ezion-geber is at the top center, and a portion of the Red Sea
is near the bottom of this photograph.
the Phoenicians an outlet at Ezion-geber for
trading in the Indian Ocean.
With the division of the kingdom after Solo-
mon, the port-was under Judah’s control. It
was burned and destroyed by Shishak of
Egypt in his invasion of Judah in Rehoboam’s
5th year (g25 Bc). A second city was built on
the ruins, but there is no mention of a navy. Je-
hoshaphat was able to restore the fleet to sail
once again, but some storm or other disaster
wall (Neh wrecked the ships (1 Kgs 22:48). In subsequent
Judean history, Judah was able to use the port
when it was strong, but in times of weakness
other nations did (e.g., Edom, 2 Kgs 8:20—22;
16:6).
In 1934 Ezion-geber was first identified with
Tell el-Kheleifeh, where Early Iron Age pottery
had been found. Beginning in 1936 Nelson
Glueck excavated the site, finding four settle-
ment levels, each of which had been burned.
Glueck assigned the first settlement to the
Solomonic period, since he thought that the
area was a copper and iron refinery for the Ara-
olive bah ores. What may have been a seal of king
Jotham was also recovered, perhaps indicating
a restoration of port facilities in his day. Pieces
of s5th-century Bc Greek black ware indicated
trade with the Aegean in Persian times. In 1962
Beno Rothenberg suggested that Glueck’s
“smeltery” was a storehouse for grain and cara-
van supplies. Perhaps the port of Ezion-geber
should be identified with the island of Jazirat
Farun.
alliance See Exopus, THE; WILDERNESS WANDERINGS.
Eznite. x sv designation for the preeminent
and leader of David’s mighty men in 2 Samuel
756

23:8. Most consider Adino the Eznité a later
scribal alteration of the Hebrew text and pre-
fer the reading “Jashobe-am, a Hachmonite”
in the parallel passage of 1 Chronicles 11:11
(Rsv omits “Adino the Eznite” in the 2 Sm pas-
sage, replacing it with “Josheb-basshebeth
Tah-chemonite’”).
Ezra (Person). 1. Religious reformer follow-
ing Israel’s return from exile. Ezra’s genealogy
(Ezr 7:1-5; cf. 1 Chr 6:3—-15) places him in the
high priestly Aaron-Zadok family line, which
accounts for the importance of his scribal and
priestly activities. He is called “priest” (Ezr
10:10,16; Neh 8:2), “scribe” (Ezr 7:6; Neh 12:36),
and “priest and scribe” (Ezr 7:11,12; Neh 8:9;
12:26). The OT scribe was not a mere copyist,
as in Christ’s time, but a profound student of
God’s laws and commandments (Ezr 7:11,12;
Jer 8:8). In the commission of the Persian king
Artaxerxes to Ezra, the king described him as
“scribe” (Ezr 7:6—11). It was Ezra who began
the traditional view of the scribe as a religious
leader, a “bookman”; the view lasted until 200
Bc. Scribes were qualified to teach and preach
the Scriptures as well as interpret them, but
by the 1st century ap the scribe’s function was
more specialized.
As “Secretary of State for Jewish Affairs” in
the Persian empire, Ezra visited Jerusalem
about 458 Bc, and on his return reported his
findings. Little was done, however, until Nehe-
miah went to Jerusalem in 445. Once the city
walls had been rebuilt, Ezra instituted a reli-
gious reformation in which the ancient Torah
(the Law) was made the norm for Jewish life.
He also demanded that Jews who had married
foreigners must divorce them to maintain the
Jewish purity the Torah required. Ezra set
an example of piety and dedication through
prayer and fasting, and this placed his reform-
ing zeal in proper spiritual perspective. He set
the pattern for life in the postexilic Jewish
commonwealth, making God’s Word and wor-
ship central features. The date and place of his
death are unknown.
Louis GOLDBERG & R. K. HARRISON
See Ezra, Book OF; POSTEXILIC PERIOD, THE.
2. KJV rendering of Ezrah in 1 Chronicles 4:17.
See EZRAH.
Ezra, Book of. One of the historical books
of the OT, associated with 2 Chronicles and
Nehemiah.
Name. In the Talmud tractate Baba Bathra
15a, the rabbis and scribes regarded Ezra and
Nehemiah as one book. Josephus (Apion 1.8)
also considered the two books to be one when
the number of OT books was given as 22.
Some church fathers, such as Melito of Sardis
and Jerome, thought of them as one book. The
Ezra, Book of
Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) also
grouped the two books as one, referring to
them as 2 Ezra to distinguish them from an
apocryphal book known as 1 Ezra. The Latin
Vulgate, however, calls Ezra “1 Ezra” and Ne-
a hemiah “2 Ezra.”
Historical Background. The Jewish peo-
‘ple came under the rule of the Persian empire
when Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 Bc.
From then until Ezra’s time the Persian kings
were: Cyrus (539-530 BC), who allowed the
Jewish people and other captives to return to
their homeland (Ezr 1); Cambyses (529-522
Bc); Gaumata, a usurper of the throne (522
Bc); Darius I (521-486 Bc; Ezr 5:6); Xerxes I
(OT Ahazuerus, 485-465 Bc; Ezr 4:6); Arta-
xerxes I (464-424 Bc; Ezr 4:7-23; 7:1-10:44).
Both Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s work fall within
the period between Cyrus and Artaxerxes I.
Some scholars, however, place Ezra during
the reign of Artaxerxes II (404-359 Bc).
The Sources. By tradition, the Jewish lead-
er Ezra researched and put together the mate-
rial that forms his book. Chapters 7—10 are
written in the first person singular, and Ezra
may have used the autobiographical passages
as the core of this book, adding information
from other sources. That the book contains
portions written in Aramaic has been used as
justification for assigning a date later than Ez-
ra’s time. But the Aramaic of Ezra bears a re-
markable similarity to 5th century Bc Aramaic
papyri from the Jewish community at Elephan-
tine, in Egypt.
The book is largely a compilation, using
autobiography, official documents, edicts, and
other material. The present Book of Ezra con-
tains four identifiable strata of source mate-
rial.
Memoirs of Ezra. Certain sections appear
in the first person singular (7:27-9:15), located
between third person narratives (7:1—26; 10).
The memoirs were probably part of Ezra’s
own Official reports.
Aramaic Documents. Aramaic was the dip-
lomatic language in the Persian empire, and a
number of documents appear in the Book of
Ezra. A letter of complaint was written to Ar-
taxerxes I about the rebuilding of the city
walls, for example, and Ezra also included the
official reply (4:8—23). There is also a letter of
Darius IJ and the king’s reply (5:1—6:18). An offi-
cial authorization by the Persian court of Ar-
taxerxes permitted Ezra to return, and also
included a description of material entrusted
into his keeping (7:12—26). All of those sections
were official correspondence, so the record
naturally is written in Aramaic.
Hebrew Lists. Ezra included Hebrew docu-
ments listing people’s names for a number of
purposes. One such document indicated the
757
Ezra, Book of
Persian government’s permission for Jewish
immigrants to return to the land of Israel (Ezr
1:2-4). It was a Jewish version of Cyrus’ gen-
eral edict expressing concern for all his sub-
jects. The edict in Aramaic is repeated by Ezra
in 6:3-5, and that version is probably taken
from an original memorandum of a royal deci-
sion. Ezra included lists of the immigrants who
returned to begin the second commonwealth of
Israel (ch 2, repeated in Neh 7). The book also
contains a list of immigrants who returned
with Ezra by permission of Artaxerxes I (8:1—
14). Lists of those who had married pagan
wives are provided as well (10:18—43).
Narrative. The rest of the book comprises
narrative by Ezra himself. For the period of
the first return prior to his own time, he proba-
bly drew upon existing sources, either oral or
documentary. Material in the book that was
contemporary with the scribe would be his
personal account about his own work.
Date. Traditionally the Artaxerxes in Ezra
7:1 has been identified with Artaxerxes I Longi-
manus. Ezra’s arrival in Jerusalem would thus
have been in 458 Bc (“the 7th year of the king,”
7:8). Therefore Ezra’s work at Jerusalem
started before Nehemiah, who came in 445 BC.
But the traditional dates are questioned
from a number of sources. One alternative is
to place Nehemiah during the reign of Arta-
xerxes I (464-424 Bc) and Ezra at a later date,
in the reign of Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404-359
Bc). Such a suggestion creates a difficulty with
Nehemiah 8:2, because there Ezra is named as
Nehemiah’s contemporary and fellow worker.
In addition, the Elephantine papyri (407—
400 BC) mention the high priest Johanan in Je-
rusalem, and Sanballat as governor of Sa-
maria. Johanan is considered a grandson of
Eliashib, but Nehemiah was a contemporary
of Eliashib (Neh 3:1,20). The biblical material
that speaks of Nehemiah going to Jerusalem
in the 2oth year of Artaxerxes (Neh 1:1, 445 BC)
and again during the 32nd year (Neh 13:6, 433
Bc) refers to Eliashib’s contemporary high
priesthood with Ezra. The traditional position
‘thus furnishes a better date for the Book of
Ezra. If the scribe were placed during the
reign of Artaxerxes II (c. 397 Bc), his ministry
would be too late for the high priesthood of
Johanan.
More recently scholars suggest that Ezra’s
return and work should be dated in Arta-
xerxes’ 37th year (c. 428 Bc). The assertion is
that Ezra 7:8 contains a copyist’s error and
should read “‘thirty-seventh year of the king’
rather than “seventh year,’ thus allowing for
a return by Ezra later than Nehemiah but
still within the reign of Artaxerxes I. A num-
ber of possibilities are advanced to counter
this proposal.
758
(1) If ‘‘seventh year” is an error in Ezra
77,8, and “‘thirty-seventh” should replace it,
then there seems to be a difficulty because the
reforms of Nehemiah were carried on in the
“‘thirty-second”’ year of Artaxerxes (Neh 13:6).
It is difficult to accept the idea that measures
against intermarriage with foreigners would
have to be repeated only five years after Nehe-
miah had dealt with the problem. It is much
easier to hold to the traditional dates, main-
taining that Nehemiah had to address the
same problem after Ezra’s reform.
(2) Another argument in favor of the 37th
year of Artaxerxes is a supposed difficulty in
reconciling Ezra’s description of Jerusalem as
fairly well organized (8:33—-35) with Nehemi-
ah’s description of the city as “broken down
and... destroyed by fire” and desolate (Neh
1:3; 2:17). Therefore some suppose that Ezra
came after Nehemiah, when the city was bet-
ter organized and more fully populated. But
the scriptural record does not describe the sit-
uation that way. When Nehemiah arrived in
Jerusalem, his complaint was not that the
city was uninhabited, but that the city walls
had not been rebuilt and that some areas of
the city still showed the effects of war. No-
where does Ezra say that the city was totally
repopulated in his day. But it was not secure,
and that was what Nehemiah desired. As long
as Jerusalem was not militarily protected,
neighboring peoples didn’t care. Only when
the Jewish people began to rebuild the walls
did the surrounding states make problems for
Nehemiah. The point is that Ezra returned to
Jerusalem in 458 Bc to do a specific job in
making the Law the civic standard for the
Jewish community. Nehemiah’s journey to Je-
rusalem in 445 BC was prompted by deep con-
cern for the people’s welfare, as they were at
the mercy of their neighbors in the defense-
less city. The urgency of the situation im-
pressed itself upon him so much on his ar-
rival that he bent every effort to secure the
city and create the means by which the popu-
lation could protect themselves.
(3) Still another charge against the tradi-
tional position is that if Ezra’s reforms (chs
g,10) preceded Nehemiah (ch 8), then Ezra had
failed in his ministry. If Ezra’s reforms were
considered contemporary with Nehemiah, the
two accounts could be more easily put to-
gether. But the Scripture specifically indicates
that Ezra dealt only with the problem of inter-
marriage with pagans (9:10) about 458 Bc. Ne-
hemiah, though also confronting intermar-
riage, dealt with additional problems: unfair
interest (ch 5), temple quarters given to To-
biah the Ammonite (ch 13), neglect in pre-
senting tithes, and the desecration of the sab-
bath. It would seem that there are two alto-

gether different accounts in view in the books
of Ezra and Nehemiah. It is quite possible that
the evil of foreign intermarriages could have
arisen again and therefore required the atten-
tion of Nehemiah a second time.
Languages. The language of Ezra for the
most part is Hebrew; the exceptions are 4:7;
6:18; and 7:12—26, which are written in Ara-
maic. The Hebrew portion appears to resem-
ble the language of Daniel, Haggai, and 2
Chronicles much more than later Hebrew,
such as that of Ecclesiasticus. As indicated,
the Aramaic portions resemble the Elephan-
tine papyri, dated at about 407—400 Bc. In addi-
tion, Persian personal and family names and
Persian words and expressions occur in the
book, such as Bigvai, Mithredath, and Elam.
All of these evidences serve to place the book
in about the 5th century Bc.
Text and Versions. The Hebrew Masoretic
text of Ezra seems well preserved. The Septua-
gint version is a bit shorter than the Masoretic
text. Only parts of Ezra 4 and 5 have been
found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Some Critical Problems. There seems to
have been an unsuccessful attempt to build
the walls and foundation of Jerusalem
4:6-23). The passage is actually a history of
opposition to rebuilding the ruined temple
(4:1). It narrates the frustrations experienced
by the Judean community from the time of
return to their homeland during Cyrus’ rule
up to the time of King Darius. The prophet
Haggai (520 Bc) aroused the people with his
message and persuaded them to lay the foun-
dations of the new temple. When the building
was only partly complete, another lengthy in-
terval ensued during the reign of Ahasuerus,
or Xerxes, and the early part of Artaxerxes’
regime. During this period complaints were
made to the Persian authorities that the re-
turned Judeans were rebuilding the city wall
of Jerusalem, and as a result the work
halted for some time. In Ezra 4 the writer
recorded the opposition launched against the
reconstruction of the temple. Accordingly he
shows that in the days of Cyrus (4:1-5) and
Darius I (4:24; 5:1-17) the project met with
opposition. This continued through the reign
of Xerxes I (4:6) and was finally dealt with
under Artaxerxes I (4:7—23), when Nehemiah
appeared on the scene. Construction stopped
in Jerusalem until the second year of Darius.
Ezra resumes the theme of the book in chap-
Temsse
Nate the type of building activities
forth in Ezekiel 5:6—23, when “walls’’
“foundations of the city’’ are mentioned but
not the temple (vv 12,21). Note in contrast
that when telling the story of the problem of
the erection of the temple, Ezra pointed out
Ezra, Book of
the problems, frustrations, and hindrances
the Jewish people had with its construction.
It was not until a diligent search had been
made in the archives by the Persian authori-
ties that the original edict granting permis-
sion to build the temple was found (5:7—6:5).
Internal evidence suggests that a long histori-
‘cal insertion existed, having to do largely
with the matter of the walls of the city (vv 5—
23). It readily can be seen that Ezra was deal-
ing with the evil intentions of Judah’s ene-
mies and that the opposition of Rehum and
Shimshai did not appear in the 520s because
they lived in the 460s, early in the reign of
Artaxerxes I. We should recognize that Ezra’s
approach is topical rather than chronological
where, in the middle of describing the earlier
opposition to building the temple, he com-
plained that the same kind of opposition was
being repeated in his day concerning the at-
tempt to rebuild the city walls and repair the
fortifications of Jerusalem.
Still another problem has to do with the
differences in the versions of Cyrus’ edict, the
Hebrew one in Ezra I and the Aramaic version
in Ezra 6. However, the edict in the latter was
(Ez found in Ecbatana in Persia, while that in
Ezra 1 was given in Babylon to the Jewish
people in Hebrew. The Aramaic copy was on
file for preservation in the archives, whereas
the Hebrew form was given to the Jewish peo-
ple themselves. It is interesting to note that
Cyrus dealt with a number of refugee peoples
and that he gave permission to each of them
to return to their own lands and rebuild their
temples. The set form of such edicts would pro-
vide for acknowledging various gods. When
dealing with the God of the Jews, Cyrus in-
serted the name of Yahweh, who is related to
Israel; on the other hand, when he spoke to
the Babylonians, he addressed himself to
Marduk.
was Purpose. The Book of Ezra is a straightfor-
ward account of one of the most important
events in Jewish history. From a priestly point
of view, it is an account of the restoration of
Jewish people to their homeland following the
Babylonian dispersion. The record tells of two
distinct returns, one under the leadership of
Zerubbabel (ch 1-6; 538 Bc) and, 80 years later,
the second return led by Ezra (chs 7-10; 458
Bc). The book emphasizes Ezra’s leadership
and the reestablishment of the people on their
land, both of which were to have important
future consequences.
set Little is known about the political activity
and of Ezra in the Persian court. He appears to
have been a man of considerable influence,
however, and could well be described as an
official who held a position corresponding to
that of “Secretary of State for Jewish Af-
759
Ezrah

fairs.” To what extent that function applied to Bibliography. L.W. Batten, A Critical and Exegetical
the Persian empire as a whole is uncertain, Commentary on the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah; C.F. Keil,
The Books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther; H.G.M. William-
since Ezra’s recorded activities took place son, Ezra, Nehemiah.
only in the area known to the Persians as the
province “Beyond the River,” that is, the terri- Ezrah. Father of four sons from Judah’s
tory lying to the west of the Euphrates. The tribe (1 Chr 4:17, KJv Ezra).
importance of Ezra’s position in the Persian
empire is indicated by the fact that King Ar- Ezrahite. Word occurring only three times
taxerxes gave him full authority to do what- in the OT. Twice it is used as a title for Ethan
ever he thought necessary for the welfare of (Ps 89 title; 1 Kgs 4:31) and once as a name
his people and the empire (7:21-26). Ezra’s given to Heman (Ps 88 title). It is no longer
genealogy is given in 7:1~-5, and he is consis- thought to be a family name, but instead signi-
tently spoken of as a scribe learned in the fies a member of a pre-Israelite family.
Mosaic law. As a descendant of Zadok the
priest he would have the authority to instruct Ezri. Son of Chelub and one of the men who
others in the Torah. Louis GOLDBERG supervised the tilling of David’s lands (1 Chr
See POSTEXILIC PERIOD, THE; EZRA (PERSON) # 1. 27:26).

760
Fair Havens. Small harbor, identifiable
with modern Limenes Kali, positioned along
Crete’s southern coast about five miles east of
Cape Matala near the city of Lasea. Here
Paul’s ship sought shelter from contrary winds
on his voyage to Rome (Acts 27:8).
Faith. State wholly and steadfastly in God.
Faith lies at the very heart of Christianity, and
its importance for today’s Christian is clear
from the fact that Protestantism was born
through the rediscovery of the great words
“The just shall live by faith’ (Rom 1:17 Ksv).
Definition. Faith in the OT and NT car-
ries several meanings. It may mean simple
trust in God or in the Word of God, and at
other times faith almost becomes equivalent
to active obedience. It may also find expres-
sion in the affirmation of a creedal statement.
Thus it also comes to mean the entire body of
received Christian teaching or truth. So in Co-
lossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be
accepted as’a whole and embodied in personal
life. In 2 Timothy 4:7 Paul witnesses to having
“kept the faith.”
The OT. In the OT, faith first involved
God as the Creator, Sustainer of life, and the
Controller of history. Psalms such as 19 and 24
are evidence of the trust in God as the Creator,
whose sovereign power continues to operate in
the creation.
The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as
confidence in God’s covenant or in the cov-
enant God has made with Abraham and his
descendants. The call of Abraham and the
promise that his descendants would be used in
the history of redemption became the basis of
the narratives of the OT, being seen as the
working out of that covenant. Once the nation
Israel is brought into being, God sustains and
protects it. The land which was promised to
Abraham and his descendants remains theirs.
The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indica-
761
tion that God is at work restoring his people
to the Promised Land. The obedience of the
people of God as the proper expression of faith
is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God,
his people believe and obey him. Abraham
leaves his native land to go into unknown ter-
ritory. The people of Israel leave Egypt fol-
lowing the leadership of God to a land they
cannot see. The promise of God gives them
courage to possess the land that has been
promised to them. After the exodus the cov-
enant of Abraham was confirmed with the peo-
ple of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex
24:6,7). There was to be strict obedience to
God’s commands as an expression of faith.
This response of human faith to Jehovah's
faithfulness was national and collective: There
also were, however, commands to and _ in-
stances of personal faith.
Not only the narrative and legal portions of
the OT, but also the poetic and prophetic writ-
ings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in
expressions of personal confidence in Jehovah
even in dark times. Habbakuk points out that
“the righteous shall live by his faith” (2:4).
From such instances it is clear that as Jeho-
vah’s education of Israel proceeded, the mat-
ter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more
and more a matter of individual and personal
response, and it is in the prophets that several
ingredients such as trust, obedience, fear, and
certainty blend into the understanding of such
personal faith.
The NT. As over against the OT, where the
accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT
the emphasis is placed on the active, respond-
ing faith of the hearer to the promised, final
revelation in the Messiah, Jesus Christ. Both
verb and noun regularly describe the adequate
response of man to Jesus’ word and deed and
to the gospel of the primitive church.
The Synoptic Gospels. The most striking
feature of the synoptic Gospels is the use of
Faith
The restored portion of the
synagogue at Capernaum, the
city where Jesus saw the faith
of the men who lowered the
paralytic through the roof of a
house (Mk 2:5).
faith without identifying its object. “If you
have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt
17:20). “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50).
“When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5). Jesus is
portrayed as one who by his work and word
opens the door to faith and makes faith possi-
ble. The question is not whether the faith is in
Jesus or in the Father; the implication is un-
doubtedly both, but as with every true bearer
of the Word of God the eye of faith is turned to
the One who sends.
On more than one occasion Jesus denies the
request for a miracle to substantiate his words
(Mt 12:38,39; 16:1—4). Faith is response to the
Word alone without any supporting props. No
sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the
story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19—
31) Jesus denies the request for the spec-
tacular and insists that the hearer must re-
spond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29).
The Word demands self-surrender and commit-
ment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and
762
of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and
the powerful.
Faith is the medium by which the power of
God is made visible. It moves mountains,
heals the sick, and is the means of entrance
into the kingdom. It may be mingled with
doubt, as with the father who sought healing
for his son (‘I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk
9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison,
who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by
Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman
(Mt 11:2~-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’)
perception was very faulty, but Jesus affirms
Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of
the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the
early faith of the disciples in all its limitations
and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is
their positive response to Jesus’ word and
work.
The Fourth Gospel. Faith is an especially
significant concept in the Gospel of John,
though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as

a verb. Quite often the reference has to do
with the acceptance that something is true,
that is, simple credence, or belief: ‘‘Believe me
that I am in the Father and the Father in me”
(Jn 14:11); “If you had believed Moses, you
would believe me” (Jn 5:46). This is consistent
with the importance of “truth” in the fourth
Gospel. (Cf. also Jn 8:24; 11:27,42; 16:27,30;
17:8.)
Even more significant is the special expres-
sion ‘‘to believe into’’ in the sense of putting
one’s trust into another. The particular form
of the expression is without parallel before the
fourth Gospel and may well express the strong
sense of personal trust in the eternal Word
made flesh. In John 3:16 whoever puts trust in
him has eternal life. Those who put their trust
in him are given power to become sons of
God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will
never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though
they die (11:25).
In other places John speaks of trust or faith
in an absolute sense, that is, without referring
to the one in whom trust is placed. In John
11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus
and is glad “in order that you might believe.”
The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly in
the prologue (Jn 1:7), John the Baptist bears
witness in order that through him all might
believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas
concerning the resurrection, he says, ‘“‘Have
you believed because you have seen me?
Blessed are those who have not seen and yet
believe” (20:29). In these and other passages
the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to
himself is trust.
Faith and knowledge are closely related. In
John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and
have come to know that you are the Holy One
of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that
eternal life is to “know thee, the only true
God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent”’
(Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of
faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only
Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has
seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).
To believe is also expressed in the verb “‘re-
ceive.’ Those who receive Christ are given
power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12).
Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by
which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made
present.
Paul. In his letters Paul writes about faith
from a number of angles. He sets faith over
against “works of the Law” as the only and
true basis for righteousness (Rom 1-4; Gal 1-
4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point:
“Abraham believed God and it was reckoned
to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; Rom 4:5;
Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the Law
(Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God
763
Faith
through faith in Christ, specifically in his aton-
ing work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his
awareness of the radical and pervasive sinful-
ness of humans which renders each one help-
less. Humanity is dead in sin, but is made
alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus
mediated through the gospel.
Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The
number of metaphors Paul employs to de-
scribe the consequences of faith is staggering.
It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom
5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph
1:7), made alive (Eph 2:5), adopted into the
family of God (Rom 8:15,16), re-created (2 Cor
5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col
1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul,
the sine qua non of every aspect of salvation,
from the grace that convicts to the receiving
of the full inheritance at the coming of the
Lord.
In Paul’s letters faith is bound up with love
so that the great exponent of justification by
faith becomes also the articulate exponent of
distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is
indispensable to salvation is only part of the
truth, for faith expresses itself through love:
“For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor
uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith work-
ing through love’ (Gal 5:6); “If Ihave all faith,
so as to remove mountains, but have not love,
I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the
genesis and the ultimate expression of faith.
Hence, even for Paul there can be no total sepa-
ration between faith and works. This love of
which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the
Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived.
Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does
faith find expression in love.
Rest of the NT.. James speaks of faith as
being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He is op-
posing that concept of faith which thinks pri-
marily of creedal assent, of believing that
something is true without acting upon it.
James assumes, like Paul, the primacy of faith
but is warning against those who would draw
wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is
not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical di-
mension of faith is the burden of much of this
epistle.
The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith
has always been characteristic of the people of
God and their specially called leaders. Faith
makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous
and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not
visible. By faith the people of God have a more
certain ground for their lives and their action
than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1).
The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testi-
mony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.
Faith is opened up by the Word of God,
finds expression through the Holy Spirit who
Faithfulness
is given, and bears witness to the lordship of
Jesus Christ.
Faith and Reason. Any serious discussion
of faith must give some attention to the re-
lation of faith to reason. Historically, three
major views have emerged regarding this rela-
tionship.
The Thomistic View. Reason precedes faith
in the sense that the truth of at least some of
the objects of belief can be rationally demon-
strated. Thus, the existence of God can be
proved to any rational human being willing to
honestly examine the evidence. Some forms of
this position undertake to prove the whole of
the teachings of Christianity, so that faith is
virtually a function of reason. In other forms,
faith takes over where reason leaves off, ac-
cepting on the basis of authority what cannot
be established by reason.
The Augustinian View. Faith precedes rea-
son, but makes reason possible. From the per-
spective of faith, understanding can emerge.
Thus, while faith does not result from reason,
it is in harmony with it. Neither faith nor rea-
son can dispense with each other.
The Tertullian View. Faith and reason do
not support one another. Hence one believes
virtually in spite of reason. This position, of-
ten referred to as fideism (faithism), may ei-
ther take the form that faith and reason are
quite independent of one another, or that they
are opposed. In the latter case, there is a dis-
junction between the two, leading to conflict
or tension.
There arise here three questions: (1) the in-
ternal relation of God as Creator to the God
who reveals himself to his creatures; (2) the
structure of humankind as the crownpiece of
God’s creation; and (3) the meaning of reli-
gious statements in general and of Christian
thought in particular.
As Creator, God built a pattern of struc-
tures into the world. In placing man within
that world, he addressed himself to man’s
mind. This involved a capability upon the part
of man to receive, not only impressions, but
information. The fall of man made the issue
especially crucial, for any plan for recovery
would need to appeal to his thinking pro-
cesses. This would suggest the necessity for
points of clear contact between the human
mind and what man would need in order to
believe in, and respond to, the call of grace.
As the culmination of God’s creation, man
was placed in a world which flashed all sorts
of signals, and these would include data con-
cerning the nature of the world. With the fall,
the need became urgent for some harmony be-
tween knowledge gained by his usual reason-
ing powers, and that addressed to him by God
in saving love and grace. In such a situation
764
man could scarcely act purposively, to say
nothing of acting morally and spiritually, if
there were no possibility of relating the intima-
tions of grace to the signals from his world.
After all, one can scarcely act on the basis of
two vital abilities (i.e., reason and faith) if
these have no connection with one another.
The question of the meaning of religious
statements has, of course, historical dimen-
sion. While truth does not change, human un-
derstanding of truth does. Certainly no one
would maintain seriously that we are asked to
accept in faith what is absurd. What is true
must have value to the thinking mind, and
where religious faith touches the mind, it
must appeal to the best modes and ways of
thought.
It is well known that much thinking of our
time is undergirded by the idea that every-
thing is in process, that there is nothing which
can be regarded as final and fixed. The rela-
tion of faith to reason is particularly crucial
here, for Scripture clearly indicates that there
are realities in the Judeo-Christian tradition
which are enduring. This suggests that in relat-
ing faith to reason, one must at times go out-
side the usual ways of viewing the world,
man, God, and man’s relation to him.
Scripture gives valuable assistance here.
Paul states that ‘‘the man without the Spirit”
(NIv) (the “natural man’’) cannot accept God’s
thoughts which the Holy Spirit teaches (1 Cor
2:14). It is also asserted that faith is closely
related to understanding. Note, for instance,
the words of Hebrews 11:3: “By faith we under-
stand that the world was created by the Word
of God, so that what is seen was made out of
things which do not appear.”
From the foregoing, it seems clear that
Scripture takes for granted that reason and
faith are not two separate and unrelated abili-
ties; rather, they are both inescapably bound
up in the structure of the total person. In the
final analysis, neither can safely stand alone.
Reason without faith may deteriorate into a
mere gathering of facts—facts that are never
really put together. Faith without reason, on
the other hand, can trail off into vagueness
and lack of meaning.
ROBERT W. Lyon
Bibliography. D.M. Baillie, Faith in God; G.C. Berk-
ouwer, Faith and Justification; D.M. Emmet, Philosophy and
Faith; R.M. Hals, Grace and Faith in the OT; P.S. Minear,
The Obedience ofFaith.
Faithfulness. Maintaining faith or alle-
giance; showing a strong sense of duty or con-
scientiousness. In biblical Hebrew, ‘‘faith’”’ and
“faithfulness” are grammatically related. Al-
though both concepts are important in the OT,
there is no English word exactly equivalent to

the Hebrew terms. The most relevant Hebrew
verbal root (related to our word “‘amen’’) car-
ries such meanings as “‘strengthen,” ‘‘support,” ing on him for all things (Hab 2:4; cf Rom
or “hold up.” In a physical sense it is used of 1:17).
pillars that provide support for doors (2 Kgs
18:16). Moses used the word when he dis-
claimed any role as supporter of the Israelites Falcon.
(Nm 11:12). God, however, is an eternally firm - sight, and declared unclean in the OT (Lv
support for his people (Dt 7:9; Is 49:7). II:14).
With that notion of firm support as the bed-
rock for faith, words such as “firmness,” “‘con-
stancy,” or “‘trustworthiness” best convey the
related concept of faithfulness. Trustworthi-
ness, or steadfastness of character, is ascribed
to the object of one’s trust. To be unfaithful is
to be unworthy of confidence or belief. In the
OT a synonym for “faithfulness” is “truth.”
Since God is consistently true he is the logical
object of human trust (Ps 71:22; Is 61:8). When
used of God in the OT, the word “‘faithfulness”’
frequently refers to his unwavering commit-
ment to his promises.
Human Faithfulness. Faith and faithful-
ness are logically and linguistically one in the
OT and NT. That is, the major words for faith
in both Testaments also connote the concept
of “faithfulness.” This indicates that faith is
more than momentary assent to the truth of
God. It is commitment to that truth, and it
manifests itself in continued obedience. Abra-
ham’s life in this regard is instructive. He as-
sented to, relied upon, and acted in confor-
mity to the revealed Word of God. He received
God’s revelation as true (i.e., demonstrating
faith), and his subsequent actions proved his
faithfulness. He left home and country, settled
in a strange land, and offered up his son Isaac
as God commanded. His willingness to sacri-
fice his only son is an unparalleled expression
of faithfulness in the OT. It is no surprise,
therefore, that Abraham is commended for his
steadfastness and is set forth in the NT as one
whose behavior should be imitated by Chris-
tians (Gal 3:6—9; Heb 11:8—10). Faithfulness,
then, must not be viewed as an isolated act.
Rather it is an attitude that should character-
ize the entire life of those who say they have
faith in God. Although by definition all unbe-
lievers are characterized by unfaithfulness,
God’s children are called to manifest faithful-
ness as a fruit of the Holy Spirit (Gal 5:22; cf.
Eph 2:8).
God’s Faithfulness. In spite of Israel’s
faithlessness (Dt 32:20; cf. Rom 3:3), God
showed himself to be absolutely reliable. His
faithfulness is great (Lam 3:23). He is loyal to
his covenant and will always manifest his
steadfast love to his people (Ps 136).
The pinnacle of faithfulness in the Bible is
seen in the work of Jesus Christ, who showed
himself faithful to his Father (Heb 3:2) and in
765
Fall of Man
his witness (Rv 1:5). God calls men and
women to be faithful by following Christ, rely-
STuarT D. Sacks
Bird of prey noted for keen eye-
See BirDs (KESTREL).
Fall of Man. Transition from a state of
moral innocence and favor with God to a state
of condemnation and death, which occurred in
the history of mankind with Adam’s eating of
the forbidden fruit.
Biblical Evidence. The narrative of cre-
ation in Genesis 1 and 2 affirms the distinc-
tiveness of both man’s nature and task. Man
was created in the image of God for the pur-
pose of communion and fellowship with God.
As God's vicegerent, he was given dominion
on the earth to cultivate and use its resources
for the glory of God. Man was created righ-
teous with a disposition and with every en-
couragement to do good.
In addition to the cultural mandate, man
also received a specific command. He was au-
thorized to use the vegetation of the garden of
Eden for food, but he was expressly forbidden
to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil. The purpose of this command was to in-
troduce into the human consciousness the radi-
cal antithesis between good and evil and to
confirm man in service of the Creator. As a
faithful and loyal servant, man was to enjoy
all the blessings bestowed by his father in
heaven and at last be led into the fulness of
eternal life with God.
Man was made a living creature as were
the animals, but the core of his life was to be
union and communion with God. Fellowship
with God was to become Adam’s conscious
possession, in contrast to the animals which
know neither the possibility of sin nor con-
scious communion with God.
In full awareness of the evil of the alterna-
tive, man was to serve God willingly and lov-
ingly. His life before God was therefore to be
religious rather than instinctive.
The purpose of God in giving the command
not to eat was to establish man in the ways of
righteousness and faith, but Satan used the
command as an occasion to tempt man to
rebel against God. Although there was no evil
for man in being tempted, it was evil for Sa-
tan to tempt man to sin. This means that there
was evil in the universe prior to the fall of
man. It was the apparent purpose of Satan to
subject man to himself, and through man to
Fall of Man
extend his kingdom of darkness over the earth.
The fall of man and the subsequent program
of redemption must be understood in the con-
text of the cosmic conflict between God and
Satan, in which the ultimate triumph of God
is assured.
Satan approached Adam by way of Eve, us-
ing as his instrument the serpent and urging
them to eat of the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil.
The difference between good and evil was
not concealed from man prior to the fall,
though man’s experiential knowledge was
only of the good. Adam was to receive instruc-
tion concerning the nature of this distinction
and the consequences of eating or not eating
only from God. As he had received life in the
beginning from his Creator, so he was to live
in obedience to every word that proceeded
from the mouth of God. Such obedience was
believing trust in God. Adam was a righteous
man whose destiny was to live by faith.
The point of the temptation was to urge in-
dependence from God. Satan called into ques-
tion the truth of God and challenged his au-
thority. He led man to think that he could
determine for himself the difference between
good and evil and that he could control the
consequences to his own advantage. It was the
temptation for man to be a god to himself.
Adam fell when he yielded to the tempta-
tion of Satan and, together with his wife, ate
of the forbidden fruit. As it is impossible to
establish the date of the creation, so it is im-
possible to establish the date of the fall or the
length of time between the creation and the
fall. The length of this period is not theologi-
cally significant, but the historicity. of it is.
The sin of man is not eternal, nor is the fall
given with the creation or existence of man.
The fall took place in calendar history at a
point subsequent to the creation as an act of
rebellion by the creature against the Creator.
The act of rebellion was an act of disobedi-
ence, disloyalty, faithlessness, and unbelief. As
the command not to eat summarized and
brought to a focus all that was involved in
righteousness before God, so the transgression
epitomized radical apostasy from God. Satan
attacked Adam precisely at the concentration
point of man’s covenant loyalty. Undivided
obedience to God gave way to whole-souled
rebellion and complete revolt: the authority of
God was repudiated; the goodness of God was
doubted; the wisdom of God was disputed;
and the truth of God was contradicted. A
whole new complex of affections and emotions
took possession of the heart and mind of man.
The cause of the fall is not located in God,
for he is not the author of evil. Nor is the
cause to be found in Satan, since the tempta-
766
tion was the occasion for the fall, not the
cause of it. There is no rationale for man’s vol-
untary acquiescence to the temptation and the
overt act flowing from this acquiescence.
Effects of the Fall. The immediate effects
of the fall are visible in the loss of boldness
and joy in the presence of God and the emer-
gence of fear and shame. They are visible also
in the alienation of Adam and Eve from God
and in the revolution in the relation that God
sustains to man. This is exemplified in the
curse in relation to man, but more pointedly
in the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the
garden. The garden was the dwelling place of
righteousness, the sphere of union and commu-
nion between man and God. Expulsion was
inevitable once the communion was severed
by unrighteousness.
As God had warned, the consequence of sin
was death. Righteousness is the way of blessed-
ness and life in communion with God; sin is
punished by the suffering of hell in separation
from God’s beneficent presence. Since death
intervenes at every point where there is life, it
works itself out also in the dissolution of the
body in the grave.
The consequences of the fall are not limited
to Adam and Eve but extend to all those de-
scended from the first pair by natural genera-
tion, because there is a unique relation of soli-
darity existing by divine institution between
Adam and the rest of the race. Some theolo-
gians accent the generic connection between
Adam and his descendants, while others focus
on the covenant relationship of Adam as the
head and representative of his posterity. The
consequences of Adam’s transgression for the
human race are the imputation of his sin to
all his descendants, their consequent liability
to death, and their inheritance of a depraved
nature.
The results of the fall are also manifest in
the cosmos as the curse works itself out in the
resistance offered to the accomplishment of
the original cultural mandate. Only with the
pain and danger attendant upon childbirth is
the world populated, and only with arduous,
toilsome labor is the food, clothing, and shel-
ter necessary to sustain life provided.
However, the fact that death does not de-
scend immediately upon man after the fall as
final judgment is indicative of God’s saving
purpose for man. Adam does not hear the
curse pronounced until he has heard the prom-
ise of a savior (Gn 3:15). An indirect conse-
quence of the fall, and one which by no means
justifies or explains it, is the magnificent dis-
play of grace in the redemption wrought by
Christ.
After Genesis 3, the Bible only infrequently
refers to the fall of man, but this historical

event is the indispensible presupposition of all
that follows. The thrust of the Bible is toward
the future—the widening effects of sin and the
unfolding of God’s remedy.
Contemporary Understanding. Within con-
temporary theology of all confessional vari-
eties there is widespread denial of the histori-
city of the biblical account of the fall. It may
be granted that the Genesis account is told as
history continuous with subsequent history
and that within the worldview of the writers
of the Bible, the account is alluded to as his-
tory. But it is argued that moderns can receive
the story of the fall only as myth. This view
has its source in the development of an evolu-
tionary view of human origins coupled with a
negatively critical evaluation of the literary
history of the Genesis account.
Although the historicity of Adam may be
abandoned, there is usually an attempt to ap-
preciate the “truth” conveyed by the myth.
For example, it is said that every person is
Adam, and that everyone living is a sinner as
far back as he or she can remember.
Others see in the myth not a fall, but an
ascent to conscious and independent responsi-
bility. Sin is thought of as necessary to reli-
gious maturity in the same way that exposure
to competition from opponents strengthens
the prowess of an athlete.
Because of the way the Bible parallels
Adam and Christ (Rom 5:12—19; 1 Cor 15:22), a
mythological understanding of Adam leads to
a mythological understanding of Christ. As
Adam becomes a symbol for the universality
of sin and death, so Christ becomes simply a
symbol for the inherent righteousness and re-
demption of all men.
The modern isolation of the message from
the history of Genesis 1-3 violates the integ-
rity of the account without offering a valid
explanation for the universality of sin and
death. Christian doctrine holds that sin en-
tered the world within the horizon of man’s
daily life and is overcome by Christ within
the arena of human history by his death and
resurrection.
NORMAN SHEPHERD
See Sin; MAN, DocrRINE OF; DEATH; ADAM
SON).
Fallow Deer. xsv translation of roebuck, a
ruminant and member of the deer family, in
Deuteronomy 14:5.
See ANIMALS (DEER; GAZELLE).
False Christs. Those who falsely claim to
be the Christ or Messiah. False christs are men-
tioned only in the eschatological discourse of
Jesus recorded by Matthew (24:24) and Mark
(3722):
Family Life and Relations
In that discourse Jesus instructed his disci-
ples about the future. He prophesied the de-
struction of the temple in Jerusalem and
warned about deception and persecution that
would confront the disciples. With a foreshort-
ened perspective characteristic of biblical
prophecy, Jesus blended together the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem and his return as the Son of
man.
He especially warned his disciples that dur-
ing the terrible days surrounding the destruc-
tion of the temple they were not to be de-
ceived by false christs and false prophets (Mk
13:21—23). In this particular form of deception
some would claim that the Christ was in a
particular location (v 21). Those deceivers
would perform signs and wonders to try to
deceive the elect. But Jesus prepared his disci-
ples by instructing them that there will be cos-
mic signs preceding his return as the Son of
man (vv 24-25) and that his coming will be
with great power and glory visible to all.
From history we know Jesus’ instruction
enabled Christians to flee the destruction of
Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70, and to
withstand the deception of false christs. The
church still awaits Jesus’ return as the glori-
ous Son of man.
HoBERrT K. FARRELL
See ANTICHRIST.
False Prophets. See PROPHET, FALSE.
Family Life and Relations. In Bible times,
the family comprised members of a house-
hold, including not only parents and children,
along with other relatives and concubines, but
also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone
else who happened to be within the house and
(PER-
sienna
An ancient baby walker (in the museum in Tel Aviv).
767
Family Life and Relations
was therefore under the protection of the head
of the family. The family of Jacob, for exam-
ple, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8—26).
Biblically, the term ‘family’ is interchange-
able with “‘house,’”’ and ‘founding a house”
can refer to setting up a separate dwelling as
well as establishing a family. In the broader
sense “‘house’”’ may refer to an entire nation
(‘house of Israel’). The heads of families re-
turning from Babylon in the postexilic period
controlled sometimes several hundred family
members (Ezr 8:1-14). The family was a
smaller part of a clan and tribe. In nomadic
times the responsibilities and allegiances cen-
tered on the larger family group.
Those who belonged to the clan knew that
they had to work for common interests and
accept responsibility for the whole group. All
members of the family were to be protected
and assisted in time of need.
As the life of the Israelites became more
settled, families in the wider sense of the
term lived in villages surrounded by fields of
wheat, barley, and flax, with areas of grazing
land for sheep and goats. Each group of vil-
lages consisted of an intermarried, interdepen-
dent family group, such as that of the Danites
of Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 18:11). The hard life
of those days demanded a sharing of work
and the loyal cooperation of the entire family
for survival.
As crafts and trades developed, along with
a more sedentary lifestyle, sons learned their
fathers’ skills and continued the family trade.
Consequently the whole village might follow a
particular craft (1 Chr 4:14; Neh 11:35). By spe-
cializing in such trades, however, the villagers
became less self-sufficient, depending more on
farmers for food and on other specialized vil-
lages for the production of cloth (1 Chr 4:21) or
pottery (v 23).
With the growth of cities, related groups
lived together in specific areas. Many mem-
bers of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah were
listed in the census of Jerusalem by Nehemiah
(Neh 11:4—8), and by the writer of Chronicles
(x Chr 9:4—9). One consequence of life in the
cities was the fragmentation of the family
group. As the bonds of the wider family were
loosened, the unit consisted increasingly of a
husband and wife with their children, living
in one house. The size of houses that have
been excavated precludes the idea of any
larger family unit as the norm in OT societies.
During the kingdom period, although King
David’s unmarried daughter Tamar lived with
him at the palace, his sons Amnon and Absa-
lom set up their own separate houses (2 Sm
13:7,8,20). At that time there were few slaves in
Hebrew society, but they also were considered
members of the family. As bonds of the wider
768
family loosened, and the master of the house-
hold lost a degree of authority, the society be-
came one in which the king was sovereign and
all the people were his subjects.
The early kings of Israel promoted such a
change in order to establish a central ruling
authority for the entire country. The king’s
subjects fell broadly into the categories of em-
ployers and employees, corresponding to the
rich and poor of society. By the 8th century BC,
members of the wider family no longer
worked for the communal ‘good under the au-
thority of the clan’s head; rather, individuals
worked primarily for the good of their own
immediate family. Hence one’s labor and devo-
tion were focused more narrowly, and the
greatest beneficiary was the king, the personal
symbol of the nation.
Emphasis on the smaller family unit in-
creased, and old duties that had been will-
ingly accepted by the wider groups in former
times came to be neglected. People did not al-
ways help relatives in times of need, and they
frequently had to be reminded of their obliga-
tions, particularly toward widows and _ or-
phans (Is 1:17; Jer 7:6). Family feuds also
declined, because members no longer felt re-
sponsible to take vengeance as a way to up-
hold the honor of the clan (2 Sm 3:27; 16:8; 2
Kgs 9:26). Nevertheless, Nehemiah expected Is-
raelites to fight for their family honor (Neh
4:14). In NT times, the family was such a unit
that it could be sold for a debt incurred by one
of its members (Mt 18:25).
The Hebrew religion’s emphasis on family
participation in certain celebrations strength-
ened the small unit. The Passover, for ex-
ample, was always celebrated as a family
thanksgiving meal (Ex 12:3,4,46). The prophet
Samuel’s parents made a traditional annual
pilgrimage to the shrine at Shiloh (¢ Sm
2:19). In modern times, a young Jewish boy’s
arrival at the threshhold of manhood is cele-
brated with the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. Being
so honored in the midst of a religious family
preserves the ancient Hebrew tradition of
family participation in religious ceremonies.
In his preaching Jesus used the family as a
symbol for the relationship of God to his peo-
ple (Mt 19:14; 23:9; Lk 8:21). From the cross he
handed over responsibility for the care of his
mother to his disciple John (Jn 19:27).
In NT times, the communion meals in the
Jerusalem church took place by households
(Acts 2:46). Early Christian meetings were held
in the homes of believers because of opposi-
tion by the authorities. The Book of Acts con-
tains examples of entire families being con-
verted to Christianity (Acts 10:24,44-48; 16:15,
31,32). Timothy learned the gospel from his
grandmother and mother (2'Tm 1:5).

Status of Family Members. From no-
madic times a father’s authority held the fam-
ily group together in their encampment, and
he became the symbol of their security. In
ancient patriarchal societies, the father was
an absolute master who had the power of life
and death over family members, ruling with
unchallenged authority. Although he had ex-
tensive responsibilities for those under his
care, his power was awesome and his status
unquestioned.
A man’s possessions included his wife, ser-
vants, slaves, and animals (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21).
In fact, the phrase “to marry a wife’? comes
from a Hebrew root meaning ‘‘to become the
master of a wife.’’ A husband was as much the
master of his wife as he was of his home or his
fields. Consequently the wife addressed him in
a subservient manner, as a slave would ad-
dress a master (Gn 18:12 KJv; Jgs 19:26). This
low status for a woman extended to a daugh-
ter’s position in the ancient household. Fe-
males were always under the authority of a
male relative: first the father, then a husband,
and if a woman became a widow she was sub-
ject to her husband’s nearest male relative,
who became her “‘redeemer.” The bride-price
(Guieidg: 18)27; VExK 22 :16;973 71) Sn.18:257, 24Sm
3:14) paid by her husband was not exactly a
purchase of the woman from her father, but
the exchange of money did stigmatize her. The
amount of a bride-price depended on the fa-
ther’s status (Gn 34:12). The usual price was
probably 20 to 30 shekels of silver. The price
for a virgin who had been raped was 50 shek-
els, a figure set presumably as a punishment
of the man who had violated her (Dt 22:29).
The bride received gifts of jewelry, ornaments,
and clothing from her future husband, and she
occasionally enjoyed some sort of financial or
material return from the bride-price for her
own use (Jos 15:19; Jgs 1:15). When her father
or husband died the money frequently re-
verted to her.
An engaged woman was considered her fian-
ce’s property just as much as if she were al-
ready married to him (Dt 22:23-27). The
woman left her own family at marriage, to
live with and become part of her new hus-
band’s family. Normally any succeeding mar-
riages would be with members of that family.
In Mesopotamia, according to the law of
Hammurabi, a bridegroom gave presents to
his bride’s parents. If the engagement was bro-
ken off, the bride’s family had to restore dou-
ble the amount of the gifts received. Under
Assyrian law both the bride and her parents
received presents, though most if not all of
those gifts seem to have reverted to the bride
for her personal use. There was nothing resem-
bling a dowry, but a Babylonian woman re-
769
Family Life and Relations
ceived gifts from her father upon marriage,
which could be used by her husband, although
they did not belong to him. Their ownership
remained with her if she became a widow.
Despite the low legal status of the mother
of the family, her life was not as bad as one
might suppose. She was the legal wife, not an
‘unpaid servant, and she frequently took a
strong role as advisor to her husband in fam-
ily affairs. Her most important function, aside
from childbearing, was organization of the
household, of which she was generally the re-
spected manager. Even though the wife might
have been acquired through capture in war
(Dt 21:10-14), she could not be sold as a slave
or daughter could (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5).
Nevertheless her position was precarious,
in that she could be disowned or divorced by
her husband as the result of a simple renuncia-
tion: “She is no longer my wife and I am no
longer her husband.” Perhaps he had found
fault with her culinary skills, or possibly he
was casting his eyes on another woman. In
any event, a husband knew that if his wife did
not obey even a signal or a glance he was
within his rights to obtain a divorce (cf.
Ecclus 25:26). The wife, however, obtained a
certain degree of protection in the letter of re-
pudiation, by which her freedom was formally
restored. Under Jewish tradition a wife could
not divorce her husband.
In ancient Mesopotamia, the law of Ham-
murabi permitted a man to divorce his wife
by pronouncing a stated formula, but despite
that he was still responsible for paying her
compensation. The wife also had the right to
secure a divorce if she could obtain a judg-
ment about her husband’s guilt. Under Assyr-
ian law no compensation was payable to a dis-
carded wife, and she had no right of divorce at
all.
In matters of domestic protocol, the He-
brew wife was not introduced to her hus-
band’s guests, a tradition that subsequently
led to considerable embarrassment for Abra-
ham’s wife Sarah and for Rebekah (Gn 20:16).
A woman normally remained veiled in public
(24:65; 38:14; Is 47:2), which accounts for
Ruth’s mother-in-law Naomi failing to recog-
nize her when she returned home (Ru 3:15,16).
During the period of the monarchy the
queen mother took precedence over the queen
consort (1 Kgs 2:19), a custom probably show-
ing more respect for age than for women.
The imagery in Proverbs 19:13 and 27:15
draws a vigorous comparison between a con-
tentious woman and water dripping from a
leaky roof. The OT leaves little doubt about the
type of behavior expected from a woman. She
was expected to be charming, soft-spoken, dis-
creet, and calm (Prv 9:13; 11:16,22; 21:9). She
Family Life and Relations
was also to be responsible, well-organized, in-
telligent, thoughtful, reverent, and a good man-
ager of both the household and the family
purse (31:10-31). A woman should also be pious
and beautiful, and, in NT tradition, submissive
to her husband, as befitted a woman adorned
with the priceless jewel of a gentle and quiet
spirit (Ti 2:4,5; 1 Pt 3:2—6).
The actions of a few women whose roles in
life do not seem to fit the pattern of the meek,
passive female pictured above, are recorded in
the Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of Ju-
dith and Esther recount heroic tales of how
national fortunes were saved by women. Debo-
rah and Jael were renowned heroines (Jgs 4,5),
and the kingdom of Judah was ruled by a vi-
cious woman, Athaliah, for several years
Kgs 11). The women who stepped to the fore-
front of public life were exceptional and few in
number. Judith was a rich widow, an unusual
thing in Israel.
The Rights of Children. The nature of pa-
triarchal society made for unfortunate distinc-
tions between male and female children. The
position of a daughter, who could be sold into
slavery or sold to be the concubine of a man
and then possibly sold again (Ex 21:7—11), was
certainly inferior to that of a son. In the patri-
archal period, however, both a son and a
daughter could be put to death for disobeying
the head of the family. One’s children could
also be sacrificed in worship rituals (see Gn
22; Jgs 11). It is probable that infant sacrifice
was practiced by nations neighboring Israel,
including Canaan and Ammon.
The rights of children were improved con-
siderably with the promulgation of the code of
Mosaic law. A father was no longer permitted
to put his child to death without referring the
case to the elders (Dt 21:18—21). Both sons and
daughters could be brought before such au-
thorities and accused of being disobedient,
gluttonous, or drunkards. If convicted, they
were stoned to death. A father’s absolute au-
thority even extended to his married son and
family if they were living under his roof. The
law also prohibited children from being held
responsible for the crimes of their parents
(24:16). In King David’s time a person con-
victed by the community had the right of ap-
peal to the king (2 Sm 14:4-11).
In Hebrew families both parents were held
in high respect. Honor had to be given to both
mother and father (Ex 20:12), and the law con-
demned offenses against either parent (21:17;
Lv 20:9; Dt 21:18; 27:16). Respect due to the
mother is a recurrent theme in the Wisdom
literature (Prv 19:26; 20:20; cf. Ecclus 3:1—16).
Marital Security. The security of a wife’s
position improved considerably when she pro-
duced her first child, particularly if it was a
An ancient cradle (in the museum in Tel Aviv).
son. A woman’s primary duty to her husband
(2 and his family was procreation (Gn 1:28; g:1),
and until she gave birth to a son she feared
displacement by a second wife or a concubine.
Polygamous marriages were by no means rare,
especially in wealthy families. They resulted
in two ill-defined family groups, controlled by
the mothers but under the overall authority of
fathers; there were inevitable jealousies and
frictions.
The legal status of a woman was consis-
tently poor in Bible times. With no evidence
at all, a husband could accuse his wife of
adultery, and she was compelled to face a
trial by ordeal. She had to abase herself, tak-
ing an oath, eating dust and a cereal offering,
and drinking bitter water. A priest mean-
while made pronouncements regarding the
dire results that would come to her if she
were guilty: she would become an outcast
with no hope of survival. But if she main-
tained her serenity, and her thigh did not rot
nor her abdomen swell, she was considered to
have “proved” her innocence. In such an
event she would go free, and her husband
bore no blame whatsoever for his false accusa-
tion (Nm 5:12—31).
If a woman took a vow, it was only legal as
long as her father or husband approved it. If
she became a widow, the vow still remained
in force and could be used against her (Nm
30:4-15).
A woman in Israel was always under the
protection of a male, be it her father, grandfa-
ther, great-grandfather, brother, husband, or
some other member of her husband’s family.
She had few legal rights and, in contrast to
Babylonian traditions, could not inherit at her
husband’s death. It is small wonder that wid-
ows were classed with orphans and aliens as
the pitied poor. A childless widow could on
occasion return to her father’s family (Gn
38:11; Lv 22:13; Ru 1:8), thus becoming subject
again to the authority of her father. A Hebrew
widow could also remain with her late hus-
band’s family. She would then come under the
age

protection of her ‘‘redeemer,” a male relative
of her husband’s family who assumed responsi-
bility for her. If a husband died leaving a
woman childless, it was the responsibility of
the husband’s brother to marry her. The first
son born of such a union was then regarded as
the heir of the first husband.
It was normal for a brother to accept the
obligation for such a marriage (levirate). It
could be refused on various grounds, but such
refusal was considered dishonorable, for it
was a man’s duty to perpetuate his brother’s
name and to safeguard the family fortune.
A redeemer’s responsibilities were consid-
erable. In addition to the marriage, he was
perhaps involved in avenging the family repu-
tation, and he had to ensure that family prop-
erty increased and remained within family
control.
If an Israelite fell into debt and was forced
to sell himself into slavery, he would normally
be “redeemed” by one of his relatives (Lv
25:47—49). If in his penury an Israelite had to
sell his land or his house, the redeemer had
the right of first refusal over all other prospec-
tive purchasers. It was as much his duty as his
right to prevent family property from passing
into the hands of strangers (Lv 25:25). The
prophet Jeremiah bought his cousin Hana-
mel’s field under similar circumstances (Jer
32:6-15).
The most familiar OT story of a childless
widow and her “‘redeemer”’ and their levirate
marriage is recorded in the Book of Ruth. One
of Naomi’s two sons married Ruth. When
Ruth was widowed, her impoverished mother-
in-law Naomi left her home in Moab and re-
turned to Bethlehem to sell some of the family
property. Although a close relative was pre-
pared to buy the land and keep it in the fam-
ily, he was not ready to marry Ruth as well
(Ru 3:12; 4:4). He knew that a son of that
union would be deemed a son of the deceased,
bearing the dead husband’s name, and thus
ultimately inheriting the land (vv 4-6). The
next relative in order of kinship was
who became Ruth’s ‘“‘redeemer.”’ He was pre-
pared to accept the double obligation of pur-
chasing the land and marrying Ruth (vv 9,10).
Names. In the ancient Near East, the
naming of an object or person implied power
and authority over what was named (Gn 2:19,
20). Thus a person not knowing another’s
name could do neither harm nor good to that
person (Ex 33:12,17). In the ancient world a
name described the person or his work in
some way. When the individual or his situa-
tion changed, so did the name, as with
Abram (Abraham) and Jacob (Israel). Pha-
raoh, as master of the patriarch Joseph,
changed Joseph’s name when his status al-
Family Life and Relations
tered, calling him Zaphenath-paneah (Gn
41:45). When Eliakim was made king of Ju-
dah, the pharaoh changed the Jewish king’s
name to Jehoiakim (2 Kgs 23:34). In captivity,
Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were
forced to change their names to Belteshazzar,
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego by order
of the eunuch (Dn 1:6,7).
In the NT, John the Baptist was named by
an angel who represented God, and similarly
Jesus was given his name by an angel. The
naming of those children symbolized God’s au-
thority over John the Baptist and his special
relationship as Father to Jesus. In biblical
times an infant received his or her name at
birth from its mother (Gn 4:1,25; 35:18; 1 Sm
1:20) or father (Gn 4:26; 5:29).
Position of Children. Children were gener-
ally well loved, but their childhood was short
and they were often regarded as laborers for
the house or fields. According to the law of
primogeniture, the eldest son received a dou-
ble portion of the estate as his birthright (Dt
21:17). Thus he was assured of the position of
family head. Even during his father’s lifetime,
the eldest son took precedence over his broth-
ers and sisters (Gn 43:33). Where twins were
born, the first to emerge from the womb was
considered the elder, with all the attendant
privileges (Gn 25:24—26; 38:27—30).
For a serious offense the eldest son could
lose the right of primogeniture (Gn 35:22;
49:3,4; 1 Chr 5:1), or it could be surrendered
voluntarily as Esau did by selling his birth-
right to his brother Jacob (Gn 25:29—34). There
was a law protecting the eldest son from his
father’s favoritism for a younger brother (Dt
21:15-17). Nevertheless King David gave his
kingdom to Solomon, his youngest son (1 Kgs
airs):
In a family with no sons, a daughter could
inherit property (Nm 27:8). Frequently parents
consulted neither sons nor daughters when
marriage partners were arranged for them.
Marriage was often an alliance or contract be-
Boaz, tween two families, and thus the wishes and
concerns of individuals were considered unim-
portant. Love matches were few, although oc-
casionally a son would marry in defiance of
his parents, as Esau did (Gn 26:34,35). Al-
though it was rare for young people to express
their feelings and preferences about marriage
in an open fashion, Saul’s daughter, Michal,
made known her love for David (1 Sm 18:20).
It is not certain what the normal age for mar-
riage was in biblical times.
There is no record of legal adoption among
the Hebrews, but it was practiced from an-
cient times in Mesopotamia. It was especially
useful as a means of ensuring a childless cou-
ple that their land would be tilled and that
ie
Family Life and Relations
they would be cared for in their old age. All
examples of adoption mentioned in the OT
took place outside the land of Israel (Ex 2:10;
1 Kgs 11:20; Est 2:7,15), and are not examples
of true adoption as a lifetime member of a
family.
Daily Life of the Hebrew Family. In the
everyday affairs of a Hebrew household, it was
the father’s responsibility to maintain the
family fortune and to be the provider. He
might work in the fields, most probably with
crops of flax, barley, or wheat. Or he would
work at a trade, possibly as a weaver, builder,
potter, dyer, fuller, or a worker in copper or
bronze. If he lived near the shore, he might~be
a fisherman.
The father was also responsible for the reli-
gious well-being of the family. It was his duty
to take over his sons’ education from the
mother at an early age, teaching them the te-
nets of Hebrew religion (Ex 10:2; 12:26; Dt 4:9;
6:7). He also explained all the facets of the
Law and the interwoven history of the nation.
The father was the disciplinarian of the fam-
ily, with the rod being used to drive home the
lessons taught (Prv 13:24; 22:15; 29:15,17).
Though children were loved and valued, they
were not pampered (Ecclus 30:9—12). In postex-
ilic times education also took place within the
precincts of the synagogue, and shortly before
the time of Christ a general elementary educa-
tion was introduced. It was also imperative
that a father teach his sons a trade, normally
his own, for a man without a trade either
starved or became a thief. Another important
paternal responsibility was to provide wives
for male offspring in the household.
The mother was responsible for her sons’
and daughters’ early education (Prv 1:8; 6:20),
teaching them religious songs and prayers as
soon as they could talk. A father took over the
education of his sons, but the mother contin-
ued with the daughters, training them to spin,
weave, cook, clean, trim the lamps, and gener-
ally to become competent in all the household
duties, (31:13—-31).
With little furniture, keeping a house clean
meant sweeping the floors to keep them free
from dust and dirt. Cooking was at once sim-
ple and difficult. It was simple in that much of
the food was cooked in the form of a soup or
stew, or else made into a cake and cooked ona
griddle. it was difficult in that the corn had to
be ground by hand and bread was baked
daily.
A mother was expected to take wool, card
it, spin it, and often weave and make clothes
for her family. In addition, she would help her
husband in the fields at harvest time. Because
many families had one or more olive trees, a
few grape vines, and fig trees, the mother
J
would also assist in picking the fruit. She
would sometimes work at the press when the
olives or grapes were being processed. Fre-
quently the treading of grapes in the family
vat would be done together by husband and
wife. Drawing water from the well was consid-
ered a menial task and was generally the
wife’s responsibility, although sometimes it
was assigned to the children (Gn 24:15,16).
As in all societies, there was a time when
children laughed and played together (Zec 8:5;
Mt 11:16), although childhood and adolescence
were not recognized as specific stages of devel-
opment. Children were considered as suck-
lings if under three, but were regarded as boys
or girls when they were able to take care of
themselves. A small child sat on his mother’s
lap and was played with (Is 66:12). There is no
evidence of organized sports for children. Toys
including whistles, rattles, dolls, and minia-
ture cooking utensils have been excavated at
Palestinian sites.
As soon as a boy was old enough, he took
his place in the family and accepted his ap-
pointed task. Among other things, children
were expected to gather fuel (Jer 7:18). Young
boys and girls tended the flocks. The sheep
had to be protected from marauding wild
beasts, guarded against their own folly when
they wandered near crevices, steered toward
good pasture and water, and carried home
when sick or injured (Gn 29:6; Ex 2:16). The
care of cattle was also the responsibility of
children (1 Sm 16:11). Of necessity, boys were
trained in the various arts of war.
Children sometimes joined their fathers in
the fields, and their presence was always wel-
come. From earliest times, boys in particular
would watch their fathers until they too
picked up a tool or implement to try their
skill; girls watched and learned from their
mothers. Young children frequently listened
to the talk of the elders at the city gates or in
the villages. A visit to a sanctuary at festival
time was a family affair, furnishing an ideal
learning experience. As a child, Jesus accompa-
nied his parents Mary and Joseph to the tem-
ple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:42—47).
Young girls were surprisingly free to go
about their appointed tasks. They were not
secluded or veiled, and could visit unhin-
dered with friends and neighbors (Gn 34:1).
They were also able to converse with men
without embarrassment (24:15—25; 29:11,12; I
Sm 9:11—13).
Mealtimes were strictly family times. It is
doubtful whether a meal comparable to a
breakfast was eaten, and a farmer would proba-
bly have a light lunch in the fields. The main
meal of the day was prepared by the mother,
and would be eaten in the early evening. Al-

though the variety of food available was lim-
ited, its preparation was time-consuming.
Feast times were periods of great religious
significance, and also the days when family
members participated in the symbolic rituals
of their faith. Among the Israelites several
kinds of food were fundamental to their reli-
gious ritual. Family unity and the national reli-
gion were molded together by special meals in
the home.
Light played an important part in the daily
habits of the people in antiquity. Although oil
lamps were readily available in later periods,
it was customary to rise with the sun and go
to bed relatively soon after dark. The wife
would probably be up before sunrise and
might continue her labor after dark.
By NT times, for those who followed the
Greek and Roman style, life became more ele-
gant. Despite that, the status of many family
members did not change substantially. Wealth-
ier families had more slaves, and the children
were more likely to have formal education,
sometimes spending less effort on family
chores. Even in Roman times, however, the
father still had a legal right to accept or reject
his child.
The status of the woman had definitely im-
proved by the NT period. A Roman matron
was highly respected, and exerted a strong in-
fluence over her husband. She was not seques-
tered in a particular section of the house, as a
Greek woman was, but managed and super-
vised tasks in any part of her home. She
helped her husband in business, had her own
place in theaters, games, and religious festi-
vals, and sometimes managed her own prop-
erty. Palestinian women began to enjoy a new
status and dignity as the result of Jesus’ atti-
tude toward women and its influence on the
early Christian church.
HAZEL W. PERKIN
See MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS; EDUCATION;
FooD AND Foop PREPARATION; MEALS, SIGNIFICANCE OF;
SEx, SEXUALITY; WIDOW.
Bibliography. A.C. Bouquet, Everyday Life in NT Times
and Everyday Life in OT Times; R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel,
pp 19-55; A. Edersheim, Sketches of Jewish Social Life in the
Days of Christ; E.A. Judge, The Social Pattern of Christian
Groups in the First Century; A. Van Duersen, Illustrated Dic-
tionary of Bible Manners and Customs.
Famine. Prolonged and extreme lack of
food. Famine along with other disasters (such
as war and disease) have always been part of
the human experience. Sometimes there was
enough rainfall, properly timed, but occasion-
ally rainfall was too early or late or insuffi-
cient (Lv 26:19; Am 4:7,8). The Hebrews and
other people in the Near East viewed famine
as a judgment of God. God as Creator and Sus-
773
Fashion and Dress
tainer had power over the natural world. He
could use his created order as he chose; it was
no accident when there was famine. Whether
a famine occurred through lack of rainfall,
hailstorms, or any other event, God was the
agent.
, The most prevalent cause of famine in the
ancient world was lack of rain. Such famines
occurred in the time of Abraham (Gn 12:10)
and Isaac (26:1). Joseph was greatly concerned
about overcoming the famines in Egypt (41-
47). The Nile River usually provided the Egyp-
tians with enough water for their crops; a fail-
ure to receive adequate water supplies from
upland regions meant famine for Egypt.
Besides lack of rainfall, famine could result
from other causes, such as hail and thunder-
storms (Ex 9:28,31; 1 Sm 12:17). Sieges on
crops by locusts and other pests sometimes
caused famine (Ex 10:15; Am 4:9). Invasion by
foreign armies also brought on famine (Dt
28:53; 2 Kgs 6:25; 25:3; Lam 4:9,10). Disease
often accompanied famine (1 Kgs 8:37; Jer
T4tI2; 21:0).
Famine brought changes to the lives of Na-
omi and Ruth (Ru 1:1). God raised Joseph to a
position of power in famine conditions. Fam-
ine also affected the lives of King David (2 Sm
21:1), Elijah (1 Kgs 17), Elisha (2 Kgs 4:38;
6:25), and Zedekiah (2 Kgs 25:2,3).
Famine was used by God to warn (1 Kgs
17:1), correct (2 Sm 21:1), and punish God’s
people or the heathen (Jer 14:12,15). The fam-
ines predicted by Jesus and the writer. of the
Book of Revelation were signs of judgment
(Mk 13:8; Rv 18:8).
The famine of Acts 11:28 was of great sever-
ity.
Farmer, Farming. See AGRICULTURE; TRADES
AND OCCUPATIONS.
Farthing. 1. ksv translation for penny, a cop-
per coin equivalent to %« of the silver denarius
(Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6).
2. KJV translation for another word trans-
lated ‘‘penny” (Rsv), a coin equivalent to % of
#1 above, or %,4 of the denarius (Mt 5:26; Mk
12742):
See Coins; MONEY AND BANKING.
Fashion and Dress. Clothing, especially as
related to Bible times. Clothing mentioned in
the Bible is usually referred to in such general
terms as “inner garment,” “outer garment,’
or “tunic.” Few descriptions give specific de-
tails of costumes or clothing, and it is there-
fore necessary to rely on paintings, pottery,
decorations, statues, and bas-reliefs to show
Fashion and Dress
Hi
Statue that illustrates a typical dress in ancient Rome.
the clothing styles of the period. It should be
remembered that many Egyptian and Babylo-
nian artifacts depict the people of Israel as cap-
tives and supplicants, and as such their cloth-
ing would be different from that normally
worn by the various ranks of their society.
Many ancient Near Eastern peoples (includ-
ing the Israelites) kept flocks of sheep before
the discovery of spinning and weaving and
used the leather of their hides for clothing. La-
ter, wool plucked from the sheep and from
branches on which the fleece had accumulated
as the animals brushed past was made into a
feltlike fabric. Wool remained one of the most
important fabrics for clothing throughout the
biblical period.
774
As the seminomadic Israelite tribes became
more sedentary in nature, flax was cultivated.
It was woven into linen, which became a com-
monly used fabric. Flax was manufactured in
several qualities, ranging from very coarse to
extremely fine. Goat’s hair and camel’s hair
were also used for making coarse, heavy fab-
rics. At the beginning of the Middle Bronze
Age (c. 2000 Bc), fine silks began to be im-
ported from China, and wild silk was pro-
duced in some areas of the Near East. Cotton
was known in Egypt, but it does not appear to
have been produced anywhere in Palestine in
the biblical period.
Attitudes Toward Clothing. Articles of
clothing were frequently regarded as objects
of wealth. Clothing was sometimes taken after
a battle, as during the Israelite conquest of
Canaan. Thirty linen garments formed the
prize when Samson tested the Philistines with
a riddle (Jgs 14:12,13). Elisha’s servant Gehazi
exhibited greed in his request for two festal
garments (2 Kgs 5:22,26). Excessive quantities
of clothing were frowned upon as an unneces-
sary extravagance. Similarly, anxious concern
for items of clothing was considered a materi-
alistic approach to life (Mt 6:25; 10:10). The
Jews pictured God as the supplier of food and
clothing for his people (Dt 10:18). A significant
contrast in social standing was reflected in the
clothes described in the story of the rich man
and Lazarus (Lk 16:19—31). In contrast to the
poor beggar, the rich man was clothed in pur-
ple and fine linen. That cloth was so expensive
that it was considered inferior only to the pur-
est silk imported from China, which was as
valuable as gold. Fine linen was imported ei-
ther from Egypt (see Ez 27:7) or India.
The general care of fabrics was of great im-
portance in the Near East, especially where
fine quality materials were involved. For
Jews, laundering or changing clothes often
had religious connotations, as seen in the in-
structions that Jacob gave to his household on
the changing of clothes as part of a purifica-
tion rite (Gn 35:2,3). Washing clothes was also
part of a complex levitical ritual for diagnos-
ing leprosy (Lv 13:47—59), purifying healed lep-
ers (14:8,9), and cleansing those in contact
with any cultic uncleanliness (15:2—27).
Garments were also changed in times of
grief. Thus David changed his attire after the
death of his child (2 Sm 12:20). As one indica-
tion of mourning or anger, it was common for
garments to be torn (2 Sm 1:11; 2 Kgs 5:7).
Sackcloth (woven goat’s hair) was also worn
during mourning (Gn 37:34) or as an act of
repentance (Jer 4:8).
Clothing also served as a token of joy and
festivity. Ruth was instructed to put on her
best clothes when she presented herself to

} made of animal skin or wool, was used as a
ode ;|
‘
a goat’s hair or camel’s hair, such as John the
ft L
Bilt.
| been particularly warm at night. Those tough
“e
Another Roman statue depicting a woman's dress.
Boaz (Ru 3:3). Garments and jewelry were
used as gifts by Abraham’s servant when he
went to encourage Rebekah to return with
him as Isaac’s bride (Gn 24:22,47,53). Weddings
were occasions for special garments: ‘“The
princess is decked in her chamber with gold-
woven robes” (Ps 45:13).
In later periods Jewish attitudes toward
clothing were expressed in talmudic regula-
tions. An example is the law concerning rescue
of garments from a house that had caught fire
on the sabbath. According to rabbinic tradi-
tions, the salvaging of articles of clothing un-
der such conditions would have been thought
of as work and prohibited on the sabbath. On
the contrary, a person was permitted to sal-
vage 18 specified articles, but only on condi-
775
Fashion and Dress
tion that they be worn and not carried from
the fire.
Male Clothing. Early in biblical times the
loincloth formed an important item of male
clothing that was worn by all levels of society.
Prior to 2000 BC, a type of loincloth was also
the customary piece of clothing for all Egyp-
‘tians, from the lowliest laborer to the pha-
raoh. At a later period, however, it appeared
only as part of military dress (Ez 23:15). The
inner garment (a tunic or shirt) was made of
wool or linen. It had openings for the neck and
arms, and appears to have had long sleeves,
although some styles had half-sleeves. It was
worn next to the skin, and fell either to the
knees or, more often, to the ankles, frequently
being belted at the waist. The Greek chiton
(‘coat’) and the Roman tunic would have
been undergarments of a similar character. A
man who was wearing nothing except this
undergarment was considered ‘“‘naked.’’ The
young man who followed after Jesus at Geth-
semane at his arrest was probably attired in
this manner (Mk 14:51,52).
Generally speaking, the outer garment,
formed out of a square-shaped piece of cloth,
was referred to as a cloak or mantle. It had
openings for the arms, and was draped over
one or both shoulders.
A Hebrew man was considered improperly
dressed without his cloak, and one was forbid-
den to demand another’s mantle as a loan or
pledge. At night when the other items of cloth-
ing were removed, the cloak, which was often
blanket (Ex 22:26,27; Dt 24:13). Cloaks made of
Baptist wore (Mt 3:4; Mk 1:6), would have
outer garments were probably the clothes de-
scribed as longlasting by the Israelites, follow-
ing the exodus (Dt 29:5). The mantle was re-
moved while working.
The coat of many colors which Jacob gave
to Joseph was probably a striped shirt or tunic
made of leather or wool felt. The entire gar-
ment may have been bound with a woolen bor-
der (Gn 37:3). The garment Hannah made each
year for the young Samuel was probably a
coat or mantle (1 Sm 2:19).
Cloaks were usually made with a hem, and
in Matthew 9:20 it was this that the woman
touched when she came to Jesus for healing.
The robe that Roman soldiers placed deri-
sively upon Jesus to symbolize his kingship
was probably a purple military cloak such as
Roman officers commonly wore (Mt 27:28,31;
Mk 15:17; Jn 19:2).
In Greek and Roman times, the outer gar-
ment often had tassels at the four corners. The
best-known item of Roman men’s apparel was
Fashion and Dress
the toga. It was a heavy, voluminous garment
that fell in luxurious folds. The toga symbol-
ized the strength and wealth of Rome and was
intended strictly for Roman citizens. It was
worn over a white tunic that came to the
knees. A robe similar to the Greek himation
was the type of outer garment placed on the
prodigal son (Lk 15:22) when his father cele-
brated the son’s return with his best food,
clothing, and jewelry. The cloak that Paul
wore (2 Tm 4:13) may well have been a circu-
lar style of cape that was popular in the rst
century AD.
Girdles, used as belts for undergarments,
consisted of fabric folded to about 5 inches in
width. These were sometimes made of leather
(Mt 3:4) or linen (Prv 31:24), but wool,
tougher and longer-lasting material, was more
common. Coins, knives, or food could be car-
ried in the girdle as in a pocket. On dusty jour-
neys or when manual work was being per-
formed, the undergarment was often tucked
around the girdle. The messianic descendant
of Jesse is depicted as wearing a girdle of righ-
teousness and faithfulness (Is 11:5). The writer
of the Book of Revelation envisaged ‘‘one like
a son of man, clothed with a long robe and
with a golden girdle” (Rv 1:13).
Garments were of different qualities and
signified rank or office (Is 3:6). The scribes and
prophets wore special mantles symbolic of
their professions. Elijah wore a prophet’s man-
tle (2 Kgs 19:13,19; 2 Kgs 2:8,13,14). In NT
times scribes wore special robes (Mk 12:38; Lk
20:46).
Israel’s kings wore a linen ephod and robe
(1 Chr 15:27). David wore a garment of linen
when the ark of the covenant was transferred
to Jerusalem (2 Sm 6:14). Foreign princes were
often notable for their luxurious embroidered
garments (Ez 26:16). Outer garments with tas-
sels at the corners were a favorite item of
royal attire. Turbanlike conical headwear was
also a mark of kingship (21:26). On special oc-
casions royalty wore perfumed garments (Ps
45:8). Royal robes were frequently volumi-
nous,.dyed scarlet and purple and embellished
with tassels and beaten gold or silver thread.
The seriousness of an occasion was indicated
when a king discarded his royal robes and put
on sackcloth. This occurred when the ruler of
Nineveh proclaimed a time of mourning after
hearing the preaching of Jonah (Jon 3:6). King
Herod appeared on his throne “arrayed in
royal robes’ and awed the populace into be-
lieving he was divine, as was Roman custom
of that time (Acts 12:21).
Christ and his disciples probably wore tu-
nics, sandals, and carried moneybags and
staffs (Mt 10:9,10; Mk 6:8; Lk 9:3; 10:4). When
Poman soldiers divided Jesus’ clothing after
the crucifixion (Jn 19:24), they cast lots for the
inner garment, one woven without any seams
and probably made of wool. This was the most
valuable of Jesus’ items of clothing.
The Hebrew Priest’s Clothing. The gar-
ments of the priests, particularly the high
priest, were ‘elaborate full-length linen tunics
with long sleeves and decorated with embroi-
dery. The belt or sash worn by the priest was
also exquisitely crafted of fine linen. Exodus
28:4—8 specifies in detail the garments to be
made for the high priest.
Breeches or drawers as an undergarment
are mentioned only in connection with priestly
clothing. These linen breeches were designed
to cover the area from the loins to the thigh
a (Ex 28:42). Breeches were worn during two
ceremonies: during the removal of the ashes
of the burnt offering from the altar (Lv 6:10)
and on the Day of Atonement (16:4). In the
Book of Ezekiel the priests are again exhorted
to wear the correct linen garments for their
sacred duties, including the breeches (Ez
44:17,18).
On top of the tunic or undershirt, the high
priest wore a robe of blue linen with blue, pur-
ple, and scarlet pomegranates, which were ei-
ther woven into the fabric or embroidered on
it. Between the pomegranates were gold bells
which gave a soft tinkling sound as the high
priest moved about (Ex 28:31-35). Over the
robe from the shoulder to the waist was the
ephod (similar to a vest) made of fine linen
interwoven with gold, blue, purple, and scar-
let cloth. A heavily jeweled breastplate made
of similar material was prescribed for wearing
on top of the ephod (vv 15-28). The attire of
Aaron’s sons was much less elaborate than
that of the high priest and was of fine white
linen. The special headdress worn by the high
priest was made of fabric, often linen, and was
a type of turban. Other priests wore a less
elaborate cap (29:9; 34:28).
Women’s Clothing. The woman’s under-
garment was similar to the man’s but slightly
longer, reaching the ankle. It also had a higher
neckline. It was made in such a way that it
could be worn draped across one shoulder.
Hebrew women also wore a robe that could
have special significance when worn by the
virgin daughters of a king (2 Sm 13:18). The
robe depicted on one of the Megiddo ivories is
elaborately decorated with a fringe. Roman
women wore a long tunic that reached to the
ankles, while their outer garment was a rectan-
gular woolen cloth or stola, which could be
pulled up over the head when in public.
As a sign of mourning a widow probably
wore a garment of sackcloth (Gn 38:14,19; 2
Sm 14:2). This coarse, uncomfortable fabric
was most probably made of goat’s hair and
776

~5=i/
Wi
could be worn over the tunic or next to the
skin. In Deuteronomy 24:17 the Israelites were
forbidden to take a widow’s robe as a pledge,
since, like a man’s cloak, this article of cloth-
ing was used as a blanket at night.
The girdle was also part of a woman’s cloth-
ing as mentioned in the detailed description of
wealthy women’s attire in Isaiah 3:18—24. The
woman’s girdle was often quite elaborate and
could be more valuable than the dress.
Head Coverings. Carvings on monuments
frequently. depicted Israelites with simple
headbands or caps of conical shape made from
strips of cloth. At a wedding, the bridegroom
also wore special headgear for the ceremony
(Sg 3:11).
The type of head covering most frequently
used by both men and women was a piece of
fabric, sometimes referred to as a veil, which
would be placed on the head and fall below
the shoulders, covering the upper part of the
body (Gn 24:65; 38:14). The woman’s veil was
often held in place by a circlet, frequently
made from the coins that formed part of her
dowry. The man’s headwear would probably
have been very similar to the prayer shawl
worn by many Jews today. It was probably
held in place by a piece of twisted fabric or
cord.
Footwear. In Bible times footwear con-
sisted of shoes and sandals, which were an es-
sential part of a person’s wardrobe (2 Chr
777
Fashion and Dress
Typical attire of two Greek
women.
28:15; Acts 12:8). Occasionally sandals had
wooden soles, but usually they were leather.
Sometimes they had an enclosed upper front
and open back. The upper part was typically
made of open strips of leather, and sometimes
the sandal merely consisted of a sole with
thongs laced around the leg or ankle. A wom-
an’s sandals were considered an attractive and
fashionable part of her wardrobe (Jth 10:4;
16:9).
On a long journey through the country,
one’s sandals might be carried and saved for
the arrival in the next town, so that they
would not be worn out. (Being barefoot in a
town or city was a sign of abject poverty.)
Since sandals were so open in design one can
easily understand the necessity for the ritual
foot washing of a guest.
Decorated shoes or boots are seen in the
Tell Beni-Hasan (Egypt) paintings. Most people
would have been unable to afford such elabo-
rate shoes in Bible times. A closed type of shoe
was worn occasionally in parts of the ancient
Near East. The sandals worn by a bride or
bridegroom would have been made from fine
quality leather, possibly cowhide. In a pro-
phetic passage concerning the fate of Jerusa-
lem, Ezekiel used the imagery of a bride wear-
ing shoes made from expensive badgers’ skin
(Ez 16:10).
Shoes were not worn in the temple or on
any holy ground (Ex 3:5; Jos 5:15) and were
Fashion and Dress
Two sides of a palette from Egypt, the obverse showing a recess in which to grind cosmetics.
also taken off when a person was in a house. It
was customary to remove the sandals at a
time of mourning. The shoes which the Israel-
ites wore in their wilderness wanderings did
not wear out (Dt 29:5).
Cosmetics. Eye paint originally served the
medical purpose of preventing flies from
spreading infection by settling on the eyes, es-
pecially of sleeping persons. Substances such
as kohl, malachite, and stibium had astringent
and antiseptic properties and so were useful
medications. These minerals were ground and
made into a paste by mixing them with gum
arabic or water. The paint was compounded in
a small bowl and applied either with a spatula
or with the finger. Many such bowls dating to
800 BC have been found at various Palestinian
sites. Much earlier ones have been recovered
from Egypt, where women used green mala-
chite as an eye paint. In the Roman period anti-
mony came into popular use.
When eye makeup became fashionable as a
cosmetic procedure, the eyes were outlined in
black, using balena or lead sulphide to make
them look large, a practice that was followed
particularly in Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopota-
mia. Eyebrows were also darkened by the ap-
778
plication of a black paste. Jezebel decorated
her eyes with cosmetics just before her dra-
matic death in about 841 Bc (2 Kgs 9:30). In
biblical Jewish society, painted eyes were asso-
ciated with women lacking in virtue (Jer 4:30;
Ez 23:40). Henna was used as a paint and was
applied to parts of the body, including the
hands and feet, as well as the fingernails and
toenails.
Although not mentioned specifically in the
Bible, rouge for coloring cheeks was used by
both men and women in Egypt and Babylonia.
It has become apparent from excavations that
red ochre, yellow ochre, and lead carbonate
were used to make red, yellow, and white face
powders. In the makeup of the Sumerians yel-
low predominated, while the Babylonians fa-
vored red. The single reference in the Bible to
a cosmetic use of powder is found in Song of
Solomon 3:6. The powders used for cosmetic
purposes were most probably carried in boxes
or pouches. Among general toilet articles, the
earliest known powder puff was recovered
from an Egyptian site, while lipstick was also
a familiar commodity. In Greek and Roman
times, painted lips were particularly popular.
Oils, often perfumed, were used as a protec-

tion for the skin against the sun. Anointing
with oil was considered so important that
when the troops of the Israelite king Ahaz
were repatriated in about 730 Bc, they were
clothed, fed, and anointed (2 Chr 28:15). Anoint-
ing a guest's feet was a normal act of hospital-
ity. The process may also have had hygienic
significance. Many persons found it far more
convenient to apply perfumes than to wash
the body, particularly when water was in
short supply.
An alabaster jar of ointment (Lk 7:37) was
an extremely expensive gift since it would
have to be imported. At the archaeological dig
of Lachish an excellent ivory ointment flask
from about the 13th century Bc was unearthed.
A Babylonian inscription described a fragrant
ointment made from the root of gingergrass,
which was imported from Arabia. In NT times
costly ointments most probably came from In-
dia. Excavators at Mari discovered the re-
mains of a flourishing perfume factory in 18th-
century Bc palace buildings. Perfumes and
ointments were mentioned frequently in the
Bible and were used as gifts and applied for
personal adornment (Est 2:12; Sg 1:12).
Hair and Beards. In Palestine and through-
out the Near East, men wore their hair short.
Women’s hairstyles were long. In NT times a
A tribute bearer, with hair in spiral curls (which was a conven-
tion of archaic Greek art).
779
Fashion and Dress
woman who cut her hair might be mistaken
for a pagan priestess, and thus be disgraced
(see 1 Cor 11:15).
Women’s hair in Greek and Roman society
was often twisted into a knot at the nape of
the neck, while the forehead was surrounded
by a mass of stiff curls. Braided hair became
popular among women and was copied to a
limited extent by men also. Bands of gold
thread or beads were used to keep the long,
elaborate hairstyles in position.
The apostle Peter warned Christian women
against preoccupation with elaborate styles of
hair (1 Pt 3:3). When a woman married, it was
customary to change her hairstyle slightly, in
favor of a more mature appearance. Curling
tongs and hair oils were used by some married
women.
Dark hair was more popular in Bible times,
although gray hair represented maturity and
was respected. Some persons preferred to
make use of popular black and red hair dyes.
According to tradition, Herod the Great dyed
his graying hair with henna.
Hair was anointed at times of festivity and
also as a mark of hospitality (Ps 23:5; Lk 7:46).
Reference is made to the anointing with oil of
the high priest Aaron’s beard (Ps 133:2) as part
of his priestly consecration (Ex 30:22—30).
Christ commanded his disciples to anoint
their heads when they were fasting (Mt 6:17),
which was contrary to the Pharisees’ custom.
Beard and hair trimming was performed in
a specialized manner in Jewish culture. An Is-
raelite man was instructed not to cut the hair
on his temples or trim the corners of his beard
(Lv 19:27). This was done to maintain a con-
trast in every way between the Israelites and
the members of idolatrous cults in Canaan
and elsewhere (Dt 12:29,30). Beards distin-
guished Hebrews from Egyptians, who were
clean shaven, although they sometimes wore
false beards on ceremonial occasions. Shaving
or cutting off the beard of enemy captives was
considered the gravest humiliation that the
victor could impose. A shaved head, however,
was also a recognized symbol of purification
at the termination of a vow (Lv 14:8,9; Acts
18:18). Shaving a beard was the usual sign of
mourning (Is 15:2). It could also symbolize the
approach of doom (Is 7:20; Jer 41:5; 48:37). A
beard which was well cared for was a source
of great pride to its owner.
When Roman males shaved, they most
likely used hot water and oil to first soften
the beard. As early as the rst century aD, the
Romans had discovered the process for mak-
ing tempered steel. Their sharp but some-
what expensive razors were a great advance
upon the awkward flints or knives used in
earlier periods. About the beginning of the
Fast, Fasting
Christian era, the moustache put
pearance in Palestine.
Baldness was unpopular in OT times, possi-
bly because of its association with the practice
of shaving all hair. There seem to have been
periods when priests, young boys, and soldiers
had shaved heads.
Dishevelled hair was a sign of mourning,
while tearing the hair was the action of a
distraught person (Ezr 9:3). Mutilating a
beard brought dishonor upon the bearer (2
Sm 10:4-6).
Jewelry. Items of jewelry were worn by
both men and women in the Near East. Gold
was used in considerable quantities, and silver
was also very popular. Semiprecious stones
were frequently incorporated into necklaces
and other pieces of jewelry. Royal headdresses
from the graves at Ur near the Persian Gulf
give an indication of the skill of jewelers
around 2700 Bc. Hairbands and pins were a
necessary part of hair adornment and have
been recovered from numerous Near Eastern
archaeological sites. Rings, often with deli-
cately carved stones, were extremely popular,
and nose rings were also in use by the Middle
Bronze Age (see Gn 24:47). Fine gold chains
were frequently worn. A signet ring or a heavy
gold chain was a decorative symbol of office
(41:42). Bracelets and amulets were
ther around the wrist or on the upper arm.
Decorative pins, similar in design and intent
to the modern safety pin, were often used to
hold clothing together.
An excellent description of women’s cloth-
ing and jewelry is found in Isaiah 3:18—23,
where the prophet warns: “In that day the
Lord will take away the finery of the anklets,
the headbands, and the crescents; the pen-
dants, the bracelets, and the scarfs; the head-
dresses, the armlets, the sashes, the perfume
boxes, and the amulets; the signet rings and
A mirror and jewelry box found in Judea.
in an ap- nose ring; the festal robes, the mantles, the
cloaks and the handbags; the garments of
gauze, the linen garments, the turbans, and
the veils.”
Conclusion. In general, clothing styles
changed very little in the Near East during the
biblical period. Climate and occupation dic-
tated the most suitable styles. Natural fabrics
have remained popular even to modern times,
as they are best suited to the heat in Near
Eastern lands.
HAZEL W. PERKIN
See CLOTH, CLOTH MANUFACTURING.
Fast, Fasting. Eating sparingly or abstain-
ing from food altogether, either from necessity
or desire. In medical terms, fasting is the de-
toxification of the body through the restriction
of food. }
Spiritual fasting entails setting aside activi-
ties as well as reducing the intake of food and
replacing these activities with the exercise of
prayer and preoccupation with spiritual con-
cerns. The NT word which is translated “‘fast-
ing” literally means one who has not eaten,
one who is empty.
Three types of fast are generally recog-
nized: normal, in which there is no intake of
worn ei- food for a prescribed period of time, though
there may be an intake of liquids; partial, in
which the diet is limited, though some food is
allowed; and absolute, in which there is a total
abstinence from food and liquids in all forms.
In the OT the fast was regarded as an act
of self-renunciation designed to mollify God’s
wrath and move him to act in gracious dispo-
sition. In times of emergency, the people
fasted to persuade God to spare them from
impending calamity (Jgs 20:26; 1 Sm 7:6; 1
Kgs 21:9; 2Chr 20:3; Jer 36:6,9). Individuals
fasted in the hope that God would liberate
them from trouble (2 Sm 12:16-20; 1 Kgs
21:27; Pss 35:13; 69:10). Fasting was regarded
as concomitant to prayer to assure that God
would answer the prayers (Ezr 8:21; Neh 1:4;
Jer 14:12). Throughout the OT, fasting is asso-
ciated with a mournful attitude of importun-
ing God to aid the supplicant.
Regular fasts were usually for one day,
morning to evening, with food permitted at
night (Jgs 20:26; 1 Sm 14:24; 2 Sm 1:12), al-
though there are reports of longer fasts, such
as Mordecai’s call for a 3-day fast (night and
day specified) (Est 4:16) and the 7-day fast at
Saul’s death (1 Sm 31:13; 2 Sm 3:35). Among
special fasts were Moses’ 40 days on Mt Sinai
(Ex 34:28) and Daniel’s 3-week fast prior to re-
ceiving visions (Dn 9:3; 10:3,12).
In general, in the OT, fasting was abused.
Instead of a sincere act of self-renunciation
780

and submission to God, fasting became exter-
nalized as an empty ritual in which a pretense
of piety was presented as a public image.
Hence, the prophets cry out against the cal-
lousness of such hypocrisy. Jeremiah records
Yahweh as saying, ‘Though they fast, I will
not hear their cry” (14:12; see Is 58:1—10.).
The setting for the NT understanding of
fasting lies in the development of the rabbinic
tradition that grew out of the period between
the Testaments, during which fasting became
the distinguishing mark of the pious Jew, even
though it was largely still ritualistic. Vows
were confirmed by fasting (Tob 7:12), remorse
and penitence were accompanied by fasting (4
Esd 10:4), and prayer was supported by fasting
(1 Mc 3:47). Special fast days were observed,
some voluntarily imposed (2 Mc 13:12; 4 Esd
5:13).
This developed into a rabbinic tradition in
which fasting was viewed as meritorious and
therefore became the primary act of demon-
strating piety. It was, however, a false piety
consisting mostly in the externals of fastidious
observance of fast days, both public and pri-
vate. With the exception of ascetic groups
such as the disciples of John the Baptist, the
prevailing mood of fasting when Jesus ap-
peared on the scene was one of mournful sad-
ness, an obligatory necessity, a self-imposed
requirement to produce the discipline of self-
denial.
Jesus’ understanding of fasting is signifi-
cant in that it represents a shift in the role of
fasting. His initial attitude undoubtedly re-
flected the fact that he grew up participating
in the regular fasts and therefore shared the
prevailing teachings of his day. Yet, his ma-
ture teaching about fasting breaks with the
rabbinic tradition.
Two accounts relating to Jesus and fasting
are important: his fast as a part of his tempta-
tion in the wilderness (Mt 4:2; Lk 4:2), and his
teaching about fasting in the Sermon on the
Mount (Mt 6:16—18).
His temptation was born out of the context
of struggle. Immediately after his baptism, he
was cast out into the wilderness by the Spirit
to face as the Second Adam the temptation of
Satan. In the midst of his temptation, he
fasted and prayed, quoting from Deuteronomy
8:3 and Psalm g1:11,12. His fasting is associ-
ated with dependence upon God.
Jesus’ words about fasting in the Sermon
on the Mount constitute a radically different
approach to voluntary fasting. In condemning
the type of fasting which seeks favor with men
by an ostentatious display of outward piety,
Jesus taught instead a robust faith that sought
genuineness of relation to God through a pure
heart. Jesus does not condemn fasting as such,
781
Fear
nor does he forbid it. He does, however, give it
a new meaning. Fasting is service to God.
This new understanding of fasting is set
within the context of the dawning of the time
of salvation. The bridegroom is here. It is a
time of joy, not of sorrow. Consequently, the
prevailing mood of fasting as mournful stress
and pretended piety is inconsistent with the
mood of the new age that has begun.
Jesus’ teachings may be summarized: Fast-
ing is transcended by the beginning of the es-
chatological times. The rule of the Messiah
has broken the power of the evil age. Fasting
would appear to be no longer consistent with
the spirit of thanksgiving and joy that marks
the framework of the new age, since the Chris-
tian life is not to be dominated by tragedy but
by joy and happiness. Yet, the kingdom is not
fully realized. There is a place for fasting, prop-
erly understood. Fasting must be done within
the context of the joyful thanksgiving of the
new life in Christ.
The context of fasting is prayer. It should
conform to the same conditions as prayer: unos-
tentatious quietness before God, arising out of
gratitude, expressing thanksgiving, grounded
in faith, as a means of spiritual growth.
CLARENCE B. Bass
See PRAYER.
Bibliography. 1. Abrahams, Studies in Pharisaeism and
the Gospels, vol 1, pp 121-28; D. E. Briggs, Biblical Teaching
on Fasting; H. von Campenhausen, Tradition and Life in the
Church.
Father, God as. See Gop, NAMES OF.
Father, Human. See FAmiy LIFE AND RELA-
TIONS.
Father-in-law. See Famity Lire AND RELA-
TIONS.
Fathom. Unit of measure equivalent to
about 6 feet (Acts 27:28).
See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
Fawn. Designation for a young animal, usu-
ally a deer.
See ANIMALS (DEER).
Fear. Emotional foreboding or dread of im-
pending distress or misfortune. Often spoken
of as the source of religion. Yet fear alone can
never account for true religion, since men are
impelled to draw near unto God, the object of
their worship. One does not desire to come
close to the being he fears.
The biblical conception of fear embraces a
much wider dimension than our common En-
glish word, which simply denotes some sort of
Fear
dread or terror. While this meaning forms an
essential part of the scriptural picture, it is by
no means the primary significance, especially
when the fear of God—an awe-inspiring rever-
ence—is referred to.
There is, of course, a legitimate place for
the fear of God in the lower, anxious sense. We
are told, “It is a fearful (terrible) thing to fall
into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).
Jesus taught that we should fear him (God)
who has power to punish sin and consign men
to utter destruction (Lk 12:4,5). Fear has a con-
structive role to play in enabling men to real-
ize both the degeneracy of their souls and
their need of divine forgiveness. The first oc-
currence of such fear may be found in Genesis
3 where Adam and Eve recoiled from the pres-
ence of the Holy God whose commandment
they had blatantly spurned. Their fear was en-
tirely reasonable for they had been sternly
warned that disobedience would incur a grave
judgment. Fear is quite naturally the logical
consequence of sin (Gn 3:10; 4:13,14; Prv 28:1).
The Bible presents an array of people who
are plagued with deep-reaching anxiety (e.g.,
Cain, Saul, Ahaz, and Pilate). Anxious fear
seizes the wicked (Jb 15:24), surprises the hypo-
crite (Is 33:14), and consumes evildoers (Ps
73:19), whose faithless lives are characterized
by fear (Rv 21:8). Pharaoh’s mighty host was
virtually paralyzed by fear as God moved
ane them (Ex 15:16), and Job’s associate
ildad spoke of men driven to their knees by
the judgments of God (Jb 18:11).
Fear has a tendency to either immobilize
men or seriously affect their activity. This is
especially true of the spiritually uncommitted.
Saul’s fear of the people caused him to trans-
gress the commandment of God (1 Sm 15:24).
The parents whose blind son was miracu-
lously healed by Jesus were afraid to support
Christ because they feared the Jews (Jn 9:22).
In the parable of the talents Jesus told of a
man whose fear prevented him from doing his
reasonable duty (Mt 25:25).
Jesus Christ, by his atoning death, resurrec-
tion, and heavenly intercession for believers,
is the unique liberator from fear. The apostle
Paul encouraged the Romans by informing
them that in their conversion to Christ, they
received the Holy Spirit, not as a spirit of fear
and bondage, but as the spirit of adoption,
whereby they could address God as ‘‘Abba”’
(Rom 8:15; the Aramaic word commonly used
by Jewish children to address their fathers).
This is the word by which our Lord Jesus ad-
dressed his heavenly Father and which Chris-
tians, by virtue of their adoption into the fam-
ily of God, may also use in speaking to God
(Gal 4:6). Recipients of God’s love have re-
ceived a dynamic force for casting out their
anxieties (1 Jn 4:18). A sense of God’s intimate
love inspired Paul to say, “If God is for us,
who is against us?” (Rom 8:31).
Unwarranted fear may harm the efforts of
the people of God. Jeremiah was warned by
God not to fear the faces of his opponents (Jer
1:8) lest God allow calamity to befall him (v
17). Similar calls to courage were given to Jere-
miah’s contemporary, Ezekiel, and to a great
many others (Jos 1:7,9; Ez 2:6). We realize that
even godly people are tempted to fear and
may be temporarily overwhelmed (Ps 55:5). So
God repeatedly counsels his people not to suc-
cumb to that temptation (Is 8:12; Jn 14:1,27).
He tells them to heap their anxieties upon the
God of their redemption, whose care for his
sheep is infinitely great (1 Pt 5:7). Faith, then,
is the indispensable antecedent of fearlessness
as seen in the words of Isaiah: “Thou dost
keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is
stayed on thee, because he trusts in thee’’ (Is
26:3). The psalmist repeatedly stresses the role
of faith in conquering fear (37:1; 46:2; 112:7).
Genuine faith is expressed in, and animated
by, a reverential awe, and this is the basic
meaning of the biblical idea of the fear of God.
Unless there is personal awareness of the awe-
some and majestic sovereignty of God, it is
impossible to have a meaningful faith existing
in one’s heart (Pss 5:7; 89:7). When God was
called ‘‘the fear of Isaac’”’ (Gn 31:42) it showed
the patriarch’s understanding of the immuta-
ble greatness of Yahweh. Isaac’s father, Abra-
ham, anxiously observed the absence of this
holy fear in the people who dwell in Gerar
(20:11). Even Jesus carried out his ministry in
the fear of God (Is 11:2,3; Heb 5:7). Though
Christians are to be liberated from the fear of
men (Heb 13:6), death (2:15), and life in gen-
eral (2 Tm 1:6,7), they must never lose their
sense of the awesomeness of God. Such aware-
ness not only leads to true wisdom (Ps 111:r)
but also provides direction for the child of
God throughout life (Phil 2:12; Eph 5:21).
Godly fear is characterized by total alle-
giance to the one true God. The Samaritans, in
attempting to serve Yahweh and their idols
simultaneously, were rejected by God (2 Kgs
17:33,41). Those who love God learn of whole-
some fear by searching the Scriptures (Prv
2:3-5), the Word of God, which the ancient
Israelites were commanded to cleave to and
obey as evidence of their reverence for God (Dt
6:2). In Acts 10:2 Cornelius and his family were
called ‘‘God-fearers” because of their high re-
gard for the God of Israel and because they
stood in awe of his person. True reverence for
God must invariably express itself in good
works and holy living (2 Cor 7:1). To truly re-
vere the Lord entails avoiding sin (Ex 20:20)
and translating the directives of the Word of
 Feasts and Festivals of Israel

God into everyday experience (Eccl 12:13).
This holy fear is actually a source of joy (Ps
2:11) and a veritable fountain of life (Prv
14:27). The fear of the Lord is more valuable
than the greatest material riches (15:16) be-
cause the Lord takes pleasure in those who
hold him in such high regard (Ps 147:11).
Stuart D. Sacks
Feast of Lights. Alternate name for Hanuk-
kah, one of Israel’s festivals celebrating the re-
dedication of the temple in 164 Bc.
See FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL.
Feasts and Festivals of Israel. Occasions
of public or private rejoicing to commemorate
some significant event or personage. The ele-
ment of celebration has a special meaning in
the cycle of religious occasions and the rites
and ceremonies associated with these particu-
lar days. While the idea of a feast commonly
implies a banquet with plenteous food and
drink, this element is not indispensable. Some-
times there is only a token amount, as in the
celebration of Holy Communion.
In contemporary usage “‘festival’”’ usually re-
fers to activities extending over a period of
time, while “feast’’ indicates one part of the
celebration, often a meal. However, in reli-
gious usage, both ancient and modern, the two
words are used interchangeably. The ancient
Hebrews employed the words mo‘ed (‘‘sea-
sons’’) and hag for their great public celebra-
tions, while feasts of a more private nature
were commonly described by the term mish-
teh. The majority of English translations of
Scripture do not differentiate between these
words.
Feasts and Their Functions. A festival
places great emphasis on community parti-
cipation and on the continuity of social or
religious tradition, especially where the cele-
brations are elements of a regular civil or reli-
gious calendar. Without community backing,
even in a family celebration, no festival can be
successful. When there is communal participa-
tion, a festival can reinforce the individual
and community memory of specific occasions,
and can perpetuate that store of recollection
over years and generations. Such shared mem-
ory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating
community, large or small, and serves to estab-
lish the traditions by which the group lives. If
the festival commemorates a particular event
or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme be-
comes more firmly embedded in the minds of
the participants by being associated repeat-
edly with the rites and ceremonies performed.
The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this
positive function. The great festivals of their
religious calendar commemorated specific oc-
casions when God had reached out in power to
intervene for his people or had provided for
them in their distress. By celebrating these
feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews were
keeping at the forefront of their minds the
power and greatness of their covenant God in
directing their destiny. Their repeated re-
hearsal of God’s help and love for them re-
minded them that he was still able to sustain
them. Especially in times of hardship, it

Annual Feasts and Festivals of Israel*

Feasts and Day(s) and Post-
Festivals (Pre-)exilic Month Gregorian Month Major References

Passover 14th of Nisan (Abib) March/April Ex 12:11-30; Lv 23:5;

Nm 9:15; 28:16; Dt
16:1-8
Unleavened Bread 15th (+7 days) of Ni- March/April Ex 34:18—21; Lv 23:6—
san (Abib) 8; Nm 28:17—25; Dt
16:1—8,16—17
Pentecost (Shavuot, 6th—Sivan May/June Ex 34:22; Lv 23:15—21;
First fruits, Harvest, Nm 28:26-31; Dt
Weeks) 16:9—12,16-17
Trumpets (Rosh 1st of Tishri (Ethanim) September/October Lv 23:23-25; Nm 29:1—
Hashanah) 6
Day of Atonement roth of Tishri (Etha- September/October Lv 16:29-34; 23:26—32;
(Yom Kippur) nim) Nm 29:7-11
Tabernacles (Succoth, 15th (+7 days) of September/October Ex 34:22; Lv 23:33-433
Booths, Ingathering) Tishri (Ethanim) we 29:12—38; Dt
16:13-17
Simhath Torah 22nd (+1 day) of September/October
Tishri (Ethanim)
Dedication (Lights, Ha- 25th (+7 days) of November/December t Mc 4:41—49; 2 Mc
nukkah) Kislev 10:6—8; Jn 10:22
Nicanor 13th of Adar February/March 1 Mc 7:49
Purim (Lots) 14th (+1 day) of Adar February/March Est 9:21,27—28

*Beginning with Nisan (Abib), the first month in the calendar of Israel.

783
Feasts and Festivals-of Israel
pointed to the reality of God’s presence and
activity among them. Faith sustained by this
means furnished an invaluable spiritual di-
mension to the life of the nation and provided
a sense of continuity under divine provision
and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan ele-
ments were introduced into festive occasions
did this important ingredient of national life
begin to lose its vitality.
OT Festivals. 1. General festival occasions
were surprisingly numerous in Israel, consider-
ing the rather austere mode of life reflected in
much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations
offset or compensate for the hardships and in-
securities of existence in the ancient Near
East, and the Israelites made the most of ev-
ery opportunity. A wedding was one of the
most obvious occasions for celebration, and it
is not surprising that a feast was prepared for
the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in
which the whole neighborhood participated.
Just how long this particular feast lasted is
unknown, but some marriage festivals contin-
ued for a week, as in the case of the marriage
between Samson and the woman of Timnah
(Jgs 14:17). A festival, still observed in some
parts of the Near East, was held when a child
was weaned. On such an occasion the child,
then from two to three years old, was intro-
duced to semisolid food and was not thereaf-
ter nursed again. It was during such a feast
that an emotional scene occurred when Sarah
saw the son of Hagar playing with Isaac (Gn
21:8—10). The canons of Near Eastern hospital-
ity required the host to prepare a feast when
guests arrived (19:3) or left (26:30). Wine that
makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was con-
sumed freely on such occasions.
Birthdays were often observed in a festive
spirit, especially where a royal person was con-
cerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was com-
memorated with a feast provided for his ser-
vants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was
dedicated the occasion was celebrated for a
full week (8:65 RSV, NEB). Kings and queens
held feasts periodically to mark certain occa-
sions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18;
5:4,14; 7:2,7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally
made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep,
and this occasion was consecrated when the
wool was sent to the levitical priests (Dt 18:4).
2. Preexilic Feasts. In addition to the gen-
eral festivals, which were frequently of a secu-
lar nature, communal feasts were prescribed
for the Israelites that had a specifically spiri-
tual significance. They were meant to empha-
size the activity of God on behalf of his people
and to remind them that continued divine
blessing depended upon their obedience to his
will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2
began with an injunction to observe the sab-
784
bath. The seventh day, in which God ceased
from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is
difficult to determine the extent to which
it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8—
11). From that time on, sabbath observance
stressed refraining from all work so as to com-
memorate properly God’s own rest from cre-
ative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his
people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12—15).
Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special
relationship between God and the Israelites.
During this 24-hour period even trivial tasks
like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood
(Nm _ 15:32,33) were prohibited on pain of
death. Journeys of any distance also came un-
der the sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offer-
ings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9,10),
and the bread of the presence was replaced in
the tabernacle (Lv 24:5—8). Despite the restric-
tions on activity, the sabbath was meant to
symbolize a time of happiness and security in
the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13,14), since its
observance would bring blessing to the indi-
vidual and to the whole land.
The new moon was a monthly celebration
based on the lunar calendar. It was especially
appropriate for an agricultural people, since
all could tell when the moon was new. Special
offerings were prescribed for this festival, con-
sisting of a burnt sacrifice, a cereal offering,
and a drink offering (Nm 28:11~-15). In addi-
tion, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a
sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded
over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial be-
fore God (Nm 1o:10). The sacrifices prescribed
for the new moon festival were significantly
greater than those required in Numbers 28:9,
10 for the weekly sabbath. This lunar feast was
popular throughout Israelite history; during
the monarchy the Levites were required to as-
sist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festi-
val, as well as on the sabbath (1 Chr 23:29—31).
The preexilic prophets may well have taken
advantage of the large gatherings to give guid:
ance to the people or proclaim prophetic ora-
cles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this
was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the
period of rest and celebration valuable, how-
ever, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about
those avaricious Israelites who felt that such
observances interfered with the business of
making a living. The feast could not be ob-
served when the Judeans were in exile in Baby-
lonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehe-
miah its observance was restored (Neh 10:33).
In Isaiah 66:22,23 it was related to Israel’s final
destiny and was an accepted part of the ordi-
nances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).
The purpose of the festival was to enhance the
unity of national life by reminding the Israel-
ites that God’s covenant with their ancestors
 Feasts and Festivals of Israel

was permanent and still binding upon the na- their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep
tion. It also stressed the loving nature and the Israelites from experiencing any shortages
providence of a God who could begin such a or other hardships during the year of sabbath,
relationship and carry out his promises with God promised that in the year immediately
complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19; Ecclus preceding the sabbatical period the land
43:6-8). By implication it was also a constant would bear fruit to suffice for the next 3
reminder to the Israelites that they, too, had years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based
responsibilities under the covenant which -uipon the experience of the wilderness wander-
they would neglect at their peril. ings, when on the 6th day of the week suffi-
The feast of trumpets was celebrated on the cient manna appeared to last through the sab-
1st day of the 7th new moon. This month, sub- bath (Ex 16:5).
sequently named Tishri, was especially holy, In this festival period God’s absolute claim
and for this reason was governed by certain over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and
regulations different from those of ordinary the faith of the nation in God’s ability to pro-
new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown vide for future needs was reinforced. The provi-
on the 1st day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and sions that freed for a year from agricultural
cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers bondage were paralleled in the 7th year of rest
29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required by those requiring liberation of slaves and debt-
for this particular feast exceeded those pre- ors. These underprivileged members of society
scribed for normal sabbath sacrifice, but were were to be released from their obligations of
somewhat less than those required for the servitude. As a result, men and women who
regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This had become slaves for one reason or another
feast was to be observed as a day of solemn found personal liberty (Ex 21:2—-6), and under
rest and as a holy convocation, and the trum- proclamation of the Lord’s release the provi-
pets were sounded as a triumphant memorial sions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt.
to God’s great provision for his people through 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have
the Sinai covenant. been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life,
The 7th month was particularly sacred, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah
partly because of its place in the hallowed 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of
cycle of sevens, but also because the day of the opportunity presented to instruct the peo-
atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the feast of ple in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical
tabernacles, or booths, occurred during this year ordinance. He also warned the wayward
period. The latter feast followed the day of Judeans that because they had disobeyed the
atonement by some 5 days (Ex 23:33), and its commands of God in denying proper liberty to
joyful character served to offset somewhat their slaves, they would have their own free-
the solemnity of the annual penitential occa- dom taken away in a far more serious manner
sion when the nation confessed its collective by being carried captive to Babylonia after see-
sins and saw them banished symbolically ing their land destroyed. The lesson was not
into the wilderness as the scapegoat was lost upon those who returned from exile, for
driven from the congregation. under the administration of Nehemiah the
Another feast closely connected with the in- Jews bound themselves by a covenant to ob-
stitution of the sabbath was the sabbatical serve the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh
year. At the end of each cycle of 6 years the 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its im-
following 12 months were observed as a ‘‘sab- petus from the reading of the Law of Moses at
bath of rest for the land.” During this inter- the feast of booths, which coincidentally oc-
val the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) curred at the beginning of the sabbatical year
without any form of cultivation, and whatever (Neh 8:13-18).
sprouted and grew from it naturally was as- Still another feast based on the principle of
signed to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This the sabbath was the year of jubilee or pente-
provision for the land itself constituted one of costal year (Lv 25:8—55; 27:17—24). As the sab-
the most important ecological principles of batical year was related to the concept of the
Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was 7th day, so the pentecostal (“soth’) year
holy, and just as they needed to have regular marked the completion of a cycle of 7 sabbati-
intervals of rest from daily work in order to cal years. The commencement of a jubilee
regain their energy and spiritual vitality year was proclaimed on the day of atonement
through worship, so the ground needed to rest throughout the land by means of trumpet
and recuperate from the strain of constant cul- blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities which took
tivation. The festival reminded the Israelites place during the pentecostal year were similar
that the land on which they lived had been to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A
given to them by God in fulfillment of his special feature was that land that had been
covenantal undertaking to provide richly for sold during the preceding 49 years was re-

785
Feasts and Festivals-of Israel
turned to its original owners, a procedure
which sometimes involved financial adjust-
ments. To prevent abuse of the process
through opportunism or speculation, the He-
brews were instructed to deal fairly and hon-
estly with one another in the fear of God, who
was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14—17).
As in the sabbatical year, God promised to
make provision so that no one would suffer
hardship. It was during the year of jubilee
those who were slaves in Hebrew households
were given their liberty, so that everyone in
the land would commence a new cycle of sab-
batical years on the same footing, as free per-
sons under God.
Three annual feasts which followed the sea-
sons of the year rather than phases of the
moon furnished important occasions for com-
memorating God’s power and provision in na-
tional life. These festivals were designated by
the term hag, indicating a festival usually ob-
served by some sort of pilgrimage. These three
festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17
and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the
feast of Passover and unleavened bread, the
feast of weeks (Pentecost), and the festival of
booths (tabernacles). On these occasions all
the males of Israel were commanded to make
pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate
le a j ue da ac
The mosaic floor of the synagogue in Tiberias depicts a
menora, as well as other objects used at the feast of Taberna-
cles (including shofar, incense shovel, lulav [palm branch
stem], and etrog [a citrus fruit]).
786
these “feasts of the Lord” (Ex 12:14). The Pass-
Over and the feast of unleavened bread were
originally separate ordinances, but since the
latter always followed immediately upon the
Passover rite, they naturally blended into a
single festival.
The Passover was of supreme theological
significance for the Israelites, since it marked
one of the most momentous acts of divine in-
tervention in their history, the beginning
of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt
when, in the final plague, God destroyed the
firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Is-
raelites whose homes had blood smeared on
the doorposts (Ex 12:11—30). God commanded
that the day was to be observed as a memorial
feast (12:14), and the next Passover celebration
occurred in the Sinai desert (Nm 9:1—5). In the
Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in
the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy
16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf.
Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th
evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a
seven-day period during which nothing leav-
ened was to be eaten. The principle for remov-
ing all leaven from bread was similar to that
underlying the draining of blood from animal
flesh. Both ledven and blood had quickening
power and were to be kept separate as an offer-
ing to God. The rst and 7th days of this period
were marked by a holy assembly, during
which the only work permitted was the prepa-
ration of food (Ex 12:16). This period when un-
leavened bread was eaten was described as a
feast because it opened the 7-day period of
grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast spe-
cial burnt sacrifices were offered, along with a
sheaf of newly harvested barley. By NT times
the festivals of Passover and unleavened bread
were well-attended celebrations and were
known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk
22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliver-
ance from the power of Egypt by divine inter-
vention assured the Israelites that God was al-
ways ready to act on behalf of a faithful and
obedient covenant people. It also reminded
them that they had once been slaves (Dt
16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and
unleavened bread observances were compara-
tively simple in character, but during the mon-
archy more elaborate passover rituals came
into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1—19).
The and great festival, Pentecost, or weeks,
lasted for 1 day only and was observed on the
soth day after the newly harvested corn sheaf
had been waved before the Lord at the feast of
unleavened bread (Dt 16:9—12). The festival
marked the end of the grain harvest and the
beginning of the period when first fruits could
be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The
feast day was marked by the presentation of 2
 Feasts and Festivals of Israel

wheaten flour loaves along with sacrifices of 7 the festival of booths, Zechariah warned that
lambs, a ram, and a bullock (Lv 23:15~—20). those who did not continue this tradition
Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect could expect hardship and shortages of food
gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occa- (Zec 14:16—19).
sion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt Postexilic Feasts. There are a few minor
16:10,11). Since Pentecost was essentially a har- festivals which took their rise in the period of
vest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were the return, some of which had their origin in
called on to recognize that they depended en- -- Specific historical occasions. The feast of Pu-
tirely upon God for their material prosperity. rim, or lots, was a joyful occasion occurring
In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It
given for the ritual of presenting first fruits. It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mor-
comprised a great confession of faith set decai were used by God to deliver his people
within the framework of Israel’s history and in the Persian empire from extermination by
recounted God’s deliverance of the nation Haman (Est 9:21,24-28). The feast was ob-
from Egyptian oppression and his provision of served on the 14th day of Adar by those living
a land which could amply supply the needs of in villages, and on the rs5th by the inhabitants
his people. of walled towns and cities. The explanation of
A festival known variously as the feast of the name of the festival is given in Esther
booths, tabernacles (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the He-
ingatherings (Ex 34:22) was the 3rd great occa- brews of God’s ability to save them during a
sion that all Hebrew males were required to time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. This
observe annually. It began on the 15th day of hope of deliverance memorialized in this festi-
the 7th month (Tishri), shortly after the obser- val has consoled the Jews on other occasions
vance of the day of atonement, which fell on when they have suffered persecution. Tradi-
the roth day. The feast of booths lasted for 1 tionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in
week and involved pilgrimage (hag). It was the synagogue on the evening before the feast,
associated initially with the end of the year and there was a great outcry, especially
(Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had among the children present, whenever the
been completed. The rst day was marked by names of the hated Haman and his sons were
a symbolic cessation from all activity, after mentioned.
which burnt offerings were presented to the Another joyous festival which lasted for 8
Lord. The 8th day was also one on which the days was the feast of the dedication of the tem-
congregation of Israel abstained from manual ple (1 Mc 4:52—59; 2 Mc 10:6-8), familiar to mod-
work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Le- ern readers as Hanukkah, or the festival of
viticus 23:39—-43 furnished details for the ritu- lights. The specific dedication which prompted
als which gave the festival its special name of the feast occurred in 164 Bc, when Judas Macca-
booths or tabernacles. The fruit of ‘goodly beus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem af-
trees’’ was to be gathered on the rst day of ter it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Ephi-
the feast, along with palm fronds, willow phanes. The celebrations commenced on the
branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. 25th day of the 9th month (Kislev), and were
From these, rough shelters or booths were to marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns.
be constructed in which the people lived for The stories of brave opposition by the Macca-
the week of the feast. Every 7th year the ob- bees to the crushing forces of paganism were
servances were marked by a public recital of recounted, and the feast was one of praise to
the covenant provisions to which the Israel- God for his marvellous deliverance of the Jews
ites under Moses had committed themselves, during the Maccabean period.
a procedure designed to keep fresh in their A 3rd minor feast was that of the reading of
minds the obligations as well as the blessings the Law (cf. Neh 8:9; 1 Esd 9:50), held on the
of the covenant relationship. A particularly 1st day of the 7th month. This soon became
significant observance of the feast of taberna- attached to the end of the feast of booths. The
cles took place in the time of Ezra, when the feast of Nicanor (1 Mc 7:49) on the 13th of Adar
Judean community returned from Babylon— similarly became part of the feast of Purim.
celebration of a kind unknown for centuries Both expressed gratitude for divine guidance
was held (Neh 8:13—-18). From the context and deliverance.
it appears that observance of the feast had NT Festivals. In Christ’s time the sabbath
lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at was observed rigorously and was the occasion
Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14;
drunken woman and the feast referred to in 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and
Judges 21:19 were evidently the feasts of Jesus came into conflict with the authorities
booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw periodically for breaches of the sabbath regula-
all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe tions (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10—-17). In

787
Felix, Antonius
the primitive church, worship occurred on
“the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to
commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early
Christians initially participated in Jewish cere-
monies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8), and it was
on the feast of Pentecost after Christ’s resur-
rection and ascension that the Spirit was
poured out (Acts 2:1—4), fulfilling Joel 2:28—32
and commencing the history of the Christian
church as such.
The Passover and feast of unleavened bread
were of great significance in the life of Christ
(cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion
was a very popular one in NT times (cf. Jn
12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted
the custom of clemency to a prisoner nomi-
nated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Je-
sus participated actively in the Passover ritu-
als (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The last supper
with his disciples occurred just prior to the
Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot be-
trayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4—6). The
breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at
that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22—25) were
related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death
on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ's
disciples were instructed to observe this rite
as a memorial of his suffering and death for
human sin (1 Cor 11:24—26) and as a proclama-
tion of the power of the cross until the Lord
returns in glory. Some scholars have sug-
gested that Christ was actually hanging on the
cross when the Passover lamb was _ being
slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct
it would represent Jesus graphically as the
“Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the
world” (Jn 1:29). Jesus was also present once
when the feast of tabernacles was celebrated
(Jn 7:2). In his day water was carried in pro-
cession from the pool of Siloam as an offering
to God, and the ceremony most probably
prompted Christ’s discourse on living water
and eternal life (Jn 7:37—39). On one occasion
at least Jesus was in Jerusalem when the festi-
val of lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly
missed death by stoning.
Jesus was entertained occasionally at pri-
vate feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an
emergency situation when the wine ran out at
a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8—10). He was criti-
cal of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats
at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and
taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor
(Lk-14:73);
Symbolism of Feasts. Many aspects of the
ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted sym-
bolically in the early church. Paul regarded
the earliest Hebrew Christians as the first
fruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Ro-
mans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by
Christians was regarded as only a token of
788
what was to come, and as such was the first
fruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were
described in James 1:18 as the first fruits of
God’s creatures who were brought forth by the
word of truth. The resurrection of Jesus was
considered by Paul to be the first fruits of
those who slépt (1 Cor 15:20,23). In an allusion
to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the sabbaths,
new moons, and feasts as merely comprising a
shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16,17).
The Passover was used figuratively to empha-
size that Christ our passover lamb had been
sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep
the feast with the unleavened bread of sincer-
ity and truth, and not with the old leaven of
malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7,8). The OT prophets
looked for a divinely appointed banquet at the
end of the age (cf. Is 34:5; Ez 39:17,20; Zep 1:7—
g) in which God’s judgments would be poured
out on unbelievers. The Qumran brotherhood
also expected a great banquet at the appear-
ing of the Messiah, but without the threat of
judgment. In Revelation 19:17,18, carrion birds
will be summoned to a great feast on the flesh
of God’s enemies, in stark contrast to the des-
tiny of the elect (cf. Mk 14:25).
R.K. HARRISON
See ISRAEL, RELIGION OF; PRIESTS AND LEVITES; OF-
FERINGS AND SACRIFICES; ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; JUDAISM;
TABERNACLE, TEMPLE.
Bibliography. R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, pp 424-517; W.
Eichrodt, Theology of the OT, vol 1, pp 119-33; A.J. Heschel,
The Sabbath; HJ. Kraus, Worship in Israel; H. Schauss,
Guide to Jewish Holy Days and The Jewish Festivals.
Felix, Antonius. Roman procurator (gover-
nor) of Judea (AD 52—60) succeeding Cumanus,
appointed by Claudius and succeeded by Fes-
tus Porcius. Felix’s brother, Pallas, a promi-
nent, more influential Roman, interceded on
his behalf after he was recalled from his procu-
ratorship by Nero. During his oppressive rule,
Felix utilized the aid of robbers to have Jona-
than, the high priest, murdered. His tyranny
has been cited as the cause for the Jewish War
that broke out 6 years after he was recalled.
Felix had 3 wives: one unknown, another the
granddaughter of Mark Antony and Cleopatra,
and another the Jewess sister of Agrippa II,
whose name was Drusilla. At the age of 16,
Drusilla left her husband, King Azizus of
Emesa, to marry Felix. She later bore him a
son, Agrippa.
Felix was serving as governor when the
apostle Paul was brought before him in Caesa-
rea to answer charges against him after the
riot in Jerusalem (Acts 23:24-24:27). After a 5-
day delay, Tertullus, spokesman for the Jews,
and others arrived to state their charges. Felix
put off a decision until he could hear from
Lysias, the tribune. In the meantime, Paul was

placed in limited custody. Felix hoped to ob-
tain bribe money for his release. As a result,
Paul was detained for 2 years, during which
time he and Felix often conversed. The apos-
tle’s message of “justice, self-control, and fu-
ture judgment” alarmed Felix greatly (24:25).
Record of his life after being recalled by Nero
is not available.
Fellowship. The essence of the Christian
life—fellowship with God and fellowship with
other believers in Christ.
In the beginning, Adam was placed in the
garden to enjoy friendship and communion
with God. When the creature chose to assert
his own autonomy rather than live under the
Creator’s gracious care, fellowship was bro-
ken. Hence Adam and Eve hid themselves
from the Lord’s presence (Gn 3:8). Yet God im-
mediately sought them out (v 9g) and revealed
his plan for the ultimate restoration of sinners
through the work of the Redeemer (v 15).
The OT tells how God began to draw a spe-
cial people into fellowship with himself.
Enoch is described as a man who walked with
God (Gn 5:22,24). Noah, likewise, walked in
communion with the Lord (6:9). And Abra-
ham, the father of Israel, is called ‘‘the friend
of God” (Jas 2:23). No OT saint had deeper
fellowship with God than did Moses during
his 40-day encounter with the Lord on Mt Si-
nai (Ex 24). Later in Israel’s history David
wrote psalms that reflect a heart vitally in
tune with the living God (Pss 16,34,40,63).
As a result of Christ’s finished work on the
cross, God now makes his permanent abode in
the believer’s heart (Jn 14:23). Hence the fel-
lowship which now prevails under the new
covenant is nothing less than the vital, spiri-
tual union of the believer with Christ
14:20,21). Fellowship with God is the goal of
the Christian life (1 Jn 1:3), and this relation-
ship will be perfected forever when we see our
Savior “face to face”’ (1 Cor 13:12), when God
dwells with his people in the heavenly king-
dom (Rv 21:3).
The gospel restores fellowship not
with God, but among believers as well. Jesus’
last supper with his disciples illustrates the
relationship between the vertical and horizon-
tal dimensions of fellowship (Mk 14:22—25). In
the upper room Jesus shared with his disciples
a sacred love feast. The hearts of the Lord and
his followers were knit together by a deep
sense of love and commitment. Later the disci-
ples discovered that their own hearts were
strongly united out of their common loyalty to
Jesus. Following the cross and the outpouring
of the Spirit the church was born, that new
society of people in fellowship with God and
with one another.
Fellowship
The depth of comraderie among the first
Christians is portrayed in the early chapters
of Acts. Daily the believers met together in
house groups for teaching, fellowship, the
Lord’s Supper, and prayer (Acts 2:42,46). So
profound was their sense of togetherness that
the Christians pooled their possessions and
. distributed them to brethren in need (vv
44,45; 4:32-35). Perhaps the dominant charac-
teristic of this early Christian fellowship was
“love of the brethren” (1 Thes 4:9; 1 Pt 1:22).
Constrained by love, Paul organized among
the gentile churches a collection for poor be-
lievers in Jerusalem. In Romans 15:26, which
speaks of the gifts of the churches in Macedo-
nia and Achaia, the word translated “contri-
bution” is the common Greek word for “‘fel-
lowship.” Similarly, the fellowship which the
Philippian church shared with Paul assumed
the form of gifts to support the apostle’s min-
istry (Phil 1:5; 4:14,15).
Scripture uses several images to describe
the spirit of togetherness which characterized
the early church. The first is “the household of
God” (Eph 2:19; 1 Tm 3:15), or “the household
of faith” (Gal 6:10). In God’s household, love
and hospitality are to be the rule (Heb 13:1,2).
Further, the church is depicted as the family
of God on earth (Eph 3:15). God is the Father
and believers are his faithful sons and daugh-
ters. The life of God’s family is to be governed
by love, tenderness, compassion, and humility
(Phil 2:1—4). Finally, the Christian fellowship
is represented as the “one new man”’ or the
“one body” (Eph 2:15,16). In spite of great natu-
ral diversity, the Holy Spirit binds believers
together into a single organism (4:4—6). In this
fellowship of love, no believer is insignificant.
Each member has been endowed with gifts for
(Jn the spiritual edification of the entire body.
Scripture lays down the basis of fellowship
in 1 John 1:7: “If we walk in the light, as he is
in the light, we have fellowship with one an-
other.” Jesus Christ, then, is the source and
fount of all spiritual communion. Only when
rightly related to the Lord do we experience
only true fellowship with another Christian. Just as
light and darkness are incompatible, so a be-
liever can have no real fellowship with an un-
believer. Neither can the Christian be in fel-
lowship with one who walks contrary to the
teaching of Christ (2 Jn g—11), or a professing
brother who is immoral, idolatrous, a drunk-
ard, or a thief(1 Cor 5:11).
Scripture lays down several guidelines for
enhancing the communion of believers in the
body. (1) Love one another with the same com-
passion that Christ displayed to his own (Jn
13:34,35; 15:12). The law of the fellowship
should be the rule of love (Heb 13:1). (2) Culti-
vate that spirit of humility that seeks the
789
Ferret

other person’s honor (Phil 2:3—5). (3) Lighten though still agreeing that Paul had done “noth-
fellow believers’ load by bearing one another’s ing to deserve death or imprisonment” (v 31).
burdens (Gal 6:2). (4) Share material blessings
with brothers and sisters in need (2 Cor 9:13). Field of Blood. See BLoop, FIELD oF.
(5) Tenderly correct a sinner while helping to
find solutions to the problems (Gal 6:1). (6) Fiery Serpent. Brazen symbol made by Mo-
Succor a fellow believer in times of suffering ses on God’s ‘instruction to save the Israelites.
(1 Cor 12:26). And (7) Pray for one another in Deadly snakes sent by God to punish the Is-
the Spirit without ceasing (Eph 6:18). raelites for their rebellious grumblings, many
The Christian will want to seriously regard of whom died from the poisonous bites (Nm
the saying of an anonymous saint, “You cannot 21:4-9). Recognizing their sin they cried out to
draw nigh to God if you are at a distance from God for deliverance and he instructed Moses to
your brother.” Bruck A. DEMAREST make a fiery (bronze) serpent and set it on a
Bibliography. M. Burrows, More Light on the Dead Sea
pole; healing was granted to those who gazed
Scrolls; J.Y. Campbell, Three NT Studies; A.L. George, Com- at the uplifted figure.
munion with God in the NT; R. Schnackenburg, The Moral Jesus Christ referred to the bronze serpent
Teaching of the NT. incident as a witness to the saving power of
his crucifixion. A person who looks in faith to
Ferret. kv translation for gecko, a kind of the uplifted Christ will receive forgiveness for
reptile, in Leviticus 11:30. sin and have eternal life (Jn 3:14,15). The apos-
See ANIMALS (GECKO; LIZARD). tle Paul also drew upon the OT event as a
warning to those who might arrogantly test
Fertility Cults. See CaNaaNniTe DEITIES AND God (1 Cor 10:9).
RELIGION.
Fig, Fig Tree. See PLAnts.
Festival. See Feasts AND FEsTIVALS OF ISRAEL.
Filigree. Wirelike setting (usually gold) for
Festus, Porcius. Roman procurator (gover- a precious stone or ornament (Ex 28:11-25;
nor) of Judea, who succeeded Felix Antonius 39:13-18).
and who was succeeded by Albinus. The pre- See FASHION AND DREss.
cise date of Porcius Festus’ accession to power
is debatable but has been narrowed to some- Finance. See INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE;
time between AD 55 and 60. The only sources MONEY AND BANKING.
mentioning Festus are the Book of Acts and
the writings of Josephus, a Jewish historian Finger (Measure). Linear measure equiva-
who lived in Rome in the rst century aD lent to the width of a finger (Jer 52:21).
(Antiq. 20.8.9—11; 9.1). See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
Josephus wrote that Festus ruled wisely
and justly in contrast to Felix and Albinus. Fir Tree. Translation of several Hebrew
Sicarii bandits (named after the small swords words in the OT that possibly designate a coni-
they carried) who had terrorized the Palestin- fer type of tree. Positive identification is not
ian countryside were eliminated under Festus’ possible.
rule. In spite of this, he could not reverse the
See PLANTS.
damage incurred by his predecessor, Felix,
who had aggravated the conflict between pa-
gans and Jews. Fire, Lake of. See Lake oF Fire.
The NT recounts that as new procurator,
Festus traveled from Caesarea (where Paul
Fire, Pillar of. Supernatural phenomenon
was in custody) to Jerusalem (Acts 25:1). The of God’s presence which guided the Israelites
Jewish leaders confronted him there and
in the wilderness.
brought charges against Paul. Upon returning See WILDERNESS WANDERINGS; PILLAR OF FIRE AND
to Caesarea, Festus heard Paul’s defense (v 4). CLOUD.
He granted the apostle’s appeal to be heard by
Caesar (the right of any Roman accused of a Firkin. Measure of about ro gallons. In John
capital offense) in an effort to avoid further 2:6, firkin is the kv translation for the name
religious disputes in his jurisdiction (vv 11,12). of a Greek liquid measure. The rsv converts
When King Agrippa arrived a few days later, the amount to gallons.
Festus was in a quandary, unable to under- See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
stand the Jews’ charges against Paul (vv 25—
27). After Paul’s address before the king, Fes- Firstborn. Term used in the Bible to de-
tus loudly declared him to be mad (26:24), scribe a family’s oldest son (Gn 22:21). Israel

799

was called God’s firstborn because of that na-
tion’s miraculous beginning and special deliv-
erance out of Egypt (17:5,15,16; Ex 4:22). As
God’s firstborn, Israel had unique privileges
over all other nations. Gentiles were ‘‘blessed”
only in relation to their kindness to Israel
(12:3; Ex 19:6; Dt 4:5-8). The prophet Isaiah
foresaw a day when Israel would have a dou-
ble portion of inheritance (Is 61:7). Thus, first-
born implies priority or preeminence, as well
as an inheritance.
The expression “firstborn of the poor,” (Is
14:30) means one who is supremely poor, the
poorest of the poor. Another figurative expres-
sion, ‘firstborn of death” (Jb 18:13), implied
that Job’s disease was fatal.
Because God delivered Israel’s firstborn
from death in Egypt, he expected each first-
born to be sanctified to him (Ex 11:4—7; 13:12).
The first male child was a representative of
the entire offspring (Gn 49:3; Ex 22:29; Nm
3:13). The firstborn of all animals used in sacri-
fice was to be sanctified to the Lord (Ex
13°2,15).
Firstborn and Redemption. The firstborn
of every tribe except Levi’s was to be re-
deemed by a sum not to exceed 5 shekels (Nm
18:15,16). Redemption implied a previous bond-
age and was to remind Israel of their redemp-
tion from bondage in Egypt (Ex 13:2-8).
The firstborn of ritually clean animals was
devoted to the Lord. It was brought to the tab-
ernacle (or later, the temple) within a year
from the 8th day after birth. This animal was
then sacrificed and its blood sprinkled on the
altar. The meat of the sacrificed animal was
for the priests (Ex 13:13; 22:30; cf. Nm 18:17).
The firstborn of unclean animals could be re-
deemed with an addition of % of the value as
determined by the priest. If not redeemed
these animals were sold, exchanged, or de-
stroyed by the priests (Lv 27:27). The colt of an
ass was to be redeemed with a lamb (Ex
13:13). If not redeemed, it was to be killed.
Meat from unclean animals was not eaten.
Firstborn and Birthright. The firstborn
acted as priest of the family in the father’s
absence. or death. Esau and Reuben are both
examples (Gn 27:19,32; 1 Chr 5:1,2). This posi-
tion of the firstborn ceased when the priest-
hood was committed to Levi’s tribe
3:12,13). All the firstborn of succeeding genera-
tions had to be redeemed. The redemption
money became part of the Levites’ yearly in-
come (8:17; 18:16).
A double portion of the family inheritance
was the right of the firstborn. This protected
the firstborn when there was a polygamous
marriage. The son of a favorite wife could not
take the place of the first son born of the house-
hold (Dt 21:17).
First Fruits
The title “firstborn” is applied to Christ (Lk
2:7; Rom 8:29; Col 1:15,18; Heb 1:6; Rv 1:5). It
stresses Christ’s right or preeminence or his
position as first to rise from the dead. As first-
born, Christ is heir of all things (Heb 1:2) and
the head of the church (Eph 1:20—23; Col
1:18,24; Heb 2:10—12).
; R.K. HARRISON
See PRIMOGENITURE; HEIR; INHERITANCE; BIRTH-
RIGHT.
First Day of the Week. Sunday.
See Lorp’s Day, THE.
First Fruits. Firstborn child or animal or
first parts of any crop which, in Hebrew
thought, were considered as holy and belong-
ing to the Lord. The first fruits, as a foretaste
of more to come, were offered to God in
thanksgiving for his goodness in providing
them.
First-fruit offerings could include produce
either in its natural state or prepared or pro-
cessed in some way—such as dough, bread,
wine, olive oil, wool. The firstborn son and the
firstborn of the animals that one owned were
to be treated as belonging to God. The first-
born children and the firstborn of the unclean
animals were ‘‘redeemed’’ (paid for) with
money by the offerer, and the firstborn of the
cows, sheep, and goats were offered in sacri-
fice to God (Nm 18:14~—17).
First fruits of any kind were reserved for
those whom God designated, namely, the
priests. At least 3 times ‘‘the first of the first
fruits” is mentioned in the OT. This may be a
reference to the first ripened of the first
fruits, or it may refer to the choicest of them.
These offerings were especially designated for
the priests and could be eaten by any of them
who was ritually clean (Nm _ 18:12,13). For
other references to the first fruits, see Exodus
23:15-19; 34:22,26; Leviticus 2:14; 23:10-17;
Numbers 15:20,21; 28:26-31; and Deuteron-
omy 26:1-11.
The first fruits were presented to God by
bringing the offering to the priest at the taber-
nacle and, in later times, at the temple (Dt
26:2). The priest took the offering and on the
(Nm first day of the week with arms outstretched
waved it before the Lord. On the same day,
the person presenting the first fruits offered a
male lamb as a burnt offering to the Lord, a
meal offering of fine flour mixed with olive oil,
and a drink offering of wine. Fifty days later
another meal offering was to be made. Each
family was to give two loaves of bread to the
Lord as a special gift. These were also given
with appropriate animal, meal, and drink of-
ferings (Lv 23:9-22).
m9
First Jewish Revolt

In the NT the apostle Paul referred to Jesus

Christ’s resurrection as the first fruits of the
resurrection of believers which will occur at
Jesus’ return (1 Cor 15:20,23). The Holy Spirit,
who indwells all believers (Rom 8:9), is also
said to be the first fruits of the full redemption
that is yet to come (v 23). ‘First fruits’’ is some-
times used of the first believers in a geographi-
cal area (16:5; 1 Cor 16:15 KJv). They were a
kind of promise of a spiritual harvest to follow
in that particular locality.
Christian believers are said to be first
fruits, referring to their being a unique and
sacred possession of God out of all he has
created (Jas 1:18). Similarly, in the Book of
Revelation the 144,000 are said to have been
redeemed from humanity as first fruits be-
longing to God and to the Lamb, Jesus Christ
(14:4).
WESLEY L. GERIG
See OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES; FEASTS AND FESTI-
VALS OF ISRAEL.

First Jewish Revolt. Uprising in ap 66—70,

occurred as the result of a series of ineffective
Roman governors in Judea. The last Jewish
king, Agrippa I (the Herod of Acts 12), died in
AD 44, and the next 20 years were filled with
persecution and humiliation for the Jews in
Palestine. The unrest needed only a spark to
flame into open revolt; the spark was provided
by Florus, the Roman governor appointed in
AD 64. His demand for money from the temple
treasury, and the slaughter and pillage by Ro-
man soldiers, provoked the Jews into an upris-
ing in the year 66.
Rebellion quickly spread throughout Pales-
tine, accompanied by a general struggle be-
tween Jews and pagans in several eastern
Mediterranean cities. The revolt in Palestine
was led by the Zealots, a Jewish group that
had long wanted the Romans to leave Pales-
tine. After an initial Jewish victory at the pass
of Beth-horon, the emperor Nero dispatched
his most able general, Vespasian, to direct the
operation of punishing the rebels. By the au-
tumn of Ap 67 all of Galilee and other northern
lands were back in Roman hands. In 67 and 68
further operations in Samaria and Judea left
only four strongholds in Jewish control. At
this point the Roman campaign slackened.
Nero committed suicide in Ap 68, and after
three short-lived emperors, General Vespasian
gained control of the empire in AD 69. His son
Titus took command of the forces in Palestine,
and laid siege to Jerusalem in AD 70.
The Jews in the capital might have been
better prepared had they taken advantage of
the turmoil in Rome to consolidate their own
position and resolve disputes among warring
Arch of Titus in the forum in Rome. It commemorates Titus’
conquest of Jerusalem in AD 70.
Jewish factions. As it was, the arrival of Titus
with 80,000 soldiers forced them to unify for a
last defense of the city.
The siege of the city lasted for some 5
months. Jerusalem held out heroically against
the advancing Romans, forcing a step-by-step
conquest of the city. A tragic moment in Jew-
ish history came early in August, AD 70, when
for the first time in centuries, the morning
and evening sacrifices were not offered at the
temple. About August 29, under circumstances
still not clear, the sanctuary was put to the
torch and the temple destroyed, thereby fulfill-
ing Jesus’ prophecy (Mt 24:1,2; Mk 13:1,2; Lk
19:43,44; 21:5-7). For another month some re-
sistance continued, but by the end of Septem-
ber the conflict was over in the desolated city.
In all, perhaps 1,000,000 Jews were killed and
goo,ooo taken captive during the course of the
revolt.
WILLIAM TRAVIS
See JERUSALEM; JUDAISM; ISRAEL, HISTORY OF.
Fish. See ANIMALS.
Fisherman, Fishing. See Inpustry AND Com-
MERCE; TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS.
Fish Gate. Gate probably located in the
north wall of the city of Jerusalem. The Fish
Gate was built in David’s time and later

Toe

formed part of Manasseh’s fortifications (2 Chr
33:14). After the Babylonian exile it was re-
stored under Nehemiah (Neh 3:3; 12:39) and is
mentioned along with the Mishneh or Second
Quarter (Zep 1:10).
The gate was probably so named either be-
cause fish were brought into the city from the
north, or because it was located near the city’s
fish market.
See JERUSALEM.
Fitch. «sv translation of two Hebrew words.
“Fitch” is actually an older form of the word
“vetch,” the name of many species of legumi-
nous plants. The “fitch” of Isaiah 28:25,27 (Rsv
dill) is the nutmeg flower, the seeds of which
are used as a condiment. The “fitch” of Eze-
kiel 4:9 (Rsv spelt) is probably emmer, an infe-
rior kind of wheat.
See PLANTS (NUTMEG FLOWER; SPELT).
Flag. «sv rendering of an uncertain marsh-
land plant in Job 8:11.
See PLANTS (PAPYRUS; REED; RUSH).
Flax. Cultivated plant providing one of the
oldest of textile fibers. The term may also re-
fer to the fiber itself, thread spun from it, or
the woven linen cloth.
See PLANTS; CLOTH, CLOTH MANUFACTURING.
Flea. Small, wingless insect with strong legs
for jumping. The flea is mentioned only in
1 Samuel 24:14 and 26:20 (KJv), where David
refers to himself as a flea.
See ANIMALS.
Flesh.
In the OT. Term commonly used to desig-
nate the material stuff of the body, whether of
men (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). How-
ever, ‘‘flesh’”’ is used in the OT with a variety
of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equiva-
lent for the whole body (Prv 14:30; Hebrew has
no separate word for ‘“‘body”’), and the mean-
ing is extended to designate the whole person
(“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9
KJV). This idea leads to the union of two differ-
ent persons, man and wife as ‘‘one flesh” (Gn
2:24), and a man can say of his relatives “I am
your bone and your flesh” (Jgs 9:2). The idea
of flesh as the whole person leads to the expres-
sion ‘‘all flesh,” denoting the totality of man-
kind, sometimes including also the animal
world.
Perhaps the most distinctive use of “flesh”
in the OT is found in those passages where it
designates human weakness and frailty over
against God. “My spirit shall not abide in
793
Flesh
man for ever, he is flesh” (Gn 6:3). In Psalm
78:39, God attributes sin to the fact that men
are but flesh. In 2 Chronicles 32:8 the arm of
flesh of the king of Assyria (i.e., his weakness)
is contrasted with the all-powerful God. The
one who puts trust in God need not fear what
“flesh” can do (Ps 56:4), but the one who puts
trust in human flesh instead of in God is un-
der a curse (Jer 17:5). In Isaiah 31:3 flesh is
contrasted with spirit as weakness is with
strength.
However, nowhere in the OT is flesh viewed
as sinful. Flesh is conceived as being created
by God of the dust of the earth (Gn 2:7), and,
as God’s creation, it is good.
In the NT. Paul makes the most distinc-
tive use of “flesh”’ in the NT, one being unique
to him. The more common uses include:
Flesh as the Stuff of the Body. ‘‘Flesh’’ is
frequently used to describe the tissues that
constitute the body and is thus contrasted
with its other parts. There are different kinds
of flesh—‘“‘of men,” “of animals,” “of birds,”
“of fish” (1 Cor 15:39). Pain and suffering may
be experienced in the flesh (2 Cor 12:7). Cir-
cumcision is done in the flesh (Rom 2:28).
While “flesh” in such references is not sinful,
it is corruptible and cannot inherit the king-
dom of God (1 Cor 15:50). Jesus’ body was also
a body of flesh (Col 1:22).
Flesh as the Body Itself. By a natural tran-
sition, the part is used for the whole, and in
many places “‘flesh’”’ is synonymous with the
body as a whole rather than designating the
fleshy part of the body. Paul may thus speak
either of being absent in the body (1 Cor 5:3)
or in the flesh (Col 2:5). Paul can say that the
life of Jesus may be manifested in our body or
in our mortal flesh (2 Cor 4:10,11). ‘““He who
joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body
with her. For, as it is written, ‘The two shall
become one flesh’ ”’ (1 Cor 6:16).
Flesh as Person with Reference to Origin.
Following an OT usage, ‘‘flesh” is used to refer
not merely to the stuff of the body or to the
body itself, but concretely to the person as con-
stituted by flesh. In this usage the word may
refer to the person’s human relationship, the
physical origin and the natural ties that bind
that one to other humans. Paul speaks of his
kinsmen “according to the flesh,” his fellow
Jews (Rom 9:3 Kv), and even uses ‘“‘my flesh”
(11:14 KJV) as a synonym for these kinsmen.
The “‘children of the flesh” (9:8) are those born
by natural generation in contrast to those
born as a result of divine intervention. Christ
was descended from David according to the
flesh (1:3). The phrase does not designate
merely the source of his bodily life, but of his
entire human existence including both his
body and his human spirit.
Flesh
Flesh as Human Existence. Another use of
“flesh” simply designates human existence. As
long as a person lives in the body, that one is
“in the flesh.” Thus Paul can speak of the life
which he lives ‘‘in the flesh” as lived by faith
in the Son of God (Gal 2:20). Referring to Je-
sus’ earthly ministry, Paul says that he abol-
ished “in the flesh” the enmity between Jew
and Gentile (Eph 2:15). Peter has the same
meaning when he speaks of Jesus having been
put to death “‘in the flesh” (1 Pt 3:18). So also
John: “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” (x Jn
4:2). This usage is reflected most notably in
the Johannine saying, “The Word
flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14).
Flesh as Human Existence in Terms of Out-
ward Appearance and Conditions. ‘‘Flesh”
also extends beyond man in his bodily life to
include other factors crucial to human exis-
tence. Thus, “confidence in the flesh”
3:3-6) does not mean confidence in the body,
but confidence in the whole complex of the
outward realm of human existence. It includes
Paul’s Jewish ancestry, his strict religious
training, his zeal, and his prominence in Jew-
ish religious circles. The phrase to “glory after
the flesh” (2 Cor 11:18 KJv) is rendered “‘boast-
ing of worldly things’ by rsv. A good showing
“in the flesh” is practically synonymous with
worldly prominence (Gal 6:11—14). The Judai-
zers insisted upon circumcision to promote
a sense of prideful attainment in the reli-
gious life so that they might have a ground of
glorying. But these external distinctions and
grounds for glorying no longer appealed to
Paul, because the world had been crucified to
him and he to the world.
“Flesh” is also used of outward
ships, as when describing the social ties exist-
ing between slave and master (Eph 6:5; Col
3:22; Phlm 16). “In the flesh” also describes
the realm of marital relationships, which en-
tails certain troublesome problems (1 Cor
7:28).
This usage illuminates an otherwise diffi-
cult saying, ‘“Henceforth know we no man af-
ter the flesh; yea though we have
Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth
know we him no more” (2 Cor 5:16 kJv). The
Rsv correctly renders the phrase, “from a hu-
man point of view.” The verse does not mean
that Paul had heard and seen Jesus in Jerusa-
lem at some previous time and had gained
some acquaintance with Christ “after the
flesh.” “After the flesh” modifies the verb “to
know,” not the noun “‘Christ.’”’ Before his con-
version, Paul knew all people “after the flesh”;
that is, he judged them by worldly, human
standards. To know Christ “after the flesh”
means to look at him through merely human
eyes. As a Jew, Paul had felt that Jesus was a
false, deluded messianic pretender. According
to the Jewish understanding, the Messiah was
to reign over the earth as Davidic king, save
his people Israel, and punish the hated Gen-
tiles. Now Paul has surrendered this false hu-
man view and knows Christ as he really is—
the incarnate Son of God, the Savior of all
who believe. Now as a Christian, Paul no
longer judges others according to the flesh. He
no longer thinks of the Gentiles as dogs in the
usual Jewish way. He sees both Jews and
Greeks as beloved of God,.as people for whom
Christ died.
became Flesh as Fallen Human Nature. The expres-
sion, ‘flesh and blood” designates fallen hu-
manity seen over against God. After his conver-
sion, Paul says that he did not confer with
flesh and blood (Gal 1:16) but rather went
away for three years into Arabia. He means
(Phil that he did not seek the meaning of his Damas-
cus Road vision from anyone else but drew
apart for a considerable time to confer with
God.
When Paul says that “flesh and blood can-
not inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 15:50),
he means, not that humanness cannot inherit
the kingdom,of God, but that human fallen-
ness cannot; as the next clause shows, “‘nei-
ther doth corruption inherit incorruption’”’
(kJv). The weak, fallen, corruptible body can-
not inherit the kingdom of God; there must be
a change; the “‘corruptible must put on incor-
ruption, and this mortal must put on immor-
tality” (1 Cor 15:52 kJv). This is not the salva-
tion of the soul or spirit, but the exchange of
one kind of body for another that is suited to
the final glorious kingdom of God.
relation- When Peter confessed the messiahship of Je-
sus, Jesus replied, “flesh and blood has not
revealed this to you, but my Father who is in
heaven” (Mt 16:17). The meaning of this verse
is obvious. This knowledge of Jesus’ messiah-
ship was not a human deduction; it could be
achieved only by divine revelation.
Flesh as Fallen Sinfulness. There remains
a group of ethical references that are dis-
known tinctly Pauline. The most important feature of
this usage is that man is seen not only as
fallen and weak before God, but as fallen and
sinful. Flesh is contrasted with Spirit—the
Holy Spirit, not man’s spirit, and without the
aid of the Spirit one cannot please God. The
most vivid passage is the first part of Romans
8, where Paul sharply contrasts those who are
“in the flesh” with those who are “in the
Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit’’ in this sense
does not mean to be in a state of ecstasy, but
to be living one’s life in that spiritual realm
which is controlled by the Spirit of God. Those
who are “‘in the flesh,” that is, unregenerate,
cannot please God: “Because the carnal mind
794

is enmity against God: for it is not subject to
the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then
they that are in the flesh cannot please God’’
(vv 7,8 KJv). The translation ‘‘carnal mind” is
unfortunate, for ‘carnal’ in our idiom means
to be surrendered to bodily appetites, espe-
cially to the sexual. The Greek is “‘the mind of
the flesh.” Then Paul says, “But you are not
in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if in fact
the Spirit of God dwells in you” (v 9). There
are two contrasting and mutually exclusive
realms: ‘‘in the flesh” and “in the Spirit.’’ To
be “in the Spirit’ means to be indwelt by
God’s Holy Spirit, that is, to be a regenerate
person.
Those who are unregenerate cannot fulfill
the Law of God and thereby please him. The
highest demand of the Law was to “love the
Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all
thy soul, and with all thy mind,” and then “‘to
love thy neighbor as thyself’? (Mt 22:37—39
KJv). Paul claims that he had blamelessly kept
the formal demands of the Law as a Jew (Phil
3:6) and was therefore blameless so far as legal
righteousness was concerned. But the one
thing formal commandments could not do
was to give him a new heart so that he would
love God. Indeed, the flesh boasted in the con-
formity to the legal demands of the Law and
was uplifted in pride. Romans 8:8 means that
the unregenerate heart cannot please God by
loving and serving him as God requires. Thus
the Law was unable to make mankind truly
righteous, because the flesh is weak (Rom 8:2).
To live after the flesh is death; to live after the
Spirit is life (v 6). Elsewhere Paul says, ‘‘For I
know that in me [i.e., in my flesh] dwelleth no
good thing” (v 18 kJv). Flesh here cannot be
the physical flesh, for the body of flesh is the
temple of the Spirit (1 Cor 6:19) and a member
of Christ (v-15) and is to be the means of glori-
fying God (v 20). Paul means that in his unre-
generate nature, there dwells none of the good-
ness that God demands.
While Paul makes a sharp and absolute con-
trast between being “‘in the flesh” (unregener-
ate) and “in the Spirit’ (regenerate); when one
becomes regenerate and comes to be “‘in the
Spirit,’ that person is no longer in the flesh,
the flesh is still in him. In fact, there remains
in the believer a struggle between the flesh
and the Spirit. Writing to people who are “‘in
the Spirit,’’ Paul says, “For the flesh lusteth
[strives] against the Spirit, and the Spirit
against the flesh; and these are contrary the
one to the other; so that ye cannot do the
things that ye would” (Gal 5:17 KJv). Because
the Christian life is the battleground of these
two opposing principles, it is impossible to be
the perfect person that one would wish to be.
The same situation is reflected in 1 Corin-
795
Flesh
thians 2:14—3:3 where Paul describes three
classes of people: the ‘‘natural”’ (2:14), the ‘“‘car-
nal” that is, fleshly man (3:1,3), and the “‘spiri-
tual man” (3:1). The “natural man” is unregen-
erate. Those who are “in the flesh” (Rom 8:9),
have devoted the whole of their life to the hu-
man level and hence are unable to know the
‘things of God. “Spiritual man” refers to those
whose life is ruled by the Spirit of God so that
the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22,23) are evident
in their life. Between these two there is a third
class—those who are “fleshly,” yet who are
babes in Christ. Therefore they must be “‘in the
Spirit,” yet they do not walk ‘‘according to the
Spirit.’” Because they are “babes in Christ,”
the Spirit of God dwells in them, yet the Holy
Spirit is not allowed to have full control over
them, and they are still walking “like men”
(3:3), manifesting the works of the flesh in jeal-
ousy and strife. Those who are “‘in the Spirit”
and no longer “‘in the flesh” have yet to learn
the lesson of walking after the Spirit and not
after the flesh.
Works of the Flesh vs. Fruit of the Spirit. In
Galatians 5:19—23 Paul contrasts the life in the
flesh and the life in the Spirit. ‘Now the works
of the flesh are manifest, which are these:
adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lascivious-
ness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance,
emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings,
and such like” (vv 19-21 KJv). The important
thing to note about this list is that while some
of these are sins of bodily and sexual appetite,
others are religious sins—idolatry, witch-
craft—and several are sins “‘of the spirit,’’ that
is, of the disposition—hatred, variance, emula-
tions, wrath, strife. The words “‘seditions’”’ and
“‘heresies’’ refer not to theological heresies but
to a factious, divisive spirit. This proves con-
clusively that for Paul the “flesh” is not
synonymous with the body but includes the
whole person, with all the inner attitudes and
disposition.
On the other hand, the fruit of the Spirit is
love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness,
goodness, faithfulness, meekness, and self-
control (vv 22,23). These are mostly characteris-
tics of the inner self; ‘‘against such there is no
law”’ (v 23); that is, when one is characterized
by such traits as these, there is no need for an
external law to indicate what is right and
wrong.
Victory over the Flesh. While a struggle re-
mains in the Christian between the Spirit and
the flesh, Paul knows of a way of victory for
the Spirit. The flesh of the body comes within
the sphere of sanctification (1 Thes 5:23), but
the flesh as the unregenerate human nature
can only be put to death.
This is called the tension between the in-
Flint
dicative and the imperative. Because certain
things have happened in Christ (indicative),
certain inevitable results should accrue (im-
perative). In Paul’s view, the flesh has already
been put to death in the death of Christ. Those
who belong to Christ have already crucified
the flesh with its passions and desires (Gal
5:24). Paul elsewhere says, “I have been cruci-
fied with Christ’ (2:20) and “‘our old self was
crucified with him” (Rom 6:6). Such refer-
ences make it clear that ‘‘flesh” and the “‘self”’
are in some ways to be identified. This iden-
tity is further supported in the teaching about
crucifixion, for Paul means the same thing by
the crucifixion of the flesh that he means
when he says, ‘‘How shall we that are dead to
sin, live any longer therein? We were baptized
into his death. We are buried with him by bap-
tism into death” (vv 1-3). It is I myself who
have died with Christ.
The same idea is expressed in a different
idiom in Colossians 3:9. “Lie not one to an-
other, seeing that ye have put off the old man
[the old nature of the flesh] with his deeds,
and have put on the new man” [the regenerate
nature]. The “old man’’ denotes the sinful, un-
converted being. This is another way of saying
that the old self has been crucified with Christ
(Rom 6:6). Paul views this as something that
has already happened when one comes to faith
in Christ.
This crucifixion and death of the flesh does
not, however, work automatically. It is an
event that must be appropriated by faith.
This involves two aspects. First, believers are
to recognize that the flesh has been crucified
with Christ. ‘“Reckon ye also yourselves to be
dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God
through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 6:11
KJV). One cannot consider the self dead with
Christ unto sin unless that person has actu-
ally died and been crucified with Christ; but
because this has already happened at the mo-
ment of saving faith, it can be put into daily
practice. Those who have died with Christ are
to “put to death the deeds of the body”’ (8:13
KJv). “Body” is here used as a vehicle for the
works of the “‘flesh’—the sensual life of the
unregenerate nature. Those who have been
brought from death into life are to yield their
members to God as instruments of righteous-
ness (6:13). One who has died with Christ is
to ‘‘mortify” (kv), that is, put to death what
is earthly—fornication, uncleanness, covetous-
ness (Col 3:5). Having already put off the old
nature and put on the new, the believer is to
put on compassion, kindness, lowliness, and
the like (v 12).
Victory over the flesh is sometimes de-
scribed as walking in the Spirit. ““Walk by the
Spirit, and do not gratify the desires of the
796
flesh” (Gal 5:16; cf. Rom 8:4). Walking in the
Spirit means to live each moment under the
control of the Holy Spirit.
GeEorGE E. Lapp
See Bopy; MAN, DocTRINE OF; SIN.
Bibliography. W. Barclay, Flesh and Spirit; E.D. Bur-
ton, Spirit, Soul, and Flesh; W.P. Dickson, Paul's Use of the
Terms Flesh and Spirit; R. Jewett, Paul’s Anthropological
Terms; W.G. Kimmel, Man in the NT; W.D. Stacey, The
Pauline View of Man.
Flint. Dark, fine-grained, hard silica (rock)
used for blades of tools. Flint when struck
against other hard surfaces produces sparks
and so was used for lighting fires.
See MINERALS, METALS, AND PRECIOUS STONES.
Flogging. Beating a person with a whip or
other instrument, sometimes used as a legis-
lated punishment.
See CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT.
Flood, The. Rising and overflowing of wa-
ter to cover the land, specifically the flood of
Noah. :
Biblical Account. The narrative of the
Noahic flood, found in Genesis 6—9, constitutes
one of the longest connected stories in the Pen-
tateuch (first five books of the OT). The flood
is referred to frequently elsewhere in the Bi-
ble, in each case being mentioned as a histori-
cal event (Gn 10:1,32; 11:10; Mt 24:38,39; Lk
17:27; 2 Pt 2:5). According to the biblical ac-
count, God brought about the flood because
of human society's increasing deterioration,
which finally reached a point where ‘‘the wick-
edness of man was great in the earth’’ (6:5).
God determined to destroy the race and to be-
gin again with a new people who would obey
him (cf. Gn 1:26-28). Of all the people on
earth, only Noah, his sons, and their wives re-
mained faithful to the Lord. They became
God's means of repopulating the earth follow-
ing its watery destruction. After a period of
120 years’ preparation, during which Noah
built a great ship and preached of God’s com-
ing judgment, the flood came in the form of
heavy rain and the rise of subterranean waters
(Gri6:37:9e chs Hebi peszsor \Phegvz0}i2t Pee eh
Only the selected pairs of land animals
brought aboard the vessel were saved from the
onslaught. For more than a year the waters
prevailed, until finally the waters receded and
the earth was dry and habitable again (Gn
7:6,10-12,24; 8:3—-6,10,12-14). When Noah and
his family left the ark, they offered sacrifices
to God in thanksgiving. God then promised
that he would never again destroy the earth
by a flood.

The Chronology of the Flood
The 600th—601st year Day from the
of Noah’s Life Flood’s Beginning
roth day of 2nd month =F
17th day of 2nd month ° Rains begin to fall.
27th day of 3rd month 40
17th day of 7th month 150
rst day of roth month 224
11th day of 11th month 264
18th day of 11th month 271
25th day of 11th month 278
1st day of rst month 319
27th day of 2nd month 375
Nonbiblical Traditions. No theme is more
widely circulated in the world’s epic and
mythic literature than that of a great flood
which long ago destroyed either the entire
world or some vast portion of it. Such stories
are found among the Chinese, Indians, Greeks,
Mayas, islanders of the South Pacific, and else-
where. Many stories have aspects similar to
the Genesis accounts, but none is so strikingly
similar as that of the ancient Babylonians.
Their story was based on that of their histori-
cal and cultural predecessors, the Sumerians
of Lower Mesopotamia. The Babylonian ver-
sion, known as the Gilgamesh Epic, dates in
its present form to the period of Hammurabi
(c. 1750 BC). It professes, however, to narrate
the life and career of Gilgamesh, a celebrated
king of Uruk in the 3rd millennium Bc. The
epic tells how a pious man named Utnapish-
tim was saved from a devastating flood which
the gods sent upon Shuruppak by building an
ark. After seven days afloat, the storm ended
and the ship landed on Mt Nisir. After sacrific-
ing to Ealil, Utnapishtim became immortal.
Though few deny a connection between the
Genesis account and flood stories like the
Gilgamesh Epic, how they are to be related is a
debated matter. The possibilities are: (1) the
Genesis account is adapted from the extrabib-
lical ones; (2) the extrabiblical stories are
adapted from the Genesis account; (3) all finda
common source. The nonmythical, transcen-
dent, and monotheistic character of the bibli-
cal narrative seems to rule out the first option.
The earlier dating of the extrabiblical stories in
their written versions excludes the second, un-
less earlier copies have been lost. The best solu-
tion, to those who understand the Genesis rec-
ord as inspired narrative history, is to see all
the major early accounts as reflections of the
same vast deluge recounted in written form.
Extent of the Flood. Scholars who view
the flood account as history are divided as to
197
Flood, The
Genesis
Event Reference
Animals and 8 people enter ark. 7:4,7-10
711
Underground springs erupt and rains Acasa
- *cease.
Water covers the mountains. 7:19,24; 8:3
The ark lands on the mountains of 8:4
Ararat.
Other mountain peaks appear. 8:5
Noah sends out a raven and a dove. 8:6-8
The dove is sent out again. 8:10
The dove is sent a third time. 8:12
The water has dried up. 8:13
The ground is dry; animals and 8 peo- 8:14-19
ple leave ark.
its geographical extent. An objective reading
of the story would seem to indicate that the
whole earth was flooded, even to the height of
the highest mountains (Gn 7:17—20; 8:4,21).
Some have argued that waters high enough to
cover ‘‘all the high mountains under the whole
heaven” (7:19) would extend over the entire
earth. Some advocates of a local flood respond
that the narrative uses the language of appear-
ance (that is, to Noah it appeared that all the
earth was flooded). Thus a universal flood was
unnecessary, for God wished to destroy only
the human race, which at that time may have
lived in Mesopotamia. Others point out trans-
lation difficulties in the use of the word
“earth.” In Genesis 1:1, it is part of an an-
cient idiomatic expression denoting totality
(“heaven and earth” means “‘cosmos’’). Some-
times “earth’’ describes a person’s country
(Gn 47:13), the soil itself (23:15), and so on.
Thus one should not assume that the use of
the word in the Genesis flood story implies the
complete inundation of the world.
Some advocates of a universal flood use the
presence of marine fossils on the tops of the
world’s highest mountains in support of their
arguments. But all the mountains originally
emerged from the seas (Gn 1:9), so they would
be expected to preserve traces of their marine
ancestry on their summits. One’s view on the
matter must be determined in the final analy-
sis on theological considerations as well as in-
terpretative factors.
Scientific Evidence for the Flood. With
the beginning of modern archaeology in Meso-
potamia, it became popular to associate evi-
dence of flood destruction in sites such as
Kish, Ur, and Shuruppak with the biblical
flood. Those places, however, were destroyed
by different floods at different times. Their
floods were also much too limited in scope to
suit any interpretation of the Genesis account.
More recently a “catastrophism’’ movement
Flood Myths
has developed within conservative circles, in-
terpreting the world’s great geologic upheav-
als as chaotic remnants of the destruction
caused by Noah’s flood. That view suggests,
among other things, that such geological for-
mations may have taken shape in a short time
(during the flood) and in a relatively recent
era (the time of Noah). Though that theory sat-
isfies many, its opponents point out that some
means of dating show the formations to be
much earlier than the time of Noah.
Geologists exploring the Mt Ararat region
have discovered on the mountain what is
called “pillow lava,” volcanic rock formed un-
der water. Such lava structures have been lo-
cated up to the mountain’s ice cap at 13,500
feet, so water evidently reached that height at
one period. That phenomenon has been taken
by some as a confirmation of worldwide scope
for the Genesis flood, but it does not prove
that the lava was formed on Mt Ararat in the
time of Noah. All it really indicates is that the
structures originated under water, just as all
land masses did.
The presence of “conglomerates” on Mt Ara-
rat is cited as yet another proof of a universal
deluge. Such rocks, varying in size from peb-
bles to boulders, resulted from a process
fusion in which eruptions of lava interacted
with a violent disturbance of water. But again,
the presence of such material at the 13,000-foot
level merely indicates that Mt Ararat was
born in precisely the same manner as modern
islands and that the highest levels involved an
eruption of volcanic rock in the ocean. Nor can
such geological structures be used to imply
that Mt Ararat was in the process of growth
even while the flood occurred. The Genesis ac-
count says nothing about the mountain erupt-
ing during Noah’s deluge. In any event, the
material deposit would have been silt, not
lava.
Interest in the nature of the Genesis flood
has been stimulated periodically since 1856,
for some 200 persons have claimed to have
seen Noah’s ark on Mt Ararat in 23 separate
sightings. At least one report was a hoax, but
many of them agree on the general nature of
the object that has been sighted. Despite such
apparent evidence, all concerned must admit
that no conclusive proof exists that Noah’s ark
is located on Mt Ararat. From a crevasse near
the top of the mountain, Fernand Navarra in
1955 recovered a five-foot piece of wood, which
was hand-tooled and originated at some dis-
tance from the mountain. Carbon-14 dating
techniques, however, produced widely differ-
ing dates for the artifact. It has so far been
impossible to locate what many have thought
to be remains of the ark, despite the use of
sophisticated photographic techniques.
._ The nature of the Genesis flood will con-
tinue to be a matter of debate among inter-
ested parties, but it seems unlikely that the
issue will be resolved unless some new ar-
chaeological or scientific evidence of a compel-
ling nature is forthcoming. That there was a
flood of enormous proportions is hardly to be
doubted in the light of the Genesis account
and other ancient traditions. However, the pre-
cise nature and extent of the biblical deluge
must remain a matter of interpretation and
speculation until incontrovertible evidence set-
tles the issue. EUGENE H. MERRILL
See NoaH #1; FLoop MyrTus.
Bibliography. F.A. Filby, The Flood Reconsidered; H.M.
Morris and J.C. Whitcomb, Jr., The Genesis Flood; A.M.
Rehwinkel, The Flood; D.A. Young, Creation and the Flood.
Flood Myths. Traditional stories which seek
to explain a catastrophic, possibly universal
flood. Such myths are found among nearly all
nations and tribes, though most commonly on
the Asian mainland and the islands immedi-
ately south of it as well as on the North Ameri-
can continent.
Although these traditions have been modi-
fied through the ages and have occasionally
of taken on fantastic elements, they share three
common features: (1) destruction of human be-
ings and other living things by water; (2) some
sort of ark or boat provided as a means of
safety for one person or a few; (3) one or more
human beings preserved to repopulate the
earth; and sometimes (4) wickedness of man
as a cause of the flood. The universality of
these flood myths may lend support to the
view that the flood was worldwide, at least as
far as the inhabited world was concerned.
Examples of Flood Accounts. A few ran-
dom examples will demonstrate the nature of
these myths. A Mexican flood tradition has
Concox (also known as Tezpi) embarking in a
boat with his wife and children, some ani-
mals and some grain to escape a great flood.
As the waters receded, Concox first sent out a
vulture, which did not return because it feeds
on carrion. Then he sent out other birds; fi-
nally a hummingbird returned with a branch
covered with leaves, indicating it was now
safe to disembark.
In Greenland there is a tradition that after
roo generations had lived on the earth a flood
came and destroyed the whole human race,
with the exception of one man who managed
to save himself. Subsequently, when he struck
the earth with his rod, a woman was created
for him; this pair became the progenitors of a
new human race.
A Hawaiian myth describes how, a long
time after the first man, mankind became very
wicked. One among them was righteous, Nu-u.
798

He built a great canoe with a house on it and
stocked it with food and took plants, animals,
and his family aboard. Then came a flood
which destroyed all humankind except those
on the canoe. Subsequently the great god put
a rainbow in the sky as a token of forgiveness.
In India the Hindus revere Manu the righ-
teous as the progenitor of the race. A great fish
warned him that the earth was about to be
covered by water. He was instructed to build a
ship, stock it with all kinds of seeds, and take
aboard seven holy beings (a total of eight—
equivalent to the number on Noah’s ark).
Then the flood came, and a great fish towed
the ship to a summit of the Himalayas, where
Manu was permitted to create a new human
race.
Chinese tradition identifies Fahhe as the
flood hero. He escaped the universal deluge
with his wife, 3 sons, and 3 daughters. From
these the whole earth was repeopled.
The Roman flood tradition appears in Ov-
id’s Metamorphoses (1st century AD) which tells
of the creation of man, his innocence and hap-
piness in Paradise, his fall, and finally the
flood as punishment for human rebelliousness.
Jupiter, enraged, caused a great flood to en-
gulf all humanity; the rains from above were
joined in their destructiveness by the release
of subterranean waters, as in the biblical ac-
count. Only the righteous Deucalion and his
wife Pyrrha escaped in a boat to Mt Parnassus.
After the flood they were instructed to throw
stones over their backs; these became men
and women who then repeopled the earth.
The Babylonian Flood Account. By far
the most interesting flood myth is that of the
Babylonians because of its alleged or actual
similarity to the biblical flood account. Some
have argued that the Babylonian story helped
to confirm ‘the biblical narrative because of
similarities in the accounts and because it
came from the same geographical area as that
intimated in the biblical story. Others have
used the Babylonian account to cast doubt on
the biblical account, claiming that the biblical
narrative is only a myth like the other myths
of the world and merely a sanitized or mono-
theistic version of the Babylonian account.
Discovery. The world first became aware
of the Babylonian flood story on December 3,
1872, when George Smith of the British Mu-
seum reported it in a paper read before the
Society of Biblical Archaeology in London.
What Smith described was part of a flood ac-
count found among the tens of thousands of
clay tablets comprising the library of King
Ashurbanipal of Assyria (669-633 BC). Hor-
muzd Rassam, conducting a British excava-
tion at Nineveh, had found this library in 1853
and had sent it to the British Museum.
799
Flood Myths
Smith’s report led to demands for reopen-
ing the Nineveh excavations in order to find
the missing portion of the account. The follow-
ing May, Smith arrived at Nineveh and found
the flood fragment after only about a week of
excavation! This flood story turned out to be
the 11th tablet of a 12-tablet piece, the Gilga-
‘mesh Epic. It is an account of Gilgamesh’s ob-
session with the fact that all must die and of
his search for immortality. In the 11th tablet
Gilgamesh (king of Uruk, biblical Erech) inter-
viewed Utnapishtim, the “Babylonian Noah,”
and learned from him the story of the flood
and his securing of immortality.
Smith later reported on fragments of an ear-
lier Akkadian story of the flood, written in
Mesopotamia about 1600 Bc. This is now
known as the Atra-hasis Epic, which has been
properly understood only since 1967. Mean-
while, an earlier Sumerian version of the Baby-
lonian flood story (dating perhaps c. 1700 BC)
was found at Nippur and published in 1914.
Without going into all the archaeological de-
tail, it should be said that fragments of the
myth have been found in Mesopotamia, in the
Hittite archives in Asia Minor, and even
among the Ras Shamra texts in Syria. The ef-
fect of all these discoveries has been to pro-
vide clearer understanding of the narrative as
a whole and to make possible an accurate read-
ing of doubtful passages. The story in all these
texts is similar, and the flood hero is known
variously as Ziusudra in Sumerian and Atra-
hasis or Utnapishtim in Akkadian.
The Flood Narrative. As the account goes,
the god Enlil could not sleep because the in-
creasing number of people on earth made too
much noise. So he decided to reduce their
numbers by plague. But the god of plague was
appeased, and the people began to increase
again and to make more noise. Next Enlil de-
cided to reduce the earth’s population by
drought and famine. This effort was frustrated
by Enki or Ea, the god who controlled subter-
ranean waters. Finally Enlil decided to de-
stroy mankind by flood.
Enki, partial to Utnapishtim (or Atra-hasis)
was forced to take an oath to cooperate with
Enlil. Enki found a way around the commit-
ment, however, by communicating with the
flood hero, first in some sort of enigmatic
dream and more specifically by speaking to
the wall of a reed hut, so Utnapishtim, inside
the house, could get the message and prepare
to escape destruction. The instruction was to
pull down the house and build a boat, to make
it watertight by coating it with pitch, and
then to load it with his family and possessions
and with animals and birds. The Gilgamesh
Epic specifies construction of a very large
ship, while the Atra-hasis Epic indicates that
Flood Myths
The Gilgamesh Epic.
the boat was fairly small and that the occu-
pants had only 7 days to build it and get ready
for the flood.
The flood lasted for 7 days and 7 nights,
after which the boat landed on Mt Nisir and
the hero sent out 3 birds (a dove, a swallow,
and a raven) to reconnoiter the situation.
Upon disembarking, Utnapishtim made an of-
fering to the gods, after which he was granted
immortality.
Comparison of Mesopotamian Accounts
with Genesis. Comparing the Genesis and
Mesopotamian flood stories, one is impressed
with the number of similarities. Both accounts
indicate that the flood was divinely planned
and that the disaster was revealed to the flood
hero. Both accounts assert that the hero was
divinely instructed to build a boat which was
pitched within and without, that a limited
number of persons embarked in these ships
with a considerable number of other living
creatures to be saved alive, and that those not
on board were destroyed. Both accounts also
specify the physical causes of the flood, its du-
ration, the landing place of the boat, and the
sending out of birds. And in both accounts the
800
aOR Le yeipiies
sie ALAGOAS &
CpitodforHD at
ShupolsnslyherLt
a Kuz tint
Ep PbO" i TIE
atl df
heroes offer a sacrifice after the flood is over,
receive a divine blessing, and are given some
assurance that a similar catastrophe will
never again overtake mankind.
The degree of similarity between the Gene-
sis and Mesopotamian flood narratives has of-
ten been so emphasized that the extent of
differences between them has been obscured.
Actually the differences are far greater than
the similarities. Most significant among these
differences is the gross polytheism of the
Babylonian and Assyrian stories, while the
Genesis narrative is characterized by an ex-
alted monotheism.
The reason for the flood is different in the
two accounts. Genesis clearly indicates that
God judged man with the deluge because of
his sin. At the beginning of the Gilgamesh
Epic the caprice of the gods seems to be re-
sponsible for the curse. The Atra-hasis Epic
states that Enlil sent the flood to destroy man
because he was so noisy Enlil could not sleep.
In addition, there are several lesser differ-
ences between the biblical and non-biblical
accounts.
1. A period of grace. Genesis 6:3 notes that

man was granted a reprieve of judgment for
120 years, during which time he had ample
opportunity to repent. The Mesopotamian dei-
ties jealously guarded their secret, giving man
no opportunity for repentance.
2. Nature of the boat. Figuring the biblical
cubit as 18 inches, Noah’s ark was 450 feet
long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a
displacement of about 43,300 tons. Supposing
that the Babylonian cubit mentioned in the
Gilgamesh Epic was the usual 20-inch mea-
sure, Utnapishtim’s ship was cubical, measur-
ing 200 feet on a side, with a displacement of
228,500 tons. Moreover, the latter vessel had 7
stories; Noah’s had 3.
3. Occupants of the boat. Utnapishtim took
aboard his family and relatives, craftsmen,
boatmen, gold and silver, and “beasts of the
field,” while Noah took only his wife, sons and
their wives, and a specific number of living
creatures according to God’s instructions (Gn
6:19—21; 7:2,3).
4. Length of the flood (or rain). The Sumer-
ian narrative says it rained for 6 days and
nights; the Babylonian, 7 days and nights. The
Hebrew account declares it rained 40 days and
nights (Gn 7:11).
5. Landing of the boat. Utnapishtim’s ship
landed on Mt Nisir, usually identified with a
mountain east of the Tigris River and 400
miles north of the Persian Gulf, whereas No-
ah’s ark landed in the Ararat Mountains, con-
siderably farther north, either in eastern Tur-
key or adjacent territory in Russia.
6. The birds. According to the cuneiform ac-
count, a dove was sent forth first, then a swal-
low, and finally a raven. Noah sent a raven
first and a dove on 3 separate occasions.
7. Blessing on the hero. Utnapishtim was
granted immortality after the flood was over;
Noah was not.
Though we have noted the differences, the
similarities are considerable and scholars long
have puzzled over the relationship between
the accounts. There seem to be only 3 possibili-
ties: (1) the Babylonian borrowed from the He-
brew; (2) the Hebrew borrowed from the Baby-
lonian; (3) both descended from a common
original. The first seems highly unlikely be-
cause the Mesopotamian accounts antedate
the Pentateuch, though the Hebrew account
could have existed orally long before it was
written. While many in the past have sug-
gested that the Hebrews borrowed the flood
and many other accounts from Babylonian
sources and merely purified them of polytheis-
tic elements, even liberal scholarship now
finds this view increasingly unacceptable.
The position that Hebrew and Babylonian
accounts descended from a common original
is very appealing. After all, Genesis gives Meso-
801
Food and Food Preparation
potamia as the original home of the Hebrews
and the place where civilization first began
and where it made a fresh start after the flood.
What would be more likely than that many
accounts of an early tragedy of such magni-
tude would be preserved by peoples who lived
in Mesopotamia or who had migrated from
‘there. In accepting such a conclusion, we do
not rule out divine inspiration. Biblical writ-
ers did not always write without access to
source materials, but God ruled and directed
the choice of such materials, guaranteeing ac-
curacy of the finished product.
Howarbp F. Vos
See FLoop, THE; NOAH #1; INSCRIPTIONS.
Flour. Fine, powdery substance produced
by grinding the inner kernels of wheat. Called
“the finest of the wheat” (Dt 32:14), flour was
used in baking and also for cereal offerings
(Lv 2).
See FoopD AND FooD PREPARATION.
Flower. See PLants.
Flute. Translation of several words designat-
ing various kinds of wind instruments played
by blowing across or through a hole.
See Music AND MusIcAL INSTRUMENTS (HALIL).
Fly. Two-winged insect. In Scripture, several
species are in view, including the common
housefly (Eccl 10:1) and the horsefly (Is 7:18).
See ANIMALS.
Followers of the Way. Designation for
Christians in the Book of Acts (9:2; 19:9,23;
24:22). In its early years, Christianity was
called “the Way.”
See Way, THE; CHRISTIANS, NAMES FOR.
Food and Food Preparation. Substances
required by the body to sustain life and the
methods of making them edible. Food con-
sumed in Bible times included bread, milk
products, fruit, meat, and fish. Food was also
offered sacrificially or given as gifts. The avail-
ability of food was a perpetual concern be-
cause of the recurrent scarcity: droughts were
frequent (2 Kgs 4:38; Jer 14:1,4-6; Hg 1:11),
hail storms wrought devastation among crops
(2:17), farming was frequently interrupted by
warfare with neighboring nations (2 Kgs 6:25),
and intermittent plagues of locusts ravaged
large areas.
Food was more plentiful in Palestine (de-
scribed as a “land flowing with milk and
honey”) than in many other parts of the Near
East. Shallow cultivation of the soil, however,
Food and Food Preparation
made crops highly reliant on regular rainfall.
Egyptian crops were far less susceptible to
weather variations, because the Nile provided
a dependable source of water.
Food shortages were considered warnings
or punishment from God (Lam 4:9,11; Am 4:6—
g) to teach the Hebrews that life is more than
food and that faith must continue despite scar-
city, famine, or even death (Dt 8:3; Hb 3:17,18).
Adam and Eve were given their choice of
all the vegetation (except the fruit of the tree
of the knowledge of good and evil) in the gar-
den of Eden (Gn 1:29; 2:16,17), but there is no
indication that meat was eaten at that period.
In patriarchal times of the OT, food was
often scarce. Esau, a hunter, sold his birth-
right for a bowl of lentil soup (Gn 25:33,34),
which indicates a shortage of meat in the
household at that time. Joseph, a Jewish offi-
cial in the Egyptian empire, was informed in a
dream of an impending famine. He was able,
therefore, to convince the pharaoh of the need
to build storehouses and make adequate prepa-
ration. As a result, the available food in one
area was used to supplement the disappearing
stocks among other nations. Jacob probably
cultivated grain, and thus needed to go to
Egypt when his crops failed (Gn 42:2).
The staple of nomadic Hebrews was milk,
curds, and cheese. As the people became
more stationary, they grew grains and vegeta-
bles, and planted orchards and vineyards.
Grain would sometimes be grown for a sea-
son, and then after the harvest, the tribes
would move their flocks to other pastures and
find other arable land. Religious sacrifices
and festivals were not only times of solemnity
but of rejoicing and great feasting. Victories
were also celebrated with banquets and feast-
ing on the food obtained from the camp of
the vanquished enemy.
Dairy Products. Milk and its by-products
formed a vital part of the Hebrew diet (see Jgs
4:19). Goat’s milk was most frequently used,
although milk from camels, cows, and sheep
was also available (Gn 32:15; Dt 32:14; Prv
a7).
Since fresh milk could not be preserved in
Palestine’s hot climate, it was processed into
buttermilk, curds, and cheese. Milk was poured
into goatskins, where it soured and thickened
because.of the unsterile condition of the previ-
ously used skins and the movement as it was
transported. That movement of the pouch (of-
ten made from a cow’s stomach, containing the
enzyme rennin used in cheese-making) pro-
duced curds. Curds are first mentioned in the
Bible as part of the meal that Abraham pro-
vided for his extraordinary guests (Gn 18:8).
The Hebrew word for curds (chena) is also
translated ‘butter’ (Jb 10:10). This butter
802
would be similar in consistency to yogurt
from which the water has been squeezed out.
When pressed and rolled into small balls, it
kept indefinitely, despite the climate. Thus,
compressed curds were particularly valuable
for journeys in arid regions where food was
scarce. i
Grain Crops. The most frequently men-
tioned food in the Bible is bread. The term
refers in a general sense to all foods but also to
food prepared from grain. In biblical times
bread was prepared from several grains.
Wheat, barley, and spelt were grown in Egypt
(Ex 9:31,32).
Wheat was the most expensive grain. Fine
wheat flour was a luxury only the rich could
afford (Gn 18:6; Ez 16:13,19). In later periods
wheat became a valuable export crop that
was shipped from Tyre to other ports in the
Mediterranean.
Because barley could grow in less produc-
tive soil and was more tolerant of drought con-
ditions, it became a popular grain crop in the
ancient Near East. Barley could also be har-
vested several weeks earlier than wheat. Bar-
ley bread (Jgs 7:13; 2 Kgs 4:42) and barley
cakes (Ez 4:12) were eaten by the average la-
borer. Jesus miraculously multiplied a young
boy’s five barley loaves and two fishes and fed
five thousand (Jn 6:9,13).
Millet, a cereal with a small grain head
growing on a stalk less than two feet high, and
spelt, a type of wheat, were also used in times
of need as a border around the edges of fields.
An Egyptian physician named Sinuhe, liv-
ing in the mid-2oth century Bc, recorded that
bread was baked daily in Palestine and Syria,
and it is probable that it was served with ev-
ery meal. This bread was probably a wafer or
flat cake made from barley or emmer (an early
form of wheat), since these were the two grain
crops that Sinuhe mentioned seeing.
The most primitive way of processing grain
was to rub the ears between the hands to sepa-
rate the kernels, as Jesus and his disciples did
(Lk 6:1). To perform this act on the sabbath
(the day of rest) was considered the equivalent
of reaping and was therefore forbidden.
Parching (roasting the grain lightly in a
pan) was another simple method of prepara-
tion (Jos 5:11; 1 Sm 17:17). It formed a quick
and easy meal for laborers or kings (Ru 2:14; 1
Sm 25:18; 2 Sm 17:28). Parched corn was ideal
for taking on journeys.
Bread-making was a strenuous task. Mor-
tars, pestles, and simple mills with upper and
lower stones were used for grinding flour in
ancient Egypt around 2900 Bc. These primitive
mills were normally placed on the ground,
and one was compelled to kneel in order to do
the back-breaking work. The resulting meal

ps ee 7 = ca
A millstone for grinding grain.
was coarse and filled with small pieces of
husk.
When the flour had been prepared, water
was added and it was kneaded together in a
special trough. The dough could then be made
immediately into cakes, pancakes, or un-
leavened bread (Gn 19:3). These flat cakes or
wafers were often baked on previously heated
stones, on the inner walls of small conical ov-
ens, or in larger communal ovens. Leaven was
added to make a lighter dough. The leaven
was normally a piece of dough left over from
an earlier mixing, and allowed to ferment be-
fore being used.
The flour meal was also mixed with a por-
ridge made of lentil beans in order to stretch
the food supply.
God provided a different kind of bread for
the Israelites in the wilderness (Ex 16:14,15,22).
This manna was made into cakes (Nm
which fed the Israelites for the following 40
years, providing valuable food for the people
(Jos 5:12).
Food and Food Preparation
Animal Products. The introduction of meat
as part of the diet seems to coincide with the
time when Noah and his family left the ark
(Gn 9:3). After this time, however, the animals
normally eaten for food were so valuable that
only the wealthy could afford to slaughter
them. So in biblical times the peasant had a
simple, somewhat monotonous diet, while the
rich feasted on meat, delicacies, and imported
commodities. As a result, meat was a luxury
item which the poor would rarely enjoy except
on such occasions as the Passover celebration
or sacrifices in which the worshiper ate part of
the offering (Ex 12:8). Although it was clearly
uneconomic to slaughter an animal that pro-
duced such staples as milk, curds, and cheese,
the rules of hospitality in the Near East dic-
tated that an animal should be killed to enter-
tain an honored guest or an unexpected trav-
eler (2 Sm 12:2-4).
Domestic sheep, goats, and oxen provided
the main source of meat, although venison
was popular with the upper classes. When the
blind Isaac was deceived by his son Jacob, the
father was offered the luxury of both kid’s
meat and wild game (Gn 27:3,9,19). The ox
kept in a stall or the fatted calf were reserved
for occasions of great festivity (Mt 22:4).
The use of meat for sacrifice was given de-
finitive form in the provisions of Leviticus and
Deuteronomy. The Law forbade anyone to
slaughter an animal and its offspring on the
same day (Lv 22:28). Another prohibition, per-
haps directed at pagan Canaanite sacrificial
rituals, would not allow a kid to be stewed or
11:7,8) poached in its mother’s milk (Dt 14:21). Mo-
saic law was emphatic in prohibiting the con-
sumption of blood in any form. Animal blood
was considered the source of the animal’s life
Ovens on Cyprus.
803
Food and Food Preparation
and was offered by priests as a sacrifice to
God to atone for human sin (Lv 17:11). In the
Mosaic law, pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits
were considered unclean and were therefore
forbidden for food, principally on hygienic
grounds (11:4—8).
Many food regulations were not strictly fol-
lowed by the nobility (Am 6:4). This deviation
from the Law inspired the distinctive ritual
holiness of the covenant people of Israel (Lv
11:44,45).
In the ancient world, meat was usually
boiled or stewed. Roasting an ox or a kid
would usually occur only as part of a special
feast or sacrificial ritual. Animals might also
be roasted for members of the royal palace or
for a king’s special guests.
Despite the fact that hunting was enjoyed
by all who were able to participate, wild game
provided only a minor part of the diet. Among
the game found in Palestine and mentioned in
the Bible are gazelle, roebuck, wild goat, and
deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23). It is probable that
pheasants were available, and there were cer-
tainly turtledoves, pigeons, quails, and par-
tridges, although the precise quantities of food
that these birds provided is not certain (Gn
15:9; Ex 16:13). Goose was the most popular
dish in Egypt, and marsh ducks were also
highly esteemed as game. After the Persian pe-
riod, chickens were eaten (2 Esd 1:30), and
eggs and omelettes were popular in Rome in
early Christian times. The eggs mentioned in
Deuteronomy are probably wild birds’ eggs
(Dt 22:6,7; Is 10:14).
Thirty varieties of fish were available in the
Jordan, and an extensive fishing industry ex-
isted on the shores of the Sea of Galilee at the
time of Christ. Supplies of fish were readily
available from the Mediterranean coast dur-
ing the Roman period, but at an earlier time
inhabitants depended to a large extent upon
whichever nation had control of the coastline.
In the postexilic period the people of Tyre sup-
plied the city of Jerusalem with fish, which
was sold near the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3). In the
regulations concerning the types of fish suit-
able for food, only those that had fins and
scales were acceptable (Lv 11:9—12).
In NT times many of the distinctions con-
cerning food were eliminated. In the Gospel
of Mark, Jesus, challenging the Pharisees’ hy-
pocrisy, upset the Jewish food laws by saying
that evil thoughts, not certain foods, make a
person unclean (Mk 7:19). As Christianity
spread into gentile areas, there was, however,
a continuing concern about eating meat that
had been offered to idols. The question came
to a head in Corinth. The apostle Paul main-
tained that though the meat was acceptable,
one should take care not to cause spiritual
804
damage to another Christian with a more sen-
Sitive conscience.
Insects and Their By-Products. Wild honey
was found in Palestine, but there is no evi-
dence of beekeeping. Egyptians, however, did
practice beekeeping at that time.
The honéycomb is mentioned specifically in
1 Samuel 14:27 and Song of Solomon 5:1; liq-
uid honey is referred to in 1 Kings 14:3. Honey
was to be found in crevices of rocks and on
trees (Dt 32:13). It was the primary sweetener
in cooking. Although it could not be used in a
sacrifice to the Lord (Lv 2:11), honey was
prized as a delicacy. In the 15th century Bc,
when Thutmos III was campaigning in Syria
and Palestine, he brought back vast quantities
of honey as tribute from his newly conquered
lands.
Locusts were probably first eaten in des-
peration after they had devastated crops. They
are one of the few insects mentioned as a per-
missible source of food (Lv 11:22). Locusts
were fried in flour or honey, or were preserved
by being dried. Locusts and wild honey
formed John the Baptist’s basic diet in the wil-
derness (Mt 3:4; Mk 1:6). Although locusts con-
tain little protein, they are rich in fat and have
some mineral content.
Vegetables and Seasoning. The Hebrew
people wandering in the Sinai wilderness be-
moaned the loss of the flavorful vegetables
they had become accustomed to during their
Egyptian captivity. In particular, they ex-
pressed a longing for cucumbers, melons (pos-
sibly watermelons), leeks, onions, and garlic
(Nm 11:5). Many of these vegetables were later
grown in Palestine, the Gaza area in particu-
lar producing excellent onions. When cucum-
bers were first cultivated they were regarded
as luxury items and had to be protected by
guards who lived in shacks overlooking the
gardens (Is 1:8). Beans, lentils, and parched
grain were among the items brought to David
and his soldiers at Mahanaim (2 Sm 17:28).
Lentils were known in Egypt from at least
the 13th century Bc and were used extensively
both then and in later times by the Israelites.
Lentil soup is mentioned in Genesis 25:34.
In times of hunger the husks of the carob
tree, normally fed to cattle, could be used for
food. Those would have been most acceptable
to the prodigal son (Lk 15:16). There were
many other kinds of green herbs which could
provide a meal for the poor in time of need
(Prv 15:17). In cases of extreme hunger, some
kinds of mallow and juniper roots could also
be used as food. In Elisha’s time a group of
prophets at Gilgal prepared a stew of wild
vegetables, to which they mistakenly added
poisonous wild gourds. Elisha somehow recti-
fied the situation by adding meal to the pot (2

Kgs 4:38—41). While there is no actual record
of the kinds of bitter herbs used as part of the
Passover offering (Ex 12:8; Nm 9:11), mint and
cummin were most probably included. Dill,
cummin, rue, and mint were common garden
herbs (Mt 23:23; Lk 11:42).
Seasonings were welcome additives to the
rather bland character of typical Israelite fare.
Salt came mainly from the Dead Sea area, and
was essential as a seasoning and preserving
agent. Salt was so important in the diet that it
became part of the vocabulary of moral obliga-
tion. The sharing of salt with a person at a
meal sealed a covenant or pact (Nm 18:19). In
the levitical sacrificial ritual, salt was part of
meat and cereal offerings, since it signified the
sealing of God’s covenant with Israel (Lv 2:13;
Ez 43:24).
The mustard tree, which was probably
grown for its oil content, grew from a minute
seed to the height of 15 feet (Mt 13:31,32). An-
ise, coriander, and cinnamon were also avail-
able (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:7). Perhaps the most
popular and widely used spice, apart from
salt, was garlic. Vinegar was also probably
used as a flavoring agent and a preservative.
From the number of seeds and plants found in
Egyptian tombs from the 18th dynasty, it is
obvious that the use of seasoning was wide-
spread in antiquity.
Fruits, Nuts, and Wine. Olive trees grew
abundantly in Palestine and were an excellent
source of food and oil.Even in poor soil, one
tree could sufficientlysupply a family for a
whole year. Some green olives were pickled in
brine and eaten with bread, but the olive was
most important as a source of oil. Workers are
A mortar and a pestle for grinding grain in small quantities.
805
Food and Food Preparation
recorded as receiving rations of 20,000 mea-
sures of wheat and 20 measures of pure oil.
Olive oil was used in baking bread and cakes,
and in frying foods. The best quality olive oil
was used in the temple sacrifices.
Oil was extracted from olives by a simple
process: for the finest quality oil, olives were
picked before fully ripe and then crushed by
hand with a stone mortar and pestle. Usually,
however, pickers beat the olives from trees
with long poles and collected them in baskets.
The oil was then trodden out, probably in the
same vat used for grapes (Mi 6:15), which were
harvested approximately four weeks later.
An oil mill was developed subsequently,
and the heavy upper grinding stone was
turned by two people. As the oil dripped
through, it was collected in another stone
vat and was allowed to settle and purify.
When refined, the oil was stored in skins or
jars.
Fig trees grew in all areas of Palestine.
They required little attention and provided
two or three crops per year. The most abun-
dant of these was the second, which ripened in
late summer. The first figs of the season were
considered a great delicacy (Is 28:4; Mi 7:1).
The prophet Hosea suggested that the Israel-
ites were like the first fruits of the fig tree
(Hos 9:10). Another prophet, Jeremiah, spoke
of those who had gone into exile as being like
An olive press for making olive oil.
Footstool
the first figs, while those who were left behind
were the bad figs, fit only for destruction (Jer
241-10).
Figs were usually eaten fresh from the
trees, but some were pressed into cakes to use
when traveling (1 Sm 25:18; 30:12; 1 Chr 12:40).
Figs were also valuable for medicinal pur-
poses, since effective poultices could be made
from them (2 Kgs 20:7; Is 38:21). Sycamore
trees produced small, figlike fruit eaten pri-
marily by the poor. A short time before har-
vest, the fruit was slightly incised, making it
swell and ripen more quickly. The prophet
Amos notched sycamore fruit before his call
(Am 7:14).
Fruit from the date palm could also have
been pressed into flat cakes for travelers, as
figs were. The Bible, however, makes no spe-
cific reference to its fruit as food (see Jgs 4:5;
Ps'92:42; Jb 1i12)In 12:13):
Another popular Near Eastern fruit was the
red pomegranate. It was eaten whole, or the
seeds were pressed to provide refreshing
drink. The pomegranate is mentioned in tem-
ple ritual as one of the fruits brought back
from Canaan to Moses by his spies (Ex 28:33),
and as an exotic drink (Sg’8:2).
The ‘‘apple” mentioned in Scripture (Prv
25:11; Sg 2:5) was most likely a type of apricot
or quince, not an apple as we know it today.
Nuts were used for additional flavor in
cooking. Almonds and pistachio nuts were
among the gifts sent by Jacob to ransom his
sons (Gn 43:11).
Grapes were popular and plentiful from the
Early Bronze Age. In addition to being eaten
fresh from the vine, grapes were dried as rai-
sins (Nm 6:3; 1 Sm 25:18) or pressed, their
juice drunk either as new wine or fermented
into an alcoholic drink. One of the duties of
the cupbearer in ancient royal courts was to
provide grape juice or wine for the king, his
family, and guests (Gn 40:9—13).
The juice of grapes also provided vinegar
when wine deteriorated. Vinegar was used as
a flavoring agent in cooking and as a preserva-
tive. When diluted with water, it supplied a
refreshing drink for workers in the fields. A
type of jelly was made in the Near East by
boiling grapes until they assumed the consis-
tency of molasses. This syrup could also be
used as a sweetening agent in cooking.
Wine was the universal drink in antiquity.
It could be diluted with water or mixed with
spices or honey to make a mulled wine (Sg 8:2;
Is 5:22). The Hebrew word for “banquet’’ or
“feast” means literally ‘drinking,’ which re-
veals much of the character of such occasions.
While a certain amount of merriment was con-
sidered proper at a festival or banquet (Gn
43:34; Jgs 9:13; Lk 5:34), Scripture contains
806
stern warnings against excessive drinking and
drunkenness (1 Sm 1:14; Prv 20:1; Is 5:11).
Wine making was similar in many respects
to the production of olive oil. Clusters of grapes
were cut from the vine with a sickle, collected
in baskets, and taken to the winepress, where
they were trodden by men and women. The
juice ran into a lower vat, where, under the hot
sun, fermentation began almost immediately.
The wine was left to settle so that any twigs or
skins would form a sediment; after that the
wine could be strained off. In about six weeks
the wine was ready to drink or store in earthen-
ware jars or wineskins.
HAZEL W. PERKIN
See ANIMALS; MEALS, SIGNIFICANCE OF; FAMILY LIFE
AND RELATIONS; BREAD; LEAVEN; PLANTS; UNLEAVENED
BREAD.
Footstool. Low stool used to support one’s
feet. Part of King Solomon’s great revenue of
gold was used to fashion a footstool for his
ivory throne (2 Chr 9:18). Both the ark of the
covenant and the temple are referred to as
God’s footstool because they were places
where God rested (his glory resided there)
and reigned.(1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7; Lam
2:1; cf. Is 60:13). Though Solomon’s throne
and footstool were spectacular, the heavenly
throne and earthly footstool of God dwarf
them (Is 66:1).
The enemies of the Messiah were to become
his footstool, that is, they would be fully sub-
jected to him by the power of God (Ps r10:1).
Many of the NT references to a footstool (lit.,
“something under the foot’’) parallel the OT
expectation of the final conquest of Messiah’s
enemies (Mt 22:44; Mk 12:36; Lk 20:43; Acts
2:35; Heb.1:13; 40:43):
Another OT concept repeated in the NT is
that of the earth being God’s footstool (Mt
5:35; Acts 7:49).
See FURNITURE.
Fords of the Jordan. Shallow places where
people and animals could wade through the
Jordan River. Many OT personalities crossed
over the Jordan at its two main fords: Jacob
(Gn 32:10), Gideon (Jgs 8:4), David (2 Sm 10:17;
17:22), Absalom (17:24), Abner and his men
(2:29). Joshua led his followers across the Jor-
dan on dry land during a flood, truly a God-
given miracle (Jos 3:15,16). Jesus crossed the
Jordan on several occasions on his trips be-
tween Galilee and Jerusalem.
The two main fords of the Jordan were at
Jericho (Jos 2:7; Jgs 3:28; 2 Sm 19:15) and at
Bethabara, where John baptized (Jn 1:28 kv).
In certain places and at certain times the Jor-
dan was not fordable: after the melting of the

snows in the Lebanese mountains, and near
the Dead Sea, where the Jordan is about 100
feet wide and from 5 to ro feet deep (Jos 3:15).
See JORDAN RIVER.
Foreigner. Noncitizen or alien, temporary
guest, sojourner, or stranger. The Greek word
for “proselyte”’ (‘‘foreigner’’) means a stranger
in sympathy with Judaism (Mt 23:15; Acts 2:10;
6:5); it can also mean a convert to Christianity.
The Hebrew word meaning foreigner is ren-
dered correctly on all occasions in the rsv, but
the KJv uses it in its truest sense on only two
occasions (Dt 15:3; Ob 11). In most cases KJV
translates the word as “alien” (Dt 14:21; Jb
19:15; Ps 69:8; Lam 5:2) or “‘stranger’’ (Gn
15:13; Ex 2:22; Lv 25:35). Another Hebrew
word means “dweller” (Lev 25:35; 1 Chr 29:15;
Ps 39:12), or ‘‘settler.’’ For the most part, how-
ever, it is rendered “foreigner.”
A temporary guest or sojourner was usually
someone who wanted to take up temporary
residence or had moved from one tribe or peo-
ple to another, and then attempted to obtain
certain privileges or rights belonging to the
natives. A whole tribe might be sojourners in
Israel. This was the case with the Gibeonites
(Jos g) and the Be-erothites (2 Sm 4:3; cf. 2 Chr
2:17). The Israelites themselves were sojourn-
ers in the land of Egypt (Gn 15:13; 23:4; 26:3;
47:4; Ex 2:22; 23:9) and in other lands (Ru 1:1).
Foreigners or sojourners had certain rights
but also certain limitations while in Israel.
They could offer sacrifices (Lv 17:8; 22:18) but
could not enter the sanctuary unless circum-
cised (Ez 44:9). They were allowed to partici-
pate in the three great Jewish festivals (Dt
16:11,14) but could not eat the Passover meal
unless circumcised (Ex 12:43,48). Foreigners
were not obliged to follow the Israelite reli-
gion, but shared in some of its benefits (Dt
14:29). They were not to work on the sabbath
and the Day of Atonement (Ex 20:10; 23:12; Lv
16:29; Dt 5:14) and could be stoned for reviling
or blaspheming God’s name (Lv 24:16; Nm
15:30). Foreigners were forbidden to eat blood
(Lv 17:10,12) but could eat animals that had
died a natural death (Dt 14:21). Israel’s code of
sexual morality also applied to the foreigner
(Lv 18:26). There were prohibitions against Is-
raelite intermarriage with foreigners, but it
was nevertheless a common occurrence (Gn
34:14; Ex 34:12,16; Dt 7:3,4; Jos 23:12).
Civil rights were provided for foreigners by
the Law of Moses (Ex 12:49; Lv 24:22), and
they came under the same legal processes and
penalties (Lv 20:2; 24:16,22; Dt 1:16). They were
to be treated politely (Ex 22:21; 23:9), loved as
those under the love of God (Lv 19:34; Dt
10:18,19), and treated generously if poor and
807
Foreknowledge
receive the fruits of the harvest (Lv_ 19:10;
23:22; Dt 24:19—-22). They could receive asylum
in times of trouble (Nm 35:15; Jos 20:9). For-
eign servants were to receive treatment equal
to Hebrew servants (Dt 24:14). A foreigner
could not take part in tribal deliberations or
become a king (17:15). The prophet Ezekiel
_leoked forward to the messianic age when the
foreigner would share all the blessings of the
land with God's own people (Ez 47:22,23).
One Hebrew word specifically describes
one who goes out of the way to visit a foreign
country (Ez 7:21; Ps 54:3; Hos 7:9; 8:7 KJv).
In the NT, “foreigner” refers variously to
Samaritans (Lk 17:18) and Canaanites (Heb
11:9,34). The work of Christ allowed all for-
eigners to become members of God’s house-
hold (Eph 2:11—19). Christians should consider
themselves foreigners in this world (Heb 11:13;
ip t-2351)
See BARBARIAN; NEIGHBOR.
Foreknowledge. Knowledge of things or
events before they exist or happen.
In the NT the Greek equivalent of ‘“‘fore-
knowledge” appears only seven times. It refers
to the Christian’s advance warning about false
teachers (2 Pt 3:17); the Jews’ previous knowl-
edge of Paul’s early life (Acts 26:4,5); God’s pre-
vious knowledge of the death of Christ (Acts
2:23; 1 Pt 1:18-20); and knowledge of his peo-
ple (Rom 11:2) and of the church (8:28—30; 1 Pt
T:1,2)s
The concept of foreknowledge does, how-
ever, appear throughout the Bible in other
ways. First, the all-inclusiveness of the knowl-
edge of God is clearly taught. God’s under-
standing is unlimited (Ps 147:5). He knows ev-
ery heart and thought (1 Chr 28:9). Psalm 139
provides an extended poetic description of
God’s knowledge of all human thoughts,
words, and actions. This knowledge extends to
the flight of a sparrow and the number of
hairs on the head (Mt 10:29,30). From such lim-
itless knowledge, it may be inferred that God
also knows the future events of human history.
In addition, Scripture directly teaches that
God is aware of events before they happen.
This sets him apart from heathen idols who
lack the ability to foresee the future (Is 44:6-8;
45:21; 48:14). It is God’s foreknowledge that
provides the basis for the predictions of the
prophets. God announced to Adam and Eve
that the seed of the woman would certainly
defeat the serpent and his seed (Gn 3:15). Prom-
ises of future blessing were given to Abraham
(12:3). God said to Moses, “I know that the
king of Egypt will not let you go” (Ex 3:19).
The coming glory of the Messiah was declared
by the OT prophets. (See, e.g., Is 9:1-7; Jer
Foreordination
23:5,0; Ez 34:20-31; Hos 3:4,5.) In Daniel 7 (see
also Dn 2:31-45) God reveals the rise and fall
of future world empires and the establishment
of the kingdom of God. In many places the NT
sees Christ’s ministry and the establishment of
the Christian church as fulfillment of predic-
tions made beforehand by the OT prophets
(Mt 1:22; 4:14; 8:17; Jn 12:38—41; Acts 2:17—-21;
3122-25; Gal 3:8; Heb 5:6; 1 Pt 1:10—12; etc.).
For many of the early Greek philosophers,
fate rigidly controlled all future events, in-
cluding not only the events of human history
but the fortunes of the gods as well. Occasion-
ally a future event might be known by the
gods and revealed to men, and such foreseen
events could in no way be altered. This view
is, of course, far different from the biblical
view of the personal Creator who knows the
future and guides history according to his
own purpose.
Nevertheless the question of the relation-
ship between God’s foreknowledge and hu-
man responsibility and freedom has occupied
the attention of theologians and philosophers
over the centuries. It is sometimes argued
that if God knows infallibly what will happen
in the future then it must happen. Therefore
it makes no difference at all what choice a
person makes since it could not have been
otherwise.
The theologians of the early church em-
phatically denied that foreknowledge implies
any predetermination of events. Justin Mar-
tyr, for example, said, “What we say about
future events being foretold, we do not say it
as though they come about by fatal necessity.”
Other theologians, fearing that foreknowl-
edge destroys human freedom and responsibil-
ity, insist that God does not know future
events either certainly or completely. Modern
process theology, for example, conceives of
God as growing and developing along with na-
ture and man. This God, it is argued, can at
most know only those events which have al-
ready taken place. Hence the future remains
open and uncertain for God as well as for
man. An older theologian, Adam Clarke, sug-
gested that although God can know all future
events, he chooses not to know some events
beforehand.
Augustine denied foreknowledge for a differ-
ent reason. He argued that God lives in eter-
nity where all things are present. For God,
then, there is no past or future. Hence
would not know things before they happened,
since he would see all events from the vantage
point of an eternal ‘‘now.’’ Augustine,
course, did not deny God’s knowledge of all
things, even of things which are still in the
future as far as we are concerned.
Because of the clear biblical teaching re-
garding God’s foreknowledge, evangelical theo-
logians have generally held that God has com-
plete knowledge of all future events. There is a
further distinction, however. The followers of
Augustine and Calvin insist that God knows
all events precisely because he sovereignly de-
termines what is to happen in human history
right down to the tiniest detail. Here fore-
knowledge is closely tied to, if not identified
with, foreordination. At the same time, most
Calvinistic theologians assert that human be-
ings are nonetheless responsible for their
choices—not victims of a blind fate. It is also
generally held that God is not the author of
sin. Rather, sin is the result of the rebellion of
angels and men against a holy and righteous
God.
Evangelicals in the Arminian tradition, on
the other hand, distinguish foreknowledge
from foreordination of events. While the plan
of salvation of the world and human history in
broad outline are predetermined by God, it is
argued that individual response to God is not
so predetermined. Hence God can foreknow an
event without directly decreeing that event to
take place.
While evangelical Christians differ in their
descriptions af the relationship between the
eternal all-knowing God and the events of hu-
man history, it should be kept in mind that
Scripture teaches both God’s foreknowledge of
all things and the responsibility of humans for
their choices.
WILLIAM S. SAILER
See ELEcT, ELECTION; FOREORDINATION.
Foreordination. Activity of God by which
he establishes events and outcomes before they
occur. In common usage, “‘foreordination” and
the term “predestination” are synonymous.
“Predestination” or “‘election,”’ however, spe-
cifically refers to the destiny of persons.
Foreordination underlies the whole plan of
God: his decision to create the universe, to
care for it (providence), and to determine its
destiny ‘‘according to the counsel of his will”
(Eph 1:11). The Westminster Shorter Cate-
chism states the teaching in this way: God has
decreed “his eternal purpose according to the
counsel of his will, whereby, for his own glory,
he hath foreordained whatsoever comes to
pass.” Foreordination, then, is at the founda-
he tion of all Christian teaching, for it concerns
the history and destiny of the whole world, the
universe, and all that it contains.
of The apostle Paul spoke of God’s plan for the
fulfillment of all creation: ‘‘For the creation
waits with eager longing for the revealing of
the sons of God; for the creation was subjected
to futility, not of its own will but by the will of
808
 Foreordination

him who subjected it in hope; because ‘the cre- dination, primarily discussing predestination
ation itself will be set free from its bondage to or election. Contemporary Lutheran thought
decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the stresses conditional, rather than absolute elec-
children of God’’ (Rom 8:19—21). Scripture tion, that is, election or predestination based
gives only a glimpse of the redemption of the on foreseen faith.
whole creation. It speaks of new heavens and a Foreordination in Scripture. There are
new earth in which righteousness dwells (2 Pt many references to foreordination (including
3:13). Those things that mar human existence predestination, or election) and the related
and demonstrate human fallenness and sinful- idea of foreknowledge in the Bible. Foreordina-
ness (i.e., depravity) will all pass away. God tion can be thought of as logically prior to
will make “‘all things new”’ (Rv 21:1—5). So the foreknowledge, but there is no actual priority
destiny of everything rests with God himself. since both activities are eternal in God.
Foreordination creates problems for theol- Speaking of judgment to come upon Baby-
ogy and commonsense thinking, particularly lon, God said: ‘This is the purpose that is pur-
in relation to human freedom and responsibil- posed concerning the whole earth; and this is
ity and that aspect of foreordination con- the hand that is stretched out over all the na-
cerned with salvation. How can people be held tions. For the Lord of hosts has purposed, and
responsible for their actions and decisions if who will annul it? His hand is stretched out,
they have been predetermined? To remove and who will turn it back?” (Is 14:26,27). God
that difficulty some have denied God's fore- also declared that he has determined the end
ordination as it relates to human freedom. In from the beginning. ‘‘My counsel shall stand,
creating free beings, they argue, God must and I will accomplish all my purpose”’ (46:10).
have limited his determination of things that Paul stated that the purpose of God is carried
“must’’ come to pass. Otherwise free and re- out “according to the counsel of his will’’ (Eph
sponsible human activity has no meaning. 1:11; cf. Ps. 119:89—91; Dn 4:35).
Calvinism rejects such an argument, insist- With respect to human affairs it is said that
ing that free activity is possible even though it one’s life span is determined (Jb 14:5), that
is foreordained and foreknown. The problem God’s concern extends to his creatures (Ps
remains, however, for humanly speaking there 104:14—30; Mt 10:29), and even the hairs on our
seems to be no possibility for a last minute heads are numbered (Mt 10:30). Furthermore,
change of mind. God’s plan extends to peoples and nations, for
On the other hand, denial of the doctrine of “he made from one every nation of men to live
foreordination implies that God does not con- on all the face of the earth, having determined
trol his creation. If that were true, the exis- alloted periods and the boundaries of their
tence and happenings in the universe, in- habitation” (Acts 17:26).
cluding human activity, would be determined God knows and even uses people’s evil acts
either by something above or beyond God, or for his own ends. For example, although Jo-
by occurrences whose ultimate causes are un- seph’s brothers sinned by selling him into
known. God’s providence and care revealed in slavery, Joseph later said, “As for you, you
the Bible and human experience make such a meant evil against me; but God meant it for
view untenable. Christian thought generally good, to bring it about that many people
states that God foreordains and controls his should be kept alive, as they are today’ (Gn
creation and that humans are able to act 50:20). Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus, but God
freely and responsibly within that larger con- used that sinful intent. Jesus said, “For the
trol. The apparent contradiction or paradox Son of man goes as it has been determined;
remains unresolved because there is a limit to but woe to that man by whom he is be-
human understanding. trayed!” (Lk 22:22). On the day of Pentecost
Foreordination was referred to by many the apostle Peter said ‘‘this Jesus, delivered
early church fathers and was a major empha- up according to the definite plan and fore-
sis in the theology of Augustine of Hippo knowledge of God, you crucified and killed by
(354-430). Augustine greatly influenced the re- the hands of lawless men’”’ (Acts 2:23; cf.
formers, particularly John Calvin. Reformed 4:27,28). Paul refers to God’s determining au-
theologians begin the study of the doctrine of thority over pharaoh’s acts (Rom 9:17). Reve-
foreordination with the eternal decree of God, lation 17:17 says, “God has put it into their
as indicated by creeds such as the Westmin- hearts to carry out his purpose.” God, then,
ster Confession of Faith. The decree of God is foreordains the events of nature and history,
one, but for purposes of discussion and expla- and even evil acts are subject to his control
nation it is usually referred to as “the decrees and are made to fulfill his purposes.
of God.” Martin Luther believed in foreordina- Election of sinners to salvation through
tion but did not stress it as much as Calvin. Christ is also included in God’s foreordination
Luther’s theology is generally silent on foreor- (Rom 8:28—39; cf. Acts 13:48; Phil 2:12,13; 1 Pt
809
Forerunner
2:9). God’s choosing or electing is not arbi-
trary, “‘since all have sinned and fall short of
the glory of God’’ (Rom 3:23). God’s plan of
salvation is grounded in his eternal love and
good pleasure (Eph 1:3-14; Rom 5:6—-11). The
Christian is the recipient of God’s grace in
that the believer knows God and is known
(i.e., loved) by God (Gal 4:9). Both election
and believers’ faith are part of the salvation
process.
Foreordination and Providence. The doc-
trine of foreordination is implied in the doc-
trine of providence or God’s care. Providence is
the working out of God’s plan for the world.
God’s care and control of the whole creation
point to his plan of redemption for man and
woman made in his image. God sovereignly
controls the events that take place in the world,
but God is not responsible for sin. He created
human beings who may say no to God as well
as yes. That does not mean that God’s plan can
be thwarted; it goes on in spite of opposition.
God’s ultimate plan is being realized through
all the events of human history, evil and good.
Yet, his sovereignty is not imposed arbitrarily.
God is not a tyrant, but holy, loving, and righ-
teous. His plan is effected according to his na-
ture, which is expressed in care and concern for
the whole creation and in steadfast love for un-
deserving sinners.
Natural law refers to the rules God has laid
down (foreordained) to control the universe.
What about destructive forces of nature, such
as earthquakes, tornadoes, and hurricanes?
Why are such apparent evils necessary in a
world made and controlled by a loving God?
It is no answer to suggest that God is unable
to act or control nature fully. If life’s total
meaning resided in the temporal, physical
world, there might be reason for complaint.
But considering the whole plan of God and
his ultimate redemptive purpose, the answer
takes on a different dimension. God’s ultimate
purpose transcends the present life and cen-
ters in the fulness of the redemptive kingdom
yet to be revealed (Rv 11:15; 21:1—4). The doc-
trine of foreordination is a great mystery, but
it should be a source of joy and comfort to
believers whose loving Lord has brought them
to a knowledge of his great plan.
WARREN C. YOUNG
See ELECT, ELECTION; FOREKNOWLEDGE.
Forerunner. Scout sent in advance of troops,
or a herald who precedes a high official to an-
nounce his coming. The term is used to de-
scribe the man who ran ahead of Joseph when
he was viceregent of Egypt (Gn 41:43), and to
refer to the first grapes of the season in the land
of Canaan (Nm 13:20). In the Apocrypha, hor-
810
nets were said to be sent as forerunners of the
Israelite army, who were to bring judgment on
the people of Canaan (Wis of Sol 12:8).
Although John the Baptist is commonly
viewed as the forerunner of Jesus Christ, the
term is not used with reference to him. The
word occurs‘only once in the NT, where Christ
himself is described as a “forerunner on our
behalf’ (Heb 6:20). Under the old covenant,
the people never accompanied the high priest
into the most sacred place of the temple. The
Book of Hebrews, in discussing the new cov-
enant, describes Jesus as a high priest who has
entered heaven—the holy place—ahead of
those who believe in him (cf. 2:17—3:2; 5:19).
Forest. See PLants.
Forgiveness. Ceasing to feel resentment for
wrongs and offenses; pardon, involving resto-
ration of broken relationships. Primarily, for-
giveness is an act of God, releasing sinners
from judgment and freeing them from the di-
vine penalty of their sin. Since only God is
holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk
5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act toward
one’s neighbor, given new incentive and em-
phasis in the NT because of God’s forgiveness
in the death of Christ. Hence forgiveness is a
uniquely Christian doctrine.
In other religions, forgiveness does not have
the same force. In animism, there is no aware-
ness of a personal relationship with God. In
Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable con-
sequences of karma in the wheel of reincarna-
tions. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a
forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam,
but there is no personal God and Father. Even
in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited ex-
perience, though forgiveness as developed in
the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the
OT.
Expressions of Forgiveness in the OT. The
idea of forgiveness is expressed in various
metaphors. The command is nasa, to “send
away,’ as the scapegoat was sent away into
the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israel-
ites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv
4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30,34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The He-
brew word kapar is commonly used of atone-
ment, meaning “‘to cover up,” as the sacrifice
was offered to cover the deficiency of the wor-
shiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20;
45:20). Cognates of salah always refer to God’s
act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5,8,12; Pss 86:5;
130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression;
he removes it. Another expression is maha, to
“wipe away” (Ps 51:1,7; Is 43:25; 44:22).
The OT teaches that God is a forgiving God
(Ex 34:6,7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and
punishes sin. Many incidents are also given

where God refuses to forgive when the proper
conditions are not met, or when certain seri-
ous offences are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs
24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the char-
acter of God, but his forgiveness is never indis-
criminate, for man must also be penitent. God
will “by no means clear the guilty.” The OT
uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude
of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast ‘into the
depths of the sea’’ (Mi 7:19), removed ‘‘as far
as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid
behind God’s back (Is 38:17), ‘remembered no
more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is
bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens
like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.
The dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is
thus releasing one from the past. The past
acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but
there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness
brings freedom.
Forgiveness in the NT. In the NT, the con-
cept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is
extended, intensified by the death of Christ,
offered on our behalf. The human creature is
an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no
hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot
keep the Law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26,27).
This highlights the NT teaching that it is in
the person of Christ himself that there is for-
giveness. He alone has the power to forgive
sins (Mk 2:5,7,10). It is his death that is redemp-
tive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is
the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is
through him that one can enter into the living
experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15,22). So for-
giveness is inseparable from the proclamation
of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1
Jn:2:12).
There are other distinctively NT concepts
of forgiveness. The Greek word charizomai,
meaning ‘‘to forgive sins,” is distinctively de-
veloped by Paul in terms of God’s gracious par-
don (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13).
Sin is considered as a debt, and aphesis de-
notes the discharge of a debt (“putting it
away,’ Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as
remission, paresis, (‘passing over’). God has
not executed the full retribution called for by
sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown
mercy.
Yet the NT speaks of two limitations to for-
giveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt
12:31,32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard
Christ speaks of those, who like the Pharisees,
are so warped in their moral judgments that
they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan
and the good deeds of Christ. There is also
“the sin against the Holy Ghost” (1 Jn 5:16)
that is ‘‘sin unto death.” This sin is not specifi-
cally defined, but its essence seems to be con-
sistent rejection of the grace of God.
Forgiveness
The ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists
not only on penitence as a condition for for-
giveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to
forgive others (Mt 6:14,15). If in the midst of
receiving forgiveness one does not forgive oth-
ers, it is a clear sign that repentance is not
complete. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so
_you also must forgive’ (Col 3:13). Several
times in his parables, the Lord insists that the
readiness to forgive others is a sign of true
repentance (Mt 18:23—35; Lk 6:37). So Christ
taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits
can be set on it. It must be granted without
reserve, even to seventy times seven (Mt
18:21,22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual rela-
tionship of believers: since all are dependent
upon God's forgiveness, all are required to for-
give one another.
The Christian Experience of Forgiveness.
The Christian understanding of forgiveness
has broad implications.
1. It reflects the character of God as one
who pardons and enters into a meaningful re-
lationship with his creature, producing a
change in human relationship with him. This
has been done in the costly anguish of the
cross of Christ.
2. It expresses the efficacy of divine atone-
ment in the reconciliation of man with God.
Those who truly realize their condition as sin-
ners know that God can remove sin and redeem
sinners. This must be experienced, not just com-
prehended intellectually. In Christ’s death, sin
is condemned and absolutely judged, and yet
Christ bears the penalty on our behalf by his
sacrifice.
3. For the apostle Paul the bare concept of
forgiveness did not convey deeply enough the
full consequences. Instead, he speaks of being
justified. To be “‘treated as righteous” is a
rich consequence of forgiveness (Rom 4:5), a
gift of God’s grace (3:24), a present experience
(1 Cor 4:4) for those who have a faith relation-
ship with Christ (Rom 3:26). Thus justifica-
tion is the positive relationship that forgive-
ness provides.
4. Forgiveness implies that God has recon-
ciled man to himself (Eph 2:14-17). The out-
come is peace with God (Phil 4:7; Col 3:15), a
reconciliation accomplished by the cross (Col
1:20). This is the implication of all the refer-
ences to being justified, reconciled, and trust-
ing in Romans 5. It also includes the idea of
divine sonship (Mt 5:9,44; Jn 1:12).
5. Forgiveness includes the theme of fellow-
ship with God the Father (1 Thes 1:3), Son (1
Cor 1:9), and Holy Spirit (2 Cor 13:14). It is
expressed in the Pauline phrase “in Christ”’ or
“in the Lord” (used some 164 times), indicat-
ing a profound relationship of communion
and union with God. Forgiveness as reconcilia-
Form Criticism
tion and restoration to fellowship with God
comprehends, in effect, the whole nature of
the Christian life. Sanctification is its fruit,
and glorification is its objective. In forgive-
ness, God ultimately remains God, and the err-
ing sinner is brought home to the Father who
has eternally loved him.
JAMES M. Houston
See CONFESSION; REPENTANCE.
Bibliography. W. Eichrodt, Theology of the OT, vol 2,
pp 380-95; E.M.B. Green, The Meaning of Salvation; J. Jere-
mias, The Prayers of Jesus; P. Lehmann, Forgiveness; H.R.
Mackintosh, The Christian Experience of Forgiveness; 1.H.
Marshall, Kept by the Power of God: A Study of Perseverance
and Falling Away; E.B. Redlich, The Forgiveness of Sins; V.
Taylor, Forgiveness and Reconciliation; W. Telfer, The For-
giveness of Sins.
Form Criticism. Study of biblical tradition
which may be presumed to have existed origi-
nally in oral form.
Definition and History. The concern of
form criticism is to get behind the sources
which literary criticism may identify to the
preliterary stage of the tradition. It seeks to
describe what took place as the tradition was
transmitted orally from person to person and
from community to community. Its special
concern is the modification of the tradition by
the life and thought of the believing commu-
nity. In the case of the OT, form criticism pre-
supposes that the dynamic life of Israel ex-
erted a creative influence on the tradition
when it circulated orally, and seeks to recover
the earlier forms of the individual units within
a larger cycle of tradition. In the NT, form
criticism has concerned itself primarily with
an investigation of the synoptic Gospels. It has
focused upon the individual units of tradition
in the Gospels in an effort to distinguish those
strata which reflect the concerns of the church
from the elements which might be thought to
go back to Jesus himself or to some contempo-
rary source in Judaism or Hellenism.
Form criticism was developed as a critical
tool in 1901 by Hermann Gunkel. In a com-
mentary on Genesis he broke new ground by
attempting to recover the earliest form of the
tradition which was given its final literary ex-
pression in Genesis. Gunkel accepted the cur-
rent literary-critical analyses, but was con-
vinced it was possible to recover an earlier
stage of the tradition than source criticism
had envisioned. He postulated that before
there were written documents or structured
collections of tradition there was a preliterary
oral stage in which the individual stories circu-
lated as independent accounts. The stories
must therefore be isolated from the context in
which they now stand in Genesis and studied
as individual units against the background of
similar accounts in the ancient Near East.
812
Gunkel was persuaded that these originally
oral stories had been developed and modified
over an extended period of time in response to
social and cultural changes in the life of Israel.
Gunkel classified the stories in Genesis in
terms of their purposes: “ethnological legends’
were accourits told to explain the relations of
the tribes to each other; ‘“‘etymological leg-
ends’ were popular accounts explaining the
origin and meaning of the names of races,
mountains, wells, sanctuaries, and cities; ‘“‘cere-
monial legends” were devised to explain the
sacred customs of Israel; while “‘geological leg-
ends” were told to explain the character of a
particular region or locale.
Gunkel attempted to detect how an earlier
account had been altered by additions which
show more concern for the thought than for
the form of the story. He argued that these
additions could be recognized by the fact that
they disrupted an otherwise harmonious story
and by the fact that they were relatively gen-
eral in character. His analysis tended to elimi-
nate speeches and short narrative notes from
the accounts as they stand in Genesis. In his
analysis of the individual units Gunkel sought
to find reasons for the transformation of an
original account and so to describe the inner
history of the units of the tradition.
Gunkel was convinced that this method of
identifying and classifying smaller units of
narrative, didactic, and liturgical tradition be-
hind the literary text was applicable to the
study of the synoptic Gospels as well. This in-
sight was developed by one of his pupils, Mar-
tin Dibelius, in a study of the primitive Chris-
tian tradition concerning John the Baptist
(1911). In this early work Dibelius expressed
two methodological conclusions concerning
the synoptic Gospels and the tradition embed-
ded in them which became programmatic for
form criticism: (1) The Gospel writers are not
authors but collectors and preservers of tradi-
tion, who have edited their material by adding
such items as time and place references, con-
necting links, and summary reports. (2) Both
sayings and narrative material existed in fixed
oral forms before they received literary expres-
sion by the writers of the Gospels. The second
of these insights Dibelius developed in a small
brochure, “The Form Criticism of the Gos-
pels” (1919), in which he distinguished five
“forms” that he could recognize behind the
units of tradition now found in the synoptic
Gospels. Three months later his own student,
K.L. Schmidt, applied Dibelius’ insights to the
framework of the synoptic Gospels and sought
to demonstrate that the order of the para-
graphs even in Mark, the oldest connected nar-
rative source for the ministry of Jesus, was
casual and arbitrary.

In 1921 Rudolf Bultmann published his
own independent research into the history of
the synoptic tradition. He examined system-
atically the entire material of each of the syn-
optic Gospels and sought not only to classify
the units by form but to distinguish between
the tradition which owes its present form to
the early Palestinian church from that which
received its form from the later Hellenistic
community.
Methodology of Form Criticism. There
are three stages in the form criticism of the
synoptic Gospels. In the first, the stories and
sayings in the Gospels are separated from the
framework in which they now appear. K.L.
Schmidt had compared a Gospel, with its sev-
eral units of tradition, to a string of pearls,
where each pearl is held in place by the string
to which it has been attached artificially. This
initial stage of form-critical investigation sim-
ply cuts the string so that each of the pearls
(the individual units of tradition) may be ex-
amined independently.
In the second stage, internal criticism is ap-
813
Form Criticism
Traditional birthplace of John
the Baptist, who was the sub-
ject of Martin Dibelius’ study.
plied to these units of tradition in order to
recover the original form of each. It is presup-
posed that the units which have been isolated
by removing the framework are not yet in
their earliest form. A first step toward the re-
covery of the original form of the tradition is
the classification of the material according to
its type. Much of the tradition of Jesus’ say-
ings, for example, may be classified as pro-
nouncement stories containing important ut-
terances. Some of these occur in the context of
a controversy (e.g., Mk 2:23—28, where the pro-
nouncement occurs in vv 27,28), while others
may be assigned to catechetical instruction
(e.g., 12:28-34, where the pronouncement is
preserved in vv 32,33). The words of the Lord
sometimes assume the form of a proverb
(2:17a), a prophetic statement (9:1), a mission
pronouncement (2:17b; 10:45), or a parable
(4:30-32). Narrative material about Jesus can
be similarly classified (e.g., 1:40-45 is a mira-
cle story).
Once the material has been classified, stylis-
tic considerations established through the
Form Criticism
study of oral communal “literature” are ap-
plied to each unit to determine its original
form. It is assumed (1) that each of the several
forms possesses a certain stereotyped char-
acter; (2) that each unit is complete in itself,
stylistically marked off, expressing a single
thought or event; (3) that by analysis of the
forms it is possible to detect modifications of
the tradition; and (4) that since these consider-
ations apply to the popular literature of the
day, whether Jewish or Hellenistic, they must
apply to the Gospels as well. Working with
these assumptions Bultmann, for example,
judged that Mark 2:19 preserved a brief para-
ble told by Jesus, but that verse 20 was an
allegorical addition appended to the parable
after Jesus’ death to interpret the parable and
apply it to the worshiping community.
In the third stage, external criticism is ap-
plied to the units of tradition to recover the
setting in the life of the early church which
accounts for their preservation. At this stage
the form critic must seek to reconstruct the
actual course of early Christian history in or-
der further to classify the material embedded
in the Gospels. It is assumed that the gospel
tradition served the church in its concern to
advance its cause through evangelism, to de-
fend itself through apologetics, and to mature
its life through worship and discipline. These
several types of concern are reflected in the
tradition and account for the modification of
the original core of the tradition in some in-
stances, while in others they explain how the
tradition actually originated within the devel-
oping life of the church, according to Dibelius,
Bultmann, and others.
Evaluation of Form Criticism. There are
positive features in the form-critical method.
(1) The emphasis upon the period of oral trans-
mission prior to the writing of the Gospels bal-
anced earlier approaches which had stressed
literary sources almost exclusively. (2) The in-
terest in the role of the community of faith as
the guardian and transmitter of the biblical
tradition is sound. (3) The Gospels are “occa-
sional writings,’ in the sense that they were
composed for a particular occasion. The empha-
sis placed by the form critics on the life situa-
tion of the believing community is, therefore,
proper. (4) Finally, the isolation of particular
units of tradition, especially the different
groups of,pronouncement stories, and the insis-
tence upon the centrality of the passion narra-
tive in the tradition about Jesus, has been help-
ful for the interpretation of the Gospels.
Negatively, criticism must be directed to
each of the three stages of form criticism.
There is an element of truth in the estimate of
the character of the synoptic Gospels ex-
pressed in the first stage. There are fewer pre-
814
cise links to the aspects of the tradition than
one might suppose. Nevertheless, this does not
imply that there was an indifference to histori-
cal sequence or factual truth in the early
church. Schmidt’s method was to play one
Gospel off against another. His method presup-
posed a rigid literary criticism of the synoptic
Gospels and failed to take into account the ele-
ment of oral tradition which may clarify some
of the differences he observed. Form criticism
also fails to appreciate the distinct historical,
theological, and communal concerns of each
of the Evangelists. Moreover, the gospel could
not be proclaimed apart from some frame-
work. Since the evangelical message involved
a life story, there was a demand for a se-
quence, at least to some extent. The actual
framework discovered by Schmidt conforms
to the outline of Peter’s preaching in Acts
10:36—41.
A basic weakness in the second stage is that
the classification of the material frequently re-
flects not form, but content. The objectivity
claimed by the discipline, consequently, is not
evident. Moreover, the appeal to stylistic con-
siderations may be seriously challenged, be-
cause the assumptions upon which they are
based are not as established as is generally
claimed. That they can be applied in a rigid
way to materials which have been transmitted
orally can be questioned. Such a presupposi-
tion precludes diversity which may originate
in the authority of the individual responsible
for the tradition. In the synoptic Gospels, con-
tent is more important than form; it is inappro-
priate to bring a critical judgment upon the
tradition from narrow considerations of form.
One other objection is substantial. The de-
termination of the “‘laws of style’ was based
upon a study of material which circulated in
an oral state for an extended period of time.
It is inappropriate to apply such criteria to
traditional units which were written down
within a generation or two from the time of
their origination.
It is in the third stage of form criticism, the
application of external criticism to the units of
the tradition to recover their life setting in the
experience of the community, that the radical
character of the presuppositions of the form
critics becomes evident. Dibelius and Bult-
mann felt that the demands of preaching and
worship accounted for most of the modifica-
tion of the tradition. Bultmann assigned to the
(later) Hellenistic community everything that
suggests worship, such as interest in the per-
son of Jesus, the birth narratives, most of the
accounts of Jesus’ miracles, the resurrection
narratives in their present state, the mission
pronouncements of Jesus (Mt 11:27; Mk 10:45;
Lk 19:10), and the words of institution of the
.
 Fornication

Lord’s Supper. To the Palestinian community Fornication. Unchastity, sexual immoral-

Bultmann assigned almost all the rest of the ity. The word “fornication” is used in the
narrative portions and of the teaching, includ- Scriptures to mean several different things.
ing the distinctly eschatological features of the Its general meaning refers to every kind of
Gospels and those sayings which indicate that illegal sexual intercourse, that is, any inter-
Jesus was conscious of being the Messiah. course except that between a husband and
The basis of this negative evaluation was Wil- wife. For example, in 1 Corinthians 5:1 (KJv)
helm Bousset’s reconstruction of early Chris- |. the word is used twice to refer to a sin which
tian history. Bousset distinguished sharply be- was being tolerated by the church: a man ap-
tween Palestinian and Hellenistic Christianity parently was living with his stepmother as
and maintained that the title ‘‘Lord” was ap- though with a wife. In a list of terrible sins in
plied to Jesus first by the Hellenistic Greek- Romans 1:29, the apostle Paul included fornica-
speaking Christians in the course of worship. tion, apparently intending the term to mean
The early Palestinian Aramaic-speaking Chris- all acts of sexual immorality (Ksv). In 1 Corin-
tians referred to Jesus only as the Son of man. thians the context suggests that Paul used the
This overly sharp distinction between the Pales- word in reference to all sorts of illicit sexual
tinian and Hellenistic churches was adopted activity (vv 13, 18 KJv). In 1 Corinthians 7:2
by Bultmann and others in the determination (kJv) Paul used the plural Greek word for ‘‘for-
of the social setting in the life of the church in nications” to imply the various ways in which
which the tradition first assumed its distinc- the sin may manifest itself. He thus gave a
tive shape. reason why people in Corinth, should marry
It is now widely recognized that this recon- and live together properly. One of the sins in-
struction of the course of early Christian his- cluded in the word’s general sense is adultery.
tory and development is not accurate. The dis- “Fornication” also has a more limited sense
tinction between Hellenistic and Palestinian of immoral sexual activity between unmarried
Christianity is overdrawn. Palestine was not people. Such a meaning is implied in those
an island isolated from all Hellenistic influ- biblical lists where both fornication and adul-
ences; Jerusalem itself had Hellenistic syna- tery come together. Jesus’ list of the defiling
gogues. Moreover, it was primarily Christians sins that proceed out of a person’s heart in-
from Jerusalem and other Palestinian commu- cludes “fornication” and ‘“‘adultery” (Mt 15:19;
nities who carried the gospel into Hellenistic Mk 7:21). Paul’s list of those sinners who will
regions. Consequently, the disparity between not inherit the kingdom of God also contains
Palestinian and Hellenistic Christianity postu- both fornicators and adulterers (1 Cor 6:9 KJv).
lated by Bousset is difficult to maintain. “Fornication” in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9
Moreover, this stage of form criticism tends (ksv, ‘‘unchastity’’ Rsv) is usually taken by bib-
to separate the gospel tradition from Jesus lical students today to refer specifically to
and those who were the eyewitnesses to what adultery. The conclusion has to do with inter-
had been said and done unjustifiably. The pres- pretation rather than translation. Conserva-
ence of the apostolic witnesses within the tive scholars disagree whether Jesus’ excep-
early church exercised a stable influence upon tive phrase relative to divorce has to do with
the formation and transmission of the tradi- fornication in a general or limited sense. He
tion which must be appreciated when seeking might have meant adultery alone, or he might
to recover the earliest form of the tradition have been including it generally with other
about Jesus’ words and deeds. sexual sins. He also could have used the term
WILLIAM L. LANE in a more limited sense of unlawful premarital
See DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS; REDACTION CRITI- Sex.
CISM; SOURCE CRITICISM; TRADITION CRITICISM; DEMy- A figurative use of the word “fornication”
THOLOGIZATION; BIBLICAL CRITICISM, NEW TESTAMENT; appears in both the OT and NT. Originating in
BIBLICAL CRITICISM, OLD TESTAMENT. descriptions of Israel and the church as the
Bibliography. R. Bultmann, History of the Synoptic Lord’s wife or the bride, apostasy from God
Tradition; M. Dibelius, From Tradition to Gospel; W.G. Doty, and idolatry are called fornication (see, e.g.,
“The Discipline and Literature of NT Form Criticism,” An- Jer 2). Ezekiel 16 uses marriage and unfaithful-
glican Theological Review 51 (1969), 257-319; K. Koch, The ness to marriage vows as a symbol of God’s
Growth of the Biblical Tradition; E.V. McKnight, What Is
Form Criticism? E.B. Redlich, Form Criticism: Its Value and relation with sinful Jerusalem, which had be-
Limitations; V. Taylor, The Formation of the Gospel Tradi- come an “unfaithful wife’ to him. The first
tion (4th ed.), 1957; G.M. Tucker, Form Criticism of the OT. three chapters of Hosea use the relationship of
the prophet Hosea and his unfaithful wife Go-
Former Rain. Important rainfall which be- mer as an illustration. The nation Israel was
gins the agricultural year in Palestine, usually guilty of fornication against its “husband,”
in October (Dt 11:14; Jer 5:24; Jas 5:7). the Lord, by going after other gods. In the
See PALESTINE. Book of Revelation the same figurative use of
815
Fort, Fortification
“fornication” and “impure passion’’ appear
(RW 245857172245 185471972):
Fornication is a category of sin that the
Christian must continuously shun and persis-
tently avoid (1 Cor 6:18; 1 Thes 4:3). The apos-
tle Paul even counseled against carelessly talk-
ing about it and other sins (Eph 5:3,4).
WESLEY L. GERIG
See ADULTERY.
Fort, Fortification. Walls, citadels, and
sometimes moats protecting most cities in the
ancient world. Fortifications followed the natu-
ral contour of the area encircling a city. Early
city defenses consisted of simple banks of
earth tossed against the walls and outer struc-
tures to make it difficult for hostile forces to
approach and enter the city. Wherever possi-
ble, the site chosen for the location of a city
would be a naturally favorable topographical
situation, such as a steep elevation in an iso-
lated place or a hill that afforded natural pro-
tection. Some sites were so strategic because
of ample water supply, good navigation, or a
central location at crossroads of traveled high-
ways, however, that they were chosen even if
they had no natural defenses. The difficulty
and cost of fortifications were then obviously
much more serious.
In general, whatever materials were avail-
able were used for construction of fortifi-
cations, including old debris, rubble, and
beaten earth. Those materials were faced
with hard-packed clay or lime plaster to pre-
vent an enemy from knowing the quality of
the underlying filling. Commonly a ditch or
moat was dug or cut out of solid rock in front
of the walls. This hindered an enemy’s ad-
vance, and made any attempt to tunnel under
the walls and into the city more difficult.
The eastern wall of Jerusalem, with Bedouin tents pitched next
to it.
816
Towers were built for added strength and
protection at potentially weak spots, such as
corners, gateways, or openings for water sup-
plies. Towers had inner access stairways, and
chambers for use by soldiers who manned the
structures and for watchmen who announced
the approach of danger. Gateways were pro-
vided with massive piers and bronze or iron
bars and bolts. Gates were hung on pivots
driven into the pavement below and into the
lintel above and had to be strongly fortified
and carefully protected. Often they consisted
of a series of entrances, one inside the other,
with guard rooms between them.
Excavations of ancient forts reveal the de-
velopment of fortifications from primitive be-
ginnings to NT times. Earliest strongholds
were constructed with crude brick and rough
stone work. Masonry was irregular, and large
stones of various sizes and shapes and field
boulders were roughly trimmed and crudely
placed into the wall structures. Stone facings
and wall joints were packed with pebbles or
limestone chippings. During later times care-
fully prepared mortar was used to cover the
walls to give greater strength and support to
the fortifications. Not until late in the Hebrew
period were stones with ornamentation and
skilled drafting used.
Scripture uses the imagery of a fortress or
high tower to picture the confidence that be-
lievers can have in God’s strength and protec-
tion. The prophets realized that the strength
and defense of the nation lay not in fortifica-
tions of brick and stone, but in God, and they
urged the people to put their trust in him as a
secure refuge (2 Sm 22:2,3,33; Prv 10:29; Is 25:4;
Jer 16:19; Hos 8:14; J] 3:16; Na 1:7).
God is also able to make his chosen ser-
vants “‘a fortified city” (Jer 1:18; 15:20). In the
messianic age cities will no longer need bars
or gates (Ez 38:11) but will be protected by
God's salvation (Is 26:1; 60:18).
RALPH E. POWELL
See WATCHTOWER; City; ARMS AND WARFARE.
Fortunatus. Member of the church at Cor-
inth. Fortunatus is a Roman proper name
written in Greek and found only once in the
NT (1 Cor 16:17). Paul rejoices that he, along
with Stephanas and Achaicus, had come to be
with him in Ephesus. The Textus Receptus (a
16th-century compilation of Greek NT manu-
scripts) has a subscript naming these three
men as the carriers of Paul’s letter to the
Corinthians.
Forum. Open area in Roman cities used for
commerce, political affairs, and judicial mat-
ters. The forum was usually on level ground,
°

rectangular in shape, and surrounded by tem-
ples, law courts, colonnades, and other public
buildings.
The forum of Appius was a traveler’s stop
on the Appian Way, 43 miles south of Rome,
where Paul was met by Christians from Rome
on his way to the capital under guard (Acts
28%15):
The most important of the forums were
those located in the city of Rome. These were
built at different times in its history, and exist-
ing forums were changed through continued
building. The Rome to which Paul went for his
trial had several forums, including those of Jul-
ius Caesar (begun by him but actually com-
pleted by Augustus Caesar) and Augustus Cae-
sar. Most important was the Roman Forum,
center of the world in Paul’s day. It lay be-
tween the two central hills of the seven hills
on which the city was built. It contained many
columns, statues, works of art, and buildings
important in the political and religious life of
the empire.
If Paul was brought directly into the city by
the centurion who had charge of him,
would have passed on his way to the forum
the triumphal arch of Augustus, the temple of
Castor and Pollux, and the temples dedicated
to Julius and Augustus for emperor worship.
Arriving at the Roman Forum proper, he
would have noticed on the northwest the fa-
mous ideal center of the city (and thus of the
empire), and on the southwest the gilded mile-
stone, giving distances to places as far away as
London to the west and Jerusalem to the east.
In the background was the temple to Jupiter,
chief god in the Roman pantheon. On the
south side was a large public building, the Ba-
silica Julia, completed in aD 12, the probable
site of the pronouncement of Paul’s death sen-
tence. On the north side was the Basilica
Aemilia, a building from which marble
umns were taken and used in the building of a
church over the traditional site of Paul’s tomb.
That church was completed in ap 398 and
stood for 1400 years.
A short distance to the northwest of the Ro-
man Forum was the Mamertine prison, the
place where, according to tradition, both Paul
and Peter were confined before their execu-
tions under the emperor Nero in the AD 60s.
See APPIUS, FORUM OF.
Foundation Gate. Structure mentioned in
2 Chronicles 23:5, in the narrative about Queen
Athaliah’s execution. The parallel passage in 2
Kings 11:6 reads “gate of Sur,” while the
Septuagint has ‘gate of the ways,’ indicating
some difficulties within the Hebrew text.
See JERUSALEM.
Freedmen
Fowl. «Jv common translation for bird. In
modern usage and the rsv, the term is re-
served for domestic birds or wild fowl which
are eaten.
See BIrDs.
Fowler. One who traps or shoots wild birds.
See HUNTING; TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS.
Fox. Small, wild, carnivorous, doglike mam-
mal, several species of which existed in Pales-
tine in the biblical period.
See ANIMALS.
Frankincense. Fragrant gum resin that can
be ground into powder and burned to produce
a balsam-like odor. It was often associated
with myrrh (Sg 3:6; 4:6; Mt 2:11). Frankincense
is obtained from balsam trees of the genus Bos-
wellia, specifically the species B. carterii, B.
papyrifera, and B. thurifera. These trees, which
are related to turpentine trees, have star-
shaped flowers that are pure white or green,
he tipped with rose. To obtain the resin a deep
incision is cut into the trunk, yielding an
amber-colored gum. Since these trees were na-
tive only to Saba (Sheba) in southern Arabia
(Is 60:6; Jer 6:20) and Somaliland, the resin
was a very costly item transported into Pales-
tine by caravan. The so-called frankincense
tree growing in Palestine (Ecclus 50:8) was
probably Commiphora opobalsamum whose
resin was used to produce perfume.
Frankincense was used alone or with other
materials for incense. It was one of the ingredi-
ents of the holy incense used for worship in
the tabernacle (Ex 30:34). It was placed on the
bread of presence (Lv 24:7) and mixed with oil
on the cereal offerings (2:1,2, 14-16; 6:15), but
excluded from the sin offering (5:11). A supply
col- of frankincense was maintained in the Jerusa-
lem temple (Neh 13:5,9). It was later used in
cosmetics and perfume (Sg 3:6). Both the
costly value and its use for worship made the
presentation of frankincense to the infant Je-
sus an appropriate gift (Mt 2:11).
F. DUANE LINDSEY
See PLANTS.
Freedom. See LIBerty.
Freedmen. Members of a Jewish synagogue
in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9), descended from Jews
who had been captured and taken to Rome by
the general Pompey (106—48 Bc), then later re-
leased. Pompey found that the Jews adhered
so strictly to their religious and national cus-
toms that they were worthless as slaves.
Not all the freedmen returned to Jerusa-
817
 Freewill Offering
lem; some stayed in Rome. In the time of the
Roman writer Pliny, a freedman was de-
scribed as a ‘mean commoner.” The freedmen
derived their name from a Latin term for one
manumitted, or the son of such a former slave.
See LIBERTINES.
Freewill Offering. Voluntary peace offer-
ing (Lv 7:16; Dt 12:6).
See OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES.
Fringe. «Jv translation for “‘tassel,” four of
which were worn on the upper garments of
Jewish men according to the Lord’s command-
ment (Dt 22:12). Those tassels were to be re-
minders of God’s laws.
See FASHION AND DRESS.
Frog. Aquatic, tailless, smooth-skinned am-
phibian, mentioned in connection with the sec-
ond plague in Egypt (Ex 8; Pss 78:45; 105:30;
Rv 16:13).
See ANIMALS.
Frontlet. Translation of a Hebrew word re-
ferring to anything bound on the forehead (Ex
13:16; Dt 6:8; 11:18). The phylacteries of Jesus’
day (Mt 23:5) were worn daily at morning
prayer by every male Israelite over the age of
13. They consisted of four Scripture passages
(Ex 1321-10; 13:11-16; Dt 6:4—9; 11:13—21) writ-
ten on parchment and placed in small leather
boxes tied to the forehead and the left arm.
Whether the phylacteries were the parch-
ments or the leather boxes is debated. There is
no evidence that the Israelites in Moses’ day
made such phylacteries. It is probable that the
commands were to be understood figuratively,
portraying the memorial value of the feast of
unleavened bread, and the importance of the
Law in the people’s lives. For the Pharisees the
outward observance had replaced the obliga-
tion to apply the power of God’s Word to the
heart (Mt 23:5).
See PHYLACTERY; AMULET.
Frost. Frozen water vapor or dew (Pss 78:47;
148:8; Jer 36:30; Zec 14:6).
See PALESTINE.
Fruit. ..See Food AND FooD PREPARATION;
PLANTS.
Fruit of the Spirit. Expression taken from
Galatians 5:22,23. As listed there, this fruit is
the manifest evidence one may expect from a
life in which the Spirit of God is living and
reigning. Jesus also implied that the character
of a life can be determined. In the context of
818
Matthew 7, the test for false prophets is,
-among other things, the kind of life they live.
Consequently, even though Jesus did prohibit
censorious criticism of others by his followers
(Mt 7:1), he encouraged fruit inspection. The
secret to exhibiting spiritual fruit in abun-
dance is described in John 12:24. Using as an
illustration a grain of wheat sown in the
ground, Jesus encourages death to self and to
the desires of the old nature and resurrection
to the new life of ‘‘much fruit.”’
The fruit of the Spirit, as listed in Galatians
5, is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, good-
ness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.
Love is that outgoing, self-giving kind of ac-
tion, not necessarily emotion, that character-
ized God himself when he loved the world so
much that he gave his only Son (Jn 3:16). Good-
ness is the translation of a Greek word that
includes the idea of generosity. The word
“faith” refers usually to trust or confidence in
someone or something. However, the word
can also refer to that which causes trust and
faith, namely faithfulness and reliability. Both
meanings are in the use of the word here as
another evidence of the Spirit-controlled life.
Another fruit, translated ‘‘temperance’”’ by the
KJV, is the Greek word for self-control, that
ability to hold oneself in, to keep oneself in
check. It is significant that the Spirit is said to
be the one responsible for this fruit. Since
these qualities are the fruit of the Spirit, it is
self-evident that legalism and obedience to
law cannot originate or produce them.
This fruit appears in a context within Gala-
tians where Paul is emphasizing Christian free-
dom from obedience to the Law as a meritori-
ous means of being justified before God. He
warns the Galatian Christians, who were in
danger of returning to the Law, that physical
circumcision is an outward sign of a return to
legalistic means of justification and that to at-
tempt to obtain it this way is impossible (Gal
5:3). However, lest the Galatians overempha-
size their freedom in Christ, Paul cautions that
this liberty does not mean license to sin, an
opportunity for gratifying the desires of the
flesh, but rather an opportunity to continue as
loving bondservants belonging to one another
(v 13). Life in the Spirit will mean that one
will not fulfill the lusts or desires of the flesh
(v 16). Then Paul identifies both the works of
the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit. A person
who is abstaining from the works of the flesh
and is demonstrating the fruit of the Spirit in
his life will be loving, joyful, peaceful, pa-
tient, kind, good, dependable, gentle, and self-
controlled. These are not said to be gifts of the
Spirit, however, but graces that will adorn the
life that is under the Holy Spirit’s control.
There has been some confusion about the
°

relation of this fruit to the gifts (Greek, charis-
mata) of the Spirit listed in 1 Corinthians
12:4-11; 12:28—31a; Romans 12:3—8; and Ephe-
Sians 4:11-14. First Corinthians 12:31b explic-
itly relates the gifts of the Spirit to the fruit.
The first fruit of the Spirit mentioned in Gala-
tians 5:22 is love, the very item which Paul
mentions as “a more excellent way’ (1 Co..
12:31b) rather than as a gift to be listed with
the others.
It is significant that the works of the flesh,
are many, while the fruit of the Spirit is singu-
larly one. Hence some have interpreted Gala-
tians 5:22 to mean that the fruit of the Spirit is
singular, namely, love, and that what follows
(vv 22,23) are varying facets of love. Correlat-
ing this Galatians reference with 1 Corinthians
12:31b demonstrates that the fruit of the Spirit
is love with all of its many aspects and also
the more excellent way in which the various
gifts are to be used. To underscore that love is
not itself a gift, Paul goes on to describe the
fruit of the Spirit, in 1 Corinthians 13, the
great love chapter of the Bible. Comparing
these two passages it is interesting to note
how many of the facets of love appear in both
places. Paul is saying in essence that the gifts
of the Spirit are only effective, worthwhile,
and capable of edifying, when they are exer-
cised in a proper way, that is, with the quali-
ties given in Galatians 5:22 and 23 and 1 Corin-
thians 13.
It becomes apparent then that the fruit of
the Spirit and not the gifts or any particular
gift is the evidence of a Spirit-controlled life.
The Corinthians were blessed with many of
the gifts (x Cor 1:5,7; chs 12,14), but they were
still immature (1 Cor 3:1—-4). The proof of a
Spirit-led, sanctified life is not the gifts of the
Spirit but the fruit of the Spirit, chief of which
is love.
WESLEY L. GERIG
Fuller. One who cleans, shrinks, and thick-
ens, or dyes cloth or newly shorn wool.
See TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS.
Fuller’s Field. Place in Jerusalem which
was linked to a spring or pool by a causeway
(2 Kgs 18:17; Is 7:3; 36:2). It has been generally
identified with an area near En-rogel (‘‘spring
of the fuller’). The spring was south of Jerusa-
lem in the Kidron Valley. It was originally the
tribal boundary between Judah and Benjamin
(Jos 15:7; 18:16). When Absalom rebelled and
King David fled from Jerusalem, two of Da-
vid’s men stayed at En-rogel to gather informa-
tion about the rebellion (2 Sm 17:17).
En-rogel has been identified with the mod-
ern Bir Ayyub, or “Job’s Well,” on the left
819
Fullness of Time
bank of the Wadi en-Nar. The well sinks deep
into the rock, reaches an underground stream,
and gushes forth following rainfalls.
See JERUSALEM.
Fullness of Time. Expression meaning
“‘when the time was ripe,’ occurring in En-
glish translations of Galatians 4:4 and Ephesi-
ans 1:10. In Galatians the reference is to the
time when “God sent forth his Son.” The apos-
tle Paul used the image of a child coming of
age to say that Jesus came at a point in hu-
man history when the time was ripe and re-
leased humanity from bondage to the Law.
Traditionally theologians have seen indi-
cations of the ripeness of the time of Jesus’
birth in the historical circumstances of his
day. Rome’s conquests had produced “‘Roman
peace,” so that travel was both safe and easy.
That political unity was built on the earlier
victories of Alexander the Great, whose expan-
sion from Greece to Egypt to India left in its
wake the Greek language and culture, which
later made the spread of the gospel easier.
Greek-speaking Jews lived in every city of the
Roman Empire. Their religion was protected
by Roman law, and that law protected Chris-
tianity for its first half century. Many Gentiles
who were interested in the monotheism and
morality of Judaism went to the Jewish syna-
gogues. Thus the synagogue was a natural
starting point for the church’s early outreach
to Gentiles.
In Palestine the Jews were longing for a
Messiah (deliverer) since they were politically
subject to the Herods and the Romans. Messi-
anic rebellion simmered constantly, and re-
peatedly broke out in open battle. Socially,
peasants were oppressed by large landholders,
who used every opportunity and legal loop-
hole to expand their properties. Many of those
oppressors were from the chief priestly fami-
lies, whose greed was well known to all.
Throughout Palestine messianic speculation
was at a high point. The Pharisees talked
about what would happen when the Messiah
came, and the scribes at Qumran (Dead Sea
Scrolls community) wrote books about it. The
time was ripe for Jesus’ coming, as he himself
indicated (Mt 13:11,16,17; Mk 1:15).
In Ephesians 1:10 Paul used a slightly differ-
ent Greek expression, which covers the whole
of the time between Jesus’ first coming and
his future return to complete God’s plan in
history. Jesus revealed this plan (or mystery,
as Paul called it—Rom 16:25,26; Eph 1:9; 3:4,5;
Col 1:26), which works out in the church as
people repent and are joined to him. In the
ultimate sense, the full “ripeness” will come
when God’s plan or purpose (“‘dispensation”’
Funeral Customs

KJV) is completed and Christ becomes Head

over all things. Paul knew that this comple-
tion was in progress, but he awaited its total
realization in what he hoped would be the
near future.
PETER H. DAvipDs

Funeral Customs. Practices and rites that

encompass the dying and death of human be-
ings. Funerary rites have been practiced by all
social groups from their very beginnings.
Most anthropologists believe that funeral
customs fulfill certain important social func-
tions for the living. However, the general
meaning these customs provide for any given
culture is a matter of longstanding dispute.
On the one hand, some behavioral scientists
believe that funeral rites alleviate the sudden
anxiety which death brings for the grieving.
On the other hand, some believe that the pur-
pose of death customs is not to dispell anxiety
but rather to foster the feelings of religious
awe or group solidarity. In varying degrees
both these factors probably underlie most fu-
neral rites. Funerary customs remind the par-
ticipants that death must be taken seriously,
while at the same time providing a comforting
interpretation of death.
Belief patterns have profoundly influenced
funeral customs. A conception of immortality
is one of the more commonly held beliefs. The
discovery of artifacts such as tools, ornaments,
and even food in the oldest known human
graves may be evidence of the pervasive con-
viction that human beings continue to exist in
some form after death. Proper funeral rites
were believed to assist the dead in reaching
their final habitat, which usually included a
journey fraught with various perils, such as
crossing mythical rivers or wide chasms. The
rites also assured the living that the spirits of
the dead would not harm them.
Disposing of the Corpse. A common form
of disposing of a corpse has been burial in the
earth (inhumation). This practice may have
emerged because of the belief that the abode Philistine coffin with lid.
of the dead was located under the ground. Of-
ten the grave was considered the entrance to
the underworld, although some groups consid- popular in the West and may become more
ered the habitation of the dead to be in the widely practiced because of the increasing
sky. Above-ground disposal has also been prac- scarcity of land for grave sites.
ticed by many. Some communities place the Nearly every society observes special
corpse on,a rack to be devoured by birds or mourning customs during the disposal of the
other animals. A few groups have been known body. These include the wearing of special
to eat the corpse, believing that the good quali- clothing, emotional outbursts, seclusion, and
ties of the deceased could be ingested. Many food taboos. Most societies mark the experi-
Asian societies have traditionally practiced ence by a ceremony which may include purifi-
cremation, or the burning of the corpse. In the cation rites and the sharing of special meals
past it was not uncommon for the wife and by the friends and relatives of the dead. In
slaves of a deceased man to throw themselves almost every cultural group status symbols
on the burning pyre. Cremation is becoming infiltrate the funeral customs and rituals. For
.

820

instance, if the deceased were of a high social
standing, then the funeral ceremonies would
be more elaborate.
Funeral Customs and the Bible. While
the Bible does not provide a detailed picture
of proper burial procedures, it does allude to
the common practices of the Hebrew people,
and contains some scattered prohibitions relat- . desecrated Christian tombs and burned bodies,
ing to death. Placing the corpse in the ground
or in a cave was the principal method for dis-
posing of their dead. One of the worst indigni-
ties was to be left unburied or become “food
for beasts of prey” (Dt 28:26; 1 Kgs 11:15). If corpse tended to reflect local practices.
possible the deceased were to be buried on the
day of death (Dt 21:23). While embalming was
not practiced, the corpse was dressed in spe-
cial burial clothes and sprinkled with various
perfumes (Mk 15:46; Jn 11:44).
Intense weeping surrounded funerary rites
during biblical times. This mourning did not
simply result from spontaneous grief, but was
part of the funeral ritual (Mt 11:17). In ancient yards.
Israel, groups of paid mourners emerged who
could wail on ritual cue. Much of the funeral
service centered around these professional
mourners who sang psalms and delivered elab-
orate eulogies for the dead (2 Chr 35:25; Jer
g:17-22). The emphasis upon mourning re-
sulted from the Hebrew appreciation of hu-
man life and health, which was considered
one of God's greatest gifts (Ps 91:16), and also an opening to give the refiner access from the
from a view of human nature which affirmed
embodied existence (Ps 16:9—11). This latter
belief may have contributed to the OT’s lack
of a full-fledged doctrine of immortality, even
though it implies that the dead partake in the
“shadowy existence” of Sheol and will some
day be resurrected (Jb 14:13; Ez 37).
The early Christian church affirmed the Jew-
ish belief in embodied existence, but high-
lighted a belief in existence after death. Unlike
the Greek dualists who asserted the immortal-
ity of only the soul, the NT writers, following
the OT, emphasized a belief in eternal life
which entailed not only the soul, but also the
body. This view became the fulcrum for the
belief in the bodily resurrection, which under-
girded Christian funeral customs. Nearly every
practice symbolized a belief in the resurrection
and eternal life. Thus, the emphasis upon lam-
entation gave way to joyful singing of psalms.
The body was washed, anointed with perfumes
and spices, wrapped in linen, and surrounded
by candles, all of which represented eternal
life. Friends and relatives usually held a vigil at
the home of the deceased, and scriptural pas-
sages dealing with the resurrection and eternal
life were read. Whenever possible the Lord’s
Supper was observed, symbolizing the sacri-
fice of Christ. At the church or the gravesite, a
funeral oration was delivered both to eulogize
Furnace
the dead and to comfort the living. Many of
these practices are still observed by Christians
today. In opposition to the common cultural
practice of not touching a corpse, Christians
often kissed the dead as a sign of both love for
the person and reverence for the body. The
body was usually buried. Because pagans often
however, Christians began to affirm that any
form of disposal was acceptable—no method
could impede the resurrection. Consequently,
Christian customs surrounding disposal of the
Douc as J. MILLER
See BuRIAL, BURIAL CUSTOMS; MOURNING.
Bibliography. R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, pp 56—61; A.
Edersheim, Sketches of Jewish Social Life, pp 161-81; A.
Van Deursen, Illustrated Dictionary of Bible Manners and
Customs.
Furlong. Linear measure of about 202
See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
Furnace. Brick or stone structure varying
in size and shape, depending on whether it
was to be used domestically or commercially.
A typical furnace consisted of a firebox, a flue,
a chamber for the material to be heated, and
outside. Common uses of the furnace were to
smelt ore, melt ore for casting, heat ore for
forging, fire ceramic materials, fire bricks, and
make lime.
Various types of furnaces are mentioned in
Scripture. The potter’s kiln was used to make
lime and to fire and glaze pottery (Gn 19:28;
Ex 9:8,10; 19:18). It was commonly made of
limestone, was dome-shaped, had a chimney
for smoke to escape, and a hole at the bottom
for fuel. Such a furnace emitted a thick, dark
column of smoke.
Larger furnaces used for smelting ore were
seldom employed by the Hebrews, except pos-
sibly in the time of King Solomon. The He-
brews, however, knew of this type of furnace,
probably from its extensive use in Lebanon.
Most OT references to such furnaces are figura-
tive (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Prv 17:3; 27:21; Is
48:10; Jer 11:4; Ez 22:18,20,22). This kind of
large, ore-smelting furnace is central in the
story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego,
the three Jewish men whom King Nebuchad-
nezzar threw into the fiery furnace for refus-
ing to bow down and worship his golden idol
(Dn 3).
A small, household oven for baking bread
(Gn 15:17; Neh 3:11; 12:38; Is 31:9) was a neces-
sary item in biblical times; baking as a com-
mercial trade was a later development.
821
Furnaces, Tower of the
The most common use of “furnace” in the
Bible is to describe figuratively God’s disci-
pline or punishment, and his refining of char-
acter (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Is 48:10; Jer 6:27—30;
Ez 22:17-22). The NT preserves the Hebrew
distinction between the furnace (Mt 13:42,50;
Rv 1:15; 9:2) and the oven (Mt 6:30; Lk 12:28).
Furnace is used as a symbol for hell (Mt
13:42,50; Rv g:21). The refining image is used
to refer to the trials of life which prepare a
person for life after death (Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:7). In
John’s vision, the one who is like the Son of
man has “feet like unto fine brass, as if they
burned in a furnace” (Rv 1:15 KJV). This refer-
ence to refined brass, an extremely hard
metal, is symbolic of Christ’s power to con-
quer his enemies.
WAYNE C. HENSLEY
See HOMES AND DWELLINGS; INDUSTRY AND
MERCE.
Furnaces, Tower of the. kv rendering of
Tower of the Ovens in Nehemiah 3:11
1253S)
See OVENS, TOWER OF THE.
Furniture. Items of material culture used in
homes, palaces, and temples. Because of the
close geographical proximity to other nations,
Israel had extensive contact with neighboring
cultures. Historical surveys document paral-
lels between the furniture of Israel and that of
other tribes and countries.
Sources: Archaeology and the Bible. Ar-
chaeological investigations provide the most
specific cultural information. Sometimes items
of furniture are discovered in graves and
tombs; notable examples have come from
Egypt and Mesopotamia. Particularly in
Egypt, murals or stone bas-reliefs adorning
tomb walls provide information. Similar data
are often obtained from scenes painted on
Greek pottery. Items of cultic furniture occur
in excavated temples. Terra-cotta models of
furniture items have been discovered in vari-
ous lands. There are numerous references to
household tables, beds, couches, chairs,
stools, and such, as well as more uncommon
items used in shrines and temples. As a re-
sult, knowledge of Egyptian, Greek, and Ro-
man furniture is quite extensive.
The Bible refers to beds, stools, reclining
couches, tables, curtains, ivory (inlay), and
lamps in the domestic scene. The furniture of
the tabernacle is described in some detail in
the Book of Exodus. The Israelite kings’ pal-
aces included thrones, footstools, tables, cur-
tains, and more.
Egypt. Egypt had many cultural contacts
with the people of Palestine over the centuries,
reaching Israel to the north by caravan and
shipping routes. Thus it is possible that Egyp-
tian furniture styles influenced the furniture
craft in Palestine.
Archaeologists have found an Egyptian bed
from the 1st dynasty (c. 3000 Bc). Soft linen
strings, closely plaited and lashed to the low
wooden frame, form a mattress—a common
style for Egyptian beds in all periods. A more
elaborate bedroom set, including a chair and
canopy overlaid with gold, came from a tomb
at Giza of the 4th dynasty (c. 2600 Bc) Queen
Hetepheres. The original bed with its silver
headrest and detachable footboard of inlaid
faience can be seen in the Egyptian Museum
today. Some of the finest examples of beds
come from the tomb of Pharaoh Tutank-
hamen who lived late in the New Kingdom
COM- period (c. 1552-1306 Bc). The beds of this pe-
riod had frames that curved up at the head
and were furnished with a high footboard.
The legs of these beds were generally elabo-
and
rately carved—a characteristic of furniture in
wealthy Egyptian households.
There are many examples of chairs and
thrones of royalty and nobility, although little
is known about chairs in other economic lev-
els. Perhaps the, earliest example of an Egyp-
tian chair is a representation from Hiera-
konpolis of two seated figures which dates to
about 3000 Bc. Another early picture shows the
1st dynasty (c. 3100 Bc) King Narmer seated on
a throne watching a dance. His throne was
merely a stone block hollowed out for a seat
with no back or arms. Chairs came into use for
the nobility after the time of Zoser, a ruler of
the 3rd dynasty during the pyramid age (c
1600 BC), These were constructed of wood with
a cushion resting on a plaited leather seat. La-
ter, arms and backs were added, and the
carved legs resembled those of animals.
Ornate footstools were often used by roy-
alty. The symbolic representation of crushing
one’s foes beneath one’s feet was common in
Near Eastern art and literature (cf. Ps r10:1).
Less elaborate stools standing about a foot
high with square legs and plaited leather seats
were used by other citizens.
In ancient Egypt, tables were evidently not
used. Where food is shown in reliefs and paint-
ings the “table” is merely a tray and stand. In
the Old Kingdom period (c. 2g00—2200 BC) wood-
en stands holding water jars and wine jars
were placed at household entrances or in gar-
dens with other stands for food beside them.
Bas-reliefs and paintings also depict ornate
boxes for storing cloths and household objects.
With the advent of the Middle Kingdom (c.
2100-1700 BC), furniture usage seems to have
increased so that less affluent people had
beds, chairs, stools, and tables.
822

The 18th dynasty period (c. 1552-1306 BC)
evidenced a degree of luxury in many homes.
Patterns established during that period contin- recline and who might sit persisted through
ued during the centuries that followed.
Mesopotamia. Contact between Palestine
and lands to the east was longstanding. The
first Hebrew tribes came from Mesopotamia
(later the nations of Assyria and Babylonia). .- Ancient Palestine, although there are also sig-
Assyria had a profound political effect on the
Jewish people during the Babylonian exile
(see 2 Kgs 25) and postexilic times. Such con-
tacts may well have introduced new ideas
about furniture into Palestine.
Beds, stools, chairs, and boxes were the
main items of furniture in ancient Mesopota-
mia as evidenced by bas-reliefs. Their con-
struction resembled Egyptian furniture but
was heavier and lacked the curves which dis-
tinguish Egyptian patterns. Ornamentation
was applied in thin strips of bronze, bone, or
ivory. Metal studs and rings were characteris-
tic decorations.
Since most soil conditions in Mesopotamia
do not preserve wooden objects, the furniture
of lower economic classes has disappeared,
leaving a somewhat distorted impression since
only the wealthy could afford to have bas-
reliefs made depicting their way of life.
Wooden beds were evidently in common
use, at least among the upper classes. The men-
tion of beds in extant medical texts probably
means they were available for patients. Some
bas-reliefs depict the gods using tables for
meals. Other reliefs show well-to-do citizens
dining from tables. Chairs with legs, a back,
and even arms were common in Assyrian pal-
aces. Artisans’ footstools appear as early as
the 3rd millennium Bc. In some excavated pal-
aces, mud brick benches have been found.
There were also wooden storage boxes and
chests of various sizes.
Babylonian (southern Mesopotamian) fur-
nishings are quite similar to Assyrian. Poor,
and even middle-class, Babylonians may have
slept on mats, rugs, or mattresses. Wealthier
citizens, nobles, and rulers slept on high beds
with one end built up to form a bolster.
As in Assyria, bas-reliefs show patients on
sickbeds and tents of soldiers (probably offi-
cers) furnished with beds.
The Babylonians sat on stools made of
palm wood or on a kind of armchair with a
deeply curved back of plaited reeds. Chests
and boxes completed the household furniture.
It has been conjectured that Mesopotamian
styles influenced features of later furniture in
both Asia and Europe. Those features include
heavily turned furniture legs, fringes on furni-
ture covers, couches for reclining while eating
or conversing, small tables to hold food, and
low chairs on which servants or musicians sat
Furniture
to entertain and attend reclining superiors.
The recognized conventions about who might
classical times, the Middle Ages, and still exist
in some forms today.
Palestine in OT Times. OT passages sup-
ply most of the information about furniture in
nificant archaeological data. There are many
references to beds in the OT, using at least
three Hebrew nouns. Jacob is pictured as sit-
ting up in bed (Gn 48:2) and as dying on his
bed (49:33). Moses threatened that frogs would
invade the bedroom and bed of the Egyptian
pharaoh (Ex 8:3). Michal, Saul’s daughter,
placed an effigy in David’s bed (1 Sm 19:11—
17) when Saul sent messengers to capture him
there (vv 15,16). King David condemned the
practice of killing a defenseless person sleep-
ing in bed (2 Sm 4:7,11). The prophet Elijah
laid a dead boy on his bed and revived him (1
Kgs 17:19).
King Ahab sulked on his bed (1 Kgs 21:4),
and King Ahaziah lay on his sick bed (2 Kgs
1:4,6,16). The prophet Amos criticized the
rich who lay on beds of ivory and stretched
out on their couches (Am 6:4). The prophet
Ezekiel spoke symbolically of disobedient Je-
rusalem as a prostitute sitting on a stately
couch with the Lord’s incense and oil on a
table nearby (Ez 23:41). Isaiah promised that
the righteous would rest in their beds (Is
57:2) and also spoke of the unrighteous set-
ting their beds among false worshipers (vv
7,8). The psalmist flooded his bed with tears
(Ps 6:6), and Proverbs refers to a sluggard on
his bed (26:14).
“Table” in the OT refers both to the temple
table for the bread of the Presence and to the
table used in the palace or home for meals or
banquets. King Adoni-bezek had his captives
scrambling for scraps under his table (Jgs 1:7).
David absented himself from Saul’s table (1
Sm 20:29). Saul’s son Jonathan showed his an-
ger by leaving his father’s table (v 34). Jona-
than’s disabled son Mephibosheth was. al-
lowed to sit at David’s table (2 Sm 9:7,10—13;
19:28). Solomon’s table is described several
times (1 Kgs 2:7; 4:27). The Queen of Sheba
was particularly impressed by the food and
table service in Solomon’s palace (10:5). The
prophets frequently refer to tables (Is 21:5;
28:8; 65:11; Ez 40:39—43).
The few references to chairs describe peo-
ple reclining at meals and indicate couches
rather than actual chairs (Am 6:4). There
are numerous mentions of thrones, including
those of (1) the pharaoh (Gn 41:40; Ex 11:5), (2)
David (2 Sm 3:10; 7:13), (3) Solomon (1 Kgs
10:18), (4) the kings of Israel and Judah (1 Kgs
22:10), and (5) God (1 Kgs 22:19; Pss 9:4,7; 11:4;
823
Furniture
93:2). The OT writers sometimes indicate
thrones decorated with ivory (1 Kgs 10:18).
The exact character of furniture in Pales-
tine is difficult to determine. Bas-reliefs and
wall paintings are more common among Isra-
el’s neighbors. Excavations in Jericho, how-
ever, have unearthed some valuable archaeo-
logical clues. Tombs of the Middle Bronze Age
produced reasonably well-preserved tables,
stools, and boxes, making possible a study of
ancient joinery methods. A variety of small
trinket boxes show evidence of bone inlay and
incised decoration. Some large slabs of timber
may have been beds. Although primarily Ca-
naanite styles, the furniture reflects the house-
hold furniture used in Israel in the centuries
to follow.
Greece. Historians are more informed
about Greek furniture because of the abun-
dance of decorated vases, bas-reliefs, bronze
and terra-cotta statuettes, and literary de-
scriptions. That archaeological evidence indi-
cates that Greek furniture was influenced by
preceding civilizations. The picture is gener-
ally one of comparative simplicity, far re-
moved from the cluttered and crowded rooms
of later civilizations.
The Greeks made several types of seats: (1)
the throne, often with a back, legs of various
shapes, and armrests, (2) the lighter curved-
back chair with arm supports, (3) the four-
legged stool, (4) the folding stool with crossed
legs traceable to Egyptian models, (5) and the
bench. Representations which regularly ap-
pear on monuments dating from the 8th to the
2nd century Bc link Greek chairs to Egyptian
and Assyrian prototypes.
Greeks used couches for sleeping and for
reclining at meals. Footstools were used to
rest the feet or as a step up to higher couches.
Like chair legs, couch legs varied in style.
Some were carved in the shape of animal legs,
some were turned, some were rectangular.
From about the 6th century Bc, the legs pro-
jected above the frame. Such projections later
became headboards and bootboards. In Helle-
nistic times these headrests and footrests were
carved and carried bronze medallions in high
relief depicting children, satyrs, and animals.
Turned legs replaced the rectangular ones.
Couches were normally in wood, although
bronze and marble couches are known.
Tables: were used during meals to hold
dishes and food and were removed after the
meal. They were made of wood, bronze, and
marble and normally had four legs, but three-
legged tables were occasionally used.
Chests, large and small, served to store
clothes, jewelry, and other articles. They were
normally of wood, although some were bronze.
824
A carbonized bed found at Herculaneum and typical of those in
use in Herculaneum and Pompeii in the 1st century AD.
Rome. Roman furniture continued many
Greek patterns. The eruption of the volcano
Vesuvius in AD 79 preserved actual pieces of
Roman furniture in its lava flow.
Chairs with backs were heavier than their
Greek counterparts and widely used. There
were several types of stools: the folding stool,
mostly wooden though sometimes metal; and
a newly developed decorative stool often of
bronze which was supported by four curved
legs ornamented with scrolls.
A variety of couches were in use. Some fol-
lowed Greek models, but others were a Roman
invention. Excellent examples of bronze bed
frames have -been preserved. Presumably,
interlaced strips of leather or cords were
stretched crisscross on the frame. Gold, silver,
tortoiseshell, bone, and ivory decoration were
used along with veneer work in rare timber.
Later, couches in Italy and in other lands had
high backs and sides. The Romans seem to
have used tables more widely than Greeks.
They appear often as permanent supports for
vases and other possessions. Tables were nor-
mally rectangular with four legs, but table-
makers also constructed some with three legs,
or even resting on a single support. Round ta-
ble tops and legs of animals became popular
from the 4th century Bc on. Plain, undecorated
wooden tables and benches were used in kitch-
ens and workshops. Outdoor tables were usu-
ally of marble with carved animal legs or deco-
rative figures of animals and monsters.
There were various chests and boxes in
daily use. Shelves and cupboards became
much more popular than in Greek times.
Palestine in NT Times. The nature of fur-
niture in the NT is probably best understood
in relation to contemporaneous Roman mod-
els. The NT refers to beds in several passages.
People brought a paralytic lying on his bed to
Jesus (Mt 9:2,6; Lk 5:18). When the apostles
went into Solomon's portico, people brought
the sick to them on beds (Acts 5:15). A Syro-
phoenician woman’s sick child lay on a bed
(Mk 7:30). Jesus spoke of setting a lamp on a
stand and not placing it under a bed (Mk 4:21;
e
 Furniture

Lk 8:16), and described what would happen to Jesus overthrew the money-changers’ tables in
people in bed when the day of the Lord came the temple (Mt 21:12; Mk 11:15). Jesus sat with
(Lk 17:34). In another parable Jesus spoke of a his disciples at a table for the Passover meal
needy person begging for bread at midnight (Lk 22:21) and promised his disciples that they
from a friend who was already in bed with his would sit at his table in God’s kingdom (v 30).
family (Lk 11:7). Beds of the poor and sick The apostles were relieved of serving tables in
were probably only pallets or mattresses (Mk order to preach (Acts 6:2).
6:55; Jn 5:8). When people reclined at meals, .- * The household lamp is referred to a num-
they would have been lying on a couch (Jn ber of times (Mt 25:1; Mk 4:21). Terra-cotta
13523). domestic lamps have been found in abun-
There are numerous NT references to ta- dance in excavations.
bles. Jesus mentioned crumbs falling from a JOHN A. THOMPSON
rich man’s table (Mt 15:27; Mk 7:28; Lk 16:21). See HOMES AND DWELLINGS.

825
Gaal. Ebed’s son, who persuaded the men of reveal to him the meaning of a vision, to show
Shechem to revolt against Abimelech, the what would transpire on the day of judgment,
judge of Israel. The revolt, however, was and to give Daniel wisdom and understanding
quickly crushed and Shechem was destroyed (Dn 8:16; 9:21,22). In the NT Gabriel appeared
(Jgs 9:26—41). to Zechariah the priest as he served in the tem-
ple, to announce the birth of Zechariah’s son,
Gaash. 1. Mountain about 20 miles south- John the Baptist (Lk 1:11—20). Six months la-
west of Shechem. Joshua was buried at ter Gabriel appeared to Mary to announce
Timnath-serah (Timnath-heres) in the hill that she would become the mother of Jesus,
country of Ephraim, near Mt Gaash (Jos 24:30; the long-awaited Messiah (vv 26-33). Gabriel
Jgs 2:9). is commonly called an archangel, but is not
2. Stream in the vicinity of the mountain, referred to as such in the Bible.
mentioned as the home of Hiddai, one of King There is an abundance of material about
David’s mighty soldiers (2 Sm 23:30; 1 Chr Gabriel in the noncanonical writings of the
T1<32). Jews. In the books of Enoch he is pictured as
one of the four chief angels, along with Mi-
Gaba. ksv spelling of the Benjamite city, chael, Raphael, and Uriel (1 Enoch 40:3,6). He
Geba, in Joshua 18:24; Ezra 2:26; and Nehe- is one of the holy angels (20:7) who looks down
miah 7:30. from heaven and is a principal intercessor
(9:1; 40:6; 2 Enoch 21:3). He is to destroy the
See GEBA.
wicked (1 Enoch 9:9,10) and cast them into the
furnace (54:6) and is set over all powers (40:9).
Gabbai. Head of a family that returned to Michael sits at God’s right hand and Gabriel
Jerusalem with Zerubbabel after the Babylo- sits on the left (2 Enoch 24:1). Michael, as
nian exile (Neh 11:8). guardian angel of Israel (cf. Dn 12:1) and a
high priest of heaven, is more occupied with
Gabbatha. Transliteration of an uncertain affairs in heaven, but Gabriel is God’s messen-
Aramaic expression, which is rendered in ger who goes from heaven to execute God’s
Greek as “paved with stones,’ and refers to will on earth.
the raised area before the palace in Jerusalem CARL WAYNE HENSLEY
where formal sentencing by the governor oc- See ANGEL.
curred. Pilate seated himself on the elevated
judgment seat here in order to preside over
the trial of Jesus (Jn 19:13). The site today is Gad (Person). 1. One of the 12 sons of Jacob
identified by many as the basement of the Con- (Gn 35:26; 1 Chr 2:2). He was the first of the
vent of Our Lady of Zion, adjacent to Herod’s two sons born to Jacob by Zilpah, Leah’s
Tower of Antonia. A paved court measuring maid. Delighted with giving Jacob another
approximately 25,000 square feet has been ex- son, Leah named the boy Gad, meaning ‘‘good
cavated here. fortune” (30:11). Later he moved his family
with Jacob to Egypt (Ex 1:4). When Jacob
Gabriel. One of the two angels mentioned blessed his sons, he predicted that Gad would
by name in the Bible (the other is Michael). constantly be troubled by foreign invaders but
Gabriel appeared in human form to Daniel to would successfully withstand them and put
826

them to flight (Gn 49:19). Gad became the fa-
ther of 7 sons (46:16) and the founder of the
Gadites (Nm 2:14), one of the 12 tribes of Israel
(Dt 3:12,16).
See GaD, TRIBE OF.
2. Prophet and seer of David. He counseled
David to leave Mizpah of Moab and return to Gilead (including Gad) was threatened, if not
the land of Judah (1 Sm 22:5). Gad communi- - occupied, by the Ammonites until they were
cated David’s punishment for numbering the
fighting men of Israel (2 Sm 24:11—14,18,19;
1 Chr 21:9—19), assisted David and Nathan in
setting up the order of worship in the sanctu-
ary (2 Chr 29:25) and later wrote an account of
David's life (1 Chr 29:29).
3. Canaanite god of fortune whom the Israel-
ites worshiped (Is 65:11).
WayNE C. HENSLEY
See CANAANITE DEITIES AND RELIGION.
Gad, Tribe of. Descendants of Jacob’s 7th
son Gad (Gn 30:11; Nm 1:24,25), and 8th larg-
est of the 12 tribes that came out of Egypt
with Moses (according to the number of war-
riors in Nm 1:1—3,24—25). They were cattlemen
and had a reputation for being fierce in battle
(32:1; Dt 33:20).
During the wilderness period, they were led
by Eliasaph’s son Deuel (Nm 1:14; 2:14, Reuel;
7:42; 10:20). When Israel encamped, Gad was
located south of the tabernacle behind the
tribes of Reuben and Simeon (2:14,15). They
are mentioned at the tribal offering to the tab-
ernacle, and after the plague, which God
brought upon Israel (7:42—47; 26:15,18). Ma-
chi’s son Geuel represented the tribe as one of
the 12 spies sent by Moses into Canaan (13:15).
At the close of the wilderness period, Gad,
Reuben, and half of Manasseh’s tribe re-
quested permission to settle east of the Jor-
dan, for it had good pasture land (Nm 32:1,2).
This was permitted on the condition that they
would help in the conquest of Canaan (32:20—
22; Jos 1:12—18).
During the conquest under Joshua, Gad is
mentioned only at the battle of Jericho (Jos
4:12). After the cessation of conflict Gad, Reu-
ben, and halfofManasseh settled their land east
of the Jordan (cf. Nm 34:13,14; Jos 12:6; 13:8).
Gad’s inheritance was between Manesseh’s
tribe to the north and Reuben’s to the south.
The Arabian desert formed its eastern border
and the Jordan River its western. There seem
to have been no fixed borders between the
three tribes, and the whole area was often re-
ferred to as Gilead and Bashan (2 Kgs 10:33).
Its land ran north to the Sea of Chinnereth
(Galilee), but among the mountains it seems
to go east only as far as the Jabbok River. To
the south the cities of Aroer and Heshbon
mark their southern limits (Dt 3:12,13; Jos
12:16; 13:24—28).
827
Gadara, Gadarenes
The history of Gad from its settlement to
the captivity was closely tied with the two
neighboring Hebrew tribes. Shortly after re-
turning to their lands, the three tribes almost
started a civil war by erecting a large altar
(Jos 22:10-34). During the time of the judges,
defeated by Jephthah (Jgs 11). Some Gadites
joined David at Ziklag during his exile (1 Chr
12:14,37). In the 14th year of David’s reign the
three tribes were formally brought together
under an overseer named Jerijah (and his
brothers, 26:30—32).
During the time of the divided kingdom,
the tribes east of the Jordan were constantly
under attack. During Jehu’s reign (841-814 BC),
Hazael annexed all the lands east of the Jor-
dan, and they were later carried off into captiv-
ity by Tilgath-pileser, king of Assyria (2 Kgs
15:29; 1 Chr 5:26,27). Subsequently the Ammon-
ites occupied Gad’s land (Jer 49:1).
In the postexilic period Gad is mentioned
only once—in Ezekiel’s vision of the resto-
ration of Israel (Ez 48:1,27,28,34).
In the NT Gad is mentioned only in the
Book of Revelation, in the list of the seals (Rv
FALE
See IsRAEL, History OF; GAD (PERSON) #1.
Gad, Valley of. Translation of a Hebrew
phrase in 2 Samuel 24:5, meaning literally
“the river or streambed of Gad.” It is rendered
“in the midst of the river of Gad” (kJv), “in the
middle of the valley, toward Gad” (Rsv), and
“the valley of Gad” (asv). The valley of Gad
was the beginning point for David’s census,
and the “river” or “valley” is undoubtedly the
Arnon.
Gadara, Gadarenes. City of the Decapolis
and its inhabitants, mentioned only once in
the better manuscripts of the NT (Mt 8:22).
Jesus had crossed to the eastern side of the
Sea of Galilee and healed the demoniac, Le-
gion, whom he encountered in “the country of
the Gadarenes” (Mt 8:28, KJv Gergesenes).
Mark’s account in 5:1 and Luke’s in 8:26,37
read “Gerasenes” (kKJv Gadarenes). The vari-
ant readings may be due to the fact that
Gerasa was the wider geographical area of
which Gadara was a chief city. Geographers
conclude that the most likely location for the
leap of the swine into the sea would have
been a strip of steep coastline near Gergesa, a
smaller, less important town of the area. This
would fit another suggestion that Matthew
was a native of the region and so he pin-
pointed the precise place, while Mark and
Luke intended to point out the general lo-
Gaddi

Gaddi. Man from Manasseh’s tribe sent by

Moses to search out the land of Canaan (Nm
LUE):

Gaddiel. Sodi’s son from Zebulun’s tribe,

sent by Moses to search out the land of Ca-
naan (Nm 13°10).

Gadfly. Any of a number of large flies, in-

cluding the horsefly and botfly, which sting
livestock. King Nebuchadnezzar is called a
gadfly in the only biblical reference to this in-
sect (Jer 46:20).
See ANIMALS (FLY).

Gadi. Father of Menahem. Menahem re-

Gadara, the location where, according to the vast majority of
Greek manuscripts (Mk 5:1; Lk 8:26,37), Jesus sent demons
from a man into a herd of swine.
cation for their Greek and Roman readers,
since Gergesa was small and relatively un-
known, while Gadara was a Greek city of
some importance.
The name “Gadara” indicates that the city
was of Semitic origin. It was located 5 to 6
miles southeast of the Sea of Galilee, and
its territory included the hot springs of el
Hamme, north of the Yarmuk River. The first
reference to it in history was when it was
captured by Antiochus III (218 Bc). It was
taken by the Jews under Alexander Jannaeus
(103 Bc), and the inhabitants were
and forced to receive the Law of Moses as
proselytes of justice. The city was demolished
by the Jews, but when the area was recon-
quered by Pompey, it was rebuilt (63 Bc). It
became a free city under Pompey and joined
the federation of Greek cities in the Trans-
jordan known as the Decapolis. Augustus Cae-
sar added Gadara to the territory of Herod
the Great (30 Bc), and at Herod’s death it was
annexed to Syria (4 Bc). During the Jewish
rebellion (aD 66-70), Vespasian took the city,
and it continued to flourish for many years. It
was the seat of a Christian bishopic from ap
325 until the Moslem conquest.
Gadara is identified with the modern Um
Qeis on the east edge of the Jordan Valley. Al-
though ifthas not been excavated, visible signs
indicate that it had a circumference of two
miles and that it had characteristic Greek fea-
tures, including two theaters, a basilica, a tem-
ple, public baths, a colonnaded street, and an
aqueduct.
WAYNE C. HENSLEY
See DECAPOLIS; GERASA, GERASENE,
GERGESENE.
volted and killed Shallum, king of Israel, plac-
ing himself on the throne as king in his stead
(2 Kgs 15:14,17).
Gadite. Member of Gad’s tribe (Dt 3:12,16).
See Gab (PERSON) #1; GAD, TRIBE OF.
Gaham. Son of Nahor, Abraham’s brother,
and his concubine Reumah (Gn 22:24).
Gahar. Ancestor of a group of temple assis-
tants that returned to Jerusalem with Zerubba-
bel after the exile (Ezr 2:47; Neh 7:49).
Gaius. 1. Native of Macedonia and traveling
companion of Paul during the apostle’s third
missionary journey. He and Aristarchus were
both seized at Ephesus during the riot caused
enslaved by Demetrius, the silversmith (Acts 19:29).
2. Native of Derbe in Lycaonia, who trav-
eled with Paul from Ephesus to Macedonia
(Acts 20:4). Some have identified him with #1
above.
3. Prominent believer in Rome and host to
Paul and the whole church there (Rom 16:23).
4. One of two Corinthians whom Paul per-
sonally baptized (1 Cor 1:14). Since Romans
was written in Corinth, this Gaius has been
equated with #3 above.
5. Man to whom John addressed his third
letter (3 Jn 1).
Galal. 1. Levite and Mica’s son, who re-
turned from exile in Babylon (1 Chr 9:15).
2. Levite and forefather of Obadiah (Abda).
Obadiah returned from exile in Babylon (1 Chr
9:16; Neh 11:17).
Galatia. Ancient kingdom resulting from mi-
grations of Gallic people from the west and
settlement on the central plain of Asia Minor.
An earlier migratory movement resulted in
GERGESA, the sack of Rome by the Gauls (or Celts) in 390
Bc, but in a later attempt to overrun Greece

828

the Gallic invaders were repulsed. That unsuc-
cessful invasion into Greece led the Gauls to
turn their attention to Asia Minor. They pene-
trated the larger part of the area but were de-
feated by Attalus I in 230 Bc. As a result they
became restricted to that part of Asia later
known as Galatia. By that time, the Gauls con-
sisted of three tribes, the Trocmi, Tolistobogii, -- fished in those towns on Paul’s first mission-
and Tectosages, which settled into the towns
of Tavium, Pessinus, and Ancyra, respectively.
In 189 Bc these Galatians were subdued by Ro-
mans but were allowed to govern themselves.
After the death of Amyntas in 25 Bc Galatia
became a Roman province. Within its bound-
aries were the ethnic areas of Galatia proper,
Lycaonia, Isauria, and part of Phrygia and Pi-
sidia. The new province, therefore, included
the towns of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and
Pisidian Antioch, all of which the apostle Paul
visited on his first missionary journey. The
term ‘Galatia’ was used in two different
ways, one to describe the area occupied by the
Gauls in the north, and the other to describe
the whole Roman province, including the
southern towns. That ambiguity has given rise
to a problem over the destination of Paul’s let-
ter to the Galatians.
The original inhabitants of north Galatia
were Phrygians, many of whom still remained
in the rst century aD, together with some
Greeks and a fairly large community of Jews.
Although the area was cosmopolitan, the
Celtic element predominated. These people
were known for their sturdy independence,
but also for their drunkenness and revelings.
They were of an inquisitive disposition and
were easily impressed with new ideas, particu-
larly of a religious kind. They were neverthe-
less easily turned aside and had a reputation
for fickleness. In religious matters there is evi-
dence that they were highly superstitious and
were especially attracted to the wild rites of
the goddess Cybele. It is not difficult to imag-
ine the impact the Christian gospel may have
made on a people of such temperament. Paul’s
letter to the Galatians reflects several of the
traits of the Gallic peoples.
In towns of the southern region, Greek influ-
ence was more pronounced, especially among
the more educated members of the communi-
ties. But the Phrygian element was still strong
among the humbler inhabitants. They too
were predominately devotees of Cybele, al-
though there the cult had become modified by
Greek influences. In Pisidian Antioch, for in-
stance, the goddess was known as the Genius
of Antioch, while in Iconium she was known
as Athena Polias.
Geographically the northern towns, situ-
ated on a well-watered plateau and served by
a major road from the Aegean shores to the
Galatians, Letter to the
west, became prosperous centers of com-
merce. But access from north to south was dif-
ficult and communication poor because of the
mountainous terrain leading up to the pla-
teau. The southern towns were situated on the
route between Syria and Asia. Their strategic
location explains why churches were estab-
ary journey (cf. Acts 13, 14).
Galatia, linked with Phrygia, is mentioned
in Acts 16:6 and 18:23, but it is not clear
whether Paul ever visited or established
churches in the northern area.
The only other references to Galatia in the
NT are probably to the southern towns (1 Cor
16:1; 2 Tm 4:10; 1 Pt 1:1).
DONALD GUTHRIE
See GALATIANS, LETTER TO THE.
Galatians, Letter to the. This letter has an
important place in the NT. It reveals much of
Paul’s character and sheds light on his teach-
ing. It has appropriately been called the char-
ter of Christian liberty.
Author. The letter gives some brief but tell-
ing glimpses of the writer’s experience before
he became a Christian. He mentions his former
life in Judaism (1:13). The fact that he had been
a thoroughly devout Jew has an important
bearing on what he writes in this letter. He
remembers his passionate devotion to his
former faith, in whose cause he had violently
persecuted the church of God. He reminds the
Galatians about this, for the Jewish traditions
had meant a great deal to him. There is no
doubt that he had once regarded his violent
opposition to the church as a religious act of
the highest order. Indeed, his strong devotion
to Judaism sets in clear relief the remarkable
transformation which occurred when he be-
came a Christian. A revelation from God, he is
convinced, gave him special authority to write
the way he does.
He mentions two features of his conversion
experience which have had a profound effect
on him. One is the purpose of God for his life
which he recognizes as reaching back even be-
fore he was born (1:15). He does not go into
detail, but he never tires of talking about the
grace of God. His present position is none of
his own doing. He has turned his back on the
idea of earning merit through his own efforts.
The second aspect of his conversion which
deeply impresses him is the recognition that
his call to preach can be traced to that occa-
sion. When he preached to the Galatians he
did so with divine authority because he was
conscious of having received a divine commis-
sion. The apostles and elders of the church did
not decide it would be a good thing for him to
829
Galatians, Letter to the
preach the gospel. It was God who planned it.
Moreover, Paul is equally convinced that the
gospel he preaches is not of his own making.
He has received it through a revelation of Je-
sus Christ (v 12). It is in no sense a human
gospel.
Why does Paul place so much emphasis on
his own position? He goes to some lengths to
demonstrate that he has received his apostle-
ship from God (1:1). He is conscious not only
of a call to preach but also of a call to exercise
apostolic authority on an equal footing with
the Jerusalem apostles. He certainly seems to
be on the defensive, but this is prompted by
the special situation that had arisen among
the Galatians and that caused this letter to be
written.
Paul gives one biographical detail in this
letter which is not mentioned in his other let-
ters. He states that after his conversion he
went away into Arabia (1:17). The apostle does
not tell us what he did there, but probably he
was quietly reorientating his thoughts. Accord-
ing to the Book of Acts, when he returned to
Damascus he powerfully proved that Jesus
was the Messiah (Acts 9:22). He also refers to
traveling in Syria and Cilicia (Gal 1:21), which
must have been prior to his first missionary
journey.
Date and Destination. It is impossible to
determine the date of this letter before discuss-
ing its destination.
The Destination. Paul addresses his letter
to the Galatians; but there has been much de-
bate over where they lived, because the term
“Galatia’’ was used in two different senses. It
was used of the province which stretched from
the borders of Pamphylia in the southern part
of Asia Minor to the borders of Pontus toward
the northern sea coast. The term was also used
of a part of the province in the north where a
group of people from Gaul had settled and
given their name to the whole area. Hence
“Galatia” could mean either the geographical
area in the north or the whole province. It is
not easy to decide what the term meant when
used by Paul. The debate is between the view
that the term was used geographically, in
which case some churches in the north are in
mind (North Galatian Theory), or politically,
in which case Paul may be referring to the
churches in southern Galatia founded on his
first missionary journey (South Galatian The-
ory). It may at first sight seem a quite unim-
portant issue, but since the decision affects the
date of the letter and to some extent its occa-
sion and purpose, a brief glance at the lines of
evidence on both sides must be made.
Until the beginning of the 2oth century no
one seems to have questioned that Paul was
writing to the inhabitants of the geographical
830
district in the northern part of the province.
This view agrees with the oldest use of the
term, since the province did not come into exis-
tence until 25 Bc, whereas there were Galatians
in the north some time before this. It is reason-
able to suppose that the southerners would not
have taken too kindly to being addressed as
“Galatians.” It may be argued that most peo-
ple in those days would have thought of the
northern peoples when hearing the name.
Luke’s habit when writing Acts was to use
geographical rather than political descriptions
of places. He refers, for instance, to Lystra and
Derbe as cities of Lycaonia, not as cities of
Galatia. It is reasonable, therefore, that when
he refers to Phrygia and Galatia in Acts 16:6
and 18:23, he means that Paul went through
the northern area. There were three main
towns in that district, Ancyra, Tavium, and
Pessinus, and it would therefore follow that
Paul must have established churches there.
Nevertheless the evidence is not quite as
straightforward as it seems, for Luke some-
times uses political terms when referring to
Paul’s movements, as when he says that the
Spirit would not allow Paul and Silas to go
into Asia or Bithynia (Acts 16:6,7). Since this is
in the same context as the reference to Gala-
tia, some caution is needed before reaching
conclusions.
The map shows that if Asia and Bithynia
were closed to the missionaries, it would have
been quite natural for them to go to the north
of Galatia, although this would be something
of a detour. It would be more convincing if we
had other evidence of churches having been
established in that area.
Another point often made is the reputation
of the Gallic people for being fickle and the
possibility that this would explain why they
had so quickly turned aside from the gospel
Paul had preached to them (cf. 1:6). This is an
interesting point, but it cannot be shown that
this would not equally apply to the people of
the southern area.
This traditional North Galatian view has
been challenged. It is pointed out that al-
though Luke prefers geographical descrip-
tions, Paul prefers political ones for grouping
his churches. In this letter he mentions the
churches of Christ in Judea (1:22). Elsewhere
he mentions the ‘‘churches of Asia’ (1 Cor
16:19). Several times Paul refers to the believ-
ers in Macedonia (e.g., 2 Cor 8:1; 9:2; 1 Thes
4:10) and in Achaia (1 Cor 16:15; 2 Cor 1:1),
while both are mentioned together in Ro-
mans 15:26; 2 Corinthians 9:2 and 1 Thessalo-
nians 1:7. This seems to be Paul’s normal
habit, in which case a letter addressed to the
Galatians would be circulated to all the exist-
ing churches in the province of Galatia.
 Galatians, Letter to the

South Galatian supporters do not agree the two passages. In both, Barnabas is men-
that the southern people would not have re- tioned. In both, questions are asked about the
sented the name “Galatians,” maintaining circumcision of the Gentiles, and in both, Paul
that there would have been no other name and Barnabas give a report about the matter
available with which to describe them. One to the Jerusalem leaders. The main difficulty
fairly positive piece of evidence is found in is that Paul’s wording in Galatians 2:1 sug-
Paul’s statement that it was because of a gests that this event took place on his second
bodily ailment that he first preached to the , visit to Jerusalem, whereas Acts 15 relates his
Galatians (Gal 4:13). But a glance at the map, third visit. It is traditionally explained that on
particularly a relief map, would show that the the second visit Paul and Barnabas had no con-
route to the northern area was over mountain- tact with the apostles but simply handed over
ous terrain, and it is difficult to think that a the collection from the Antioch church to the
sick man would have attempted it. Under the Jerusalem elders (cf. Acts 11:30). Another diffi-
southern theory the journey would have been culty with this view is that Galatians 2 speaks
much shorter and less arduous. only of conversations with the three leading
Another argument in support of the South apostles at Jerusalem and does not mention
Galatian Theory assumes that Acts 20:4, which the whole church (as Acts 15 clearly does).
mentions the names of those who accompa- Paul does not refer to the decision reached by
nied Paul to Jerusalem, is referring to dele- the church, but only to his agreement with
gates appointed by the churches in support of those he calls the “‘pillar’”’ apostles. It could of
the collection to aid the poor churches of Ju- course be that before the general meeting of
dea. If this assumption is right it is notice- Acts 15, Paul and Barnabas had a behind-the-
able that no representative is included from scene meeting with the leaders and preferred
the northern area, although both Gaius and to mention the decision reached with them
Timothy were from the south. This would be rather than quote an ecclesiastical edict. This
more weighty if Acts had actually mentioned may also explain another difficulty—the lack
the collection. of any mention of the prohibitions which the
One last point is that Barnabas is men- Jerusalem church imposed on the Gentiles
tioned three times (2:1,9,13) suggesting that he (15:20). Paul simply mentions the need to re-
is known to the readers. Yet according to Acts member the poor (Gal 2:10). Yet another diffi-
he accompanied Paul only on the first mission- culty with the traditional view is the fact that
ary journey. Paul mentions his dispute with Peter over the
It is difficult to reach a conclusion, but it question of Gentile-Jewish fellowship (vv 11-
seems that the arguments for the South Gala- 14) after his account of the agreement reached
tian Theory have a slight edge on those for the with the Jerusalem apostles. This places Peter
older theory. in a compromising position. It is difficult to
Date. Under the North Galatian Theory, it explain his inconsistency. He may have agreed
is claimed that the letter was written after the that Gentiles should not be circumcised, but
events mentioned in Acts 18:23, that is, during then vacillated over the question of fellowship.
the course of the third missionary journey, pos- An alternative view suggests that when
sibly while Paul was at Ephesus or soon after. Paul and Barnabas went to Jerusalem with
If on the other hand, the letter was ad- the collection they also had private talks with
dressed to the south Galatian churches the leading apostles. Acts 11:29,30 is set in a
founded on the first missionary journey, any period of political activity against the apostles
date after that journey is possible, including (Acts 12 records the martyrdom of James and
during the third journey as mentioned above. the arrest of Peter), and this may explain the
But a further possibility opens up since a private nature of the meeting. This interpreta-
much earlier date might more readily fit into tion would explain why Paul makes no men-
the background of the letter. In fact it is possi- tion of the church’s decision because the meet-
ble that this letter is among the earliest that ing happened before the Jerusalem council. It
Paul wrote. would also make it easier to explain Peter’s
The main problem is that in Galatians 1 action at Antioch, if this was before the church
and 2 Paul mentions two visits to Jerusalem as a whole had discussed and resolved the mat-
(1:18; 2:1), whereas Acts mentions (or implies) ter. According to this view Paul’s Letter to the
three visits (Acts 9:26; 11:29,30; 15:2). It has tra- Galatians may be the earliest of his letters.
ditionally been supposed that the second visit There are, however, some difficulties with
(2:1) can be identified with the events of Acts this view. Acts 11:30 mentions no apostles as
15. This would mean that Paul is giving his meeting Paul and Barnabas. Nor is there any
own account of the decisions of the so-called reference to Titus, whom Paul says they took
council of Jerusalem. There is much to be said with them (Gal 2:1). Further, Paul’s references
for this view. There are similarities between to preaching among the Gentiles (v 2) would

831
Galatians, Letter to the
seem to require a date after the first mission-
ary journey, unless he was thinking of his
work in Antioch, a Jewish-Gentile church.
It is difficult to decide between these two
views. Chronological considerations (based on
Paul’s mention of 14 years in 2:1) slightly favor
a later date. The same may be said for doc-
trinal considerations, since Galatians is so
closely akin to the thought of Romans, which
must be dated at the end of the third mission-
ary journey.
Purpose and Theological Teaching. Diffi-
culties had arisen in the Galatian churches
because a group of people had been insisting
that Gentiles must be circumcised. These peo-
ple must have been Judaizers, that is, Chris-
tian Jews who could see no hope for Gentiles
unless they accepted circumcision as an ini-
tiatory rite. Linked with this was a criticism
of Paul’s apostolic status. The opponents were
claiming the support of the Jerusalem apos-
tles, whom they regarded as superior to Paul.
This would explain why Paul sees the issue
so clearly as a challenge to the gospel which
he preached. His letter strongly expresses
his understanding of the seriousness of the
situation.
Interpretations will vary slightly according
to which date one assigns to the letter. If it
was written before the Jerusalem council (Acts
15), the circumcision issue had not yet been
thrashed out and the Galatian situation would
be the first major crisis over it. But if the Jeru-
salem council had already happened, the
south Galatian churches would already have
received those decisions (16:4), and apparently
had allowed themselves to be affected by Juda-
izers who took a harder line than the Jerusa-
lem apostles had. If the northern churches are
indicated, there is no direct evidence to show
that they had received the decrees.
We may conclude that the apostle’s aim in
this letter is twofold—to maintain the validity
of his apostleship and the character of the gos-
pel which he preached. In the first part of the
letter he is concerned to show his relationship
with the Jerusalem “‘pillar’’ apostles in order
to demonstrate his equality with them, while
at the same time claiming his independence of
them. His apostleship was from God, not from
men. Moreover, he asserts that there is only
one gospel, which suggests that his opponents
were charging him with preaching a different
gospel. But he claims to have received his gos-
pel from God, not from men.
In the course of his letter Paul gives expres-
sion to some important theological truths. The
main body of the letter issues a strong warn-
ing against legalism that is applicable, not
only to the situation Paul confronted in the
Galatian churches, but wherever dependence
832
on legal observances is considered essential
for salvation. If a Gentile could not become a
Christian without being circumcised, it would
not only make an external rite a condition for
Christian salvation, but would imply a com-
mitment to keep the whole Jewish Law. Paul
is arguing against justification by works of the
Law and in doing so shows the superiority of
justification by faith. The whole letter extols
the doctrine of grace.
Nevertheless in contesting the doctrine of
works the apostle lends no support to spiritual
license. He sees clearly that the alternative to
legalism is not the absence of all restraint. Al-
though Christ has secured freedom for the be-
liever, that freedom must not be used to in-
dulge the flesh (5:13). Indeed, Paul’s exposition
of the Christian life in this letter is of a high
moral order. He sets the standard himself by
declaring that he has been crucified with
Christ (2:20). Not only is this letter a charter
for Christian liberty, but also a chart for Chris-
tian living.
Contents. Introduction (1:1-5). The open-
ing to this letter is more abrupt than in Paul’s
other letters. He omits the usual thanksgiving
and expands the usual greeting. In the first
words he strongly affirms the divine origin of
his apostleship.
The Opponents (1:6—10). Paul is astonished
that the Galatians have allowed themselves to
be influenced so quickly by those who were
perverting the gospel. He expresses an anath-
ema against any who preach another gospel.
A Defense of His Apostleship (1:11-2:14).
There are several stages in Paul’s argument
about his own position. He states that his
teaching has come from God, not from men,
showing his awareness that God has not only
called him to be an apostle, but has also sanc-
tioned his gospel. It is important for him to
make clear that he is not dependent on others
for his position, although he proceeds to show
that there is no difference between him and
the leading apostles (1:11-12). He next con-
trasts his former zeal in Judaism with his call-
ing to preach the gospel, again emphasizing
the divine nature of his call (vv 13-17).
He then proceeds to mention that he has on
two occasions had meetings with the Jerusa-
lem apostles. As a result he has been offered
the right hand of fellowship, a way of showing
that there is no disagreement between them.
It was agreed that Paul should be entrusted
with the gospel for the uncircumcised, and
that Peter should go to the circumcised. There
was no questioning of Paul’s apostleship. They
all agreed on the Christian responsibility to
remember the poor (1:18—2:10).
In order to give a tangible example of his
apostolic position, Paul mentions the occa-
.

sion of his public rebuke of Peter. Peter had
acted inconsistently for fear of certain men
who had come from James in Jerusalem, and
who were representatives of the circumcision
party. Paul’s challenge to Peter sets the scene
for the introduction of the doctrinal part of
the letter (2:11—14).
A Defense of the Gospel (2:15-4:31). Paul
at once introduces the issue of justification by
works of the Law and contrasts it with justi-
fication by faith. He sees the whole situation
as a choice between Christ and the Law
(2:15—21).
His aim is to show the superiority of Chris-
tianity over Judaism in the matter of salva-
tion. He notes first that the Galatians had
become Christians through the Spirit and won-
ders what is possessing them to want to return
to the works of the Law, which Paul then
equates with the “‘flesh”’ (3:1-5).
Abraham is brought into the discussion pre-
sumably because the opponents were main-
taining that only Abraham’s seed would re-
ceive the inheritance, and circumcision was
regarded as an indispensable sign of a son of
the covenant. But Paul points out that even
Abraham was justified by faith, not by the law
(3:69).
Indeed, the Law could only bring a curse on
those who disobeyed. This leads Paul to show
how Christ had become a curse for us. Hence
he claims that in Christ we may still inherit
the blessing promised to Abraham (3:10—14).
Paul anticipates that some may say it is in-
valid to appeal to the promise to Abraham to
counteract justification by works of the Law.
He shows that the promise preceded the Law
by four centuries and cannot be invalidated by
it (3:15—-18).
This leads the apostle to reflect on the func-
tion of the Law. He points out that it served to
prepare the way for Christ by showing man-
kind’s need and by revealing its own inability
to give life. Paul calls the Law our custodian,
thinking in terms of the person whose function
it was to guard and guide a son until he
reached the age of independence (3:19—29).
The contrast between those under a guard-
ian and fully independent sons causes Paul to
reflect on the superior position of sons. The
Spirit of God has enabled believers to call God
“Abba” (Father), something the Law could not
do (4:1-7).
The apostle has made his point, but he sup-
ports it with a personal appeal. He reminds
his readers of their state of bondage before
they became Christians and deplores that they
have returned to such a state in wanting to
observe ritual feast days after the Jewish man-
ner. He also reminds them of the former affec-
tionate relationship they had with him when
833
Galbanum
they first became Christians. He is deeply af-
fected by their present attitude (4:8—20).
Paul appeals to a scriptural allegory in sup-
port of his argument. He sees Isaac and Ish-
mael, both sons of Abraham, as representing
the distinction between sonship and slavery,
which he has already mentioned (4:21-31).
_« Practical Advice (5:1—6:10). Paul proceeds
| to draw out the practical consequences of his
doctrinal arguments. He sets out the way in
which those who are liberated in Christ
should live. They should not commit them-
selves to Judaism by submitting to circumci-
sion (5:1-6). Paul again attacks those who
were leading the Galatians astray (5:7—12).
The new principle which must replace legal-
ism is love. Love is possible only by living in
the Spirit. This will lead not only to a rejec-
tion of the works of the flesh, but to the devel-
opment of the fruit of the Spirit (5:13—-26). The
spiritual man will have a concern for the bur-
dened and will seek to help others, particu-
larly fellow Christians (6:1—10).
Conclusion (6:11—18). Paul now takes the
pen and writes his final word with his own
hand. He sees fit to contrast his own aim in
glorying in the cross of Christ with his oppo-
nents’ aim to glory in the flesh.
There are no greetings at the end of this
letter, only a request that no one should
bother him further.
DONALD GUTHRIE
See PAUL, THE APOSTLE; JUDAIZERS; GALATIA; Law,
BIBLICAL CONCEPT OF.
Bibliography. H.D. Betz, Galatians; F.F. Bruce, Com-
mentary on Galatians; E.D. Burton, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians; R.G. Gromacki,
Stand Fast in Liberty; D. Guthrie, Galatians; J.B. Lightfoot,
St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians.
Galbanum. One of the ingredients used to
make a special perfume for the tabernacle (Ex
30:34). Galbanum comes from a waxy, brown-
ish gum excreted from the lower part of a plant
that is a member of the carrot or parsley family
and native to Syria and Persia. It is a tall herb
which bears small, greenish-white flowers and
fruit at the stem tip in bunches or clusters. Its
leaves are compound and divided into many
fine parts like the leaves of parsley or carrot.
An incision made in the stem a few inches
above soil level yields a milky sap that hard-
ens. Galbanum is presently used as an antispas-
modic and in the manufacture of varnish.
Galbanum is mentioned in the apocryphal
book of Ecclesiasticus as having a pleasant
odor (24:15). Although galbanum is not an
agreeable perfume when used alone, it was evi-
dently mixed with other substances to yield a
fragrant ointment.
See PLANTS.
Galeed
The Horns of Hittin, the tradi-
tional site of the Sermon on
the Mount. The twin peaks
were on the road from Tibe-
rias (on the Sea of Galilee) to
Cana and Nazareth.
Galeed. Name meaning literally ‘‘a heap of
witness.”’ Jacob gave this name to a pile of
stones erected as a witness to the pact of
friendship made between himself and _ his
father-in-law, Laban, who named the cairn
Jegar-sahadutha (Gn 31:47,48). Its location is
unknown. The name Galeed is not to be con-
fused with the name Gilead, designation of the
territory east of the Jordan.
Galilee, Galileans. Area in northern Pales-
tine which, in Israel’s earlier history, had
boundaries which were not clearly defined but
which became more precisely defined in the
period of Roman rule. The English name “Gali-
lee’ comes from two Hebrew words meaning
“circuit” or ‘‘district.”
Historical Background. In OT times Gali-
lee was not significant in Israelite life, but in
NT times it was a prominent Jewish popula-
tion center. Galilee is first mentioned in the
Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of ref-
uge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7;
cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).
Galilee originally designated the area occu-
pied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is
g:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27
is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11—13). None of
those tribes was able to completely expel the
original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30—33;
4:2), and as a result Galilee tended to be ra-
cially intermixed. The cities that King Solo-
mon gave. to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were
within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile in-
termixture in that area may have influenced
Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This
racially mixed condition is also the probable
basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, ‘“Galilee
of the nations” (cf. 1 Mc 5:15; Mt 4:15).
During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer
zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the
834
brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This
fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but
he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day
when the messianic king would reign. Galilee
was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1
Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Isra-
el’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated
by the Aramaeans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32;
12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2
Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian con-
quests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in
732 Bc by Tiglath-pileser III (15:29), more Gen-
tiles were imported into the area while many
of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This
naturally led to greater gentile influence and
domination in Galilee. Under the successive
influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and
Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing in-
filtration and migration. From the time of the
Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of
the 2nd century Bc, Galilee’s population was
dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.
The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought
to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 Bc (1 Mc
5:21—23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobu-
lus I (104-103 Bc), who forced the inhabitants
to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish
laws, a work that probably already had been
initiated by John Hyrcanus (134-104 BC).
Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37-4
Bc) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more
Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded
that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and
100,000 men available to fight against the
Romans. After the death of Herod the Great,
Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod
Antipas (4 BC-AD 39). With the banishment of
Herod Antipas in AD 39, Galilee was added to
the territory of Herod Agrippa I who ruled it
until he died in ap 44. Rome directly adminis-
tered Galilee until it was put under the rule of

Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans
during the Jewish revolts, he was able to re-
tain his position until ap roo. In spite of the
Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the
revolutionary faction was brought under sub-
jection by Vespasian in ap 67. After Herod
Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the
Roman province of Syria.
Following the fall of Jerusalem in Ap 70, the
Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern
Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such
cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jew-
ish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of
Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a cen-
ter for Jewish learning, and it was there that
such major contributions as the Tiberian sys-
tem of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonan-
tal text were made, as well as the formulation
of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.
From about ap 451 until the Muslim rule
over Galilee began in the 7th century, Galilee
was governed by the Christian patriarchate of
Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon
in AD 451. Muslim rule from the 7th century on
was continuous except for the intervals caused
by the r2th century Crusades and World War
I. All of Galilee has been included in the mod-
ern state of Israel since its establishment in
1948.
Boundaries. Galilee was bounded on the
east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of
Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdra-
elon, which served as a natural boundary be-
tween Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain
was included in Galilee as it was during the
intertestamental period (1 Mc 10:30; 12:47,49).
While the northern boundary was uncertain
and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT
times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western
boundary followed along the Mediterranean
Sea to Mt Carmel.
From the time of the divided kingdom until
the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 Bc), it
was the northernmost part of the kingdom of
Israel. The area was divided into upper Gali-
lee and lower Galilee by the Plain of Ramah
which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais
(cf. Jth 1:8; 1 Mc 12:49; and Josephus Wars,
3.3.1). In the Mishna (compilation of early rab-
binical interpretation of the Law) Galilee is
divided into 3 parts corresponding to the natu-
ral divisions of plain, hill country, and moun-
tain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25
to 30 miles from east to west and about 35 to
40 miles from north to south.
Geography. The attractive Galilean land-
scape is made up of volcanic limestone hills
and alluvial fertile plains. Its climate is cooler
than: any other part of Palestine, and its
beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the
sunbaked, barren hills of southern Palestine.
835
Galilee, Galileans
The physical features range from the high
mountains in the north to the plain of Esdrae-
lon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the
east while Mt Carmel stands out on the west.
Much of upper Galilee is 3000 feet above sea
level, and in NT times it was largely forested
and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee.
Lower Galilee starts at 1500 to 2000 feet above
‘sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of
Galilee more than 600 feet below sea level.
Besides the average annual rainfall of 25
inches, Galilee is watered by the streams that
flow from springs in the hills and are the main
sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin,
and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the
largest river in Palestine. The ground is also
moistened by heavy dews resulting from clima-
tic conditions created by the Lebanon moun-
tain range to the north.
Cities. Among the more notable cities in
Galilee’s early history were Kedesh-Naphtali,
a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and
Hazor, about 10 miles north of the Sea of Gali-
lee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of
Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum
(4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in
the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Caper-
naum seems to have been a center for Jesus’
ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33;
etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the
city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22,23; Lk 2:39;
4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the
north edge of the mountain now called Little
Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1—11) also
figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sep-
phoris and Tiberias were important cities dur-
ing Roman administration.
Roads and Travel. Many roads traversed
Galilee, and those in NT times were superior
due to Roman construction and maintenance.
ce : se ie
Teo ee OR
Seats along the wall of the synagogue at Chorazin, one of the
cities that Jesus upbraided (Mt 11:20-21).
Galilee, Sea of
Among the best known trade routes was the
Via Maris (the Way of the Sea) which ran
through Galilee on its way from Damascus to
Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias
near the Sea of Galilee to Acco (Ptolemais), a
port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan
routes also connected Galilee with the mar-
kets of the East. The area was tied together by
a network of spurs and connecting roads that
branched from the main highways.
Inhabitants. The occupants of Galilee were
basically Jewish in religious and patriotic ori-
entation, but they were composed of various
ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture
was sufficient to cause recognizable differ-
ences in speech from that of southern Pales-
tine (cf. Mt 26:69,73). The Galileans absorbed
more Greek and Roman influences than did
the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differ-
ences in speech, and location caused Judean
Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with
contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41,52).
Lower Galilee was densely settled with vil-
lages, and in NT times the population was
probably about three million. The fertility of
the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the coun-
try produced a prosperous Jewish populace,
particularly in the centuries immediately after
the time of Christ.
Government. Galilee was under the Ro-
man rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius
during the time of Christ. Roman fortifi-
cations throughout Galilee were a constant
reminder of the presence and influence of
the Roman Empire. During Christ's ministry
Rome installed the tetrarch, Herod Antipas
(Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5—7) to rule the territory. He
was appointed to office when 17 years old.
Sepphoris was his first capital, and about ap
22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of
Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the
emperor.
Products. Abundant crops enabled Gali-
lee to provide produce for the neighboring
Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around
the middle of the 1st century ap. Main crops
included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and
grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a
prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14—20).
Jesus and Galilee. Jesus was raised
Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples
were from there (Judas was the only Judean).
The culture, commerce, farming, and fish-
ing business of the area formed the back-
ground for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his
parables show (Mt 20:1—8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk
13:6—g). The first three Gospels are largely oc-
cupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee with
much of it being spent around the Sea of Gali-
lee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken
here and the vast majority of his miracles (25
of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus re-
ceived his greatest response in this region. The
Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee,
and one of its mountains was the scene of the
Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women
who followed Christ and ministered to him
also came “from here (Mt 27:55). Two of
Christ’s most significant postresurrection ap-
pearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16—20;
Jn 21:1—23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Je-
sus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a
Galilean.
Henry W. HOLLOMAN
See PALESTINE; GALILEE, SEA OF.
Galilee, Sea of. Perhaps the most familiar
body of water in the Near East to the readers
of the Gospels. It has had many names in its
history. In the OT the Sea of Galilee was
known as the Sea of Chinnereth (Nm 34:11),
named for the town (Jos 19:35), or as Chinne-
roth (12:3). Later the name was changed to
Lake of Gennesaret because the city of Gen-
nesaret was located on the site of Chinnereth
or Tell Ureime (Lk 5:1; 1 Mc 11:67). The most
familiar name (the Sea of Galilee) was due to
its connection with the province of Galilee to
the west (Mt 4:18). It derived the name Sea of
Tiberias (Jn 6:1,23; 21:1) from the town of Tibe-
rias on its southwestern shore. About aD 26
Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, built
the town near the warm springs of Hamath by
the sea and named it for the emperor. In the
Gospels ‘‘the sea’ usually identifies the Sea of
Galilee. Its modern Hebrew name is Yam
Kinneret.
Location. The sea lies in the lower section
of the Jordan Valley about 60 miles north of
Jerusalem, located in a range of mountains.
The mountains of Upper Galilee are northwest
of the lake and rise to a height of 4000 feet
above sea level, while the mountains on the
east and west ascend about 2000 feet. On the
west, south, and east is the Decapolis.
At the northwest corner of the lake the
mountain wall flattens into the rich plain of
Gennesaret, and on the east at 2000 feet above
sea level it gives way to the fertile El Batila
in in the northeast, where the Jordan enters the
sea. At the time of the NT the Sea of Galilee
was surrounded by the towns of Capernaum,
Bethsaida, Chorazin, Magdala, Tiberias, and
others.
The sea is an integral part of the Jordan
River which feeds it with water from the snow-
capped Mt Hermon (towering over gooo ft.
above sea level) and the Lebanons. In its 65-
mile course from the Sea of Galilee to the
Dead Sea, the Jordan River drops 590 feet, an
average of 9 feet per mile.
836

Description. The lake is approximately 13
miles long and 6 miles wide (7% at its broad-
est point opposite Magdala). It lies almost 700
feet below the Mediterranean Sea, and its
greatest depth is 200 feet. Its shape resembles
a harp, and some scholars think the name
“Chinnereth” comes from a Hebrew word
meaning “‘harp.” The climate is semitropical.
Because of this climate, combined with the
sulphur springs at Tiberias, it became a re-
sort to which sick people traveled for cen-
turies. The lake abounds in fish, so fishing
became an importaut industry (Mt 4:18—22;
Mk 1:16—20; Lk 5:10,11). Sudden and violent
storms (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35—-41; Lk 8:22-25),
caused by the collision of the warm and cold
air, occur regularly.
Importance. Most of the events of Christ’s
life took place in Galilee, especially around
Gennesaret, the most densely populated area
of Palestine. He is said to have lived at Caper-
naum (Mt 4:13), and he did many miracles
there (11:23). Because the area on the west of
the lake was a health resort, Jesus found many
infirm people there and healed them (Mk
1:32-34; 6:53-56). Other important occur-
rences in relation to the sea were the Sermon
on the Mount, traditionally near Capernaum
(Mt 8:1,5); the drowning of the Gadarene swine
in Gadara; the curse on Chorazin (11:21); the
calming of the sea (Mt 8:23—27; Mk 5:35—41; Lk
8:22-24); and Jesus walking on the water (Mt
15:22,23; Mk 6:45—51; Jn 6:15—21).
See PALESTINE; GALILEE, GALILEANS.
837
Gallim
A view of the Sea of Galilee
from its western shore.
Gall. 1. Yellowish-brown, bitter secretion of
the liver (Jb 16:13) or the organ containing the
gall (20:25).
2. Very bitter, poisonous herb which cannot
be identified with certainty, although the hem-
lock, colocynth, and poppy have been sug-
gested. The Hebrew word occurs periodically
in the OT and refers to (1) “gall’’ in Deuteron-
omy 29:18 (KJv); (2) the “poison” of a venom-
ous snake in Job 20:16; (3) “gall” or “poison”’
given to a person for food in Psalm 69:21; (4)
divine punishment upon Israel as “water of
gall” (Jer 8:14; 9:15; 23:15 KJV, or poison Rsv).
(5) Israel’s bitter experience of divine judg-
ment (Lam 3:5,19); (6) divine judgment upon
Israel sprouting up like “hemlock” in the fur-
rows of the field (Hos 10:4 KJv, or poisonous
weeds rsv); and (7) Israel’s perversion of jus-
tice by turning “judgment into gall” (Am 6:12
KJV).
3. ‘Substance of an unpleasant taste” in the
NT. Matthew 27:34 mentions the gall mixed
with wine which was offered to Christ on the
cross. Mark 15:23 speaks of “myrrh” which
may be a more specific identification of the
liquid mixed with the wine. In Acts 8:23 Peter
described the spiritual state of Simon the ma-
gician as being “‘in the gall of bitterness.”
See PLANTS (GouRD, WILD).
Gallim. Village near Gibeah of Saul and
Anathoth in Benjamin, north of Jerusalem and
close to Bahurim (1 Sm 25:44; Is 10:30); proba-
bly present-day Khirbet Kakul.
Gallio
Gallio. M.Annaeus Seneca’s son, and brother
of the philosopher Seneca, who lived from 3
BC—AD 65. Born in Cordoba, Spain, Gallio came
to Rome during Tiberius’ reign. His given
name was Marcus Annaeus Novatus, but he
assumed the name Gallio after his adoption by
the rhetorician Lucius Junius Gallio. The
wealthy Lucius trained him for his career in
administration and government.
Gallio served as Roman proconsul of Achaia
sometime between aD 51 and 53. During the
apostle Paul’s first visit to Corinth the Jews
brought the apostle before the proconsul, accus-
ing him of having persuaded people to practice
religion in an unlawful manner (Acts 18:12—17).
Gallio abruptly dismissed the charge since it
dealt with Jewish and not Roman law. His ac-
tion reflected the characteristic behavior of Ro-
man governors toward religious disputes.
Forced to leave Achaia because of illness,
Gallio returned to Rome as consul suffectus
under Nero. His involvement in a conspiracy
against Nero resulted in temporary pardon
but eventual obligatory suicide.
Gallio Inscription. Dated Greek inscription
found in Delphi, Greece mentioning Gallio as
proconsul, and establishing the time of Paul’s
initial visit to Corinth (cf. Acts 18:12—17).
See CHRONOLOGY, NEW TESTAMENT; INSCRIPTIONS.
Gallows. Upright frame with a crossbeam
and a rope for hanging criminals. In the Book
of Esther, a gibbet is mentioned, upon which
men were impaled and left to hang in scorn.
See CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT.
Gamad. Home of mercenaries who served
in the army of Tyre, according to Ezekiel’s
prophecy (Ez 27:11, Kiv Gammadims). Gamad
may have been located in Syria and is identi-
fied as Kumidi in the Tell el-Amarna Letters.
Gamaliel. 1. Pedahzur’s son and captain or
prince of Manasseh’s tribe (Nm 10:23). Gama-
liel was chosen by Moses to help take the cen-
sus in the wilderness near Mt Sinai (1:10) and
to organize the tribe for the journey to the
Promised Land (2:20). He participated in the
special 12-day ceremonial offering by the
princes at the dedication of the altar following
completion of the tabernacle (7:54,59).
2. Jewish scholar. This man lived in the rst
century AD and died 18 years before the de-
struction of Jerusalem in aD 70 by Titus, the
Roman general.
Gamaliel is mentioned in Acts 22:3 as the
rabbi with whom the apostle Paul studied as a
youth in Jerusalem.
When Peter and the other apostles were
838
brought before the enraged and threatening
council in Jerusalem, Gamaliel, who was
highly respected by the council, offered cau-
tionary advice that probably saved the apos-
tles’ lives in that situation (Acts 5:27—40).
During that period in Israel a number of
rabbinical schools evolved. Two of the most
influential were the rival Pharisaic schools of
Hillel and Shammai. Both of those teachers
had vast influence on Jewish thinking. Hillel’s
school emphasized tradition even above the
Law. Shammai’s school preserved the teach-
ing of the Law over the authority of tradition.
Hillel’s school was the most influential, and
its decisions have been held by a great num-
ber of later rabbis.
Traditionally Gamaliel is considered to be
the grandson of Hillel, and was thoroughly
schooled in the philosophy and theology of his
grandfather’s teaching. Gamaliel was a mem-
ber of the Sanhedrin, the high council of Jews
in Jerusalem, and served as president of the
Sanhedrin during the reigns of the Roman em-
perors Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius. Un-
like other Jewish teachers, he had no antipa-
thy toward Greek learning.
The learning of Gamaliel was so eminent
and his influence so great that he is one of
only seven Jewish scholars who have been hon-
ored by the title ‘““Rabban.” He was called the
“Beauty of the Law.” The Talmud even says
that ‘‘since Rabban Gamaliel died, the glory of
the Law has ceased.”
Gammadims. _ksv form of ‘‘men of Gamad”’
in Ezekiel 27:11.
See GAMAD.
Gamul. Priest assigned to temple duty in
David's time (1 Chr 24:17).
Gangrene. Death of tissue due to the loss of
the vital blood supply to that part of the body.
Often the most distal tip of an extremity, such
as fingertips or toes, will turn black and sur-
geons will amputate the dead part to prevent
extension and harm to more of the limb or to
life itself.
The term “gangrene” or “consumption”
occurs only once in Scripture (2 Tm 2:17, KJV
canker). Paul warns Timothy that godless
talk will encourage more godlessness, just
like gangrene tends to spread to surrounding
tissues.
Although not identified by name, Asa’s dis-
ease of the feet (2 Chr 16:12) could have been
gangrene. Miriam’s leprosy was likened to the
flesh of a macerated, gangrenous, stillborn’s
body (Nm 12:12).
See MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE.
 Gath

Garden House. xsv translation of Beth-
haggan in 2 Kings 9:27.
See BETH-HAGGAN.
Garden of Eden. Location east of Eden (Gn
2:8) in the Tigris-Euphrates area of Mesopota- Gatam.
mia, referred to 14 times in the OT. The data Eliphaz and an Edomite chief (Gn 36:11,16; 1
in Genesis 2:8—10 show that it was in the Shi- ‘Chr 1:36).
nar Plain area, and that four ‘‘heads’” were
formed from the one river flowing through
Eden to water the garden. The heads were the
Tigris and Euphrates (both of which are famil-
iar modern rivers), and two rivers which have
disappeared—the Pishon and Gihon. The lat-
ter were most probably irrigation canals,
since in cuneiform there is no separate word
for “river” and “irrigation canal.” Thus the
Eden area was irrigated after the Sumerian
manner, making for a highly fertile garden. If
Pishon and Gihon were in fact irrigation ca-
nals, the narrative places Adamic man firmly
in a historic high culture, and takes him out of
the realm of myth and legend. If the above
identification is correct, Cush referred to the
land of the ancient Kassites, while Havilah
may have indicated Arabia.
The notions that the rivers were the four en-
circling the earth and that Eden is to be identi-
fied with the Sumerian Dilmun are based on
inadequate geographical information.
Eden was the testing ground of man’s fidel-
ity to God’s commands, and through disobedi-
ence, the garden was lost. It will be regained
in the form of the new paradise (Rv 22:14).
See ADAM (PERSON); FALL oF MAN; Eve; TREE OF
KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL; TREE OF LIFE.
Gareb (Person). Warrior among David’s
mighty soldiers (2 Sm 23:38; 1 Chr 11:40).
Gareb (Place). Hill near Jerusalem men-
tioned in Jeremiah 31:39 as a future boundary
of the city, perhaps on the south or west side.
Gaspar. Traditional name for one of the
wise men who brought a gift to Jesus in Mat-
thew 2:1,2.
See WISE MEN.
Esau’s grandson, the fourth son of
Gate. See ARCHITECTURE; CITY.
Gate Between the Two Walls. Entrance
in the southeast part of the city of Jerusalem,
possibly the same as the Fountain Gate (2 Kgs
25:4; Jer 39:4).
See JERUSALEM.
Gatekeeper. See TRADES AND OccuPATIONS.
Gath. Walled city (2 Chr 26:6) and one of the
five chief cities of the Philistines, which also
included Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, and Ekron
(Jos 13:3; 1 Sm 6:17), all situated on or near
the southern coast of Palestine. Although fre-
quently involved in conflict with the Israel-
ites, the city was apparently not subdued until
David’s time (1 Chr 18:1). It was a Canaanite
city, the home of the giant Goliath (1 Sm 17:4)
and other men of great height (2 Sm 21:18—22).
A remnant of the Anakim was left even after
the extensive campaigns of Joshua (Jos 10:36—
39; 11:21,22).
When the Philistines captured the ark of
God, they carried it from Ebenezer to Ashdod,
from there to Gath, and then to Ekron (1 Sm
5:8). After many of the Philistines died or were
stricken with tumors the ark was returned to
Israel, first to Beth-shemesh and then to
Kiriath-jearim (6:14; 7:1). When David fled
from Saul he came to Gath and feigned mad-
ness before Achish, the king of the city (21:10—
15). During the rebellion of Absalom, 600 Git-
tites served among David’s mercenaries (2 Sm

Garlic. Bulbous herb cultivated for use in

cooking (Nm 11:5).
See Foop AND Foop PREPARATION; PLANTS (ONION).

Garmite. Designation for Keilah in 1 Chroni-

cles 4:19. The word seems to denote strength
and means “‘bony”’ (the same Hebrew word is
used in Jb 40:18 and Prv 25:15). Some feel that
the word refers to a place, although no such
place is known.

Gashmu. ksv spelling of Geshem the Arab <i

res
es
oe
Coe
oe
in Nehemiah 6:6. Gath, the city of the Philistines that is mentioned most fre-
See GESHEM. quently (33 times) in the OT.

839
Gath-hepher
15:18). According to 2 Chronicles 11:8, Reho-
boam fortified the city of Gath, and 2 Kings
12:17 relates that it was taken by Hazael, king
of Syria, in the gth century, but it was appar-
ently again in Philistine control when Uzziah
broke down its walls (2 Chr 26:6). The city dis-
appeared after being besieged and conquered
by Sargon II in the 8th century Bc (cf. Am 6:2).
Today its location is uncertain. The scriptural
data suggests a site in the Shephelah, proba-
bly a few miles northeast of Ashkelon and
about ro miles east of Ashdod. Tell es-Safi has
been suggested as the site of ancient Gath.
Due to the widespread culture of grapes in an-
cient Israel there were a number of cities by
the name of Gath (‘‘winepress’’) in Palestine
(e.g., Gath-rimmon, Jos 19:45; 21:24,25; Gath-
hepher, 2 Kgs 14:25), several mentioned in the
Amarna Tablets without any additional identi-
fying name.
See PHILISTIA, PHILISTINES.
Gath-hepher. Town in Galilee, in Zebulun’s
territory, which was the birthplace of Jonah
(Jos 19:13, KJV Gittah-hepher; 2 Kgs 14:25).
Modern el-Meshad occupies the site of Gath-
hepher and boasts a Muslim tomb in honor of
Jonah.
Gath-rimmon. 1. City located in the land
allotted to Dan’s tribe for an inheritance (Jos
19:45). It was assigned as one of the four
levitical cities for the Kohathites in Dan (Jos
21:24). Lost to the Canaanites, Gath-rimmon
was later regained by Ephraim and included
as one of its cities for the sons of Levi (1 Chr
6:69). Its site is identifiable with the modern
Tell ej-Jerisheh.
See LEVITICAL CITIEs.
2. One of two cities given to the Levites in
Manasseh west of the Jordan River (Jos 21:25),
suggesting a possible transcription mistake
better read as Bileam (cf. 1 Chr 6:70).
Gaulanitis. Small province east of the Sea
of Galilee, situated between Mt Hermon and
the Yarmuk River, and extending perhaps to
the Jordan River. It took its name from the
ancient town of Golan. Archaeologists have dis-
covered extensive ruins 17 miles east of the
Sea of Galilee, which they consider to be the
remains of Golan. Moses named Golan as a
city of refuge for Manasseh’s half tribe east of
the Jordan (Dt 4:41,43), and Joshua assigned it
to the Gershonite Levites (Jos 20:8; 21:27;
1 Chr 6:71). According to Josephus, Alexander
Jannaeus suffered a heavy defeat in this place
and later destroyed the town (Antiq. 8.2.3). Jo-
sephus also identified a Judas, who led a tax
revolt, as being from Gaulanitis (18.1.1), where-
840
as Luke called him a Galilean (Acts 5:37). La-
ter, Josephus called him a Galilean as well
(20.5.2; Wars 2.8.1). It is quite possible that this
Judas lived in these places at different times.
After Herod’s death in 4 Bc, Philip inherited
Gaulanitis, making his capital Bethsaida Jul-
ias which he had rebuilt and named after Au-
gustus Caesar’s daughter. Jesus traveled in
this area (Mk 6:45; 8:22), and it remained un-
der firm Roman control until ap 66 when the
Jewish war broke out. Jewish revolutionaries
subsequently hid in its heights and the Ro-
mans fought several campaigns here.
See GoLAN; HEROD, HERODIAN FAMILY.
Gaza, Gazathites. City near the Palestinian
coast, about 50 miles W, SW of Jerusalem. It
has been occupied almost continuously since
ancient times; modern Gaza (Arab. Ghazzeh)
has played an important part in the conflict
between Arabs and Israelis. Gazite and Gazath-
ite are biblical names for the residents of the
town. Azzah is a variant transliteration of the
Hebrew name (KJV).
Set about midpoint of the length of the
plain of Philistia, Gaza was in a rich agricul-
tural area, where wheat and similar grains
flourished. Situated some three miles from the
Mediterranean, Gaza’s position as the greatest
trading center of ancient Palestine did not
come from the sea but from the highways,
which brought caravans from all parts of the
Fertile Crescent. This accessibility was also a
handicap, for the roadways along the coast
were the easiest route for the armies of Egypt,
Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome.
Often Gaza was the victim of their passage.
In the records of secular history, Gaza first
shows up in the annals of Thutmose III in the
temple of Karnak. Thutmose wisely sched-
uled his Asiatic campaigns just after the Egyp-
tian harvest and in time to seize the harvest
of Palestine.
In Amarna Letter No. 289, Abdu-Heba of Je-
rusalem acknowledged that Gaza was loyal
to the king of Egypt, but complained that
Addaya, the Egyptian ruler of Palestine whose
residence was at Gaza, had taken the garrison
the pharaoh had sent for Jerusalem. From the
late 13th century Bc there is a satirical letter
which was composed as an exercise for train-
ing scribes. In this letter, written from one
scribe to belittle another, various itineraries
are traced, including one from the frontier of
Egypt to Gaza.
Pharaoh Neco (610-595 BC) captured and
chastised Gaza and Ashkelon in the reign of
Josiah of Judah (cf. Jer 47:1,5).
Tiglath-pileser II] (745-727 Bc) refers to
Hanno of Gaza, who fled to Egypt just prior to
 Gazite

the capture of Gaza by the Assyrians. On the swered his prayer for vengeance. Samson dis-
Oriental Institute Prism and the Taylor Prism, lodged the two pillars which were the sup-
Sennacherib (705-681 Bc) tells of his invasion port for the stone slab roof of the pagan
of Palestine and of how he shut up Hezekiah temple; so Samson died, along with a great
“like a bird in a cage.” He captured 46 of Heze- number of Gazites.
kiah’s fortified cities and gave them to three In the days of Eli, the high priest, the Philis-
minor kings, including Sillibel of Gaza, who is tines captured the ark of the covenant in bat-
also mentioned by Esar-haddon (681-669 BC) . tle and took it as a prize of war to the temple
and Ashurbanipal (669-633 Bc). Reference to of Dagon in Ashdod (1 Sm 5:1,2). After the
“the king of Gaza” also appears in the records Lord sent afflictions upon this false deity and
of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon (604—562 Bc). the Philistine cities, the rulers of the five cities
In 332 BC Gaza was captured and punished determined to send the ark away, placing with
by Alexander the Great. He was angered be- it guilt offerings of gold to appease the Lord
cause it had held out against him for two (6:17).
months, so he killed all of the men and sold Gaza is named as the southern boundary of
the women and children into slavery. During Israel during the time of Solomon, who ruled
the Maccabean period it was taken by Alexan- over “all the region west of the Euphrates
der Jannaeus, who slaughtered its inhabitants. from Tiphsah to Gaza” (1 Kgs 4:24).
In the Bible, Gaza is first mentioned in Hezekiah defeated the Philistines as far as
Genesis 10:10, where it is said that the terri- Gaza (2 Kgs 18:8). When he rebelled against
tory of the Canaanites extended from Sidon to Assyria, Sennacherib came and took 46 of
Gaza. In a summary of the conquests of Josh- Hezekiah’s cities and gave them to the king of
ua, one of the dimensions of the conquered Gaza and two other kings.
area is “from Kadesh-barnea to Gaza” (Jos Jeremiah 47 records a prophecy against the
10:41). Joshua destroyed all the Anakim in the Philistines, which the Lord gave to the prophet
land, but some remained in Gaza and other “before Pharaoh smote Gaza” (v 1; cf. v 5; see
Philistine cities (Jos 11:22). Another ancient Neco, above). Amos gives specific prophecies of
people, the Avvim, “who lived in villages as far judgment against Gaza (1:6,7). Zephaniah also
as Gaza,” were annihilated and replaced by states that Gaza would be deserted (2:4). Zecha-
the Caphtorim from Caphtor (Crete) (Dt 2:23). riah 9 gives an oracle of judgment, in which it
Gaza, along with its towns and villages, was is said that Gaza will be afraid and “writhe in
listed among the tribal inheritance of Judah anguish” and that its king shall perish (v 5s).
(Jos 15:47). At the time of Joshua’s advanced In the NT there is only one reference to
age, Gaza and the other four cities of the Philis- Gaza (Acts 8:26). Philip, who was preaching in
tine Pentapolis are said to be among the terri- Samaria, was told by an angel to go south to
tories not yet taken (Jos 13:3); in Judges “the road that goes from Jerusalem to Gaza.”
1:18,19, however, it is reported that Judah took Here he met the treasurer of Cush, who was
his reading Isaiah 53 as he rode in his chariot.
During the time of the judges, Midianite Philip preached the gospel to this man and
raiders swept through Israel, looting and de- baptized him. Car- E. DEVRIES
stroying, even as far as Gaza (Jgs 6:4). See PHILISTIA, PHILISTINES.
In this period, the main biblical interest in
Gaza centers in the life and exploits of Sam-
son. Philistine women were Samson’s weak- Gazelle. Medium-sized Asian or African
ness. He went to Gaza and found a prostitute antelope.
with whom he had relations (Jgs 16:1). The See ANIMALS.
people of Gaza learned that he was there and
determined to kill him in the morning, but
Samson arose at midnight and went to the Gazer. KkJsv alternate spelling of the town, Ge-
gate of the city, took the doors, posts, and the zer, in 2 Samuel 5:25 and 1 Chronicles 14:16.
bar of the gate and carried them to the top of See GEZER.
a hill facing Hebron.
His involvement with another Philistine
woman, Delilah, resulted in his capture by Gazez. 1. Caleb’s son by his concubine
the Philistines, who gouged out his eyes and Ephah and the brother of Haran (1 Chr 2:46).
took him to Gaza (Jgs 16:21), where he was 2. Son of Haran and the nephew of #1
bound and forced to grind at a mill in the above (1 Chr 2:46).
prison. On a festival day in the temple of Da-
gon, the reveling worshipers called for Sam-
son to be brought so they could make sport of Gazite. Resident of Gaza (Jos 13:3).
him. His strength was returning and God an- See GAZA, GAZATHITES.

841
Gazzam

Gazzam. Ancestor of a group of temple assis-

tants that returned to Jerusalem with Zerub-
babel after the exile (Ezr 2:48; Neh 7:51).

Geba. Modern Jeba‘, and a levitical city in

the territory of Benjamin (Jos 18:24, kiv Gaba;
21:17), about seven miles N, NE of Jerusalem
and south of the pass of Michmash (1 Sm 14:5;
Is 10:29). It is easily confused with Gibeah, the
home town of Saul, which is also in Benjamin,
to the southwest of Geba. Both names mean
“hill.” The phrase ‘from Geba to Beersheba”
indicated the north and south extremities of
Judah's tribe (2 Kgs 23:8).
In the time of Saul the Philistines had a
garrison at Geba (1 Sm 10:5; 13:3). Jonathan
defeated this outpost and stirred up the Philis-
tines, who swarmed into Israel with an army
vastly outnumbering the forces of Saul. Saul
and his men were at Geba (13:16) and later
approached Gibeah (14:2). The Philistines had
set up a garrison at Michmash, just opposite
Geba. Jonathan proposed to his armor-bearer
that they go over to this outpost and suggested
that if the Philistines called to them to come
over that would be a sign that the Lord had
given their enemy into their hand. The Philis-
tines did just that, so the two Israelites ap-
Gebal, the place with “all the ships of the sea with their mari-
proached and killed some 20 of the Philistines, ners” (Ez 27:9).
putting the garrison and the entire army to
rout.
During the reign of David another horde of
Philistine invaders was struck down by him when the diplomatic and commercial interests
“from Geba to Gezer”’ (2 Sm 5:25). Asa, king of of Egypt reached all over Syria. It was a city-
Judah, built up Geba and Mizpah of stones kingdom according to the el-Amarna Letters
taken from Ramah, which Baasha, king of Is- (c. 1400-1350 BC), and seal impressions found
rael, had been building (1 Kgs 15:22; 2 Chr there from a very early period suggest that it
16:6). was on a major exchange route through Pales-
Isaiah prophetically traces the advance of tine and Syria. Its inhabitants were called Ge-
the Assyrian army toward Jerusalem: “At balites (Jos 13:5, Kv Giblites). While it was a
Michmash he stores his baggage; they have great commercial center, a more important
crossed over the pass, at Geba they lodge for achievement of the Gebalites was the develop-
the night” (Is 10:28,29). Zechariah prophesied ment of a syllabic script modeled on the Egyp-
that the land would become a plain “from tian. Passed on from Phoenicia to Greece, it
Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem” (14:10). became the ancestor of our own alphabet. Ex-
Men from Geba are mentioned among the cavations begun by Dunand in 1919 revealed a
Jews who returned from the Babylonian exile succession of remains from Neolithic (5000 Bc)
(Ezr 2:26, KJv Gaba; Neh 11:31). At the dedica- to Crusader times. Prior to 4000 Bc a people
tion of the rebuilt Jerusalem wall, singers who lived in one-room rectangular houses set-
from the area of Geba participated (Neh tled in Byblos and buried their dead beneath
12:29). the plastered floors of their houses. Heavy trib-
CaRL E. DEVRIES ute was collected from the kings of Tyre, -
Edom, Moab, Gaza, Ashkelon, Ekron, Byblos
Gebal. 1. One of the earliest villages in Phoe- (Gebal), Arvad, Samsimuruna, Beth-ammon,
nicia and Syria (along with Ras Shamra and and Ashdod by the Assyrians. It was then suc-
Tell Judeideh); also called Byblos (‘‘books”’) by cessively under the control of Babylonia, Per-
the Greeks. It was situated on the Mediterra- sia, Greece, and Rome.
nean about 20 miles north of modern Beirut 2. Territory southeast of the Dead Sea, asso-
and was an important commercial center and ciated with Ammon and Amalek as hostile to
outlet for the hardwoods of Lebanon in the Israel (Ps 83:7).
period when it was an Egyptian colony and PauL L. KAUFMAN

842

Gebalite. Inhabitant of Gebal (Jos 13:5).
See GEBAL #1.
Geber. 1. Alternate name for Ben-geber, one
of Solomon’s commissariat officers, in 1 Kings
AGT,
See BEN-GEBER.
2. Uri’s son, who was responsible for provid- --Haps identifiable with Gedor in the mountains
ing food for Solomon’s household. His terri-
tory was probably south of Ramoth-gilead (1 26%).
Kgs 4:19). Perhaps #1 and #2 were related.
Gebim. Small town just north of Jerusalem.
Isaiah 10:31 prophesied that its inhabitants
would flee when the Assyrian army came to
invade. Its exact location is unknown.
Gecko. Small lizard, incorrectly identified
with the ferret by the kJv in Leviticus 11:30.
See ANIMALS.
Gedaliah. 1. Ahikam’s son, and grandson of
Shaphan (King Josiah’s royal scribe). In 586 Bc
Nebuchadnezzar, the Babylonian king, ap-
pointed Gedaliah as governor over the Jews
remaining in Israel to work the fields, vine-
yards, and orchards (2 Kgs 25:12,22).
Gedaliah established his headquarters at
Mizpah, where he was joined by the prophet
Jeremiah and the Jewish commanders and
their guerrilla forces who had escaped capture
during the fall of Jerusalem (Jer 40:6—8). Geda-
liah assured them that if they would settle
down and live in peaceful subjection to Baby-
lon all would be well (2 Kgs 25:23,24; Jer
40:9,10). On the basis of that assurance many
of the Jews who were dispersed in the Trans-
jordan and other countries returned to Israel
to work the land into great productivity (Jer
40:11,12).
Though warned about a plot against him
by Ishmael, Gedaliah entertained the schemer
at a meal and was killed (2 Kgs 25:25;
40:11,12; 41:1-3). Along with some pilgrims vis-
iting the temple, Ishmael fled with hostages to
Ammon, escaping the vengeance of Johanan
(Jer 41:10,15,16).
See ISRAEL, HIsToRY OF.
2. Jeduthunite temple musician in the time
of King David (1 Chr 25:3,9).
3. Jeshua’s son and one called to divorce his
foreign wife during Ezra’s reforms (Ezr 10:18).
4. Pashhur’s son and one of the Jerusalem
officials who urged King Zedekiah to put the
prophet Jeremiah to death for his pro-Babylo-
nian prophetic pronouncements (Jer 38:1).
5. Amariah’s son, grandson of King Heze-
kiah, and grandfather of the prophet Zepha-
niah (Zep 1:1).
Ge-harashim
Gedeon. ksv spelling of Gideon, Joash’s son
and judge of Israel, in Hebrews 11:32.
See GIDEON.
Geder. One of the 31 royal cities in Canaan,
whose kings were defeated by Joshua (Jos
12:13). Its location is uncertain. Geder is per-
of Judah (15:58) or with Beth-gader (1 Chr
Gederah, Gederathites. Town and its in-
habitants situated in the Shephelah (hill coun-
try) of the territory allotted to Judah’s tribe
for an inheritance (Jos 15:36). It was a place
where potters lived (1 Chr 4:23). A man from
Gedarah, Jozabad the Gederathite, is men-
tioned in 1 Chronicles 12:4. The town is per-
haps the modern Jedireh, and not the Gadara
(Um Qeis) of the Gospels.
Gederoth. Town (modern Qatra) in the She-
phelah assigned to Judah's tribe for an inheri-
tance (Jos 15:41) and later captured by the Phi-
listines from King Ahaz (2 Chr 28:18).
Gederothaim. Village in the Judean She-
phelah (Jos 15:36) of unknown location. The
Hebrew list contains 14 cities without Gedero-
thaim (vv 33-36), while the Greek version
reads, “Gederah and her sheepfolds” (v 36).
Gederothaim probably reflects a later scribal
error where the copyist accidently made the
term “sheepfold” into a 15th city.
Gedor (Person). Joel’s son, who was an an-
cestor of King Saul. Gedor’s family lived in
Gibeon (1 Chr 8:31; 9:37).
Gedor (Place). 1. City in the Shephelah allot-
ted to Judah’s tribe (Jos 15:58) named with
Halhul, Beth-zur, Maarath, Bethanoth, and El-
Jer tekon. It has been identified with Khirbet
Gedur north of Hebron near Bethlehem.
2. Place founded by Penuel, one of the fami-
lies of Judah (1 Chr 4:4).
3. Settlement established by Jered of Judah
(1 Chr 4:18).
4. City settled by the Simeonites (1 Chr
4:39).
5. Town in the territory of Benjamin and
the home of Joelah and Zebadiah, the sons of
Jeroham (1 Chr 12:7); perhaps the same as #1
above.
Ge-harashim. Name for a richly wooded
valley near Lod and Ono, settled by Joab from
Judah’s tribe, whose posterity called the val-
ley Ge-harashim, meaning “valley of crafts-
843
Gehazi
men,” after their own trade (1 Chr 4:14, KJv
valley of Charashim). In the 5th century Bc the
area was resettled by people from Benjamin’s
tribe (Neh 11:35, valley of craftsmen).
Gehazi. Servant of Elisha (2 Kgs 5:25) who
instructed the prophet how best to recom-
pense the generous Shunammite woman for
her kindness to him (4:25—31). Gehazi took Eli-
sha’s staff to use in reviving the woman’s
dead son, but he was unsuccessful, and the
prophet himself had to revive the child (4:32—
37). His greed in securing from Naaman pres-
ents declined by Elisha resulted in his con-
tracting Naaman’s leprosy (5:20-23). In 2
Kings 8:1-6 Gehazi again encountered the
Shunammite woman as she was petitioning
the king of Israel.
Gehenna. English transliteration of the
Greek form of an Aramaic word which in turn
is derived from the Hebrew phrase “‘the Valley
of [the son(s) of] Hinnom.” The name properly
designates a deep valley delimiting the territo-
ries of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Jos
15:8; 18:16). It is commonly identified with the
Wadi er-Rababi which runs from beneath the
western wall of the Old City, forming a deep
ravine south of Jerusalem.
The place became notorious because of the
idolatrous practices which were carried out
there in the days of Judah’s kings Ahaz and
Manasseh, especially involving the heinous
crime of infant sacrifice associated with the
Molech ceremonies (2 Kgs 16:3; 21:6; 2 Chr
28:3; 33:6; Jer 19:56; 32:35). The spiritual refor-
mation of King Josiah brought an end to these
sinister proceedings (2 Kgs 23:10). The prophet
Jeremiah referred to the valley in picturing
God’s judgment upon his people (Jer 2:23;
7:30-32; 19:5,6).
The Valley of Hinnom, with Jerusalem in the background.
844
Subsequently, the valley appears to have
been used for the burning of the city’s refuse
and the dead bodies of criminals. Interest-
ingly, a well-established tradition locates the
scene of Judas’ suicide and the consequent pur-
chase of the Potter’s Field on the south side of
this valley. *
The ravine’s reputation for extreme wicked-
ness gave rise, especially during the intertesta-
mental period, to use of its name as a term for
the place of final punishment for the wicked
(Enoch 18:11—16; 27:1—3; 54:1 ff.; 56:3,4; 90:26;
2 Esd 7:36; cf. Is 30:33; 66:24; Dn 7:10). Jesus
himself utilizes the term to designate the final
abode of the unrepentant wicked (Mt 5:22;
10:28; 18:9). Since Gehenna is a fiery abyss (Mk
9:43), it is also the Lake of Fire (Mt 13:42,50) to
which all the godless will ultimately be con-
signed (23:15,33), together with Satan and his
hosts (Mt 25:41; Rv 19:20; 20:10,14,15).
Gehenna must be carefully differentiated
from other terms relative to the afterlife or
final state. Whereas the OT ‘‘Sheol’” (cf. NT
“Hades’’), uniformly designates the temporary
abode of the lost between death and resurrec-
tion when referring to the place of the de-
parted spirit of man, ““Gehenna”’ specifies the
final place where the wicked will suffer ever-
lasting punishment (cf. Ps 49:15,16 with Mt
10:28). ‘“Tartarus” occurs only in 2 Peter 2:4
and identifies the particular abode of the an-
gels who fell in the primeval satanic revolt.
Significantly, the hideous nature of Ge-
henna is laid hold of by James (Jas 3:6) to de-
pict the grave sinfulness of the unbridled
tongue.
See DEATH; HELL; HapEs; DEAD, ABODE OF THE;
SHEOL.
Geliloth. Place mentioned in the boundary
line of Benjamin (Jos 18:17), usually identified
with Gilgal.
See GILGAL #4.
Gemalli. Father of Ammiel, one of the 12
spies sent by Moses to explore the land of Ca-
naan (Nm 13:12).
Gemara. Summary of the important points
of rabbinic discussion on the Mishna (the oral
tradition). The Gemara and Mishna together
form the Talmud (which many Jews consider
authoritative for their faith). In Aramaic
Gemara means “acquired learning.” That
meaning reflects the teaching method of the
rabbis, who passed on the Gemara by commit-
ting it to memory rather than writing it
down. The word’s Hebrew root means ‘‘to
complete.” Since the Gemara takes the form
°
 Genealogy

of a running commentary on the Mishna, it

serves to supplement and hence complete it.
Two basic schools contributed to the devel-
opment of Gemara material. One arose in Pal-
estine in the third or fourth century aD
(mainly in Tiberias). The other came from the
Babylonian cities of Pumbedetha, Sura, and
Nehardea (3rd century to the end of the 5th -.
century AD).
The Gemara, developed from rabbinic dis-
cussions and debates, represents the distilled
wisdom of the rabbis on the Mishna. Where
there was an apparent conflict between the
Mishna and the Law or among different rab-
bis, later rabbis would attempt to resolve it.
An obscure quotation from an earlier rabbi
they would attempt to clarify and apply to
their own situation.
The Gemara, then, contains many different
strands of tradition and perspective. Some pre-
date the NT, some parallel it, and others are
much later. It stands as an important source
for understanding the thought world of the
Jews.
Pages of the Talmud are arranged with the
Mishna in the middle and the Gemara in
blocks of print on the side. The Gemara does
not necessarily quote the same sources twice
when dealing with similar passages from the
Mishna on the same problem, nor does it al-
ways contain commentary on the Mishna. The
Gemara also includes folklore, astronomy, as-
trology, medicine, homiletic parables, and ex-
amples from great rabbis’ lives.
See TALMUD.
The Sumerian King List, the earliest record of Sumerian rulers
before and after the flood.
Gemariah. 1. Hilkiah’s son and emissary to
Nebuchadnezzar from King Zedekiah. He car-
ried Jeremiah’s letter to the exiles in Babylon ture of the ancient Near East. Only at the be-
(Jer 29:3). ginning of the Islamic age are such broad ge-
2. Son of Shaphan the scribe. In the temple nealogical records found. Even today among
chamber of Gemariah, Baruch read Jeremi- tribal Semites, such as Arab nomads, there is
ah’s scroll (Jer 36:10—12,25). an intense interest in genealogy, and it is not
unusual for an Arab to be able to recite accu-
Genealogy. Record or study of descent in- rately the names of his ancestors for 10 or 15
volving a tracing backward or forward of the generations back, covering a period of several
ancestry of a nation, tribe, family, or individ- hundred years.
ual. The Hebrews were not the only people in Terms Used. The word “genealogy” oc-
the ancient world to take an interest in main- curs only once as a noun in the OT (Neh 7:5),
taining genealogical records. The Sumerian where it refers to a register of those who re-
king list of the 3rd millennium Bc contains rec- turned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel at the
ords of the early rulers of Mesopotamia. In end of the exile. The verbal form of the same
Babylonian records the word “‘son’’ was fre- word is found a total of 20 times in 1,2 Chroni-
quently used in the sense of ‘‘descendant of.” cles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. The terms “genera-
King Tirhakah of Egypt (c. 685 Bc) referred to tions” and ‘‘book of the generations,” used in
his ‘‘father,’’ Sesostris III, who lived some 1200 Genesis and elsewhere in the OT, convey the
years before him. Greeks and Romans also same idea. The equivalent NT terms are found
kept genealogical records. However, the bibli- in 1 Timothy 1:4 and Titus 3:9 (““genealogies’’)
cal genealogies, especially those in Genesis and Matthew 1:1, which refers to the “book of
and 1 Chronicles 1-9 are unique in the litera- the genealogy” of Jesus Christ.

845
Genealogy
Purpose of Genealogical Records. The
keeping of genealogical records in ancient Is-
rael was an important activity and served a
number of useful purposes. God’s promise of a
land to Abraham and his descendants made
such records necessary to establish and pre-
serve the allotment of the land; a genealogical
record served as evidence of a legitimate title
to the ancestral property. Genealogies were es-
sential for the preservation of the exclusively
hereditary priesthood that had been estab-
lished by the Mosaic law. In the time of Jose-
phus every priest was supposed to be able to
prove his descent.
One of the most important reasons for
keeping genealogical records was to establish
and maintain the right of royal succession in
Judah through the family of David. The be-
lief that the Messiah would come from the
Davidic house made such records even more
important.
Other purposes served by these family rec-
ords included the imposition of military duty
according to families (Nm 1:2,3). Position
camp and on march from Egypt was deter-
mined by tribes and families (2:2,17; 10:1—28).
Also God’s blessings were passed from one
member of the family to his descendants (Gn
27). The stress placed on purity of the congre-
gation (Dt 7:1-4; 23:1-8) required complete
family records, particularly in the postexilic
period. With the insistence of Ezra and Nehe-
miah upon racial purity and the purging of
foreign elements from among the people (Ezr
2:59-63; 10:9-44; Neh 13:23-28), written evi-
dence of purity of descent became essential;
and interest in the compilation of genealogies
became intense after the exile.
Lineage was ordinarily traced through the
male members of the family, with females be-
ing mentioned only rarely (e.g., Gn 11:29, Sar-
ah and Milcah; 22:23, Rebekah; and Nm 26:33-—
27:11, where the property inheritance of the
daughters of Zelophehad was involved).
Principal Genealogical Lists in the Bible.
The principal sources of genealogical material
in the OT are found in Genesis, Numbers, 2
Samuel, 1 Kings, 1, 2 Chronicles (which con-
tain the greatest amount of genealogical mate-
rial in the Bible), Ezra, and Nehemiah. The
genealogies of Jesus Christ in Matthew 1 and
Luke 3 are the only NT records. Together they
contain a genealogical record from Adam to
Christ.
Grouped together by historical periods, the
following are the principal genealogical lists
found in the Bible:
Before the Flood. Three lists are from this
period. The first, found in Genesis 4:17—22,
traces the descendants of Cain through seven
generations and explains the hereditary origin
of certain occupations and crafts. The second,
Genesis 4:25,26, begins the account of the de-
scendants of Seth, the posterity of Adam
whose faithfulness to God is contrasted with
the ungodly posterity of Cain. The third list,
Genesis 5:1—32 (cf. 1 Chr 1:1—4), traces the de-
scendants Of Adam through Seth down to
Noah and his sons at the time of the flood.
From Noah to Abraham. Genesis 10:1-32
(cf. 1 Chr 1:4—23), frequently called the “table
of nations,” contains a list of the nations de-
scended from the sons of Noah (Shem, Ham,
and Japheth). Genesis 11:10—27 (cf. 1 Chr 1:24—
27) traces the descendants of Shem to the time
of Abraham, and Genesis 11:27—30 (see also Gn
22:20-24) lists the descendants of Nahor, Abra-
ham’s brother.
From Abraham to the Descent into Egypt.
The descendants of Abraham by Hagar, Sarah,
and Keturah are found in Genesis 16:15; 21:1—
3; and 25:1—4 (introducing the Arabs as descen-
dants of Abraham). Genesis 19:37,38 links the
Moabites and Ammonites to Abraham through
in his nephew Lot. A very important genealogical
list during this period is that of the descen-
dants of Jacob, giving the account of the par-
entage, birth, and naming of the founders of
the 12 tribes of Israel (Gn 29:31—30:24; 35:16—
26). Esau is acknowledged as the ancestor of
the Edomites; his Edomite descendants are
traced through his three wives (Gn 26:34; 36:1—
43; 1 Chr 1:35—54). The list of Jacob’s family at
the time he entered Egypt, numbering 7o, is
found in Genesis 46:1-27 (cf. Ex 6:14-16; Nm
26:1-51; 1 Chr 2-8). A partial list of the heads
of the fathers’ houses of Reuben, Simeon, and
Levi is found in Exodus 6:14—25; the chief pur-
pose of this genealogy is to establish Aaron
and Moses as members of Levi's tribe.
From the Exodus to the Conquest of Canaan.
While the tribes were still in the desert after
leaving Egypt, a census was taken to deter-
mine the total number of Israelites (Num 1:4—
54; 2:2-33). During this same period a geneal-
ogy of the family of Aaron was compiled, and
a separate census was taken of the Levites
(3:1-39). A list of the 12 spies who searched out
the land and the tribes they represented is
given in Numbers 13:4—16, the most important
names on this list being Caleb and Joshua.
Near the end of the wilderness wanderings an-
other census of the people was ordered; the
total number was approximately the same as
that of the first census almost 40 years earlier
(26:4—51,57—62). As the tribes neared the Prom-
ised Land, a list was prepared of the tribal
representatives who would take part in the di-
vision of the land (34:16—29).
Period of the Judges. The period of the
judges contains very little helpful genealogical
information. This history is given in the ac-
846
 Genealogy of Jesus Christ

counts of the various judges rather than Saul (1 Chr 1-9), the longest section of genea-
through a genealogical format. One exception logical material in the Bible. It is properly in-
is the account of the ancestors of David found cluded with the genealogies compiled during
in Ruth 4:18—22 (cf. 1 Chr 2:9-15). the postexilic period, as the unknown Chroni-
The Monarchical Period. During the entire cler (some think he was Ezra) prepared this
period of the monarchy, over 400 years, the list around 400 Bc from extant records and
only genealogical records of any consequence documents available to him. His purpose
are those that pertain to David. His descen- .. seems to have been to conserve the purity of
dants are traced through 20 rulers who sat blood in the restored nation and to insist that
upon the throne of Judah until the nation fell the nation’s well-being depended on its faith-
to the Babylonians in 586 Bc (1,2 Kgs; cf. 1 Chr fulness to God’s law.
11:1-2 Chr 36:21). A list of David’s children is The NT Period. The only genealogies of con-
found in 2 Samuel 3:2-5 and 5:14—16 (cf. 1 Chr sequence in the NT are those concerning Jesus
3:1-9; 14:4-7). His mighty men, an elite group Christ in Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38.
of soldiers, are named in 2 Samuel 23:8—39 (cf. F.B. Huey, JR.
1 Chr 11:10-47). His recruits at Ziklag are re- See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.
corded in 1 Chronicles 12:1-22. Those who
were his musicians and doorkeepers when the
ark was brought to Jerusalem are named in Genealogy of Jesus Christ. Account of Je-
1 Chronicles 15:1-24 (cf. 1 Chr 16:5, 6,37—43). sus’ human descent. The NT records Jesus’ ge-
David's political and religious organization of nealogy twice in great detail: in Matthew 1:1—
the kingdom that included the Levites, priests, 17 and in Luke 3:23—38.
singers, porters and other household officers, Matthew’s Genealogy (1:1—17). Matthew
and military officers is found in 1 Chronicles 1:1 presents Jesus Christ as “the son of David,
23-27. In spite of the literary activity associ- the son of Abraham.” By those two names Mat-
ated with the reign of Solomon, the only genea- thew highlights Jesus’ earthly relationship to
logical record preserved from this period is the Abrahamic (Gn 17:1—8) and Davidic (2 Sm
that of Solomon’s princes and 12 officers (1 7:12-16) covenants of promise. Then beginning
Kgs 4:1-19). The genealogy of one prophet is with the patriarch Abraham, Matthew traces
traced back four generations (Zep 1:1). Jesus’ human ancestry through King David to
The Postexilic Period. During the postexilic Joseph, ‘“‘the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus
period the keeping of genealogical records was born, who is called Christ” (Mt 1:16). Mat-
probably received its greatest impetus through thew summarizes his account: “So all the gen-
the activity of Ezra and Nehemiah, primarily erations from Abraham to David were fourteen
because of their insistence upon racial purity generations, and from David to the deportation
and the purging of foreign elements from the to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the
community. A list of the exiles who returned deportation of Babylon to the Christ fourteen
with Zerubbabel is found in Ezra 2:1—70 (cf. generations” (v 17).
Neh 7:6—73, where the same list is found). A An examination of Matthew’s handling of
list of those who returned with Ezra is in 8:1- this genealogical material discloses several in-
20. Ezra’s own genealogy is also recorded (7:1— teresting peculiarities:
5). There is a list of the Jews who married (1) The arrangement of the names into
foreign women that included priests, Levites, three groups of 14 seems to be an artificial
singers, porters, and other Israelites (Ezr device. Furthermore, there are 41 and not 42
10:18—44). Nehemiah 8:4—7 names the Levites names in the genealogy, as verse 17 implies.
and others who assisted Ezra when he read (2) The list of names in the first group (vv
the Law publicly. Nehemiah also contains a 2-6) totals 14; the list in the second group (vv
list of those who participated in the ceremony 6-11), if reckoned “‘from David to the deporta-
of sealing the covenant (Neh 1o0:1-27) and a tion to Babylon,” totals 15. The third group
list of those who lived in Jerusalem and other (vv 12-16) totals 14 counting Jeconiah. If Jeco-
cities (3-36). His interest in the priesthood is niah is restricted to the third group David has
reflected in the list of priests and Levites who to be counted twice, as the name concluding
returned with Zerubbabel (12:1—9), of the high the first group and beginning the second
priests from Jeshua to Jaddua (vv 10-11), of group.
the heads of the priestly families (vv 12-21), of (3) To have 14 names in the second group,
the Levites and porters who served under the Matthew omits three kings, Ahaziah, Joash,
high priest (vv 22-26), and of the princes and and Amaziah, between Joram and Uzziah (v 8)
priests who were present at the dedication of and one, Jehoiakim, betweeen Josiah and
the rebuilt wall of Jerusalem (vv 31—42). Jechoniah (v 11).
The final genealogical record that must be (4) In the first group Matthew mentions
mentioned is the genealogy from Adam to three women: Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth; and

847
Genealogy of Jesus Christ

The Genealogy of Jesus Christ

Matthew Luke Matthew Luke
1:1-17 3:23-38
(that of Joseph?) (that of Mary?) Asa Menna
Jehoshaphat Melea
God Joram Eliakim
Adam Uzziah - Jonam
Seth Jotham Joseph
Enos Ahaz Judah
Cainan Hezekiah Simeon
Mahalaleel Manasseh Levi
Jared Amos Matthat
Enoch Josiah Jorim
Methuselah Jechoniah Eliezer
Lamech Shealtiel Joshua
Noah Zerubbabel Er
Shem Abiud Elmadam
Arphaxad Eliakim Cosam
Cainan Azor Addi
Shelah Zadok Melchi
Eber Achim Neri
Peleg Eliud Shealtiel
Reu Eleazer Zerubbabel
Serug Matthan Rhesa
Nahor Jacob Joanan
Terah Joseph Joda
Abraham Abraham (Jesus)* Josech
Isaac Isaac Semein
Jacob Jacob Mattathias
Judah Judah Maath
Perez Perez Naggai
Hezron Hezron Esli
Ram Arni Nahum
Amminadab Admin Amos
Nahshon Amminadab Mattathias
Salmon Nahshon Joseph
Boaz Sala Jannai
Obed Boaz Melchi
Jesse Obed Levi
David Jesse Matthat
Solomon David Heli
Rehoboam Nathan Joseph
Abijah Mattatha (Jesus)*

*Both Gospels are careful to not connect Jose’ ph to Jesus in a physical father-son
relationship.

in the second group alludes to Bathsheba, an
uncommon practice in genealogies and all the
more strange when it is noted that these four
represent what could be regarded as moral
blemishes in the history of the Davidic dynas-
ty—Tamar, a victim of incest, Rahab, a prosti-
tute, Ruth, a Moabitess, and Bathsheba, an
adulteress.
(5) In the first group Matthew mentions
Judah’s brothers and Zerah, Perez’s brother.
In the second group he refers to Jeconiah’s
brothers.
(6) In verse 6 David is called ‘‘the king.”
From these data, it is obvious that Matthew
does not intend to present a strict genealogy;
the arrangement is contrived, and extraneous
material is included, probably for some other
purpose than merely to present Jesus’ fore-
bears. Matthew’s arrangement of the names
into groups of 14, probably guided (here as
throughout the Gospel) by an interest in por-
traying Jesus to Jews as the promised king of
Israel and rightful heir to the Davidic throne,
gives a definite historical movement to the ge-
nealogy by dividing it into three periods of
time. These respectively highlight the origin,
rise to power, and decay of the Davidic house,
the last point represented by the lowly birth of
the promised heir to a carpenter of Nazareth.
The 14 names in each group may be an ef-
fort to call attention to the thrice-royal char-
acter of Mary’s son by focusing on the numeri-
cal value 14 of the Hebrew letters in David's
name (d=4, v=6, d=4). This number also hap-
pens to be twice the sacred number seven, so
that the whole list is composed of three sets of
two sevens each. It may be, however, that the
contrived groupings were merely intended to
aid in memorization.
With respect to the second peculiarity—the
“missing name” in the third group—one must
conclude either that David or Jechoniah are to
be counted twice, being the pivotal names
separating the three groups, or that a name
was mistakenly dropped out in a later copy of
Matthew’s Gospel.
The third peculiarity presents no difficulty
at all. Numerous genealogies in Scripture
.

848

omit some names. Ancient Near Eastern writ-
ers often used the phrase ‘‘the son of,” or the
word ‘‘begat’’ quite flexibly, relating grand-
sons or great-grandsons, for instance, to ear-
lier forebears without indicating every inter-
vening ancestor. The modern mind should not
require a precision in ancient records that an-
cient writers themselves did not insist on. .-fegally adopted into the line and the one
The women listed in the genealogy—the
fourth peculiarity—may have been intended
to disarm Jewish criticism about Jesus’ birth
(1:18—25) by showing that irregular unions
were not disqualifications for the Messiah’s le- by adoption, as the legal heir to the Davidic
gal ancestry.
The reason for including several brothers in upon Jechoniah was fulfilled while an actual
the genealogy at three points—the fifth pecu-
liarity—is not readily discernible. The men-
tion of “Judah and his brothers” (v 2) may
simply be following an established practice of
speaking of the 12 patriarchs together.
Finally, David's description as “the king” (v
6) underscores the Davidic or royal character
of the list.
The sources employed in compiling the first
group in the genealogy, drew upon records pre-
served in Chronicles 1:27-2:15 and in Ruth
4:18—22. The second group followed the rec-
ords found in 1 and 2 Kings, and 2 Chronicles.
The third group relied mainly on public or pri-
vate records from the intertestamental period;
the nine names from Abiud to Jacob are not
mentioned elsewhere in Scripture.
On the basis of this genealogy, if there had
been a Davidic throne in Joseph’s day, the
lowly carpenter would have been the legal
heir to it, and Jesus stood after him as the
next in line to inherit the royal seat.
It has been argued against this understand-
ing of Matthew’s genealogy that the presence
of Jechoniah in the list (v 11) jeopardizes, if
not completely negates, the legal claim to the
Davidic throne of every one descending di-
rectly from him, inasmuch as the Lord de-
clared of him: “Write this man down as child-
less, .. . for none of his offspring shall succeed
in sitting on the throne of David, and ruling
again in Judah” (Jer 22:30). Therefore, it is
said, it could not have been Matthew’s inten-
tion to represent the men from Shealtiel to
Joseph as legal heirs to the throne.
This is a point which admittedly could dis-
pose of the view that the list presents David’s
descendants if it were not for the fact that She-
altiel, who in Matthew’s record is represented
as the son of Jechoniah, appears also in Luke’s
genealogy as the son of Neri (Lk 3:27). Neri’s
name is unique to Luke’s Gospel so it is impos-
sible to check its use elsewhere to discover the
actual parentage of Shealtiel. But it is not sur-
prising in the light of Jeremiah 22:30 to find
him listed in both accounts with different par-
Genealogy of Jesus Christ
ents. Neri most likely was Shealtiel’s real fa-
ther, and while it is impossible to determine
Neri’s precise relationship to Jechoniah, it
may be that those responsible for determining
and keeping the record of the legal heirs to the
Davidic throne looked to the collateral line of
Neri and selected Shealtiel as the man to be
through whom the line would continue. Sheal-
tiel may well have died without a male descen-
dant which made it necessary to look to Zerub-
babel, the son of Pedaiah, Shealtiel’s brother
throne. By this pair of adoptions the curse
grandson of Jechoniah continued the line, inas-
much as the grandson was legally the son of
Shealtiel, who in turn was the actual son of
Neri. Jechoniah’s presence in the genealogy is
a strength, rather than a weakness, for the in-
terpretation that Matthew’s Gospel intended
to present the legal heirs of the Davidic
throne, since only a writer conscious of the
problems surrounding Jechoniah’s lineage,
but also aware of an explanation, would pre-
sent such an ancestry to a Jewish audience he
was seeking to convince that Jesus was indeed
the royal Messiah.
Luke’s Genealogy (3:23—38). Luke’s gene-
alogy also has peculiarities.
(1) Some expositors have thought it signifi-
cant that Luke’s genealogy appears not at the
beginning of the Gospel, but at the beginning
of Jesus’ ministry.
(2) Luke’s account, in contrast to Mat-
thew’s, begins with Jesus and traces his lin-
eage back through OT history. This seems ir-
regular, for most genealogies follow the order
of succession.
(3) Luke’s account, furthermore, does not
end with Abraham, but goes all the way back
to “Adam, the son of God”’ (3:38).
Some have seen the first peculiarity as a
result of Luke’s desire to bring a period of sa-
cred history to its close, and to signal the
beginning of another with the person and espe-
cially the ministry of Jesus. The genealogy, lo-
cated as it is, sets off the work of Christ from
the accounts of his birth and preparation.
Many have suggested that the regressive or-
der in the genealogy is probably Luke’s instru-
ment to focus attention on Jesus. The fact that
Luke traced Jesus’ ancestry back to Adam,
“the son of God,” was probably due to the fact
that he wrote for Romans and Greeks. By trac-
ing Jesus’ ancestry back to Adam, he shows
Jesus to be related to the whole human race.
In Luke’s genealogy Jesus and Adam are both
“sons of God;” Jesus, of course, is the son of
God by nature, Adam, the son of God by hav-
ing been created in God’s image.
849
Genealogy of Jesus Christ
As to his sources, it is rather certain that
Luke used the Septuagint version (ancient
Greek version of the OT) of Genesis 11:12,
which inserts the name Cainan between She-
lah and Arphaxad (Lk 3:36), and the records of
1 Chronicles 1-3 for the history down to Da-
vid. For the period from David to Jesus most
expositors agree that Luke relied upon infor-
mation probably received directly from Mary
or from persons close to her. It was a common
practice among the Jewish people for genea-
logical records to be maintained both publicly
and privately. There was special concern in
families of Davidic descent to preserve their
ancestral records because of OT prophecies
that Messiah would be born in the house of
David.
Luke no doubt intended to accomplish
more by his list than merely a presentation of
a number of Jesus’ ancestors. Since Luke did
not highlight David in his list, it may be as-
sumed that he was not zealous to present a list
of legal heirs to the Davidic throne, not that
the issue is of no concern to him (cf. 1:27,32,69;
2:4,11). Rather a concern throughout Luke’s
Gospel is this emphasis—that of portraying
the Christ as the savior of Romans and Greeks,
indeed, of the world. Therefore, though Luke
traced Jesus’ ancestry through Joseph’s ances-
tral line to David, he continued beyond David
to Adam. Jesus is a member of the race to
which all people belong.
The Relationship Between the Two Rec-
ords. Even a cursory examination of the two
genealogies of Jesus will show several differ-
ences. For example, Matthew's genealogy com-
prises 41 generations, while Luke lists 76. Luke
includes the period between Adam and Abra-
ham, Matthew does not. While the two lists
are practically identical from Abraham to Da-
vid, they diverge for the period from David to
Jesus, Matthew tracing Jesus’ lineage from
David through Solomon in 27 generations,
whereas Luke traces Jesus’ lineage from David
through Nathan, another son, in 42 genera-
tions. Furthermore, at only one point do the
lines converge during this period: at the
names of Shealtiel and Zerubbabel, who are
doubtless the same men in both lists. Finally,
Matthew represents Joseph as the son of Jacob
(1:16), whereas in Luke’s account he is the son
of Heli (3:23).
How are these differences to be explained?
The differences between these lists stem from
the purposes for which they were compiled and
the meanings they were intended to convey.
A widely held explanation is that Matthew
gives Jesus’ ancestry through Joseph and that
Luke gives his ancestry through Mary. On this
interpretation Jacob was Joseph’s real father,
and Heli, probably Mary’s father, became Jo-
850
seph’s foster father, that is, Joseph was Heli’s
“son,” or heir, by his marriage to Mary, assum-
ing that Heli had no sons (cf. Nm 27:1-11;
36:1-12). This view is certainly a possibility
and should not be rejected out of hand. If
Mary was a direct descendant of David, it
could be literally said of any son of hers, “he is
the seed of David.”
On the other hand, many scholars prefer to
regard Luke’s genealogy as that of Joseph
rather than Mary, since it is to Joseph’s ances-
try that Luke calls the reader’s attention (1:27;
2:4). Furthermore, nowhere in Scripture is
Mary said to be of Davidic descent. If the fact
that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus
nullifies any value which Joseph’s lineage
might otherwise possess for a real son, why
does Luke point to Joseph’s lineage twice, and
to Mary’s not at all?
A major difficulty for the view that regards
both genealogies as Joseph’s is related to Jo-
seph’s two fathers. One solution is that Mat-
thew gives the legal descendants of David,
but Luke gives the actual descendants of Da-
vid in the line to which Joseph belonged. This
would mean that Heli was Joseph’s real fa-
ther and that Jacob was his legal foster fa-
ther. How this could be is readily explain-
able. Assuming that Jacob’s father, Matthan
(Mt 1:15), and Heli’s father, Matthat (Lk 3:24),
are the same person, then Jacob [the elder]
may have died without a male descendant so
that his nephew, the son of his brother Heli,
would have become his heir.
If Matthan and Matthat are not the same
person, one might postulate that Jacob, the
legal heir to the throne, died without a descen-
dant and that Joseph, son of Heli, became the
legal heir immediately upon the death of Heli
and was counted as Jacob’s son in a list of
legal heirs to the throne. Possibly Heli, a rela-
tive, married Jacob’s widow making Joseph,
the son of that union, Heli’s son and Jacob’s
son by levirate marriage. In other words, there
are a number of possible explanations of this
divergence.
One other major objection to the view that
regards both genealogies as Joseph’s is that,
because of the virgin birth of Jesus, one may
in no sense speak of Jesus as being literally the
seed of David, a proposition that Scripture
seems to insist upon. This objection has been
adequately countered: (1) because of the realis-
tic manner in which the Jews looked upon
adoptive fatherhood; and (2) because the rela-
tionship in which Jesus stood to Joseph was
much closer than a case of ordinary adoption,
there being no earthly father to dispute Jo-
seph’s paternal relation to Jesus. Jesus could
and would have been regarded as Joseph’s son
and heir with complete propriety, satisfying

every scriptural demand that he be the “‘seed
of David.” The question, therefore, whether
Mary as well as Joseph was descendant of Da-
vid does not need to be answered one way or
the other by one who desires to defend Jesus’
Davidic descent.
It is beyond human reach to discover for
certain the full solution to the divergencies be- :-
tween the two genealogies of Jesus, or the ac-
tual relationship of Jesus to them. Enough has
been said to demonstrate that they are recon-
cilable, and the purposes of each, suggested
here, indicate that either of the ways outlined
above does full justice to the Davidic descent
of Jesus, as rightful heir to his ancestor’s
covenanted throne, and also to his virgin birth
by Mary.
RoBeErtT L. REYMOND
See GENEALOGY; VIRGIN BIRTH OF JESUS; INCARNA-
TION; JESUS CHRIST, LIFE AND TEACHING OF.
Genesis, Book of. First book of the Bible.
Name. The name ‘Genesis’? comes into
English as a transliteration of the Greek name
meaning “origin” or ‘“‘beginning.’”’ This name
was given to the book in the Greek translation
of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septu-
agint. Genesis reflects both the content of the
book and the Hebrew name for it, which is
taken from its first word bereshith, ‘in the
beginning.”
Authorship. The authorship of Genesis is
closely related to the authorship of the entire
Pentateuch (lit. “five-volumed,” the first five
books of the Bible, which in Hebrew are called
the Torah). It is clear that the Bible regards
the human author of these books as Moses. On
several occasions the Lord commanded Moses
to write down various things; ‘“‘in a book”’ (Ex
17:14); ‘“write these words”’ (34:27). The Penta-
teuch reports that ‘Moses wrote all the words
of the Lord” (24:4); he wrote the itinerary of
the exodus wanderings (Nm 33:2); “Moses
wrote this law” (Dt 31:9). (Here it is not cer-
tain that all five books are meant, but it must
refer to at least the greater part of Deuteron-
omy.) In Exodus 24:7 it is said that Moses read
the book of the covenant, which he must have
just completed.
The rest of the OT bears witness to the writ-
ing of the Pentateuch by Moses. David re-
ferred to ‘the law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3). In the
time of Josiah there was found in the temple
the ‘book of the law of the Lord given through
Moses” (2 Chr 34:14). Day by day Ezra read
from “‘the book of the law of God”’ (Neh 8:18;
cf. ‘‘the book of the law of Moses,” 8:1).
In the NT, Jesus refers to “the book of Mo-
ses” (Mk 12:26; Lk 20:37) and otherwise men-
tions the commands or statements of Moses
851
Genesis, Book of
Three stages in the development of the alphabet—the top row
being Proto-Sinaitic (before 1446 BC), the middle row being
transitional (c. 1200 BC), and the bottom row being later Phoe-
nician (9th cent. BC).
(Mt 8:4; 19:8; Mk 7:10; cf. Lk 16:31; 24:44). The
Jews also quoted from the Torah as coming
from Moses, and Jesus did not contradict
them.
Of Genesis in particular, it may be said that
Moses had the opportunity and ability to
write the book. He could have written it dur-
ing his years in Egypt or while exiled with the
Kenites. As the recognized leader of the Israel-
ites he would have had access to, or perhaps
even custody of, any records which Jacob
brought from Canaan. He was “instructed in
all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Acts 7:22);
and probably could have written in several
languages and in several scripts (hieroglyphic,
cuneiform, old Hebrew). Although Moses was
admirably fitted for the task of writing, one
must remember that he was not putting to-
gether a human composition, but was writing
under the inspiration of God (2 Pt 1:21). We
may with confidence conclude that Moses was
the human author of Genesis.
The liberal view of the authorship of Gene-
sis is that the book is an editorial composite, a
view first put forward by a French physician,
Jean Astruc, who suggested that the different
names for God indicated different documents
or sources for the writing of the book. This
position is still held today, even by some who
profess to be conservative, for the divine
names are in actuality reflections of the vari-
ous attributes of God.
The German higher critics expanded the
view of the use of documents in the writing of
Genesis and developed it into the Graf-Well-
hausen-Kuenen or Documentary Hypothesis,
which may also be called the JEDP theory of
the authorship of the book. This view holds
that there were four basic documents: (1) J,
which uses the name YHWH for God, dates
about the 9th century Bc and comes from Ju-
dah; (2) E uses the name Elohim, dates from
the 8th century, and comes from the northern
Genesis, Book of
kingdom; (3) D is Deuteronomy and is sup-
posed to come from the time of Josiah, about
621 BC; (4) P is the priestly element, which
deals with matters of the priesthood and rit-
ual, dating to the 5th century Bc or later.
Some may date portions of Genesis as late
as the Hellenistic period. According to this
theory, the various documents were blended
together by editors, so that there was a JE,
JED, and so on.
The science of archaeology broke down
many of the extreme postulations of these crit-
ics, and the work of W.F. Albright and his fol-
lowers did much to restore confidence in the
historicity of Genesis. Within the last several
decades the patriarchal narratives and the ac-
count of Joseph have again come under strong
attack, but these views are extreme, and much
of the evidence adduced by Albright and ear-
lier scholars like R.D. Wilson, W.H. Green,
and others still has validity.
Date. The date of the book is also a matter
of debate. Even among those who accept the
Mosaic authorship the date for Moses varies.
Based on the biblical data, Moses must
placed in the 15th century Bc (cf. Jgs 11:26; 1
Kgs 6:1), but many scholars incline toward a
13th century date.
As outlined above, the liberal view of the
date of Genesis would be from the gth to the
5th centuries Bc, with the final editing coming
around the 5th century or perhaps even later.
Purpose. Genesis sketches the origin of
many things: the universe, the earth, plants,
animals, and mankind. It gives the beginnings
of human institutions, professions, and crafts.
It describes the origin of sin and death, and
illustrates the insidious working of Satan in
human life. Above all, Genesis relates the be-
ginning of the history of redemption with the
announcement of a Redeemer who was to
come (Gn 3:15). It names the early progenitors
in the lineage of the Messiah and the begin-
ning of the Hebrew people through whom the
Bible and the Savior came. Genesis also gives
a selective history of people and events as
viewed from the purposes of God.
Structure. The book is divided into 11
parts of uneven length, each set off by the
expression “these are the generations [descen-
dants, history] of” (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10;
IT 29sc2n:1at) 255193.36:15 37:2)... Only three
times does,the formula coincide with the first
verse of a chapter; usually called a heading
or superscription, the expression serves as a
kind of link between what precedes and what
follows.
Content. The Creation (1:1—2:25). These
two chapters have been a scientific-theological
battleground for many years, as researchers
and students have tried to probe the origins of
the universe and of life. Much of the evidence
is not subject to scientific scrutiny, for science
by definition requires that the evidence must
be reproducible by experiment.
The statement of Genesis 1:1 remains the
grandest, most precise, and most accurate
statement of origins: “In the beginning God
created the heavens and the earth.” He did
this ex nihilo (“out of nothing”) by his word
(Heb 11:3); he spoke the word of command
and it was done (Gn 1:3,6,9,11,14,20; Ps 33:6,9).
The date of the beginning is unknown; time
meant little to the ancients, and it appears
that the duration of time also means little to
God (cf. 2 Pt 3:8), who is more concerned
about timing (Gal 4:4, ‘““when the time had
fully come”; Rom 5:6, ‘‘at the right time’’).
Uniformitarian cosmogonists (students of the
origins of the universe who believe that natu-
ral events have always followed a uniform pat-
tern, cf. 2 Pt 3:3-7) have speculated that the
beginning of the universe was billions of years
ago, but creationists posit a world thousands
of years old.
be To accommodate geological ages and the ex-
istence of extinct animals, some interpreters
have proposed a gap between Genesis 1:1 and
1:2, with Genesis 1:2—2:3 representing a second
or new creation. The notion that the days rep-
resent geological ages has little to commend it
and much to controvert it. The days are called
evening and morning, and the term “day” in
the OT points to the days as 24-hour periods.
Theistic evolution in its various forms is an-
other attempt to bridge the gap, or to straddle
the fence, between evolution and creationism;
generally it is rejected by both sides.
There is a correlation between the first
three days and the second three days. Day one
saw the creation of light; day four, the light-
bearers. Day two was the time of the creation
of the firmament (better, “expanse’’), which
divided the waters; day five, birds and swarm-
ing water creatures. On day three, God made
the dry land and plants; on day six he created
the land animals and man. He made man in
the image of God (1:26), “a little less than
God”’ (Ps 8:5), and gave him dominion over the
earth. He made everything “according to their
kinds,” so that each kind is distinct and
unique. The perfection of his work is affirmed
in that “God saw that it was good” (1:4,10,12,
18,21; ‘very good,” 1:31).
The seventh day was a time of cessation
from the activity of creating and served as a
type for mankind’s day of rest (2:1—3).
Critical scholarship eyes 2:4-25 as a dou-
blet in conflict with Genesis 1:1-2:3. To conser-
vative scholars the second chapter is the same
account from a different perspective. Chapter
1 gives the creation from the standpoint of se-
852

quence; chapter 2 shows it in view of the cen-
trality of mankind in God’s creative work.
Chapter 2 gives details of the creation of
man of “dust from the ground” (v 7) and
woman from a rib of the man (vv 21,22). She
was created to be “a helper fit for him” (vv
18,20). They were created as mature adults,
with the gift of speech and with great intelli-..
gence. Adam had imagination and vocabulary
sufficient for naming all of the animal species
(v 19).
The location of the Garden of Eden is given
(vv 10-14). Two of the four rivers, the Tigris
and the Euphrates, can be identified with cer-
tainty. So man lived in this beautiful garden
in the bliss of innocence.
The History of Mankind from Eden to Babel
(3:1—11:26). Tue Fatt. The loss of Eden and
the break in fellowship with God is the sad-
dest chapter in human history. The serpent,
the devil, approached Eve with the same phi-
losophy he always uses: doubt of God’s word
(3:1), denial of death (v 4), and the suggestion
of equality with God (v 5). He gained access to
her will by a three-fold attack (v 6; cf. 1 Jn
2:16): (1) “good for food,” “the lust of the
flesh’; (2) “‘a delight to the eyes,” “the lust of
the eyes’; and (3) ‘‘to be desired to make one
wise,” “‘the pride of life.” Eve was deceived,
but when she offered the fruit to Adam he took
it willingly, knowing what he was doing (Gen
3:6; cf. 1 Tm 2:14), but later he had the audac-
ity to blame God for giving him the wife that
gave him the fruit (Gen 3:12). Fellowship with
God was broken (v 8), yet God came seeking
Adam and found him.
With sin came judgment, and the Lord pro-
nounced righteous judgment on the serpent,
the woman, and the man. The earth was also
“subjected to frustration’’ and now groans as
it awaits renewal (Rom 8:21,22). God gave
hope to man and a promise of a Redeemer
(Gen 3:15), who was to bruise the serpent’s
head. Adam and Eve were forced out of the
garden, and it was made inaccessible to them.
The impatience of humankind is shown in
Eve’s expectation that her son Cain was the
promised Deliverer. Instead, he developed a
wrong-hearted attitude toward God and be-
came so jealous of his younger brother that he
murdered him. Apprehended by God and con-
fronted with his crime, Cain showed only self-
pity and went east from Eden where he built a
city (4:1-16). Chapter 4 closes with another
contrast: the brazen poetic effrontery of La-
mech, who called for vengeance while others
began to call upon the name of the Lord.
THE GENERATIONS OF ApaM. This genealogical
table brings mankind to the time of Noah and
the flood. The longevity of the antediluvian pa-
triarchs seems very striking to us, but one
853
Genesis, Book of
must remember that the earth had not yet
been subjected to pollution and the effects of
sin on the human race were still nominal. The
refrain ‘‘and he died” reminds us of man’s
mortality; for Enoch there was something
better—he “walked with God; and he was not,
for God took him”’ (5:24).
* THEFLoop. With population explosion came
an eruption of sin (6:1-5). As men multiplied,
so did their corruption. The universal condem-
nation of verse 5 shows a world ripe for judg-
ment. Noah, however, ‘‘found favor in the eyes
of the Lord,” for he was a righteous and blame-
less man who walked with God (vv 8,9).
The Lord then moved to annihilate the hu-
man race, but he determined to save Noah
and his family. Intending to cover the earth
with a flood, God instructed Noah in building
the ark. Noah was directed to take animals
aboard the ark, two by two, male and female,
for the preservation of each species. When all
was in readiness, the flood came; “the foun-
tains of the great deep burst forth, and the
windows of the heavens were opened” (7:11).
It rained for 40 days and 40 nights. The highest
mountains were covered, and life outside the
ark perished. ‘‘But God remembered Noah”
and sent a wind to evaporate the waters (8:1).
Eventually the ark came to rest on the moun-
tains of Ararat (v 4). Noah made a sacrifice to
the Lord, and the Lord determined that he
would never again bring such destruction
upon the earth.
The flood is another of God’s acts which
has been much debated. Many have argued for
a local flood, which affected only part of Meso-
potamia. Archaeologists have pointed to vari-
ous flood strata in the excavation of Mesopota-
mian city-mounds as evidence for the account
of the flood and have cited the various flood
stories from that area as the source of the
Genesis record. The epic of Gilgamesh gives
an interesting tale of this hero, who went on a
mission to visit Utnapishtim, the cuneiform
Noah, in quest of eternal life. The flood story
told by Utnapishtim has many parallels to
Genesis, but there are greater contrasts, which
demonstrate that the Bible preserves the true
account.
Both the Genesis account and the refer-
ences to it in the NT (cf. 2 Pt 3:6) favor the
view that the deluge was not a minor episode
in the Tigris-Euphrates area but was an un-
precedented worldwide catastrophe. Christian
geologists affirm that the flood had _ far-
reaching effects on the earth itself. Flood sto-
ries are almost universally known, lending sup-
port to the conclusion that the flood covered
the whole earth.
Following the flood, God blessed Noah and
his sons, Ham, Shem, and Japheth. God made
Genesis, Book of
a covenant with Noah, promising that he
would never again send a worldwide flood. As
a sign of this he established the rainbow.
Noah was the first tiller of the soil, and he
planted a vineyard (9:20). Noah became drunk
from wine he made and lay uncovered in his
tent. Ham saw him and reported this to his
brothers, who discreetly covered him. Ham
and his son, Canaan, were cursed; Shem and
Japheth were blessed.
THE TABLE oF Nations. ‘‘These are the genera-
tions of the sons of Noah (10:1). This chapter
lists the descendants of Noah’s three sons, in
the order of Japheth (vv 2—s5), Ham (vv 6-20),
and Shem (vv 21-31). Many of the names of
their descendants are preserved in tribes and
nations of the world.
THE Tower oF BaseL. The building of the
tower of Babel (‘Gate of God’’) illustrates
man’s perversity and his tendency to want in-
dependence from God. The desire of man to
displace God follows the fateful example of Lu-
cifer and is a basic tenet of many cults. God
thwarted the designs of the builders of Babel
by confusing their languages, so that the proj-
ect came to a halt (11:1—9). The site of this
tower is not known with certainty. Some asso-
ciate it with Birs Nimrud, not far from the
ruins of the city of Babylon.
Genesis 11:10—-25 picks up the line of Shem
and carries it down to Terah, the father of
Abram.
The History of Abraham (11:27—25:10) and
Isaac (21:1—28:5). Abram came from Ur of
the Chaldees, an urbane and prosperous city.
Large-scale excavations at the site of Ur were
conducted by C.L. Woolley. The city had an
imposing ziggurrat (temple-tower), with many
temples, storehouses, and residences.
Abram and Sarai, his half-sister and wife,
went with his father to Haran in Syria, which
like Ur was a center of the worship of the
moon god, Sin (or Annar).
Apram’s caLL. The call of God came to
Abram directing him to leave his relatives and
move to a land which the Lord would show
him (12:1; cf. Acts 7:2,3). Abram obeyed and at
age 75 he, Sarai, and his nephew Lot left Ha-
ran and went to Shechem where the Lord ap-
peared to him and promised that land to his
descendants.
Famine drove Abram down to Egypt (12:10-
20). Because of Sarai’s beauty, he feared that
someone might kill him to get her, so he passed
her off as his sister. She was taken into the
pharaoh’s harem. When the Lord plagued pha-
raoh because of this, Abram’s lie was discov-
ered and Sarai was returned to him.
Critics have assailed the record of 12:16 be-
cause camels are included among Abram’s pos-
sessions, and there is no word for “camel” in
854
ancient Egyptian and very little evidence for
them from Egyptian archaeology. There is,
however, sufficient evidence to account for his
ownership of such animals, and if they were
rare they were of that much greater value.
ABRAM AND Lot. Abram and Lot returned to
Canaan, where strife broke out between
Abram’s herdsmen and those of Lot. Abram
suggested that they should separate and he
gave Lot his choice of territory. Lot chose the
well-watered Jordan valley and the cities of
the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah (ch 13).
THE INVASION OF THE FouR KINGS FROM THE East.
The four kings who invaded along the King’s
Highway in Transjordan cannot be identified
with certainty. Those kings were successful in
their attack against the five cities of the plain,
and they moved off with much booty and
many captives, including Lot. Abram took 318
retainers, born in his household, and set off
after them. By surprise attack Abram recov-
ered both Lot and the loot. On his return he
was met by Melchizedek, king of Jerusalem, to
whom Abram paid tithes (ch 14).
THE Covenant. The Lord promised Abram a
son as heir, and in an impressive nighttime
ceremony God made covenant with Abram
and promised him the land from the River of
Egypt (wadi el Arish) to the Euphrates (ch 15).
Because of her own barrenness, Sarai gave her
Egyptian maid, Hagar, to Abram. Hagar gave
birth to Ishmael, the progenitor of the Arab
peoples. When trouble arose between the
women, Sarai sent Hagar away, as was her
right according to Near Eastern custom as il-
lustrated by the Nuzi tablets. God showed
mercy to Hagar and promised that she would
have a great posterity (ch 16).
God repeated his promise to Abram con-
cerning his descendants and changed the
names of Abram (‘exalted father’) and Sarai
to Abraham (‘‘father of many’) and Sarah
(“‘princess’’). A covenant sign of circumcision
was given to Abraham (ch 17). This operation
had already been practiced among the Egyp-
tians for several centuries.
THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CITIES OF THE PLAIN.
The Lord and two angels appeared to Abra-
ham and announced the birth of the promised
heir within a year as well as the impending
destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, concern-
ing which Abraham bargained with God
(18:22—33). Lot and his immediate family were
rescued from Sodom and the cities were de-
stroyed by God with brimstone and fire
(19:24—25). Lot’s two daughters, wishing to pre-
serve their family line, got their father drunk
and had sexual relations with him. Moab and
Ammon, enemies of Israel in later times, were
the result.
In Genesis 20:1-18, Abraham again repre-
 Genesis, Book of

sented Sarah as his sister and got into trouble but Laban substituted Leah, so that Jacob
with Abimelech, king of Gerar. had to work another seven years for Rachel.
Isaac. When Isaac was born (21:1—3) trou- The Lord prospered Jacob, but difficulties
ble again broke out between Sarah and Hagar, continually came about with Laban. The
who was driven out a second time, and once Lord directed Jacob back to Canaan (31:3), so
more was befriended by the Lord. he left secretly with his wives, children, and
A disagreement arose between Abraham property. Laban pursued them because his
and Abimelech concerning a well, but they ‘household gods were missing (possession of
made a covenant of peace at Beersheba these ‘‘gods”’ made the holder heir to the own-
(21:25—-34). er’s estate according to Nuzi custom). Rachel
God tested Abraham’s faith by asking him had taken them but successfully concealed
to sacrifice Isaac on Mt Moriah, which proba- them from her father, and Laban went back
bly is the same site David later bought from to Haran.
Araunah the Jebusite (2 Sm 24:16—25), the Fearing a meeting with Esau as they passed
place where the temple was to stand. As Abra- through Edom, Jacob sent gifts to his brother
ham was about to use the knife, God called to and divided his own party into two camps for
him and showed him a ram caught in a security. On this return journey, Jacob had an
thicket. Isaac was freed and the animal was unexpected wrestling bout with the angel of
sacrificed in his stead. the Lord, and he was left with a limp and a
Sarah died at Hebron, and Abraham pur- new name, Israel (ch 32).
chased the cave of Machpelah as a burial The meeting with Esau was friendly, and
place from Ephron the Hittite (ch 23), in a Jacob went on to Shechem (ch 33), where his
transaction typical of Near Eastern business sons killed the male Shechemites because of
dealings. To find a wife for Isaac, Abraham the rape of their sister Dinah (ch 34). God told
sent his servant Eliezer back to the area of Jacob to go to Bethel and build an altar to the
Haran, and the Lord directed Eliezer to Rebek- Lord. All idols of foreign gods were put away
ah (ch 24). (35:1-4). At Bethel God reaffirmed his promise
Chapter 25 records the marriage of Abra- of a posterity and the land (vv 9-15).
ham to Keturah, who bore him a number of Rachel died on the way to Bethlehem,
children. Abraham died at the age of 175 years while giving birth to Benjamin, Jacob’s 12th
and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by and last son. Isaac died at Hebron at age 180
his two sons, Isaac and Ishmael (vv 7-10). and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by
The History of Jacob and Esau (25:19- Esau and Jacob.
37:1). Rebekah bore twin sons, Esau and Ja- Genesis 36 records “the generations of
cob. When the boys were grown, Esau sold his Esau”’ (v 1). Here Esau is also named Edom
birthright to Jacob for a meal of red pottage Red’ 4 ef,.25:30),
(25:27-34). The History of Joseph (37:2—50:26). Joseph
When famine came to the land, Isaac went was Jacob's favorite son and thus incurred the
to Gerar as his father had done (ch 20) and jealousy of his brothers. This was heightened
repeated his father’s lie by calling his wife his by Joseph’s dreams of lordship over them, and
sister (26:1—11). Trouble arose with the Philis- their resentment climaxed when Jacob gave
tines over wells, but Isaac was a peaceable Joseph a beautiful coat. The brothers deter-
man and preferred digging new wells rather mined to kill Joseph, but compromised by sell-
than fighting over old ones (vv 17-33). ing him to a caravan of merchants, who took
In Isaac’s old age, when his sight had him to Egypt and sold him as a slave to Poti-
failed, Rebekah connived with Jacob to trick phar, an Egyptian captain of the guard (37:36;
Isaac into giving to Jacob the blessing of the 39:1).
firstborn, which was rightfully Esau’s. This Chapter 38 relates a historic case of levirate
oral blessing had legal validity and was irrevo- marriage. Judah failed to give his widowed
cable, according to the Nuzi tablets. Fearing daughter-in-law to his third son. She deceived
for Jacob’s life at the hands of Esau, Rebekah him into fathering twin sons and forced him
arranged to send Jacob to Haran to find a wife to acknowledge his faults. The elder son, Pe-
from among her own people. At Bethel God rez, is named in Luke’s genealogy of Christ
appeared to Jacob in a dream of a ladder (38:33).
(stairway?) leading up to heaven and renewed The Lord blessed Joseph, who soon was put
with him the promise made to Abraham and in charge of Potiphar’s household (ch 39). The
Isaac (28:10—22). young man attracted the attention of Poti-
Jacob reached Haran, found his uncle La- phar’s wife who, after many attempts to se-
ban, and was employed by him (ch 29). His duce him, at last accused him of attempted
wages for seven years labor were to be La- rape. Sentenced on this charge, Joseph met
ban’s younger daughter, Rachel, as his wife, with favor in prison and had opportunity to

855
Gennesaret
interpret dreams for two of the pharaoh’s ser-
vants (ch 40). When the king had dreams that
his magicians and wise men could not inter-
pret, Joseph was remembered and was sum-
moned from jail. Joseph told pharaoh that the
dreams meant seven years of plenty, followed
by seven years of famine. Joseph was then ex-
alted to the office of vizier, or prime minister,
second only to the king and put in charge of
the administration of the land (41:37—44).
When the famine came to Palestine, Jacob
sent his sons to Egypt to purchase grain. Jo-
seph recognized his brothers but did not re-
veal his identity to them. Joseph put them to
the test by accusing them of being spies (42:9),
by keeping one of the brothers (Simeon) hos-
tage (v 19), and by demanding that if they
came to Egypt again they must bring their
youngest brother with them (v 20; 43:3). The
famine became so severe in Canaan (43:1) that
Jacob at last allowed Benjamin to go with his
brothers to Egypt. The brothers were again set
up by Joseph, who had his silver cup put into
Benjamin’s grain sack and then had him ap-
prehended as a thief (ch 44).
At this point Joseph revealed himself to his
brothers (45:4-15) and there was much rejoic-
ing. Joseph pointed out that it was God who
had sent him to Egypt (vv 7,8), in order to
preserve the lives of all the family.
Jacob was then sent for (46:1), and Joseph
met him in the land of Goshen (vv 28,29). The
Israelites were assigned land in the region of
Goshen where they prospered (47:27).
In Jacob’s final illness, Joseph brought his
two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to his father
for his blessing. Jacob gave the primary blessing
to the second-born Ephraim (48:13,14,17—20).
Jacob blessed each of his own sons and then
died at the age of at least 130 years. Joseph
arranged for Jacob’s body to be prepared for
burial according to Egyptian custom (50:2,3).
After the burial of their father in the cave of
Machpelah at Hebron, Joseph’s brothers wor-
ried about vengeance, but Joseph declared
“you meant evil against me, but God meant it
for good, to bring it about that many people
should be kept alive” (v 20).
Joseph died at age 110 with the prophetic
request that when the Israelites went up from
Egypt they would take his bones with them
(50:25; cf, Ex 13:19; Jos 24:32).
CaRL E. DEVRIES
See PATRIARCHS, PERIOD OF THE; DOCUMENTARY Hy-
POTHESIS; ADAM (PERSON); EvE; NOAH #1; ABRAHAM;
Isaac; JACOB #1; JOSEPH #1; FALL OF MAN; NATIONS;
ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; COVENANT; FLOOD, THE; CREATION,
DOocTRINE OF; CIRCUMCISION.
Bibliography. G.Ch. Aalders, Genesis, 2 vols; W. Bruegge-
mann, Genesis; R.S. Candlish, Studies in Genesis; M. Dodds,
The Book of Genesis; W.H. Green, The Unity of the Book of
856
Genesis; J. Skinner, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on
Genesis.
Gennesaret. Area on the northwest shore of
the Sea of Galilee between Capernaum and
Magdala, where many of Jesus’ healing mira-
cles took place (Mt 14:34; Mk 6:53).
The Plain of Gennesaret, as the district was
called, curves along a distance of about four
miles with an average width from sea to moun-
tains of approximately one mile. The topogra-
phy is generally level, with the land rising
slowly as it nears the bordering mountains.
The unusually fertile soil is laced with flowing
streams and rivers and noted for its productiv-
ity. Temperatures ranging from hot to mild al-
low for a long growing season and abundant
crops. The fruits of Gennesaret were so excep-
tional that the rabbis did not allow them in
Jerusalem during feast observances, fearing
many would attend only to enjoy their succu-
lence. Rabbis termed this area the Garden of
God. During Jesus’ lifetime, the area was con-
sidered the garden spot of Palestine. Trees such
as the walnut, palm, olive, and fig, which re-
quire a wide diversity of growing conditions,
all flourished here. Rich harvests of grapes, wal-
nuts, rice, wheat, vegetables, and melons, as
well as wild trees and flowers, were common.
Later, centuries of neglect caused the plain to
be largely overgrown with thorn bushes, al-
though in more recent years, certain areas have
been cleared and productivity restored.
In Luke 5:1, the Sea of Galilee is referred to
as the Lake of Gennesaret, the alternate name
undoubtedly derived its origin from the bor-
dering plain.
Gennesaret (more accurately termed Ginne-
sar) was also the later name of the town Chin-
neroth (Jos 11:2), an ancient city which had
long since fallen into ruin by Jesus’ day.
Gennesaret, Lake of. Alternate name for
the Sea of Galilee in Luke 5:1.
See GALILEE, SEA OF.
Gentiles. See Nations.
Gentiles, Court of the. Large outer portion
of King Herod’s temple complex. The court
was of irregular oblong shape, somewhat
broader at the north than the south. In that
court, which was open to Gentiles as well as
Jews, sacrificial animals were sold and money
was exchanged. A warning was posted on a
partition wall instructing Gentiles not to stray
into the temple’s inner courts. Jesus’ “cleans-
ing of the temple” probably occurred in the
Court of the Gentiles (Mt 21:12,13; Mk rr:15—
18; Jn 2:14-16).
See TABERNACLE, TEMPLE.

Genubath. Son of Hadad, the Edomite
prince who, as a young lad, was taken
Egypt to escape Joab’s slaughter. There Ha-
dad married a sister of Queen Tahpenes. She
bore Genubath, who was raised by the queen
as a son of pharaoh (1 Kgs 11:20).
Gera. 1. One of Benjamin’s sons (Gn 46:21).
The name, however, does not appear in a simi-
lar list in Numbers 26:38—41.
2. Father of the judge Ehud (Jgs 3:15).
3. Shimei’s father. Shimei cursed and threw
stones at David during Absalom’s rebellion; la-
ter he sought David’s pardon (2 Sm 16:5;
19:16—18; 1 Kgs 2:8).
4. Bela’s son from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr
8:3,5); alternately called Heglam in verse 7.
Gerah. Measure of weight defined as 1/20 of
a shekel, the latter being the basic weight
among Semitic peoples.
See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
Gerar. City located in the western Negeb. It
was used as a geographical landmark defining
the western boundary of the Canaanite terri-
tory from Sidon to Gaza (Gn 10:19). Abraham
resided temporarily in this city, at which time
he deceived Abimelech the king by giving him
the impression that Sarah was his sister
(20:1,2). Later, Isaac settled in this city and
also disguised his marriage to Rebekah for
fear of reprisals from the men of the city. Isaac
eventually left the town, moving to the nearby
valley of Gerar on account of his conflicts with
the Philistines. Here the herdsmen of Gerar
quarreled with Isaac’s servants over a newly
dug well, and Abimelech king of the Philis-
tines made a covenant with Isaac (26:1—26). It
is doubtful that King Abimelech of Gerar (Gn
20:2) was the same person as Abimelech, king
of the Philistines (Gn 26:8). Abimelech was
probably a surname or an official title.
During the patriarchal period, Gerar ap-
peared as a dominant Canaanite city in the
Negeb; however, in Joshua’s recounting of the
conquest, this town was not named among the
Philistine cities yet to be conquered (Jos
13:2,3) or in the list of cities already defeated
(15:21,22). Later, in the period of the kings, Ge-
rar was mentioned as the southernmost city to
which the Ethiopian army fled before it was
completely destroyed by King Asa of Judah
(g10o—869 BC) and his army (2 Chr 14:13,14). Per-
haps the fertile valley of Gedor (1 Chr 4:39; cf.
Gn 26:17), formerly inhabited by the sons of
Ham (cf. Gn 10:9), was identical with the val-
ley of Gerar. Gedor was possibly a later
scribal error where the copyist confused the
Hebrew letter r for a d.
Gerasa, Gerasene, Gergesa, Gergesene
to
Cliff (upper left) where pigs that were possessed by demons
may have run off.
The site of Gerar is identifiable with Tell
Abu Hureireh along the northwestern bank of
the Wadi esh-Sheri‘ah, 15 miles northwest of
Beersheba and 12 miles southeast of Gaza.
Gerasa, Gerasene, Gergesa, Gergesene.
City and district in the Decapolis. Gerasa was
a well-known Roman city situated in the hills
of the Transjordan about 35 miles southeast of
the Sea of Galilee and 19 miles east of the Jor-
dan River. Although the city is not named in
the NT, Mark 5:1 and Luke 8:26,37 mention the
“country of the Gerasenes’’ (Rsv) as the place
where Jesus healed the demoniac and the
swine drowned in the Sea of Galilee. The paral-
lel account in Matthew 8:28 reads the ‘“‘coun-
try of the Gadarenes” (Rsv).
The reading of “Gerasenes” in Mark and
Luke is preferred by the better manuscripts of
the NT over the later scribal alterations of
“Gadarenes” and ‘‘Gergesenes.”’ Gadara was
an important city of the Decapolis whose po-
litical jurisdiction extended to the eastern
shores of the Sea of Galilee. It was added per-
haps by later copyists to harmonize Mark and
Luke’s account with Matthew’s Gospel. Ger-
gesa was a city along the eastern coastline of
the Sea of Galilee and the name was probably
inserted in the texts of Mark and Luke to make
better geographical sense of Jesus’ miracle.
Nonetheless, the district of the Gerasenes has
the best textual support and should be under-
stood as the intended site of Mark and Luke
for Jesus’ exorcism and miracle. To the non-
Palestinian Roman and Greek readers of Mark
and Luke’s Gospels, the small regional district
of Gadara would be unknown; however, the
affluent Roman city of Gerasa would be
widely known and suitable as a geographical
designation for Jesus’ miracle at the Sea of
Galilee.
Gerasa was established as a Greek city by
Alexander the Great around 333 Bc. In 85 Bc,
the Jewish monarch Alexander Jannaeus con-
quered the city. Gerasa remained in Jewish
857
Gerizim, Mount
Mt Gerizim, as seen from the
vicinity of Shechem.
hands until Pompey brought it under Roman
control in 63 Bc, at which time it was incorpo-
rated into the province of Syria and later in-
cluded in the Decapolis. The site of Gerasa is
identical with the modern Jerash.
H. DouGLas BUCKWALTER
See DECAPOLIS.
Gerizim, Mount. Mountain (modern Jebel
et-Tor) from which the blessings were to be
pronounced just as the cursings were to come
from Mt Ebal (Dt 11:29). The two mountains
designated by God were opposite each other,
and the setting was a memorable one with six
tribes positioned on Mt Gerizim and six on Mt
Ebal, the Levites standing in the valley be-
tween with the ark of the covenant reciting
“with a loud voice” the blessings and the
cursings (27:11—28:68; Jos 8:33—35). The moun-
tain is near Shechem, about 10 miles south-
east of the city of Samaria, and it is referred to
by the woman of Samaria in John 4:20—23 as
the mountain where “our fathers worshiped.”
Abraham, indeed, had built an altar in this
area (Gn 12:6,7; 33:18—20), and it had been the
revered site for Samaritan worship for centu-
ries. Jesus answers the woman’s implied ques-
tion as to which is the correct place to wor-
ship, Gerizim or Jerusalem, by pointing out
that where one worships is not the important
thing, but the attitude of heart with which one
worships.
It was in this area that the bones of Joseph
were buried (Jos 24:32) and that Joshua called
upon the people to renew their allegiance to
the God_of their fathers (vv 25-27). Josephus
records in his Antiquities Sanballat’s promise
to Manasseh to preserve for him the honor of
the priesthood and also to build a temple on
Mt Gerizim like that at Jerusalem (11.8.2,4). It
was apparently destroyed later by the Macca-
bean forces under Hyrcanus (13.9.1). The Sa-
maritans still worship at Nablus, which lies at
the foot of Mt Gerizim, but are a diminishing
community precariously held together. The
858
so-called Samaritan Pentateuch, while an-
cient, is not in the opinion of most scholars, as
old as it is claimed to be.
PauL L. KAUFMAN
Gershom. 1. Moses’ son by Zipporah, born
in Midian during Moses’ exile from Egypt (Ex
2:22:.36:35 1 Chr 23:15516),
2. Jonathan’s father. He and his sons were
priests to Dan’s tribe. They made a graven im-
age for the Danites to worship (Jgs 18:30).
3. Alternate spelling of Gershon, Levi’s old-
est son (1 Chr 6:1,16,17,20,43; 23:6,7).
See GERSHON, GERSHONITE.
4. Ancestor of Shebuel, the chief officer over
the temple treasury during David’s reign (1
Chr 26:24).
5. Phinehas’ son who returned with Ezra
after the exile (Ezr 8:2).
Gershon, Gershonites. Levi's oldest son
(also spelled Gershom) who went into Egypt
with Israel (Gn 46:11; Nm 3:17; 1 Chr 6:1) and
was ancestor of a division of Levites (Gershon-
ites) who came out of Egypt with Moses (Ex
6:16,17; Nm 3:18,21).
In the list of the allotment of levitical cities,
the Gershonites were listed as one of the larg-
est levitical groups in Israel (Jos 21:1—7). Some
passages indicate that they were at times
dominant among the functioning levitical
groups (Gn 46:11; Ex 6:16; Nm 3:17; 26:57; 1
Chr 6:1,16; 23:6).
During the wilderness wandering the Gersh-
onites were encamped behind the tabernacle
to the west (Nm 3:23). Early in the second year
after the exodus from Egypt the Gershonite
males numbered about 7500 (v 22). Only those
between the ages of 30 and 50 could serve in
the tabernacle, which at the time of that early
census totalled 2630 men (4:39,40). They were
responsible for the care and transportation of
the external furnishings of the tabernacle
(3:25-27; 4:24,27,28) and were given two wag-
ons and four oxen for the purpose, being super-
vised by Aaron and his sons (4:27).

After the initial settlement of Canaan, the
Gershonites were allotted 13 cities among the
tribes of Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, and Manas-
seh in the northern part of Palestine (Jos 21:6).
During the time of King David they were
listed among the Levites appointed to service
in the temple (1 Chr 23:6—11). The Gershonite _ three years.
families of Ladan and Jehieli were in charge of ©
the treasury of the house of God (26:20—22). At
David’s request music in the temple was
partly directed by Asaph and his family, who
were Gershonites (25:1,2).
In the reign of King Hezekiah the Gersho-
nites are mentioned among the Levites who
cleansed the temple (2 Chr 29:1—6,12).
In the postexilic period the descendants of the territory of Achish, king of Gath, David
Asaph celebrated the laying of the temple foun-
dation (Ezr 3:10) and the dedication of the city far as Shur, to the land of Egypt” (1 Sm 27:8).
walls (Neh 12:46) with music.
See LEVI, TRIBE OF; PRIESTS AND LEVITES.
Geruth Chimham. Plot of land (meaning
“the lodging place of Chimham’’) near Bethle-
hem. Geruth Chimham possibly was given to
Chimham for the service his father, Barzillai
the Gileadite, had rendered to King David (2
Sm 19:31—40; 1 Kgs 2:7). After the fall of Jerusa-
lem (586 Bc) Geruth Chimham was the camp
of Johanan son of Kareah and his band as they
prepared to flee to Egypt (Jer 41:17).
See CHIMHAM.
Geshan, Gesham. Jahdai’s son and a de-
scendant of Judah through Caleb’s line (1 Chr
2:47, KJV Gesham).
Geshem. Arab opponent of Nehemiah who
derided those seeking to rebuild the walls of
Jerusalem (Neh 2:19; 6:1,2,6, Kiv Gashmu). He
was likely an inhabitant of the North Arabian
desert and has been identified with Gashm,
son of Shahr in a Dedanite Arabian inscrip-
tion. Like Sanballat and Tobiah, his economic
interests were threatened by the rebuilding of
Jerusalem.
Geshur, Geshurites. 1. District and its in-
habitants: east of the Jordan River, in the
tribal allotment of the half tribe of Manasseh
(Jos 13:11). Most Bible geographers place it
near Bashan, on the E, NE shore of the Sea of
Galilee. In their conquest of the land, the Isra-
elites defeated Og, king of Bashan, and Jair
of Manasseh took Bashan as far as the border
of the Geshurites and Maachites (Dt 3:14).
Though the land of the Geshurites was given
to the Transjordanian tribes (Jos 13:11), Israel
did not drive them out (v 13). Later, Geshur
and Aram took 60 towns from the Israelites in
Transjordan (1 Chr 2:23).
Geuel
David married Maacah, daughter of Tal-
mai, king of Geshur, and she bore Absalom (2
Sm 3:3; 1 Chr 3:2).
After the vengeful murder of Amnom, Absa-
lom fled to Geshur for refuge with his grand-
father, Talmai (2 Sm 13:37) and stayed there
See Syria, SYRIANS.
2. Name of an area and its people south of
Philistia. Among the lands not yet taken at the
time of Joshua’s advanced old age are listed
“all the regions of the Philistines and Geshu-
rites: from the Shihor River on the east of
Egypt to the territory of Ekron on the north”
(Jos 13:2 NIv). When David lived at Ziklag, in
made raids upon the Geshurites and others, ‘‘as
CarRL E. DE VRIES
Gether. Aram’s son and the grandson of
Shem (Gn 10:23). In 1 Chronicles 1:17 he is
listed as one of the sons of Shem.
Gethsemane. Place to which Jesus and his
disciples walked after their last supper to-
gether in the upper room. In Gethsemane Je-
sus underwent a great inner struggle as he re-
alized the hour of his betrayal was at hand
(Mt 26:36—56; Mk 14:32—50; Lk 22:39-53).
The name “‘Gethsemane,’’ used only in the
Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32),
means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of
an olive grove. The use of the Greek word
“place” indicates that Gethsemane was an en-
closed piece of ground. It may be that the
grove was privately owned and that Jesus and
his disciples had special permission to enter.
Though the Gospels of Luke and John do
not mention the word ‘Gethsemane,’ they
both record Jesus’ agony before his betrayal.
Luke says the location was on the ‘‘Mount of
Olives’’ (22:39). John describes the area as
“across the Kidron valley” (18:1); John’s is the
only Gospel to call the spot a garden. From
those accounts it is also evident that Jesus and
his disciples gathered in Gethsemane often for
fellowship and prayer (Lk 22:39; Jn 18:2).
The Gospel narratives indicate that the gar-
den was large enough for the group to sepa-
rate into different parts of it.
Though the Franciscan, Russian, Armenian,
and Greek Orthodox churches have all claimed
otherwise, the precise location of Gethsemane
remains a matter of conjecture.
JAMEs D. PRICE
Geuel. Machi’s son from Gad’s tribe, and
one of the 12 spies appointed by Moses to
search out the Promised Land of Canaan (Nm
137165):
859
Gezer

The Garden of Gethsemane.

Gezer. Modern Tell Jezer (also known as

Tell Abu Shusha), and an important ancient
city in a strategic position in the north Shephe-
lah, about 18 miles W, NW of Jerusalem. It
was identified by C. Clermont-Ganneau in
1873, and excavations there were conducted by
R.A.S. Macalister (1902-09), A. Rowe (1934-
35), and G.E. Wright, W.G. Dever, et al. (1964-
73). An early non-Semitic people who lived
here apparently cremated their dead. The city
of the 3rd millenium Bc was protected by a
brick wall, which was replaced by a 13-foot
thick stone wall. The Canaanite city reached
its zenith during the 2zoth—14th centuries Bc.
The so-called outer wall was 14 feet thick and
enclosed an area of 27 acres. There was a Ca-
naanite high place (c. 1600 Bc) with 1o pillars
or standing stones (up to ro feet high) and a
stone altar or basin. A 216-foot tunnel with
steps led down to a spring in a cave, so that
there was safe and ready access to water in
time of siege, as at Gibeon and other Palestin-
ian sites. Objects found indicate cultural and
commercial contacts with Egypt. The Gezer
Calendar, a stone tablet with a Hebrew inscrip-
tion that gives the months of the year in terms
of agricultural activities, was dated to the roth
century BC.
Gezer (KJv Gazer) first appears in Egyptian
sources in the list of cities taken by Thutmose
III (c. 1469 Bc). The 14th-century Amarna tab-
lets include letters from kings of Gezer, Mil-
kilu and his successor, Yapahu, and show that
Gezer controlled an area that included Ajalon
and Zorah.
Horam, the king of Gezer, was defeated by
the Israelites under Joshua (Jos 10:33). Gezer A stone serpent for Baal worship, found in a cave at Gezer
was a levitical city in the tribal territory of and dated 1800-1200 BC. Both the Jebusites and the Canaan-
Ephraim (16:3; 21:21) but Ephraim was unable ites used the snake in their idol worship.

860
 Gibbethon

to drive out the Canaanites (Jgs 1:29). Mernep- ally in plural form, refers to several tribes of
tah (c. 1225-1215 Bc) of Egyptian dynasty 19 people who inhabited Palestine and who may
lists Gezer, along with Ashkelon and Yanoam, have been unusually large in physical size.
on the Israel Stela, which gives an account of They included the Anakim of Judah’s coastal
his conquests. area and hill country around Hebron (Dt 2:11),
During the reign of David, the Philistines the Emim of Moab (v 10), the Zamzummim of
invaded the plain of Rephaim, but the Lord Ammon (v 20), and the inhabitants of Bashan
instructed David in a successful ambush and (3:11). The word also appears in Joshua (12:4;
David struck down the Philistines “from Geba 13:12; 15:8; 17:15; 18:16). Some interpreters
to Gezer” (2 Sm 5:25). have suggested that these people were the
After Solomon’s marriage to the daughter original inhabitants of Palestine who were dis-
of the king of Egypt, the pharaoh, whose iden- tinct tribes of tall people and who were eventu-
tity is uncertain, captured and burned Gezer ally conquered and absorbed by the Canaan-
and gave it as a dowry to his daughter (1 Kgs ites, Philistines, Hebrews, and other invading
9:16). Solomon rebuilt Gezer, along with a peoples. Other interpreters contend that they
number of other cities which served as store- were not distinct racial tribes but were indi-
cities or chariot-cities (cf. vv 15-17). He forti- viduals of great stature, perhaps the result of
fied Gezer and made a strong gate with four disease, who were found among the various
sets of piers, like those at Hazor and Megiddo. races and tribes of Palestine. Neither conten-
In the 5th year of Rehoboam, Solomon’s tion can be established with certainty. Another
son, Shishak (Sheshonk), king of Egypt, in- Hebrew term is translated “giant” in both the
vaded Israel (1 Kgs 14:25). Gezer is included in KJv and Rsv (2 Sm 21:16,22; 1 Chr 20:8).
the list of captured cities inscribed on the wall Perhaps the most famous giant in biblical
of the temple of Karnak. literature is Goliath of Gath, the Philistine sol-
The capture of Gezer by the Assyrian king, dier who challenged King Saul’s army at the
Tiglath-pileser III (745-727 Bc), was shown in Valley of Elah and caused them to be dis-
reliefs on the walls of his palace at Nimrud mayed and afraid (1 Sm 17). He is said to have
(biblical Calah). The Assyrians brought to Ge- been 6 cubits and a span tall, which has been
zer conquered people from other areas, as they variously interpreted as being between 7% and
did at Samaria (2 Kgs 17:24). Cuneiform tab- g¥2 feet. David’s defeat of Goliath brought the
lets of contracts testify to their presence. youth prominence in Israel (18:5—7). Goliath is
CaRL E. DEVRIES not referred to in the text as a “giant,” but his
See LEVITICAL CITIES. height marks him as one of “gigantic” size.
King Og of Bashan was another unusually tall
Gezrite. kJv spelling of Girzite in 1 Samuel person (Dt 3:11).
27:8. The Girzites were raided by David’s men See NEPHILIM.
while he was at Ziklag.
See GIRZITES.
Giants, Valley of the. xksv translation for
Ghost, Holy. See Hoty Spirit. “Valley of Rephaim” in Joshua 15:8 and 18:16.
See REPHAIM, VALLEY OF.
Giah. Unidentified place along the descent
from Gibeon to the Arabah to which Joab and
Abishai pursued Abner (2 Sm 2:24). Gibbar. Forefather of a family that returned
to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel (Ezr 2:20). The
Giants. English translation of four different parallel list in Nehemiah 7:25 reads “sons of
Hebrew words. One of these words occurs in Gibeon,” suggesting that “Gibbar” may be a
Job 16:14, where the Hebrew word means textual corruption. Some support for this view
“mighty man, warrior” in the rsv, and “giant” lies in the fact that Ezra 2:21 begins listing de-
in the ksv. Another Hebrew word is translated scendants by home city rather than by family.
“giants” in the kKJv and “Nephilim” (a translit-
eration of the Hebrew) in the rsv (Gn 6:4; Nm
13:33). The original meaning of this Hebrew Gibbethon. City in the western part of cen-
term is unknown, but it seems to be used of a tral Palestine. It was located in the territory of
group or race of people. Since none of the Dan (Jos 19:44) and allotted to the Levite clan
terms translated “giants” has that actual of Kohath (21:23). Baasha killed King Nadab
meaning, we cannot be sure that the Nephilim at Gibbethon when Israel was taking the city
were of unusual physical stature. from the Philistines (1 Kgs 15:27). About 26
In several passages the KJv translates “gi- years later, Omri was proclaimed king at Gib-
ants” where the rsv translates “Rephaim” bethon (16:17).
(e.g., Dt 2:11,20; 3:11; Jos 12:4). That word, usu- See LEVITICAL CITIES.

861
Gibea
An aerial view of Gibeah.
Gibea. Caleb’s grandson from Judah’s tribe
(1 Chr 2:49; see also Jos 15:57).
Gibeah. 1. Gibeath-haaraloth (Jos 5:3 Rsv,
KJV hill of the foreskins); a place located be-
tween the Jordan River and Jericho, in the vi-
cinity of Gilgal, where Joshua conducted the
circumcision of the Hebrew males born in the
wilderness during the 40 years of wandering.
2. Town in the hill country of Judah
15:57). Its exact location is uncertain. Gibeah
is listed as being among other towns located
in the section of Judah southeast of Hebron
and probably was in the fertile plateau con-
taining Maon, Ziph, and Carmel.
3. Town in the province of Benjamin, also
called “Gibeah of Saul” (1 Sm 11:4, 15:34; Is
10:29), and its inhabitants are called Gibea-
thites (1 Chr 12:3). It is first mentioned in the
description of the territory assigned to Benja-
min (Jos 18:28, KsJv Gibeath) and comes
prominence in the biblical narrative as a re-
sult of the atrocity recounted in Judges 19-21
of the Levite and his concubine.
Gibeah was also noted as the home of Saul
(1 Sm 10:26). After his anointing as king of Is-
rael, Saul returned to Gibeah, and it probably
remained his home and his capital (10:26; 22:6;
23:19).
Another tragic event is recorded in 2 Sam-
uel 21. A famine had afflicted Israel for three
years, and the text assigns the reason for it
to Saul, “because he put the Gibeonites to
death” (v 1). So, David asked the Gibeonites
what he could do to recompense them, and
they asked for seven sons of Saul to be hanged
at Gibeah; David gave them two sons and five
grandsons of Saul, and the Gibeonites hanged
them there (1 Sm 21:8,9).
The site of ancient Gibeah has been gener-
ally identified as the modern Tell el-Ful. The
OT references place Gibeah north of Jerusa-
lem, between Jerusalem and Ramah, and situ-
ated near the primary south-to-north road
through the hill country (Jgs 19:11—19). Tell el-
Ful is about 37% miles north of Jerusalem and
is situated on one of the highest areas in that
mountain range. Excavations reveal that an
early Israelite village was there about the 12th
century BC and was destroyed by fire. Proba-
bly during the 11th century a stone fortress
was built, and its corner tower is still evident.
It probably was the citadel of Saul and his
royal residence. A second fortress was built
about rooo BC, but fell into disuse when David
established the Israelite capital at Jerusalem.
It then served as an outpost for the capital
city. The tower was alternately destroyed and
rebuilt through the centuries until its final de-
struction in the war between Antiochus II
and Ptolemy V. Josephus wrote that a village
existed at the site of Gibeah during the Roman
period, but it finally ceased to exist with the
Roman destruction of Jerusalem (aD 70).
4. Town in the hills of Ephraim which was
given to Phinehas, son of Eleazar. It was the
burial site of Eleazar (Jos 24:33). An addition
to the Septuagint indicates that Phinehas was
also buried here. Its exact location is un-
known, and several sites have been suggested:
(Jos Nibi Saleh, about 6% miles northwest of Jifna;
Jibia, 4 miles northwest of Jifna; et-Tell, north-
east of Jifna and south of Sinjil; and Awertah
near Shechem.
5. Gibeath-elohim (1 Sm 10:5 Rsv, KJv hill of
God). At this site Samuel, following Saul’s
anointing as king, predicted that Saul would
meet a company of prophets and would proph-
esy with them. This was to be a sign of God’s
selection of Saul as Israel’s king. Some have
suggested that this is the same place as Gib-
to eah of Benjamin, the home of Saul, but the
context suggests that Saul reached this place
before he arrived at his home.
6. Hill near Kiriath-jearim, where the ark of
the covenant was housed by Abinadab, after
its return from the Philistines and until it was
moved by David to the house of Obededom (2
Sm 6:1—4).
WayNE C. HENSLEY
Gibeath. uv spelling of the town Gibeah in
Joshua 18:28.
See GIBEAH #3.
Gibeath-elohim. Place where Samuel fore-
told an event that would confirm Saul as Isra-
el’s king (1 Sm 10:5).
See GIBEAH #5.
Gibeath-haaraloth. Place situated between
Jericho and the Jordan, near Gilgal (Jos 5:3).
See GIBEAH #1.
Gibeathite. Inhabitant of the Benjamite
town of Gibeah (i Chr 12:3).
See GIBEAH #3.
862
 Gibeon, Gibeonites

Gibeon, Gibeonites. Place and its inhabit- in his blood. In David’s time also seven sons
ants figuring prominantly in the OT from the of Saul were executed ‘“‘at Gibeon on the
days of Joshua to the days of Nehemiah, mountain of the Lord” (21:1—9) in retribution
though both were in existence outside these for Saul’s violation of the ancient covenant
time limits. The site may be identified with between Gibeon and Israel when he slew men
confidence as el-Jib some 5% miles north of of Gibeon (21:1-6).
Jerusalem. This identification was proposed There was an important high place still op-
as early as 1838 by Edward Robinson. Since --erating at Gibeon in David’s time. The taberna-
the excavation of this site in the years 1956, cle of the Lord rested there and an altar of
1957, 1959, 1960, and 1962, and the discovery of burnt offering as well (1 Chr 16:39; 21:29). It
31 jar handles bearing the names of Gibeon was at Gibeon according to 1 Kings 3:3—9 that
the identification is placed beyond doubt. Cer- Solomon dreamed after offering a sacrifice
tain geographical and chronological consider- and asked for an understanding mind to gov-
ations also support this. The location of Gib- ern Israel well (cf. 2 Chr 1:2—13). A second time
eon, north of Jerusalem and accessible to that God appeared to Solomon at Gibeon to assure
city in the days of David, Solomon, and Jere- him that his prayer had been heard and to
miah, as well as its location southwest of Ai urge him to walk in God’s ways (1 Kgs 9:2-9).
combine geographically to support this identi- Gibeon was among the cities taken by Pha-
fication. Further, the periods of occupation at raoh Shishak in the second half of the roth
el-Jib revealed by excavation are parallel to century Bc. Presumably Gibeon remained an
historical data supplied by the OT. important center during the days of the kings.
Biblical Data. The first mention of Gibeon There was a prophet in Gibeon in the days of
and its inhabitants comes in Joshua g and ro Jeremiah, although he prophesied falsely (Jer
in the days of Joshua, perhaps about 1200 Bc. 28:1—4). In the months following the fall of Je-
Hearing of the success of the people of Israel rusalem in 586 Bc when the traitor Ishmael
at Jericho and Ai the people of Gibeon, Chephi- slew Gedaliah, the Babylonian governor, and
rah, Be-eroth, and Kiriath-jearim plotted to his garrison and took loyal Jews captive, Joha-
obtain a covenant of peace from them. By pre- nan led a force to capture him and to rescue
tending that they had come from afar and dis- his captives. They came upon Ishmael at the
playing worn-out clothing and footwear as great pool in Gibeon. The captives were res-
well as dried bread, they were able to deceive cued but Ishmael escaped (41:11—16).
Joshua into making a treaty with them. When Some of the Gibeonites went into exile in
their deception was discovered they were sen- Babylon and a small group returned (Neh
tenced to become “‘hewers of wood and draw- 7:25) and assisted Nehemiah in repairing the
ers of water’ (Jos 9:21,23,27). Neighboring Jerusalem wall (3:7,8). Later still Josephus re-
groups of people from Jerusalem, Hebron, Jar- lates that Cestius pitched his camp at Gibeon
muth, Lachish, and Eglon, led by Adoni-zedek on his march to Jerusalem in aD 66 (War 2.515—
king of Jerusalem, launched an attack on Gib- 516). Biblical references cover a period from
eon because of its defection to Joshua. The about 1200 BC to about 445 BC, in archaeologi-
Gibeonites appealed to Joshua, and the Israel- cal terms from the beginning of the Iron I pe-
ites made a forced march from Gilgal to assist riod, through the Iron II period, and into the
them. The enemies of Gibeon were driven Persian or Iron III period. We would expect,
down the road to Beth-horon. Their rout was therefore, to find evidence for at least these
completed with the assistance of hailstones. In periods in an excavation. In fact the whole pe-
that day the sun stood still over Gibeon (Jos riod of occupation reaches from Early Bronze
10:9-13). Only Gibeon made peace with the in- I, about 3100 Bc, into the early Roman period.
coming Israelites (11:19). In due course the Archaeological Data. Gibeon was occu-
town became part of Benjamin’s territory pied extensively in the Early Bronze Age I
(18i2s2r-77). (3150-2850 Bc) well before the biblical story
In the days before David was king, Saul’s begins. There was some occupation during the
general encountered some of David’s men at Middle Bronze Age (2200-1550 Bc) and the
Gibeon and engaged in an unusual contest at Late Bronze Age (1550-1200 BC), but the re-
the “pool of Gibeon.” Twelve men from each mains from these periods are limited. With
side fought and were all thrust through by the coming of the Iron I period (1200-1100 Bc)
the swords of their opponents (2 Sm 2:12~17). Gibeon began to flourish, and it remained a
This encounter was followed by a further thriving city throughout the Iron II period
skirmish where David’s men were successful (1000-586 Bc). There is scant evidence of occu-
(2:18—32). Later, David’s nephew Amasa, cap- pation from the end of the 6th century until
tain of the rebel army of Absalom, was at- the beginning of the rst century Bc when it
tacked by Joab at the ‘‘great stone which is in began to flourish once again.
Gibeon”’ (20:8) and left to die in the highway Apart from some preliminary work, the ma-
863
Giblite
The pool of Gibeon.
jor excavation of Gibeon was undertaken by
J.B. Pritchard in five seasons during the sum-
mers of 1956 to 1962. Several features of these
excavations are significant.
The Great Pool. This is referred to several
times in the Bible and can now be identified.
It was 37 feet in diameter and 82 feet deep,
cylindrical in shape with perpendicular sides
cut into bed-rock. There was a spiral stairway
of 79 steps which gave access to fresh water 80
feet below street level. The pool lay inside the
city walls.
The Stepped Tunnel. There was a second
plan for obtaining water in time of siege. An
underground sloping tunnel which descended
by a series of 93 steps led to an underground
reservoir fed by a spring originating in the
rock mass below the city. This spring had
been traced and a feeder tunnel enabled its
water to flow more readily to the reservoir.
Any overflow found its way via a conduit to
the village below. This was a remarkable en-
gineering achievement. The stepped tunnel
reached down to a depth of 80 feet and was 167
feet long. In its walls were niches to hold oil
lamps. Probably it was here that the “drawers
of water” (Jos 9:27) obtained their supplies.
Inscriptions and Royal Stamp Seals. Sixty-
one jar handles have been found on which in-
scriptions were cut in the archaic Hebrew
script. On 31 of these is the word for Gibeon in
whole or in part. Another 80 jar handles carry
the letters Imlk, “belonging to the king.” Sev-
eral well-known OT names such as Azariah,
Amariah, Hananiah, and Neriah and a num-
ber of place-names such as Hebron, Socoh,
and Ziph appear on these inscriptions.
Industrial Area. A remarkable industrial
area came to light in the excavations, located
both north and south of the pool. Here there
were numerous winepresses, fermenting ba-
sins, and 63 underground cellars for cooling
large wine jars. The whole area covered over
rr0o square yards with cellars sunk into the
864
limestone, some of these being over seven feet
deep and equipped with stone covers. It is esti-
mated that up to 25,000 gallons of wine could
be stored in the jars. Some of the cellars were
used as tombs in Roman times, but in Byzan-
tine and modern times their use as wine cel-
lars continued. In detail the cellars were
bottle-shaped and averaged 7.2 feet in depth
and 6.6 feet across at the bottom. The opening
to the cellars averaged 2.2 feet in diameter at
the top. The jars in which the wine was stored
had a capacity of 9.75 gallons. It is clear that
the manufacture of wine was an important ele-
ment in the economy of Gibeon in OT times.
Fortifications. Gibeon was a walled city.
Two impressive stone walls which encircled
the city at different periods have been ex-
posed. No traces of walls were found that
could be dated to the Early, Middle, or Late
Bronze periods although the remains of house
walls, pottery, and tombs demonstrate that
the city was occupied then. The excavator con-
cluded that the construction of the earlier wall
dates to the 12th century Bc and the later wall
was built in the roth century Bc and continued
in use to the end of the 7th century Bc. The
average thickness of the wall was about 13
feet. The circumference of the fortification was
z125-feet.
The Necropolis. The burial place of Gibeon
was situated to the west of the city halfway
down the rock scarp. Many of the graves con-
tained skeletal remains, pottery, scarabs, and
other artifacts. The size of the tombs varied
considerably, but most consisted of a vertical
cylindrical shaft about 3.7 feet in diameter,
the depths varying from 3.3 feet to 13 feet. The
tombs were sealed by either one large stone or
several smaller ones at the foot of the vertical
shaft where the burial chamber opened to one
side.
JOHN A. THOMPSON
See GIBBAR; CONQUEST AND ALLOTMENT OF THE
LAND.
Giblite. sv rendering of Gebalite, an inhab-
itant of Gebal, in Joshua 13:5.
See GEBAL #1.
Giddalti. Heman’s son and a temple singer
appointed by David to serve under the direc-
tion of his father (1 Chr 25:4). The 22nd of the
24 divisions of service fell to Giddalti (v 29).
Giddel. 1. Ancestor of a group of temple assis-
tants that returned to Jerusalem with Zerub-
babel after the exile (Ezr 2:47; Neh 7:49).
2. Another ancestor of a group of people
that returned with Zerubbabel after the Baby-
lonian exile (Ezr 2:56; Neh 7:58).
 Gideon

Gideon. Judge of Israel, son of Joash, of the effect of the clamor is overwhelming. Thinking
clan of Abiczer and the tribe of Manasseh. Of themselves outnumbered, the confused and dis-
the 12 judges of Israel more verses are devoted heartened Midianites flee eastward across the
to Gideon than any other, Samson running a Jordan. In hot pursuit, Gideon’s men are joined
close second. The narrative in which he is the by Israelites from Naphtali, Asher, and Manas-
central character antedates the Christian era seh, who follow the enemy into the Trans-
by roughly 11 centuries. jordan area. The men of Ephraim, whose ef-
Following seven years of cruel oppression .- forts are now called upon for the first time,
by the Midianites, Israel cried out to the Lord capture and kill two of the Midianite leaders.
for relief (Jgs 6:6). An unknown prophet in- Angry with Gideon for failing to enlist their
forms the Israelites that their miserable condi- services earlier, the Ephraimites are nonethe-
tions stem from their forgetting to give exclu- less appeased by Gideon’s tactful response to
sive devotion to the one true God. God sends their queries (8:1—3).
his angel to Gideon. A touch of humor ear- Perhaps out of chronological sequence, we
marks the angel’s greeting, for the “mighty learn of the uncooperative Israelites of Suc-
warrior” (v 12) is threshing wheat secretly for coth (in the region of Gad) and their nearby
fear of the Midianites. Yet God addresses Gid- eastern neighbors of Penuel (cf. Gn 32:22—32)
eon in realization of what his mighty power is who refuse aid to their Jewish brethren for
able to accomplish in him (vv 14,16,34). Con- fear of possible retaliation by the Midianites,
scious of his own weakness and the formidable whose kings Zeba and Zalmunna are still at
task before him, Gideon is an ideal vehicle for large. True to the rough justice of that time,
God’s tremendous work of deliverance (cf. Gideon vows terrible reprisals upon these fel-
1Cor 2:27; 2 Cor 12:10), low countrymen (Jgs 8:7—9; cf. vv 15-17).
Gideon’s first task is to tear down his fa- Following the devastating victory at Kar-
ther’s altar to Baal and the adjacent one to kor, a remote wadi east of the Dead Sea, the
Asherah, Baal’s female consort (cf. Is 42:8). Midianite host is finally and totally dispersed.
Conscious of the people’s resistance to such an It is at that point that Gideon’s noble unselfish-
act, Gideon and his servants destroy these im- ness shines in response to the people’s desire
ages of debased Canaanite religion at night. to make him king (Jgs 8:22,23). He does, how-
The following day the men of Ophrah confront ever, receive an immense personal fortune
Gideon and seek his life in retaliation for the from the spoils of war (vv 24-26).
act. Surprisingly Joash pleads the cause of his The unfortunate conclusion of Gideon’s
son, inviting Baal, if he indeed is deity, to con- story relates to his making an ephod from the
tend for himself. Out of this confrontation the gold won in battle. Perhaps a garment pat-
name Jerubbaal (‘let Baal contend’’) is as- terned after the high priest’s or a free-standing
cribed to Gideon (Jgs 6:32). image, the object ensnares the people, and
Yet Gideon is a man of inconstant faith, they worship it at Ophrah (Jgs 8:27). In 2 Sam-
and his desire for further assurance is not re- uel 11:21 Gideon’s alternate name, Jerubbaal,
buked as God graciously and patiently accedes becomes Jerubbesheth, ‘‘Baal’’ being replaced
to his requests concerning the dew and the with the Hebrew word for “shame” (bosheth).
fleece (Jgs 6:36—40). Subsequently Gideon is in- No longer a man of modest means, an afflu-
formed that mere numbers will not assure vic- ent Gideon enjoys peace for the remainder of
tory (cf. Pss 118:8,9; 147:10; Eccl 9:11a). More- his lifetime. Seventy sons are born with lin-
over, there must be no doubt whatever as to eages through his Abiezrite clan. Yet Abimi-
the true source of Israel’s liberation (Jgs 7:2). lech, whose treachery is described in chapter
From 32,000, Gideon’s troops are trimmed g, is the son of a concubine of Shechem, a Ca-
down to only 300 by an unusual method of naanite city.
reduction (vv 3—7). A secret reconnaisance mis- Following Gideon’s death there is a large-
sion to the outskirts of the opposition’s camp scale reversion to idolatry, chiefly the worship
enables Gideon to receive further strengthen- of Baal-berith (Lord of the covenant). The Isra-
ing as he and his servant Purah overhear a elites not only forget the Lord their God but
Midianite soldier reveal his dream indicating also forget to show honor to the memory of
Israel’s imminent victory (vv 13,14). In re- their former general (8:35).
sponse to this additional encouragement he A humble man who spoke firmly for the
worships the Lord (v 15; cf. 6:24). rightness of theocracy and not a hereditary
Divided into three companies, Gideon's monarchy (8:23), Gideon has been singled out
army stations itself at night outside the Midian- in the Letter to the Hebrews as a hero of the
ite stronghold. At Gideon’s signal each man faith whose trust in God—not the arm of
blows a trumpet (made from an animal’s horn) flesh—brought glory to the Lord (Heb 11:32,
and smashes an empty jar, shouting, “‘a sword KJV Gedeon). As far back as the time of Isaiah,
for the Lord and for Gideon!” (Jgs 7:20). The “the Day of Midian” had become proverbial
865
Gideoni
for deliverance accomplished by the hand of
God apart from human strength (Is 9:4).
Stuart D. Sacks
See JUDGES, Book OF.
Gideoni. Abidan’s father and leader of Ben-
jamin’s tribe when the Israelites were roam-
ing in the Sinai wilderness after their escape
from Egypt (Nm 1:11; 2:22; 10:24). As leader,
Gideoni presented his tribe’s offering at the
consecration of the tabernacle (Nm 7:60—65).
Gidom. Place to which the Benjamite army
was driven during a civil war between Benja-
min and the rest of Israel (Jgs 20:45). Its loca-
tion is unknown.
Gier Eagle. xsv translation for carrion vul-
ture in Leviticus 11:18 and Deuteronomy 14:17.
See BIRDS (VULTURE, EGYPTIAN).
Gifts, Spiritual. See Sprriruat GiFts.
Gihon, Spring of. Site in Jerusalem where
Solomon was anointed as king (1 Kgs 1:33,38,
45). There are two sources of running water in
Jerusalem: (1) the ‘Ain Umm el Daraj’ (also
known as the Spring of the Mother of Steps,
Gihon in the OT, and to Christians as the Vir-
gin’s Fountain), which lies at the eastern
ridge, and (2) Bir ‘Ayub, or the well of Job. The
importance of the spring of Gihon for the de-
fense of Jerusalem in time of siege is empha-
sized by Hezekiah’s measures to deny his ene-
mies access to the water supply and provide
access for those who defended the city (2 Kgs
267209 2°Chri42730;: cla: Kgs: 25472: Chr 32:34;
Is 7:3). Hezekiah’s tunnel brought the waters
from the spring of Gihon in the Kidron valley
Excavations on Mt Ophel near the Spring of Gihon.
866
(eastern) into the central valley where the
present-day Pool of Siloam is located. The
spring was unable to supply all of Jerusalem's
needs after the exile, and in the Roman period
aqueducts were built to bring in additional
water.
See SILOAM, Poot oF.
Gilalai. Musician present at the dedication
of the Jerusalem wall, rebuilt during Ezra’s
time (Neh 12:36).
Gilboa, Mount. Mountain on the east side
of the plain of Esdraelon between Galilee on
the north and Samaria on the south (modern
Jebel Fuqu‘ah). Many battles were fought in
the area, including Deborah’s defeat of Sisera.
At that time the flooding of the Kishon, which
rose in Gilboa, greatly helped in the victory
(Jgs 5:21). This region was the probable loca-
tion of Gideon’s camp when he attacked the
Midianites (Jgs 6:33). Gilboa is only men-
tioned by name in connection with Saul’s de-
fense of the area against the Philistines. Here
his sons were killed, and he himself commit-
ted suicide (1 Sm 31:1,8; 2 Sm 1:6,21; 21:12; 1
Chr 10:1,8). Had the Israelites stayed in the
uplands instead of moving into the Philistine
plain and posing a threat to the trading route
between Egypt and Damascus, Saul and his
family would not have been killed.
Mt Gilboa towers over the valley of Jezreel.
It is a weathered limestone ridge reaching toa
height of 17,000 feet above sea level.
See SAUL #2.
Gilead, Balm of. Substance of uncertain
identification and one of several resins used in
the Near East for medicinal purposes. It did
not grow in Gilead, however, but may have
received its name from being exported to
Egypt and Phoenicia from Gilead (Gn 37:25;
Ez 27:17). The substance supposedly had as-
tringent, antiseptic, and other therapeutic
qualities.
See MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICES; PLANTS.
Gilead, Gileadite (Person). 1. Machir’s son
from Manasseh’s tribe (Nm 26:29,30; 27:1; 36:1)
and head of the clan of his descendants (26:29;
36:1) during the time of Moses (26:29).
2. Father of Jephthah during the period of
the judges (Jgs 11:1,2). Jephthah was the head
of the Gileadites and judge over Israel.
3. Michael’s son from Gad’s tribe, who lived
in Bashan during the initial settlement of Pal-
estine (1 Chr 5:14).
Gilead, Gileadite (Place). 1. Region east of
the Jordan River. Generally used to designate

the territory occupied by all the Transjor-
danian Israelite tribes (Jgs 20:1; 2 Kgs 10:33;
Jer 50:19; Zec 10:10). Specifically, Gilead is the
area of the Transjordan lying between the
Yarmuk and Arnon rivers and divided by the
Jabbok River.
The so-called Dome of Gilead is an exten-
sion of the central hill country of Judah, rising
to heights of more than 3000 feet above the
Jordan Valley. The valleys and hills were well
watered by numerous rivers and tributaries,
making flatter portions of the countryside
well-suited for agriculture, especially olive
trees, grape vines, and grains (cf. Jer 8:22;
46:11; Hos 2:8). The densely forested and
rugged hills were sometimes compared to
those of Lebanon (Jer 22:6; Zec ro:10) and
made the land a refuge for those in flight,
since the terrain prohibited ready pursuit by
enemies (cf. Gn 31:21; 1 Sm 13:7).
Originally the region of Gilead was allotted
to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh
(Nm 21). The period of the judges saw Israelite
security there assailed by the Midianites and
Amelekites, only to be checked by the military
exploits of Gideon (Jgs 6,7). Half a century
later Jephthah was recalled from his banish-
ment to rescue Gilead from oppressive Am-
monite rule (Jgs 10,11). During the united
monarchy Saul delivered Jabesh-gilead from
Ammonite dominance (1 Sm 11:1—11; 31:8—13;
2 Sm 2:1—7); Abner installed Ish-bosheth as a
rival to David in Gilead (2 Sm 2:8,9); David
conquered the Ammonites controlling Gilead
as he extended the borders of Israel (2 Sm
8:12; 10:1-19). He fled there for refuge in the
face of Absalom’s rebellion (chs 15-17) and
was finally restored to the throne when Absa-
lom was slain in the forest of Ephraim (chs
18,19). Gilead remained a battleground during
867
Gilgal
The Yarmuk River, the north-
ern boundary of Gilead.
the divided monarchy, as first the Israelites
warred with the Syrians (Aramaeans; 1 Kgs
20:23—43; 22:1-4,29-40; 2 Kgs 13:22; Am 1:3)
and then with the Assyrians, who wrested the
territory from Pekah in 733 Bc and deported
the Israelite population, thus severing Gilead’s
tie to the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 15:27—31).
See DECAPOLIS; PEREA.
2. ‘City of evildoers, tracked with blood”
(Hos 6:8). This may be an abbreviated name
for Jabesh-gilead or Ramoth-gilead (cf. Jgs
10:17,18).
ANDREW E. HILL
Gilgal. 1. Town near Jericho. Gilgal was as-
signed to Benjamin’s tribe when Palestine was
divided among the tribes of Israel. For many
years it was a center of religious, political, and
military importance, especially during the pe-
riods of the conquest of Canaan and the early
monarchy under Saul.
Gilgal was the first place where Israel en-
camped in Palestine after the miraculous cross-
ing of the Jordan River (Jos 4:19). No doubt
the tabernacle was set up here, since Israel
occupied Gilgal for some time and used it as
center of the commonwealth. Several signifi-
cant religious events occurred at Gilgal: the
circumcision of all Hebrew males born in the
wilderness during the 40 years of wandering
(Jos 5:2—-9), the celebration of the Passover (v
10), the cessation of the manna (v 12), and a
divine manifestation to Joshua by the “com-
mander of the army of the Lord” (vv 13—15).
Militarily, Gilgal was Israel's first foothold
in Canaan and the base of operations for the
conquest. From here Joshua led Israel to the
conquest of Jericho (Jos 6) and Ai (8:3), formed
a treaty with the Gibeonites (9:3-15), attacked
Gilgamesh Epic
the five Amorite kings (10:6—43), and launched
his northern campaign (ch rr). At Gilgal Ju-
dah, Manasseh, and Ephraim were assigned
their portions of Palestine (chs 15-17).
After the relocation of the tabernacle at
Shiloh, Gilgal retained its importance to Is-
rael. It was one of the towns visited regularly
by Samuel in his annual circuit as judge
(1 Sm 7:16) and was one of the primary places
for offering sacrifices (10:8; 13:9,10; 15:21). At
Gilgal Saul, a Benjamite, was crowned king
(11:14,15), and later rejected (13:4-15; 15:17—
31). Here the men of Judah met David return-
ing to Palestine after Absalom’s rebellion
(2Sm 19:15). That Gilgal was still a religious
center of some importance as late as the 8th
century BC is indicated in the denunciation by
Hosea and Amos of the sanctuary and sacrifi-
cial cult located there (Hos 4:15; 9:15; 12:11;
Am 4:4; 5:5).
The exact location of Gilgal is disputed
among archaeologists. Some locate it at Khir-
bet en-Nitleh about two miles east of modern
Jericho. Others prefer Khirbet Mefjir, a mound
about one mile from ancient Jericho (Tell es-
Sultan). Joshua 4:19 places it on the eastern
border of Jericho, and Josephus gives the dis-
tance from the Jordan fording place to Gilgal
as 50 Stadia (c. 5.8 miles), with Gilgal being
about 10 stadia from Jericho (Antig. 5.6.4).
These distances fit best with Khirbet Mefjir.
2. Place perhaps near Jericho (Dt 11:30);
however, the language of the passage implies
that it is located in the neighborhood of Mt
Ebal and Mt Gerizim.
3. KJV rendering of “Goiim in Galilee” in
Joshua 12:23. Although its location is uncer-
tain, the context places it in northern Pales-
tine in the area of Galilee.
See Goum #2.
4. Place describing the northern border of
Judah (Jos 15:7). It was near Adummim and
was perhaps identifiable with Geliloth in Josh-
ua 18:17.
5. Place mentioned in connection with Eli-
jah and Elisha (2 Kgs 2:1; 4:38). It was appar-
ently a town farther from the Jordan River
than #1 above. In the story of Elijah’s transla-
tion into heaven, he and Elisha were going
from Gilgal to Bethel to Jericho. Since the ac-
count places Bethel between Gilgal and Jeri-
cho, it could not have been the first Gilgal. It
may refér to the modern Jiljiliah, a town on
top of a hill in central Palestine, about seven
miles north of Bethel.
WAYNE C. HENSLEY
Gilgamesh Epic. Twelve-tablet Babylonian
story of Gilgamesh’s quest for immortality. The
11th tablet records a version of the flood.
See FLoop MyTHs.
868
Giloh, Gilo, Gilonite. Village, and the in-
habitants, in the mountains of southern Judah
(Jos 15:51). David’s counselor Ahitophel was a
Gilonite (2 Sm 15:12; 23:34, RSV Gilo). It has
been identified with modern Khirbet Jala just
northeast of Hebron.
*
Gimzo. Town of Judah captured by the Phi-
listines during King Ahaz’s reign (2 Chr 28:18).
It is modern Jimzu, located southeast of Ludd
(Lydda).
Ginath. Tibni’s father. Tibni unsuccessfully
attempted to gain the throne of Israel. Omri
became king instead (1 Kgs 16:21,22).
Ginnethoi, Ginnetho. Priest who set his
seal on Ezra’s covenant during the postexilic
period (Neh 10:6, alternately spelled Ginne-
thon; 12:4, KJV Ginnetho).
Ginnethon. 1. Alternate spelling of Ginne-
thoi, a postexilic priest, in Nehemiah 10:6.
See GINNETHOI, GINNETHO.
2. Priest and head of Meshullam’s house-
hold during the postexilic days of Joiakim the
high priest (Neh 12:16).
Girdle. Various articles of clothing worn
about the waist.
See FASHION AND DRESS.
Girgashites. Canaanite tribe (Gn 10:16; 1
Chr 1:14) whose land was promised to the
Jews (Gn 15:21; Dt 7:1; Jos 3:10) and was ulti-
mately acquired (Jos 24:11; Neh 9:8). The
tribe’s location is unknown, though they may
have lived in Karkisha, a city mentioned in
Hittite texts, or in Kirkishati, an area east of
the Tigris. The name Gresh appeared in 13th
century Bc Ugaritic texts, and might indicate a
tribe. In Matthew 8:28; Mark 5:1; and Luke
8:26, a name variously translated as “Gerge-
senes” (KJv), “Gerasenes,’ and “Gadarenes”
may preserve the tradition of Girgashite occu-
pation in Palestine.
Girzites. People living in southwest Canaan
who were raided by David when at Ziklag (1
Sm 27:8, KJv Gezrites). The Hebrew text has
girzi, while the marginal variant transposes
two consonants to read gizri, “Gezrites.” The
Greek version follows the Hebrew marginal
variant. The confusion of the names is obvi-
ously early. If “Gerzites” is the original, they
could have been a Canaanite tribe living in the
Mt Gerizim area. If “Gezrites” originally, the
people could have migrated from Gezer. They
are otherwise unmentioned in the OT.

Gishpa, Gispa. Overseer of the temple ser-
vants in Nehemiah’s time (Neh 11:21,
Gispa); perhaps alternately called Hasupha in
Ezra 2:43 and Nehemiah 7:46.
See HASUPHA.
Gittah-hepher. «sv form of the town, Gath-
hepher, in Joshua 19:13.
See GATH-HEPHER.
Gittaim. Town in Benjamin to which the in-
habitants of Be-eroth fled, where they re-
mained under civil protection (2 Sm 4:3). Nehe-
miah 11:33 lists Gittaim as one of the places
where the returned exiles later settled. The
two references may indicate two different
places. If so, the second Gittaim may be lo-
cated northwest of Jerusalem. Some scholars,
however, believe that there is only one
taim, the one near Be-eroth. No site has been
established as yet.
Gittite. Inhabitant of Gath, the Philistine
city (2 Sm 6:10,11; 1 Chr 13:13).
See GATH.
Gittith. Obscure Hebrew term in the super-
scriptions of Psalms 8, 81, and 84; perhaps a
musical instrument or a musical cue, signal-
ing a mood, to which the psalms were to be
performed.
See Music AND MusIcaL INSTRUMENTS.
Gizonite. Designation for Hashem, one of
David’s mighty men (1 Chr 11:34). Gizon may
describe an ancient Canaanite settlement.
Some scholars have emended the text to read
“Gunite” (cf. 1 Chr 5:15; 7:13) or “from Gimzo”’
(cf. 2 Chr 28:18).
Glass. «sv mistranslation for “mirror” in
Isaiah 3:23; 1 Corinthians 13:12; and James
1:23. Since mirrors of Bible times were pol-
ished metal sheets, ‘‘glass” is incorrect.
See MIRROR.
Glean, Gleaning. Practice of allowing the
poor to follow reapers in a field to pick up
missed spears of grain (cf. Lv 19:9,10; 23:22; Dt
24:21; Ru 2:2—23). Vineyards, as well as fields
of grain, were to be available for gleaning (Lv
19:10; Dt 24:20,21). Olive trees, however, were
not to be gone over a second time (cf. Jgs 8:2;
Is 17:6; 24:13; Jer 6:9; 49:9 [figuratively]; Mi
7:1). The word “gleaned” is also used to de-
scribe the killing of men who fled from a bat-
tle (Jgs 20:45 KJV).
Glorification
Glede. xsv translation for “buzzard” in Deu-
KJV teronomy 14:13.
See Birps (KITE).
Glorification. Doctrine of an aspect of sal-
vation built upon the broader biblical concept
.of the glory of God. The Hebrew word for
“glory” originally meant “weighty, heavy, or
important.’’ From there it moved to the idea
of an influential, rich, or prominent person. In
ancient cultures the wealthy and the powerful
were marked by the finery of their dress and
jewels. Hence a person’s glory meant the osten-
tatious signs of wealth and power. Glory also
suggested beauty, since fine clothes and jewels
were items of beauty. The concept was then
extended to God.
Glory of God. In the OT the glory of God
Git- means something obvious about God. The
Book of Exodus is rich with references to
God’s glory. There was the fiery pillar and the
glory that entered into the Holy of Holies in
the tabernacle (cf. 40:34—38).
In the making of the tabernacle (Ex 25-27),
the concepts of glory and beauty are joined.
There is evidence that the goodness of the
Lord that Moses saw (33:19) could also be
translated as beauty. Hence God’s glory is his
beauty.
The NT continues the theme of the OT, that
God is a God of glory (cf. the vision of God in
his glory in Rv 4). The main NT evidence, how-
ever, centers on the glory of Christ. John’s Gos-
pel is uniquely the Gospel of glory. In the in-
carnation, the Son of God showed the glory
that was his as the only begotten of the Father
(Jn 1:14). The raising of Lazarus was a manifes-
tation of the glory of God by. Christ (11:40).
Jesus’ prayer in John 17 is filled with com-
ments on the glory of Christ, including the af-
firmation that the disciples of the Lord would
share in that glory.
The transfiguration of Christ was a break-
ing out into the open of his glory (Mt 17:1—8).
The apostle Paul called Jesus the Lord of glory
(1 Cor 2:8) and wrote that the glory of God
radiated from his face (2 Cor 3:18).
Glorification of the Believer. In 2 Corin-
thians 3:18 sanctification is described as a
changing from glory to glory. Glorification is
implied as the last event in the change from
glory to glory. In the process of salvation
Paul lists glorification as the last and final
event (Rom 8:28—30). The verb used (v 30) is
in the past tense, which some have taken to
mean the certainty and finality of glorifica-
tion. Glorification is the completion, the con-
summation, the perfection, the full realiza-
tion of salvation.
Glorification is a perfect, incontestable
869
Glory
standing before God in the day of judgment
(Rom 5:6—11). Christ died for believers while
they were ungodly, helpless, sinners, and ene-
mies of God. By faith believers have now been
justified. Paul, anticipating the day of the
wrath of God, said that if believers are now
saved by the death of Christ, in that day they
shall be totally vindicated by the life (or inter-
cession) of Christ (v 9). In Romans 8:38,39 Paul
says that nothing shall separate believers from
the love of Christ, now or in the age to come.
In glorification believers shall be in a state
of complete exoneration from any possible
charge.
Glorification is the perfection of sanctifica-
tion, and that pertains to one’s inner char-
acter, self, person. No one passage treats this
theme extensively, but Ephesians 5:27 may be
taken for all. In that passage Paul wrote of
presenting the church to Christ, but what he
says of the church is true of each Christian.
Jesus will present the church to himself in
“splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any
such thing, that she [the church] might be
holy and without blemish.” Or in the language
of 2 Timothy 2:10, ‘“Therefore I endure every-
thing for the sake of the elect, that they also
may obtain salvation in Christ Jesus with its
eternal glory.”
Another aspect of glorification is that Chris-
tians shall reign with Christ. Paul sets out the
reign of Christ in general terms (1 Cor 15:20—
28). In one passage of admonition he says that
those who endure shall reign with Christ (2
Tm 2:12). Another view of reigning with Christ
as an experience of glorification is found in
Ephesians, where it describes the state of the
Christian in the age to come. Especially rele-
vant is Ephesians 2:7, where believers are seen
seated and viewing the immeasurable riches
of God in Christ for the redeemed.
The strongest passages of reigning with
Christ as part of the Christian’s vindication
and share in glorification are the martyr chap-
ters in the Book of Revelation (1,11,15,19,21).
Paul wrote that believers are heirs of God and
joint heirs with Christ, and those who suffer
with him shall be glorified with him (Rom
S517).
Just as the inner person undergoes glorifica-
tion so does the believer's body. Paul calls the
resurrection of the body the redemption of the
body (Rom 8:23). In Philippians 3:21 Paul
speaks of the transformation of bodies of hu-
miliation (i.e., humiliated by sin and mortal-
ity) into bodies of glory identical to that of
Christ. The power that shall do this is the
power of God by which he subjects all things
to his reign.
The most extensive treatment on the glorifi-
cation of the body is found in 1 Corinthians 15
870
with some additional material in 2 Corinthi-
=ans 5. Paul’s theme in 1 Corinthians 15 is that
as Christians have borne the image of the mor-
tal clay of Adam, they shall bear the image of
the immortal Son of God. Paul contrasts the
two bodies. The present body is perishable,
the resurrection body will be imperishable.
This body is one of dishonor, the resurrection
body will be one of glory. This body is one of
weakness, the resurrection body is one of
power. This body is of the current physical
order, the resurrection body will be of the fu-
ture, spiritual, eternal order.
The final event of glorification is God’s re-
creation of all things: ‘‘Behold, I make things
new’ (Rv 21:5). This means that the old age of
sin, defeat, and corruption will be effaced, and
the new order of eternal glory shall replace it.
Hence there will be a new heaven, a new
earth, and a new Jerusalem. Without making
all things new the entire plan of salvation
would be incomplete.
Salvation involves justification, regenera-
tion, and sanctification in this life. In the life
to come it means the glorification of the inner
person and the resurrection of the body in
glory. But such a glorified person must live
in a glorified environment. Hence Scripture
must logically end the course of salvation with
a glorious new heaven, new earth, and new
Jerusalem.
BERNARD L. RAMM
See GLory; HEAVEN; NEw CREATION, NEW CREA-
TURE; RESURRECTION.
Glory. The singular splendor of God and its
consequences for mankind.
The Glory of God. The glory of God can
be described in two senses: (1) as a general
category or attribute, and (2) as a specific cate-
gory referring to particular historical manifes-
tations of his presence.
As an Attribute. God's glory refers primar-
ily to his majestic beauty and splendor and
the recognition of it by mankind; however, it
is also an ethical concept and embraces his
holiness, for to sin is to fall short of the glory
of God (Rom 3:23). The Scriptures record
praise to his glorious name (Neh 9:5), describe
him as the glorious Father (Eph 1:17) and the
King of glory (Ps 24); he is exalted above the
heavens and his glory is over all the earth (Pss
57:5,11; 108:5; 113:4). He is the God of glory
that appeared to the patriarchs (Acts 7:2). He
is jealous to maintain his glory and unwilling
that it be given to another (Is 42:8); he acts to
bring glory to himself (Ps 79:9; Is 48:11).
The glory of God is proclaimed by the cre-
ation (Pss 19:1; 97:6; Rom 1:20). It is revealed
by his mighty acts of salvation and deliver-
ance (1 Chr 16:24; Pss 72:18,19; 96:3; 145:10-12;
Jn 11:4,40). His glory is the theme of the praise
of men (1 Chr 16:24—29; Pss 29:1,2,9; 66:1,2;
96:7,8; 115:1; Is 42:12; Rom 4:20; Phil 2:9—11).
As His Presence. References to the glory of
the Lord are often to particular historical
manifestations of his presence; images of light
and fire are prominently associated with these
occurrences. The foremost example is what is
known in rabbinical literature as the Shek-
hinah glory, a phrase meaning the “dwelling
glory” and referring primarily to the presence
of God in the pillar of cloud and fire in the OT.
The first explicit reference to the glory
cloud is found in Exodus 13:21,22; however,
earlier examples of God’s visible presence
should probably be included as well. The pres-
ence of the Spirit of God hovering over the
waters (Gn 1:2) is likely the same glory cloud
that hovered over Israel in the empty wastes
of the wilderness at the exodus (Dt 32:10,11).
The smoking fire and flaming torch seen by
Abraham (Gn 15:17) should also be understood
as the glory presence of God. The flame of the
burning bush (Ex 3:2) anticipates the later
presence of the glory of God on Sinai (Ex
24:16—18).
At the time of the exodus the glory of God Moses’ Peak at Sinai, where the glory of God came in cloud
appeared in the pillar of cloud and fire to lead and fire.
the people through the sea and wilderness (Ex
13:21,22; Neh g:11,12,19). At Sinai with Israel
encamped around the mountain, the glory of temple as the place where his glory dwells
God comes in the cloud and fire to speak with (Pss 26:8; 63:2; 85:9); God was in their midst.
Moses in the sight of the people (Ex 19:9,16—18; Israel, however, did not obey the God in
24:15—-18; Dt 5:5,22-24). When Moses is given a their midst. They denied his glorious presence
glimpse of that glory unconcealed by the (Is 3:8) and exchanged the glory of the Lord for
cloud and fire, his own face becomes radiant idols made by human hands (Ps 106:20; Jer
and must be veiied because of the people’s 2:10,11; cf. Rom 1:23). Because of their disobe-
fear (Ex 33:18—23; 34:29—-35; 2 Cor 3:7—18). dience judgment came against Jerusalem; the
The picture of Israel encamped around the penalties of covenant violation were enforced.
glory of God on Sinai portrays the Immanuel God would no longer be the God of a disobedi-
concept of God in our midst, God in the midst ent people (Hos 1:9)..God’s presence in the
of his people. When the tabernacle is com- glory cloud leaves the temple (Ez 10:4,18,19;
pleted and the people set out on their march, 11:12), and Israel goes into exile (12:1—15).
the glory cloud of God’s presence dwells above Yet out of this judgment God determined to
them throughout their journey (Ex 40:34—-38; bring a remnant to rebuild the city and the
Nm 10:11,12). When they encamp, the tribes temple. In his visions Ezekiel sees the glory of
encircle the tabernacle (Nm 1:50—2:2), and the the Lord return to dwell in the temple again
cloud reminds them of his presence in their (Ez 43:2-9), a time when the glory would re-
midst. The cloud is present to quell their rebel- turn to a purified people and dwell among
lions (Lv 10:1—3; Nm 12:5; 14:10,21,22; 16:19,42), them forever. When the exile is over and the
to give them manna from heaven (Ex 16:10), second temple is under construction, Haggai
and water from a rock (Nm 20:6). and Zechariah urge the people on with the
When the ark is lost in battle against the promise of the return of the glory of God to
Philistines, a child is named Ichabod, “‘for the “fill the house’ as it had done in the first tem-
glory has departed from Israel” (1 Sm 4:21,22). ple and to “‘be glory in their midst” (Hg 2:3—9;
The cloud makes no appearances before Israel Lee aigj10j02):
until the ark is recovered; then the glory cloud The Shekhinah, however, never returned to
fills the new temple that Solomon built and the second temple—not, that is, until Jesus
fire devours the offerings (2 Chr 5:13—6:1; 7:1- “became flesh and dwelt among us,” and we
3). The psalmists celebrate Jerusalem and the “beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son” (Jn
871
Glory
1:14). Isaiah had foreseen that the Messiah,
“the Branch,’ would be glorious (Is 4:2—6;
11:10). John came preaching to prepare the
way for the coming of the glory of the Lord (Is
40:2—5; Mt 3:3; Mk 1:3). After the messenger
prepared the way, the Lord would suddenly
come to his temple (Mal 3:1). Ezekiel had seen
the glory of God in the form of a man (Ez
1:28). When Jesus comes to the second temple,
he does it as ‘‘the radiance of God’s glory and
the exact representation of his being’ (Heb 1:3
NIv). God is again in the midst of his people;
Immanuel is present. Christ is the very image
of God; to see the light of his face is to know
the glory of God (2 Cor 4:4-6). The disciples
who witnessed the transfiguration (Mt 17:1—8)
saw his glory (2 Pt 1:16,17). To see Jesus was to
see a “light to the Gentiles and the glory of
Israel” (Lk 2:30—32).
That glory which was Christ’s before the
foundation of the world (Jn 17:5; Phil 2:4—7)
and in his incarnation is enhanced yet more in
his resurrection and ascension. Because he
humbled himself and was obedient to the
point of death, God has highly exalted him
(Phil 2:8,9). The Christ who glorified the Fa-
ther on earth (Jn 7:16; 8:50-54; 12:28; 13:31,32;
17:4) prays that he himself be glorified by the
Father (17:1-10). He suffers the death of the
cross and enters into his glory (Lk 24:26). He is
vindicated and taken up in glory (1 Tm 3:16; 1
Pt 1:21). His resurrection is to a new and glori-
ous body (1 Cor 15:39—43; Phil 3:21). Like the
glory cloud of the OT he ascends in the clouds
to receive dominion, glory, and a kingdom (Dn
7:14); he is crowned with glory and honor
(Heb 2:6—10). He is worthy (Rv 5:12).
The glorified Christ also appears to his ser-
vants. Stephen sees the glory of God (Acts
7:55), and Saul is blinded by its splendor (9:3).
That same Christ is to return in glory. He
will sit on his throne in judgment (Mt 25:31);
evil will be punished (16:27; 24:30; Mk 13:26;
Lk 21:27; 2 Thes 2:9,10). Those who have pro-
fessed him before men need not fear his glori-
ous appearing (Mk 8:38).
At the consummation “the whole earth will
be filled with his glory” (Ps 72:19; Is 6:3; Hb
2:14). No longer will a glory cloud rest above a
temple to mark the holy place, for there will
be a new heaven and a new earth (Rv 21:1).
The whole city will have the radiance of the
glory of.God (vv 10,11), and the glory and
honor of the nations shall be brought to its
light (vv 22-26).
Glory and the People of God. The people
of God experience the glory of the presence of
God. The glory cloud of the OT was their glory
(Ps 106:20; Jer 2:11). Christ came as the em-
bodiment of the glory of God; God was in the
midst of his people. When Christ ascended he
872
sent his Spirit (Jn 16:7—14). God is still in the
smidst of his people. But he did not come in a
pillar of fire over one place, but in tongues of
flame at Pentecost as the Spirit filled those in
whom he would dwell. The Spirit of glory
rests on those who suffer for the name of
Christ (1 Pt 4:14); that Spirit is the guarantee
of the glorious inheritance of the saints (Rom
8:16,17).
God has given to his people the hope of
glory (Rom 5:2; Phil 3:21; Col 1:27; Jude 24,25).
Those whom he has chosen he will also glorify
(Rom 8:30; 9:23); they will share in the glory of
Christ (Col 3:4; 2 Thes 2:14; 2 Tm 2:10). The
sufferings of this age do not compare with the
glory that will be revealed (Rom 8:18; 2 Cor
4:17). The whole of creation longs to see the
glorious freedom of the children of God (Rom
8:21). This hope of glory is so certain that Pe-
ter can speak of participating in it even now (1
Pt 5:1) while looking forward to that eternal
glory (v 10).
As partakers in the glory of Christ, the
church is called to glorify God. Because of the
hope that is in them they purify themselves (1
Jn 3:3)
They are called to do all to the glory of God
(Rom 15:6; 1 Cor 10:31), to glorify him in their
bodies (1 Cor 6:20), and to live such lives that
those who see their good works will give glory
to God (Mt 5:16,48). They readily endure suffer-
ing and persecution to bring glory to him
(Rom 5:1—3, 2 Cor 12:9). Their lives are lived
“to the praise of his glory” (Eph 1:12,14), de-
pending on his glorious might (Col 1:11). They
share in the ministry of the glorious gospel (2
Cor 3:7—18). They are a glorious church (Eph
5:27).
Glory and Mankind. The Bible does speak
of the glory of mankind and of the individual
in two different ways, one positive and the
other negative.
The word in the OT usually translated as
“glory” can also be translated as ‘‘wealth,
honor, status’’ as the context may demand (Gn
31:1; 45:13; Nm 24:11; 1 Sm 2:8). Men and
women strive for wealth and honor as their
glory in the world. This status is given them
by God (1 Kgs 3:13; 1 Chr 29:12; Pss 21:5; 84:11;
Prv 3:16; 8:18), but he can also take it away (2
Chr 26:18; Jb 19:9).
On the whole, however, the attitude of the
Bible toward the glory achieved by mankind
is negative. It is transitory, and ‘“‘you can’t
take it with you” (Ps 49:16,17). All flesh is like
grass that withers (Is 40:6), a vapor that van-
ishes (Jas 4:13-16). Pride in appearance and
boasting come from evil motives; faith in the
glorious Lord discounts human glory (Jas 2:1—
4); pride should not be in appearance but in a
pure heart (2 Cor 5:12). All the glory of Solo-

mon could not compare with that of a flower
(Mt 6:29). The glory of nations can be toppled
in a moment (Is 10:16; 16:14; 17:4; 21:16; Jer
48:18; Ez 31:18; Hos 4:7); the glory of all the
kingdoms of earth could not tempt Christ to
forsake the law of God (Mt 4:8,9). Rather than
seek self-glorification (Lk 14:10,11; Jn 12:43;
Rom 2:7,8), all people should give praise to _,Gnostic heretical tendencies have been associ-
God (1 Cor 1:29-31; Eph 2:9). Pretensions to ated with Marcion, who developed his own
the glory of God bring only death (Acts 12:23). censored canon of the NT and thereby forced
RAYMOND B. DILLARD the Christians to counter by clarifying their
See Gop, BEING AND ATTRIBUTES OF; PILLAR OF FIRE
AND CLouD; SHEKINAH; THEOPHANY; Boast; WEALTH.
Bibliography. 1. Abrahams, The Glory of God; F.D.
Coggan, The Glory of God; A.M. Ramsey, The Glory of God
and the Transfiguration of Christ.
Glossolalia. Transliteration of a Greek ex-
pression meaning, “‘speaking in tongues.”
See TONGUES, SPEAKING IN.
Gnat. Small flying insect. The word as
found in Matthew 23:24 is a general word for a
small fly.
See ANIMALS.
Gnosticism. Religious thought distinguished
by claims to obscure and mystical knowledge,
and emphasizing knowledge rather than faith.
Until the mid-zoth century Gnosticism was re-
garded as a Christian heresy which developed
through the interweaving of Christian experi-
ence and thought with Greek philosophy. More
recently, many scholars define the Gnostics
more broadly as devotees of a religious view
which borrowed ideas from many religious tra-
ditions. The meanings of these borrowed terms
and practices were shaped into mythological
expressions of experiential salvation.
Gnosticism as a Heresy. Prior to the 2oth
century most of the information available con-
cerning the Gnostics came from early Chris-
tian writers (heresiologs) who penned treatises
against heretics, and in the process described
some of their beliefs and practices. These
heresiologs, such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, and
Hippolytus, viewed the Gnostics as distorters
of Christianity. The Gnostics developed many
misinterpretations of the Bible, especially of
the creation account and the Gospel of John,
Indeed, the Gnostic writers Heracleon and
Ptolemaeus are the first known commentators
on the fourth Gospel. The anger of the Chris-
tian apologists is well summarized by Ire-
naeus when he likens the Gnostic interpreter
to one who tears apart a beautiful picture of a
king and then restructures it into a picture of
a fox.
Apparently a number of Gnostics continued
as members of local churches and some served
873
Gnosticism
in high offices. Indeed, there is speculation
that Valentinus may have been considered as
a possible candidate for bishop at Rome. More-
over, Marcion, the fabled Christian heretic, re-
interpreted Paul in such a way that the OT
God became the god of evil and Christ became
the messenger of the good god of grace. Many
own canon. The early Christian historian,
Eusebius (d. aD 339), who excerpted some of
the early lost works of heresiologs like Hege-
sippus, also provides insight into the hostility
of Christians against various Gnostics like
Marcion, Basilides, Tatian, Satornil, Dosithe-
us, and the so-called father of all heresy, Si-
mon the sorcerer.
The wide variety of sects mentioned by
heresiologs like the Samaritans, Essenes, and
perhaps the Encratities, Nazarenes, Ebionites,
and Osseans may suggest the question, Who
are the Gnostics? Nevertheless, the view of the
heresiologs was so well accepted up to the
close of the 19th century that, despite some
broadening and generalizing by scholars of
the meaning, Adolph von Harnack could still
define Gnosticism as the “acute secularizing
or hellenizing of Christianity.”
During the first third of the zoth century,
however, scholars began the task of translat-
ing Mandean materials which appeared to be
related to Gnosticism. Even though these docu-
ments are late—some as late as the roth
century—a number of speculations were made
at that time concerning the pre-Christian na-
ture of Mandean literature, primarily by schol-
ars associated with Bultmann.
From this turmoil of ‘“Mandean fever,”
Hans Jonas, a student of Bultmann, arose to
challenge the heresiolog’s view of Gnosticism.
For Jonas, Gnosticism had emerged because of
the mixing of Oriental religions (not merely
Christianity) with Greek culture. While Greek
culture was superior to the cultures of the Ori-
ent, the Hellenistic world experienced a fail-
ure of nerve. Because of the religious and
philosophic upheaval in the Greek culture, at
least three religious traditions made an im-
pact on the Hellenistic world: (1) Jewish mono-
theism, (2) Babylonian astrology with its view
of fate, and (3) Iranian dualism with its basis
for understanding evil. The ability of the
Greek mind to fuse these ideas into mythologi-
cal expressions which sought to answer the
deep problems of mankind provided for Jonas
the context of Gnosticism. While this broader
understanding is still debated, Jonas has pro-
vided a foundation for distinguishing the two
basic types of Gnostic systems as well as for
Gnosticism
categorizing the library of documents recently
discovered in Nag Hammadi, Egypt.
The Gnostic Types. (1) The Iranian type of
Gnostic myths that arose in Mesopotamia is
an adaptation of Zoroastrianism. The myths
are constructed with a horizontal dualism in
which the opposing powers of good (light) and
evil (darkness) are regarded as fairly equal in
strength. In the first stage of the myth, a seg-
ment of the light is captured by the jealous
darkness when the light transcends itself and
reaches into the realm occupied by the dark-
ness. The capture of the light had been viewed
by some scholars as the Iranian cosmic “fall.”
Since the Gnostics themselves are usually iden-
tified with the captured light particles, a ma-
jor task of their myths is to describe the pro-
cess by which the light particles (encapsulated
within the bodies of Gnostics) are released.
The body, or flesh in the Greek sense,
merely a worthless covering or tomb, while
the spirit—the spark in man linked to the
divine—is the part that seeks release and re-
turn to the heavenly bliss. In the Iranian sys-
tem the light forces regroup and make a par-
tially successful counterattack on the forces of
darkness. Then, primarily through the work of
an alien messenger of strength who has gained
a foothold in the world, the good forces are
able to challenge the work of the evil captors
and supply advice (gnosis) to their devotees.
This gnosis leads to salvation or release.
(2) The Syrian type of Gnostic myth that
arose primarily in Syria, Palestine, and Egypt,
is more complex and involves a vertical dual-
ism. In these systems there is only one ulti-
mate being or group of divinities (not two as
in the horizontal systems). Their dualism is
usually explained as the result of a flaw, or
error, in the good. The error in good, for exam-
ple, is frequently attributed to the least aeon
or member in the good pantheon. The guilty
deity is usually designated as Sophia (the
Greek term for ‘‘wisdom’’—which indicates
the Gnostic’s low opinion of the Greek philoso-
pher’s quest for wisdom). This Gnostic myth
details how, instead of being satisfied with her
station in life, Wisdom lusts for the Ultimate
Depth. Since this ultimate god cannot tolerate
distortion and weakness in the godhead, he
must exclude Wisdom’s lust from the heavenly
realm. This lust is exiled to a lower heaven, is
personalized as the Lower Wisdom (some-
times called the demiurge), and becomes the
creator of the world. As lesser deities, the cre-
ator and the subordinate gods (often called
fates) are unable to perceive the upper heav-
enly realm and falsely consider themselves to
be ultimate. The upper godhead deviously ma-
neuvers the Lower Wisdom to create human
beings and give life to them through the pro-
cess of passing on the breath of life. Unknow-
ingly, in the act of creation the Lower Wisdom
not only gives life to human beings, but also
passes on the divine light particles. Thus, with
the help of a savior—an alien messenger of
knowledge sent by the upper godhead and of-
ten designated as Jesus—humanity is enabled
to perceive even more than the creator and to
conquer the spiritual stupor that has come
upon him when his spirit was encased by the
creator in an earthly body.
As a result of the split within the deity in
this system, the biblical garden of Eden story
becomes radically reinterpreted. The creator
provides a tree of life which is a misnomer
and actually offers humanity bondage instead.
The lower god also forbids access to the tree of
knowledge (gnosis), which appears in his cre-
ation without his authorization, being pro-
is vided by the upper godhead for the purpose of
awakening Gnostics to the state from which
they have come.
Because only those people who have light
particles are capable of being saved, the pro-
cess of salvation in most Gnostic myths is very
deterministic. Moreover, salvation really oc-
curs at the end of the Gnostic’s life when he
seeks to escape from the created world. Con-
current with the escape, the Gnostic strips off
the created elements of the body from his
spirit and climbs through the fates to the heav-
enly realm.
With respect to both systems of Gnosticism,
recent discoveries have clarified our under-
standing of the myths. New primary sources
for the Iranian type of Gnosticism became
available during the first half of this century
and include the publication of a Manichean
Psalter (1938) and a Manichean book of Homi-
lies (1934). New primary sources for the Syrian
type of Gnosticism were made available
through the publication of the Berlin manu-
script in 1955, but more significantly, our
knowledge has recently increased through the
discovered codices usually designated as the
Nag Hammadi library.
A New Library. In 1947, the area of Jabal
al-Tariff (near Chenoboskion and Nag Ham-
madi in Egypt) gave up a magnificent collec-
tion of 12—not 13 as first reported—Coptic cod-
ices containing 52 tractates or documents, 6 of
which are duplicates. One volume was smug-
gled out of Egypt and was finally purchased in
1952 by the Jung Institute in Zurich
(Gnosticism is important to the study of the
psychology of religious experience). After pub-
lication the owners agreed to return the pi-
rated manuscript to Egypt, and, together with
the remainder of the Nag Hammadi docu-
ments, it is now housed in the small but very
significant Coptic Museum in Cairo. The docu-
°
874

ments in the Nag Hammadi library can be di-
vided into several categories.
(1) Gnostic Texts with Christian Orientation.
In this category, those which have received
considerable attention are: The Gospel of
Thomas which is a series of sayings and was
thought at first by some scholars to be a
sayings-source for the canonical Gospels of _known as the Corpus Hermeticum (Eng. trans.
Matthew and Luke; The Gospel of Truth which
some scholars have thought came from the
pen of the well-known heretic Valentinus; The
Gospel of Philip which contains a unique se-
ries of logia related to Gnostic sacraments;
and the Apocryphon of John which has close
affinities to the theories of the Ophites and
Sethians as described by the heresiologs and
provides a full-scale primary source for the
Syrian Gnostic reinterpretation of the garden
of Eden story, as outlined above. Some of the
other documents in this category which show
indisputable signs of Christian influence on
Gnosticism are: The Treatise on the Resurrec-
tion, the several apocalypses of Peter and
James, The Book of Thomas the Contender, and
Melchizedek.
(2) Gnostic Texts with Less Than Clear Chris- divine.
tian Orientation. Some scholars have consid-
ered that these texts suggest a pre-Christian
Gnosticism, but such a conclusion does not
seem to be fully substantiated. Eugnostos is phers of history. The Gnostics devised their
the document usually cited in this matter and
is frequently viewed as an undeveloped stage
of the more Christianized form of the text
known for some time as The Sophia of Jesus
Christ. Even the so-called pre-Christian Eu-
gnostos, however, seems to bear unmistakable
signs of being related to the Alexandrian
school of Christian writings and has been
found to contain some allusions to the NT.
The Paraphrase of Shem is another document
frequently assigned to this category. Its refer- good. Accordingly, they abandoned the world
ences to baptism and the redeemer, however,
may be the result of a reinterpretation of focused on salvation as the process of escape
Christian views and may reflect the conflict
between the church and the Gnostics rather
than arising from a totally non-Christian con-
text. Other documents in the library usually
assigned to this category and subject to simi-
lar doubtful interpretations by those who
seek to sustain the theory of the presence of a
pre-Christian Gnosticism are: The Apocalypse
of Adam, The Three Steles of Seth, and The
Thunder.
(3) Non-Gnostic, Christian Documents. There
are also in the library several non-Gnostic,
Christian documents which include: The Acts
of Peter and the Twelve, The Sentences of Sextus, divine-human encounters—the more the bet-
and The Teachings of Silvanus.
(4) Miscellaneous Documents. In addition,
there are several documents which are neither
Christian nor technically Gnostic but which
Gnosticism
were probably read with great interest by the
Gnostic scribes. Of particular note are the her-
metic treatises that are Egyptian in orienta-
tion but contain a less radical dualism than is
evident in typical Gnostic literature. Hermetic
literature has long been known by scholars
through the publication of a hermetic library
Thrice Greatest Hermes). The first tractate, ‘‘Po-
imandres,’ is probably of the greatest interest
to biblical students because of its rather posi-
tive view of creation and its interesting paral-
lels with some of the theological ideas such as
“light” and “‘life’” in the fourth Gospel.
Understanding the Gnostic Purpose. Per-
haps one of the greatest problems for the un-
initiated readers of Gnosticim is understand-
ing the purpose of the Gnostic myths. The
myths often seem so strange that the readers
are tempted to scratch their heads and won-
der how anyone with any intelligence could
believe such wild stories. One must realize,
however, that the myth writers were seeking
to communicate elements of the unexplained
relationships between the human and _ the
The bondage of evil in the world and its
relationship to a good god has stretched the
minds of the greatest theologians and philoso-
answer to the problem of evil by shifting the
blame from this world back to either God him-
self or to divisions within the divine realm. By
compartmentalizing good and evil, it was pos-
sible to decide one’s destiny by the alignments
one made.
But the role of evil was seen as so strong in
this world that the Gnostics, like the Greek phi-
losophers before them, concluded the world
was a hopeless context for the victory of the
to the evil god and developed a theology which
from the world. Their theory also provided a
salvation while on earth: Since the Gnostics
contained divine light particles, they were in
fact immortal, and their spirits, though exist-
ing in an evil context, would not ultimately be
contaminated. The body and all its lusts and
lower animal desires would be shed from the
spirit as it rose through the realms of the lower
godhead to be reunited with the divine spiri-
tual realm after death. Some Gnostics, indeed,
carried the idea of noncontamination to ridicu-
lous lengths and devised systems whereby sex-
ual relations with various persons represented
ter! Others tended to affirm more ascetic ten-
dencies whereby they sought to conform the
miserable body to the life-style of the incorrupt-
ible spirit.
875
Goad
One of the realities the Gnostic interpreters
encountered was the fact that not everyone
accepted their theories. Accordingly, they de-
vised mythical methods to distinguish be-
tween various types of people. Using ideas sug-
gested by Paul in 1 Corinthians 2 and Romans
8, the Gnostics developed a highly sophisti-
cated categorization of people. The pneumatic
or spiritual (i.e., Gnostic) persons were divine
in origin, being from light particles. The
sarkic or fleshly persons were formed totally
from the substances made by the creator and
could never inherit the divine realm. The
Christians whom they saw as struggling to be
obedient to the biblical message, however,
were a kind of mixture. They needed desper-
ately to work out their salvation, and if they
were obedient as psychic people they might
gain some form of acceptance. This elitism of
the Gnostics and their distortion of the Chris-
tian message clarifies the hostility of the Chris-
tians against the Gnostics.
The myths were the methodological formu-
lations the Gnostics used to express their theo-
logical constructs. To understand them the
reader needs the key of gnosis, or knowledge.
Interpretation of the myths was in fact an
early type of demythologizing, not unlike the
process Bultmann employed in interpreting
the Bible. The Gnostic writers were among
some of the brightest minds of their day. Their
creativity is to be admired. Their theology,
however, is to be rejected as a distortion of the
biblical message.
GERALD L. BORCHERT
Bibliography. R.M. Grant, Gnosticism and Gnosticism
and Early Christianity; H. Jonas, The Gnostic Religion; E.
Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels; J.M. Robinson (ed.), The Nag
Hammadi Library; R.M. Wilson, The Gnostic Problem;
Yamauchi, Pre-Christian Gnosticism.
Goad. Pointed rod, sometimes tipped with
metal, used for driving or guiding cattle, espe-
cially oxen in plowing.
See TOOoLs.
Goah. Location mentioned in connection
with the hill of Gareb to which the restored
city of Jerusalem will extend. Goah is situated
south of Gareb (Jer 31:39, KJV Goath).
Goat. See ANIMALS.
“ attributes was made by Jonah in his angry
KJV spelling of Goah in Jeremiah
Goath.
31:39.
See GOAH.
Gob. Location where David and his men
twice encountered the Philistines in battle (2
Sm 21:18,19). In the parallel description of 1
Chronicles 20:4, Gezer is mentioned as the
-place of war instead of Gob.
God, Being and Attributes of. Inherent
characteristics of God revealed in Scripture
and displayed in God’s actions in biblical his-
tory. They are characteristics equally of the Fa-
ther, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attri-
butes are revealed in progressively richer and
fuller ways within the history of redemption.
According to the Bible, the entire creation
shows God’s glory, deity (Godhead ksv), and
eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s
providence also reveals certain of his attri-
butes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Acts 14:16,17; 17:22-
31). The fullest revelation of God’s attributes
is seen in his work of redemption through Je-
sus Christ.
How does Scripture express the characteris-
tics of God? First, in the divine names by
which God revealed himself (Gn 1:1; 2:4; 17:1;
Ex 3:6,14,15; 6:2-5). Some of God’s attributes
are revealed implicitly in the biblical accounts
of creation, fall, flood, Babel, and the exodus,
and more fully in the various covenants God
made with his people. To Israel he identified
himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Ja-
cob (Ex 3:15). To the pharaoh he identified
himself as the “God of Israel’’ or the ‘God of
the Hebrews” (5:1,3).
By the time the people of Israel had
reached Mt Sinai the revelation of God’s attri-
butes in the biblical narrative had become
more explicit: “The Lord, the Lord, a God mer-
ciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abound-
ing in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping
steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity
and transgression and sin, but who will by no
E.
means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of
the fathers upon the children and the chil-
dren’s children, to the third and the fourth gen-
eration” (Ex 34:6,7). This summary is repeated
elsewhere with slight variations (Nm 14:18;
Neh 9:17; Ps 103:8; Jer 32:18; Jon 4:2).
Historically, theologians have often dis-
cussed the attributes of God in abstract, specu-
lative, scholastic ways. That never happens in
the Bible. God’s disclosure of his attributes led
Moses to fall on his knees in worship to con-
fess Israel’s sin and pray for pardon (Ex
34:8,9). In other summary passages the re-
sponse was similar. A sinful appeal to God’s
prayer (Jon 4:1-4). To Christian believers,
Scripture presents God’s attributes as a stan-
dard for living: his people are to be holy, lov-
ing, and the like, because God is (Lv 19:2; 1 Jn
4:8,11).
Essence and Attributes. Under the influ-
ence of Greek philosophy, scholastic theolo-
gians of the Middle Ages usually separated
876

God's attributes from his ‘‘essence.” God's es-
sence was viewed in an abstract way; they
spoke of “pure Being” or “‘absolute essence.”
His essence was generally considered un-
known, or known only as “pure Being,’ where-
as his attributes could be known by human-
kind.
Some theologians have thought that the es- .. °
sence of God could be defined by one
attribute—independence, infinity, or absolute
will. From a liberal perspective, Albrecht
Ritschl (1822-89) thought of love as the chief
attribute of God, a view prominent in contem-
porary theology. Rudolf Otto (1869-1937) de-
scribed God as “‘the Holy’; some contempo-
rary theologians also regard holiness as God’s
chief attribute. Others think of the essence of attributes is fully satisfactory. The incommunti-
God as being more complex so that each attri-
bute is part of God’s total essence.
All such views are speculative. The attri-
butes should be viewed as inherent character-
istics of God, and no separation should be
made between essence and attributes. The at-
tributes are the biblical description of God’s
essence; they state who God really is and what
he is like. God revealed himself in relation to God's attributes; the distinction between God
his creatures, but in that revelation he gave an
authentic description of himself.
Classification of Attributes. The historic
Christian confessions refer to various charac-
teristics of God without calling them attri-
butes or classifying them. The Westminster
Shorter Catechism (1647) shows a tendency to-
ward classification, describing God as ‘‘a
Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in
his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice,
goodness and truth.” The first four attributes
qualify the others.
Several ways of classifying the attributes
have been suggested. Generally such schemes
divide the divine attributes into pairs: nega-
tive and positive, natural and moral, absolute
and relative, immanent and emanent, intran-
sitive and transitive, quiescent and operative,
antithetical and synthetical, or incommunica-
ble and communicable. Roman Catholics pre-
fer the distinction of negative and positive, or
natural and moral. Lutherans generally favor
the distinction between quiescent and oper-
ative attributes. Reformed and evangelical
scholars usually distinguish incommunicable
and communicable attributes. Karl Barth
(1886—1968) grouped the attributes under free-
dom and love and then proposed pairs of at-
tributes that reflect freedom-love or love-
freedom. In spite of the diversity of labels
given the groups of attributes, surprising
agreement exists in the attributes listed un-
der each group.
This article will make a distinction be-
tween incommunicable and communicable at-
God, Being and Attributes of
The Attributes of God
Incommunicable |Communicable
Eternity Intellectual
Immensity Knowledge
Immutability Veracity
Independence Wisdom
Spirituality Moral
Unity Holiness
Love
Volitional
Omnipotence
Sovereignty
tributes without considering the classification
itself as significant. No classification of God’s
cable attributes emphasize the absolute dis-
tinctness of God, his transcendent greatness
and exalted nature. Such attributes have little
or no analogy in God’s creatures. The commu-
nicable attributes find some reflection or anal-
ogy in human beings created in God’s image.
They indicate the immanence of God in rela-
tion to creatures. Yet all the attributes are
and man, between Creator and creature, is al-
ways basic.
Incommunicable Attributes. Acknowledg-
ing some diversity of theological opinion, the
following attributes will be considered incom-
municable: unity, spirituality, independence,
immutability, eternity, and immensity. In ad-
dition, the incomprehensibility of God must
be mentioned.
God’s incomprehensibility is sometimes in-
cluded in lists of his attributes. It seems pref-
erable to regard it as a description of human
inability to understand God fully. Incompre-
hensibility is therefore not an attribute, al-
though it is a given in every discussion of God.
Through his revelation God is truly known by
faith, yet no creature will ever comprehend
God the Creator. Likewise, no one will ever
fully understand any one of God’s attributes.
Acknowledgment of God’s incomprehensibil-
ity should contribute to a spirit of humility in
every consideration of God and his attributes
(Pss 139:6; 145:3; Is 40:28; 55:8,9; Mt 11:25—27;
Rom 11:33—36; 1 Cor 2:6—16; 13:8—13).
God’s unity is an expression of mono-
theism—the fact that the God of Scripture is
the only, living, true God (Dt 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn
17:3). All other gods are idols and figments of
human imagination. This attribute is reflected
in the first commandment: “You shall have no
other gods before me”’ (Ex 20:3; Mt 4:10).
God’s spirituality indicates that God is not
physical and is invisible. Positively it means
that God is personal, living, self-conscious,
and self-determining. The invisible God can-
877
God, Being and Attributes of
not be seen by human eyes (Ex 33:20), so the
second commandment forbids every visible
representation of God (20:4). Because God is
Spirit, he must be worshiped in spirit and in
truth (Jn 4:24).
God’s independence or self-existence indi-
cates that he is not dependent upon anything
outside himself. He is self-sufficient in his exis-
tence, in his decrees, and in all his works. God
has “‘life in himself’ (Jn 5:26) and he “‘gives to
all men life and breath and everything”’ (Acts
17:25). To Israel he revealed himself as “ ‘I
Am’ ” (Ex 3:14), and he made Israel a covenant
people for his own possession. God continues
to work out his will in the world, and even
though he uses various means, his indepen-
dence remains intact. Thus he enters into fel-
lowship with his covenant people, and he pub-
lishes the gospel through human agents.
God’s immutability or constancy expresses
his changelessness and his faithfulness to him-
self, to his decrees, promises, and works. He
remains forever the same true God who under-
goes no change from within or from anything
outside himself. And so in James 1:17 (RSV) we
read: “Every good endowment and every per-
fect gift is from above, coming down from the
Father of lights with whom there is no varia-
tion or shadow due to change.’’ God’s oath to
Abraham expressed his immutability so that
his covenant people could be sure of the “un-
changeable character of his purpose’? (Heb
6:17). Samuel told King Saul that the Lord
would not “change his mind; for he is not a
man” (1 Sm 15:29 Niv; cf. Nm 23:19). ‘‘For I the
Lord do not change” (Mal 3:6). That was God’s
explanation for not destroying sinful Judah;
he shows mercy and keeps his covenant. Be-
cause ‘‘Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and
today and forever,” Christians are warned not
to be “led by diverse and strange teachings”
(Heb 13:8,9).
God’s immutability or constancy does not
imply that he is static or immobile. He is a
dynamic, living God who is constantly work-
ing (Jn 5:17). Sometimes God is described as
being sorry, repenting, or changing his mind
(Gn 6:6,7; 1 Sm 15:11; Jon 3:10). In their con-
texts, such figurative expressions show the con-
stancy of God who, in holiness and righteous-
ness, always abhors sin and reacts against it.
In his grace and mercy he forgives the peni-
tent, and.he carries out his promises without
fail (Jer 18:7—10; Ps 110:4; Is 46:10; Eph 1:11).
Thus the constancy of God is significant in all
human relationships with him, including peti-
tions offered in prayer.
God’s eternity indicates his transcendence
over time. He is timeless and everlasting. He
has no beginning or end; he does not undergo
growth, development, or maturation. He ex-
878
isted before the creation of the world; he
‘dwells now in eternity; he will continue as
the eternal God even when history ends.
Scripture speaks of God as “eternal” (Dt
33:27), ‘the King” (1 Tm 1:17 Niv), “the begin-
ning and the end” (Rv 22:13). He “inhabits
eternity” (Is 57:15) and his “years have no
end” (Ps 102:27; cf. 2 Pt 3:8). Although God is
above time and is timeless, time is his cre-
ation and history is the arena of his work.
“When the time had fully come God sent
forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); Jesus Christ died on
a Friday and rose on the third day. In re-
sponse to the eternal God, Christians confess
that their “times are in thy hands” (Ps 31:15),
the powerful hands of the Lord of history.
God's immensity and omnipresence express
his transcendence over space. God fills heaven
and earth (Jer 23:23,24). Heaven is his throne
and the earth his footstool, so he is not re-
stricted to temple buildings (Is 66:1; Acts
17:24). Yet God is immanent in the world and
is actively at work in it to establish his king-
dom. No one can hide from the omnipresent
God (Ps 139:6-12). Jesus promised “I am with
you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20).
Since Pentecost (Acts 2) the Holy Spirit is said
actually to dwell within the bodies of believ-
ers (1 Cor 6:19).
Communicable Attributes. Many attri-
butes of God can be classified under this head-
ing, although it is sometimes difficult to say
which biblical references to God should be
regarded as attributes. A rich diversity of ter-
minology is found in Scripture, with many syn-
onyms. For convenience the communicable at-
tributes are often classified as intellectual,
moral, and volitional.
Intellectual Attributes. God’s knowledge in-
dicates that in a unique way God knows him-
self and all things possible and actual. Omni-
science means that “he knows everything” (1
Jn 3:20). ‘‘Even before a word is on my tongue,
lo, O Lord, thou knowest it altogether’ (Ps
139:4), the secret thoughts of a person’s heart.
God’s righteous judgment is rooted in the fact
that he “knows the thoughts of man” (Ps
94:11). Acknowledging that God’s omniscience
is incomprehensible, the psalmist finds it a
source of comfort (139:1—5). All the ‘‘treasures
of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in
Christ (Col 2:3); therefore the Christian is told
to bring every thought captive to obey Christ
(2 Cor 10:5). Christian sanctification includes
renewal in knowledge to become more like
Christ (Col 3:10).
God's wisdom indicates that he uses his
knowledge in the best possible manner to
achieve his goals. God’s works are varied, but
they are all done in wisdom (Ps 104:24). “The
Lord by wisdom founded the earth”’ (Prv 3:19);
°

his providence also displays his wisdom (Gn
50:20). Redemption through Jesus Christ re-
veals God’s wisdom (1 Cor 1:24) and awakens
awe and praise (Rom 11:33—36). Human be-
ings should seek wisdom (Prv 3:21)—wisdom
rooted in the fear of God (Jb 28:28; Ps 111:10;
Prv 9:10). Christians are said to be ‘‘wise in
Christ” (1 Cor 4:10), and Christ charges them
to act wisely (Mt 10:16), thus emulating the
wisdom of God.
God’s veracity expresses his truthfulness
and faithfulness. He is the truth and he is faith-
ful to himself, to his Word, and to his prom-
ises (2 Tm 2:13). “God is light and in him is no
darkness at all”’ (1 Jn 1:5); therefore his follow-
ers are to walk in the light (vv 6,7). Jesus is
“the way, and the truth, and the life’ (Jn 14:6);
hence Christians are to walk in the truth and
show faithfulness in their lives.
Moral Attributes. The most comprehensive
description of God’s moral character is his
goodness. God deals bountifully and kindly
with all his creatures. He is ‘good to all” (Ps
145:9). Jesus insisted that ‘‘No one is good but
God alone” (Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19). The redeemed
praise God for his goodness (1 Chr 16:34; 2 Chr
So Pss bobbin; fo7ia¢0118:177'nz6inp Jer.43231)
and are called upon to emulate this divine
characteristic (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:27—36).
God’s love is the heartbeat of the gospel.
Perfect love flows between the Persons of the
Trinity (Jn 3:35; 17:24). At Sinai God revealed
himself as “abounding in steadfast love and
faithfulness” (Ex 34:6,7), and all his covenantal
relations with Abraham’s descendants showed
his steadfast love. The chief manifestation of
God's love was the sending of his Son, Jesus
Christ (Jn 3:16). The apostle John, who de-
clared that ‘‘God is love,” pointed to the cross
to indicate what that love really meant: “he
loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation
for our sins” (1 Jn 4:8,10).
Since the rise of liberalism, many theolo-
gians have cheapened God’s love for sinners
by suppressing God’s holiness and righteous-
ness. The catastrophe of sin is minimized, and
the cross as an atoning sacrifice and satisfac-
tion of God’s justice is denied. But God’s holy
and righteous love should not be romanticized
or cheapened. Love is neither God’s chief attri-
bute nor a full description of his nature. Yet
Jesus Christ and the cross do express the mar-
velous love of God—a sovereign, righteous,
holy, immutable love (Rom 8:29,30,35—39).
God’s love shown to undeserving sinners is
called grace (Eph 1:6—8; 2:7—9; Ti 3:4). Mercy is
God’s love (sometimes his goodness) shown to
those in misery and distress. God is longsuffer-
ing or patient in his love; he gives time for
repentance.
God’s holiness depicts the moral purity and
879
God, Being and Attributes of
excellence of God. The description of Jesus’ ho-
liness is applicable to each of the Persons of
the Trinity: ‘holy, blameless, unstained, sepa-
rated from sinners, exalted above the heav-
ens’ (Acts 3:14, Heb 7:26). The root idea of holi-
ness is to be separate or set apart. Because of
his inherent holiness, God is distinct from
everything impure or unholy. God alone is
holy; his name is holy, and he bears the name
the “Holy One” (Pss 78:41; 89:18; 99:3,9; 111:9;
Is 12:6; Jer 51:5; Rv 15:4). Angels praise God’s
holiness (Is 6:3; Rv 4:8); that revelation led the
prophet Isaiah to recognize his own unholi-
ness (Is 6:5). Objects, places, and people are
called holy when set apart for the worship of
God. Because God is holy his people are called
to holiness (Lv 11:44,45; 19:2; 1 Pt 1:14,15).
God's discipline of his people is aimed at mak-
ing them “‘share his holiness’’ (Heb 12:10). The
holiness of God is so prominent in Scripture
that some have (mistakenly) regarded it as
God's chief attribute.
Volitional Attributes. God’s sovereignty indi-
cates the divine authority with which he rules
the entire creation and in his sovereign good
pleasure does whatever he wills. God is king
over the entire creation, and he rules the des-
tiny of human beings and nations. He restores
his kingdom through Jesus Christ; the risen
Lord revealed that “all authority in heaven
and on earth” was given him (Mt 28:18). Elec-
tion to salvation in Christ is ‘‘according to the
purpose of him who accomplishes all things
according to the counsel of his will’’ (Eph
1:11). God’s sovereign will, though free, is not
arbitrary; it is righteous and holy. He created
the world and gave his Law as the rule for his
people’s lives; he covenants, blesses, and
judges. God is the ‘King of kings and Lord of
lords” (1 Tm 6:15); he calls all his subjects to
obedient love (Dt 6:4,5; Mt 22:37—40; 1 Jn 5:3).
God’s sovereign power means that he is with-
out bounds or limit in ability; he is omnipotent
or almighty (Rv 4:8). By his powerful word he
created all things, and upholds “the universe
by his word of power” (Heb 1:3). There is noth-
ing too hard for the Lord God Almighty (Gn
18:14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26); he keeps his gra-
cious covenant and fulfills all his promises (Lk
1:37; Heb 6:18; 2 Tm 2:13). The gospel is “the
power of God for salvation’ (Rom 1:16) for
Christ is “the power of God” to save (1 Cor
1:24). Hence believers must come to know “‘the
immeasurable greatness of his power in us
who believe, according to the working of his
great might which he accomplished in Christ
when he raised him from the dead and made
him sit at his right hand in the heavenly
places” (Eph 1:19,20).
God’s Glory. All the attributes of God are
summarized in Scripture’s references to the
God, Names of
glory of God. The majesty, splendor, beauty,
and brilliance of God who dwells in unap-
proachable light are expressed by this indefin-
able term. “The God of glory appeared to our
father Abraham” (Acts 7:2); God showed his
glory to Moses (Ex 33:18,19; 34:6,7). The God of
the Lord Jesus Christ is “the Father of glory”
(Eph 1:17). The heavens declare the glory of
God (Ps 19:1); “the majesty and glory” of God
fill heaven and earth (8:1). When finally every
tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord, it will be
“to the glory of God the Father” (Phil 2:11).
Human beings were created for God’s glory
and Christian believers are instructed to do
everything for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31),
thus reflecting in themselves his inherent
glory. FRED H. KLoosTER
See Gop, NAMES OF; MONOTHEISM; REVELATION;
GLORY.
Bibliography. S. Charnock, The Existence and Attributes
of God; L.R. Farnell, The Attributes of God; D.L. Hocking,
The Nature of God in Plain Language; J.M. Houston, I Believe
in the Creator; R.G. Jones, Our God; J.J. Packer, Knowing
God; H. Schultz, OT Theology, vol 2, pp 142-79; P. Toon, God
Here and Now; AW. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy.
God, Names of. Cumulative self-disclosure
of God to his people. When the Scripture em-
ploys the phrase “name of God,” God in his
fullness is meant. When men and women call
on the name of God, God himself is worshiped
(Gn 21:33); when they forget the name of God,
they depart from God himself (Jer 23:27);
when they take the name of God in vain, God
himself is personally profaned and affronted
(Ex 20:7):
The Biblical Idea of Name. In the Scrip-
tures the name and person of God are insepara-
bly related. This is in keeping with the biblical
conception of what a name signifies.
In the Hebrew language, the term for
“name” most probably meant “sign” or “dis-
tinctive mark.” In the Greek language, “name”
(onoma) is derived from a verb which means
“to know”; a name then indicates that by
which a person or object is to be known. But
the idea of name is not to be taken in the sense
of a label or an arbitrary means of identify-
ing or specifying a person, place, or object.
“Name” in biblical usage correctly describes
the person, place, or object and indicates the
essential character of that to which the name
is given. Adam names the animals according
to their nature (Gn 2:19,20); “Noah” means
“one who brings relief and comfort” (5:29); “Je-
sus” means “savior” (Mt 1:21). When a person
was given a new position or a radical change
took place in his life a new name was given to
indicate that new aspect, for example, Abra-
ham (“father of many,” Gn 17:5); and Israel
(“one who strives with God” or “God strives,”
880
32:28). The name of a person or people ex-
pressed what the person or people thought the
proper description or statement of character
was. But with regard to the names of God
there are considerable differences, and these
are most clearly seen when biblical schol-
ars and thevlogians confront the question of
whether the names of God are ascriptions
given by God concerning himself or they are
ascriptions given to God by people who ob-
served his acts and reflected on his character
as discerned through a study of divine deeds.
Some scholars consider the names of God
as human ascriptions. They choose to speak
about God as unknowable; they speak of the
names and attributes of God as limiting con-
cepts and as hindrances to a fuller understand-
ing of the God who is only known by acts and
events. The suggestion is that people should
study the acts of God in the present as well as
past rather than pay too much attention to the
names and attributes ascribed to God by peo-
ple of ancient times. This view implies that
God is still revealing himself as he did in bibli-
cal times.
Evangelical scholars, however, insist that
the Bible clearly states that God employs
names to reveal himself. No one name God
employs states all that can be said by God
about himself; in fact, all the names taken to-
gether do not reveal all that God is. God is
infinite; he cannot be fully known. But he has
revealed much concerning himself, so much
that if one studies the names of God one is
struck by the greatness, holiness, majesty,
glory, indescribable goodness, and justice of
God. And, it should be added, evangelical bibli-
cal scholars and theologians are quick to as-
sert that a study of the acts of God increases
one’s understanding of the self-revealing names
and attributes. These same evangelical schol-
ars, while disagreeing with Emil Brunner on
some aspects of his view concerning divine
revelation, readily agree with him when he
writes that if one point is clear from the outset
it is that God is not an object which man can
manipulate by means of verbal activity or rea-
soning: “God is mystery in the depths of ‘inac-
cessible light...’ God’s name is wonderful”
(Jgs 13:18). Why ask about it? The answer is
that by his name(s) God has chosen to reveal
himself. But, the better we know God, the
more we know and feel that his Mystery is
unfathomable” (Christian Doctrine of God, p.
117).
At this point, it should be stated that there
is a difference of opinion among biblical schol-
ars and theologians on how to classify the
names, ascriptions, descriptions, and attri-
butes of God. For example, J. Calvin and C.
Hodge do not discuss the names of God except

as they aid in the understanding of‘his at-
tributes. Others, such as A. Kuyper, have
separate discussions of God’s attributes and
names. H. Bavinck and L. Berkhof deal with
the nature of God under three headings: (1)
proper names, (2) essential names, and (3) per-
sonal names. If one consults these works and
goes on to those of scholars like A. Jukes, H.
Stevenson, L.S. Chafer, and a group of works
designated biblical theology, one would con-
clude that the names (in the broadest sense)
fall into six categories:
(1) Proper names: El, Yahweh, Adonai,
Theos, Kurios (God).
(2) Personal names: Father, Abba, Son, Je-
sus, Holy Spirit.
(3) Titles: Creator, Messiah/Christ, Para-
clete/Comforter.
(4) Essential names: Light, Love, Spirit.”
(5) Descriptive names: Rock, Ba’al, Master,
Rabboni, Shepherd.
(6) Attributes: names of virtues or charac-
teristics of the triune God-head.
The OT Names of God. El and Related
Names. The name El is found over 200 times
in the Hebrew Bible. It is best translated as
“God.” The term E/ has a number of possible
meanings. The root is thought by some to be Ul,
which means “‘to be first’’ or ‘‘to be strong.”
Others suggest the root is Alah, which means
“to precede,” and suggests “leader’’ or ‘‘com-
mander.”’ It can also mean “‘to be afraid,” thus
God as Alah, as the strong one, is to be feared.
Still others suggest the preposition e/ (‘‘to, to-
ward’) as the root; the idea then is of “‘one
giving self to others” or of “one to whom others
go for help.”” Some scholars suggest that the
word Alim, meaning ‘‘to bind,” should be con-
sidered as a root also; that is “the strong one
binds and. holds firm control.’’ Common to
these four suggested root meanings is the idea
of strength, power, and of supreme excellence
and greatness.
Recent discoveries of tablets inscribed with
poems about Canaanite deities indicate this
meaning. It is the case in the “Epic of Baal”
found at Ras Shamra and thought to have
been written in patriarchal times. This epic
sets forth Baal as the chief hero, but El [or I]]
is referred to numerous times. He is the father
of the gods Baal, Amoth, Mot, and the male
counterpart of the female goddess Asherah
from whom came 7o sons. El is also referred to
as the creator of creatures and the father of
mankind. He is thus the highest of all Canaan-
ite deities; the king, ruler, the strong one over
all things and people. This Canaanite god is
very likely referred to in the OT. Isaiah says
that a throne will be set above the stars of El
(Is 14:13), and Hosea accuses Judah of unfaith-
881
God, Names of
Ruins at Ugarit, where the “Epic of Baal” was found.
fulness to God because he still is roaming with
El. From these passages it can be understood
that the God of the Scriptures called El, is not
to be identified with the Canaanite god El.
The Canaanite god was conceived of as mor-
tal, the Hebrew El as the eternal Living One.
The point is that both the Hebrews and the
Canaanites used the word El to refer to their
deity as the strong and powerful one and the
first and preeminent one.
El in the OT is used particularly in the ear-
lier books, where it describes God’s exercising
dynamic power as distinguished from author-
ity. El speaks of God as the great doer and
producer. He is the One who exercises such
power that whatever is made, done, kept, or
destroyed is his doing (cf. Ex 15). El is also
used to express the idea that God is not to be
identified as part of creation but as the One
who is above, behind, and beyond creation (Ps
19:1). In relation to man, the crown of cre-
ation, God as El is totally other (Ez 28:2; Hos
11:9).
Elohim is also commonly used as the name
of God, occurring over 2500 times in the OT.
There are differences of opinion concerning
the exact origin and meaning of this plural
name. Some have suggested that Elohim is the
plural form of El, but it seems more likely that
it is a plural of Eloah, which appears in the
poetical writings. Some critical writers have
suggested that this plural form is borrowed
from pagan polytheistic sources; but no such
plural form is found among pagans as the
name of a deity. Others have suggested that
the plural form is used to indicate the triune
nature of God, and support for this has been
seen in the use of a singular verb with this
plural noun. The biblical doctrine of the Trin-
ity, as it is developed throughout the Scrip-
tures, does not appear to be based on the use
of this plural form of God’s name, even though
the two positions are not contradictory.
The plural form, Elohim, is best understood
as expressing intensity. God makes himself
known by this name as the Lord of intense and
God, Names of
extensive glory and richness as he exercises
his preeminence and power in the created cos-
mos. Hence, when the Scripture speaks of cre-
ation, it states, ‘In the beginning Elohim cre-
ated the heavens and the earth” (Gn 1:1). This
name is repeated 35 times in Genesis 1 and 2
in connection with God’s power revealed in
creation. In the Book of Deuteronomy the
name Elohim is used repeatedly to stress the
majestic power of God which was shown in
Israel’s release from bondage in Egypt, her
preservation in the wilderness, and her prepa-
ration for entrance into the Promised Land. In
this context, God (Elohim) is also recognized
as the lawgiver who will powerfully execute
judgment on covenant-breakers. The psalmists
also used this name repeatedly as they ac-
knowledged and praised God the majestic
ruler who had demonstrated his omnipotence
in many dimensions of life (see Ps 68, in which
Elohim appears 26 times.)
Evangelical scholars such as A. Juke and G.
Campbell Morgan have interpreted Elohim as
an expression of God’s covenant relationship
with his people. They point to the use of Elo-
him when God spoke to Abraham and said he
would be Elohim to the patriarch and his
seed, that is, God would be in a covenant rela-
tionship to them (Gn 17:1—8). Included in this
relationship is the idea that God is ever ready
to use his power on behalf of those who are in
covenant with him. Thus Elohim also ex-
presses the concept of God’s faithfulness in re-
gard to the covenant and the promises and
blessings involved in it.
The name Eloah occurs mainly in the poeti-
cal writings, no less than 41 times in Job. Isa-
iah used it to express the incomparable char-
acter of God (Is 44:8). In like manner David
asked, ‘““Who is Eloah, but the Lord?” (2 Sm
22:32). Moses was the first to use the name
Eloah in his song (Dt 32:15—17) referring to Is-
rael’s God in the context of the “no-gods,”
which had been chosen in place of the rock of
salvation and the incomparable One. This
name was probably used to stress the fact that
God is the only true and living One, the One to
be adored and worshiped; he is to be rever-
enced with a holy fear.
Another closely related name is Elah, found
in Ezra and Daniel. Some think Elah is a
Chaldee form of Eloah. Its root is said to be
Alah, which means “‘to fear’ or ‘‘to be per-
plexed.” God as Elah is the God to be feared
and worshiped accordingly. In view of this
meaning it can be understood why, in the time
of Israel’s exile and immediately after their
return this name was commonly used.
Three other names of God include the term
El: El Elyon (or ’Eljon) is the name used to
designate the God of Melchizedek (Gn 14:18-
882
22) as God Most High. In Psalms 57:2 and 78:56
the Hebrew reads Elohim Elyon. It is believed
that the term Elyon is derived from the verb
Alah, meaning “go up, be elevated, to be ex-
alted.”’ There are a number of instances where
the term Elyon is used alone, but the context
indicates tat it is then used as a synonym for
God (e.g., Nm 24:16; Ps 83:18; Is 14:14). The
term Haelyon, translated the Most High, also
occurs (e.g., Gn 40:17). The term elyon is used
quite frequently as an adjective; it is then
translated as “high, highest, upper, upper-
most.’ The basic ascription given to God
when this name is employed is to One who is
above all things as the maker, possessor, and
ruler. He is incomparable in every way; he is
subject to no one and no thing; he is the Ex-
alted One. Some evangelical biblical scholars
have noted that this term is used particularly
of God’s ruling in the millennial kingdom, a
conclusion based on the fact that Yahweh is
called Elyon in passages construed to refer to
Israel’s final and full restoration (Dn 4:25; Ps
83:18). It would seem, however, that El Elyon
is a name that is applicable to God in all ages
and in all circumstances. In all dimensions of
life, in worship, military activities, political
and economic involvement, God is to be ac-
knowledged as the incomparable, the exalted,
the maker, possessor, and ruler of all people,
all things, and all events.
El Shaddai is used in the longer form seven
times in the Scriptures (Gn 17:1; 28:3; 35:11;
43:14; 48:3; Ex 6:3; Ez 10:5). In the shorter
form (Shaddai), it appears more frequently: in
Job 30 times, in Psalms 19:1 and 68:14, once in
Isaiah (13:6), Ezekiel (1:24), Joel (1:15), and
Ruth (1:21). In these passages the combined
ideas of God as the all-powerful, all-sufficient,
transcendent, sovereign ruler and disposer are
present. This meaning is generally accepted,
but there are differences as to the exact mean-
ing of the term Shaddai. Some have begun
with shad as the first concept to be consid-
ered; its meaning is “breast, pap, or teat,’ and
it is considered a “‘precious metaphor’ of God
who nourishes, supplies, and satisfies. The
root of shad (shadah) in Semitic usage, is to
moisten; this meaning is not the preferred one
in the context in which El Shaddai appears;
nor is shed (demon), which some scholars have
sought to use because it appears in Deuteron-
omy 32:17 and Psalm 106:37 speaking of Isra-
el’s idolatry. In addition to the fact that shed
is spelled differently, the connection between
the concept of demon and God as all-powerful
is difficult to establish. More acceptable is the
suggestion that Shaddai is a composite term
of sha (‘‘the one who’) and dai (‘‘is suffi-
cient’). The later Greek versions have adopted
this meaning. The most preferred explanation

is that Shaddai is derived from the verb
shadad (“to overpower, to deal violently, or
to devastate”). A clear connection between
shadad and Shaddai is said to be found in Isa-
iah 13:6 and Joel 1:15. God as El Shaddai is
presented as the all-powerful One, totally self-
sufficient, absolute ruler, and the One who can
and does make final disposition. The Septua- _.Elohim. Yahweh is used 164 times in Genesis,
gint has adopted this meaning; it translates El and it appears 1800 times in Exodus through
Shaddai as Pantokrator, the “All Ruler or Sover-
eign One.”
G. Vos points out that El and Elohim empha-
size God’s relation to nature, and El Shaddai
points to God’s overpowering nature in the ser-
vice of his grace and compelling her to further
her designs. L. Berkhof (Systematic Theology)
points out that whereas God as El Shaddai is the root in the verb hayah (“to be”) or in an
indeed presented as the all-powerful One who
Overpowers nature, the name, where it occurs
in the Bible, does not present God as an object
of fear or terror, but rather as a source of bless- ered as the root. Those who opt for the hiphil
ing and comfort.
El Olam is used to refer to God as the ever-
lasting or eternal one, a clear instance where
the name of God and an attribute of God are
combined. The term olam has a wide range of Am” or “I Shall Be.” Still others are inclined
uses. It is usually defined in lexicons as mean-
ing “long duration, antiquity, and indefinite
futurity.” It is used to speak of God’s exis-
tence, God’s covenant and promises, and of
the Messiah’s reign. The psalmist said, “Thou
art from olam (everlasting) to olam (everlast-
ing)” (90:2), and the prophet Isaiah spoke of
God as the everlasting Creator (40:28), as ever-
lasting strength (26:4), and Jeremiah spoke of
God as everlasting King (10:10). Berkhof
points out that God’s everlastingness or eter-
nity speaks of his infinity in relation to time.
Olam, as ascribed to God, should not be
thought of as duration prolonged indefinitely
backward: and forward. Rather, the word
speaks to God’s transcending all temporal lim-
its; in addition, olam refers to the quality of
God which differs essentially from time. The
Scriptures speak of El Olam in contexts
where the believer’s assurance of well-being,
security, and hope are presented as prized pos-
sessions.
El Gibbor is a name that speaks of God’s
power and might. Gibbor alone is used in refer-
ence to mighty and heroic men. The two terms
together always refer to God, and in some in-
stances Haggadol (“the greatest”), is added (Dt
10:17; Jer 32:18) to emphasize the greatness
and awesome majesty of God. El Gibbor is also
used to describe the Messiah in Isaiah 9:6 (cf.
also Pss 45:4; 89:20).
El Roi is used once to describe God as the
seeing One. Hagar described the Lord this way
when she was found in the wilderness (Gn
16:13). Psalm 139:1,2 expresses this concept of
God, Names of
God as the all seeing One from whose eye noth-
ing is hidden (cf. also Ps 33:18).
Yahweh (Joseph). Yahweh is a distinctly
proper name of God. It is never used to refer
to any pagan gods; neither is it used in regard
to men. It appears 6823 times in the OT, occur-
ring first in Genesis 2:4, where it is joined with
Joshua. It never appears in a declined form in
the Hebrew language, and it never occurs in
the plural form or with suffixes. It is abbrevi-
ated as Yah and Yahu (cf. Ex 15:2; Ps 68:4; Is
1222; Ste.)
The exact meaning of the name “Yahweh”
is difficult to determine. Some have sought
ancient form of that same verb hawah. There
is no agreement as to whether or not the gal
or hiphil form of the verb should be consid-
form read Yahweh to mean, “cause to be’;
thus Exodus 3:14 would read, “I will cause to
be what has come to be.” Others look to the
gal form and then translate the name as “I
to disassociate the name from the verb hayah
and regard it as an original and independent
term, expressing the uniqueness of Israel’s
gracious God.
Translators of the OT have not agreed
upon the correct translation of the name “Yah-
weh.” Since it is translated into the Greek as
kurios, which means “Lord,” many have ren-
dered Yahweh as “Lord.” But “Adonai,” which
is best rendered “Lord,” appears with Yahweh
in various instances. Many modern transla-
tors have chosen to use Yahweh. The name
“Jehovah,” as used in the ARv (1go1) is judged
unacceptable. This name arose due to the Jew-
ish practice of not pronouncing Yahweh be-
cause of Leviticus 24:16, “He that names the
name of Yahweh shall surely be put to
death.” This warning against a vain or blas-
phemous use of the name was taken in an
absolute sense, especially after Israel’s depor-
tation (cf. Am 6:10). Hence, when reading the
OT the Jews substituted either Elohim or
Adonai for Yahweh. From this, the practice of
adding the vowels of Adonai to YHWH
(JeHoWaH) became established.
An interesting question is whether Yahweh
was used initially in a specifically geographi-
cal area. Some scholars have concluded that
Moses first learned of the god called Yahweh
while in the desert of Midian. Later it became
the name used of the god worshiped in south-
ern Canaan, that is, the area of Judah and Sim-
eon. These scholars posit that Elohim was the
name used in northern Canaan. They also sug-
gest that each area developed its own religious
883
God, Names of
traditions and wrote its “records of religious
beliefs,” each employing the divine name in
use in its respective area. Later, when the na-
tion of Israel was united, the two documents
were joined, and the names ‘Yahweh’ and
“Elohim” were both used to refer to their com-
mon god. This view of the origin and use of
the names of God finds no basis in the text of
the OT. Both names are used in unique combi-
nations and are also shown to have been
known and used long before the time of the
exodus. Abraham, for example, spoke of lifting
his hand to Yahweh, El Elyon (Gn 14:19—22),
and Abraham and Isaac built altars to Yah-
weh and called on his name (13:4; 26:25).
The interpretation of Exodus 6:2,3 has
caused much debate. “And God said to Moses,
‘Tam Yahweh; I appeared to Abraham, to
Isaac, and to Jacob, as El Shaddai, but by my
name Yahweh I did not make myself known to
them.’ ’’ This passage has been understood to
mean that the name Yahweh was not known
or used prior to the time of Moses. But that is
not what the passage states; rather it speaks of
the patriarchs not knowing God as Yahweh.
They knew him as El Shaddai in actual revela-
tory historical deeds. They had not come to
know God according to his unique character,
that is, as Yahweh. In other words, God had
always been Yahweh; he is saying to Moses
that the descendants of the patriarchs would
come to know the full rich meaning of the
name by the way God dealt with them.
This name “Yahweh” reveals God’s nature
in the highest and fullest sense possible. It in-
cludes, or presupposes, the meaning of the
other names. Yahweh particularly stresses the
absolute faithfulness of God. God had prom-
ised the patriarchs that he would be their
God, that he would be with them, would de-
liver and bless them, keep them, and give
them a land as a place of service and inheri-
tance. Moses is told by God that Israel is
about to behold and experience the unchange-
ableness of God as he steadfastly and won-
drously remembers his word and executes it
to the fullest degree. God would prove to be a
faithful, redeeming, upholding, restoring God.
In working out this redemption, God would
demonstrate that he is all that his name im-
plies: merciful, gracious, patient, full of lov-
ing-kindness, truthful, faithful, forgiving, just,
and righteous (Ex 34:5,6). Truly, Jacob had re-
ceived an insight into the meaning of the
name when he exclaimed, “I wait for thy salva-
tion, O Yahweh” (Gn 49:18).
Yahweh, then, is the name par excellence of
Israel’s God. As Yahweh he is a faithful cov-
enant God who, having given his Word of love
and life, keeps that Word by bestowing love
and life abundantly on his own.
884
In view of the richness of the name Yah-
weh, it can be understood why there were
stringent rules regarding its proper use (Lv
24:11,16). It also explains why thankful, rejoic-
ing, worshiping Israelites used the abbrevi-
ated form of Yahweh in song when they sang
Hallelujah: «Praise Yah’ (Pss 104:35; 106:1;
14:1}, 350:1).
Yahweh is used in a number of phrases
which are considered names of or ascriptions
of God. The most common of these compound
names is Yahweh Sabaoth (“‘hosts’’). The word
“hosts’”’ is used very frequently in the Penta-
teuch to refer to the armies of Israel (cf. e.g.,
Nm 10:14—28). This is because the word is de-
rived from the verb saba which means ‘‘to
wage’ war. It also means ‘“‘to serve’’ in some
contexts; for example, Numbers 8:24 clearly
has reference to the service performed in the
tabernacle. The noun sabaoth first occurs in
Genesis 2:1, where it refers to the many compo-
nents of the earth and heaven. Some would
limit the reference in these contexts to the
stars. Still others would suggest that the saba-
oth refers to the angels, appealing to Psalm
33:6 for confirmation.
The compound name, Yahweh Sabaoth
first appears in 1 Samuel 1:3. In view of the
frequent use of sabaoth in 1 and 2 Samuel to
refer to armies (1 Sm 12:9; 14:50; 17:55; 2 Sm
2:8; 8:16; 10:16, etc.), it is thought that the com-
pound name refers to Yahweh as the God of
armies, that is, God has his armies to serve
him. These are considered to be armies of an-
gels who are ministering servants to God. It
has been correctly pointed out that the com-
pound name, Yahweh Sabaoth, is used most
frequently by the prophets (Jeremiah 88 times,
Zechariah 55 times, Malachi 25 times, Haggai
14 times) at times when God’s people had ei-
ther suffered defeat at the hands of enemy ar-
mies or were threatened by defeat. So the com-
pound name was used to remind them that
their covenant God had great hosts to fight
and work for him on behalf of his people.
Thus, though Israel’s armies failed, their cov-
enant God was sufficient for every possible
circumstance. And it was to this Yahweh Saba-
oth that Israel’s commanders were to give alle-
giance (Jos 5:14,15), and in whose name Israel
was blessed (2 Sm 6:18).
Other compound names which occur infre-
quently are:
Yahweh-Nissi (nissi, “my banner’’) is the
name that Moses called on when he built an
altar celebrating Israel’s God-given victory
over the Amalekites (Ex 17:15). Isaiah uses the
term nissi when speaking of the coming Mes-
siah who is to be the conqueror (Is 11:10;
59:19).
Yahweh-Rapha (rapha, ‘“‘healer’’) appears in

Exodus 15:26, when Israel is assured that God,
their healer, will prevent the diseases of Egypt
from affecting Israel. Although the name is
only used once, God was often called upon and
praised as the healing One (e.g., Ps 103:3; Is
30:26; Jer 6:14, etc.).
Yahweh-Rohi (rohi, “‘my shepherd’) ap-
pears in Psalm 23:1. The concept of Yahweh as
shepherd is explicated in Ezekiel 34. “I myself
will be the Shepherd of my sheep” (v 15). Je-
sus demonstrated this concept’s full meaning
when as a shepherd he gave his life for his
sheep.
Yahweh-Jireh (jireh, “to see ahead or to pro-
vide’) appears in Genesis 22:14. Abraham gave
this name to the place where God provided a
substitute for his son Isaac, whom Abraham
was to offer as a sacrifice to God.
Yahweh-Shalom (shalom, “‘peace’’) is the
name Gideon gave to the altar he built when
the angel of the Lord came to give him orders
to fight the Midianites (Jgs 6:24). In Ephesians
2:14, Christ is called the peace for sinners, a
peace which passes all understanding and
guards believers’ hearts and thoughts (Phil
4:7).
Yahweh appears with a few forms of the
term zadaq, “‘righteousness.”’ Yahweh is spoken
of as our righteousness in Jeremiah 23:6; the
thought evidently is that David’s Righteous
Branch (the Messiah) will impute God’s righ-
teousness to those who are incorporated in the
new covenant. This concept is expressed in the
Pentateuch a number of times when it is said
that God has provided a way for living righ-
teously; that is, God provides a way of sanctifi-
cation (cf. Lv 20:8; 22:9; etc.).
Adonai. This name for God appears some
360 times in the OT, though it is not uniformly
used. It is first found in Genesis 15:2,8, when
Abram requests more definite information con-
cerning a son and the Promised Land. It ap-
pears only 14 times after that in the Penta-
teuch. It appears repeatedly in the Psalms
(over 50 times), and certain of the prophets use
it frequently (Is 47; Jer 29; Ez, over 150; and
Am 27 times).
The word adan, meaning “master, ruler,
owner, lord” is thought to be the root of the
noun adon which is frequently used of men.
For example, in Genesis and 1 and 2 Samuel
the term is used often for men who own slaves
or are in positions of authority.
In reference to its use as a name for God,
some have argued that it was used frequently
in early times but that it was later replaced by
Yahweh. This hardly seems likely in view of
its frequent use during the monarchy by kings,
servants, and prophets. It is a name by which
people addressed God, and when so used, it
was in combination with Elohim. Adonai is
885
God, Names of
correctly described as the name of personal
communication between the believer and God.
In such communication the worshiper ac-
knowledged God’s intense majesty and great-
ness and also the sense of belonging to this
God. Adonai, coming from human lips, ex-
pressed honor for God and humble submission
..6n the part of the believing person. Adonai,
thus, is the name that expresses faith, assur-
ance, security, ready service, and thanksgiving
(Pss 16:2; 57:9,10, etc.).
Old Testament Combinations. In the OT
the names of God appear in various combina-
tions. For example Elohim-Yahweh, Elohim-
Yahweh-Adonai, and Elohim-Adonai are very
common. These combinations were an effort
to express the fullness of God’s being and char-
acter as these had been revealed. Names of
God in combination with “Israel” occur also
as, for example, Yahweh-God-Israel (Jgs 5:3; Is
17:6), God is also invoked in relation to Israel
without the mention of one of his names, for
example, Qedosh Yisrael (Holy One of Israel,
Is 43:14, etc.) and Abir Yisrael (Mighty One of
Israel Gn 49:24; Ps 132:2; Is 49:26, etc.). By
means of these phrases the covenantal relation-
ship between God and his people was ex-
pressed and God’s unchanging character was
positively acknowledged.
Old Testament Personal Names. The per-
sonal names of God are Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit and variations of these.
H. Lockyer has correctly stated that there is
no revelation of God as Father in the OT com-
parable to that of Jesus in his prayer, “Our
Father.”
The term Abh (“father’’) appears more fre-
quently in Genesis than in any other book, and
in the Pentateuch more than in any other divi-
sion of the OT. But it is not used there of God,
but of one who has generated children (i.e.,
the male parent), the progenitor—head, chief,
and ruler of the family group or clan. It is
used often in the sense of the responsible one
through whom God has spoken, with whom
God has dealt, and through whom he has
given a rich heritage to the children and de-
scendants of the patriarchs.
In the poetical books, God is referred to as
Father, but is not directly named as such. Job
is asked ‘‘Has the rain a father?” (Job 38:28).
The reference is to God as the maker, source,
and controller of rain. In Psalm 68:5 God in his
holy dwelling place is the ‘‘Father of the father-
less”; the parallel phrase, “protector of wid-
ows,’ indicates the sense. Psalm 89:26 says
that David will cry to God, ‘“‘Thou art my Fa-
ther,’ and the parallels use the terms ‘‘God”
and ‘‘Rock of my Salvation.” The idea here is
of God as creator and savior who raised up, de-
livered, and protected David. In Psalm 103:13,
God, Names of
“Father” is used analogously, ‘‘As a father pit-
ies his children.”
Isaiah uses the term ‘Father’ in relation
to God four times. Three times it refers to
the One who has made, saved, formed, kept,
and directed Israel (Is 63:16; 64:8). Isaiah
says the promised child is to be named Ev-
erlasting Father (9:6). Used in this sense,
the term establishes the Son’s equality with
the Father in stature, function, ability, and
responsibility.
Jeremiah also refers to God as father in
3:4,19, Meaning the origin, keeper, and friend
of his people Israel. Malachi in 1:6 and 2:10
speaks of God as the parent who deserves
honor from his children and as the origin and
ruler of all people.
The term “son” is one of the most used
terms in the OT; it commonly occurs in the
sense of offspring and descendant. It also ap-
pears in the sense of follower or successor.
There are a few indirect references to the sec-
ond person of the Trinity.
The messianic Psalm 2 has such a reference,
“You are my son” (v 7). It is stated in the
context of the king speaking to one who rules
and is to rule with and under the sovereign.
The immediate reference may be to the theo-
cratic king; however, the reference is revealed
in the NT to be the second person of the Trin-
ity (Acts 13:33). Thus the term “son” is applied
to the promised Messiah who is set forth as
the divine sovereign ruler and judge of the na-
tions. The Son is perceived to be equal with
Father in deity and function. Not all biblical
scholars accept this interpretation, but sup-
port is found in such NT passages as Hebrews
1:8 which quotes Psalm 45:6. As stated above,
Isaiah speaks of the son to be given (9:6), the
One born of the virgin (7:14) who is Immanuel,
Almighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of
Peace.
The name Holy Spirit occurs only a few
times in the OT. The Spirit is referred to fre-
quently by terms and phrases such as the
Spirit of God (Gn 1:2), the Spirit of the Lord
God (Is 61:1), the Spirit of the Lord (Ez 37:1),
the Spirit (Nm 11:17; 27:18), my Spirit (Gn
6:3), and thy Spirit (Ps 51:11). Though the char-
acter of the Spirit is not developed as clearly
in the OT as in the NT, it can be safely stated
that the relationship posited between God and
the Spirit_is such that there is no doubt that
the OT teaches the deity of the Spirit. The
character and function of the Spirit is referred
especially in relation to the work of creation
(Gn 1:2; Ps 33:6, etc.) and the equipping of ser-
vants for the service of God, for example,
craftsmanship (Ex 35:31), leadership (Nm 11:17;
27:18), prophecy (1 Sm 10:6; 2 Sm 23:2; 2 Chr
Ee TRZ tereteyy
886
Old Testament Titles of God. Titles are em-
ployed in the OT in reference to offices and
functions. It is not suggested that God has an
office as such, but the terms are used to indi-
cate the concept of functions with authority,
full right, and responsibility. In this sense,
God possesses office in fullness and totality.
God is entitled the Creator of men (Eccl
12:1), of the entire earth (Is 40:28), and of Israel
his people (43:15). God is spoken of as Re-
deemer in a personal manner (Jb 19:25; Ps
19:14) and also as the universal Redeemer (Is
59:20). Other titles are employed which refer
to God’s functions, such as maker, (Is 54:5),
king (Ps 29:10; Is 43:15), judge (Gn 18:25; cf.
Ancient of Days, Dn 7:9,13,22), keeper (Ps
121:5).
Messiah is the title that is given to the one
who is to come as the True Prophet, the Only
High Priest, and the Eternal King. The term
Messiah comes from the Hebrew word Mes-
hiah (‘‘to be anointed”). When a person was
anointed to be a prophet, priest, or king, it
meant that he was designated for the position,
assigned the duties of the position, authorized
to function, and qualified or enabled to fulfill
the requirements of the respective office. The
anointing oil symbolized the Holy Spirit par-
ticularly in respect to qualifying a person for
the tasks assigned. The Holy Spirit is not re-
ferred to by any specific title in the OT.
Old Testament Essential Names. The group
of names included under this heading are
more common in the NT, but when used there,
they reflect an OT source.
God is light. The psalmist sang, “The Lord
is my light” (Ps 27:1); he undoubtedly had in
mind the pillar of fire that gave light and di-
rection to the Israelites in the wilderness. The
cloud that stood before the tabernacle and
filled the temple is described as a radiant
light of glory. Hence, to speak of God as light
is to speak of him as the source and dispenser
of glory.
God is also spoken of as the one who loves
his people (Dt 7:8,13), but he is not said to be
love in the NT sense. Nor does the OT speak of
God as spirit, although it does teach that he is
spirit.
Old Testament Descriptive Names of God.
The OT writers employed a wide variety of
symbolic names to describe some specific as-
pect of God and of his relationship with his
people. Only a few of the more common and
striking ones will be listed.
Baal is used to express the concept of God
as owner and possessor. The term must be un-
derstood as carrying both the idea of a posi-
tion of sovereignty combined with a personal
relationship; this explains why the term is of-
ten translated as “husband.”

The verbal root of Baal means “to marry,
take possession of, to rule over.”
Baal is used very frequently, either alone or
in compounds (e.g., Baal Peor), of the pagan
gods of Canaanites and Philistines. It is used
of the God of Israel by Isaiah: ‘“Your Maker is
your husband” (54:5). In Hosea 2 God is
spoken of as husband also, but the Hebrew .- Over 1000 times in the NT. Kurios, “Lord,” is
word used there is ‘ish.
Qanne’ is said to be God’s name in Exodus
34:14. The word originally meant ‘‘to possess,”
and the idea of becoming protective over that
which was possessed seems to have given the
meaning of ‘‘to be red or to be jealous.”’ God’s OT gave to Yahweh, especially when used of
name is Jealous because he presses his claim
on those with whom he has covenanted; he
will not tolerate their covenanting with other
gods.
Zur (‘‘Rock’’) is used by Hannah in her song
of exultation to describe God (1 Sm 2:2). It
conveys the idea of God as a support and de-
fense. God had upheld and protected the
scorned and despised Hannah. Isaiah accuses
God’s people of not remembering the “Rock of formula, which is part of the Great Commis-
your refuge” (17:10). The psalmist sang to God
to be his rock (31:2) and then sang, ‘“‘Thou art Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These names
my Rock and my fortress” (31:3, cf. also Ps carry the OT meaning, but since the relation-
71:3). The most striking reference to God as
Rock is in Moses’ song: ‘‘The Rock, his work is
perfect; for all his ways are justice. A God of
faithfulness ... just and right is He’ (Dt 32:4). the NT. It is an Aramaic word which is trans-
Moses expresses complete confidence in God’s
unfailing and permanent demonstration of his
virtues as he performs his Word and work.
Ro’eh, from the verb ra’ah (‘‘to feed, shep-
herd’’) is used by the psalmist to sing of God’s
care and concern for his people (23:1). Psalm
80:1 appeals to the Shepherd who leads Israel
to bestir himself and to restore Israel to her
place and blessing. Jacob used the name when
blessing Joseph, speaking of God as the Shep-
herd and Rock who had kept and protected
Joseph and who would continue to do so (Gn
49:24). Ezekiel presents an expanded descrip-
tion of the Shepherd’s character and work (Ez
34). Jesus undoubtedly drew from these OT
passages when he said, “I am the good shep-
herd” (Jn 10:11). It should be noted that in
taking the OT name of shepherd Jesus was
identifying himself with Yahweh of the OT.
Divine names which are descriptive of the
promised Messiah are very common in the OT,
for example, Root, Branch, Star, Scepter, and
the like.
The NT Names of God. Proper Names of
God. Theos is the NT equivalent of the OT
names El and Elohim; Elyon appears in the
NT as Hupsistos Theos, the Highest God (Lk
1:32,76; Mk 5:7, etc.). Pantokrator (El Shaddai)
appears with Theos (2 Cor 6:18; Rv 16:7, etc.).
This name was used not only to express God’s
God, Names of
transcendency, power, sovereignty, and lord-
ship; but also, the fact that God is a personal
God in close relationship with his people. This
fact is established by the very frequent use of
personal pronouns used with Theos. L. Berk-
hof says this is so because in Christ God is the
God of each of his children. Theos appears
used to express the OT names Yahweh and
Adonai in the Septuagint and the NT follows
it. Kurios means “power,” so the meaning is
not the same as “Yahweh”; yet the NT does
give Kurios the full weight of meaning that the
Jesus Christ (cf. Acts 2:36; Phil 2:9—11; etc.).
Despotes is used five times of God or of Je-
sus in the NT (Lk 2:29; Acts 4:24; 2 Pt 2:11;
Jude 4; Rv 6:10). It expresses the idea of au-
thority; the idea of brutality conveyed by the
modern concept “despot” is absent from the
NT usage even when applied to men, where its
central thought is ownership (2 Tm 2:21).
Personal Names of God. In the baptismal
sion, the three personal names of God appear,
ship of the three persons is explicated, the NT
meaning of the names is enriched.
Abba is used as a personal name of God in
lated as “Father” (Mk 14:36; Rom 8:15; Gal
4:6). The name expresses a very intimate and
inseparable relationship between Christ and
the Father and between believers (children)
and God (Father).
“Jesus” is the personal name of the Son,
the second person of the triune Godhead. It
means ‘‘savior’” (Mt 1:21). The root of this
name “to save” gave rise to names such as
Joshua, Hoshea, and Hosea. The basic mean-
ing of the OT root is “to bring into a safe,
wide, open place.’’ Joshua, bringing Israel into
Canaan, did in person what his name meant.
The NT explanation (‘‘save from sin’’) is not
contrary to the OT meaning. To be saved from
sin is to be restored to fellowship with God
and to enter into the paradise of the heavenly
kingdom.
Titles of God. As in the OT, the title “Cre-
ator” is applied to God (Rom 1:25; 1 Pt 4:19). It
expresses specifically the idea of God as origi-
nator, sole possessor, and absolute ruler of the
cosmos.
“Christ” is the title applied to the Son, Je-
sus. It is the Greek translation of the Hebrew
“Messiah.”
“Paraclete” is the title given to the Holy
Spirit by John (14:16,26; 15:26; 16:7). The Greek
word paraklétos means “intercessor, advocate,
consoler, comforter.’”” When Jesus spoke to his
887
God-fearer
disciples concerning his departure he empha-
sized that he would send his Spirit, through
whom he would be present. In addition, the
Spirit would minister to them in their specific
needs, particularly in times of stress, persecu-
tion, and threats of death. The Spirit would
render whatever service was deemed neces-
sary for Christ’s disciples.
The Essential Names of God. Jesus often
used a wide variety of terms to express who
and what he was. According to John’s Gospel
he repeatedly said, “I Am,” and then used
such terms as “‘light,” ‘““manna/living bread,”
“water.” These self-appropriated names can
be fully understood only if they are studied in
their OT contexts (cf. above).
Jesus spoke of God as spirit (Jn 4:24). The
essential nature of the triune God must be un-
derstood as spiritual, that is, noncorporeal.
Spirit carries with it the idea of transcendence
of space, time, or any other limitation.
John specifically stated that God is love
(1 Jn 4:8). Love expresses in the fullest manner
how God gave himself in his Son Jesus Christ.
Descriptive Names. ‘Shepherd,’ “door,”
“vine,” and similar names are terms Jesus
Christ used to describe himself when he spoke
of what he came to do on behalf of those the
Father had given him.
Rabbi is used to describe Jesus Christ. It
means ‘‘my great one.” Rabboni is an intensi-
fied form of the word. Applied to Christ it sug-
gests a recognition of his divine status and
character. The term rabbi was used to refer to
the teachers who had mastered the Law of
God and were able to communicate its truth
to the unlearned. ‘The Highest,” Hupsistos, is
used to refer to God as the transcendent, ex-
alted One. It carries much the same meaning
as E] Elyon in the OT.
GERARD VAN GRONINGEN
See Gop, BEING AND ATTRIBUTES OF; MONOTHEISM;
NAMES, THE SIGNIFICANCE OF; CHRISTOLOGY; MESSIAH;
Hoy Spirit; JESUS CHRIST, LIFE AND TEACHING OF.
Bibliography. W. Eichrodt, Theology of the OT, vol 1, pp
178-205; L. Koehler, OT Theology, pp 21-58; G. Oehler, The-
ology of the OT; D. Patrick, The Rendering of God in the OT;
H.H. Rowley, The Faith of Israel; H. Schultz, OT Theology,
vol 2, pp 116-41.
God-fearer. One who fears God. This can be
a term of reverence, an emotional reaction of
terror, or a dread of God’s vengeance.
Phrases describing the God-fearer in the OT
are frequently coupled with such terms as
“stood in awe” and “held in awe” (1 Chr 16:25;
Ps 22:23). Reverence for the Lord is used less
frequently, but is used with this meaning
when Obadiah hid the prophets in a cave to
save them from being assassinated by Jezebel
(1 Kgs 18:3,4,12). A man could expect to receive
888
justice from a God-fearing ruler (2 Sm 23:3; 2
€hr 19:7), and long life was a reward for those
who feared the Lord (Prv 10:27; 14:27; 19:23). A
God-fearing family would rely on the Lord for
practical help in time of trouble (2 Kgs 4:1;
Prv 14:26). The fear of the Lord was effective in
driving away sin and was itself the beginning
of wisdom (Sir 10:24; 40:14—20).
In the NT fear of God is frequently used in
conjunction with admonitions to love and
serve the Lord (Col 3:22; 1 Pt 2:17), and in the
Magnificat, Mary’s statement “His mercy is
on those who fear him”’ is used in the sense of
revere and obey (Lk 1:50). In Acts, the term
“God-fearer’’ is given a specific interpreta-
tion, being used with reference to Gentiles
who attended the synagogue. Paul mentions
them separately when introducing his ad-
dress: “Men of Israel, and you that fear God”
(Acts 13:16). Cornelius was an honest, gener-
ous, and God-fearing Roman centurion who,
although not a Jew, was recognized as lead-
ing a life acceptable to the Lord (Acts 10:2,35).
The fear of God was also used in both the
OT and the NT to denote dread or terror of the
mighty power and judgment of the Lord (Gn
3:10; Dt 9:19; Jb 6:4; 9:28,29; Ps 76:8; Mt 17:7;
28:10; Lk 5:10; 12:5; Acts 5:5,11; 1 Tm 5:20).
HAZEL W. PERKIN
See PROSELYTE; FEAR.
Gods, Goddesses. Pagan male and female
deities. Although the Bible teaches that there
is only one God (Is 45:18,21,22; Mk 12:32), hea-
then people in ancient times quickly devel-
oped a belief in large numbers of so-called
gods (Jer r1o:11) and goddesses. Eventually
each nation created and worshiped its own dei-
ties, usually more than one in number. Many
of these “foreign gods” (1 Sm 7:3) are named
in the Bible, and in most cases we are told to
what nation each belonged. The list from
Mesopotamia, a center of idol worship, is the
longest: Adrammelech and Anammelech (2
Kgs 17:31), Bel (also known as Marduk; Is 46:1;
Jer 50:2; 51:44), Kaiwan (Am 5:26), Nebo or
Nabu (Is 46:1), Nergal (2 Kgs 17:30), Nisroch
(19:37; Is 37:38), Rephan (Acts 7:43), Sakkuth
(Am 5:26), Succoth-benoth (2 Kgs 17:30), Tam-
muz (Ez 8:14), and Tartak (2 Kgs 17:31). The
Syrians were devoted to Ashima (v 30) and
Rimmon (5:18), who was also worshiped un-
der the compound name Hadad-rimmon (Zec
12:11). Israel’s eastern neighbors, Ammon and
Moab, worshiped Milcom or Molech (1 Kgs
11:5,7,33; 2 Kgs 23:13) and Chemosh, respec-
tively, although the Moabites also worshiped a
local manifestation of Baal (Nm 25:3,5). Philis-
tine gods were Dagon and Baal-zebub (2 Kgs
1:2,3,6,16), who is the equivalent of the NT Beel-
 Gods, Goddesses

declares of idols that ‘“‘an idol has no real exis-

tence’’ (1 Cor 8:4) and that ‘‘gods made with
hands are not gods” (Acts 19:26). It is not sur-
prising, then, that when the Israelites began to
encounter other nations in significant ways—
that is, as early as the time of the exodus—
they were told repeatedly that the Lord is
.-greater than all other gods (Ex 15:11; 18:11; Dt
10:17; Jos 22:22; 1 Chr 16:25; 2 Chr 2:5; Pss 86:8;
95:3; 96:4,5; 97:79; 135:5; 136:2; Dn 2:47; Zep
eenWei Je
Such so-called gods were not worthy of Isra-
el’s attention or veneration. Since there is only
one God, other gods could not claim and did
not deserve Israel’s worship (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7).
The Hebrew language did not even have a
word for “goddess” and therefore had to use
its word for ‘‘god”’ to express that concept (see
1 Kgs 11:5,33). The Israelites were to make no
images (Ex 20:4,23; Lv 19:4; Dt 5:8) or mention
(Ex 23:13; Jos 23:7) of the gods and goddesses
of their heathen neighbors.
Yet despite all God’s warnings, idolatry
was Israel’s besetting sin from the earliest
times. During the patriarchal period God's
people were attracted to the “household idols”
(Gn 31:32) of their relatives, and they contin-
ued to worship other gods throughout most of
their history (Ex 32:1,4,8,23,31; 34:15; Hos 11:2).
Idolatry eventually led to the destruction of
the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 17:7—18) in 722 BC
and of the southern kingdom (2 Kgs 22:17; cf.
Dt 29:25—-28) in 586 Bc. During their time of
exile in Babylonia the Jewish people saw idola-
try at its worst and turned away from it, but
A four-headed god from Babylon.
their ancestors could have avoided untold ag-
ony if they had simply followed the example
zebul (Mt 12:24; Lk 11:15). One Canaanite god, of Joshua: ‘“‘As for me and my house, we will
Baal, and two Canaanite goddesses, Asherah serve the Lord” (Jos 24:15).
and Ashtoreth, are mentioned frequently in Refusing to worship the one true God in the
the OT; Ashtoreth was the same as the Mesopo-
tamian Ishtar, also known as the “Queen of
Heaven” (Jer 7:18; 44:17—19,25). The gods of
Egypt are represented by only two names in
the Bible: Amon (46:25) and Apis (v 15). Nib-
haz (2 Kgs 17:31) was probably an Elamite
god.
At least three Greco-Roman deities are men-
tioned in the NT: the Greek goddess Artemis
(Acts 19:24,27,28,34,35), known as Diana by the
Romans, and the Greek gods Zeus and Hermes
(Acts 14:12,13), known as Jupiter and Mercury,
respectively, by the Romans.
The Bible clearly teaches that the gods of
the nations have no objective reality (Jer 2:11),
even though their worshipers sincerely believe
that they actually exist (v 28). But the Lord
proclaims that “they are no gods,” (v 11;
16:20), ‘gods that are not gods” (5:7 NIv), they
“are nothing” (Is 41:24), “beings that by na- Red-figure ware (dated in the 5th cent. BC) from Athens, pictur-
ture are no gods” (Gal 4:8). The NT further ing Leto, Apollo, and Artemis.

889
Gog
proper way leads inevitably to other evil ac-
tivities (Rom 1:21—-32). An example applicable
to modern times is given to us by Paul, who
warns that we are not to ‘worship the good
things of life, for that is idolatry” (Col 3:5 LB).
RONALD F. YOUNGBLOOD
See CANAANITE DEITIES AND RELIGION; IDOLS, IDOLA-
TRY; HIGH PLACE.
Gog. 1. Reubenite, Shemiah’s son (1 Chr
5:4).
2. Individual described as the prince of Me-
shech who ruled over the land of Magog (Ez
38:2-21; 39:1-16). Magog was evidently a terri-
tory located far from Palestine whose inhabit-
ants would attack Jerusalem in a final at-
tempt to overthrow God’s people. The Lord,
through Ezekiel, promised Gog a catastrophic
defeat.
Attempts to identify Gog with some histori-
cal ruler have not been convincing. Gyges of
Lydia, who drove out Cimmerian invaders,
has been suggested, but equally probable are
Gaga, mentioned in the Amarna tablets, and
Gagi, king of the city-state of Sabi. Some have
maintained a mythological interpretation, in
which Gog is a symbol of evil actively oppos-
ing good. Certainly Gog, connected in Scrip-
ture with godless nations such as Gomer, Put,
Persia, Sheba, and Tarshish, is depicted as
leading an alliance of world powers in opposi-
tion to God. Gog also appears in Revelation
(20:7—9), where Satan mobilizes Gog and Ma-
gog (l.e., the nations of the world) against
God’s saints in a final battle. A literal view
contemplates an attack on Jerusalem by hos-
tile forces (cf. Zec 14) while a symbolic inter-
pretation envisions a climactic conflict be-
tween good and evil.
R.K. HARRISON
Goiim. 1. People or region mentioned in
Genesis 14:1,9 as ruled by a king named Tidal.
The word is variously translated “nations”
(kJv) and ‘“Goiim”’ (rsv). Tidal, together with
three other kings—Amraphel of Shinar, Arioch
of Ellasa, and Chedorlaomer of Elam—at-
tacked several cities in the Valley of Siddim
near the Dead Sea (v 3). They defeated the five
kings of the valley region, looted their towns,
and captured Lot, Abraham’s nephew, who
lived in Sodom (v 12). When Abraham heard of
this, he gathered his soldiers, pursued the vic-
torious kings, defeated them, and rescued Lot
(vv 13-16).
2. People mentioned in connection with
Joshua’s victory over an unknown king of
Goiim (Jos 12:23, KJv king of the nations of
Gilgal). The location of these people is uncer-
tain, since the verse reads ‘‘Gilgal’”’ in the He-
brew text and “Galilee” in the Septuagint.
890
Golan. City and a district in the territory
given to Manasseh in Bashan. It was the
northernmost city of refuge east of the Jordan
River (Dt 4:43; Jos 20:8), given to the Levite
family of Gershon (Jos 21:27; 1 Chr 6:71). Of
uncertain identification, it was known to Jose-
phus as a fertile area, and to Eusebius as a
village. The best current suggestion places it
at Sehem el-Jolan, east of the river el-‘Allan.
See CITIES OF REFUGE; LEVITICAL CITIES.
Gold. Soft yellow metallic element.
See Coins; MINERALS, METALS, AND PRECIOUS
STONES; MONEY AND BANKING.
Golden Calf. See CALF, GOLDEN.
Goldsmith. See INpustRY AND COMMERCE;
TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS.
Golgotha. Place where Jesus and two thieves
were crucified, in the vicinity of Jerusalem.
The term appears in the NT only in the ac-
counts of the crucifixion. Three of the Gospels
use the Hebrew-Aramaic term, ‘‘Golgatha”
(Mt 27:33; Mk 15:22; Jn 19:17), while one uses
the Greek equivalent, “Calvary” (Lk 23:33,
meaning “skull or cranium”’).
The reason why this place was called “the
skull” is unknown, although several explana-
tions have been offered. (1) An early tradition,
apparently originating with Jerome (AD 346-—
420), asserted that it was a common place of
execution and that the skulls of many who had
been executed were strewn around the site. No
1st-century evidence has been found to sub-
stantiate this viewpoint. (2) Some suggest that
it was a place of execution and that “skull”
was used figuratively, simply as a symbol of
death. (3) Origen (AD 185-253) mentioned an
early, pre-Christian tradition that the skull of
Adam was buried in that place and hence its
name. This is probably the oldest explanation
of the name, and is referred to by several writ-
ers after Origen. (4) Others have said that the
name resulted from the fact that the place of
the crucifixion was a hill which had the natu-
ral shape of a skull. No. early evidence from
any sources has been found to substantiate
this view, and the NT accounts do not refer to
the place as a hill.
The location of the site is disputed. The bib-
lical references give us only general indica-
tions. It was outside the city proper (Jn 19:20;
Heb 13:12). It may have been on an elevated
site since it could be seen from a distance (Mk
15:40). It was perhaps near a road since “pass-
ersby’’ are mentioned (Mt 27:39; Mk 15:29).
John’s account places it near a garden which
contained the tomb in which Jesus was buried
°

Gordon’s Calvary/Golgotha.
(Jn 19:41). The use of the definite article, “the
place of the skull,” would indicate that it was
a well-known place.
There seems to have been little interest in
the site of Golgotha until the early part of the
4th century. Eusebius, who lived in Jerusalem
for several years, said that Constantine the em-
peror instructed Bishop Marcarius to find the
site of the crucifixion and burial. Later ac-
counts said that the bishop was guided to the
site by a vision of the Queen Mother Helena.
The site which he settled on contained a Hadri-
anic temple of Aphrodite, which Constantine
destroyed; and there tradition says he found
fragments of the cross of Christ. On that site
he built two churches, and this is the site of
the modern Church of the Holy Sepulcher. Al-
though destroyed and rebuilt several
this has remained a fixed site since the time of
Constantine.
In 1842 Otto Thenius contended that Golgo-
tha was a rocky hill about 250 yards north-
east of the Damascus Gate. He based his con-
tention on. the assertions that it had been a
Jewish place of stoning, lay outside the city
wall, and was shaped like a skull. Later Gen-
eral Charles Gordon also advocated this spot,
and it has come to be known as “Gordon’s
Calvary.”
WAYNE C. HENSLEY
See CRUCIFIXION; JERUSALEM.
Goliath. Eleventh-century sc Philistine war-
rior from Gath, who challenged Israel to bat-
tle (« Sm 17). He was subsequently felled and
decapitated by the youthful David. Goliath
was over 9g feet tall (v 4), wore armor weighing
about 125 pounds, and carried a spear of 15
pounds weight. His sword, kept at Nob, was
later given to David (21:9; 22:10). He may have
descended from the Anakim (see Jos 11:22), but
his height could have resulted from an ante-
rior pituitary tumor. In 2 Samuel 21:19 his
death is attributed to Elhanan, who in 1
Goshen
Chronicles 20:5 is credited with killing Goli-
ath’s brother.
Gomer. 1. Son of Japheth, who was a son of
Noah (Gn 10:2; cf. 1 Chr 1:5). He had three
sons: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarma (Gn
10:3; 1 Chr 1:6). He is the progenitor of the an-
‘cient Cimlerians, who according to Ezekiel’s
prophecy would join with Gog, the leader of
the Magogites, in an effort to stamp out Israel
(Ez 38:6).
2. Diblaim’s daughter, a prostitute and
wife of Hosea by divine command. Having
borne Hosea children, she lapsed into immor-
tality but was redeemed. Her behavior served
as an illustration of Israel’s infidelity to God
(Hos 1-3).
See HosEA (PERSON).
Gomorrah. One of the “cities of the valley”
destroyed by God because of its wickedness
(Gn 19).
See CITIES OF THE VALLEY, CITIES OF THE PLAIN;
SODOM AND GOMORRAH.
Goose. See Birps.
Gopher Wood. Material Noah used to build
the ark (Gn 6:14).
See PLANTS (CYPRESS).
Goshen. 1. Geographical region in Egypt oc-
cupied by the Israelites during their sojourn in
times, Egypt from the time of Joseph to the exodus.
Genesis 46,47 gives us several pieces of infor-
mation concerning Goshen. (a) It was a defi-
nite part of Egypt. (b) It was the place where
Joseph met his father after their years of sepa-
ration, when Jacob moved his family to Egypt.
(c) It was an area good for grazing flocks. Go-
shen has been associated with Egyptian bull
cults and as being important for animal hus-
bandry. At one period the princes of Thebes
sent their cattle to the Delta for pasture, even
though it was controlled by the Hyksos. Sa-
cred cattle were probably pastured there by
Egyptians also. (d) It is called “the best of the
land” in two different verses (Gn 47:6,11) and
is identified as the “land of Rameses.” (e) It
probably had a military outpost on its eastern
border and may not have been heavily inhab-
ited by Egyptians.
The name “Goshen” is not of Egyptian ori-
gin, but is Semitic and attests to the occupa-
tion of the region by Semites before the New
Kingdom of Egypt. The Septuagint reads
“Gesem of Arabia” instead of “land of Goshen”
in Genesis 45:10 and 46:34. Ptolemy the geogra-
pher said that “Arabia” was an Egyptian name
for the eastern border of the Nile Delta, and
891
Gospel
Delta, and this would account for the terminol-
ogy of the Septuagint.
Goshen was a region of about goo square
miles, consisting of two districts. The western
half ran from Zoan to Bubastis, a distance of
about 35 miles from north to south. This dis-
trict was an irrigated plain containing some of
the most fertile land in Egypt. It is about 15
miles wide at the Mediterranean Sea and nar-
rows to about 10 miles between Zagazig and
Tell el-Kebir on the south. The eastern sector
contains a large desert area between the Nile
plain and the Suez. As it stretches to the south
from Daphnai to the Wadi Tumilat, it in-
creases in width to about 40 miles from east to
west. South of this section more desert area
stretches to the Suez on the south and from
the Bitter Lakes on the east to Heliopolis on
the west. The physical arrangement of Goshen
is important in determining the route of the
exodus. Given the above description, the Wadi
Tumilat would have been the most logical
route to the Red Sea for people who were driv-
ing flocks and herds. The route would have led
from the south side of the field of Zoan near
Bubastis, east to the edge of the wilderness
and the head of the Bitter Lakes.
2. Area in the territory conquered and occu-
pied by the Israelites under Joshua (Jos 10:41,
country of Goshen; Jos 11:16, land of Goshen).
It was probably in the hill country of Judah
between Hebron and the Negeb.
3. Town in the territory of Judah
15:51). It may have been the central city of
the district discussed in #1 above, but this is
uncertain.
Gospel. Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon
godspell denoting “glad tidings’ or ‘good
news.”
The OT. The Gospel Declared. Glad tid-
ings may concern the birth of a son (Jer 20:15);
deliverance from personal affliction (Ps 40:9);
the choice of a king (1 Kgs 1:42); victory in
battle (1 Sm 31:9; 2 Sm 1:20; 4:10; 18:19-31; 2
Kgs 7:9; 1 Chr 10:9; Ps 68:11); or Israel’s salva-
tion from foreign powers (1 Chr 16:23; Ps 96:2),
particularly Assyria (Na 1:15) and Babylon (Is
40:9; 41:27; 52:7; 61:1)—a theme eventually
taken up by the Gentiles themselves (Is 60:6).
Naturally such news is proclaimed widely
(e.g., 1 Sm 31:9; Pss 40:9; 96:2,3; Is 40:9; 52:7),
spread rapidly (2 Sm 18:19—-31; 2 Kgs 7:9; note
also the “great host’ of evangelists in Ps
68:11), and declared and received joyfully (2
Sm 1:20; Ps 96:2,11,12; Is 52:7-9; 61:1-3;
ZOsrE).
God the Savior. Where the message is gos-
pel for the Israelites (cf. 1 Sm 31:9) and is
based on fact (cf. 1 Kgs 1:42—43), the news is in
every case but one (Jer 20:15) expressly related
to God. Gospel owes its existence and bears its
witness to action which he has taken, action
moreover that is saving in character. In 2 Sam-
uel 18, the good news is not merely that David
has been delivered from his enemies, but that
the Lord has accomplished this (vv 19,28,31). A
direct act of God causes the Syrians to flee (2
Kgs 7:1-9). The “‘glad news” of Psalm 40:9 con-
cerns the Lord’s “saving help” (v 10; cf. 1 Chr
16:23 and Ps 96:2). The kings whose flight the
maidens celebrate (Ps 68:11) have been scat-
tered by the Almighty (v, 14). The gospel of
Nahum 1:15 is that the Lord has broken the
Assyrian yoke (v 13). God’s saving work is the
main theme of Isaiah 40-66. The good news is
that the mighty God is returning to Zion
(40:9,10), having conquered Babylon by the
hand of Cyrus (41:25,27). The “peace” and “‘sal-
vation” announced in 52:7 are won by his sov-
ereign power (“Your God reigns’’). Having wit-
nessed his saving deeds, the nations praise the
Lord (60:6, cf. vv 4,9,16). There are “good tid-
ings for the afflicted’”’ (61:1) because “the year
of the Lord’s favor” has arrived (v 2).
The Basis of Salvation. Of all the passages
cited, those of Isaiah provide the most impor-
tant background for gospel in the NT. Accord-
ing to Isaiah's gospel, it is God alone who
saves, and there is no explanation for his sav-
ing action except in his own nature. Israel’s
deliverance is undeserved; she is no more wor-
thy of the divine love now than when she went
(Jos into captivity. In whatever measure she has
paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she
remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12,13; 48:1).
It is only by God’s grace that she is saved
(55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation de-
pends not upon her own righteousness but
upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5,6). There be-
ing no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts
to create righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3,10,
11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation
is not accomplished at the expense of justice.
The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in
full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into
question. On the contrary, it is precisely here
that his mercy is most poignantly expressed;
for the penalty is exacted not from his people
but from the Servant appointed to stand in
their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s
work, many shall be justified (v 11); those who
could present no case for their own righteous-
ness (43:25—28) shall be acquitted.
The Effects of Salvation. The joy which at-
tends the proclamation and reception of gos-
Jer pel finds its ultimate expression in the praise
of God. In reporting victory to David, Ahimaaz
exclaims, ‘“‘Blessed be the Lord your God, who
has delivered” (2 Sm 18:28). The gospel of
Psalm 40 is declared amidst public worship
(vv 9,10). It is during a festal procession cele-
892
 Gospel

brating God’s enthronement that the glad tid- is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1—5 the gospel is rep-
ings of Psalm 68:11—14 are recollected. At the resented as a blessing promised in the OT but
heart of the evangel in Isaiah 40:9 is the excla- not actually given until Jesus comes (see also
mation “Behold your God!” The herald of 52:7 Acts 13:32,33). Galatians 3:8 is not so excep-
declares, “Your God reigns”; it is not primar- tional as might first appear, for the word used
ily the appearance of the herald or the release here to denote an advance proclamation of the
of the captives that causes the watchmen to gospel to Abraham is not euangelizomai but
“sing for joy,” but rather “the return of the . proeuangelizomai.
Lord to Zion” (v 8). The identity of the evange- Good News of Christ’s Coming. The prom-
list in 61:1 is not disclosed; what is certain is ised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk
that the Lord has anointed him (v 1), that he 1:19), not only for his parents (1:7,24,25) but for
proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2), all the people: John is sent to prepare them for
and that God will be glorified through his Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17,67—79). John’s own
preaching (v 3). According to 60:6, the nations preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason.
“shall proclaim the praise of the Lord.” Psalm Messiah is coming to execute judgment, a pro-
g6 calls upon the whole earth to tell of God’s cess that involves both condemnation and sal-
salvation (vv 1,2) and thereby to “‘bless his vation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for
name” and ‘‘declare his glory” (vv 2,3). sinners in that they are warned of impending
The Promise of Salvation. With the return doom and urged to repent before the axe falls
of the exiles from Babylon, the salvation an- (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that
nounced in Isaiah’s gospel is only partly real- they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and mem-
ized. Israel’s suffering is by no means over: the bership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The
foreign nations, far from becoming her fellow birth of the Savior himself is announced as
worshipers (as envisaged in Is 60 and Ps 96), “good news of a great joy” (Lk 2:10,11).
would remain her oppressors. Nor was Israel Gospel According to Jesus: The Coming of the
altogether liberated from her sin: her unrigh- Kingdom of God. Jesus is authorized by God
teousness was to persist (cf. Mal), and the Ser- and anointed by the Spirit to evangelize (Mk
vant appointed to bear her iniquities (Is 53) 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching
had not yet appeared. As Isaiah makes clear, stands the announcement, “‘The time is ful-
the full realization of this salvation awaits the filled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; re-
dawn of a new age—an age which is itself cre- pent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For
ated by God’s saving activity. At the close of further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23;
the OT, the inauguration of this new age is 92353 24:14 26:13; Mkyw8:455\10:20;: 13210},,14:05
still awaited. We are thus prepared for gospel Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news
as set forth in the NT. for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is com-
The NT: Stage One. The gospel as de- ing. The God whom Jesus worships is eter-
clared before the death of Jesus must be ex- nally sovereign over all that he has made. Yet
amined. paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will
Gospel and the OT. In only two places (Gal is not done on earth as it is in-heaven; wrong,
3:8; Heb 4:2,6) does the NT speak of the procla- not right, prevails. But these conditions are
mation of gospel prior to the Christian era. not final, according to Jesus. With the coming
This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmis- of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed;
takable presence of gospel in the OT, (2) the wrong will be judged, righteousness estab-
extent of gospel terminology in the NT (the lished, and his people blessed. (2) The king-
noun appears 76 times, and the verb 54), and dom is now being inaugurated. “The time is
(3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfilled,’ declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time
fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the appointed for the fulfillment of the OT prom-
OT to interpret his person and work. Not only ises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the
is it remarkable, it is very significant. It indi- kingdom is therefore no longer a distant pros-
cates that the NT usage depends not only pect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at
upon the character of the message (truth about hand” (v 15b). (4) God is establishing his rule
salvation), but also upon historical events. Al- for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’
most without exception, the NT restricts its call to repentance (v 15c). It is especially clear
application of gospel-terminology to proclama- in the passages to which we now turn.
tions made during the time of fulfillment—the Gospel According to Jesus: The Salvation of
age in which the salvation promised in the OT the Poor. Invited to read the Scripture in the
is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccu- synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah
pied, not with promises of salvation, but with 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, be-
news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, cause he has anointed me to preach good news
the gospel “‘begins’” not in the OT but with to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim re-
John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy lease to the captives and recovering of sight to

893
Gospel
the blind, to set at liberty those who are op-
pressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the
Lord” (Lk 4:18,19). Having read the prophecy,
Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own min-
istry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus
has come to free are the physically infirm such
as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27). (cf.
the references to healing miracles in 4:23,33-
41; the close connection between evangelizing
and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21,22;
9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk
13:11—16, of the physically afflicted as captives
of Satan now liberated by Jesus.) Also in-
cluded are the materially poor—people like the
widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk
4:25,26). It is the literally poor and hungry
whom Jesus pronounces ‘‘blessed” in Luke
6:20,21 (cf. the woes upon the rich and well-fed
in vv 24,25, and the commands to give to the
needy in vv 30—38). Yet it is primarily spiritual
poverty which is in view. Still applying Isaiah
61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “‘poor in
spirit.’’ These are people broken and grieved
by misery and poverty, oppression and injus-
tice, suffering and death, national apostasy
and personal sin—people who in their extrem-
ity turn to God and longingly wait for him to
bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and es-
tablish his kingdom. It is to just such people
that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God
has sent him to usher in the kingdom, to res-
cue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure
the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are bro-
ken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5,10,17;
10:45; Lk 4:18—21; 7:48—49; 15:1-32; 19:10).
Gospel According to Jesus: The Grace of
God. The coming of the kingdom is not the
effect or the reward of human effort, but God’s
answer to the human predicament—the gift of
his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the ex-
planation for the salvation of the poor lies
nowhere but in God’s own character. As the
prodigal himself recognizes, he hardly de-
serves to be his father’s servant, much less his
son. Nothing he has done, not even his repen-
tance, accounts for the father’s love (15:11—32).
In the parable of Matthew 20:1—16, it is owing
entirely to the goodness of the employer that
the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s
wages. The first debtor in the story of Mat-
thew 18:23-35 has earned nothing but the
right to be sold into slavery; instead the king
cancels his enormous debt. The publican who
has nothing to offer God but a confession of
sin and a plea for mercy, goes home justified
(Lk 18:13,14). The same holds true for the more
virtuous among the poor, such as the persons
described in Matthew 5:7—10. Their virtue is
real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s com-
mands, they do not put him in their debt; they
are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7—10). Fur-
894
thermore, even the most merciful need divine
‘mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to
obey God’s Law are unable to fulfill all its re-
quirements (cf. 11:28—30). The first servant in
Matthew 18:23—35 owes far more money than
someone in such a situation could possibly
pay—whicli serves to magnify the generosity
of the king. Grace depends for its exercise
upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12—14).
Gospel According to Jesus: The Call to Salva-
tion. The Israelites are without exception a
sinful people, all of them needing the salva-
tion which Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In
demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaims
his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35;
15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most re-
spectable to the least, all are summoned to
submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come
and partake freely of the banquet he has
spread (Lk 14:16—24). But the gift of salvation
must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk
10:15). And while it is indeed a gift which costs
nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for
which a wise person will freely sacrifice every-
thing else (Mt 13:44-46; a sacrifice exceeded
only by the cost of rejecting the gospel: Mt
11:20—24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24,33). “Repent
and believe in the gospel,’’ commands Jesus
(Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-
sufficient must be jolted out of their false
sense of security and humbly recognize their
need of God (Lk 6:24—26). Only then will Jesus’
message to the poor be seen as gospel. An an-
nouncement of liberation (4:18-19) is good
news only to people who are enslaved and
know they are. The command applies also to
the destitute and the afflicted. Those among
them who bemoan their lot without repenting
of their sin, must learn that it is being person-
ally related to God as subject to sovereign and
as child to father which makes one “‘blessed”’
(Mt 5:3-10). But something further is needed
for the response to be complete: a person can-
not believe Jesus’ gospel without a commit-
ment to the person (11:28; 18:6; cf. Jn 3:16).
Even those who are already “poor in spirit”
in the sense defined earlier, are not really
“blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of
Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves
to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21—27).
This prepares us for the next point.
Approaches to Stage Two. Throughout Je-
sus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel
remains the dawning kingdom of God (Mt
4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is
furthermore preached almost exclusively to
Jews (Mt 10:5,6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides
glimpses into what the gospel is to become
once his work on earth is accomplished. (1) In
Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individu-
als who make great sacrifices ‘for my sake

and for the gospel.’’ While distinguished from
each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel
are here associated in the closest possible way.
The time is approaching when the Proclaimer
of the gospel will become the Proclaimed. (2)
In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the tex-
tually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the
preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the
gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having inter-
preted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing
of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus
declares, ‘‘And truly, I say to you, wherever
the gospel is preached in the whole world,
what she has done will be told in memory of
her” (v 9g; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement
strongly implies that both the person of Jesus
and the event of his death will figure prom-
inently in the message that is to be pro-
claimed; otherwise it is strange that the
gospel and this particular act should be so sol-
emnly bound together. Thus here already
there is an indication how crucial Jesus’ death
is both for the provision of the salvation an-
nounced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22—24) and for
the launching of the evangelistic mission to
the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining
the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18—20).
The NT Stage Two. It remains to consider
gospel as declared after the resurrection of Je-
sus. Our main sources are the Book of Acts
and the letters of Paul. Of the 43 instances of
euangelizomai (‘‘evangelize’’) beyond the Gos-
pels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul; of the 64
instances of euangelion (‘gospel’), 2 occur in
Acts and no less than 60 in Paul.
The Gospel of God. God is the author of
the gospel and the one who authorizes and en-
ables men to proclaim it (Acts 15:7; 16:10;
Rom 1:1—5; 15:15,16; 16:25—27; 2 Cor 11:7; Gal
1111-16; 2:7-9; Eph 3:6—8; 6:13-15; 1 Thes
2:2,4,8,9). Not only so, God himself is an evan-
gelist, personally declaring his own gospel
through human agents, and by this means call-
ing people to salvation (Acts 10:36; 2 Cor 4:4—
6; Gal 1:6; 2 Thes 2:13,14; Rv 10:7). Paul’s gos-
pel is both a witness to and an expression of
God’s grace (Acts 20:24; Col 1:5,6) and power
(Rom 1:16; 16:25; 1 Cor 1:17—25) and glory (2
Cor 4:4—6; 1 Tm 1:11). Thus to accept the gos-
pel is to turn to God (Acts 14:15; 1 Thes 1:5—9).
Conversely, to disobey the gospel is to be de-
prived of the knowledge of God (2 Thes 1:8).
What especially distresses Paul about the Gala-
tians’ abandonment of the true gospel for a
false one, is that in the process they are turn-
ing away from God (Gal 1:6). The “eternal gos-
pel” of Revelations 14:6,7 summons the na-
tionsto recognize and revere the one true God
before judgment falls (cf. 1 Pt 4:17).
The Gospel of Christ. Having risen from
the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph
895
Gospel
2:16,17), doing so now through his appointed
representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17;
g:12-18; Gal 4:13,14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11).
More than that, Christ has become the central
theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the
Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in
Acts (5:42; 8:4,5,35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul
(Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19,20; 2 Cor 4:4—6;
11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8).
Mark describes his whole book as “good news
about Jesus Christ” (1:1; the thought of Christ
as evangelist may also be included, cf. vv 14—
15). The NT always speaks of the gospel—never
the Gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as
inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second
Christ. This is the one gospel which God autho-
rizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2
Thes 2:13,14; according to one interpretation
of 1 Thes 3:2, Timothy is called “God’s fellow
worker in the gospel of Christ’). Galatians
2:7—9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mis-
sion fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircum-
cised) and Peter (the apostle to the circum-
cised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of
Christ’”’ (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the mes-
sage which God has ordained for the salvation
of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The ‘‘dif-
ferent gospel” which Paul denounces in Gala-
tians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not an-
other gospel about Jesus, but a message about
“another Jesus’’-—not the real one, but one
who exists only in the minds and the messages
of those who proclaim him. On the other
hand, to preach the true Christ is to preach
the true gospel, however questionable one’s
motives (Phil 1:15—-18,27); and to respond
rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts
11:20,21; Rom 10:8—17; Gal 2:14—16).
The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events.
The gospel bears witness to every aspect of
Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3;
2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts
10:36—38) to his second coming (Col 1:5,23, cf.
3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5—10) and the last judgment
(Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrec-
tion of Christ that are most crucial for the ac-
complishment of salvation, and that are there-
fore most prominent in the gospel’s witness.
These are the events with which Mark’s procla-
mation climaxes (chs 15,16), and for which
everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33,34;
12:6—8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’
death as the means of salvation from sin
(10:45; 14:3-9,22—24). In Paul’s gospel too the
death and resurrection of Jesus are central
(Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occu-
pying the very center (1 Cor 1:17—2:5). Had
Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues,
the preaching of the cross would be a waste of
time (1 Cor 15:14,17; cf. Rom 6:3-11); but now
that Christ has risen, his death deserves spe-
Gospel
cial emphasis as the place where God provides
atonement for sins (Rom 3:21—26; 5:6—-11;
Cor 5:14—21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to
Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (8:35; 20:24,28; cf.
10:36—43), and preeminently his resurrection,
the event by which he conquered death and
was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-
43) 13:32,33; 17:18,31). According to 1 Peter the
bearers of the gospel (1:12) concentrated,
had the OT prophets, on ‘“‘the sufferings of
Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11;
1:18,19; 2:21—24; 3:18—22).
The Gospel as a Power for Salvation. The
gospel is much more than a report of past
events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul de-
clares in 1 Corinthians 1:17,18 and again in Ro-
mans 1:16 that the gospel is ‘‘the power of
God’’—not merely a witness to his power but
an expression of his power. Thus it cannot be
fettered (2 Tm 2:8—9). ‘“Our gospel came to you
not only in word, but also in power,” Paul
writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:15. His point is not
that the gospel was accompanied by mighty
works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18,
19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work.
God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom
15:18,19; 1 Cor 2:1—5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore,
God’s singular purpose in thus exercising his
power is to change men’s lives, to liberate
them from sin and death, and to reconcile
them to himself—in short, to save them. The
gospel has power to effect the salvation it an-
nounces and to impart the life it promises
(e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17,18; 15:1,2;
Eph i1:r33825Thes:2:13;1.43):2) Tmiir:8—14 321-Pt
1:23-25). If men are to experience salvation,
they must hear and believe the gospel. It is
precisely in and through this message that the
saving power manifested in the person and
work of Christ (especially in his death and res-
urrection) is conveyed to men and made effec-
tive in their lives. Similarly it is in association
with the gospel, or as a direct result of the
reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is
imparted to believers (Acts 10:36—-44; 15:7,8; 2
Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1,2). In short, the gospel is the
decisive place of encounter between man the
sinner and God the Savior.
The Gospel of Grace. According to Peter’s
testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7—
11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gen-
tiles and Jews alike—is salvation ‘‘through the
grace of the Lord Jesus” (v 11; cf. 1 Pt 1:10—12).
Toward the close of his missionary career,
Paul states that his basic concern has been “‘to
testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts
20:24; cf. Col 1:5,6). This statement can be un-
derstood only in relation to Paul’s concept of
the righteousness of God, particularly as set
forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely ex-
pounding a divine attribute. Rather he is dra-
matizing a divine activity—the manifestation
2 of God’s righteousness now, “‘in the present
time’’ (Rom 3:21,26), in the New Age inaugu-
rated by the coming of Jesus. The manifesta-
tion is twofold. Viewing the two aspects to-
gether, and doing so in the light of the gospel
declared by Isaiah and by Jesus, respectively
(both of whom strongly influenced Paul), will
as help us to understand why Paul speaks of ‘‘the
gospel of the grace of God.” (1) The gospel is a
cf. witness to God's grace. In offering his Son as a
sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demon-
strates his righteousness (vv 25b,26). That is,
in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed
over’ (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath
(cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place
where God deals justly and decisively with
sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the
judgment against sin is focused not upon the
sinners themselves but upon the One ap-
pointed to act on their behalf and to stand in
their place (4:25; 5:6,11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal
3:13). On this basis sinners are freely pardoned
(Rom 3:24). ‘““The grace of the Lord Jesus”
(Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evi-
dence, for he willingly bears their iniquities
and suffers the consequences of their wrongdo-
ing (Gal 2:20;-cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6—8). (2) The
gospel is a channel of God’s grace. ‘‘The righ-
teousness of God is revealed” in the gospel,
says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not
that the gospel talks about the righteousness
of God (though it does), but that God’s righ-
teousness is actively at work in the gospel.
This activity in turn explains how the gospel
becomes ‘‘the power of God for salvation” (v
16). And just how does God demonstrate his
righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestow-
ing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It
remains the righteousness of God, but by
God's grace it is a righteousness in which hu-
mans may share. Furthermore, partaking of
God's righteousness depends on being person-
ally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view
the saved person is one who has been acquit-
ted, justified, ‘‘declared righteous,’ by God
the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that
I in myself am righteous (God justifies the
ungodly, 4:5). Nor does God treat me as
though I were righteous. According to Paul I
am declared righteous because I really am
righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor
1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is estab-
lished through the revelation—and the free
offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel
(Rom 1:16,17).
Responding to the Gospel. The gospel calls
for a threefold response. (1) Believing. The gos-
pel, says Paul, is ‘‘the power of God for salva-
tion to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16).
For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reli-
°
896

ance upon ‘“‘works of law’ for justification
(3:28) and utter dependence instead upon the
grace of God as demonstrated in the work of
Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly
the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2
Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches sal-
vation by personal merit rather than (or to-
gether with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16).
Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1
Thes 1:8,9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22,26; Gal
2:16,20). Yet it is imperative that one believe
the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20,21; 15:7; Rom
1:16; 10:8—17; 1 Cor 1:17—24; Phil 1:27; Heb
4:2), for it is just by this means that God's
salvation is made known and mediated. More-
over, believing the gospel entails repentance
(Acts 14:15; 20:21,24; 1 Thes 1:5—10) and obedi-
ence (Rom 1:5; 15:16—18; Heb 4:6). Those who
refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their
lives (2 Thes 1:5—10; 1 Pt 4:17; cf. Rv 14:6,7). (2)
Growing. The gospel is more than a message
to be received; it is also a place in which to
stand (1 Cor 15:1,2). It is sustainer of life as
well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian
not by turning from the gospel to other things
(to turn away from the gospel is to abandon
God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever
more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15
Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the
gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the ensu-
ing chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers
his profoundest exposition of the gospel—one
whose truth has never been fathomed and
whose power has never been exhausted. (3)
Hoping. ‘The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23)
includes not only the return of Christ and the
glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-
16), but the final judgment as well. For those
who embrace the gospel the last judgment
holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very
one who rescues them from the wrath to come
(1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him
need not dread condemnation now or at the
end (Rom 8:1); instead the last judgment will
mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal
5:5). Accordingly this theme is not just a corol-
lary but an integral part of the good news
(Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believ-
ing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have
suffered a fate common to all men, or even the
condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact,
their response to the gospel assures them of
approval by the coming Lord (vv 5,6; 5:4) and
of a share in the imperishable inheritance of
heaven (1:4).
J. KNox CHAMBLIN
Bibliography. K. Barth, God, Grace, and Gospel; C.F.
Burney, The Gospel in the OT; J. Denney, Jesus and the Gos-
pel; C.H. Dodd, The Apostolic Preaching and its Development
and Gospel and Law; J.A. Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gospel,
pp 149-61; R.H. Mounce, The Essential Nature ofNT Preach-
ing; E.F. Scott, The Gospel and Its Tributaries.
897
Governor
Gospels, Apocryphal. Writings preserving
stories about Christ and some varied teach-
ings; being mostly fanciful in nature, they
never became canonical. There are three
broad classes:
1. A type similar to the synoptic Gospels,
represented by the Gospel of Peter and the
.Gospel of the Egyptians, as well as papyrus
fragments including Oxyrhynchus 840 and pa-
pyrus Egerton 2. Other papyrus collections of
sayings show affinities with the canonical
Gospels.
2. Gospels that disseminated Gnosticism, a
2nd-century AD heresy stressing philosophical
knowledge (gnosis) of the cosmos and man.
They are often in the form of dialogues be-
tween Jesus and his disciples, for example,
the Coptic Gospel of Thomas, the Apocryphon
of John, the Wisdom of Jesus Christ, and the
Dialogue of the Redeemer. Into this category
also come those ‘gospels’ attributed to the
Twelve as a group, such as the Memoirs of
the Apostles.
3. Infancy gospels, purporting to supply
otherwise unknown information of a legend-
ary nature about Christ’s earliest years. Pas-
sion “gospels” also come into this category.
These narratives were written to satisfy curi-
osity about Christ’s birth and childhood or to
embellish the canonical accounts of his cruci-
fixion and resurrection.
See GNOSTICISM; APOCRYPHA, OLD AND NEw TESTA-
MENTS.
Gouging. Common practice among the Phi-
listines. Amorites, Babylonians, and other na-
tions surrounding Israel (Jgs 16:21; 2 Kgs 25:7)
of forcibly removing the eyes. The practice
was not only intended to disable but to bring
extreme disgrace upon the person (1 Sm 11:2).
Although the Israelites seem to have known
about it from their sojourn in Egypt (Nm
16:14), there is no evidence that it was a com-
mon practice in Israel.
See CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT.
Gourd. Trailing or climbing plant.
See PLANTS (CASTOR OIL PLANT; GouRD, WILD).
Governor. Biblical term translated from at
least 10 different Hebrew root words and 5
Greek roots. English versions do not render
these words consistently: they use a variety of
titles, such as “overseer,” “officer,” “leader,”
“judge,” and “deputy,” to translate the same
Hebrew word. The situation is similar in the
Septuagint (Greek OT).
A governor was someone of superior rank
who exercised authority over persons, terri-
tory, or both. Sometimes rank and power were
Gozan
his by virtue of the office; other times acces-
sion to office was based on noble
wealth, public attainment, and the like. A gov-
ernor normally received authority from a
king; hence he was a deputy in the territory he
governed. Such was the case with Joseph (Gn
42:6), Gedaliah (Jer 40:5), Daniel (Dn 2:48), and
Zerubbabel (Hg 1:1). One Hebrew term for
“governor,” however, could mean “absolute
ruler’ (Jos 12:2) as well as a person who acted
under authority.
The term most frequently used in the OT is
evidently from an Akkadian expression mean-
ing “lord of a district.” Such governors nor-
mally relied on military power to maintain
their rule (2 Kgs 18:24; Jer 51:23,28; Neh 2:7).
The satrap of the Persian and Greek periods
was most probably a civil governor. The
leader of a city-state was often known as “‘gov-
ernor” in the preexilic period (1 Kgs 22:26; 2
Chr 34:8). The writer of Psalm 22:28 used that
title to describe God as the ruler of his people.
A temple official who imprisoned the prophet
Jeremiah in the stocks (Jer 20:1) was described
in tHeKJV as a “governor” (Rsv “officer’’). One
who governed an army probably commanded
one or more military units. What appears to
be a special title is rendered “governor” by
the rsv in Ezra 2:63 and Nehemiah 7:65.
Translation problems from the Greek are
also numerous. Different levels and functions
in leadership were obviously intended by the
various words used. This is most clearly indi-
cated by the use of such terms as ethnarch
(1 Mc 14:47; 2 Cor 11:32 NASB), one
erned as a deputy of a king, and by another
word referring to Roman provincial officials.
Such governors were mentioned in NT writ-
ings (cf. Mt 10:18; Lk 2:2; 3:1; Acts 23:24; 1 Pt
2:14) and were responsible for maintaining
law and order in their assigned territory. In
NT times Judea was under the control of the
governor of Syria. Archaic uses of “governor”
occasionally appear in the kJv. The “gover-
nor’”’ of KJv James 3:4 is the ship’s pilot.
is wee
Pool built north of Hebron by Pontius Pilate, mentioned in
Scripture as governor of Judea (Lk 3:1).
Gozan. City and district near the Euphrates
lineage, River. The Harbor River (modern Khabur)
flowed through it. The Assyrians conquered it
sometime before Sennacherib’s invasion of Ju-
dah (701 Bc). This fact is mentioned by Sen-
nacherib, king of Assyria, in a blasphemous
letter sent to Hezekiah, king of Judah (2 Kgs
19:12; Is 37:12). Later, it became one of the
places in Assyria where conquered Israelites
were deported. Gozan has been excavated, and
excellent pottery has been found.
Grace. One of the distinctive features of the
religion of the Bible. No other system of reli-
gious thought, past or present, contains an em-
phasis on divine grace comparable to that of
the Bible.
As a general definition, the doctrine of
grace pertains to God’s activity rather than to
his nature. Although God is gracious, this trait
of his nature is revealed only in relation to his
created works and to his redemptive enter-
prise. In other words, grace is to be under-
stood in terms of a dynamic expression of the
divine personality rather than as a static attri-
bute of God’s nature. Grace is the dimension
of divine activity that enables God to confront
human indifference and rebellion with an inex-
haustible capacity to forgive and to bless. God
is gracious in action.
The doctrine of divine grace underlies the
thought of both OT and NT. However, the OT
merely anticipates and prepares for the full
expression of grace that becomes manifest in
who gov- the NT.
Early in the narrative of the OT, God re-
veals himself as “a God merciful and gra-
cious, slow to anger, and abounding in stead-
fast love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6). As a
result, it becomes possible for undeserving hu-
mans to approach him with the prayer, “If
now I have found favor (or grace) in thy
sight, O Lord,...”’ (v g). Through divine ini-
tiative, human alienation from God is turned
by him into a state of unmerited acceptance
that opens the way for reconciliation and re-
demptive usefulness.
Divine grace was already operative in the
garden of Eden when God responded to the
debacle of the fall with the promise of redemp-
tion (Gn 3:15b) and solicitous watchcare (v 21)
rather than with abandonment or retributive
annihilation. The call to Abraham was an ex-
tension of grace, not only to him as an individ-
ual, but through him as a means of universal
outreach. As an inseparable part of God’s
promise of individual blessing to Abraham
and of a national blessing to his descendants,
the indication was given that the individual
and the national blessings would be instru-
mental in bringing about a universal blessing
898

to ‘‘all the families of the earth” (12:2,3). Conse-
quently, both the election of Abraham and the
promise of universal blessing find expression
in a God-given covenant, the object of which is
to extend God’s grace to the whole human
race. In a solemn confirmation of the promise
to Abraham, God affirmed, ‘““My covenant is
with you, and you shall be the father of a mul-
titude of nations.... And I will establish my
covenant between me and you and your de-
scendants after you throughout their genera-
tions for an everlasting covenant’ (17:4,7).
This promise was to be understood as finding
fulfillment on the basis of grace, not of race, so
that it would become applicable to all Abra-
ham’s offspring—not only to Jewish believers,
his racial descendants, but also to his spiritual
descendants, believers from all nations who
profess a faith like Abraham’s (Rom 4:16).
Thus, from the perspective of divine grace, the
election of Abraham and of national Israel was
not an end in itself. It was God’s plan for ex-
tending his redemptive designs to all believ-
ers, from all nations. In extending his grace to
Abraham, God was establishing the begin-
nings of the church, the community of grace.
The divine particularism evidenced in the
election of Abraham and in his becoming the
recipient of God’s grace provides a model for
the selection of all the individuals used by
God in the history of redemption. Beyond the
benefits of grace accorded to individuals such
as Abraham, David, the prophets, and later
the apostles by virtue of their call, loomed the
potential of their contributions to the fulfill-
ment of the covenant of God on behalf of the
community of those who share the faith of
Abraham, the church. In the gracious dealings
of God with Israel, with its patriarchs and its
leaders, God was laying the basis for his out-
reach of grace to the church universal. God’s
gracious interventions in the old covenant
were intended to manifest the ultimacy of the
church in his redemptive purposes. In the exer-
cise of their ministries, the prophets of the old
covenant knew that they were serving not
themselves but the church (1 Pt 1:10—12).
As a transitional, mediatory expression of
divine grace, the institutions of the old cov-
enant possessed only a temporary validity
that has been superseded by the ultimate
manifestations of God’s grace in the new cov-
enant (Heb 8:6,7). Consequently, the old cov-
enant was to become obsolete and replaced by
a new covenant that would display the full
manifestation of God’s grace (v 13). The prover-
bial tension between law and grace becomes
intelligible in this perspective. Like the elec-
tion of racial Israel, the Law, as one of the
most visible institutions of the old covenant,
was a temporary measure of divine grace ac-
899
Grace
corded to anticipate and prepare the covenant
of justification through grace by faith in Jesus
Christ (Gal 3:23—29; Heb 10:1).
The concept of grace defined as God's ac-
tive involvement on behalf of his creatures in
their states of need receives a sharper focus in
the NT. Divine grace becomes embodied in the
‘person of Jesus Christ who demonstrates visi-
bly the dynamic nature of God’s grace and ful-
fills in his ministry of redemption the old
covenant promises relative to God’s gracious
dealings with humanity (Jn 1:14,17).
God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ
makes it possible for God to forgive sinners
and to gather them in the church, the new
covenant community. During his ministry, Je-
sus repeatedly pronounced the words of for-
giveness on a great number of sinners and min-
istered God’s benevolent succor to a variety of
desperate human needs. Through teachings
such as the father’s forgiveness of the prodigal
son and the search for the lost sheep, Jesus
made it clear that he had come to seek and
save those who were lost. But ultimately, it
was his redemptive death on the cross that
opened wide the gate of salvation for repen-
tant sinners to find access to God’s forgiving
and restorative grace. This simple truth is for-
mulated in the doctrine of justification by
faith through grace (Rom 3:23; Ti 3:7). Accord-
ing to this teaching, God’s gracious provision
of the substitutionary death of Christ enables
him to pronounce a verdict of “‘just’’ or “not
guilty” on repentant sinners and to include
them in his eternal purposes. As a result, they
enter into the realm of God’s gracious activity,
which enables them to implement the process
of individual sanctification in cooperation
with the Holy Spirit.
God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ
makes it also possible for God to bestow on
believers undeserved benefits that enrich their
lives and unite them together in the church,
the body of Christ. Their acceptance on th
basis of grace endows them with a new status
as children of God, members of the household
of God, so that they relate to him as to their
heavenly father (Gal 4:4—-6). Consequently,
they become members of a community where
race, class, and sex distinctions are irrelevant
since they all became equal inheritors of God’s
age-long promise to Abraham of universal
blessing (3:28,29). In order to enrich their indi-
vidual lives and to assure the usefulness of
their participation in the life of the new com-
munity, the Holy Spirit graciously energizes
believers with a variety of gifts for the perfor-
mance of ministries designed to benefit the
church (Rom 12:6—8). Foremost among those
ministries is that of apostle, itself closely
linked to God’s gracious provision (1:5, 15:15,
Grain

16) since it combines with the ministry of the found in almost every book of the NT, ‘“‘The
prophets of old to provide the foundational grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all”
structure of the church (Eph 2:20). Because the (2 Thes 3:18).
riches of divine grace are freely lavished upon GILBERT BILEZIKIAN
believers in their community life upon earth See Gop, BEING AND ATTRIBUTES OF; LOVE; MERCcy.
(1:7,8), the church translated into eternity will
Bibliography. P. Fransen, Divine Grace and Man; R.M.
demonstrate, by its very existence, the immea- Hals, Grace and Faith in the OT; E. Jauncey, The Doctrine of
surable riches of God’s grace in Jesus Christ Grace; J. Moffatt, Grace in the NT; C.R. Smith, The Biblical
(2:6). Doctrine of Grace; N.P. Williams, The Grace of God.
Finally, God’s grace manifested in Jesus
Christ makes it possible for God to cause be- Grain. See AGRICULTURE; PLANTS (BARLEY;
lievers to reflect his grace in their character MILLET; SPELT; WHEAT).
and relationships. The irreducible condition
for receiving God’s grace is humility (Jas 4:6; 1 Granary. See AGRICULTURE.
Pt 5:5). Such humility in relation to God en-
ables believers to practice humility in regard Grape. Smooth-skinned, juicy berry which
to other people. From a position of grace, they grows in clusters on woody vines. Grapes are
can set aside selfishness and conceit in order eaten fresh or dried, and are fermented for
to treat others with deference (Phil 2:3,4) in an wine.
attitude of mutual servanthood (Eph 5:21), See AGRICULTURE; PLANTS (VINE); VINE, VINEYARD;
and in a spirit of mutual forgiveness (Mt WINE.
18:23-35) so that even their communication
can exhibit divine grace (Col 4:6). Since the Grass. See PLANTs.
grace of Jesus Christ constitutes the existen-
tial context of the lives and relationships of Grasshopper. Plant-eating insect equipped
believers, they are exhorted not to pervert the with long hind legs for leaping.
grace of God into ungodly practice (Jude 4)
See ANIMALS..
but instead to grow in the grace of the Lord (2
Pt 3:18).
The essential meaning of grace in the Bible Grate, Grating. Network of bronze sur-
refers to God’s disposition to exercise goodwill rounding the lower half of the altar of burnt
toward his creatures. This favorable disposi- offering in the tabernacle (Ex 27:4).
tion of God finds it supreme expression in Je- See ALTAR; TABERNACLE, TEMPLE.
sus Christ. By its very definition, this grace is
rendered fully accessible to all humans with Gratitude. Natural expression of thanks in
no other precondition than a repentant desire response to blessings, protection, or love. In
to receive it (Ti 2:11,12). As a result, the human the Judeo-Christian tradition, gratitude is not
condition of alienation from God and from his a tool used to manipulate the will of God. It is
purposes becomes replaced with access to the never coerced or fabricated in one’s mind;
otherwise inapproachable majesty of God rep- rather, gratitude is a joyful commitment of
resented by a throne, so that his grace may one’s personality to God.
become available to meet human need (Heb In the OT, gratitude to God was the only
4:16). The tragic alternative to receiving God’s condition in which life could be enjoyed. For
grace is to remain in hopeless alienation or to Jews, every aspect of creation provided evi-
pursue sterile attempts to merit God’s favor dence of God’s lordship over all life. The He-
through human efforts doomed to futility brew people thanked him for the magnificence
(Rom 1:21). God’s unconditional acceptance of of the universe (Pss 19:1-4; 33:6-9; 104:1—24).
sinners may be conditioned only by their rejec- When they received good news they thanked
tion of his acceptance. God for his goodness and great deeds (1 Chr
Because Christ represents the fulfillment, 16:8—12). When they received bad news, they
the embodiment, and the dispenser of divine also gave thanks, trusting that he was a just
grace, the early Christians freely referred to God (Jb 1:21).
God’s grace as “the grace of our Lord Jesus These same sentiments are found in later
Christ.” This grace was conceived as being so Jewish writings such as the Talmud (6 Ber,
basic and so pervasive to their individual lives 35a, 54a). The people of Israel thanked God for
and to the existence of their communities of his faithfulness to covenant promises: (1) for
faith that they naturally coupled the tradi- deliverance from enemies (Pss 18:17; 30:1;
tional greeting of shalom (‘‘peace’’) with a ref- 44:1-8) and from death (Ps 30:8—12; Is 38:18-
erence to the grace of Jesus Christ. This is the 20; (2) for forgiveness of sin (Pss 32:5; 99:8;
reason for the ubiquitous repetition of numer- 103:3; Is 12:1); (3) for answers to prayer (Pss
ous variations on the basic greeting formula 28:6; 66:19); (4) for compassion toward the af-

goo

flicted and oppressed (34:2; 72:12); (5) for exe-
cuting justice (Dt 32:4; Ps 99:4); (6) and for con-
tinuing guidance (Ps 32:8; Is 30:20,21).
Gratitude was such a vital part of Israel’s
religion that it pervaded most ceremonies and
customs. Thank offerings acknowledged bless-
ings from God (Lv 7:12,13; 22:29; Ps 50:14).
Shouts of joy (Ps 42:4), songs of praise (145:7;
149:1), and music and dance (150:3-5)
added to the spirit of thanksgiving in worship.
Feasts and festivals were celebrated in remem-
brance of God’s steadfast love throughout
their history (Dt 16:9—15; 2 Chr 30:21,22). King
David appointed levitical priests to offer God
thanks (1 Chr 16:4). This custom was carried
on by the kings Solomon (2 Chr 5:12,13) and
Hezekiah (31:2), and by those who returned
from the exile (Neh 11:17; 12:24,27).
In the NT, the object of thanksgiving is the
love of God expressed in the redemptive-work
of Christ. The apostle Paul thanked God for
that gift of grace (1 Cor 1:4; 2 Cor 9:15) and the
ability to preach the gospel (2 Cor 2:14; 1 Tm
1:12). Paul thankfully participated in the spiri-
tual gifts (: Cor 14:18). Gratitude for love and
faith among believers pervades his letters
(Rom 6:17; Eph 1:15,16; Phil 1:3—5; Col 1:3,4; 1
Thes 1:2,3).
Because the expression of gratitude is tied
so closely to the response of faith, Paul encour-
aged believers to give thanks in all things
(Rom 14:6; 1 Thes 5:18). He commanded Chris-
tians to pray with thanksgiving (Phil 4:6; Col
4:2) in the name of Christ, who has made all
thanksgiving possible (Eph 5:20). In his teach-
ing on how to celebrate the Lord’s Supper,
Paul specified that Christians should give
thanks, just as the Lord “had given thanks”’ (1
Cor 11:24).
Grave. See BuRIAL, BURIAL CUSTOMS.
Grave Clothes. See BURIAL, BuRIAL Cus-
TOMS.
Graven Image. Image or representation of
a deity made of wood, stone, or metal.
See IDOLS, IDOLATRY.
Great Lizard. One of the reptiles which the
Jewish Law listed as ceremonially unclean (Lv
11:29).
See ANIMALS (LIZARD).
Great Owl. Name of one of the great horned
or eagle owls (Dt 14:16).
See Birps (OWL; OwL, GREAT).
Greece, Greeks
Great Sea, The. Alternate name for the
Mediterranean Sea. It was given this name by
the ancient Near Eastern peoples because of
its great size in comparison to the other seas
they knew (Nm 34:6; Jos 1:4).
See MEDITERRANEAN SEA.
all Greaves. Protective piece of armor worn
over the shank of the leg (1 Sm 17:6).
See ARMS AND WARFARE.
Greece, Greeks. Location and inhabitants
of a country in southeastern Europe. The bibli-
cal references to Greece and Greeks are often
ambiguous. In the OT some references have
been understood to mean Greece or Greeks.
Javan, the fourth son of Japheth in the table of
the nations (Gn 10) seems to fit a Greek identi-
fication (vv 2,4; 1 Chr 1:5,7; Is 66:19; Ez 27:13).
The name Greece occurs clearly in Daniel 8:21;
10:20; 11:2; and Zechariah 9:13, and Greeks are
mentioned in Joel 3:6. In the NT the term
“Greek’”’ appears to have the special sense of
Hellenist, that is, Jews living in Hellenistic cit-
ies (Acts 6:1; 9:29; 11:20). The term in John
12:20; Acts 14:1; 16:1,3 seems to refer to Greeks
specifically. But often in the NT the term
“Greek” was used for non-Jews because the
Jews recognized only Jews and non-Jews.
Hence the term was virtually synonymous
with Gentiles (Rom 1:16; 10:12; 1 Cor 1:22,24;
Gal 2:3; 3:28). Sometimes the term “‘Greek’’ re-
fers to the language (Jn 19:20; Acts 21:37; Rv
g:11). The use of the term “Greek” for the Syro-
phoenician woman (Mk 7:26) may be a cul-
tural term. In Acts, references are made to
Greeks in the synagogues as observers. These
may have been Greeks as such, although cer-
tainty is not possible (Acts 14:1; 17:4; 18:4).
Geography. The ancient Greek homeland
comprised the southern end of the Balkan pen-
insula. But at times Greek speakers were to be
found in the islands of the Aegean Sea, West-
ern Asia Minor, South Italy, and Sicily. Small
Greek republics were also established quite
early throughout the Black Sea area and Asia
Minor, to the east and as far west as Mar-
seilles and Spain. After the days of Alexander
there were Greek states as far to the east as
India. But always, the core of Greek culture
was in the Balkan peninsula and in the Aegean
islands.
Greece and the Greeks in History. Ori-
gins. Precisely who the Greeks were origi-
nally remains an enigma. Their language be-
longs to the Indo-European family. One of the
ancient scripts, the Linear B, which has been
found both on the mainland and in Crete dat-
ing to the 15th century Bc in association with
gol
Greece, Greeks
the Mycenaean civilization is a primitive
Greek.
Bronze Age people came to the Aegean per-
haps by way of Asia Minor prior to 2000 BC
when mass migrations, probably of Indo-
European origin, began. They imposed their
culture on the original population of the area,
the Aegeans, and occupied the islands as well
as the mainland. Immigrants arrived in four
waves: (1) the Achaeans who came overland
from the north and the east about 2000-1900
Bc and settled in the central area (Arcadia)
and in Thessaly, Boeotia, and the northeastern
Aegean area; (2) the Dorians who settled in
east Peloponnesus and the isthmus, Crete and
the islands of the south Aegean and the south-
west corner of Asia Minor about 1500-1200 BC;
(3) the Ionians who settled in Attica, Euboea,
the islands of the middle Aegean and parts of
the mainland of western Asia Minor; and (4)
the Aetolians who occupied west
Greece, the northern Peloponnesus,
and the offshore islands. Unfortunately the ac-
counts of these migrations are largely pre-
served in legend, and exact dates and loca-
tions are far from certain.
The Minoans. The first significant civiliza-
tion among these Greek-speaking peoples was
the Minoan on the island of Crete, named after
Minos the legendary king of Crete. It was a
remarkable culture with fine buildings, pot-
tery, painting, art work, and technical skills.
Writing was in use. Two scripts have been dis-
covered, Linear A showing affinities with
Akkadian and Linear B, a primitive Greek.
This civilization collapsed about 1400 Bc for
unknown reasons.
The Mycenaeans. The Mycenaean civiliza-
tion benefitted greatly from the contact of the
mainland Achaeans with the people of Crete.
The first mainland settlers produced the so-
called Helladic civilization, which was not par-
ticularly distinguished although its pottery
was quite distinctive. The Middle Helladic civi-
lization (c. 2000-1550 BC) from the mainland
combined with the Cretan influences from
1500 BC onward to produce the Mycenaean civi-
lization, named after the great fortress
Mycenae on the Peloponnesus. This civiliza-
tion was distinguished by great palaces,
strong fortresses, great wealth, and a powerful
army. Writing was known and the Linear B
script has been found both on the mainland
and in Crete. It has been conjectured that the
destruction of the Minoan civilization about
1400 BC was partly due to the Mycenaean in-
vaders, although internal strife and natural
causes such as earthquakes played a part. Cer-
tainly Greek invaders sacked and destroyed
Cnossus in Crete, the center of the Minoan civi-
lization and scattered the survivors over the
central
Aetolia, The rocky ruins of Troy, a major Mycenaean city in northwest
Asia Minor and the site of the Trojan War.
eastern Mediterranean. Some of these reached
the coastlands of Palestine. The Mycenaean
civilization has left a good archaeological rec-
ord. Archaeologists have been able to subdi-
vide the period into a number of distinct subdi-
visions. About 1200 Bc a Greek expedition to
the mainland of. western Asia conquered and
destroyed the prosperous city of Ilium (Troy)
which lay on the northwest coast of Asia Mi-
nor near the entrance to the Dardanelles. This
event gave rise to the story of Helen of Troy,
vividly recounted by the poet Homer. The Tro-
jan war was a major military exploit which
weakened the Mycenaeans and led in part to
their collapse before the Dorian invaders, al-
though part of the reason for the collapse was
climatic. The rain belt of southern Europe re-
ceded to the north at that time, and important
centers like Mycenae were depopulated as peo-
ple fled to more hospitable lands. The Dorians
entered a land that was already depopulated.
Greece and the Aegean area entered a dark age
of that lasted for about four centuries.
The City-States. From about 800 Bc onward
Greece settled down, reorganized itself, built
cities, cultivated the land, absorbed the survi-
vors of earlier cultures on the mainland and in
the islands, and developed Greek as a common
language although it was spoken in a variety
of dialects. Small city-states developed as scat-
tered villages united for protection. The vil-
lages of Attica merged into a city-state around
ancient Athens. Similar developments oc-
curred around Thebes and Sparta. The process
began with “kings” though monarchy soon
gave place to oligarchy in which an aristoc-
go2

racy governed the people. But the aristocracy
was often incompetent, especially in crises
and people rallied round individuals—often a
noble turned democrat—and overthrew the ar-
istocracy. These individuals were the ‘“‘ty-
rants” (leaders or dictators). They were not
necessarily cruel men, but the opportunity for
the development of corruption and despotic
rule was a natural consequence. Athens re-
sisted ‘‘tyranny” in 630 BC, and by 594 Bc So-
lon, a rich representative of a new industrial
class, was empowered to institute constitu-
tional reforms on a broadly democratic basis.
There were further crises with the tyrants but
in 507 Bc Cleisthenes introduced a genuinely
democratic constitution. The assembly of citi-
zens held sovereign power. By 500 Bc the age
of the tyrants had passed.
Other states also broke free. Sparta was
slow to follow. It was dominated by a Dorian
group that oppressed the subject population
and built up a military society that was to
destroy Athens in a great war which lasted
from 431 to 400 BC.
City-states were independent of one another
so that there is strictly no history of Greece in
these years but rather a history of Greek states.
Even so there were some unifying elements
such as pan-Hellenic games, important sanctu-
aries to which all Greeks might come, the ora-
cle at Delphi, and an underlying sense of a com-
mon origin, heritage, and destiny.
Colonization. From about 770 Bc onward
sea trade developed greatly and colonization
began. Colonies developed in the form of city-
states in Spain, southern France, southern It-
aly and Sicily, the Black Sea, and the African
coast. There was no penetration inland, but
powerful states developed at Massilia in south-
ern France, Tarrentum in southern Italy, Syra-
cuse in Sicily, and many other places. Rome
was strongly influenced by the Greek civiliza-
tion that flourished around the coasts of Italy.
The Crisis of the Fifth Century Bc: The Per-
sian Wars. In the 7th century Bc Greek settle-
ments on the western coast of Asia Minor
known as Ionia, fell under the control of the
inland empire of Lydia based on Sardis. But
by 546 Bc Lydia was overcome by Persia
which was expanding to the west and looking
toward the Aegean. In 499 Bc the Ionian cities
revolted against Persia and Athens, which
had helped them, and was marked down for
invasion by the Persians. Darius I attacked
from the sea in 450 Bc but was driven back by
the Athenians at Marathon in 486 Bc. Within
ro years the Persian Xerxes sent forces by
land and sea. The army was held up for a
short time at Thermopylae by the Spartans
who were supporting Athens. But the Per-
sians pressed on into Attica and sacked Ath-
993
Greece, Greeks
ens, whose citizens drew back to the island of
Salamis. In the Straits of Salamis the Greek
fleet struck a severe blow to the Persian fleet
and Xerxes had to withdraw. He left an army
in Boeotia that was defeated by a united
Greek force at Plataea in 479 Bc. The final
debacle for the Persians came when the
_Greeks crossed into Asia Minor, defeated the
remnants of the Persian army, and burned
their warships, also in 479 Bc. It was the end
of the Persian threat, and Greece was free to
continue her own system of government.
The Delian Confederacy. The confederate
Greeks determined to liberate the Greeks of
Asia Minor and assembled a fleet under the
Spartan Pausanias. He proved arrogant and
inclined to come to terms with the Persians,
and Aristeides the Athenian replaced him and
the Spartans withdrew. Athens came to an
agreement with the Greek allies to form a con-
federacy which would meet annually in the
Temple of Apollo at Delos and contribute
money and ships each year till the Persians
were driven out of Asia Minor. This was
achieved within 10 years. When the center was
moved from Delos to Athens about 455 Bc ten-
sions arose because Athens became despotic
and used the annual payments to the league
for her own ends. The tension reached a cli-
max in the days of Pericles, the Athenian
leader. Finally came a clash with Sparta in
431 Bc which ended Athenian greatness. The
disastrous 27-year war with Sparta left the
way open for the emergence of Philip II of
Macedon who united Greece into a Macedo-
nian empire.
The Climax of Greek Culture. The end of
the Persian wars saw Athens enter upon a re-
markable period of greatness. Athens was re-
built and its port at Piraeus was fortified.
When the Athenian citizens embarked on a
course of unbridled democracy, chaos seemed
to threaten, but Pericles, a brilliant leader, re-
stored the equilibrium of the state and Athens
soon regained her glory. Vast buildings were
erected on the Acropolis, notably the Parthe-
non (dedicated to Athena, the goddess of Ath-
ens). Athens became wealthy, partly from the
contributions to the Delian League. Athenian
sea power grew. There was an abundance of
slaves, artisans, craftsmen, foreign traders,
artists, poets, philosophers, teachers, actors,
athletes, scientists, physicians, historians, reli-
gious teachers, and experts in military and na-
val affairs. The great writers of the 5th and
early 4th century Bc included the dramatists
like Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripedes, his-
torians like Thucydides and Herodotus, and
philosophers like Socrates, Plato, and Aris-
totle. There was a flowering of art and archi-
tecture. It was a golden age of spectacular
Greek Language
achievement in art, thought, literature, and
architecture. ~from Roman times.
The Age of Hellenism. The great glory of
Athens withered before the 4th century Bc was
over. Philip of Macedon, with ambitions of em- LENISTIC JUDAISM; JUDAISM.
pire, drove west, and by 338 Bc Athens and
Thebes were overwhelmed and Greece became
united into a Macedonian empire. Philip was
assassinated in 366 Bc, but Alexander his son,
educated in Athenian tradition, took up his fa-
ther’s work and before his own death in 323 Bc
had finally conquered Persia and reached to
the Punjab in India. In the end he exerted his
control from the Caucusus to the Libyan desert
and the borders of Ethiopia as well. On the
death of Alexander, his vast territories were di-
vided among four generals. After some adjust-
ments three divisions emerged—Egypt under
Ptolemy; Asia Minor, Syria, and the East under
Seleucus; and Macedonia under Antigonus.
Finally the whole of the Greek area came
under the control of the Romans, who moved
into Greek areas in 198 Bc and over the years
established a number of Roman provinces
such as Achaia (Acts 18:12). It was into the
world of Hellenism, now under Rome, that the
Christians moved with the message of the gos-
pel in the 1st century aD.
The Greeks in Palestine. Excavations have
shown that there was contact between Pales-
tine and the Aegean areas over many centu-
ries. From the Middle Bronze period (patriar-
chal age) Middle Minoan II pottery has been
found at a number of sites. The Philistines
who formed part of the Sea Peoples in the 13th
century BC settled in areas of coastal Palestine
and developed their own culture there, leaving
a great deal of their distinctive pottery. Dur-
ing the period around 1370-1200 BC various
peoples from the Aegean and western Asia Mi-
nor found their way to Palestine. Mycenaean
pottery has been found in a number of sites.
From a later period still, numerous examples
of Attic black-figure ware from the 6th century
Bc, and Attic red-figure ware from the period
around 530-300 Bc have been found in excava-
tions. Silver coins struck in imitation of Attic
drachmas come from the same period. With
the rise of Hellenism and the occupation of
Palestine by the Ptolemaic and Seleucid rul-
ers, Greek influence increased greatly. The
presence of Greek pottery like Rhodian jars,
and the influence of Greek architectural fea-
tures in buildings emphasize how significant
the Greek influence in Palestine was, as well
as throughout the Levant region and the hin-
terland. With the coming of the Romans these
influences continued. Greek was the language
of commerce. Indeed the NT was written in
the Greek of ordinary people, and a wide vari-
ety of Greek inscriptions has come to light
JOHN A. THOMPSON
See ALEXANDER #1; ALEXANDRIA; HELLENISM; HEL-
Bibliography. M.1. Finley, The Ancient Greeks; G. Glotz,
The Greek City and Its Institutions; W.K.C. Guthrie, A His-
tory of Greek Philosophy, 3 vols; M. Hengel, Judaism and
Hellenism, 2 vols; P. Jonquet, Macedonian Imperialism and
the Hellenization of the East; G. Murray, The Five Stages of
Greek Religion; D.S. Robertson, A Handbook of Greek and
Roman Architecture; M. Rostovtzeff, A History of the An-
cient World, vol 1, The Orient and Greece; Out of the Past of
Greece and Rome; W.W. Tarn, Hellenistic Civilization.
Greek Language. See BrpiicaL LANGUAGES.
Greyhound. xksv mistranslation in Proverbs
30:31 (RSV strutting cock).
See Birps (FowL, DoMESTIC).
Grief. Emotional suffering brought on by be-
reavement, mishap, or disaster. To grieve is
either to cause or feel sorrow or distress. The
concept is found in the Scriptures under a vari-
ety of circumstances. Isaac and Rebekah expe-
rienced grief when their son Esau married a
Hittite woman (Gn 26:35 KjJv). God mourned
the misery of Israel brought upon them by dis-
obedience (Jgs 10:16 KJv). Hannah was so sad
because she had no son that she appeared to
be drunk while praying (1 Sm 1:16 KJv). Simi-
larly, Samuel, distraught at King Saul’s dis-
obedience, prayed all night. Job was exceed-
ingly sorrowful over his personal loss (Jb 2:13;
cf. 6:2; 16:6), and the psalmist poetically dem-
onstrated distress and sorrow (cf. Pss 6:7;
31:9,10; 69:26 KJV; 73:21 KJV; 95:10 KJV; 112:10
KJV). The Book of Lamentations is devoted to
the expression of grief, and the prophets in
general speak of judgment because Israel had
grieved a holy God.
Jesus experienced sorrow and distress (Mk
3:5; Jn 11:33), including the death of a friend
(Jn 11:35). The Jews are said to have been
grieved as the apostles taught about Christ
(Acts 4:2 KJV). The apostle Paul instructed be-
lievers not to grieve one another (Rom 14:15
KJv) and did not want to cause any sorrow
himself (2 Cor 2:1-5 kJv). Most of all, the be-
liever is not to grieve the Holy Spirit (Eph
4:30). A believer may, of course, suffer grief
and suffering in an alien world (1 Pt 2:19 KJv).
In Bible times grief was given particular ex-
pression at a time of death by means of
shrieks, wails, and laments (cf. Jer 9:17,18; Am
5:16; Mk 5:38).
See MOuRNING.
Grove. Mistaken kJv translation of a He-
brew word that was the name of a Canaanite
904

goddess, Asherah. Often sacred trees were des-
ignated as symbols of that fertility goddess;
sometimes wooden poles were erected. God
commanded the Israelites to destroy those
symbols (called Asherim, Asheroth) by cutting
them down (Ex 34:13) and burning them (Dt
12:3). Because the poles were wooden, archae-
ologists have been unable to find any clear re-
mains. In an early sanctuary at Ai, however, a
large piece of carbonized wood was discovered
lying between incense burners. It may have
been a tree trunk from which the branches
had been trimmed. Some researchers suggest
it was an Asherah.
God strictly forbade the Israelites to wor-
ship Asherah or to erect sacred symbols in her
honor. From time to time Israel disobeyed
God and engaged in false worship. One ac-
count of the downfall of the northern kingdom
attributes its failure to the existence of groves
and the worship of the pagan goddess and her
male counterpart, Baal (2 Kgs 17:7—18). Jeze-
bel, a priestess of the Tyrian Baal, promoted
the spread of such idolatry. The ‘grove’ of
Genesis 21:33 (KJV) was actually a tamarisk
tree.
See HiGH PLACE; CANAANITE DEITIES AND RELI-
GIONS; Gops, GODDESSES; IDOLS, IDOLATRY.
Guard, Court of the. Perhaps an emer-
gency detention area in 7th-century Bc Jerusa-
lem when the city was under Babylonian at-
tack. Although the prophet Jeremiah was
placed under arrest there, he was still able to
maintain his normal activities, indicating that
the area was probably a small courtyard (Jer
32:2-12; 33:1; 37:21; 38:6—-28; 39:14,15; KJV
court of the prison).
Guard, Gate of the. Gate located in the
north or northwest part of Jerusalem, al-
though unrelated to the Court of the Guard
(Neh 3:25), which was connected to the palace
(12:39, KJV Prison Gate). Perhaps it was the
same as the Muster Gate.
See JERUSALEM.
995
Gurbaal
Guardian Angel. See ANGEL.
Gudgodah. Alternate name for Hor-haggid-
gad, one of the stopping-places in the wilder-
ness wanderings of the Israelites (Dt 10:7).
See HOR-HAGGIDGAD, HOR-HAGIDGAD.
‘Guilt Offering. See OFFERINGS AND SACcRI-
FICES.
Gull. Any of a number of birds from the fam-
ily Laridae. The rsv “‘sea gull” (ksv cuckoo) in
Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15 is un-
certain.
See Birps (SEA GULL).
Gum. General name for the sap of shrubs of
the Astragalus species (Gn 43:11, KJV spices),
used in trade. Astragalus shrubs grew widely in
the Near East. Gum tragacanth, from the Astra-
galus Tragacantha, is still used commercially.
See PLANTS (ALOE; BALM; Myrrw).
Guni. 1. Naphtali’s son and the grandson of
Jacob (Gn 6:24; 1 Chr 7:13). His descendants
were the Gunites (Nm 26:48).
2. Abdiel’s father from Gad’s tribe (1 Chr
ee 9
Gunite. Descendant of Guni, Naphtali’s son
(Nm 26:48).
See GuUNI #1.
Gur, Ascent of. Elevated place near Ibleam
where Ahaziah, king of Judah, was smitten by
the soldiers of Jehu of the northern kingdom.
From Gur Ahaziah fled to Megiddo where he
died (2 Kgs 9:27). Though its location is uncer-
tain, some identify it with the Akkadian
Gurra, about one-half mile south of Jenin.
Gurbaal. Town in the Negeb occupied by Ar-
abs, possibly in the neighborhood of Edom,
which Uzziah of Judah conquered (2 Chr 26:7).
Its location is uncertain.
 Hh
Haahashtari. Naarah’s son from Judah’s
tribe (1 Chr 4:6). aan yam nt naan nna staat
es Sy TY icser 97 Han
Habaiah. Head of a priestly family who re-
turned to Palestine with Zerubbabel after the ies be sn yay ay ON shan
exile. He was unable to prove his priestly gene- AWA yin iin YY ans
alogy and so was not allowed to do priestly
service (Ezr 2:61; Neh 7:63, Hobaiah).
pyps wha) Pires Twa ana 941
pieasyeypar anda wae quit
Habakkuk (Person). Author of the eighth Leceaet vain nen alk
book of the Minor Prophets. The meaning of
“nway {rng my DW ya 9D se
Habakkuk’s name is uncertain. It was proba-
bly derived from a Hebrew word meaning “to yeni mia SAY 4 l ae
embrace.” pry RAO eas ID NITY ANN
Nothing is known about Habakkuk apart J Ma IY
from what can be inferred from his book. Sev-
eral legends purporting to give accounts of his MAAS UMP BAN pt tN
life are generally regarded as untrustworthy. py 44 ve wy “iv yw At? AD
The apocryphal book Bel and the Dragon de- yan vO miarn Ney ya) nid
scribes a miraculous transporting of Habak-
kuk to Daniel while Daniel was in the den of ah a rank
lions. A Jewish legend makes Habbakkuk the The Habakkuk Commentary from the Dead Sea Scrolls.
son of the Shunamite woman mentioned in 2
Kings 4:8—37. That legend apparently is based
on the fact that it is said she would ‘‘embrace’’ Author. Little is known about the prophet
a son. Chronological difficulties make both ac- Habakkuk apart from information that may
counts unlikely. be gained from the Book of Habakkuk itself. In
Habakkuk lived in the period before the 1:1 and 3:1 he is called a prophet, a spokesman
rise of the Chaldeans (Hb 1:6), that is, during for God to his fellow Israelites.
the reign of the Judean king Jehoiakim. The The prayer of chapter 3 contains several mu-
dates 605-589 Bc delineate the probable period sical designations (3:1,3,9,13,19). Such technical
of his prophetic activity. notations suggest that the author had some
The Book of Habakkuk reveals a man of responsibility for the temple music. If that is
great sensitivity. His deep concern about injus- so, he may have been a member of one of the
tice and his prayer (Hb 3) show that Habakkuk levitical families. The apocryphal book, Bel
was characterized by profound religious con- and the Dragon, contains a reference to Habak-
viction and social awareness. kuk as ‘‘the son of Jesus of the tribe of Levi,”
Tuomas E. McCoMIsKEY possibly reflecting such a tradition.
The book portrays Habakkuk as a man of
See HABAKKUK, Book OF; PROPHET, PROPHETESS. deep moral sensitivity who rebelled at the injus-
tice that characterized the society of his day.
Habakkuk, Book of. Eighth book of the Date. Although it is difficult to date the
Minor Prophets in the OT. prophecy of Habakkuk precisely, several clues
go6

to its date appear in the text. In 1:°5,6 the
prophet refers to the Chaldeans whom God is
“rousing.”” The Chaldeans were originally a
group of loosely organized tribes who occu-
pied a large portion of the Assyrian Empire.
They were a constant source of trouble to their
Assyrian lords. Eventually, the Chaldeans suc-
cessfully rebelled against the Assyrian power,
placing Nabopolassar on the throne (625—605
Bc). The Chaldeans then ruled all of Babylo-
nia, establishing the Babylonian empire and
inaugurating a period of extensive expansion.
Because the Chaldeans came to power about
625 BC, many scholars think that the prophecy
of Habakkuk was written shortly before that
time. The book would have been written, then,
within the reign of Josiah (640—609 Bc). Habak-
kuk 1:6 does not necessarily refer to the initial
rise of the Chaldeans. Their reputation was al-
ready established as warlike and cruel, for the
prophet described them as “‘bitter and hasty”;
they ‘“‘seize habitations not their own,” and
“their horsemen come from afar’ (1:6—8).
Their reputation for military prowess seems to
fit best with a time after the battle of Carche-
mish (605 Bc), when Nebuchadnezzar II de-
feated the Egyptians and established the Baby-
lonians as an important world power. It is
also possible that their reputation was gained
from the Babylonian conquest of Nineveh in
612 BC.
The term “‘rousing’’ need not imply that the
Chaldeans were being raised up on the scene
of world history as a new nation. The term
may also signify the concept of “‘stirring up,”
indicating that God was preparing the already
powerful Babylonians to be a tool of his wrath
against the kingdom of Judah.
The social conditions in Habakkuk’s day
seem to fit best with a time after the death of
Judah’s king Josiah in 609 Bc. Josiah’s reign
was characterized by far-reaching religious re-
forms, initiated by the discovery of the Book
of the Law during renovations in the temple (2
Kgs 22:8). Habakkuk describes his society as
filled with ‘“‘destruction and violence” (1:3). An
unfair judicial system led to oppression of the
righteous (v 4). Such conditions contradict the
national reforms initiated by Josiah. It thus
seems best to date Habakkuk’s ministry be-
tween 608 and 605 Bc, early in the reign of
Jehoiakim (609—598 BC).
Background. The historical period inaugu-
rated by King Josiah’s death was one of the
most bitter in the history of the kingdom of
Judah. In 612 Bc the Babylonians destroyed
the Assyrian city of Nineveh, and in two years
they eliminated the last vestiges of formal As-
syrian rule in Mesopotamia. The Egyptians,
who had been allies of the Assyrians, sought to
solidify their hold on the western portion of
997
Habakkuk, Book of
the former Assyrian Empire. They marched to
Carchemish, an important city on the Euphra-
tes River, where they were opposed by Josiah,
who died in that battle.
The Egyptians placed Jehoiakim on the
throne in place of Jehoahaz, the rightful succes-
sor of Josiah. Jehoiakim was an Egyptian vas-
.sal, and the land of Judah was forced to pay
heavy tribute, its independence gone forever.
The faith of many people might understand-
ably have begun to falter in that time. The
religious reforms under Josiah had resulted
not in national blessing, but in the loss of their
freedom. The tenor of society had changed
from one of relative stability to one of oppres-
sion and violence (see Jer 22:17).
In 604 Bc the Babylonians advanced into
the Syro-Palestinian area, encountering only
weak resistance. At that time Jehoiakim trans-
ferred his allegiance to Nebuchadnezzar, who
continued his advance to the south. When Pha-
raoh Neco’s army challenged the invaders,
both sides suffered heavy losses and Nebuchad-
nezzar retreated to Babylon. The vacillating
Jehoiakim then transferred his loyalty to
Egypt. In 598 Bc the Babylonians advanced
again to Syro-Palestine, beginning a campaign
that led to the fall of Jerusalem in 586 Bc.
Purpose and Theological Teaching. The
main purpose of Habakkuk’s prophecy is to
explain what a godly person’s attitude should
be toward the presence of evil in the world. It
also addresses the nature of God’s justice in
punishing moral evil.
The teaching of the book is set forth in an
interesting pattern of crucial questions by the
prophet about God’s activity in history. His
questions may reflect deep doubts and con-
cerns, or they may be a literary device for re-
flecting the questions that people in his soci-
ety were asking. In the psalm at the end of the
book, the prophet shows that he has reached
an understanding of God’s purposes, and he
rests in utter submission to God. One of the
prophet’s chief problems was the seeming inac-
tivity of God, as evil continued unpunished.
God’s answer was that he does punish evil in
his own time and with his chosen instruments.
The world is not an arena in which evil con-
tinually triumphs. History testifies to the fall
of tyrants and wicked nations. The godly per-
son thus interprets history in terms of faith,
trusting God and affirming God’s righteous
rule in the world.
The Book of Habakkuk does not explain
why God has allowed evil in the world. It does
affirm that a righteous person will see God's
activity in history through the eyes of faith.
Chapter 3 eloquently expresses that theme as
Habakkuk looks at history and recounts all
God's gracious activity on behalf of his people.
Habakkuk, Book of
One of the most important theological con-
cepts in the book is that of God’s sovereign
activity in history. Habakkuk affirms God’s
control of all history and demonstrates that
even the godless nations are subject to his con-
trol. Their rise and fall is determined not by
the fortuitous course of events but by God.
Content. The First Complaint and Its Re-
sponse (1:1—11). The prophecy of Habakkuk
begins with a series of questions reflecting the
prophet’s deep feelings over the wrongs ram-
pant in his society. He begins by asking how
long he shall have to cry to God who does not
seem to hear. Many have asked that question
as they see evil present in a world governed by
the sovereign God.
The answer that the prophet received was
unusual. The Lord was surely doing some-
thing about the evil in his society; he was rais-
ing up the Chaldeans as an instrument of his
wrath to punish the people of Judah.
The description of the Chaldeans in 1:6—11
is filled with bold metaphors that depict them
as an awesome force pillaging as they advance
in their conquests. One might well wonder, as
the prophet did, why God would use such a
tool to accomplish his purposes.
The prophet’s first complaint reflects a
number of perplexing problems. Why does
God not do something about evil? Why does
he allow it to continue? God does not always
seem to respond when people want him to.
Furthermore, when God did answer he said
he would punish the evil in Judah by using the
Babylonians. The prophet’s prayer was an-
swered, but in a way he did not expect. God
would use a hated and wicked nation to pun-
ish the wrongs of his own people. Habakkuk
must have been perplexed at this, but he could
take comfort in one fact: God was still in con-
trol of history (1:6). God governed the rise and
fall of nations, using even wicked ones to ac-
complish his will.
The Second Complaint and Its Response
(1:12—2:5). The answer to the first complaint
was not enough for Habakkuk. He acknowl-
edged that God had ‘‘ordained them as a judg-
ment” and “established them for chastise-
ment” (1:12). But he goes on to say that God is
“of purer eyes than to behold evil,” and he
wonders why God looks on “faithless men”
and is “silent when the wicked swallows up”
those who are more righteous (v 13). He im-
plies that God observes the wicked Chaldeans,
but does not punish them for their wrongs.
Habakkuk still cannot understand how God
can use a wicked nation to punish his own
people.
But Habakkuk did learn something from
God’s first response. He began his second com-
plaint with the affirmation, ‘Art thou not
908
from everlasting, O Lord my God. . . . We shall
not die” (1:12). The prophet probably had in
mind the previous verse (v 11), that declared
that the god of the Chaldeans was their own
military might. In contrast, Judah’s God is
eternal and not transitory like the fleeting
strength of armies and nations.
Habakkuk’s problem was still not resolved,
for he next described the rapacious nature of
the Chaldeans, wondering how God could use
them to punish Judah. The Chaldeans were
like fishermen, catching people in their nets
and then worshiping their nets (1:15,16). Ha-
bakkuk asked God if the Chaldeans would con-
tinue emptying their nets and slaying the na-
tions (v 17).
Having posed his questions, the prophet
waited to see what God’s response would be
(2:1). The Lord replied that his answer should
be written in large clear letters for it was cer-
tain (v 2); but it would not be fulfilled immedi-
ately (v 3).
What follows is one of the greatest verses
about faith in the whole OT (2:4). The words
“the righteous shall live by his faith’ became
the touchstone of the Protestant Reformation.
The apostle Paul appealed to Habakkuk 2:4 in
his exposition of the doctrine of justification
by faith (Rom 1:17; Gal 3:11). This passage was
also important in the NT Book of Hebrews
(10:38,39).
The word “faith” in the OT basically means
“firmness’’ or ‘‘strength.” The root of the word
is used to describe the supporting posts of a
door (2 Kgs 18:16) and firm support for a peg
(Is 22:23). When used of God, the word has the
sense of faithfulness, or unwavering commit-
ment to his promises. Referring specifically to
human faith, it means unwavering trust in the
God who promised. Faith in the OT is not an
abstract concept, but commitment to God. It
is not characterized by works, but by an atti-
tude of wholehearted trust in God.
God affirms in 2:4 that a truly righteous
person will live by unwavering trust in God,
trust that remains firm in spite of trials. Jesus
taught the same thing in the parable of the
sower (Mt 13:21), and it is also expressed in
James 1:12. '
God’s answer to Habakkuk’s complaint was
that he does punish evil, but in his time and
his way. A truly righteous person will not lose
faith because evil is not immediately elimi-
nated or the wicked quickly punished. Faith
trusts in the sovereignty of God’s righteous
rule in this world.
A Taunt-Song Celebrating the Fall of the Chal-
deans (2:6—20). After hinting at the fall of the
Chaldeans, the prophet composes a taunt-song
in which he depicts the gloomy future of that
nation. When the Babylonian Empire fell to a

coalition of Medes and Persians, the prophetic
elements in Habakkuk’s poem became histori-
cal reality.
The prophet affirms that Babylon’s ‘‘debt-
ors” will arise against her (2:7). This expres-
sion implies that some nations would sud-
denly arise to bring about Babylon’s downfall.
The reason for the destruction of Babylon is _-prophet questioned divine providence. It dem-
cited in 2:8: “Because you have plundered
many nations, all the remnant of the peoples
shall plunder you.” The OT principle of re-
tributive justice teaches that God’s moral law
extends not only to believers but to unbeliev-
ers as well.
The great building efforts of the Babylonian
king Nebuchadnezzar seem to be implied in bakkuk;
verses 9-11. The prophet says that even the
stones and beams of his cities will cry out, as to Faith: Studies in the Book of Habakkuk; E. Marbury, Oba-
though protesting the fact that the city was
built with blood (vv 12-14).
Habakkuk condemns the Chaldeans,
only for their inhuman cruelty, but for the
shameful way in which they treated their cap-
tive peoples. The prophet pictures this degrad-
ing treatment in a vivid metaphor, saying it is
like making others drunk in order to gaze on
their shame (2:15).
Habakkuk concludes his taunt-song with a
denunciation of Chaldean idolatry, pointing
out the folly of those who make gods from
wood and stone (2:18,19). The Chaldeans, like
other pagan peoples, attributed their success
to their idols. The prophet implies that be-
cause such trust is groundless—their idols are
powerless to help them—Babylon will fall.
Habakkuk goes on to make a striking con-
trast between the Lord and the idols created
by people (2:20). ‘The Lord is in his holy tem-
ple’ in heaven, and all the earth must keep
silence before him. God is real and he is sover-
eign. The prophet’s word is that the earth
should wait in hushed silence for the judg-
ment that will surely come.
ThePrayer of Habakkuk (3:1-19). Theproph-
ecy of Habakkuk closes with a prayer, reminis-
cent of some of the OT psalms. It contains a
superscription (3:1) and several musical nota-
tions. Some have argued that this chapter is
not originally Habakkuk’s, because it does not
fit the narrative flow of the book. They regard
the chapter as originating in the postexilic
period.
The psalm could have been written by the
prophet and added to his prophetic oracles,
either by himself or by a secretary. The musi-
cal notations do not necessarily point to a la-
ter period, because many psalms have such
musical directions, and their preexilic date
has been substantiated by linguistic and his-
torical studies.
The prayer is similar to the messageof Ha-
Habiru
bakkuk. In it he affirms that God will judge
his enemies (3:16), and he praises God’s sover-
eignty (v 3). Both themes are prominent in the
prophetic oracles of chapters 1 and 2.
The prayer is filled with assurances of
God’s power and justice. It forms a fitting con-
clusion to the body of the book, in which the
onstrates that the prophet had come to a place
of unshakeable faith as he observed God’s ac-
tivity in history.
THOMAS E.. McCoMISKEY
See HABAKKUK (PERSON); ISRAEL, HISTORY OF;
PROPHECY; PROPHET, PROPHETESS.
Bibliography. D.E. Gowan, The Triumph of Faith in Ha-
C.F. Keil, Biblical Commentary on the OT: The
Twelve Minor Prophets, vol 2; D.M. Lloyd-Jones, From Fear
diah and Habakkuk; G.A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve
Prophets, vol 2; C. von Orelli, The Twelve Minor Prophets.
not
Habazziniah, Habaziniah. Jaazaniah’s
grandfather. Jaazaniah was a leader of the
Rechabites, warriors tested by Jeremiah with
regard to their forefather’s command not to
drink wine (Jer 35:3, KJV Habaziniah). They re-
mained loyal to the command, and Jeremiah
used their loyalty in an appeal to Judah to be
faithful to God.
Habergeon. jv translation for coat of mail,
part of a soldier’s defensive armor (2 Chr
26:14; Neh 4:16; Jb 41:26).
See ARMS AND WARFARE.
Habiru. Term, more accurately rendered
Hapiru, referring to certain groups of people
appearing in texts from virtually the whole
ancient Near East from the 19th century Bc to
the rath century Bc.. Despite more than a
half-century of discovery and research, no
agreement has been reached on the spelling,
etymology, and meaning of the name; whether
the term represents a people, a social class,
an occupational group, or something similar;
and whether or not they were related to the
Hebrews.
The Name. With the discovery of the Ugari-
tic language and the identification of these
same people in Egyptian texts, it has become
virtually certain that the word is West Semitic
in origin and is to be correctly spelled ‘Apiru.
The traditional forms Habiru/Hapiru. come
from the attempt of Akkadian scribes to render
a foreign name. The alternate form with b or p
arises from the fact that the second syllable can
be read with either sound in the cuneiform or-
thography of the period. In cuneiform texts
they are also frequently referred to by the
ideogram SA.GAZ. Unfortunately the meaning
of the name is quite unclear. The only meaning
909
Habor
attested in West Semitic in this period for the
root pr is “‘dust.”” The word would then signify
“dusty,”” people covered with dust from the
sands of the desert, or from long journeys, but
this etymology seems forced.
Brief Survey of the Evidence. Hapiru have
appeared in virtually every major textual find
from the 2nd millennium sc in a wide diver-
sity of roles. Frequently they function as
armed units in service to local princes or cities
(e.g., Mari, Alalah), stationed in garrisons for
protection (e.g., in Hittite texts from Asia Mi-
nor), or provided with rations and clothing
from the state (e.g., in Babylonia and Nuzi).
On the other hand, they are frequently pic-
tured as hostile to the established order and
engaged in looting and pillaging (e.g., at Mari
and in the Amarna tablets). Elsewhere they
appear as wealthy persons detained for ran-
som (Cappadocia); kings make treaties with
them (Alalah and the Hittite capital); while
other texts refer to the “gods of the Hapiru”
(Hittite) or “Aleppo of the Hapiru” (Ugarit). At
Nuzi several texts are concerned with Hapiru
men and women who enter voluntarily into
slavery to wealthy persons.
The largest body of evidence comes from
the Amarna texts, about 1400-1350 Bc. Here
the Hapiru are a powerful force hostile to the
pharaoh and his loyal princes. Local princes
are allied with them, and the complaint is of-
ten made that the pharaoh’s land has been
taken over by them. Yet the Egyptian commis-
sioner at Damascus has Hapiru troops in his
army. It is clear that here they are mercenary
soldiers.
They were present in large numbers in Pal-
estine throughout the Egyptian Empire, about
1500-1200 BC. Several pharaohs report bring-
ing large numbers of Hapiru prisoners from
campaigns there, and Egyptian texts of the
19th dynasty (c. 1300-1200) mention Hapiru,
probably prisoners of war, as employed in
Egypt working vineyards and quarrying stone.
The Identification of the Hapiru. The
above evidence is so diverse in date and origin
and in the role that the Hapiru play that it is
exceedingly difficult to construct a coherent
picture from it. The most common view re-
gards them as an underprivileged class in soci-
ety, soldiers of fortune, refugees or outlaws,
stateless or uprooted persons who work for
food or who rebel against constituted author-
ity. Serious objections to this view include the
fact that none of these definitions fits all, or
even most, of the texts, and it is very unlikely
that a group would be known by exactly the
same designation for almost a millennium
among widely separated people who spoke dif-
ferent languages. The facts are best explained
by the view that Hapiru is an ethnic term or
gio
had an ethnic connotation, referring to re-
dated Semitic nomadic or seminomadic tribal
groups living in the border areas and also in-
side Syria, Mesopotamia, and Palestine, who
were in the process of settling down, either
peacefully in cooperation with the ruling pow-
ers or in opposition to them.
The Hapiru and the Hebrews. The ques-
tion of their connection to the Hebrews can
only be answered tentatively. The view that
“Hapiru” is the same word as “Hebrew” is
now made difficult, although not impossible,
by the recognition that the true form of the
word is ‘Apiru. That the two are historically
identical is made impossible by the wide-
spread temporal and geographical distribu-
tion of the Hapiru. Further, there is no
extrabiblical text dealing with the Hapiru that
bears any relation to the Hebrews. But that
does not mean there is no connection at all.
The term ‘‘Hebrew”’ is not used in the OT
after the time of Saul, about rooo Bc, and is
regularly used only by foreigners to identify
the Israelites, or by the Israelites when speak-
ing to foreigners. Thus, the word disappears in
Israel at about the same time as the term
“Hapiru” disappears from nonbiblical texts.
Further, numerous close analogies exist be-
tween the Hapiru and the Hebrews. Both are
seminomadic tribal societies in the process of
settling down, mainly by armed conflict. They
move in the same areas: for example, both ap-
pear as state slaves in Egypt, both appear in
armed conflict with the city-states of Pales-
tine; and the Hapiru appear frequently in
northwest Mesopotamia, the region the Bible
gives as the homeland of the patriarchs. All
this can be explained by the hypothesis that
the Hebrews were part of the broad movement
represented by the Hapiru/ ‘Apiru, groups of
semisedentary West Semitic tribes in the pro-
cess of settling down by various means in vari-
ous places.
FREDERIC W. BusH
Habor. Modern Habur (Chaboras) River.
The Habor River runs from the mountains in
north-central Assyria, in Gozan, into the Eu-
phrates River at a junction about 250 miles
south and west of Nineveh. Numerous tributar-
ies feed the Habor farther to the north. The OT
names the river as the site to which King Shal-
maneser carried the captive Israelites (2 Kgs
17:6} 18:12}.5 Chrg:26):
Hacaliah, Hachaliah. Nehemiah’s father
(Neh 1:1; 10:1; KJV Hachaliah).
Hachilah. Unidentified site in Hebron to
which David fled when Saul attempted to kill
him (1 Sm 23:19; 26:13).
 Hadar

Hachmoni. Name of Jehiel’s family. Jehiel“went to restore his power at the river Euphra-
was David's servant (1 Chr 27:32), apparently a
tes’; David engaged him in battle and de-
companion or tutor of David’s sons. feated him. When the Syrians came to his aid,
David defeated them and occupied Damascus.
Hachmonite. Designation for Jashobeam In 2 Samuel 10:1—3 David sent servants to com-
(also named Josheb-basshebeth in 2 Sm 23:8), fort Hanun when his father, Nahash king of
one of David’s personal guards (1 Chr 11:11). Ammon, died. The servants were mistreated
He is alternately called a Tahchemonite (kv -and humiliated (v 4). So David sent Joab
Tachmonite) in 2 Samuel 23:8, but this is against Ammon, after Ammon allied with Syr-
probably a textual error. ia as protection against Israel (v 6). Joab de-
feated the combined armies (vv 15—19; see also
Hadad. _:. Eighth of the 12 sons of Ishmael, 1 Chr 19:16,19). After Joab’s victory Hadadezer
and thus a grandson of Abraham (Gn 25:15; sent more troops from ‘‘beyond the river.’”’ The
1Chr 1:30). The ksv reads ‘‘Hadar’’ in Genesis armies met at Helem, David was victorious,
25:15 and “Hadad” in 1 Chronicles 1:30, and Hadadezer sued for peace, becoming tribu-
whereas RSV and asv read ‘‘Hadad” in both tary to Israel.
passages.
See ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; SYRIA, SYRIANS.
2. Edomite ruler, son of Bedad, who reigned
before the Hebrew captivity in Egypt, and
who won an important victory over the Midi- Hadadrimmon. Combination of two storm
anites in the plain of Moab (Gn 36:35,36; 1 Chr deities, Hadad (mentioned in the Ugaritic
1:46,47). texts) and Rimmon (Babylonian storm god).
3. Another king of Edom, one of the few Hadadrimmon was formerly thought to be a
whose wife, Mehetabel, was mentioned by place. The Ras Shamra material equated Ha-
name. His capital city was Pau (Gn 36:39; dad with the vegetation god Baal, who was
t Chr 1:50,51). worshiped to ensure agricultural productivity.
4. Prince of the royal house of Edom who Canaanite fertility rituals included periodic
fled to Egypt after David and Joab conquered mourning for the deceased Baal by the god-
Edom and occupied the land. He grew up in dess Anat, his consort. It is to that rite that
Egypt and gained favor with the pharaoh who Zechariah 12:11 alludes. The messianic refer-
gave him his sister-in-law as a wife. Later, ence in the previous verse likens the grief in
when David was dead, he desired to return to Jerusalem to the lamentation for Hadadrim-
Edom and lead a revolt against Solomon (1 mon at the rites near Megiddo.
Kgs 11:14—25). Some scholars have identified See CANAANITE DEITIES AND RELIGION.
him with #3 above.
Hadar. 1. kv spelling of Hadad, Ishmael’s
Hadadezer. King of Zobah in Syria during son, in Genesis 25:15.
David's reign in Israel. He apparently ruled a See HapaD #1.
region from Ammon in the south to the Eu- 2. Alternate spelling of Hadad, king of
phrates in the east. In 2 Samuel 8:3—12 (see Edom, in Genesis 36:39.
also 1 Chr 18:3-10; kJv Hadarezer) Hadadezer See HapaD #3.

A view of the Dead Sea and

the mountains east of it near
Lisan and the area where Ha-
dad defeated the Midianites.
Hadarezer
Hadarezer. xkJv alternate spelling of Had-
adezer, king of Zobah.
See HADADEZER.
Hadashah. Town in the lowlands of Judah,
near Gath, in the vicinity of Zenan
Migdal-gad (Jos 15:37). Its site is unknown.
Hadassah. Original name of Esther (2:7).
See ESTHER (PERSON).
Hadattah. Name of a city (KJv) incorrectly
derived from the name of the town Hazor-
hadattah in Joshua 15:25.
See HAZOR-HADATTAH.
Hades. Abode of all the dead (in Greek and
some Jewish literature) or the abode of the
wicked dead (in Christian literature).
In Greek mythology Hades was originally
the god of the underworld (also named Pluto),
a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of
Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His
realm, which was called by his name (and also
called Tartarus), was the dark land where the
dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and
fed the ghosts with blood to get directions
back home (Homer, Odyssey 4,834). Originally
the Greeks thought of Hades as simply the
grave, a shadowy, ghostlike existence that hap-
pened to all who died, good and evil alike.
Gradually they and the Romans came to see it
as a place of reward and punishment, an elabo-
rately organized and guarded realm where the
good were rewarded in the Elysian Fields and
the evil were punished (so described by the
Roman poet Virgil, 70—19 BC).
Hades became important to the Jews as the
stereotyped term used by the translators of
the Septuagint to translate the Hebrew name
“Sheol” into Greek. This was a very suitable
translation for the Hebrew term, for both
words can signify the physical grave or death
(Gn 37:35; Prv 5:5; 7:27), and both originally
referred to a dark underworld (Jb 10:21,22)
where existence was at best shadowy (J 38:17;
Is 14:9). Sheol is described as under the ocean
(Jb 26:5, Jon 2:2,3) and as having bars and
gates (Jb 17:16). All people go there whether
they are good or evil (Ps 89:48). In the earlier
literature “there is no hope of release from
Sheol/Hades. C.S. Lewis describes this concept
well in The Silver Chair: “Many sink down,
and few return to the sunlit lands.” Of course
all these descriptions are in poetic literature:
how literally the Hebrews (or the Greeks for
that matter) took their descriptions of Hades/
Sheol is hard to say. They may have simply
used the older picture-language of Greek po-
etry to describe that for which prose words
were inadequate.
Jew and Greek alike came in contact with
Persia, the Jews at the time the postexilic
writers were composing their books (e.g.,
Malachi, Daniel, and some psalms) and the
and Greeks somewhat later (they fought the Per-
sians 520-479 Bc and conquered them 334-330
Bc). Whether because of Persian influence on
these groups or not, during this period the
idea of reward and punishment after death
developed, and Sheol/Hades changed from a
shadow-land to a differentiated place of re-
ward and punishment for both Greeks (and
Romans) and Jews. Josephus records that the
Pharisees believed in reward and punishment
at death (Antig. 18.1.3) and a similar idea ap-
pears in 1 Enoch 22. In these and many other
cases in Jewish literature, Hades stands for
the one place of the dead, which has two or
more compartments. In other Jewish litera-
ture Hades is the place of torment for the
wicked, while the righteous enter Paradise
(Pss Sol 14; Wis of Sol 2:1; 3:1). Thus by the
beginning of the NT period Hades has three
meanings: (1) death, (2) the place of all the
dead, and (3) the place of the wicked dead
only. Context ‘determines which meaning an
author intends in a given passage.
All these meanings appear in the NT. In
Matthew 11:23 and Luke 10:15 Jesus speaks of
Capernaum’s descending to Hades. Most likely
he simply means that the city will “die” or be
destroyed. Hades means “death,” in this con-
text as ‘“heaven” means “‘exaltation.” Revela-
tion 6:8 also exemplifies this: Death comes on
a horse and Hades (a symbol of death) comes
close behind. This personification of Hades
probably comes from the OT, where Hades/
Sheol is viewed as a monster that devours
people (Prv 1:12; 27:20; 30:16; Is 5:14; 28:15,18;
Hb 2:5).
Matthew 16:18 is a more difficult use of Ha-
des. The church will be built upon a rock and
the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.
Here the place of the dead (complete with
gates and bars) is a symbol for death: Chris-
tians may in fact be killed, but death (the
gates of Hades) will no more hold them than it
held Christ. He who burst out of Hades will
bring his people out as well. This is also the
meaning of Acts 2:27 (quoting Ps 16:10): Christ
did not stay dead; his life did not remain in
Hades; unlike David he rose from the dead. It
is uncertain in either of these cases whether
Hades is simply a symbol for death or whether
it means that Christ and the Christian actually
went to a place of the dead called Hades;
probably the former is intended. Whatever the
case, since Christ did rise, he has conquered
death and Hades. He appears in Revelation
gi2

1:18 as the one holding the keys (the control)
to both.
Two NT passages refer to Hades as the
place where the dead exist: Revelation 20:13,14
and Luke 16:23. In Revelation 20 Hades is emp-
tied of all who are in it (either all dead or the
wicked dead, depending on one’s eschatol-
ogy)—the resurrection is complete. When the .-Haeleph.
wicked are judged and cast into the lake of fire an inheritance after the initial conquest of
(Gehenna) Hades is also thrown in. Luke 16:23,
however, clearly refers to Hades as the place
of the wicked dead. There the rich man is tor-
mented in a flame, while the poor man Laza-
rus goes to heaven (Abraham’s bosom).
Hades, then, means three things in the NT
as it did in Jewish literature. (1) Death and its
power is the most frequent meaning, espe-
cially in metaphorical uses. (2) It also means
the place of the dead in general, when a writer
wants to lump all the dead together. (3) It
means, finally, the place where the wicked
dead are tormented before the final judgment.
This is its narrowest meaning. The Bible does
not dwell on this torment—Dante’s picture in
The Inferno draws on later speculation and
Graeco-Roman conceptions of the Hades more
than on the Bible. Yet it also knows that the
Christian cannot go to the same place as the
wicked, for the progress of revelation has re-
vealed that death is conquered and cannot
separate us from Christ. Thus death for the
Christian means not the gloom of Hades (She-
ol), but the light of seeing Christ face to face.
PETER H. Davips
See HELL; SHEOL; DEAD, ABODE OF THE; GEHENNA.
Hadid. City in Benjamin (Neh 11:33) men-
tioned with Lod and Ono (Ezr 2:33; Neh 7:37)
as the home of 720 Benjamites returning from
the Babylonian captivity (Neh 11:34). In 1 Mac-
cabees 12:38 and 13:13 the place is identified
with Adida, which was fortified by Simon
Maccabeus and later by Vespasian. A more
likely suggestion identifies it with the modern
site of el-Haditheth, about three to four miles
northeast of Lydda.
Hadlai. Amasa’s father from Ephraim’s tribe
(2 Chr 28:12). Amasa opposed the taking of pris-
oners from Judah’s tribe after a battle.
Hadoram. 1. Joktan’s fifth son; Hadoram
and his brothers were the sixth generation
from Noah (Gn 10:27; 1 Chr 1:21).
2. Alternate spelling of Joram in 1 Chroni-
cles 18:10.
See JORAM #1.
3. Alternate spelling of Adoniram in 2
Chronicles 10:18.
See ADONIRAM.
943
Hagar
Hadrach. Settlement in northwest Lebanon
mentioned only in association with Tyre, Si-
don, Hamath, and Damascus (Zec 9:1). The
last two cities were listed in Assyrian records
with Hatarivia, with which Hadrach is now
identified.
City given to Benjamin’s tribe for
Palestine (Jos 18:28, KJV Eleph). Its location is
unknown.
Hagab. Ancestor of a family of temple ser-
vants returning with Zerubbabel to Palestine
following the exile (Ezr 2:46).
Hagaba, Hagabah. Forefather of a family
of temple servants that returned to Jerusalem
with Zerubbabel after the Babylonian exile
(Neh 7:48; also spelled Hagabah in Ezr 2:45).
Hagar. Egyptian handmaid of Sarai, the
wife of Abram. At Sarai’s insistence Abram
took Hagar as his concubine and she became
the mother of his son Ishmael (Gn 16:1—16;
21:9—21).
When God commanded Abram to leave
Mesopotamia, he promised to make a great na-
tion of him and to give the new land to his
seed (Gn 12:2,7). After 10 years in Canaan and
still childless, Sarai suggested to Abram that
he take Hagar as his concubine and have chil-
dren by her. It was the custom in northeast
Mesopotamia when a wife failed to produce an
heir for her husband, she could give him a
slave for that purpose. Any son born of the
union of husband and concubine was consid-
ered the child of the wife (cf. Gn 30:16).
During her pregnancy, Hagar became disre-
spectful to Sarai. Sarai dealt so harshly with
Hagar that she fled to the desert. An angel of
God appeared to her at a well in the desert
and told her to return to Abram’s house, prom-
ising that she would have a son, Ishmael
(‘God heard”), who would be a wild and quar-
relsome man. Hagar then named the place
Beer-lahai-roi, ‘“‘the well of one who sees and
lives.”
Ishmael was born when Abram was 86
years old, and 14 years later God gave Abra-
ham and Sarah the promised son, Isaac. At the
time of Isaac’s weaning (at approximately
three years of age), a feast was held. At the
weaning feast Ishmael mocked Isaac (Gn 21:9),
and Sarah in anger asked Abraham to send
Hagar and Ishmael away. Abraham hesitated
until God spoke to him and told him to do so
(v 12).
Hagar and Ishmael left to wander in the
wilderness of Beersheba. When their water
was exhausted, God miraculously rescued Ha-
Hagarene, Hagarite
An animal skin used for carrying water, such as the waterskin
that Abraham gave to Hagar when he sent her and Ishmael
away (Gn 21:14).
gar and Ishmael from death and assured Ha-
gar that Ishmael would be the father of a
great nation (21:17—19). Ishmael lived in the
wilderness of Paran, became a hunter, mar-
ried an Egyptian, and became the father of the
Ishmaelites.
In an allegory developed by Paul (Gal 4:22—
31), Hagar represents the old covenant of Si-
nai. As Ishmael was Abraham’s son by human
arrangement, the Judaizing Christians who
would bind all Christians to the Law of Moses
are the bondslave Hagar’s spiritual children.
Sarah, the freewoman, represents the new cov-
enant of Christ. As Isaac was Abraham’s son
by faith in the divine promise, Christians who
are free of the fleshly ordinances of the Law
are spiritual children of Sarah. The contrast is
between salvation by works, which is bondage
to the Law, and salvation by grace and faith,
which is freedom.
See SARAH #1; ABRAHAM.
Hagarene, Hagarite. kJv alternate
of Hagrite, the name of a member of an Ara-
bian tribe descended from Hagar living east of
Palestine.
See HAGRITE.
Hagerite. «sv rendering of Hagrite, a de-
‘scendant of Hagar, in 1 Chronicles 27:31.
See HAGRITE.
Haggadah. Method of Jewish interpreta-
tion that is homiletical in character. Hagga-
dah is usually defined negatively, that is, as
that part of rabbinic teaching that is not Hala-
kah. Haggadah and Halakah complement each
other: the latter is interpretation which gives
the rule, statute, or religious law Jews are to
follow, while Haggadah aims at edification, in-
spiration, inner piety, and religious devotion,
covering the entire field of religion and ethics.
Halakah states the fact; Haggadah stirs one to
action. Halakah means literally “walking,”
thus showing the devout Jew how to walk in
“the way of the Lord.”” Haggadah means liter-
ally “narrative,” or “storytelling,” which
includes proverbs, parables, and sermions.
Within these artistic forms of instruction are
contained moral and ethical principles in-
tended to show one how to live correctly.
Among the two types of interpretation, Hagga-
dah is the more “‘popular,” having a wider ap-
peal. Its way of storytelling is designed to
touch the human heart “so that one should
recognize Him who created the world, and so
cling to His ways’ (Sifrei-Deuteronomy 49). As
one Jewish scholar has said, its purpose is ‘‘to
bring Heaven down to earth and to elevate
man to Heaven.” Because Haggadah is not Ha-
lakah, but rather interpretation, it also con-
tains other material, such as metaphysical
speculations, historical and legendary tales of
Israel’s past, visions of its furture, and re-
marks on scientific subjects such as astron-
omy and medicine.
See TALMUD; HALAKAH.
Haggai (Person). Prophet whose book is the
roth in a series of 12 brief prophetic books con-
cluding the OT. Haggai’s name probably came
from a word for “festival.” We have no infor-
mation concerning his family or social back-
ground. He is referred to merely as Haggai the
prophet (Hg 1:1; Ezr 5:1; 6:14). His place in the
postexilic community seems to have been a
conspicuous one, and according to Jewish tra-
dition he was known as a prophet in Babylon
during the exile. The major concern of his pro-
phetic ministry was to encourage the people
to rebuild the temple, which had been de-
stroyed during the earlier years of the exile.
See HacGal, Book OF; PROPHET, PROPHETESS.
forms
Haggai, Book of. Tenth in the 12 short pro-
phetic books at the end of the OT.
Author. Haggai was among the Jewish col-
onists at Jerusalem in the year 520 Bc when his
914
 Haggai, Book of

prophetic words were recorded (Ezr_ 5:1,2; of hosts” 14 times in the book. This title is
6:14). The four messages which the Lord gave characteristic of the postexilic prophets (Hg;
to Haggai were to be directed to specific indi- Zec; Mal) where it is found more than 80
viduals. The first was to Zerubbabel the gover- times. It teaches that God is all-powerful and
nor and Joshua the high priest (Hg 1:1). The is Master of all spirit beings in heaven and all
second was to Zerubbabel, Joshua, and the created beings on the earth.
remnant of the people (2:2). The third was a Haggai also testifies to the God-breathed
word to the priests (v 11). The final message ‘quality of the Word of God and its divine au-
was limited to Zerubbabel (v 21). thority. Over and over the prophet announces
Purpose. The key phrase of Haggai’s ways that God has spoken to him and is the
prophecies is “Consider your ways’ or “Con- author of these messages (at least 25 times in
sider” (1:5,7; 2:15,18). The purpose of God’s the space of 28 verses).
messages to the Judean leadership and peo- Content. First Message. The first mes-
ple, therefore, was to awaken them to spiri- sage Haggai was to deliver to the Judeans was
tual responsibilities. Two different classes of given to him “‘on the first day of the month”
Judeans had to be turned from their indiffer- (1:1). Upon the first day of each month the
ence. The true believers needed to be re- Jews were to bring special offerings to the
minded that God was yet merciful. The condi- sanctuary (Nm 28:11—15). God chose this spe-
tions which they thought were the result of cial time to reveal the sin of the people with
unforgivable sins committed by their fathers regard to the unfinished sanctuary.
could be remedied. The hypocrites among the The leaders of the Judeans were singled out
Judeans had only sought the promised bless- for the first message from the Lord (Hg 1:1).
ings. They had only exchanged one form of Zerubbabel was the civil leader or governor
idolatry for another. When the blessings did and Joshua was the spiritual leader or high
not materialize they were disappointed. priest. Together, they were responsible for the
The unifying message was: Today gives no activity (or inactivity) of God’s people.
key to what God will do tomorrow. God's ful- The Word of the Lord revealed the procras-
fillment of his promises cannot be judged by tination of the people (1:2). God’s temple had
appearances. Haggai’s message was twofold: not been completed because his people had de-
reproof and encouragement. The colonists termined for themselves that “the time is not
needed to be chastised for their indifference come.” The energies and finances of God’s
and consoled in the midst of their troubles. people had been channeled selfishly into their
Teaching. Haggai is a practical book, deal- own homes (v 4).
ing with the believer’s service to God. Procras- “Now” (1:5) focused the attention of the
tination and indifference have been debilitat- Jews upon the present requirement of God in
ing sins among God’s people throughout all the light of their sinful indifference. They were
ages. Concern and a sense of urgency are al- to give attention to their own condition spiritu-
ways pleasing to God (Rom 13:11—14). ally and materially: ‘Consider how you have
The presence of God is the primary motiva- fared” (v 5). This key phrase of Haggai’s
tion for boldness and the means of banishing prophecies is literally, “‘Set your heart to your
discouragement (Mt 28:19,20; Eph 3:8—21; Heb ways” or “Lay your ways to your heart.”
13:5,6). Self-examination would reveal that their pro-
Separation from contaminating influences crastination had robbed them of more than
and sin is demanded of all believers (2 Cor just 16 years.
6:14—-7:1). Without this quality of life the be- Verse 6 reveals the poverty in which the
liever cannot expect to be found fit for God’s Jews were living as a result of God’s chastise-
service (2 Tm 2:19—26). ment for their sin. The blessings of God had
The disobedient child of God can expect re- been withdrawn in accord with his covenant
moval of blessing and chastisement from God (see Dt 28:15—31).
(2 Cor 9:8—11; Heb 12:3—13; Jas 4:1—3). Following another exhortation to “con-
The message concerning God’s judgment of sider” their ways (1:7), the Lord revealed the
sin and the establishment of the messianic remedy for the Jews’ cursed condition: “build
kingdom is a message of hope to the NT be- the house’”’ (v 8). The disobedience with regard
liever as well as the Jews of Haggai’s day to the completion of the temple was the rea-
(Rom 15:4—-13; 2 Pt 3:10—18). son for their poverty (vv 9-11).
The key phrase of Haggai (“consider your The response of the leaders and the people
ways’) has echoes in 1 Corinthians 11:28 and was encouraging. The resumption of the con-
2 Corinthians 13:5, as do his writings about struction of the temple was a definite mani-
the effects of sin and the blessings of God festation of belief in the Word of God (1:12).
(Jude 1-25). Immediate obedience also testified to the ac-
The God of Haggai is given the title ‘‘Lord ceptance of the ministry of Haggai, who was

915
Haggai, Book of
‘the Lord’s messenger” delivering “the Lord’s
message” (v 13).
Second Message. Approximately one month
later Haggai was summoned again by the
Lord (2:1). The second message continued the
note of encouragement with which the first
message closed. Perhaps the builders had be-
gun to feel the pressures of their service. Per-
haps the old doubts and discouragements had
plagued their faith again. The adversaries had
reappeared to hinder them (Ezr 5:3—6:12). Hag-
gai’s second message was similar to Ezra’s
claim that ‘‘the eye of their God was upon the
elders of the Jews” (5:5). The Lord not only
sees his servants’ needs, but also sends relief
and encouragement.
The day of this second message was the last
day of the feast of tabernacles (Lv 23:33—43).
Perhaps this reminder of God’s glorious pres-
ence with their ancestors in the wilderness
made their present situation all the more dis-
couraging. Therefore, the Lord spoke to all the
people rather than just their leaders (Hg 2:2).
Was there any survivor of the preexilic days
who had personally beheld the glory of God as
it resided in the Solomonic temple (cf. 1 Kgs
8:1-11; Ez 9:1—11:23)? Was the present temple
“as nothing” in comparison (Hg 2:3)? The
Babylonian Talmud listed five things that
were absent in the new temple that had been
present in the Solomonic temple: (1) the ark of
the covenant, (2) the sacred fire, (3) the Sheki-
nah glory, (4) the Holy Spirit, and (5) the Urim
and Thummim.
Again, “now” calls attention to God’s rem-
edy. Three times the command “‘take courage’
is proclaimed (Hg 2:4). Each time the com-
mand is given, one of the recipients of God’s
message is addressed (cf. v 2). The concluding
command was “work.” The reason for the
strength and the activity was God’s presence.
The Holy Spirit might seem to be absent from
the temple, but he would remain among the
people “according to the word” of God (v 5s).
To encourage the workers further, God re-
vealed the future glory of his house (2:6—9).
That glory would come to pass after a time of
judgment (vv 6,7a), when “the treasures of all
nations shall come in” (v 7b). The exact mean-
ing of this verse has been variously inter-
preted. The views center around two different
translations: “the desire of all nations shall
come” (KdV) and ‘‘they will come with the
wealth of all nations” (NASB).
The arguments for the messianic interpreta-
tion based on the first translation may be sum-
marized as follows: (1) The vast majority of
both Christian and Jewish interpreters took
this phrase as a reference to the Messiah. (2)
The abstract noun “‘‘desire’’ may have the con-
crete concept of the one who is desirable. (3)
g16
Though the verb in the Hebrew is plural, it is
grammatically possible for the agreement of
subject and predicate to be based upon the
second noun (‘‘nations’’) in a genitive relation-
ship. (4) The time element is suitable since
God has just judged the nations and the hour
of Christ’s toming would be at hand. (5) An
alternate translation is available which meets
the grammatical difficulties but retains the
Messianic import: “they (the nations) have
come to the desire of all the nations.”
In spite of the weight of the arguments for
this first view, it seems better to accept the
second translation and corresponding view.
The arguments are as follows: (1) The vast ma-
jority of early Christian and Jewish interpret-
ers base their view on the Latin Vulgate transla-
tion (c. AD 400) while the second translation is
in agreement with an older version, the Greek
Septuagint (c. 300 BC). (2) The singular “desire”’
may be taken as a collective noun referring to
“features,” “wealth.” (3) The principle of He-
brew grammar which allows the noun “na-
tions’’ to be the one with which the verb agrees
is a rare occurrence in poetic books for such
constructions as this. It is unlikely that such
phraseology would be used without Haggai de-
claring the exact meaning in the immediate
context. (4) The immediate context does solve
the difficulty by the plain declaration that the
silver and the gold belong to the Lord (2:8). (5)
The kingdom context of these verses accords
well with such parallel passages as Isaiah
60:5,11 and Revelation 21:24.
The conclusion to this message of encour-
agement is that the future glory of the temple
(cf. Hg 2:3, “first glory’’) will be greater than
in the days of the Solomonic temple (v 9), be-
cause the Shekinah glory will return (v 7c; Ez
43:1-5) and the building will have great
beauty (cf. Hg 2:8; Is 60:13,17). God will also
grant peace (Hg 2:9) in his kingdom at the
time of this future glorious temple (see Is 9:6,7;
66:12; Zec 6:13).
Third message. About two months later
Haggai received a third message from God
(2:10). This time exhortation would be the
theme, and the message was directed to the
priests alone (v 11). Haggai used questions con-
cerning the Law of Moses, to instruct the
priests in the polluting character of sin. Some-
thing clean or holy cannot transfer its sanctity
to something else (v 12). On the contrary, that
which is unholy can transfer its character to
something clean, defiling it (v 13; cf. Lv 22:4-
6; Nm 19:11).
The application of this principle to the Ju-
deans was clear: the offerings they brought
during their years of disobedience were unac-
ceptable to God because of Judah’s unclean-
ness (Hg 2:14).

By reviving the memory of past disobedi-
ence and chastisement, God was exhorting the
Jews to constantly ‘‘consider”’ (2:15,18) the con-
sequences of disobedience. Such consideration
should prevent future spiritual indifference.
The conclusion of the message was a reminder
of the blessing of God upon the obedient (v rg).
Fourth Message. On the same day Haggai
received another message from God (2:20).
This message was to be directed toward Zerub-
babel (v 21) who was to be encouraged by the
permanency of his inherited Davidic office (cf.
1:1; 1 Chr 3:1,5,10,17—19; 2 Sm 7:4—17). The gen-
tile nations would be judged and the king-
doms of the world overthrown (Hg 2:6,7,21,22).
This would be but the preparation for God’s
rule (cf. Rv 11:15—18).
The promise to Zerubbabel in Haggai 2:23
was God’s means of confirming that his prom-
ises to David were still operative even after
the 70-year Babylonian captivity and the 16-
year stagnation among the Judeans who had
returned to Jerusalem. Zerubbabel was ap-
pointed “‘as a signet” by God. A signet was a
personal cylinder or ring seal with which men
demonstrated their authority and the authen-
ticity of their signature. Kings used them for
identifying their decrees (Est 3:10; 8:8—10) and
for confirming the authority of their deputies
(Gn 41:42). God’s appointment of Zerubbabel
“as a signet,’ therefore, meant that Zerubba-
bel would be God’s seal of authority on the
continuation of the Davidic line from which
the Messiah should come and reign (cf. Mt
1:12; Lk 3:27).
See Haccal (PERSON); ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; Post-
EXILIC PERIOD, THE; PROPHECY; PROPHET, PROPHETESS.
Bibliography. J.G. Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah, and Mal-
achi; N.E. Barnes, Haggai and Zechariah; C.F. Keil, Biblical
Commentary on the OT: The Twelve Minor Prophets, vol 2;
E.B. Pusey, The Minor Prophets, vol 2; G.A. Smith, The Book
of the Twelve Prophets, vol 2; C. von Orelli, The Twelve Minor
Prophets; H. Wolf, Haggai, and Malachi.
Haggedolim. Father of Zabdiel, overseer of
128 mighty men of valor who lived in Jerusa-
lem in Nehemiah’s day (Neh 11:14).
Haggeri. «Jv rendering of Hagri, Mibhar’s
father, in 1 Chronicles 11:38.
See HacRrI.
Haggi. Gad’s son and founder of the family
of Haggites (Gn 46:16; Nm 26:15).
Haggiah. Merarite Levite, Shimea’s son and
the father of Asaiah (1 Chr 6:30).
Haggite. Descendant of Haggi (Nm 26:15).
See Haaci.
OT7
Hakkatan
Ruins at Hebron, the city in which Haggith gave birth to
Adonijah.
Haggith. One of David’s wives and the
mother of Adonijah (2 Sm 3:4; 1 Kgs 15,11;
2:13; 1 Chr 3:2). She gave birth to Adonijah in
Hebron while David maintained his capital
there. In 2 Samuel she and her son are fourth
in the list of David’s wives and sons.
Hagri. Mibhar’s father according to 1 Chron-
icles 11:38 (kjv Haggeri). The parallel list in
2 Samuel 23:36, however, has ‘‘Bani, the Gad-
ite’ instead of ‘“‘Mibhar, son of Hagri.’’ Due to
some textual difficulties in the 1 Chronicles
passage, the 2 Samuel reading is preferred.
Hagrite. Arabian tribe descended from Ha-
gar, Abraham’s concubine. Being nomads, the
Hagrites roamed the desert east of Gilead. Re-
lations between Israel and the Hagrites were
usually hostile. During Saul’s reign Reuben’s
tribe fought them and were defeated (1 Chr
5:10, KJV Hagarites). Later, however, with the
help of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh,
Reuben was able to take their land and hold it
until the exile (1 Chr 5:19,20, kjv Hagarites). In
the light of that hostility it is easy to under-
stand Asaph’s prayer against them in Psalm
83:6 (kJv Hagarenes). David, on the other
hand, made a Hagrite, Jaziz, the steward of all
his flocks (1 Chr 27:31, kJv Hagerite).
Hahiroth. Alternate form of Pi-hahiroth in
Numbers 33:8.
See PI-HAHIROTH.
Hai. xsv form for the Canaanite city Ai in
Genesis 12:8 and 13:3.
See AI.
Hair. See FAsHIoN AND DREss.
Hakkatan. Member of Azgad’s family, the
father of Jonathan, and one of the exiles who
returned to Jerusalem with Ezra (Ezr 8:12).
Hakkoz
Hakkoz. Name borne by a priestly family
during the monarchy (1 Chr 24:10). In Ezra’s
time, the family pedigree could not be docu-
mented properly; consequently the privilege
of priestly service was withdrawn (Ezr 2:61;
Neh 3:4,21; 7:63; KJV Koz).
Hakupha. Forefather of a family of temple
assistants that returned to Jerusalem with
Zerubbabel after the exile (Ezr 2:51; Neh 7:53).
Halah. Place in Assyria where the inhabit-
ants of Samaria were taken after its fall in 722
BC (2 Kgs 17:6; 18:11; cf. 1 Chr 5:26).
Halak, Mount. Mountain listed as marking
the southern boundary of Joshua’s conquests
(Jos 11:17; 12:7). It is located in the western
Arabah, and is probably identical with Jebel
Halaq on the northwest side of the Wadi Marra.
Halakah. Overall term for Jewish law. Hala-
kah, which means literally ‘“walking,” gives
the authoritative Jewish way of life as con-
tained in the Mishna. It shows the Jew how he
is to walk and what he must do (see Ex 18:20).
First of all, Halakah rests upon the biblical
laws and commandments found in the written
Law (the Pentateuch, the first five books of the
Bible) and the oral Law (according to Jewish
tradition the unwritten law supposedly given
to Moses on Mt Sinai and passed down
through generations, finally to be recorded in
the Talmud). In the Pentateuch, then, Halakah
is given as law; for example we are told not to
work on the sabbath. But what, in this con-
text, does “work’’ mean? The written Law
gives us no help, but in the Talmud we have
Halakah, which is interpretation of the writ-
ten Law, and in the Talmud we learn what
“work” means.
Second, Halakah rests upon all the rab-
binic legislation and decisions handed down
through the ages by great Jewish scholars. All
these things, then, taken together provide the
basis for making religious-legal decisions in
the orthodox Jewish community. All these
things, the written and oral Law plus the his-
tory of Jewish legal scholarship, provide us
with Halakah.
Halakah is intended to be all-encompass-
ing, to handle every situation in life. One’s eat-
ing habits, sex life, business ethics, social ac-
tivities, entertainment; these and much more,
are dealt with by Halakah. For this reason it
has been called “‘the Jewish way,’ that way in
which we can hope to find the mind and char-
acter of the Jewish people exactly and ade-
quately expressed. Halakah is the Jewish legal
and practical guide to living.
See TALMUD; HAGGADAH.
918
Halhul. City assigned to Judah’s tribe for
an inheritance after the initial conquest of Pal-
estine. It was located between Beth-zur and
Beth-anoth, four miles north of Hebron (Jos
15:58).
Hali. Town mentioned among those which
formed the border of Asher’s tribe (Jos 19:25).
Hali may have been located west of Mt Car-
mel, but this is uncertain.
Hallel. Hebrew term describing a song of
praise to God. It was later used in the Talmud
and in rabbinical writings to refer to several
groups of psalms of praise to God. Psalms 113—
118 were known as the Egyptian Hallel, and
1st-century AD Jewish tradition assigned them
to Moses. During the temple period this Hallel
was recited on 18 days in the year, but only
once at night, on the Passover. For that occa-
sion it was recited in parts. Psalms 113,114 pre-
ceded the meal, prior to drinking the second
cup, and Psalms 115-118 were recited after the
last cup was filled. This is probably the song
that is meant in the reference to the last sup-
per of Jesus and his disciples, ‘“when they had
sung a hymn” (Mt 26:30; Mk 14:26). This Hallel
was also used for the feasts of unleavened
bread, Pentecost, tabernacles, and dedication.
The Great Hallel consisted of Psalm 136, but
sometimes included Psalms 120-136. Psalms
146—148 were also considered as a single Hallel.
These were used in the daily morning service of
the synagogue.
See TALMUD; HALLELUJAH.
Hallelujah. Important Christian term figur-
ing extensively in the church’s worship and
liturgy from early times. Hallelujah is a trans-
literation into Greek, and thence into English,
of two Hebrew words which mean ‘‘Praise ye
the Lord.’ This combination of the two He-
brew words forms the characteristic call to
praise. Jews living in the dispersion in pre-
Christian times were already using the translit-
eration in their synagogue worship. “‘Hallelu-
jah,” according to ancient Hebrew tradition,
is to be written as one word, except in Psalm
135:3. It occurs nowhere in the OT but in the
Psalter, where it occurs 23 times, and for the
first time in Psalm 104:35. In Psalms 111-113
each one begins with ‘‘Hallelujah”; in 115-117
each ends with the word; and 146-150 each
begins and ends with it.
In the Septuagint version of Psalms 113-118
all the individual psalms are headed ‘‘Allelu-
jah.” Through the Vulgate, this form of the
word ‘‘Hallelujah” has come into use in the
church. Like another famous Hebrew liturgi-
cal term “Amen,” “Hallelujah” has passed

from the OT to the NT, and thence to the Chris-
tian church. But in the av and rv the phrase is
rendered, ‘‘Praise ye the Lord.”
In Hebrew liturgical usage the Hallel, or
Hymn of Praise, Psalms 113-118, is sung at the
three great religious festivals of Passover, Pen-
tecost, and tabernacles. At the domestic cele-
bration of Passover, Psalms 113 and 114 are
sung before the meal, and Psalms 115—118 are
sung after it. Matthew 26:30 and Mark 14:26
refer to the singing of 115-118 as the “hymn”
sung by the Lord and his disciples after their
celebration of the Passover and before they
left the upper room.
“Hallelujah” does not appear anywhere in
the NT except in Revelation 19:1,3,4,6. There
it is a chant of the saints in heaven, and was
taken over into the liturgy and hymnody of
the church at an early date. It became the
characteristic expression of joy, and
therefore, sung especially at Eastertide, as is
witnessed by Augustine. The choice by the
Christian church of Psalms 113, 114, and 118
from the Hebrew Hallel as the psalms to be
sung on Easter Day marks the liturgical con-
nection of Easter with Passover, which
succeeded.
J.G.S.S. THOMSON
See HALLEL.
Hallohesh, Halohesh. Shallum’s
(Neh 3:12, KJv Halohesh) and one who set his
seal on Ezra’s covenant (10:24).
Ham (Person). Second son of Noah (Gn 5:32;
6:10; 7:13; 9:18,22; 10:1,6,20). Ham had four
sons whose names were Cush, Mizraim (He-
brew for Egypt), Put, and Canaan (Gn 10:6; 1
Chr 1:8). Ham, then, is seen as the ancestor of
the Egyptians (though a mixed race appar-
ently occurs later), as well as of peoples
Africa, Arabia, and Canaan.
After the flood Noah began cultivating vine-
yards, and on one occasion exposed himself
while drunk (Gn 9:20—24). Ham saw his father
lying naked and related the incident to Shem
and Japheth, who covered Noah up discreetly.
When Noah awoke and learned what his youn-
gest son (seen by some as Ham) had done, he
cursed Ham’s son Canaan, saying his brothers
(Cush, Mizraim, and Put) and Shem and Ja-
pheth would rule over him. But if Ham is the
one referred to in 9:24 as offending Noah, why
should the curse fall on his son Canaan? The
most likely answer is that Ham is not being
referred to in verse 24. The expression is “his
youngest son” (the “‘younger’’ of the av is
hardly possible in Hebrew), whereas Ham
repeatedly seen as the second of the brothers,
not the youngest (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18;
Hamath
10:1), the explicit order of the sons indicating
age. Instead “his youngest son’’ refers to Ca-
naan, and to some base deed not being re-
corded, on whom the curse falls. ‘““Son’”’ used
for “grandson” is common in Semitic mate-
rial, and it seems to have been used here in
this way since Canaan is the “youngest” of the
-(grand)sons. The curse, then, as the text
clearly says, is on Canaan rather than Ham.
Canaan (and his posterity) is to be subjugated
by Japheth and Shem with the Canaanites, fi-
nally disappearing by NT times.
See NaATIons; NoaH #1.
Ham (Place). Place where Chedorlaomer
and his cohorts defeated the Zuzim (Gn 14:5).
The name is probably preserved by Tell Ham,
near the modern village on the Wadi er-
Rejeilah. Bronze and Iron age settlements
was, have been unearthed there.
Haman. Son of Hammedatha the Agagite, a
high official under King Ahasuerus (Xerxes) in
Persia during the time of Esther. Haman be-
came angry with Mordecai, the uncle of Es-
it
ther the queen, because Mordecai would not
bow down to him as all others did. In anger he
planned to exterminate all the Jews in Persia
(Est 3:8). While he was plotting Mordecai’s
hanging, Esther was gaining the favor of Ahas-
father uerus and telling him of Mordecai’s valuable
services. Haman’s plot to kill all Jews was
revealed, and he and his ten sons went to
the gallows made for Mordecai. In the Hebrew
Bible the sons’ names are written in a perpen-
dicular manner, supposedly to show their rel-
ative positions on the gallows. The carnival
atmosphere of the feast of Purim sometimes
resulted in Haman being hanged in effigy, or
his name being written on the soles of shoes to
express contempt.
in
See ESTHER, BOOK OF.
Hamath. 1. City and district located about
125 miles north of Damascus (Syria), on the
Orontes River. The early residents apparently
were of the Hamitic race from the descendants
of Canaan (Gn 10:18), but later inhabitants
were Semitic. It was to be the northern bound-
ary of the nation of Israel (Nm 34:8; Jos 13:5),
described as the “entrance of Hamath”’ (He-
brew, Lebo Hamath), but actually it was such
only in the early monarchy and under Jero-
boam II (793-753 BC). The location is uncer-
tain, but was between the Lebanon and Anti-
Lebanon ranges. Some scholars have thought
of it as an actual place-name, Lebo-hamath,
is and have identified it with modern Lebweh on
the Orontes. Others have located it elsewhere
in Syria.
OED
Hamath, Entrance of

Hamath was established during the Neo- divided and the northern boundary shrank. It
lithic period and destroyed about 1750 BC, per- was not until the reign of Jereboam II, son of
haps by the Hyksos. It was later rebuilt and Joash (793-753 BC), king of the northern king-
conquered by Thutmose III (1502-1448 Bc), dom (called Israel), that the northern bound-
and while Egypt controlled Syria, Hamath aries extended again to the entrance of Hamath
prospered. Several Hittite inscriptions have (2 Kgs 14:23-25).
been discovered which disclose that Hamath Both Amos and Ezekiel refer to the en-
had become the capital of a small Hittite king- trance of Hamath in their prophecies concern-
dom prior to goo BC. ing Israel (Am 6:14; KJV Hemath; Ez 47:15—20;
When David fought Hadadezer, king of Zo- 48:1). Some authorities regard the place as the
bah, and defeated him, Toi, king of Hamath, ancient town, Lebo-hamath, identified with
sent his son to congratulate David (2 Sm 8:10). modern Lebweh.
Since Solomon built stone-cities in the region
of Hamath (2 Chr 8:4), it has been suggested Hamathite. Resident of Hamath (Gn 10:18;
that Hamath had become a tributary kingdom r Chr 1:16).
to Israel. During the reign of Ahab of Israel, See HAMATH #1.
the Assyrian royal inscriptions state that
Irhulini, king of Hamath, allied with Damas-
Hamath-zobah. City captured by King Solo-
cus, Israel, and the 12 kings of the coast to
mon of Israel (2 Chr 8:3,4). Its identity is uncer-
resist the advances of Shalmaneser III (860—
tain. It occurs only once in the Bible, and is
825 BC). The league halted Shalmaneser, al-
not mentioned in any of the cuneiform inscrip-
though he continued to harass Syria, and
tions from that period. Some scholars have
about 846 Bc he conquered the Syrian league,
suggested that there were two Hamaths, and
when Hamath became subject to Assyria. In
Zobah was added to distinguish it from the
730 BC Eni-Ilu, then king of Hamath, paid trib-
better known city (cf. Ez 47:17). The city is
ute to Tiglath-pileser III. About 720 Bc Sargon
mentioned with Hamath and Tadmor, and
II colonized Hamath with 4300 Assyrians and was perhaps located in northeastern Syria.
moved many people from different areas of his
kingdom, including Hamath, to Samaria (2
Hammath (Person). Ancestor of the house
Kgs 17:24). Israelites also were apparently colo-
nized in Hamath (Is 11:11). Other OT refer-
of Rechab (1 Chr 2:55, kv Hemath), about
whom nothing else is known.
ences to the Assyrian conquest of Hamath in-
clude 2 Kings 18:34; 19:13; Isaiah 10:9; 36:19;
37:13; and Amos 6:2. Later the city seems to Hammath (Place). Fortified outpost identi-
have been subject to Damascus (Jer 49:23). fied with the modern Hamman Tabariyeh (Jos
Some of the prophets predicted that Israel 19:35). This place is located among hot springs
would eventually extend its boundaries once on the western shore of Galilee and is proba-
again to Hamath (Ez 47:16,17; 48:1; Zec 9:2). bly identifiable with Hammon (1 Chr 6:76),
During the Maccabean period Jonathan Hammoth-dor (Jos 21:32), and perhaps the Em-
Maccabeus and his army met the army of De- maus of Josephus (Antiq. 18.2.3).
metrius at Hamath (1 Mc 12:25). According to
Josephus, Antiochus Epiphanes changed its Hammedatha. Father of Haman, a chief ad-
name to Epiphania (Antiq. 1.4.2), the name by visor to the Persian king Ahasuerus and a
which it was known to the Greeks and Romans. sworn enemy of the Jews according to the
The modern city of Hama is built at the Book of Esther (3:1,10; 8:5; 9:10,24).
location of ancient Hamath.
2. Hamath-zobah is mentioned in 2 Chroni- Hammelech. Hebrew word meaning “the
cles 8:3 as a town conquered by Solomon. king,” taken to be a personal name by the xsv,
Some have suggested that is was the same city but more correctly translated as ‘‘the king” by
as the Hamath above while others suggest other versions (Jer 36:26; 38:6).
that it was a different town in the district of
Zobah. Its identification remains uncertain. Hammer. See Toots.
See HAMATH-ZOBAH.
Hammolecheth, Hammoleketh. Machir’s
Hamath, Entrance of. Place of uncertain daughter and Gilead’s sister (1 Chr 7:18, KJv
identification, marking the northern border of Hammoleketh).
the Canaanite territory promised to Israel by
God (Nm 34:8), but only attained by the time Hammon. 1. One of the cities of Asher men-
of the monarchy (1 Kgs 8:65 1 Chr 13:5, KJV tioned in Joshua 19:28. Its exact location is un-
Hemath; 2 Chr 7:8). known, but it was somewhere south of Tyre on
After the death of Solomon the kingdom was the west border of Asher.
920
 Hammurabi, Law Code of

2. Alternate name for Hammath in 1 Chroni-

cles 6:76.
See HAMMATH (PLACE).

Hammoth-dor. Alternate name for the le-

vitical town Hammath in Joshua 21:32.
See HAMMATH (PLACE).

Hammuel. Member of Mishma’s family

from Simeon’s tribe (x Chr 4:26, kJv Hamuel).

Hammurabi, Law Code of. Law code de-

vised by Hammurabi, the last great king of the
first Babylonian dynasty (c. 1790-1750 BC), to
safeguard the rights and define the respon-
sibilities of Babylonian citizens. The laws
were inscribed on stelae, which were usually
erected in marketplaces or near temples far all
to see. The most complete example discovered
so far dates from the latter part of his reign.
The black diorite stela was found at Susa in
tgo1 by French archaeologists. It stood eight
feet high, and showed a bas-relief of Hammu-
rabi receiving the symbols of kingship and law
from the god Shamash. Beneath this was a
poetic introduction, followed by the 282 arti-
cles of the code, and an epilogue in an equally
poetic style extolling the virtues of Hammu-
rabi, his concern for his people, and the way
in which he had followed the wishes of the
great god Marduk and Shamash, god of jus-
tice. The gods are called upon to curse any
who defy the stela.
It had been carried to Susa as a battle tro-
phy by the Elamites in 1160 Bc, and it is now
in Paris in the Louvre. The code is a collection
of laws based on Sumerian and early Semitic
laws. Similarities between the code of Ham-
murabi and those of the Assyrians, Hittites,
and Hebrews are numerous.
Hammurabi began his code by setting out The Law Code of Hammurabi—black diorite stele, about 7 feet
high, inscribed with about 250 laws and a scene at the top
punishments for the most obvious crimes such showing the sun-god Shamash committing the law to Hammu-
as kidnapping, theft, or receiving stolen prop- rabi. It was found at Susa in three pieces by Jacques de Mor-
erty, breaking and entering, looting, perjury, gan (1901-2), having been set up first at Babylon.
false accusation, and harboring a fugitive. All
these could be punished by death, especially
where robbery involved the theft of temple or on the goods of the owner of the house and
state property, and where perjury was commit- has appropriated the goods of the owner of
ted by a witness giving testimony in a case the house, that man shall be thrown into that
involving a capital offense. fire’ (Sect 25).
All valid transactions took place before wit- The protection of feudal rights and responsi-
nesses, and it was essential that their tes- bilities are outlined in the next section. The
timony was trustworthy in disputed cases. officer was responsible for soldiers under his
Summary justice was meted out to the man command in the same way that the soldier
found guilty of breaking and entering: “If a was required to fulfill his duty to the state.
man made a breach in a house, they shall put The law also protected his property while he
him. to death in front of that breach and wall was in the army. A tenant was under obliga-
him in” (Sect 21), and to the looter at a fire: tion to use his rented property carefully and
“If a fire broke out in a man’s house, and a advantageously. If a tenant rented land that
man, who went to extinguish (it) cast his eye became flooded before the harvest, the law
g2r
Hammurabi, Law Code of
protected him from having to pay rent for that
year. He also had to be thoughtful toward his
neighbors’ crops and ensure that he didn’t in-
undate their fields by his own overzestful irri-
gation (Sects 30-56).
The detail in which contracts and commer-
cial laws are discussed indicates the extent
and variety of such transactions. If money was
borrowed from a merchant who foreclosed
and the borrower was unable to repay the
loan, he had to make payment in kind, for ex-
ample, in dates from his own crop. The permis-
sible interest rate was approximately 20 per-
cent. The borrower was also protected by law
from the practice of the lender using a small
weight of grain or money and insisting on the
return with interest at a large weight. Anyone
caught doing this forfeited whatever he had
lent. Female wine sellers were also cautioned
against selling with short weight (Sect 108).
High interest rates were prescribed for obtain-
ing wine on credit, and it is unlikely that
many took advantage of this early form of
credit.
To ensure an equal division in the break-
ing-up of a partnership, the transaction was
performed in the presence “of God,” pre-
sumably in the temple. A trader borrowing
money at interest was expected to make a
profit. If he did, he repaid the principal and
the interest. If he did not, it was presumed
that he was a poor trader, and he was penal-
ized by having to repay the merchant double
the amount that he had borrowed. If the
money was loaned as a favor, however,
the trader then suffered a loss, the principal
only was repayable without interest. A trader
who was set upon by bandits on the road was
not required to make payment. Sealed re-
ceipts were used as a safeguard of fair trad-
ing practices. In disputes between a merchant
and a trader over a loan, if the merchant
proved his case the trader had to return three
times the amount of the money originally bor-
rowed. Where the merchant disputed with a
trader who then proved his case, the mer-
chant paid the trader six times the amount of
the principal involved (Sects 98—107).
A creditor could not come and take a debt-
or’s money or grain without his permission. If
he did so, he had to return what he had taken
and forfeit the loan. In several instances a per-
son could be held as a pledge. If he died of
natural causes during that period, no claim
could be made, but if he died as a result of
maltreatment, compensation was payable ac-
cording to rank. If the pledge was a slave (the
lowest level of Mesopotamian society),
amount payable was one-third of a mina of
silver and the loan was forgiven. If the pledge
was a man’s son, the creditor’s son was put to
death as a recompense. Where a wife, son, or
daughter was bound over for service to pay a
debt, the maximum period of servitude was
three years (Sects 113-17).
A man was responsible for the security of
anything left with him for safekeeping. If the
property was lost through robbery because the
building was not secure, restitution had to be
made to the owner of the property. Anyone
claiming falsely that his property was lost had
to pay the city council double the amount of
his claim.
Extensive laws relate to sex and marriage
(Sects 127-62). Like most transactions, mar-
riage was not valid without a contract. Adul-
tery was frequently punished by death, but a
man might plead to have his wife’s life spared.
The victim of rape was not punished. Accord-
ing to Mosaic law such a person was equally
guilty if the act took place within the city, as
she was expected to scream for help. If it oc-
curred outside the city walls, however, she
was not held responsible, on the theory that
her screams could not have been heard. Ham-
murabi’s code shows concern for the woman
who was deserted or whose husband was
taken captive. She was permitted to live with
another man if she had insufficient means to
be self-supporting.
A woman’s dowry was returned when she
was divorced, or if there had been no dowry, a
payment of one mina of silver was made to
her, or one-third of a mina of silver if her hus-
band was a peasant. If a woman neglected her
and household duties to set herself up in business,
her husband might divorce her without pay-
ment or he might remarry without divorcing
her, thus forcing her to live on in the house as
a servant.
A slave who had borne her master’s child
could not be sold. If a man married a woman
who was sick, and he then decided to marry
another, the sick wife might continue to live in
the house and her husband had to support her
for the rest of her life. A woman who killed her
husband for her lover was impaled on stakes
(Sect 153). Incest was punishable by death or
banishment. Breach of promise cases usually
resulted in the repayment of double the value
of the dowry. When a wife died, her dowry
became part of her inheritance for her chil-
dren, but if she died childless and her father
returned her marriage price, her husband
might not lay claim to her dowry, which had
to be returned to her father (Sects 162—63).
The rights of a younger unmarried son were
protected, as were those of the children of a
the master and his slave. A son was protected
against being disinherited by his father unless
he had committed some serious offense. A
widow was protected against the over-zealous
922

financial demands of her children. If a free
woman married a slave, their children were
free. If the slave died, his widow retained her
dowry and half the goods acquired since the
marriage, the slave-owner being entitled
the remainder. Women temple personnel were
also protected by law.
Under Hebrew law it was a father’s duty to
teach his son the means of earning a liveli-
hood. Hammurabi’s code prescribed that an
adopted son had to be similarly trained, and if
in any way he was not reared as a natural
child within the family, he might return to his
own home.
If a man subsequently had a family of
own and the foster child was sent away,
had the right to take with him one-third of
man’s goods, although none of his land or
house, since these were the inheritance of the
natural children. If a child died in a nurse’s
care and she took another assignment without
informing the new employers of the previous
death, her breast was cut off.
The most famous section of Hammurabi’s
law code concerns assault: “If a (man) has de-
stroyed the eye of a member of the aristoc-
racy, they shall destroy his eye.” Similarly if
he broke a man’s bone or knocked out a tooth,
he would suffer the same fate (Sects 196,197). If
the injured person was a commoner, however,
a fine of one mina of silver was charged for
destroying an eye or breaking a bone. When
the injured man was a slave, payment of half
his value had to be made. Punishments for sim-
ple assault depended upon the rank of the two
protagonists. Where a man swore that the
blow was not deliberate, he might simply pay
the physician’s bill. Other penalties were set
out for instances where the blow was fatal or
caused a woman to miscarry (Sects 209-14).
Surgeons’ fees were also specified. For sav-
ing a life or for eye surgery the fee was ten
shekels of silver when the patient was an aris-
tocrat, but only five for a commoner, and two
for a slave. If an aristocratic patient died un-
der the surgeon’s bronze knife, or lost an eye,
the surgeon could have his hand cut off (Sect
218). If a slave died during surgery, the sur-
geon had.to replace the slave with another.
For setting a broken bone or healing a
sprained tendon the physician charged five,
three, or two shekels, depending on the pa-
tient’s status (Sects 221-23).
The final section of laws concerns the pro-
tection of people from the poor workmanship
of house and boat builders, rules and regula-
tions for those who rent animals or hire peo-
ple, theft of agricultural implements, rates for
hiring and paying wages, and rules for the pur-
chase and sale of slaves (Sects 228-82).
A man who fraudulently let out his mas-
Hamonah
to
his
he
the
his
Limestone relief with part of Hammurabi’s law code and a fig-
ure representing Hammurabi; the monument was dedicated to
a goddess.
ter’s oxen for hire rather than using them on
his own fields would be required to pay the
normal rental of grain for the field. If he was
unable to do so, he was to be dragged through
that field by the oxen.
Because of similarities in culture, it is
hardly surprising that there should be areas of
correspondence between Hammurabi’s code
and the Mosaic law. Thus both bodies of legis-
lation prescribed the death penalty for adul-
tery (Hammurabi Sect 129; Lv 20:10; Dt 22:22),
and for the kidnapping and selling of an indi-
vidual (Hammurabi Sect 14; Ex 21:16). The lex
talionis, or principle of retaliation, in Exodus
21:23-25 and Deuteronomy 19:21 is reflected
widely in Hammurabi’s laws, including Sec-
tions 197, 210, and 230. The differences, how-
ever, are equally significant. Whereas Hammu-
rabi’s legislation allowed women equal rights
of divorce (Sect 142), these were denied under
the Mosaic law by simply not being included
(cf. Dt 24:1-4). Hammurabi’s code was basi-
cally pragmatic in nature, and although pro-
mulgated under the authority of Shamash,
god of justice, the legislation took little notice
of ethical and spiritual principles. By compari-
son with the Mosaic enactments, Hammura-
bi’s laws placed a lower value upon human
life.
HAZEL W. PERKIN
See Law, BIBLICAL CONCEPT OF; CRIMINAL LAW AND
PUNISHMENT; CiviL Law AND JUSTICE.
Hamonah. Site in the Transjordan where
the marauding armies of Gog will be de-
stroyed by the Israelites (Ez 39:16).
923
Hamon-gog
Hamon-gog. Valley in the Transjordan
where the dead of the armies of Gog will be
buried (Ez 39:11,15).
Hamor. Hivite or Horite prince of the coun-
try about Shechem (Gn 34:2), from whom Ja-
cob bought land when returning with his fam-
ily from Paddan-arem. At this time Hamor’s
son, Shechem, committed fornication with Di-
nah, the daughter of Jacob. At his son’s re-
quest Hamor asked Jacob for a marriage alli-
ance between Shechem and Dinah, offering a
dowry. Simeon and Levi in pretended friend-
ship persuaded the males of the city to be
circumcised, but then attacked and
them before they were healed in revenge for
their sister’s humiliation (vv 1-31).
“Hamor” is the word which Jacob uses to
denote Issachar in blessing his sons (Gn 49:14),
and is the usual word for ass in OT (e.g., Gn
42:26; Ex'20:17; Jes 15:15;°Is 1:3; Zec 9:9).
In the NT, Emmor is the xJv form for Ha-
mor in Acts 7:16.
Hamran. Alternate name for Hemdan,
hon’s oldest son, in 1 Chronicles 1:41.
See HEMDAN.
Hamuel. xyv spelling of Hammuel, the Si-
meonite, in 1 Chronicles 4:26.
See HAMMUEL.
Hamul, Hamulite. Perez’s younger son (Gn
46:12; 1 Chr 2:5) and founder of the Hamulite
family (Nm 26:21).
Hamutal. Daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah,
one of King Josiah’s wives, and the mother of
two kings: Jehoahaz and Zedekiah (2 Kgs
agtarsedeSpJer 5221).
Hanamel, Hanameel. Shallum’s son, from
whom Jeremiah bought a field in Anathoth
(Jer 32:7-12, kKJv Hanameel). This purchase
signified that God would restore the nation
and that possession of the land would again
be possible.
Hanan. 1. Shashak’s son and one of the
chief men of Benjamin (1 Chr 8:23).
2. Azel’s son from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr
8:38; 9:44).
3. Warrior among David’s mighty men who
were known as “the thirty” (1 Chr 11:43).
4. Ancestor of a group of temple assistants
that returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel
after the exile (Ezr 2:46; Neh 7:49).
5. Levitical assistant who explained to the
people passages from the Law read by Ezra
(Neh 8:7).
6. Levite who signed Ezra’s covenant of
faithfulness to God with Nehemiah and others
after the exile (Neh ro:10).
7.8. Two political leaders who signed Ez-
ra’s covenant of faithfulness to God with Nehe-
miah and others after the exile (Neh 10:22,26).
g. One of the Levites whom Nehemiah ap-
pointed as treasurer over the storehouses (Neh
13:13).
10. Igdaliah’s son and head of a prophetic
guild occupying the room in the temple where
Jeremiah offered the Rechabites wine to drink
(Jer 35:4).
killed Hananel, Tower of. Tower on the north
wall of Jerusalem, located near the Sheep
Gate (Neh 3:1; 12:39; KJV Hananeel). Later in
Israel’s history John Hyrcanus erected a Mac-
cabean fortress on this spot which Pompey de-
stroyed in 63 Bc. Still later, Herod the Great
built the Tower of Antonia here to oversee the
temple area. Two prophecies refer to the
Tower of Hananel as a boundary point in the
rebuilding of Jerusalem (Jer 31:38; Zec 14:10).
Dis-
Hanani. 1. Seer who rebuked King Asa for
giving treasure to Ben-hadad of Syria to per-
suade him to attack Israel. Hanani was impris-
oned for his preaching (2 Chr 16:1—10). Hanani
was the father of the prophet Jehu who in-
veighed against Baasha, king of Israel (1 Kgs
16:1,7), and Jehoshaphat, king of Judah (2 Chr
19:2).
2. Heman’s son, David’s seer, and a musi-
cian in the temple (1 Chr 25:4,25).
3. Priest who obeyed Ezra’s exhortation to
divorce his pagan wife after the exile (Ezr
10:20).
4. Brother of Nehemiah who induced him
to act on behalf of the Jews when he reported
the state of Jerusalem and Judah (Neh 1:2).
Hanani was later given responsibility for the
city of Jerusalem (7:2).
5. Priest and musician who participated in
the dedication of the rebuilt walls of Jerusa-
lem (Neh 12:36).
Hananiah. 1. Zerubbabel’s son and a de-
scendant of David (1 Chr 3:19,21).
2. Benjamite and the son of Shashak (1 Chr
8:24).
3. Heman’s son and the leader of the 16th of
24 divisions of musicians trained for service in
the house of the Lord (1 Chr 25:4,23).
4. One of the commanders of King Uzziah’s
army (2 Chr 26:11).
5. Bebai’s son, who returned with the exiles
from Babylon and was later encouraged by
Ezra to divorce his foreign wife (Ezr 10:28).
6. Perfumer who helped Nehemiah rebuild
the Jerusalem wall (Neh 3:8).
924

7. Shelemiah’s son, who with Hanun re-
paired a section of the Jerusalem wall during
the days of Nehemiah (Neh 3:30). He is per-
haps identical with #6 above.
8. Commander of the citadel of Jerusalem
who was assigned by Nehemiah to rule the
city jointly with Hanani, Nehemiah’s brother.
Hananiah, described as a faithful and God-
fearing man, was appointed the task of seeing
that the city walls and gates were regularly
guarded (Neh 7:2,3).
g. One of the leaders of the people who set
his seal on the covenant of Ezra (Neh 10:23).
10. Head of the priestly family of Jeremiah
during the days of Joiakim, the high priest, in
postexilic Jerusalem (Neh 12:12).
11. One of the priests who blew a trumpet
at the dedication of the Jerusalem wall during
the days of Nehemiah (Neh 12:41).
12. Gibeonite and the son of Azzur. Hana-
niah prophesied during the fourth year of
King Zedekiah of Judah’s reign (597-586 Bc).
He openly declared in the temple that in two
years the Lord would break the yoke of Nebu-
chadnezzar, king of Babylon (605-562 Bc),
from the neck of Judah and return its exiles
and sacred possessions to Palestine. Told by
the Lord that Hananiah’s prophecy was false,
Jeremiah reproached Hananiah for lying and
foretold his imminent death. Hananiah died
two months later (Jer 28).
13. Father of Zedekiah, an official of King
Jehoiakim of Judah (609—598 Bc; Jer 36:12).
14. Grandfather of Irijah, the captain of the
guards, who arrested Jeremiah at Jerusalem’s
Gate of Benjamin for apparently deserting to
the Babylonians (Jer 37:13).
15. One of the three Jewish friends of Daniel
exiled in Babylon. He was assigned the Babylo-
nian name Shadrach (Dn 1:6—19; 2:17).
See SHADRACH, MESHACH, AND ABEDNEGO.
Hand. Unit of measure among the Hebrews.
The fingers, up to four (Jer 52:21), made a
handbreadth; three handbreadths made a
handstretch (Ex 28:16). Figuratively, hand
meant power (Dt 2:15; Ps 31:15; Mk 14:42). In-
deed, in Joshua 8:20 “hand” is translated
“strength” (see Ps 76:5). Conversely, limp
hands symbolized irresoluteness and weak-
ness (Is 35:3). Clasping the hands signified
friendship (2 Kgs 10:15). To seat someone on
one’s right hand denoted favor (Pss_ 16:11;
77:10). Clean hands symbolized innocence (Ps
18:20), while striking hands sealed a bargain
(Prv 6:1 KJv). Lifting the hand symbolized vio-
lence (1 Kgs 11:26). The hands were used in
supplicatory prayer (Ex 17:11; Lv 9:22; Is 1:15;
1 Tm 2:8) and in making vows (Gn 14:22 KJV;
24:2).
925
Handbreadth
Other idiomatic uses of the hands ex-
pressed jeopardizing one’s life (Jgs 12:3), glad-
ness (2 Kgs 11:12), generosity (Dt 15:11), grief
(2 Sm 13:19), humility (Prv 30:32), and under-
taking a duty (Lk 9:62). Manual labor is an
expression of man’s dignity and duty (Eph
4:28; 1 Thes 4:11), the marks of which Paul was
‘not ashamed to display (Acts 20:34; 1 Cor 4:12).
Ritual hand-washing was obligatory for the
priests before fulfilling their office (Ex 30:19—
21; 40:30—-32). The scribes and Pharisees so mis-
applied this that Jesus ignored ceremonial
hand-washing (Mt 15:1-20; Lk 11:38). Pilate’s
hand-washing (Mt 27:24) disclaimed responsi-
bility for, or professed innocence concerning,
a wrong which, however, could not be done
without his consent.
When Israel went out of Egypt ‘with a high
hand” (Ex 14:8 KJv), the reference is to the
hand or help of the Lord. The hand of the Lord
represented God’s resistless power (Dt 2:15),
judgment (Acts 13:11; Heb 10:31), divine inspi-
ration (Ez 8:1; 37:1), providential care (Ezr 7:6;
Jn 10:28,29), and blessing (Mt 19:13-15); al-
though the latter refers to an act of prayer.
The laying on of hands had a profound sig-
nificance and occurs frequently in the Bible.
Before making a blood sacrifice the person
making the offering, not the priest, laid hands
on the victim. The act signified the transfer-
ence of guilt to, or self-identification with, the
victim (Lv 1:4). Laying on of hands signified
appointment to an office: as when Moses com-
missioned Joshua (Nm 27:12—23), the apostles
made seven disciples their associates or depu-
ties in the ministry (Acts 6:5,6), and Paul and
Barnabas were appointed missionaries and
representatives of the church in Antioch (13:3).
By laying on of hands a person was made an
associate with the holder of an office and was
admitted to the status of that office (x Tm
4:14; 2 Tm 1:6). The act was accompanied by
prayer and was, in itself, a form of prayer. As
Augustine remarks: “What else is the laying
on of hands but a prayer over one?”
The laying on of hands accompanied heal-
ing in the ministry of the Lord (Mk 6:5; Lk
4:40; 13:11-13) and of the disciples (Mk 16:18;
Acts 9:12,17; 28:8). This expressed the self-
identification and sympathy of the healer with
and for the sufferer, as well as reinforcing of
the patient’s faith, and God’s imparting health
to him in answer to prayer.
J.G.S.S. THOMSON
See LAYING ON OF HaANDs; RIGHT, RIGHT HAND.
Handbreadth. Linear measure equivalent
to one-sixth of a cubit or just under three
inches in length.
See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
Handmaid, Handmaiden

Handmaid, Handmaiden. See TrapEs AND Hanniel. 1. Ephod’s son and leader of Man-
OCCUPATIONS. asseh’s tribe who represented his tribe in ap-
portioning land to Israel under Moses (Nm
Handpike. Wooden staff with pointed met- 34:23).
al tip (Ez 39:9). 2. Ulla’s son and warrior in the tribe of Ash-
er (1 Chr 7:39, KJV Haniel).
See ARMS AND WARFARE.
Hanoch. 1. Midian’s third son, and grand-
Hands, Laying on of. See LayING ON OF son of Abraham by Keturah (Gn 25:4; 1 Chr
HANDs.
1:33; KJV Henoch).
2. Reuben’s first son (Gn 46:9; Ex 6:14; 1 Chr
Hands, Washing of. Jewish religious rit- 5:3) and ancestor of the Hanochites (Nm 26:5).
ual.
See Hann. Hanochite. Descendant of Hanoch, Reu-
ben’s firstborn son (Nm 26:5).
Handstaff. KJV rendering of handpike in See HANOCH #2.
Ezekiel 39:9.
See ARMS AND WARFARE. Hanukkah. See Feasts AND FESTIVALS OF Is-
RAEL; JUDAISM.
Hanes. City in Egypt included with Zoan
(or Tanis) in Isaiah 30:4 as a center of Egyp- Hanun. 1. Nahash’s son and successor to
tian government to which ambassadors would the Ammonite throne. When King Nahash
be sent. This indicates that it was one of the died, King David of Israel sent messengers to
dynastic centers. It has been identified with console Hanun, and to express his continued
Heracleopolis Magna, south of Memphis, the friendship. But Hanun insulted David by hu-
capital of northern Egypt in Roman times, miliating his messengers and accusing them of
and also with Heracleopolis Parva in the east- spying. This action led to war and the defeat
ern delta region. of Ammon (2 Sm 10:1—14; 11:1; 12:26-31; 1 Chr
19:1—20:3).
Hanging. See CriminaL Law AND PUNISH- 2. One who helped repair Jerusalem’s Val-
MENT; IMPALEMENT. ley Gate during the time of Nehemiah (Neh
3:13). .
3. Zalaph’s son who repaired a section of
Haniel. «sv spelling of Hanniel, Ulla’s son, the Jerusalem wall during the time of Nehe-
in 1 Chronicles 7:39. miah (Neh 3:30); perhaps the same as #2
See HANNIEL #2. above.

Hannah. Wife of Elkanah from Ephraim’s Hapharaim, Haphraim. Town included in

tribe and the mother of the prophet Samuel.
The childless Hannah prayed annually at Shi-
loh for a son, whom she vowed to dedicate to
the Lord.
The Lord answered her prayer, and she
called her son Samuel. When he was weaned
(probably about age three), she dedicated him
at Shiloh to the service of the Lord in the sanc-
tuary. Henceforth, Samuel lived with Eli the
priest and was visited by his parents on their
annual pilgrimages. Hannah had three more
sons and two daughters (1 Sm 1:1—2:21).
Her prophetic psalm (1 Sm 2:1~10) antici-
pates the Magnificat (Lk 1:46—55).
Hannathon. Northern border town of Zebu-
lun (Jos 19:14), mentioned in the Amarna tab-
lets (c. 1370 Bc) and in the annals of Tiglath-
pileser II (745-727 Bc). Not yet precisely
located, it has been identified with Kefr ‘Anau
near Rimmon, or with Tell el-Bedeiwiyeh,
north of Nazareth.
the territory allotted to Issachar’s tribe for an
inheritance (Jos 19:19, KJV Haphraim). Its loca-
tion is uncertain, though some have identified
it with et-Taiyibeh, about 10 miles northwest
of Beth-shan.
Happizzez. Head of a division of priests
whom David assigned to official duties in the
temple (1 Chr 24:15, kJv Aphses).
Hara. Place where Tiglath-pileser exiled
Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh
(x Chr 5:26). A possible miscopying of 2 Kings
17:6 and 18:11 may have substituted Hara for
“cities of Media.” The Greek version reads
“Mountains of Media,” indicating an area east
of the Tigris Valley. A district rather than a
single site seems to be indicated.
Haradah. Twentieth wilderness encamp-
ment of the children of Israel, and the ninth
from Sinai; listed between Mt Shepher and

926

Makheloth. Its location is unknown (Nm
33:24,25).
Haran (Person). 1. Terah’s son, youngest
brother of Abraham, and the father of Lot (Gn
11:26—31).
2. Caleb’s son by his concubine Ephah, a
member of Judah’s tribe and the father of Ga-
zez (1 Chr 2:46).
3. Shimei’s son, a member of the Gershon-
ite division of Levi’s tribe (1 Chr 23:9).
Haran (Place). City of northern Mesopota-
mia, first mentioned in Genesis 11:31 as the
destination of Terah, Abraham’s father, in mi-
grating from Ur of the Chaldees, and his home
until his death. At age 75, Abraham was com-
manded by God to move to a land which God
had for him (Gn 12:1—4). There were relatives
who remained in Haran, however, to whom
Jacob, Abraham’s grandson, fled in fear of
Esau (27:42,43; cf. 29:1-14). Jacob stayed in Ha-
ran many years while serving his uncle Laban
and acquiring Leah and Rachel as wives, as
well as many cattle, servants, camels, and don-
keys (30:43).
This “city of Nahor’” (Gen 11:27—29; 24:10;
27:43) was established in the 3rd millennium
BC, and its location on a branch of the Euphra-
tes soon made it an important commercial cen-
ter. Perhaps the ancient trade route which
linked Damascus, Nineveh, and Carchemish
passed by Haran. Ezekiel mentions trade be-
tween Haran and Tyre (Ez 27:23). Haran was
an Aramaean city and was famous for its wor-
ship of the lunar Sin-and-Nikkal cult. This sys-
tem was an offspring of the cult found in Su-
merian Ur. Sin and his wife Nikkal were not
only revered here, but throughout Canaan and
even in Egypt. The cult persisted past NT
times, its temple being finally destroyed by
O27,
Harhaiah
Mongols in the 13th century. It is little wonder
that God commanded Abraham to leave this
seat of idolatry. Modern Harran preserves the
ancient cuneiform spelling of the name. Acts
7:2,4 (KJv) has Charran.
Hararite. Term applied to several names
.-Which appear in the accounts of King David’s
“mighty men.’ Shammah, one of David's
mightiest men, and Jonathan’s father (a differ-
ent Jonathan than Saul’s son and David's
friend) is called a Hararite (2 Sm 23:11,33;
1 Chr 11:34 has Shagee), as is Agee, Sham-
mah’s father (2 Sm 23:11). Sharar, Ahiam’s fa-
ther, is also so named (v 33; 1 Chr 11:35 has
Sachar). The meaning of the term is uncertain.
Harbona. One of King Ahasuerus’ seven
personal attendants. They were ordered by
Ahasuerus to parade Queen Vashti before a
drunken banquet to satisfy his vanity (Est
1:10). Harbona later suggested that Haman be
hanged on the gallows he had built for Morde-
cai (7:9).
Hare. Small, swift, long-eared mammal sim-
ilar to the rabbit; condemned as unclean (Lv
11:6; Dt 14:7):
See ANIMALS.
Hareph. Caleb’s son from Judah’s tribe and
founder (or perhaps father) of Beth-gader
(1 Chr 2:51).
Hareth. KJV spelling of Hereth in 1 Samuel
Bae.
See HERETH.
Harhaiah. Father of Uzziel, a goldsmith
who worked to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem
in Nehemiah’s time (Neh 3:8).
Haran.
Harhas
Harhas. Shallum’s grandfather. Shallum’s
wife was Huldah the prophetess who delivered
an oracle on the discovery of Josiah’s Book of
the Law (2 Kgs 22:14; spelled Hasrah in 2 Chr
34:22).
Har-heres. Mountain in Aijalon of Dan’s ter-
ritory (Jgs 1:35).
See HERES #1.
Harhur. Ancestor of a group of temple assis-
tants that returned to Jerusalem with Zerubba-
bel after the exile (Ezr 2:51; Neh 7:53).
Harim. 1. Priest whom King David ap-
pointed to official duties in the temple (1 Chr
24:8).
2. Ancestor of a Jewish family which re-
turned from the Babylonian exile with Zerub-
babel (Ezr 2:32; Neh 10:5). Members of this
family were guilty of marrying foreign women
(Ezr 10:31), but they divorced their wives and
a representative of the clan signed Ezra’s cove-
nant (Neh 10:27).
3. Ancestor of a family of priests who re-
turned from the exile with Zerubbabel (Ezr
2:39; Neh 7:42). Some identify him with #1
above. Members of this family were guilty of
marrying foreign women.
4. Ancestor of Malchijah. Malchijah re-
paired a section of the Jerusalem wall during
Nehemiah’s time (Neh 3:11). This Harim could
be the same as #2 above.
5. Priest who returned from the exile with
Zerubbabel (Neh 12:3, here incorrectly spelled
Rehum). His son (or grandson), Adna, is listed
as a leading priest during the high priesthood
of Joiakim (12:25). Later, under Ezra, a repre-
sentative of the family signed the covenant of
faithfulness to God (10:5).
Hariph. Ancestor of a family that returned
to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel after the exile
(Neh 7:24). The name Jorah appears in the par-
allel list of Ezra 2:18. A representative of this
family signed Ezra’s covenant of faithfulness
to God with Nehemiah and others (Neh 10:19).
Harlot. Woman guilty of illicit sexual rela-
tionships, figuratively, one who worships an
idol. The term “‘harlot”’ translates four differ-
ent words found in the Bible. One type of har-
lot was the man or woman, married or unmar-
ried, who committed immoral acts (Gn 34:31;
Jgs 19:2; Prv 23:27). A different harlot was the
temple prostitute of heathen religions in
which fornication was part of the worship (Gn
38:21,22; Dt 23:17; Hos 4:14). Such prostitution
was forbidden by the Law of Moses (Lv 19:29;
21:9). The ‘strange woman” was another har-
928
lot (x Kgs 11:1; Prv 5:20; 6:24; 7:5; 23:27). There
are different opinions why that name was
given to harlots. One explanation is that it re-
ferred to a man leaving his own wife for an-
other, who ought to be a stranger to him (Prv
5:17,18,20). It may also have referred to a for-
eign woman (Nm 25:1; Jos 23:13). “Harlot”
also refers to any woman, married or single,
who practices unlawful sexual indulgence,
whether for lust or gain (Mt 21:31,32; Lk 15:30;
1 Cor 6:15,16; Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25).
Harlotry appeared early in Israel’s life and
continued throughout biblical history. Most
biblical passages strongly condemn the prac-
tice of harlotry in any form. The priestly law
of Leviticus 21:9 provided that a priest’s
daughter who practiced harlotry was to be
burned to death. A priest could not marry a
harlot (Lv 19:29) and the wages of harlotry
could not be used to pay vows in the temple
(Dt 23:18). These prohibitions served to keep
the worship of the Lord free from the practice
of cult harlotry.
The sons of Jacob killed Hamor and his
son Shechem, justifying their act by saying:
“Should he treat our sister as a harlot?” (Gn
34:31). Amaziah’s wife was to become a harlot
(Am 7:17) as punishment for his treatment of
the prophet Amos.
In the 1st century harlots and tax collectors
were equally detested by the Jews (Mt 21:32).
According to Paul, the body of a Christian be-
longs to Christ, and should not be joined to a
prostitute’s (1 Cor 6:15,16). Proverbs is replete
with warnings to those who would go in to
harlots.
A number of biblical passages do, however,
seem to accept the harlot as a member of the
community. Tamar temporarily served as a
temple harlot to remind her father-in-law of
his promise to her (Gn 38:14,15), and Rahab
the harlot had a special place in Hebrew his-
tory because she had befriended the Hebrew
spies (Jos 2:4—16; Heb 11:31).
The words “harlot” and “harlotry” were
used figuratively for idolatry, especially in the
prophetic books (Is 1:21; Jer 2:20; Rv 17:15,
15,16; 19:2). This figurative use was based on
the marriage-like relationship of the Lord and
the nation of Israel (Jer 3:20). When the people
gave their allegiance to idols rather than God
he charged that they “went a whoring after’
other gods (ksv) or “played the harlot after”
other gods (Jgs 8:33). The same idea is found
in the NT (Rv 17). These condemnations are
directed toward that inner harlotry which is a
rejection of the Redeemer.
WILLIAM B. TOLAR
Harmon. Place mentioned by the prophet
Amos to which the inhabitants of Bashan
 Harvest

would be exiled (Am 4:3, KJv palace). Harmon Harrow. Agricultural term for implement
occurs only once in the Bible, and there is no or procedure, though no implement corre-
known place with such a name. There are sponding to the modern harrow is known from
problems with the text and numerous emenda- Palestine or Egypt. Job 39:10 speaks of an ox
tions have been proposed. Some Hebrew manu- performing the harrowing, while Isaiah 28:24
scripts render it as a common noun, meaning notes that previously plowed ground was lev-
“palace” (ksv), rather than a proper name. elled in the process. Like the foregoing ref-
The Septuagint renders it “the mountain of .efences, Hosea 10:11 speaks of harrowing in
Rimman,” perhaps referring to a hill east of connection with plowing. Most probably har-
Rimmon (see Jgs 20:45,47; cf. Jos 15:32; 19:13). rowing consisted of branches being pulled be-
hind an animal or plow to smooth the land
Harnepher. Zophah’s son from Asher’s tribe and cover seed.
(1 Chr 7:36). See AGRICULTURE; TOOLS.

Harod. 1. Spring beside which Gideon and Harsha. Ancestor of a group of temple assis-
his army camped before their encounter with tants that returned to Jerusalem with Zerubba-
the Midianites (Jgs 7:1). Perhaps this is the bel after the exile (Ezr 2:52; Neh 7:54).
same spring by which Saul and his army
pitched their tents prior to their battle with Hart. Adult male red deer.
the Philistines (1 Sm 29:1). The spring of Ha- See ANIMALS (DEER).
rod is at ‘Ain Jalud by the northern side of Mt
Gilboa, about two miles E, SE of Zerin. Harum. Aharhel’s father from Judah’s tribe
2. Home of Shammah and Elika, two of Da- (1 Chr 4:8).
vid’s valiant warriors (2 Sm 23:25). In the par-
allel passage (1 Chr 11:27), Elika’s name is Harumaph. Jedaiah’s father. Jedaiah helped
omitted and Shammah (Shammoth) is listed repair the wall of Jerusalem during the time of
as a Harorite instead of a Harodite. Harorite Nehemiah (Neh 3:10).
reflects a later scribal error where the copyist
mistook the Hebrew letter “d”’ for an “r.” Haruphite. Name applied to Shephatiah,
one of David’s ambidextrous warriors from
Harodite. Designation for Shammah and Benjamin’s tribe who joined him at Ziklag (1
Elika, two of David’s mighty men (2 Sm 23:25). Chr 12:5). Whether the name refers to a family
or a place is uncertain.
See Haron #2.

Haruz. Maternal grandfather of Amon, king

Haroeh. Alternate name of Reaiah, Shobal’s of Judah (2 Kgs 21:19).
son, in 1 Chronicles 2:52.
See REAIAH #1. Harvest. The gathering in of a crop, espe-
cially for food. There was no single harvest
time in ancient Israel. Olives were harvested in
Harorite. Alternate description of one of Da- September—November, flax in March—April,
vid’s mighty men (1 Chr 11:27). barley in April-May, and wheat in May—June.
See HaRrop #2. Fruits such as figs and grapes were harvested
at the end of the summer, in August or Septem-
Harosheth-ha-goiim. Town in Canaan ber. The Israelites’ calendar revolved very
which was the home of Sisera. This Canaanite much round the harvest periods (cf. Jgs 15:1;
general led his forces from Harosheth against Ru 1:22).
Deborah and Barak (Jgs 4:2,3,16, KJV Haro- In the OT, harvest was one of the three ma-
sheth of the Gentiles). After his soldiers were jor feasts which the Israelites were required
defeated they fled back to Harosheth (v 16). by the Lord to keep annually (Ex 23:16). In
The exact location is unknown, but it has been doing so they would remember that the rich
identified with both Tell ‘Amr and Tell el- land into which they had been brought from
Harbaj, though not convincingly. Some au- Egypt (Dt 8:7—10) was the gift of God. In offer-
thorities have identified Harosheth with a ing the firstfruits of the harvest (Lv 23:10,11)
place described in the Tell el-Amarna tablets the Israelites showed gratitude and acknowl-
as Muhrashti, but this too is uncertain. edged their dependence on the Lord. More-
over, as the harvest was a gift, they were not
to be selfish in enjoying it, but leave some for
Harp. Stringed instrument. the underprivileged (19:9).
See Music AND MusIcAL INSTRUMENTS (NEBEL). NT references to harvest are largely figura-

929
Hasadiah
tive. In one parable (Mt 13:24—43) harvest rep-
resents the final judgment and the reapers are
angels, gathering in the righteous and exclud-
ing the wicked from the kingdom. In another,
the harvest refers to those who have not yet
heard the gospel, and the “laborers”’ are those
who bring it to them (9:37,38).
See AGRICULTURE; FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL;
VINE, VINEYARD.
Hasadiah. One of Zerubbabel’s sons (i: Chr
3:20).
Hasenuah. xkJv rendering of Hassenuah in
1 Chronicles 9:7
See HASSENUAH.
Hashabiah. 1. Ancestor of Ethon, a Levite
and descendant of Merari. Ethon was a musi-
cian in the temple during the reign of David (1
Chr 6:45).
2. Ancestor of a group of Levites who
helped rebuild the temple after the Babylo-
nian exile (1 Chr 9:14; Neh 11:15).
95e
3. Jeduthun’s son, a Levite and musician in
the temple during the time of David (1 Chr
25:3,19).
4. Head of a group of Hebronites who was
given the position of overseer of Israel west of
the Jordan. He was in charge of both political
and religious activities (1 Chr 26:30).
5. Kemuel’s son, a Levite and head of a
household during the reign of David (1 Chr
ay).
6. Chief of the Levites who participated in
the Passover kept by King Josiah in the king-
dom of Judah (640—609 Bc; 2 Chr 35:9).
7. Merarite Levite who returned to Jerusa-
lem from Babylon with Ezra (Ezr 8:19).
8. Priest who returned to Jerusalem from
Babylon with Ezra (Ezr 8:24).
g. Parosh’s son, who obeyed Ezra’s exhorta-
tion to divorce his pagan wife after the exile
(Ezr 10:25, KJV Malchijah); possibly the same
as Asibias (1 Esd 9:26).
10. Ruler over half the district of Keilah (a
city of Judah in the Shephlah district of
Libnah-Mareshah) who participated in rebuild-
ing the city wall in his district after the exile
(Neh 3:17).
11. Levite who signed Ezra’s covenant of
faithfulness to-God (Neh 10:11).
12. Ancestor of Uzzi, an overseer of Levites
in Jerusalem after the exile (Neh 11:22).
13. Priest and head of a household in Pales-
tine after the exile during the time of the high
priest Joiakim (Neh 12:21).
14. Chief of the Levites and a temple musi-
cian after the exile during the time of Joiakim
the high priest (Neh 12:24); perhaps the same
person as #10 above.
Hashabnah. One of the leaders who signed
Ezra’s covenant of faithfulness to God with Ne-
hemiah and others after the exile (Neh 10:25).
Hashabneiah, Hashabniah. 1. Hattush’s
father. Hattush assisted in rebuilding the
walls of Jerusalem during Nehemiah’s day
(Neh 3:10, KJV Hashabniah).
2. Levite who joined with others in an invo-
cation at the covenant-signing ceremony (Neh
9:5; KJV Hashabniah).
Hashbaddana, Hashbadana. Man, possi-
bly of Levite origin, who stood on Ezra’s left
when Ezra read the Law to the people (Neh
8:4, KJV Hashbadana).
Hashem. Warrior among David’s mighty
men (1 Chr 11:34); alternately called Jashen in
2 Samuel 23:32.
See JASHEN.
 Hathach, Hatach

Hashmonah. One of the places where the Pharisees and the Essenes may have had early
Israelites stopped during the 40 years they roots in the Hasidim movement.
wandered in the wilderness (Nm 33:29,30). Its R.K. HARRISON
location is unknown. See EssENES; JUDAISM; PHARISEES.
See WILDERNESS WANDERINGS.
Hasmonean. Family name of the Jews who
Hashub. KJV alternate spelling of Hasshub. instigated the Jewish revolt against the Greeks
See HASSHUB.
“in 167 BC.
See JUDAISM.
Hashubah. One of Zerubbabel’s sons (1 Chr
3:20). Hasrah. Variant spelling of Harhas, Shal-
lum’s grandfather, in 2 Chronicles 34:22.
Hashum. 1. Ancestor of a family that re- See HARHAS.
turned from Babylon with Zerubbabel after
the exile (Ezr 2:19; 10:33; Neh 7:22). Hassenaah. Alternate name for Senaah in
2. Israelite who stood to Ezra’s left at the Nehemiah 3:3.
reading of the Law (Neh 8:4). See SENAAH.
3. Leader who signed Ezra’s covenant of
faithfulness to God with Nehemiah and others Hassenuah. Ancestor of a Benjamite family
after the exile (Neh 10:18). that returned to Judah with Zerubbabel after
the exile (1 Chr 9:7; kjv Hasenuah; Neh 11:9;
Hashupha. xv alternate spelling of Hashu- KJV Senuah); perhaps alternately called Se-
pha in Nehemiah 7:46. naah (Ezr 2:35; Neh 7:38), and Hassenaah (Neh
See HASUPHA. 3:3).
See SENAAH.
Hasidim. Transliteration of a Hebrew word
meaning “the pious.” The influence of Greek Hasshub. 1. Merari clan leader of Levi's
customs and ways threatened the preservation tribe. Hasshub was the father of Shemaiah, a
of Jewish patterns of life in the 3rd and 4th settler in Jerusalem after the return from cap-
centuries Bc. Jews were required to employ tivity (1 Chr 9:14; Neh 11:15; KJv Hashub).
the Greek language in their daily lives and 2. Pahath-moab’s son, who repaired a sec-
with the language came the influence of Greek tion of the Jerusalem wall and the Tower of
culture. This process was quite apparent in the Ovens during the time of Nehemiah (Neh
Palestine during the 2nd century Bc, and the 3:11, KJV Hashub).
Jewish people responded in two antagonistic 3. Another Hasshub who repaired the Jeru-
ways: one party was friendly to the Greeks; salem wall opposite his house (Neh 3:23, kJv
the other party set as their goal strict adher- Hashub).
ence to the principles of Judaism. The latter 4. Leader who signed Ezra’s covenant of
group, known as “‘the pious” or Hasideans, faithfulness to God with Nehemiah and others
cherished the ideals of responsible covenant after the exile (Neh 10:23, KJv Hashub).
observance (Dt 7:9), and in the Maccabean pe-
riod became militants in their efforts to wor- Hassophereth. Ancestor of a family of tem-
ship God according to the Mosaic law. They ple assistants that returned to Jerusalem with
were probably one of several religious groups Zerubbabel after the exile (Ezr 2:55, kJv Soph-
in Judea. The Apocrypha identifies them by ereth). He is perhaps identifiable with Sophe-
the alternate name of Asideans. When Antio- reth in Nehemiah 7:57.
chus Epiphanes ruled (176-164 Bc), he at-
tempted to abolish Jewish worship and insti- Hasupha. Ancestor of a group of temple as-
tute purely Greek rites; the Hasidim and the sistants that returned to Jerusalem with Ze-
majority of the people rose up to preserve the rubbabel after the exile (Ezr 2:43; Neh 7:46;
old faith. In 1 Maccabees 2:42 they are de- KJV Hashupha). He is perhaps the same person
scribed as “mighty warriors of Israel, every as Gishpa in Nehemiah 11:21.
one who offered himself willingly for the law” See GISHPA, GISPA.
(cf. 1 Mc 1:63; 2:34; 2 Mc 6:18—20). Although
they had accepted the leadership of Judas Hat. See FAsHION AND Dress.
Maccabeus (2 Mc 14:6), the Hasideans later
questioned the Maccabean claims to the high Hathach, Hatach. Eunuch appointed by
priesthood, and their break with Judas contrib- the Persian king, Ahasuerus, to wait on Esther.
uted significantly to their decline. Both the Hathach brought Esther messages from Morde-

OS
Hathath
cai. In this way, Esther learned of Haman’s
plot against the Jews (Est 4:5—10, KJV Hatach).
Hathath. Othniel’s son and the grandson of
Kenaz (1 Chr 4:13).
Hatipha. Ancestor of a family of temple ser-
vants that returned to Jerusalem with Zerub-
babel after the captivity (Ezr 2:54; Neh 7:56).
Hatita. Ancestor of a family of gatekeepers
that returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel
after the exile (Ezr 2:42; Neh 7:45).
Hattil. Forefather of a family of temple ser-
vants that returned to Jerusalem with Zerub-
babel after the exile (Ezr 2:57; Neh 7:59).
Hattush. 1. Shemaiah’s son and a descen-
dant of David (1 Chr 3:22). Huttush returned
from the Babylonian exile with Ezra (Ezr 8:2).
2. Son of Hashabneiah, who helped Nehe-
miah rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Neh
3:10).
3. Priest who returned from Babylon with
Zerubbabel (Neh 12:2). One of his descendants
signed Ezra’s covenant of faithfulness to God
(Neh 10:4). His name is omitted from Nehe-
miah 12:14 through scribal error.
Hauran. Region in northeastern Transjor-
dan mentioned in Ezekiel’s description of the
borders of the land (Ez 47:16,18). In biblical
times it corresponded to the modern Jebel ed-
Druze of the Leja. This area is mentioned as
early as the reign of Shalmaneser III of As-
syria in his description of a military campaign
in 841 Bc. His army marched to Mt Khauranu
after a siege of Damascus and before crossing
Galilee to Mt Carmel.
In 733-732 Bc Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria
conquered Damascus and its surrounding re-
gion and organized it into provinces, one of
which was Khaurina, or Hauran. The same
province is mentioned in the Annals of Ash-
urbanipal during his campaign against the
Arabians (639—637 BC).
The Greek version of the OT calls Hauran
by the name Auranitis. It was evidently under
the control of the Ptolmies, the Macedonian
rulers of Egypt, in the 3rd century Bc as indi-
cated by a reference to Aurana in the Zenon
Papyri. A great deal is said about the area by
Josephus,.who records that Hauran (Auranitis)
and the adjacent area, Trachonitis, were part
of the territory assigned to Herod the Great
and later given to his son Philip.
Havilah (Person). 1. Descendant of Cush (Gn
10:7; 1 Chr 1:9).
2. Descendant of Shem through Joktan (Gn
10:29; 1 Chr 1:23).
032
Havilah (Place). Land in the neighborhood
ef Eden, now unknown but said to be watered
by the River Pishon and containing supplies of
gold, bdellium, and onyx stone (Gn 2:11,12).
The location of Havilah has been a matter of
much dispute. It cannot have any connection
with the Havilah of 1 Samuel 15:7, where Saul
fought against certain Amalekites, because the
locale of the Eden narratives is Mesopotamian
and not Palestinian. On the same basis any
attempt to locate Havilah in southern Arabia,
Somaliland, or India would be mistaken. The
“river” Pishon may have’ been an irrigation
canal, since Akkadian does not have a separate
word for these two different bodies of water,
and the Mesopotamian custom was to name
large irrigation canals as if they were rivers.
This would help to account for the survival of
the name ‘‘Pishon” long after the canal had
disappeared. The Pishon was one of four
branches which the river formed once it left
Eden, hence Havilah must have been to the
north since the narrative assumes an up-
stream perspective. Probably Havilah was in
the general area of the Shinar plain and was
watered by a major irrigation canal. Both
Havilah and the canal have long disappeared.
Havvoth-jair, Havoth-jair. Series of settle-
ments on the edge of Bashan across the Jordan
captured by Jair, according to Numbers 32:41.
Because of their location they fell into the al-
lotment of the half-tribe of Manasseh. The
number of these villages is given in Joshua
13:29,30 as 60, and they are probably included
in the list of cities and towns of 1 Chronicles
2:22,23, although only 23 cities are specified as
belonging to Jair. The kJv rendering as
Bashan-havoth-jair (Dt 3:14) makes the loca-
tion as specific as the Hebrew. In Judges 10:4,
a judge named Jair had 30 sons who con-
trolled 30 cities named Havvoth-jair; but he is
obviously different from the Jair of Numbers
32:41. If his sons controlled only 30 settle-
ments, he himself probably governed the re-
maining 30. In 1 Chronicles 2:21-24, which
reflects a relationship between Judah and Ma-
nasseh, Jair was said to have 23 cities in Gil-
ead when Geshur and Aram captured 60 towns
from the tent-settlements of Jair and Kenath
and its dependencies. While the variant num-
bers presents difficulties, the narrative itself
may be the chronicler’s way of indicating Ju-
dah’s sense of sovereignty over Gilead.
Hawk. See Birps.
Hay. Dried grass used as animal fodder.
See PLANTS (GRaSss).
 Hazer-hatticon

Hazael. King of Syria (843?—796? Bc) who 34:9,10); alternately spelled Hazar-enon in Eze-
came to power by assassinating his ruler Ben- kiel 47:17,18 and 48:1. It is identified with mod-
hadad (2 Kgs 8:7—15) and establishing a new ern Hadr at the base of Mt Hermon.
dynasty. An inscription of Shalmaneser speaks
of Hazael as a ‘“‘son of a nobody,” and men- Hazar-gaddah. City in the southern extrem-
tions that he had “‘seized the throne.” The He- ity of the land assigned to Judah's tribe for an
brew prophet Elijah was told to anoint Hazael inheritance (Jos 15:27). Its site is unknown.
as the next king of Syria (1 Kgs 19:15).
Upon becoming king, Hazael continued the ‘ Hazar-hatticon. KJV spelling of the place
policy of Ben-hadad in resisting the Assyrian Hazar-hatticon in Ezekiel 47:16.
military influence in Palestine. Although most See HAZER-HATTICON.
of Palestine came under Assyrian control in
841 BC, Hazael was able to retain indepen- Hazar-maveth. Descendant of Shem through
dence by withstanding the siege of Damascus. Joktan (Gn 10:26; 1 Chr 1:20) whose progeny
Failing in a final attempt to subdue Damascus lived in southern Arabia (Gn 10:30) in the Wadi
in 837 Bc, the Assyrians withdrew. This al- Hadhramaut. Excavations there revealed a
lowed Hazael the freedom to begin a series of flourishing economy in the 5th century Bc,
attacks against Israel which resulted in Syrian based on frankincense trade. This trade, re-
domination of most of Palestine. vived in the 2nd century Bc, made the area pros-
Toward the end of Jehu’s reign in Israel, Haz- perous and influential.
ael occupied Israelite territory in the hills of
Galilee and east of the Jordan (2 Kgs 10:32). Hazar-shual. Simeonite city located in the
After Jehu’s death, the Syrian king continually southern section of Judah (Jos 15:28; 19:3; 1
harassed Israel, captured much of Philistia, Chr 4:28). It is also listed among those cities
and spared Jerusalem only because Joash, king occupied by the Jews who returned from cap-
of Judah, sued for peace and was willing to pay tivity (Neh 11:27).
heavy tribute (12:17,18). The Syrian oppression
continued during the reign of Hazael’s son un- Hazar-susah, Hazar-susim. City assigned
til Adad-nirari III, king of Assyria, marched to Simeon within the territory allotted to Ju-
into Syria causing Damascus to submit and dah for an inheritance (Jos 19:5); alternately
pay heavy tribute. This took the pressure off called Hazar-susim (1 Chr 4:31). Solomon
Israel and provided opportunity for her to re- probably used it as a transfer point for horses
gain territory taken by Hazael (13:24,25). brought from Egypt for sale to the Hittites
Archaeologists found the remains of a bed and Syrians, as suggested by its name, mean-
at Arslan Tash (Hadathah) which may have ing “horse station.’”’ Hazar-susah has been
been included in the tribute taken from Da- identified with Sbalat Abu Susein, east of the
mascus. Part of the inscription on a piece of Wadi Far‘ah.
ivory inlay from the bed reads ‘‘to our Lord
Hazael.”’ Evidently there was a high level of Hazazon-tamar. City identifiable with En-
culture in Damascus under Hazael. According gedi in 2 Chronicles 20:2. During the time of
to Josephus, Hazael was long remembered for Abraham it was inhabited by Amorites who
his part in building temples in Damascus. were subdued by Chedorlaomer as he and
GEORGE BLANKENBAKER and R.K. HARRISON other eastern kings swept through the area
See SYRIA, SYRIANS. (Gn 14:7, kKIv Hazezon-tamar). It has been sug-
gested that it may be the Tamar which Solo-
Hazaiah. Maaseiah’s descendant from Ju- mon fortified (1 Kgs 9:18), placed by Ezekiel
dah’s tribe, who was one of the leaders in Jeru- southeast of Israel (Ez 47:18,19; 48:28). Wadi
salem after the exile (Neh 11:5). Hasasa has apparently been named after the
ancient site.
Hazar-addar. Town, which with Azmon, de-
fined the southern border of Judah (Nm 34:4), Hazel. xJv mistranslation for almond in
usually identified with Khirbet el-Qudeirat Genesis 30:37.
near Kadesh-barnea. The parallel passage in
See PLANTs (ALMOND).
Joshua 15:3,4 lists four places—Hezron, Addar,
Karka, and Azmon—instead of two. Some
have suggested that Hazar-addar and Addar Hazelelponi. sv spelling of Hazzelelponi,
are the same place; others, that it was re-
Etam’s daughter, in 1 Chronicles 4:3.
named Hezron to distinguish it from Addar. See HAZZELELPONI.

Hazar-enan, Hazar-enon. Place describ- Hazer-hatticon. Boundary marker along Is-

ing the northeast corner of Israel’s border (Nm rael’s northern perimeter (Ez 47:16, KJv Hazar-

933
Hazerim
hatticon). In conjunction with the use
Hazar-enon in this context and in comparison
with Numbers 34:9,10, it appears that Hazer-
hatticon may represent a scribal error for
Hazar-enan.
Hazerim. kJv transliteration of the corre-
sponding Hebrew word in Deuteronomy 2:23.
Instead of the proper name for a city, it may
be a generic term for “villages,” a rendering
favored by the asv and Rsv; NEB has ‘“‘hamlets.”
Hazeroth. Camp of the Israelites during
their wanderings in the desert. It was the
third camp from Mt Sinai (Nm 11:35; 12:16;
33:17,18; Dt 1:1). Here Miriam and Aaron spoke
against Moses for marrying a Cushite woman
and questioned whether God spoke only
through Moses (Nm 12:1,2). The site is proba-
bly modern ‘Ain Khadra, about 30 miles north-
east of Jebel Musa.
See WILDERNESS WANDERINGS.
Hazezontamar. xsv spelling of the city
Hazazon-tamar in Genesis 14:7.
See HAZAZON-TAMAR.
Haziel. Levite and son of Shimei during Da-
vid’s time (1 Chr 23:9).
Hazo. Nahor’s fifth son (Gn 22:22); probably
used as the name for a Nahorite clan. It has
been identified with the name “Hazu” which
designated a mountainous region in northern
Arabia mentioned in an inscription telling of
Esar-haddon’s Arabian campaign.
Hazor. 1. City in northern Palestine in the
territory of Naphtali, called ‘“‘head of all those
kingdoms (of Canaan)” in Joshua 11:10
Asher in Tobit 1:2. Located 5 miles southwest
of Lake Huleh and 10 miles north of the Sea of
Galilee, it is known as Tell el-Qedah (or Tell
Waggas) today. At its peak it numbered 40,000
inhabitants and was by far the largest Canaan-
ite city in area and population. It was a great
commercial center on the trade routes be-
tween Egypt and Babylon.
Hazor was identified by J.L. Porter in 1875,
but the first excavations were made by John
Garstang in 1928. More extensive excavations
were made in 1955-58 and again in 1968 under
the direction of Yigael Yadin. Excavators un-
covered remains of 22 cities, from its begin-
nings around 2700 Bc to its final destruction
around 150 Bc, and have been able to recon-
struct its history based on their findings.
Hazor is first mentioned in the r9th-century
Egyptian Execration Texts. It is given promi-
of
The mound of Hazor.
nence in the archives of Mari (18th century),
being the only Palestinian city to be men-
tioned in these documents. It is frequently
mentioned in Egyptian documents from the
time of Thutmosis III to Ramses II, including
the Tell el-Amarna correspondence.
The OT mentions Hazor a number of
times—first, concerning the conquests of Josh-
ua in which Hazor was completely destroyed
(Jos 11:1-15; 12:19). At that time Hazor was a
Canaanite royal city whose king Jabin headed
a northern Canaanite federation against the in-
vading Israelites. Hazor figures in the revolt
led by Deborah and Barak against another Ja-
bin (a dynastic name?) that resulted in a rout
of Jabin’s forces under Sisera (Jgs 4,5). Hazor
was fortified by Solomon (1 Kgs 9:15); the re-
mains of Solomon’s Hazor are clearly pre-
served. King Ahab (874-853 Bc) also added to
the fortifications; the elaborate water system
Ahab constructed when he rebuilt the whole
upper city and fortified it to withstand long
siege has been found. The city was destroyed
by Tiglath-pileser III about 732 Bc, thus bring-
ing to an end its use as a fortified Israelite city
(2 Kgs 15:29). Fortresses of the Assyrian, Per-
sian, and Hellenistic periods respectively have
and been found in various strata of the city. Hazor
is not mentioned again in the OT, but 1 Macca-
bees 11:67 says Jonathan encamped on the
plain of Hazor while he fought against Deme-
trius (147 Bc). The last mention of Hazor in
ancient sources was by Josephus.
The site of Hazor is composed of two dis-
tinct elements: (1) the tell proper, an area of
about 25 acres, rising about 130 feet above the
surrounding plain; and (2) a large rectangular
enclosure north of the tell about 175 acres in
area, on the west side of which was a beaten
earth wall about 350 feet wide. Temples,
tombs, palaces, and numerous artifacts, found
at different levels, have enabled archaeologists
to reconstruct the history of Hazor through
successive centuries. One temple was very
similar in plan to Solomon’s with an ante-
chamber, holy place, and holy of holies. Ar-
chaeologists believe the city suffered severe de-
934

struction by earthquake during the time of
Jeroboam II (Am 1:1).
Hazor has been of particular interest for
the light it sheds on the conquest of Palestine
described in Joshua. Excavations clearly show
that the great city was destroyed by fire in the
last half of the 13th century Bc, and was never
rebuilt. Archaeological finds support the bibli-
cal picture of a violent conquest under Joshua.
The meager Israelite occupation in the 12th
and 11th century Bc was replaced by a well-
fortified city during the Solomonic era.
The excavations at Hazor have been particu-
larly illuminating for the picture they give of
Canaanite temples and religious practices.
One sanctuary was found with a basalt statue
of a god seated on a throne, holding a goblet
in his right hand. Beside a nearby pillar was a
basalt lion, still keeping watch. Beside the
deity were bowls and dishes apparently used
for sacrificial purposes. Sacrificial high places
have been found with altars and incense
stands. In the antechamber of a temple whose
pattern has been compared to Solomon’s was
found a deep trench in which a standing lion
of basalt almost six and one half feet long had
been buried.
2. Town in southern Judah (Jos 15:23). It is
perhaps el-Jebariyeh, on the Wadi Umm Eth-
nan near Bir Hafir, about 9 miles southeast of
el-‘Auja.
3. Another town in southern Judah, called
Hazor-hadattah (Jos 15:25). The Ksv translates
as separate cities, ‘‘Hazor, Hadattah.”’
See HAZOR-HADATTAH.
4. Alternate name for Kerioth-hezron
15:25), probably situated in southern Judah.
The kJv translates as separate cities, ‘‘Kerioth,
and Hezron.”
See KERIOTH #1.
5. Town: north of Jerusalem occupied by
Benjamites after their return from exile (Neh
11:33). The name has been preserved in Khir-
bet Hazzur, west of Beit Hanina.
6. Place somewhere in the Arabian desert
east of Palestine, called a kingdom of his ora-
cle of judgment against Kedar and Hazor (Jer
49:28—33).
F.B. Huey, JR.
Hazor-hadattah. One of the cities located
in the southern extremity of Judah, near the
border of Edom (Jos 15:25). The kJv trans-
lates the term as two different cities, ‘“‘Hazor
and Hadattah.” The Aramaic adjective ‘“Ha-
dattah” indicates this as a settlement from
Hazor, but this is unsure. Its location
uncertain.
Hazzelelponi. Etam’s daughter from
dah’s tribe (1 Chr 4:3, KJV Hazelelponi).
Head
Head. Term with many figurative uses in
Scripture. Frequently it designates promi-
nence or authority. The OT commonly uses
parts of the body to refer to the whole person
(e.g., Dt 6:5). Thus, the number of soldiers in
an army or the inhabitants of a nation could
be determined by a ‘“‘head count” (Nm 1:2).
.-° To raise one’s head was considered an act
of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3;
27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is
58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word
is used metaphorically of mountain peaks (Gn
8:5), the tops of buildings (Gn 11:4) or trees (2
Sm 5:24), and river sources (Gn 2:10). The term
was commonly used to designate positions of
political, military, or familial authority. In
this sense the “head” exercised control over
all those subjected to him (Jgs 10:18; 1 Sm
1531.73-Psi18:435;/18 7:8,9;.Jer41:7; Hos:1751).: Dae
vid was called the “defender of the head” (ksv)
when he served as the bodyguard of Achish (1
Sm 28:2; cf. Jgs 9:53; Ps 68:21).
Greek philosophers used the image of the
body to represent the universe. The head of
this body—called Zeus or Reason—was consid-
ered responsible for the creation and suste-
nance of the remaining members (celestial be-
ings, humans, animals, plants, and inanimate
objects). The universe or “body” owed its exis-
tence to the “head.”
Between 460 Bc (the date usually ascribed
to the first writings of Hippocrates) and aD 200
(the death of Galen, who developed Hippo-
crates’ findings), Greek medical science came
to understand the head as the seat of intelli-
(Jos gence. The body was able to operate efficiently
only because the brain was capable of inter-
preting data received from the body (eyes,
ears, skin, and so on), and because it was able
to send out appropriate impulses to the vari-
ous members of the body, based upon the data
received. The ability of the brain to interpret
and direct made the existence of the body com-
pletely dependent upon it.
In the NT, the term refers to the actual hu-
man head (Mt 5:36; 6:17; 14:8; 26:7; Mk 6:27;
14:3; Lk 7:46; Jn 13:9; 20:7); to apocalyptic be-
ings (Rv 1:14; 4:4; 12:1) and animals (Rv
9:7,17,19; 12:3); and appears in such expres-
sions as ‘‘to heap coals of fire upon the head,”
meaning to return good for evil (Mt 5:44; Rom
12:20); to ‘shear’ or ‘‘anoint the head,” ex-
pressing a vow (Acts 21:24); or “to lay down
the head,” meaning to sleep (Mt 8:20; Lk 9:58).
The apostle Paul drew from the OT meta-
phorical understanding of the term to express
is the authority of God over Christ, Christ over
man, and man over woman (1 Cor 11:3—16; cf.
Eph 5:23). In the light of these relationships,
Ju- Paul encouraged women at Corinth to wear
veils in worship. The veil gave a woman the
935
Headband
authority to worship as an equal with men
before God. The term is used again with the
meaning ‘‘authority” to express the lordship
of Christ over the universe (Eph 1:21,22; Col
2:10).
Paul used the image of the head and body
to express the relationship between Christ and
his church (Eph 4:15; 5:23b; cf. 1 Cor 12:12—27).
In addition to the OT sense, the contributions
of medical science in Paul’s day may provide
insight into this image—for Christ is not only
the dominant ruler over the church, but he is
also the dynamic force that provides its direc-
tion and unity. The ability of the church to
exist and the focal point of its activity are
rooted in the work of its “head,’’ Jesus Christ.
Bibliography. J. Bannerman, The Church of Christ;
K. Barth, Church Dogmatics, vol 3, pp 309-16; H. Ridderbos,
Paul: An Outline of His Theology; H.W. Wolf, Anthropology of
the OT, pp 40-58.
Headband. Sce FAsHION AND DREss.
Head Covering. Something used to cover
one’s head either for protection or for religious
reasons.
Men wore either a cap, turban, or head-
scarf to protect against the sun. The cap was
similar to a modern skullcap and was some-
times worn by the poor. The turban (Is 3:23)
was made of thick linen wound around the
head with the ends tucked inside the folds.
The priest’s turban had a plate strapped to it
bearing the inscription ‘Holy to the Lord”’
(Ex 28:36). The head-scarf was made from a
Three Egyptian
ceremonial headdresses
and five styles of Greek
headdresses.
square yard of cloth, folded in half to form a
triangle. The sides fell over the shoulders and
the V-point down the back, and it was held in
place by a headband made of cord. About the
and century Bc male Jews began to wear phy-
lacteries on their foreheads, small leather
boxes containing special scripture passages,
at morning prayers and at festivals, but not
on the sabbath.
Women were often veiled in public, al-
though this custom changed over the centu-
ries. Thus Rebekah was unveiled when she
first saw Isaac (Gn 24:65). In NT times, women
usually wore veils (1 Cor 11:6). Women also
wore a cloth similar to the head-scarf, but the
fabric was different in quality and color from
that worn by men. It was often pinned over a
stiff hat and set with ornaments. If a woman
was married, these and other important coins
covered the front of the hat and constituted
her dowry (cf. Lk 15:8—10). Women also
adorned their heads with an elaborate ‘“‘plait-
ing’ of their hair, prompting Peter to warn
Christian women about too much concern
with external beauty (1 Pt 3:3,4).
See FASHION AND DRESS.
Heal, Healing. To make sound or whole.
The OT provides the proper background for a
Christian understanding of the concept of heal-
ing. In the OT the basic point is made that
God is the healer of his people. In Exodus
15:22-26, after God has delivered his people
from Egypt, led them through the sea, and
sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of
 Heal, Healing

withered hand (3:1—6), the multitudes by the

sea (vv 7—12), the Gerasene demoniac (5:1—20),
the woman with a hemorrhage, and Jairus’
daughter (vv 21-43). Jesus then commissioned
the 12 to proclaim repentance, to cast out de-
mons, and to heal the sick (6:7—13); and he
himself continued with healings at Gennesaret
._Avv 53-56), casting out the unclean spirit from
the daughter of the Syrophoenician woman
(7:24-30), healing the deaf and dumb man (vv
31-37), the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22—26),
the boy possessed with a dumb spirit (9:14-
29), and blind Bartimaeus (10:46—52).
Certainly healing is an important aspect of
Jesus’ ministry. Those healings expressed not
only his compassion for the suffering but also
constituted a revelation of his person. This is
brought out by the climactic statement of Je-
sus in healing the paralytic, “that you may
know that the Son of man has authority on
earth to forgive sins’ (2:10). It also seems that
Mark intended his readers to understand that
the healing of the deaf and dumb man (7:31—
37) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22—26)
symbolize the awakening of spiritual under-
standing in the disciples of who Jesus is. It is
also significant that Mark has placed the heal-
ing of Bartimaeus (10:46—52) immediately af-
ter Jesus’ third announcement of his own
coming death (vv 32-34) and the disciples’
third failure to understand that his being the
Messiah entailed the necessity of suffering (vv
35-45).
Matthew also portrays Jesus as teaching,
preaching, and healing (4:23—25), and parallels
the accounts in Mark, except the healing of the
demoniac in the synagogue (Mk 1:23—28) and
A headcovering from Ur.
the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22—26). How-
ever, according to his special purpose and
himself as their “healer.”’ This refers primarily structure, Matthew has placed many of Jesus’
to physical sustenance, but it points to the healings together in a ‘‘mighty works’”’ section
more encompassing concept of God sustaining (chs 8,9) following and complementing the
his people in an eternal relationship with him- “great words’ (‘‘sermon”’) section (chs 5—7).
self. In a similar manner Deuteronomy 32:39 Matthew views Jesus’ healings as directly ful-
speaks of God as the One who heals. The con- filling the OT, as he states in 8:17. The unique
text in Deuteronomy implies that this healing way in which the healings of 8:16 are spoken
power derives from the fact that God is God. of as fulfilling Isaiah 53:4 seems to indicate
This concept of God as the healer is echoed that Jesus’ power over sickness derives in
throughout the OT by the psalmists (Pss 6:2; some way from his death for sin which was to
41:4; 103:3) and prophets (Is 19:22; Jer 17:14; be accomplished at the end of his ministry.
Hos 7:1; Zec 11:16). It is also interesting that Matthew, in relat-
The NT significantly emphasizes Jesus as ing Jesus’ healing of the multitudes by the sea
the healer. Mark portrays him as a teacher (12:15—22), cites Isaiah 42:1-4. This OT pas-
and healer in his opening account of Jesus’ sage speaks of God’s servant anointed with the
ministry in Capernaum with the healing of the Spirit to proclaim justice to the nations. As
demoniac, Peter’s mother-in-law, the sick used by Matthew, the quotation explains why
brought to him in the evening, and the leper Jesus commanded those healed not to make
(1:21-45). Indeed, healing sickness and casting him known. Jesus did not want too much pub-
out demons characterize Jesus’ ministry as licity about himself to thwart God’s plan for
Mark presents in rapid succession his healing him as the Suffering Servant who was to bring
of the paralytic (2:1-12), the man with the forth justice or salvation to the nations. This

937
Healing, Gift of

action demonstrates that Jesus’ healings are powered by the Spirit. The primary focus in
revelations of his person. ~Acts is on proclamation as 1:8 indicates. How-
Again another quotation from Isaiah (6:9, ever, the healing of the lame beggar in Jerusa-
10) in Matthew 13:14 brings out the fact that lem indicates that the disciples were able to
healing is understood primarily in the spiri- exercise the power of healing in the name of
tual sense of hearing Jesus’ proclamation of Jesus (3:12—16; 4:8—-16). The healing is clearly
the kingdom of God. intended te point to and glorify the person of
Further indication of Matthew’s special in- Jesus and lead to faith in him (3:12—16,17—26).
terest in Jesus’ healing in his inclusion of the The balanced twofold ministry of the disciples
healing of the blind and lame (21:14—16) in may be seen in the prayer of 4:29,30. “Lord,
his account of Jesus’ cleansing the temple look upon their threats, and grant to thy ser-
(21:12—17). vants to speak thy word with all boldness,
Luke, like Matthew and Mark, portrays Je- while thou stretchest out thy hand to heal,
sus preaching and healing. After the account and signs and wonders are performed through
of the birth of John and Jesus and the ministry the name of thy holy servant Jesus.”
of John the Baptist, Luke presents Jesus The ministry of Philip in Samaria was de-
preaching in Nazareth (4:16—30). Here in the voted to proclaiming Christ (Acts 8:5) and heal-
synagogue of his hometown Jesus himself af- ing the sick and those with unclean spirits (v
firms, using a quotation from Isaiah 61:1,2, 7). Peter heals Aeneas and raises Tabitha
that the Spirit has anointed him to proclaim (9:34,40), and in each case the effects are that
good news and to announce release for the cap- many believe in the Lord (vv 35,42). Paul is
tives and a recovery of sight for the blind (v also described as preaching the gospel (14:7),
18). The healing aspect of Jesus’ ministry occu- healing (vv 8-11; 28:8), casting out spirits
pies an important place in the rest of the Book (16:18), and raising a dead man (20:10).
of Luke. Indeed, Luke has all the healing inci- The letters of the NT say little about heal-
dents noted by Mark, except for those in Mark ing. First Corinthians speaks of the gifts of
6:45-8:26, which have no parallels in Luke. healing (12:9,28). The implication is that such
However, Luke’s opening scene in Nazareth gifts are intended to be part of the ministry of
seems to underscore that Jesus’ healing is to the church, but the context indicates that not
be understood, not as merely expressing Jesus’ all are given such gifts (v 30) and that it is God
compassion for the needy, but primarily as a who sovereignly distributes gifts for the good
sign of the arrival of the kingdom of God as of the body.
promised in the Scriptures. James indicates that a believer who is ill
This emphasis may be seen in the distinc- should request the church to pray for his heal-
tively Lukan account of the commissioning of ing (Jas 5:14—16; cf. Heb 12:13). The clear impli-
the 70 (10:1—12), where Jesus instructs them to cation is that God is willing and able to minis-
heal the sick in any city they enter and an- ter to his people for healing today.
nounce to the people there that the kingdom HOoBERT K. FARRELL
of God has come near to them (vv 8-10). Bibliography. E. Frost, Christian Healing; A.J. Gordon,
The first three Gospels take up the OT un- The Ministry of Healing; M.T. Kelsey, Healing and Christian-
derstanding of God as the healer of his people ity in Ancient Thought and Modern Times; K. Seybold and
and see this as fulfilled in Jesus. This fulfill- U.B. Mueller, Sickness and Healing; R.A. Torrey, Divine
Healing.
ment signifies the presence of God’s reign in
the ministry of Jesus and points to him as the
One through whom God is at work in the Healing, Gift of. See SprriruaL Girts.
midst of his people.
John’s Gospel has only four healing inci- Heart. Vital bodily organ; however, all mod-
dents: the official’s son (4:46—54), the man ill ern assumptions concerning circulation of the
for 38 years (5:1-18), the man born blind (9:1— blood, the intellectual and directive functions
41), and the climactic raising of Lazarus in (ch of brain and nervous system, must be set aside
11). The special purpose and structure of this when considering Scripture’s remarkably con-
Gospel indicate that these incidents are care- sistent physiological language. “Heart” (He-
fully related to the accompanying discourses brew léb; Greek kardia) occurs approximately
and are clearly intended as signs revealing the 1000 times, often disguised in translation, and
person of Jesus. This heightened emphasis on the range of meaning is immense.
healings as revelatory signs in this Gospel con- Physical Heart. That the beating heart in-
firms the similar intention in the first three dicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37,38
Gospels. despite the delay in Nabal’s death; perhaps
The Acts of the Apostles tells of the contin- “heart” means “midriff” (cf. 2 Sm 18:14; 2 Kgs
uation of Jesus’ ministry through the Spirit at 9:24). Physical food and wine affect the heart
work in his disciples, though now they are em- (Jgs 19:5; Ps 104:15; Acts 14:17), and the heart

938

can “faint,” and “tremble.’’ The heart’s posi-
,
tion yields an obvious metaphor for ‘‘the cen-
ter” (Dt 4:11; Mt 12:40).
Psychological Heart. The heart attends
intellectually (e.g., Jer 12:11); it also per-
ceives (Jn 12:40), understands (1 Kgs 3:9), de-
bates (Mk 2:6), reflects (Lk 2:19), remembers
(Lk 2:51), thinks (Dt 8:17), imagines (Lk 1:51),
is wise (Eccl 1:17 KJv) or mad (Eccl 9:3), has
technical skill (Ex 28:3 Ksv), and much
more.
Emotionally, the heart experiences intoxi-
cated merriment (1 Sm 25:36), gladness (Is
30:29), joy (Jn 16:22), sorrow (Neh 2:2), anguish
(Rom 9:2), bitterness (Prv 14:10), anxiety (1 Sm
4:13), despair (Eccl 2:20), love (2 Sm 14:1),
trust (Ps 112:7), affection (2 Cor 7:3), lust (Mt
5:28), callousness (Mk 3:5), hatred (Lv 19:17),
fear (Gn 42:28), jealousy (Jas 3:14), desire (Rom
10:1), discouragement (Nm 32:9), sympathy
(Ex 23:9), anger (Dt 19:6 KJv), irresolution (2
Chr 13:7 KJv), and much besides.
Volitionally, the heart can purpose (1 Cor
4:5), incline to (1 Sm 14:7), prompt (2 Kgs 12:4;
cf. Prv 4:23), be steadfast (Acts 11:23), willing
(Ex 35:22), or willful (Ez 13:2 kJv), contrive evil
(Acts 5:4), or follow its “treasure” (Mt 6:21).
Morally, the heart can be gentle, lowly (Mt
11:29), holy (1 Thes 3:13), faithful (Neh 9:8),
upright (Ps 97:11), pure, singleminded (Jas
4:8), clean (Acts 15:9), loving toward God (Mk
12:30) and others (1 Pt 1:22), or hardened or
sensitive (Ez 11:19). Scripture’s emphasis falls
upon the heart’s evil (Gn 6:5 and throughout),
as self-deceiving (Jas 1:26), deceitful (Jer 17:9),
avaricious (Mt 6:19—21), lustful (Mt 5:28), arro-
gant (Is 9:9), impious (Acts 7:51), perverse (Ps
1o1:4), and impenitent (Rom 2:5). Nothing de-
files a man but his own heart (Mk 7:18,19).
Yet, as conscience the heart can smite (1
Sm 24:5; cf. Acts 2:37). Moreover, out of the
heart can come good (Lk 6:45, 8:15). Even
when frustrated by circumstances or by fear,
the heart’s good intention remains good, its
evil intent, bad (1 Kgs 8:18; Mt 5:28).
Being so complex, man’s heart is sadly di-
vided, and Scripture often extols a perfect,
whole, true (i.e., united) heart (Gn 20:5; Acts
8:37 mg; Ps 86:11). For “heart” signifies the
total inner self, a person’s hidden core of being
(x Pt 3:4), with which one communes, which
one “pours out” in prayer, words, and deeds
(Gn 17:17; Ps 62:8; Mt 15:18,19). It is the genu-
ine self, distinguished from appearance, pub-
lic position, and physical presence (1 Sm 16:7;
2 Cor 5:12; 1 Thes 2:17). And this ‘‘heart-self’”’
has its own nature, character, disposition, ‘‘of
man” or “of beast’ (Dn 7:4 KJV; 4:16; cf. Mt
12:33-37).
Religious Heart. The heart is especially
important in biblical religion. The mystery of
939
Heart
the hidden self is fully known to God and to
Christ (Jer 17:10; Lk 9:47; Rom 8:27; and
throughout), and the heart is the seat of our
knowledge of God (2 Cor 4:6). The state of
heart governs the vision of God (Mt 5:8); from
the heart one speaks to God (Ps 27:8); the heart
is the locus of divine indwelling (2 Cor 1:22;
Gal 4:6; Eph 3:17).
On the other hand, moral evil in the heart
is seen in biblical perspective as sin against
God. Senseless hearts are darkened, often se-
cretly idolatrous, far from God, “not right” be-
fore God (Dt 29:18,19; Mt 15:8; Acts 8:21; Rom
1:21). Yet the Lord will not despise a broken,
contrite heart (Ps 51:17); if when one’s heart is
turned toward God, he promises to make it
sensitive to divine things, renewed and puri-
fied (Dt 4:29; 2 Kgs 23:25; Ps 51:10; Jl 2:13; Ez
36:25-27). God’s law shall then be written on
the heart, as the inward guide and incentive
(Jer 31:33; Heb 8:10; cf. 2 Cor 3:2,3).
In Christian terms, such transformation in-
volves believing the gospel from the “honest
and good heart” that provides fruitful soil for
the Word of God (Lk 8:15; Rom 1o:9). The
true heart draws near to God, loves him with
all its intellect, feeling, and will (Lk 10:27;
Heb 10:22). Then’ God becomes to the heart
strength, reward, renewal, grace, peace, and
joy (Ps 73:26; Is 57:15; Acts 2:46; Phil 4:7; Heb
13:9). So the ancient ideal becomes possible
again, that of being ‘‘a man after God’s own
heart” (1 Sm 13:14; Acts 13:22).
The high value which Scripture places
upon such heart-religion does not discourage
corporate worship and prayer, nor the uniting
of individual hearts in spiritual fellowship (Jer
32:39; Ez 11:19; Acts 4:32). But it is directed
against the external legalism, which judges ac-
cording to visible outward acts rather than in-
ward dispositions (Mt 5:21—48); against the
heartless “hardness” of prevailing regulations
concerning the sabbath, marriage, religious ob-
ligations (Mk 3:5; Mt 19:8; 23:4); against hypoc-
risy and self-display that belie the true state of
heart (Is 29:13; Jer 3:10; Mt 6:1—18).
One fundamental assumption of Scripture
is that the human heart is constantly open to
influences from above and from below. God
would “lay hold of [human] hearts” (Ez 14:5),
“incline hearts” to his truth and ways (Ps
119:36), “put into... hearts to carry out his
purposes,” both for judgment and for salva-
tion (Rv 17:17). The alternative to divine ‘“‘pos-
session” is the demonic influence that can
drag the heart down to utmost evil (Jn 13:2;
Acts 5:3). The same heart that can be “‘deceit-
ful above all things, and desperately wicked”
(Jer 17:9) can also become the shrine of divine
love and the Spirit (Rom 5:5).
In that openness to infinite good or evil, the
Hearth
scriptural dimensions of the human heart are
revealed. R. E. O. WHITE ~the will of God, from the superstitious hea-
Bibliography. R. Bultmann, Theology of the NT, vol 1,
pp 220-27; R. Jewett, Paul’s Anthropological Terms; A.R.
Johnson, The Vitality of the Individual in the Thought of An- important use of the term “heaven” is its ref-
cient Israel; H.W. Wolf, Anthropology of the OT, pp 40-58.
Hearth. See Homes AND DWELLINGS.
Heath. Type of evergreen shrub; KJv mis-
translation for shrub and for wild ass in Jere-
miah 17:6 and 48:6, respectively.
See PLANTS (JUNIPER).
Heaven. Realm (or realms) designated by a
Hebrew term used to represent the sky and
air, and also heaven. The form of the word in
Hebrew is dual (implying two of something).
Although this dual form may only represent
an ancient device for expressing the plural, it
is supposed by some to imply the existence of
a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and
a spiritual heaven.
The OT. The OT writers viewed the physi-
cal heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a
great arch supported on foundations and pil-
lars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the
earth, with rain descending through its doors
(Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation
about the physical heavens is set forth in
Psalms 8 and 19:1—6. Elsewhere the OT speaks
of the atmospheric heavens as the region of
the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt
11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13, mg),
frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn
1:26,30). It is also the locale of such destructive
forces as hail (Jos 10:11) and fire and brim-
stone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the
vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in
which the elements, clouds, and tempests
gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58)
is continued.
In addition to the atmospheric regions, the
Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes
stellar space, which ultimately embraces the
universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar
heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inex-
pressibly glorious manifestations of God’s
handiwork without having any power or vital-
ity of their own. These include the sun, moon,
planets, and stars, which were but lights in
the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5).
As such; they were regarded as unworthy of
worship because God had, by his own will and
grace, made humans superior to them. In fact,
the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to wor-
ship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and
goddesses who represent them (Jer 44:17—25),
or to participate in astrological speculation (Is
47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordi-
nance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed
940
the heavenly bodies as made and moved by
then, who worshiped them.
From the theological viewpoint, the most
erence to the spiritual domain, the abode of
God himsélf. Numerous passages of Scripture
speak of God as “the high and lofty One who
inhabits eternity” (Is 57:15), who has a parallel
dwelling on earth and in heaven (1 Kgs 8:12),
and of whom Solomon said, “Behold, heaven
and the highest heaven cannot contain thee”
(v 27). It is that abode to which the Lord Jesus
Christ said he was about to return (Jn 14:2; cf.
Pss 61:4; 65:4). There is where the true taberna-
cle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle
was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1—5). That
abode of God was in view when the apostle
Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2).
As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God
himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).
The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see
also KJv 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the lit-
eral English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for
the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some
have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s ex-
pression, “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2),
which parallels the classical Greek conception
of three heavens. This notion was _ subse-
quently adopted by the Roman Catholic medi-
eval church and in the Latin form of Coelum
Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum, and Coelum Empy-
reum. The basic concept followed the Greek
view, and coincides with the OT view of the
physical and spiritual heavens as indicated
earlier. Those who follow this approach tend
to regard this third heaven as the place
reached by the souls of the blessed as they
pass through the two lower regions of the at-
mosphere and outer space containing the celes-
tial bodies, and enter into the uttermost
reaches of the universe.
The NT. The Lord Jesus indicated that
heaven is the dwelling place of God, or the
place from which his presence is made mani-
fest (cf. Mt 6:9; Rv 11:1—3); the Scriptures tell
how Christ came from heaven to declare the
glory of God (Jn 1:14,18); Jesus, during his
earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he
had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33—51); and
on at least three occasions utterances from
heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16,17;
17:5; Jn 12:28). In the upper room, Jesus said
that he was about to return to his Father’s
house and that it was a genuine place (Jn
14:1—6). In his high priestly prayer (ch 17), he
tells of his eternal preexistent glory with the
Father in heaven. After his ascension in Acts
1:6—-11, two angels reminded the disciples that
Jesus would return again from heaven. This
was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor

15:1-11; Eph 4:7—16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated
in the summary of the teachings of the NT
known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the rela-
tionship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode
of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT
and is inseparable from the gospel message
itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of
God” that Christ ever lives to make interces-
sion for those who have come to him by faith
(Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).
Paul presents one of the fullest statements
in Scripture of the relationship of the believer
to heaven. He asserts that in heaven the be-
liever will be made conformable to the glori-
ous body of Jesus Christ (Phil 3:20,21). In so
doing Paul confirms John’s teaching (1 Jn
3:2,3) and adds that the believer’s true citizen-
ship is in heaven. The term “‘citizenship”’ (kJv)
or “commonwealth” (Rsv) implies a colony of
individuals who live in a foreign country
while observing the laws of their homeland
instead of the land in which they reside (cf.
Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is
quite clear: They are to live according to the
moral and ethical principles of God as re-
vealed from heaven regardless of the stan-
dards proclaimed by the world. They have
been raised together with Christ and have
been instructed to “seek the things that are
above, where Christ is, seated at the right
hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has
blessed his followers “with every spiritual
blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The
expression ‘‘in the heavenly places” is peculiar
to Ephesians (see 1:3,20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), sug-
gesting that the blessings of the spiritual
world are not relegated to some remote future
time or place, but can be perceived by faith
here and now. That is why believers are said
to have been made partakers already in the
heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).
In addition to the absence of tears, sorrow,
pain, and death, there will be no night or
need of light in heaven, because the Son of
God will be there (Rv 21:4,27; 22:3,5), and in
the resurrected state there will be no marry-
ing or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27—38). At
least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22—24; Heb
11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:1), were translated
directly into the presence of God—into
heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about
the third heaven, John was called into heaven
(Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be popu-
lated (cf. 1 Thes 4:16,17; Rv 19:1). All believers
will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resur-
rection bodies, which they will receive when
the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes
4:16,17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give
treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1
Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12;
1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10). Meanwhile, the souls
Heberites
of the redeemed abide with Christ in heaven
(2 Cor 5:8,9).
See ABRAHAM’s Bosom; NEW HEAVENS AND NEW
EARTH; PARADISE.
Bibliography. J.S. Bonnell, Heaven and Hell; PJ. Krieft,
Heaven: The Heart's Deepest Longing; R. Lewis, A New Vision
of Another Heaven; A.T. Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet;
D.E. Moody, Heaven; K. Schilder, Heaven: What is it?; W.M.
Smith, The Biblical Doctrine of Heaven.
Heavenlies, The. Term unique to Paul’s let-
ter to the Ephesians, also translated “heavenly
places” or “realms,” and referring to the
super-earthly upper regions of the air. Since
the term “in the heavenlies” carried with it
associations from pagan cultic vocabulary, it
was perhaps used by the apostle in an apolo-
getic manner.
The heavenly places indicates the sphere
where the risen Christ has been seated at the
right hand of God in a position of authority,
power, and dominion, reigning as conqueror
and ruler high above the heavenly world (Eph
1:20,21). Other usage points to the idea of the
realized hope of those who are in Christ, in
that believers have already been blessed with
“every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies” (v
3) and are raised with Christ, made to sit with
him in the heavenlies (2:6). The church will
make known the wisdom of God to the princi-
palities and powers in the heavenlies (3:10).
She will thus participate in the victory over
the spiritual hosts of wickedness, also present
in the heavenly places (6:12).
See HEAVEN; PRINCIPALITIES AND POWERS.
Heavens, New. See NEw HEAVENS AND NEw
EARTH.
Heave Offering. Portions of the sacrifices
and offerings set aside for the Lord and for the
priests.
See OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES.
Heber. 1. Descendant of Jacob through Ash-
er and Beriah (Gn 46:17) and father of the fam-
ily of Heberites (Nm 26:45; 1 Chr 7:31,32).
2. Husband of Jael, the woman who decep-
tively killed Sisera, known as Heber the Ke-
nite (Jgs 4:11-21; 5:24).
3. Judahite, Mered’s son and the father of
Soco (1 Chr 4:18).
4. Elpaal’s son from Judah’s tribe (1 Chr
8:17).
5. KJV spelling for Eber in 1 Chronicles 5:13;
8:22; and Luke 3:35.
See EBER #S 1,2,4.
Heberites. Descendants of Heber in the fam-
1 Pt ily of Jacob (Nm 26:45).
See HEBER #1.
941
Hebrew Language
Hebrew Language. See BusiicaL
GUAGES.
Hebrews, Letter to the. One of the most
profound and enigmatic books in the NT. The
identity of its author, the time of its writing,
and the people and place to which it was sent
are all shrouded in mystery. Yet in spite of the
uncertainty, Hebrews remains one of the most
timely and relevant books in the Bible. Some
300 years ago John Owen, the English Puritan,
appropriately remarked: “No doubt the Epis-
tle next in importance to Romans is this to the
Hebrews.” The letter is both doctrinal and
practical, theological and pastoral. In short, it
builds a compelling case for the finality of
Christianity.
Yet in addition to the excellence of its doc-
trine and apologetic, Hebrews reflects the im-
passioned concern of a pastor’s heart. Those
who have experienced God’s ultimate work of
grace in Christ are urged to hold fast to God’s
final word of revelation in his Son.
Unlike most other NT epistles, Hebrews
does not begin like a letter. There is no intro-
ductory salutation, the writer is not identified,
and no mention is made of those to whom the
document is addressed. The author character-
izes the work as a “word of exhortation”
(13:22) which suggests a sermon or oral homily
(cf. Acts 13:15). The phrase ‘“‘time would
me to tell” (Heb 11:32) suggests a spoken
rather than a written discourse. Yet although
the general character of Hebrews is sermonic,
its conclusion is that of a conventional letter
(13:22-25).
Some have detected a gradual transition in
the document from an ‘essay’ to a more specifi-
cally ‘epistolary’ form (cf. 2:1; 4:1; 13:22-25).
The evidence thus suggests that the author
may have cast the original homiletic ‘word of
exhortation” into letter form when the need to
communicate in writing with his Christian
friends became urgent.
Author. Who wrote Hebrews is not di-
rectly stated in the letter. Since the late 2nd
century, various authorities have linked
document with the apostle Paul. Clement of
Alexandria (d. 220) theorized that Paul wrote
the letter in Hebrew for Jews and that Luke
translated it into Greek. However, this sug-
gestion has not been widely received by mod-
ern scholars. Clement’s pupil Origen (d. 254)
stated more generally that the thoughts of the
letter are Pauline, but that the style is unlike
that of the known writings of the apostle.
Other early authorities such as Jerome (d. 419)
and Augustine (d. 430), persuaded that canon-
icity demanded apostolic authorship, likewise
affirmed that Paul was the author.
Yet a number of factors argue against the
Lan- Pauline authorship of Hebrews. The anonym-
“ity of the letter is contrary to the consistent
pattern of Paul’s introduction in the opening
salutation of his letters. Moreover, Hebrew 2:3
indicates the writer was discipled by eyewit-
nesses of the Lord. Yet Paul insists that his
knowledge of Christ was gained from an en-
counter with the risen Christ (cf. Gal 1:12). F.F.
Bruce evaluates the authorship of Hebrews as
follows: ‘“We may say with certainty that the
thought of the epistle is not Paul’s, the lan-
guage is not Paul’s, and, the technique of OT
quotations is not Paul’s.”’
Early Christian tradition suggests that Bar-
nabas may have written Hebrews. According
to Tertullian (d. 220), many early authorities
believed that Barnabas was responsible for
the letter. Acts 4:36 speaks of him as a “‘son of
exhortation” (cf. Heb 13:22). Furthermore, as a
Levite, Barnabas would have been familiar
with the Jewish sacrificial ritual so prominent
in the letter.
Luther was the first to suggest that He-
brews may have been penned by Apollos, “an
excellent man of learning, who had been a dis-
ciple of the apostles and learned much from
them, and who was very well versed in Scrip-
ture.” As a native of Alexandria (Acts 18:24),
Apollos would have been familiar with the ty-
pological interpretation evident in Hebrews.
fail Clearly Apollos was the sort of man who was
qualified to write Hebrews.
Other names have been suggested as possi-
ble authors. Calvin surmised that either Luke
or Clement of Rome was responsible for the
letter. It is noted that the Greek of Hebrews
resembles the language and style of the third
Gospel and Acts. Others theorize that Hebrews
may have been written by Silas, a Jewish
Christian from Jerusalem who would have
been thoroughly familiar with the levitical rit-
ual. Silas is described as one of the ‘‘chief men
among the brethren’”’ (Acts 15:22). He was a co-
worker with Paul in the gentile mission, and
apparently was known in Rome as well as in
Jerusalem (1 Pt 5:13).
the In conclusion, it is probable that the author
of Hebrews was a second-generation Jewish-
Christian, a master of classical Greek whose
Bible was the Septuagint, conversant with
first-century Alexandrian philosophy, and a
creative apologist for the Christian faith. As to
the identity of that author we can affirm no
more than Origen in the 3rd century: ‘But as
to who actually wrote the Letter, God alone
knows.”
Historical Background. The very early
title of the letter, ‘To Hebrews,” suggests that
the book concerns Jewish Christians living in
the dispersion. The letter itself offers a few
hints of the historical circumstances surround-
942
 Hebrews, Letter to the

ing its composition. Not long after becoming (quoting Ps 95:8—11) and suggest that the argu-
Christians, the readers of the letter were ex- ment of Israel’s 40 years wandering in the wil-
posed to severe persecution (10:32—36). During derness would be more forceful if the 4oth
their trial the new believers endured imprison- year from the Lord’s death was approaching.
ment, confiscation of personal property, and Such a scheme of reckoning would date He-
public ridicule and contempt. Yet the persecu- brews about Ap 66. In conclusion, the various
tion had not been fatal; they had not yet been strands of evidence suggest that Hebrews was
called upon to lay down their lives in martyr- .Mritten between AD 60 and 7o, possibly near
dom (12:4). Amidst the excitement of their the middle of the decade.
new-found faith in Christ they had demon- Origin and Destination. The place from
strated practical concern and love by minister- which Hebrews was written is also uncertain.
ing to fellow believers in need (6:10) and com- Some old manuscripts of the letter bear the
forting others who had been harassed for their subscriptions, ‘‘written from Rome,” or “writ-
faith (10:34). ten from Italy.” Such notations are educated
But since those earlier trials the readers deductions drawn from the statement: ‘“‘Those
had made little progress in Christian maturity who come from Italy send you greetings”
(5:11-13). Moreover, in the face of a new wave (13:24). Most probably this indicates that the
of persecution, and despondency caused by an writer is extending greetings to a church in
apparent delay in the Lord’s coming, the be- Italy on behalf of Italian Christians associated
lievers began to waver and abandon hope. In- with him in another land, possibly Asia. Never-
deed, they threatened to renounce Jesus Christ theless, we cannot locate the point of origin
and to revert back to the security of the Jew- with any certainty.
ish religion which enjoyed the protection of It has been suggested that the letter was
Roman law. written to a group of Jewish converts to Chris-
Thus we read that because of the ‘‘diverse tianity. Yet the precise community to which it
and strange teachings” of certain Judaizers was sent is a matter of debate. Opinions vary
who sought to draw them back to their former
religion (13:9), the wavering believers have
neglected to assemble together (10:25) and
have lost confidence in their spiritual leaders
(13:17). Faced with the possibility that these
Jewish Christians might abandon their faith
altogether, the writer sternly warns them of
the tragic consequences of renouncing the Son
(13:12-19; 6:4-6; 10:26-31) and urges them to
renew their commitment to Christ, God’s fore-
most and final revelation.
Date. Lacking firm information as to the
author and recipients of the letter, no cer-
tainty exists as to the date of the writing. We
have noted that the author of Hebrews, and
probably his readers as well, had been
discipled by those who were personally ac-
quainted with Jesus (2:3). Further evidence in
the letter suggests that Paul probably was not
alive. Timothy, Paul’s younger associate, was
still living (13:23).
The absence of any mention in Hebrews of
the destruction of the Jerusalem temple is sig-
nificant for dating the letter. In terms of his
argument that the old covenant had passed
away and the legal priesthood had been super-
seded, the writer would scarcely have omitted
mention of the temple’s destruction had he
written the letter later than ap 70. Hebrews
g:6—-1o and 10:1—4, 11-14 plainly suggest that
the Jewish sacrifices were still being offered.
Hence it may be supposed with some degree of
certainty that the letter was written prior to
AD 70. Latin inscription in Rome, where some believe that the Book of
Some scholars point to Hebrews 3:7—19 Hebrews was written or was its destination.

943
Hebrews, Letter to the
from Judea to Spain. Tradition has it that He-
brews was directed to Jewish Christians living
in Palestine. But against a Palestinian destina-
tion it may be argued: (1) no allusion is made
to the temple in Jerusalem; (2) the readers had
had no personal contact with Jesus (2:3), an
unlikely event for mid-1st century residents of
Palestine; (3) the statement in 12:4 that his
readers ‘‘had not yet resisted to the point of
shedding blood’ could hardly be said of
Palestinean Christians of the period; (4) the
generosity of the believers (10:34; 13:16) was
inconsistent with the poverty of the Jerusalem
church; and (5) the general tone of the letter is
Hellenistic rather than rabbinical.
Other proposals for the destination of He-
brews include (1) Caesarea, on the supposition
of Lukan authorship; (2) Syrian Antioch or Cy-
prus, assuming Barnabas wrote the letter; (3)
Ephesus, in the light of the conversion of
many Jews during Paul’s ministry in that city;
(4) Colossae, noting certain similarities be-
tween the Colossian heresy and the false be-
liefs of the ‘““Hebrews”’; and (5) Alexandria,
because of the apparent influence of the phi-
losopher Philo Judaeus in the letter.
The thesis that Hebrews was directed to a
group of Jewish Christians in Rome has found
favor with a number of scholars. Arguments in
support of a Roman destination include: (1)
the letter was first known in Rome no later
than AD 96; (2) Romans 11:13,18 suggests that
the church at Rome consisted of a Jewish-
Christian minority; (3) references to persecu-
tion and suffering endured by the readers
(10:32,33; 12:4) is consistent with known repres-
sive measures exacted by the Roman authori-
ties; (4) the possibility that saints who “come
from Italy’ convey greetings to their brethren
in Rome; and (5) the Jewish community in
Rome preserved certain features of noncon-
formist or sectarian Judaism that would ex-
plain several notable similarities between the
theology and praxis of the Qumran commu-
nity and that expressed in Hebrews.
It is likely that the letter was addressed toa
small subgroup within a local church. The ex-
hortation in 5:12, ‘‘by this time you ought to
be teachers,” hardly would have been relevant
to an entire congregation. Hebrews 13:7,24
lends further support to the theory that the
letter was sent to a small group, perhaps to a
“house church” within a larger assembly.
Tentatively, one might conclude that the ad-
dressees were converts from Judaism who
dwelt in the dispersion. Hence they were famil-
iar with OT Judaism and were acquainted
with the religious philosophy of the Greek
world. Possibly the readers comprised a house
fellowship which tended to disassociate itself
from the parent group (10:25). The existence of
944
such house churches in Rome is confirmed by
~ Romans 16:5,14,15.
Purpose. In response to the threat that his
Jewish-Christian friends might renounce Chris-
tianity and revert back to Judaism, the writer
by a ‘‘word of exhortation” (13:22) commu-
nicated to’ them the finality of the Christian
revelation. He sought also to inform his de-
spondent, vascillating readers that Christ, the
object of God’s final revelation, is vastly supe-
rior to the greatest of Judaism’s heroes. The
author, in addition, affirmed the heavenly and
eternal character of the salvation wrought by
Christ. Whereas the legal sacrificial system
was powerless to effect the remission of sin,
Christ the eternal high priest “is able to save
for all time those who draw near to God
through him” (7:25).
In short, the writer commended to his read-
ers the need for patient endurance amidst the
persecution and sufferings to which the heirs
of eternal salvation are inevitably exposed.
Just as Jesus, the forerunner of our faith, su#
fered and patiently endured in anticipation of
eternal reward, so ought harassed, oppressed
believers ‘‘lift up the hands which hang down,
and the feeble knees” (12:12 K5v) in anticipa-
tion of their’reception in that eternal ‘‘king-
dom which cannot be shaken”’ (v 28).
The author’s final purpose for writing was
to proclaim the fearful judgment that awaits
those who repudiate Jesus Christ. Since ‘‘our
God is a consuming fire’ (12:29), “how shall
we escape if we neglect so great salvation’”’
ex
Contents and Theology. Next to Romans,
Hebrews is the most doctrinal book in the NT.
The writer develops a series of weighty argu-
ments to demonstrate the superiority of the
gospel of Christ to the religion of Judaism.
Since Jesus is final both as to his person and
his work, Christianity is the ultimate and nor-
mative faith. The book’s particularism runs
counter to the spirit of the modern world.
The Superiority of the Son to Former Revela-
tion (1:1-4). The writer acknowledges that
God revealed himself to the prophets of old in
many ways—through dreams, visions, audible
speech, and mighty acts. But ‘‘in these last
days” (the advent of the endtimes, cf. 9:26)
God spoke finally and definitively through his
own Son (v 2). Central to the argument is the
fact that in one way or another the prophets
received an eternal word from God. Yet given
the intimate relation of the Son to the Father,
God's latest revelation has come forth from
the very depths of his own being.
Identification of the Son as the pinnacle of
divine revelation leads to a concise but pro-
found statement of Christ’s person and his cos-
mic work. The Son “‘reflects the glory of God”’

in that the sum of the divine attributes bril-
liantly shine through his person. Moreover, he
bears the very image and stamp of God’s na-
ture (v 3), as the wax bears the impress of the theological implications of Christ’s descent
seal. Jesus as God’s final word of revelation is and ascent are carefully spelled out: Christ de-
truly the divine and eternal Son of God.
Christ’s excellence is further displayed in the glory (v 10); (2) to destroy the devil (v 14); (3)
fact that he is the mighty agent through whom “to deliver his people from the bondage of
the universe was created (v 2) and by whom
the cosmic order is sustained (v 3). In the
moral realm he has wrought the purification
of sins and now sits enthroned on God’s right
hand (cf. 8:1). God’s pleasure toward the Son
is seen in that he has appointed Christ heir
and head of all (1:2). His name is surpassed by
none save God the Father (v 4).
The Superiority of the Son to Angels (1:5—
2:18). Angels enjoyed an exalted status in bib-
lical and postbiblical Judaism. Traditionally
the Jews believed that angels praised God
upon his throne, mediated God’s revelation to
men, attended to God’s will, and gave succor
to the people of God. Angels were far superior
to men in power and knowledge. According to
the Jewish Apocrypha angels ruled the stars
and were responsible for the rise and fall of
civilizations. In Qumran thought angelic be-
ings would engage in a final cosmic struggle
with Belial and the forces of evil at the end of
the age.
Against this background the writer of He-
brews argues that the Son is vastly superior to
the angels. To prove his point the author as-
sembles a string of well-known OT texts and
applies them directly to the Son. God never
said of any angel, ‘“You are my Son, today I
have begotten you” (Ps 2:7). Yet just such a
claim was made on behalf of the Son (Heb
1:5). When the Son incarnated himself in the
world he received the obedient worship of an-
gels (v 6). His is the sovereignty and
eternality and the majesty at God’s right hand
(vv 8,11,12). By contrast, angels are ‘‘minister-
ing spirits” (v 14) that rank below the Son in
dignity and might.
In Hebrews 2:1—4 the writer parenthetically
warns his wavering congregation of the dan-
ger of drifting away from the truth of God. If
disobedience to the Law mediated by angels
resulted in stern punishment, how much more
severe would be God’s judgment on those who
trampled under foot the revelation delivered
by the Son. If God’s saving grace in Christ is
neglected, retribution will surely follow (v 3).
The mention of angels turns the writer’s
mind to Jesus’ humiliation and exaltation
(2:5-18). Psalm 8, a song about the smallness
and yet the significance of man, is applied to
the experience of Jesus. In assuming human
flesh and blood, Jesus was made “‘for a little
while lower than the angels” (4:7). But subse-
Hebrews, Letter to the
quent to the completion of his earthly work he
was elevated above the angels and crowned
with the glory and honor of heaven (v g). The
scended to earth (1) to bring many children to
death (v 15); and (4) to make expiation on the
cross for the sins of the people (v 17). He as-
cended to heaven (1) to intercede on our behalf
as a faithful high priest (v 17); and (2) to suc-
cor those who are sorely tempted (v 18). The
perfect summary of Christ’s person and work
is given in Hebrews 2:9: ‘“But we see Jesus,
who for a little while was made lower than the
angels, crowned with glory and honor because
of the suffering of death, so that by the grace
of God he might taste death for every one.”
The Superiority of the Son to Moses and Josh-
ua (3:1-4:13). Jewish-Christians contemplat-
ing reversion to Judaism surely believed that
Moses was one of the greatest figures in Isra-
el’s history. So esteemed was the one who led
Israel out of Egypt through the wilderness, the
one to whom God delivered his holy Law, that
there was no one in Israel’s history quite like
Moses. Yet the author of Hebrews argues that
Moses, though faithful to his calling, was but a
servant in the house of God. Jesus by contrast
was no a mere servant, but a Son; he was not
a mere dweller in the house, but the very
builder of the structure. Jesus, therefore, far
transcends the revered figure of Moses.
Practical implications are drawn from Je-
sus’ superiority to Moses. From Psalm 95:7—11
the writer rehearses the tragic experience of
Israel under Moses during the desert wander-
ings (Heb 3:7—19). Throughout the 40-year wil-
derness experience the people hardened their
the hearts and rebelled against God. In turn God
“was provoked”’ (v 10) by their stubbornness
and swore that those who sinned would never
enter the rest he was going to provide (v
11,18). The writer thus argues that if disobedi-
ence to God under Moses had serious conse-
quences, forsaking Christ will be much more
perilous. Hence the wavering Christians are
urged to watch lest due to an evil, unbeliev-
ing heart they should fall away from the liv-
ing God (v 12). Nothing short of steadfast per-
sistence will lead to the attainment of the
heavenly goal (v 14).
Joshua, likewise, was regarded as a great
leader of Israel. Yet because of disobedience
the people under Joshua’s leadership failed to
enter the rest that God had planned. That rest
spoken of corresponds to the sabbath rest of
God (4:3,4), and is a concept closely related to
salvation. It is a spiritual reality that is
achieved by turning from our own empty
945
Hebrews, Letter to the
works and trusting in the finished work of
Christ (v 10). The author reminds the readers
that “there remains a sabbath rest for the peo-
ple of God” (v g) that only Christ can provide.
Christians not only benefit from this sabbath
rest in the present age, but anticipate its full
realization in the age to come. One of the chief
means of ensuring entry into the sabbath rest
of salvation is the Word of God (v 12). The
living and powerful Word penetrates the inner-
most depths of the soul, reveals our impover-
ished condition, and strengthens the trusting
heart.
The Superiority of the Priesthood of the Son
(4:14-7:28). More than 4o percent of Hebrews
is devoted to the priesthood of Jesus Christ.
The writer goes to great lengths to demon-
strate that the revered Aaronic priestly system
has been superceded by the high priest ‘after
the order of Melchizedek”’ (5:6; 6:20; 7:11). This
central theme had been anticipated earlier
when Christ was referred to as “a merciful
and faithful high priest in the service of God”
who has made atonement for sins (2:17).
Hebrews makes the claim that Jesus’ priest-
hood is the ultimate ground of the believers’
confidence (4:14—16). On three counts Jesus
surpasses the old legal priestly order. First, he
is an exalted high priest (v 14). The Jewish high
priest climbed the mount to enter the temple
sanctuary. But Jesus, our great high priest,
has ascended to heaven itself and entered the
sanctuary on high. He ministers in no earthly
tabernacle, but in the very presence of God.
Second, Jesus is an empathetic high priest (v
15a). Fully God and fully man, Jesus suffers
along with his people in their trials and afflic-
tions. From heaven’s perspective he knows
fully what his people are called upon to en-
dure. He “‘feels” our hurts, and he does so per-
fectly. Finally, Jesus is a sinless high priest (v
15b). Day in and day out (7:27), year in and
year out, the levitical priests were required to
bring sacrifices for their own sins. Yet Jesus
had no sin that needed cleansing, for he was
“holy, blameless, unstained, separated from
sinners’ (v 26). In view of Jesus’ priestly perfec-
tions, sorely tempted Christians are urged to
“draw to the throne of grace’’ to “receive
mercy and find grace to help in time of need”
(4:16).
For those not convinced that Jesus was, in-
deed, a legitimate priest, two prerequisites
for priesthood are detailed. First, if the high
priest is to represent humanity before God he
must be taken from among men (5:1,2). And
second, he must be called by God to high
priestly office as was Aaron (v 4). Christ
has fully satisfied these qualifications. From
Psalms 2:7 and 110:4 it is shown that Jesus
did not take this office upon himself, but was
946
appointed by God (5:5,6). Moreover, from the
“obedience which he had to learn (v 8) and
from the agony of the Gethsemane experience
(v 7) it is clear that Jesus was in every way a
man. Nevertheless, Hebrews makes it per-
fectly clear that Jesus was not a priest after
the order of Aaron but a “high priest after the
order of Melchizedek”’ (v ro).
After introducing the theme of Christ as a
Melchizedekian high priest the writer recalls
that his readers were not ready for such ad-
vanced teaching. Although not new converts
(5:12), his friends had remained spiritually im-
mature and sluggish. Hence the writer issues
the challenge to press on to Christian matu-
rity, to be ready for the solid food of advanced
teaching.
In his digression the writer warns not only
against spiritual immaturity but also against
“apostasy. The question now arises whether
the author’s apostasy teaching in Hebrews
6:4-8 and 10:26-31 contradicts the NT doc-
trine of the perseverance of the saints. Un-
doubtedly it does not. Some authorities hold
that those addressed were not true Christians,
hence the issue is not one of apostasy. It is
possible, like Judas Iscariot or Simon Magus
(Acts 8:9—24),; to possess considerable knowl-
edge of the gospel and fall short of personal
commitment. But the writer makes it quite
clear that in the case of his addressees he is
persuaded otherwise (Heb 6:9). The most rea-
sonable view is that in these two hortatory
passages the writer advances a hypothetical
argument warning his friends of the utter seri-
ousness of reverting back to Judaism. That is,
if a falling away were to occur, renewal would
be impossible unless Christ were to die a sec-
ond time. The writer sums up the point of
these difficult passages with the words, “it is a
fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living
God” (10:31). Nevertheless, followers of Christ
may confidently lay hold of God’s promises,
confirmed by solemn oath, to see them
through their trials (6:13-18). The believer
must practice “hope” (v 11), “faith,” and “‘en-
durance”’ (v 12). God may be trusted to hold
the believer fast.
Hebrews 7 contains an intricate argument
for the superiority of Christ, a priest like Mel-
chizedek, over the old legal order. Melchize-
dek, the ancient priest-king of Salem (Gn
14:18—20), is regarded as a primordial type of
Christ. He is “king of righteousness’ and
“king of peace’”’ (Heb 7:2). The solemn priest
from Salem has figuratively what Christ pos-
sesses actually: neither mother nor father, nei-
ther beginning nor end of life (v 3). Melchize-
dek is shown to be superior to Abraham on
three counts: (1) Melchizedek blessed the pa-
triarch (vv 1,7); (2) he accepted tithes from
 Hebrews, Letter to the

Abraham (vv 2,4,6); and (3) Melchizedek lives ary. The Jewish priests in their daily service
on since the OT nowhere mentions his death were not permitted to enter the Holy of Holies,
(v 8). It follows that since Levi was in the which contained the ark of the covenant and
loins of Abraham as seed (v 10), Melchizedek the mercy seat—the place of propitiation of
is superior to the levitical priests. And inas- sins (v 6). The high priest alone could enter the
much as Christ is a priest after ‘‘the likeness Holy of Holies, and then but once a year on the
of Melchizedek”’ (v 15), it follows that the Son Day of Atonement, and only after sacrificing
of God is more excellent than the old legal -- for his own sins (v 7). The inaccessibility of the
priesthood. Holy of Holies signified that access to the pres-
The result is that the old levitical priest- ence of God had not been opened. The presence
hood has been superseded by the priesthood of of the curtain symbolized that the people had
Christ. The demise of the old order was inevita- no way to the throne of God, the priests had no
ble, for its repetitive animal sacrifices could way, and the high priest had a limited way and
never effect spiritual perfection (7:11). It was a only once a year. Moreover, the sacrifices
system characterized by “weakness and use- brought by the Jewish priests could not purify
lessness’”’ (v 18). By contrast, Christ’s priest- the conscience, but merely dealt with external
hood is indestructible, eternal, uninterrupted, ritual cleansing (vv 9,10). A truly effectual sac-
efficacious, final, and perfect (vv 16,21,24,25, rifice must await ‘‘the time of reformation”
27). Forgiveness and reconciliation is possible (v 10).
only through Christ, our great high priest. Christ’s priestly ministration is shown to
The Superiority of the Priestly Work of the be far more efficacious. First, the Christian’s
Son (8:1—10:39). Since Christ’s priestly office high priest has brought a better sacrifice
far excels the old order, it follows that his (g:11-14), and here we arrive at the heart of
priestly ministration is superior to all that has the message of Hebrews. Employing the imag-
gone before. The theme of Christ as high priest ery of the tabernacle the author demonstrates
in a better sanctuary is introduced (8:1-5). that Christ our high priest has accomplished
The writer utilizes Plato’s distinction between what the Jewish priests failed to do. He en-
the ideal form in heaven and the imperfect tered the heavenly Holy of Holies, not repeat-
copy on earth to argue that the levitical sanc- edly, but once for all, thereby effecting a com-
tuary and sacrifices are mere shadows of the pleted redemption (v 12). Christ brought to
heavenly realities: (1) Christ ministers in “the the altar, not the blood of bulls and goats,
true tent’’ which is the “heavenly sanctuary” but his own life’s blood. The Lord did not
(vv 2,5); (2) he discharges his high priestly ser- merely lay down a material body, but he pre-
vice in the very presence of the Father, which sented himself to God through the eternal
results in a far more effective ministry (vv 1,6); Spirit (v 14). Christ’s better sacrifice thus
and (3) his oblation on the cross was the ulti- goes beyond cleansing of the flesh to the puri-
mate sacrifice (v 3). How unreasonable it is fication of the defiled conscience.
that his Christian readers should go back to Second, Christ through his death has insti-
the old Jewish priestly system. tuted a better covenant (9:15—23). The teach-
Christ is the minister of a new and better ing of Hebrews 8:6—13 is developed further.
covenant (8:6—-13). The old covenant estab- The old covenant was sealed with the blood of
lished by God with the fathers was not to be calves and goats (v 19). But the new covenant
despised, nevertheless, it had become ineffec- was ratified with the blood of Christ, God’s
tual and obsolete (v 13). Indeed, the prophet own Son. The new covenant thus could accom-
Jeremiah (31:31—34) foresaw the new covenant plish what the old covenant merely foreshad-
that God would inaugurate with his people. owed—forgiveness and cleansing of sins (v 22).
This new covenant sealed by Christ involves Third, Christ ministers in a better taberna-
(1) the immediate work of the Holy Spirit on cle (g:24-28). Our Lord entered, not into a
the mind and heart (v 10); (2) a personal and merely earthly sanctuary, but into the holy
intimate knowledge of God (v 11); and (3) the place of heaven there to represent us (v 24).
full absolution of sins (v 12). This new and Access to the throne is not limited to one day
better covenant has been established on the per year, for he is continually in the presence
work of Christ, the great high priest. of the Father. Nor is it necessary that re-
Chapter g gives a detailed comparison of the peated sacrifices be made. Christ’s single sac-
efficacy of priestly service under old and new rifice on the cross has conquered sin once and
covenants. The levitical priests ministered in a for all (v 26). In sum, as regards the sanctu-
material sanctuary on earth (vv 1-5). Features ary, the covenant, and the sacrifices, the
of the tabernacle and its furnishings are de- Christian’s high priest is vastly superior to
scribed to highlight their obsolescence. More the old Jewish order.
important, however, is the character of the sac- In order to drive home these crucial points
rificial ritual conducted in the earthly sanctu- the writer expands on the theme of the abso-

947
Hebrews, Letter to-the
lute finality of Christ’s high priestly work in
chapter 10. The earlier argument concerning
the futile character of the levitical sacrifices
(9:6—14) is repeated for emphasis (10:1—4). The
Mosaic ceremonial legislation called for repeti-
tive sacrifices, which could never perfect the
worshiper (v 1). Instead of purifying one’s life,
they served only as a yearly reminder of sin (v
3) until Christ should come.
The writer discovers in Psalm 40:6-8 a pre-
diction that the eternal Christ would become
man for the purpose of offering himself as the
ultimate sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:5—10). Once
again the sanctifying power of Christ’s single
self-oblation is emphasized (v 10). The vivid
contrast is again drawn between the ineffec-
tive ministrations of the Jewish priests who
stand during the daily ritual (v 11), and the
effectual single sacrifice of Christ who is now
seated at the right hand of God (wv 12). Since
Jesus ‘‘has perfected for all time those who are
sanctified” (v 14), nothing can be added to
what the seated Sovereign has accomplished
(v 18).
In view of the manifest superiority of
Christ's priestly office and work, the struggling
Christians are exhorted to appropriate the
means of grace at their disposal (10:19—39). In
the midst of trials and persecution they should
remember that Christ has effectively opened
the way to God (vv 19,20). They are summoned
to come to God in faith with hearts cleansed by
Christ’s sacrifice (v 22). Those tempted to re-
vert to legal religion should hold fast and sup-
port one another in love (vv 23,24). The means
of grace afforded by corporate worship should
not be neglected (v 25). In short, the wavering
Jewish-Christians are summoned to renewed
endurance and fidelity to their Lord (vv 26-31).
What God has promised to his people he will
surely make good.
The Superiority of the Life of Faith (11:1-
12:29). The discussion of faith and endur-
ance as the solution to despondency (10:36,38)
prompts a fuller consideration of the faith
theme. Faith is a prominent concept in the
Book of Hebrews, as attested by the fact that
the word occurs some 35 times in the letter.
The Pauline idea of faith as the means of legal
justification is adapted to the particular cir-
cumstances of the threatened Jewish-Chris-
tians. The concept of faith is broader in this
book thar the strictly ‘saving’ faith discussed
by Paul, in that it leads to spiritual salvation
(11:39,40). But uniquely faith is the power by
which heaven’s unseen realities are laid hold
of to satisfy the soul. Faith enables the Chris-
tian disciple to view the world and interpret
the flow of history from the divine perspec-
tive. Faith is the means of victory over the
world of sin and woe. Through faith the be-
948
liever approaches the throne of grace (4:16)
“with the confidence and assurance that God
will enable him to overcome.
The victory faith affords is amply illus-
trated from the history of God’s OT people.
Abel, Enoch, and Noah in the primal history,
Abraham the father of faith, Moses the leader
of the young nation, and many valiant proph-
ets and martyrs serve as living memorials to
faith’s overcoming power. And yet God has
something better in store for his sanctified peo-
ple, the church (11:40); that is the reality of the
living Christ.
Yet the greatest model of steadfast endur-
ance in suffering is Jesus, “the pioneer and
perfector of our faith’ (12:2). When sur-
rounded with trials the Christian needs to re-
call Christ, who in anticipation of the heav-
enly crown endured the cross and its shame.
The Christian’s trials are trivial compared
with what Jesus Christ was called upon to suf-
fer (v 3). Moreover, for the people of God suffer-
ing and persecution prove to be disguised
blessings. The rod of discipline confirms our
status as children of the living God (vv 5~—10).
But beyond this, the sovereign God is able to
transform the Christian’s suffering into inesti-
mable blessing (v 11). Hence the wavering
saints should strive for spiritual wholeness
and maturity, taking care lest they be over--
taken by bitterness and resentment (v 15).
Final Exhortations and Benediction (13:1-
25). The writer in his closing words chal-
lenges his Christian friends to be faithful to
the tasks that lie right at hand. They are to
show continued love to the brethren, to extend
hospitality to strangers, to uphold the sanctity
of marriage, to be content with what they now
possess, and to be obedient to their spiritual
leaders (13:1,2,4,5,7).
The readers are warned against the trickery
of the Judaizers who would lead them astray
from Jesus Christ, the One who remains ‘‘the
same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).
Spiritual determination is strengthened by re-
calling the example of Christ, who “suffered
outside the gate’ for their salvation (v 12). As
the people of God they are challenged to fol-
low Christ out of the camp bearing abuse for
him (v 13). Patient endurance is possible when
the Christian realizes that he has no enduring
city here (v 14). His goal is the heavenly Jerusa-
lem, the eternal city of God.
The anonymous letter to the unknown “‘He-
brews’”’ closes with a glorious benediction. The
Christian’s God is described as the great “God
of peace”’ (13:20), and Jesus is “the great shep-
herd of the sheep,” who established a new and
eternal covenant and then rose triumphant
from the dead. And the promise is made to the
trusting soul that the triune God would
“equip you with everything good that you
may do his will, working in you that which is
pleasing in his sight” (v 21).
The letter to the Hebrews is rich in doc-
trinal teaching. It discloses more about the his-
torical Jesus than any other NT letter. It alone
explains the atoning work of Christ under the
rubric of the Melchizedekian priest. The let- --
ter’s discussion of repentance, justification,
sanctification, and perseverance makes it a
mine of soteriological teaching. Its explication
of old and new covenants, impending judg-
ment, and the world to come make a signifi-
cant contribution to Christian theology. And
the letter’s teaching on faith, endurance, and
the practical Christian combine to make He-
brews one of the most glorious documents
God has given to the church.
Bruce A. DEMAREST
Bibliography. R. Brown, Christ Above All: The Message
of Hebrews; F.F. Bruce, Commentary on the Epistle to the
Hebrews; F. Delitzsch, The Epistle to the Hebrews, 2 vols.;
W.A. Henrichsen, After the Sacrifice; R. Jewett, Letter to Pil-
grims: A Commentary on the Book of Hebrews; S.J. Kiste-
maker, NT Commentary: Exposition of the Epistle to the He-
brews; N.R. Lightfoot, Jesus Christ Today: A Commentary on
the Book of Hebrews; W.S. Plumer, Commentary on the Epis- Grains being sold at a Bedouin market in Hebron.
tle of Paul, the Apostle to the Hebrews.

Hebron (Person). 1. Third of Kohath’s four
sons, Hebron was a descendant of Levi (Ex
6:18; Nm 3:19; 1 Chr 6:2,18; 23:12). Hebron’s
sons were Jeriah, Amariah, Jahaziel, and Jeka-
meam (1 Chr 23:19). Hebron’s descendants
were called the Hebronites. They are men-
tioned in a census taken in the wilderness near
Sinai (Nm 3:27) and again in a census taken in
the plains of Moab (26:58). The Hebronites are
mentioned in connection with the transfer of
the ark to Jerusalem in David’s time (1 Chr
45°05 '20:23,30;31).
2. Mareshah’s son and Korah’s father (1 Chr
2:42,43).
Hebron (Place). 1. City of antiquity still
standing today. It was built on the southern
end of the highlands which run north to
south through the length of Palestine. In patri-
archal times it was known as Kirjath-arba (or
Kiriath-arba; see Gn 23:2), and stood on the
hill known as El Arbain. The modern city
straddles both ridges of the mountain range.
Hebron is situated 25 miles S, SW of Jerusa-
lem and less than 2 miles from Mamre, where
Abraham spent much of his life. It is 3000 feet
above sea level and marks the southern end of
the Judean highlands. From this elevation the
land slopes down rapidly to the east, but
gradually to the west and south. The soil is
relatively fertile, and a variety of fruits (ap-
ples, plums, figs, pomegranates, apricots),
nuts, and vegetables are grown easily. To the
south is the Negeb, where the grazing land is
excellent. A large number of springs and wells
dot the landscape and assure residents of an
abundance of water.
Between 1964-66 a team of American ar-
chaeologists excavated portions of ancient He-
bron. They found evidence of occupation dat-
ing back to about 3000 Bc. Because of Hebron’s
location, the fertility of the soil, and the plenti-
ful supply of water, it seems to have enjoyed
almost continuous occupation. The city must
have been destroyed, however, perhaps by the
Hyksos, for it was “built” (or rebuilt) seven
years before Zoan (also known as Tanis), ap-
proximately 1730 Bc (Nm 13:22).
In OT times Hebron included Mamre, the
place where Abraham built an altar to the
Lord after parting from Lot (Gn 13:18). It was
here too that he learned of the capture of his
nephew Lot (14:12—16); and, years later, enter-
tained three angels and was told of the judg-
ment soon to fall on Sodom and Gomorrah
(ch 18).
It is most unlikely that the “oaks of
Mamre” (probably terebinth trees) known by
the patriarch are still standing. Two ancient
oak trees in the vicinity of Hebron, neverthe-
less, have been associated with Abraham: the
one stands near the traditional site of Mamre,
and the other on the western edge of the Wadi
Tuffa in the grounds of the Russian Orthodox
church. The site where the trees probably once
stood is now enclosed. Walls bearing evidence

949
Hebronite
of the Herodian era may be seen to the south In the intertestamental period Hebron is
and west of this enclosure, and the ‘‘well of ~again mentioned. Judas Maccabeus defeated
Abraham” in the southwest corner still is used
by shepherds to water their flocks. The basil-
ica located on this piece of land was erected
by Constantine. Arab remains have been un-
earthed, and artifacts from the time of Abra-
ham have been discovered.
Sarah died in Hebron, and Abraham pur-
chased. the cave of Machpelah from Ephron
the Hittite (Gn 23:8,9,17; 25:9; 49:29—32; 50:12,
13) in which to bury her. This cave is now
within the walls of the modern city, and the
famous mosque of Haran el-Khalil was built
Over it.
At the time of the exodus of the Israelites
from Egypt, spies were sent into the land. They
began in the south and traversed the central
highlands of Palestine from Kadesh-barnea
through Hebron to Rehob (Nm 13:17—21). On
their return they brought back evidence of the
productivity of the land (Nm 13:23,24).
From Numbers 13:33 we know that giants
(“sons of Anak’’) lived in Hebron. The sight of
these men filled 10 of the spies with fear. Only
Caleb and Joshua proved equal to the occa-
sion. On account of their faith they were prom-
ised a possession in the land, and Caleb was
given Hebron (Jos 14:9,13). The unfaithful
spies died in a plague in the presence of the
Lord (Nm 14:36,37).
During the period of the judges Hebron is
mentioned in connection with Samson. When
trapped inside the city of Gaza, he carried off
the gates and left them at Hebron (Jgs 16:3).
Following the death of Saul, the first king
of Israel, David was crowned king of the tribes
of Judah and Benjamin in Hebron (2 Sm 2:1).
He made this city his capital, for it was more
centrally located than Benjamin, and its posi-
tion at the southern end of the mountain
range removed it as far as possible from the 10
northern tribes that followed Ish-bosheth, the
son of Saul. It was far enough from the Philis-
tines to the west and the Amalekites to the
south to avoid notice, and it was also easily
defensible. Hebron also lay at the junction of
several important trade routes, and this in-
sured its prominence. Later, however, when
David was made king over all Israel, he moved
his capital to Jerusalem—an act which must
have displeased the people of Hebron.
When.Absalom wished to obtain support
for his claim to the throne, he initiated his
revolt from Hebron (2 Sm 15:7—12).
Following the death of Solomon, David’s
son, the kingdom was divided. Rehoboam,
fearing an attack by the Egyptians on his
southern border, fortified Hebron (2 Chr 12:1—
12). From this time onward the city disap-
pears from the OT record.
95°
the Edomites who had invaded the Negeb
from Edom and had established themselves as
far north as Hebron. Shortly before the birth
of Christ, Herod erected a “haran’”’ (“enclo-
sure’) around the ancient burial site of the
patriarchs and their wives.
Hebron is not mentioned in the NT. How-
ever, because it preserves the cave of Mach-
pelah, the last resting place of Abraham and
Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah, it
became in the centuries that followed one of
the most sacred places for Christian and Mos-
lem pilgrims.
2. KJV translation of the town of Ebron, in
Joshua 19:28.
See EBRON.
CyriL J. BARBER
Hebronite. Descendant of Hebron from Le-
vi's tribe (Nm 3:27; 26:58; 1 Chr 16:23,30,31).
See HEBRON (PERSON) #1.
Hedgehog. Small, insect-eating mammal
with a coat of short spines and similar to the
porcupine (Is 14:23; Zep 2:14).
See ANIMALS.
Hegai, Hege. Chamberlain of Ahasuerus
and keeper of his harem when Esther was
chosen as queen (Est 2:3, KJv Hege).
Heglam. Alternate name for Gera, Bela’s
son, in 1 Chronicles 8:7.
See GERA #4.
Heifer. Young cow.
See ANIMALS (CATTLE).
Heir. One who inherits something or who is
entitled to a future inheritance; the one who
receives the property of a deceased person, par-
ticularly on the basis of law and usually by
means of a will. In both the OT and NT, the
Hebrew and the Greek words encompass these
ideas.
In Genesis 15, after God had reiterated his
special promise to Abraham (vv 5,13—16), Abra-
ham wondered how the fulfillment of the
promise might occur. At the time, only his
steward, Eliezer of Damascus, was ‘‘the son of
his house,” that is, the one of his large house-
hold who would inherit. There was no natural-
born son of Abraham within the family (see
15:3,4). Without a son in patriarchal times, a
man’s chief steward could be his heir as a sub-
stitute. Later, after the birth of Ishmael (Abra-
ham’s son by Hagar, Sarah’s maidservant)

and of Isaac (his son by Sarah his wife), trou-
ble erupted between the women, and Sarah
demanded that Abraham send Hagar and her
son away, because Sarah did not want Ish-
mael to be an heir with her own son, Isaac (Gn
21:10).
A maidservant, at Joab’s instigation, told
David a story about herself and her two sons.
She said that one son killed the other, and
that her family now wanted to kill the remain-
ing son for the murder. If this happened, she
claimed, the heir of her deceased husband
would be destroyed and he would be left with
“neither name nor remnant upon the face of
the earth” (2 Sm 14:7). Another biblical illus-
tration of this normal use of the word “‘heir”’ is
seen in a parable told by Jesus. The workers in
the vineyard who saw the son of their master
coming, said among themselves, “This is the
heir; come, let us kill him and have his inheri-
tance’ (Mt 21:33—43; Mk 12:7; Lk 20:14).
In a number of references in the NT, the
word “‘heir’”’ is used to refer to the believer in
Christ, who has an inheritance coming be-
cause of being a child of God the Father and
consequently a joint heir with Christ (Rom
8:16,17). The inheritance of salvation is vari-
ously referred to in different sections of the
NT. In Hebrews 6:17, Christians are called
“heirs of the promise’ made to Abraham
when God said, “Surely I will bless you and
multiply you” (vv 13,14). In Hebrews 11:7,
Noah is described as ‘‘an heir of the righteous-
ness which comes by faith.” In James 2:5, the
poor in the world who are rich in faith are
said to be “heirs of the kingdom which he has
promised to those who love him.” Paul writes
that those who are justified by God’s grace are
made heirs according to the hope of eternal
life (Ti 3:7).
In Hebrews 1:2, the word “heir” is used
with a singular reference to God’s Son, who is
said to have been appointed “heir of all
things” by his Father. Here is an instance
where someone has been designated to receive
an inheritance but will actually enter into full
possession much later.
In biblical times the right of primogeniture
prevailed, that is, the right of the eldest son in
the family to be the primary heir in the house-
hold. In OT times, the firstborn son possessed
the birthright, which included inheriting a
double portion of his father’s possessions and
headship of the family (Dt 21:15—17). The other
sons shared the remainder equally. If there
were no sons to inherit, the daughters became
the heirs (Nm 27:8; 36:1-12), although there
was a stipulation that the daughters could not
marry outside their tribe. This was to preserve
the tribal territory intact. If there were no
daughters, then the dead man’s brothers inher-
951
Heled
ited; if no brothers, then his uncles; and if no
uncles, then the nearest relative (Nm 27:9—11).
Because the matter of tribal possession was so
important, it is easy to understand why there
was such a concern for genealogical records
among the Hebrew people.
WESLEY L. GERIG
See INHERITANCE; FIRSTBORN.
Helah. One of Ashhurs’ wives who bore him
Zereth, Izhar, and Ethnan from Judah’s tribe
(1 Chr 4:5,7).
Helam. Place east of the Jordan where Da-
vid defeated the armies of Hadadezer, king of
Syria (2 Sm 10:16,17). Its location is uncertain.
Helbah. One of the Canaanite strongholds
that was not conquered by the Asherites after
taking possession of the land under Joshua
(Jgs 1:31). Its location is unknown.
Helbon. District north of Damascus, which
produced choice wine (Ez 27:18); perhaps iden-
tifiable with modern Halbun, where the vine
is still cultivated.
Heldai. 1. Baanah’s son, described as a Neto-
phathite in the line of Othniel. He appears
first as one of David’s mighty men (2 Sm
23:29; Heleb; 1 Chr 11:30, Heled). In 1 Chroni-
cles 27:15, he is commander of an army divi-
sion of 24,000 which served during the rath
month of the year.
2. One of the exiles returning from Babylon
from whom the prophet Zechariah took gold
and silver to make a crown for Joshua, the
high priest (Zec 6:10, KJV Helem in v 14).
Heleb. Alternative name for Heldai, Baa-
nah’s son, in 2 Samuel 23:29.
See HELDAI #1.
Helech. Term mentioned in Ezekiel’s proph-
ecy against the city of Tyre (Ez 27:11, kJv thine
army), perhaps referring to mercenaries from
Cilicia southeast of Asia Minor. Assyrian texts
indicate that Cilicia was once called Hilakku,
but little is known about the people. They are
first mentioned by Shalmaneser III, king of As-
syria (854-824 BC) in his conquest of Asia Mi-
nor. Their history under the Assyrians was
quite violent. Sargon, Sennacherib, and Esar-
haddon had to put down revolts from the Hilak-
ku. Later, they gave tribute to Ashurbanipal.
Heled. Alternate name for Heldai, Baanah’s
son, in 1 Chronicles 11:30.
See HELDAI #1.
Helek, Helekite
Helek, Helekite. Gilead’s son from Manas-
seh’s tribe (Jos 17:2) and founder of the
Helekite family (Nm 26:30).
Helem. 1. Member of Asher’s tribe (1 Chr
7:35), called Hotham in verse 32.
2. KJV rendering for Heldai in Zechariah
6:14.
See HELDAI #2.
Heleph. Village on Naphtali’s southern bor-
der (Jos 19:33), northeast of Mt Tabor. Its site
may be modern Khirbet ‘Arbathah.
Helez. 1. One of David’s valiant warriors,
called a Paltite in 2 Samuel 23:26 and a Pelo-
nite in 1 Chronicles 11:27. The former is proba-
bly correct and refers to a person from Beth-
pelet. Most scholars feel that he is the same
man as the officer in charge of the seventh
course during David's reign (1 Chr 27:10).
2. Jerahmeel’s descendant from Judah’s
tribe (1 Chr 2:39).
Heli. Ancestor of Joseph in Luke’s genealogy
of Christ (3:23).
See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.
Heliopolis. Ancient Egyptian city famed as
a center for worship of the sun god Re. Heli-
opolis (“city of the sun”) was located in the
Nile River delta region of Lower Egypt, a few
miles northeast of modern Cairo. Heliopolis
became important from about 2400 Bc, with
the emergence of Atum-Re as the cult deity.
Many pharaohs embellished the city’s temples
and put up various public monuments, espe-
cially in the New Kingdom period (1570-1150
BC).
Since the temples contained the royal ar-
chives, the priests became the official histori-
ans of Egypt. Herodotus, a Greek historian of
the 5th century Bc, said the priests at Helio-
polis were famous for their knowledge of Egyp-
tian history. There were also training schools
for priests and a medical school in the city.
Other Egyptian sun worship centers existed
at various times, but Heliopolis maintained its
popularity for some 2000 years. Though the
city was of little importance politically, it was
of primary religious influence. Among Egyp-
tian religious buildings, the temple of Re at
Heliopolis was second in size only to the tem-
ple of Amon at Thebes.
In the OT Heliopolis is called On. When Jo-
seph was a member of the Egyptian official
class he married Asenath, the daughter of Poti-
phera the priest of On (Gn 41:45,50; 46:20). The
prophet Ezekiel warned of coming destruction
in Egypt by Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar,
O52
citing Heliopolis (On) as one of the cities to be
“destroyed (Ez 30:17). In Amos 1:5, the Rsv has
an alternative rendering, “On,” for ‘‘valley of
Aven,” and the same reading in Ezekiel 30:17
for the Kyv ‘‘Aven.”’ The prophet Jeremiah also
predicted the destruction of the obelisks (sa-
cred pillars) of Heliopolis (43:13, KJv Beth-
shemesh). Isaiah 19:18 (kKJv City of Destruc-
tion) may be a reference to Heliopolis, but this
is not certain.
The city fell into decay in the 4th and 3rd
centuries Bc, partly because of Egypt’s declin-
ing fortunes and partly because of the library
founded at Alexandria early in the 3rd century
Bc. Alexandria replaced Heliopolis as the lead-
ing intellectual center in Egypt.
Little remains today from the ancient city
of the sun, but an obelisk erected by Sesostris
I (1971-1928 Bc) can still be seen at the site of
Heliopolis. Several obelisks from Heliopolis,
erected by Thutmose III (1490-1436 Bc), have
been moved to various parts of the world in
modern times.
WILLIAM TRAVIS
Helkai. Head of Meraioth’s priestly house
in the time of Joiakim the high priest (Neh
e2e1s).
Helkath. First of 22 cities mentioned in the
territory allotted to Asher’s tribe for an inheri-
tance (Jos 19:25). Helkath was one of four cit-
ies in Asher given to the levitical Gershonite
families (Jos 21:31). It is alternately spelled Hu-
kok in 1 Chronicles 6:75. Its ancient site is per-
haps located at the modern Tell el-Harbaj.
Helkath-hazzurim. Area near the pool of
Gibeon, where 12 champions from Joab’s
army and 12 from Abner’s battled. All 24 died
in the fight, each fighter killing his opponent
(2 Sm 2:16). Some feel that the name may
mean “field of the crafty,” that is, ‘field of
ambush,” or “field of the adversaries.”
Hell. Place of future punishment for the
lost, unrepentant, wicked dead.
Definition and Description. Hell is the fi-
nal destiny of unbelievers and is variously de-
scribed by the figures of a furnace of fire, eter-
nal fire, eternal punishment (Mt 13:42,50;
25:41,46); outer darkness, the place of weeping
and torment (8:12); eternal sin (Mk 3:29); the
wrath of God (Rom 2:5); everlasting separa-
tion from the Lord, never to see the glory of
his power (2 Thes 1:9); the bottomless pit (Rv
9:1,11); continuous torment (14:10,11); the lake
of fire, the second death (21:8); a place for the
devil and his demons (Mt 25:41). The foregoing
designations clearly show that the state of
those in hell is one of eternal duration.

Other expressions that indicate that the fi-
nal state of the wicked is eternal are: ‘burn
with unquenchable fire’ (Mt 3:12); ‘‘to the un-
quenchable fire . . where their worm does not
die, and the fire is not quenched” (Mk 9:43,48);
there is sin which “will not be forgiven, either
in this age or in the age to come” (Mt 12:32).
When Scripture is understood properly, there
is no hint anywhere of the termination of the
terrible state of unbelievers in hell. Their
doom is unending; there is a solemn finality
about their miserable condition. (It is signifi-
cant that the most descriptive and conclusive
utterances about hell come from the lips of
our Lord.)
A summary of all Scripture that speaks of
hell indicates that there is the loss and ab-
sence of all good, and the misery and torment
of an evil conscience. The most terrifying as-
pect is the complete and deserved separation
from God and from all that is pure, holy, and
beautiful. In addition there is the awareness of
being under the wrath of God and of enduring
the curse of a righteous sentence because of
one’s sins that were consciously and voluntar-
ily committed.
Although the biblical descriptions of hell
are stated in very physical and literal terms,
the essential character of hell should not be
conceived in or limited to designation such as
the worm that devours, the stripes that are
inflicted, the burning or being consumed by
fire. This affirmation does not detract from
the horror or the gravity of the situation in
hell, because nothing could possibly be worse
than separation from God and the torment of
an evil conscience. Hell is hell for those who
are there essentially because they are com-
pletely alienated from God, and wherever
there is alienation from God there is always
estrangement from one’s fellows. This is the
worst possible punishment to which anyone
could be subject: to be totally and irrevocably
cut off from God and to be at enmity with all
those who are around oneself. Another painful
consequence of such a condition is to be at
odds with oneself—torn apart from within by
an accusing sense of guilt and shame. This con-
dition is one of total conflict: with God, one’s
neighbors, and oneself. This is hell! If the de-
scriptions of hell are figurative or symbolic,
the conditions they represent are more intense
and real than the figures of speech in which
they are expressed.
Punishment for sin is a persistent teaching
of the Bible. The doctrine of judgment is as
extensive as the canon itself. Typical of such
passages are Genesis 2:17; 3:17—19; 4:13; Leviti-
cus 26:27—33; Psalm 149:7; Isaiah 3:11; Ezekiel
14:10; Amos 1:2—-20; 2:1-11; Zechariah 14:19;
Matthew 25:41,46; Luke 16:23,24; Romans 2:5—
953
Hell
12; Galatians 6:7,8; Hebrews 10:29-31; and
Revelation 20:11-15.
Biblical Terms. The Hebrew word ‘‘She-
ol” in the OT is predominantly used for “the
grave, the pit, the place of the departed dead”
(Gite g7295h 0b 07:0) mass sser7713—163 -Pss 6's;
16:10; 55:15; Prv 9:18; Eccl 9:10; Is 14:11; 38:10—
‘“12,18). There does not seem to be a very clear
distinction in the OT between the final destiny
of the good and the evil. They all alike go to
the grave, to the world below, a world of
gloom, weariness, darkness, decay, and forget-
fulness, where one is remote from God (Jb
10:20—22; Ps 88:3—-6), yet accessible to him (Jb
26:6; Ps 139:8; Am 9:2). It is a place character-
ized by silence (Pss 94:17; 115:17) and rest (Jb
3:17). Other texts, however, seem to suggest
some aspect of consciousness, hope, and com-
munication in Sheol (Jb 14:13-15; 19:25—27;
Pss 16:10; 49:15; Is 14:9,10; Ez 32:21). A few
texts seem to suggest the threat of divine judg-
ment after death (Pss 9:17; 55:15). On the
whole, Sheol was regarded with dismay and
foreboding (Dt 32:22; Ps 39:13; Is 38:18).
It was not until the time of the postcanon-
ical Jewish literature, the writings which were
developed between the close of the OT and the
beginning of NT times, that clear distinctions
were made between the final destinies of the
righteous and the unrighteous. The idea of
separate divisions within Sheol for the good
and the evil was developed. It is unmistakable
that there was in Jewish thought, as reflected
throughout the OT, a belief in a future and
continued existence beyond death, however
shadowy and indefinite the concept.
The Greek word “‘Hades’”’ in the NT is used
very similarly to ‘‘Sheol” in the OT. It was, in
fact, used by the translators of the Septuagint,
the Greek version of the OT, for Sheol. It desig- .
nated in general the place or state of the dead,
the grave, or death itself. In some versions the
word is not translated at all, but is transliter-
ated simply as ‘‘Hades.” The NT is not always
very explicit about the meaning of Hades,
other than what has just been described. Use
of the word often does not reveal much about
the specific condition of the dead. There are
some passages, however, which indicate a dis-
tinct advance over the use of Sheol in the OT.
Some NT passages definitely describe Hades
as a place of evil and punishment of the
wicked, and may appropriately be translated
“hell” (Lk 16:23).
Some Bible scholars held on the basis of
the Luke passage (16:19—31) that Hades con-
sists of two compartments where the dead are
kept, ‘the bosom of Abraham,” or Paradise,
where Lazarus resided, and the place of tor-
ment where the rich man suffered. This teach-
ing seems derived more from a pagan Greek
Hell
origin than from the Gospel of Luke. The con-
trast here seems to be a distinction between
“the bosom of Abraham” and an altogether
different place, antithetical and exclusive
the place where Lazarus was. It does not natu-
rally seem to be speaking about two separated
divisions both included in Hades, but about
two altogether different locales and conditions
separated by an impassable and fixed gulf.
The intent of the passage is not to give topo-
graphical information about the realm of the
dead, but to give a warning to those who are
not prepared for life after death.
The Greek word ‘‘Gehenna’”’ is used in a
number of NT texts to designate the fiery
place for punishment of sinners and is often
translated “hell” or ‘‘the fires of hell’ (Mt
5:22,29,30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15,333 Mk 9:43,45,47;
Jas 3:6). It is usually used in connection with
the final judgment and often has the sugges-
tion that the punishment spoken of is eternal.
Gehenna is derived by transliteration from the
Hebrew of the OT, “valley of Hinnom”’ or the
“valley of the son of Hinnom,” a ravine on the
south side of Jerusalem. This valley was the
center of idolatrous worship in which children
were burned by fire as an offering to the hea-
then god Molech (2 Chr 28:3; 33:6). In the time
of Josiah it became a place of abomination,
polluted by dead men’s bones and the filth of
Jerusalem (2 Kgs 23:10-14) and by garbage
and rubbish dumped there. A fire burned con-
tinuously in this valley. It thus became a sym-
bol of the unending fires of hell where the lost
are consumed in torment. It was a symbol of
judgment to be imposed on the idolatrous and
disobedient (Jer 7:31-34; 32:35).
Another Greek word used to designate hell
or “‘the lower regions” is Tartarus (2 Pt 2:4), a
classical word for the place of eternal punish-
ment. The apostle Peter uses it for the fallen
angels who were thrown into hell, “commit-
The Gehenna Valley outside of Jerusalem, the location of the
garbage dump with its fire that was never quenched (Mk
9:43,44,45,46,48).
ted ... to pits of nether gloom to be kept until
“the judgment.”
As noted above, there are, in addition
of to these terms, the very explicit and vivid
phrases that clearly teach the doctrine of hell,
as developed at the beginning of this article.
The biblical doctrine is determined much
more by these decisive phrases than by
the somewhat indecisive but frequently used
terms “Sheol” and “Hades.”
Justice of Eternal Punishment. It is diffi-
cult for us as sinners to understand the righ-
teous judment of a holy God who, on one
hand, hates all evil, yet, on the other hand,
loves the evildoers enough to sacrifice his only
Son for their salvation from sin. Divine wrath
is the necessary reaction of a holy God who
hates all that is contrary to his righteous na-
ture. When the only remedy for human sin is
rejected and all appeals of a loving, seeking
God for the reconciliation of rebellious sinners
are refused, there is no other course of action
which God himself can pursue but to leave the
sinner to his self-chosen destiny. Punishment
for sin is then the inevitable and inescapable
response of holiness to that which is morally
opposite, and it must continue as long as the
sinful condition requiring it continues. There
is no indication anywhere in Scripture that
lost sinners in hell are capable of repentance
and faith. If in this life they did not turn away
from sin and receive Christ as Savior with all
the favorable circumstances and opportunities
afforded them on earth, it is unreasonable to
think they will do so in the life to come when
none of the encouragements to believe and to
forsake sin are present. Punishment cannot
come to an end until guilt and sin come to an
end. When the sinner ultimately resists and
rejects the work of the Holy Spirit whereby he
is convicted of sin, there remains no more pos-
sibility of repentance or salvation. He has com-
mitted an eternal sin (Mk 3:29; Rv 22:11),
which deserves eternal punishment. (Inciden-
tally, the same word “eternal” is applied to
the duration of the punishment in hell as is
used for the duration of the bliss in heaven,
Mt 25:46.)
The impossibility of faith and repentance in
hell is seen also from the tragic reality of the
depraved will, conditioned and determined by
its repeated rebellion against God. Sin repro-
duces itself in the will, and character tends to
become irrevocably fixed. God responds to
endless sinning with the necessary counter-
part of endless punishment.
If the question be raised, How can a loving
God send men to an everlasting Hell? it must
be replied that God does not choose this des-
tiny for men; they freely choose it for them-
selves. God simply concurs in their self-chosen
954

way and reveals the full consequences of their
evil choice. It must always be remembered
that God is not only loving; he is also holy and
righteous, and there must be some adequate
reckoning with justice in the universe where a became increasingly characterized by a strong
revolt against God has brought evil conse-
quences of enormous proportions.
While the duration of punishment in hell “of the major development of that period, the
is eternal for all who have chosen that des-
tiny for themselves, there are degrees of pun-
ishment proportional to the degrees of guilt
of each individual. Only God is able to de-
termine what those degrees are, and he will
assign the consequences with perfect justice
according to the responsibility of each one.
Evidence of such gradations in future punish-
ment is found in Scripture (Mt 11:20—24; Lk
12:47,48; Rv 20:12,13; cf. Ez 16:48—61). An obvi-
ous comparison is made in these texts be-
tween the differing intensities of punishment
that are involved in the contrasting privi-
leges, knowledge, and opportunities.
From all that has been said it should be
obvious that a variety of nonbiblical views
must be ruled out, however attractively they
may be presented by their advocates and how-
ever popular they may be from time to time.
- Among these views are the erroneous, but
sometimes persuasive, doctrines of universal-
ism, annihilationism, and second probation. It
must always be remembered that the Bible is also the times of Greek alliances; the Pelopon-
our rule of faith for the doctrine of hell, how-
ever difficult the doctrine may seem for natu-
ral reason or for human sentiment. Scripture
leaves no doubt about the terrible nature and
the eternal duration of hell. Rejection or ne-
glect of this doctrine will have dire effects
upon the true health and mission of the
church.
RALPH E. POWELL
See DEATH; DEAD, ABODE OF THE; SHEOL; HaDEs;
INTERMEDIATE STATE; GEHENNA; ABRAHAM’S BosoM;
WRATH OF GoD.
Bibliography. J.A. Beet, The Last Things; J.S. Bonnell,
Heaven and Hell; H. Buis, The Doctrine of Eternal Punish-
ment; W. Eichrodt, Theology of the OT, vol z, pp 210-28.
Hellenism. That unique blend of Greek cul- Sparta, Pericles transformed both architecture
tural, philosophical and ethical ideals which
after Alexander the Great had a profound ef- ernment (by adding a new dimension to Athe-
fect on the development of culture through-
out the Mediterranean world. While the ante-
cedents of the movement occur long before,
the Hellenistic Age is seen by most to have
begun in 323 Bc, with the death of Alexander,
and to have continued until either 30 Bc,
when Rome conquered Egypt, or (more like-
ly) aD 300+. Rome itself was culturally con-
quered by Hellenism.
Historical Development. The Antecedents.
The Hellenistic spirit can be traced as far back
955
Hellenism
as the Archaic period (750-500 Bc), which was
a time of growing population and prosperity.
The polis or city-state became the center of
political and social life. As a result, the era
individualism and realistic approach to life.
This cultural factor must be seen in the light
growing specialization of war. The Greeks de-
veloped a new approach, that of the hoplite or
infantrymen. Previously, warfare had been un-
der the province of the aristocracy and was
fought by individual champions. The Greeks
introduced the idea of the finely molded unit
and taught peasants how to fight. This made
the art of warfare a Greek specialty, and their
mercenaries were known throughout the an-
cient world.
Some city-states, such as Sparta, special-
ized in military matters while others, like Ath-
ens, moved in the direction of political reform,
evolving a democratic form of government
from the “tyrannies’’ of earlier times. The re-
sult was that Sparta ambitiously extended her
influence, conquering and colonizing neighbor-
ing lands, while Athens seemed to be charac-
terized by internal squabbles and atrophy.
However, in the 5th century Bc Athens had set-
tled her problems and became a major force
in the wars against the Persians. These were
nesian league of the 6th century was followed
by the Delian league of the 5th.
The Classical Period. These political devel-
opments provided the basis for the evolution
of a vigorous, dynamic new spirit that was
to characterize art, drama, and philosophy.
Sculpture and painting were revitalized, and
the stylized figures of the past were replaced
by the realistic forms associated with the clas-
sical period. The Greek tragedy developed vig-
orously. Schools of philosophy flourished, nota-
bly Pythagoras’, whose mathematical approach
set the stage for the marriage of science and
ideas so crucial to Greek philosophy; and Par-
menides’, who wedded physics to metaphys-
ics. After a period of war between Athens and
(by building the Parthenon in Athens) and gov-
nian democracy, allowing even foreigners to
participate). During this time, the Greeks de-
veloped the idea that was to transform their
way of life: that human intellect or reason was
the highest good and the path to happiness.
From this nucleus arose the sciences, the arts,
and the Hellenistic philosophies.
The Great Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC)
accelerated the cultural changes. The political
and economic tensions produced first the Soph-
ists, who exalted rationalism and rhetoric,
Hellenism
then Socrates and Thucydides, both of whom
stressed a rigorous cross-examination of all
truth-claims. The war ended with the defeat of
Athens by Sparta, but during the next few de-
cades Sparta began to decline from lack of
good leadership, while Athens restored its de-
mocracy and built a Second Athenian League.
Yet even this was only temporary, and the com-
mon Greek tendency to individualism and dis-
sension soon led to its failure as well.
It remained for Philip of Macedonia to pick
up the pieces. Through a series of wars he suc-
ceeded in finally uniting the Greek city-states.
His untimely assassination left his son, Alex-
ander, the task of spreading his kingdom
throughout the then-known world.
Philosophy during this period became the
handmaiden of politics. Plato was primarily a
statesman-philosopher who never ceased in
his search for a ‘‘philosopher-king”’ who could
unite Greece. The death in 399 Bc of his men-
tor, Socrates, turned Plato from active politics
and he established his Academy, primarily a
school of political philosophy which sought to
use truth to reform the state. His most famous
pupil, Aristotle, became the tutor of young Al-
exander and thereby achieved his master’s
dream. Platonic idealism and Aristotelian real-
ism were to become the two poles of Greek
thought for generations to come.
The Hellenistic Age. Alexander the Great
was more than a military conqueror. He made
Hellenistic culture the norm throughout his
realm. He taught conquered people the Greek
language and customs, and he built new Greek
cities like Alexandria in Egypt (34 in all),
which became bastions of Hellenism. His ma-
jor accomplishment was not so much territo-
rial as cultural; after him Hellenism
trolled the Western world for centuries. It was
Alexander who spearheaded the triumph of
the Attic koine (common) dialect over the
other Greek dialects, and this became the pri-
mary force in the Hellenization of the East.
The koine dialect was to be the basis for the
acceptance of Hellenism by subject peoples.
The first period after his death would be char-
acterized by the dissolution of Alexander’s em-
pire and an emerging balance of power be-
tween the forces cf Ptolemy, who controlled
Egypt and Palestine; Seleucus, who
Babylon and Asia Minor; and Antipater (fol-
lowed by Antigonus), who reigned over Mace-
donia and the Hellespont.
In the East the next century was typified
by intermittent skirmishes between the Pto-
lemies and Seleucids, with the result that Pal-
estine became a buffer state between the two.
An important difference is that the Ptolemies
had a unified kingdom and so were not inter-
ested in change; under their rule Palestine
was autonomous both culturally and reli-
giously. However, the Seleucids controlled
many different groups and so tried to unite
them by forcing Hellenization on them. This
finally led to the successful revolt of the Jews
under the Maccabees and the disintegration
of both empires. In the West, Rome became
progressively involved in Greek affairs and by
149 BC controlled the Greek lands politically,
while they themselves were overtaken by
Greek ideals culturally.
During this period there was a growing mid-
dle class, which was brought about partly be-
cause Alexander’s conquests led to a vast dis-
persion of Greeks into the conquered lands.
The redistribution of wealth this engendered
was based upon a Greek education and an ac-
ceptance of Hellenistic ideals. The term “civi-
lized’”’ came to be identified with the Greek
way of life. Education was controlled by the
idea of sound rhetoric, so that style triumphed
over truth. Greek drama turned to comedy,
which stressed realism in human emotions,
and Hellenistic art grew even more naturalis-
tic than in the classical period.
Philosophy also developed, with at least
three schools arising to dominate Greek
thought for the next few centuries. Interest-
ingly, all three centered on practical ethics
rather than the classical quest for truth and
knowledge. The Cynics, founded by Diogenes,
stressed a total self-sufficiency which left the
individual in a social vacuum but taught him
how to deal with human misery. The two most
influential schools were the Epicureans and
the Stoics. Epicurus sought freedom from anxi-
ety or fear and taught that peace of the soul
could only be derived from a disciplined, mod-
con- erate experience of pleasures. The result was a
retreat from society into one’s own selfhood.
Stoicism, founded by Zeno and named after
the stoa (porch) in Athens where he taught,
was similar to cynicism in its emphasis on
self-sufficiency, but it combined this with a
stress on the brotherhood of man. Every per-
son was to strive after virtue and live above
the vicissitudes of life. This last philosophy
had become the center of Hellenism by the
time of Christ.
Hellenism and Judaism. Judaism was vir-
ruled tually the only culture that resisted the en-
croachment of Hellenism. Therefore the power
of this movement can be seen in the degree to
which it permeated Judaism.
The pull of Hellenism was always felt pri-
marily by the upper class nobility, and it was
strongest in Jewish communities of the disper-
sion. However, under the Seleucids the temple
priesthood was pro-Hellenist, so this added a
religious dimension to the economic pressure
upon the wealthy. From the beginning Pales-
956

tine was split into two factions, the urban
nobility, who tried to make Jerusalem another
polis or Hellenistic city-state by adding such
things as gymnasia and Greek drama; and the
agricultural, poor peasants who saw in Helle-
nism a threat to the very existence of the Mo-
saic system.
Jews had to learn koine Greek to make busi- -’ ture of the opposition movement, shows the
ness transactions and participate in legal mat-
ters. Archaeology shows that almost all in-
scriptions in Palestine from the 3rd century Bc
were in Greek, and the translation of the To-
rah into Greek in the Septuagint shows the
permeation of the language in the Jewish com-
munities outside of Palestine (diasporate com-
munities). The gymnasium was the school in
Hellenistic cities, and Greek education
the key to citizenship. Alexandria (Egypt) in
this regard became the intellectual center of
the Greek world, and its influence
strong Jewish community in that city was con-
siderable. Well-to-do Jews in lands of the dis-
persion and in Jerusalem itself were expected
to procure a gymnasium education. Many fol-
lowed the Greek practice of participating na-
ked in sports, as can be seen from the litera-
ture of the intertestamental period, which is
strongly antagonistic a century later (due to
Jewish aversion to such public display). Jew-
ish synagogue schools, as a result of competi-
tion with the gymnasia, adopted Greek ways.
In fact, the development of the scribal tradi-
tion is partly due to this interaction; the move-
ment was away from the oligarchical system
of the temple era and toward a democratic
instruction of the whole people.
Jewish literature and philosophy became
permeated by Hellenistic patterns. This is
seen in 1 and 2 Maccabees, which reflect Greek
historiography, and Hellenistic influence can
be seen in virtually every Jewish work of this
period. The major exponent, of course, was
Philo of Alexandria, whose allegorical interpre-
tation of the OT was designed to make Jewish
teachings palatable to the Hellenistic world
and vice versa. This attitude was quite com-
mon. The symbolism of Jewish apocalyptic
was influenced by a combination of Hellenis-
tic and oriental (primarily Persian) themes,
and even the hyper-conservative Essene move-
ment used thought-forms which had been
molded via Judaism’s penetration by Hellenis-
tic and Persian ideas. The stress on “eternal
knowledge” and ‘‘revealed mystery” and the
dualistic combination of salvation history and
anthropology are evidence of this. Of course,
the influence was not all one way. The develop-
ment of Greek philosophy was strongly influ-
enced by Semitic forms, especially Phoeni-
cian; and the strong Jewish piety was very
attractive to the Greek mind.
Hellenism
It is accurate to say that even the Judaism
of Palestine in the rst century Bc was a Helle-
nistic Judaism. The universality of the koine
Greek, the infiltration of Greek learning and
thought-patterns, the presence of Jewish litera-
ture in Greek, and the permeation of Hellenis-
tic rhetorical devices, even into the very litera-
power of Hellenism in Palestine.
Hellenism and Christianity. Some schol-
ars have attempted to stratify early Chris-
tianity into periods typified by Palestinian,
Hellenistic-Jewish, and Hellenistic outlooks.
However, as the evidence above has shown,
this is by no means an easy task, since even
Judea was penetrated by Greek thought-
was patterns. To be sure, the reactionary stance
against Hellenism in Judaism is paralleled by
the Hellenist-Hebrew conflict of Acts 6 and by
on the the opposition of the Judaizers to Paul and the
gentile mission. However, from the very earli-
est stages the influence of Hellenism on the
church can be traced. Moreover, it becomes
virtually impossible to know whether a phrase
is drawn from Palestinian or from Hellenistic
sources, due to the mutual penetration of both
into diasporate communities as well as Pales-
tine itself, and to the bilingual nature of the
church from the beginning.
This does not mean that there were no dif-
ferences at all. The Hellenistic background of
Stephen allowed him to see the logical impli-
cations of Christ for the land and the temple
(cf. Acts 6,7) while the more conservative Jeru-
salem church did not. Also, a study of the
speeches in Acts shows that the kerygma
(preaching) developed differently for Jewish
and gentile audiences. The first centered on
OT fulfillment and the second on the active
penetration of history by the one true God,
who unlike dead idols involved himself in the
affairs of man.
The very fact that the NT was written in
koine Greek makes the influence very direct.
Strongly Jewish-oriented works, such as He-
brews or James, are written in polished Greek,
and even the Gospels, which record the life of
Jesus in a Jewish setting, reflect Hellenistic his-
toriography (e.g., an interest in the theological
meaning of the historical events). Most obvi-
ously Hellenistic, of course, are ideas found in
the epistles stemming from the gentile mission.
Early hymns like Colossians 1:15—20 use termi-
nology from the Hellenistic environs to de-
scribe the incomparable superiority of Jesus
over pagan ideals. The stress on the universal
mission, while based on the teachings of Jesus,
developed during the gentile mission; the prim-
itive church interpreted it in keeping with Jew-
ish proselyte theology, which was that the Gen-
tiles became Christians after becoming Jews.
957
Hellenistic Judaism
Further Developments. Two Hellenistic
schools of thought evolved during the time of
the early church, coming to full fruition only
later. One was Gnosticism, which seemed to
develop simultaneously from Babylonian my-
thology, Persian dualism, Egyptian mysticism,
and Jewish Christian theology. In fact, Gnos-
ticism has been called one of the earliest
syncretistic movements. In the past it has
been common to regard the movement as a
Christian development, since the sources for
most information about it were early church
fathers writing against these ‘‘heresies.’’ How-
ever, it is now more common to recognize the
movement as a broader Hellenistic conception
which arose out of the general intellectual and
metaphysical milieu of the late rst century aD.
The stress on knowledge (gnosis) as the saving
way of escape in the dualistic battle between
good and evil, defined in terms of the spiritual
versus the material, and the central place of
the “‘savior’’ as the means of leading the soul
into the higher realms of salvation are both
Hellenistic in their essence. While many have
seen these ideas in the NT, it seems more
likely that the movement was just in its begin-
ning stages and was not fully developed until
the 2nd century. However, this “incipient” or
“proto” Gnosticism is definitely opposed in la-
ter writings like Colossians, the pastoral Epis-
tles, or 1 John.
The second aspect of Hellenistic thought is
the mystery religions, which appeared early in
the Hellenistic period, as in the Greek culis of
Eleusis or Dionysus. These eastern cults be-
came popular in the West only after the
spread of Christianity. These popular move-
ments, for example, the Isis (Egyptian) and
Mithraic (Persian) cults, were primarily orien-
tal and exotic, appealing to the Greek sense of
myth and ritual. They primarily taught that
every person had a divine essence trapped in-
side the flesh which could be released only
through solemn initiatory rites and commu-
nion with the deity around which the particu-
lar cult revolved. While the details of the rites
differed, the meaning and significance was
much the same. Salvation was found by par-
ticipation in the mystery rites of the cults,
which for the most part resembled ancient fer-
tility rites centering on the renewal of vegeta-
tion in the spring. The popularity of these
groups shows the highly syncretistic nature of
Hellenism, which adapted itself to new ideas
and worked them into the Greek way of life.
GRANT R. OSBORNE
See HELLENISTIC JUDAISM; STOICS, STOICISM; EPICU-
REANS; JUDAISM; GREECE, GREEKS; GNOSTICISM.
Hellenistic Judaism. Branch of Judaism
which maintained the Jewish way of worship
958
but accepted Greek cultural and linguistic pe-
‘culiarities. It originated from four factors: (1)
the forced dispersion of the Jews into Greek-
speaking lands under the Assyrians (2 Kgs
17,18) and Babylonians (2 Kgs 24,25). Other
forced deportations took place under Ptolemy
I (to Egypt, 300 Bc) and Pompey (to Rome, 63
BC); (2) unsettled conditions in Palestine, espe-
cially in the latter stages of the Hasmonean
period, which led many Jews to prefer an un-
certain future in foreign lands to the assured
deprivations at home, with wars, persecu-
tions, and hard taxation; (3) economic op-
portunities abroad, which led Jews to take
advantage of agricultural and commercial op-
portunities in nearly every country of the
known ancient world; and (4) the growing
proselyte movement, which reached its peak
at the time of Christ (Mt 23:15).
Estimations of population density in the Ro-
man Empire vary, but most scholars favor 10
million. This means that one of every 20 peo-
ple in the empire was Jewish! The areas of
greatest density were Rome, Egypt, and Par-
thia, but the economic strength was negligi-
ble. While some rose to positions of power
(e.g., Daniel or Nehemiah), the majority were
farmers or belonged to the lower middle class.
While they were not paupers, they were nei-
ther wealthy nor influential.
Hellenistic Judaism in Palestine. The his-
torical origins of Hellenism and its impact on
main-line Judaism are not only chronicled in
the dispersion movements of the people but
are also to be found in the strong influence of
Hellenism in Palestine itself. After the Greek
takeover of Palestine (332 Bc) the power turned
from the priests to the scribes, and the reli-
gious emphasis thereby shifted from cultus to
Torah. This introduced the dialogue method of
interpretation into Jewish life, and inevitably
Greek logic entered the picture. Originally, the
subtle encroachment of Hellenistic ideals took
the form of cultural borrowing, that is, the
Jews copied their more sophisticated cultural
(but not religious!) practices. Problems began
when cities and especially the upper classes
(called “Hellenes”’) began to emulate Greek
practices in political as well as cultural areas.
The gymnasiums became popular, a thing ab-
horrent to the orthodox Jew who hated naked-
ness and display. Theater and drama were
also considered depraved.
These caused bitter debates among Palestin-
ian Jews, many of whom refused to separate
the cultural from the religious. The situation
came to a head when the Ptolemies, who
wished to purge strong nationalistic ties,
elected pro-Hellenists to the high priestly of-
fice. Onias III, Jason, and Menalaeus (175-1 63
BC) built gymnasiums, encouraged Greek dress,
 Hellenistic Judaism

and forced ‘“‘reform’”’ upon Palestine. This led hardly make it to Jerusalem for each festival.
first to rebellion, then to the “abomination,” Nevertheless, many often tried to send a sacri-
the desecration of the temple, by Antiochus fice when they could not take it themselves.
Epiphanes, and finally to the successful revolt 2. The temple tax united the Jews. While
by Matthias and his sons that eventually freed Jews outside Israel did not have to support the
Palestine from Greek rule. For a time the land of Palestine, the half-shekel temple tax,
strong surge of puritanism controlled the land, which went for the public sacrifices, was an
but even here the Hellenistic thought patterns “obligation upon all Jews. From written rec-
were so ingrained that they could not be eradi- ords of the large amounts gathered in various
cated (for the most part, the people did not communities, it was faithfully met. In fact,
even realize this, for they were imbedded in when the amount greatly exceeded the needs,
external practices). the excess was applied to the maintenance of
However, later in the period of the Macca- Jerusalem, which was thought to be part of
bees and Hasmoneans the strong influence of the temple area. The feeling of unity engen-
Hellenism was again felt. When that period dered by this is seen in the temple prayers,
came to an end and the Herodian dynasty was which included the “exile Jews” in other
inaugurated, the forces of change intensified. lands.
To solidify the break with the Hasmonean 3. The pilgrimages to the three major
past, Herod brought in diasporate Jews from feasts (Passover, Pentecost, Tabernacles) tied
Egypt and elsewhere to take over the high Hellenistic Jews to Israel. Exodus 23:17, 34:23,
priesthood, a situation that continued into the and Deuteronomy 16:16 commanded every
time of Christ. For all these reasons Hellenis- Jewish male to “appear before the Lord” at
tic Judaism had a strong influence within the these three feasts. Of course, it was impracti-
borders of Palestine itself. cal, even within the confines of Palestine, and
Relations Between the Diaspora and Pales- so the requirement was not rigidly enforced;
tinian Judaism. Historically, the unity be- but Jews from every land streamed to the
tween the Hellenistic Jews of the diaspora and feasts each year, as may be seen in the fa-
those in the homeland varied, depending on mous Pentecost passage (Acts 2:9—11). Often
the political situation and the orthodoxy of young Jews would remain in Jerusalem for a
the Jews in the particular area. There are rec- time to study the Torah under a famous rab-
ords of communities which combined the wor- bi, as did Saul of Tarsus (later the apostle
ship of Yahweh with the Greek pantheon, but Paul) under Gamaliel.
for the most part these were isolated and had 4. Many diasporate families actually settled
no influence on Hellenistic Judaism. Diaspor- down in Jerusalem. Acts 2:5 says, ““Now there
ate Jews followed the Torah publicly as well were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men
as privately. from every nation under heaven.” Acts 6:9
As noted, Hellenistic Jews accepted the speaks of synagogues “of the Freedmen...
Greek culture but at the same time regarded and of the Cyrenians, and of the Alexandri-
themselves as aliens and believed that Pales- ans....” In fact, while it was impractical for
tine was their true homeland. They identified all Hellenistic Jews to return to their home-
strongly with the traumas of their fellow Jews, land, it was the desire of every devout diaspor-
and their literature contains a strong expecta- ate Jew to do so.
tion of deliverance for their homeland from 5. Another unifying influence was the en-
the foreign oppressors. The Promised Land voys or traveling rabbis who acted as emissar-
and temple worship were the centers of their ies from the homeland to the Hellenistic Jews
religious longing, and they did not consider of the diaspora. These were often the most fa-
themselves significantly different from the Pal- mous scholars of the period, such as Gamaliel
estinian Jews. Five factors especially contrib- or Akiba. These men, called sages, traveled in
uted to the unity: pairs and functioned in every way like local
1. The presence of the temple in Jerusalem rabbis—preaching, teaching, settling legal dis-
bound them to Palestine. They believed that putes, or collecting contributions. Their influ-
God was present in the Holy of Holies, and so ence was enormous, and they more than any
God could only be worshiped there. While other force solidifed the authority of the San-
there was the Temple of Onias at Heliopolis in hedrin in Jerusalem over the Jewish communi-
Egypt, it was only built for the military force ties in other lands.
there and had no influence even among the Religious Practices. Jews of the disper-
Jews of Egypt. Diasporate worship centered in sion were generally quite orthodox. It was Hel-
the synagogue; but sacrifices, the core of Jew- lenistic Jews who instigated the trial against
ish cultic life, could only be offered in the tem- Stephen (Acts 6:9—15) and who started the riot
ple. Of course, the legal regulations were soft- against Paul for allegedly bringing Greeks into
ened for Jews of the Diaspora, who could the temple (Acts 21:27—36). While their cul-

959
Hellenistic Judaism
The synagogue at Herodium.
tural practices followed Hellenistic customs,
their religious life was Jewish to the core. The
center, of course, was the synagogue. The
great synagogue at Alexandria was reputedly
so large that flags had to be waved to tell the
congregation when to say the Amen. A typical
service is described in Acts 13:15, with prayers,
readings from the Law and the prophets, re-
spectively, then an address. The service was
designed for the public rather than for special-
ists like the priests (unlike temple worship),
and laymen were asked to deliver the readings
or the address (as was the case with Jesus and
Paul). The most important difference within
Hellenistic Judaism was the use of Greek in
the worship service rather than Hebrew or the
Aramaic Targums. As a result, it had an impor-
tant social role in the community. In fact the
head of the synagogue functioned with the el-
ders as the “ruler” of the community (there
being no distinction between religious and
civic matters), especially in lands which al-
lowed the Jewish community to govern its
own internal affairs (common Roman prac-
tice). His assistant, the “attendant” of Luke
4:20, not only managed the practical affairs of
the synagogue but also functioned as town
“manager.”
The synagogue, because of its unique func-
tion, came to be used for many purposes within
Hellenistic Judaism. Civic business was con-
ducted there, and in most communities it also
functioned as the school. In addition, the pub-
lic tribunals met in the synagogues. There are
scriptural examples of public floggings given
there (Mt 10:17; Acts 22:19), and Acts 9:1,2 tells
of Paul procuring letters to the diasporate syna-
gogues so that the tribunals there would allow
Paul to extradite Christians to Jerusalem.
Education naturally centered around the
study of the Torah, which was not just the
prerogative of priests and rabbis but was a
community responsibility. Here there was lit-
tle difference between the diaspora and Judea
except for the refusal to teach or use Greek in
the schools of the homeland. The child began
g60
studying the written Scriptures at the ‘age of
“five or six and then added the oral law at the
age of ten. At 12 or 13 he finished school and
after bar mitzvah entered the adult world.
Adults would continue studying Torah, but
mainly would confine themselves to the oral
law. i
Another area peculiar to the diasporate
communities was the training of proselytes
and God-fearers; the difference between the
two groups was often that the latter had not
undergone circumcision and so could not be
considered a legal part of the covenant people.
A perusal of the Book of Acts shows that the
God-fearers provided the nucleus of the con-
verts in most of the cities Paul evangelized.
Gentiles were particularly susceptible to Juda-
ism and Christianity due to the deterioration
of faith in the pagan religions. The religious
conviction and moral strength of both had
great appeal. So the Hellenistic synagogues be-
came missionary centers.
Finally, we might mention here the devel-
opment of the guilds. As was common in the
ancient world, the various guilds (e.g., the
tentmakers or weavers) became mini-commu-
nities. We know that in the synagogue of Alex-
andria, each guild sat in a different section,
and this may well have been the universal
practice.
Differences with Palestinian Jews. As al-
ready intimated, the distinctions should not
be overstated, for Hellenistic Judaism was far
more Jewish than Hellenistic, and Hellenistic
influence can certainly be demonstrated in Pal-
estine itself. The major differences are seen in
the daily life, business practices, and the
mind-set of diasporate Judaism. Naturally, af-
ter the first generation there was a tendency
to accept the external way of life of the nation
within which they lived, so long as it did not
interfere with their religious convictions. For
example, some Jews would favor the games or
plays, the artistic tastes and ways of expres-
sion observed in the lives of their neighbors.
In Alexandria, some even sought a Greek edu-
cation, a necessary prelude to citizenship.
However, the majority of Hellenistic Jews
probably refused to succumb even this far and
remained in their isolated communities. The
aristocracy naturally was more inclined to
Hellenization. The average diasporate Jew
had contact with Greek-speaking neighbors
only on the commercial plane. At the same
time, however, Hellenistic Judaism was forced
out of its cocoon by a widespread anti-Jewish
movement about the time of Christ. Jews in
Palestine remained aloof from an active propa-
gandizing of pagans; for example, there was
very little polemic against idolatry in Judaea.
They connected the disappearance of idolatry
 Heman

with the appearance of the kingdom:of God In 6:1 the group was probably made up of
and refused to get involved in an active way Hellenistic Jews then living in Palestine. This
against pagan ways. In the diaspora condi- is seen in the deacons chosen in 6:5 (Luke used
tions were different; Jews were forced to de- Greek names for all of them, probably not be-
fend their ways and then to develop an active cause they were Greek but to symbolize the
polemic. desire of the apostles to unify the separate
This propaganda was couched in terms of groups; most Jews in the ancient world had
Greek philosophy and led to a vigorous output .-three names—a Jewish, a Greek, and a Roman
of Hellenistic Jewish literature. The Septua- name—and used one or the other depending
gint was probably produced, not only to pro- on the occasion) but especially in the syna-
vide a Bible for Greek-speaking Judaism, but gogues mentioned in 6:9. Hellenistic Jews dif-
also to show that Judaism and Greek thought fered sufficiently in their background’ and
were not mutually exclusive. The writings of worship habits (especially in the use of Greek
Philo went even further, attempting to couch in the service) that there would be separate
Jewish theology in Hellenistic thought-forms. synagogues for them (there were seven such in
Scholars list four types of literature: (1) His- Jerusalem alone). This created a potentially di-
torical works (e.g., Josephus) that sought to visive situation for the early church, and the
show the meaning of Jewish history in con- schism here was the result. The “Hebrews”
trast to pagan; (2) theological and philosophi- would naturally tend to allocate the common
cal writings that presented Jewish beliefs in pool to those they knew, and so the very sepa-
Greek forms (e.g., Wisdom of Solomon); (3) ration between the groups would add to the
Jewish poetry that employed Greek stylistic problem.
traits; (4) apologetic works that answered pa- In 9:29 the “Hellenists’’ are members of the
gan charges and then went on to ridicule pa- same group. Paul, a diasporate Jew himself,
gan ways. However, it is important to modify would naturally go to his old compatriots on
this by noting that it was the intelligentsia his first visit to Jerusalem after his conversion.
rather than hoi polloi (the people) who pro- In 11:20 the manuscript evidence is equally di-
duced these works. The common Jews re- vided between “‘Hellenists” and “Greeks.”
mained isolated from much of this, even in As “Hellenist” is used in 11:20, it designates
diasporate communities. the Greek-speaking populace of Antioch, there-
GRANT R. OSBORNE fore Gentiles in general. This is different from
See HELLENISM; JUDAISM; PHILO JUDAEUS; ALEXAN- the usages in 6:1 and 9:29.
DRIA. GRANT R. OSBORNE
Bibliography. W. Foerster, Palestinian Judaism in NT See HELLENISTIC JUDAISM; JUDAISM; ACTS OF THE
Times; M. Hadas, Hellinistic Culture: Fusion and Diffusion; APOSTLES, BOOK OF THE.
M. Hengel, Jews, Greeks, and Barbarians; M. Hengel, Juda-
ism and Hellenism, 2 vols; M. Stone, Scriptures, Sects, and
Visions; V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews.
Helmet. See ARMS AND WARFARE.

Helon. Father of Eliab, prince of Zebulun’s

Hellenists. Name used in Acts 6:1; 9:29; and tribe at the taking of the first census (Nm 1:9;
possibly 11:20 for a distinct branch of the early 2:7; "724,20; 10:10).
church that was characterized by Greek modes
of thinking. Their actual identification is dis- Helps, Gift of. See Spreiruat Girts.
puted, and the following possibilities have
been propounded: (1) Greek-speaking Jews
rather than Aramaic-speaking Jews (but “He- Hemam. kjJv spelling of Heman, Lotan’s
son, in Genesis 36:22.
brews” as in 6:1 was seldom used in a linguis-
tic sense); (2) proselytes or ‘Greeks’ as op- See HEMAN #1.
posed to true Jews (the list of deacons in 6:5
makes this doubtful, for it is unlikely that they Heman. 1. Lotan’s son, the brother of Hori
were all proselytes); (3) diasporate Jews living and a descendant of Seir the Horite (Gn 36:22,
in Palestine (fits 6::—6 but not the other pas- kJvV Hemam); alternately spelled Homam in
sages); (4) pro-Hellenist sect within Judaism 1 Chronicles 1:39, reflecting a later scribal
(this does not fit the whole tenor of the pas- error.
sages); (5) Gentiles who joined the church at 2. Mahol’s son, descendant of Zerah from
an early date (this does not really fit the con- Judah’s tribe and one of the sages whose wis-
text of all three passages); (6) a general not dom was surpassed by King Solomon’s (1 Kgs
specific term and simply referring to one who 4:31; 1 Chr 2:6). He is perhaps the Ezrahite and
either speaks Greek or follows Greek customs author of Psalm 88.
(or both). This is the best answer, as a study of 3. Kohathite Levite, Joel’s son and one ap-
the contexts will illustrate. pointed, along with Asaph and Ethan (also

961
Hemath

called Jeduthun), by David to lead the musi-
cians in the sanctuary (1 Chr 6:33; 15:17;
16:41). During the transport of the ark from
Obed-edom’s house to Jerusalem, he was re-
sponsible for sounding the bronze cymbals
(1 Chr 15:19; 2 Chr 5:12). Heman fathered 14
sons and 3 daughters, all of whom served as
musicians in the Lord’s house (1 Chr 25:1—6);
later, his descendants participated in the
cleansing of the temple during King Hezeki-
ah’s reign (715-686 Bc; 2 Chr 29:14) and as-
sisted with the Passover celebration initiated
by King Josiah (640—609 Bc; 2 Chr 35:15).
Hemath. xv form of Hammath, the Rechab-
ite, in 1 Chronicles 2:55.
See HAMMATH (PERSON).
Hemath, Entering of. See Hamatu,
TRANCE OF.
Hena. One of the six cities that Rabshakeh
~boasted fell before the armies of Sennacherib,
in spite of their gods (2 Kgs 18:34). Rabshakeh
hoped the example of these cities would strike
fear in King Hezekiah’s heart and make him
doubt the Lord’s deliverance as the same
hordes surfounded Jerusalem. The kings of the
five other cities are mentioned along with
Hena again in 2 Kings 19:13 and Isaiah 37:13.
Henadad. Head of a Levite family that par-
ticipated in the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr
3:9). Members of this family also helped to
build the Jerusalem wall (Neh 3:18,24), and
signed Ezra’s covenant of faithfulness to God
together with Nehemiah (10:9).
Henna. Fragrant, flowering shrub men-
En- tioned in Song of Solomon 1:14 and 4:13.
See FASHION AND DREss; PLANTS.

Hemdan. Dishon’s son and a descendant of Henoch. 1. kJv form of Enoch, Jared’s son,
Seir the Horite (Gn 36:26). He is also called in 1 Chronicles 1:3.
Hamran in 1 Chronicles 1:41 (kv Amram). See ENOCH (PERSON) #2.
2. KJV form of Hanoch, Midian’s son, in
Hemlock. xksv mistranslation for poisonous 1 Chronicles 1:33.
weeds and for wormwood in Hosea 10:4 and See HANOCH #1.
Amos 6:12, respectively.
Hepher (Person). 1. Manassite and founder
See PLANTS (WORMWOOD).
of the Hepherite family (Nm 26:32).
2. Ashhur’s son from Judah’s tribe (1 Chr
Hemorrhage. Issue of blood, coming from 4:6).
any cut or nosebleed (Prv 30:33). However, in 3. One of David’s valiant warriors (1 Chr
Scripture it almost always refers to vaginal 11:36).
bleeding. Laws concerning normal and ab-
normal menstruation are given in Leviticus Hepher (Place). Canaanite city located south-
15:19-30. A woman with normal menstruation west of Jerusalem. It was captured by Joshua
was considered unclean for seven days, along (Jos 12:17) and later used as an administrative
with anything that came into contact with her district under Solomon (1 Kgs 4:10).
(vv 19-24). A woman who bled longer than
seven days was unclean as long as she was Hepherite. Descendant of Hepher from Man-
bleeding seven additional days (vv 25-28). asseh’s tribe (Nm 26:32).
All the Gospels except John give an account
of the miraculous healing by Jesus of the See HEPHER (PERSON) #1.
woman who had a hemorrhage for 12 years
(Mt 9:20—22; Mk 5:25—34; Lk 8:43—-48). By touch- Hephzibah. 1. Mother of Manasseh, king of
ing Jesus’ garment, the woman was actually Judah (2 Kgs 21:1).
violating the OT laws concerning menstrua- 2. Symbolic name (ksv) for the restored city
tion and making Jesus’ garment unclean (Lv of Jerusalem, meaning ‘‘my delight is in her’
15). Jesus knew that she was made whole (Is 62:4).
through her courageous act of faith in him,
but he wanted her to testify before the crowd Herb. See Pants (Grass).
as to what had happened.
See MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE.
Herdsman. See TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS.

Heres. 1. Region from which the Amorites

Hen. See Birps (FowL, DoMEsTICc).
were not expelled by the Israelites, known as
Mt Heres (Jgs 1:34,35, RSV Har-heres). In Josh-
Hen (Person). KJv alternate name for Josiah, ua 19:41,42 Mt Heres is synonymous with the
Zephaniah’s son, in Zechariah 6:14. town of Ir-shemesh (Beth-shemesh).
See JOSIAH #2. 2. Ascent of Heres (Jgs 8:13 RSv; KJv before
962

the sun was up). Though the text and ‘the ex-
act nature of the terrain is unclear, it was the
place on the Jordan River from which Gideon
returned after his victory over Zebah and
Zalmunna.
Heresh. Levite who returned to Jerusalem
following the exile (1 Chr 9:15).
Hereth. Section of forested land in the terri-
tory of Judah where David and his men hid for
a time as they fled from King Saul (1 Sm 22:5,
KJv Hareth).
Hermas. Christian to whom Paul sent greet-
ings in his letter to the Romans (16:14).
Hermeneutics. Practice of interpreting
Scripture.
See BIBLE, INTERPRETATION OF THE.
Hermes. 1. Greek god and the son of Zeus
by Maia. He was identified with Mercury in
the Roman pantheon of deities. In Greek my-
thology, Hermes was the messenger of the
gods and the escort of the dead to Hades. He
was the god of fertility, the patron of music,
the guardian of travelers, and the god of elo-
quent speech.
While ministering at Lystra, Paul was ac-
claimed by its people to be Hermes because
of his miraculous work and role as chief
speaker. The Lystrans thought Paul was a god
visiting them in bodily form (Acts
KJV Mercurius).
2. Christian to whom Paul sent greetings in
his letter to Rome (16:14).
Hermogenes. Prominent Asian believer who
“turned away” from Paul (2 Tm 1:15). His ac-
tions may have been the result of doctrinal
disagreement, but more likely involved his un-
willingness to come to Paul’s defense during
the apostle’s second Roman imprisonment for
fear of suffering the same fate himself.
Hermon, Mount. Mountain often men-
tioned as the northern extremity of the terri-
tory conquered by Joshua and Moses in Trans-
jordan; it is also the northern boundary of the
inheritance of the half-tribe of Manasseh as
well as of Israel in general (Dt 3:8; 4:48; Jos
Titty; wars,sye 13x; g99:33)a «Chr s223).cHer-
mon is said to tower over the Valley of Leba-
non (Jos 11:17; 13:5) and over the land of Miz-
pah in the valley of Mizpah to whence Joshua
pursued the kings of Canaan after his victory
over them at the waters of Merom (Jos 11:3,8).
Biblical poetry praises Hermon for its height
and for causing the dew on Zion (Ps 133:3),
Hermonite
Po.
The southern slope of Mt Hermon.
and it was famed for its wildlife (Sg 4:8). It
also appears in tandem with Mt Tabor (Ps
89:12) and with the Jordan (Ps 42:6; k3Jv Her-
monite); the plural in the latter passage ex-
presses majesty and not a multiplicity of
peaks.
Though Hermon does not appear in epi-
graphic sources from the biblical period, it
has other names in the Bible that do play a
role in the extrabiblical records. According to
Deuteronomy 3:9, ‘‘the Sidonians call Hermon
Sirion, while the Amorites call it Senir” (ksv,
Shenir). Scholars have suggested that Sirion is
mentioned in the Execration Texts from Egypt
(19th century Bc), but this is uncertain. Sirion
and Lebanon appear in Ugaritic poetry as the
sources for choice woods. Similar parallelisms
between Lebanon and Sirion or Senir occur in
14:11,12, the Bible (Ps 29:6 Ez 27:5). Shalmaneser III
called it “Saniru, a mountain facing the Leba-
non” (841 BC). Deuteronomy 4:48 (mg) gives
Sion as another name for Hermon; the Greek
version supports this reading but the Syriac
has Sirion.
It would appear that Senir/Sirion is the
name for the Ante-Lebanon range while Her-
mon is the name of the highest peak, today
called Jebel esh-Sheikh, “the Mountain of the
Elder,” because of its snowy white mane. This
identification is related to that of Baal-
hermon (Jgs 3:3; 1 Chr 5:23) and Baal-gad (Jos
II:17: 12:7; 13:5). These places are also border
points for Manasseh and are either identical
or else represent two cult centers on the lower
slopes of the mountain.
The mountain itself is about 13 miles long
and rises to a height of 9166 feet.
ANSON F. RAINEY
Hermonite. «sv mistranslation for Hermon
(Mount) in Psalm 42:6. Mt Hermon, a sacred
site since antiquity, lies on the northernmost
boundary of Joshua’s conquest (Jos 12:5;
13:11).
See HERMON, Mount.
963
Herod, Herodian Family
Phasael Herod (the Great)
Doris Mariamne |
Antipater
Glaphyra = Alexander Aristobulus = Berenice [of Salome]
(1) Mariamne = Herod of Chalcis = (2) Berenice [of Agrippa |]
Aristobulus = Salome [of Herodias]
I I
Herod of Chalcis = Berenice
Herod, Herodian Family.
during the lifetime of Christ. Christ was born
when Herod the Great was ruling. Herod’s
son, Herod Antipas, was the ruler of Galilee
and Perea, the territories in which Jesus and
John the Baptist carried out most of their min-
istries. It was this ruler who beheaded John
the Baptist and tried Christ just before his
death. Herod Agrippa I is persecutor of the
church in Acts 12, and Herod Agrippa II heard
Paul’s testimony (Acts 26) just before he went
to Rome to be tried by the caesar. Without a
knowledge of the Herodian family one can
hardly have a proper understanding of the
times of Christ.
The Herodian Dynasty
Herodian dynasty became prominent during
the confusion that resulted in the decay of the
Hasmonean dynasty, the transference of Syria
and Palestine to Roman rule, and the civil
wars that marked the decay of the nation.
The first member of this dynasty was Anti-
pater, who was appointed governor of Idu-
maea. He came into prominence after the
death of Alexandra, the Maccabean queen. Her
eldest son, Hyrcanus II, assumed power in 67
Bc. He was set aside by his younger brother,
Aristobulus, after only three months. Anti-
pater, with the help of the Roman general
Pompey, restored Hyrcanus II to power, rally-
ing the people to support him as their ruler.
However, Antipater secretly
an unsuitable leader to rule Judea. Conse-
quently, while continuing his loyalty to Hyrca-
nus he was definitely the power behind the
throne, appointing his son Phasael as governor
of Jerusalem and his second son Herod as gov-
ernor of Galilee (Josephus, Antiq. 14.9.1-2
§§156—58; and War 1.10.4 §§201-3).
Herod the Great (47—4 Bc). As Governor of
Galilee (47-37 Bc). Herod the Great became
The Herodian Genealogy
Antipater | Key
= Married
Antipater Il
T ]
Joseph Pheroras (1) Joseph = Salome = (2) Costoharus
Antipater
|
Bétenice = Aristobulus [of Mariamne 1]
|
WeRets i Malthrace Cleopatra (of Jerusalem)
Herod (Philip) = Herodias Philip the Tetrarch = Salome [of Herodias]
| Archelaus Antipas = daughter of Aretas IV
Salome = Herodias
Agrippa | Aristobulus Herodias = Herod (Philip) Mariamne
= Antipas
Agrippa II Drusilla = Felix Mariamne
Political rulers governor of Galilee at 25 years of age. Al-
though he gained the respect of both the Ro-
mans and the Galilean Jews for quickly captur-
ing and executing the bandit leader Ezekias,
some in Hyrcanus’ court thought that he was
becoming too powerful and arranged to have
him brought to trial. He was acquitted and
released and thereafter fled to Sextus Caesar
at Damascus. Sextus Caesar, governor of Syr-
ia, appointed Herod governor of Coele-Syria,
and thus he became involved with Roman af-
fairs in Syria. He remained in this position
under a series of rulers and was successful in
collecting taxes and suppressing various re-
volts. Thus, in 41 BC when Antony came to
(67—47 Bc). The power under Octavius Caesar, after asking the
advice of Hyrcanus II, he appointed Herod
and Phasael as tetrarchs of Judea (Antiq.
14.13.1 §§324-26; War 1.12.5 §§243—44).
The new tetrarchs of Judea enjoyed their
office for only a brief period. The next year (40
Bc) the Parthians appeared in Syria. Pacorus,
a Parthian prince, joined with Antigonus (son
of Aristobulus and nephew of Hyrcanus) in the
effort to place the latter on the throne held by
Hyrcanus. This began a complicated series of
incidents which resulted in Jerusalem’s being
besieged by the invaders (War 1.13.2 §§327—29;
cf. also 12.3 §240; Antiq. 14.13.3 §335). A civil
war was inevitable with daily skirmishes oc-
curring between the two forces. The Parthians
considered him gained the upper hand and captured Phasael
and Hyrcanus. To prevent Hyrcanus from be-
ing restored to the priesthood he was muti-
lated which disqualified him. Phasael died ei-
ther by suicide, poisoning, or in battle. (Antig.
14.13.10 §8365—69; War 1.13.10-11 §§271—73).
Herod, with his family and troops, fled to Ma-
sada, and finally moved to Petra, the capital
of the Nabatean kingdom (Antig. 14.13.7—-9
§§352-64; War 1.13.6-7 §§261—64). Malchus,
964

the Arabian king from whom Herod had ex-
pected help, ordered him to leave. Herod de-
parted to Egypt and then to Rome, where he
was welcomed by Antony and Octavius. After
hearing Herod’s story, they, with the senate’s
confirmation, designated him king of Judea
(Antiqg. 14.14.6 §§381—-85; War 1.14.4 §§282-85;
cf. also Strabo 16.2.46; Appian, Civil Wars 5.75;
Tacitus, Hist. 5.9). From Italy he sailed back to
Ptolemais in late 40 Bc or early 39 Bc, marched
through Galilee, captured Joppa, and finally
moved to Masada, where his relatives were un-
der attack (Antiq. 14.15.1 §§394—-98; War 1.15.3—
4 §§290—94). With the help of the Roman ar-
mies, Herod then proceeded to encamp on the
west side of Jerusalem. He proclaimed that he
was rightful king and promised to forget all
past offenses against himself. Antigonus made
counter-proclamations, announcing that Her-
od was a commoner and an Idumean, that is,
a half-Jew, and thus not a legitimate heir to
the throne.
In 38 Bc after putting down guerrilla bands
in Galilee, Herod went to Samosata where An-
tony was besieging Antiochus, king of Com-
magene, who had sided with the Parthians.
Herod hoped that his timely assistance to An-
tony, who had been unsuccessful with the
siege, would move the general to help him in
return. Antony was pleased with Herod’s unso-
licited loyalty, and after the defeat of Samo-
sata he ordered his legate Sossius to use the
Roman army to support Herod against the Par-
thians. Thus in the summer of 37 Bc Jerusalem
fell, and Antigonus was captured by Sossius
(Antiq. 14.16.2 §§470—80; War 1.18.2 §§349-52;
Tacitus, Hist. 5.9; Dio Cassius 49.22). During
the course of this siege Herod took time to
journey to Samaria to marry Mariamne, to
whom he had been betrothed for about five
years. This was a contemptuous move against
Antigonus, Mariamne’s uncle. Since she was a
Hasmonean it strengthened Herod’s claim to
the throne.
It is recorded that Antigonus fell beneath
the axe (War 1.18.3 §357; Plutarch, Antony 36;
cf. also Dio Cassius 49.22). This ended the Has-
monean rule of 129 years.
As King (37-4 Bc). The reign of Herod is
divided by most scholars into three periods:
(1) consolidation from 37 to 25 Bc; (2) prosper-
ity from 25 to 12 Bc; and (3) the period of do-
mestic troubles from 14 to 4 BC.
The period of consolidation extended from
his accession as king in 37 Bc to the death of
the sons of Babas, the last male representa-
tives of the Hasmonean family. During this
period he had to contend with many powerful
adversaries—the people and the Pharisees,
the ruling class, the Hasmonean family, and
Cleopatra.
965
Herod, Herodian Family
The first adversaries, the people and the
Pharisees, objected to his being an Idumean, a
half-Jew, and a friend of the Romans. Those
who opposed him were punished, and those
who took his side were rewarded with favors
and honors (Antig. 15.1.1 §§2—-3; War 1.18.4
§358).
.-*The second adversaries were those of the
aristocracy who sided with Antigonus. Herod
had executed 45 of the wealthiest and had con-
fiscated their properties thus replenishing his
own coffers.
The third group of adversaries were the
Hasmonean family. Herod’s chief problem
was his mother-in-law, Alexandra. She was up-
set that he had not appointed another Hasmon-
ean to the high priesthood to replace Hyrca-
nus, specifically her son Aristobulus. She
wrote to Cleopatra asking her to influence An-
tony to force Herod to remove the appointed
high priest, Ananel, and replace him with Aris-
tobulus. Finally, Herod gave way to the pres-
sure, even though it was unlawful to set aside
a high priest once he had been appointed. This
brought about a temporary truce between Her-
od and Alexandra. Herod, however, never
really trusted either her or Aristobulus. Much
hostility developed between the three. In the
end, after a celebration of the feast of taberna-
cles, Herod had Aristobulus drowned, making
it look like an accident. Alexandra never be-
lieved the official report of accidental drown-
ing, and she reported to Cleopatra that Herod
had murdered her son. Antony summoned Her-
od to give an account for his actions, but
through eloquence and bribery Herod per-
suaded Antony to free him of any charges. Her-
od put Alexandra in chains and placed her un-
der guard to keep her from causing him more
trouble (Antiq. 15.3.3-9 §§50—87; War 1.22.2—5
§8437—44).
Herod’s fourth adversary was Cleopatra.
First, she had cooperated with Alexandra in
the matter of Aristobulus. Next, she asked An-
tony to increase her territory, which he did by
including the district of Jericho, the most fer-
tile area of Herod’s kingdom (Antiq. 15.4.1—-2
§§88—96; War 1.18.4-5 §§360-—63). When civil
war broke out between Antony and Octavius,
Herod wanted to help Antony. But Cleopatra
persuaded Antony to set Herod in battle
against the Arabian king Malchus who had
failed to pay tribute to her. When she saw Her-
od winning she ordered her troops to help Mal-
chus, hoping to weaken both parties to the
breaking point so that she could absorb them
both. After a catastrophic earthquake in his
domain in 31 Bc Herod defeated the Arabs and
returned home (Antiq. 15.5.1-5 §§108—60; War
1.19.3—6 §§369-85).
Soon after, on September 2, 31 Bc, Octavius
Herod, Herodian Family

defeated Antony in the Battle of Actium, result-

ing in the suicide of Antony and Cleopatra.
Immediately Herod felt it was necessary to
ingratiate himself with Octavius and persuade
him that he, Herod, was the rightful ruler of
Judea. He first eliminated Hyrcanus II, his
only possible rival, by making false charges
against him and then executing him (Antiq.
15.6—14 §§161—82; War 1.20.1 §386). He then set
out for Rhodes and skillfully persuaded Octa-
vius that Herod’s loyalty would be beneficial.
Shortly after, Octavius returned Jericho
Herod's territory and also gave him Gadara,
Hippos, Samaria, Gaza, Anthedon, Joppa, and
Straton’s Tower (later Caesarea). Octavius
also made Herod king (Antiq. 15.6.5—7.3 §§183-
217; War 1.20.1-3 §§387—97). During this time
Herod continued to have domestic problems.
Convinced that Mariamne had been unfaithful
to him while he was in Rhodes, he had her
executed at the end of 29 Bc (Antiq. 15.7.1-5
§§202-36). He became very ill as a result of
this, and when recovery seemed doubtful, Alex-
andra took the opportunity to win the loyalty
of those in charge of the two fortified places
in Jerusalem. When Herod recovered and
learned of this, he had Alexandra executed in
28 Bc. Herod’s sister Salome, wanting to get
rid of her husband Costobarus, revealed to
Herod that Costobarus had concealed and pro-
tected the influential sons of Babas who were
loyal to Antigonus and who spoke ill of Herod.
Herod executed Costobarus and the sons of
Babas (25 Bc). This act eliminated the possibil-
ity of any of Hyrcanus’ line becoming king
(Antiq. 15.7.6—10 §§237—66).
The second period of Herod’s reign was one
of prosperity (25-14 Bc). It was a period of
splendor and enjoyment interrupted by an oc-
casional disturbance.
According to Josephus the most noble of all
Herod’s achievements was the building of the
temple in Jerusalem, begun in 20/19 Bc (Antiq.
15.8.1 §380). Rabbinic literature claims:
who has not seen the Temple of Herod has
never seen a beautiful building” (Babylonian
Talmud: Baba Bathra 4a). Prior to this he had
built theaters, amphitheaters, and race courses
for both men and horses (Antiq. 15.8.1 §§267—
76). In 24 Bc Herod built himself a royal palace
and built or rebuilt many fortresses and gentile
temples, including Strato’s Tower, later re-
named Caesarea (Antiq. 15.8.5—9 §§292—341).
During this time he became very interested
in culture and gathered around him men ac-
complished in Greek literature and art. Greek
rhetoricians were appointed to the highest of-
fices of the state. One of these was Nicolas of
Damascus, Herod’s instructor and advisor in
philosophy, rhetoric, and history.
In late 24 Bc he married Mariamne, daugh-
to
~ So arene
Part of the palace of Herod the Great in Jericho.
ter of Simon, a well-known priest in Jerusa-
lem (she will be referred to as Mariamne II).
In 22 Bc he sent his two sons of Mariamne I,
Alexander and Aristobulus, to Rome for their
education. Caesar was most cordial to them,
and they stayed at the home of Asinius Pollio,
who professed to be one of Caesar Augustus’
most trusted friends.
It was at this time that Octavius (now
named Augustus) gave Herod the territories of
Trachonitis, Batanea, and Auranites. When Au-
gustus came to Syria in 20 Bc, he gave Herod
the territory of Zenodorus and gave his
brother Pheroras the territory of Perea. In
gratitude to Augustus for his generosity, Her-
‘He od built in Zenodorus’ territory (near Panieon)
a beautiful temple for him (Antig. 15.10.1—3
§§342—-63; War 1.20.4—21.3 §§398—406).
Around 17 or 16 Bc Herod went to Rome to
bring his sons home. They had completed
their education, and upon returning home
Aristobulus married Berenice, the daughter of
Salome (Herod’s sister), and Alexander mar-
ried Glaphyra, the daughter of Archelaus, king
of Cappadocia (Antiq. 16.1.2 §§6—11; War 1.23.1
88445-46).
During this period Herod’s rule was favor-
ably accepted by the people. They were an-
noyed, however, by two things. First, he vio-
lated Jewish law by his introduction of the
quinquennial games in honor of the caesar
and second, he built theaters and race courses.
He demanded a loyalty oath from his subjects,
966

except for a privileged few. Also, he would not
allow them to congregate freely for fear of a
revolt. Despite these things he had good con-
trol of the people and twice favored them by
lowering taxes (in 14 Bc he reduced taxes by
one-fourth, Antiq. 16.2.5 §§64—65).
The third period of Herod’s rule was clearly
marked by domestic troubles (14-4 Bc). By
now he had married 10 wives (Antig. 17.1.3
§§19-22; War 1.28.4 §§562—63). His first wife,
Doris, had only one son, Antipater (Antiq.
14.12.1 §§300). He repudiated Doris and Antipa-
ter when he married Mariamne I, allowing
them to visit Jerusalem only during the festi-
vals (War 1.22.1 §433). He married Mariamne I
in 37 Bc. She was the granddaughter of Hyrca-
nus and had five children, two daughters and
three sons. The youngest son died while in
Rome, and the remaining two sons were to
play an important role in this part of Herod’s
reign. In late 24 Bc he married his third wife,
Mariamne II, to whom one child was born,
Herod (Philip). Malthace, his fourth wife, was
a Samaritan, and mother of two sons, Arche-
laus and Antipas. His fifth wife, Cleopatra of
Jerusalem, was the mother of Philip the te-
trarch. Of the remaining five wives only Pal-
las, Phaedra, and Elpsis are known by name,
and none played a significant part in the
events of this period (Antiqg. 17.1.3 §§19—22;
War 1.28.4 §§562—63).
Alexander and Aristobulus, the sons of Mar-
iamne I, were his favorites. Immediately fol-
lowing their own marriages troubles began
within the Herodian household. Salome, Her-
od’s sister and mother of Berenice (wife of Aris-
tobulus), hated these two sons, mainly be-
cause she wanted the position and favor they
enjoyed for her own son. She spread rumors
that the two young men had never forgiven
Herod for their mother’s murder and were
seeking to avenge it. Because of this Herod de-
cided to recall his exiled son, Antipater, to
show Alexander and Aristobulus there was an-
other heir to the throne. Antipater took full
advantage of the situation and used every con-
ceivable means to acquire the coveted throne.
Slander of his half-brothers was one of his fa-
vorite methods. On two separate occasions
during this period, Augustus tried to reconcile
Herod and his sons. Alexander’s father-in-law,
the Cappadocian king, joined the effort and
both times they met with temporary success.
Finally, however, a man of bad character,
Eurycles from Lacedaemon, took it upon him-
self to inflame the father against his two sons
and vice versa (Antiq. 16.9.1-4 §§271—99). Soon
other mischiefmakers joined Eurycles, and
Herod’s patience became exhausted. He put Al-
exander and Aristobulus in prison.
During this time Herod was also having po-
967
Herod, Herodian Family
litical problems. Syllaeus, who ruled Arabia,
was very hostile to Herod and irritated him by
giving refuge to 40 rebels from Trachonitis.
Also, he refused to repay a debt Arabia had
contracted with Herod. Herod demanded that
Syllaeus hand over the rebels and pay the
debt. When Syllaeus refused, Herod, with the
permission of the governor of Syria, invaded
Arabia as a punitive measure, but with no in-
tention of territorial gain. In reprisal Syllaeus
went to Rome and told Augustus a distorted
story about the whole incident. His report
caused Augustus to suspect Herod and to let
him know that their friendship had ended and
that he would no longer be treated as an ally,
but as a subject. Herod sent an embassy to
Rome to clear up the matter, and when the
first failed he sent a second under the leader-
ship of Nicolas of Damascus (Antig. 16.9.1-4
§§271—99). This time the mission was success-
ful. In fact, when this embassy reached Augus-
tus, they found the emperor in such a compli-
ant mood that he not only changed his mind
about the Arabian situation but also gave Her-
od permission to deal with Alexander and Aris-
tobulus in any manner he desired. He did,
however, specify that any trial should take
place outside of Herod’s territory at Berytus
(modern Beirut) and that Roman officials
should form part of the court and should inves-
tigate the charges made against the sons
(Antiq. 15.10.5-11.1 §§320-360; War 1.27.1
§§534-37). Herod followed the advice of the
emperor. His sons were found guilty and
around 7 BC were executed by strangulation at
Sebaste (Samaria) where Herod had married
their mother Mariamne I 30 years earlier
(Antiq. 16.11.2-8 §8§361-404; War 1.27.2-6
§§538-51).
Antipater was now the sole heir, and in his
impatience to gain the throne he attempted to
poison Herod. This plot failed when Pheroras,
Herod’s brother, drank the poison by mistake.
Herod put Antipater in prison and reported
the matter to the emperor (c. 5 BC).
At this time Herod because very ill with an
incurable disease. He drew up a new will
which bypassed his oldest sons Archelaus and
Philip because Antipater had poisoned his
mind against them. He chose his youngest son,
Antipas, as his sole successor (Antiq. 17.2.4—6.1
§§32-146; War 1.29.1-32.7 §§567—646).
Just before his death the wisemen arrived
in Judea searching for the newborn king of the
Jews. Herod instructed them to report to him
the whereabouts of this child as soon as they
found him. Being warned in a dream they did
not do so, but rather returned to their homes
by another route. God warned Joseph (hus-
band of the mother of Jesus) to flee to Egypt
because of Herod’s intention to kill Jesus. Jo-
Herod, Herodian Family
seph took his family and left Bethlehem.
Shortly after, Herod killed all the male chil- . trarch over Gaulanitis, Trachonitis, Batanea,
dren in Bethlehem who were two years old
and under.
Herod’s disease grew increasingly worse.
Permission had come from Rome to execute
Antipater, which he promptly did. He again
altered his will—making Archelaus king, Anti-
pas tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, and Philip
tetrarch of Gaulanitis, Trachonitis,
and Paneas.
On the fifth day after Antipater’s execution
Herod died at Jericho in the spring of 4 Bc.
The people acclaimed Archelaus as their king.
Herod reigned for about 33 or 34 years. Al-
though his rule was characterized by violence,
it was really not much different than the
reigns of most of his contemporaries. Violence
was the order of the times.
Herod’s Wills. Herod had written six wills
during the course of his life. The sixth will was
actually a codicil of his fifth will. Since this
final version had been written only five days
before his death, it had not been ratified by
the emperor. Therefore, although Archelaus
took over the leadership at Herod’s death he
did not use the title king (Antiq. 17.8.4 §§202-
3; War 2.1.1 §§2—-3). After the Passover he and
Antipas set out for Rome to dispute the last
two wills, leaving Philip behind to govern. Ar-
chelaus wanted to convince Augustus that he
should ratify the will made just before Herod
died, because it represented his wish. On the
other hand, Antipas sought to convince the em-
peror that Herod had not been of sound mind
and body when he wrote the last will. While
they were in Rome there was a revolt in Pales-
tine, and a Jewish delegation arrived in Rome
to ask autonomy for the nation and for union
with the province of Syria. After much debate
Augustus devised a compromise. He made Ar-
chelaus ethnarch (meaning “ruler of a na-
tion’) over Idumaea, Judea, and Samaria. He
made Antipas tetrarch (meaning “ruler of a
The Herodium, the magnificent fortress and palace of Herod
the Great, where, at his own request, he was buried (Jose-
phus, War 1.33.9), though his tomb has not yet been found.
quarter’’) of Galilee and Perea and Philip te-
and Paneas (Antiq. 17.11.4 §§317—-20; War 2.6.3
§§93—100). Thus, Antipas, while losing his bid
to be king, did prevent Archelaus from ruling
the entire nation.
Archelaus (4 BC-AD 6). Archelaus was the
son of Herod the Great and Malthace (a Sa-
maritan) and was born around 22 Bc. Upon his
Batanea, return to Judea, Archelaus was faced with a
multitude of problems. Before going to Rome
he had killed 3000 people in putting down a
revolution led by people‘avenging the blood of
those killed by his father, Herod (Antiq. 17.8.4—
9-3 §§200-218; War 2.1.1-3 §§1—13). Thus his
rule got off to a bad start. While he was en
route to Rome another revolt broke out at Pen-
tecost in 4 Bc, which lasted about two and a
half months and during which the temple por-
ticoes were burned and the treasury was pil-
laged_by the Romans. This unrest spread to
the countryside of Judea and to Galilee and
Perea (Antig. 17.10.2-5 §§254—72; War 2.3.1-4.1
§§40-56).
Upon his return, Archelaus treated both the
Jews and Samaritans very brutally (War 2.7.3
§111), a fact borne out by the Gospels. When
Joseph returned from his flight to Egypt and
learned that Archelaus was ruling Judea, he
was afraid to go there and was warned against
it by God; he took the infant Jesus to Galilee
instead (Mt 2:22).
Two incidents followed that led finally to
the loss of Archelaus’ power. First, he removed
the high priest Joazar, stating that he had
sided with the insurgents. He replaced him
with Eleazar, brother of Joazar and later re-
placed Eleazar with Jesus, son of See (Antiq.
13.13.1 §§339—41). Next, he divorced Mariamne
and married Glaphyra, daughter of King Ar-
chelaus of Cappadocia. She was the former
wife of Alexander, Herod’s son and Archelaus’
half-brother. This was a transgression of ances-
toral law (Antiq. 17.13.1, 4-5 §8§341, 350-53;
War 2.7.4 §§114-16). Either or both of these
incidents was enough to cause the unrest that
erupted, and Archelaus was brutal in dealing
with opposition.
His tyranny finally caused the Jews and
Samaritans to send a delegation to Rome and
complain formally to Augustus. The fact that
such bitter enemies as the Jews and Samari-
tans could cooperate in this matter indicates
the serious nature of the complaint. Antipas
and Philip also went to Rome to complain
about him. Presumably they resented his ne-
glect as their Roman representative for Pales-
tine. Thus in ap 6 Archelaus was deposed and
exiled to Vienna in Gaul (modern Vienne on
the Rhone, south of Lyons). Antipas and Phil-
ip were allowed to continue their respective
968

rules, and Archelaus’ territories were reduced
to a province ruled by prefects or procura-
tors (Antiq. 17.13.1-5 §§342-55; War 2.7.3-8.1
§§111-18; Strabo 16.2.46: Dio Cassius 55.27.6).
Antipas (4 BC-AD 39). Antipas was the
younger brother of Archelaus, born around 20
Bc. Of all the Herodians, he is mentioned most
in the NT because he ruled over Galilee and
Perea, where both Christ and John the Baptist
concentrated their ministries.
Like his brother Archelaus, Antipas re-
turned from Rome to find his domain in the
turmoil of the rebellion begun at Pentecost in
4 Bc. He immediately set out to restore order
and rebuild what had been destroyed. Follow-
ing the example of his father, Herod the Great,
Antipas founded cities. Sephoris was his first
project; it was the largest city in Galilee and
his capital city until he built Tiberias. Since
Nazareth was only four miles S, SW of
Sephoris it is quite possible that Joseph,
Mary’s husband, was employed as a carpenter
(Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3) to help rebuild that city.
Antipas’ next project was probably Livias (or
Julias) in Perea, built in honor of Livia, Augus-
tus’ wife. It was completed around aD 13.
Of the 12 cities built by the Herodian fam-
ily, Tiberias is the most important. It was the
first city in Jewish history to be founded with
the municipal framework of a Greek polis. It
was built in honor of the reigning emperor Ti-
berius. Due to the fact that a cemetery was
destroyed in the process of building, Tiberias
was considered unclean by the Jews. Antipas
offered free houses and lands and tax exemp-
tions for the first few years to anyone who
would move into the city. He completed the
city in AD 23 and made it his capital.
As was mentioned above, early in Antipas’
rule he and his brother Philip helped to bring
about the downfall of their brother, Archelaus.
At this time Antipas received the dynastic title
Herod (cf. Antig. 18.2.1 §§26—27; War 2.9.1
§167). This was of great significance to his sub-
jects and in the political and social circles of
the Roman world.
In the Christian world the incident for
which Antipas is most remembered is‘his be-
heading of John the Baptist (Mt 14:3-12; Mk
6:17—29; Lk 3:19—20; Antiq. 18.5.2 §§116—19).
There was a tangle of family events leading
up to the death of John the Baptist. Antipas
had married the daughter of Aretas IV, whose
name is unknown. Aretas IV was the Nabatean
king, and Augustus may have encouraged this
marriage since he favored intermarriages be-
tween various rulers to promote peace in his
empire.
Around aD 29 Antipas took a trip to Rome
and on the way paid a visit to his half-brother
Herod Philip, who must have lived in a coastal
969
Herod, Herodian Family
city in Palestine. Antipas fell in love with He-
rodias, Philip’s wife, who was also Antipas’
niece. The idea of becoming the wife of a te-
trarch appealed to her and she agreed to
marry him when he returned from Rome if he
would oust Aretas’ daughter (Antiq. 18.5.1 §§
1og—110). Antipas agreed to the plan, and
when Aretas’ daughter heard of it she fled to
her father. This was a breach of political alli-
ance as well as a personal insult which led to
retaliation by Aretas.
The marriage of Antipas and Herodias was
in violation of the Mosaic law which forbade
marriage to a brother’s wife (Lv 18:16; 20:21)
except in order to raise children for a deceased
childless brother by a levirate marriage (Dt
25:5; Mk 12:19). In this case, Philip not only
had a child, Salome, but he was still alive.
This is the situation which John the Baptist
spoke so boldly against, and Antipas threw
him in prison. Herodias’ hatred of John the
Baptist was too great merely to settle for his
incarceration. At an appropriate time, possi-
bly Antipas’ birthday, she planned a banquet
at Machaerus in Perea. Her daughter, Salome,
danced for the king and in an impulsive mo-
ment Antipas promised her under oath that he
would give her anything, up to half of his king-
dom. Following her mother’s advice she asked
for John the Baptist’s head on a platter. Imme-
diately Antipas was sorry for his rash promise,
but in order to save face in the presence of his
underlords he granted the request. Thus,
John’s ministry ended around AD 31 or 32.
The identity of Herodias’ first husband,
Philip, is considered a problem by some schol-
ars, since there seems to be a contradiction
between the Scriptures and Josephus in the
matter. In Matthew 14:3 and Mark 6:17 he is
referred to as Philip, whereas Josephus refers
to him as Herod, son of Herod the Great and
Mariamne II (Antig. 18.5.1 §109). Many schol-
ars conclude on these ground that the scrip-
tural account is incorrect. They think that
Mark and Matthew confused this Herod with
Philip the tetrarch, who later married Hero-
dias’ daughter, Salome.
Such a solution would mean that the Gos-
pels contain three historical errors: (1) confus-
ing Herod with his half-brother Philip, (2) mak-
ing Philip, the tetrarch, husband of Herodias
instead of husband of her daughter, and (3)
making Salome the daughter of Philip the te-
trarch, who according to Josephus had no chil-
dren. However, the Christian community had
some very reliable witnesses such as Joanna,
wife of Chuza, Antipas’ financial minister (Lk
8:3), and Manaen a close friend of Antipas
(Acts 13:1), and it seems most unlikely that the
Gospel writers would make such a historical
blunder.
Herod, Herodian Family
There are also other reasons why the Gos-
pel account, though seeming to be contradic- - Roman officer, who would be especially inter-
tory, is accurate. First, the Gospels mention a
daughter of Herodias before her marriage to Antipas mentioned in this passage.
Antipas (Mt 14:6,8—11; Mk 6:22,24—26,28). This
is in accord with Josephus’ reference to Sa-
lome (Antiq. 18.5.4 §136).
Second, there is no validity to the objection
that Herod the Great would not have two sons
with the name Philip. Many of his children
had different mothers and their names were
duplicated. He had two sons named Antipas/
Antipater and two sons named Herod.
Third, the double name of Herodias’s first
husband, Herod Philip, is not unusual. Most
scholars would agree that the Herod of Acts
12:1,6,11,19,20,21 is the Agrippa of Josephus.
Nor do they accuse Luke of confusing this Her-
od with Herod, king of Chalcis (ap 41—48). Fur-
thermore, they never question that Archelaus
is Herod Archelaus.
Fourth, the Gospel writers certainly would
have used the title tetrarch if they were refer-
ring to Philip the tetrarch as being Herodias’
former husband since in the very same peri-
cope they had used this title in referring to
Antipas (Mt 14:1; Mk 6:14,26).
Therefore, the Philip in the Gospels and the
Herod in Josephus is one and the same person.
There are three specific times when Anti-
pas and Jesus are mentioned together in the
Gospels.
Early in Jesus’ ministry Antipas heard of
him and commented, perhaps with irony, that
Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected
14:1,2; Mk 6:14—16; Lk 9:7—9). It was obvious to
Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more
remarkable than John’s, but he was reluctant
to use force to bring about the meeting for fear
of once more arousing the people against him.
Eventually, Jesus withdrew from Antipas’ ter-
ritories without the two meeting.
Later, as Jesus became more popular Anti-
pas saw a potential threat to his own power
and threatened to kill Jesus. Thus it was that
on Jesus’ final trip to Jerusalem he was
warned by some of the Pharisees that he
should leave Antipas’ territories for his own
safety (Lk 13:31-33). Jesus sent as answer to
“that fox’ that he would continue his ministry
of healing and casting out demons for a little
longer, and when he had finished he would
then go to Jerusalem to perish. The lion and
fox were often contrasted in ancient literature.
The Lion of Judah, Jesus Christ, was not going
to be coerced by the crafty coward, Antipas.
The final encounter between the two oc-
curred when Jesus was tried by Antipas in aD
33 (Lk 23:6-12). Since this event is mentioned
only by Luke some scholars consider it legend-
ary. It must be remembered, however,
Luke’s addressee was Theophilus, probably a
ested in the reconciliation between Pilate and
According to Luke’s account, when Pilate
could find no fault in Jesus, he sent him to
Antipas (who was celebrating the Passover in
Jerusalem). Herod thus freed himself from an
awkward situation. A more subtle reason may
have been to reconcile himself to Antipas.
Their relationship had been rather strained
since the Galilean massacre (Lk 13:1), and be-
cause Pilate brought votive shields into Jerusa-
lem, arousing the anger of the Jews (Philo,
Legatio ad Gaium 299-304). When Jesus was
brought before Antipas, the ruler only mocked
him and sent him back to Pilate. The main
political accomplishment of the incident was
Antipas’ and Pilate’s reconciliation.
In aD 36 Aretas attacked and defeated Anti-
pas’ army. The Jews considered this a divine
punishment for Antipas’ execution of John the
Baptist (Antiq. 18.5.1-2 §§116—19). At Tiberius’
command, Vitellius, governor of Syria, was to
help Antipas retaliate. However, before this
could be accomplished Tiberius died and Vitel-
lius withheld his aid until he received orders
from the new emperor Caligula.
Upon his accession Caligula gave his friend
Agrippa I, brother of Herodias, the much cov-
eted title “king’’ along with Philip the te-
trarch’s land and the tetrarchy of Lysanias
(Antiq. 18.6.10 §§225-39). Herodias’ ambition
motivated her to urge Antipas to go to Rome
(Mt to seek the title of king for himself, and in ap
39 they both set out for the capital on this
mission. At the same time Agrippa sent a freed-
man to Rome to make accusations against An-
tipas. Instead of gaining the title of king, Anti-
pas was banished to Lugdunum Convenarum,
now Saint-Bertrand de Comminges in France.
Herodias was not included in the banishment,
but she chose to go with her husband. Agrippa
acquired Antipas’ territories (Antiq. 18.7.1-2
§§240-55; War 2.9.6 §§181—83).
Philip the Tetrarch (4 Bc—AD 34). Philip
the tetrarch was the son of Herod the Great
and Cleopatra of Jerusalem and was born
around 22/21 BC.
When Herod’s will was resolved, Philip was
made tetrarch over Gaulanitis, Auranitis, Ba-
tanea, Trachonitis, Paneas, all in the northern
part of Herod the Great’s domain (Antiq. 17.8.1
§189; 9.4 §319; 18.4.6 §106; 5.4 §136; War 1.33.8
§668; ii.6.3 §95; Lk 3:1). His subjects were
mainly Syrian and Greek. Thus he was the
first and only Herodian to have his image on
his coins.
He built two cities (Antig. 18.2.1 §28; War
2.9.1 §168). First, he rebuilt and enlarged
that Paneas and renamed it Caesarea Philippi.
979

Here Peter made his confession of faith to Je-
sus and was given the revelation of the church
(Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-30). Next, he rebuilt
and enlarged Bethsaida and renamed it Julias.
Here Jesus healed the blind man (Mk 8:22—26),
and in a nearby desert place he fed the 5000
(Lk g:10—17).
Philip was not as politically ambitious as
his brothers. His rule was marked by tranquil-
ity and the loyalty of his subjects (Antiq. 18.5.4
§137). When Philip died in ap 34, Tiberius an-
nexed his territories to Syria. After Caligula
became emperor in AD 37, he gave the territo-
ries to Agrippa I, brother of Herodias.
Agrippa I (AD 37-44). Agrippa I was the
son of Aristobulus (son of Herod the Great and
Mariamne I) and Berenice. He was born in ro
BC (War 1.28.1 §552; Antig. 19.8.2 §350). He was
the brother of Herodias.
Agrippa I might be considered the black
sheep of the Herodian family. While at school
in Rome he lived a wanton life, incurring
many debts. When Tiberius’ son Drusus was
poisoned by Sejanus in aD 23, Agrippa lost fa-
vor with the court and retired to Maltha leav-
ing angry creditors in Rome (Antiq. 18.6.1—2
§8143-47;
6.4 §165).
Eventually his sister Herodias and her hus-
band Antipas took him into their home, but
hostilities developed when Antipas humili-
ated Agrippa by reminding him of his poverty
and dependency. Finally Agrippa returned to
Rome, where he incurred new debts (Antiq.
18.6.2-3 §§148—60). He became a friend of Ga-
ius Caligula and at one point stated that he
wished Caligula were king rather than Tiber-
ius. This was overheard and reported to Tiber-
ius, who imprisoned him. He remained in
Herod, Herodian Family
prison until Tiberius’ death six months later
(Antig. 18.6.4-10 §§161—236; War 2.9.5 §§178—
80; Dio Cassius 59.8.2).
Upon Caligula’s accession to the throne,
he released Agrippa and gave him Philip the
tetrarch’s territories and the northern part
of Lysanias’ territory as well as the title of
_king (Antiq. 18.6.10 §237; War 2.9.6 §181). The
title of king aroused the jealousy of his sister
Herodias, and that eventually led to her hus-
band, Antipas’, downfall. At that time (aD 39)
Agrippa acquired all Antipas’ territories and
property (Antig. 18.7.1-2 §§240-56; War 2.9.6
§§181—83).
When Caligula died in ap 41, Agrippa cur-
ried the favor of the new emperor Claudius,
whereupon Claudius added Judea and Sa-
maria to Agrippa’s territory. Agrippa had now
acquired all the territory once ruled by his
grandfather, Herod the Great (Antiq. 19.5.1
§§274-75; War 2.11.5 §§214-15).
Agrippa I is mentioned in the NT for his
persecution of the early church in order to
gain favor of the Jews (Acts 12:1-19). He killed
James, the son of Zebedee, and imprisoned Pe-
ter. When Peter was released by an angel,
Agrippa put the sentries to death.
Agrippa died in aD 44 in Caesarea. Accounts
of this incident are recorded both by Josephus
and the Scriptures. The incident occurred at
Caesarea; he was wearing a sparkling silver
robe, and when the people flattered him by
calling him a god, sudden death came upon
him.
He was survived by his daughters Bernice,
Mariamne, and Drusilla, and by a son Agrippa
who was 17 at the time (Antiq. 19.9.1 §§354—-55;
War 2.11.6 §§218—20). Because of Agrippa II’s
Traditional site of the family
tomb of the Herods in Jerusa-
lem. Note the stone that could
be rolled in front of the
entrance.
Herodians
youth, his father’s territories were temporarily
made a province.
Agrippa II (4p 50-100). Agrippa II was
the son of Agrippa I and Cypros. In aD 50, six
years after his father’s death, Claudius made
him king of Chalcis (Antig. 20.5.2 §104; War
2.12.1 §223). In AD he was given
tetrarchy of Philip, Abilene (or Abila), Tracho-
nitis, and Acra (tetrarchy of Varus) in ex-
change for Chalcis (Antiq. 20.7.1 §138; War
2.12.8 §247) When Nero became emperor in AD
54 he gave Agrippa the Galilean cities of Tibe-
rias and Tarichea and their surrounding land
and the Perean cities of Julias (Betharamph-
tha) along with Abila and the surrounding
land (Antiq. 20.8.4 §159; War 2.13.2 §252). In
appreciation Agrippa enlarged his capital Cae-
sarea Philippi and renamed it Neronius (Antiq.
20.9.4 §211).
Agrippa II was in control of the temple
treasury and the vestments of the high priest
and thus could appoint the high priest (Antigq.
20.5.2 §103; 9.4 §213; 9.7 §222). The Romans
consulted him on religious matters, which is
probably why Festus asked him to hear the
apostle Paul at Caesarea (AD 59), where he
was accompanied by his sister Bernice (Acts
25,26).
In May ap 66 the Palestinian revolution be-
gan (War 2.14.4 §284). When Agrippa’s attempt
to quell the revolt failed, he became a staunch
ally of the Romans throughout the entire war
(66—70). During this time Nero committed sui-
cide, the new emperor Galba was murdered,
and Vespasian became the emperor. After
pledging his allegiance to the new emperor,
Agrippa remained with Titus, Vespasian’s son,
who was in charge of the war (Tacitus Hist.
5.81). After the fall of Jerusalem (5 Aug 70),
Agrippa was probably present to celebrate the
destruction of his own people (War 7.1.2—-3
§§5—40).
Following this, Vespasian added new ter-
ritories to Agrippa’s kingaom, though just
which ones is not known. In aD 79 Vespasian
died and Titus became emperor. Little is
known of Agrippa’s rule after this, except that
he wrote to the historian Josephus praising
him for The Jewish War, and he purchased a
copy of it (Josephus, Life 65 §§361-67; Apion
1.9 8847-52).
Although the Talmud implies that Agrippa
II had two wives (Babylonian Talmud: Sukkah
27a), Josephus gives no indication that he had
any wives or children. Rather, he was known
for his incestuous relationship with his sister
Bernice. He died around ap 100. His death
marked the end of the Herodian dynasty.
HAROLD W. HOEHNER
See JUDAISM; HERODIANS.
Bibliography. E. Bevan, Jerusalem Under the High
~Priests; F.O0. Busch, The Five Herods; F.W. Farrer, The Her-
ods; M. Grant, Herod the Great; H.W. Hoehner, Herod Anti-
pas; AH.M. Jones, The Herods of Judea; J.S. Minkin, Herod,
King of the Jews; S. Perowne, The Life and Times of Herod the
Great and The Later Herods.
the Herodians. Jewish party mentioned three
times in the Gospels in connection with two
incidents (one in Galilee and one in Jerusa-
lem) and associated with the Pharisees in their
opposition to Christ. In Mark 3:6, after the
healing of the man with the withered hand,
the Pharisees went out and took counsel with
the Herodians, plotting to destroy Jesus. In
Matthew 22:16 and Mark 12:13, the Pharisees
and Herodians allied against Christ to entrap
him with their question as to the lawfulness of
paying taxes to Caesar. The Herodians are
never mentioned in either Luke or John.
The real problem comes in Mark 8:15,
where it speaks of the “‘leaven of Herod.” An-
other reading is the “leaven of the Herodians.”
However, the parallel passage in Matthew 16:6
speaks of the “leaven of the Sadducees.” Are
the Sadducees and the Herodians the same?
Matthew tends to label the religious leaders
as Jesus’ opponents, whereas Mark empha-
sizes that Jesus’ opponents were both religious
and political. What then is the significance of
Matthew’s use of “‘the leaven of the Saddu-
cees”’ in place of Mark’s ‘“‘leaven of Herod,” or
“the Herodians’’? Some have speculated that
the Herodians were a political party com-
posed principally of Sadducees. Some have
identified them with the Sadducees, and oth-
ers with the Boethusians, whose name more
often than not was used interchangeably with
that of the Sadducees. The Boethusians and
the Sadducees were indistinguishable theologi-
cally, but the Sadducees were loyal to the
Hasmonean dynasty, whereas the Boethusians
were attached to the Herodian house and con-
sequently were called the Herodians. Thus the
Herodians had political affiliations with the
Herodian house and religious affiliations with
the Sadducees. Along with the Sadducees, the
Herodians were men of influence—the aristo-
crats of Palestine.
Nevertheless during Jesus’ time the politi-
cal differences between the Herodians and the
Sadducees were not as distinct because of the
marriage of the Herodian Herod Antipas to
the Hasmonean Herodias. The Herodians and
the Sadducees would have been on the same
side politically against the Pharisees, the
former being progovernment while the Phari-
sees were both anti-Hasmonean and anti-
Herodian. Congruent with this, Matthew 16:12
and Mark 8:15 represent the Pharisees and the
Sadducees/Herodians as contrary parties op-
posing Jesus.
972

In summary, the Herodians were
known as the Boethusians. Theologically they
were in agreement with the Sadducees,
politically they were more pro-Herodian than
the Sadducees. While the Pharisees looked for
a cataclysmic messianic kingdom to remove
the present Herodian rule, the Herodians
worked to keep Herod’s dynasty in power.
HAROLD W. HOEHNER
See HEROD, HERODIAN FAMILY.
Herodias. Daughter of Aristobulus, the son
of Herod the Great, and Bernice. Born be-
tween g and 7 Bc, her older brother was Herod
Agrippa I. In 6 Bc, while still in her infancy,
she was betrothed by her grandfather, Herod
the Great, to his son by Mariamne II named
Herod Philip. Herodias was the mother of Sa-
lome, born between aD 15 and 19.
Herodias and Herod Philip lived on the sea
coast of Judea, possibly at Azotus or Caesarea.
In aD 29 Herod Antipas visited Herodias’ (his
niece) residence on his way to Rome. They
were attracted to each other and Herodias
agreed to marry him provided he would di-
vorce his present wife, the daughter of Aretas
IV, the Arabian king of Petra. Herodias, being
a Hasmonean, did not want to share the house
with an Arab—longtime foes of the Hasmo-
nean dynasty. When Aretas’ daughter got
word of this plot, she secretly escaped to her
father; and Herodias and Antipas were
ried. This incident was the beginning of hostili-
ties between Antipas and Aretas which eventu-
ally led to Aretas’ war against and defeat of
Antipas in AD 36.
John the Baptist openly denounced this
marriage (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17—29; Lk 3:19,20)
because Jewish law forbade marriage with
one’s brother’s wife (Lv 18:16; 20:21), except in
order to raise children for a deceased childless
brother by a levirate marriage (Dt 25:5; Mk
12:19). In this case the brother, Herod Philip,
was still alive and had a child, Salome. The
bold denunciation by John the Baptist led to
Antipas’ imprisoning him around ap 30 or 31.
Herodias wanted more than this. She ar-
ranged, possibly at Herod Antipas’s birthday,
to have her daughter dance before him and his
magistrates. In appreciation, Herod Antipas
promised Salome up to half of his kingdom. At
her mother’s bidding, she asked for John the
Baptist’s head on a platter.
Herodias last appears in history involved in
an intrigue between her brother, Agrippa I,
who had been designated king by the emperor
Caligula, and her husband Antipas, who had
long wanted such a title. Antipas, at his wife’s
insistence, went to Rome to plead his case, but
lost and was banished. Herodias, however, did
Heth
also remain faithful and followed him into exile,
even though Caligula would not have pun-
but ished her because she was Agrippa’s sister.
Haroip W. HoEHNER
See HEROD, HERODIAN FAMILY.
_Herodion. Christian of Jewish ancestry to
whom Paul sent greetings at the conclusion of
his epistle to the Romans (16:11).
Heron. Long-necked wading bird, consid-
ered unclean under Jewish law (Lv 11:19; Dt
14:18).
See BIRDS.
Hesed. Part of the name Benhesed (1 Kgs
4:10 KJV).
See BENHESED.
Heshbon. Important Transjordanian city
about 50 miles due east of Jerusalem. It had
originally been Moabite, but was conquered
by Sihon, the Amorite king, and became the
capital of his kingdom (Nm 21:25—30). The
city was captured when Israel advanced into
Canaan, and this portion of Amorite territory
was placed under Reubenite control (32:37;
Jos 13:17). However, its position on the bound-
ary between Reuben and Gad (Jos 13:26) re-
sulted in its being occupied by the tribe of
mar- Gad. The Moabites soon contested Israel’s
claim to the territory, and in the period of
the judges it changed hands at least once (Jgs
3:12; 1 Sm 12:9—11). Israel controlled Heshbon
until around 853 Bc, when it was occupied by
Mesha, king of Moab. Subsequently it was
mentioned in preexilic prophetic censures of
the Moabites (cf. Is 15:4; 16:8,9; Jer 48:2,33,34).
Jeremiah 49:3 seems to indicate that Heshbon
was finally occupied by the neighboring Am-
monites.
It was an important Nabataean city in the
Greek period, and was conquered by the Jews
in the campaigns of Alexander Janneus (103—
76 BC). In the Roman period it was incorpo-
rated into the province of Syria. The site, Tell
Hesban, consists of Roman ruins but has Am-
monite pottery dating to the 7th century Bc.
Heshmon. Town mentioned only in Joshua
15:24. It was located near Beth-pelet in south-
ern Judah. The notion that the Hasmoneans
originated there is unsubstantiated.
Heth. Progenitor of the Hittite people and a
descendant of Canaan, in Ham’s line (Gn
10:15; 1 Chr 1:13).
See HITTITES.
973
Hethlon
Hethlon. Site mentioned by Ezekiel (47:15;
48:1) describing part of the northern boundary
of the restored kingdom of Israel. Its actual
location is unknown.
Hexateuch. Name meaning “the sixfold
book,” given to a grouping of the first six books
of the Bible. Biblical critics added Joshua to
the Pentateuch, the fivefold book (Genesis
through Deuteronomy), because the contents
and style of Joshua connected it intimately
with the literary elements of the Pentateuch;
thus creating the Hexateuch.
Literary-critical theory divides the Hexa-
teuch into four documents called J, E, D, and
P. The portions identified as J and E use the
divine names Jehovah (Lord) and Elohim
(God), respectively. The D document contains
the core of Deuteronomy, and P presents the
priestly viewpoint. However, the use of divine
names as a Starting point for documentary
analysis, and the use of vocabulary and liter-
ary style for identifying documents, is too sub-
jective a procedure, and makes scientific ex-
amination virtually impossible.
Many critics date J, E, D, and P from the
gth to the 4th centuries Bc; however, such a
conclusion involves a defective evolutionary
theory. It is based on the myth of Israel's isola-
tion from surrounding cultures, and on the as-
sumption that Israel’s religion evolved froma
“primitive” to a “higher” or more ‘“complex”’
form. Archaeology, however, reveals both the
strongly imitative and derivative character of
Israel’s culture, and the unique character of
her religion.
Today form criticism sees the Hexateuch as
a combination of reliable oral traditions; but
the end result is a variation of the Documen-
tary Hypothesis. Although the theory of a uni-
lateral historical process upon which the criti-
cal theory was based has been discarded, the
Documentary Hypothesis of a single set of lit-
erary sources, in their order of precedence, is
still widely assumed by many scholars.
J.G.S.S. THOMSON
See DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS; FORM CRITICISM.
Hezeki. xsv spelling of Hizki, Elpaal’s son,
in 1 Chronicles 8:17.
See HIZKI1.
Hezekiah. 1. King of Judah from 715-686
Bc. The account of Hezekiah’s reign is in 2
Kings 18:1—20:21; 2 Chronicles 29:1—32:33; Isa-
iah 36:1-39:8.
Chronology. Hezekiah succeeded to Ju-
dah’s throne at 25 and ruled for 29 years
(2 Kgs 18:2; 2 Chr 29:1). His mother was Abi
(2 Kgs 18:2; 2 Chr 29:1, Abijah, a longer form),
974
a daughter of Zechariah. The chronology of
~Hezekiah’s reign is difficult to establish with
certainty. The Bible says the Assyrian siege of
Samaria, capital of the northern kingdom of
Israel, began in the 4th year of his reign and
that Samaria fell in the 6th year (2 Kgs
18:9,10), which would make his reign begin
about 728 Bc and end about 699. Assyrian king
Sennacherib besieged the fortified Judean cit-
ies during Hezekiah’s 14th year (2 Kgs 18:13),
which would have been 714. Assyrian records,
however, indicate that Sennacherib came to
the Assyrian throne in 705 and that his Judean
campaign took place in 701. The most gener-
ally accepted solution to the discrepancy is
that Hezekiah came to the throne in 715, proba-
bly after a co-regency with his father Ahaz
that began in 728. That solution harmonizes
with the statement that Sennacherib’s siege
took place in the 14th year of Hezekiah’s reign,
or 701.
Hezekiah’s Religious Reforms. Hezekiah
came to the throne at a critical juncture in
Judah’s history. Sargon II had taken Samaria
in 722 Bc, and Judah was militarily weakened
from wars and raids by surrounding nations
during the reign of Ahaz. Perhaps motivated
by warnings ‘to the northern kingdom deliv-
ered by the prophets Amos and Hosea that
punishment would come if Israel did not turn
back to God, Hezekiah began his religious re-
forms soon after becoming king.
In the first month of his reign Hezekiah
opened the temple doors and repaired them.
He brought the Levites together and ordered
them to “sanctify’’ themselves and the temple
and to reinstate the religious ceremonies that
had long been neglected. Hezekiah brought
sacrifices, and the priestly temple service was
restored (2 Chr 29).
Hezekiah then sent invitations throughout
Judah and Israel for the Passover celebration
in Jerusalem (held a month later than the pre-
scribed time because the priests ‘and people
could not be ready earlier). It was hoped that
religious unification would be a prelude to po-
litical reunification of the northern kingdom
of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah.
However, most of the northern tribes mocked
the Judean messengers who brought the invita-
tions, and only a few persons from the tribes
of Asher, Manasseh, and Zebulun went to Jeru-
salem for the celebration (2 Chr 30).
After the Passover observance the worship-
ers set about destroying the high places and
altars. They broke the pillars and cut down
the Asherim throughout Judah, Benjamin, and
also went into Ephraim and Manasseh (2 Chr
31:1). Hezekiah even smashed the bronze ser-
pent that Moses had made (Nm 21:6—9) for it
had become an object of worship and was iden-
 Hezekiah

tified with a serpent deity, Nehushtan (2 Kgs

18:4). Because of his sweeping reforms later
generations said of Hezekiah: ‘‘there was none
like him among all the kings of Judah after
him, nor among those who were before him”
(v 5).
The Assyrian Threat. Hezekiah knew that
Assyria’s growing international dominance .-
was a serious threat to his kingdom, but follow-
ing his father Ahaz’s policy of submission, Heze-
kiah did not at first attempt any resistance.
The inscriptions of the Assyrian king Sar-
gon II record his victorious campaign in 711 BC
against a revolt by Aziru king of Ashdod, who
requested help from Egypt and Judah. Per-
haps a prophecy received by Isaiah warned
Hezekiah not to interfere with the Ashdod
siege (Is 20:16), and so no punitive action was
taken against Judah by Assyria. Sargon died
in 705, and his son Sennacherib came to the
throne. This triggered widespread rebellion
throughout the Assyrian provinces. Hezekiah
withheld tribute from the new Assyrian ruler
and, taking advantage of the confused situa-
tion, made raids against the Philistines (2 Kgs
The tunnel leading to the pool of Siloam.
18:8). After subduing rebellious elements in
the East, Sennacherib began his campaign
against the “land of Hatti’” (the Assyrian name were defeated by the Assyrians in the vicinity
for the western countries) in 701 Bc. In prepara- of Eltekah. Ekron was captured, and Padi was
tion Hezekiah repaired Jerusalem’s city wall, recalled to his throne by Sennacherib.
raised towers on it, built another wall outside Sennacherib then turned his attention to
it, and strengthened the Millo in the City of the fortified cities of Judah and took them one
David. He also stockpiled abundant quantities by one (2 Kgs 18:13). Assyrian records claim
of weapons and shields (2 Chr 32:5). Knowing that he captured 46 walled cities and countless
the necessity of an adequate water supply for villages, including Lachish and Debi, south-
a city under siege, Hezekiah had a 1777-foot east of Jerusalem, 200,150 people, homes, cat-
tunnel cut through solid rock from the spring tle, and flocks without number. While Lachish
of Gihon to the Siloam pool to bring water was still under siege, Hezekiah saw that it was
into the city, and to prevent the Assyrians ac- hopeless to resist and sent word to Sennach-
cess to the spring water outside the city (2 Kgs erib offering to surrender and pay whatever
20:20; 2 Chr 32:3,4). The Siloam inscription, tribute he would impose. The Assyrian ruler
carved inside the tunnel itself, records the demanded an enormous tribute of 300 talents
completion of that remarkable conduit, and is of silver (800 talents according to Assyrian rec-
one of the oldest preserved examples of the ords, either an exaggerated figure or com-
Hebrew language. puted by a different standard) and 30 talents
Sennacherib invaded Palestine and after an of gold. In order to pay that tribute Hezekiah
extensive campaign put down the rebellion took all the silver in the temple and the royal
there. That campaign is well documented in treasuries, and stripped the gold from the tem-
Assyrian records, including a description of his ple doors and doorposts (2 Kgs 18:14—16). This
siege on Jerusalem in 701, and is supplemented treasure was sent to Sennacherib along with
by the biblical account (2 Kgs 18:13-19:37; 2 other gifts that, according to the Assyrian ac-
Chr 32:1—22; Is 36,37). Sidon, the cities of Phoe- count, included some of Hezekiah’s own
nicia, and the immediate neighbors of Judah, daughters as concubines.
including Byblos, Arnon, Moab, Edom, and Ash- The account in 2 Kings 18:17—19:37 raises
dod submitted to the Assyrians. Resistant Phi- the question of whether there was another in-
listine cities were also taken. Sennacherib laid vasion of Judah at a later date, or whether this
siege against Ekron, whose king Padi (a loyal passage gives additional details about the inva-
subject of Sennacherib) had been taken pris- sion of 7o1. Although Hezekiah had already
oner by his own subjects and turned over in submitted and paid tribute, these verses de-
chains to Hezekiah. A large Egyptian and Ethio- scribe further Assyrian demands. Those who
pian army failed to relieve the Ekronites who believe it was a single invasion suggest that

975
Hezekiah’s Tunnel

this is an account of the Assyrian deputation Hezekiah lived the remainder of his life in
sent by Sennacherib to demand Jerusalem’s ‘peace and prosperity. It may have been during
surrender while Lachish was still under siege. this time that he encouraged literary efforts in
The deputation included Tartan, Rabsaris, and Judah, which included copying some of Solo-
Rabshakeh (titles of court officials rather than mon’s proverbs (Prv 25—29). Upon his death in
personal names). They warned the citizens 686 he was succeeded by his son Manasseh,
that their God was no more able to save them who probably had become co-regent 10 years
than the gods of other cities defeated by the earlier. F. B. Huey, JR.
Assyrians. In distress Hezekiah sent word to See ISRAEL, History OF; CHRONOLOGY, OLD TESTA-
the prophet Isaiah who assured the king that MENT; KING, KINGSHIP.
Sennacherib would hear a rumor and return 2. KJV form of Hizkiah, Neuriah’s son, in
to his own land and there die by the sword 1 Chronicles 3:23.
(19:1-7). Shortly afterward Sennacherib re- See HIZKIAH #1.
ceived word of Babylon’s revolt in his eastern 3. Head of a family of exiles (the sons of
provinces, so he departed at once without tak- Ater), 98 of whose descendants returned from
ing Jerusalem. Assyrian records do not claim the Babylonian exile with Zerubbabel (Ezr
that Jerusalem was taken but only say that 2:16; Neh 7:21; 10:17, KJV Hizkijah).
Hezekiah was “shut up in Jerusalem like a 4. Ancestor of the prophet Zephaniah, pos-
bird in a cage.” Judah’s surrounding neighbors sibly King Hezekiah himself (Zep 1:1, kjv Hiz-
celebrated their deliverance and brought gifts kiah). :
of gratitude to Hezekiah (2 Chr 32:23).
According to the second invasion theory, af- Hezekiah’s Tunnel. See SiLoaM, Poot oF.
ter repeated rebellions Babylon was defeated
by Sennacherib in 689 Bc. Then the Assyrian Hezion. Tabrimmon’s father and the grand-
king heard that Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, father of Ben-hadad, king of Syria. Ben-hadad
was advancing against him, so he sent another formed an alliance with King Asa of Judah
threatening message to Hezekiah probably to (g10—869 Bc) and opposed Israel’s king Baasha
warn him against making an alliance with Tir- (908-886 Bc; 1 Kgs 15:18).
hakah. Hezekiah took the matter before the
Lord and received word from Isaiah that the
Assyrian king would return the same way he Hezir. 1. Levite and head of the 17th of 24
came and that Jerusalem would be untouched. divisions of priests for sanctuary service
Soon afterward in a miraculous intervention formed during David's reign (1 Chr 24:15).
by God 185,000 Assyrian troops were killed, 2. Israelite leader who set his seal on Ezra’s
and the Assyrian monarch abandoned his covenant during the postexilic era (Neh 10:20).
plans to conquer Hezekiah. That embarrassing
calamity understandably is not mentioned by Hezro, Hezrai. One of David’s mighty war-
the Assyrian records. In 681 Sennacherib was riors (2 Sm 23:35, KJV Hezrai; 1 Chr 11:37), a
killed by two of his sons as Isaiah had pre- Carmelite by birth.
dicted (2 Kgs 19:7,37).
Sometime prior to 701 Hezekiah became se- Hezron (Place). Town on Judah’s border (Jos
riously ill, and Isaiah told him to prepare for 15:3). In Numbers 34:4 it probably forms part
death. The king earnestly prayed for an exten- of the name Hazar-addar.
sion of life, and God promised him 15 more
years as well as deliverance from the Assyri- Hezron (Person). 1. Reuben’s son (Gn 46:9;
ans. Hezekiah asked Isaiah for a sign that he Ex 6:14; 1 Chr 5:3) and founder of the Hezron-
would be healed, and a shadow cast by the ite family in Reuben’s tribe (Nm 26:6).
sun moved backward to steps contrary to its 2. Perez's son (Gn 46:12; Ru 4:18,19; 1 Chr
normal direction (2 Kgs 20:1-11). 2:5—25; 4:1), founder of the Hezronite family in
Sometime after his recovery Hezekiah re- Judah's tribe (Nm 26:21), and an ancestor of
ceived a delegation with presents from Mero- Jesus Christ (Mt 1:3; Lk 3:33; kKjv Esrom).
dach-baladan of Babylon, ostensibly to con- See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.
gratulate “Hezekiah on his return to health.
The real object of the visit was probably to
enlist Hezekiah as an ally in a conspiracy be-
Hiddai. Warrior among David’s mighty men
(2 Sm 23:30); alternately called Hurai in 1
ing formed against Assyria. The king showed
Chronicles 11:32.
the Babylonian envoys all the gold, silver, and
other valuables he possessed. This act brought
a warning from Isaiah that the day would Hiddekel. Hebrew name for the Tigris Riv-
come when all those treasures would be car- er (Gn 2:14; Dn 10:4).
ried away to Babylon (2 Kgs 20:12—19). See TicRIs RIVER.

976

Hiel. Bethelite in the days of King Ahab
who fulfilled Joshua’s curse upon the city of
Jericho (Jos 6:26; 1 Kgs 16:34). Joshua had said
centuries before that anyone attempting to re-
build the city would suffer the loss of his old-
est and youngest sons. It is unclear whether or
not Hiel’s sons died a natural death or were
killed in a punitive ritual.
Hierapolis. City of southwest Phrygia, stra-
tegically located between Colossae to the east
and Laodicea to the south. The founding of the
city is credited to Eumenes II of Pergamum
(197—160 Bc). Hierapolis, because of its mineral
springs and deep cave known as Plutonium,
came to be a cultic center for the worship of
Phrygian gods. Lethal vapors issued from the
cave, which was thought to be an entrance to
the underworld. Residents believed that a
priest was seated deep inside the cave and
that on certain occasions prophecies would be
uttered for those seeking them. The mineral
baths attracted visitors, and gradually the city
developed into a leading commercial center.
As Roman rule enveloped the city, Hierapolis
became part of the province of Asia.
Under Paul’s influence, Christianity took
hold there during his stay in Ephesus. Paul
mentions Hierapolis in connection with the be-
liever Epaphras, who worked diligently for the
inhabitants as well as those in Laodicea and
Colossae (Col 4:13). Even though several early
Christians were martyred there, the church
continued to grow. In the 4th century, Chris-
tians closed off the Plutonium with stones.
Hieroglyphics. See WritING.
Higgaion. Musical notation in text of Psalm
g:16, presumably cueing the instrumental ac-
companiment to play softly, with a subdued
sound.
See Music AND MusICcAL INSTRUMENTS.
977
High Place
Hierapolis.
Higher Criticism. See Brs.icat CRITICISM,
NEw TESTAMENT; BIBLICAL CRITICISM, OLD TEs-
TAMENT.
High Place. Phrase commonly translated
from the Hebrew bamdah (pl., b6mah) which
apparently derived from a word originally
meaning “‘the back or ridge of an animal.”
Thus it came to refer to a height or hill or a
stone burial cairn. Usually it was an elevated
worship center, such as the ones referred to in
Numbers 33:52; 1 Samuel 9:13,14; 2 Kings 12:3;
2 Chronicles 21:11 and Ezekiel 36:1,2. But some-
times (as in 2 Kgs 23:8) it was a bamdah of the
gate, a sanctuary with no special reference to
height, located at the city gate as in Dan and
Beersheba. It might even have been placed in
a declevity (Jer 7:31).
That a bamah might simply be a burial
place with commemorative stela or memorial
stones is clear from such a passage as Ezekiel
43:7b. An illustration of such a bamdah is the
so-called Gezer high place. This Bronze Age
center with its 10 huge pillars is now inter-
preted as a mortuary shrine instead of a sanc-
tuary in the strict sense of the term.
A second word translated “high place”’ is
ramah (elevation), from the Hebrew meaning
“to be high.” Ezekiel used this term to refer to
illicit worship centers (16:24,25,31,39) which
evidently had no necessary connection with
height.
One of the best-known and best-preserved
of all high places in the vicinity of Palestine is
the great high place at Petra, discovered by
George L. Robinson in 1g00. Located on a
ridge west of the Khazneh, or treasury, it con-
sists of a large rectangular court and adjacent
altars. The court is about 47 feet long and 21
feet wide and is cut into the rock platform toa
depth of 18 inches. West of the court stand a
square and a round altar, each hewn from the
solid rock. South of the court is a pool measur-
High Place
“on a physical height, where one could feel
closer to the god. Its first essential was an al-
tar, which might be a heap of earth, unhewn
stones, or a unit cut out of the solid rock. Sec-
ond, there was a stone pillar (Dt 12:3) or obe-
lisk (massebah) representing the male deity
The snake monument, an altar at Petra.
ing about 8 1/2 by g 1/2 feet and cut 4 feet into
the rock. South of the pool stand two sacred
obelisks or pillars, also cut out of the solid
rock. This whole complex is reached from a
lower terrace by two flights of stairs. At this
center the ancient Nabataean inhabitants of
Petra evidently engaged in feasts and sacri-
fices to honor their gods. Though the worship
center in its present form does not date before
the 1st century BC, it preserves a very ancient
tradition of Transjordan and illustrates the pa-
gan and Israelite high places of OT times.
Excavations begun at Dan in 1966 have un-
covered what is thought to have been the ba-
mah constructed by Jeroboam I when he intro-
duced calf worship to Israel after the rupture
of the kingdom (1 Kgs 12:28—33). This open-air
platform passed through two stages of con-
struction during the period of the divided mon-
archy. The lower stage, apparently dating to
the reign of Jeroboam I in the roth century Bc,
was about 20 by 61 feet in size; the upper, of
Ahab’s day in the following century, measured
60 by 62 feet, had walls of limestone 5 to 7 feet
thick, and was approached by a monumental
flight of steps 27 feet wide. In addition, at the
gate was a construction which some have in-
terpreted as the ‘‘bamdah of the gate” (2 Kgs
23:8). Excavations at Tell Beersheba (1969-75)
uncovered in that gate area a bamah with a
round incense altar.
978
The pagan high place was usually located
and having phallic associations; third, a tree
or pole (asherah) representing the female deity
(a fertility goddess); and fourth, a laver for
ceremonial washings. A sanctuary with an im-
age of the deity also required a building of
some sort to protect it (2 Kgs 17:29).
At these pagan high places sacrifices of ani-
mals and sometimes of human beings took
place, and religious prostitution or homosex-
ual acts were common. It is natural that such
practices should develop in a context of sympa-
thetic magic, where promiscuity and breeding
among human beings was supposed to influ-
ence animals and crops.
The Hebrews had legitimate high places be-
tween the time of the destruction of the taber-
nacle at Shiloh and construction of the tem-
ple, though there was little similarity to pagan
accouterments or practices, apart from the
presence of an altar and the offering of sacri-
fices. At one high place the people ate a sacrifi-
cial meal before Samuel anointed Saul king
(1 Sm 9:12—10:1). The tabernacle was located
at the high place of Gibeon during the reign of
David (1 Chr 16:39; 21:29). Solomon offered sac-
rifices at several high places (1 Kgs 3:2,3), and
at the high place of Gibeon he met God and
was granted the gift of wisdom for his adminis-
tration (vv 4-15). Once Solomon’s temple was
completed, high places were eliminated and
were off-limits for the Hebrews.
When the Hebrews entered Canaan, they en-
countered pagan peoples who had long wor-
shiped at high places. God commanded the Is-
raelites to destroy those sanctuaries (Nm
33:52) to avoid contamination by them, but
the warning went largely unheeded. At the
height of the Hebrew kingdom, after Solomon
had completed the temple, he built high
places for the god Chemosh of Moab, Molech
of Ammon, and other gods of his pagan wives.
For this sin God determined to split the He-
brew kingdom (1 Kgs 11:7—11).
After the division of the kingdom Jeroboam
established high places at Dan and Bethel,
and Ahab and others proliferated their con-
struction. Judgment was prophesied (1 Kgs
13:2,3} 2 Kgs 17:7—-18), and ultimately the king-
dom of Israel went into captivity to Assyria for
her idolatry.
Rehoboam, the first king of the southern
kingdom, spread high places all over his do-
main (1 Kgs 14:23,24). Though King Asa
launched a revival of true religion, he did not
 Hind

remove the high places (15:12—14). Jehosha- kiah sent to Babylon with a letter of assurance
phat also initiated revival, but again the high from Jeremiah (Jer 29:3).
places remained (22:43). On the other hand,
his son Jehoram and his wife, Athaliah, encour- Hillel. 1. Father of Abdon, one of the judges
aged their construction (2 Chr 21:11). Joash (Jgs 12:13,15).
during his revival did not eliminate the high 2. Jewish teacher and scholar (c. 60 BC—AD
places (2 Kgs 12:3), nor did the similar efforts 20) who helped to develop the oral law and
of the good king Uzziah (15:3,4). Ahaz made no -tay have founded rabbinic Judaism. Hillel
pretense of faithfulness to God, and actively was called “the Elder,” a title which indicates
encouraged the idolatry of the pagan sanctuar- a person holding a position of honor, generally
ies (2 Kgs 16:3,4). Finally, Hezekiah launched a given to those who stood at the head of the
campaign against the high places (2 Chr 31:1); community. Born in Babylonia, he moved to
but his policies were reversed during the reign Palestine for more advanced studies under
of his wicked son Manasseh (2 Kgs 21:2—9). Jo- two outstanding scholars, Shemaiah and Ab-
siah led the last Judean revival and again at- talyon. He first gained recognition when the
tacked the high places (23:5,8). sons of Bathyra, the chief interpreters of the
The prophets roundly condemned these cen- Law at the time, could not decide on an an-
ters of idolatry: Isaiah (15:2; 16:12); Jeremiah swer to an important legal problem, namely,
(48:35); Ezekiel (6:3); Hosea (10:8); and Amos whether or not the offering of the paschal
(7:9). lamb overrode the sabbath prohibitions. Hav-
Howarbp F. Vos ing heard that there was a man living in Jeru-
See CANAANITE DEITIES AND RELIGION; GROVE; salem who had studied under Shemaiah and
IpoLs, IDOLATRY; GoDS, GODDESSES. Abtalyon, they sent for Hillel and told him the
problem. Hillel’s answer was that the paschal
High Priest. See Priests AND LEVITEs. offering took precedence over the sabbath, and
he argued his point so successfully that his
Highway, King’s. See K1nc’s HicHway. ruling was accepted. He was then appointed
to replace the sons of Bathyra. It has been
argued, however, that Hillel’s appointment
Hilen. Alternate name for Holon, a city as- can hardly be attributed solely to this one
signed to Levites, in 1 Chronicles 6:58. incident.
See HOLON #1. Hillel was one of the first persons to apply
advanced principles of interpretation in deter-
Hilkiah. 1. Father of Eliakim, an overseer in mining practical law and action. Thus he is es-
King Hezekiah’s household (2 Kgs 18:18,26; Is pecially important for the development of the
22:20; 36:3,22). Talmud and the oral law. These rules provided
2. High priest and Shallum’s son in the the basis for later rabbinic interpretation.
reign of King Josiah who, during the repair of There are many stories describing Hillel’s
the temple, found the Book of the Law (2 Kgs character, picturing him as a man of great hu-
22:3-14; 1 Chr 6:13; g:11; 2 Chr 34:14—-22). Ac- mility and extreme patience, pursuing peace
cording to:Ezra 7:1 (cf. 1 Esd 8:1), he was also even at the expense of truth. He is usually con-
an ancestor of Ezra. He is an important figure trasted with his colleague Shammai, who is
in the events surrounding Josiah’s religious re- portrayed as impatient and ill-tempered. The
form, not only because he found the Book of most famous tale tells of a heathen who came
the Law, but also led the king’s messengers to Shammai to be converted on the condition
to consult Huldah the prophetess regarding that he teach him the entire Law while he
God’s Word (2 Kgs 22:14) and later presided stood on one foot. Shammai snubbed him, and
over the purification of the temple (23:4). so the heathen went to Hillel. Hillel replied,
3. Merarite Levite, the son of Amzi and Ama- “What is hateful to you do not do to your
ziah’s father (1 Chr 6:45). neighbor; this is the entire Law, all the rest is
4. Merarite Levite and Hosah’s son, who commentary. Now go and learn it.” Hillel thus
was appointed as a gatekeeper in the temple became a model for Jews throughout history.
by David (1 Chr 26:11). See TALMUD; JUDAISM; SHAMMAI.
5. Companion of Ezra at the public reading
of the Law (Neh 8:4). Scholars disagree as to Hin. Liquid measure equal to one-sixth of a
whether he was a layman or a priest. bath or about one gallon.
6. Priestly leader among the returned exiles
See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
(Neh 12:7,21).
7. Anathoth priest who was the father of
Jeremiah (Jer 1:1).
Hind. Adult female red deer.
8. Father of Gemariah whom King Zede- See ANIMALS (DEER).

979
Hinnom, Valley of
~people, Solomon did maintain a fleet of ships
The Valley of Hinnom.
Hinnom, Valley of. Deep, narrow ravine
running south of Jerusalem which marked the
boundary between Judah and Benjamin’s ter-
ritories.
See GEHENNA.
Hippopotamus. See ANIMALS (BEHEMOTH).
Hippos. One of the cities of the Decapolis (a
loose federation of 10 Greek cities) established
in Palestine after the death of Alexander the
Great (323 Bc; also called Susitha); not men-
tioned in the Bible. Its location is in doubt,
but most likely it was eight miles north of
Gadara and four miles east of the Sea of Gali-
lee near the road to Damascus. Its position
was of strategic military importance in the de-
fense of Jerusalem, while its location was also
ideal for trading, from which it exported not
only its merchandise but also Greek culture.
See DECAPOLIS.
Hirah. Adullamite and friend of Judah to
whose house Judah went after he and his
brothers sold Joseph (Gn 38:1). He accompa-
nied Judah to the sheepshearing after Judah's
wife died (v 12), and served as the messenger
to carry a kid from Judah to Tamar (v 20).
Hiram. 1. King of Tyre during the time of
David and Solomon. After David had con-
quered Jerusalem and moved his capital there,
Hiram sent cedar wood, masons, and carpen-
ters to build David’s palace (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Chr
14:1). Hiram remained David's friend through-
out his life (1 Kgs 5:10), and after David's
death he sought to continue that friendship
with Solomon. When Solomon was ready to
build the temple, Hiram provided wood from
the forests of Lebanon, gold, and skilled crafts-
men to help build and furnish the temple; and
Solomon in return gave Hiram wheat and oil
for his household. Moreover, Solomon gave Hi-
ram 20 cities in Galilee, although the Scrip-
ture indicates that Hiram was not pleased
with them (1 Kgs 5:1~—11; 9:10—14).
980
Although the Israelites were not a maritime
at Ezion-geber (1 Kgs 9:26—28). Hiram gave his
assistance to Solomon by supplying sailors
and perhaps ships to make Solomon’s fleet op-
erable. The Phoenicians were noted sailors,
who sailed*the Mediterranean Sea as far west
as Tarshish in Spain, and this aid was no
doubt quite beneficial.
Josephus says that Hiram was the son of
Abibal, that he reigned in Tyre for 34 years,
and that he died at the age of 53. Phoenician
historians record that Solomon married the
daughter of Hiram.
2. Craftsman from Tyre who worked on
Solomon’s temple. He was said to be the son
of a man of Tyre and a woman from the tribe
of Naphtali (1 Kgs 7:13,14), although 2 Chroni-
cles 2:14 says that his mother was from Dan’s
tribe. He was responsible for the creation of
various furnishings in the temple: two brass
pillars, the capitals that adorned the pillars,
the molten sea and the 12 oxen on which it
stood, the ro lavers with their bases, the shov-
els, and basins.
His name is also spelled Huram in 2 Chroni-
cles 4:11. He is called Huram-abi (abi meaning
“master”) in z Chronicles 2:13 and 4:16.
Hittites. Biblical people who figure largely
in the promises of a land for the descendants of
Abram and the children of Israel. Once un-
known to secular history and thought to be a
mythical people by some critics of Bible his-
tory, the Hittites have been recovered by the
efforts of archaeologists and historians and
now are known to have had an empire centered
in Asia Minor. They were of sufficient military
strength to challenge the armies of Egypt un-
der the vainglorious Ramses II and fought him
to a standstill at Kadesh on the Orontes.
For the most part, the biblical references do
not suggest that the Hittites were more than a
minor group, but the association of Hittite
kings and Egypt with Solomon’s trade in
horses and their involvement in the conflicts
of Syria and Israel in the divided monarchy
indicate that the Hittites were a people of
great consequence.
The Term “Hittite.” Specialists give three
meanings to the term Hittite: (1) the aborigi-
nal inhabitants of Anatolia, whom the special-
ists prefer to call Hattian; (2) the Indo-
European people who are generally known as
the Hittites; (3) the small city-states in north-
ern Syria that preserved certain elements of
the Hittite culture and are often called Neo-
Hittite. These kingdoms flourished in the 1st
millennium Bc but had been subservient to the
Hittites of Asia Minor during the empire pe-
riod (c. 1400-1190 BC).

Their neighbors of the rst millennium Bc,
such as the Assyrians and the Hebrews, used
the term “Hittite’’ to refer to the earlier
empire as well as to the later Syrian city-
states, without regard to linguistic or ethnic
background.
Geography. The Hittite Empire had its
center in Anatolia (Asia Minor, modern Tur-
key), with its capital at Hattusas (modern
Boghazkéy) at the bend of the Halys River
(present Kizil Irmak). The empire at times ex-
tended over a much larger area without defi-
nite boundaries since it included city-states
that were dependencies of the Anatolian king-
dom, related to it by treaties but otherwise
not a part of it. Because of their presence in
Palestine-Syria, the Hittites made their influ-
ence felt in Egypt and are well known from
the art and inscriptions of that country. The
presence of Hittites in Palestine is widely at-
tested in the Bible, and the power of the Hit-
tites in Palestinian cities like Hebron is indi-
cated in patriarchal times.
History. The Hattians were one of several
groups of peoples, thought to be neither Se-
mitic nor Indo-European, who occupied the
Anatolian plateau in the 3rd millennium Bc. In
the late part of this millennium Indo-Euro-
peans overran the area and assumed political
power.
History in the true sense, that is, based on
written records, begins in Anatolia around
1900 BC with the arrival of Assyrian traders.
These merchants established themselves in
various cities and corresponded with their
homeland using cuneiform tablets. Numbers
of these records have been found, principally
at Kultepe (ancient Kanesh) near Kayseri.
These mention the struggle among Hittite prin-
cipalities for supremacy in Anatolia and refer
to a King Anittas, who is known from Hittite
sources of later date.
The Old Kingdom (c. 1740-1400 BC). Hittite
kings traced their lineage to one Labarnas,
from whose reign no records have survived,
although later inscriptions tell of his activi-
ties. His successor, Hattusilis I (c. 1650-1620
BC), left the text of a speech which is the main
source of knowledge of the political situation
in this early period. It was during his reign
that Hattusas (modern Boghazkéy) became
the administrative capital of the empire.
Mursilis I (c. 1620-1590 BC) even succeeded
in taking the famous city of Babylon in about
1600 BC, but he was assassinated and the em-
pire fell into disarray. In the East the Hurri-
ans took over and Hittites also lost power in
the south. The balance of the Old Kingdom
period was marked by instability and internal
friction.
Some alleviation of these conditions was
981
Hittites
brought about by a usurper, Telepinus, who
seized the throne around 1525 Bc and managed
to do away with his rivals. He issued an edict
concerning the succession, prefaced by an ab-
breviated survey of Hittite history and accom-
panied by rules regulating the conduct of the
king and nobility.
<° ” Although the remainder of the period is ob-
scure, the famous law code, one of the most
important texts found at Boghazkoy, dates
from this time.
The Empire (c. 1400-1190 BC). During the
15th century Bc the dominance of the Hurrians
was broken by the campaigns of the Egyptian
king Thutmose III, but another Hurrian king-
dom, Mitanni, soon became prominent in west-
ern Asia. Mitanni presented a threat to the Hit-
tites, but with the arrival of an ambitious and
energetic monarch, Suppiluliuma I (c. 1380—
1340 BC), there came a resurgence of Hittite
vitality and the strength of the empire. This
was the time of the writing of the Amarna Let-
ters, with their testimony of the confused situa-
tion in Palestine-Syria.
Suppiluliuma carried out a brilliant mil-
itary expedition against Mitanni and then by
combining force with diplomatic genius,
forged for himself a buffer zone of vassal
city-states, which were bound to him by trea-
ties, copies of which were found in the Hit-
tite archives.
During the first half of the 14th century, the
languor of Amenhotep III and the religious pre-
occupation of Akhenaten had allowed the Asi-
atic empire of Egypt to dwindle away into a
memory. But with the beginning of the 19th
dynasty, the Egyptians became concerned
about regaining what was lost. The contest for
Palestine-Syria reached its climax with the fa-
mous battle at Kadesh on the Orontes, where
the initial advantage was won by Hittite chari-
ots. Ramses II celebrated the battle as a vic-
tory, although he barely escaped with his life.
The Hittite king, Muwatallis, also claimed a
triumph, but in political terms the battle was
inconclusive. The next Hittite king after him,
Hattusilis III, signed a treaty with Ramses II
in the 21st year of the reign of the Egyptian
king; the pact was confirmed by the marriage
of the daughter of Hattusilis to Ramses II.
Around the middle of the 13th century Bc
the Hittites were threatened from the west by
the Ahhiyawa, possibly to be associated with
the Achaeans and the Sea Peoples. It was a
wave of the Sea Peoples that brought the Hit-
tite Empire to an end around 1190 Bc and
surged along the eastern Mediterranean coast
until it was finally stopped in the Nile Delta
by Ramses III.
The Neo-Hittite Kingdoms (c. 1190-700 BC).
In northern Syria, independent city-states con-
Hivites
tinued to be ruled by kings who bore Hittite
names and erected monuments inscribed with
Hittite hieroglyphs. The Assyrians continued
to refer to the area as the Land of Hatti, and
the OT speaks of these rulers of principalities
as ‘‘Kings of the Hittites.’’ These little king-
doms were soon placed under Assyrian tribute
and became Assyrian provinces in the reigns
of Shalmaneser V and Sargon II, the rulers
who also put an end to the northern kingdom
of Israel by conquering Samaria in 721 BC.
Languages and Literature. In the texts
found at Boghazkéy, eight different languages
were employed. Of these, only two, Hittite and
Akkadian, were used for official royal records.
Akkadian was the lingua franca of the empire
and was also the main language of the
Amarna Tablets. Hurrian is the only other lan-
guage in which complete texts were written.
The other languages occur mostly in short pas-
sages in Hittite religious documents, and one
is identified only by some technical terms.
These eight languages are:
(1) Hittite, also called Nesite, was recog-
nized by B. Hrozny as having affinities with
Indo-European. This proposal met with skepti-
cism among scholars for a while, but has
been proved beyond question. (2) Hattic (Hat-
tian), the language of the aboriginal people of
Anatolia, is used for speeches of the priests in
the performance of the cultic ritual relating
to the Hittite pantheon. (3) Luwian is another
Indo-European language, closely related to
Hittite. (4) Palaic, a little known language, is
also Indo-European. (5) Hurrian appears in
many ritual texts. Fragments of a Hurrian
translation of the Epic of Gilgamesh were
found. One of the Amarna Tablets, written by
Tushratta, king of Mitanni, to Amenhotep III,
was in Hurrian. Also represented are (6) the
Aryan language of the Mitanni rulers, (7)
Akkadian, and (8) Sumerian. In addition to
the cuneiform script, the Hittites used hiero-
glyphs, which have been found inscribed on
stone and lead.
The Hittite archives contained texts of offi-
cial documents, such as treaties, laws, instruc-
tions, annals of the kings, letters, and other
historical records. There was much religious
literature, including myths, legends, epics, in-
cantations, rituals, omens, prayers, and de-
scriptions of festivals and their celebration.
The People. The diversity of language
characteristic of Hittite civilization is paral-
leled by the great mixture of ethnic back-
grounds, particularly over the geographic
range covered by the empire. The physical ap-
pearance of the Hittites is known from their
own reliefs and from representation on Egyp-
tian monuments. Their own depictions show
the Hittites with unattractive faces, heavy
982
coats, tall pointed caps, and shoes with
~turned-up toes.
Religion. The Hittites had a pantheon of
deities, known by name from the inscriptions
and by appearance from the reliefs. Gods may
be identified by a weapon or tool carried in
the right hand, a symbol in the left hand,
wings or similar appurtenances, or the sacred
animal on which a divinity may stand.
A principal god was the weather god, whose
sacred animal was the bull. Out of the multi-
plicity of local cults there arose an official pan-
theon, headed by the sun goddess, Arinna, who
was the supreme deity of the state and of the
king. The treaties of the Hittites typically have
a long list of divinities who served as witnesses
to the treaty and oath.
Hittites and the Bible. The name “Hit-
tite(s)’”” occurs nearly 50 times in the OT but
does not appear in the NT. If one includes the
occurrences of the name of Heth, the father of
the Hittites, there are more than 60 citations
in the Bible. Most have to do with the pres-
ence of Hittites in Canaan. Their progenitor
and eponym, Heth, is listed second among the
sons of Canaan in the table of nations (Gn
10:15; cf. 1 Chr 1:13). Most of the references to
the ‘‘sons of Heth” appear in the narrative of
the purchase of the cave of Machpelah by Abra-
ham (Gn 23).
The OT references to Hittites include Gene-
sis 26:34; 27:46 (Hittite women); 49:29—-32;
50:13 (Ephron); Exodus 33:2; Numbers 13:29;
Deuteronomy 7:1; 20:17 (their destruction);
Joshua 11:3; 12:8 (occupants of Canaan); 1
Samuel 26:6; 2 Samuel 11,12 (warriors under
David); 1 Kings 9:20; 10:29 (laborers or traders
under Solomon); 11:1 (wife of Solomon); Ezra
g:1 (foreigners); Ezekiel 16:3,45 (Jerusalem’s
ancestors).
Car E. DEVRIES
Bibliography. F.F. Bruce, The Hittites and the OT; C.W.
Ceram, The Secret of the Hittites; O.R. Gurney,.The Hittites;
S. Moscati, The Face of the Ancient Orient; A.H. Sayce, The
Hittites; C.L. Woolley, A Forgotten Kingdom.
Hivites. Name of a pre-Israelite group liv-
ing in Canaan. Though not yet demonstrated
archaeologically or from secular history as a
people, they were regarded as emerging from
a son of Canaan (Gn 10:17) and as inhabiting
areas of the Lebanon mountains (Jgs 3:3) and
Hermon (Jos 11:3). They are referred to fre-
quently as a group dispossessed by Israel (Jos
12:8; 24:11; 1 Kgs 9:20) but who managed to
survive into the kingdom period (2 Sm 24:7)
and lived at that time near Tyre as well as in
other possible areas. Some scholars think that
an error in copying, involving the changing of
the letters r (resh) to w (waw) was responsible
for the origin of the name Hivite from Horite.

Others have suggested a scribal confusion
of names, since Zibeon is called a Hivite in
Genesis 36:2 and a Horite in verses 20 and 29.
In several cases the Septuagint gives ‘“‘Horite”’
in place of Masoretic text ‘“‘Hivite” (Gn 34:2;
Jos 9:7). Other passages in the Septuagint read
“Hittite” rather than “Hivite” (Jos 11:3; Jgs
The overlapping or equivalence of Hivite
and Horite in Genesis 36 probably indicates
some relationship between the two peoples
(cf. Ishmaelites and Midianites in Gn 37:28,
36). Perhaps both Horites and Hivites are re-
lated to the Hurrians, who are well attested
archaeologically.
The fact that there are some 25 occurrences
of the name Hivite(s) in the OT, nearly one-
third of which come in Joshua, makes it proba-
ble that they were a distinct people. Aside
from Hivites in Palestine, they also appeared
in Edomite territory (Gn 36:2). OT references
to Hivites include Hamor (Gn 34:2), the men of
Gibeon (Jos 9:7), the northern Hivites (Jgs 3:3-
8), and those who lived near Tyre (2 Sm 24:7).
During the reign of Solomon the Hivites
and other foreign inhabitants of the land were
made slaves; that is, they were put under
forced labor (1 Kgs 9:20,21; 2 Chr 8:7). The Hi-
vites are not mentioned again in the Bible,
and their fate is unknown.
Hizki. Elpaal’s son from Benjamin’s tribe
(1 Chr 8:17, KJv Hezeki).
Hizkiah. 1. Neariah’s son and a descendant
of David through Rehoboam’s line (1 Chr 3:23,
kKJv Hezekiah). He is perhaps identifiable with
the Hezekiah in Ezra 2:16 and Nehemiah 7:21.
See HEZEKIAH #3.
2. KJV spelling of Hezekiah, Zephaniah’s
forefather, in Zephaniah 1:1.
See HEZEKIAH #4.
983
Hod
The traditional site of the
=, Cave of Machpelah in
“*.f2 Hebron.
Hizkijah. «sv form of Hezekiah, Ater’s de-
scendant, in Nehemiah 10:17.
See HEZEKIAH #3.
Hobab. Name associated with Moses’ father-
in-law (Nm 10:29; Jgs 4:11), who was a priest
of Midian (Ex 18:1) and ancestor of the Kenites
(Jgs 4:11). He is usually called Jethro (Ex 3:1;
4:18; 18:1-12), but also Reuel (2:18) with its
variant Raguel (Nm 10:29 KJV; RSV Reuel).
The confusion surrounding the name Ho-
bab has never been satisfactorily resolved.
Judges 4:11 seems to identify Hobab with Je-
thro; there is some manuscript evidence for
adding ‘‘Hobab”’ to “‘the Kenite, Moses’ father-
in-law” in Judges 1:16, and to the mention of
Reuel in Exodus 2:18. But Hobab could be
Jethro’s son, on one reading of Numbers
10:29a: ‘‘Hobab the son of Reuel the Midianite,
Moses’ father-in-law.” In this passage Moses
requests that Hobab accompany Israel as
guide and advisor in the wilderness.
See JETHRO.
Hobah. Town to which Abraham pursued
the armies under Chedorlaomer (Gn 14:15). Its
location is uncertain but various suggestions
have been made. Some equate it with the Ho-
bah about 50 miles northwest of Damascus;
others, with the territory called Ube in the
Amarna letters; and still others, with Tell el-
Salihite, ro miles east of Damascus.
Hobaiah. Alternate spelling of Habaiah in
Nehemiah 7:63.
See HABAIAH.
Hod. Zophah’s son from Asher’s tribe (1 Chr
7:37):
Hodaiah
Hodaiah. xv spelling of Hodaviah, David’s
descendant, in 1 Chronicles 3:24.
See HODAVIAH #1.
Hodaviah. 1. Postexilic descendant of Da-
vid (1 Chr 3:24, KJV Hodaiah).
2. Chieftain of Manasseh’s half-tribe east of
the Jordan (1 Chr 5:24).
3. Hassenuah’s son and the father of Meshul-
lam from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 9:7).
4. Progenitor of a family of Levites that re-
turned with the exiles from Babylon (Ezr
2:40); alternately called Judah in Ezra 3:9 and
Hodevah in Nehemiah 7:43.
Hodesh. Name given to Shaharaim’s wife
from Benjamin’s tribe in 1 Chronicles 8:9 (a
textually corrupt passage).
Hodevah. Alternate spelling of Hodaviah in
Nehemiah 7:43.
See HODAVIAH #4.
Hodiah, Hodijah. 1. Either (a) the wife of a
man of Judah mentioned in 1 Chronicles 4:19
(KJV) or (b) the man of Judah himself (Rsv).
2. Three of the men who signed the cove-
nant of Ezra (Neh 10:10,13,18) bear this name;
two of them are perhaps among those who in-
terpreted the covenant to the people at Ezra’s
public reading of the Law (Neh 8:7, ksv Hodi-
jah) and stood upon the stairs of the Levites
during the service of covenant renewal (Neh
9:5, KJV Hodijah).
Hoglah. One of Zelophehad’s five daughters
(Nm 26:33; 27:1; Jos 17:3). Zelophehad, who
was of Manasseh’s tribe, had no sons, so that
his inheritance passed to his daughters. They
married within their own tribe according to
God’s command, so that their land “‘remained
in the tribe of the family of their father’”’ (Nm
36:12).
See BETH-HOGLAH, BETH-HOGLA.
Hoham. Amorite king of Hebron, confeder-
ate with four other kings in reprisals against
Gibeon for making peace with Joshua (Jos
10:3). They were defeated and put to death at
the cave of Makkedah (Jos 10:16—27).
Holiness. Chief attribute of God and a qual-
ity to be developed in his people. “Holiness’’
and the adjective “holy’’ occur more than goo
times in the Bible. The primary OT word for
holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fun-
damentally, holiness is a cutting off or separa-
tion from what is unclean, and consecration to
what is pure.
984
In the OT, holiness as applied to God signi-
fies his transcendence over the creation and
the moral perfection of his character. God is
holy in that he is utterly distinct from his cre-
ation and exercises sovereign majesty and
power over it. His holiness is especially promi-
nent in the Psalms (47:8) and the prophets (Ez
39:7), where “holiness” emerges as a synonym
for Israel’s God. Thus Scripture ascribes to
God the titles “Holy” (Is 57:15), ““Holy One”
(Jb 6:10; Is 43:15), and “Holy One of Israel” (Ps
89:18; Is 60:14; Jer 50:29). .
In the OT God’s holiness denotes that the
Lord is separate from all that is evil and de-
filed (cf. Jb 34:10). His holy character is the
standard of absolute moral perfection (Is 5:16).
God’s holiness—his transcendent majesty and
the purity of his character—are skillfully bal-
anced in Psalm gg. Verses 1 through 3 portray
God’s distance from the finite and earth-
bound, whereas verses 4 and 5 emphasize his
separation from sin and evil.
In the OT God demanded holiness in the
lives of his people. Through Moses, God said
to the congregation of Israel, “You shall be
holy; for I the Lord your God am holy” (Lv
19:2). The holiness enjoined by the OT was two-
fold: (1) external, or ceremonial; and (2) inter-
nal, or moral and spiritual. OT ceremonial ho-
liness, prescribed in the Pentateuch (the first
five books of the OT), included ritual consecra-
tion to God’s service. Thus priests and Levites
were sanctified by a complex process of ritual
consecration (Ex 29), as were the Hebrew Nazi-
rites, which means “‘separated ones” (Nm 6:1—
21). Prophets like Elisha (2 Kgs 4:9) and Jere-
miah (Jer 1:5) were also sanctified for a special
prophetic ministry in Israel.
But the OT also draws attention to the in-
ner, moral, and spiritual aspects of holiness.
Men and women, created in the image of God,
are called to cultivate the holiness of God’s
own character in their lives (Lv 19:2; Nm
15:40). Psalm 15, for example, deals with God’s
ethical requirements. To the question, ‘‘Who
shall dwell on thy holy hill?’ the Lord re-
sponds. “He who walks blamelessly, and does
what is right, and speaks truth from his heart”
(v 1,2). In a similar vein, Isaiah represents
God’s ransomed community as “the holy peo-
ple, the redeemed of the Lord” (Is 62:12).
In the NT the ceremonial holiness promi-
nent in the Pentateuch recedes to the back-
ground. Whereas much of Judaism in Jesus’
time sought a ceremonial holiness by works
(Mk 7:1—13), the NT stresses the ethical rather
than the formal dimension of holiness. With
the coming of the Holy Spirit, the early
church perceived that holiness of life was a
profound internal reality that should govern
an individual’s thoughts and attitudes in rela-

tion to persons and objects in the external
world.
The NT Greek equivalent of the common
Hebrew word for holiness signifies an inner
state of freedom from moral fault and a rela-
tive harmony with the moral perfection of problems the Corinthian believers were “holy
God. The word “godlikeness” or “godliness”
captures the sense of the primary Greek word -’ * The NT, however, places great stress upon
for holiness. Another Greek word approxi-
mates the dominant OT concept of holiness as
external separation from the profane and dedi-
cation to the service of the Lord.
Because the NT writers assumed the OT
portrait of deity, holiness is ascribed to God in ness should accompany believing.
relatively few apostolic texts. Jesus affirmed
the ethical nature of God when he enjoined his
disciples to pray that the Father’s name might
be esteemed for what it is: “Hallowed be thy
name” (Mt 6:9). In the Book of Revelation the
Father’s moral perfection is extolled with the
threefold ascription of holiness borrowed from
Isaiah: “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Al-
mighty, who was and is and is to come” (4:8;
cf. Is 6:13). Luke, however, contemplated God's
holiness in terms of the dominant OT concept
of his transcendence and majesty (1:49).
Similarly the holiness of Jesus Christ is as- of the divine nature” (2 Pt 1:4).
serted in the NT. Luke (1:35; 4:34), Peter (Acts
3:14; 4!27,30), the writer of Hebrews (7:26), and
John (Rv 3:7) ascribe holiness to both the Fa-
ther and the Son.
Since the Spirit comes from God, discloses
his holy character, and is the instrument of
God’s holy purposes in the world, he also is
absolutely holy (Mt 1:18; 3:16; 28:19; Lk 1:15;
4:14). The common title, “Holy Spirit,” under-
scores the ethical perfection of the third per-
son of the Godhead (Jn 3:5—8; 14:16,17,26).
In the NT holiness also characterizes
Christ’s church. The apostle Paul taught that
Christ loved the church and died for it “that he
might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the
washing of water with the word” (Eph 5:26).
The Greek forms of the verbs “sanctify” and
“cleanse” suggest that Paul had in mind the
“once for all” (1 Pt 3:18) imputation of Christ’s
righteousness to the church on the basis of his
death and resurrection (cf. 1 Cor 6:11). Peter
addressed the church as a holy people in lan-
guage borrowed from the OT. Separated from
the unbelieving nations and consecrated to the
Lord, the church is “a holy nation” (1 Pt 2:9; cf.
Ex 19:6).
But the NT more often discusses holiness in
relation to individual Christians. Believers in
Christ are frequently designated as “saints,”
literally meaning “holy ones,” since through
faith God justifies sinners, pronouncing them
“holy” in his sight. A justified sinner is by no
means morally perfect, but God does declare
believers to be guiltless before the bar of his
Holon
justice. Thus, although Christians at Corinth,
for example, were plagued with numerous
sins, Paul could address his erring friends as
those who were “sanctified in Christ Jesus,
called to be saints” (1 Cor 1:2). Despite their
ones” in Christ.
the reality of practical holiness in the Chris-
tian’s daily experience. The God who freely de-
clares a person righteous through faith in
Christ commands that the believer progress in
holiness of life. In God’s plan, a growth in holi-
Paul urged Christians at Rome to “yield
your members to righteousness for sanctifica-
tion” (Rom 6:19). The Book of Hebrews urges
believers to strive for “the holiness without
which no one will see the Lord” (12:14). A goal
of the Christian life, therefore, is conformity to
the moral image of God. In this sense Paul
enjoins believers at Ephesus to “put on the
new nature, created after the likeness of God
in true righteousness and holiness” (Eph 4:24).
God graciously provides the spiritual re-
sources to enable Christians to be “partakers
Bruce A. DEMAREST
See Gop, BEING AND ATTRIBUTES OF.
Bibliography. O.R. Jones, The Concept of Holiness; S.
Neill, Christian Holiness; R. Otto, The Idea of the Holy; J.C.
Ryle, Holiness; S. Taylor, Holy Living; A.W. Tozer, The Knowl-
edge of the Holy.
Holiness Code. Group of laws supposedly
edited into the P (Priestly) source, comprising
chapters 17-26 of Leviticus (referred to as the
H document). It was either added by the au-
thors of P or by an editor influenced by P. Lib-
eral scholars date the work from the postexilic
period in the time of Ezra (570 Bc).
See DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS.
Holiness of God. See Gop, BEING AND ATTRI-
BUTES OF; HOLINESS.
Holm Tree. Tree mentioned in Isaiah 44:14
whose wood was used for fuel and idol con-
struction; its identity is uncertain.
See PLANTS.
Holon. 1. Town in the uplands of Judah’s in-
heritance (Jos 15:51) given to the Levites
(21:15). In 1 Chronicles 6:58, the town is called
Hilen. Holon may be Khirbet ‘Alin, northwest
of Hebron.
See LEVITICAL CITIES.
2. City near Heshbon located in the plain
of Moab (Jer 48:21). Its exact location is un-
known.
985
Holy Ghost
Holy Ghost. See Hoty Spirit.
Holy of Holies. See TaBERNACLE, TEMPLE.
Holy One of Israel. See Gop, NaMEs oF.
Holy Place. See TaBERNACLE, TEMPLE.
Holy Spirit. Third person of the Trinity. The
word “‘spirit”’ (Hebrew ruah, Greek pneuma) is
the word used from ancient times to describe
and explain the experience of divine power
working in, upon, and around men, and under-
stood by them as the power of God.
Old Testament. There are three basic mean-
ings evident in the use of spirit from the earli-
est Hebrew writings.
Period of the Judges. (1) Wind of God. It
was a wind from God which caused the waters
of the flood to subside (Gn 8:1), and which
blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quails
over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nos-
trils separated the waters of the Red Sea at
the exodus (14:21).
(2) Breath of life. The breath of God consti-
tuted man as a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one
of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith
that man lives only because of the stirring of
the divine breath or spirit within him (6:3; Jb
33°45 34:14,15; Ps 104:29,30). Later a clearer dis-
tinction was drawn between divine Spirit and
human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but
at the earliest stage these were all more or less
synonymous manifestations of the same divine
power, the source of all life, animal as well as
human (Gn 7:15,22; see Eccl 3:19,21).
(3) Spirit of ecstasy. There were occasions
when this divine power seemed to overtake
and possess an individual fully, so that his or
her words or actions far transcended those of
normal behavior. Such a person was clearly
marked as an agent of God’s purpose and
given respect. This was apparently how lead-
ers were recognized in the premonarchy
period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jeph-
thah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm
11:6), as well. So too the earliest prophets
were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy
(19:20,23,24).
Such an understanding of divine appoint-
ment naturally posed some serious questions:
Is ecstasy the only divine authentication, and
is all ecstasy to be equally so regarded?
There are some indications in the OT that
these became relevant questions during the
period of Israel’s nationhood prior to the ex-
ile in Babylon.
Period of Monarchy. During the transition
from the charismatic leadership of the judges
to the institution of a hereditary monarchy,
the issue was raised whether an anointing
986
with the power of God was the qualification
for kingship or part of the coronation cere-
mony itself. The issue was more lively in the
northern kingdom of Israel, where hereditary
monarchy did not long survive. Jehu’s claim
to the throne rested on his anointing by Elijah
at divine command. In the southern kingdom
the model ruler was David whose own claim
to the throne rested on the charismatic anoint-
ing by Samuel (1 Sm 16:13; Ps 89:20,21).
The question of qualification for office and
divine anointing arose in even sharper form in
the preexilic period. Who should be regarded
as authoritative speakers for God—the priests
and cultic prophets, or the independent proph-
ets? Did the authoritative Word of the Lord
come from the priest or prophet who spoke by
virtue of his place within the official cult or
sanctuary, or from the prophet who spoke
with the sole authority of compelling inspira-
tion? Even with hindsight we cannot decide
unequivocally for the latter alternative. While
Isaiah and Jeremiah attack the corruptness of
the official spokesmen of their day (Is 28:7; Jer
6:13; 23:11), it is quite likely that some of the
canonical prophets, including Habakkuk and
Zechariah, belonged to the cult. (Recent schol-
arship has coricluded that at least some of the
psalms began as prophetic utterances within
the worship at the sanctuary.) On the other
hand, where cult and charisma clash it is al-
most always the charismatic prophet whose
utterances have been enshrined as the authori-
tative Word of the Lord. The two most famous
incidents are the encounter between Micaiah
and the 400 prophets of King Ahab (1 Kgs
22:5—28) and the confrontation between Amos
and Amaziah, priest of Bethel (Am 7:10-17).
In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought ec-
static experience was seen as the direct effect
of divine power. This was true even when the
ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as
in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (x
Sm 16:14—16). A spirit from God could be for
evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs
22:19—23).
From the major prophets onward, however,
talk about the Spirit becomes much more cau-
tious. For Isaiah, spirit was that which charac-
terized God and distinguished him and his ac-
tions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later the
adjective ‘‘holy” appeared as that which distin-
guished the Spirit of God from any other
spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10,11).
The problem of false prophecy emphasized
the danger of assuming that every message de-
livered in ecstasy was the Word of the Lord.
Thus tests of prophecy evaluated the content
of the message delivered or the character of
the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of
inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Is 44:7,8; Jer
 Holy Spirit

23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discrimi- inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Hag-
nate between true and false inspiration and to gai, Zechariah, and Malachi the Spirit had
distinguish the Word of God from the merely been withdrawn (1 Mc 4:44—-46; 9:27; 2 Bar
ecstatic oracle may help to explain the other- 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2—6). The Spirit
wise puzzling reluctance of the major 8th- and would be known again in the age of the Mes-
7th-century Bc prophets to attribute their in- siah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent
spiration to the Spirit (Mi 3:8 may be the only from Israel. Even the great Hillel, (learned
exception). Perhaps, as Hosea 9:7 may suggest, ‘Jewish leader and teacher, 60?,BC—AD 20?) a
the Spirit had become too much identified near contemporary of Jesus, had not received
with the madness of ecstasy, and a period of the Spirit, though if anyone was worthy of the
silence was necessary to separate the Word Spirit it was he. There is a tradition that at a
from the grosser manifestations which earlier meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice
had been regarded as its clearest expression. from heaven said, ‘‘Among those here present
The questions posed by the earliest under- is one who would have deserved the Holy
standing of the Spirit and agonized over by Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been
the great prophets are questions which re- worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at
main: How is one to recognize the experience Hillel.
of the Spirit to be such? How can one distin- The consequence of this accepted dearth of
guish true inspiration from false? How can a the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became
proper balance and healthy tension be main- subordinated to the Law. The Spirit was the
tained between the Spirit and the institutional inspirer of the Law, but since the Spirit could
forms of religion, between charisma and cult? no longer be experienced directly, the Law be-
Exilic and Postexilic Periods. In exilic and came the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this
postexilic literature the role of the Spirit is increasing dominance of the Law and its au-
narrowed to two major functions. thoritative interpreters that provided the back-
(1) The prophetic Spirit. The later prophets ground for the mission of Jesus and the initial
again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as spread of Christianity.
the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1—4,22-24; New Testament. If we are to understand
Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the rightly the NT’s teaching on the Spirit we
preexilic period, these prophets freely attrib- must recognize both its continuity and discon-
uted the inspiration of “the former prophets” tinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage
to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12). cannot be fully understood except against the
This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as background of OT concepts or passages. For
the inspirer of prophecy became steadily example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (‘“‘wind,”
stronger in the period between the OT and NT “Spirit’’), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (‘‘breath’’), and
until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was al- Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life’) takes us
most exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic back to the basic Hebrew meanings of
writings now regarded as Scripture. “spirit,” outlined at the beginning. Acts 8:39
(2) The eschatological Spirit. The other un- and Revelation 17:3; 21:10 reflect the same con-
derstanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic ception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings
and postexilic times was as the power of God 18:12; 2 Kings 2:16; and Ezekiel 3:14; and the
that would characterize the age to come. That NT writers generally share the rabbinic view
eschatological hope of divine power effecting a that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit
final cleansing and a renewed creation is behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2
rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is Pt 1:21). The principal continuity however is
4:4; 32:15; 44:3,4), where the hope of one that of fulfillment of what the OT writers
anointed by the Spirit as the agent of final looked forward to in hope. At the same time
salvation comes to clearest expression (Is 11:2, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. In
42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere the same longing is ex- the central significance of Jesus and in the
pressed for that time when the Spirit would new definition of the Spirit which follows
be freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl from the life and work of Jesus, we have an
2:28,29; Zec 12:10), for that new creation and element of discontinuity that marks off the
new covenant when relationship with God new faith as something distinct.
would be much more vital and immediate (Jer The Spirit of the New Age. The most strik-
31:31,34; Ez 36:26,27). ing feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the mes-
In the period prior to Jesus, the understand- sage of the earliest Christians was their convic-
ing of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and tion and proclamation that the blessings of
as the Spirit of the age to come had developed the new age were already present, that the es-
into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was chatological Spirit had already been poured
no longer to be experienced in the present. out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qum-
The Spirit had been known in the past as the ran, no other group or individual within the

987
Holy Spirit
The caves at Qumran, where the Essenes aiso proclaimed a
new age.
Jewish religion of that time had dared to
make such a bold claim. The prophets and the
rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come
and the apocalyptic writers warned of its im-
minent arrival, but none thought of it as al-
ready present. Even John the Baptist spoke
only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s
operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But
for Jesus and first-century Christians, the
longed for hope was a living reality, and the
claim carried with it the exciting sense of be-
ing in ‘‘the last days.”” Without some recogni-
tion of that eschatological dimension of the
Christians’ faith and life, we cannot
stand this teaching on and experience of the
Spirit.
Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and
healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope
(Mt 12:41,42; 13:16,17; Lk 17:20,21). In particu-
lar, he saw himself as the One anointed by the
Spirit as the agent of eschatological salvation
(Mt 5:3—-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17—19). So too Jesus un-
derstood his exorcisms as the effect of the es-
chatological power (Spirit) of God and as
manifestations of the endtime rule (kingdom)
of God (Mt 12:27,28; Mk 3:22—26). The Gospel
writers, especially Luke, emphasize the es-
chatological character of Jesus’ life and minis-
try by stressing the role of the Spirit in his
birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35,41,67; 2:25—-27), his bap-
tism (Mk 1:9,10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry
(Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1,14; 10:21; Jn
3:34).
Christianity proper began with the outpour-
ing of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last
days,” the overwhelming experience of vision
and inspired utterance being taken as proof
positive that the new age prophesied by Joel
had now arrived (Acts 2:2—-4,17,18). Similarly
in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of
as ‘‘the powers of the age to come” (6:4,5).
More striking still is Paul’s understanding of
the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete
salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13,14), as the
“first-fruits” of God’s final harvest of men
(Rom 8:23), and as the first installment of the
~believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (8:15—
17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6,7; 5:16—
18,21—23; Eph 1:13,14). The Spirit is here again
thought of as the power of the age to come, as
that power—which will characterize God's
rule at the end of time—already shaping and
transforming the lives of believers.
For Paul this means also that the gift of the
Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong pro-
cess that will not end until the believer's
whole person is brought under the Spirit’s di-
rection (Rom 8:11,23; 1 Cor 15:44—49; 2 Cor
3:18; 5:1—5). It also means that the present ex-
perience of faith is one of lifelong tension be-
tween what God has already begun to bring
about in the believer’s life and what has not
yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6),
between Spirit and flesh, between life and
death (Rom 8:10,12,13; Gal 5:16,17; 6:8).It is
this eschatological tension between life “in the
Spirit” and life “in the flesh’’ (see Gal 2:20)
that comes to poignant expression in Romans
7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2—4.
The Spirit of New Life. Since the Spirit is
the mark of the new age, it is not surprising
that the NT writers as a whole understood the
gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an
individual into the new age. John the Baptist
under- described the way the coming One would bap-
tize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt
3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this im-
agery was taken up by Jesus and the promise
seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring
of the Spirit here being understood as the
risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples
into the new age, in initiating them into ‘the
last days” (Acts 2:17,33).
It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in Acts to
highlight the central importance of the gift of
the Spirit in conversion-initiation, as that deci-
sive ‘‘gift of the Holy Spirit’”’ that makes one a
Christian (2:38,39). People could have been fol-
lowers of Jesus on earth, but it was only with
the gift of the Spirit at Pentecost that they
could be said to have “believed in [i.e., com-
mitted themselves to] the Lord Jesus Christ”
(11:16,17). Even belief of the gospel message in
baptism could fall short of full commitment to
and acceptance of Christ of which the Spirit
was the decisive evidence (8:12—17).
When the Spirit’s presence was manifested
in and upon a life, that was recognized by Pe-
ter as proof enough that God had accepted
that man even though he had not yet made
any formal profession of faith or been bap-
tized (Acts 10:44—48; 11:15—18; 15:7—9). So too
Apollos, already “aglow with the Spirit”
(18:25; cf. Rom 12:11), even though his knowl-
edge of “the way of God” was slightly defec-
tive (Acts 18:24—26), apparently was not re-
988

quired to supplement his “‘baptism of John”
with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-
called disciples at Ephesus proved by their
very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not
yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1—6). Luke
represents Paul as asking these 12 men, “Did
you receive the Holy Spirit when you be-
lieved?” (19:2).
This is entirely of a piece with Paul’s own
emphasis in his letters. The step of faith and
reception of the Spirit go together, two sides
of the one coin: to receive the Spirit is to begin
the Christian life (Gal 3:2,3); righteousness
through faith and the promise of the Spirit are
equivalently regarded as “the blessing of Abra-
ham”’ (vv 1-14); to be baptized in the Spirit is
to become a member of the body of Christ (x
Cor 12:13); if anyone does not “‘have the Spirit
of Christ” that person does not belong to
Christ, is not a Christian (Rom 8:9); only recep-
tion of the Spirit makes it possible for us to be
sons of God, to call on God as Father (vv 14-
17; Gal 4:6,7); the divine seal establishing the
bond between God and the believer is now the
Spirit himself, not circumcision (and not bap-
tism) (2 Cor 1:22; Eph 1:13,14). The Spirit so
characterizes the new age and the life of the
new age that only the gift of the Spirit can
bring a person into the new age to experience
the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinc-
tively and peculiarly the lifegiver; the Spirit
indeed is the life of the new age (Rom 8:2,6,10;
1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).
In just the same way in the Johannine writ-
ings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-
giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above,
the seed of divine life that brings about the
new birth (3:3—-8; 1 Jn 3:9), a river of living
water that brings life when one believes in
Christ (Jn 7:37—39; so also 4:10,14). Or again,
reception of the Spirit in 20:22 is depicted as a
new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Conse-
quently in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13 possession and
experience of the Spirit count as one of the
“tests of life” listed in that letter.
The Spirit of the New Covenant. The life
that begins with the Spirit depends on the
Spirit for its continuance (Gal 3:3). As Christ
fulfilled his mission in the power of the Spirit
(Heb 9:14), so the person “in Christ’ can only
live life as a Christian out of the same Spirit.
Jesus had promised the inspiration of the
Spirit in times of trial (Mk 13:11), and the first
Christians found this to be fulfilled in their
own experience (Acts 4:8,31; 6:10; 13:9). But
they also experienced the Spirit in a much
more regular way as the one who directed
their mission (1:8; 8:29,39; 10:19; 11:12; 13:2,4;
Peia83 07-7097, 19:21; F Ptr: 125 also Jn 16:8—11;
20:21—23), and as a strengthening power (Acts
9:31; 1 Pt 4:14; Jn 14-16).
989
Holy Spirit
Paul in particular is quite clear that this
living out of the resources and direction of the
Spirit is what distinguishes Christianity from
the Judaism of his day. There is a practice of
religion which is “according to the letter, the
written code” (Rom 2:28,29; 7:6; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal
4:9,10; Col 2:20—23), just as there is a quality of
‘living which is “according to the flesh,” on the
level of one’s appetites and selfish desires
(Rom 8:4—6,12,13; Gal 5:13). But the Christian
is one who “walks by the Spirit,” is ‘“‘led by
the Spirit,’ “orders his life by the Spirit”
(Rom 7:6; 8:4—6,14; Gal 5:1,16,18,25). The Spirit
within is precisely the fulfillment of the pro-
phetic hope of a new covenant, for a circum-
cision of the heart giving an immediate and
direct knowledge of God’s will and a spontane-
ity of worship that leaves all “rule-book reli-
gion” far behind (Rom 2:28,29; 7:6; 12:2; 2 Cor
3:3—alluding to Jer 31:31-34; Eph 2:18; 6:18;
Phil 3:3; cf. 1 Jn 2:27; Jude 20).
Manifestations of the Spirit. It will be clear
from what has already been said that when
the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews,
spoke of the Spirit they were thinking of expe-
riences of divine power. As in the OT so in the
NT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the
experience of new life and vitality (see above),
of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2;
2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal
(cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37—39;
Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; Ti 3:5,6). It is important
to realize how wide a range of experiences
were attributed to the Spirit—ecstatic experi-
ences (Acts 2:2-4; 10:44-46; 19:6; cf. 10:10;
22:17—"‘in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1—4; Rv 1:10; 4:2),
emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5;
joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22;
Phil 2:1,2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor
3:14-17; Eph 1:17,18; Heb 6:4; 1 Jn 2:20), experi-
ences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor
6:9-11). Likewise when Paul speaks of spiri-
tual gifts, charismata (acts or words that
bring divine grace to concrete expression), he
evidently has a wide range of actual events in
mind-inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8,10; see also
2:4,5; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor
12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), acts of service and
help, of counsel and administration, of aid and
mercy (Rom 12:7,8; 1 Cor 12:28).
In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of ex-
perience, we should not overemphasize par-
ticular experiences or manifestations, as
though earliest Christianity consisted of a se-
quence of mountaintop experiences or spiri-
tual highs. There clearly were such experi-
ences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but
no one experience is singled out to be sought
by all (except prophecy), there is no distinc-
tively second (or third) experience of the
Spirit in the NT, and Paul if anything warns
Holy Spirit
against overvaluing particular manifestations
of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6—19; 2 Cor 12:1—10; cf.
Mk 8:11—13). Where particular experiences are
valued it is as manifestations of a more sus-
tained experience, particular expressions of an
underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3,5; 11:24—
“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in
touch with here is the vigor of the experiential
dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit
is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez
37:9,10,14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presum-
ably the analogy extends further, and the expe-
rience of the Spirit is like the experience of
breathing: one is not conscious of it all the
time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least
sometimes, something is wrong.
The Fellowship of the Spirit. It was out of
this shared experience of the Spirit that the
earliest Christian community grew and de-
veloped—for this is what “the fellowship
(koin6nia) of the Spirit’”’ properly means, com-
mon participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1;
cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4—9). As it was the gift of
the Spirit that brought those in Samaria,
Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the
community of the Spirit (Acts 8,10), so it was
the experience of the one Spirit that provided
the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s
mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3,4; Phil 2:1). Here
we see the real importance of the divine mani-
festations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the
diversity of these particular manifestations
that the unity of the church emerges, that the
body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:48;
1 Cor 12:12-27; Eph 4:4-16). It is as specific
expressions of the divine life which all share
that Paul thinks of the charismata. And it is
only as they benefit and build up that com-
mon life and worship that Paul values them
(1 Cor 12:7). This is why he ranks prophecy so
highly (cf. Acts 2:17,18), because unlike glosso-
lalia it ministers to the whole person (mind as
well as spirit) and, more important, to the
whole community (1 Cor 14). For the same rea-
son he is cautious about accepting all claims
to charismata—the experience of inspiration
is not self-authenticating—and urges that ev-
ery such claim be submitted to the judgment
of the community. What does not find an echo
among those who have the Spirit and does not
build up the community of the Spirit is un-
likely to be a gift of the Spirit (1 Cor 2:12-15;
14:29; 1 Thes 5:19—22; cf. Mt 7:15—23).
In this way Paul provides a resolution to
the OT problem of whether authority lies in
the individual utterance of the charismatic
prophet or in the official of the institutional-
ized cult. For the antithesis of individual char-
ismatic over against official spokesman has
been transcended. All, not just one or two spe-
cially anointed individuals, have the Spirit;
99°
and all, not just a particular prophet, may be
“used by the Spirit as ministers of grace (Rom
8:9; 1 Cor 2:12; 12:7,11). This means that au-
thority lies not in an either-or of charisma or
office, but rather in the correlation and inter-
action of charisma and community, in the indi-
vidual charisma (word or act) as tested and
approved by the community as a whole.
The Spirit of Christ. The most important
development and element in earliest Christian
understanding of the Spirit is that the Spirit is
now seen to be the Spirit of Jesus (Acts 16:7;
Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6; Phil 1:19; 1 Pt 1:11; see also
Jn 7:38; 15:26; 16:7; 19:30; Rv 3:1; 5:6). It is this
more precise definition of the Spirit that pro-
vides the Christian answer to the other OT
problem: how to recognize the experience of
the Spirit to be such. The answer is partly that
the Spirit is to be identified as the Spirit
which bears witness to Jesus (Jn 15:26;
16:13,14;- Acts§:32;-1:Corj12:3;7a3m 4525 715:7,8;
Rv 19:10), but also and more profoundly, as
the Spirit which inspired and empowered Je-
sus himself. Thus the Spirit is to be recognized
as the Spirit of sonship—that is, as the one
who inspires the same prayer and brings
about the relation with God as Father that Je-
sus enjoyed (Rom 8:15—17— ‘fellow heirs’; Gal
4:6,7). The Spirit is to be recognized as the
power of God that transforms the individual
into the image of God, that makes the believer
like Christ (2 Cor 3:18; cf. Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 13;
15:44-49; Phil 3:21; Col 3:10; 1 Jn 3:2). In par-
ticular, this means that experience of the
Spirit of Jesus is experience of Christ the cruci-
fied as well as of Christ the Exalted One, expe-
rience not just of resurrection power but also
of sharing his sufferings and death (Rom 8:17;
2 Cor 4:7—12,16—18; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10,11). The
mark of the Spirit of Christ is not so much
experiences of divine power that leave behind
or transform physical weakness, but rather
the experience of power in weakness, of life
through death (2 Cor 12:9,10).
The link between the Spirit and ‘the exalted
Jesus is even closer for the believer. The Spirit
in a real sense is Jesus’ mode of existence now
(Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:45; 1 Tm 3:16; 1 Pt 3:18). To
experience the Spirit is to experience Jesus (Jn
14:16—28; Rom 8:9,10; 1 Cor 6:17; 12:4—6; Eph
3:16,17; Rv 2,3). One cannot know Jesus apart
from the Spirit or other than through the
Spirit. One cannot experience the Spirit other
than as that of power which bears the char-
acter of Christ and impresses that character
on those who submit to it. Any other spiritual
experience is to be discounted by the Chris-
tian, entirely disregarded and avoided.
JAMES D.G. DUNN
Bibliography. C.K. Barrett, The Holy Spirit and the Gos-
pel Tradition; F.D. Bruner, A Theology of the Holy Spirit; M.

Green, I Believe in the Holy Spirit; G.S. Hendry, The Holy
Spirit in Christian Theology; R.B. Hoyle, The Holy Spirit in
St. Paul; M. Inch, Saga of the Spirit; C.D.F. Moule, The Holy
Spirit; H.W. Robinson, The Christian Experience of the Holy
Spirit; E. Schweizer, The Holy Spirit; H.B. Swete, The Holy
Spirit in the NT.
Holy War. See War, Hoty.
Homam. Alternate spelling of Heman, Lo-
tan’s son, in 1 Chronicles 1:39.
See HEMAN #1.
Homer. Dry measure of capacity estimated
to be anywhere from four to six and one-half
bushels.
See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
Homes and Dwellings. Places of abode for
people of Bible times.
The Earliest Houses. Precisely how long
ago humans appeared in Palestine is not
known. Before 10,000 Bc people who were hunt-
ers, fishermen, and collectors of edible fruits
and roots lived in caves and in temporary shel-
ters. In the Wadi el Mughara near Mt Carmel,
Professor Dorothy Garrod excavated caves be-
tween 1929 and 1934 which provided overlap-
ping sequences of deposits left by man from
the Palaeolithic Age (c. 25000-10000 BC) to the
Mesolithic Age (c. 10000-7500 BC). These caves
were the dwelling places of Old Stone Age
man in the area. At the close of this period
people became keepers of goats, sheep, and cat-
tle and learned to cultivate grain crops. The
Neolithic or New Stone Age (c. 7500-4000 BC)
had come. One of the most significant sites of
this period in Palestine was Jericho, which de-
veloped into a township some ro acres in area
with a massive town wall and a remarkable
watchtower. The people moved from the caves
and began constructing houses, which were
probably a variation of the primitive shelters
of the earlier hunters, round or curvilinear in
plan. Their lower walls inclined inward, sug-
gesting that they had domed roofs of some
kind, probably made of wattling or brush-
wood plastered over with clay or mud. Each
house had a projecting porch in which a num-
ber of steps or perhaps a sloping ramp led
from the slightly sunken floor to a higher out-
side street level. The walls were made with
hand-moulded plano-convex bricks with a flat
base and a curved top. Sometimes wooden
posts and wattling were incorporated in the
walls. The houses had only one room, a single
doorway, and probably no window. While
most of the houses were roughly circular, a
few were polygonal, square, or rectangular. At
Beidha in southern Jordan a special house had
got
Homes and Dwellings
four rooms around a central court, although
the houses at Beidha generally resembled
those of the prepottery Neolithic A phase in
Jericho (c. 7000 Bc).
The houses of the prepottery Neolithic B
phase in Jericho showed considerable develop-
ment. The rooms were larger with wide door-
“ways, and were flanked by timber posts. The
plan was rectangular with slightly rounded
corners, and the walls were straight and solid
and built of hand-molded bricks somewhat dif-
ferent from earlier bricks made in molds. The
floors were covered with a hard lime-plaster,
often reddish or cream-colored, carried up the
walls a little. The main rooms were flanked by
smaller rooms, probably used for storage.
Rain water was kept in plastered vats built
against the walls. These houses were built
round a courtyard where cooking was done, to
judge from the thick charcoal layers on many
floors. The only utensils were white limestone
bowls, although skins and perhaps some
wooden vessels were no doubt used.
With the discovery of pottery further
changes appeared. The pottery Neolithic A
people dwelt in pits dug in the mound, but
their successors, the pottery Neolithic B peo-
ple, began to build freestanding houses rectan-
gular in shape with stone foundations and a
superstructure of mud-bricks.
Houses of the Chalcolithic Age (c. 4000-—
3150 Bc). The succeeding Chalcolithic Age
saw some interesting variations in dwellings.
In southern Palestine in the general area of
Beersheba there was a good deal of subterra-
nean dwelling and some quite remarkable arti-
ficial cave dwellings were dug into com-
pacted, unstratified sediment (loess) at Abu
Matar. These were entered either by horizon-
tal passages or from the edge of the mound or
by vertical shafts into which hand- and foot-
holds were cut. They were on the average
about 14 feet by 10 feet and were connected by
galleries in groups of 5 to 7 chambers. Along
the walls of the rooms were pits, some lined
with plaster for water storage. Silos for stor-
ing grain were sunk in the rooms or in the
connecting galleries. Fireplaces may have
been on the surface of the mound. Eventually
this community moved above ground and
built rectilinear houses with walls set on stone
foundations.
Along the coastal areas north of modern Tel
Aviv there may have been another type of
house. At Hedera near Caesarea, and at some
other sites in the same general area, ossuaries
(bone boxes) in the shape of a single-roomed
house with a door at one end and a gabled
roof were found. Some of the ossuaries had
four feet, suggesting houses built on stilts.
Some scholars have asked whether these mod-
Homes and Dwellings
els may not point to yet another type of house
during the Chalcolithic period.
The most remarkable collection of houses
from this period comes from Teleilat Ghassul,
just north of the Dead Sea and three miles
east of the Jordan River. A whole community
of houses was closely grouped together here,
each roughly rectangular or square in shape.
The foundations were of stone and the walls of
hand-molded bricks. Some of the walls still
preserved fragments of plaster on which repre-
sentations of animals, birds, and human be-
ings were depicted in bright colors. Appar-
ently cooking, grinding of grain, and other
household chores were done in an open area
near the house where paved threshingfloors,
storage pits, basalt querns (millstones), open
fireplaces, and ovens with sunken combustion
chambers were discovered.
Early Bronze Age Houses (c. 3150-2200
Bc). The pattern established during the Chal-
colithic period continued on into the Early
Bronze Age. The houses of this age can be stud-
ied at a number of important sites. In general,
two-roomed dwellings were more common, al-
though the one-roomed house continued. The
general shape was square or rectangular. At
Tell el Far‘ah (biblical Tirzah), one house mea-
sured 16 feet on each side and had walls two
feet thick made of closely fitting field stones
with mud-bricks above the lower walls. A
stone bench 14 inches high stood against the
interior walls. Pottery found in the house
pointed to a date about 2600 Bc. Other smaller
one-roomed houses stood adjacent. The site of
Arad in southern Palestine east of Beersheba
produced a large area of domestic occupation
and many houses of the period (c. 2850-2650
BC) were brought to light. These consisted
largely of one broad room with an additional
room (kitchen or storeroom) and a courtyard
attached. The size of the room ranges from
about 8 by 5.5 to 4.6 to 3.6 yards with the
larger size more frequent..Lime plaster cov-
ered the floors and was carried up the walls.
The door was always in the long wall with a
few steps leading down into the room to a
floor which was lower than street level. To the
left of the entrance was a door socket. Low
benches adjoined most of the walls and a
stone base for a wooden post to support the
roof was normally present. The roof was proba-
bly flat to judge from a small pottery model of
a house. Large quantities of broken pottery,
mortars, and grinding querns found in almost
every room indicate the kind of household im-
plement in use. Large amounts of charred
grain in receptacles give a good idea of the
crops that were cultivated.
At Jericho, too, there is good evidence of
Early Bronze Age houses. A succession of sol-
992
A mud-brick house with thatch roof from Jericho.
idly built and spacious structures point to a
period of full urban development. In one
house a wall standing to a height of more than
15 feet may indicate that some houses were
two-storied. The normal house, however, was
the two-roomed dwelling. This style continued
in use till the end of the Early Bronze Age.
Changes came in the Middle Bronze Age
which followed a period of severe depopula-
tion at the end of the 3rd millennium (c. 2200—
2000 BC). Towns such as Jericho, Beth-shan, Ai,
Tirzah, and Megiddo provide evidence of this
depopulation.
Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 2000—1550
Bc). With the Middle Bronze Age we move
into the period of the biblical patriarchs. Isra-
el’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or
temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of
the Middle Bronze Age into whose land they
came lived in substantial houses of several
rooms built around a courtyard.
The simplest form of this new type of house
had a courtyard with one single room on one
side, generally on the west of the courtyard, to
avoid having the prevailing westerly winds
blow smoke into the room. Silos for storing
grain were normally in the room rather than
in the courtyard. Good examples of such one-
roomed houses were found at Tell Nagila
northwest of Beersheba dating to about 1700
Bc. Three such houses had a room 1o by 7 feet
and a courtyard ro by 16 feet, and partitions
sometimes divided the room. The walls were
made of rough stone and mud bricks covered
by mud plaster, and were hardly thick enough
to carry a second story. Houses were set close
together to take advantage of a common back
wall with entrances to the court on roughly
parallel streets. Each house contained a stone
and clay bench along the walls.
Sometimes several rooms were built off
one side of the courtyard. The grandest of
these yet found comes from Tell Beit Mirsim
dating from about 1600 Bc, probably the
house of a local governor or patrician. There
were no less than six rooms on the western
’

side of the courtyard, which was some 35 by
1g feet in size. The roofed living space includ-
ing both the ground and second floors was
about 1500 square feet; a second floor is as-
sumed from the thickness of the walls all
around. The ground floor may have been
partly functional with two stable rooms and
two storage areas. Other less imposing vari-
ants of the courtyard house with rooms on
one side only come from this same tell in
Stratum E (c. 1700 Bc).
The second type of house in the Middle
Bronze Age had a roofed hall with rooms on
one or two sides. A good example of such a
house with rooms on one side comes from Tell
Beit Mirsim dating from about 1800 Bc. The
large roofed rectangular hall contained three
large flat stones set along the long axis to
serve as foundations for the wooden roof sup-
ports. Rafters of wood and a roof of reeds cov-
ered with mud were found in the debris. Each
of the three rooms on the west was entered
from the hall. The stone foundations and mud
brick walls were substantial enough to sup-
port a second story which could be reached by
an exterior wooden staircase or ladder. The
floor of earth, ashes, and straw was carefully
smoothed over.
A third type of house consisted of an open
courtyard with rooms on two adjacent sides of
the court. A good example comes from Tell
Beit Mirsim built on the ruins of the house
with the roofed hall. The roofed hall became
the court. A house at Tell Taanach from the
Middle Bronze IIB period (c. 1700 Bc) was of
very strong construction with walls over three
feet thick laid in mortar. The courtyard con-
tained a cistern, and an oven was found in a
room on the east side of the house. The ground
floors were plastered and covered some 2300
square feet. An interior staircase led to a sec-
ond story.
In some houses rooms were placed at oppo-
site sides of the courtyard. Good examples
come from Beth Shemesh (Tell er-Rumeilah)
and Megiddo. At Beth Shemesh the city wall
formed the south wall of the house, and rooms
lay east and west of the courtyard. Entrance
was from the street into one of the rooms. The
other rooms were entered by crossing the
courtyard. The outer walls were over three
feet thick and interior walls a foot and a half.
Mud and lime plaster coated the walls.
At Megiddo, too, houses were built against
the north city wall. In level XII (c. 1700-1750
Bc). three well-preserved houses of this kind
have been found. The houses were separated
by walls at right angles to the city wall. En-
trance to each house was through one door
onto the street, and through a room and into a
courtyard paved with small stones and peb-
993
Homes and Dwellings
bles. The courtyards housed the ovens, and
one house had a cistern.
A fourth type of Middle Bronze Age house
had rooms on 3 sides of the courtyard. These
rooms varied greatly in size and use. A good
example dating to about 1600 Bc comes from
Megiddo, level IX. The house was 42 by 39 feet
.iri size and contained 9 rooms of varying sizes.
The courtyard was plastered with lime and
had a large oven in the center. A second oven
was found in an eastern room. Each room had
a door to the courtyard. This house, like other
Middle Bronze houses, had burials under the
floors (cf. 1 Sm 25:1; 1 Kgs 2:34 for biblical
references in the Iron Age).
The wide variety of Palestinian houses dur-
ing the Middle Bronze Age points to a level of
prosperity much higher than that of the Early
Bronze Age. Both houses and tombs yielded
quantities of graceful and well-made house-
hold utensils.
Late Bronze Age Houses (c. 1550-1200
Bc). Information is limited for this period,
due partly to the accidents of excavation and
partly to the severe destruction at the close of
the age of many sites at the hands of Israelites,
Sea Peoples, Egyptians, and others. At Tell
Beit Mirsim one earlier house was rebuilt on
the same plan, probably by an Israelite, but it
lacked the finesse of earlier buildings. The
courtyard type house continued in general
use. One residence at Beth-shemesh was some
49 by 39 feet in size, but its three-feet-thick
walls were very rough. A stone staircase inside
the courtyard suggests an upper story. At Me-
giddo around 1400 Bc one house had rooms
around four sides of the courtyard. Jericho,
which was rich in Middle Bronze Age houses,
did not produce Late Bronze Age houses be-
cause of serious erosion.
Israelite Houses of the Iron Age (c. 1200-—
600 Bc). Many examples of domestic build-
ings come from this period. The Israelite struc-
tures were at first rather crude but the quality
improved. Thus at Tell Qasile in the 12th cen-
tury there were poor homes with a courtyard
and a single room on one side. At contempo-
rary Beth-shemesh one larger house had a
foundation of large uncut stones, a courtyard
some 34 by 20 feet, and 3 rooms on one side 11
by 10¥%2 feet. There was rough stone paving in
the court and in two of the rooms. At Hazor,
Yigael Yadin discovered a house with a court-
yard and rooms on one side dating to about
goo Bc. Half of the courtyard was covered, the
roof being supported on stone pillars. These
stone pillars are very characteristic of the Iron
Age houses in Palestine and have been found
in sites all over the country.
The Late Bronze and Middle Bronze Age
pattern with a courtyard and rooms on two
Homes and Dwellings
adjoining sides was common in the Iron Age.
A good example comes from Megiddo, level V
from around 1050 Bc. The house had two parts,
each of which was entered from the street
along a corridor which opened into three
rooms. The courtyard was at the end of the
corridor and a stairway off the courtyard led
up to a second story. The floors were paved
with lime plaster, and the range of high qual-
ity pottery found there suggests the home of a
man of influence. Beyond this large structure
lay many small structures in which querns,
grinders, stone bowls, and ovens were found.
The most common type of house in the days
of the kings of Judah and Israel was one in
which rooms were built on three sides of a
courtyard. Good examples of this type of
house have been found at Tell Qasile (near Tel
Aviv), Megiddo, Tell en Nasbeh (perhaps bibli-
cal Mizpah), Tell es Sa‘idiyeh (across the Jor-
dan River midway between Galilee and the
Dead Sea), Tirzah, Hazor, and Shechem. This
type of house has sometimes been called the
“four-room house.” A long room was built
across the short axis of the courtyard, and two
other rooms, one on each side of the court,
were constructed on the long axis. The court-
yard was divided into three by two rows of
pillars which extended down the long axis of
the court. These pillars supported the roof and
gave support for walls, either half height or
full height. Entrance to the house was from
the street into the courtyard where ovens and
silos were normally placed, although this var-
ied. Such a framework could be expanded by
adding a row of rooms outside the existing
rooms on the long axis of the court. There
were many ways to divide long rooms into
smaller ones. In some cases where the walls
were strong enough a second story was added.
An excellent example of a four-roomed house
which was later enlarged was found at She-
chem and dated to the period around 748—724
Bc. The courtyard contained a storage bin, a
large open hearth, a quern, stone grinders,
and the bases of pottery jars resting in stone
pedestals. In the rooms that had been added
there was a device for catching water from the
roof and delivering it to an underground wa-
ter system. A large silo in one room was con-
nected to a kitchen.
Other houses of the same general plan be-
longing to the 8th century Bc were found at
Hazor. These usually had rooms on both sides
of the courtyard and opening onto it. Stone
pillars were set in a row to one side of the
court and seem to have supported a roof. The
courtyards housed an oven and storage jars.
Some dwellings in Hazor had only one or two
rooms.
There is evidence that larger Iron Age
994
houses served as industrial or commercial
~buildings. Certain houses at Tell Beit Mirsim
contained dye vats and loom weights. In
other places the large number of querns sug-
gests a wheat-grinding industry. There is evi-
dence also of wine vats, of potters’ equip-
ment, and“of shops. Some houses had rooms
set apart for religious purposes and contained
incense stands, figurines, small altars, and
the like.
The excavations of Kathleen Kenyon at Je-
rusalem brought to light houses from the last
days of Judah. They were rather small and ir-
regularly planned, but of the same general de-
sign as those in the hill country sites of
Judah—a courtyard divided by a row of stone
pillars which supported the roof.
The contrast between big houses and
small houses in some towns probably indi-
cates the social inequality referred to in the
prophets. In the roth and goth centuries Bc
there was a fairly uniform picture of many
small houses and a few large ones. By the
8th century BC at a town like Tirzah there
were 3 or 4 large houses and a great many
flimsy structures.
Babylonian, Persian, and _ Hellenistic
Houses. After the fall of Jerusalem to Nebu-
chadnezzar in 586 Bc, Palestine was under the
rule of Babylonians (586-539 Bc), Persians
(539-332 Bc), and Greeks (332-37 Bc). Archaeo-
logical evidence is at present somewhat lim-
ited for the Babylonian and Persian periods
partly because of the extensive destruction
caused by the Babylonians and partly because
many Persian remains were destroyed by in-
tensive Hellenistic and Roman constructions
built over them. There are biblical references
to the houses of the people in this period (Neh
7:3,4; Hg 1:4,9; Zec 13:6; 14:2). In a number of
sites, for example, Lachish, Megadim, and
Mevorakh, the Persian period is represented
by a large palacelike structure, probably an
administrative building on the top of a
mound. The domestic areas of these towns lay
off the tell. It is clear that already in the
Persian period the towns began to be laid out
in the rectangular Hellenistic pattern with
houses set along parallel streets. One of the
best examples of a Hellenistic town is Mare-
shah (Marisa). Two types of building were
found in the city—the large structure with
rooms surrounding an enclosed courtyard,
and the small houses comprised of rooms not
arranged in any clear plan. Several houses con-
tained hearths, basins, shelves, and steps lead-
ing either to a roof or a cellar. One house con-
tained a granary. The architecture was a
blend of Hellenistic and Eastern elements. The
city had a drainage system to which the pri-
vate houses were connected.
 Homes and Dwellings

ant
Dowse:
aise
“apaeugs

Detail of the house of Neptune BO

zie
and Amphitrite (his wife) on a
wall mural from Roman times.

Houses in NT Times. There are references
in the NT to houses, roofs, doors, foundations,
an upper room, and lamps. One of Jesus’ para-
bles refers to good and bad foundations (Mt
7:25). In one incident friends took a paralyzed
man up to the roof which they took apart to
lower him into the room where Jesus was (Mk
2:4). Jesus referred to proclamations made
from the housetops (Mt 10:27; Lk 12:3), and
Peter went up on the roof to pray (Acts 10:9).
Houses were swept to find lost objects (Lk
15:8) and illuminated by lamps
There are several references to houses of spe-
cific individuals (Mk 8:3; Lk 10:5; 16:4; 19:9; Jn
11:20; Acts 4:34; 9:11; 10:32). Some houses had
upper rooms on the roof reached by an outside
staircase. The Passover meal was prepared in
such a large upstairs room (Mk 14:12—15). The
disciples lodged in a similar room after the
death and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 1:13). Per-
haps the reference to robbers breaking in was
to one of these larger, better-class houses (Mt
6:19; Mk 3:27; Lk 12:39). In such houses there
were sometimes servants (Acts 10:7) and some
had a guest room (Mk 14:14). We conclude
from the NT data that there was a variety in
the size and elegance of the houses of Jesus’
day. A typical street in Judea or Galilee would
have houses ranging from the small house (25
to 30 feet square) to the mansion of the upper
classes, which could be two or more
high embellished by rows of pillars and archi-
tectural adornment.
For the precise character of these houses we
have to turn to archaeological and literary evi-
dence. The writings of the rabbis and Jose-
phus fill in many details. Excavation in sites
of the early Roman (Herodian) period (37 Bc—
AD 70) have provided more tangible evidence.
A rich source of information is the excavation
in the old Jewish quarter in Jerusalem. One
large house of some 209 square yards in size
had a central courtyard where three cooking
ovens and a water cistern were found. Large
niches set in some of the walls contained bro-
(Mt 5:15). ken pottery and must have been cupboards.
Traces of mosaic floors and plastered walls
gave an idea of the beauty of this house. There
were several rooms off the courtyard, perhaps
as many as ro. The remains of other fine
houses of the late second temple period have
been found further west, notably in the area of
stories
y
A room in a house (the Burnt House on Mt Zion) from the
Roman period.

995
Honey
the Armenian cemetery on Mt Zion, in which
beautiful frescoes were preserved exhibiting a
unique representation of birds. Other houses
have yielded mosaic pavements with purely
geometric patterns, thus adhering to the in-
junction against depicting animal forms.
The wealthy house of NT times bore some
resemblance to the Roman house with its
courtyard (atrium) and rooms leading off from
it, of the type preserved at Pompeii. There was
a military occupation of Palestine from 63 BC
onward and Roman governors and officials
tended to build houses in their own style. The
local Jewish population, however, adhered
more to patterns which had been in use over
many centuries.
JOHN A. THOMPSON
See ARCHITECTURE.
Honey. Sweet syrup produced by bees (Jgs
14:8), either wild (1 Sm 14:25,26) or domesti-
cated (apparently so in 2 Chr 31:5). Some-
times, however, it may refer to thick grape
syrup (as in Arabic) or date syrup (as de-
scribed by Josephus). Honey was considered
one of life’s necessities (Ecclus 39:26); one
must not, however, eat too much (Prv 25:16,
27). It was part of the diet of John the Baptist
(Mk 1:6) and of Immanuel (Is 7:15). Its exclu-
sion, along with leaven, from grain offerings
(Lv 2:11) is undoubtedly because it is suscepti-
ble to ferment. Obviously sweet (Jgs 14:18), it
became a familiar metaphor (Ps 19:10; Rv
10:9,10).
See FooD AND Foop PREPARATION.
Hoopoe. Any of a number of Old World sing-
ing birds; considered unclean (Lv 11:19;
14:18).
See BIRDs.
Hope. An expectation or belief in the fulfill-
ment of something desired. Present hurts and
uncertainty over what the future holds create
the constant need for hope. Worldwide pov-
erty, hunger, disease, and human potential to
generate terror and destruction create a long-
ing for something better. Historically people
have looked to the future with a mixture of
longing and fear. Many have concluded that
there is no reasonable basis for hope and there-
fore to hope is to live with an illusion. Scrip-
ture relates being without hope to being in the
world without God: ‘‘remember that you were
at that time separated from Christ, alienated
from the commonwealth of Israel, and strang-
ers to the covenants of promise, having no
hope and without God in the world” (Eph
2:12).
The modern world has sought hope in hu-
man effort and a belief in the inevitability of
=progress that assumed everything would natu-
rally get better and better. The threat and real-
ity of war in the 2oth century challenged that
optimism and left growing despair in its wake.
Though many still find little reason to hope,
others havé returned to a humanistic basis for
hope. It is held that because people are the
source of the world’s problems they can also
be the solution. This position can be called
into question on the basis of present and his-
torical evidence to the contrary.
Christianity has often been considered in
discussions concerning hope. Unfortunately,
Christianity has not always received ‘‘good
press” in this regard. In the early centuries of
church history stress on the disparity between
this world and the next seemed to create an
attitude of escapism, futility, or indifference
toward the problems and pains of human exis-
tence. In the 19th century Prussian philoso-
pher Frederick Nietzsche (1844-1900) claimed
that Christianity made people cowards be-
cause it taught that whatever happened was
God’s will, thus discouraging efforts to change
the world. Karl Marx (1818-83) said that Chris-
tianity or religion was the ‘opiate of the peo-
ple.” For Marx religion kept people from ris-
ing against those who oppressed them.
The tendency for Christianity to be viewed
as otherworldly was opposed by Jiirgen Molt-
mann in what has been called “the theology
of hope.” That theology was the product of
the pessimism and despair of post—World
War II Europe. Moltmann’s theology of hope
says that the future is the basis for changing
the present, and that Christian service should
be an attempt to make otherworldly hopes a
Dt present reality. The resurrection is said to
bring hope amid present suffering by becom-
ing the catalyst for human effort to overcome
that suffering.
Certain ideas suggested by proponents of
this theology, for changing present political,
social, and economic problems are thought by
some to imply a use of violence and revolution
which seems incongruous with the gospel of
peace. Other objections point to that theol-
ogy’s potential for altogether denying the hope
of God’s future intervention in world affairs.
Trust in human effort to change the future
could lead to a humanistic notion that the res-
urrection is merely a hopeful symbol that will
spur people into action, and not necessarily a
reality of God’s historical action in the world
through Jesus Christ. Another concern is that
the discussion of hope for this world by a
transformation of political and social struc-
tures could neglect the need for personal trans-
formation of people’s lives through conversion
and repentance. While critical questions have
996
 Hope

been raised about the theology of hope; on the to live at peace and share what they have with
positive side that theology has led to examina- others. In the context of the social implica-
tion or reexamination of the biblical doctrine tions of the Christian life, Paul brings together
of hope. certain important categories. Showing the
The patriarch Abraham is a model of faith relevance of hope to ministry he wrote, ‘‘Re-
and hope. In spite of the realities that sur- joice in your hope, be patient in tribulation,
rounded him, ‘“‘no distrust made him waver be constant in prayer” (Rom 12:12). Paul said
concerning the promise of God, but he grew _that the coming salvation should lead Chris-
strong in his faith as he gave glory to God” tians to live differently, to live in accord with
(Rom 4:20,21). Christian faith and hope, like what they know of the future: “let us conduct
Abraham’s, are based on the faithfulness of ourselves becomingly as in the day” (13:13).
God. As the apostle Paul wrote of his strug- The context brings together the future hope
gles, “Why, we felt that we had received the and present ministry, a combination made
sentence of death; but that was to make us possible for those with transformed minds
rely not on ourselves but on God who raises (i2:1,2):
the dead; he delivered us from so deadly a That transiormation is made possible in
peril, and he will deliver us; on him we have part by Christian hope. Before people are will-
set our hope and he will deliver us again” (2 ing to share with others, thus bringing relief
Cor 1:9,10). Hope is, therefore, not irrational, to contemporary hurts, they need to overcome
but rather is based upon God, who has proven their selfish and self-justifying nature. When
himself faithful. men and women hope only in their own abili-
Biblical hope is hope in what God will do ties or possessions, they really are not free to
in the future. At the heart of Christian hope is give of their resources to others. When believ-
the resurrection of Jesus. Paul discussed the ers are justified by God’s grace and receive his
nature, certainty, and importance of the resur- certain hope, they are free to share with oth-
rection (1 Cor 15:12—28). That Paul is certain ers. Jesus hints at this: “Fear not, little flock,
that Christian hope points to the future can be for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give
seen by his statement, “If for this life only we you the kingdom. Sell your possessions” (Lk
have hoped in Christ, we are of all men most 12:32,33a). Therefore I tell you, do not be anx-
to be pitied” (1 Cor 15:19). The significance of ious about your life, what you shall eat or
Christ’s resurrection is not only that it points what you shall drink, nor about your body,
to his victory over death, but also extends that what you shall put on” (Mt 6:25). Paul stated:
victory to those who are his: “But each in his “As for the rich in this world, charge them not
own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on uncer-
coming those who belong to Christ” (1 Cor tain riches but on God who richly furnishes us
15:23). The apostle Peter said, “Blessed be the with everything to enjoy. They are to do good,
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By to be rich in good deeds, liberal and generous’’
his great mercy we have been born anew to a (1 Tm 6:17,18). So, Christian hope not only
living hope through the resurrection of Jesus grants certainty about the future, but by giv-
Christ from the dead, and to an inheritance ing Christians that certainty enables them to
which is imperishable, undefiled, and unfad- give freely to the needs of others. To those who
ing, kept in heaven for you” (1 Pt 1:3,4a). In want to justify themselves or make their own
that passage, Peter attributes living hope to future secure through selfish accumulation of
the resurrection of Christ and points to God’s riches, Christian hope offers fulfillment that
future blessing upon those who belong to they could not achieve on their own.
Christ. That future hope empowers the Chris- Christian hope is securely based upon the
tian to live without despair through the strug- words and actions of God. The promises of
gle and suffering of the present (cf. Rom 8:18; God have proven to be dependable. The resur-
2 Cor 4:16—18). rection of Jesus becomes the ultimate basis for
Does Christian hope lead one simply to hope. Since God has already overcome death
wait for the future, or does that hope stimu- through Christ, the Christian can live with con-
late one to help allay the present hurts of hu- fidence in the present. No matter how dark
manity? In a number of NT passages hope is the present age seems, the Christian has seen
mentioned in contexts dealing with ministry the light to come. People need to hope, and
to others. Hope is related to faith and love hope placed in the personal promise of God is
thus denying that hope can be selfish. Chris- secure. This secure hope is full of social signifi-
tian hope, far from leading to social uncon- cance, however, freeing one from bondage to
cern, makes meaningful ministry in the world materialism and its natural selfishness. Chris-
possible. Many humanistic efforts to trans- tian hope offers security for the future and lov-
form society fail because of an inability to ing involvement in sharing for the present.
transform people’s values so that they are able PauL K. MCALISTER

997
Hophni
Bibliography. R.J. Banks (ed), Reconciliation and Hope;
E. Brunner, Eternal Hope; G.B. Caird et al., The Christian
Hope; F. Herzog (ed), The Future of Hope; P.S. Minear, Chris-
tian Hope and the Second Coming; C.F.D. Moule, The Mean-
ing of Hope; S. Travis, The Jesus Hope.
Hophni. Brother of Phinehas, with whom he
served as a priest at Shiloh (1 Sm 1:3). He was
an evil man who flouted the sacrificial rituals
(2:13-17) and behaved immorally (2:22). Con-
demned by God, Hophni died during a Philis-
tine attack on Shiloh and its sanctuary (4:11).
Hophra. Son of Psammis, ruler over Egypt
from 589-570 Bc during the 26th dynasty,
called Pharaoh Hophra in Jeremiah 44:30. He
is also referred to as Apries (Herodotus II.161;
Diodorus 1.69) or Onophra (Manetha; Septua-
gint Jer 44:30). Although he is alluded to sev-
eral times during the divided kingdom period
(Jer 43:8-13; Ez 29:1-3; 31:1-18), he is men-
tioned by name only in Jeremiah 44:30.
He came to power after the death of his
father, and in 589 Bc marched into Judah
against Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians
in order to assist Zedekiah. Apparently he re-
treated before superior forces, and Jerusalem
was overthrown (Jer 37:5). Both Jeremiah
(43:9-13; 46:13—-26) and Ezekiel (Ez 29,30) fore-
told his defeat. This occurred in 566 Bc, at the
hands of Amasis, who had usurped the throne
of Egypt in 569 Bc. Hophra was killed as
prophesied (Jer 44:30).
Hopping Locust. Type of locust (ksv can-
kerworm) mentioned in Joel 1:4.
See ANIMALS (Locust).
Hor, Mount. 1. Mountain located at the bor-
der of the land of Edom (Nm 20:23; 33:37). Mt
Hor was the first place to which the Israelites
came (20:22) after wandering nearly 40 years
(Dt 2:14) because of their lack of faith in God’s
ability to lead them triumphantly into Canaan
(Nm 14:33,34), a land that none of them (ex-
cept Joshua and Caleb) would be allowed to
enter (14:30). Moses’ brother Aaron would not
be permitted to enter Canaan because he had
refused to carry out the Lord’s instructions at
Meribah (20:7—13,24). Stripped of his priestly
garments, which were then put on his son El-
eazar, Aaron died on the top of Mt Hor (20:25—
29) at the age of 123, on the rst day of the 5th
month of the 4oth year after the exodus of the
people of Israel from Egypt (33:38,39). A simi-
lar punishment was later meted out to Moses,
whose death on Mt Nebo is compared to Aar-
on’s death on Mt Hor (Dt 32:49—51). According
to Deuteronomy 10:6 (which is part of a long
parenthetical note), Aaron died and was bur-
ied at Moserah (probably the Moseroth of Nm
998
33:30,31), a place that must have been very
-close to (or perhaps a part of) Mt Hor.
The location of Mt Hor remains uncertain.
The traditional site, Jebel Nebi Harun (which
means ‘‘the mountain of the prophet Aaron’’)
is almost 4800 feet high and is the tallest moun-
tain in Edom. The Muslims claim that a small
building on its summit is the tomb of Aaron.
But Jebel Nebi Harun is located near Petra—
in the middle of Edom—and too far east of
Kadesh. A more likely location is Jebel
Madeira, situated on the northwest border of
Edom about 15 miles northeast of Kadesh. In
any event, the Hebrew word hor probably
means ‘“‘mountain” (as in Gn 49:26), so that
“Mt Hor’’ perhaps means simply “‘mountain of
mountains” or “high mountain” rather than
being a proper name.
2. Another mountain located in the far
north (Nm 34:7,8). Generally identified as ei-
ther Mt Hermon or Jebel Akkar, it too was
perhaps simply an unusually high mountain.
RONALD F. YOUNGBLOOD
Horam. King of Gezer, who, while coming
to the aid of Lachish, was defeated and killed
by Joshua (Jos 10:33).
Horeb, Mount. Alternate name for Mt
Sinai.
See SINAI, SINA.
Horem. Town set up for defense purposes in
the uplands of Naphtali’s territory (Jos 19:38).
Its exact site is unknown, though undoubtedly
in northern Galilee.
Horesh. Hebrew word translated as a place-
name in 1 Samuel 23:15—19 (part of the wil-
derness of Ziph). David hid from Saul there,
and met secretly with Jonathan. The word is
translated simply as “wooded hills” (ksv in
the forests) in 2 Chronicles 27:4. Authorities
differ on whether the place-name in 1 Samuel
is warranted.
Hor-haggidgad, Hor-hagidgad. Camping
place of the Israelites during their wilderness
wanderings (Nm 33:32,33; KJV Hor-hagidgad).
It may be the Gudgodah of Deuteronomy 10:7,
and has been identified with Wadi Ghadaghed.
See WILDERNESS WANDERINGS.
Hori. 1. Lotan’s first son. Lotan was the
founder of a Horite subclan in Edom (Gn
36:22; 1 Chr 1:39).
2. Shaphat’s father and a member of Sim-
eon’s tribe. Shaphat was one of the 12 spies
(Nm 13:5).

The entrance to Siq, the mile-long passage (through cliffs 300
feet high) to Petra, in the area where tradition says the Horites
lived.
Horite, Horim. Cave dwellers of Mt Seir,
according to tradition. These pre-Edomites
were called the children of Seir (Gn 36:20). In
the Bible they were defeated by Chedorlaomer
and his allies (14:6). They were governed by
chieftains (36:29,30), and eventually destroyed
by the descendants of Esau (2:12,22).
The popular and biblical etymology of
“Horite” has been disputed since the discov-
ery of the Hurrians (Khurians) as ethnic prede-
cessors of many Near Eastern tribes. The Hur-
rians were a non-Semitic people from the
mountains. About the 2nd millennium Bc they
migrated into north and northeast Mesopota-
mia, and later moved into the regions of Syria
and Palestine. Since the Hurrian language was
prevalent in the west Jordan area and since
phonetically ‘‘Horite’’ is the OT Hebrew
equivalent of the extrabiblical “Hurrian,” sev-
eral scholars and translators have substituted
“Hurrian” for ‘“Horite.”” Many have equated
the Hivites, who were part of the Hurrian lan-
guage and cultural group, with the Horites.
These critics assumed an early textual corrup-
tion of the r(esh) in Horite to w(aw) in Hivite.
A certain Zibeon is called a Horite in Genesis
36:20-30, whereas in verse 2 the man is called
a Hivite. The Septuagint of Joshua 9:7 and
Genesis 34:2 reads “Horite” instead of ‘‘Hi-
999
Horn
vite” as in the Masoretic text. Some manu-
scripts of the Septuagint read ‘‘Hittite”’ for the
Masoretic text’s ‘‘Hivite” (Jos 11:3; Jgs 3:3). In
Genesis 36:2, the Hebrew erroneously reads
“Hivite’” for “Horite.” It appears that the OT
references do not fit the Hurrians, nor do the
personal names of the Horites correspond to
Hurrian examples (Gn 36:20-30). They seem
instead to be Semitic. The Horites were from
Transjordan, and were the predecessors of the
Edomites (14:6). Later references to Horites
may be to western Horites, who were perhaps
Hurrians (Is 17:9) and non-Semitic, but quite
distinct from the predecessors of the Edom-
ites, the eastern Horites. The Hebrew of Gene-
sis 34:2 and Joshua 9:7 may be from a differ-
ent family of manuscripts than those used by
the Septuagint translators, preserving its own
ethnic traditions. It seems best to think of
both Hivites and Horites as ethnic groups
connected with the Hurrians by language and
culture.
See HuRRIANS; HIvITES.
Hormah. Town near Beersheba in the Neg-
eb and on the border of the tribes of Judah
and Simeon. Originally a Canaanite settle-
ment, it became Judah’s according to Joshua
15:30 and then Simeon’s according to 19:4. Ju-
dah had dominated it again by the time of
the early monarchy (1 Sm 30:30). The change
of the Canaanite name Zephath to Hormah
when the Hebrews first conquered it is noted
in Judges 1:17. Hormah took David's side dur-
ing his running feud with King Saul (1 Sm
30:30), and David rewarded the town by send-
ing it some of the spoils of war from his con-
quest of Ziklag. Joshua 15:30 describes it as
being in the south near Chesil and Ziklag, but
its precise location remains unknown. From
the reference in Numbers 14:45, it could well
be south of Kadesh-barnea, where the Israel-
ites spent much of the wilderness period.
Other suggested locations of Hormah include
Tell el-Milh, 7 miles east of Beersheba, and
Tell esh-Sheri‘ah, about 12 miles northwest of
Beersheba.
Horn. 1. Musical instrument frequently
made from a ram’s horn.
See Music AND MusicaL INSTRUMENTS (HATZOTZ-
ROT).
2. Figuratively, a symbol of power (1 Kgs
22:11) expressing dominance over the weak
(Ez 34:21), forces of destruction (Zec 1:18—21),
and deliverance from oppression (1 Kgs 22:11;
2 Chr 18:10). Thus the horn has two aspects, to
succour and to denote force (2 Sm 22:3; Ps
18:2). The succession of horns could mean the
continuation of the kingly line (Ps 132:17).
Psalm 75:10 declares that the horns of the
Hornet
wicked shall be cut off but those of the righ-
teous exalted. The symbolic imagery in Daniel ~ the Lord’s salvation, made in a time of need.
and Revelation reinforces the use of the horn
to represent power and authority (Dn 7,8; Rv
13,17). The ram’s horn, goat’s horn, and horn
of a wild ox were used as containers for liquid.
They were also ceremonial receptacles for oil the worship when this verse was read, the peo-
(x Sm 16:1,13; 1 Kgs 1:39). Cows’ horns were
forbidden for any religious or ceremonial use.
Four horn-shaped projections jutted forth
from the four corners of the tabernacle and
temple altars (Ex 27:2; 30:2,3). These altar
horns were coated with sacrificial blood, and
denoted an area of sanctuary (Ex 29:12; Lv
4:7,18). Altar horns are seen in the example
found at Megiddo.
Hornet. Large wasp.
See ANIMALS (Wasp).
Horonaim. Moabite settlement of uncertain
location, listed in prophetic oracles against
Moab (Is 15:5; Jer 48:3,5,34). It fell to Alexander it is possible that the word ‘‘Hosanna”’ by it-
Janneus, but the Hasmonean rule was subse-
quently returned to King Aretas by John Hyr-
canus (Josephus, Antiq. 13.15.4; 14.1.4).
Horonite. Reference to either the residence
or birthplace of Sanballat who opposed Nehe-
miah’s restoration program (Neh 2:10,19;
13:28). The name probably derives from the
two cities of Upper and Lower Beth-horon.
Horse. See ANIMALS.
Horse Gate. Gate near the palace in Jerusa- can say is they believed Jesus was One sent by
lem (Jer 31:40), in the southeast part of the
city wall. Here Queen Athaliah\ was put to
death (2 Kgs 11:16; 2 Chr 23:15). The gate was
restored under Nehemiah (Neh 3:28).
See JERUSALEM.
Horus. See Ecypt, EGyprians.
Hosah_ (Person). Merarite Levite who
guarded the gate of the tent where the sacred
ark was kept (1 Chr 16:38) when David
brought it to Jerusalem. His gatekeeping re-
sponsibilities were shared by his sons (1 Chr
26:10—16).
Hosah (Place). City south of Tyre on Asher’s
border (Jos 19:29). Its exact location is un-
known.
Hosanna. Hebrew expression meaning “‘Save
us, we beseech thee,’ taken from Psalm 118:25.
The crowd welcomed Jesus to Jerusalem with
the cry of “Hosanna” (Mt 21:9; Mk 11:9,10; Jn
12114):
Psalm 118 is a declaration of confidence in
The psalm as a whole was part of a longer
hymn (the Hallel) which was sung on great
occasions. Verse 25 in particular was used in
the Jewish feast of tabernacles. At the point in
ple would wave branches of myrtle, willow,
and palm. Branches may have been waved at
other times also as a general expression of jubi-
lation. This happens in 2 Maccabees 10:6,7, at
a ceremony for the rededication of the temple
after it had been defiled: But because the peo-
ple who welcomed Jesus not only waved
branches but also sang “Hosanna,” and
“blessed be he who enters in the name of the
Lord” (Ps 118:26) it appears they had the feast
of tabernacles in mind.
This means the crowd was greeting Jesus as
Messiah. Already before Jesus’ time the phrase
“blessed is he who comes in the name of the
Lord” was taken to refer to the Messiah. And
self had messianic significance. Other expres-
sions in the report of Jesus’ entry into Jerusa-
lem support this. In Matthew 21:9 Jesus is
called the “Son of David”; in Mark 11:9 there
is reference .to “the coming kingdom of our
father David’; in John 12:13, Jesus is called
“the King of Israel.” All of these have messi-
anic overtones.
We need not suppose that in shouting ‘‘Ho-
sanna’’ the people had a political deliverance
in mind. They probably did not know in what
way Jesus would be a deliverer. The most one
God for their salvation. Had there not been
something in their response to him which Je-
sus could recognize as proper worship, he
would hardly have accepted their praise. It
would only appear later, in his cross and resur-
rection, what his messiahship really meant.
J.GORDON McCOoNVILLE
See MEssIAH; HALLEL; HALLELUJAH.
Hosea (Person). Prophet of ancient Israel
whose sphere of activity was the northern king-
dom. Little is known of him outside of the pro-
phetic book that bears his name. His pro-
phetic ministry is best placed in the third
quarter of the 8th century Bc. His name means
“help” or “helper,” and is based on the He-
brew word for salvation.
The evidence for placing Hosea in the north-
ern kingdom is basically internal. The book is
concerned mainly with the northern tribes
whom he frequently identifies as “Ephraim,”
a common appellation for the northern king-
dom and the dialect of Hebrew in which the
book was written seems to be of a northern
cast.
1000

The circumstances surrounding the mar-
riage of Hosea form the catalyst for his pro-
phetic message. He was commanded by God
to marry Gomer, who apparently was a har-
lot; his marriage provided an analogy with Is-
rael who was guilty of spiritual adultery.
Scholars differ as to the interpretation of
this controversial account but there is little
reason for doubting that it was a literal event.
The act of sacrifice involved in Hosea’s obedi-
ence to God forms a marvelous picture of
God’s sacrificial love for man.
Tuomas E. McCoMISsKEY
See HosEA, Book OF; PROPHET, PROPHETESS.
Hosea, Book of. First of the 12 minor
prophets in the traditional arrangement of the
OT books. It was written in the last part of the
8th century Bc. Hosea’s prophecies were pro-
claimed to the northern kingdom of Israel in
the final years of its existence. Hosea was the
only prophet to reside in the northern king-
dom and also to preach there. God commis-
sioned Hosea to reveal the widespread apos-
tasy and corruption in the northern kingdom
and to exhort his fellow countrymen to repent
and return to God. Hosea had the unique priv-
ilege of illustrating by his own family life
the steadfast covenant love which God had for
Israel.
Author. Hosea’s ministry extended over a
period of at least 34 years (c. 756-722 BC), and
he appears as a knowledgeable individual
whether he was a peasant or a member of the
wealthier class in Israel.
Hosea’s marriage to the prostitute Gomer
may have been controversial in his own day,
and it has certainly caused a great deal of con-
troversy ever since among Bible students and
commentators. It seems best to recognize that
Gomer was a publicly known harlot whom Ho-
sea was commanded to marry for the purpose
of illustrating Israel’s apostasy and God’s
steadfast covenant love.
Authenticity. The authenticity and unity
of Hosea is not seriously questioned, even by
higher criticism. Two areas of controversy are:
(1) passages that refer to Judah (e.g., 1:1,7,11;
42153 §:5,10-14; 6:4,11; 8:14; 11:12; 12:2) and (2)
those sections that refer to future blessing or
national deliverance (e.g., 11:8—11; 14:2-9).
Hosea’s references to Judah, however,
could be expected from a man of God cha-
grined by the separation of Israel from the le-
gitimate Davidic line. The northern kingdom
with its ungodly kings was on the verge of
judgment from God. Hosea evidently had re-
ceived divine revelation concerning his deal-
ings with Judah as well as Israel.
The references to the future blessings and
IoOol
Hosea, Book of
deliverance of Israel do not neutralize the con-
demnation of the sins of Israel, any more than
Hosea’s constant love for and reconciliation
with adulterous Gomer neutralizes her sin.
Restoration and forgiveness need not ignore
guilt.
Historical and _ Archaeological Back-
ground. Hosea lived during the prosperous
days of the northern kingdom of Israel under
Jeroboam II (793-753 Bc). He also saw its de-
feat and the deportation of its people after the
invasion by the Assyrians (722 BC).
In Hosea 1:1 the following kings are named:
from the southern kingdom of Judah—Uzziah,
Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah; and from the
northern kingdom of Israel—Joash and Jero-
boam. Uzziah was a contemporary of both Jo-
ash and Jeroboam. Ahaz was king of Judah
when Israel was taken captive by Assyria.
Hezekiah seems to have been a co-regent with
Ahaz at the time of the Assyrian captivity.
Jeroboam II reigned over Israel for 41 years
(2 Kgs 14:23) and followed the evil example of
his father Nebat (v 24).
Though Israel was prosperous and success-
ful during Jeroboam’s reign, the corruption in
the government and the degeneracy in the
spiritual lives of the people set the stage for
more tumultuous times in the days of subse-
quent kings.
The deterioration of economy and morals
in the reign of Jeroboam II paved the way for
the fall of Israel. The rich landowners (includ-
ing the king) oppressed the peasants and
caused the lower class landowners to migrate
from the farms to the cities. The social reper-
cussions were soon to engulf Israel in a wave
of corruption. Anarchy was a product of those
times (Hos 4:1,2; 7:1,7; 8:3,4; 9:15).
Date. Hosea’s prophetic ministry com-
menced with the reign of Jeroboam II (793-753
Bc) and extended into that of Hezekiah of Ju-
dah (715-686 Bc).
Several factors indicate that Hosea contin-
ued prophesying under Hoshea of Israel (732—
722 BC): (1) “Shalman” (Hos 10:14) may be
Shalmaneser of Assyria who invaded Israel
early in the reign of Hoshea (2 Kgs 17:3). (2)
“Jareb” (Hos 5:13; 10:6, both kJv) may be Sar-
gon II (722—705 BC). (3) Predictions of the Assyr-
ian invasion appear to refer to an imminent
event (10:5,6; 13:15,16). (4) Mention of Egypt
and Israel’s dependence on that nation seem
to fit the reign of Hoshea (7:11; 11:11). These
factors confirm that the compilation of Ho-
sea’s messages may have taken place very
near to the time of Israel’s fall (722 Bc). ?
Origin and Destination. Hosea prophe-
sied while residing in Israel. He refers to the
king in Samaria as “our king’”’ (Hos 7:5). His
descriptions of Israel evidence a degree of fa-
Hosea, Book of

miliarity with the geography of the northern rael simply did not marry prostitutes. Medi-
kingdom. Gilead is mentioned by Hosea as ~ eval Jewish writers, therefore, regarded the ma-
though he knew that area from personal obser- terial as symbolic but unhistorical. Some later
vation (6:8; 12:11). Hosea was probably the scholars drew a distinction between chapters 1
only prophet to the northern kingdom who ac- and 3, regarding the latter as an intimate de-
tually lived there throughout his ministry. scription by Hosea of his marriage; the first
Purpose. Hosea proclaimed to Israel the chapter was held to contain rather general rec-
need to repent and return to God. He pre- ollections of his early days as a prophet. Other
sented the God of Israel as a patient and lov- commentators regarded both chapters as lit-
ing God who remained faithful to his covenant eral fact, while certain scholars thought that
promises. This emphasis is characteristic of chapter 1 was historical whereas chapter 3 rep-
Hosea (cf. 2:19). resented an allegorical interpretation of the
“Loving-kindness” is the word which best marriage by Hosea himself. Needless to say,
represents the covenant faithfulness and love the premarital sexual activities of Gomer have
of Jehovah, and Hosea’s family life was a liv- also been discussed widely. Two views pre-
ing illustration of that loving-kindness. dominate. (1) Gomer was a faithful wife to Ho-
Outline and Content. The major divisions sea in their early years of marriage. “A wife of
and topics of the Book of Hosea may be out- whoredoms,” which is not the common term
lined as follows: for ‘‘prostitute,”’ has reference to her sinful and
wayward nature that God later causedto be
Introduction (1:1) exposed as an illustration of Israel's idolatry.
I. The Word of the Lord to Hosea (1:2—3:5) (2) Gomer was a publicly known harlot whom
A. The Lord’s command to marry Gomer Hosea was commanded to marry in order to
and to have children (1:2—2:1) illustrate Israel’s idolatry and God’s faithful
1. Gomer’s children and Israel’s rejec- and steadfast love. This latter view seems to
tion (1:2—9) have the greatest appeal to evangelical schol-
2. God’s children and Israel’s restora- ars, and is the simplest interpretation within a
tion (1:10—2:1) literal, grammatical, and historical framework
B. The Lord’s contention with Israel illus- of Bible interpretation.
trated by Gomer’s adultery (2:2—23) Some scholars have interpreted the woman
C. The Lord’s command to remarry Go- beloved of her paramour (3:1) as perhaps some-
mer (3:1—5) one other than Gomer, but since the latter rep-
1. The illustration (3:1—3) resents wayward Israel, and no other nation is
2. The application (3:4,5) mentioned, there can be little doubt that Go-
II. The Word of the Lord to Israel (4:1—14:9) mer is intended. Why it was necessary for her
A. Israel’s apostasy (4:1—7:16) to be ransomed by Hosea is not evident, nor is
. God’s case against Israel (4:1-5:7) it known why part of the price was paid in
. God’s caution to Israel (5:8—14) grain and the remainder in money. Perhaps
. God’s call for repentance (5:15—6:3) the entire transaction was meant to symbolize
. God’s concern for Israel (6:4—11) God’s deliverance of Israel from future exile,
DN
W . God’s conclusion concerning Israel
nap although as far as is known, the 1o northern
(7:1-16) tribes did not return from exile in Assyria.
B. Israel’s punishment (8:1—10:15) Such an interpretation could hardly apply to
1. Israel’s reaping of judgment (8:1—14) Judah, since Hosea’s message was not directed
2. Israel’s return to exile (g:1—17) at the southern kingdom, although Judah did
3. Israel’s recompense (10:1—15) receive a warning (6:11).
C. Israel’s restoration (11:1—14:9) God’s intention in this command to Hosea
1. The Father’s steadfast love (11:1—12) is revealed in 1:2b. Hosea’s marriage was to
2. The Father’s steadfast judgment illustrate Israel’s relationship to Jehovah “‘for
(12:1-13:16) the land commits great harlotry by forsaking
3. The Father’s steadfast invitation the Lord.”
(14:1-9) The children born to Hosea and Gomer
were given symbolic names. The first child
The first three chapters of Hosea are con- was a son named Jezreel (1:4a), signifying
cerned with the example of Hosea’s life, stress- God’s judgment on the house of Jehu for Je-
ing Hosea’s faithfulness and love for his un- hu’s slaughter of the house of Ahab in the val-
faithful wife. ley of Jezreel (2 Kgs 10:1-11,30; 15:8—12).
God commanded Hosea to marry the harlot Lo-ruhamah was the second child (Hos
Gomer and to have children by her (1:2—3:5). 1:6a), whose name meant “not compassioned
This command has caused difficulties for some or pitied.” The judgment of Israel was thus
commentators, since priests and prophets in Is- symbolized. The spiritual corruption of the
1002

northern kingdom had run its course, ‘and it
would be defeated and taken away into captiv-
ity (1:6b).
Lo-ammi was the third child, a second son,
whose name meant ‘“‘not my people”’ (1:8,9).
This rejection of Israel as God’s covenanted
people was to be temporary (1:10—2:1). God’s
covenant promises to Abraham (cf. 1:10; Gn
22:17) and to Moses (Ex 19:1—7) would be ful-
filled in spite of the disobedience of any par-
ticular generation.
Hosea’s declaration of divorce from Gomer
for her adultery depicted Jehovah’s divorce
from Israel for her adultery (Hos 2:2; cf. Jer
3:1-4:2). The children are the individual mem-
bers of the nation of Israel in Hosea’s day (Hos
22-5).
Not satisfied with her relationship to her
husband, Gomer sought other lovers. Israel
pursued the same elusive satisfaction in her
flirtation and adultery with heathen deities.
The good which their merciful God had be-
stowed upon them they attributed to pagan
gods (2:8,12). Repentant Israelites would re-
turn to their first love after discovering that
there was no lasting satisfaction in their sea-
son of sin (v 7).
The illustration of restoration in chapter 3
highlights a concise summary of Israel’s his-
tory. Israel’s bondage to sin and Satan (cf.
Heb 2:14,15) is symbolized by the price paid
by Hosea for Gomer (Hos 3:2). The price was
that of a female slave since Gomer had be-
come the slave of her adultery (cf. Ex 21:32).
The days of Gomer’s isolation, like the days of
Israel’s exile, were established for cleansing
(Hos 3:3; cf. Dt 21:13; 30:2).
After the exile period (‘‘afterward’’) and “‘in
the latter days” Israel will return to her hus-
band to enjoy the blessings of the renewed re-
lationship. In a messianic reference, David
will be resurrected to lead Israel to the Lord
(Hos 3:5).
The last major section of Hosea deals in
detail with what has already been illustrated
and briefly explained in chapters 1-3. Israel's
apostasy (4:1-7:16), punishment (8:1—10:15),
and restoration (11:1—14:9) are prophesied by
Hosea...
Israel was totally given over to ungodly ac-
tivities and had separated itself from God
(4:1,2; cf. Ex 20:1-17). The people had rejected
the Word of God through their own indiffer-
ence and the deception of the priests (Hos 4:6—
g; cf. Is 5:13; Am 8:11,12; Zep 1:6). Israel fol-
lowed the example of corrupt spiritual leaders
in the same way her kings followed the cor-
rupt.leadership of their predecessors (4:9). In
place of God’s Word, Israel turned to idolatry
and divination for guidance (vv 12,13). Finally,
Israel lost its priestly character (v 6; cf. Ex
1003
Hosea, Book of
19:6), because the priests were chiefly responsi-
ble for national apostasy (Hos 5:1).
Upon revealing his case against the north-
ern kingdom, God then issues a caution (5:8—
14). The trumpet will be raised in the hills of
Benjamin (v 8), the buffer zone between Israel
and Judah. The alarm in that region will indi-
eate that Israel is being overrun and Judah is
endangered (vv 9-12). The northern kingdom
had depended upon the commandment of
man, not God (v 11). Israel had turned to As-
syria for aid but received treachery and defeat
at their hands (v 13). In this prophecy of the
fall of Israel to the Assyrians (722 Bc), Hosea
depicts God as the ultimate instrument of
chastisement (v 14).
God's call for repentance was fast upon the
heels of the revelation of chastisement (5:15—
6:3). (The division of chapters at this point is
unfortunate. Hos 6:1—3 belongs with 5:15.) The
exhortation to return to Jehovah could have
been Hosea’s own heart response to the revela-
tion he had received. However, it is best to
take 6:1-3 as the words employed by the fu-
ture returning remnant. Assyria did not offer
healing, nor would any other nation, but God
will heal Israel spiritually, politically, and
physically (6:1; cf. Ex 15:26; Dt 32:39; Is 53:5;
Ez 37:1-14; Mal 4:2).
After the call to repentance, God returns to
his concern for Israel (Hos 6:4—11; cf. 4:15). Is-
rael has turned from its Creator and has dis-
obeyed his Word (6:7). Gilead is but one exam-
ple of the murderous character of Israel (v 8).
Even the priests are known for their violence
(v 9; cf. 1 Sm 2:12-17; Jer 5:31). The sin of
Israel is ‘“‘horrible’”’ (Hos 6:10).
Chapter 7 presents God’s conclusion con-
cerning Israel (vv 1-16). Every attempt of God
to bring Israel to repentance only reveals
more fully the extent of their sin (v 1). They
believe they can sin without God taking ac-
count (v 2; cf. Ps 90:8; Mt 12:36,37). Their civil
leaders rejoice that the people are as wicked
as the king and the princes (Hos 7:3). All Israel
is characterized by habitual adultery (v 4). Is-
rael has not separated itself from the heathen
(v 8; cf. Ex 34:12-16; 2 Cor 6:14-7:1). Like “a
cake not turned,” Israel is not well balanced
spiritually or politically but has one side done
to a turn and the other side raw.
In the area of foreign affairs, Israel has flit-
ted about from Egypt to Assyria and back
again “‘like a silly dove” without understand-
ing (Hos 7:11). They have not sought the
Lord’s counsel in their time of need, but have
depended upon worldly powers. The lack of
faith in Jehovah and the lack of separation
from sin will bring chastisement from God (v
12; cf. 1 Cor 11:32; Heb 12:5~15).
Chapter 8 deals with Israel’s reaping of
Hosea, Book of
judgment (cf. v 7). An alarm is sounded to
warn the people of the approach of the Assyri-
ans (v 1; cf. Ez 17:2-21). They would come
against Israel (“the house of the Lord,” Hos
8:1) because of their transgression of the Sinai
covenant (cf. Dt 27:9—29:29) and disobedience
to the Law of Moses. Crying falsely to God for
deliverance from his rod of punishment (cf. Is
10:5), Israel will receive no answer and Assyria
will continue to pursue the 1o tribes (Hos
8:2,3). Other reasons for God’s judgment in-
clude setting up kings without God’s direction
(v 4a) and idolatry (vv 4b—6). Israel’s sacrifices
are unacceptable because of the nation’s dis-
obedience (v 13; cf. 1 Sm 15:22; Is 1:11-15).
Thus they will go into exile just like the earlier
exile in Egypt (Hos 8:13).
The theme of exile is continued in chapter 9
of Hosea. There is no joy for Israel (v 1). The
produce of the land will not sustain her be-
cause she will no longer dwell in the land (vv
2,3). Some Israelites will flee to Egypt in exile
while others will be taken captive to Assyria.
All the sacrifices will cease and the sacrificial
wines and meats will be drunk and eaten to
satisfy their own desires (vv 4,5). Those Israel-
ites who flee to Egypt will be slain by the
Egyptians (v 6).
The recompense of Israel's evil is further
described in chapter ro. Israel is like a luxuri-
ant vine (v 1), but its bounty is misappropri-
ated, being poured out as sacrifice on heathen
altars. They are guilty before God, and he is
about to destroy their altars and take away
their king (vv 2,3).
Portion of a relief showing
Assyrian captives.
1004
Gibeah is mentioned again (cf. 9:9), remind-
~ing Israel that apostasy is not only infectious,
it is also indelible (10:9). The ‘“‘two furrows”
may refer to the two calf idols in Bethel and
Dan which brought chastisement from God (v
10). The punishment will be a sentence of hard
labor under a heavy yoke and with the added
burden of the Assyrian rider (v 11).
Chapters 11 through 14 close the prophecies
of Hosea with a message concerning the resto-
ration of Israel at a future time (11:1—14:9).
The steadfast love of the Father is first given
as the ground of future restoration (11:1—12).
Israel, as a nation, had been called out of
Egypt as a son of Jehovah (v 1; cf. Ex 4:22,23).
Yet Israel did not return the Father’s love,
but sought heathen alliances (11:5) that would
only bring judgment upon them (vv 5-7). The
words of Jehovah reveal his irreversible judg-
ment in his absolute holiness and righteous-
ness (12:1—13:16). The sins of Israel can only be
responded to with just recompense (12:1,2).
The responsibility for the destruction of the
northern kingdom rests upon Israel herself. In
spite of Israel’s sin, God can yet be her help
(13:9).
Israel should have repented quickly but she
did not (13:13). Yet the mercy of Jehovah
would ultimately bring about the death of
death itself so that Israel might live—spir-
itually, politically, and, perhaps, physically (v
14; cf. Ez 37:1-14; Dn 12:1,2,13).
The last chapter of Hosea sets forth the Fa-
ther’s loving invitation for Israel to repent and
return to him (14:1-g) in confession, prayer,

and praise (v 2). “Calves of our lips” (v 2 KJv)
refers to the thank-offering that normally con-
sisted of young bullocks (Ex 24:5; Lv 7:11-13;
cf. Pss 51:17—19; 69:30,31; Heb 13:15,16). Part of
Israel’s confession will involve recognizing
that there is no salvation in either Assyria (po-
litical alliance) or idols (Hos 14:3).
God repeatedly promises blessing to Israel
in their restoration (note “I will,” 14:4,5). Jeho-
vah will heal Israel spiritually, love them
freely, prosper them completely, and protect
them fully (wv 4-7). Israel will be as the lily,
durable as the cedar, and fruitful as the olive
tree.
Teaching. The primary emphasis of Hosea
is summarized in the last verse (14:9). The wise
will live godly, and the foolish will live ungodly
lives. The godly will have restoration, victory
over death (13:14), and blessing (14:4—7).
Idolatry is essentially anything that usurps
the sole place of God in the human heart. Is-
rael had substituted heathen deities (4:12—19),
national pride (5:5), religious ceremony (6:6),
political expediency (7:3), political alliances
(7:11), civil government (8:4), building projects
(8:14), selfish affluence (10:1), and idolatry
(13:2) for Jehovah’s counsel, aid, blessing, and
salvation. Only in God could they find true
blessing and security (13:4,9; 14:4—-7).
Hosea’s prophecies bring out the serious-
ness of sin and the terrible nature of divine
judgment (1:4; 4:1-5; 5:2,4,9; 6:9,10; 7:13,16;
8:7; 9:11-17; 10:4,8,15). They also emphasize
the mercy and the love of God (1:7; 2:19—23;
11:4,8,9; 14:4—7).
Apostasy is presented by Hosea as infec-
tious. The cycle of apostasy may begin with
the spiritual leaders or with the people and
spread from one to the other (4:9). Apostasy is
punished according to the degree of responsi-
bility (v 14; 5:1; 13:9).
See HoskEA (PERSON); ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; PROPH-
ECY; PROPHET, PROPHETESS.
Bibliography. C.F. Keil, Biblical Commentary on the OT:
The Twelve Minor Prophets, vol 1; G.A.F. Knight, Hosea; J.L.
Mays, Hosea; M. Scott, The Message of Hosea; G.A. Smith,
The Book of the Twelve Prophets, vol 1; N.H. Snaith, Amos,
Hosea, and Micah; C. von Orelli, The Twelve Minor Prophets;
H.W. Wolff, Hosea.
Hoshaiah. 1. Prince of Judah who led a con-
tingent of princes in procession at the dedica-
tion of the walls of Jerusalem after they were
rebuilt (Neh 12:32).
2. Father of Azariah (Jer 42:1; 43:2). Azariah
was a leader of the people of Judah after the
fall of Jerusalem.
Hoshama. __Jeconiah’s descendant (1 Chr
ai78);
1005
Hoshea
Hoshea. 1. Original name of Joshua, the son
of Nun and Moses’ successor, before his name
was changed by Moses (Nm 13:8,16).
See JOSHUA (PERSON) #1.
2. Son of Elah and the last of the 19 kings of
the northern kingdom of Israel (2 Kgs 17:1—6).
He reigned for 9 years (732-723 BC) before be-
.ing taken captive by the Assyrians. In the lat-
ter years of the northern kingdom, Assyria,
ruled by Tiglath-pileser III (745-727 Bc), had
gained control of most of the Middle East and
had reduced the scope of the northern king-
dom to Ephraim, Issachar, and the half of Ma-
nasseh west of the Jordan.
Earlier, the northern kingdom, under Pe-
kah (752—732 Bc), entered an alliance with Re-
zin of Damascus (Syria) and attempted to co-
erce King Ahaz of Judah (735-715 Bc) to join
them in action against Tiglath-pileser (2 Kgs
16:5; Is 7:1-6). Assyria came to Judah’s aid,
and at this point Hoshea was one of a group
of conspirators who assassinated Pekah (2
Kgs 15:30). Tiglath-pileser rewarded Hoshea
by making him king over the remnant of the
northern kingdom. Hoshea ruled only as a
vassal of Assyria and paid heavy tribute, re-
maining loyal to Assyria until the death of
Tiglath-pileser in 727 Bc. When Shalmaneser
V succeeded to the throne of Assyria, Hoshea
withheld tribute and attempted to assert in-
dependence. He entered into negotiations
with So, king of Egypt (2 Kgs 17:4), and
found a favorable response, because Egypt
would be in a precarious position if Assyria
were to control Palestine. Therefore, Egypt
was quite willing to support Hoshea in his
resistance to Assyria in the hope that Sa-
maria would remain a buffer between Egypt
and Assyria. Soon, Shalmaneser directed his
army against Samaria (724 Bc), and Hoshea
discovered that the alliance with Egypt was
of little value. He attempted to avert disaster
by resuming the tribute payments (2 Kgs
17:3), but Shalmaneser did not trust his loy-
alty and marched against Samaria. In a
short time Hoshea was taken prisoner, and
Assyria apparently besieged Samaria for
three years. The city fell in 722 Bc, and Sar-
gon II, who had succeeded Shalmaneser
about 726 Bc, deported many Israelites to
various places in Assyria, thus ending the
northern kingdom.
See ISRAEL, HISTORY OF.
3. Son of Azaziah and one of King David's
officers set over the Ephraimites (1 Chr 27:20).
4. One who set his seal on Ezra’s covenant
(Neh 10:23).
5. Eighth-century prophet of Israel best
known as Hosea.
See HosEA (PERSON); HoskEA, Book OF.
R.K. HARRISON
Hospitality

Hospitality. Biblical concept often usedtive of this pagan practice was Israel's belief
with the terms “guest,” ‘‘stranger,’”’ and ‘‘so- ~in the Lord as the Creator of heaven and earth,
journer.” It is useful to limit the meaning of the one who marshalled the heavenly bodies
“hospitality” to benevolence done to those at his command and ordained them to per-
outside one’s normal circle of friends, as is form a special function (Gn 1:14-19; 2:1; Neh
implied in the literal meaning of the Greek 9:6; Pss 33:6; 103:21; 148:2; Is 40:26; 45:12).
word (‘‘love of strangers’’). Although the con- God is frequently called “the Lord God of
cept is thoroughly endorsed in the Bible, it is hosts,” that is, of the celestial armies (Jer 5:14;
clearly found in nonbiblical cultures as well, 38:17; 44:7; Hos 12:5). The heavenly host in-
especially the nomadic, where definite obliga- cludes angels or messengers who are associ-
tions to provide food, shelter, and protection ated with the Lord’s work in heaven and on
are recognized. earth. God presides over a heavenly council
The normal exercise of hospitality in the composed of angels or “sons of God” (Gn 1:26;
OT can be seen in the examples of Abraham 1 Kgs 22:19; Jb 1,2; Ps 82; Is 6) whose messen-
and the three visitors (Gn 18:2—8,16), Laban’s gers are sent from the Lord’s council to accom-
reception of Abraham’s servant (24:15—61), and plish his purpose (Gn 28:12-15; Lk 2:13).
Manoah’s treatment of the angel (Jgs 13:15), Though the hosts are sometimes under-
but there are also cases in which the host felt stood as the stars or angels, the tribes of Israel
compelled to take extreme steps to protect his are also called ‘‘the hosts of the Lord’ (Ex
guest, even to the harm of his own family (Gn 12:41). The “host of heaven” referred to in Dan-
19:1-8; Jgs 19:14—25). The hospitality of the iel 8:10,11, appears to be figurative language
Shunammite family is also noteworthy, al- referring to Israel, ‘‘the holy people” (cf. v 24
though Elisha was no stranger to them (2 Kgs KJv) and God, the King of Israel is called “the
4:10). Prince of the host.”
In the NT Jesus relies on the general prac- The Greek words translated “‘host’’ occur
tice of hospitality in sending out the disciples only twice in the NT (Lk 2:13; Acts 7:42). ‘“Lord
(Lk 10:7) and in his own travels. As the gospel of hosts” is used by Paul and James (Rom
was spread by traveling missionaries, Chris- 9:29; Jas 5:4)-as a title for the Lord. The term
tians were commended for entertaining them expresses God’s sovereign might and majesty
in their homes (Heb 13:2; 1 Pt 4:9; 3 Jn 5-8). in history, but the precise identification of the
Church leaders must not exempt themselves “hosts” that stand at his command is uncer-
from this ministry (1 Tm 3:2; Ti 1:8); to do so tain. The name “‘Lord of hosts’’ in the litera-
is grounds for judgment (Mt 25:43). ture of the prophets does not identify the hosts
Daviw K. HuTTAR with Israel’s armies. The prophets do not relin-
See FOREIGNER. quish the idea of God’s action on behalf of Is-
rael in the military sphere, but they often indi-
cate that God would even turn military forces
Host, Host of Heaven. Hebrew expres- against his people in judgment for their sins.
sions found frequently in the OT and literally The epithet ‘Lord of hosts” sums up the Israel-
meaning “army” and “army of the skies.” ite faith that God alone is Lord in heaven and
Host is basically a military term, occurring on earth.
nearly 500 times in the OT, and can mean
WILLIAM B. TOLAR
“army’”’ (2 Kgs 18:17), “angels,” “heavenly bod-
ies,” or “creation.”
The phrase “‘host of heaven” has various ap- Hosts, Lord of. OT name for God found
plications in the Bible. Ancient writers some- mostly in the prophets. The hosts are the heav-
times referred symbolically to the sun, moon, enly powers and angels that act at the Lord’s
and stars as an army (Dt 4:19; Jgs 5:20). In the command.
astrological cults of antiquity it was believed See Gop, NAMES OF.
that celestial bodies were animated by spirits
and thus constituted a living army that con- Hotham. 1. Variant form of Helem in 1
trolled heavenly destiny. The worship of the Chronicles 7:32.
host of heaven was one of the earliest forms of See HELEM #1.
idolatry, and was common among the Israel- 2. Shama and Jeiel’s father. Shama and Je-
ites in their times of regression from serving iel were two of David’s mighty men (1 Chr
God (Jer 19:13; Acts 7:42). Although warned 11:44; KJV Hothan).
against such pagan beliefs (Dt 4:19; 17:3), the
Israelites fell into the practice of worshiping
heavenly bodies, particularly during the Assyr- Hothan. KJV spelling of Hotham in 1 Chroni-
ian and Babylonian periods (2 Kgs 17:16; cles 11:44.
21:3,5; 2 Chr 33:3,5; Jer 8:2; Zep 1:5). The correc- See HoTHAM #2.

1006
 Huldah

Hothir. Levite and the head of the arst of 24

divisions of priests for sanctuary service,
formed during David's reign (1 Chr 25:4,28).

Hour. See Day.

House. See Homes AND DWELLINGS.

Household. Persons who live in the same

place and compose a family or extended fam-
ily. In biblical times a household included fa-
ther, mother(s), children, grandparents, ser-
vants, concubines, and sojourners. Jacob’s
household included 66 people, not counting
the wives of his sons (Gn 46:26). Households
were seen as corporately responsible for the
honor of the family (2 Sm 3:27 gives an exam-
ple of revenge by a household). Male members
of the entire household were circumcised as a
sign of the covenant (Gn 17:23). In the NT
some entire households were baptized (Acts
11:14).
See FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS.

House of God. Common phrase used in the A cedar of Lebanon, the type of tree used to build the House
of the Forest of Lebanon (1 Kgs 7:2).
ancient Near Eastern world for a structure
used to accommodate a deity or his servants.
It referred in the OT to the tabernacle (Dt gold. A large ivory throne overlaid with gold
23:18; 1 Kgs 8:11—20); the Solomonic temple (1 was constructed and placed within the palace
Kgs 12:27; Jer 20:1), to national shrines, or to (1 Kgs 7:2-5; 2 Chr 9:16—20). Besides providing
pagan temples (Jgs 9:4; 2 Kgs 10:21). housing and a formal palace for Solomon, it
In NT times the OT custom of referring to was also used to store arms (Is 22:8).
the temple as the ‘House of God” was still
employed (Mt 12:4; Mk 2:26; 11:17; Lk 6:4; Jn Hozai. Author of annals describing the life
2:16,17), but with some significant changes. No of Manasseh king of Judah, and included in
longer was the personal name of God used in the “Chronicles of the Kings of Israel” (2 Chr
reference to the temple, as in the OT (Ex 23:19; 33:18,19). The Septuagint renders Hozai as
Dt 23:18; 1 Sm 3:15), for it had become so sa- “seers,” which is preferred by many commen-
cred to the Jews that it was against the rab- tators and the Rsv.
binic law to publicly speak the personal name
of God. The phrase ‘‘House of God” referred Hukkok. Town on Naphtali and Zebulun’s
only to the temple in Jerusalem. After Christ’s boundary, listed next to Aznoth-tabor (Jos
ascension, the church viewed itself as the 19:34). It has been identified with Yaquaq,
house of God (1 Cor 3:9; Heb 3:6; 1 Pt 2:5; 4:17). northwest of Gennesaret.
God no longer dwelt in buildings made by hu-
man hands, but in the lives of those who con- Hukok. Alternate form of the Asherite town
fess Jesus as Lord. Helkath in 1 Chronicles 6:75.
See TABERNACLE, TEMPLE. See HELKATH.

House of the Archives. See ARCHIVES, Hul. Son of Aram and grandson of Shem
HOUSE OF THE. (Gn 10:23; 1 Chr 1:17).

House of the Forest of Lebanon. Exotic Huldah. Prophetess living in Jerusalem; a

name for Solomon’s palace in Jerusalem, adja-
cent to the temple, given this designation be-
cause of the amount of Lebanese cedar used in
its construction. The structure was about 150
long, 75 feet wide, and 30 feet high. Three hun-
dred gold shields were made to decorate it,
and all the vessels of the house were made of
contemporary of the prophets Jeremiah and
Zephaniah. Huldah is introduced as the wife
of Shallum, the wardrobe keeper in King Josi-
ah’s court (2 Kgs 22:14; 2 Chr 34:22). Josiah
sent his officers to ask Huldah’s counsel con-
cerning the book of the Mosiac law which had
been found during the temple repair. She

1007
Humtah
prophesied that disaster would strike the na-
tion (2 Kgs 22:16), but that Josiah would be
spared because he was penitent, humbling
himself before the Lord (vv 18,19). She de-
clared he would be buried in peace (v 20). Al-
though Josiah later died in battle, he was prop-
erly entombed (23:30), avoiding the indignity
of becoming prey for carrion-feeders. It was
after receiving Huldah’s advice that Josiah car-
ried out his religious reform (2 Chr 35:1—25).
Humtah. Settlement in the Judean uplands
near Hebron according to Joshua 15:54. No sat-
isfactory site has yet been suggested for this
place.
Hunchback. See DEFormity.
Hundred, Tower of the. Tower at the
northernmost part of the Jerusalem wall (near
where the wall crosses over the Tyropoean Val-
ley). It stood west of the Sheep Gate near the
Tower of Hananel (Neh 3:1; 12:39; KJv tower of
Meah).
See JERUSALEM.
Hundred-weight. Measure equal to about
roo pounds mentioned only in Revelation
LO:213
See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
Hunting. Practice of tracking and pursuing
animals for food, animal products, or sport, a
practice as old as man. In Bible times hunting
was practiced all over the biblical world. Gene-
sis 10:9 refers to a certain Nimrod who was ‘“‘a
mighty hunter before the Lord” long before
the patriarchs. In earliest human history hunt-
ing was an essential means of obtaining food,
clothing, and tools, and even when civilization
developed hunting provided supplementation
for an agricultural diet.
In lands surrounding Israel hunting is well
represented in paintings and bas-reliefs. In an-
cient Egypt hunting became a sport, and Egyp-
tians hunted for game and birds often with the
help of dogs and cats. Wild game was driven
by dogs or humans into enclosures or toward
pits and traps. Similarly in Mesopotamia hunt-
ing was widely practiced as is evident from
many bas-reliefs depicting stags and deer
caught in nets. In Assyria wild animals like
lions were commonly hunted. The bas-reliefs
of Nineveh provide many fine pictures of the
hunter’s art.
Palestine was a land where hunting was
practiced very early. This is clear from the
bones of hunted animals found in the excava-
tion of early sites. Certainly by the Middle
1008
Bronze Age (c. 1800-1500 BC), which approxi-
‘mates the patriarchal age, hunting was widely
practiced. The reference to Esau as a skillful
hunter (Gn 25:27) would be typical of a time
when both agricultural and hunting pursuits
were followed. The Egyptian Tale of Sinuhe
from the 2oth century Bc mentions hunting
with hounds.
The Bible text gives a number of glimpses
into the kinds of birds and animals that were
hunted. Lists of animals that were ‘‘clean’’ are
provided in Deuteronomy, 14:4—6. An interest-
ing variety of animals was available to the peo-
ple of Israel; many were domestic, but there
was a variety of wild animals to test the inge-
nuity of the hunter: the goat, the hare, the ga-
zelle, the roebuck (cf. 1 Kgs 4:23), the wild
goat, the ibex, the antelope, and the mountain
sheep. In every case the blood of the animal
had to be poured out. There was a proverb
current in Israel about a slothful man who
caught no prey (Prv 12:27).
Some passages in the OT record the killing
of animals in self-protection (Jgs 14:6; 1 Sm
17:34-37; 2 Sm 23:20). Shepherds normally car-
ried a club and a sling to protect their flocks
from marauding beasts (1 Sm 17:40; Ps 23:4).
A variety of birds was hunted, for example,
the partridge referred to in 1 Samuel 26:20 (Dt
14:11—-18).
There are references also to some of the de-
vices used in hunting: bows and arrows (Gn
27:3), clubs (Jb 41:29), sling-stones (1 Sm
17:40), nets (Jb 19:6), fowlers’ snares (Ps 91:3),
camouflaged pits (Pss 7:15; 35:7; Prv 22:14;
26:27; Is 24:17,18). Two kinds of bird traps are
mentioned in the Bible (Jos 23:13 and Is 8:14).
One of these seems to have been an automatic
device (Am 3:5) that would spring up from the
ground when an animal touched it (cf. Ps
69:22; Hos 9:8) or when the fowler pulled a
cord (Ps 140:5; Jer 5:26). The many references
to the fowler with his nets and snares are re-
minders that Palestine lies on one of the main
flight routes of certain migratory birds (cf. Ex
16:13; Nm 11:31-34). Some of the common
hunting expressions came to be used figura-
tively (Jb 18:10; Jer 5:26).
The method of driving animals into a trap
seems to be referred to in Jeremiah 16:16 and
Ezekiel 19:8.
Evidently hunting was practiced in NT
times to judge from pictures in Matthew 22:15;
Luke 11:54; and Romans 11:9. The writings of
the Jewish rabbis in the early Christian era
provide further evidence of hunting in the im-
mediate postbiblical period.
JOHN A. THOMPSON
Hupham, Huphamite. Benjamite and the
founder of the Huphamite family (Nm 26:39);

he is perhaps identifiable with Huppim
46:21; 1 Chr 7:12,15) and Huram (1 Chr 8:5).
See HuppPiM.
Huppah. One of the chief men appointed in
charge of the 13th division of priests in the
time of David and Solomon (1 Chr 24:13).
Huppim. Perhaps the son of Ir (Iri) and a
descendant of Benjamin through Bela’s line
(Gn 46:21); 1 Chr 7:12,15). Huppim is probably
an alternate spelling of Hupham, the father of
the Huphamite family from Benjamin’s tribe
(Nm 26:39). His precise lineage is difficult to
determine.
Hur. 1. First mention in the account of Isra-
el’s battle with the Amalekites at Rephidim,
he aided Aaron in supporting Moses’ hands un-
til the Amalekites were defeated (Ex 17:8—13).
He is mentioned again as assisting Aaron in
overseeing Israel while Moses was on Mt Sinai
(24:14). According to Josephus, Hur was the
husband of Miriam, the sister of Moses (Jose-
phus, Antiq. 3.2.4).
2. Fourth of the five kings of Midian who
was killed with Balaam by the Israelites under
Moses (Nm 31:8). He is also referred to as one
of the ‘princes of Median” and “Sihon” (Jos
13527):
3. Father of one of the 12 officers whom
Solomon appointed to provide food for the
king’s household (1 Kgs 4:8, KJv; Rsv Benhur).
4. Son of Caleb and Ephrath and the grand-
father of Bezaleel (1 Chr 2:19,20). Although
some interpreters regard the Hur discussed in
#1 as the grandfather of Bezaleel, others think
that the Hur who assisted Moses and the Hur
who was Bezaleel’s grandfather were different
men.
5. Father (or perhaps family name) of
Rephaiah, a postexilic leader who assisted Ne-
hemiah in rebuilding the Jerusalem wall (Neh
3:9).
Hurai. Alternate form of Hiddai in 1 Chroni-
cles 11332:
See Hippal.
Huram. 1. Bela’s son from Benjamin’s tribe
(1 Chr 8:5); perhaps the same person as Hu-
pham (Nm 26:39).
2. Alternate spelling of Hiram, the Phoeni-
cian king of Tyre who was an ally of David
and Solomon, and who supplied materials for
the building of the temple (2 Chr 2:3,11,12;
8:2,18; 9:10,21).
See HIRAM #1.
3. Alternate spelling of Hiram, a craftsman
Hurrians
(Gn from Tyre who worked on Solomon’s temple
(2 Chr 4:11).
See HIRAM #2.
Huram-abi. Alternate name for Hiram, Solo-
mon’s temple architect, in 2 Chronicles 2:13
and 4:16.
“See HiraM #2.
Huri. Abihail’s father from Gad’s tribe who
inhabited Gilead in Bashan (1 Chr 5:14).
Hurrians. People (also called Mitannians)
who spoke a language different from Semitic
and Indo-European, and yet played a signifi-
cant cultural role in the Near East during the
2nd millennium Bc, particularly in transmit-
ting the culture of Sumer and Babylon to west-
ern Asia and to the Hittites.
The presence of Hurrians in an area can be
inferred from the presence of Hurrian texts,
the presence of people with Hurrian names (or
Indo-Iranian as explained below), and from
statements in other ancient literature, includ-
ing the OT.
At the beginning of the 2nd millennium,
and even somewhat before, Hurrians are
found in the northernmost parts of Mesopota-
mia, having come there presumably from still
farther north. They are found in the 18th cen-
tury Bc at Mari and Alalakh, and in the rs5th
and 14th centuries Bc at Nuzi, Ugarit, Alalakh,
a few cities in Palestine, and especially in
their political center of Mitanni. During this
latter period their rulers were actually an aris-
tocracy of Indo-Iranian extraction, who often
retained their Indo-Iranian names, but who in
other respects had adopted Hurrian language,
religion, and general culture, and so were for
all practical purposes Hurrians.
The main question concerning Hurrian pres-
ence is the extent to which they-were influen-
tial in Palestine, and here the evidence is not
clear. The Amarna Letters, written by the
Mitannian/Hurrian kings and by petty kings of
Palestine to the Egyptian pharaohs during the
14th century, refer to a few Palestinian kings
with Hurrian (some Indo-Iranian) names such
as Abdikhepa of Jerusalem. However, the let-
ters, written in Akkadian by the scribes of
these Palestinian kings, betray a local Canaan-
ite rather than Hurrian speech. On the other
hand, the Egyptians referred to Palestine as
the land of the Hurrians, and indeed one pha-
raoh claimed to have captured 36,000 Hurrians
there, but this could mean inhabitants of Pales-
tine rather than ethnic Hurrians. In view of
the evidence of the Amarna Letters, it is likely
that Palestine was only nominally Hurrian.
Furthermore, the extent to which Hurrians
1009
Husband

are referred to by ethnic terms in the OT is Hushah, Hushathites. Ezer’s son (1 Chr
likewise problematic. Some scholars believe ~4:4) or perhaps a town which Ezer founded.
that the Hurrians are the biblical Horites (Gn The warriors Sibbecai (2 Sm 21:18; 1 Chr
14:6; 36:20-30; Dt 2:12,22). Linguistically this 11:29; 20:4; 27:11) and Mebunnai (2 Sm 23:27)
is possible, but the Horites are always located were described as Hushathites; whether desig-
at Mt Seir, whereas the Hurrians are at Jerusa- nating genealogical ancestry or geographical
lem, Taanach, Megiddo, Acco, Achshaph, She- locality (or perhaps both) is uncertain.
chem, and possibly Hebron, but not likely at
Mt Seir. In addition, the names of the Horites Hushai. Friend and adviser who remained
in Genesis 36 appear Semitic rather than Hur- faithful to David when his other adviser,
rian. Finally, if the Horites of Mt Seir are con- Ahithophel, defected to join the rebelling Absa-
temporary with Esau, who married the daugh- lom. According to David’s instructions, Hu-
ter of a Horite chief, this would be too early shai pretended loyalty to Absalom and slipped
for patriarchal contacts with Hurrian penetra- information to David regarding Absalom’s
tion in the south, if the early date of the patri- plans. Ahithophel urged Absalom to attack the
archs is sustained by the newly discovered fleeing David before he had a chance to
Ebla tablets. strengthen his forces, but Absalom followed
A second theory identifies the Hivites as Hushai’s advice, which gave David time to es-
Hurrians, the linguistic differences between cape over the Jordan and ultimately to defeat
the two names usually being explained as due Absalom’s party. When his counsel was not fol-
to confusion of similar-looking Hebrew conso- lowed, Ahithophel hanged himself, probably
nants by the later scribes. In support of the anticipating the disastrous outcome (2 Sm
Hivite identification of Hurrians it is pointed 15:32—-37; 16:15—17:23). Hushai belonged to the
out that in two passages (Gn 34:2; Jos 9:7) the Archite family from Ataroth, a town on Ephra-
Septuagint (Greek translation) understands im and Benjamin’s border (Jos 16:2,7).
Hivites to be Hurrians, while in Genesis 36:2,
29 Zibeon is called both Hivite and Horite, Husham. Temanite who succeeded Jobab
the latter identified as Hurrian. However, the as king of Edom (Gn 36:34,35; 1 Chr 1:45,46).
former argument places too much weight on
the Septuagint, which may simply be mis- Hushim. 1. Dan’s son (Gn 46:23), alternately
taken, and the latter argument amounts called Shuham in Numbers 26:42 where he is
again to the claim that the Mt Seir Horites mentioned as the founder of the Shuhamite
were Hutrians. family.
A third theory sees the Hittites of Genesis 2. Benjamite descendants of Aher (1 Chr
23 as Hurrians. While it is true that the term meta):
“Hittite” is often broad and may include eth- 3. Benjamite and one of Shaharaim’s two
nic Hurrians, this theory faces the same chro- wives (x Chr 8:8,11).
nological difficulties as the first. On the other
hand, it may well be that the later Hittite, Huz. xksv rendering of Uz, Nahor’s son, in
Uriah, and Arauna the Jebusite were Hur- Genesis 22:21.
rians, the name “Arauna”’ often being inter-
See Uz (PERSON) #2.
preted as clearly Hurrian.
The above theories all assume that a people
will be referred to by a distinctive ethnic Huzzab. Obscure Hebrew word found only
term. Alternatively, one might admit a Hur- in Nahum 2:7 (ksv). Scholars are uncertain
rian presence in Palestine and see them re- whether the word is a verb meaning ‘“‘it is de-
ferred to (along with other peoples) under creed,’ a noun personifying Nineveh, or a ref-
broad terms such as ‘“‘Canaanite.” erence to an Assyrian queen. The problem is
Davin K. ae perhaps due to textual error, but thus far nei-
ther textual scholarship nor archaeology has
See Hittites; HivirEs; Horite, Horim. been able to resolve the question.

Husband. See Famiry LIFE AND RELATIONS. Hyacinth. Plant indigenous to the Holy
Land yielding blue fragrant flowers.
See PLANTS.
Husbandman, Husbandry. Occupation and
practice of farming and animal production; Hyena. See ANIMALS.
KJV rendering of farmer, tenant farmer, plow-
man, tiller, and vinedresser. Hyksos. Term used by Egyptian historian
See AGRICULTURE; TRADES AND OccUPATIONS (FAR- Manetho (c. 280 Bc) to designate the foreign
MER). rulers of the 15th and 16th dynasties in Egypt
IOIO

(1730?—1570? BC). Once called the shepherd
kings, that expression is now thought to have
come from a misrendering of an Egyptian
text.
The Hyksos were Semites, probably enter-
ing Egypt from Syria and Palestine, though
their exact origin is unknown. They gradually
infiltrated Egypt during the 18th century Bc,
and it is possible that some intermarriage
took place. This infiltration was aided by a
weakening of Egyptian power as a result of
internal dynastic rivalries. Some of the Hyk-
sos may have held Egyptian administrative
posts before the actual Hyksos takeover,
which was probably more of a swift political
maneuver than a great military conquest.
The Hyksos capital was probably estab-
lished at Qantir in the delta region of north-
eastern Egypt. From there they could main-
tain ties with their cultural base in Palestine
and Syria. Qantir was close to Goshen, the
Egyptian territory inhabited by the Israelites
during their sojourn in Egypt.
The Hyksos introduced the war chariot
into Egypt, a military device later used to
drive the Hyksos aliens out of Egypt. Horse
and chariot warfare became the norm in the
following centuries. The Hyksos presence also
forced the Egyptians to acknowledge the sur-
rounding Middle Eastern world. Previously
Egyptians generally had viewed other peoples
as barbarians and themselves as the cultural
center of the world. When the Hyksos were
evicted by Ahmose in 1570(?)Bc, Egypt em-
barked on a course of conquests initiating its
empire period (16th—12th centuries Bc). No
monuments from the Hyksos era have been
found, and whatever monuments did exist
IOI!
Hyksos
were probably destroyed when Egyptian rule
was reestablished.
The relation of the Hyksos to Israel's his-
tory is debated and depends on a correct inter-
pretation of Exodus 1:8: ‘““Now there arose a
new king over Egypt, who did not know Jo-
seph.” If Joseph died just before 1800 Bc, and
‘thle Hyksos takeover in Egypt was about 1730
Bc, then the “new king’’ was a Hyksos ruler
who did not know of Joseph, or perhaps had
no reason to respect Joseph’s descendants
even if he had known Joseph. The new rigor of
servitude described in Exodus 1:9—14 would,
according to that interpretation, have been in-
troduced by the Hyksos. If so, it may be that
the Hyksos were fewer in number than the He-
brews and feared some kind of uprising (Ex
1:9), or the Hyksos may have feared an alli-
ance between the Hebrews and the Egyptians,
which also might have led to the Hyksos being
deposed (v 10). In this view, the pharaoh who
ordered the Hebrew midwives to kill newborn
Hebrew boys (v 15) ruled Egypt after the Hyk-
sos had been overthrown. Thus there would be
a gap of at least 150 years between verses 14
and 15.
The other interpretation places Joseph’s ar-
rival in Egypt sometime during the Hyksos
rule, not prior to it. Here it is assumed that a
Semitic people such as the Hyksos would not
be averse to having another Semite in their
government, nor would they oppose the settle-
ment of Jacob’s family in Egypt. Further, the
location of Jacob’s family and descendants in
Goshen fits with the known fact that the Hyk-
sos had their center of control in that region.
This view might also explain why Egyptian
records do not mention Joseph—his name
The ruins of a fortress-temple
built by the Hyksos at
Shechem.
Hymenaeus

would have been offensive to later Egyptian it might have involved physical affliction as
national feeling, and therefore removed from ~ well as severance from the body of other Chris-
any records. If this line of reasoning were ac- tians. The harsh action was meant to bring
cepted, then the king ‘‘who did not know about, not ultimate destruction, but eventual
Joseph’’came to the throne after the Hyksos and lasting benefit to Hymenaeus so he might
had been overthrown. With the Hyksos elimi- as a result learn not to blaspheme (cf. 1 Cor
nated by the revived Egyptian dynasty, it 5:5). Apparently, this censure was not success-
follows that the Hebrews, another Semitic ful. In 2 Timothy 2:17,18, Hymenaneus appears
group, would be brought into subjection also. as one who is “upsetting the faith.” He (along
In either case, it is clear that the Hyksos with Philetus) was teaching that the resurrec-
and the Hebrews were not in agreement on tion had already taken place. Most probably,
religious matters. The Hyksos worshiped the he was teaching that the resurrection takes
Canaanite gods, especially Baal, in their own place at the time of spiritual rebirth and bap-
lands and combined that worship with Egyp- tism, based on a faulty interpretation of Ro-
tian sun-god worship when they ruled in mans 6:1—11 and Colossians 3:1. This teaching
Egypt. is probably a rejection of Gnosticism, which
WILLIAM TRAVIS maintains that matter is evil and that real sal-
vation is liberation from the body. Hymenaeus
Hymenaeus. Believer, probably of Ephesus, thus sought to teach a spiritualized resurrec-
cited by Paul as one who “rejected con- tion taking place as the soul awakens from sin.
science” (1 Tm 1:19,20) and “swerved from the JAMEs D. PRICE
truth” (2 Tm 2:17). In the first instance, Hyme-
naeus (mentioned with Alexander) is viewed Hymn, Hymnody. See Music anp Musica
as having rejected correct beliefs and made a INSTRUMENTS.
shipwreck of his faith. The seriousness of his
offense is evident, as Paul sternly exhorts Hyssop. Syrian or Egyptian marjoram
Timothy to deliver him over to Satan. The plant (Ex 12:22; Lv 14:4).
meaning of this phrase is uncertain, although See PLANTS.

Ioi2
 1
Ibex. Species of wild goat, declared clean in Ichabod. Name given to Phineas’ son (Eli’s
the Law (Dt 14:5). grandson) to commemorate the glory that had
See ANIMALS (GoaT). departed from Israel, after the ark of God was
taken by the Philistines (1 Sm 4:19—22; 14:3).
Phineas was killed in the battle of Aphek, at
Ibhar. Son born to David during his reign the same time the Philistines had captured the
in Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:15; 1 Chr 3:6; 14:5).
ark. When Phineas’ wife heard of the tragedy,
she went immediately into labor, and when
Ibis. Wading bird with a long, slender bill, the child was born she named him Ichabod
declared unclean in Leviticus 11:17. (meaning ‘“‘no glory”) to sum up her despair.
See Birps.
Iconium. City in the southwest part of cen-
Ibleam. City in Manasseh’s territory (Jos tral Asia Minor located about 95 miles from
17:11; Jgs 1:27; 2 Kgs 9:27), perhaps identifi- the Mediterranean coast. It is known today as
able with Bileam, a levitical city west of the Konya, a Turkish city, and capital of the prov-
Jordan River between Samaria and Jezreel (1 ince bearing the same name.
Chr 6:70). Iconium was an agricultural center famous
for its wheat fields and apricot and plum or-
See LEVITICAL CITIES.
chards. Its ideal location and climate helped
establish its place as a major link in the trade
Ibneiah. Jeroham’s son from Benjamin’s routes between Syria, Ephesus, and Rome.
tribe (1 Chr 9:8). Little is known about the origin of the city.
Its beginnings may be traced to a group of
Ibnijah. Forefather of Meshullam from Ben- immigrant tribes from northern Greece—the
jamin’s tribe (1 Chr 9:8). Phrygians. Xenophon, a Greek historian (c.
428-354 BC), mentions it as a Phrygian city vis-
Ibri. Merarite Levite and Jaaziah’s son, who ited by Cyrus. Since the Phrygian language
lived during David's time (1 Chr 24:27). was spoken in Iconium, it is likely that the
inhabitants considered themselves of this ex-
traction. Although the name “Iconium’’ was
Ibsam. Tola’s son from Issachar’s tribe (x
originally Phrygian, a myth was later created
Chr 7:2, KJv Jibsam).
to infuse it with Greek meaning. According to
this legend, a great flood destroys mankind.
Ibzan. Judge who ruled over Israel or part Life is restored when Prometheus and Athena
of it for 7 years (Jgs 12:8—10). Ibzan was a na- breathe life into human images made from
tive of Bethlehem, probably of Zebulun, and mud left by the subsiding waters. The Greek
was buried in his place of birth. Jewish tradi- word for “image”’ is eikon from which, so the
tion identified Ibzan with Boaz and conse- legend goes, comes the name “‘Iconium.”’
quently understood his native city to be Beth- In the 3rd century Bc, Iconium was gov-
lehem in Judah. Ibzan had 30 sons and 30 erned by the Seleucid kings of Syria. As disci-
daughters and was a man of wealth and high ples of Greek culture, the Seleucids soon
social standing. turned Iconium into a Hellenistic city. The
See JUDGES, BOOK OF. Greek language was spoken and the people
1013
Idalah
were ruled by two magistrates appointed an-
nually. Despite later domination by the Gauls
and Pontic kings (c. 165—63 Bc), Iconium re-
tained its Hellenistic character until NT
times. In 36 Bc Mark Anthony gave the city to
Antymas. Upon his death in 25 Bc, Iconium
joined the neighboring cities of Lystra, Derbe,
and Pisidian Antioch as a part of the province
of Galatia and so became incorporated into
the Roman Empire.
The apostle Paul visited Iconium on his
first missionary journey. Having been forced
to leave Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13:51), Paul
came to the synagogue in Iconium. His preach-
ing initially won the approval of both the Jews
and Greeks, but unbelieving Jews soon incited
a riot against him (14:1—7). Paul fled to Lystra
but was followed by the Iconian Jews who
stoned him and left him for dead (v 19; cf. 2
Tm 3:11). Cared for by friends, Paul was able
to join Barnabas in Derbe, where they made
disciples who later returned to Iconium to
strengthen the Christians there (Acts 14:20-
23). During the second missionary journey,
Timothy was recommended to Paul and Silas
by the Christians at Iconium (16:1,2). The city
served as the setting for the apocryphal Acts of
Paul and Thecla—an indication that the im-
pact of Christianity was still provoking opposi-
tion in this city as late as the 2nd century.
Idalah. Town assigned to Zebulun’s tribe
for an inheritance (Jos 19:15). It is generally
identified with Khirbet el-Hawarah, north-
west of Nazareth.
Idbash. One of Etam’s three sons from Ju-
dah’s tribe (1 Chr 4:3).
Iddo. 1. Father of Ahinadab, Solomon’s offi-
cial at Mahanaim, who administered the royal
household (1 Kgs 4:14).
2. Gershonite Levite, descendant of Joah
and forefather of Zerah (1 Chr 6:21); perhaps
alternately called Adaiah in verse 41.
See ADAIAH #2.
3. Zechariah’s son and the chief officer of
Manasseh’s half tribe in Gilead during David’s
reign (1 Chr 27:21).
4. Prophet and seer who chronicled the
events of Solomon’s reign in a book of visions
concerning Jeroboam, Nebat’s son (2 Chr 9:29),
recorded Rehoboam’s acts in the genealogies
(12:15), and wrote a story of Abijah’s life
(13:22).
5. Grandfather of Zechariah the prophet
(Zec 1:1,7). Iddo, presumably, was a well-
known priest who returned to Jerusalem from
exile in 538 Bc, and whose household was
headed by Zechariah during Joiakim’s reign
1014
as high priest during the postexilic era. Accord-
sing to Ezra 5:1 and 6:14, Zechariah and not
Berechiah his father, was considered Iddo’s
successor.
See ZECHARIAH (PERSON) #20.
6. Leading man at Casiphia in Babylonia to
whom Ezra sent a delegation of men request-
ing priests and temple servants to join Ezra’s
caravan returning to Palestine for service in
the Jerusalem temple (Ezr 8:17).
Idols, Idolatry. Man-made images or repre-
sentations worshiped as deities; any natural
or manufactured objects worshiped as deity;
anything receiving worship other than the one
true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of
an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in
ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly
and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of
the worship of a false god Baal is given in the
account of the contest on Mt Carmel; the
priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped’”’
around the altar, they cut themselves with
swords and lances (1 Kgs 18:26—29). Baal wor-
ship was at times widely followed by Israel
during the period of the monarchy.
The pre-Abrahamic progenitors of the Isra-
elites were worshipers of idols in Mesopota-
mia (Jos 24:2). Archaeological excavations in
that area have revealed the images of numer-
ous deities and Mesopotamian religious litera-
ture reveals the gross polytheism out of which
Abraham came.
The tendency of the Israelites toward idola-
try was in part the expression of the universal
human longing for a god one can see and
know through the physical senses. It is in par-
tial fulfillment of this desire that God sent his
Son in the flesh (cf. Jn 1:18; 2 Cor 4:6). Rebel-
lion against God also led to idol worship (Rom
1:18—23).
Most of the idolatry of the Israelites was
borrowed from their neighbors. During the
more than 400 years that the descendants of
Jacob spent in Egypt, they were exposed to
polytheistic idolatry, which influenced their re-
ligious mindset. At Sinai, while Moses was re-
ceiving the Ten Commandments from the
Lord, the people were demanding that Aaron
make gods for them (Ex 32:1-6). He fashioned
a golden calf, following an Egyptian form, for
the whole bovine family was worshiped in
Egypt—the Apis bull, the Hathor cow, and the
Mnevis calf.
It was after his stay in Egypt (1 Kgs 11:40)
that Jeroboam became king of Israel and set
up golden calves, one at Bethel and one at Dan
(12:26—33), an action that earned him the la-
bel, “Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, who made
Israel to sin.”
Already in patriarchal times there are refer-
 Idols, Idolatry

ences to the teraphim, or household gods. Ex- and would not let his mother be queen be-
amples of these idols have been found at Ur of cause she had “‘an abominable image made for
the Chaldees, Nuzi, and other sites, and are Asherah”’; he cut down and burned the image
referred to in the cuneiform tablets. The tera- (v 13). The Israelite king Ahab, however, fol-
phim which Rachel stole from Laban could be lowed after idols (21:26; cf. 16:30—33).
hidden in her camel’s saddlebag (Gn 31:34). It Hezekiah destroyed the high places, broke
seems, however, that in the time of David such down the pillars, and cut down the Asherah
idols were larger, for when Saul’s men came .(% Kgs 18:4; 2 Chr 31:1). He also put an end toa
to kill David, Michal, David’s wife and the strange cult that illustrates the insidious na-
daughter of Saul, helped David to escape and ture of idolatry. The bronze serpent which Mo-
then took such an image and placed it in a bed ses lifted up on a pole to save the Israelites
to make the men think that David was sick (1 from death by snakebite (Nm 21:9; cf. Jn 3:14)
Sm 19:11-17). had been preserved until the time of Hezekiah.
The prohibition of idolatry is explicitly It had been given the name Nuhushtan, and
stated in the second commandment (Ex 20:4,5; people venerated it and burned incense to it,
Dt 5:8,9): “You shall not make for yourself a so Hezekiah destroyed it (2 Kgs 18:4) because
graven image, or any likeness of anything that what had been an instrument for good had
is in heaven above, or that is in the earth be- become a thing of evil.
neath, or that is in the water under the earth; The prophet Isaiah described the making of
you shall not bow down to them or serve an idol in human form (Is 40:19,20; 44:9—-17).
them” (cf. Ex 34:17; Lv 19:4; 26:1; Dt 4:15—19; Images were cast in a mold using molten
27:1-5). This commandment is an extension or metal (40:19; 44:10). Statues were forged by
auxiliary of the first, for it seeks to preserve smiths (44:12), carved from wood (vv 13-17),
God’s uniqueness and to protect his glory. The and overlaid with precious metal (40:19).
definition of idolatry was broadened during Small clay images and plaques were also
the time of Samuel, who confronted King Saul molded and fired in a kiln, and statues were
with the charge that ‘‘stubbornness is as iniq- sculptured from stone.
uity and idolatry’ (lit. “teraphim’; 1 Sm The psalmist spoke out against idols and
15:23). In the NT the concept of idolatry was images (96:5; 97:7; 106:34-39) and the helpless-
extended even more; covetousness is equated ness of idols is described in Psalms 115:4—8
with idolatry (Gal 5:20; Col 3:5). and 135:15—17.
Previous to the conquest of Canaan, the The northern and southern kingdoms of Is-
Lord kept warning Israel against marrying rael went into captivity because they forsook
members of the native populace, which he had
ordered Israel to annihilate. This measure was
intended to prevent the weakening of moral
life in Israel (Ex 34:16; Dt 7:3,4). This principle
is again expanded in the NT (cf. 1 Cor 15:33; 2
Cor 6:14). The history of Israel demonstrated
the practicality of the prohibition against such
marriages, for they inevitably led to apostasy.
Perhaps the saddest example is Solomon (1
Kgs rr:1—8). “When Solomon was old his
wives turned away his heart after other gods;
and his heart was not wholly true to the Lord
his God” (v 4).
In the time of the judges there was an infa-
mous case of idol worship (Jgs 17:1—18:31).
The mother of an Ephraimite named Micah
took 200 pieces of silver and had a silversmith
make them into a graven image for her son.
He also had a shrine, an ephod, and teraphim.
He hired a wandering Levite to be his priest,
but men from the tribe of Dan came along and
took the Levite, the image, and all the accou-
terments and set up this idol at Dan and used
it as an object of their worship (18:30,31).
In Scripture the kings of Israel are evalu-
ated on the basis of what they did with respect
to the “high places’’ and idols. Asa removed A lararium (altar for household gods) in an ancient Roman
all the idols his fathers had made (1 Kgs 15:12) home at Pompeii.

IOI5
Idumaea, Idumeans
God and served idols. The Jews were well
aware that idolatry had brought them into
captivity, and during their time in Babylon
they developed an abhorrence to idols which
has characterized Judaism to this very day.
CarRL E. DEVRIES
See GROVE; HIGH PLace; Gops, GODDESSES; CANAAN-
ITE DEITIES AND RELIGION; SIN.
Idumaea, Idumeans. Term derived from
the Greek form of Edom (“red’’). The change
from Edomite to Idumean resulted from the
conquests of Alexander the Great, which made
Greek the common language of the area. The
name was applied to the former country of the
Edomites and to the portion of south Judah
occupied by the descendants of Esau after the
Jews had been deported to Babylon following
the conquest by Nebuchadnezzar in 586 Bc.
The country known as Idumaea in the intertes-
tamental period, had its northern boundary at
Bet-sur (Beth-zur), a few miles north of He-
bron, and included some of the shephelah (low
country) extending down into the former Phi-
listine country (1 Mc 4:15,22,61; 5:65).
The inhabitants of Idumaea were the de-
scendants of Esau, known as Edomites, then
as Nabataeans, and finally as Idumeans. The
ancestors of the Idumeans trace their lineage
to the elder brother of Jacob, Esau, who was
cheated out of his birthright (Gn 27:1—45). This
led to conflict between the children of Israel
and the descendants of Esau throughout the
entire biblical period.
It is not surprising, therefore, that
Edomites rejoiced when the Babylonians con-
quered Israel. The Edomites then occupied the
territory vacated by the Israelites following
the subjugation of the kingdom by the Babylo-
nians after 586 BC.
About 300 Bc Arabian tribes invaded and
took the Edomite capital, forcing the remain-
ing Edomites into the area south of Judah,
which then became known as Idumaea. These
invaders, known as Nabataeans, made Sela or
Petra the center of their caravan trade both
from east and west and north to south. These
desert tradesmen, influenced now by Greek
ideas, fashioned the bowllike “crater” at Petra
into a fantastic city with a concentration
of rock-hewn temples, tombs, and buildings
made from the colorful red sandstone of the
area. In addition to creating the world’s most
unique city, the Nabataeans were excellent
traders and farmers. As Josephus says, they
were not warlike but skilled in commerce, art,
and agriculture. The Nabataeans created the
strategic desert stronghold of Avedat, which,
with Petra, commanded the caravan routes.
The Nabataeans flourished from about 100 Bc
to AD 100, when the Romans gradually caused
their demise by changing the caravan routes
from south of the Dead Sea to the area around
Damascus and Palmyra.
The religion of the Idumeans is virtually
unknown. It is quite likely that the Nabataean
deities were those they acquired from the
Edomites. These included the god Dushara,
symbolized by an obelisk, the storm god Ha-
dad, adopted from Syrian neighbors, and Atar-
gatis, the fertility goddess equivalent to the
Greek Artemis. If these were the gods of the
Edomites, the OT writers are surprisingly si-
lent about them, whereas they were quite ar-
ticulate about the gods of other neighbors (cf.
a Chrizg:14):
During the intertestamental period the re-
turning Jews had border scrimmages with the
Idumeans. Hebron was captured by Judas
Maccabeus (1 Mc 5:65). John Hyrcanus com-
pelled the Idumeans to become Jews and sub-
mit to circumcision. The governor of Idumaea,
Antipater, who had been made procurator of
Judea by Julius Caesar, was an Idumean. An-
tipater assigned his son Herod as governor of
Galilee. This paved the way for Herod to be-
come king of Judea, under the title of Herod
the Great. With the conquest of Judea by the
Romans, first in AD 70, and later in AD 135, Idu-
maea disappears from history. Only in recent
years have archaeologists begun to uncover
some of the secrets of the Idumeans and of the
Nabataeans, their conquerors.
See EpoM, EpoMITES; JUDAISM.
the
Iezer, lezerites. Contractions of Abiezer
and Abiezrite, the names of Gilead’s son and
that son’s descendants (Nm 26:30).
See ABIEZER #1.
Igal. 1. Joseph’s son from Issachar’s tribe
and one of the 12 spies sent by Moses to search
out Canaan (Nm 13:7).
2. Nathan’s son and one of David’s mighty
men (2 Sm 23:36). In 1 Chronicles 11:38 he is
called Joel, Nathan’s brother (in Hebrew, only
one letter different from Igal).
3. Shemaiah’s son and a descendant of King
David through King Jehoiachin (1 Chr 3:22,
KJV Igeal).
Igdaliah. Hanan’s father. Hanan’s sons had
a room adjacent to the temple during Josiah’s
reign (Jer 35:4).
Igeal. xuv spelling of Igal, Shemaiah’s son,
in 1 Chronicles 3:22.
See IGAL #3.
1016

lim. 1. KJv rendering of Iyim, a shortened
form of Iye-abarim, in Numbers 33:45.
See IYE-ABARIM, IyIM.
2. Town near Edom in the southern por-
tion of the land assigned to Judah’s tribe for
an inheritance (Jos 15:29). Its exact location is
unknown.
Ije-abarim. kv spelling of Iye-abarim, one
of Israel’s stopping places in the wilderness, in
Numbers 21:11 and 33:44.
See IYE-ABARIM, [yIM.
Ijon. Town assigned to Naphtali’s tribe in
the extreme north of Palestine. Some identify
it with Tell ed-Dibbon between the Litani
River and Mt Hermon, but this is disputed.
Ijon was one of the towns taken by Ben-hadad
of Damascus during Baasha’s reign (c. goo BC;
1 Kgs 15:20; 2 Chr 16:4). Tiglath-pileser III of
Assyria captured the town and deported its
people during Pekah’s reign (c. 733 Bc; 2 Kgs
15:29).
Ikkesh. Man from Tekoa whose son Ira was
one of David’s mighty men (2 Sm 23:26; 1 Chr
11:28), and head of a division of 24,000 men
during the 6th month of the year (1 Chr 27:9).
Ilai. Alternate name for Zalmon, a re-
nowned warrior, in 1 Chronicles 11:29.
See ZALMON (PERSON).
Illness. See DisEASE; MEDICINE AND MEDICAL
PRACTICE.
Illyricum. Roman province northwest
Macedonia. Although its borders were at times
uncertain, during the height of the Roman Em-
pire (c. AD 117) Illyricum was bounded by the
Adriatic Sea on the west and by the provinces
of Pannonia on the north, Upper Moesia on the
east, and Macedonia on the south. Today Yugo-
slavia and Albania occupy that territory.
Throughout the 4th century Bc the people of
Illyricum warred with the Macedonians, until
the Macedonian ruler Philip II defeated them
in 359 Bc. During the 3rd century Bc their acts
of piracy against Greek and Roman ships led
to a war with Rome that continued on and off
for 60 years (229-168 Bc). After a series of re-
volts and sporadic Roman rule, Illyricum was
officially made a part of the empire in 11 Bc. It
took another 20 years for the people to be fully
integrated into Roman culture.
In 229 Bc the Roman historian Polybius
stated that ‘‘the Illyrians were not the enemies
of this people or that, but were the common
enemies of all.’’ Later Strabo, a 1st-century
Image of God
Greek geographer, was still describing the peo-
ple of Illyricum as savage and rapacious.
The sole NT reference to Illyricum is found
in the apostle Paul’s statement that he had
preached the gospel ‘“‘from Jerusalem and as
far round as Illyricum’”’ (Rom 15:19). Although
Acts does not document a ministry in that re-
_.gion, Paul may have visited Illyricum during
his visit to Macedonia and Achaia just before
returning to Jerusalem (Acts 20:1,2). Paul ex-
pressed a desire to continue his ministry in
Spain, a totally Latin environment (Rom
15:28); in Illyricum he would have had his first
experience in a culture that was more Latin
than Greek.
Image of God. Likeness to God, the most
basic affirmation to be made concerning the
nature of man from a Christian perspective.
Man is unique among the creatures in that he
is like God and therefore able to have commu-
nion and fellowship with God.
Genesis 1:26,27 teaches that God deter-
mined to create man in his own “image” and
“likeness” with dominion over the animal cre-
ation. The two terms used in the creation ac-
count and found also in the NT convey closely
related shades of meaning, but the difference
between them is no longer thought to be theo-
logically significant.
Because Genesis 2:7 states unambiguously
that man became a living creature, the Bible
does not countenance the view that a previ-
ously living creature developed into man, nor
the view that the image of God evolved from a
lower form of life. The moment man became a
living creature, he was the image of God. Both
male and female share this likeness to God
of (Gn 1:27).
Other passages that speak of man’s cre-
ation in the image of God are Genesis 5:1; 9:6;
1 Corinthians 11:7; and James 3:9. Ephesians
4:24 and Colossians 3:10 refer to man’s re-
demptive re-creation, but the passages are
generally regarded as directly relevant for an
understanding of man’s original likeness to
God. Although explicit references to man as
the image of God are comparatively infre-
quent in the Bible, the truth itself underlies
the whole relation between God and man and
is therefore the presupposition of the entire
biblical account.
The affirmation of man as the image of God
in Genesis 1 is not made of any of the other
living creatures. The animals, the fish, and the
birds do not share this privilege. It is disputed
whether the angels are in the image of God,
but certain theologians so view them because
they find the image to reside in moral righ-
teousness. However, there is no explicit bibli-
cal statement to this effect.
IOI7
Image of God
By virtue of his creation from the dust of
the ground, humankind has an obvious kin-
ship with the earth. It is not strange, there-
fore, that the body, both in its constitution
and functions, shows similarities with other
earthly creatures. But man is unique in every
aspect of his existence; for not some part of
man or some faculty of man, but man as
such, man in his integrity, is the image of
God. The biblical concept is not that the im-
age is in man, but that man is the image of
God.
The problem is to understand how human
bodily existence is to be included as an aspect
of the image of God in view of the biblical
teaching on the spirituality and incorporeality
of God (Jn 4:24).
Some argue that man was made in the im-
age of the incarnate Christ, or the Christ who
would in time become incarnate. However,
the need for the incarnation arises only after
the fall into sin and with a view to the
mediatorial office. Therefore in becoming
flesh, Christ is said to have been made in the
likeness of men (Phil 2:7; Heb 2:16,17), and
not the other way round.
Another perspective is afforded by further
reflection on the nature of man. Consideration
of the image of God usually proceeds on the
premise of a distinction between the material
aspect (body) and immaterial aspect (spirit) of
man’s constitution; recent discussions have fo-
cused on the unity and integrity of man. Thus
it is man as a physical-spiritual unity who is
in the image of God as Spirit. This explains
why the same words can be used both of God
and man. God sees and hears as men do, but
men do so in a way appropriate to their consti-
tution as physical-spiritual creatures (with
ears and mouth) and God in a way appropri-
ate to his nature as spiritual and uncreated.
However, as man’s kinship with the earth
is most clearly visible in his body, so the im-
age of God is best seen when man is viewed
from the perspective of his spirituality. Theolo-
gians have sought at this point to enumerate
those aspects of man’s spirituality that define
his humanity and set him apart from the ani-
mal creation. The image of God is then found
to reside in some attribute or combination of
attributes, such as rationality, will, freedom,
responsibility, or the like. Contemporary theo-
logians -prefer not to enumerate attributes,
and the Bible does not set forth the image of
God in this way. Nevertheless, it is the person-
ality of man which separates him from the ani-
mals, and is a reflection of the personality of
God. The animals have their existence from
God, but man has his being in God, and is his
offspring (Acts 17:28,29).
Another major aspect of the doctrine of im-
1018
age of God is developed from Ephesians 4:24
-and Colossians 3:10. These verses describe re-
demption in terms of re-creation in the like-
ness of God, in righteousness, holiness of the
truth, and true knowledge. The argument is
that what holds so prominent a place in the
new creation must also have held a corre-
spondingly prominent place in the original cre-
ation. Without moral integrity, man would
have been created a sinner, or at best, morally
neutral; but he is represented in the Bible as
upright from the beginning.
How the humanity or personality of man,
on the one hand, and the righteousness of
man, on the other, are to be understood in
relation to the image of God is a matter of
disagreement among the major confessional
groupings.
In Roman Catholic theology, man is the im-
age of God by virtue of his humanity as a ra-
tional and free person. His original righteous-
ness does not belong to the image but is
thought of as a supernatural gift, added in or-
der to assist the soul in keeping the lower de-
sires of the flesh in control. Lutherans take the
opposite position—the image resides exclu-
sively in man’s moral excellence and not in his
nature as man. Their appeal is principally to
Ephesians 4:24 and Colossians 3:10. Reformed
theologians locate the image in both the per-
sonality and the holiness of man, and there-
fore distinguish between image in the broader
sense, or personality, and in the narrower
sense, righteousness. These are not two differ-
ent images, but a single one in which the
broader sense is inclusive of the narrower.
The classic Socinian and Remonstrant Ar-
minian theologians (17th century) presented a
quite different conception, arguing that the im-
age resides exclusively in the dominion with
which man was invested at his creation. Gene-
sis 1:26, the basic proof text for the image of
God, was thought to define the nature of the
image. This view, however, is difficult to rec-
oncile with Genesis 9:6; Ephesians 4:24; and
Colossians 3:10, and the breadth of the concep-
tion suggested by biblical language. Most theo-
logians would therefore include dominion as
an aspect of the image, or as a consequence
arising from man’s constitution as the image
of God.
Basic confessional differences are also re-
flected in the way the fall into sin is seen to
affect the image. In Roman Catholic thought,
the fall involves the loss of the superadded gift
of original righteousness but leaves the image
unimpaired. If the image were totally cor-
rupted there would no longer be left a man to
redeem. On the other side, the Lutherans who
find the image exclusively in man’s moral in-
tegrity see the image as wholly destroyed by
é
 Image of God

the fall. Re-creation of the image in’ knowl- changed for the image of the heavenly (1 Cor
edge, righteousness, and holiness presupposes 15:49).
its previous total loss. Modern theologians view these classic con-
Using the distinction between image in the fessional conceptions as too static. Their criti-
broader and narrower senses, the Reformed cism is similar to that made of the historic
hold that with respect to moral integrity, the doctrine of the Bible as the Word of God. Just
image of God is totally destroyed. In the as revelation is no longer thought of as given
broader sense, however, the image of God is ahd present in history, but rather as occurring
corrupted and barely visible, but it is not de- or taking place, so the image of God does not
stroyed. Passages like Genesis 9:6; 1 Corinthi- exist as a given entity, nor can it be possessed.
ans 11:7; and James 3:9 refer to man even after The image of God is located in the continuing
the fall as the image of God. relation sustained between God and man.
The Reformed argue that the doctrine of to- Karl Barth (1886-1968) is a good example of
tal depravity does not require the total de- this view. Barth took his cue from the fact that
struction of the image of God. Depravity is a man is created male and female (Gn 1:26,27)
moral condition affecting man in every part of and argued that the image is found in the rela-
his constitution, but only as a responsible per- tionship that is sustained between them, com-
son is man a sinner. The fact that man, pre- parable to the relationship sustained among
cisely as the image of God, is a sinner, only the persons of the Trinity. Between man and
serves to compound his guilt. Even in perdi- God there is not an analogy of being but an
tion where all grace is absent, man is still a analogy of relation.
person, and his personality is an indispensible The full significance of this view emerges
condition of his suffering. only with the further observation that the
Just as the fall into sin was not without its male-female relation is specifically the rela-
effect on the image of God, so also redemption tion between Christ and his church, and that
from sin affects man as the image of God. Jesus is the image of God. As Christ and the
Ephesians and Colossians speak of renewal in church have their existence only in relation to
the image of God the Creator, but other texts one another, so man, since he is the image of
become even more specific in view of the medi- God, has his existence only in relation to God,
atorial office of Christ. that is, in Jesus Christ. All men are men only
Jesus Christ is preeminently the image of in Christ, and their redemption, therefore, is
God (2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:15; Heb 1:3). Frequently given with their creation.
this is understood exclusively as a reference to Although the view of Barth contains fatal
the deity of Christ. To see Christ is to see the liabilities from the perspective of historic
Father (Jn 14:9). However, in the passages cit- Christianity, the introduction of the concept of
ed, it is the incarnate Mediator, the last Adam relationship is suggestive for a deepened un-
who is at least all that God intended the first derstanding of the traditional view. The place
Adam to be. Incarnation means that Jesus is given to moral integrity in the image of God
truly man, and because he is truly man, he is shows that the historic conception was not
truly the image of God. purely static. At the same time, the image
As the last Adam and the Mediator of the could not be described in purely functional
New Covenant, Jesus brings his people into terms since man himself, and not a relation, is
conformity with his own image, the image of the image of God.
the Son of God (Rom 8:29). He who became When Adam surveyed the animals, he
like his brethren, in the likeness of sinful flesh, found no helper suitable for himself (Gn 2:18—
destroys sin in order that his brethren might 23) and so God made a helper for him, bone of
reflect his own glory. They are changed into his bone and flesh of his flesh. The suitable
the same image from glory to glory by the and helpful partner was one like himself. This
Spirit of the Lord (2 Cor 3:18). The believer is created relation underlies the heightened com-
to “put on Christ’’ (Gal 3:27; Rom 13:14; cf. munion of the marriage covenant.
Eph 4:24; Col 3:10, putting on the new man in This account in Genesis 2 is analogous to
the image of God), an action also described as what took place on a grander scale in Gene-
the formation of Christ in man (Gal 4:19). sis 1. On the sixth day God surveyed his cre-
Conformity to the image of Jesus Christ is ation and it was good; but there was no one
achieved through the process of sanctification like him, suitable to be his helper. God made
which is ultimately completed at the resurrec- man (male and female) in his own image to be
tion. Only then is the body changed until it is glorified in him, as woman is both the likeness
fashioned like unto the glorious body of Christ and glory of man (1 Cor 11:7). The likeness
(Phil 3:21). Restoration in the image of Christ between male and female, which underlies the
carries man beyond creation in the image of marriage covenant, is analogous to the like-
God, for the image of the earthly is then ex- ness between man and God, which underlies
101g
Imlah, Imla

their covenant relation of union and commu- The concept of the special presence of God
nion. As man is God’s helper, his vicegerent, goes back to the Garden of Eden, where God
exercising dominion in the earth, so the wife conversed with Adam in the cool of the day.
exercises rule in her sphere of authority in sub- There was, however, a difference of viewpoint,
jection to her husband (Prv 31:10-31; Eph for most of the pre-Isaiah expressions are seen
5:22,33). The relation of God to Israel and of from the perspective of God. It was God’s as-
Christ to his church is sometimes set forth as a surance, “I am with you,” not man’s recogni-
marriage in the Bible. tion that ‘‘God is with us.”” God manifested his
The infrequent explicit reference to the im- presence in many ways: by the pillar of cloud
age of God in Scripture is explained by the and of fire (Ex 13:21,22), and by the symbolism
fact that man is made in the image of God for of the tabernacle and the temple, especially
the sake of covenant relation with God, and the Holy of Holies and the ark of the covenant.
therefore the concept of image is taken up im- But most of this was remote, impersonal, or
mediately into the covenant relation which is inaccessible, and when the glory of the Lord
fully expounded in both the OT and NT. was seen in those buildings it produced such
The revelation concerning the image of God a sense of overwhelming awe that the normal
in Genesis 1 does not serve as a springboard ministration could not be conducted (Ex
for an analysis of the structure of man in inde- 40:34-38; 2 Chr 5:13,14; 7:1-3). God assured Is-
pendence from revelation as sometimes hap- rael of his presence when they confronted bat-
pened in the traditional formulations. Rather, tle (Dt 20:1; 31:6; Jos 1:9) and promised to
it leads directly to the covenant, and therefore be with them when they were fearful and
to the biblical understanding of the point of weak (Is 41:10) and when they were facing
contact for the persuasive proclamation of the great trial (43:2). In Isaiah 7:14 the emphasis
gospel. Men are to be addressed as the image- changes from “I with you” to “He with us.”
bearers of God. They are not addressed as ra- In focusing on the birth of Immanuel Jesus,
tional animals, but as sinners apostate from there has been some neglect of the historical
the covenant of creation. They are now invited fulfillment that occurred in the time of Ahaz.
to return to the Father by the blood of the Ahaz was the son of a good king, Jotham (2
New Covenant in Jesus. Their redemption in- Chr 27:2), and the grandson of another godly
volves conformity to the image of Christ and ruler, Uzziah (2 Chr 26:4), but his reign was
therefore the restoration of the image of God. marked by apostasy and idolatry. He made
They have communion with God through “molten images” for the baals, offered incense
union with Christ. in the Hinnom Valley, and even burned his
NORMAN SHEPHERD sons as an offering (2 Chr 28:2—4). Because of
See Man, DOCTRINE OF; WOMAN, DOCTRINE OF. this the Lord gave him into the hand of Rezin,
king of Syria, and of Pekah, king of Israel. The
Bibliography. G.C. Berkouwer, Man: The Image of God;
D. Cairns, The Image of God in Man; G.A. Clark, A Christian
Edomites also invaded Judah and the Philis-
View of Men and Things; J.G. Machen, The Christian View of tines attacked the Shephelah and the Negeb
Man; J.A. Motyer, The Image of God, Law and Liberty in and took several cities (2 Chr 28:17,18).
Biblical Ethics; J. Orr, God’s Image in Man; H.W. Robinson, Ahaz appealed to Tiglath-pileser III of As-
The Christian Doctrine of Man.
syria (745-727 BC) for help against Israel and
Syria. Tiglath-pileser accepted tribute from
Imlah, Imla. Father of Michaiah, a prophet Ahaz, but attacked him instead of helping
during King Ahab’s reign, whom the king de- him (2 Chr 28:21,22). When he went to Damas-
spised for speaking the truth (1 Kgs 22:8,9; 2 cus to meet the Assyrian king, Ahaz saw an
Chr 18:8, KJv Imlah). altar, upon which he made offerings to the
gods of Syria (2 Chr 28:23). He had a replica
Immanuel. Hebrew masculine name which of this made and placed in the temple of Jeru-
means “God with us.” It appears only twice in salem (2 Kgs 16:10-12). The prophet Isaiah
the OT (Is 7:14; 8:8) and once in the NT (Mt was directed to accost Ahaz at the end of the
1:23), where it is transliterated “Emmanuel.” conduit of the upper pool. God’s message to
In the OT the name was given to a child born the king was to “take heart,” for the attack-
in the time of Ahaz as a sign to the king that ing kings would fall (Is 7:7—9). Isaiah directed
Judah would receive relief from attacks by Is- Ahaz to ask the Lord for a sign of this, but
rael and Syria. The name symbolized the fact the king demurred, having a sudden attack of
that God would demonstrate his presence piety (v 12).
with his people in this deliverance. Upon this refusal the Lord gave to Ahaz a
The larger application, on which there is sign: a young woman would conceive and bear
general agreement, is that this is a prophecy a son and call his name Immanuel (Is 7:14).
of the birth of the incarnate God, Jesus the That son would eat curds and wild honey and
Messiah, as shown in Matthew. before he could distinguish good from evil the
1020

two kings would be removed and the king of
Assyria would devastate their lands. The people
would be taken away captive, so that the land
would lie desolate and uncultivated. A man
would have a cow to provide milk for curds
and wild honey would be gathered from the
tangle of brush in the untended land.
The identity of this woman and child in Isa-
iah’s time is uncertain. It has been proposed
that the woman was Abijah, the wife of Ahaz,
and that their son, Hezekiah, was this Imman-
uel. This is not demonstrable and it seems in-
appropriate that a man like Ahaz should be
the father of Immanuel.
It has also been suggested that the wife of
Isaiah was the mother of Immanuel. Isaiah
7:14 tells of the prospective birth of Imman-
uel; 8:3 tells of the conception and birth
of Isaiah’s son, whose name, Maher-shalal-
hashbaz (‘‘the spoil speeds, the prey hastes’’)
is related to the prediction of the fall of Ju-
dah’s enemies, for before the child
learn to talk the lands of Syria and Israel
would be taken by the king of Assyria (v 4).
Immanuel
A magical figure from Assyria,
the country that would devas-
tate Judah before Imman-
uel was old enough to distin-
guish good from evil. The fig-
ure is a detail from a palace
relief of Ashurnasirpal II.
Isaiah’s statement that he and his children
were ‘‘signs and portents in Israel from the
Lord”’ (v 18) enhances the view that it was his
son who was also named Immanuel.
The Lord then directed a message to Im-
manuel (Is 8:8—10). Because the people had re-
fused the gracious invitation of the Lord, the
Assyrians would scourge and fill the land of
Immanuel. The plotting and plans of the people
would come to nothing, for “God is with us”
Cimmanu ’el). This is a play on words, using
the name Immanuel to express the truth of the
Lord’s presence.
Although there may be varying perceptions
as to the OT application, the ultimate mean-
ing of the passage is clear. The rock of offense
and the stone of stumbling (Is 8:14,15) could be
none other than Immanuel Jesus, God Incar-
nate (Mt 1:23; Rom 9:32,33; 1 Pt-2:8,9).
In the fulness of time God sent forth his
son; more than 700 years after Ahaz, Jesus was
would born and here all ambiguities fade away. His
mother was a virgin from Nazareth named
Mary (Miriam), betrothed to a solid citizen
1021
Immer
named Joseph. Matthew 1:23 cites Isaiah 7:14
as being fulfilled in the birth of Jesus. The
Scripture is very explicit in stating that Mary
had no sexual contact with her husband prior
to the birth of Jesus (Mt 1:25). The same preci-
sion is seen in the Gospel of Luke. When the
announcement of this child’s conception was
made to Mary, she asked, “How shall this be,
since I have no husband?” (Lk 1:34; cf. NIV).
The angelic messenger explained that this con-
ception would be brought about by the com-
ing of the Holy Spirit upon her and by the
overshadowing power of the Most High (Lk
1:35). For this reason the child would be not
only Jesus and Immanuel but he would be
called Holy, the Son of God, God manifest in
the flesh (Jn 1:18); the child would be unique,
being both God and man.
There were great distinctions between the
Immanuel of Isaiah’s day and Immanuel the
son of Mary. The first was a type; the other, the
antitype; the first was the shadow, the other
the Reality. The one symbolized deliverance
from foreign oppression, the second was the
Deliverer from the oppressor. The first repre-
sented God’s presence for but a few years; the
second Immanuel is the son who abides for
ever.
The concept of “God with us” was often reit-
erated by Jesus. He told his disciples that
where two or three gathered in his name he
would be present (Mt 18:20). Before his ascen-
sion, he assured them that he would be with
them until the end of the age (28:20).
He spoke also of the promise of the Holy
Spirit, who “dwells with you, and will be in
you” (Jn 14:17), who will abide with them for-
ever (v 16). The “God with us” indwelling is
spoken of in Colossians 1:27, “Christ in you,
the hope of glory.” In the consummation of all
things, as shown to the apostle John, the Lord
said: “Behold, the dwelling of God is with
men. He will dwell with them, and they shall
be his people, and God himself will be with
them” (Rv 21:3).
There is a corollary to the principles of
“God with us” and “I with you”; like the third
side of an equilateral triangle the Lord asserts
the assurance, “you (they) with Me (Him).” Je-
sus chose his disciples that they might be with
him (Mk 3:14). When he foretold his departure
he told them he was going to prepare a place
for them so that they could be where he is (Jn
14:3). In another place the eternal summation
is given: “So we shall always be with the
Lord” (1 Thes 4:17). CarL E. DEVRIES
See MESSIAH; GoD, NAMES OF.
Immer (Person). Priest in the time of David.
He became the ancestral head of a house of
1022
priests: Pashhur, the priest who had Jeremiah
arrested and placed in stocks, was a descen-
dant of Immer (Jer 20:1). There were 1052
priests of the sub-clan of Immer who returned
from the exile (1 Chr 9:12; Ezr 2:37; Neh 7:40);
128 priests,under Amashsai (a descendant of
Immer) helped rebuild the temple (Neh 11:13).
Immer (Place). Place in Babylon. The Jews
who returned from Immer had lost the record
of their ancestry and could not prove their Jew-
ish lineage (Ezr 2:59; Neh 7:61). Its site is un-
known.
Imna. Heler’s son from Asher’s tribe (1 Chr
7:35):
Imnah. 1. Asher’s son (Gn 46:17; KJv Jim-
nah; 1 Chr 7:30) and founder of the Imnite fam-
ily (Nm 26:44; KJv Jimna, Jimnites). .
2. Levite and Kore’s father. Kore was a tem-
ple assistant during King Hezekiah’s reign
(2 Chr 31:14).
Imnite. Descendant of Imnah from Asher’s
tribe (Nm 26:44).
See IMNAH #1.
Impalement. Driving of a pointed stake
into a human body. It was apparently prac-
ticed in ancient Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia,
Persia, and possibly also in Israel. There are,
however, many problems in understanding
the exact nature of impalement and what it
means in individual OT passages.
It is not always clear from documents writ-
ten in Greek whether impalement or crucifix-
ion is being described since the same Greek
word could refer to either procedure. (In cruci-
fixion the body is fastened to a stake rather
than being punctured by it.)
Nor is it always clear whether the impale-
ment is done to a living body or to a corpse.
Probably both types of impalement were em-
ployed, the former as a method of execution,
the latter as a means of exposing the corpse to
the elements, beasts, and general disgrace.
Furthermore, it is not clear to what extent
“hanging” in the OT refers to impalement.
Perhaps the fact that it is typically used with
the preposition “on” (rather than “from”)
indicates that impalement of some kind is
intended.
Some light is shed on the nature of impale-
ment through Mesopotamian sources, where
it was apparently a means of execution, in
one case for a woman who has caused her
husband’s death because of another man
(Code of Hammurabi, 153), in another for a
woman performing an abortion on _ herself
 Imprecatory Psalms

(Middle Assyrian Laws, 53). The latter law Jews, Jesus remarked parenthetically, ‘‘scrip-
makes it clear that the woman should be im- ture cannot be broken’”’ (Jn 10:35). The Bible
paled whether or not she lived through the does not contradict itself; the NT cannot be
abortion. The claim of Assyrian kings to have placed against the OT, neither can the psalms
hung captives of war on stakes correlates be in opposition to the Gospels. When the
with the portrayal in Assyrian art of battle Lord declares in the OT, “Vengeance is mine,
scenes where impaled bodies can be seen. The and recompense’”’ (Dt 32:35), the statement is
stake could be pushed up into the chest, with .-twice echoed in the NT (Rom 12:19; Heb
the body resting face down, or between the 10:30).
legs, with the body upright. We must be careful not to make ourselves
Darius’ provision that violators of his de- judges of the Word of God, or to exalt our-
cree should be “struck upon a stake” probably selves to think that we are more fair or more
refers to impalement (Ezr 6:11). If the expres- just than God. Abraham wondered at the pro-
sion “hang on a tree (stake)’’ (Gn 40:19; Dt : spective destruction of the cities of the plain,
21:22; Jos 8:29; 10:26; Est 2:23; as distinct from but the question that he asked, ‘‘Shall not the
the expression describing Ahithophel’s death Judge of all the earth do right?” was rhetori-
in 2 Sm 17:23) refers to impalement, at least cal, for he realized that he was not more just
sometimes it is clear that it is a corpse being than God. The Lord prefaces his judgments
impaled (Jos 10:26). This interpretation also with admonitions and warnings, but there
applies to Deuteronomy 21:22, in which the vic- comes a time when he says, “Enough.’’ One
tim is first put to death and then ‘“‘hung.” The who apologizes for God because God made
point of similarity to the crucifixion of Christ hell for the eternal punishment for the unbe-
(Gal 3:13) is the disgrace involved and not the liever understands neither the enormity of sin
precise form of treatment. Other possible ex- nor the justice of God. Unbalanced emphasis
amples of impalement are found in 2 Samuel on the love of God has been at the expense of
4:12 and 21:6-13. his holiness.
Davin K. HUTTAR Psalm 1og is often singled out, for it has the
See CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT. greatest imprecatory content, and its state-
ments are stronger than other psalms of this
character. Some have suggested that the male-
Imprecatory Psalms. Psalms which contain dictions of this psalm are unworthy of Scrip-
curses (imprecations, maledictions) against en- ture and are expressions of wicked human
emies. These elements do not make up an en- emotions that should not be included in the
tire psalm, but verses of this nature appear in Bible. However, these curses cannot be ex-
more than a dozen (5,17,28,35,40,55,59,70,71,79, plained away on the basis that they are quota-
80,94,129,137,139,140). A number of other psalms tions of human authors; they must be taken as
express the same ideas as future or accom- the Word of God.
plished acts of the Lord. Usually these expres- Historically this psalm has been regarded
sions are couched in the form of a prayer or a as both prophetic and messianic. It was the
wish. They voice the desire that evil may come view of Chrysostom, Jerome, Augustine, and
upon an enemy as judgment or retribution. others. This was also the interpretation of
To the casual reader such statements may Horne, who in his commentary translates the
appear to be at variance with much of the rest imperfect tenses of this psalm as futures, not
of Scripture, especially with the teaching of the subjunctives of our English versions. He
Jesus. The clear injunction of Leviticus 19:17, took his cue for this prophetic interpretation
18 states: “You shall not hate your brother in from Peter’s quotation of verse 8 upon the oc-
your heart, but you shall reason with your casion of choosing a successor for Judas (Acts
neighbor, lest you bear sin because of him. 1:20). The psalm can then seem to fit the expe-
You shall not take vengeance or bear any riences of the life and passion of Jesus, which
grudge against the sons of your own people, changes its tenor completely and in large mea-
but you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I sure removes it from being imprecatory and
am the Lord.” Jesus expanded the concept of makes it predictive.
neighbor to include even the despised Samari- Another passage which has been abhorrent
tan (Lk 10:29-37). In the Sermon on the to many occurs in Psalm 137:8,9, which speaks
Mount, Jesus declared, “Love your enemies of the happiness of those who dash Babylo-
and pray for those who persecute you” (Mt nian children on a rock. Horne took this as
5:44; cf. vv 38-48). This is in harmony with the predictive of what took place when the armies
teaching of the OT, which instructs one to feed of the Medes and Persians conquered the city
a hungry enemy and give water to a thirsty of Babylon in 539 Bc.
one (Prv 25:21,22; cf. Rom 12:20). If one predicates that the expressions in the
In posing a difficult biblical question to the psalms are curses or desires for retribution,

1023
Imputation

they are not out of keeping with the rest of puted for reward (Ps 106:30,31), and evil deeds
Scripture. The prayer of Jeremiah for ven- “were imputed for punishment (Lv 17:3,4).
geance on his persecutors (Jer 11:20) received The Bible sets forth the theological concept
direct affirmative response from the Lord (vv of imputation in three distinct yet related
21-23). The plea of the righteous for justice ways. First, Scripture affirms the imputation
and vindication will be answered speedily (Lk of Adam’s original sin to the entire human
18:1—8). In Revelation those who had been race. In the sovereign plan of God, the first
slain for the Word of God and for their testi- man’s initial act of disobedience was set to the
mony cry out, “How long before thou wilt account of every member of the human fam-
judge and avenge our blood?” (6:10) and they ily. Every person thus participates in the guilt
were heard. David, to whom Psalm tog is at- and penalty of that original sin. Second, the
tributed, was given victory and vengeance sin and guilt of the human race was imputed
over his enemies and he realized that those to Christ, so that although the Savior was not
who were his enemies were also the enemies a sinner, he nevertheless bore the penalty aris-
of God. ing from sin. Finally, the Bible teaches that, as
The argument that the imprecations are a result of his atoning work, Christ’s righteous-
based on God’s justice and not on personal ven- ness is set to the believer’s account. Although
geance is not completely accurate. In Psalm not yet perfectly holy or morally righteous, be-
41:10 after complaining against his enemies lievers nevertheless are justified before the
and his betrayer, the psalmist prays, “Raise me Law of God, and they are “clothed” with the
up, that I may requite them!” Also in Psalm imputed righteousness of Christ.
118:10—12 the writer three times states that he Imputation and Original Sin. The bibli-
is surrounded by enemies but “in the name of cal doctrine of sin necessarily leads to the
the Lord I cut them off!” The personal involve- problem of the imputation of Adam’s sin to his
ment of David is also stated in Psalm 144: posterity. Genesis 3:1-13 describes the en-
“Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my trance of sin into the world, and verses 16—19
hands for war; and my fingers for battle (v 1; cf. detail God’s punishment of Adam and Eve for
2 SM 22:35—43; Ps 18:34,37-42). their disobedience. Although the perspective
Evidently the enemies against whom the here is limited to sin’s consequences for Adam
psalmists prayed had reached the place of and Eve, human experience shows that their
judgment, and the imprecations of the writers sin ages ago has affected the entire race. In
coincided with the judgment of God. Romans 5, Paul the apostle affirmed that just
Car E. DEVRIES as Adam’s act of disobedience brought spiri-
See PSALMS, BooK OF; JUDGMENT; WRATH OF Gop. tual ruin for humankind, so Christ’s obedient
submission to death on the cross brought righ-
teousness and eternal life. When Paul wrote
Imputation. Charging to an account, used that sin came into the world through one man
in the Bible with legal reference to sin and and death through sin, and so death spread to
salvation being recorded by God. The biblical all men because all men sinned (Rom 5:12), he
teaching on imputation represents one of the was not teaching simply that all people sin
principal doctrines of the Christian faith. Al- and die. Rather, he emphasized that the guilt
though the noun form is not found in Scrip- and penalty of Adam’s sin was directly im-
ture, the verb ‘“‘to impute” occurs frequently puted to his descendants, so that all succumb
in the OT and NT. The basic meaning of the to death. Paul reiterates that truth in various
biblical word “impute”’ is, ‘‘to set down in a phrases: “if many died through one man’s tres-
record or a ledger.” In relation to the doctrine pass”’; ‘‘as one man’s trespass led to condemna-
of salvation the word is consistently used in a tion for all’; and “by one man’s disobedience
legal sense. Philemon 18, which affirms that many were made sinners’? (Rom 5:15,18,19).
the apostle Paul assumed the debt of Onesi- The apostle’s declaration in 1 Corinthians
mus, aptly illustrates the predominant theo- 15:22 that “in Adam all die’ further highlights
logical usage of the word: “if he ... owes you the biblical teaching that Adam’s original act
anything, charge that to my account.” of disobedience has been charged to the whole
Hence when Scripture speaks of the imputa- human family.
tion of good or evil, it in no wise suggests that The question remains as to how the human
any change of moral character is involved. race participated in Adam’s transgression. Al-
Scripture does affirm that, from God’s per- though the Bible does not explicitly address
spective, righteousness or sin is charged to an that issue, two theories exist that draw to-
individual’s account. In the broadest sense, gether various strands of biblical teaching. (1)
Scripture teaches that God participates in the As the head and representative of the human
process of imputing (Ps 32:2) as do people (1 race, Adam acted on behalf of all humanity
Sm 22:15). Good deeds were commonly im- (the “federal” theory). (2) The entire race,
1024

body and soul, was genetically present in
Adam (the “realist’’ or “seminal” theory). The
latter theory draws support from Hebrews
7:9,10, which states that Abraham’s descen-
dant Levi paid tithes to King Melchizedek in
the sense that Levi was in Abraham’s loins
when the patriarch centuries earlier presented
tithes to the king.
Imputation and Sacrifice. In terms of the
judicial reckoning of humanity’s sin to Christ,
the Bible does not specifically use the word
“impute.” Nevertheless, the fundamental idea
is plainly present. The imputation of sin to
Christ was typified in the OT sacrificial sys-
tem, where the sins of the offerer were sym-
bolically transferred to the animal victim. The
ritual of the scapegoat on the Day of Atone-
ment (Lv 16:20—22) graphically symbolized the
transfer of human sin and guilt to a divine
substitute. When the high priest placed his
hands on the head of the goat and confessed
the sins of the people, he in effect shifted the
sins of the people onto the animal. “The goat
shall bear all their iniquities upon him to a
solitary land”’ (v 22).
Isaiah 53 is replete with sacrificial imagery,
affirming emphatically that the guilt of hu-
man sin was reckoned to the Servant of the
Lord. ‘Surely he has borne our griefs and car-
ried our sorrows’; “the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all’; and “he bore the sins of
many” (vv 4,6,12).
The apostle Paul developed at length the
theme that Christ on the cross bore the punish-
ment due to believers’ sins. Thus he wrote that
God ‘‘made him to be sin who knew no sin”
(2 Cor 5:21; cf. Heb 9:28). Similarly he depicted
Christ as bearing the curse of the Mosaic law
(Gal 3:13). Finally, reflecting on Isaiah 53, the
apostle Peter affirmed that Christ “himself
bore our sins in his body on the tree” (1 Pt
2:24). The idea that the guilt of the entire
world was charged to the account of the sin-
less Savior largely explains Christ’s impas-
sioned cry on the cross, ‘““My God, my God,
why hast thou forsaken me?” (Mt 27:46).
Imputed Righteousness. The imputation
motif is also employed, in the sense of Christ’s
righteousness being credited to believers. An
incident in the life of the patriarch Abraham
illustrates the imputation of righteousness on
the basis of faith. After God had promised ma-
terial and spiritual blessing to Abraham, Gene-
sis 15:6 states that he “believed the Lord; and
he [God] reckoned it to him as righteousness.”
The Bible teaches that no person naturally
possesses the standard of righteousness de-
manded by God (Ps 130:3; Is 64:6; Rom 3:10).
Yet, in his gracious plan of salvation, God him-
self supplies the righteousness to satisfy his
holy character (Is 45:24; 54:17; Hos 10:12). That
1025
Incarnation
is, as a person accepts by faith the work of
Christ in satisfying the demands of God’s Law,
God imputes or reckons Christ’s righteousness
to the believer. The imputation of divine righ-
teousness to the believer constitutes a major
theme of Paul’s letter to the Romans (3:21-
5:21). Thus the apostle speaks of the blessed-
‘ness of a person “‘to whom God reckons righ-
teousness apart from works“ (4:6). Moreover,
the imputation of Christ’s righteousness re-
sults in justification before God’s law court
(5:18). The merits of Christ’s death imputed to
the sinner are the basis for acquittal by the
holy God. The apostle triumphantly affirmed
that through his sacrifice, Christ is ‘‘“made our
wisdom, our righteousness and sanctification
and redemption” (1 Cor 1:30). The same
thought occupied Paul’s mind when he prayed
that he would “be found in him, not having a
righteousness of my own, based on the law,
but that which is through faith in Christ,
the righteousness from God that depends on
faith” (Phil 3:9). The phrase “‘the righteousness
of God” occurs nine times in Paul’s writings.
The apostle was gripped by the profound real-
ity that God imputes objective righteousness
through faith in Christ’s atoning work.
Thus the Bible teaches that the ruinous ef-
fects of the imputation of Adam’s sin are effec-
tively reversed for those who believe in Christ.
The imputation of human sin to Christ makes
possible the imputation of his righteousness to
believers. By God’s judicial act of accounting
righteousness to the unworthy, strangers and
aliens share with Abraham the privileged sta-
tus of “friend of God” (Jas 2:23).
Bruce A. DEMAREST
See SIN; ADAM (PERSON); CHRISTOLOGY; FALL OF
Man.
Imrah. Zophah’s son, a chief of Asher’s tribe
(1 Chr 7:36).
Imri. 1. Ancestor of Uthai, one of the post-
exilic Jews of Judah’s tribe (1 Chr 9:4). In the
genealogy of Nehemiah 11:4, he is apparently
called Amariah.
2. Father of Zaccur, a rebuilder of the Jeru-
salem wall (Neh 3:2).
Incantation. Chant used in magic.
See Macic.
Incarnation. Literally, ‘‘in flesh’; theologi-
cally, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth
God took on human flesh and became the di-
vine God-man. Historically, the doctrine of
incarnation was central in the christological
debates of patristic times and has recently
come to the fore again in academic circles.
 Incarnation
Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’
identity.
New Testament Evidence. The Synoptic
Gospels. The Gospel of Mark has no account
of the incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiah-
ship more than his deity. As a result, some
believe that it represents an earlier stage in
the development of the church’s theology,
before the doctrine of the incarnation had
evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: in-
carnation passages like the Philippians hymn
(2:6—-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel; and
Mark has a well-developed theology of the two
natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’
humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis
on divinity. Jesus was called the ‘‘beloved
Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and
transfiguration (1:11; 9:7); demons called him
divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion
(15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36) indicate
his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he
was charged with claiming the title, “Son of
the Blessed”’ (vv 61,62). Thus, though the incar-
nation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it
is implicitly affirmed.
Matthew and Luke are openly incarna-
tional. The birth narratives, of course, stress
the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Je-
sus’ royal messiahship and Luke, the divine
witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel
is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ
as Savior, or, more precisely, on salvation-his-
tory. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ hu-
manity, he emphasizes his lordship (23:6—10)
and divine sonship. The incarnation thus be-
comes the means whereby the divine becomes
human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14;
28:18—20). Luke shows the greatest interest of
the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless,
his Gospel does not stress the human side of
Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus
primarily as the divine Savior within history
(2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic
office and divine nature, showing that the in-
‘The Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, the town where Je-
sus was born.
1026
carnate Son of God suffered and was exalted
“in order to bring humankind to God.
John's Writings. The apostle John’s doc-
trine of incarnation is more explicit than any
of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-
man status but also his preexistent “‘glory’’ (Jn
1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the one-
ness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29,
30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I Am” (a major
title for Jesus, taken from the OT title for the
one true God and probably signifying God’s
personal name “Yahweh”’) came to reveal God
to his people (Jn 1:4,5,14,18). Yet John also has
the most balanced presentation of the incarna-
tion. The divine Logos or Word (7:1—18) is the
exemplar of perfect humanity (4:7,31; 11:35)
who “became flesh”’ (1:14) to enlighten people
(vv 5,9) and generate in them “eternal life”
(3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).
Acts. Many argue that the Book of Acts
does not exhibit an incarnational Christology
but rather is adoptionist, portraying Jesus as
God's appointed or anointed one with no hint
of divine overtones (see e.g., 2:22; 10:38). But
such OT titles as ‘“Holy and Righteous One”
(3:13,14; 7:52), ‘Author of life’’ (3:15), and espe-
cially “Lord” (2:36; 16:31; 20:24) have a defi-
nite exalted sense. In Peter’s Pentecost sermon
Jesus is the Lord who has poured out the
Spirit (2:33-36,39). Other passages continue
the same theme of the glorious resurrected
Christ, showing the Christology of Acts as one
of exaltation rather than adoptionism.
Paul's Letters. The apostle Paul presented
the incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and
redemption. In Galatians 4:4,5 the incarnation
(‘born of woman’’) came “in the fullness of
time’’ or at the apex of salvation-history, to
“redeem those who were under the law.” In
the Philippians hymn (2:6—11), the incarnation
is seen in terms of preexistence (‘though he
was in the form of God”), humiliation (‘“emp-
tied... humbled’’), and obedience (‘became
obedient to the point of death” Nass). The goal
of the incarnation was the cross (‘“‘even death
on the cross’’), and its result was Christ’s exal-
tation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theo-
logical statement on the incarnation in the
NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a
refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity
(“did not consider equality with God a thing
to be grasped’’).
Paul described Christ as a second Adam
(Rom 5:12—19; 1 Cor 15:45—47), who brought
humanity a new possibility to attain what
Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the
form of a man, Christ became the redeemer
who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor
5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul’s greatest stress, how-
ever, was that the exalted Christ provides new-
ness of life (Rom 6:4—6; 2 Cor 3:17,18; Col 3:1-
 Incarnation

4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians natures must always remain distinct in the
(1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom person of Christ; they functioned together but
speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to were separate in his being. The Council of
show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “‘full- Chalcedon (aD 451) affirmed the unity of the
ness of God.” The one who always existed as two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chal-
God, through his sacrificial death, became the cedon arose, called Monophysites, who be-
exalted Lord and brought humankind to God lieved in one divine nature in Jesus, who was
(see also the “‘flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3,4; only in a sense human. That movement caused
1 Tm 3:16). serious political and religious divisions, and
Hebrews. The Letter to the Hebrews is the Council of Constantinople (680-681) reaf-
strongly incarnational. The opening hymn firmed Chalcedon and established the ortho-
(1:2b—4) accents Christ’s exalted status as ‘‘the dox incarnation theology.
very stamp” of God’s image, aligning it with In the 8th century, Spain and France were
his work of redemption (‘purification for centers of the “‘adoptionist’”’ controversy. Adop-
sins’’). Christ is superior to the angels (1:4—9), tionism taught that at birth Jesus was human,
yet he became a man in order to suffer for but at his baptism he underwent a “second
human salvation (2:9; 5:7—9). Once more the birth” and was ‘‘adopted” as Son of God. It
incarnation is aligned with sinful human- was condemned in a series of synods and
kind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of He- never gained many adherents until modern
brews is to show Christ’s incomparable superi- times. During the scholastic age Peter Lom-
ority to the OT’s sacrifices, and at the same bard (1095?—1160) advocated what became
time to stress his salvific work. His real temp- known as “nihilism.” The incarnation suppos-
tation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinless- edly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’
ness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for deity, but his human nature was both insub-
human sin. The incarnation was Christ’s path stantial and unessential. That view likewise
to final, once-for-all atonement and victory was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159—
over sin (7:28; 9:26). 81). Another debate at that time centered on
Historical Development. The first group the relationship between the fall and the incar-
to challenge the traditional doctrine of the in- nation. Thomas Aquinas (1224-74) concluded
carnation was the Gnostics, who in the 2nd that there was a cause-effect connection; the
century denied that Jesus was truly human. incarnation was necessitated by sin rather
Their Greek belief that the physical creation than predestined apart from the fall.
was evil led them to deny the incarnation. The Roman Catholic Church and the Prot-
They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual be- estant reformers follow basically the same or-
ing who merely appeared human. The theolo- thodox teaching about the incarnation. The
gian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic conflict in the Reformation centered more on
teachers, also accepted a docetic interpreta- soteriology (doctrine of salvation). Several ab-
tion of Christ (his humanity was only appar- errant antitrinitarian movements took advan-
ent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an anti- tage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical au-
dote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity thority, however. Michael Servetus (1511~—53)
in his day: After his excommunication in AD taught a pantheistic view of the incarnation,
144, Marcion founded his own:church, and his focused on the divine Spirit becoming mani-
views were widely disseminated in the next fest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the
two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead,
christological heresy, the orthodox churches nor is it fundamentally different from a ‘‘di-
unified their doctrine. vine spark” in every person. At the same time
The next challenge to the orthodox view Laelius Socinus (1525-62) and his nephew,
came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Faustus Socinus (1539-1604), taught a unitar-
Nestorian controversies in the 3rd and 4th cen- ian system. The incarnation was not a trans-
turies. Arianism held that the incarnation was ferral of the divine essence, but a communica-
total, so that Christ the ‘‘Logos’”’ was no longer tion of divine authority and revelation. Christ
fully God. At the same time he was not fully thus did not die as an atonement, but as a
human, so Christ was someone between two moral example. Both Servetus and Socinian-
natures. The Council of Nicaea (AD 325) af- ism were condemned by Catholics and Protes-
firmed that Jesus was indeed both God and tants alike.
man. A further question soon arose, however, In the 17th and 18th centuries ‘‘kenoticism”
as to the relation between his two natures. (from Greek for ‘“‘empty’’) taught that in the
Apollinarius (310?—390?) taught that only the incarnation the Logos totally ‘““emptied him-
body of Jesus was human; his soul was ab- self’ (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That
sorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nes- doctrine was the final step of a dialogue from
torius (after 381-451) taught that the two the scholastic period, about the exact commu-
1027
Incense
nication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his
human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the
man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The
kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully
human and that his divine nature was quies-
cent until after the ascension. His miraculous
powers were external, given by the Spirit.
Against that view the majority of theologians
argued that Jesus was at all times both God
and man, and that in Philippians 2:6—8 Jesus
did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he
still exhibited the “form of God’’) but rather
the majesty associated with deity.
The rgth and 2oth centuries have given rise
to a view that the incarnation was a “myth,” a
pictorial way of describing how God spoke
through Jesus. The virgin birth was not histori-
cal, nor did any of the supernatural events of
the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories
in the Gospels were concoctions of the later
church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the
movement. The Gospels, however, have
strong a flavor of accurate history for such a
view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).
Application. Recent incarnational theol-
ogy has sometimes had difficulty balancing its
understanding of Christ’s humanity and deity.
Some theologians have given too much empha-
sis to his manhood, with the result that his
atoning work is neglected. He then becomes
an example of God’s gracious dealing with hu-
manity. Such theological imbalance appears
in those who have reacted too strongly to the
“demythologizing’’ movement, stressing the
Jesus of history to the extent that he has be-
come little more than an object of rational
thought.
On the other hand, some modern theology
focuses only on Christ’s divinity. The Bultman-
nian (after Rudolf Bultmann) school has sepa-
rated the “Christ of faith” from the ‘Jesus of
history,’ making him a hero in the Greek
style. Some evangelicals make a similar error
by removing Jesus’ teachings from the real
world of history and placing them in a subjec-
tive realm of religious experience. Jesus thus
becomes a vague object of religious devotion
having no contact with the real world.
Another group has interpreted the biblical
image of the church as the “body of Christ” to
mean that the church somehow continues the
incarnation on earth. The NT does not teach
that idea, however; it is based on a metaphor
rather than on explicit biblical doctrine. More-
over, such an application of the theme can mis-
lead the church to assume more divine author-
ity for itself than it actually possesses.
Conclusion. The NT teaching on the incar-
nation balances the humanity and divinity of
Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any
theological system, for both are absolutely nec-
essary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the
incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human be-
ing. As God in human flesh, he suffered the
divine penalty for sin as an innocent substi-
tute. Being both God and a man, Jesus simulta-
neously revealed God’s will for human life and
reconciled sinful people to God through his
own perfect life and death. Because of the in-
carnation, therefore, those who believe in
Christ have peace with God and new life from
God.
GRANT R. OSBORNE
See CHRISTOLOGY; JESUS CHRIST, LIFE AND TEACH-
ING OF; VIRGIN BIRTH OF JESUS; GENEALOGY OF JESUS
CHRIST.
Bibliography. N. Anderson, The Mystery of the Incarna-
tion; D.M. Baillie, God Was in Christ; H.E. Brunner, The
Mediator; O. Cullmann, The Christology of the NT; J. Mur-
ray, Collected Writings, vol 2; R.L. Ottley, The Doctrine of the
Incarnation, 2 vols; K. Rahner, Theological Investigations,
vol 1; B.B. Warfield, The Person and Work of Christ. —
too
Incense. Perfume or sacrifice which sends
up fragrant smoke to God in order to please
him.
Perfumes. People of every age have loved
fragrant odors. In ancient times, sacrifices in-
cluded sweet smells to make the deity happy.
The aroma was a crucial factor in whether the
god would accept the offering. Therefore, aro-
matic plants and exotic perfumes were pre-
cious for both secular and religious purposes.
Spices and precious oils were valued along
with silver and gold. The Queen of Sheba
brought perfumes to Solomon as a gift (1 Kgs
10:2). Incense was kept in the royal treasury
(2 Kgs 20:13). The price of spices and oils was
extremely inflated because of the difficult
work of extracting the juices, transportation
costs to import them from faraway places, and
high profits for the merchants who sold the
perfumes.
Consequently, lovers sometimes compared
their betrothed to “myrrh,” a ‘‘mountain of
myrrh” and a “hill of frankincense” (Sg 1:13;
4:6). The fragrance of incense set the right
mood (Sg 1:12). Every perfume known to a
merchant burned beside the “couch of Solo-
mon” (Sg 3:6). A bridegroom delighted in the
perfumes of his beloved. She was literally a
“garden” of incense (Sg 4:10—-14). Even a pros-
titute burned incense beside her bed (Ez
23:41). No wonder wise men said that ‘‘fra-
grant oil’’ makes the heart glad and the
“sweetness of friendship’? comforts the soul
(Prv 27:9).
Types of Incense. Frankincense is men-
tioned most often in the Bible. It was im-
ported from India, Somaliland, and Arabia Fe-
lix. Myrrh also came from Arabia Felix. Cinna-
mon was another important fragrance from
1028

Ceylon and China. Nard was a popular per-
fume from Nepal and the Himalayas. Galba-
num, tragacanth, and laudanum all
grown in the mountains of Asia Minor. Galba-
num was the most popular of these three for it
was also found in Turkestan, Persia,
and Crete.
Several kinds of incense were grown in Is-
rael. Henna, saffron, and balsam came from
native aromatic plants. In postexilic times
other plants were introduced to Palestine and
cultivated there: the rose, narcissus, and jas-
mine. Onycha seems to have been produced
from the local fauna, and musk (muskin) may
have been extracted from a gland of the musk
deer.
Incense itself came in many forms. It might
be used as granules placed in a bag hung
around the neck (Sg 1:13). In the main, how-
ever, perfumes were in a liquid form, dis-
solved in olive oil. A good example of this is
the “holy anointing oil’ (Ex 30:31). Such oils
were used to anoint the priests and kings of
Israel. Only holy priests were allowed to pre-
pare and administer them. Raw _ perfumes
were beaten into a fine consistency and sea-
soned with salt to make them holy. Stacte,
onycha, galbanum, and pure frankincense
were mixed in equal proportions, all accord-
ing to the art of the perfumer (Ex 30:22-37).
The perfumes for the sanctuary were donated
as gifts (Nm 7:14—86; Jer 17:26; 41:5) and kept
in the temple (Neh 13:5,9). Josephus described
the incense of his day as a much more compli-
cated compound. He listed 13 ingredients in
the best incense of the Herodian era.
Incense Offering. Archaeology has demon-
strated that incense offerings were common
throughout the ancient Near East from the ear-
liest times of organized worship. Egyptian
paintings and reliefs from the New Kingdom
occasionally show a man holding a censer of
burning incense. Incense seems to have been
used as well in the rituals of Assyria, Babylo-
nia, and Arabia. Canaanite altars found at
Megiddo and Tell Beit Mirsim have horned
limestone altars (roth century Bc) which may
have been designed to hold a bowl of incense.
Hence, it is safe to assume that incense offer-
ings also played some part in the worship of
Israel from the beginning.
Incense offerings seem to have served a mul-
titude of purposes. They may have been used
to drive away evil spirits and thereby sanctify
all the utensils of the place of worship
30:26—29). Undoubtedly the sweet smell of in-
cense provided an antidote to the putrid odor
of the animal sacrifices. Therefore, if God was
to receive a sweet savor and thereby
pleased with an offering, incense was
sary to compensate for the smell of the sacri-
Incense
fices. However, spices were never added to the
flesh of the animals or birds.
were In some instances, incense itself became a
sacrifice. As a supplement to other sacrifices,
frankincense alone was burned. To alleviate a
Syria, plague, Aaron performed a ritual of incense
(Nm 16:16,17). Finally, on the Day of Atone-
-aient, the high priest carried burning incense
and hot coals on a pan (censer) into the Holy
of Holies (Lv 16:12,13). The burning incense
was thought to protect the life of the high
priest, perhaps because the smoke kept him
from seeing the full glory of God.
Frankincense was added to grain, or offer-
ings on the altar of burnt offering (Lv 2:1,2,
15,16; 6:15). It also accompanied the bread of
the Presence (24:7) in two dishes. The bronze
serpent destroyed by Hezekiah in his reform
may have been a profane vessel for incense
burning (2 Kgs 18:4).
Except on the Day of Atonement, the in-
cense was offered on a special altar, the getoret
sammim (Lv 4:7), where it burned morning
and evening and came to be called “‘perpetual
incense’’ (Ex 30:7,8). Probably the altar of gold
in Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 6:20,22) was the
incense altar.
Offering incense required the utmost care,
and unqualified persons who offered it were
condemned (Lv 10:1,2; Nm 16:6—50). Uzziah
the king of Judah became a leper because he
dared to offer incense (2 Chr 26:16—21). The
burning of incense at “high places’ is often
criticized (e.g., 1 Kgs 22:43) either because the
sanctuaries were idolatrous or because their
priests did not take proper care as did the
priesthood in Jerusalem. Prophets who criti-
cized the offering of incense (Is 1:13; 66:3; Jer
6:20) did so to condemn a formalism that was
void of devotion to the God of Israel.
Meaning of Incense. Since incense was
such a precious commodity, incense was a fit-
ting offering to God (Mal 1:11). Incense offer-
ings also provided tangible sense of God’s holi-
ness in which the people could experience
atonement for sin (Nm 16:46,47). The smoke
rising to the sky symbolized the prayers of the
people (Ps 141:2; Lk 1:10; Rv 5:8; 8:3,4). At the
same time the smoke in the temple symbol-
ized the presence of God as it had been por-
trayed by the cloud in the wilderness (Ex
19:18; 33:9,10; Nm 11:25). Together with the ris-
ing sun the smoke provided a powerful symbol
for the glory of the Lord (Is 6:1—7).
(Ex The significance of incense is further en-
hanced by NT allusions. The Christian’s testi-
mony about Christ is paralleled with the offer-
ing of incense (2 Cor 2:14,15). The sweet smell
be of the gospel is contrasted with the smell of
neces- death which leads to death. Likewise, money
from the Philippian Christians came to Paul in
1029
Incest
the spirit of an incense sacrifice (Phil 4:18), a aries of the empire of Ahasuerus are said to
costly expression of love and devotion. Finally, ~have stretched Hoddu to Kush. The term
incense seems to sanctify and accompany the
prayers of the saints into the presence of God
(Rv 5:8; 8:3,4). None of the NT references call
upon the Christian to offer incense, but rather
to learn the devotion and dedication to holi-
ness signified by the burning of this precious
substance.
J. GORDON HaArRIS Greek historian Herodotus in the 5th century
See PLANTS (FRANKINCENSE); TABERNACLE, TEMPLE. BC seems to have been poorly informed about
Incest. Sexual relations between close rela-
tives.
Prohibitions against incest are prominent
in Leviticus 18. Leviticus 20 also addresses the
matter and attaches the death penalty to some
forms of incest named. The assignment of se-
vere penalty and the judgments of dishonor
and perversion clearly mark incest as a grave
offense.
Actual cases in the Bible show incest to be
a fruit of a flawed character. Lot’s daughters
sleep with their drunken father and both be-
come pregnant (Gn 19:30—38). And, in 2 Sam-
uel 13:1-22, the deceitful Amnon shows no
shame in forcing himself upon his sister Ta-
mar. Paul’s strong rebuke in 1 Corinthians
5:1-5 demonstrates that neither the act nor its
wickedness is limited to OT times.
Blood relationship, or consanguinity, is one
ground for declaring sexual contact unlawful.
This applies, for example, to brothers and sis-
ters, parents and children, grandparents and
grandchildren, and some aunts, uncles, nieces,
and nephews.
The relationships denounced in Leviticus 18
are not, however, all based upon blood kin-
ship. A number of them are matters of kinship
through marriage, matters of affinity. In this
connection, sexual relations with in-laws and
certain aunts and uncles are declared incestu-
ous. It should be noted that the in-law rule
could be relaxed in ancient Israel when a wid-
owed sister-in-law was left without a son (Dt
25:5—10).
While there are good genetic reasons to
shun incest among blood relations, the funda-
mental problem with incest is that it strikes at
the soundness of the family. And since the fam-
ily is central to God’s purposes and work on
earth, his judgment on this practice is fierce.
Families simply cannot survive carnal in-
trigue among their members.
Mark T. COPPENGER
India. Eastern land of uncertain geographi-
cal boundaries in Bible times. The only spe-
cific reference to the land of India in the Bible
occurs in Esther 1:1 and 8:9, where the bound-
‘“Hoddu”’ seems to have derived from an Old
Persian word Hindush, which was itself re-
lated to a Sanskrit word Sindhu meaning
“stream,” that is, the Indus River. Inscriptions
from Persia indicate that India was a province
of the Achaemenid Empire (559-330 Bc) and
thus support the biblical statements. Even the
India (Persian Wars, 3.94-106; 4.40,44). There
are some Hebrew legends and traditions that
there were Jews in India in the days of King
Solomon. Some interpreters have suggested
that the river Pishon in Genesis 2:11 in the
land of Havilah may refer to India. Others
have proposed that goods brought from Ophir,
such as sandalwood (almug trees, 1 Kgs 10:11;
2 Chr 2:8), ivory, and apes, were Indian in ori-
gin. Also, some of the items carried by the mer-
chants of Tyre, such as ivory tusks and ebony
(Ez 27:15), may have originated in India.
There are no references to India in the NT
but there are a number of general references
to the land in intertestamental literature and
in the later Jewish writings (e.g., the Targums
on Esther, the Midrashim, and the Talmud). It
was only after the days of Alexander the Great
(d. 323 Bc) that the literary world of Palestine
and Europe begin to record information about
India. From 1 Maccabees 6:37, it would appear
that Seleucid armies used war elephants (pos-
sibly Indian), mounted by Indian drivers in
the 2nd century Bc, and the reference in 8:8
indicates that the Romans compelled Antio-
chus III (223-187 Bc) to surrender. India is of
uncertain value because of textual problems.
There is no other evidence that the Seleucid
domains stretched as far as India. It is known,
however, that the Romans had considerable
trading activity in India via Egypt and the
Red Sea, and this makes the lack of references
in the NT strange. As the Christian centuries
passed, references do appear in both Jewish
and early Christian literature, and it is certain
that early in the Christian era settlements of
Jews and monophysite Christians were found
in India. According to legend it was the apos-
tle Thomas who took the gospel to India and
founded the Mar Thoma Church.
JOHN A. THOMPSON
Industry and Commerce. Economic activ-
ity of a people or a state. Information about
industry and commerce in Bible times comes
from several sources. Within the range of
about 2000 BC to AD 100 there is a variety of
data regarding industry and commerce of the
period. The Bible itself contains significant
material, and there are other records from
1030

Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, and from
Greek and Latin sources. Alongside the writ-
ten material is the archaeological evidence of
commercial activity in the form of documents,
seals, weights, inscribed vessels, coins, and the
like. Some paintings and bas-reliefs from
Egypt, Assyria, Persia, and other lands that
traded with Palestine provide vivid pictorial
data. Some of these sources also provide infor-
mation about industry, and excavations have
brought to light a variety of industrial in-
stallations, such as potters’ kilns, dye vats,
large wine cellars, olive-presses, and smelting
plants. The presence of numbers of loom
weights points to weaving. Molds in the shape
of metal tools or weapons suggest a foundry.
Storehouses point to distribution centers. Col-
lections of ivory pieces and hoards of metal
items or of coins suggest commercial activity
of some kind.
Long before the patriarchal age (c. 1900 BC—
1700 BC) people in the ancient Middle East had
developed commercial and industrial activi-
ties to a considerable extent. Thus one of the
best-preserved pottery kilns found in Palestine
at Tell el Far‘ah belongs to the Early Bronze
Age, perhaps as early as 2800 Bc. The presence
of large quantities of pottery in tombs and of
broken potsherds in the remains of towns indi-
cates the activities of potters, and the use of
both mud bricks and baked bricks in earlier
periods points to brickmakers. Indeed items
made by human hands provide evidence of
some kind of industrial activity in every age.
Further, the discovery of obsidian blades in
Palestine in the Early Bronze Age suggests
Me
One type of olive press.
1031
Industry and Commerce
trade with some distant area like Anatolia,
and at a shorter range, the presence of cowrie
shells in Jericho or copper ore at Tell Abu
Matar (near Beersheba) is evidence of trade
between Jericho and the coast, and between
Beersheba and the region of copper deposits
near the Gulf of Aqaba to the south.
..* Commerce and Industry in the Patriarchal
Age. The patriarchal stories provide some evi-
dence of commercial activity between Pales-
tine and Egypt. The Ishmaelite caravans car-
ried gum, balm, and myrrh to Egypt (Gn
37:25—-28). Later the sons of Jacob bought
grain in Egypt in a time of famine (42-47). The
movement of Abraham to and fro in the land
probably involved the purchase of goods. In
particular, the story of the purchase of the
field of Ephron in Machpelah near Hebron (ch
23) provides significant evidence of what was
evidently a normal act of land transfer. There
is a reference to trading and the purchase of
land in Shechem in the days of Jacob (ch 34).
Some of these practices, as well as numerous
other commercial procedures, are known from
tablet records from several sites in western
Asia during the 2nd millennium sc. There is a
good deal of evidence of caravan trade in these
lands during the same period. An important
tomb painting from Beni Hasan in Egypt de-
picts a typical caravan group from Transjor-
dan in about 1900 Bc. In archaeological terms
the early part of the 2nd millennium was the
Middle Bronze Age. Excavation of cities like
Jericho and the associated cemeteries have
yielded significant pottery finds, which must
have come from potters’ shops. The remains of
tables, stools, and beds suggest woodworkers.
Bronze weapons and ornaments point to work-
ers in metal, and small boxes with bone inlay
suggest the activities of craftsmen. The nar-
row streets in Jericho were lined with houses,
in which the ground floor rooms seem to have
been shops and stores, to judge from the jars
full of grain carbonized in the fire that de-
stroyed the town. The upper story rooms and
their contents collapsed in the fire. Numerous
loom-weights suggest that weaving was car-
ried out, and in some houses there were many
saddle querns and rubbing stones suggesting a
kind of corn-milling activity, and large grain
jars were found in some of these houses.
The Early Israelite Period. The emer-
gence of the Israelites as a recognizable group
in Palestine dates from the 13th century Bc.
The premonarchy period is represented in the
Bible by the books of Joshua, Judges, and 1
and 2 Samuel, and by the Late Bronze Age and
Iron I ages in archaeological terms.
In this period the Philistines played a
prominent part. Apparently their techniques
of metalworking were more advanced than
Industry and Commerce
those of the Israelites, who had to call on their
aid in sharpening tools. ‘‘There was no smith
to be found throughout all the land of Israel;
for the Philistines said, ‘Lest the Hebrews
make themselves swords or spears’”’ (1 Sm
13:19—21). Excavations at the Philistine town
of Tell Qasile on the outskirts of Tel Aviv have
produced small furnaces for working metal,
and it is presumed that there were others else-
where. Yet Israel must have had metalwork-
ers, for the people manufactured their own
weapons most of the time. Certainly by Solo-
mon’s time Israelite craftsmen were able to
manufacture vessels for the temple, albeit
with some help from Phoenician workers (1
Kgs 7:13—50). At least some casting was done
in the Jordan Valley in the clay ground be-
tween Succoth and Zarethan (1 Kgs 7:46).
The period of the judges marked the end of
the Late Bronze Age when Palestine was en-
riched by the import of large quantities of
beautiful painted pottery—much of it of un-
usual shape—from Cyprus and the Aegean
area, bearing witness to commerce and trade
between Palestine and these lands.
One important group of craftsmen in early
Israel were the stonemasons. Finely dressed
masonry became a feature of the days of the
kings (Iron II), but the beginnings of this indus-
try were already in evidence in the premon-
archy period. Excavations also attest the ac-
tivities of weavers because of the numerous
loom-weights, although in many cases weav-
ing may have been a home industry. Evidence
of trade with Egypt comes from a wall paint-
ing in Thebes, dating to the days of Amenho-
tep III (c. 1403-1364), which depicts a ship
bearing large jars, probably filled with grain
or oil, and characteristic of the large Late
Bronze jars of Palestine.
Israel in the Days of the Kings. There isa
good deal of evidence in biblical and nonbibli-
cal records and in archaeological discoveries of
industrial and commercial activity in Israel
during this period. One of the results of war
was the opening of markets in the defeated
lands. Thus Ben-hadad of Damascus had to ac-
cept Israelite workers into the bazaars of Da-
mascus, but in a similar way Ben-hadad’s fa-
ther had opened up bazaars in Samaria when
he overwhelmed Israel (1 Kgs 20:34). It is clear
from the booty removed from Israel by a suc-
cession-of invaders that the people had a spe-
cial liking for manufactured goods (2 Kgs 16:17;
24:13; 25:13-17). Confirmation of this comes
from Assyrian records. Thus Sennacherib (c.
705-681 BC) claims to have removed from Jeru-
salem not merely gold, silver, and precious
stones, but couches, chairs inlaid with ivory,
and other treasures. At least some of these
items were manufactured by local artisans.
1032
There are some interesting references to
~commercial activities in the prophets. In
Amos 8:5,6 the grain merchants are castigated
for their burning desire to see the sabbath
pass so they can go about their grain-selling,
making the ephah small and the shekel great
and dealirig deceitfully with false balances.
Specially prepared ephahs (a measure) and
shekels (a weight) enabled them to profit by
selling a little less than an ephah for a little
more than a shekel of silver. Their balances
were false, and they sold the refuse of the
wheat to the poor (v 6). Isaiah refers to the
land-grabbers (Is 5:8), that is, dealers in real
estate. Jeremiah has references to potters (Jer
18,19) and to those who offered linen for sale
(13:1,2), and gives a detailed account of proce-
dures for the transfer of land from one owner
to another (32:9-12). We have a glimpse into
sea trade in Jonah 1, and a much more compre-
hensive picture of international trade in Eze-
kiel 27, which describes the wide range of com-
modities brought from afar by Phoenician
ships and sold in local markets. No doubt
many of these items found their way into the
hands of Israelite traders. There are also refer-
ences to baskets of fruit, indicating that or-
chards and -vineyards played an important
role in Israel’s life (Jer 24; Am 8:1,2).
The building industry is well represented in
the OT, most prominently in the building of
Solomon’s temple and palaces (1 Kgs 6,7).
There are accounts of building fortified posts
and cities (15:21,22; 16:24; 2 Chr 26:9,10), the
repair of walls and buildings (2 Kgs 22:3-7;
2 Chr 34:9-13; Neh 3:1—32), and the construc-
tion of fine houses for the upper classes (Am
3:15; 5:11). One interesting detail is the use of
a plumb line in building (7:7,8), giving a clue
to some of the techniques used.
A suggestive picture of the number of
craftsmen in Judah comes from the list of cap-
tives taken to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar—
“craftsmen and smiths, one thousand” (2 Kgs
24:14,16).
Excavations have brought to light helpful
material for reconstructing a picture of indus-
try and commerce in the Iron Age. The site of
Tell Beit Mirsim just south of Bethlehem pro-
duced a wide range of pottery types. Several
inscribed potsherds bear traces of the letters
bt I-mlk, “the royal bath,” a “bath” being a
volume measure. Similar measures have been
found in other sites, and there are now enough
for reconstruction of a complete vessel with a
volume of about five gallons (cf. 1 Kgs 7:26; 2
Chr 2:10; Is 5:10; Ez 45:10). A number of
weights were discovered at the same site that
bore no inscription.
Of particular interest industrially are sev-
eral dye vats uncovered at Tell Beit Mirsim.

These were parts of round stone vats some 27
to 35 inches in height and diameter, with a
roughly spherical basin some 12 to 18 inches
in diameter, having a mouth % to % as wide.
Around the rim of the vats a circular groove
was chiselled to catch the dye as it was
stirred, allowing it to run back into the vat
through a connecting hole. These dye vats
were found in various areas of the town. Each
plant was located in the vicinity of a cistern,
since water was necessary for dyeing. Since so
much has been found when only part of the
site has been excavated we may conjecture
that this was a center for dyeing. Contempo-
rary evidence of the dye industry also comes
from other Palestinian sites: Beth-shemesh,
Bethel, and Tell en-Nasbeh.
At Tell Beit Mirsim there were also olive
presses. Two shallow vats of masonry were un-
covered, one about 55 by 31 inches and the
other 62 by 31 inches set 78 inches from the
wall of the room in which they stood. Many
large perforated stones found in the area seem
to have formed elements in the crushing de-
vice. A wooden pole inserted through the holes
in the wall could be moved around in the vat
from its fulcrum point, which was a niche in
the wall of the room some 19% inches above
the floor level of the vat. The device is very
similar to simple olive presses that have been
in use for many centuries.
The production of wine on a large scale for
local use as well as for export seems to have
been a well-developed industry. A fine exam-
ple of a typical winery was excavated by J.B.
Pritchard at ancient Gibeon. This town was a
center for the production and export of wine
in the 8th and 7th centuries Bc. In the course
of excavations in 1959—1960 63 rock-cut cellars
were found where wine could be stored at a
constant temperature of 18°C. The cellars are
bottle-shaped and average about g feet in
depth and 6% feet in diameter at the bottom.
The tops average 26 inches in diameter. In the
same area wine presses were found carved
from rock with channels for leading the grape
juice into the fermentation tanks and settling
basins. The jars in which the wine was stored
had a capacity of g to 10 gallons so that the 63
cellars could have provided space for 25,000
gallons of wine. Smaller jars used for distri-
bution of the wine carried proper names
stamped on their handles. Among these the
place-name “Gibeon” was very common, pro-
viding an example of an archaeological site
that carries its original name. Jar-stoppers
and a funnel for filling jars were also found.
There are some excellent examples of store-
houses where grain and wine were collected
for distribution. The ancient site of Tell She-
ba (near modern Beersheba) had three such
1033
Industry and Commerce
warehouses situated to the right of the city
gate. Each room had three sections, the two
outer ones for storage and a central one for
beasts of burden. A large collection of storage
jars of various shapes and sizes was discov-
ered in the rooms. The city of Megiddo had
many more of these storerooms than Beer-
‘sheba. In addition Megiddo had a large stor-
age silo some 37 feet in diameter at the top,
23 feet in diameter at the bottom, and 23 feet
deep. Its capacity was some 12,800 bushels. At
the sides were two winding stairways leading
down. Chaff and grain were found in the
chinks between the rubble stones of the un-
plastered walls. It is not certain, however,
whether this was a commercial activity or
some tax collecting arrangement.
Excavation has also provided information
about the activities of the stonemasons. An an-
cient quarry apparently was outside the city
walls of Jerusalem in the general area of the
modern Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which
was filled with debris in Roman times. It was
last used in the 7th century Bc and contained
good evidence of the way blocks of stone were
cut by the masons. There are numerous exam-
ples of walls of ancient buildings executed in
well-cut masonry, but none so striking as the
walls of the palace of Omri and Ahab and the
city wall at Samaria. Stonemasons must have
been in constant demand in ancient Palestine,
and some at least did beautiful work.
Palestine During the Postexilic and Helle-
nistic Periods. With the fall of Jerusalem in
586 Bc there was no independent Israelite state
since both Israel and Judah had now ceased to
exist. The land and the remaining people fell
under the control, first of the Babylonians,
then of the Persians, and then of the Hellenis-
tic successors of Alexander the Great. There
are glimpses of industrial and commercial ac-
tivity during these years (586—63 BC).
The Book of Haggai refers to the building of
paneled houses (Hg 1:4) and to the determina-
tion to rebuild the temple. This was com-
pleted in March 515 Be (Ezr 6:14,15), but no
trace of this temple has been found by archae-
ologists. Some years later Nehemiah under-
took the rebuilding of the wall of Jerusalem.
This was done by the cooperative efforts of the
citizens among whom groups like goldsmiths,
perfumers, and merchants are mentioned
(Neh 3). The wall of Nehemiah has been
brought to light in recent years. It was built of
undressed stones, a far cry from the beautiful
masonry of Samaria from the days of the
kings of Israel. The wall was, however, solidly
built and was some g feet thick, but its finish
was rough—as might be expected from the
motley group that erected it so rapidly.
The people in Judah took a long time to
Industry and Commerce
recover from the severe destructions of Nebu-
chadnezzar, so that the Persian period was
not distinguished by great achievements. Yet
there were the ever-present potters to pro-
duce wares of a distinctive type. Tombs from
the Persian period have produced not only
pottery but some fine artistic pieces including
silver bowls and dippers, one of which had a
handle in the shape of an undraped maiden.
Imported red and black figure-ware from
Greece attests trade activity with the Aegean
region, and Palestinian mints began to turn
out coinage following Greek models.
The Hellenistic age in Palestine introduced
changes in many areas of life. Local potters
were influenced by Hellenistic models in
many of their jars, jugs, bowls, lamps, and the
like. More finely prepared clays were used and
the vessels were fired to a higher temperature.
The walls of many of the vessels were thinner,
more delicate, and brittle.
Architecture became increasingly Hellen-
ized. Towns like Marisa, Lachish, Bethzun, Sa-
maria, Shechem, Gezer, and others have
yielded a good range of materials that enable
us to study the work of the artisans, potters,
jewelers, and builders. The presence of foreign
troops in the land brought trade and com-
merce. Imported wine stored in large Rhodian
jars was evidently preferred to the native prod-
uct. The land passed under control of the Ro-
mans when Pompey entered Palestine in 63 BC.
Industry and Commerce in New Testament
Times. It was 37 Bc before the Romans ap-
pointed Herod as king of the whole area of
Palestine. He and his family ruled parts of the
country until near the end of the rst century,
although in the area of Judea, Archelaus (4 Bc—
AD 6) proved incompetent and was replaced by
a Roman procurator. Thereafter, till the time
of the great Jewish revolt in aD 66—7o, a line of
procurators ruled Judea from Caesarea. The
period 37 BC to AD 70 is referred to archaeologi-
cally as the Roman I, or Herodian, period,
which is the period of Jesus and the early
Christian church. We know a good deal about
many aspects of industry and commerce in the
Roman world, and both the literature of the
times and the excavated remains bear elo-
quent testimony to these activities both in Pal-
estine and throughout the Roman world.
The NT makes reference to merchants (Mt
13:45; 25:16; Rv 18:3,11,15, 23), dealers in purple
(Acts 16:14), “money changers” in the temple
(Mt 21:12; Mk 11:15), to various coins used in
commercial transactions or in the payment of
temple taxes, the Jewish coin (the lepton or
“widow's mite,’ Mk 12:42; Lk 21:2). There
are also references to Greek coins like the
drachma (Lk 15:8), the di-drachma (Mt 17:24),
the stater or tetra-drachma (Mt 17:27), Roman
1034
coins like the quadrans (Mt 5:26), the as (Mt
“10:29; Lk 12:6), and the denarius (Lk 10:35).
The “exchangers” of Matthew 25:27 were the
regular bankers of the day. A specialized
group of these operated in the temple pre-
cincts to change money into the acceptable
coinage for the temple. Contemporary Roman
documents indicate major trading activities
by land and sea, although there was a dearth
of good harbors in Palestine. For this reason
an artificial harbor was built at Caesarea.
Clearly goods were imported into Palestine to
judge from foreign pottery vessels which once
contained wine and other commodities.
We have a growing volume of evidence of
the activities of the builders. King Herod em-
barked on ambitious building programs up
and down the land. Among his achievements
was the building of a new temple in Jerusa-
lem. This was erected on a vast platform some
500 yards by 325 yards, made of huge stones,
the largest yet found being 16% feet long by 13
feet wide. Each of these had a distinctive bevel
cut round the outer edge so that the face of the
stone stood out from its border. Recent excava-
tions have shown that at the time of Herod a
bridge (Wilson’s Arch) led across the Tyropean
Valley to the western hill where many fine
houses and other buildings lay. A second arch
(Robinson’s Arch) farther south led to a stair-
way and down to the street level. An impres-
sive roadway skirted the walls and on the
south side of the temple mount fine stairways
led up from a plaza to entrances to the temple
precinct. Remarkable engineering is displayed
in these structures, and it is typical of similar
workmanship in other areas of Palestine.
There are many evidences of beautiful artis-
tic work in floor mosaics and wall-paintings in
Jerusalem, on top of the Masada fortress over-
looking the Dead Sea, and elsewhere.
In the general area of household furnish-
ings excavations have brought to light small
stone tables and other stone vessels, a wide
The remains of Robinson's Arch, the gate near the southwest
corner of the temple platform.

range of pottery, items in iron, bronze, and
bone, stone weights, and coins. Indeed bone-
working was a well-developed craft, the mate-
rial being used for delicate utensils and orna-
ments such as needles, pins, spoons, handles,
awls, spatulas, buttons, and the like.
Important features of Jerusalem were the
water installations, cisterns, reservoirs, ritual
baths, steam baths, sewers, and water con-
duits.
Beautiful workmanship went into burial
places, many of which contained handsome
carved ossuaries.
Presumably there were also many indus-
trial plants for wine-making, dyeing, olive
pressing, weaving, the manufacture of coins,
and for the production of tools and weapons.
Examples of such plants have been found from
this period in various sites in Palestine.
JOHN A. THOMPSON
See TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS; CLOTH, CLOTH MANU-
FACTURING; MONEY AND BANKING.
Bibliography. A. Edersheim, Sketches of Jewish Social
Life in the Days of Christ, pp 182-212; R.J. Forbes, Metallurgy
in Antiquity; H. Hodges, Technology in the Ancient World; M.
Rostovtzeff, The Social and Economic History of the Roman
Empire; A. van Deursen, Illustrated Dictionary of Bible Man-
ners and Customs.
Infirmity. See DISEASE; MEDICINE AND MEDI-
CAL PRACTICE.
Ingathering, Feast of. One of the three
great festivals of Israel, also called the Feast
of Booths, or tabernacles, which celebrated
the completion of the agricultural year (Lv
23:39-43):
See FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL.
Inheritance. Legacy or bequest. Inheri-
tance plays an unusually significant role in
the Scriptures when it is usedto convey theo-
logical truths. As we might expect, however,
these theological applications reflect legal cus-
toms in force during OT and NT times.
Legal and Historical. The Patriarchs. We
learn something of early 2nd-millennium Bc
practices from the patriarchal stories in Gene-
sis. For example, the narrative indicates that
the firstborn could normally expect to receive
the birthright, yet exceptions abound. Ishmael
(Gn 17:15—21), Esau (25:23), and Reuben (49:3,
4) did not receive the birthright. Another item
of special interest is Abraham’s suggestion
that, in the absence of a son, his servant Elie-
zer-might be regarded as the heir (15:2-s);
scholars have found confirmation of this prac-
tice in Hurrian legal documents of the and
millennium.
The Hebrew Nation. According to Deuter-
onomy 21:15—17, Hebrew firstborns were le-
1035
Inheritance
gally entitled to a double portion of the inheri-
tance. Israelite law also made provision for
widows through the practice of levirate mar-
riage (Dt 15:5; see Gn 38:8; Ru 4:5).
According to Numbers 27:1~-11, the daugh-
ters of Zelophehad argued that they should re-
ceive the inheritance since their father had
‘died without sons. Consequently, God decreed
that if a man died without sons, the inheri-
tance should be transferred to his daughter; if
he had no daughter, to his brothers; if he had
no brothers, to his nearest relatives. This par-
ticular incident also illustrates the importance
of preserving tribal possessions: the daughters
of Zelophehad were not allowed to marry out-
side the tribe of Manasseh, for this would
mean transferral of the property to another
tribe (Nm 36).
How highly the Israelites valued their fami-
ly’s inherited possessions may be gathered
from Leviticus 25:25—28. If an individual sold
his land for financial reasons, provision must
be made for a relative to redeem it; if he had
no near relative, he could still purchase it
back at a later time, and even if he could not
afford to do so, the land automatically re-
verted to him in the year of jubilee, when all
debts were canceled (note also Lv 27:14—25).
The New Testament. Apart from the refer-
ence to levirate marriage in Matthew 22:23-33
(Mk 12:18—27; Lk 20:27—40), the NT has little to
say about principles of property transferral
during Roman times.
In the parable of the lost (prodigal) son, the
younger son in the family requested his share
of the inheritance (Lk 15:12). One should also
note that the elder son, who with false piety
looked down on his brother’s behavior, had
not protested when his brother asked for the
inheritance; on the contrary, the elder brother
too, without complaining, received his share—
presumably a double portion.
In another significant passage (Gal 4:1,2)
Paul, seeking to illustrate a theological point,
refers to secular practices. An heir, he tells us,
is subject to guardians and managers during
his childhood, up to the time of his father’s
disposition. The point Paul wants to establish
is clear enough, but the illustration does not
comport with Roman law and unfortunately
scholars have been unable to identify the pre-
cise social custom in view. It may be that Paul
is making reference, in general rather than
strict legal terms, to some practice with which
he and the Galatians were familiar.
Theological. Canaan as Israel's Inheritance.
The conviction that God gave Palestine to the
Israelites for their inheritance serves as a
bridge between the historical and the theologi-
cal data. The historical element lies in the ob-
vious fact that the Promised Land, a physical
Inheritance

entity, was certainly occupied by the Hebrews negative turn, as when the wicked are said to
and distributed among their tribes. Theologi- ~ inherit hell (cf. Jb 27:13). Neither of these fig-
cally, however, the Scriptures speak of this oc- ures is found in the NT.
cupation as a divine gift; in effect, even the We also read in Jewish literature state-
method of distribution was based on the con- ments about inheriting the age to come, the
cept that the land belongs to God (Lv 25:23; kingdom, eternal life; these ideas occur fre-
see Ex? rsir7;J0S'22:277 Ez48:16;9) 1:6): quently in the NT (Mt 19:29; 25:34; Lk 10:25;
The theme goes back to Genesis 12:1-3. 18:18; 1 Cor 6:9,10; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; Ti
God, in choosing Abraham, instructed him to 3:7; Jas 2:5; 1 Pt 3:7-9). Such an inheritance,
move to a new country and promised to make however, belongs only to those who are sancti-
him a great and blessed nation (Heb 11:8). The fied by God’s Word (Acts 20:32; 26:18; Col 1:12;
significance of the land in this Abrahamic note also Jn 17:17; Col 3:23,24). These future
promise is made more explicit later, when we blessings do not exclude the physical (Mt 5:5;
are told that God covenanted to give Canaan note Ps 37:11,29; Is 60:21; Rom 4:13; 2 Pt 3:13),
to Abraham’s descendants after four centuries but they certainly exclude human frailty, for
of Egyptian bondage (Gn 15:12—21; see Acts God’s inheritance is imperishable (1 Cor 15:50;
risy3 1 Pt 1:4). In short, our heritage is nothing less
Since Canaan was occupied by wicked in- than full salvation (Heb 1:14; 11:7), which God
habitants, the land was to be taken by force; carefully guards for us in heaven (1 Pt 1:4).
to inherit the land therefore really means to Doubtless, the most significant feature in
take possession of it; Israel must trust God, the NT is its emphasis that, as a result of the
whose land it is, to give them the victory (Jos work of Christ, his people begin even now to
I!1-—g; 21:43—45; Jgs 7:2; Ps 44:1-3; Acts 13:19). receive the promised inheritance. The Gospel
Once they conquered the land, it was appor- of John frequently stresses the present reality
tioned among the tribes according to their size of eternal life, as does the Letter to the He-
(following the instructions in Nm 26:52-54). brews (cf. 6:12-17 with 9:15 and 11:13,39,40).
God further commanded the people to divide Paul treats this whole question thoroughly
the land by lot (vv 55,56). Thus from the initial in Galatians 3:7—4:7. In response to the Judai-
promise to Abraham to the actual apportion- zers, who claim that the Abrahamic inheri-
ment of the land and even with reference to tance is restricted to those who become Jews
the future (Is 60:21; Ez 45:1-8; 47:13—48:29), through circumcision, Paul argues vigorously
the people were made fully aware that their that Abraham’s true children are those who
inheritance lay in the hands of a sovereign believe, whether Jew or Gentile (3:7; see Acts
Lord. 26:16—18; Eph 3:6). They become heirs of God’s
The Believer’s Inheritance. In the OT we promise for they receive the Spirit (Gal 3:14).
find the concept of inheritance transferred The principle of inheritance is promise, not
from the purely physical to the spiritual. The the Law (v 18). Those who believe are brought
tribe of Levi, which constituted the priestly into union with Christ (vv 27-29); but then
clan, received no inheritance, because ‘“‘the they are not merely Abraham’s children but
Lord is their inheritance” (Dt 18:1,2; see Nm God’s (v 26), for Christ is the Son of God and
18:8—24). The Levites, in other words, received God has determined to send the Spirit of his
no land apportionment, but in their service of Son to believers so that they too may call God
God they could begin to enjoy the fuller bless- Father (4:4—7; v 2 emphasizes the sovereign dis-
ings to which the land inheritance pointed. position of the Father; see also Rom 8:15,16).
That this truth could not be artificially re- Indeed, Christ himself as the Son is the true
stricted to the Levites is hinted at in Exodus heir (Mt 21:38; Mk 12:7; Lk 20:14); he has inher-
19:6, where the whole nation is called “a king- ited a name above every name (Phil 2:9; Heb
dom of priests” (see 1 Pt 2:9). Psalm 16 makes 1:4) and has been appointed heir of all things
it clear that no one understood more clearly (Heb 1:2; see Ps 2:7,8;:
Mt 28:18). But by his
than David what those words entailed. Even grace all who become his through faith are
though he be deprived of Israel’s physical in- counted joint heirs with him (Rom 8:17).
heritance, he has received by lot a more beauti- God's Inheritance. With a bold shift in the
ful heritage, the Lord himself, in whose pres- metaphor, the Scriptures speak of believers as
ence he finds full joy and everlasting pleasures God's inheritance. In the beautiful ‘Song of
(vv 5,6,11; see Pss 73:25,26; 142:5; Is 58:14; Lam Moses”’ the author speaks of God as the Israel-
Riza). ites’ Father (Dt 32:6), who has taken special
In later Judaism, during and after the inter- interest in their inheritance (v 8). Then we are
testamental period, the figure was extended told why God cares: ‘‘For the Lord’s portion is
considerably. For example, the rabbis began his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance’”’ (v 9
to speak of the Law as the inheritance of the NIv). This theme becomes very prominent
faithful. Further, they might give the idea a throughout the OT (e.g., Dt 9:26—29; 1 Kgs
1036

$:51,53; Pss 28:9; 49:121-94:2; Is\ 19:25; Jet 10:16;
Zec 2:12). Elsewhere Israel is spoken of as
God's special possession (e.g., Ex 19:5; Dt 7:6).
In Ephesians 1:14 “the redemption of the
possession”’ refers to the final salvation of be-
lievers, who are God’s treasure. Further, ‘‘we
have obtained an inheritance” (v 11) may well
be translated, ‘‘we have been made an inheri-
tance,’ that is, been “chosen as God’s por-
tion,’ a view supported by verse 18. No more
fundamental idea than this can be found in
Scripture, and its essence is expressed by the
words of the One who sits on the throne: ‘He
who conquers shall have this heritage, and I
will be his God and he shall be my son” (Rv
2t:7; See'v 34> Lv.26:11,1252'Sm.7714).
MolsEs SILVA
See HEIR; BIRTHRIGHT; FIRSTBORN; ADOPTION.
Bibliography. G. Dalman, The Words of Jesus; W.D. Da-
vis, The Gospel and the Land; R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, pp
53-55; J.D. Hester, St. Paul's Concept of Inheritance; E. Neu-
feld, Ancient Hebrew Marriage Laws, pp 259-65; J. Pedersen,
Israel, Its Life and Culture, pp 89-96.
Iniquity. See SIN.
Ink, Inkhorn. See WriTING AND Books.
Inn. Place of lodging for travelers.
In the OT, the word “inn” occurs three
times (KJv): twice in reference to overnight
rests of Joseph’s brothers during their jour-
neys between Egypt and Canaan (Gn 42:27;
43:21), and once in a similar situation when
Moses was returning to Egypt from Midian to
lead the children of Israel (Ex 4:24).
The rsv translates each of these instances as
“lodging place’’ because in the time of the patri-
archs and Moses the Near East had nothing to
correspond to the inn as a public place with
accommodations for hire to travelers. In a set-
tled country a traveler could ordinarily expect
hospitality from the inhabitants. Throughout
the Near East hospitality was viewed as a seri-
ous social responsibility (e.g., Gn 19:1-3; Jgs
19:15—21). In deserted areas travelers would
provide for their own shelter (e.g., Gn 28:11)
and sustenance (e.g., Jos 9:11—13).
The beginning of real inns in Palestine is
obscure. It has been argued that they had a
foreign origin, since the rabbinic words for
“inn” are borrowed from Greek and Latin. Ref-
erences to Rahab as innkeeper in the Targum
and in Josephus (Antiq. 5.1.12) may be anachro-
nistic, and they provide no reliable witness to
the. existence of inns during the time of Josh-
ua, though there are parallels in the Near East
of women keeping an establishment providing
both lodging and sexual activity for travelers.
Certainly there is evidence for Greek inns as
early as the 5th century Bc, and they became
1037
Inner Man
common in the Hellenized Mediterranean.
They were typically uncomfortable and dan-
gerous—a common haunt of thieves, prosti-
tutes, and vermin.
Such an “inn” with an “innkeeper” (kJv
“host”’) sheltered the victim of robbers whom
the good Samaritan befriended (Lk 10:34,35).
-This inn was probably much like the khan or
caravansary which has been common along
the trade and pilgrimage routes of Syria since
ancient times. It was built in the form of a
square enclosing an open court where water
and shelter were available, but the traveler
typically supplied his own food and some-
times his own bedding. The good Samaritan
clearly expected the host to provide full care
for the wounded man; it is difficult to tell
whether this was customary, or simply an ac-
commodation to the emergency. The inn of Je-
sus’ story has long been identified with the
Khan Hathrur, halfway between Jerusalem
and Jericho, though the present structure is
probably only one of many built in the same
place.
This inn of the good Samaritan is unique in
Scripture as an instance of the inn as we know
it. Two other well-known passages in the NT
allude, not to a real inn, but to other social
customs and arrangements. First, brethren
from the church at Rome met the prisoner
Paul at Three Taverns, a stopping place 33
miles from Rome at the intersection of the Ap-
pian Way with the road from Antium (Acts
28:15). Second, there is the “inn” from which
Joseph and Mary were excluded (Lk 2:7), else-
where translated “guestchamber” (Ksv) and
“guest room’ (Rsv Mk 14:14; Lk 22:11). The
Jews of Jerusalem took pride in having
enough such guestrooms to accommodate the
huge influx of pilgrims keeping Passover in
the city (cf. Acts 2:6—-11 on the crowd at Pente-
cost); evidently Joseph and Mary expected
such accommodation in Bethlehem for the cen-
sus, but found their place already taken.
JOHN W. SIDER
See TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION.
Inner Man. This Pauline phrase resembles
the “hidden man” of 1 Peter 3:4 (cf. Rom 2:29),
where outward appearance is contrasted with
inward reality. It assumes the current Jewish
conception of man as a unitary being having
both observable and invisible aspects, a physi-
cal body including a “psychological” heart.
Paul says his members submit to sin’s rule
even while his “‘inmost self” (Rsv “inner man’’)
delights in divine law (Rom 7:22). In 8:1—13, he
speaks of ‘‘setting the mind on things of the
flesh ... and things of the spirit,” describing
this same conflict between the inner and outer
man.
Inscriptions
This inner core of personality is already the
locus where the Spirit’s strength is instilled ~
and where Christ dwells in the Christian. So
another contrast is between the mortal and
already decaying outward man, weakened by
age and by sharing the dying of Christ, and
the daily renewed inner man, as the life of the
risen Jesus is manifested in mortal flesh (2 Cor
4:10-16). Taken with Romans 8:11, this may
possibly echo a speculation of intertesta-
mental Judaism, that a spiritual counterpart
to the present body is already being prepared
by the quickening of divine life in the devout
inner man.
See MAN, DocTRINE OF.
Inscriptions. Term used to refer to writing
in the ancient world which was done on a ma-
terial of a permanent nature, such as stone or
clay, rather than on ordinary and imperma-
nent substances, such as papyri or parchment.
There are occasional references to inscriptions
in the Bible, for example, the Ten Command-
ments were inscribed on stone (Ex 31:18) and
given to Moses, and later written by Joshua on
stone and set up at Shechem (Jos 8:32). In the
excavations at Shechem, G.E. Wright found a
large stone prepared to receive an inscription
which he dated to the time of Joshua on strati-
graphic grounds. It may still be seen at the
site. A message from the hand of God to the
Babylonian king Belshazzar was inscribed on
the walls of his palace (Dn 5:24). Paul observed
an altar with this inscription: “To an un-
known god” in the marketplace of Athens
(Acts 17:23). The Book of Revelation speaks of
the names of the 12 tribes of the sons of Israel
being inscribed on the gates of the heavenly
city (21:12).
Inscriptions in the ancient world can be
found in almost any language and from any
period of history: Egyptian, Babylonian, Per-
sian, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic, Nabatae-
an, Moabite, and so on. It was once popular to
argue that Moses could not have written the
Pentateuch because writing had not been in-
vented that early. Inscriptions found at the tur-
quoise mines of Serabit el-Khadim dating to
the 15th century Bc have disproven this allega-
tion. In addition it might be noted that clay
tablets found at Ras Shamra by Claude
Schaeffer and dated to about 1400 Bc demon-
strate a considerable period of literary activ-
ity, as do the newly discovered tablets at Ebla
from approximately a thousand years earlier.
Inscriptions may be found in almost any
position or place, but the most common loca-
tions are in the floors of synagogues, church
buildings, and mosques; the pavements of fo-
rums; the walls of public buildings; dedica-
1038
Four tablets from Ebla.
tory stones and statues; stelae and monu-
mental plaques; tombs and sarcophagi; and
Roman milestones. An exhaustive list is im-
possible, but a few representative samples
will illustrate the various kinds of extant in-
scriptional material.
Monumental Inscriptions. The Egyptian
pharaoh Merneptah commemorated his vic-
tory over the Sea Peoples in the 13th century
Bc by inscribing a black granite stele with a
record of his victory. It contains the earliest
known reference to Israel outside the land of
Palestine: “Israel lies desolate.”
The Israelite king Omri (1 Kgs 16:16—30) is
referred to in a text carved in the Moabite lan-
guage on a stone dating near the end of the
reign of the Moabite king Mesha, about 830 Bc.
It was found at Diban (OT Dibon) in 1868 and
contains a record of the successful rebellion of
the king against Israelite oppression.
Another monumental inscription was found
in Persia carved into the steep slope of Mt
Behistun. It is a trilingual (Old Persian, Ela-
mite, Akkadian) record of the exploits of
Darius I, providing the key to unlocking the
mystery of the cuneiform script in which sev-
eral of these ancient languages were written.
The Assyrian king Shalmeneser III left a rec-
ord of his first 6 campaigns of conquest in-
scribed on a monolith found in 1861 at Kurkh
on the Tigris. The stone is carved front and
back in cuneiform that is written over a bas-
relief of the king. This same king left a black
stone obelisk, 6% feet high, depicting his tri-
umphs over several other kings, among whom
is Jehu, king of Israel, depicted in the second
panel from the top, prostrating himself before

The Merneptah Stele contains the first known mention of Israel
in Egyptian records.
the Assyrian monarch. This is the earliest
ture available of an Israelite and the
known representation of an Israelite king
contemporary. The inscription above the
ture reads, “The tribute of Jehu,
Omri... .” It dates to the mid-gth century Bc.
Historical Records. Frequently in the re-
gion of Mesopotamia, ancient kings recorded
important events or proclamations in stone or
clay. A notable example is the clay prism con-
taining the final edition of Sennacherib’s An-
nals dated to 691 Bc. It is hexagonal, 15 inches
high and 6 inches wide, and written
sides in cuneiform script. The inscription
speaks of “Hezekiah the Jew (king of Judah),
who did not submit to my yoke... Himself,
like a caged bird, I shut up in Jerusalem, his
royal city...” (cf. 2 Kgs 18; Is 36-39).
Even though no annals comparable to
those produced by the Assyrian kings have
survived among the Babylonians, we do have
some chronicles written on clay tablets cover-
Inscriptions
ing the years from 626 Bc to the fall of Baby-
lon to Cyrus in 539. One of these, the Babylo-
nian Chronicle, provides an exact date of
March 16, 597 Bc for the fall of Jerusalem to
the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar (cf. 2
Kgs 24:10-17).
Babylon itself fell to Cyrus the Mede, king
-of Persia in 539. The event is not only referred
to in the Bible (Ezr 1:1—3) but is also described
in a clay barrel-shaped cylinder nine inches in
length, written in cuneiform script, during the
reign of Cyrus. It refers to his policy which
allowed captive nations to rebuild their cities
and temples. This provides an explanation of
his encouragement and financial help to the
Jews in returning to Jerusalem to rebuild the
temple of Solomon that Nebuchadnezzar had
destroyed (Ezr 1:2—4).
Egyptian pharaohs were fond of publishing
records of their exploits in hieroglyphic script
on the walls of temples and tombs. These
were usually incised into the stone and then
painted. One of the most interesting is Shi-
shak’s description of his invasion of the land
of Israel incised on the southern wall of a
court of the temple of Amon at Karnak. The
inclusion of Megiddo among the more than 75
cities whose names can still be read, adds his-
torical interest to the biblical account of Shi-
shak’s invasion and conquest of Megiddo (1
Kgs 14:25,26; 2 Chr 12:2—10) as well as ar-
chaeological confirmation of a destruction
and burning of the city at this time.
Myths, Epics, and Legends. Scores of
texts exist containing legendary material from
the Egyptians, Sumerians, Akkadians, Hit-
tites, and Canaanites. They are conveniently
collected in J.B. Pritchard’s Ancient Near East-
ern Texts. Among the most interesting and bib-
pic- lically relevant is the Gilgamesh Epic, an As-
only syrian account of the great flood recorded also
by a in Genesis 6-9. The story is written on the
pic- 11th of 12 clay tablets in Akkadian and re-
son of counts the experiences of Utnapishtim (the
counterpart to the biblical Noah) during a
great flood. There are many interesting paral-
lels to the Genesis account, along with some
significant differences. The Gilgamesh Epic is
also known from other versions older than
1000 BC, among which are the Babylonian, Su-
merian, Hittite, and Hurrian accounts. The
on all original composition of the Akkadian account,
which is the fullest and best known, is placed
by Pritchard somewhere at the turn of the 2nd
millennium Bc. The text we possess was found
in the library of Ashurbanipal at Nineveh.
Official Announcements. When an an-
cient monarch or public official wanted to
publish an announcement with some degree
of permanency, it would be carved in stone or
set in mosaic. An inscription on a marble slab
1039
Inscriptions
dating to the reign of Claudius (aD 41-54) was
found in 1878, originating in the city of Naza-
reth. It contains a warning against grave rob-
bing or any other desecration of cemeteries.
The penalty for such violation was declared
to be death. The stone probably reflects some
of the troubles Claudius had in Rome over
the person of Christ (Suetonius, Claudius 25)
which led to the expulsion of Jews from the
capital city (Acts 18). At issue must have been
the resurrection of Christ as proclaimed in
Rome.
Announcements were placed even in tem-
ples. Josephus referred to a small wall sur-
rounding the Jewish temple in Jerusalem that
contained slabs of stone at regular intervals
giving warning in Greek and Latin to Gentiles
entering the temple (War 5.193—-34; 6.125—26;
Antiq. 15.417). Two fragmentary examples
have been found. One discovered by Clermont-
Ganneau in 1871 reads: ‘‘No foreigner is to en-
ter within the balustrade and embankment
around the sanctuary. Whoever is caught will
have himself to blame for his death which fol-
lows.”” The Romans allowed the Jews to put
anyone to death, even a Roman, who went be-
yond this barrier (War 6.126).
An important inscription was found at the
beginning of this century in Delphi, Greece,
which was commissioned by the emperor Clau-
dius. It was written in Greek and mentions
Gallio as proconsul with a date that can be
established as AD 51-52 for his term of office.
This Gallio is the proconsul before whom Paul
was brought by the Jews of Corinth (Acts
18:12-17). It is therefore extremely important
for establishing the date of Paul’s 18-month
stay in Corinth, and an important pivotal date
for Pauline chronology in general. The inscrip-
tion is an imperial announcement to the citi-
zens of Delphi regarding the need for increas-
ing the population of the city with eminent
people.
The name Pontius Pilate has appeared in a
Latin inscription carved into a stone found in
the Roman theater at Caesarea Maritima on
the coast of Israel. It refers to him, in partially
mutilated words, as Prefect and contains the
name Tiberium, which designates a structure
built in honor of the emperor Tiberius.
Dedications. Inscriptions were commonly
placed on walls or floors of buildings or at-
tached to some other structure dedicating the
completed edifice. An inscription was cut into
the wall of a long tunnel built by the Jewish
king Hezekiah in Jerusalem when the tunnel
was finished (2 Kgs 20:20). It is in Hebrew
and is now in the Istanbul museum. One of
the oldest inscriptions we have in that lan-
guage, it describes the construction of the Si-
loam tunnel.
1040
The Pilate inscription found carved into a stone in the Roman
theater at Caesarea.
In the city of Corinth in Greece there is a
dedicatory inscription cut into the pavement
of a plaza on the north side of the large
theater. The abbreviated Latin inscription
read: Erastus pro aedilitate sua pecunia stravit
(Erastus, in return for his aedileship, laid the
pavement at his own expense’). The bronze
has long since been removed from the letters
deeply cut into the gray Acrocorinthian lime-
stone. This is probably the same “Erastus, the
city treasurer’’ mentioned by Paul in Romans
16:23. A similar inscription from the Corin-
thian Agora of Paul’s day reads: ‘‘Gnaeus
Babbius Philinus, aedile and pontifex, had this
monument erected at his own expense, and he
approved it in his official capacity as duovir.”’
A monumental dedicatory inscription in
Greek was found in Jerusalem during excava-
tions in 1913-14, which once stood on the wall
of a 1st-century AD synagogue on Mt Ophel. It
refers to a Theodotus, the son of a ruler of the
synagogue named Vettenos, who built the
synagogue. Since the name Vettenos is Ro-
man, it may be that a Jewish slave who had
been freed and given the Roman name of his
master is referred to. If so, this inscription
may have hung on the ‘synagogue of the
Freedmen” in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9).
The British Museum contains a portion of a
broken arch that stood over an entrance into
the Greek city of Thessalonica from the rst cen-
tury AD until 1867, when it was torn down to
provide stone for the repair of the vast city
wall. The. inscription begins: “In the time of
the politarchs....’”’ This is a rare word refer-
ring to Roman officials and is used in the
Book of Acts (17:6) in reference to city authori-
ties of Thessalonica. Jack Finegan states that
“it is otherwise unknown in extant Greek lit-
erature.” Another occurrence of the word has
been found on a stone pillar in the congested
backyard of a museum in Thessalonica.
 Inscriptions

Correspondence. In the 2nd millennium be-

fore Christ, it was common practice to write
correspondence on small clay tablets. More
than a half million have been found in Mari,
Nuzi, Nineveh, Ebla, and elsewhere. Interest-
ing examples of such correspondence may be
found in a great number of clay tablets found
at Tell el-Amarna in upper Egypt. They were
written in the Babylonian language using the
cuneiform script during the time when Akhe-
naton was captivated with his reformation of
Egyptian art and religion at his new capital
Tell el-Amarna (Akhetaten) and Palestine and
Syria were left to the mercy of marauders
called Habiru in the documents. Many of these
are written from cities in Canaan under attack
and ask for help from the pharaoh, whose vas-
sals they are at this time (late 14th century
BC). Some find in these Habiru a reference to
the ancient Hebrews who invaded the land un-
der the direction of Joshua.
Sometimes correspondence was written in
ink on broken pieces of ceramic pottery (pot-
sherds) called ostraca. In 1935, 18 of these were
found in the excavations at Lachish in south-
ern Israel. They are written in Hebrew and
provide examples of the kind of script used by
the Judeans in the time of Jeremiah. The lan- A Roman milestone near the valley of Elah, where David en-
guage is essentially identical with the Hebrew countered Goliath.
of the OT. The letters were sent by Hosha-
‘yahu, an officer in charge of a nearby town, to (3) the name of the road builder and of the
Ya‘osh, the military governor of Lachish, dur- emperor to whose honor the road was being
ing the invasion of Judea by the Babylonians, built. Augustus Caesar may have been the first
which ended in the destruction of the temple to erect milestones to a significant degree, al-
in Jerusalem in 586 Bc. though there is some evidence that some may
Eleven such potsherds were found in Ma- have existed earlier. They apparently were not
sada, on the western shore of the Dead Sea in erected as a matter of course in Israel be-
excavations conducted by Yigael Yadin from fore Hadrian, although Vespasian temporarily
1963 to 1965. Masada was destroyed by the Ro- erected them on some routes used by his army
man army under the command of Flavius during the conquest of the country.
Silva in aD 73. Nine hundred and sixty Tombs and Sarcophagi. As might be ex-
men, women, and children committed suicide pected, one of the most likely places to find
rather than surrender to the Romans. Ten inscriptions is on objects and structures con-
men were chosen to cut the throats of those nected with human burials. Ancient Egyptians
who remained. They drew lots for the heart- covered the walls of their tombs with inscrip-
breaking task, according to Josephus (War tions painted onto the walls and ceilings of
7.395), and Professor Yadin thinks the ostraca their burial vaults as well as on their sarco-
he found were the ones used in the drawing. phagi. These were done in hieroglyphics, the
One of them contained the name of Ben Yair, sacred language of the Egyptians, and usually
who was probably Eleazer ben Yair, the com- contained petitions to the deities or records of
mander of the fortress. all the possessions the deceased wanted to ac-
Milestones. The Romans erected milestones company them into the next world. Without
at intervals along important roads throughout this, there could be no immortality, a privi-
the empire. A number of these have been lege which of necessity belonged to those who
found in the Middle East. They are usually cy- could afford it.
lindrical stones, around six feet high, bearing On Mt Scopus an ossuary was found with
the following information in Latin (and some- the inscription, “Hanania son of Jonathan the
times in Greek): (1) the distance—probably Nazirite’’ and another containing the bones of
from the chief city of each province, or in his wife with the inscription, “Salome wife of
some cases from important military posts; (2) Hanania son of the Nazirite.” At Givat Hamiv-
the places between which the road extended; tar in northeastern Jerusalem four caves of
1041
Insect
tombs were found with many ossuaries, about
half of them containing inscriptions on their “mosaic inscriptions in six floors throughout
sides. One of them reads, “Simon the Temple
builder.” The inscription is in Aramaic and
leads us to think that the person named had
taken part in the construction of the Jerusa-
lem temple.
Another ossuary connected with the temple
is in the British Museum. It contains an in-
scription in Greek that reads: “Bones of the
family of Nicanor the Alexandrian, who made
the doors.” This refers to a wealthy Jewish fam-
ily of Alexandria who gave two huge brass or
bronze doors, called the Nicanor Gate, to the
temple of Herod.
A huge necropolis from the Roman period
was found on the Mt of Olives near the Domi-
nus Flevit Church in the early 1950s. It is the
largest discovery of its kind in Jerusalem, in-
cluding about 20 caves of the arcosolium type
and 38 tombs of the pit type. They date from
the 3rd and 4th centuries ap. The tombs con-
tained 122 ossuaries with 43 inscriptions in
Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek. Common names
appearing on these ossuaries include Jeshua
(Jesus), Maria (Mary), Martha, Salome,
Simeon.
From 1967-74 additional tombs were dis-
covered, including the one referred to above
containing the tomb of Simon the Temple
builder at Givat Hamivtar. One of the ossuar-
ies contains a fascinating inscription in Paleo-
Hebrew script for which no parallel has as
yet been found. It reads: “I, Abba, son of
the priest Eleaz(ar), son of Aaron the high
(priest), I Abba, the oppressed and the perse-
cuted, who was born in Jerusalem and went
into exile into Babylonia and brought
to Jerusalem) Mattathi(ah).”
In the mid-1970s, a Jewish cemetery more
than 7 miles long was found, spanning 7 hills
west of Jericho. Approximately 120 tomb caves
were excavated and surveyed. They covered a
period of 150 years, ending in the destruction
of Jericho in ap 68 by the Romans. One cave
alone had 32 different inscriptions on the
ossuaries, 17 in Greek and 15 in Aramaic. One
of them is of considerable interest because it
contains the name of “Theodotus, a freedman
of Queen Agrippina—ossuary.” There is a possi-
bility that this might be the same Theodotus
referred to in the synagogue inscription found
in Jerusalem. If so, the Hebrew family name
was Goliath, the family to which the entire
burial cave belonged.
Mosaic Floor Decorations. In the Roman
and Byzantine periods it was popular to deco-
rate the floors of basilicas, baths, synagogues,
churches, and other public buildings with ela-
borate tessalation containing mosaic inscrip-
tions and artwork. Excavation in 1972 dis-
closed a building in Caesarea Maritima with
the structure. Two of them are the Greek text
of Romans 13:3 set in a circular border. An-
other is a blessing on the one who enters and
exits the room: “May the Lord bless your entry
and your exit.” Two of them invoke the aid of
Christ for people associated with the function
and construction of the building. These were a
part of a building which was destroyed in the
7th century aD.
The floors of the synagogues at Tiberias-
hamath, Beth Shan, Beth Alpha, Eshtemoa,
Susiya, Hamath-gader, En Gedi, and others in
Israel have inscriptions in Greek and Aramaic
that usually refer to benefactors of the syna-
gogue. A synagogue floor has been found in
Naro, Tunisia, which contains a Latin inscrip-
tion. In the Tiberias synagogue, Hebrew was
used only for defining the astronomical: sym-
bols that appear in the zodiac. Aramaic was
used primarily for halakha (religious rule or
law) and Greek was principally used in honor-
ing donors.
One of the best-known mosaic floor inscrip-
and tions in churches comes from Madaba, Jordan,
where the oldest known map of Israel and Jor-
dan was set into the floor in the 6th century
AD. The place-names of cities, geographical fea-
tures, and passages of Scripture are given in
Greek. Church floors typically contain dated
or undated dedications, blessings, and Scrip-
ture quotations that appear in Aramaic, Cop-
tic, Syriac, Latin, and Greek. Symbolism often
accompanies the inscriptions, but in AD 427 an
edict was issued forbidding the use of crosses
and other religious symbols on pavements so
(back that they might not be stepped on. It is not
clear how widespread this prohibition was.
JOHN R. McRay
See ARCHAEOLOGY; EBLA; AMARNA TABLETS; FLOOD
Mytus; Mari; Nuzi; PotrEry; SILoaM, Poot oF; UGa-
RIT; ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE; SEAL; ALPHABET;
CREATION MyTHs.
Bibliography. M. Avi-Yonah, Encyclopedia of Archaeo-
logical Excavations in the Holy Land (see esp. vol 2 on tombs
in Jerusalem); R.D. Barnett, Illustrations of OT History; A.
Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East (4th ed); H.PV.
Nunn, Christian Inscriptions; J.B. Pritchard, The Ancient
Near East in Pictures Relating to the OT and Ancient Near
Eastern Texts Relating to the OT; D.W. Thomas, Documents
from OT Times.
Insect. Small invertebrates generally char-
acterized by a segmented body (head, thorax,
abdomen) and three pairs of legs.
See ANIMALS (ANT; BEE; CRICKET; FLEA; Fy; GNAT;
GRASSHOPPER; Locust; Motu; Wasp).
Inspiration of the Bible. See BIBLE, INSPI-
RATION OF THE.
1042
 Intermediate State

Installation Offering. See OFFERINGS AND tions. Even Christ’s parable of the rich man
SACRIFICES. and Lazarus (Lk 16:19—31), because of its obvi-
ously symbolic character (v 22) and its avowed
Instructor. See TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS purpose of teaching about the importance of
(TEACHER). the present life for a person’s eternal destiny,
must be treated with caution. Perhaps the
Instruments, Musical. See Music AND MusI- most that can be said is that the dead in
CAL INSTRUMENTS. .-Christ are “immediately with God” and that
they rest in his loving presence until the resur-
Intercession. See PRAYER. rection, while the unsaved are in a comfortless
condition awaiting their resurrection to judg-
Interest. See MONEY AND BANKING. ment (Jn 5:29).
Discussion of the intermediate state in the
Intermediate State. State of the human history of Christian thought has focused upon
person after death and before resurrection. three separate aspects that may help to clarify
Such teaching is more developed in the NT the biblical data further. First, under the influ-
than in the OT though it is a mistake to think ence of Greek philosophical ideas there has
that reference to it is totally absent in the OT been a recurring Platonic influence in Chris-
(Jb 19:25). According to Christ the intermedi- tian theology in which the Pauline contrast be-
ate state is deducible from such texts as Exo- tween the flesh and the spirit has been misin-
dus 3:6 (Mt 22:32). Even in the NT an account terpreted, and the soul has been emphasized
of the intermediate state is not given explicitly at the expense of the body with the result that
but may be inferred from teaching about the the prospective resurrection of the dead and
physical death and resurrection of all people, its eschatological setting has either been
but especially of believers. This is taught by played down or eliminated altogether because
Christ himself (Mt 22:30—32) and by the apos- of its allegedly physical (and therefore unspiri-
tles, particularly Paul (1 Cor 15). In addition tual) aspect. The doctrine of the immortality
the biblical teaching that the human being is of the disembodied soul is sometimes substi-
a unity of soul and body and not simply a soul tuted for the idea of an intermediate state
that happens to be embodied (Gn 2:7) has im- prior to resurrection, but without any warrant
plications for a person’s state after death. from Scripture. In modern theology a ten-
From such data two conclusions regarding the dency to discount the historical has tended to
intermediate state may be drawn. The first is displace the earlier discounting of the physi-
that physical death is not the total cessation of cal, but with much the same effect, at best a
the life of the individual but that the person spiritualizing of postmortem existence, at
lives on, not merely in the memories of those worst a denial of any such existence. But it is
who survive, but as a distinct personality, and clear from Scripture that the intermediate
in the case of believers with awareness of the state is a state between two phases of embodi-
loving presence of God (Phil 1:23). The second ment, the present state of physical embodi-
conclusion is that such an existence is not a ment and that of “spiritual embodiment” (1
fully human existence but is incomplete or Cor 15:44) which is to occur at Christ’s second
anomalous, since being embodied is essential coming (1 Cor 15:23).
for an individual to be in God’s image. The Second, during the Reformation a contro-
individual, surviving death, awaits the resur- versy arose between John Calvin and some of
rection of the body when, in the case of a per- the Anabaptists over “soul sleep.” Calvin vehe-
son “in Christ,” he will experience complete mently maintained that the intermediate state
redemption, a state of complete emancipation is one of conscious awareness of God's pres-
from sin in the presence of Christ (1 Cor 15:50— ence, something his opponents denied. For Cal-
58). The biblical data regarding the character vin such a denial was equivalent to holding
of the intermediate state of those who are out- that the soul is annihilated at death and to
side Christ is less clear, including as it does denying that Christ exercises rule over the
the difficult reference to Christ’s preaching to dead before they are resurrected. Calvin’s
the “‘imprisoned”’ (1 Pt 3:19,20). view is supported by Paul’s affirmation that
Scripture is restrained in its portrayal of nothing separates the believer from the love of
what life in the intermediate state is like. Paul God (Rom 8:35,39). The biblical teaching that
says of himself that after his death he will be on death the believer ‘‘sleeps” (1 Thes 4:14) is
“with Christ which is far better’”’ but he gives interpreted to mean that the dead no longer
no details. Nor is it wise to look for such de- communicate with the living on earth and no
tails in such biblical incidents as that of Saul longer engage in labor, but are in repose. To
and the witch at Endor (1 Sm 28:7), which is “fall asleep in Jesus”’ is thus to enjoy the pres-
subject to a number of different interpreta- ence of Jesus in a disembodied state, the near-

1043
Interpretation of the Bible

est analogy of which in present experience 2. Warrior among David’s mighty men,
may be found in dreaming when the aware- ‘known as “‘the thirty” (2 Sm 23:26). He was the
ness of the dreamer does not depend upon the son of Ikkesh of Tekoa (1 Chr 11:28; 27:9) and
functioning of any of the bodily senses. became commander of David's militia.
A third focus for Christian thought has been 3. Warrior among David’s mighty men,
on whether or not a person’s eternal state is “the thirty,” identified as an Ithrite (2 Sm
fixed at the time of death, or whether repen- 23:38; 1 Chr11:40).
tance and spiritual growth and purgation are
possible or inevitable after death. It is the Irad. Enoch’s son, a member of Cain’s line
teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that (Gn 4:18).
death is followed by purgatory for all who are
imperfect. In purgatory the soul is freed from Iram. Chieftain in Edom (Gn 36:43; 1 Chr
the remnants of sin, and the period of purga- 1254).
tion may be lessened by the gifts, prayers, and
masses of those who survive the deceased. Iri. Bela’s son from Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr
Such a view is rejected by most Protestants as 77):
being inconsistent with the biblical teaching
on the complete and finished work of Christ Irijah. Benjamite guard who apprehended
(Heb 9:28), on the impossibility of one human Jeremiah as he left Jerusalem to claim his in-
being meriting or otherwise gaining grace for heritance and charged him before the princes
another (Lk 17:10), and on the biblical teach- with deserting to the Chaldeans; as a conse-
ing that the eternal state of the soul is deter- quence, Jeremiah was beaten and imprisoned
mined by its condition at death (Heb 9:27). (Jer 37:13,14).
PAuL HELM
See PARADISE; HELL; SHEOL; DEAD, ABODE OF THE; Imahash. Town founded by Tehinnah, Esh-
HEAVEN; HADEs. ton’s son from Judah's tribe (1 Chr 4:12). Its
location is unknown.
Interpretation of the Bible. See Brs.e, IN-
TERPRETATION OF THE. Iron. Malleable, metallic element.
See MINERALS, METALS, AND PRECIOUS STONES.
Interpreter. See TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS.
Iron (City). ksv form of Yiron, a city in
Intertestamental Period, The. Portion of Naphtali’s territory (Jos 19:38).
time extending from the close of OT history to See YIRON.
the beginning of NT history; also known as the
silent years. Ironsmith. See TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS.
See JUDAISM.
Irpeel. City of inheritance allotted to Benja-
Iob. Alternate name for Jashub, Issachar’s min’s tribe (Jos 18:27), perhaps situated in the
son, in Genesis 46:13. hill country several miles northeast of Jerusa-
See JASHUB #1. lem, near Gibeon.

Iphdeiah, Iphedeiah. Shashak’s son from Irrigation. Watering by artificial means.

Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:25, kJv Iphedeiah). See AGRICULTURE.

Iphtah. City in the Shephelah assigned to Ir-shemesh. City allotted to Dan’s tribe for
Judah’s tribe for an inheritance, listed be- an inheritance (Jos 19:41), probably identical
tween Ashan and Ashnah (Jos 15:43, KJv Jiph- with Beth-shemesh.
tah). Its location is unknown.
Iru. Caleb’s son from Judah’s tribe (1 Chr
Iphtahel. Valley on Asher and Zebulun’s Aste);
border (Jos 19:14,27, KJV Jiphthah-el), possibly
the modern Sahl el-Battof. Isaac. Son of Abraham and Sarah, father
of Jacob and Esau, one of the patriarchs of
Ir. Benjamite father of Shuppim and Hup- Israel.
pim (1 Chr 7:12), perhaps identical with Iri (1 The name “Isaac’’ has an interesting ety-
Chr 7:7). mology. It is the Anglicized form of the He-
brew yishadg, in Greek Isaak. If taken as an
Ira. 1. David's priest or chief official in ser- imperfect form, it means “he laughs”’; as a per-
vice at the time of Sheba’s revolt (2 Sm 20:26). fect form it means “he laughed.” Scholars
1044

have debated this problem and also the ab-
sence of an antecedent subject. If ‘“God”’ is im-
plied, the name could indicate divine amuse-
ment at an aged couple ridiculing the prospect
of having a child (Gn 17:17; 18:12) and then
suddenly becoming parents, as God had prom-
ised. On the analogy of Genesis 21:6, the im-
plied subject could be ‘“‘all who hear.” How- -
ever, it is doubtful that this interpretation
would be given to Isaac’s name during his life-
time, since it is not apparent from the narra-
tives. W.F. Albright, arguing from the fact that
Egyptian and West Semitic sentence-names
comprised utterances of a parent or some
other authoritative person when a child was
born, suggests that yishadq was short for
Yishaq-el, ““‘may El [i.e., God] smile on you.”
This seems improbable, however, because the
first occurrence of the name comes from God
himself (17:19), where it stands independent of
any subject. Thus it is probably best to render
yishaq as ‘‘he laughs, he laughed.”
Isaac’s pedigree is also interesting, for Sar-
ah was not only the wife of Abraham but also
his half-sister (Gn 20:12), and this fact alone
may have interfered with conception in their
earlier years. Because of this relationship,
Isaac belonged to both sides of Terah’s family.
According to prevailing custom, the son of the
legal wife took precedence over the male off-
spring of concubines, so that Isaac had prior-
ity of inheritance over Ishmael. The gifts that
Abraham subsequently gave to the sons of his
concubines (25:6) were without prejudice
the inheritance of Isaac.
Following God’s instructions (Gn 17:10—14),
Isaac was circumcised on the eighth day as a
member of the covenant community. The next
ceremony came when he was old enough for
weaning, probably around three years old. In
eastern countries where this procedure is still
observed, the child’s transition from milk to
solid protein and carbohydrates is normally
celebrated in the context of a feast. During the
celebration the mother chews a mouthful of
solid food and then pushes it into the baby’s
mouth with her tongue. The infant is often so
shocked by this treatment that it promptly ex-
pels the food, whereupon the mother repeats
the process. For an observer the procedure can
be hilarious, and Ishmael may have been
laughing at such a spectacle when he incurred
Sarah’s wrath (21:8—10).
During the years of Isaac’s adolescence,
Abraham was living in Philistine territory (Gn
21:34). The supreme test of the father’s faith
and obedience came in this period. Having
watched this son of God’s promise grow up
into a healthy young man, Abraham is asked
by God to offer him as a sacrifice. Isaac was
familiar with sacrificial rituals and helped
Isaac
ab une
pices 7
:
Sade
:
es : ee
ae
x i
ack
IMRES.
4
Dome of the Rock on Mount Moriah, where Abraham's faith
was tested regarding the offering of his only son Isaac.
with the preparations, though probably not
without some misgivings for he was also famil-
iar with the patriarchal traditions that gave
the head of the family power of life or death
over everyone and everything in the family. If
he voiced any protest as he lay bound on the
sacrificial altar, it is not recorded. When Abra-
ham’s faith did not waver, God intervened at
the crucial moment and provided another of-
fering in the form of a ram. Because of his
obedience, God promised Abraham great bless-
ing, blessing in which Isaac also participated.
It was this act of faith and obedience that Paul
honored centuries later by calling Abraham
the forefather of the Christian church (Rom
ie9
After Sarah’s death (Gn 23:1—-20), Abraham
to set about securing a bride for Isaac, as it was
the custom for parents to arrange marriages
for their children. Rather than have Isaac
marry a local pagan woman, Abraham sent
his household steward to Nahor in Mesopota-
mia to seek a bride for his son from among his
own relatives. In an account that emphasizes
faith, perseverance, and divine blessing, Gene-
sis 24 describes how the servant met Rebekah
and betrothed her to Isaac even before he had
met the rest of her family. Bethuel, her father,
and Laban, her brother, assented to this ar-
rangement, and she left with the family’s bless-
ing to take up her new responsibilities in Pales-
tine as Isaac’s wife.
When Abraham died at a ripe old age, Isaac
and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Mach-
pelah (Gn 25:8—g). Isaac was now patriarch of
the family. He pleaded with God that his favor-
ite wife Rebekah might bear children (v 21),
and as a result she bore twin sons, Esau (‘the
hairy one’’) and Jacob (“‘supplanter’’). Esau be-
came a hunter and Isaac favored him, while
Jacob was more of a settler and agriculturalist
and was favored by his mother. Jacob was
also crafty and took advantage of Esau’s ex-
treme hunger one day, bargaining with his
older brother to exchange his birthright for
1045
Isaiah
some lentil stew. Possession of the birthright
secured for Jacob a double portion of the in-
heritance (Dt 21:17).
When famine gripped the land, God in-
structed Isaac not to visit Egypt (Gn 26:2),
but to stay in Palestine, where he would en-
joy great prosperity. When the men of the
area asked about Rebekah, Isaac became fear-
ful and said she was his sister (v 7). When the
deception was uncovered, Abimelech the king
rebuked Isaac and forbade anyone to interfere
with him. Isaac prospered so greatly that
Abimelech finally asked him to relocate, so he
moved to Beersheba where there was suf-
ficient water for his flocks and his fortune
increased.
Although Esau was Isaac’s favorite son, he
displeased his father by marrying two Hittite
women. When Isaac felt that the end of his life
was approaching, he wished to bless his first-
born in the traditional patriarchal manner
(Gn 27). Rebekah overheard his instructions to
Esau and she encouraged Jacob to deceive the
blind old man by disguising himself as Esau
and taking his brother’s blessing. The decep-
tion succeeded, and Isaac gave Jacob the bless-
ing of the firstborn. When Esau appeared to
receive his blessing he was too late, and he
was very bitter against Jacob because of what
had happened. Rebekah sent Jacob away to
her brother Laban in Mesopotamia, to escape
Esau’s anger and also to obtain a wife. Esau
did receive a blessing from Isaac, but a lesser
one. Two decades later a rich and prosperous
Jacob returned with his family. He made
peace with Esau before Isaac died and the
brothers buried Isaac in Hebron (35:27).
Isaac is given less prominence in the patri-
archal narratives than Abraham or Jacob, but
his importance for covenantal faith was recog-
nized in such NT passages as Acts 7:8; Romans
9:13; Galatians 4:21-31; and Hebrews 11:9—20.
R.K. HARRISON
See PATRIARCHS, PERIOD OF THE; ISRAEL, HISTORY
OF.
Bibliography. K.A. Kitchen, The Bible in Its World; D.J.
Wiseman and A.R. Millard (eds), Patriarchal Narratives and
Their Study.
Isaiah (Person). Eighth-century (Bc) prophet
during the reigns of the Judean kings Uzziah,
Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah; author of the bib-
lical Book of Isaiah (called Esaias in ksv NT).
Isaiah was the son of Amoz (Is 1:1) and may
have been King Amaziah’s brother. Growing
up in Jerusalem, Isaiah received the best edu-
cation the capital could supply. He was also
deeply knowledgeable about people, and he be-
came political and religious counselor of the
nation. He had easy access to the monarchs
and seems to have been the historiographer at
1046
the Judean court for several reigns (2 Chr
"26:22; 32:32).
Isaiah’s wife is referred to as a prophetess
(Is 8:3) and they had at least two sons, Shear-
jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hashbaz (8:3).
Isaiah’s customary attire was a prophet’s
clothing, that is, sandals and a garment of
goat’s hair or sackcloth around his loins. At
one point during his ministry, the Lord com-
manded Isaiah to go barefoot for a period of
three years, wearing only a loincloth (20:2—-6).
This must have seemed bizarre in a society
that measured status by meticulous dress
codes.
Isaiah worked to reform social and political
wrongs. Even the highest members of society
did not escape his censure. He berated sooth-
sayers and denounced wealthy, influential
people who ignored the responsibilities of
their position. He exhorted the masses to be
obedient rather than indifferent to God’s cov-
enant. He rebuked kings for their willfulness
and lack of concern.
Isaiah’s writings express a deep awareness
of God’s majesty and holiness. The prophet de-
nounced not only Canaanite idolatry, but also
the religious observances of his own people
that were external ceremonies only and lack-
ing in sincerity (1:10-17; 29:13). He preached
impending judgment on the idolatrous Jude-
ans, declaring that only a righteous remnant
would be saved (6:13).
Isaiah foretold the coming of the Messiah,
the ‘“‘peaceful prince,’ and the ruler of God’s
kingdom (11:1—11). He also depicted this Mes-
siah as a suffering, obedient servant (53:3—12).
Isaiah was preeminent among the prophets for
the variety and grandeur of his imagery. His
imagination produced forceful, brilliant fig-
ures of speech.
Isaiah prophesied during the last three de-
cades of the northern kingdom of Israel. Be-
cause he lived in Jerusalem, in Judah, he
made little direct reference to Israel. However,
when that kingdom fell, Judah lay open to con-
quest by Assyria. Isaiah advised King Ahaz to
avoid foreign entanglements and depend on
God to protect his people. Ignoring that ad-
vice, Ahaz made an alliance with Assyria.
It was Hezekiah, Ahaz’s pious son, who
sought to remove Judah from this dangerous
situation. When the Assyrians under Senna-
cherib approached Jerusalem, Isaiah inspired
Hezekiah and the Judeans to rely on the Lord
for the city’s defense, and “the angel of the
Lord” destroyed Sennacherib’s army (37:36—
38), securing a short period of peace for Heze-
kiah and the Judeans.
Hebrew prophecy reached its pinnacle with
Isaiah, who was greatly esteemed in both OT
and NT times. One indication of that esteem is

the collection of apocryphal literature associ-
ated with his name.
HAZEL W. PERKIN
See ISAIAH, Book oF; ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; PROPH-
ECY; PROPHET, PROPHETESS.
Isaiah, Book of.
Author. The prophet Isaiah, whose name
means “the Lord saves,” lived and ministered
in Jerusalem. Because of his repeated contact
with the kings of Judah, some scholars believe
that Isaiah was related to the royal family, but
this is not certain. According to chapters 7 and
8, Isaiah was married and had at least two
sons, Shear-jashub and Maher-shalal-hashbaz,
whose symbolic names illustrated God’s deal-
ings with the nation as a whole. The “disci-
ples” mentioned in 8:16 probably assisted Isa-
iah in his ministry and may have helped him
record the book that bears his name.
When Isaiah saw the Lord in the famous
temple vision described in chapter 6, he was
willing to go wherever God sent him, even
though he would face strong opposition (6:9,
10). King Ahaz proved to be particularly resis-
tant to Isaiah’s advice (7:4-17), and the people
in general made fun of his preaching (5:19;
28:9,10). During the reign of the godly Heze-
kiah, however, Isaiah’s ministry was much ap-
preciated, and the king consulted him eagerly
during times of crisis (37:1—7,21-35).
Isaiah is usually regarded as the greatest of
the writing prophets. Some of the chapters in
his book display an unparalleled literary
beauty and make use of poetic devices and a
rich variety of symbols. Chapters 40—66 con-
tain many powerful passages that underscore
the grandeur of the book. It is ironic, then,
that many scholars attribute these chapters to
a “second” or “third” Isaiah, unknown authors
who wrote much later than Isaiah in connec-
tion with the Babylonian exile. Yet elsewhere
in the OT, the names of all who wrote the pro-
phetic books are preserved, and it would be
most unusual for the Jews not to know who
wrote such magnificent prophecy as chapters
40—66.
Date. Since many of the events recorded
in chapters 1-39 took place during the minis-
try of Isaiah, most of these chapters were
probably written by about 700 Bc or shortly
thereafter. The destruction of the Assyrian
army in 7or BC represents the climax of the
first half of the book, fulfilling the prophecy of
10:16,24—34 and 30:31—33. In 37:38 Isaiah refers
to the death of King Sennacherib, which did
not occur until 681 Bc. This means that some
of the earlier chapters, along with 40-66, were
probably written later during Isaiah’s retire-
ment years. A gap of several decades could
help account for the change in subject matter
1047
Isaiah, Book of
that is found in the last half of the book. In
these chapters Isaiah projects into the future
as he addresses the Jews who would be in ex-
ile in Babylon about 550 Bc.
Historical Background. Isaiah’s public
ministry occurred primarily from 740-700 BC,
a,period marked by the rapid expansion of the
‘nation of Assyria. Under King Tiglath-pileser
Ill (745-727 Bc), the Assyrians moved to the
west and south, and by 738 Bc the Assyrian
monarch was demanding tribute from Damas-
cus and Israel. About 734 Bc Rezin of Damas-
cus and Pekah of Israel organized a coalition
to rebel against Assyria, and they tried to en-
list the support of King Ahaz of Judah. But
Ahaz refused to join, and when the kings of
Damascus and Israel invaded Judah (see 7:1),
Ahaz appealed directly to Tiglath-pileser for
help (cf. 2 Kgs 16:7—-9). With little hesitation
the Assyrians returned to capture Damascus
and to turn the northern kingdom of Israel
into an Assyrian province.
The puppet king Hoshea ruled over Israel
from 732—723 Bc but was imprisoned when he
joined a revolt against Shalmaneser V, the
new Assyrian king. Shalmaneser besieged the
capital city of Samaria, which finally fell in
722 BC, spelling the end of the northern king-
dom. Sargon succeeded Shalmaneser in 722
and had to quell a number of revolts. In 711 Bc
Sargon captured the Philistine city of Ashdod
in a campaign that became the occasion of Isa-
iah’s prophecy of 20:1-6.
Even more important was the widespread
rebellion that broke out with the accession of
Sennacherib in 705 Bc. King Hezekiah of Ju-
dah withheld his normal tribute payment, and
by 701 Bc Sennacherib had invaded Palestine
to punish the rebels. The details of this cam-
paign are given in Isaiah 36,37 and tell how
city after city was captured by the Assyrians
before the invaders stood at the gates of Jerusa-
lem and demanded total surrender. With al-
most no hope of survival, Hezekiah neverthe-
less was encouraged by Isaiah to trust in God,
and in one night the angel of the Lord struck
down 185,000 Assyrian soldiers, virtually wip-
ing out Sennacherib’s army (Is 37:36,37).
In an effort to befriend the enemies of As-
syria, Hezekiah showed his treasures to en-
voys of the king of Babylon (39:1—4). Isaiah
warned that some day the Babylonian armies
would conquer Jerusalem and carry off those
very treasures, along with the residents of the
city (39:5—7). Not only did Isaiah predict the
Babylonian captivity of 586—39 Bc (cf. 6:11,12),
but he also foretold that Israel would be re-
leased from Babylon (48:20). The Chaldean
kingdom led by Nebuchadnezzar would be
God’s instrument of judgment upon Judah,
but they too would suffer defeat. One of Isa-
Isaiah, Book of
A ship—with two banks of
oars and two sets of rowers—
from Nineveh, capital of the
Assyrians, from whom Heze-
kiah withheld tribute.
iah’s most remarkable prophecies was the
naming of Cyrus, king of Persia, the ruler who
would conquer the Babylonians in 539 Bc and
release Israel from exile (cf. 44:28; 45:1). Along
with the Medes (cf. 13:17), Cyrus won several
important victories before sending his troops
against Babylon. Isaiah hailed him as one
anointed by the Lord to bring deliverance for
Israel (45:1—5).
Unity. Largely because of the references
to the later kingdoms of Babylon and Persia,
the unity of Isaiah has been called into ques-
tion. Chapters 40-66 move abruptly into the
exilic period of 550 Bc, almost 150 years after
Isaiah lived. Moreover, the Servant of the
Lord plays a prominent role in these chapters
and the messianic king fades into the back-
ground. Brilliant poetic passages are found in
chapters 40, 53, 55, and 60, demonstrating re-
markable depth and power.
Although these factors are sometimes cited
as a sign of disunity, there are actually strong
indications for unity in the book. For example,
the historical interlude (chs 36-39) forms a
hinge or bridge that links chapters 1-35 and
40-66. Chapters 36,37 complete the Assyrian
section, and chapters 38,39 introduce the Baby-
lonian material. Most of the linking chapters
are written in prose, while the others are
largely poetry. From the standpoint of verbal
or stylistic unity, one can point to Isaiah’s fa-
vorite title for God, ‘“‘the Holy One of Israel.”
This title appears 12 times in chapters 1-39,
and 14 times in chapters 40-66, but only 4
times in the rest of the OT. A study of the
famous Servant Songs of 52:13-53:12 reveals
several ties with earlier passages, especially in
chapters 1-6. The servant who is smitten and
wounded (53:4,5) receives the same punish-
1048
ment as the beaten and injured nation of 1:5—6
(also cf. 52:13 with 2:12 and 6:1).
Theological Teaching. Isaiah is to the OT
as the Book of Romans is to the NT, a book
filled with rich theological truth. Like Ro-
mans, Isaiah unveils the sinfulness of God’s
rebellious people and his gracious provision of
salvation. Because God is the Holy One of Is-
rael (1:4; 6:3), he cannot ignore sin but must
punish those who are guilty. Both Israel (5:30;
42:25) and the other nations (2:11,17,20) experi-
ence a time of judgment known as the day of
the Lord. In anger God raises his hand against
his people (cf. 5:25), but ultimately his wrath
is poured out upon Babylon and the nations
(cf. 13:3-5; 34:2).
With the fall of Assyria and Babylon, the
day of the Lord becomes a day of joyous vic-
tory (10:27; 61:2). According to Isaiah 63:4 it is
“the year of my redemption.” Earlier, Israel
had been redeemed from slavery in Egypt;
now the return from the Babylonian captivity
brings equal joy (52:9; 61:1). The ultimate re-
demption is to be accomplished through the
death of Christ, and Isaiah 53 describes our
Lord’s suffering and death in graphic terms.
His ministry as the Suffering Servant is also
introduced in 49:4 and 50:6,7; 49:6 states that
the servant will be ‘“‘a light for the Gentiles.”
Looking ahead to the second coming, Isaiah
predicts a messianic age of peace and righ-
teousness. Nations will “beat their swords
into plowshares” (2:4) and the “Prince of
Peace”’ will rule forever (9:6,7).
Throughout the book God is pictured as the
all-powerful Creator (48:13), the sovereign One
“seated on a throne, high and exalted... the
King, the Lord Almighty” (6:1,5). He controls
the armies of the earth (13:4) and removes rul-

ers as he wills (40:23,24). Before him “nations
are like a drop in a bucket” (v 15), and com-
pared with him all idols are worthless and
without power (41:29; 44:6). This is the God
who shows his fury to his foes and his love to
his servants (66:14).
Content. Messages of Judgment and Hope
(chs 1-12). In the opening chapter Isaiah
characterizes Israel as a nation that has re-
belled against God. Although the people regu-
larly bring offerings to him, their worship is
hypocritical, an attempt to mask their oppres-
sion of the poor and helpless. The Lord encour-
ages the nation to repent of their sin or face
the fires of judgment. After this introduction,
Isaiah turns to describe the peace of the messi-
anic age in 2:1-4. The day will come when all
nations will obey God’s Word and live at
peace. ‘‘The mountain of the Lord’’—Jerusa-
lem—will be raised up “and all nations will
stream to it” (vv 2,3). In the meantime, how-
ever, both Israel and the nations have exalted
themselves against the Lord, and he will judge
them in an awesome display of power. For Is-
rael, God’s judgment will bring great up-
heaval, including the loss of its leaders. Defi-
ant and ruthless, the rulers will face either
death or deportation. Chapter 3 ends by de-
nouncing the pride and vanity of the women
of Zion; they too will suffer disgrace. After Je-
rusalem is cleansed of its sin, the remnant will
enjoy the rule of “the Branch of the Lord,”
who will protect and shield his people (4:2-6).
In 5:1—7 Isaiah presents a short song about
Israel as God’s vineyard. The Lord has done
everything possible to insure a yield of good
grapes, but the vineyard has produced nothing
but bad fruit and must be destroyed. Isaiah
then pronounces six words against Israel, and
announces that the Assyrian army will invade
the land. Against the backdrop of Israel’s sin
Isaiah (ch 6) gives an account of the vision
through which he was called as a prophet.
Overwhelmed by the holiness of God and by
his own sinfulness, Isaiah thought he was ru-
ined, but when he is assured that his sins are
forgiven, he responds positively to God’s call
in spite of the stubbornness of the nation to
which he is sent.
One of the most stubborn individuals in all
of Israel is King Ahaz, and chapter 7 describes
Isaiah’s encounter with this godless ruler.
When Ahaz is threatened by Damascus and
the northern kingdom, he refuses to believe
Isaiah’s promise that God will protect him.
This is occasion on which Isaiah gives Ahaz
the sign of Immanuel (7:14). The “virgin’’ re-
fers ultimately to Mary, but in the near fulfill-
ment she is probably Isaiah’s fiancée whom he
marries (8:1—3) and who later gives birth to a
boy named Maher-shalal-hashbaz and Imman-
1049
Isaiah, Book of
uel (cf. 8:3,8). The birth of this child within a
few years is a sign that God will be with Ju-
dah and will put an end to the threats of Da-
mascus and Samaria. If Ahaz appeals for help
to the king of Assyria, Isaiah warns him, Assyr-
ia’s powerful armies will one day invade Ju-
dah also (cf. 7:17—25; 8:6—8). The destruction
‘brought by Assyria will plunge Judah into a
time of famine and distress (8:21,22).
Nevertheless, the gloom and darkness asso-
ciated with the Assyrian invasion will not last
indefinitely, and 9:1-5 speaks of a time of
peace and joy. Verses 6,7 introduce a child
who will become a righteous King and will
rule forever. This “Prince of Peace’’ is the Mes-
siah, the ‘‘Mighty God’’ whose kingdom is de-
scribed in 2:2—4.
For the immediate future, however, both Is-
rael and Judah will suffer the agony of war as
punishment for their sins. God is angry with
his people because they are proud and arro-
gant and their leaders disregard the pleas of
the poor and needy. Civil war and foreign inva-
sion will crush the hapless nation (9:8—10:4).
But once Israel has been judged, God will turn
his hand against Assyria, the instrument he
has used to judge other nations. Because of
her string of victories, Assyria is filled with
pride and is eager for more triumph. Yet even
at the moment when Jerusalem is about to
succumb, God cuts down the Assyrian army
like a cedar in Lebanon and spares his people
(10:26—34).
After the joyous news of Assyria’s defeat,
Isaiah describes the restoration of Israel and
the powerful rule of the Messiah (ch 11). Both
Jews and Gentiles will be attracted to Jerusa-
lem to enjoy an era of peace and justice. Like
David, the Messiah will have the Spirit of God
resting upon him as he judges the wicked and
protects the needy. To conclude these opening
messages, Isaiah offers two short songs of
praise that reflect upon God’s past deliverance
and his promise of future blessing (12:1—6).
Oracles Against the Nations (chs 13—23). Al-
though Babylon is not the major power of the
day, Isaiah begins his announcements of judg-
ment with two chapters about the destruction
of Assyria’s neighbor to the south. Babylon
will eventually conquer Jerusalem (between
605 and 586 Bc), but the Medes (13:17) along
with the Persians will capture Babylon (539
Bc). In spite of the glory to be achieved by
future kings of Babylon, God will bring their
pomp down to the grave (14:9—20). The chap-
ter ends with short prophecies against Assyria
and the Philistines.
One of Israel’s oldest enemies was the na-
tion of Moab, situated east of the Dead Sea.
Even though it was a small country, Isaiah
devotes two chapters to these descendants of
Isaiah, Book of

Lot. Chapter 15 describes the extensive mourn- chapters 13—23 as it anticipates God’s judg-
ing that will overwhelm their cities. After a ‘ment upon the nations and the inauguration
brief interlude urging the Moabites to submit of the kingdom of God. A defiled earth must
to Israel and to her God (16:1—5), Isaiah notes bear its punishment (24:5,6) and even the
that pride will lead to Moab’s downfall. forces of Satan, ‘“‘the powers in the heavens”
Sounds of weeping fill the land as the vines (vv 21,22), face judgment.
and fields wither and are trampled. In chapter 25 Isaiah rejoices over God’s
In chapter 17 the fourth oracle is directed great triumph and looks ahead to a day when
against Damascus and Ephraim (the northern death will be swallowed up and tears will be
kingdom of Israel), probably reflecting their wiped from all faces (v 8). Israel’s longtime
alliance against Judah about 734 Bc. Both na- enemies, symbolized by Moab, will be laid low
tions will face ruin, and Ephraim is con- (vv ro—12), but Jerusalem,
will be a stronghold
demned for abandoning the Lord, her ‘‘Sav- for the righteous (26:1—3). In 26:7—21 the na-
ior” and ‘“‘Rock”’ (v 10). tion prays that these promises will become a
In chapters 18 and 1g Isaiah turns to the reality. Verses 20,21 indicate that the Lord will
south and addresses Ethiopia and Egypt, indeed respond, pouring out his wrath upon a
countries that had strong links from 715—633 sin-cursed earth and upon Satan himself
Bc, when an Ethiopian named Shabako be- (27:1). When that takes place, Israel will be a
came pharaoh in Egypt. But Egypt is plagued fruitful vineyard, a blessing to the whole
with disunity and suffers greatly at the hands world (vv 2—6; contrast 5:1—7). First, however,
of Assyrian kings. In spite of the supposed wis- Israel will have to endure war and exile, and
dom of her leaders, Egypt faces economic and then the remnant will return to Jerusalem.
political ruin (19:5—15). Yet the time is com- A Series of Woes (chs 28-33). Returning
ing when the Egyptians will be restored and to his own historical period, Isaiah pro-
will worship the God of Israel. Along with nounces a series of woes upon both the north-
Assyria and Israel, Egypt will be ‘‘a blessing ern and southern kingdoms, as well as one
on the earth” (v 24). Some interpreters feel © upon Assyria (ch 33). Chapter 28 begins with
that this is a prophecy of the salvation of Gen- a description of the fading power of Samaria,
tiles during the church age, but others relate the capital of the northern kingdom. Verses
this day to the peace of the millennial age (cf. 7-10 portray the leaders of Judah in the same
2:2—4; 11:6—g). For the immediate future, how- light; they have disregarded Isaiah’s message
ever, Isaiah announces that Assyria will take and are out of touch with God. Judgment is
many Egyptians and Ethiopians into captiv- on the way, and their false preparation (vv
ity (20:1—6). 15,18) will be of no avail. God will fight
A second oracle about Babylon (cf. 13:1— against Israel (vv 21,22), and even Jerusalem
14:23) is contained in chapter 21. This time her will be put under siege until God in his
attackers are identified as Elam and Media (v mercy intervenes (29:1—8). Because of their
2), and Isaiah is staggered as he considers the hypocritical worship, the people deserve to be
impact of Babylon’s fall (vv 3,4). When Baby- punished, but in the future Israel will again
lon collapses, the world will know that her acknowledge the Lord and be made physi-
gods were powerless (v 10; cf. Rv 14:8; 18:2). cally and spiritually whole (vv 17-24).
Although it seems out of place among these Chapters 30 and 31 denounce Judah’s pro-
oracles against the nations, chapter 22 con- posed alliance with Egypt in the effort to
demns the city of Jerusalem. Like the nations, thwart Assyria. God wants his people to trust
Jerusalem is full of “tumult and revelry” (v 2) him, not their unreliable neighbors to the
and will soon experience the terrors of a siege. south. The Lord promises to protect Jerusalem
Since the people no longer rely on the Lord (v (30:18; 31:5) and defeat the invading Assyrian
11), he will hand them over to the enemy. Jeru- army (30:31—33; 31:8,9). None can stand before
salem’s unfaithfulness is exemplified by Sheb- his mighty sword.
na, a high official guilty of pride and material- Continuing on this positive note, Isaiah
ism whose position will be taken by the godly goes on to emphasize the righteous rule of the
Eliakim (vv 15—23). . messianic king in chapters 32 and 33. Zion will
The last oracle (23:1—18) is directed against enjoy peace and security at last (32:2,17,18;
the city of Tyre, which resisted capture until 33:6), a great change from 8th-century Bc Ju-
Alexander the Great conquered the island for- dah. In Isaiah’s own time the women feel se-
tress in 332 Bc. When Tyre fell, the economy of cure (32:9), but the Assyrian troops will devas-
the entire Mediterranean world was shaken, tate the crops and precipitate widespread
for her ships had carried the goods of the na- mourning. However, the lamenting will soon
tions far and wide. end for the prophet pronounces woe upon As-
Final Judgment and Blessing (chs 24-27). syria in 33:1. After Isaiah prays for the destruc-
This section functions as a grand finale to tion of Assyria (33:2-9), God promises to take
1050
 Isaiah, Book of

action (vv 10-12). Gone will be the enemy sol- plish this return from exile God raises up Cy-
diers and officials, for the Lord will save his rus the king of Persia (41:2,25). The Lord does
people and bring them justice and security. not forget his people, and he encourages them
More Judgment and Blessing (chs 34,35). to take heart and to rejoice.
This section forms a climax to chapters 28—33. In chapter 42 we are introduced to a person
Once more, cataclysmic judgment precedes a even more significant than Cyrus the Persian.
time of blessing and restoration. In chapter 34 Verses 1~—7 describe the servant of the Lord,
Isaiah depicts a judgment of cosmic dimen- ‘who will bring justice to the nations and will
sions as he moves to a consideration of the last be “a light for the Gentiles” (v 6). This is the
days. Heaven and earth endure the wrath of Messiah, and the redemption he will accom-
God that is poured out upon the nations, and plish on Calvary (cf. ch 53) is greater than the
verse 4 provides the basis for John’s descrip- release from Babylon. In light of the good
tion of the great tribulation in Revelation 6:13, news associated with the servant, Isaiah
14. Edom—like Moab in 25:10—12—represents praises the Lord for punishing the wicked and
a world judged by the sword of the Lord in his rescuing his wayward people. Chapter 43 de-
day of vengeance. clares that nothing will stand in the way of
Chapter 35, on the other hand, speaks of joy Israel’s return, and the Lord will remember
and restoration in a passage that pulsates their sins no more. In fact, he will pour out his
with life. A blooming desert corresponds to Spirit on their descendants (44:3).
the physical and spiritual healing that will A God so great is far more powerful than
characterize the messianic age when God will any idol. In 44:6—20 Isaiah makes use of satire
come to redeem his people. Both the return of to show the worthlessness of manmade im-
the Israelites from the Babylonian captivity ages. God alone has the power to create and to
and the second coming of Christ fit this glori- restore, and he will bring Cyrus on the scene
ous scene. to effect the release of the exiles and to begin
Historical Interlude (chs 36—39). These chap- the rebuilding of Jerusalem. Chapters 46 and
ters form the hinge that ties together the two 47 contrast the God of Israel and the idols of
halves of the book. Chapters 36 and 37 contain Babylon. When God raises up Cyrus, Baby-
the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecies about As- lon’s idols will be unable to save their nation,
syria’s collapse, and chapters 38 and 39 intro- and the “‘queen of kingdoms’’ (47:5) will col-
duce the Babylonian captivity that forms the lapse along with her sorcerers and astrologers.
backdrop for chapters 40—66. In 7or Bc King The final chapter in this section (48) restates
Sennacherib of Assyria demands the uncondi- God’s purpose of gaining release of the Israel-
tional surrender of Jerusalem. He sends his ites from Babylon through his “chosen ally”’ (v
field commander to address the people and try 14), Cyrus of Persia.
to gain their submission. With persuasive Salvation Through the Servant of the Lord
words, the commander tries to convince the (chs 49-57). Chapters 49-53 contain the final
city that surrender is the best policy. Amaz- three Servant Songs (cf. also 42:1—7), culminat-
ingly the people do not panic, and King Heze- ing in the death of the servant for the sins of
kiah asks Isaiah to pray for the beleaguered the world (52:13—53:12). In the second Servant
city. The prophet does so and announces that Song (49:1-7), Isaiah describes the call and
the proud Assyrians will not triumph. Instead, ministry of the servant, noting that he will
they suffer a terrible disaster as the angel of face strong opposition as he accomplishes sal-
the Lord strikes down 185,000 men. vation for Israel and the nations. The rest of
Chapters 38 and 39 relate another crisis in| chapter 49 (vv 8-26) deals primarily with the
Hezekiah’s life when he becomes desperately way God will bring Israel back from exile.
ill. Miraculously, God heals him and Hezekiah Soon the land will be filled with a mighty
praises the Lord for his gracious intervention.
When the king of Babylon sends envoys to con-
gratulate Hezekiah on his recovery, Hezekiah
foolishly shows these messengers his royal
treasures. Isaiah solemnly announces that
someday the armies of Babylon will capture
Jerusalem, plunder the land, and take away
these treasures.
The Return from Babylon (chs 40-48). The
Babylonian captivity eventually comes, but
Isaiah promises that it will end. God, the in-
comparably powerful Creator, is far greater The Cylinder of Nebuchadnezzar Il—which concerns the resto-
than any king, nation, or god, and he will ration of temples to a god and goddess—indicates the Babylo-
bring his people back to Jerusalem. To accom- nian idolatry about which Isaiah prophesied.

1051
Isaiah, Book of
throng (vv 20,21), and the Gentiles will ac-
knowledge Israel and her God (vv 22,23).
Although Israel has fully deserved the exile
because of her sins (50:1—3), the suffering en-
dured by the servant (vv 4-11) is wholly unde-
served. The beating and mocking of verse 6 are
prophetic of Christ’s experience (cf. Mt 27:26,
30; Mk 15:19). In verses 10,11 the whole nation
is challenged to trust in the Lord, as the ser-
vant did. There is, in fact, a believing remnant
who obey the Lord (51:1—8), and the Lord
promises that he will restore them to their
homeland. Israel has drunk the cup of God’s
wrath (vv 17,22), but the good news of release
from exile causes even the ruins of Jerusalem
to burst into songs of joy (52:7—10).
Yet the best news of all is salvation from
sin; the final Servant Song (52:13—53:12) tells
how Christ wins freedom for those held in
bondage to sin. In this brief passage we learn
how Christ suffered rejection (53:3) and even
disfigurement (52:14), but, “led like a lamb to
the slaughter’ (53:7), he carries our sins in his
body as he dies in ignominy. The people think
he is suffering for his own sins (v 4), but he is
“pierced” and ‘‘crushed for our iniquities’”’ (v
5). The first and last paragraphs of this section
(52:13-15; 53:10-12) state that through his suf-
fering the servant is highly exalted. What
seemed like a terrible defeat is actually vic-
tory over death and Satan and brings salva-
tion for many.
As a direct result of the servant’s death,
great joy comes to all people. In chapter 54
this joy is reflected in Jerusalem’s new status
as the Lord’s wife. Her descendants will be
numerous and eager to learn from the Lord (v
13). For the first time the term “servants of the
Lord” appears (v 17), apparently including all
believers, whether Jew or Gentile (cf. 65:8,9,
13-15). Joy and prosperity also characterize
chapter 55, an invitation to a great spiritual
banquet. All people are urged to turn to the
Lord who keeps his promises to Israel. In
56:1—8, foreigners are invited to come to God’s
“holy mountain” in Jerusalem, for the temple
will be ‘‘a house of prayer for all nations” (v 7;
cf. Mt 21:13).
Believing Gentiles contrast sharply with un-
believing Jews, and in 56:9—57:13 Isaiah re-
turns again to the theme of judgment. Israel
suffers because her leaders are wicked and be-
cause thé people are guilty of idolatry. Spiri-
tual healing is available, but unless individu-
als repent they cannot be part of the remnant
who will return from exile and enjoy peace in
the Promised Land.
Ultimate Blessing and Final Judgment (chs
58—66). The last nine chapters of Isaiah em-
phasize redemption and glory, but the reality
of judgment is also very much in evidence. In
1052
fact chapters 58 and 59 bemoan the sins of Is-
rael. The people are hypocritical in their wor-
ship; they are selfish and fail to keep the sab-
bath. Lying, oppression, and murder separate
the people from God. When Isaiah openly con-
fesses these, sins (59:12,13), the Lord suddenly
takes action on behalf of his people. Like a
mighty warrior he rescues the believing rem-
nant from Babylon and brings them back to
Jerusalem.
In chapter 60 the glory and wealth of Jerusa-
lem reach new heights. Both the city and the
sanctuary are adorned with splendor, matching
the prosperity of Solomon’s reign. Just as the
nations treated Solomon with honor, so earth’s
leaders will assist and strengthen the returning
exiles. While it is true that the Persian govern-
ment did help the Jews repeatedly, the condi-
tions described here will have their ultimate
fulfillment during the millennium and in.con-
nection with the new Jerusalem (cf. Rv 21:23;
22:5). ‘The ancient ruins” will be rebuilt (61:4),
and the Lord will fulfill the covenant made with
Abraham and David (v 8; cf. Gn 12:1—3; Is 55:3).
Jerusalem will be the city of the holy people, the
redeemed of the Lord (62:12), and the Lord will
take delight in her (v 4).
In order to accomplish salvation for his
people, God will have to judge the ungodly
first. The great trampling of the winepress
(63:2,3) graphically portrays the judgment pro-
cess and is linked with the day of the Lord (cf.
13:3; 34:2). Since God has promised to inter-
vene on behalf of his people, Isaiah prays for
the realization of that promise (63:7—64:12). He
recalls God’s faithfulness in the past and
pleads that he will again have mercy upon his
suffering people.
The answer to Isaiah’s prayer is found in
chapter 65. God does promise to give the holy
land back to his servants, to those who wor-
ship him and obey him. But for that segment
of the nation that continues in its obstinancy,
God promises anguish and destruction. The ul-
timate joy of God’s servants is contained in a
description of ‘“‘new heavens and a new earth”
(vv 17-25). Peace, long life, and prosperity will
be among the blessings enjoyed in an era that
seems to combine features of the millennium
and the eternal state (cf. 60:1—22).
In a fitting summary, chapter 66 ties to-
gether the themes of salvation and judgment.
God will comfort Jerusalem and abundantly
bless her, but sinners are the objects of his
wrath. Those who honor him will endure for-
ever, but those who rebel will suffer everlast-
ing rejection.
HERBERT M. WOLF
See ISRAEL, History OF; ISAIAH (PERSON); MESSIAH;
SERVANT OF THE LORD; VIRGIN BIRTH OF JESUS; PROPH-
ECY; PROPHET, PROPHETESS.
 Ishmael, Ishmaelites

Bibliography. J.A. Alexander, Isaiah, 2 vols; O.T. Allis, Ishmael, Ishmaelites. 1. Abraham’s first
The Unity of Isaiah; H. Bultema, Commentary on Isaiah; son, born of Hagar, Sarah’s Egyptian hand-
W. Kelly, An Exposition of the Book of Isaiah; E.J. Kissane,
The Book of Isaiah, 2 vols; G.A.F. Knight, Isaiah gzo—55 and
maid, at the instigation of Sarah herself. God
Isaiah 56-66; J.N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, chs 1-39; E.J. promised to make a great nation of the child-
Young, The Book ofIsaiah, 3 vols, and Studies in Isaiah. less Abraham (Gn 12:2), assuring him that his
son would be his heir (15:4). But when Sarah
Iscah. Haran’s daughter and Milcah’s sister was past 75 years old and still barren, she
(Gn 11:29). ‘invoked the custom whereby a childless wife
gave her maid to her husband as concubine
Ishbah. Mered’s son by Bithiah, the daugh- and laid claim to the offspring of their
ter of the pharaoh (1 Chr 4:17). union.
When Hagar conceived, the reproach atten-
Ishbak. One of the sons of Abraham by Ke- dant on barrenness prompted the maid to be-
turah (Gn 25:2; 1 Chr 1:32). have contemptuously toward her mistress,
and with Abraham’s consent Sarah dealt
Ishbi-benob. Giant who nearly killed Da- harshly with her and she fled. An angel sent
vid. During one of his many battles with the Hagar back to submit to her mistress and
Philistines, David grew faint and was nearly promised her a son to be named Ishmael. The
killed by Ishbi-benob. Abishai killed the giant, boy was born near Hebron when Abraham
saving David's life (2 Sm 21:16). Some suggest was 86 years old (Gn 13:18; 16:16).
that “Ishbi-benob”’ is not a proper name but Abraham and Sarah received him as the
means rather “they abode in Nob.” Such a son of Ged’s promise, as attested by their sur-
view, however, requires a reconstruction of prise when the birth of Isaac was announced
verses 15,16, and Nob is an unlikely site from (17:17; 18:12), and by Abraham’s subsequent
which David launched his attacks against the wish that Ishmael should be accepted of God
Philistines. (17:18). At age 13 Ishmael participated in the
institution of circumcision as a witness of
Ish-bosheth. Alternate name for Esh-baal, God’s covenant with Abraham (vv 9—14,22—27),
Saul’s son and successor to Israel’s throne
and the Lord promised to ‘‘make him fruitful
(2 Sm 2-4). and multiply him exceedingly” as “‘the father
See ESH-BAAL. of twelve princes, and... a great nation,”
though the covenant was to be established
Ishhod. Hammolecheth’s son from Manas- with Isaac (vv 20,21).
seh’s tribe (1 Chr 7:18, kKJv Ishod). There is no evidence that Ishmael was out
of favor until Isaac’s weaning at about three
Ishi. 1. Appaim’s son, the father of Sheshan years of age. When Sarah found Ishmael
and a descendant of Judah through Jerahme- “playing” with her son Isaac—‘playing” in
el’s line (x Chr 2:31). this instance could mean mocking, fondling,
2. Man from Judah’s tribe whose descen- or fraternizing—as an equal. She determined
dants were Zoheth and Ben-zoheth (1 Chr that the son of a slave-woman should not be
4:20). heir with her son Isaac, and she demanded
3. Simeonite whose four sons led 500 men to that Ishmael and Hagar be banished. Al-
Mt Seir where they destroyed the Amalekites though vexed, Abraham received reassurance
and settled their own people (1 Chr 4:42). from the Lord and sent them away with some
4. One of the leaders of the half-tribe of Ma- provisions. It was then clear to Abraham that
nasseh east of the Jordan (1 Chr 5:24). Isaac, not Ishmael, was the son of God’s
5. Name of God, meaning “my husband,” promise.
by which Israel will one day address him (Hos Hagar survived in the wilderness with the
2:16). guidance of an angel, and Ishmael became a
See Gop, NAMES OF. hunter of wild animals. He settled in the wil-
derness of Paran and married an Egyptian
Ishiah. kv spelling of Isshiah, Izrahiah’s woman (21:20,21). Little else is recorded of
son, in 1 Chronicles 7:3. him, save that he lived to assist in the burial
See ISSHIAH #1. of Abraham (25:9,10), gave his daughter Maha-
lath in marriage (28:9), and died at the age of
Ishijah. «sv spelling of Isshijah, Harim’s 137 (25:17). The names of his 12 sons and their
son, in Ezra 10:31. settlements are recorded in Genesis 25:13—-15.
See ISSHIJAH. In subsequent history, a caravan of Ishmaelite
traders (also called Midianites cf. 8:24) bought
Ishma. Etam’s son from Judah’s tribe (1 Joseph from his brothers and sold him in
Chr 4:3). Egypt (Gn 37:25—28; 39:1; KJv Ishmaelites).
1053
Ishmaiah

Though Isaac rather than Ishmael inherited Ishmeelite. Alternate Ksv spelling for Ish-
the covenantal blessings, it is clear that the maelite (Gn 37:25—28; 39:1).
covenant was not the only means whereby di- See ISHMAEL, ISHMAELITES.
vine favor could be bestowed. Abraham and
Sarah overestimated the importance of Ish- Ishmerai. Elpaal’s son and a chief in Benja-
mael in God’s plan by mistaking him for the min’s tribe{1 Chr 8:18).
heir of covenant promises, but they also under-
rated God’s intentions for him by excluding Ishod. xv spelling of Ishhod, Hammole-
him altogether from inheritance with Isaac. cheth’s son (1 Chr 7:18).
In the NT, Paul alludes to Ishmael while
See ISHHOD.
urging the Galatians not to see the Law as a
yoke (Gal 4:22). He states that those who trust
the Law instead of putting their faith in Ishpah. Beriah’s son from Benjamin’s tribe
God’s promises do not inherit the kingdom, (1 Chr 8:16, KJv Ispah).
just as the son of the slave woman did not
receive inheritance with the son of the free Ishpan. Shashah’s son and a chief of Benja-
woman (v 30). min’s tribe (1 Chr 8:22).
2. Son of Nethaniah, son of Elishama, of the
royal family of Zedekiah (2 Kgs 25:25), incited Ishtar. Ancient fertility goddess.
by Baalis, king of the Ammonites, to assassi- See CANAANITE DEITIES AND RELIGION.
nate Gedaliah, Judean governor of the puppet
regime, which Nebuchadnezzar left behind at Ish-tob. xksv translation for “men of Tob” in
Mizpah at the time of the Babylonian exile. 2 Samuel 10:6,8.
Gedaliah ignored advance warning of the plot See Tos.
and refused to allow Johanan to assassinate
Ishmael first (Jer 40:14—16). While sharing a Ishuah. xsv spelling of Ishvah, Asher’s son,
meal with Gedaliah, Ishmael and 10 compan- in Genesis 46:17.
ions set on him and killed him along with his
See ISHVAH.
retinue and the Babylonian troops attending.
The next day he persuaded a group of 80 pil-
grims passing from the north to the temple at Ishuai. «sv spelling of Ishvi, Asher’s son, in
Jerusalem to enter Mizpah, where he killed all 1 Chronicles 7:30.
but 10 who ransomed their lives with stores of See IsHvI #1.
food. Hiding all the bodies in a cistern, Ish-
mael took captive the rest of the population of Ishui. ksv spelling of Ishvi, Saul’s son, in
Mizpah, including Jeremiah and women of the 1 Samuel 14:49.
royal family, and set out to join the Ammon- See IsHvI #2.
ites. But Johanan, with an armed force, over-
took Ishmael at Gibeon and rescued the cap- Ishvah. Asher’s son (Gn 46:17, KJv Ishuah; 1
tives, whereupon Ishmael fled to Ammonite Chr 7:30, KJv Isuah).
territory (Jer 41).
3. Son of Azel, a Benjamite of the family of Ishvi. 1. Asher’s third son (Gn 46:17, KJV
Saul (1 Chr 8:38; 9:44). Isui; Nm 26:44, KJv Jesui; 1 Chr 7:30, KJv Ish-
4. Father of Zebadiah, the “governor of the uai), and founder of the Ishvite family (Nm
house of Judah in all the king’s matters” under 26:44, KJV Jesuites).
Jehoshaphat (2 Chr 19:11). 2. One of King Saul’s sons (1 Sm 14:49, KJV
5. Son of Jehohanan, and one of the com- Ishui).
manders who allied with Jehoiada the priest
to enthrone the child Joash and thus end the Ishvite. Descendant of Ishvi, Asher’s son
reign of Athaliah (2 Chr 23:1). (Nm 26:44).
6. Son of Pashhur, and one of the priests
See IsHvI #1.
who put.away foreign wives during Ezra’s re-
forms (Ezr 10:22). Haze W. PERKIN
Ismachiah. Levite overseer of things dedi-
Ishmaiah. 1. Warrior from Benjamin’s tribe cated at the temple during Hezekiah’s reform
who joined David at Ziklag in his struggle (2 Chr 31:13).
against King Saul. Ishmaiah was one of Da-
vid’s ambidextrous archers and slingers (1 Chr Ismaiah. «Jv spelling of Ishmaiah, a war-
12:4, KJV Ismaiah). rior from Benjamin’s tribe who joined David
2. Obadiah’s son, a chief officer in Zebu- at Ziklag in 1 Chronicles 12:4.
lun’s tribe in David's time (1 Chr 27:19). See ISHMAIAH #1.

1054
 Israel, History of

Ispah. xkuv spelling of Ishpah, Beriah’s son, in his camp. If one assumes that most of the
1 Chronicles 8:16. men were married and had one or more chil-
See ISHPAH. dren each, the total extended family may have
numbered in excess of rooo.
Additional developments in the life of Abra-
Israel, History of. An account of God’s sov- ham and Jacob were particularly important
ereign purpose in calling a people out of pa- for world history. Abraham, frustrated at not
ganism and establishing them as witnesses for Having an heir, accepted Sarah’s suggestion,
the true faith among the nations, of God’s sov- which was also the custom of the land, to ob-
ereign power in protecting them from extinc- tain an heir by the slave girl Hagar. This he
tion, of his sovereign justice in dealing with decided to do, and the son born was named
their departure from his ways of holiness, of Ishmael, progenitor of the Arabs. Thus Abra-
God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins ham is revered by Arabs and Muslims as he is
and restoring them to fellowship with himself by Jews and Christians. He is the father of the
by providing through them a Savior for the Jews through his son Isaac, child of promise.
entire world. He holds a special place in Christianity as an
Patriarchal Age. The story of Israel begins example of justification by faith and as the
with Abraham, whom God called first at Ur, ancestor of Christ, through whom all Chris-
and perhaps later at Haran (Acts 7:2-4), to tians obtain their salvation.
leave Mesopotamia and go into a land to Jacob, a scheming scoundrel in his earlier
which God would direct the way. In calling years, wound up in exile in northern Mesopota-
Abraham God made with him a covenant (Gn mia for 20 years in the home of his Uncle La-
12:1-3) that promised him a land, special di- ban. There he married Leah and Rachel and
vine favor (‘‘I will bless those who bless you fathered the sons who became the progenitors
and the one who curses you I will curse” of the 12 tribes of Israel. On his return to Pales-
NASB), and the privilege of being a channel of tine he met God along the banks of the Jabbok
blessing to the entire world (‘‘In you all the River (Gn 32) and God changed his name to
families of the earth shall be blessed” Nass). In Israel (‘‘prince with God’’).
Genesis 12:14—18 God confirmed this uncondi- The patriarchal period in Canaan lasted for
tional covenant, promising Abraham this new 215 years. One estimate places Abraham’s en-
land forever, along with innumerable descen- try into Canaan about 2085 Bc, when he was 75
dants. Subsequently, in Genesis 15:1—21, God years of age. Jacob and his sons migrated to
again confirmed the covenant but added the Egypt to escape a severe famine in Canaan in
significant prediction that the guarantee of about 1870 Bc. During much of the patriarchal
holding Canaan in perpetuity did not mean period Palestine experienced a decline in popu-
occupation of the land in every generation. lation and was occupied largely by nomadic
God also spelled out the limits of the Promised or seminomadic tribes. It was relatively easy
Land (from the river of Egypt to the Euphra- for the Hebrews to enter such a situation. Af-
tes, some 500 to 600 miles in extent). A final ter 1900 Palestine began to enjoy more settled
confirmation of the covenant to Abraham ap- conditions. Shortly after the Hebrews made
pears in Genesis 17:6—8. It guaranteed the land the trek into Egypt.
of Canaan to Abraham’s posterity and added Sojourn in Egypt. If Jacob and his sons
that kings (an anticipation of the Davidic dy- entered Egypt about 1870 Bc, it was the period
nasty) would arise in his line. of the Middle Kingdom. And by that time
The covenant was confirmed to Abraham's other migrants from Asia were coming in in-
son Isaac (Gn 26:3—5) and his grandson Jacob creasing numbers. The Hebrews settled in Go-
(ch 28). shen, in the eastern delta region, under the
This period is known as the patriarchal age protecting care of Joseph, who held a position
in Hebrew history. The patriarchs were Abra- at the Egyptian court roughly equivalent to
ham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were called patri- that of prime minister. As more and more Asi-
archs because they were fathers, not only to atic Hyksos came into Egypt, they began to
their immediate families, but also to the ex- take over the country—northern Egypt at
tended family of Hebrews, over which they ex- least. During this same time the Hebrews be-
ercised a fatherly control. They served as came increasingly numerous. Some who hold
political, legal, and spiritual heads of their mi- to a different chronology believe the Hebrews
gratory community, looking after their inter- were welcomed into Egypt during the days of
ests and leading them in worship. Periodically Hyksos domination (after 1750 Bc). At any rate,
they built altars on which they offered sacri- about 1580 BC native Egyptian princes re-
fices. That the patriarchal community was gained control of the country and expelled
very large can be seen from Genesis 14:14, many of the Asiatics.
which says that Abraham had 318 armed men In process of time there arose a king over
1055
Israel, History of
Egypt “who knew not Joseph” (Ex 1:8 kJv).
Very possibly this meant that a native Egyp-
tian dynasty had arisen in Egypt and they
were apprehensive over the fact that the grow-
ing numbers and wealth of the Hebrews might
jeopardize their own supremacy. Egyptian
measures to subjugate the Hebrews and re-
duce their birth rate had a reverse effect (v 12).
Finally, the Egyptians ordered the killing of
all male Hebrew infants at birth. Among those
who disobeyed were the parents of Moses, who
set him afloat in a waterproof basket made of
reeds. Found by a daughter of Pharaoh, he was
brought up in the Egyptian court, was given a
first-class education, and became a high offi-
cial of the realm.
At the age of 40, Moses identified himself
with his own people. He killed an Egyptian in
defense of a fellow Hebrew, and immediately
fled to the land of Midian in the northeastern
part of the Sinai Peninsula. He married and
lived there for 40 years, becoming thoroughly
familiar with the geography and the ways of
the wilderness through which he would later
lead the Hebrews. The Egyptians continued to
oppress the Hebrew people severely until they
cried urgently to God for deliverance. In re-
sponse, God confronted Moses in the famous
burning bush experience and called on him to
return to Egypt and lead the people back into
the land of Canaan (Ex 3,4). He was to have
the help of his brother Aaron.
The Exodus. Understandably the pharaoh
of Egypt was reluctant to permit the Hebrews
to leave permanently. The value of this great
labor force was incalculable. But finally, after
suffering a series of 10 plagues, lasting per-
haps a year, the Egyptians were persuaded to
let the Hebrews go (Ex 7-12).
The plagues had a theological as well as a
practical purpose. They discredited the gods
The Sinai Peninsula, to which
Moses fled after he killed the
Egyptian.
of Egypt and exalted the most high God of
heaven (Ex 12:12). The plagues clearly dis-
credited specific gods of Egypt (e.g., the Nile
was worshiped as Hapi, plague 1; the frog,
worshiped as Heqt, plague 2; the bull, wor-
shiped as Ptah, plague 5; the sun, worshiped
as Amon-Re, Aton, plague g), and taken to-
gether they struck a direct blow at the Egyp-
tian pantheon.
Just before the last plague, which was the
night in which the death angel invaded the
homes of the Egyptians, the Israelites made
the Passover sacrifice according to divine in-
structions. This involved slaying a lamb for
each household (unless the household was too
small; in that event, households could com-
bine). Anyone who was careless about apply-
ing the blood to the doorpost or who rejected
this divine provision came under the judg-
ment of God. After the death of the firstborn
throughout the land, the Egyptians begged the
Hebrews to leave. Their company numbered
600,000 men over 20 years of age, plus women
and children, for a total of over 2,500,000. In
addition they took their flocks and herds and
personal belongings.
When they left is a matter of continuing
debate. Traditionally a date of 1440 Bc is given
for the exodus (e.g., 1 Kgs 6:1, which places the
exodus 480 years before the dedication of the
temple in 966 Bc) and 1400 Bc for the conquest
under Joshua, and there do not seem to be any
compelling arguments for rejecting that posi-
tion. But a great many prefer 1275 Bc for a
variety of reasons.
The early date of the exodus would place
the later years of the wilderness wanderings
and the subsequent conquest of Palestine dur-
ing the reigns of Amenhotep III and IV (1412-
1366), a time when the pharaohs allowed
Egyptian control of Palestine to disintegrate.
 Israel, History of

When the Egyptians did reassert their power, noitering in Canaan and decided that they
about 1300, they restricted their movements should not advance into Canaan. They called
largely to the coastal area, and thus did not for a new leader to bring them back to Egypt.
come in contact with the Hebrews who were God declared that the entire generation would
living in the hill country of Judea, Samaria, wander in the wilderness until the adults had
and Galilee. died. Only Joshua and Caleb (the two spies in
Wilderness Wanderings. The wilderness favor of invading immediately) would enter
wanderings were an important interlude in -- the Promised Land. Near the end of the period
the history of Israel. During those years signifi- of wandering, Moses also lost the privilege of
cant and basic institutions came into exis- entering the land by an act of disobedience
tence at God’s command. At Sinai, Moses de- (20:10—13).
livered to Israel the Law, the pattern of the The Conquest. The latter part of the Book
tabernacle (which later became the model for of Numbers describes how Moses led the Isra-
the temple) and orders for its operation, as elites to victory over the peoples living east of
well as detailed instructions for the priesthood the Jordan River. Reuben, Gad, and the half-
and sacrificial system of worship. tribe of Manasseh requested permission to set-
The period of the wanderings was truly a tle there and reluctantly were allowed to do so
remarkable time. The presence of God was evi- on the condition they would join the rest of
denced by a pillar of cloud that hovered over the Israelites in conquering Canaan before set-
the people by day and a pillar of fire by night. tling down. Prior to victories in Transjordan, a
God provided food in the form of manna, peri- new census of adult males was taken, in order
odically provided water by miraculous means, to determine the military capabilities of Israel
and arranged that clothes did not wear out. In and to provide a basis for equitable division of
spite of all that, the people murmured and the land they were about to enter. The number
complained continually. of males above 20 years of age was 601,730 (Nm
At Sinai, God gave the Law (Ex 19:2—24:18), 26:51). The Book of Deuteronomy consists pri-
and the people promptly made a commitment marily of a series of speeches delivered by Mo-
to keep it (24:3). Then God gave the pattern for ses in a covenant renewal ceremony on the
the tabernacle and its furniture (chs 24- plains of Moab just before his death, and the
27,30,31,35—-40) and established the priesthood appointment of Joshua as leader.
(chs 28,29). While Moses was on the mountain Joshua lost no time in moving forward.
receiving God’s revelation, the people grew Spies sent across the Jordan to Jericho to re-
restless and clamored for gods they could see. connoiter reported a situation quite different
Even Aaron was carried away with the idola- from what the Hebrews had experienced at
trous wave and supervised the casting of a Kadesh-barnea a generation earlier. Now the
golden calf and building an altar before it. The people of Canaan were terrified because they
fact that they turned to Egyptian cattle wor- had heard of the numerical strength and victo-
ship so readily indicates that paganism must ries of the Hebrews. Apparently the day after
have made deep inroads among them while in the spies returned, Joshua moved the people
captivity (chs 32-34). Moses’ intercessory re- to the edge of the Jordan and prepared to
sponse to God’s announcement that he would cross over. The waters parted for them here as
destroy Israel because of her idolatry led to a the Red Sea had parted earlier.
divine determination to execute judgment on The narrative of conquest that appears in
only the worst offenders. the Book of Joshua is not a detailed battle ac-
Subsequently God revealed the legal and count. It describes a thrust into the middle of
priestly order (Lv 1:1—27:34). Among the di- Palestine around Jericho and Ai, a southerly
vinely appointed institutions described or al- drive to defeat the Amorite league, and a
luded to in Leviticus are several special days northern campaign against Hazor and other
or feasts, including the sabbath, Passover, har- towns. The history of Joshua is extremely tele-
vest or firstfruits, Pentecost or feast of weeks, scoped, for his major military action must
feast of trumpets, day of atonement, feast of have required about 6 years. Joshua’s friend
tabernacles, sabbatical year, and the year of Caleb was 79 when the conquest began and 85
jubilee. after the last great battle with Jabin, king of
After camping at Sinai for about a year, the Hazor (Jos 14:7,10).
Israelites got their orders to go forward. Mir- When the war was over, major strongholds
iam (Moses’ sister) and Aaron rebelled against (e.g., Jerusalem) still remained in enemy
Moses’ leadership and suffered divine punish- hands, but the land west of the Jordan was
ment in consequence (Nm 12). When the people allocated to the nine and one-half Hebrew
arrived at Kadesh-barnea, at the gate to south- tribes. The task of reducing enemy towns was
ern Palestine, they were frightened by the ma- left to the individual tribes in whose land they
jority report of their spies who had been recon- were located. The Joshua account was not so

1057
Israel, History of
much a narrative of Israelite battle prowess as
of God’s faithfulness and intervention on be-
half of his people. For example, at Jericho they
did not attack but merely followed divine or-
ders and watched the defenses collapse; at Gib-
eon hailstones killed more Amorites than Isra-
elite soldiers did (Jos 10).
The Judges. Joshua died some 30 years af-
ter he had led the Hebrews into Canaan, and
he was followed by a series of divinely ap-
pointed leaders who ruled, sometimes over the
whole of Israel as a loose confederacy, and
sometimes over one or more tribes. They were
judges, civil functionaries, and military lead-
ers, all at the same time. Their authority was
not very strong; “every man did that which
was right in his own eyes” (Jgs 17:6; 21:25).
The Book of Judges pictures a series of re-
curring cycles: apostasy from God, punish-
ment in the form of oppression by neighboring
tribes, cries to God for relief, release from
bondage under the leadership of a judge, and
a period of rest from oppression.
Establishment of the chronology of the
judges is one of the thorniest problems of
Scripture. Adding up all years of oppression
and rest mentioned in the book gives a total of
410. The Book of Acts gives a total of 450 years
from the days of Joshua to Samuel (Acts
13:20). The difference in Acts may be ac-
counted for by the addition of the 40 years of
Eli’s ministry (1 Sm 4:18). Allowing 410 years
for the period of the judges, about 30 for the
conquest, and 4o for the wilderness wander-
ings, means 480 years from 1050 BC, the date
for Saul’s kingship, and would give a date of
about 1530 for the exodus. This is about 100
years more than even the early date for the
exodus. The most probable explanation is that
there is some overlap in oppressions and judge-
ships. For instance, the activities of Jephthah
were centered on the eastern frontier, those of
Samson in the Philistine plain in the south-
west, and those of Deborah and Barak in the
north.
The United Monarchy. Because of the
weakness of Israel resulting from political dis-
unity and the ineptness and corruption of both
Eli’s and Samuel’s sons, the people of Israel
called for a king to rule over them. This de-
mand was in reality a rejection of the divine
plan of theocracy—the rule of God. God
granted the Hebrews’ wish but warned them
of the disadvantages of monarchy (1 Sm 8:9—
21). The concept of kingship was not new to
Israel. It had been hinted at in Genesis 49:10
and Numbers 24:17, and Moses had made
some very clear statements about it in Deuter-
onomy 17:14—20.
The first stage of Hebrew monarchy is com-
monly called the united monarchy because all
1058
Israel was ruled by a single king. This period
lasted for 120 years—encompassing the 4o-
year reigns of Saul (Acts 13:21), David (2 Sm
5:5), and Solomon (1 Kgs 11:42).
The people asked for a king, and God
granted them one, but not one like those of the
surrounding nations. The Hebrew king was to
be a man who followed God’s dictates in his
public and private life, who did not intrude
into the affairs of the priesthood, and who did
not fall into idolatry but exerted all his influ-
ence to keep the people faithful to God. If he
failed in any of these respects, he ran the risk
of being deposed by God, of having his line
brought to an end, or even of having the people
fall into captivity to a foreign power. All this
must be kept in mind when evaluating the
reigns of Saul, David, Solomon, and the kings
of the divided monarchy.
Saul (c. 1020-1000 Bc) began well. He won a
great victory over the Ammonites at Jabesh-
gilead and showed considerable wisdom in ad-
ministrative matters. But after about two
years he intruded into the priest’s office to of-
fer sacrifice, bringing the divine prediction
that his kingdom would be taken from him.
But he went on to enjoy great military victory,
and was apparently an able ruler until about
the middle of his reign.
After Saul’s disobedience to God’s com-
mand to destroy the Amalekites, the Lord repu-
diated Saul and instructed Samuel to anoint
David privately as future king of Israel. Da-
vid’s rise to prominence was spurred by his
victory over Goliath and the accompanying de-
feat of the Philistines. Saul later made David
commander of the army, and the young man
soon earned a reputation greater than that of
the king himself. Saul, who had become in-
creasingly mentally disturbed after his rela-
tionship with God was broken, began to make
attempts on David's life, and for the last years
of Saul’s reign David lived as a fugitive. Mean-
while the Philistines got completely out of con-
trol and finally killed Saul and most of his
sons in the great battle of Mt Gilboa, which
gave the Philistines control over much of Pales-
tine west of the Jordan.
Soon David became king in Judah with his
capital in Hebron. A son of Saul, Ish-bosheth,
established himself at Mahanaim, east of the
Jordan. For seven years the two tiny kingdoms
existed side by side. But after the Israelite
king and his army commander were assassi-
nated, David became ruler of a united Hebrew
kingdom.
Not long after the beginning of his reign
(1000-961) David completely defeated and sub-
jugated the Philistines. Soon thereafter he cap-
tured Jerusalem, making it the capital of the
united kingdom. During succeeding years Da-

vid built up an empire (2 Sm 8,10; 1 Chr 18,19),
conquering Moab, Edom, Damascus, Zobah
and Hamath, and Ammon. So he controlled
territory from the Gulf of Aqaba (branch of the
Red Sea) and the Sinai in the south almost to
the Euphrates in the north. Moreover, he estab-
lished good relations, if not an alliance, with
Tyre.
The establishment of David’s empire was
possible because of a power vacuum in the
Middle East. The Egyptians, Myceneans, Hit-
tites, and Assyrians were either decadent or
removed from the stage of history. The Phoeni-
cians, a peaceful commercial people, were also
free to expand their trade, and they were
happy to sell cedar to David for his palace and
the temple.
Without doubt, David was Israel’s greatest
king. Jerusalem came to be known as the city
of David. When the king wanted to build the
temple as a house for God, God replied that
his son should do it instead. But God would in
a very real sense build David’s house; he made
a covenant with David, promising him that
his house (dynasty, kingdom, throne) would be
established forever (2 Sm 7). Christ, the infi-
nite One who came from the line of David,
alone was capable of fulfilling this divine
promise (see Lk 1:31—33; Acts 2:29-36; 13:32-
39; 15:14-17).
Like other oriental monarchs, David fell
into the practice of keeping a harem. Scrip-
ture names eight wives and 21 children and
refers to other wives and concubines. Such a
situation opened the door to family rivalries
and questions about succession to the throne.
Two sons, Absalom and Adonijah, made a try
for the throne; but both efforts were squelched
and Solomon, son of David’s favorite wife
Bathsheba, became the next king.
Solomon (970-930 BC) was a man of peace
and a builder of palaces, cities, fortifications,
and the temple. He fortified cities all over his
realm and outfitted cities for his chariot
corps and cavalry units. With the help of the
Solomon’s pillars near modern Eilat.
1059
Israel, History of
Phoenicians he built a seaport and kept a
fleet at Ezion-geber, near modern Eilat on the
Gulf of Aqaba. He greatly enlarged Jerusalem
by enclosing the temple area to the north of
David's city and the southwestern hill now
known as Zion. His best-known project was
the temple, which took 7 years to build. Just
_twice the size of the tabernacle, it was built
on the same basic plan; it measured go feet
long and 30 feet wide and had magnificent
appointments. But he also constructed a pal-
ace complex that took 13 years to complete.
This included an armory, a throne room, the
king’s private residence, and a house for the
daughter of pharaoh.
Apparently much influenced by the spiri-
tual testimony of David and desiring God’s
blessing on his rule, Solomon made a great
sacrifice to God at Gibeon near the beginning
of his reign. God met him there and offered to
grant whatever he might request. Solomon re-
plied, “Give thy servant therefore an under-
standing mind to govern thy people” (1 Kgs
3:9). His God-given wisdom is apparent in
many administrative decisions and _ official
policies and building plans.
Unfortunately, Solomon did not show such
wisdom in maintaining a harem of 700 wives
and 300 concubines or in excessive expendi-
tures that left the state in serious financial
straits. He even erected places of worship for
his foreign wives, thus subsidizing their idola-
tries and incurring the wrath of God. In fact,
foreign wives and their idolatry proved to be
his downfall; before Solomon died, God in-
formed him that for this reason he would di-
vide the kingdom at his death and give most
of it to someone other than Solomon’s son.
But for David’s sake, God would keep Judah
and Jerusalem in the hands of the Davidic line
(1 Kgs 11:9—13).
The Divided Kingdom. After the death of
Solomon the Near East was destined to be-
come a very different place. Israel was no
longer in a power vacuum. The Assyrian Em-
pire rose in Mesopotamia, to be followed by
the Neo-Babylonian and the Medo-Persian em-
pires in turn. Egypt was temporarily powerful
in the south, but it would later come under
control of Assyria and Medo-Persia. These em-
pires exerted great pressure on Israel and
dominated one or both of the two Hebrew
kingdoms.
When Solomon died, his son Rehoboam
took the throne and was forced to deal with a
rising tide of resentment over the high taxes
and economic stagnation of Solomon’s last
years. When Rehoboam refused to give relief,
all the northern tribes broke away and formed
the northern kingdom, Israel, under the leader-
ship of Jeroboam. The southern kingdom, Ju-
Israel, History of

Kings and Prophets of the Divided Kingdom

Judah Israel

Prophets Kings Kings Prophets

Shemaiah (1 Kgs 12:22—24; 2 Chr Rehoboam JeroboamI . Ahijah (1 Kgs 11:29—39; 12:15; 14:1—
11:2—4; 12:5—8,15) 18; 15:29; 2 Chr 9:29; 10:15)
Iddo (2 Chr 9:29; 12:15) Anonymous “man of God” (1 Kgs
13:1-32)
Iddo (2 Chr 13:22) Abijah (m) Nadab
Azariah (2 Chr 15:1—7) Asa Baasha Jehu (1 Kgs 16:1-4,7,12)
Hanani (2 Chr 16:7—10)
Elah
Zimri
Tibni
Omni
Ahab Elijah (1 Kgs 17-2 Kgs 2:12)
Jehu (2 Chr 19:1—3; 20:34) Jehoshaphat Micaiah (1 Kgs 22:7—28)
Jahaziel (2 Chr 20:14—17) Anonymous “son of the prophets”
(1 Kgs 20:35—42)
Eliezer (2 Chr 20:37)
Ahaziah Elijah
Elisha
Jehoram [Joram] Elisha (2 Kgs 2-8)
Elijah (2 Chr 21:12-15) Jehoram [Joram]
Ahaziah Jehu Elisha (2 Kgs 9,10)
Athaliah
Joel Jehoash [Joash]
Zechariah (2 Chr 24:20—22)
Jehoahaz Elisha
Jehoash [Joash] Elisha (2 Kgs 13:10-25)
Joel Amaziah
Jeroboam II Jonah (2 Kgs 14:25)
Amos (1:1)
Hosea (1:1)
Joel Uzziah [Azariah] Zechariah
Zechariah (2 Chr 26:5) Shallum
Isaiah (2:2; 6:1) Menahem
Pekahiah
Isaiah (1:1)/Micah (1:1) Jotham Pekah Oded (2 Chr 28:9—15)
Isaiah (7-9)
Isaiah (1:1,7)/Micah (1:1) Ahaz
Hoshea
Isaiah (1:1)/Micah (1:1) Hezekiah
Manasseh
Amon
Nahum/Habakkuk Josiah
Huldah(2 Kgs 22:14—20)
Zephaniah
Jeremiah
Jeremiah Jehoahaz
Jeremiah Jehoiakim
Uriah (Jer 26:20—23)
Jeremiah Jehoiachin
Jeremiah Zedekiah

dah, was left with only the territory of Judah
and Benjamin. In each of the separate king-
doms there were 20 kings. While the north had
several dynasties and the reigns of kings were
generally short, in the south the dynasty of
David continued to rule and the reigns were
longer.
The Northern Kingdom. The northern king-
dom lasted from the division in 931 Bc until its
conquest by Assyria in 722. Jeroboam, fearing
that he would lose the loyalty of the people if
they continued to go to Jerusalem to worship,
set up a new religion of his own. Instituting
calf worship, he built shrines at Dan in the
north and Bethel in the south. This idolatry
drew the condemnation of God and the predic-
tion that Jeroboam’s line would be wiped out.
All his successors are said to have followed in
his idolatrous steps. Israel found itself at war
during much of its history—with Judah, Syria,
or Assyria. Jeroboam established his capital
first at Shechem and later at Tirzah.
Four other kings of the north require spe-
cial comment: Omri, Ahab, Jehu, and Jero-

1060

boam II. Omri (885-874 Bc) must have been
an impressive ruler. Generations later Assyri-
ans still spoke of Israel as the ‘‘land of Omri.”
After he had established himself on the
throne, he located the permanent capital of
the kingdom at Samaria and began the pal-
ace complex there. Early in his reign he was
successful in conquering Moab, and later he
reestablished the good relations with Tyre
that existed in the days of David and Solo-
mon. Apparently he established a full alliance
and cemented it with the marriage of his son
Ahab to Jezebel, a princess of Tyre.
Ahab (874-853 BC) was one of the most sig-
nificant of Israel’s kings. He and his wife Jeze-
bel promoted the vile idolatry of Baal worship
with its religious prostitution, arousing the
powerful opposition of the prophet Elijah.
Ahab was a formidable military man, defeating
the Syrians in major campaigns and participat-
ing in a coalition that fought the Assyrians to a
virtual standstill. He also built extensively at
Samaria, Hazor, Megiddo, and other towns, as
excavations show.
Jehu (841-814 Bc) was God’s agent for pun-
ishing the house of Omri and destroying Baal
worship in Israel. He did eradicate Baal wor-
ship and liquidated literally scores of relatives
and court officials of Ahab. But he was so ruth-
less that he killed off the people who knew
how to run the government; subsequently it
did not work well. Jehu also was forced to be-
come a vassal to Assyria.
Jeroboam II ruled during most of the first
half of the 8th century (793-753 Bc) and
brought the kingdom to its greatest extent
and prosperity. He, with his contemporary
Uzziah in the south, ruled most of the land
David had once controlled. This was possible
because the Assyrians were in a period of
decline during most of the first half of the
century.
Prophets who were active during the his-
tory of the northern kingdom include non-
writing prophets, Elijah and Elisha, and writ-
ing prophets, Jonah and Hosea.
The Southern Kingdom. The history of the
southern kingdom of Judah was quite differ-
ent from that of the northern kingdom. The
temple was there and so were large numbers
of Levites, many of whom came south after
the division of the kingdom in protest against
the idolatry of the north. In addition to this
spiritual strength, there was greater political
stability and unity, promoted by the fact
that only two tribes—Judah and Benjamin—
shared power, and all the kings were of the
Davidic dynasty. Moreover, eight of the kings
were good monarchs. There were also periodic
religious revivals. God granted the southern
1061
Israel, History of
kingdom about 1oo more years of existence
than the north. But Judah too fell into idolatry
and went into captivity for her sins.
Rehoboam, first king in the south, is espe-
cially remembered because he refused to lis-
ten to wise counsel about fiscal matters and
perpetrated the division of the kingdom. He
isealso remembered for his religious policies.
After a good beginning, he allowed apostasy
to get out of control and brought the judg-
ment of God in the form of an invasion in his
fifth year (926 Bc) by Shishak I of Egypt,
resulting in extensive plunder and payment
of tribute. Thereafter he launched an exten-
sive program to fortify the realm. Shishak’s
invasion did have the effect of producing a
partial and temporary spiritual reform, but
the general trend of Rehoboam’s reign was
downward.
Conditions during the reign of his son, Abi-
jam, were worse, but Asa (g10—869 BC) initi-
ated a religious reform that was effective for
most of his reign. When threatened by the
northern kingdom during his latter years, how-
ever, Asa turned to Syria for help instead of to
God, and he seems to have defied the prophets
of God to his dying day.
Asa’s son Jehoshaphat (872-848 Bc), was ap-
parently influenced by his father’s early reli-
gious devotion, and his reign was characterized
by faithfulness, winning the favor of God. How-
ever, he seems to have made a full alliance with
Ahab of Israel, which resulted in the marriage of
his son Jehoram to Ahab’s daughter Athaliah.
This alliance involved Jehoshaphat in almost
ruinous joint ventures with Ahab, and later
with two of his sons when they became kings of
Israel. It also opened the door for the introduc-
tion of Baal worship into Judah when Jehoram
came to the throne in the southern kingdom. For
his sin Jehoram (853-841) suffered internal
revolt, invasion, and death from a horrible
disease:
After his death, his last remaining son, Aha-
ziah, ruled less than a year, following the
wicked ways of his father. When Ahaziah died
in battle, the queen mother Athaliah decided
to seize the throne for herself and to secure
her power by killing off all those in line to the
throne. But she missed Ahaziah’s infant son
Joash, who was kept hidden in the temple for
six years.
When Joash was seven, Jehoida the high
priest arranged his coronation and also for the
execution of the murderous and _ idolatrous
Athaliah. During his early years when Joash
was influenced by good counsel, he did well.
But after the middle of his reign (835—796 Bc) he
began to listen to the princes who wanted to
restore idolatry, and conditions deteriorated.
Israel, History of
Military reversals brought on economic decline
and ultimately the king’s assassination.
His son Amaziah (796—767 Bc) started well
with victory over Edom and faithfulness to
God. But he too fell into idolatry and was to-
tally defeated by the northern kingdom, being
held prisoner there. At that point his son Uz-
ziah took over (c. 792 Bc) and began a long and
generally successful reign. During the several
decades that followed, Assyria was in decline,
and Uzziah and his contemporary in the north,
Jeroboam II, were able to expand Hebrew hold-
ings so that between them they controlled most
of the territory Solomon had ruled.
Uzziah (792—740 Bc) was able to restore the
power of Judah rather quickly after his fa-
ther’s defeat by Israel. Then he subjugated the
Philistines in the southwest, the Ammonites
across the Jordan, and strengthened his hold
on the Edomites. All during his reign eco-
nomic conditions improved. But at the height
of his power Uzziah foolishly violated the high
priest’s prerogatives and offered sacrifice in
the temple. For this he was smitten with lep-
rosy; his son Jotham was co-regent during the
years 750-735 BC, going on to rule alone for
about five more years. Meanwhile, Assyrian
power became resurgent.
By and large Jotham merely carried on the
policies of Uzziah. But the administration of
his son Ahaz (735-715 BC) was very much af-
fected by the Assyrian threat. Israel and Syria
wanted him to join in war against Assyria but
he refused, being pro-Assyrian in sympathy.
When Israel and Syria invaded Judah, King
Ahaz sent tribute to Assyria and became her
vassal in return for protection. This rash
course of action was vainly opposed by Isaiah,
who was prophet at court (c. 740-700 Bc). Con-
temporaneously the prophet Micah ministered
to the common people of Judah. The pro-
Assyrian policy of Ahaz was accompanied by
a renewed sympathy for idolatry, and this
brought the judgment of God in the form of
invasion by Edomites and Philistines and trou-
ble with Assyria. In fact, during this period
Assyria had annexed the northern kingdom
(722 Bc) and removed many of her people into
captivity.
The next king of Judah, Hezekiah (715-686),
was greatly sobered by the fall of Israel be-
cause of her sins, and he determined to launch
a reform in his realm. He was anti-Assyrian
too, but he did not dare to discontinue tribute
payments and strike for independence until af-
ter Sennacherib came to the throne in Nine-
veh in 705 Bc. At first Sennacherib was too
preoccupied to attend to Judah, but finally in
701 he invaded. Despite tremendous initial suc-
cess, he was stopped by a divinely sent plague
1062
before the walls of Jerusalem (Is 36-39). Isaiah
-stood by the king to reassure and sustain him
during this emergency.
Hezekiah’s son Manasseh (696—642 Bc) ruled
longer than any other king of Israel or Judah.
Unfortunately he turned his back on his fa-
ther’s example and caused the people to fall
into gross idolatry (2 Kgs 21:9). Carried away
captive by the Assyrians late in his reign, he
repented of his evil and God restored him to
his throne; thereafter he led some reforms.
But the land was too steeped in iniquity to be
rescued. His son Amon (642-640) reverted to
the idolatry he knew in his youth.
The situation was different with Josiah
(640-609 BC), however. Throughout his reign
he dedicated himself to reform. He sought to
root out idolatry and to restore the temple
and its worship. In 621 the Book of the Law
was found during repair of the temple, and its
demands—which had been forgotten—made a
great impression on king and people alike. It
is certain that Jeremiah and Zephaniah minis-
tered during Josiah’s reign, and probably Na-
hum and Habakkuk as well.
International conditions were now chang-
ing rapidly. Assyria was declining, and Nine-
veh fell to Babylon and the Medes in 612 Bc.
Three years later Pharaoh Neco of Egypt
marched north to aid his Assyrian ally.
When Josiah tried to stop him he was killed
in battle.
From this point everything was downhill
for Judah. None of the rest of the kings was
devout, and political power and economic
health rapidly declined. The people put one
of Josiah’s sons, Jehoahaz, on the throne. He
lasted three months. Pharaoh Neco replaced
him with Jehoiakim (609-598 Bc), another son
of Josiah. In 605 Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon
defeated Neco, invaded Judah, and took trib-
ute and hostages from Jehoiakim—including
Daniel and his friends (Dn 1:1). Jehoiakim re-
volted in 600, but Nebuchadnezzar did not
come to deal with him personally until 597
Bc. He died before the Babylonians arrived;
and his son Jehoiachin came to the throne to
rule for only three months before the Babylo-
nians carried him away into exile. Ezekiel
was among the many captives taken on that
occasion.
The Babylonians then put Zedekiah, youn-
gest son of Josiah, on the throne. When he re-
belled, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusa-
lem and took the city (587 Bc), destroying it
and the temple and carrying off large numbers
of people. The judgment of God had finally
fallen on the Jews for their idolatrous ways.
The Restoration. But in judgment God re-
membered mercy. This is evident in individ-

ual lives, when faithful ones like Daniel, Es-
ther, or Nehemiah rose to a position of impor-
tance in political life, or as numerous other
persons became prosperous in the alien envi-
ronment. It is evident on the community level
as God moved to protect Hebrew enclaves scat-
tered abroad and to restore an organized soci-
ety in Palestine.
Among the exiles Judaism as a way of life
separated from its own political system or
cultic center and began to emerge. Jews fi-
nally turned their backs on idolatry. And with-
out a temple, priesthood, king, or land, they
turned to the divine Word as their rallying
point and the foundation of their community.
During this period they developed the syna-
gogue as a place for fellowship, prayer, and
Bible study.
God’s restoration of an organized commu-
nity to Palestine involved particularly the for-
tunes of his ‘“‘anointed” Cyrus (Is 44:28; 45:1).
Cyrus was a Persian prince who in 559 BC re-
volted against the dominant dynasty control-
ling the Medean Empire. After consolidating
his hold on the throne, he proceeded to con-
quer Asia Minor and the Chaldean, or Neo-
Babylonian Empire. As a humane man and a
wise administrator, he permitted the captive
peoples to return to their homes and rebuild
their communities. Cyrus’ decree to the Jews
appears in Ezra 1 and dates probably to 538
1063
Israel, History of
The Hill of Ophel, with a sec-
tion of Nehemiah’s wall (built
in 444 BC) at the right.
Bc. A total of almost 50,000 went back to Judah
as a result of this edict (Ezr 2:64—65).
Under the stresses and strains of reestab-
lishment, the people built their houses but got
no farther than laying the foundation of a new
temple. Finally the prophets Haggai and
Zechariah stirred the people to build the
house of God (Ezr 5:1). They began in the sec-
ond year of Darius I the Great (521 Bc; Hg 1:1;
Zec 1:1) and completed the work in his sixth
year (515; Ezr 6:15).
During the reign of Darius’ son Xerxes
(485-465), a plot was hatched to exterminate
all the Jews in the Persian Empire, which at
that time controlled the lands where Jews
lived. Fortunately Xerxes (Ahasuerus in the
Book of Esther) in his third year (483 Bc; Est
1:3) went searching for a new queen and
chose Esther, who managed to preserve her
people.
Xerxes’ son Artaxerxes I (464-424) also fig-
ured significantly in Jewish history. In his sev-
enth year (458 Bc; Ezr 7:7) a second contingent
of Jews returned to Jerusalem under the lead-
ership of Ezra. And in Xerxes’ 2oth year (445
Bc; Neh 2:1), Nehemiah went to Jerusalem to
supervise rebuilding the walls of the city.
Malachi probably wrote his prophecy during
the latter part of Artaxerxes’ reign.
After the fall of Samaria and the captivity
of Judah, the Hebrews remaining in the land
Israel, History of
intermarried with various pagan groups in
the area. Their offspring became the Samari-
tans, a religious and racial admixture. These
people had moved into the vacuum left by
the destruction of Judah, and naturally they
looked with disfavor on an intrusion of Baby-
lonian Jews into an area they had come to
call their own. They did all they could to frus-
trate the efforts of Nehemiah to rebuild the
walls. It took all the courage, tact, energy,
and persuasiveness Ezra and Nehemiah could
muster to prevent the returning Jews from
intermarrying with the racially mixed people
of the land. Such intermarriage would have
meant the ultimate absorption and destruc-
tion of the Jewish people.
A Samaritan temple was later built on Mt
Gerizim (probably during the 4th century Bc),
and it became the center of the Samaritan wor-
ship. The hostility between Samaritans and
Jews continued on into the NT period (Jn 4)
and exists to the present.
The Intertestamental Period. Alexander the
Great conquered the Persian Empire with
lightning speed. When the people of Jerusalem
threw open their gates in 332 Bc and capitu-
lated without a fight, Alexander treated them
well. After his death in 323 Bc, Palestine
passed back and forth among his successors
until Ptolemy I of Egypt managed to establish
control in 301 Bc. Thereafter the area re-
mained in Egyptian hands until 198. The Pto-
lemies were tolerant and granted the Jews con-
siderable autonomy, allowing them to develop
their unique culture undisturbed as long as
they paid their taxes and remained submis-
sive. Many Jews settled in Alexandria and
gradually forgot their Hebrew in the Hellenis-
tic environment. As a result, a translation of
the OT into Greek (the Septuagint) was pro-
duced there. While the Ptolemies did not force
Hellenism on the Jews of either Alexandria or
Cartouche from the Rosetta Stone containing the word
“ptolemy.”
1064
Palestine, many were influenced by Hellenis-
tic ideas.
When Ptolemy V came to the throne as a
minor in 203 Bc, Antiochus III of Syria took
advantage of the weakened Egypt and con-
quered Palestine (198). Apparently the Jews
hoped to gain something from the change and
welcomed the Syrians. But their hope was ill-
founded. Antiochus III suffered disastrous de-
feat at the hands of Rome at Magnesia in 190
Bc. Syria not only lost much territory but also
was forced to pay a huge indemnity. Thereaf-
ter the Jews suffered under great financial bur-
dens, along with all other peoples of the em-
pire. The next Syrian king, Antiochus IV
Epiphanes (175-164 Bc), decided to launch an
effort to achieve greater internal strength and
unity within the empire by forcing, among
other things, a greater acceptance of Greek cul-
ture and the cult of the divine ruler. Naturally
this idolatrous requirement weighed heavily
on the monotheistic Jews.
But this does not completely explain the
Maccabean revolt against Syria. In 168 armed
conflict broke out between Jewish factions in
Jerusalem. Antiochus IV chose to interpret
this as open rebellion and sent an army
against the city. His forces demolished part of
the city wall and many houses. After this An-
tiochus decided to suppress Judaism com-
pletely, and he dedicated the temple to Zeus
and sacrificed swine on the altar. Circumci-
sion, sabbath observance, and other religious
festivals were no longer permitted, and public
worship of heathen gods became compulsory.
Some Jews capitulated to Antiochus’ orders
or only resisted passively, but a few decided to
resist openly. Chief among them were Matta-
thias and his five sons. After the early death of
Mattathias, his son Judas Maccabeus led his
forces to victory over the Syrians, regaining
the right to restore Jewish worship. The re-
dedication of the temple on December 25, 165
BC, inaugurated the festival of Hanukkah. Sub-
sequently Jonathan and Simon (other sons of
Mattathias) continued the struggle until inde-
pendence was gained in 142; this was possible
in large part because they saw how to take
advantage of the increasing weakness of Syr-
ian rulers and the competition for the royal
office.
Simon ruled the Jewish state until his assas-
sination in 135 Bc when his son John Hyrcanus
(135-104) took over. John Hyrcanus fought suc-
cessfully in the east, north, and south, gaining
land in Transjordan, capturing Shechem and
the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim, and sub-
jugating the Idumeans in the south and forc-
ing them to adopt Judaism. His son Aristobu-
lus ruled for only about a year (104-103), but
he added a portion of Galilee to the kingdom.

When he died, his widow married his brother
Alexander Jannaeus (103—76 Bc). Jannaeus car-
ried on almost incessant military action dur-
ing his reign, and by the time of his death had
almost recovered the kingdom of Solomon.
When Jannaeus died, Alexandra, widow of
two kings, took the throne (76—69 Bc) and her
eldest son Hyrcanus II became high priest. - Will, his son Archelaus was to rule Idumaea,
Her reign was peaceful and prosperous; but Judea, and Galilee; Antipas, Galilee and Pe-
when she died, her sons fell to squabbling. rea; and Philip, the region northeast of the Sea
Their appeals to Pompey, who was campaign-
ing in the eastern Mediterranean area, were
responsible for Roman interference in the re-
gion and their conquest of Palestine in 63 Bc.
The Roman Period. After the Romans
took over Palestine, Hyrcanus II was con-
firmed as high priest and was appointed as
ethnarch, or political ruler (63—40 Bc). Antipa-
ter, father of Herod the Great, was the real
power behind the throne, and during many of
those years Hyrcanus was virtually unable to
function because of the confusion of the Ro-
man civil wars. Antipater was loyal to Rome
and saw that Roman policies were carried out,
and he won Julius Caesar’s favor toward Jews
of both Palestine and in the dispersion.
With the support of Mark Antony, Herod
managed to get himself appointed king of the
Jews by the Roman senate in 40 Bc. But Par-
thian invasion of Syria and Jewish hatred for
the Romans made it possible for Antigonus II
to rule for three years (40-37). Finally Herod
ascended his throne in 37 and ruled until 4
Bc. As an allied king, Herod proved to be an
excellent ruler from the Roman point of view
and earned the title of ‘““Great.’”” He brought
some order to regions east of the Jordan and
made possible organization of the Roman
province of Arabia. He also furthered the
cultural plans of Augustus for development of
a Greco-Roman civilization throughout the
whole empire.
Herod admired Greek culture and contrib-
uted to building projects in Rhodes, Antioch,
Damascus, Athens, and elsewhere outside Pal-
estine. Within Palestine he rebuilt Samaria
and named it Sebaste in honor of Augustus
(Sebastos is the Greek for ‘““Augustus’’) and also
constructed the great port of Caesarea. Proba-
bly about as large as Manhattan Island, it be-
came the capital of Roman Palestine. Among
his many other building projects, the temple
in Jerusalem was the most famous. Begun in
20 BC, it was not completed until just a few
years before its destruction in AD 70.
The material splendor of Herod’s reign did
not win him the affection or support of the
Jews, however. Nor did he achieve peace and
harmony in his family, among whom there
were periodic eruptions of treason, unfaithful-
ness, and murder. He worried about any
1065
Israel, History of
threat to his rule and cracked down hard to
destroy such threats, as is evident from his
slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem after the
birth of Christ.
Ultimately Herod controlled Idumaea, Ju-
dea, Samaria, Galilee, Perea, and the area
northeast of the Sea of Galilee. By his last
of Galilee. Archelaus was deposed in ap 6, and
his territory became a Roman province (AD 6—
41) to be ruled by direct appointees of Rome.
The best-known of these was Pontius Pilate (Ap
26-36), who ordered the crucifixion of Jesus.
Antipas was more successful and built a new
capital at Tiberias, but he ran afoul of the em-
peror’s good pleasure in aD 37 and was de-
posed. Philip was the most effective of the
three and ruled until his death in ap 34. Phil-
ip’s lands were given to Herod Agrippa I in ap
37; the holdings of Antipas were added later in
the same year and in 41 Agrippa also received
Samaria, Judea, and Idumaea.
Herod Agrippa I (AD 37—44) was the heir of
the Maccabees (through his grandmother Mari-
amne, first wife of Herod the Great) and for
this reason had the support of patriotic Jews
and of the Pharisees for his observance of di-
vine ordinances. But when he built a new
north wall for Jerusalem and dabbled in for-
eign affairs, he aroused the suspicions of the
Romans, and when he died in ap 44 they
turned his kingdom into a Roman province.
As is clear from the Gospels, several sects
had arisen in Palestine by Roman times and
were active during the 1st century. The Zeal-
ots opposed Roman rule and advocated armed
rebellion. Herodians supported the Herodian
family and Roman power. The Pharisees were
fanatically devoted to the Law and were super-
naturalists in theological orientation. They
were somewhat content to support Rome if
given religious freedom, and they dominated
the synagogues of the land. The Sadducees
were antisupernaturalists, tended to collabo-
rate with the ruling regime, and were domi-
nant in the temple. Generally speaking, the lit-
erature of the intertestamental period and the
popular mentality of the time tended to view
the Messiah as a political deliverer who would
free his people from foreign domination and
set up a new independent kingdom.
Roman prefects ruled Palestine (AD 44—66).
They had a knack for offending the religious
scruples of the Jews and alienating them in
other ways. With Felix (AD 51-60) began a con-
stant tension between Jews and Romans
which led to the first Jewish war (AD 66—70).
While Paul was imprisoned in Caesarea (Acts
23:23—24:27) about 58-60, riots broke out there
Israel, Religion of

between Jews and Gentiles. Festus (AD 60—62;

Acts 25) was an able administrator, but the
situation was almost out of hand. After he
died in office, there was virtual anarchy until
his successor Albinus arrived (62—64). Totally
incompetent and dishonest, Albinus was re-
called in 64 and replaced by Florus (64-66).
Florus was even worse, resorting to open rob-
bery and bribery until there was no safety or
justice in the land. Finally the Jews could take
no more.
The spark that ignited the fires of rebellion
was an anti-Semitic act by the Hellenistic
population of Caesarea in aD 66. Soon riots
spread to numerous cities, and Roman garri-
sons were massacred in several places. But un-
fortunately the Jews were not united, and in
Jerusalem armed bands of Jews fought with
each other for mastery. Vespasian was chosen
to command the Roman army of some 60,000
to deal with the insurrection. He had subju-
gated most of Palestine by the time he was
elevated to the imperial chair in aD 69 (after
the death of Nero), and he left his son Titus in
charge of completing operations. In August of
AD 70 the walls of Jerusalem were breached,
many of the people butchered, and the city
and the temple leveled. Masada held out until
AD 73. Palestine had been flattened by Roman The monumental arch of Hadrian in Athens.

might. Loss of life and property had been incal-

culable and indescribable.
Twice more the Jews were destined to fight
disastrously against the Romans. Under Tra-
jan’s rule a rebellion of Jews broke out in
Cyrenaica in AD 115 and spread rapidly to Cy-
prus, Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. In
the beginning it was an outgrowth of agitation
between the Jews and their Hellenistic neigh-
bors, but it developed into a challenge to Ro-
man authority. This was particularly true af-
ter the successes of Parthia on Rome’s eastern
frontier when there seemed to be some hope of
success in throwing off the Roman yoke. Wher-
ever Jews got the upper hand they perpetrated
massacres, and the non-Semitic population re-
taliated in kind. Trajan ruthlessly suppressed
the rebels and restored order everywhere ex-
cept in Egypt; his successor Hadrian was left
to accomplish that.
But Hadrian faced a new rebellion of his
own, brought on by his law forbidding circum-
cision (which he considered to be inhumane)
and his decision in AD 130 to rebuild Jerusalem
as Aelia Capitolina and erect a temple to Jupi-
ter on the site of the temple to Yahweh. The
latter would not only profane the temple site
but also would preclude any rebuilding of the
Jewish temple.
Leader of the rebellion was Simeon, Prince
of Israel, called Bar Kochba (‘Son of the
Star’’). Both sides fought with such great feroc-
ity for over three years (AD 132-135) that the
population of Judea was virtually extermi-
nated. Jerusalem was rebuilt as a Roman col-
ony, and Jews were forbidden to enter on pain
of death. Even as late as the fourth century
they were permitted to enter only once a year,
on the anniversary of the destruction of the
temple by Nebuchadnezzar. After the Bar
Kochba revolt, Judaism retreated increasingly
within the citadel of the written and oral law,
thus separating itself from the Gentiles.
Howarbp F. Vos
See PATRIARCHS, PERIOD OF THE; Exopus, THE; WIL-
DERNESS WANDERINGS; CONQUEST AND ALLOTMENT OF
THE LAND; SAUL #1; Davip; SOLOMON; EXILE; CHRO-
NOLOGY, OLD TESTAMENT; MosEs; ABRAHAM; ISRAEL,
RELIGION OF; POSTEXILIC PERIOD, THE; JUDAISM; JEw;
First JEWISH REVOLT; TALMUD.
Bibliography. J. Bright, A History of Israel; F.F. Bruce,
Israel and the Nations; R. de Vaux, Early History of Israel;
M. Noth, The History of Israel; W.O.E. Oesterley and T.H.
Robinson, A History of Israel, 2 vols; A.T. Olmstead, History
of Palestine and Syria to the Macedonian Conquest; H.W.
Robinson, The History of Israel; L.J. Wood, Israel’s United
Monarchy.
Israel, Religion of. Jewish conduct as re-
lated to God. It concerns the outward acts or
forms by which men recognize and serve their
deity. The term comes from the Latin religio,
which originally referred to reverence for the
gods, or the fear of the gods, rather than to a
°

1066

system of religious belief based upon revealed
truth. It must be realized that the religion of
Israel can and must be distinguished from the
biblical theology of the OT. The latter por-
trays objectively the truths that God revealed
prior to NT times, while Israel’s religion,
though based on these truths, is more subjec-
tive and portrays the feelings and acts of the
ancient Hebrews in relation to their God. Isra-
el’s religion was based upon the Sinai cov-
enant, with its advanced moral and spiritual
ideals. Only in times of apostasy and outright
Baal worship did her religious practices degen-
erate and become subject to condemnation.
Bases for Conduct. The religion of truly
pious Israelites was based upon heart-feelings
of commitment to their Lord. Some of the less
godly Hebrews doubtless exercised faith in Je-
hovah’s redeeming covenant without yielding
their lives fully to him. But this was not true
to the ideals of biblical religion.
Submission. The experience of the patri-
arch Jacob at Peniel (Gn 32) constitutes the
most outstanding OT example of the submis-
sion that is basic to genuinely religious con-
duct. Twenty years before this event, Jacob is
known to have been a believer; for God had
renewed the patriarchal covenant with him
and promised, “Behold, I am with you”
(28:15). Yet in Jacob’s dealings with Laban dur-
ing the years that followed, his conduct contin-
ued to be marked by grasping and deceit—
that is, until he was met by “a man” (the
Angel of the Lord), who wrestled with him all
night (32:24). Finally the angel touched his
thigh and dislocated it (v 25); but Jacob, mean-
while, is said to have ‘“‘prevailed with God”’ (v
28), which is the meaning of the name [srael
that he then received. Scripture later explains
that this wrestling was an external sign of the
patriarch’s inner struggle in prayer (Hos 12:4).
The total picture would then be this: when a
believer earnestly seeks God and yields up his
life, “broken” in true submission to him, at
this point he enters into the religious experi-
ence with which God would confront each of
his people (Ps 51:17).
Consecration. The surrendered life, which
distinguishes the religion of Israel, was one of
activity and purpose. Devotion to the duty at
hand is the theme of the words of Nehemiah,
at the close of OT history: “I am doing a
great work and I cannot come down. Why
should the work stop while I leave it and
come down to you?” (Neh 6:3). This attitude
of consecration is brought into focus by two
aspects of another experience in the life of the
patriarch who provides us with the very
name Israel. Both arise out of Jacob’s vision
at Bethel, in which he dreamed of a ladder
that reached from his resting place up into
1067
Israel, Religion of
heaven itself (Gn 28:12), meaning that God
was with him (v 15).
The first aspect of Jacob’s experience con-
cerns the form of his response to God, for he
“made a vow” (v 20), a voluntary obligation
undertaken toward God, generally because of
blessings already received or hoped for. Vows
thay be either of abstinence or of devotion.
The former serve as exhibitions of holiness,
which means the believer’s separation (Lv
20:26), both from what is profane, and to the
One who is ultimately “separate,” that is, the
holy God. As long as the sons of Israel re-
mained in control of their historical situa-
tion as an independent nation in their own
“holy land,” their obligation consisted in re-
moving from their midst all religious false-
hood, whether Canaanite (Dt 7:2) or from their
own people (Dt 17:5). But at the close of the
8th century Bc, when over 200,000 Hebrews
were taken captive to live as a subject minor-
ity in the Assyria of Sennacherib (Is 36:1), Isa-
iah warned them to maintain religious separa-
tion (52:11; cf. Jer 50:8; 57:6). The other type of
vow is that of positive devotion, whether of a
person (cf. 1 Sm 1:11) or of property (Lv
27:9,16).
The second aspect of Jacob’s response to
God’s blessing involves the actual content of
his vow when he set up the stone at Bethel. It
concerned tithing: “Of all that thou givest me
I will give the tenth to thee” (Gn 28:22). Reli-
gion demands practical commitment to God.
As expressed in Leviticus, “All the tithe of the
land, whether of the seed of the land or of the
fruit of the tree, is the Lord’s; it is holy to the
Lord” (27:30). And this obligation is not lim-
ited to the period of the Sinaitic Law; it was
paid by Jacob’s grandfather Abraham, years
before (14:20) and is cited with approval in the
NT (Heb 7:6—8); and God’s people are encour-
aged to ‘‘prove’”’ God by bringing all tithes to
him and to see if he will not pour out number-
less blessings (Mal 3:10). Behind this tithing
practice, moreover, lies the threefold religious
principle of consecrated stewardship: (1) All
things come from God (1 Chr 29:14). (2) We are
but temporary stewards, or managers, of what
God commits to us (Ps 24:1), so that when we
yield up everything to God we are but perform-
ing our expected service (see also Lk 17:10;
Rom 6:12; 12:1). (3) God in his grace invokes
only the principle of the “firstfruits’’: he ac-
cepts a token offering (cf. Ex 23:19; Dt 18:4).
Conduct of Life. The faith of the Israelites
expressed itself in conduct. It was demon-
strated by lives of obedience (Ex 19:5), both
ceremonial and moral. Submission and conse-
cration to God must be reflected in Godlike
conduct toward those who are around us (Jas
2:17; 1 Jn 4:20). Faith must indeed come first:
Israel, Religion of
if “the fear of God is not in this place’ (Gn
20:11 KJv), then moral conduct may not be ex-
pected; but faith cannot exist without accom-
panying morality: we fear God by keeping
from sin (Ex 20:20; cf. Jb 1:1; 28:28). As David
said, ‘‘Trust in the Lord, and do good” (Ps
37:3).
Patriarchal Ethics. Though Scripture re-
veals no specific code of ethics prior to Israel’s
receiving the Mosaic law on Mt Sinai, the ne-
cessity for moral obedience had been clear
from the first. Adam’s status under the origi-
nal “covenant of works” (Hos 6:7, ASV, NASB)
had depended upon his obedience (Gn 2:17);
and still under the gracious testament of Gene-
sis 3:15, his son Cain was cautioned, “If you do
well, will you not be accepted? And if vou do
not do well .. .” (4:7). Particular obligations in-
cluded respecting human life (9:6) and avoid-
ing such sins as Noah’s drunkenness (9:21) and
Ham’s and Canaan’s lack of sexual modesty
(9:22; contrast v 23).
These last instances point up the way Gene-
sis inculcates its principles of conduct through
the moral example of the Hebrew patriarchs.
Abraham exemplifies generosity (13:8,9), loy-
alty (14:12-14, toward Lot; cf. 18:22—32), and
justice (14:24, toward his allies, even while re-
fusing booty himself, v 23). Scripture refuses
to gloss over Abraham’s sins of cowardice and
lying (12:11-13; 20:11-13), but by so doing it
underscores its moral ideal, ‘“‘Walk before me,
and be blameless’ (17:1). The supreme exam-
ple of Abraham’s obedience appeared in his
willingness to sacrifice his beloved son Isaac
(22:2,3; cf. Jas 2:21). In the following genera-
tion, his grandson’s self-centered early life il-
lustrates the meaning of the name Jacob, ‘‘He
grasps at the heel” (cf. Gn 25:26,30—34; 27:10,
20; 31:1), though his subsequent progress into
Israel has been noted above. Abraham’s great-
grandson Joseph then stands as an example of
steadfastness, resisting the temptation to adul-
tery as a sin against God (39:9), and loving his
undeserving brothers (50:21).
Mosaic Ethics. In response to their adop-
tion by God as his chosen people (Ex 19:5), the
Israelites at Sinai promised, “All that the Lord
has spoken we will do’ (v 8). Moses then pro-
ceeded to reveal to them the Torah, a term
often rendered as “Law,” but really having the
broader sense of “instruction.”
Some of the particular applications of the
Sinaitic Law are, of course, limited to the im-
mediate situations in which the Israelites then
lived, such as the granting of a double portion
of inheritances to the firstborn (Dt 21:17), pro-
portionate to the elder’s added responsibilities
in a patriarchal society; or the requirements
of installing railings around roofs (22:8), for
safety in lands where these surfaces can be
1068
used for working, sleeping, and living. Yet be-
“hind such special social or national needs lie
fundamental mortal principles, the most basic
of which is ‘“‘You shall love your neighbor as
yourself” (Lv 19:18).
The Law of Moses occupies about half the
Pentateuch: and may be organized into four
major codes. The Decalogue (Ex 20:2—17),
which means “‘ten words’ or commandments
(34:28), was spoken by God on Mt Sinai at the
time of Israel’s adoption as his special nation.
It was then written down by his own hand on
two tablets of stone (31:18; 34:1,28) as the fun-
damental moral law for his people. The Book
of the Covenant (20:22—23:33; cf. 24:7) was then
spoken by God but recorded by Moses. Its pur-
pose was to provide Israel with concrete appli-
cations of the Decalogue so they could accept
it officially (24:3,7; see, e.g., how 21:16 applies
the commandment against killing to kidnap-
ing). God revealed the priestly codes (most of
Lv—except for the narratives in chs 8-10 and
24:10-23—plus similar laws in Nm 5,6,9,10,15,
18,19) immediately after the construction of
the tabernacle. These were for the professional
guidance of the priests, who were to minister
in it. By contrast, the Deuteronomic codes (pri-
marily Dt 1-30, to which may be prefixed Nm
28-30), were revealed in a more popular style
through the speeches of Moses some 40 years
later. Israel was then about to enter the Prom-
ised Land of Canaan, 1406 Bc; the aim of this
“second law” was to arouse Israel to faithful-
ness during its settlement; its keynote was
“You shall love the Lord your God with all
your heart’’ (Dt 6:5). For practical purposes,
all the moral Torah may be organized under
the last six commandments of the Decalogue
(cf. Mk 10:19), because these summarize the
social aspects of Israel’s religion, showing how
the people were to act toward their fellows.
The fifth commandment, “Honor your fa-
ther and your mother’ (Ex 20:12), establishes
the family as God’s primary social unit on
earth. Respect for authority is a religious duty
(Lv 19:32), just like keeping God’s sabbath (v
31; cf. the serious penalties described in Ex
21:15,17; Dt 21:20,21). Parents too are to cher-
ish their children as gifts of God (Ps 127:3; cf.
Ex 13:15, against child sacrifice) and to bring
them up in the nurture and admonition of the
Lord (Ex 12:26—28; Dt 6:7).
The seventh commandment, “You shall not
commit adultery” (Ex 20:14), teaches sexual
purity. Here the strict standards of Israel's con-
duct show a marked contrast to the laxness of
their pagan neighbors or, for that matter, to
much of modern thought. Adultery was punish-
able by death (Lv 20:10; Dt 22:21); and fornica-
tion (premarital sex) was equally serious,
though with a lesser penalty (Lv 19:20; Hos
 Israel, Religion of

4:14). The man who raped a virgin was obliged

vived. Note the ethical stress in many of Da-
to marry her (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:29). The very
vid’s psalms: for example, ‘Depart from evil,
desire for another man’s wife was wrong (seeand do good.... The eyes of the Lord are to-
the roth commandment). ward the righteous” (Ps 34:14,15).
Because of the hard-
ness of men’s hearts, (Mt 19:8), God later re- Solomonic Ethics. The ethical side of the
duced the death penalty for marital infidelity, religious practice of Israel reaches another
permitting the “innocent” party to divorce the height of expression in the writings of Solo-
“shameful” one (Dt 24:1 NEB; Mt 5:32), though ’ mon (970-930 Bc). Next to the Pentateuch, the
he hates divorce (Mal 2:16). Since immodesty Bible’s lengthiest block of moral teaching ap-
leads to sin (cf. 2 Sm 11:2), the OT insists on pears in the Book of Proverbs. These pointed
proper bodily covering (Ex 20:26). Canaanite statements of Hebrew wisdom may be orga-
“sacred” prostitutes and homosexuals, called nized under categories of personal, economic,
“dogs” (Dt 23:18), were banned, together with and social ethics, and they cover in detail the
all other kinds of sexual perversion (Ex 22:19); principles laid down in the Decalogue.
and, to avoid even the suspicion of sodomy, Personal religious life commences with
both men and women were forbidden to wear God: ‘‘The fear of the Lord is the beginning of
clothes of the other sex (Dt 22:5). knowledge” (Prv 1:7). The pious Israelite re-
The eighth commandment, “You shall not strains pride (11:2; 16:18) and exhibits compo-
steal” (Ex 20:15), insures property rights. Ulti- sure (14:30), deliberation (29:20,22), and a will-
mately, all property belongs to God: “The ingness to leave vengeance in the hands of
land is mine, for you are strangers and so- God (20:22; 24:29). Yet he also works hard (6:6—
journers with me” (Lv 25:23). Yet once God ti, cf. 10:4,5; 1424)-
chooses to delegate property to a certain per- On the sanctity of life, Solomon demands
son, no one else is to take it. The land of for every person the standing to which each
Canaan was assigned to the families of Israel one is entitled (17:26; 18:5). Yet punishment,
by permanent tenure; it ‘“‘shall not be sold in whether the “blows that wound” or stripes, is
perpetuity’ (v 23). If through pressure of cir- recommended to ‘‘cleanse away evil’’ (20:30).
cumstances one was forced to give up some Correspondingly, it is necessary to guard
property, it could be ‘‘redeemed”’ at any time against overevaluating one’s own _ insights
(v 25); and in any event it reverted to him (16:2,25). The proverbs also stress moral pu-
automatically at the year of jubilee. By way rity. The prostitute and adulteress must be
of contrast, property rights could be, and shunned (chs 5,6:24—35,7) because of their
were, disregarded by the surrounding pagans, shame and also because of the other sins to
particularly rulers (cf. 1 Kgs 21:7, on Naboth’s which they may lead (13:18; 28:3). Temperance
vineyard), whose conduct was not subject to in all things is taught, whether in respect to
Israel’s religious standards. The OT con- gluttony (23:20; 28:7) or drunkenness (20:1;
demns all forms of fraud, such as withholding 23:31, 31:4,5, Cf. vv 6,7). Israel’s wisest king en-
wages (Lv 19:13) or exacting usury (25:36). courages a glad heart (15:13,15,30) and bodily
The ninth commandment, ‘You shall not comfort (27:9), but never to excess (25:16,27).
bear false witness against your neighbor”’ (Ex Proverbs condemns theft (29:24), dishonesty
20:16), concerns truth. In specific court trials, (11:1; 21:6), and bribery (15:27; 17:23). Solomon
the responsibility of witnesses is brought out further insists on truth: “Lying lips are an
by their having to participate in executing the abomination to the Lord’’ (12:22), as is any
death penalty (Dt 17:7); and in case of false kind of hypocrisy (26:23,24). The wise are to
testimony the witness suffered the same pen- impart needed truths (10:21,31,32) and reproofs
alty that his words would have caused (19:19). (24:24,25), but an uncontrolled tongue brings
The tenth commandment, ‘‘You shall not disaster both to others (11:9) and to its owner
covet” (Ex 20:17), turns from one’s overt con- (12:13). Everyone must speak with care (15:28)
duct to the underlying attitude of heart. Nega- and with kindness (v 26) and be willing to ac-
tively, ““You shall not take vengeance or bear cept the truth about oneself (10:8,17). Concern
any grudge against the sons of your people’; for others underlies many of the precepts
and, positively, ‘“You shall love your neighbor taught in Proverbs, from generosity (11:24;
as yourself.” Why? Because, “I am the Lord” 19:6) to peacemaking (12:20) to simply keeping
(Lv 19:18). Religious conduct thus reflects the up on one’s correspondence (25:25). Status
goodness of God, and it goes beyond the letter means nothing to God (22:2); so those who are
of the law to sincere humanitarianism. his must honor the defenseless widow (15:25;
After Israel’s entrance into Canaan, they 23:10), aid the poor (14:21,31), be kind to ani-
lapsed badly from the standards of Moses (cf. mals (12:10), and love even their enemies
Jgs 17—19, violating every one of the command- (25:21) from the heart (24:17).
ments). Yet when led by dedicated prophets, The religion of Israel moves beyond per-
judges, priests, and kings, their religion re- sonal ethics into the world of economics and
1069
Israel, Religion of
business. The private ownership of property is
encouraged: “The diligent man will get pre-
cious wealth” (12:27; cf. 13:8; 14:20). Property
gains power (22:7), friends (19:4), protection
(10:15; 21:14), and outweighs social position
(12:9). Yet wealth obtained at the cost of righ-
teousness is worthless (15:16; 16:8), and moder-
ate substance is viewed as the ideal (30:8,9).
“In all toil there is profit” (14:23; cf. 13:4); and,
while wealth stems basically from God (3:10;
10:22; 22:4), property is to be gained through
wisdom (24:3), discipline (13:18), and hard
work (10:4; 13:4), whether by labor in the field
(12:11) or with the flock (27:23—27). Possessions
may be acquired through inheritance (19:14),
but not by deceit (20:17; 21:6), false weights
(20:10), shifted landmarks (22:28), or oppres-
sion (23:10,11; cf. 28:8) for no such wealth can
last (13:11; 28:22). Borrowing is discouraged
(22:7).
One’s use of his property is to be directed
by religion: “Honor the Lord with your sub-
stance and with the first fruits of all your pro-
duce”’ (3:9). This includes the support of wor-
ship through such regular offerings as the
“firstfruits”’ (cf. 7:14) and the exercise of char-
ity (3:28; 21:3). Believers are further expected
to make provision for their own families
(19:14, cf. 1 Tm 5:8) and for their personal
needs (30:24,25). Wealth is not to be squan-
dered (28:3); suretyship is to be avoided (6:1-
5; 22:26). Yet, possessions are not everything:
both peace and piety are preferable to wealth
(15:16; 17:1), and “a good name is to be chosen
rather than great riches”’ (22:1). Those who cen-
ter their lives on their possessions (11:28) must
ultimately fail (v 4).
The religion of Proverbs reaches also into
the various circles of social life. The center of
society is the family. A successful, happy mar-
riage is one of God’s greatest gifts (Prv 18:22;
19:14). It is to be founded on love (5:15—19). The
husband must be able to support his wife
(24:27), and she is to devote herself to her hus-
band and to her household (12:4; 31:10-31; con-
trast the warnings given in 14:1; 19:13; 21:9).
Children bring glory to a family (17:6; cf. 10:1;
15:20) and are to be trained in the fear of the
Lord (14:26). “Spare the rod, and spoil the
child” is a familiar adage (22:15; 23:13; cf.
29:15); but the equally well-known verse,
“Train up a child in the way he should go...”
(22:6) is*perhaps more accurately rendered,
“Train up a child according to his way [i.e., by
methods that are adapted to his own special
interests and capacities], and [then] even when
he is old he will not depart from it.” Children
too are responsible before God (20:11). They
must respect and obey their parents (6:20;
19:26; 20:20), even in later life (23:22), and heed
their parents’ instruction (1:8; 4:1).
1070
_ Advancing into wider circles of society,
Solomon commends the faithfulness of the
“wise servant” (17:2; cf. 29:19). Masters, corre-
spondingly, are to treat their servants well
without overindulging them (29:21). Friend-
ship is valuable (17:17); for ‘“‘There is a friend
who sticks closer than a brother” (18:24; cf.
27:10). Yet too many friends (18:24 NASB), or
the wrong kinds of friends (fools, 13:20; angry
men, 26:21, or tale-bearers, 26:20) can bring
disaster.
On the broadest level, ‘‘righteousness exalts
a nation” (14:34; cf. 28:2). Rulers are to be effi-
cient (25:2), maintain justice (16:10; 29:12), and
enforce due penalties (20:26), while at the
same time showing mercy (v 28). Citizens
must reverence the government (24:21; cf.
16:14; 20:22), even while seeking its reforma-
tion, insofar as they are able (Prv 25:5).
Two additional writings by Solomon make
specialized contributions to our appreciation
of the religious practices of Israel. The Song of
Solomon appeared early in the king’s career
(cf. Sg 3:11), before his polygamous household
had led him into apostasy (1 Kgs 11:11). It con-
sists of a lyric portrayal of God-given love be-
tween a man and a woman: “For love is strong
as death ... the very flame of the Lord. Many
waters cannot quench love” (8:6,7 NASB). The
Song underscores God’s standards of purity
and chastity (4:12; 8:9); and in it Solomon
seems honestly to describe the Shulamite hero-
ine’s rejection, both of himself and of his fla-
grant polygamy (cf. 1:12,13; 8:11,12). The refrain
sets the tone of the book: “I adjure you, O
daughters of Jerusalem, .. . that you stir not up
nor awake love until it please’ (2:7; 3:5; etc.).
Ecclesiastes, on the other hand, reflects the
thought of a sadder but wiser Solomon near
the close of a blighted career (cf. 12:1). Its
primary goal is to demonstrate the futility of
life apart from God (1:2; 12:8), yet it empha-
sizes a number of positive religious values as
well. The righteous are to do good and to re-
joice in the days that God allocates to them
(3:12). These “good”’ things include: wisdom
(2:13; 7:11; 10:10), contentment (4:5,6; 5:12),
gracious speech (10:12), love to one’s wife
(9:9), obedience to the king (8:2—4), charity
(11:2), cooperative enterprise (4:9-12), and
that characteristic of so many of Solomon’s
wise proverbs, efficiency and industriousness
(9:10; 10:18). This present world is filled with
frustrations and evils but, while waiting for
the day when the Lord will bring all things
into judgment (11:9; 12:13,14), each religious
Israelite ‘should eat and drink, and find en-
joyment in his toil’ (2:24; cf. 5:18; 7:14; etc.).
Prophetic Ethics. At Solomon’s death in
930 BC none of the OT’s prophetic books had
yet been written. Israel’s pattern of religion,

however, had been set by the Mosaic and
Solomonic writings. The main task of the
prophets was to proclaim, apply, and defend
God’s Law as it had already been revealed (Isa
8:20; Hos 8:1; Mal 4:4). Unhappily, the people
seemed quite willing to observe the Mosaic
ceremonial laws (Am 4:4,5) while disregarding
the Lord’s moral requirements of justice,
mercy, and humility before God (Mi 6:8). The
prophets constantly called for deliverance for
the oppressed (Is 1:17, cf. Dt 14:29) and consid-
eration, even for enemy prisoners (2 Chr 28:9—
11, cf. Prv 25:21). They condemned creditors
who refused to return garments taken as
pledges from the poor (Am 2:8; cf. Ex 22:26)
and the wealthy who debauched themselves in
drink (Is 5:11; cf. Prv 23:31).
The Book of Esther presents a vivid picture
of the corruption of the Persian court of Xer-
xes (485-465) (1:10—12; 2:14; 3:11). The setting
is after the fall of the Hebrew kingdoms and
against a pagan background. Esther’s stan-
dards of devotion and self-sacrifice stand out
all the more clearly (cf. 4:16, 7:3). Nehemiah
provides another example of selfless effort in
his reconstruction of Jerusalem in 444 (Neh
5:7-16). Both Ezra and Nehemiah, together
with the prophet Malachi, faced the problem
of mixed marriages in postexilic Israel (Ezr
g:1,2; Neh 13:23—-28; Mal 2:11), and they ex-
tended the Mosaic prohibition against mar-
riage alliance with the Canaanites (Ex 34:16)
to include any with those who were not of the
Jewish faith (Neh 13:27).
Ritual Conduct. OT Israel was able to
share in God’s redemption through the means
of symbolic worship (Ex 20:24). The person
who failed to keep the moral law (Dt 5:29)
could gain forgiveness and_ restoration
through ritual observance (cf. Lv 6:2—7). It was
by way of ceremonies that God in his grace
was pleased to mediate his righteousness to
those who trusted in him (Dt 6:25). The stan-
dards for Israel’s ritual conduct were fixed by
the Law of Moses and continued thereafter
with little change or modification.
It must be understood that Israel’s rituals
possessed no intrinsic or mechanical value in
themselves, despite what some legalistic He-
brews might have thought (1 Sm 4:3; Mi 3:11).
Worship without faith was useless. Confession
of sin had to precede the offerings (Lv 5:5), and
no sacrifice was sufficient for “high-handed’”’
or deliberate sin (Nm 15:30). The sacrifice of
the wicked was, in fact, an abomination to
God (Prv 15:8; 21:27). In the original Law of
Moses, therefore, moral and ceremonial legisla-
tion are mingled almost without distinction.
Only in the days of King Jehoshaphat (872-848
Bc), does the first division appear between
secular judges “‘in all the king’s matters” and
1071
Israel, Religion of
priests in “all matters of the Lord” (2 Chr
19:11). The prophets in particular criticized
hypocrites who observed the ceremonies but
disregarded the moral law. The prophets who
were used by God to emphasize that “to obey
is better than sacrifice’ (1 Sm 15:22; cf. Is
-yri—15; Am 5:21—24).
Sacred Places. The religion of Israel des-
ignated certain geographical localities and
certain physical conditions as proper to the
worship of the holy (“‘separated’’) God. As sanc-
tuaries, the early patriarchs reverenced par-
ticular places where God had appeared to
them (cf. Gn 12:7; 28:18), but without any spe-
cial buildings. The earliest ritual law had a
similar nonspecific character (Ex 20:24). It
should be noted, however, that even while
adapting itself to Israel’s journeys through the
wilderness, the Law did not authorize worship
in more than one place at one time (cf. Lv
17:5); and the specification of a single cen-
trally located place of worship only came 40
years later, when Israel was about to take up
permanent residence in the Promised Land
(Dt 12:5,11—14).
Immediately after God’s adoption of Israel
as his chosen people (Ex 19:5) and following
their formal ratification of the older testa-
ment, at Mt Sinai (ch 24), God revealed to Mo-
ses the pattern for the tabernacle (chs 25-31).
It was a movable sanctuary, designed to re-
place the provisional tent where God first met
with his people (33:7—10). Its purpose was de-
fined by God himself, ‘‘I will dwell among the
people of Israel, and will be their God” (29:45).
The tabernacle thus had sacramental value: it
was the visible sign and seal of the Lord’s tes-
tamentary promise to be present as Israel’s
God. This accounts for such names of the tab-
ernacle as “the dwelling” (25:9, lit.), because
his glory-cloud known later by the term “She-
kinah,” dwelt there, visibly resting over the
holy ark in its inner room (Lv 16:2); “the tent
of meeting’ (Ex 29:42 NASB), where God met
with his representatives; or ‘“‘the house of the
Lord” (34:26). Yet simultaneously the taber-
nacle depicted God’s separateness from his
people. This was shown by its very design. In
the center of a curtained-off court, the build-
ing consisted of a two-roomed, windowless ob-
long, made of portable vertical frames covered
with four layers of coverings. There, isolated
within the inner chamber, in “the holy of
holies” (meaning “the most holy, or most-
separated, place’), God dwelt “in thick dark-
ness” (1 Kgs 8:12).
In its teaching of “God’s presence” as a
type of heaven (Ps 11:4; Heb 9:24), the whole
design of the tabernacle had meaning. Moses
was repeatedly cautioned that it must con-
form in every respect to the pattern which had
Israel, Religion of
been shown him on Mt Sinai (Ex 25:9,40; Heb
8:5). Thus the first object within the court gate
was the altar—for God can be approached
only by way of sacrifice, a type of Christ's aton-
ing death (Heb 8:2—3, 9:12)—and the second,
was the laver (Ex 30:21), which depicts the ne-
cessity for purity, for the washing of regenera-
tion and sanctification in Christ (Ti 3:5; Heb
g:10). Inside the first curtained room, called
the holy place, stood the table with the “show
bread,” (bread of the Presence) which symbol-
ized the reestablished harmony and fellowship
of God’s people with their heavenly Lord (Lv
24:8; cf. Ex 24:11), the candlestick or lamp-
stand, indicating the Spirit-given light and
truth that radiates from believers (Zec 4:2—6;
Mt 5:14), and the altar of incense, suggesting
communion with God through prayer (Ps
141:2; Lk 1:10; Rv 8:4). A veil divided the two
chambers of the sanctuary to signify ‘that the
way into the sanctuary is not yet opened as
long as the outer tent is still standing’ (Heb
9:8), that is, until Jesus the messianic High
Priest should come and rend it at his death
(Mt 27:51). Israel’s religion permitted no repre-
sentation of God himself; as the fourth com-
mandment made clear: “You shall not make
for yourself a graven image” (Ex 20:4). The ark
served only as the throne of God’s presence.
There was no image of God (Ex 40:34).
Joshua carried the tabernacle into Canaan,
where it was first set up at Gilgal on the west
bank of the Jordan (Jos 9:6; 10:43). It was later
settled more centrally at Shiloh (18:1), where
it remained for some 300 years. By the time of
Eli, a permanent “house of the Lord” had
been built at Shiloh (1 Sm 1:7,24). This build-
ing was destroyed by the invading Philistines
(4:10,11; Ps 78:60; Jer 7:12). The tabernacle was
eventually located at Gibeon (1 Chr 16:39).
Meanwhile, the absence of a central sanctuary
explains Samuel’s conducting of sacrifices at
the major points in his circuit (1 Sm 7:9; 9:13);
and it explicitly justifies the localized worship
of the Lord at various “‘high places,” prior to
Solomon’s completion of the temple (1 Kgs
3:2). It was King David who first conducted
the ark to a tent shrine on Mt Zion in Jerusa-
lem, after capturing the city and designating
it his capital (2 Sm 5:7; 6:17; cf. Ps 24). God
later revealed to David that Jerusalem was the
place he had chosen out of all Israel in which
to place his name (his personal presence;
1 Chr 21:18—28; cf. Dt 12:5). The king then de-
voted his last years to making preparations for
a magnificent temple. In 959 Bc his son Solo-
mon completed it on Mt Moriah, just north of
Jerusalem’s city limits (2 Chr 3:1; 1 Kgs 6:38).
The plans revealed to David (1 Chr 28:12,19)
called for a structure of stone and carved ce-
dar, overlaid with gold, on the same basic
1072
plan as the tabernacle, but with double length
and breadth, triple height, and certain other
elaborations. Moses’ ancient tent was brought
up from Gibeon and housed inside the new
sanctuary (1 Kgs 8:4). In times of apostasy Is-
rael might revert to paganized high places for
worship; but Jerusalem was henceforth “‘the
city of God”’ (Pss 46:5; 48:3).
Israel’s code for religious conduct specified
the places that were holy, where God was to
be sought. The code also specified certain
places, objects, and situations that were to be
avoided by God’s people as unclean. Early in
Genesis particular animals had been desig-
nated as unclean (7:2), and it was forbidden to
eat blood (9:4). Moses developed the categories
of cleanness with their corresponding con-
cepts. Hygienic reasons must have accounted,
at least in part, for the uncleanness of leprosy
(Lv 13,14). Closely related are regulations de-
signed to prevent bodily injury (19:28). Iron
may have been forbidden in preparing the ma-
terials used in Israel’s sanctuaries (Ex 20:25; 1
Kgs 8:7) because of its association with instru-
ments of war; and leaven, because of physical
decay and corruption. A natural loathsome-
ness probably contributed to the ban against
eating certain creeping animals, birds of prey,
insects, and worms (Lv 11:20,41). There is an
ethical factor in the prohibited degrees of mar-
riage between close relatives (Lv 18:6) and in
the separation of women from normal respon-
sibilities after childbirth (12:2). This rule may
involve a humanitarian explanation as well.
Less obvious, however, are Israel’s regula-
tions that emphasize the separation involved
in holiness. The prohibitions against wearing
garments of mixed materials or of planting
mixed seeds (Lev 19:19) seem to be based on
the principle of separation. Israel’s religious
practices also included numerous reminders
of the present depravity of man’s natural life.
Sexual relations, though not wrong in them-
selves, nevertheless kept one from what is holy
(x Sm 21:4), as did anything connected with
birth (Lv 12:1-8; 15:2,3), death (Ex 22:31; Nm
19:11), idolatry (Ex 23:13), and even foreign
lands (Am 7:17). Finally, certain meat was pro-
hibited because it was reserved for sacrifice to
the Lord (Lv 7:25); clothes had to be washed
each day as a part of Israel’s ‘‘sanctifying”’ at
their adoption by God at Sinai (Ex 19:10).
Many prohibitions may have involved more
than one reason. Cutting oneself, for example
(Lv 19:28; Dt 14:1), was harmful to the body
but also had pagan connotations (1 Kgs 18:28).
But cutting one’s beard (Lv 19:27) seems to
have been prohibited on purely antipagan
grounds.
The exilic prophets stressed cleanness par-
ticularly (Ez 4:16; cf. 20:12,21) after Israel had

been forcibly deprived of many of their other
means of religious expression. Daniel’s well-
known refusal to be defiled with the Babylo-
nian king’s dainties (Dn 1:8) is still reflected in
the Jewish “kosher” laws.
Ceremonial Actions. The sacred places of
Israel furnished the stage for most of the na- _(ehs 25-27). The priestly courses were reinsti-
tion’s religious activities. Prayer and Scrip-
ture reading constituted major exceptions,
since both of these acts could be performed by
private individuals either in family groups (Dt
6:7—9) or, from exilic days onward, in what
became local synagogues (Ps 74:8). The OT con-
tains, in fact, only one set prayer, for use at the The crudest concept is that sacrifice was in-
temple during Pentecost (Dt 26:5—r10). But for
Israel’s services of song and of praise, and for But while the pagans surrounding Israel
the most central element in the nation’s wor-
ship, sacrifice, the OT specified a profession-
ally trained priesthood to perform its ceremo-
nies. God’s worship was a serious matter (cf. idea that the true God needed to eat is cate-
Nm 4:15; 1 Sm 6:7). The third commandment,
“You shall not take the name of the Lord your
God in vain” (Ex 20:7), had as its immediate
reference a prohibition against invoking God's
name in false or careless oaths; but it also
warns against any irreverence (Dt 28:58). The
priests were ministers, chosen by God, to offici-
ate at the altar in his sanctuary (Dt 18:5; Heb
5:4) and to intercede for the people (Jl 2:17).
Other functions included setting an example
of faithfulness in personal living (Dt 33:9), “en-
quiring” for the Lord’s guidance via divine ora-
cles (Jgs 20:27,28), and teaching the Law to
God’s people (Lv 10:11; Mi 3:11; Mal 2:7). In
patriarchal days a man might perform
priestly sacrifice for himself (Gn 4:3) or for his
household (12:8; Jb 1:5). But at Sinai the Lord
restricted Israel’s priesthood to the descen-
dants of Aaron, brother of Moses, of the tribe
of Levi (Ex.28:1; 40:12-15; Nm 16:17; 17:8). Aar-
on wore the names of the 12 tribes inscribed
on his vestments (Ex 28:12,21,29); he literally
“brought them before God” as he entered the
sanctuary to accomplish reconciliation (v 38).
The Aaronic priests were assisted by their
fellow tribesmen, the other Levites (Nm 8:13;
cf. Ex 32:26, Dt 33:9). During the wilderness
wanderings the levitical clans had _ specific
functions in transporting the tabernacle and
its furniture (Nm 1:50). At the conquest of Ca-
naan, these same Levites received no tribal ter-
ritory (Nm 18:23; cf. Gn 34:30; 49:7) but were
allocated 48 towns, including the 6 cities of
refuge (Nm 35:6). They were assigned Israel’s
tithes and offerings, so that they could be free
to serve God (18:21,24—26), though in the dark
days of the judges these provisions were not
well enforced (cf. Jgs 17:7; 19:1). Under David,
however, both the priests and the Levites were
carefully organized into 24 “courses” each
(1 Chr 23-24) to permit monthly rotations in
Israel, Religion of
service. The king restructured the duties of the
38,000 Levites in service at this time to accom-
modate the newly established worship in the
temple, with its chief musicians and groups of
singers, and also to meet his own imperial
needs for judicial and administrative officials
tuted after the exile (Neh 12:1—7) and were con-
tinued in NT times (Lk 1:5).
In the religion of Israel, the ceremonial
functioning of the priesthood was concen-
trated upon animal sacrifice. Four explana-
tions have been given for this practice: (1)
tended as a meal to nourish hungry deities.
doubtless thought this, and while food termi-
nology is sometimes incorporated into the
OT’s description of sacrifices (Lv 3:11,16), the
gorically denied (Ps 50:9-13; Is 40:16). (2)
Equally objectionable is the theory of physi-
cal communion, that by the sacrificial rituals
worshipers could enter into covenants of
blood brotherhood with their deity or even
eat its flesh. But, again, while it is true that
communion fellowship with God resulted
from the OT rituals (Ex 24:11), its teachings
on the spiritual nature of God forbade any
such view of the sacrifices in themselves. (3)
Of greater validity is the view that treats the
OT sacrifices as gifts. A subdivision within
the peace offerings consisted of Israel’s thank
offerings (Lv 7:12-15); certain of their acts of
worship did involve sincere gifts of gratitude
to God (cf. 1 Sm 1:24-27). But this theory
fails to account for the emphasis upon blood
in the rituals and for the OT’s repeated stress
upon the estrangement that exists between
God and men, which requires the blood in
the first place, representing the life of guilty
humans before God. (4) The most adequate
explanation for the sacrifices of Israel is
atonement, the aim of which is to avert evil,
especially punishment. All of Israel’s sacri-
fices fall into one of two classes: guilt offer-
ings to propitiate an offended God, and
sweet-savor offerings, a phrase which means
literally, an odor that placates (cf. Gn 8:21).
Offerings were presented so that God would
not deal with men “after their folly” (Jb 42:8;
efs175).
In the Law given at Sinai, the atoning char-
acter of sacrifice becomes apparent in each of
the five stages of the sacrificial ritual: (1)
Choosing the offering: neither the animal nor
the other materials involved could contain de-
fects (Lv 22:21). (2) Presenting the offering:
each offerer then laid his hands on the head of
the victim (1:4), appointing it as a proxy for
himself and transferring to it his sins (cf. Nm
1073
Israel, Religion of
8:18,19; 27:18—21). (3) Slaying the offering: by
its death (Lv 1:5) the sacrifice suffered the pen-
alty of the sins that had been laid upon it (Nm
6:11; cf. Lv 19:20,21). The symbol of surren-
dered life lay in the blood, “given for you upon
the altar to make atonement for your souls”
(Lv 17:11). (4) Committing the offering to God,
by sprinkling and burning on the altar (1:6—9).
(5) Demonstrating the restored fellowship
with God by sprinkling the remainder of the
blood on the now forgiven people (Ex 24:6-8);
or in some of the guilt offerings, by removing
the sin-laden victim’s body outside the camp
for burning (Lv 4:12,21), or most frequently, by
using part of the sacrifice for a meal of fellow-
ship in the presence of the Lord (Ex 24:11).
If sacrifice was Israel’s chief ritual act for
the maintenance of her relationship with God,
then the ceremony for its initiation was cir-
cumcision. The revelation of this rite occurred
historically in connection with God’s choice of
Abraham. God commanded circumcision to
set Abraham’s family apart (vv 11-13) and dra-
matically equated it with redemption itself.
“This is my covenant” (v 10). To neglect the
rite was most serious (Ex 4:24—26; cf. Ez 44:7).
The man who refused it was cut off from in-
heritance among the people of God (Gn 17:14);
he had, indeed, never joined them.
uncircumcision symbolized the unfitness of an
unreformed life (Ex 6:12), and as uncircum-
cised hearts indicated those that were covered
with their natural wickedness (Jer 4:4), so cir-
cumcision denoted the removal of one’s sin
(Dt 10:16). It symbolized regeneration
26:41) for those whom God had adopted as his
own (Gn 17:7).
Circumcision was performed on the male
infant’s 8th day (Gn 17:12). It taught both man-
kind’s need for redemption at the very outset
of life (Ps 51:5) and also conveyed assurance
about the incorporation of a believer's chil-
dren into the grace of God’s testament
1727).
Holy Seasons. Israel’s ceremonial actions
at her sacred places were performed at stated
times. The all-inclusive term which is ren-
dered “feasts” (Lv 23:2) means literally ap-
pointed times (NASB), which emphasizes their
divine revelation and appointment. The feasts
of the Jews did not arise from the human ob-
servation of natural phenomena, such as the
seven-day phases of the moon, or the annual
agricultural cycle in Canaan—though God did
incorporate certain agricultural elements in
his calendar.
The institution of the sabbath dates back
to creation itself (Gn 2:1-3); and it was
served by Israel prior to arriving at Sinai and
receiving the Law (Ex 16:23—-26). It became
incorporated into the Decalogue as the 4th
commandment, “Remember the Sabbath day,
to keep it holy” (Ex 20:8). At Sinai, the Lord
also ordained seven special convocation sab-
baths, these were days of rest and of special
sacrifices that occurred during the five an-
nual feasts -which God revealed in the Mosaic
Law; namely, Passover, Pentecost, trumpets,
the day of atonement, and tabernacles. The
first and last had two such convocation sab-
baths assigned to them (Lv 23:7,8,35,36). On
the first day in each of Israel’s lunar months,
that is, on the new moon, God prescribed an-
other time of rest and offering, plus a memo-
rial blowing of trumpets (Nm 1o:10; cf. Ps
81:3). A final extension of the sabbath concept
appeared in the sabbatical (7th) year, or “year
of release” (from debts, Lv 25:4; Dt 15:1—15),
and in the year of jubilee (after seven
sabbatic years, meaning the soth), with its re-
turn of all land to the original owner (Lv
25:8-34).
Out of the five annual Mosaic celebrations,
three of them—Passover, Pentecost, and taber-
nacles—are called by a special name which
means “pilgrimage feast” (Lv 23:4). These were
times at which every adult male among God’s
people was expected to appear before the Lord
at the central sanctuary (Ex 23:14—-17; cf. 1 Kgs
As 9:25). The two other annual holy days came in
the seventh month (Sept/Oct) preceding the
pilgrimage feast of tabernacles: namely, the
feast of trumpets, on the first day of the
month, introducing the climactic fall season of
harvest (Lv 23:24), and the day of atonement,
(Lv Yom Kippur, on the roth, when forgiveness
and restoration to divine favor were achieved
for the entire nation (Lv 16). The atonement
was achieved by means of the ceremonies of
the scapegoat, and by the high priest’s enter-
ing for the only time in the year the sanctu-
ary’s most holy place. Yom Kippur was a day
of national repentance and of sincere humilia-
(Gn tion before God (Lv 16:29, 31; cf. Prv 28:13).
The phrase, to “afflict your souls,” was later
interpreted to mean fasting (Is 58:3; cf. Acts
27:9, “the fast”); but it does not necessarily
carry a connotation. Fasting as an observance
is never prescribed in the OT.
In exilic times the people began to observe
four dates that were connected with Jerusa-
lem’s fall to Babylon, as annual fasts (Zec
7:3,5; 8:19; cf. 2 Kgs 25:1-3,8,9,25). But when
Zechariah was asked whether these should
continue to be observed once the postexilic res-
toration and temple rebuilding had been ac-
complished, he predicted that if the people
would but turn to God in genuine repentance,
ob- these four days would be turned into joyful
feasts (Zec 8:15—-19). However, the fasts contin-
ued. The only other post-Mosaic addition to
Israel’s religious calendar was the postexilic
1074

feast of Purim. It was a time of joy over the
national deliverance of the Jews from their per-
secution at the hands of Haman in Persia (Est
g:20—28). J. BARTON PAYNE
See OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES; PROPHET, PROPHET-
ESS; PROPHECY; LAw, BIBLICAL CONCEPT OF; TABERNA-
CLE, TEMPLE; PRIESTS AND LEVITES; FEASTS AND FESTI-
VALS OF ISRAEL; JEW; CIRCUMCISION.
Bibliography. W.F. Albright, Archaeology and the Reli-
gion of Israel; G.A. Barton, The Religion of Ancient Israel;
R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel; G. Fohrer, History of Israelite Reli-
gion; J.H. Raven, The History of the Religion of Israel; H.W.
Robinson, The Religious Ideas of the OT; H.H. Rowley, The
Faith of Israel; N.A. Snaith, The Distinctive Ideas of the OT;
G. Vos, Biblical Theology.
Israelite. Descendant of the 12 sons of Israel
(the name God gave to Jacob, Gn 32:28). As the
sons of Abraham they are distinguished from
the Ishmaelites (descended from Abraham by
Hagar his concubine), and as sons of Isaac
from the Edomites (descendants of Esau), by
having Jacob as their ancestor. They lived in
Egypt from the time of Joseph until the exo-
dus, when God led them into Canaan to fulfill
his promise to Abraham (Gn 17:8).
God led the Israelites out of Egypt, through
the wilderness, and into the land of Canaan
that he had promised them. They were ruled
by judges, kings, and conquered by other coun-
tries. In 722 Bc, the northern kingdom was con-
quered by Assyria and became incorporated
into that empire. After this time, “Israel” re-
fers to members of the southern tribes, Judah
and Benjamin. An “Israelite” then was one
who, religiously as well as politically, be-
longed to the remnant of the covenant nation
of Israel.
See ISRAEL, HIsTORY OF; JUDAISM; ISRAEL, RELIGION
OF; JEw.
Isis. See Ecypt, EGYPTIANS.
Issachar (Person). 1. Jacob’s gth son, the
5th by his wife Leah (Gn 30:17,18); his name
perhaps means “reward” (v 18). Jacob, in his
final message to his 12 sons, says, “Issachar is
a strong donkey, lying down between the
sheep folds” (49:14 NASB) and the picture sug-
gested is a loaded donkey who refuses to
move his burden, a lazy man who is unwill-
ing to do his share of the work. Little is
known about Issachar except what he did
along with the other sons of Israel. He had 4
sons (46:13), who headed clans in the tribe (1
Chr 7:1-5). His family went with Jacob to
Egypt, where they died (although Issachar
was subsequently moved to Shechem with
the other 12 patriarchs—Acts 7:16).
The descendants of Issachar numbered
54,400 at the rst census (Nm 1:29), increased to
1075
Isshiah
64,400 at the and (26:25), and to 87,000 during
David's reign (1 Chr 7:5). Issachar was the
main tribe involved in the fighting led by
Deborah, herself a member of the tribe (Jgs
5:15). During the time of David, there were “of
Issachar men who had understanding of the
_times, to know what Israel ought to do, two
hundred chiefs, and all their kinsmen under
their command” (1 Chr 12:32). These men sup-
ported David as king to replace Saul.
Issachar was assigned the fourth lot of land
after the ark was taken to Shiloh (Jos 19:17).
This included the cities of Jezreel, Shunem,
and Engannim, and it lay between the moun-
tains of Gilboa and Tabor. Their allotment was
bordered on the south and west by the tribe of
Manasseh, on the north by Zebulun, and on
the east by the River Jordan. This territory
was largely a fertile plain, but was often
threatened by the Canaanites nearby as well
as by foreign invaders.
See ISSACHAR, TRIBE OF.
2. Obed-edom’s son, who was a Levite gate-
keeper during David’s reign (1 Chr 26:5).
Issachar, Tribe of. Tribal inheritance of
Issachar. The territory is defined in Joshua
19:17—23; detailed boundary descriptions are
not included. On the east “its boundary ends
at the Jordan” (v 22). The area can be located
by the list of towns encompassed by the inheri-
tance of which Jezreel, Chesulloth, Shunem,
Anaharath, Kishion, Remeth, and Engannim
have identifications of varying degrees of cer-
tainty. Jezreel and Engannim are in the south-
east corner of the Valley of Jezreel; Chesulloth
is just west of Mt Tabor and Shunem is at the
foot of the Hill of Moreh. The northern border
can be deduced from the southern boundary of
Naphtali (Jos 19:33,34). All three areas, that of
Issachar, Naphtali, and Zebulun, met at Mt Ta-
bor (v 22). On the south side, there were some
major towns not conquered in Joshua’s time
(Jgs 1:27) that were taken from Issachar and
given to Manasseh (Jos 17:11); these included
important centers such as Beth-shan, Ibleam,
and Taanach.
In the same territory, there were distur-
bances among the local tribes (recorded on a
stele of Seti I at Beth-shan); the area is called
“Mt Yarunta,” after Yarmuth (Jos 21:29 Jar-
muth = Remeth). Issachar was located on the
rich plateau stretching east of Tabor and the
Hill of Moreh and north of the Beth-shan Val-
ley; its soil is of heavy volcanic content.
ANSON F., RAINEY
See ISSACHAR (PERSON) #1.
Isshiah. 1. Izrahiah’s son from Issachar’s
tribe (1 Chr 7:3, KJv Ishiah).
2. Warrior from Benjamin’s tribe who
Isshijah

Isui. «Jv rendering of Ishvi, Asher’s son, in

Genesis 46:17.
See IsHvi #1.

Italian Cohort, Italian Band. Roman mili-

tary unit to which the centurion Cornelius be-
longed. The single biblical reference is in Acts
Tost,
The Roman army included auxiliary co-
horts or regiments, most of which seem to
have comprised provincial subjects apart from
Jews (who were exempted). Such units were
sometimes referred to by distinctive names
like “Italian” or ‘‘Augustan”’ (Imperial) (Acts
27:1). The Italian Band was evidently com-
posed mainly of those who not only were Ro-
man citizens but had been born in Rome. The
bands were divided into 1o centuries of 100
men, each commanded by a centurion (in this
instance, Cornelius).
Inscriptions indicate that such an Italian
regiment had indeed been stationed in Syria
during AD 69-157. This does not rule out an
earlier presence in the province; military rec-
ords are simply not available.

Italy. Boot-shaped peninsula located be-

tween the Tyrrhenian and the Adriatic seas.
Uplands and two major mountain ranges—the
Alps, which form a northern boundary, and
the Appennines, which form the backbone of
the peninsula—occupy 77 percent of the land.
The plains, which are limited to the Po River
Valley, cover the remaining 23 percent.
The earliest history of the region is found in
Beth-shan stele of Seti | (1313 Bc). the artifacts of the Abbevillian and Neander-
thal cultures discovered in many areas, includ-
ing the site at Rome. With the advent of agricul-
joined David in his struggle against King ture (6000 Bc), the population increased rap-
Saul. Isshiah was one of David’s ambidextrous idly. By 3000 Bc, large groups of farmers had
archers and slingers (1 Chr 12:6, KJv Jesiah). located in southern Italy along the Mediterra-
3. Uzziel’s son from Levi's tribe (1 Chr 23:20, nean coast and in northern Italy along the Po
KJv Jesiah; 24:25). Valley. During the 3rd millennium Bc, a major
4. Rehabiah’s son from Levi's tribe and a culture developed in the central part of the pen-
descendant of Moses (1 Chr 24:21). insula, influenced by Minoan and Mycenaean
civilizations and characterized by agriculture,
animal husbandry, and bronze-working.
Isshijah. Harim’s son, who obeyed Ezra’s During the 2nd millennium Bc, an invasion
exhortation to divorce his pagan wife after the of Indo-European tribes reshaped the culture
exile (Ezr 10:31, KJV Ishijah). of the peninsula. Each area came to be known
by the name of the tribe that inhabited it.
Issue of Blood. ksv rendering of ‘‘hemor- Among the most important of these tribes
rhage” in Matthew 9:20 and Mark 5:29 (foun- were the Latins, who settled in the valley of
tain of blood). the Tiber River—an area which came to be
See HEMORRHAGE. known as Latium. According to the historian,
Antiochus of Syracuse (5th century Bc), it was
also during this time (1300 Bc) that King Italos
Isuah. xksv spelling of Ishvah, Asher’s son, in ruled the southwest part of the peninsula. This
1 Chronicles 7:30. region came to take his name which, over the
See ISHVAH. next millennium, was extended northward un-
1076
 Ittai

til, in the time of Augustus (27 Bc—apD 14), the Ithamar. Aaron’s fourth and youngest son,
entire peninsula was called “Italy.” who served as a priest to the tribes of Israel
Toward the end of the 8th century Bc, the during the wilderness period (Ex 6:23; Nm
Etruscans, immigrants from Asia Minor, in- 3:2,4; 26:60; 1 Chr 6:3; 24:2). After the death of
vaded the peninsula and organized the less- two of his brothers, he was given the special
civilized Italic tribes into Etruscan dominated
duty of overseeing the moving of the taberna-
city-states. The result was complete politicalgle (Nm 4:28,33; 7:8). During David’s reign, the
chaos. Wars with Greek colonies, wars to’ descendants of Ithamar and Eleazar were orga-
throw off Etruscan domination, and wars be- nized as the formal temple priesthood (1 Chr
tween city-states dominated the next 5 centu- 24:3-6). Later, some of his descendants re-
ries. The city-state that benefited the most turned with Ezra from Babylon (Ezr 8:2).
from this unrest was Rome. By 220 Bc, Rome
had conquered the entire peninsula and had Ithiel. 1. Ancestor of Sallu, a Benjamite who
united all Italy south of the Po Valley under lived in Jerusalem after the Babylonian exile
one rule. After a great revolt (go—88 Bc), Ital- (Neh 11:7).
ians throughout the peninsula obtained the 2. One of two persons to whom Agur spoke
rights of Roman citizenship and in 49 Bc Jul- his proverbs (Prv 30:1).
ius Caesar extended these rights to the inhabit-
ants of the Po Valley. Thus, by NT times, Italy Ithlah. City given to Dan’s tribe for an in-
had essentially come to have its present form. heritance, after the initial conquest of Pales-
“Italy” appears three times in the NT. Paul tine by Joshua (Jos 19:42; KJV Jethlah). Its lo-
has the opportunity to meet Priscilla and Aq- cation is unknown, possibly near the city of
uila, recently come from Italy because Clau- Aijalon.
dius had expelled the Jews from Rome (Acts
18:2). Italy is mentioned as Paul’s destination Ithmah. Warrior of Moabite origin who
following his appeal to Caesar (27:1,6). The joined David’s company at Ziklag (1 Chr
writer of Hebrews sends greetings to his read- 11:46).
ers from ‘‘those who come from Italy’? (Heb
13:24). Ithnan. Town in southern Judah (Jos 15:23).
Its location is unknown.
See RoME, City OF; CAESARS, THE.
Ithra. Father of Amasa by Abigal, Zeruiah’s
Itching Disease. Skin disease referred to sister (2 Sm 17:25). He is called Jether in 1
five times in Scripture. In Leviticus 13 strict
Kings 2:5,32 and 1 Chronicles 2:17.
regulations are given with regards to a variety
of skin conditions. Using these guidelines, the Ithran. 1. Dishon’s son, who was a Horite
priest was able to declare whether a person chief (Gn 36:26; 1 Chr 1:41).
was clean or unclean. While an exact diagno- 2. One of Zobhah’s sons (1 Chr 7:37). He is
sis cannot be made based on the description of probably the same Jether mentioned in
the skin diseases in the Bible, the key concept 1 Chronicles 7:38.
is that of isolating a person with spreading,
running sores from the general community. Ithream. David’s sixth son, borne by his
No man could become a priest who had wife Eglah at Hebron (2 Sm 3:5; 1 Chr 3:3).
“scurvy, or scabbed” skin lesions (Lv 21:20
KJv). “Scurvy” here means a wet or draining Ithrite. Family or clan that lived at Kiriath-
sore, while ‘‘scabbed”’ refers to a dry skin jearim (1 Chr 2:53). Ira and Gareb, two of Da-
lesion. vid’s mighty men, were Ithrites (2 Sm 23:38;
The Israelites were warned that breaking 1 Chr 11:40).
God’s laws would result in suffering a variety
of skin diseases, including ‘‘the botch [boils] of Ittah-kazin. «Jv form of the town Eth-kazin
Egypt,” “‘emerods’” (tumors), “scurvy,” and in Joshua 19:13.
“the itch” which could not be cured (Dt 28:27).
See ETH-KAZIN.
The itching disease here may be a chronic irri-
tating skin disease like scabies. Job also suf-
fered from an itching disease and used a pots- Ittai. 1. Philistine from Gath who, with 600
herd to scratch himself (Jb 2:8). men from Gath, remained loyal to David and
accompanied him on his flight from Absalom
See MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE; DISEASE. (2 Sm 15:18—22). Ittai commanded a third of
David’s army in the battle against Absalom’s
Ithai. Alternate spelling of Ittai, a Benja- forces (2 Sm 18:2,5).
mite warrior, in 1 Chronicles 11:31. 2. Warrior among David’s mighty men
See ItTal #2. (2 Sm 23:29; 1 Chr 11:31, Ithai).
1077
Ituraea
Ituraea. Small province mentioned with
Trachonitis as forming the tetrarchy of Philip,
brother of Herod the Great, during the reign of
Tiberius Caesar (Lk 3:1). A reasonable assump-
tion places Ituraea northeast of the Sea of Gali-
lee and south of Mt Hermon, but its location
and boundaries have been much disputed. The
name almost certainly comes from Jetur, a
son of Ishmael (Gn 25:15), whose descendants
were among those conquered by the Israelites
east of the Jordan (1 Chr 5:19,20). Thereafter
the Ituraeans virtually drop from sight until
Josephus records another defeat inflicted on
them by Aristobulus in 105—104 Bc, at which
time many of them were faced with a choice
between circumcision and exile.
There are frequent mentions by classical
writers of Ituraeans, sometimes described as
Syrians or Arabians—skilled bowmen with the
predatory tendencies often associated with
groups unable or unwilling to settle for long in
any one area. In view of this it is not surpris-
ing that we know more about Ituraeans than
we do about Ituraea.
Strabo speaks of them as inhabitants of a
mountainous country; Dio Cassius a little la-
ter tells us that they had a king. Any attempt
to understand their history is complicated by
divisions in the Roman Empire which affected
them, but by the end of the rst century aD
many Ituraeans were to be found under the
provincial rule of Syria.
It is easier, then, to discuss the people, for
attempts to identify the place raise thorny
problems. Some scholars, indeed, hold that
Luke could not have used the noun “‘Ituraea,”’
for this was a form unknown till three centu-
ries later, and that the adjectival form better
fits the case. This prompts another question:
Was this Ituraean territory within Philip’s
tetrarchy? Could Luke have made a slip and
anticipated a later regional regrouping? Jose-
phus at one point lists the constituent parts of
Philip’s tetrarchy without including Ituraea.
Three facts are clear: (1) there is a certain
flexibility and overlapping in descriptions of
territorial demarcation; (2) the data we have
is insufficient for exact conclusions about Itu-
raea; (3) the evidence is clear from other parts
of Scripture that Luke is a careful and reliable
writer.
Ivah. KJv spelling of Ivvah.
See IvvaH.
Ivory. Opaque dentine substance, often men-
tioned along with precious metals and gems in
the Bible and ancient Near Eastern writings.
As such, ivory was used for combs, small
boxes, jars, and other cosmetic articles, for
1078
figurines and amulets, for games, and for the
adornment of articles of furniture, buildings,
and perhaps even ships (Ez 27:6). It is fre-
quently mentioned in Egyptian and Assyrian
annals of conquest as part of the spoils of war.
Some excellent examples of work with ivory
can be found in the famed collection of
Tutankhamen.
In the Bible ivory is spoken of as the adorn-
ment of Solomon’s throne (1 Kgs 10:18; 2 Chr
9:17) and of beds in the time of Amos (6:4).
Both references are probably to ivory inlay.
The ivory palaces of 1 Kings 22:39; Psalm 45:8;
and Amos 3:15, however, may refer to forms of
decoration other than inlay. Whether Ezekiel
27:6 actually implies that ships were deco-
rated with ivory is debatable, since that pas-
sage forms part of the whole picture of Tyre as
an extravagant ship. The articles of ivory that
earth’s merchants can no longer sell to Baby-
lon (Rv 18:12) include smaller objects of the
kind found at various archaeological sites (Me-
giddo, Samaria, Nimrud).
Originally ivory was available in northern
Syria, where Assyrian monarchs hunted ele-
phants. By Solomon’s time, however, it was
important (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr g:21), probably
from the east (India) or south (Africa), while
Tarshish may represent the seagoing capabil-
ity of the ships rather than the source of the
ivory. Tyre received its ivory from the “coast-
lands” (Ez 27:15).
See FASHION AND DRESS; FURNITURE; INDUSTRY AND
COMMERCE.
Ivvah. City that had already fallen along
with others to the Assyrians (2 Kgs 18:34,
19:13; Is 37:13; KJv Ivah). Sennacherib’s repre-
sentative mocked Hezekiah’s belief that God
would save Jerusalem. Ivvah was probably in
Syria, but its exact location is unknown.
See Avva.
Iye-abarim, Iyim. Israelite camping place
on the southeast border of Moab during the
wilderness wanderings (Nm 33:44; KJV Ije-
abarim). Ifs exact site is unknown. In verse 45
the town is called Iyim (kv Iim), which is a
shortened form of Iye-abarim.
See WILDERNESS WANDERINGS.
Izehar, Izeharites. sv spelling of Izhar, Ko-
hath’s son, and his descendants (Nm 3:19,27).
See IZHAR #1.
Izhar. 1. One of Kohath’s sons from Levi's
tribe (Ex 6:18,21; Nm 3:19; KJv Izehar; 16:1;
1 Chr 6:2,18,38; 23:12,18), and father of the Iz-
harite family (Nm 3:27; KJv Izeharites; 1 Chr
 Izziah

24:22; 26:23,29); alternately called Amminadab Izrahite. Designation given to Shamhuth,

in 1 Chronicles 6:22. One of Izhar’s sons was
Korah who led the rebellion against Moses
and Aaron (Nm 16:1-11).
2. Helah’s son from Judah’s tribe (1 Chr 4:7,
KJV Jezoar).
one of David’s 12 monthly captains, meaning a
man of a family or town called Izra (1 Chr
27:8). The word “Izrahite”’ is perhaps a corrup-
tion of “Zerahite,”’ a descendant of Zerah of
Judah (1 Chr 27:11).

Izharite. Descendant of Izhar from Levi’s «’ Izri. Temple musician and head of the 4th of
tribe (Nm 3:27; 1 Chr 26:23,29). the 24 divisions of priests for service in the
See IZHAR #1. sanctuary (1 Chr 25:11). He is called Zeri in
verse 3.
Izliah. Elpaal’s son from Benjamin’s tribe
(a Chr 8:18, KJv Jezliah). Izziah. Parosh’s son, who was encouraged
by Ezra to divorce the foreign woman he mar-
Izrahiah. Uzzi’s son and a leading member ried during the postexilic period (Ezr 10:25,
of Issachar’s tribe (1 Chr 7:3). KJV Jeziah).

THEOLOGY LIBRARY
CLAREMONT, CALIF.

1079
ATLANTIC

O¢
w ® w© 2 %
 i

Senate
eerie:
ny
eee

Sa
eaten