Aaron was Moses’ older brother (eighty-three and eighty years old respectively, according to Exod. 7:7) and his close associate during the days when God used both of them to establish his people Israel as a nation. Aaron’s particular importance came when God selected him to be the first high priest of Israel.
Aaron first appears in the account of Moses’ divine commission at the burning bush. God charged Moses to return to Egypt and lead his people out of bondage (Exod. 3:7–10). In spite of God’s assurance of divine support and ultimate success, Moses hesitated to accept the call, finally citing his lack of rhetorical skills (“I am slow of speech and tongue” [Exod. 4:10]). Finally, God revealed that Aaron was on the way to see Moses. Aaron could “speak well” (Exod. 4:14), so he would serve as Moses’ mouthpiece.
Aaron plays a supportive role in the Exodus account of the plagues and the departure from Egypt. He was at Moses’ side. As previously arranged, Aaron was the spokesperson, acting as a prophet to Moses, who was “like God to Pharaoh” (Exod. 7:1). Indeed, the early plagues often were initiated by Moses commanding Aaron to “stretch out” his staff (Exod. 8:5, 16; cf. 7:9), though later Moses took over this role.
After much struggle, Pharaoh finally allowed the Israelites to leave Egypt. Aaron is not specifically mentioned as playing a role at the climactic moment of the crossing of the Red Sea, but he appears again in Exod. 16 during the first report of the Israelite community’s grumbling about lack of food for the journey. Moses and Aaron were the objects of the grumbling (v. 2), with Aaron continuing his role as the one who speaks for Moses (vv. 9–10). Aaron also supported Moses’ leading position during the first battle in the wilderness (Exod. 17:8–16). When the Israelites fought the aggressive Amalekites, Israel had the upper hand only when Moses kept his walking staff, representing God’s presence, raised above his head. When his arms grew too tired to hold the staff aloft, Aaron and Hur were next to him, hoisting his arms high.
The event of greatest significance involving Aaron in the wilderness was his appointment as high priest. The divine mandate for his installation is recorded in Exod. 28. Aaron and his sons were to be “set apart” or “consecrated” (Heb. root qdsh) for service to God. They were given special garments that distinctively related them to the sanctuary (i.e., the similarity between the ephod and the innermost curtain of the tabernacle [“blue, purple and scarlet yarn”; Exod. 26:1; 28:6]). Instructions for the installation service are given in Exod. 29, but the event itself is reported in Lev. 8.
Aaron did not fare well on the one occasion when he acted independently from Moses. While Moses was on Mount Sinai receiving the two tablets of the law from the hand of God, Aaron gave in to the people’s request to make a calf idol out of golden earrings that they gave him. Whether this calf idol represented a false god or the Lord (see Exod. 32:5) is irrelevant because in either case the worship was illegitimate and brought great harm on God’s people. When Moses returned, he confronted Aaron, who gave lame excuses by blaming the people. Unexpectedly, the Levites, his own tribe, assisted Moses by killing many of those who worshiped the idol. For this act, the Levites were ordained to work as priestly assistants.
In spite of Aaron’s sin, God did not remove him from his priestly responsibilities (thanks to the prayers of Moses [Deut. 9:20]), the height of which was to preside over the annual Day of Atonement. The incident of the golden calf was not the only occasion when Aaron tried God’s patience. According to Num. 12, Aaron and his sister, Miriam, contested Moses’ leadership. Using his marriage to a Cushite woman as a pretext, Moses’ siblings asserted their equality. God, however, put them in their place, affirming Moses’ primacy.
Other tribal leaders questioned Aaron’s priestly leadership, according to Num. 17. Moses told all the tribal leaders to place their walking staffs along with Aaron’s before God at the tent of testimony. God showed his favor toward Aaron by causing his staff to bud.
Both Moses and Aaron forfeited their right to enter the land of promise when they usurped the Lord’s authority as they brought water from the rock in the wilderness (Num. 20:1–13). Sick and tired of the people’s complaining, Moses wrongly ascribed the ability to make water come from the rock to himself and Aaron, and rather than speaking to the rock, he struck it twice. For this, God told them that they would die in the wilderness. Aaron’s death is reported soon after this occasion (Num. 20:22–27).
Aaron is cited infrequently in subsequent Scripture, with the exception of priestly genealogies (1 Chron. 6:3, 49–50) or in historical reviews (Pss. 77:20; 99:6; 105:26). Psalm 133:2 presents a striking image of the blessings of communal unity by asking the reader to picture oil running down Aaron’s beard. In the NT, the most significant use of Aaron is in comparison to Jesus Christ, the ultimate high priest. Interestingly, the book of Hebrews argues that Jesus far surpassed the priestly authority of Aaron by connecting his priesthood to Melchizedek, a mysterious non-Israelite priest who blesses God and Abram in Gen. 14 (see Heb. 7:1–14).
Aaron’srod (or staff) is his wooden walking stick, which had a significantrole in the accounts of the plagues of Egypt. In Moses and Aaron’sfirst confrontation with Pharaoh, Aaron threw his rod to the ground,and it turned into a snake. Egypt was a land filled with poisonoussnakes, so it is not surprising that the snake was a symbol of powerand threat. Although the Egyptian magicians could mimic this act,Aaron’s snake swallowed the snakes produced by their rods, thusshowing the superiority of Aaron’s God over their false gods(Exod. 7:8–13). Aaron used his rod by either extending it orstriking the ground in order to initiate other plagues as well(turning the Nile into blood [Exod. 7:19], frogs [8:5], and gnats[8:16]). Interestingly, Aaron’s rod was featured in the earlyplagues, whereas Moses used his rod in some of the later and morepowerful plagues as well as in the crossing of the Red Sea, perhapsshowing Moses’ prominence (9:23 [hail], 10:13 [locusts], 14:16[Red Sea]).
Therod was not a magical wand but rather a symbol of the presence ofGod. It is best to understand the rod as related to a tree thatstands for God’s presence. It is a portable tree. That the rodis a portable tree and signifies God’s presence is clearly seenin Num. 17. In the face of dissension from other tribal leaders whodisputed Aaron’s leadership, God directed Moses to place a rodfrom every tribe before him in the tent of testimony. Aaron’salone budded into an almond tree, signifying that God was with him.His rod was then placed in front of the testimony, according to Heb.9:4, in the Ark of the Covenant. It may also have been used by Mosesto strike the rock and produce water (Exod. 17:5; Num. 20:9).
The descendants of Aaron. The term occurs at 1 Chron.12:27 (NIV: “family of Aaron”) in reference to Jehoiada,the head of the clan at the time of David, who came to David’sside along with 3,700 fighting men “to turn Saul’skingdom over to him” (1 Chron. 12:23). But it isequivalent to other expressions such as “sons of Aaron,”used often in the OT.
A transliteration of the Hebrew word for “destruction,”signifying the grave or the underworld. It occurs six times in theOT: three times along with “Sheol,” which refers to thegrave or the underworld (Job 26:6; Prov. 15:11; 27:20), once with“death” (Job 28:22), once with the word for “bury”(Ps. 88:11), and once in Job 31:12. Most modern translations renderthis word “Destruction.” In the NT, the word is used inRev. 9:11 as the equivalent to the Greek word “Apollyon,”which means “Destroyer,” to refer to the angel of theAbyss.
One of the seven personal attendants of the Persian kingXerxes (Ahasuerus), whom he commanded to bring Queen Vashti to hisbanquet (Esther 1:10). Working with the harem, he was a eunuch.
A river in the region of Damascus mentioned by the Syriangeneral Naaman as surpassing the Jordan River (2 Kings 5:12).Its exact identity is uncertain, but often it is identified with theNahr Barada, which flows from the Anti-Lebanon Mountains throughDamascus. Some ancient versions (LXX, Targum) and Hebrew manuscriptsrender it “Amana.” See also Amana.
A mountain range in northwest Moab, separating theTransjordan Plain from the Jordan Valley. In this range stood MountNebo, the spot where Moses ascended to view the Promised Land andlater died (Num. 27:12; 33:47–48; Deut. 32:49; 34:1–8).The prophet Jeremiah pictures an announcement of destruction from thepeaks of Abarim (Jer. 22:20). See also Nebo.
An Aramaic term for “father,” used three times inthe NT, always coupled with its Greek equivalent, patēr. A termof endearment used to refer to God, it demonstrates that the speakerhas an intimate, loving relationship with God. Jesus so addresses Godthe Father in the garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:36). The believer,filled with the Spirit, becomes God’s adopted child and thuscan also so speak to God (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). The OT provides abackground for this in its teaching that God is the father of hispeople (Exod. 4:22; Deut. 32:6) and, in a special way, of the king(2 Sam. 7:14; Ps. 2:7).
(1) Thefather of Adoniram, who was in charge of forced labor at the time ofSolomon (1 Kings 4:6). (2) Sonof Shammua, son of Galal, son of Jeduthun, he was a Levite who movedto Jerusalem during the time of Nehemiah (Neh. 11:17). In 1 Chron.9:16 he is listed by the (full?) name “Obadiah” (“servantof Yahweh”).
The father of Shelemiah, an individual commissioned by KingJehoiakim to arrest Jeremiah and his scribe, Baruch (Jer. 36:26). Hewas unsuccessful.
(1) Anancestor of Ethan, from the Levitical clan of the Merarites. Ethan islisted as a temple musician appointed by David (1 Chron. 6:44).(2) Anancestor of Kish, a Levite from the clan of Merarites, who wascommissioned to purify the temple at the time of Hezekiah (2 Chron.29:12). (3) AnIsraelite man charged with the offense of intermarrying with aforeign woman during the time of Ezra (Ezra 10:26).
The father of Ahi, who was head of a family of Gadites(1 Chron. 5:15).
(1) Atown located in Asher (Josh. 19:28 [according to some Heb.manuscripts; others have Ebron (so NRSV)]; 1 Chron. 6:74), givento the Levites (Josh. 21:30). (2) AnEphraimite who functioned as a judge in Israel for eight years andwas noted for his forty sons and thirty grandsons, who rode onseventy donkeys (Judg. 12:13–15). (3) Sonof Shashak, from the tribe of Benjamin (1 Chron. 8:23).(4) Firstbornson of Jeiel and Maakah, Benjamites from Gibeon (1 Chron. 8:30;9:36). (5) Sonof Micah (2 Chron. 34:20 [although in the parallel text, 2 Kings22:12, the same individual is called Akbor son of Micaiah; see NIVmg.]). Along with others, he was commissioned to inquire of God’swill after the rediscovery of the law of God at the time of Josiah.
The Babylonian name given to Azariah by Nebuchadnezzar’schief official, Ashpenaz, as part of an attempt to turn him into aBabylonian official (Dan. 1:7). He is one of three of Daniel’sJudahite companions, along with Meshach and Shadrach. The three arelater appointed as administrators over the province of Babylon(2:49). After being accused of failing to worship Nebuchadnezzar’sgods, they are cast into a fiery furnace. They are kept safe by afourth “man,” who looks like a “son of the gods.”Afterward, all three are promoted (3:8–30). “Abednego”likely means “servant of Nego” (a form of “Nebo,”the Babylonian god of speech, writing, and water).
“Abel” is the English spelling of two differentHebrew words. (1) Thename of Cain’s brother (Heb. hebel ). As Adam and Eve’ssecond son, he is mentioned in Gen. 4:2–9 (also v. 25) asthe murdered brother of Cain, who slew him out of anger at his beingmore favored by God for offering a better sacrifice. He is notmentioned again until the Gospels (Matt. 23:35; Luke 11:51), where heis cast as the first representative of the “righteous blood”shed on earth. (The phrase “the blood of righteous Abel to theblood of Zechariah son of Berekiah” [Matt. 23:35] constitutes achronological “A to Z” of innocent blood shedin the OT.) He is last referred to in the book of Hebrews. In Heb.11:4 an explanation is given for why Abel’s sacrifice wasfavored over Cain’s: it was offered in faith. In Heb. 12:24Abel’s blood is contrasted with Christ’s. The nature ofthe contrast is not made explicit, but the context suggests thatwhereas both Christ and Abel were innocent, it is Christ’s shedblood that is efficacious to mediate the new covenant. The word hebelis also the same one used throughout Ecclesiastes, often translated“vanity” or “meaningless.” Abel’s name,therefore, may symbolize his short life.
(2) Thefirst part of a number of OT place names (Heb. ’abel )meaning “brook” or “meadow.” It appearsseveral times, as seen in entries that follow here.
A city north of Dan. Sheba fled there after his rebellionagainst David and was besieged by Joab, David’s militarycommander (2 Sam. 20:1–22). Ben-Hadad, king of Syria,conquered the city by defeating Israel’s King Baasha, thusanswering the call of Judah’s King Asa for help (1 Kings15:20). It was later conquered again, this time by the Assyrian kingTiglath-pileser III from the Israelite king Pekah (2 Kings15:29). The name means “meadow [or ‘brook’] of thehouse of Maakah,” and it is possible that “Maakah”refers to the Aramean king who fought with the Ammonites againstDavid (2 Sam. 10:6). See also Abel Maim; Beth Maakah.
A place name meaning “brook of vineyards.” Theexact location of this town, east of the Jordan, is unknown. It ismentioned only in Judg. 11:33, among the towns devastated by Jephthahwhen he was pursuing the Ammonites.
A city mentioned only in 2 Chron. 16:4. But this is in apassage parallel to 2 Kings 15:29, where the name is “AbelBeth Maakah,” suggesting that “Abel Maim” is analternate or later name. It means “meadow of water.” Seealso Abel Beth Maakah; Beth Maakah.
A place name meaning “meadow [or ‘brook’]of dancing.” The exact location of this town, near the JordanRiver, is unknown. It is one of the places to which the Midianitesfled when attacked by Gideon (Judg. 7:22) and is mentioned as one ofthe towns under the governorship of Baana son of Ahilud, one of thetwelve governors over Israel put in place by King Solomon to providethe king and the royal household with supplies (1 Kings 4:12).According to 1 Kings 19:16, it is Elisha’s hometown.
A place name that occurs only in Gen. 50:11 and, according tothe explanation given there, means “mourning of the Egyptians.”Joseph, along with his household and a large contingent of Egyptians,entered Canaan to bury Jacob. When the Canaanites saw Joseph mourningfor his father at “the threshing floor of Atad,” theynamed the place “Abel Mizraim.” With other place namesthe Hebrew word ’abel means “brook” or “meadow,”but the word for “mourn” is similar, so its meaning inGen. 50:11 may be a pun.
A place name meaning “brook of acacias.” It ismentioned only in Num. 33:49, as the last stop before crossing theJordan.
One of sixteen towns allotted to Issachar in Josh. 19:20.
Means “my father” or “father of”(often a reference to God) and is found as the first part of a numberof personal names. In 2 Kings 18:2 (KJV, RSV, NASB) “Abi”appears as a shortened form of “Abijah” (mother ofHezekiah [see 2 Chron. 29:1]). See also Abijah.
An Arbathite, he was one of David’s thirty fighting men(2 Sam. 23:31). He is called “Abiel” in 1 Chron.11:32.
(1) Samuel’ssecond son, who, along with his older brother Joel, served as judgein Beersheba, but whose corruption drove Israel’s elders to askSamuel to appoint a king (1 Sam. 8:2–5). (2) Sonof Jeroboam, the first king of the northern kingdom (930–909BC). He died as a boy, in accordance with Ahijah’s prophecy,because of Jeroboam’s idolatry (1 Kings 14:1–18).(3) Sonof Rehoboam, called “Abijam” in 1 Kings 15:1–8.He was the second king of the southern kingdom (913–910 BC). Hefollowed in his father’s sinful footsteps but was allowed torule for David’s sake. His reign was marked by warfare againstJeroboam, which is recounted in more detail and in a more positivelight in 2 Chron. 13:1–22 (Abijah defeated Jeroboam, andthe Lord struck Jeroboam down). He is listed in Matthew’sgenealogy of Jesus (1:7). (4) Themother of Hezekiah (2 Chron. 29:1 [“Abi” in 2 Kings18:2, the parallel passage]). (5) Thewife of Hezron in the genealogy of Caleb (1 Chron. 2:24 [thoughsome emend the name away; cf. NAB]). (6) Ason of Becher, a descendant of Benjamin (1 Chron. 7:8). (7)The leader of the eighth of the twenty-four divisions of priestsserving in the temple (1 Chron. 24:10). (8) Oneof the priests in Nehemiah’s time who signed a pledge to leadIsrael in covenant obedience (Neh. 10:7). See also Abi; Abijam.
One of the three sons of Korah (Exod. 6:24). The Korahiteswere of the line of Kohath, one of the three sons of Levi (see Exod.6:16–21), and therefore Levitical priests. Ebiasaph (1 Chron.6:23, 37; 9:19) seems to be the same person. See also Ebiasaph.
A high priest, son of Ahimelek, first mentioned in 1 Sam.22:20, when he escaped Saul’s slaughter of the priests of Nob.He took refuge with David in the cave of Adullam and, having escapedwith the ephod (1 Sam. 23:6–12), became the high priestafter David’s reign was established. He was from the line ofEli, son of Aaron, and served with Zadok (line of Eleazar, son ofAaron) during David’s reign (2 Sam. 8:17), although notethe reference there to “Ahimelek son of Abiathar.” Thisis usually considered a copyist’s error, since Ahimelek wasAbiathar’s father, and Abiathar is often mentioned as acontemporary of Zadok (e.g., 2 Sam. 15:29, 35; 1 Kings1:7–8). When Absalom rebelled against David, Abiathar remainedsupportive (2 Sam. 15). Later, however, he supported Adonijah asDavid’s successor rather than Solomon, which led to hisbanishment to his hometown, Anathoth, by Solomon, thus fulfillingEli’s prophecy (1 Sam. 2:30–35; 1 Kings2:26–27). He is mentioned once in the NT, Mark 2:26, whereJesus recounts when David took the showbread to feed his men “inthe days of Abiathar the high priest.” According to 1 Sam.21:1–9, however, it was Ahimelek, Abiathar’s father, whowas high priest at the time. This is often considered to be acopyist’s error, and some Greek manuscripts omit or alter thereference to Abiathar.
A month of the Jewish calendar corresponding to lateMarch/early April. It is the month during which the Israelites weredelivered from Egypt (Exod. 13:4) and the Passover was celebrated(Exod. 23:15; 34:18; Deut. 16:1). In Neh. 2:1 and Esther 3:7 themonth is called “Nisan.” See also Nisan.
One of the five sons of Midian, Abraham’s son byKeturah (Gen. 25:4; 1 Chron. 1:33).
A Gideonite and the leader of the tribe of Benjamin duringthe early wilderness period (Num. 1:11; 2:22; 7:60, 65; 10:24). Heassisted Moses and Aaron in the census (Num. 1).
The father of Kish and grandfather of Saul (1 Sam. 9:1;14:51). Also an alternate name for “Abi-Albon” (1 Chron.11:32). See also Abi-Albon.
(1) Thename of Gideon’s clan and territory, in the tribe of Manasseh,apparently known for grape production (Judg. 8:2). (2) Adescendant of Manasseh, Joseph’s son, a Gileadite (Josh.17:1–2; 1 Chron. 7:18). (3) Oneof David’s thirty fighting men (2 Sam. 23:27; 1 Chron.11:28), also mentioned in 1 Chron. 27:12 as leader of David’sfighting divisions during the ninth month.
The descendants of Abiezer (Judg. 6:11, 24, 34; 8:32). Seealso Abiezer.
(1) Thewife of Nabal, a wealthy man from Carmel, she is mentionedprominently in 1 Sam. 25. While David was hiding from Saul inthe desert, he sent a word of greeting to Nabal to ask for some food.This would have been a gesture of good faith on Nabal’s part,since his servants had been treated well by David and his men (vv. 7,15–16). Nabal treated David’s request and his tenmessengers with disrespect, so David intended to retaliate, evenswearing that not a male would be left alive among Nabal’speople (vv. 21–22). One of Nabal’s servants, however,warned Abigail of Nabal’s behavior and that his life was now indanger. Thinking quickly, and without telling Nabal, she preparedfood and brought it to David. She pleaded with David not to shed anyblood, which would be to act like the foolish Nabal (“Nabal”in Hebrew means “fool” [v. 25]). She asked forforgiveness on Nabal’s behalf, spoke of the Lord’s favoron David’s “lasting dynasty” (v. 28), and said thatshe wished to be remembered when David’s current status wasbehind him and his rule was established (v. 31). David was persuadedby her words. Abigail then returned home and reported to Nabal whatshe had done. Upon hearing the news, his heart failed and he became“like a stone” for ten days, and then God struck him dead(vv. 37–38). David rejoiced at hearing the news and then madeAbigail his wife, along with Ahinoam of Jezreel, both of whom werecaptured by the Amalekites at Ziklag (30:5) and later were present atDavid’s anointing (2 Sam. 2:2). Abigail is the mother ofKileab (2 Sam. 3:3 [Daniel, according to 1 Chron. 3:1]).
(2) David’ssister (1 Chron. 2:16–17), the mother of Amasa, one ofDavid’s army commanders (2 Sam. 17:25). The name isspelled “Abigal” in 2 Sam. 17:25.
(1) Thewife of Nabal, a wealthy man from Carmel, she is mentionedprominently in 1 Sam. 25. While David was hiding from Saul inthe desert, he sent a word of greeting to Nabal to ask for some food.This would have been a gesture of good faith on Nabal’s part,since his servants had been treated well by David and his men (vv. 7,15–16). Nabal treated David’s request and his tenmessengers with disrespect, so David intended to retaliate, evenswearing that not a male would be left alive among Nabal’speople (vv. 21–22). One of Nabal’s servants, however,warned Abigail of Nabal’s behavior and that his life was now indanger. Thinking quickly, and without telling Nabal, she preparedfood and brought it to David. She pleaded with David not to shed anyblood, which would be to act like the foolish Nabal (“Nabal”in Hebrew means “fool” [v. 25]). She asked forforgiveness on Nabal’s behalf, spoke of the Lord’s favoron David’s “lasting dynasty” (v. 28), and said thatshe wished to be remembered when David’s current status wasbehind him and his rule was established (v. 31). David was persuadedby her words. Abigail then returned home and reported to Nabal whatshe had done. Upon hearing the news, his heart failed and he became“like a stone” for ten days, and then God struck him dead(vv. 37–38). David rejoiced at hearing the news and then madeAbigail his wife, along with Ahinoam of Jezreel, both of whom werecaptured by the Amalekites at Ziklag (30:5) and later were present atDavid’s anointing (2 Sam. 2:2). Abigail is the mother ofKileab (2 Sam. 3:3 [Daniel, according to 1 Chron. 3:1]).
(2) David’ssister (1 Chron. 2:16–17), the mother of Amasa, one ofDavid’s army commanders (2 Sam. 17:25). The name isspelled “Abigal” in 2 Sam. 17:25.
(1) Themother of Zuriel, leader of the Merarite clans (Num. 3:35). (2) Thewife of Abishur, a descendant of Judah (1 Chron. 2:29). (3) AGadite from Gilead (1 Chron. 5:14). (4) Themother of Rehoboam’s wife, Mahalath (2 Chron. 11:18).(5) Thefather of Queen Esther and uncle of Mordecai (Esther 2:15; 9:29).
The second of Aaron’s four sons (Exod. 6:23). He andhis older brother, Nadab, were allowed to approach the Lord on MountSinai with Moses, Aaron, and the seventy elders (Exod. 24:1, 9). Heand his three brothers (the younger two were Eleazar and Ithamar)were made Israel’s first priests (Exod. 28:1). He and Nadab“offered unauthorized fire before the Lord, contrary to hiscommand,” so they were consumed by fire (Lev. 10:1–2; cf.Num. 3:4; 26:61; 1 Chron. 24:2).
Grandson of Benjamin (1 Chron. 8:3), although it ispossible that the text should be read as “Gera the father ofEhud” because Ehud’s lineage is given in 1 Chron.8:6.
(1) Samuel’ssecond son, who, along with his older brother Joel, served as judgein Beersheba, but whose corruption drove Israel’s elders to askSamuel to appoint a king (1 Sam. 8:2–5). (2) Sonof Jeroboam, the first king of the northern kingdom (930–909BC). He died as a boy, in accordance with Ahijah’s prophecy,because of Jeroboam’s idolatry (1 Kings 14:1–18).(3) Sonof Rehoboam, called “Abijam” in 1 Kings 15:1–8.He was the second king of the southern kingdom (913–910 BC). Hefollowed in his father’s sinful footsteps but was allowed torule for David’s sake. His reign was marked by warfare againstJeroboam, which is recounted in more detail and in a more positivelight in 2 Chron. 13:1–22 (Abijah defeated Jeroboam, andthe Lord struck Jeroboam down). He is listed in Matthew’sgenealogy of Jesus (1:7). (4) Themother of Hezekiah (2 Chron. 29:1 [“Abi” in 2 Kings18:2, the parallel passage]). (5) Thewife of Hezron in the genealogy of Caleb (1 Chron. 2:24 [thoughsome emend the name away; cf. NAB]). (6) Ason of Becher, a descendant of Benjamin (1 Chron. 7:8). (7)The leader of the eighth of the twenty-four divisions of priestsserving in the temple (1 Chron. 24:10). (8) Oneof the priests in Nehemiah’s time who signed a pledge to leadIsrael in covenant obedience (Neh. 10:7). See also Abi; Abijam.
The firstborn son of King Rehoboam, he was the second king ofJudah. “Abijam” is the name used in 1 Kings 15:1–8(KJV, ESV, NRSV; NIV: “Abijah”). Elsewhere he is called“Abijah,” and the use of “Abijam” by theauthor of 1 Kings may be meant to cast this king in a morenegative light. See also Abijah.
A region in Syria named after its chief town, Abila, locatedabout eighteen miles northwest of Damascus. Luke reports that at thebeginning of John the Baptist’s ministry the region wasgoverned by Lysanias II (Luke 3:1) as one of four rulers in theJudea province (with Pontius Pilate, Herod Antipas, and Philip).Josephus, however, only mentions three rulers and makes no referenceto Lysanias.
A descendant of Shem, one of Noah’s three sons (Gen.10:28; 1 Chron. 1:22).
(1) Theking of Gerar who took Sarah into his house, deceived by Abraham intothinking that she was Abraham’s sister. God warned Abimelek ofthis in a dream, so he released her and made restitution to Abrahamand Sarah. God responded by opening up the wombs of his wife andslave girls (Gen. 20:1–18). He is likely the same personmentioned in Gen. 21:22–24 as one who made a treaty withAbraham at Beersheba.
(2) Theking of Gerar during Isaac’s lifetime (Gen. 26:1–35) andlikely a son or grandson of the Abimelek mentioned in 20:1–18.As in the earlier incident with Abraham and Sarah, Isaac passed hiswife, Rebekah, off as his sister, causing Abimelek great concern whenhe found out the truth. Abimelek ordered his people to cause no harmto the couple. Isaac planted crops, which did very well and provokedjealousy on the part of the Philistines, and this eventually led toIsaac moving on to Beersheba.
(3) Sonof Gideon and his concubine (Judg. 8:31). After Gideon’s deathhe murdered his seventy brothers in an effort to consolidate powerunder himself in Shechem. The youngest of the brothers, Jotham,escaped and spoke a parable against the citizens of Shechem. Threeyears later they rebelled against Abimelek under Gaal, but Abimelekwas successful in capturing Shechem and killing many of itsresidents. When he attacked Thebez, he was killed by women whodropped a millstone on his head. That incident is mentioned later in2 Sam. 11:21 by Joab as he is preparing his messenger forpossible criticism by David for his strategy in besieging Rabbah.
(4) Sonof Abiathar, and a priest under David (2 Sam. 8:17). It is verylikely that a copyist’s error occurs here in which “Abimelek”and “Abiathar” have been transposed (cf. 1 Sam.22:20).
(5) Theman before whom David pretended to be insane, according to thesuperscription to Ps. 34. If the incident of 1 Sam. 21:10–15is in view, where Achish the king of Gath is named, then it ispossible that “Ahimelek” is a title for Philistine kings.
(1) Theking of Gerar who took Sarah into his house, deceived by Abraham intothinking that she was Abraham’s sister. God warned Abimelek ofthis in a dream, so he released her and made restitution to Abrahamand Sarah. God responded by opening up the wombs of his wife andslave girls (Gen. 20:1–18). He is likely the same personmentioned in Gen. 21:22–24 as one who made a treaty withAbraham at Beersheba.
(2) Theking of Gerar during Isaac’s lifetime (Gen. 26:1–35) andlikely a son or grandson of the Abimelek mentioned in 20:1–18.As in the earlier incident with Abraham and Sarah, Isaac passed hiswife, Rebekah, off as his sister, causing Abimelek great concern whenhe found out the truth. Abimelek ordered his people to cause no harmto the couple. Isaac planted crops, which did very well and provokedjealousy on the part of the Philistines, and this eventually led toIsaac moving on to Beersheba.
(3) Sonof Gideon and his concubine (Judg. 8:31). After Gideon’s deathhe murdered his seventy brothers in an effort to consolidate powerunder himself in Shechem. The youngest of the brothers, Jotham,escaped and spoke a parable against the citizens of Shechem. Threeyears later they rebelled against Abimelek under Gaal, but Abimelekwas successful in capturing Shechem and killing many of itsresidents. When he attacked Thebez, he was killed by women whodropped a millstone on his head. That incident is mentioned later in2 Sam. 11:21 by Joab as he is preparing his messenger forpossible criticism by David for his strategy in besieging Rabbah.
(4) Sonof Abiathar, and a priest under David (2 Sam. 8:17). It is verylikely that a copyist’s error occurs here in which “Abimelek”and “Abiathar” have been transposed (cf. 1 Sam.22:20).
(5) Theman before whom David pretended to be insane, according to thesuperscription to Ps. 34. If the incident of 1 Sam. 21:10–15is in view, where Achish the king of Gath is named, then it ispossible that “Ahimelek” is a title for Philistine kings.
(1) Theman in whose house the Ark of the Covenant rested for twenty yearsafter it was returned by the Philistines (1 Sam. 7:1; 1 Chron.13:7). (2) Sonof Jesse and older brother of David who was passed over by Samuelwhen choosing a king (1 Sam. 16:8; 17:13; see also 1 Chron.2:13). (3) Oneof Saul’s three sons killed by the Philistines on Mount Gilboa(1 Sam. 31:1–2; see also 1 Chron. 8:33; 9:39; 10:2).(4) Ben-Abinadab,who, according to 1 Kings 4:11, was Solomon’s son-in-lawand one of Solomon’s twelve district officials. If“Ben-Abinadab” means “son of Abinadab”(David’s brother), then he is Solomon’s cousin as well.
The father of Barak, Deborah’s army commander (Judg.4:6, 12; 5:1, 12).
(1) Sonof Eliab who, along with his brother Dathan and Korah and On, was aninstigator of a Levite rebellion against Moses and Aaron. The earthopened up and swallowed them and their families (Num. 16:1–50;26:9; Deut. 11:6; Ps. 106:17). (2) Sonof Hiel of Bethel, who rebuilt Jericho, laying its foundations “atthe cost of his firstborn son Abiram,” which may be a referenceto child sacrifice (1 Kings 16:34).
A young Shunammite woman brought to David’s bed in hisold age to keep him warm (1 Kings 1:3, 15). After David’sdeath, his son Adonijah asked to marry her (1 Kings 2:17), whichwas a declaration of his continued attempt to secure the throne (see1 Kings 1), for which Solomon put him to death (1 Kings2:23–25).
Son of Zeruiah, David’s sister, and brother of Joab,David’s general (1 Sam. 26:6; 1 Chron. 2:16), he wasan accomplished soldier in David’s army. David intervened whenAbishai sought to kill the sleeping Saul (1 Sam. 26:5–11).He accompanied his brother Joab as they pursued Saul’scommander, Abner, for killing their brother Asahel (2 Sam.2:18–24); they later murdered Abner (2 Sam. 3:30). Hecommanded an army against the Ammonites (2 Sam. 10:10–14;1 Chron. 19:11–15). David prevented him from killingShimei for cursing David (2 Sam. 16:9–12; 19:21). He ledone-third of David’s army against Absalom, David’srebellious son (2 Sam. 18:2), and an army pursuing Sheba in hisrebellion against David (2 Sam. 20:6). When the PhilistineIshbi-Benob threatened David’s life, Abishai rescued David bykilling the Philistine (2 Sam. 21:16–17). He struck downeighteen thousand Edomites in the Valley of Salt and establishedgarrisons in Edom (1 Chron. 18:12–13).
A variant spelling of “Absalom” in 1 Kings15:2, 10. See also Absalom.
(1) ALevite, son of Phineas and great-grandson of Aaron (1 Chron.6:4, 50; Ezra 7:5). (2) Adescendant of Saul (1 Chron. 8:4).
Son of Shammai, descendant of Jerahmeel of the tribe of Judah(1 Chron. 2:28–29).
One of David’s wives (2 Sam. 3:4; 1 Chron.3:3).
A Benjamite from Moab (1 Chron. 8:11).
Ablutions include a variety of practices found primarily inthe OT through which persons washed in order to participate in themost important activities of the community, usually worship. Althoughterms referring to washing cover a variety of purposes, such ascleansing the hands or bathing (Gen. 18:4; Ruth 3:3; Acts 16:33;2 Pet. 2:22), when one speaks of ablutions, the focus is uponthe necessary tasks of cleansing after suffering separation fromparticipation in the worship of the assembly because of some impurity(Deut. 21:1–9).
Sometimesablutions were performed as a means of preparing a person for anactivity of heightened importance. The priests of the OT underwentsuch cleansings, though they were not impure in the usual sense ofthe word (Exod. 30:19–21). The imagery communicated by suchpractices expressed the extreme holiness necessary to serve God andhis people. Indeed, the sense of holiness and purity that pervadedthe sacred rites of the OT was a major motivation for all levels ofablutions. For these heightened moments, however, the biblical recordgoes into extra detail concerning the process by which one could bewashed. Special care was taken to avoid recontamination of thepriest, the sacred instruments, or the camp itself, which wouldinterfere with or render useless the rite that had been carried out(Lev. 16:4, 24, 26, 28). As with all ceremonial rites, however, thebiblical interest is focused more upon the attitude and the heart ofthe worshiper than the rite itself. The integrity and the holiness ofthe participant were the true test of standing pure before God, notthe ritual of cleansing (Ps. 24:3–6; Isa. 1:11–16).
Inthe NT, the pattern of emphasis on the inner person begun in the OTreceived further expression. In the book of Mark, one of the conflictpassages recounts an encounter between Jesus and the Phariseesregarding the extent of ritual cleansing necessary in one’slife (7:1–16). Jesus proclaimed, in full harmony with the OT,that it has always been the character of the individual that made aperson clean or unclean, and that the washings of old were symbolicof that status, not determinative of it. Despite this, it seems thatJewish Christians of the first century chose to continue the practiceof ritual washings. The writer of Hebrews argues that the use of suchis both an illustration of the pure life (10:22) and a practice thatmay be considered unnecessary in light of what Christ hadaccomplished through his perfect work (6:2; 9:10).
Generallyspeaking, the source of washing for such ceremonial cleansing had tobe “living water”; that is, it had to be moving. Thiscould be obtained by pouring the water, by visiting a dedicatedceremonial bath, or by carrying out the washing in a location thatalready had moving water, such as a river. There is little question,based upon the similarities of early baptismal practices and theceremonial baths uncovered at Qumran and elsewhere, that NT baptismdraws many of its intentions and expressions from the OT ablutions.As such, the same observations about washings made above can be drawnconcerning baptism. It is symbolic of an internal reality (Eph.5:26); it is intended as a means of expressing community between theparticipant and the greater body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13); andit is reflective of a higher calling of Christ to live holy lives(Acts 10:47).
Son of King Saul’s uncle, Ner (1 Sam. 14:50–51).Abner was Saul’s military commander. He maintained loyalty tothe house of Saul during Saul’s struggle with David. UponSaul’s death, Abner made Saul’s son Ish-Bosheth king overthe northern kingdom. In battle with David’s forces, Abnerkilled Asahel, the brother of David’s military commander, Joab(2 Sam. 2:17–23). Abner rallied support for David’skingship after Ish-Bosheth accused Abner of sleeping with Saul’sconcubine (2 Sam. 3:7–13). Joab later murdered Abner toavenge his brother Asahel’s death (3:22–27).
Death is commonly defined as the end of physical life,wherein the normal biological processes associated with life (such asrespiration) cease. This definition, however, does not adequatelyencompass the varied nuances associated with death in the Bible.
TheBeginning of Death
Deathis introduced in the Bible as the penalty for transgressing theprohibition against eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of goodand evil—a contrast to Mesopotamia, where death was part of thedivine design of human beings. In Gen. 2:16–17 God tells thefirst man, “When you eat from [the fruit of the tree] you willcertainly die.” The consequences of eating provide a usefulbasis for discussing the nature of death from a biblical perspective.
First,as is apparent from the subsequent narrative, neither the man nor thewoman experiences physical, biological death immediately after eatingthe fruit. In this way, Gen. 2–3 reflects the common biblicalnotion that death refers to more than just biological death, pointingto the more significant aspect of death that embodies alienation andseparation from the source of life, God. The point is presupposed byJesus when he offers life to those who are dead (John 5:24), and byPaul when he proclaims that before Christ all were dead in their sinsand transgressions (Eph. 2:1, 5). It is also reflected in the commonpunishment prescribed in the Pentateuch whereby offenders were cutoff from the people (Gen. 17:14; Exod. 12:15, 19; 30:38; cf. Gen.9:11; Exod. 9:15). Within Gen. 2–3, death arrives with loss ofaccess to the tree of life in the garden. Biologically, the first manand woman may continue to live for a while outside the garden, buttheir fate is sealed when they are cut off from the garden and theintimate fellowship with the Creator that had been enjoyed therein.
Second,the strong implication of Gen. 2:16–17 is that human beings, asoriginally created, were not subject to death (see also Rom. 5:12;6:23; 1Cor. 15:21). This does not mean that they were immortalin the same manner as God (cf. 1Tim. 6:16), but rather thatthey were contingently immortal: they were not subject to death butsustained by their relationship to the life-giving God through theprovision of the tree of life (cf. Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14). Once theywere cut off from the source of life, death ensued.
Theaccount of the arrival of death in Gen. 3, however, tells us littleabout how death affected animals, since the Bible consistentlypresents a predominantly human focus. While Eccles. 3:21 affirmshuman ignorance over the relative postmortem fate of humans andanimals, little else is said on the matter. Similarly, it is notentirely clear whether death is introduced as a punishment for sinfor humans only (and so whether animals could have died prior to thefall) or whether animals were perceived as sharing in immortalityprior to the fall.
Deathin the Old Testament
Deathis frequently depicted negatively throughout the OT. Aside from itsinitial presentation as a divine punishment for sin, it is presentedas that which seeks out and devours life and is terrifying (Pss.18:4–5; 55:4; Prov. 30:15–16; Hab. 2:5). For the authorof Ecclesiastes, death is that which ultimately undermines anypossible value that life may otherwise have (e.g., Eccles. 9:3). Thetragedy of death, in the OT, is that it results in separation, fromGod (as noted above in the context of Gen. 2–3) and frompeople. The psalms, for example, frequently cite the finality andprofundity of death’s effects (e.g., Pss. 6:5; 88:5; 115:17;cf. Isa. 38:18). Even those few passages that appear to present deathmore positively (e.g., Job 3:13, 17) ultimately serve to highlightthe appalling circumstances of the speaker’s life rather thanany blessed state of the dead (for a similar idea in the NT, seeRev.9:6).
TheOT does, however, depict death as the natural end of life, and a gooddeath as one that arrives only after a long and prosperous life. SoAbraham (Gen. 25:8), Isaac (Gen. 35:29), and Job (Job 42:16–17)are said to live long lives before they die. Furthermore, somepassages refer to the person being “gathered to his people,”suggesting some form of reunion with previous generations in death,presumably in Sheol, although the location and state of the dead arenever explicated. Isaiah can even include the idea of death withinlanguage used to describe the ideal future world (Isa. 65:20).
Althoughthere are no laws relating to the manner in which the bodies of thedead were to be handled, all the descriptive indicators show thatburial was normative, often in a family tomb or plot (e.g., Gen. 23;cf. 1Kings 13:22). Indeed, the importance of an appropriateburial is apparent in Ecclesiastes’ comment that a stillbornchild is better off than someone who lives a long life but receivesno burial (Eccles. 6:3) and in the prophets’ presentation ofthose not buried as being accursed (Jer. 8:2; 14:16;16:4).
Lifeafter Death in the Old Testament
Beliefin some form of postmortem existence was common in many parts of theancient world. In Egypt, an elaborate set of beliefs relating to thestate of those who had died included the possibility of an ongoingexistence that could even surpass what one may have experiencedbefore death (although such an opportunity was a reasonableexpectation only for the upper classes, while the general populationprobably had more modest expectations of the nature of theirexistence in the afterlife). By way of contrast, Mesopotamian beliefsdepicted a far darker and more troubling afterlife for all but thevery few whose lives and deaths were sufficiently blessed to ensurethem some degree of postmortem comfort. For the remainder, there waslittle hope for any positive experience following death.
TheOT, however, has little to say about the state of those who havedied. The widespread belief in some form of continued existencebeyond biological death in the ancient world suggests that, in theabsence of contrary data in the Bible, the people of Israel probablyassumed that some aspect of a person persisted beyond death.Furthermore, there are hints that this may have been the case, suchas the raising of Samuel’s shade by the medium at Endor (1Sam.28), the escape from death of Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2Kings2:11), the revivification of the body dropped on Elisha’s bones(2Kings 13:21), and expressions used to refer to death such as“gathered to his people” (Gen. 25:8, 17; 35:29; 49:29;Num. 27:13; Deut. 32:50; cf. Gen. 47:30; Deut. 31:16). The dead(sometimes referred to by the term repa’im, “shades/spiritsof the dead”) were thought to dwell in Sheol, generallydescribed as under the earth (e.g., Ezek. 31:14). Beyond this, thereare prophetic expectations that God will ultimately destroy death(e.g., Isa. 25:8), and that God does not take pleasure in anyone’sdeath (Ezek. 18:23, 32).
Deathin the New Testament
TheNT continues, and in some places expands upon, the negative view ofdeath presented in the OT. The notion that death is a consequence ofand punishment for the sinful state that imprisons all humanity isstated emphatically (e.g., Rom. 3:23; 6:23) and reinforced by thenotion that, although biologically alive, sinful humans are dead intheir sin and so incapable of reviving themselves (Eph. 2:1). Death,according to Paul, is the last enemy (1Cor. 15:26), and yet todie is gain (Phil. 1:21–24) because it heralds being withChrist, which, explains Paul, “is better by far” thanbeing alive in this body in this world.
Centralto both the message of the Bible and to the significance of death inthe Bible is the death of the Messiah, God’s Son. Jesus’death provides the basis for countering the consequences of theoriginal rebellion against God by the first couple (2Cor.5:21). Consequently, Paul could write that Jesus’ death itselfdestroyed death (2Tim. 1:10). Furthermore, the life that Jesusoffers—eternal life—is available to the believer in thepresent (John 3:36; 5:24), prior to the time when death is ultimatelyabolished, such that Jesus could assert that all those who believe inhim will live even though they die (John 11:25–26).
TheNT expands somewhat on the details relating to the state of the deadfrom the OT. For one thing, the existence of an afterlife is clearlypresented. Furthermore, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke16:19–31) reflects a more comprehensive understanding of theexistence of distinctions among those who have died, such that therich man is said to be suffering in Hades (Gk. hadēs, used inthe LXX to translate Heb. she’ol in the OT), while Lazarus isfar off with Abraham and being comforted. Although there is a dangerin reading too much into a parable, the detail appears to reflectsomething of the expanded understanding of the afterlife among somein Jesus’ day.
TheNT makes several references to a “second death” (Rev.2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8; cf. Jude 12). The expression refers to thestate of eternal judgment under God’s wrath, a death from whichthere will be no escape. But those who remain faithful to Christ willnot experience this second death (Rev. 20:6), and in their dwellingplace with God, the new Jerusalem, death will be no more (21:4).
“Abomination” is a translation of the Hebrewwords shiqquts and to’ebah used primarily in the KJV (NIV usesterms such as “detestable,” “desecrated,” and“unclean”). The term shiqquts is used of idols (e.g.,2 Kings 23:13, 24; Jer. 7:30; cf. Ezek. 8:10), forbiddenpractices (e.g., 2 Kings 23:24), and generally anything contraryto the true worship of Israel’s God (e.g., 2 Chron. 15:8;Isa. 66:3; Jer. 4:1; cf. forbidden foods [Lev. 11:10, 13, 42] andceremonial defilement [Lev. 7:21]). The term to’ebah includesthe prohibition of idol worship (Deut. 7:25; 27:15; 32:16) but canmore widely apply to immorality (e.g., Lev. 18:22, 26–27),prophecy that leads to paganism (Deut. 13:13–14), blemishedanimals offered in sacrifice to Yahweh (Deut. 17:1), and heathendivination (Deut. 18:9, 12).
The“abomination of desolation” (NIV: “abomination thatcauses desolation), or “desolating sacrifice,” refers tothe desecration of the Jerusalem temple. The description occurs or isalluded to in Dan. 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; Matt. 24:15; Mark 13:14;Luke 21:20; 2 Thess. 2:4; as well as 1 Macc. 1:54–64.These texts seem to attest to two or three stages of fulfillment ofthe prophecy.
First,Dan. 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; and 1 Macc. 1:54–64 clearlyspeak of the actions of the Syrian ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes(175–164 BC) against the Jerusalem temple in 167 BC. He was theyounger son of Antiochus III, ruler of the Seleucid Empire. Thename “Epiphanes” means “manifest,” implying“manifest as a god.” Antiochus’s ambition was touse the common culture of the Greeks (Hellenism) to unite the diverseSeleucid Empire. In 167 BC, after being repelled from Egypt by theRomans, Antiochus unleashed his fury on Jerusalem. His soldiersattacked the city on the Sabbath, killing much of the male populationand enslaving the remaining women and children (1 Macc. 1:29–36;2 Macc. 5:24–26). There followed the prohibition of allJewish rites, along with the rededication of the Jewish temple to theGreek god Zeus. Anyone caught reading the Torah, observing theSabbath and dietary laws, or circumcising their male babies waskilled (1 Macc. 1:54–64; Josephus, Ant. 12.248–64).In December of 167 BC the first pagan sacrifice was offered on thealtar in the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple (1 Macc.1:54).
Antiochusat first met pockets of resistance from faithful Jews who opposed hisorders and were therefore martyred (2 Macc. 6:10–7:42).With Mattathias and his five sons, however, open defiance againstAntiochus’s policies ensued. Mattathias, a priest in the townof Modein, refused to sacrifice to heathen gods and killed the king’sofficer sent to enforce the edict. This incident sparked a Jewishrebellion led by Mattathias’s family (the Maccabees) thatculminated in his son Judas’s defeat of Antiochus’sforces in December of 164 BC. At that time Judas reconsecrated thetemple to Yahweh, the God of Israel, and Israel resumed theobservance of the Jewish law (1 Macc. 4:52–59). Not longthereafter, Antiochus, who had unsuccessfully tried to invade Persia,died of illness in 164 BC (1 Macc. 6:1–17; 2 Macc.1:13–17; 9:1–29; Josephus, Ant. 12.354–59). Thus,the prophecies of Dan. 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11 regarding the riseand fall of Antiochus Epiphanes had come true.
Second,Daniel’s prophecy apparently was not completely fulfilled withAntiochus, for Luke 21:20 labels the Roman assault on Jerusalem in AD70 as the “desolation.” In fact, the Roman destruction ofthe Holy City and its temple was an intensification of the OTprediction.
Third,some interpreters would extend the application of the prophecy of theabomination of desolation to the distant future. They contend thatthe ultimate fulfillment of Daniel’s prediction will occur inconnection with the end-time temple to be built by Israel, which theantichrist will desecrate. Supporters of this viewpoint appeal toMark 13:14; Matt. 24:15; 2 Thess. 2:4 (cf. Rev. 11).
Thosewho identify only two stages of fulfillment for Daniel’sprophecy understand Mark 13:14 and Matt. 24:15 to pertain not to afuture end-time temple but to the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 (cf.Luke 21:20). Furthermore, they see in 2 Thess. 2:4 an allusionto the emperor Caligula’s (Gaius) plan to place astatue of himself in the Jerusalem temple in AD 40 (which, because ofhis assassination, did not occur).
“Abomination” is a translation of the Hebrewwords shiqquts and to’ebah used primarily in the KJV (NIV usesterms such as “detestable,” “desecrated,” and“unclean”). The term shiqquts is used of idols (e.g.,2 Kings 23:13, 24; Jer. 7:30; cf. Ezek. 8:10), forbiddenpractices (e.g., 2 Kings 23:24), and generally anything contraryto the true worship of Israel’s God (e.g., 2 Chron. 15:8;Isa. 66:3; Jer. 4:1; cf. forbidden foods [Lev. 11:10, 13, 42] andceremonial defilement [Lev. 7:21]). The term to’ebah includesthe prohibition of idol worship (Deut. 7:25; 27:15; 32:16) but canmore widely apply to immorality (e.g., Lev. 18:22, 26–27),prophecy that leads to paganism (Deut. 13:13–14), blemishedanimals offered in sacrifice to Yahweh (Deut. 17:1), and heathendivination (Deut. 18:9, 12).
The“abomination of desolation” (NIV: “abomination thatcauses desolation), or “desolating sacrifice,” refers tothe desecration of the Jerusalem temple. The description occurs or isalluded to in Dan. 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; Matt. 24:15; Mark 13:14;Luke 21:20; 2 Thess. 2:4; as well as 1 Macc. 1:54–64.These texts seem to attest to two or three stages of fulfillment ofthe prophecy.
First,Dan. 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; and 1 Macc. 1:54–64 clearlyspeak of the actions of the Syrian ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes(175–164 BC) against the Jerusalem temple in 167 BC. He was theyounger son of Antiochus III, ruler of the Seleucid Empire. Thename “Epiphanes” means “manifest,” implying“manifest as a god.” Antiochus’s ambition was touse the common culture of the Greeks (Hellenism) to unite the diverseSeleucid Empire. In 167 BC, after being repelled from Egypt by theRomans, Antiochus unleashed his fury on Jerusalem. His soldiersattacked the city on the Sabbath, killing much of the male populationand enslaving the remaining women and children (1 Macc. 1:29–36;2 Macc. 5:24–26). There followed the prohibition of allJewish rites, along with the rededication of the Jewish temple to theGreek god Zeus. Anyone caught reading the Torah, observing theSabbath and dietary laws, or circumcising their male babies waskilled (1 Macc. 1:54–64; Josephus, Ant. 12.248–64).In December of 167 BC the first pagan sacrifice was offered on thealtar in the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple (1 Macc.1:54).
Antiochusat first met pockets of resistance from faithful Jews who opposed hisorders and were therefore martyred (2 Macc. 6:10–7:42).With Mattathias and his five sons, however, open defiance againstAntiochus’s policies ensued. Mattathias, a priest in the townof Modein, refused to sacrifice to heathen gods and killed the king’sofficer sent to enforce the edict. This incident sparked a Jewishrebellion led by Mattathias’s family (the Maccabees) thatculminated in his son Judas’s defeat of Antiochus’sforces in December of 164 BC. At that time Judas reconsecrated thetemple to Yahweh, the God of Israel, and Israel resumed theobservance of the Jewish law (1 Macc. 4:52–59). Not longthereafter, Antiochus, who had unsuccessfully tried to invade Persia,died of illness in 164 BC (1 Macc. 6:1–17; 2 Macc.1:13–17; 9:1–29; Josephus, Ant. 12.354–59). Thus,the prophecies of Dan. 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11 regarding the riseand fall of Antiochus Epiphanes had come true.
Second,Daniel’s prophecy apparently was not completely fulfilled withAntiochus, for Luke 21:20 labels the Roman assault on Jerusalem in AD70 as the “desolation.” In fact, the Roman destruction ofthe Holy City and its temple was an intensification of the OTprediction.
Third,some interpreters would extend the application of the prophecy of theabomination of desolation to the distant future. They contend thatthe ultimate fulfillment of Daniel’s prediction will occur inconnection with the end-time temple to be built by Israel, which theantichrist will desecrate. Supporters of this viewpoint appeal toMark 13:14; Matt. 24:15; 2 Thess. 2:4 (cf. Rev. 11).
Thosewho identify only two stages of fulfillment for Daniel’sprophecy understand Mark 13:14 and Matt. 24:15 to pertain not to afuture end-time temple but to the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 (cf.Luke 21:20). Furthermore, they see in 2 Thess. 2:4 an allusionto the emperor Caligula’s (Gaius) plan to place astatue of himself in the Jerusalem temple in AD 40 (which, because ofhis assassination, did not occur).
Abortion remains an important and vital issue in contemporarysociety, but the Bible does not comment directly on the practice.There is no law for or against, nor is there even a description orallusion to it, even though its practice was not unknown in theancient world. Apparently, it was not an issue in biblicallegislation.
Perhapsthe most frequently cited passages tied to the contemporary abortiondebate are Exod. 21:22–25; Job 10:10–11; Ps. 139:13–16;Jer. 1:5. Although these passages certainly speak to the unbornstate, they have only indirect relevance, at best, to the issue ofabortion.
TheHebrew wording of Exod. 21:22 is obscure and could refer to amiscarriage or full-term delivery; and the harm referred to could bethat of either the mother or the child. Also, Exod. 21:22 speaks ofaccidental death, not a willing decision by a mother to abort achild.
Jeremiah1:5 refers to God knowing Jeremiah before he was in the womb. Thisspeaks to God’s intention from time past to use Jeremiah as aprophet, and the text should not be generalized of everyone. Clearly,the focus is not on the personhood of the fetus but on the extent ofGod’s knowledge.
Psalm139:13–16 is perhaps most relevant to the debate, as thepsalmist describes the wonder of God in “creating” and“forming” him in the womb. Since the passage refers toGod’s planning of the entire believer’s life (v. 16),that life seems to begin in some sense in the womb. Similarly, Job10:10–11 speaks of fetal development. Although these passagesdo not speak directly to the matter of abortion, they imply thatGod’s care for humans does not begin only at birth.
However,care must be taken not to allow this relative silence to bemisunderstood. The Bible is very clear about the sanctity of life,especially that of the innocent. The biblical argument againstabortion is one that connects more to larger themes concerningprotection of the innocent than to any one verse or to a lack ofverses.
Abram, eventually named “Abraham,” is awell-known biblical character whose life is detailed in Gen.11:25–25:11. The patriarchal name “Abram” is usedexclusively in Genesis, 1 Chron. 1:27, and Neh. 9:7. Abram’sname (which means “exalted father”) is changed in Gen.17:5 to “Abraham,” meaning “father of manynations.” His prominence as a biblical character is evidencedin the 254 references to him documented in both Testaments.
Thehistorical reliability of the account of Abraham is vigorouslydebated by scholars, although the Middle Bronze Age (2200–1550BC) is the generally accepted time period of Abraham’s life.The narrative of his life is a selective account of key events thatserves the theme and purpose of the larger biblical narrative.
Thenarrative account in Genesis details one hundred years of Abraham’slife and moves quickly through the first seventy-five years ofevents. In just a few verses (11:26–31) we learn that Abram wasthe son of Terah, the brother of Haran and Nahor, the husband of thebarren Sarai (later Sarah), and the uncle of Lot, the son of Haran,who died in Ur of the Chaldees. The plot line marks significantevents in Abraham’s life chronologically. He left Harran at theage of 75 (12:4), was 86 when Hagar gave birth to Ishmael (16:16), 99when the Lord appeared to him (17:17) and when he was circumcised(17:24), 100 when Sarah gave birth to Isaac (21:5), and 175 when hedied (25:7). In summary, the biblical narrator paces the readerquickly through the story in such a way as to highlight atwenty-five-year period of Abraham’s life between the ages of75 and 100.
TheAbraham narrative in Genesis is a story intentionally structuredaround the familiar details of life and death, uprooting andresettling, faith and doubt, and dysfunctional relationships. It isdistinguished with illustrations of divine activity in family andpolitical relationships. God is speaking (12:1, 7; 15:5, 7, 9),revealing (12:7; 17:1; 18:1), rescuing, judging, and fulfilling wordsof promise (18:19; 21:1). God’s fingerprint is clearly notedwith the summary statements of the Lord’s blessing (24:1) andwealth (24:35).
Thecovenant that God made with Abraham is a key element in the overallstory and foundational for the theology of both Testaments. Thisdivine arrangement is introduced in Gen. 12:1–3 andprogressively unfolded with increased detail in Gen. 15; 17. It isstructured so that the obligations are borne by the Lord himself. Thecovenant promises land, seed, and blessing to Abraham and hisdescendants. In Gen. 15 the Lord officially cut the covenant withAbraham, thereby guaranteeing his commitment to his word. The halvingof animals and the walking between the cut pieces by God symbolizedby the torch constituted an ancient covenantal ritual affirming God’sresponsibility for the covenant particulars.
TheNT features Abraham in several significant ways. The intimateconnection between God and Abraham is noted in the identification ofGod as “the God of Abraham” in Acts 7:32 (cf. Exod. 3:6).The NT also celebrates the character of Abraham as a man of faith whoreceived the promise (Gal. 3:9; Heb. 6:15). Abraham is mostimportantly an example of how one is justified by faith (Rom. 4:1,12) and an illustration of what it means to walk by faith (James2:21, 23).
Thosewho exercise faith in the living God, as did Abraham, are referred toas “children of Abraham” (Gal. 3:7). Regarding thecovenant promises made to Abraham in the OT, the NT writers highlightthe promises of seed and blessing. According to Paul, the seed ofAbraham is ultimately fulfilled in Christ, and those who believe inChrist are the seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:16, 29). In a similar way,those who have Abraham-like faith are blessed (3:9). The blessingimparted to Abraham comes to the Gentiles through the redemption ofChrist and is associated with the impartation of the Spirit (3:14).
Thepromise of land made to Abraham is referenced specifically in Acts(7:5, 16) and Hebrews (11:8, 11), where his obedient faith isfeatured and the land is discussed in connection with the historicalcontext of his life. See also Abram.
Abraham’s bosom (or side) describes God’sblessings after death, using the picture of closeness with Abraham ata banquet (perhaps the messianic banquet [see Isa. 25:6–8]).The image appears in Jesus’ story of the rich man and Lazarus(Luke 16:22–23). The bliss enjoyed by Lazarus in the bosom ofAbraham stands in sharp contrast to the rich man’s experienceof great torment and suffering. This story is helpful forunderstanding the intensification of blessings for God’s peoplefollowing death and, similarly, of sufferings for the lost, but itdoes not describe the full extent of the eternal destinies of heavenand hell.
Abraham’s original name, used in Gen. 11:26–17:4.At Gen. 17:5 Abram is renamed “Abraham” because he willbe a “father of many nations.” “Abram” isformed from the common Hebrew word ’ab, meaning “father,”plus the root that means “exalted,” although note thatScripture does not assign any particular theological significance tothis name. See also Abraham.
A campsite of the Israelites on their journey from Egyptunder the leadership of Moses and Aaron. It was situated betweenJotbathah and Ezion Geber (Num. 33:34–35), but the exacthistorical location of Abronah is uncertain.
The third of David’s sons, born in Hebron while Davidwas king of Judah alone. His mother was Maakah, daughter of the kingof Geshur, a small buffer state northeast of Israel where Absalomfled after murdering his brother Amnon (2 Sam. 13:37). Nothingis known of Absalom’s formative years, but he plays a prominentrole in the violence that overtook David following his murder ofUriah (2 Sam. 11). Absalom’s sister Tamar was raped by hisolder half brother Amnon (13:1–19), and two years later heordered his men to murder Amnon (13:23–33) before fleeing toGeshur. Joab convinced David to restore him (14:1–21). Davidsnubbed him on his return, and he later rebelled against David,coming close to toppling him before being killed by Joab in theforest of Ephraim after his hair became caught in a tree (18:9–15).
Son of Zeruiah, David’s sister, and brother of Joab,David’s general (1 Sam. 26:6; 1 Chron. 2:16), he wasan accomplished soldier in David’s army. David intervened whenAbishai sought to kill the sleeping Saul (1 Sam. 26:5–11).He accompanied his brother Joab as they pursued Saul’scommander, Abner, for killing their brother Asahel (2 Sam.2:18–24); they later murdered Abner (2 Sam. 3:30). Hecommanded an army against the Ammonites (2 Sam. 10:10–14;1 Chron. 19:11–15). David prevented him from killingShimei for cursing David (2 Sam. 16:9–12; 19:21). He ledone-third of David’s army against Absalom, David’srebellious son (2 Sam. 18:2), and an army pursuing Sheba in hisrebellion against David (2 Sam. 20:6). When the PhilistineIshbi-Benob threatened David’s life, Abishai rescued David bykilling the Philistine (2 Sam. 21:16–17). He struck downeighteen thousand Edomites in the Valley of Salt and establishedgarrisons in Edom (1 Chron. 18:12–13).
Abstinence refers to intentional restraint from participatingin some activity.
Oneof the primary examples of abstinence throughout the Bible isfasting. People abstained from consuming food in times of seekingGod’s intervention (Esther 4:16), repenting of some sin (Ezra10:6), responding to a disaster (2 Sam. 1:12), or preparing fora new venture (Matt. 4:2). One plausible rationale for fasting isthat it permits clarity of focus and expresses reliance upon God forsustenance (Ezra 8:23).
Otherexamples of abstinence in the OT might be expressed in matters ofdegrees. Food laws prevented some kinds of food from being consumedat all (Lev. 11), other types could not be consumed if found undercertain conditions (Lev. 17:15; Deut. 14:21), and still others couldnot be consumed if prepared in certain ways (Exod. 34:26; Deut.14:21). Such abstinence was for the expressed purpose of consecratingthe people of Israel (Lev. 11:44). Similarly, abstinence from work onthe Sabbath was for all the people of Israel (Exod. 20:8–11),while abstinence from fermented drink and any produce of thegrapevine was reserved for those under the Nazirite vow (Num. 6:3–4)and demonstrated holiness. The corporate focus in these practicesserved as an impetus for reflections upon abstinence in the NT. Jesusinsisted that fasting be accompanied by proper motives (Matt.6:16–18), and Paul suggested that abstinence be practiced whenan activity might cause another to stumble (1 Cor. 8). Sexuallaws called for abstinence from sexual activity outside of marriage.Paul even allowed for temporary periods of sexual abstinence withinmarriage so that the couple could devote themselves to prayer (1 Cor.7:5–6).
In classical Greek, abyssos is an adjective meaning“bottomless,” and it was applied to the primeval deep ofancient cosmogonies, an ocean surrounding and under the earth. TheLXX uses abyssos to translate the Hebrew tehom in Gen. 1:2 (KJV, NIV:“deep”). In the NT, abyssos refers to the world of thedead (Rom. 10:7; KJV, NIV: “deep”) and especially thesubterranean prison of disobedient spirits (fallen angels?; Luke8:31; Rev. 9:1–2, 11; 11:7; 17:8; 20:1–3). Some Englishversions translate abyssos in Revelation as “the bottomlesspit” (NRSV, NLT), others as “the Abyss” (NIV). Seealso Bottomless Pit.
An English rendering of the Hebrew word shittim. Whenreferring to the tree, many modern translations use “acacia”(Isa. 41:19; KJV: “shittah tree”); however, when shittimis used in reference to a place name, it often is simplytransliterated as “Shittim” (Num. 25:1; Josh. 2:1; Mic.6:5). More than likely, the place name resulted from an abundantpresence of the trees in that location (Josh. 3:1; Joel 3:18).
Theacacia tree is readily available in the Sinai and provides a hardwood suitable for crafting objects requiring durability. It was usedin the construction of the Ark of the Covenant (Exod. 25:10), thepoles for moving the ark (25:13), portions of the tabernacle(26:15–37), and parts of the altar of burnt offering (38:1, 6).See also Shittim.
(1) Thefather of Baal-Hanan, king of Edom (Gen. 36:38; 1 Chron.1:49). (2) Oneof Josiah’s officials among those sent to inquire of theprophet Huldah regarding the book of the law (2 Kings 22:12, 14).Akbor may have also been called “Abdon” (2 Chron.34:20). (3) Thefather of Jehoiakim’s officer Elnathan (Jer. 26:22; 36:12).Since Jehoiakim came to power shortly after Josiah, the father ofElnathan may be identical with Josiah’s official, describedabove.
One of the cities associated with and perhaps founded byNimrod (Gen. 10:10). Outside of the Bible, Akkad was known as thecenter of the empire established by Sargon the Great(mid-twenty-fourth century BC). His kingdom became known as theAkkadian Empire.
This is a metaphor that illuminates the new relational statusthat Christ’s redemption brings about between the believer andGod. When Adam and Eve sinned, they were cast out of the garden andbanished from God’s presence. The privileged access that theyonce enjoyed was lost. As the result of Adam and Eve’sdisobedience, all human beings are born into the world in a state ofalienation from God. This condition of disfavor with God is the rootfrom which stem all other human problems in life.
Adamand Eve’s decision to cover themselves with garments made offig leaves was their “shortcut” attempt to cover theirguilt and shame before God (Gen. 3:7). It is this same impulse thataccounts for the many diverse religions in existence today. Theassumption that distinguishes all false religions is that thecondition of human spiritual alienation can be overcome by theperformance of certain prescribed rituals or good works. God’sact of making garments of skin to clothe Adam and Eve with (3:21)anticipated the “covering” that he would provide for sinand shame through his own Son’s atoning death and resurrection.What distinguishes Christianity from other religions is itsinsistence that only God can initiate reconciliation with those whohave broken his law. He alone can provide the necessary means thatmake it possible for him to forgive and accept them back intofellowship with him.
Howis forgiveness related to acceptance? Forgiveness addresses one’sneed for the removal of guilt. Acceptance addresses one’s needfor a resolution to the problem of shame, the inward sense ofunworthiness and inadequacy that one feels before God and others.When the high priest Joshua stood before the angel of the Lord withSatan standing there to accuse him because of his filthy garments,the Lord rebuked Satan; then “the angel said to those who werestanding before him, ‘Take off his filthy clothes.’ Thenhe said to Joshua, ‘See, I have taken away your sin, and I willput fine garments on you.’ Then I said, ‘Put a cleanturban on his head.’ So they put a clean turban on his head andclothed him, while the angel of the Lord stood by” (Zech.3:4–5). This anticipates the new identity and status that Jesuswould give to all who receive him. When the prodigal who had shamedhis father returned, the father, instead of reproaching him,commanded his attendants to put a new robe on him, a ring on hisfinger, and sandals on his feet. “For this son of mine was deadand is alive again; he was lost and is found” (Luke 15:24).
TheNT uses very intimate metaphors to describe the new relationship withGod that one enters upon believing. Adoption gives the believer a newlegal status as a child of God. This is objective, but it is alsoexperiential (Rom. 8:15–16). Hebrews tells us that Jesus is notashamed to call us brothers and sisters (Heb. 2:11).
Access usually refers to the right of a person of lesserstatus to appear in the presence of one of higher status and beheard. The word is appropriate in the context of a kingly court (seeEsther 1:14; Zech. 3:7). Anyone not granted such access would riskexecution when approaching the king for any reason unless the kingapproved it (Esther 4:11). The word is also appropriate in thecontext of the Lord’s sanctuary, where it is closely related toapproaching the Lord. In the OT, the right to approach the Lord inhis sanctuary is limited. For instance, the high priest is the onlyperson granted access to approach the Lord in the inner sanctuary,the holy of holies, and only on the Day of Atonement. Those who failto approach the Lord properly risk death as a punishment (Lev.10:1–3). In reality, these two contexts overlap significantly.
Accessin the NT focuses on the right to approach God. Unlike the accessgranted in the OT, the death of Christ grants to all believers theright to approach the Father, making no distinction between Jew andGentile, since the same Spirit indwells both (Eph. 2:18).Furthermore, Christ’s work secures access to both the kinglythrone and the “true tabernacle” of God, where one findsgrace and mercy in time of need (Heb. 4:16; 8:1–2; 10:19–22).
Mentioned once in the OT, Akko is one of the cities thatAsher failed to conquer (Judg. 1:31). Renamed “Ptolemais”during the Hasmonean period, this city was home to some believerswith whom Paul stayed for a day during his third missionary journey(Acts 21:7). Excavations at Tell el-Fukhkhar uncovered a long historyof urban settlement originating in the Middle Bronze Age I(2200–2000 BC). Strategically located at crossroads of coastaland inland roads, eight miles north of modern Haifa, the city playeda prominent role as a center of trade.
The Bible says that on judgment day, God will evaluate thedeeds done during our lifetime (2 Cor. 5:10; Rev. 20:12). Godsaves us by grace alone, through faith alone, because of what Christalone has done; nevertheless, our works serve as the evidence or“fruit” of regeneration (Matt. 7:15–27). Works alsobecome God’s standard when the lost are condemned in hisheavenly court, since he “will repay each person according towhat they have done” and each person has, in fact, sinned (Rom.2:6; 3:23). But what will God do with young children and the mentallychallenged, neither of whom can understand God’s moral law wellenough to sin against it or obey it consciously? How will God treatpeople who could never understand the gospel no matter how clearly anevangelist presents it? The received answer to this question appealsto the idea that we must reach an “age of accountability”before God holds us responsible for our own deeds, and that this agevaries with the individual person. But does Scripture endorse thisidea?
Theparents of miscarried children and those whose children have died atan early age have the greatest emotional stake in the answer to thisquestion. They want to hear that they will see their children again;and the position taken here is that they will, though for a differentreason than the one commonly given. Specifically, we must not saythat the innocence of these children qualifies them for heaven,because Adam’s corruption affects us all (Rom. 5:12; cf. Pss.51:5; 58:3). Their inherited depravity could not show itself in overtsins, at least not at a very early age, but Scripture implies thatthey suffer from it nonetheless. Consequently, as with every case ofsalvation, the future of children and the mentally handicapped isdecided on the basis of God’s grace. They are guilty and standin need of the cross, as we all do. But would God apply the work ofChrist to them by the Spirit before they can function as moral agentsand respond consciously to the gospel? A circumstantial case can bemade for answering in the affirmative to this question, with thiscaveat: the argument given applies only to these special cases. Itdoes not encourage the view that unreached sinners are essentiallyinfants in God’s sight and thus justified by similararrangements.
Webegin by noting that God claims some people for his own purposes,even in infancy. He does so in John the Baptist’s case, fillinghim with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb (Luke 1:15).David and Jeremiah also see God’s hand upon them from theirearliest days (Ps. 22:10; Jer. 1:5), as does the apostle Paul (Gal.1:15). At a minimum, these texts show us that God can and, in somecases, has dealt with human beings before they could ever respondconsciously to him. David also expects to be personally reunited withhis deceased son, saying, “I will go to him, but he will notreturn to me” (2 Sam. 12:23). A final clue is the responseof Jesus to children during the days of his earthly life. He rebukeshis disciples for keeping children away from him, saying that God’skingdom belongs to “such as these” (Matt. 19:14; Mark10:14; cf. Matt. 18:3). Of course, these episodes are included mainlyto show adults what discipleship means, with special reference tohumility and self-forgetfulness. In following Jesus, we must care nomore for our social status and dignity than young children typicallydo. Yet one would not do well to argue that Jesus welcomes childreninto his company merely for illustrative purposes, as if they mean nomore to him than handy visual aids. The disciples place children lowon their Lord’s list of ministry priorities, and Jesus raisesthem all the way up. Our answer to this question must be an educatedguess, but the safest conclusion seems to be that while childrenstill need the cross, they receive its benefits consistently by othermeans and thus go to heaven when they die.
Beingaccursed means being subject to judgment from God. “Curse”is used to translate several Hebrew and Greek words. The Hebrew word’arur appears repeatedly in Deut. 27:15–26; 28:16–19,passages that threaten consequences for both the land and itsinhabitants if the latter disobey the covenant stipulations. Jeremiahfrequently warned of desolation of the land as a result of thepeople’s detestable acts.
Arelated Hebrew term, kherem, indicates giving over to divine wrathand destruction those who are in opposition to God (Josh. 6:17; 7:1;1 Sam. 15:21). The Hebrew root qll carries the sameconnotations. One hung on a tree was under God’s curse (Deut.21:22–23). This judgment likewise could apply to the land(2 Kings 22:19).
Paulemployed the Greek term anathema, indicating the object of a curse(Gal. 1:8; cf. Rom. 9:3). This word is used in the LXX to translateboth ’arur and kherem. Paul also used the Greek termepikataratos in Gal. 3:10–13, citing Deut. 27:26; 21:23 in hisargument to keep the Galatians from returning to observing the law.All humans stand under God’s judgment, but Jesus becameaccursed for us.
SomeOT narratives describe death while hanging on a tree for those whowere enemies of God’s people and whose judgment was assured(Josh. 10:26; 2 Sam. 18:9–10). The ram caught in thethicket that served as Isaac’s substitute (Gen. 22:13) isperhaps an adumbration of Jesus’ substitutionary act on thecross (see 1 Pet. 2:24).
A human or heavenly opponent. In Scripture (see esp. KJV,ESV, NRSV, NASB), “adversary” can refer to one whohinders or helps. Adversaries include David’s soldiers (2 Sam.19:22), David (1 Sam. 29:4), and God (Num. 22:22). God bothraises up (1 Kings 11:14) and delivers one from (Ps. 107:2)adversaries. In Job, the adversary (Heb. satan) works for God (Job1:7–12). In this passage, many translations treat “theadversary” as if it is the personal name of the Devil.
The place where Judas Iscariot met his demise after betrayingJesus. According to the book of Acts, with the money he received forbetraying Jesus to the chief priests, he bought a field, where “hefell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilledout”; the inhabitants of Jerusalem called the field “Akeldama,”an Aramaic name meaning “field of blood” (Acts 1:18–19).According to Matt. 27:7–8, the field was purchased by the chiefpriests and subsequently used as a burial place for foreigners. Thetwo passages may be harmonized by supposing that (1) in the Actsaccount Luke means that Judas indirectly purchased the field becausehis money was used to purchase it; (2) Judas hanged himself, asMatthew says, but the rapidly decaying body fell from the rope andburst open, as Acts asserts; or (3) as so often with placenames, the original of the name was understood differently bydifferent people. Perhaps the place was known as “Field ofBlood” because it was purchased with blood money, but thesubsequent suicide of Judas at that location caused some earlyChristians to associate the name with his gory death there.
Most narrowly construed, Achaia is a region along thenorthern coast of the Peloponnesus, the southern peninsula of Greece.Paul’s letters to the Corinthians were sent to this region(1 Cor. 16:15; 2 Cor. 1:1). In the NT, the term also has abroader meaning, so that the phrase “Macedonia and Achaia”refers inclusively to all of Greece (Acts 19:21; Rom. 15:26; 1 Thess.1:7–8).
An acquaintance of Paul mentioned along with Stephanas andFortunatus (1 Cor. 16:17). These three visited Paul in Ephesusas representatives of the Corinthian church. They may have carriedsome of Paul’s correspondence to the church there. The name“Achaicus” is derived from the geographical name“Achaia,” suggesting to some interpreters that Achaicuswas a slave or former slave, possibly of the household of Stephanasmentioned in 1 Cor. 16:15.
A Judahite who disobeyed Joshua and kept for himself some ofthe plunder from Jericho (Josh. 7:1, 21). Achan’s sin wasdiscovered after the Israelite army was defeated by the men of Ai(7:4–21). He was stoned and burned along with his family andpossessions (7:25–26). “Achan” resembles the Hebrewword for “trouble” (’akar), and in 1 Chron.2:7 Achan is known as Achar, the “troubler of Israel”(NRSV). The place where he was killed was known as the Valley ofAchor, the valley of “trouble” (Josh. 7:26).
A Judahite who disobeyed Joshua and kept for himself some ofthe plunder from Jericho (Josh. 7:1, 21). Achan’s sin wasdiscovered after the Israelite army was defeated by the men of Ai(7:4–21). He was stoned and burned along with his family andpossessions (7:25–26). “Achan” resembles the Hebrewword for “trouble” (’akar), and in 1 Chron.2:7 Achan is known as Achar, the “troubler of Israel”(NRSV). The place where he was killed was known as the Valley ofAchor, the valley of “trouble” (Josh. 7:26).
(1) Son ofJotham, king of Judah, and father of Hezekiah. His reign is describedin 2 Kings 16 and 2 Chron. 28, and his confrontation by theprophet Isaiah in Isa. 7:1–17. Isaiah’s oracle againstthe Philistines is dated the year of Ahaz’s death (Isa. 14:28).Hosea and Micah prophesied during his reign (Hos. 1:1; Mic. 1:1).Ahaz reigned for sixteen years (743–727 BC). He followed thesyncretistic pagan practices of the Israelite kings. When besieged bythe Syrian and Israelite kings, with the aim of replacing him with apuppet ruler (734 BC), he sent a massive tribute to elicit Assyrianprotection (2 Kings 16:5–9). This resulted in pro-Assyrianreligious compromise (16:10–18). The goal of Isaiah’sembassy to the fearful Ahaz was to encourage a response of faith(Isa. 7:9). Though Isaiah offered him any sign of his choosing, Ahazmasked his refusal in a facade of piety about not testing God(Isa.7:10–12; cf. Deut. 6:16). The hypocritical Ahaz did notwant a sign because he had no intention of trusting God in thisnational crisis. The exasperated prophet responded by announcing thesign of Immanuel.
(2) ABenjamite, a descendant of Saul (1 Chron. 8:35–36;9:41–42).
(1) Thefather of Baal-Hanan, king of Edom (Gen. 36:38; 1 Chron.1:49). (2) Oneof Josiah’s officials among those sent to inquire of theprophet Huldah regarding the book of the law (2 Kings 22:12, 14).Akbor may have also been called “Abdon” (2 Chron.34:20). (3) Thefather of Jehoiakim’s officer Elnathan (Jer. 26:22; 36:12).Since Jehoiakim came to power shortly after Josiah, the father ofElnathan may be identical with Josiah’s official, describedabove.
Son of Zadok and an ancestor of Jesus listed among thefourteen generations between the exile and the birth of Jesus (Matt.1:14).
A Philistine, king of Gath. When David sought sanctuary atGath by pretending to be insane, Achish turned him away (1 Sam.21:10–15). When Saul continued to persecute David, David andhis men allied themselves with Achish, who gave David the city ofZiklag (27:1–6). While in Achish’s service, Davidpretended to carry out raids against his own people, so that Achishcame to trust him greatly (27:8–12). Later, Achish’sadvisers convinced him that David could not be trusted to fightagainst Israel (29:1–11). Achish is mentioned in the earlyreign of Solomon (1 Kings 39–40). Achish is called“Abimelek” in the superscription to Ps. 34.
Also known as Achmetha (modern Hamadan), located about 160miles southwest of modern Tehran, Iran. Ecbatana was known to Greekand Persian sources in antiquity and was the summer residence of thePersian kings. According to ancient Greek authors, the city wasfounded by the Medes. The single reference to Ecbatana in the OTcomes in Ezra 6:2, where a document thought to be in Babylon is laterfound to have been deposited in Ecbatana. Several stories in theApocrypha are set in Ecbatana (Tob. 3:7; Jdt. 1:14; 2Macc.9:3).
A valley in northern Judea (Josh. 15:7), identified withmodern El Buqeah. Achor was the place where judgment wasrendered to Achan after he stole plunder from Jericho (Josh.7:24–26). The prophets envision the transformation of Achorinto a verdant area (Isa. 65:10; Hos. 2:15).
The daughter of Caleb who was given as a wife to Othniel whenhe captured the city of Debir (Josh. 15:16–17; Judg. 1:12–13).Caleb gave her land in the Negev and later, at her request, the“upper and lower springs” as well (Josh. 15:18–19;Judg. 1:14–15).
A city in northern Palestine whose king was a vassal of theking of Hazor. When Jabin went to war against Joshua, he called forthe support of the king of Akshaph (Josh. 11:1), who is listed amongthe thirty-one kings defeated by Joshua (Josh. 12:20). Akshaph wasassigned to the tribe of Asher (Josh. 19:25).
(1) Atown (modern Ain Kezbeh) in the territory of Judah (Josh. 15:44).Akzib is also mentioned in a negative context in Mic. 1:14, where theprophet plays on the meaning of ’akzab, “deceitful.”Akzib may appear in Gen. 38:5 [NIV: Kezib]; 1 Chron. 4:22 [NIV:Kozeba]. (2) Atown in the territory of Asher (Josh. 19:29) that Asher did notconquer (Judg. 1:31). Phoenician Akzib has been excavated and islocated on the Mediterranean coast between Acre (Akko) and Tyre(modern ez-Zib).
(1) Aunit of measurement of land area, originally equivalent to what apair of oxen could plow in a day (see 1 Sam. 14:14; cf. Isa. 5:10).(2) Anothername for the city Akko (see Judg. 1:31). See also Akko.
An acropolis (lit., “high city”) is the elevatedportion of an ancient city, typically containing temples, palaces, orother public architecture. In Jerusalem, the temples of Solomon andHerod stood on the highest hill within the city. The most famousacropolis in the Greco-Roman world was that of Athens, where theParthenon stands. Paul preached within sight of the Athenianacropolis, already ancient by his time, on the nearby Areopagusduring his visit to the city (Acts 17:19–34). After Athens,Paul went to preach and teach in Corinth (18:1–11), which alsohad a famous acropolis, the Acrocorinth.
A literary device, most often used in poetry, in which thefirst letters of each line form a pattern. Biblical acrostics form analphabetic pattern whereby successive lines or sections begin with asuccessive letter of the twenty-two-letter Hebrew alphabet. Thelengthiest example is Ps. 119, which consists of twenty-two groups ofeight verses. Within each group, the lines in each verse begin withthe same Hebrew letter. Lamentations 1–4 also constitutes animpressive acrostic, with the alphabetic pattern repeated once ineach of the chapters. Each letter of the alphabet in turn begins aunit of (usually) three lines. In Lam. 3, each of the three lines ineach section begins with the same letter (as in Ps. 119). Other(often incomplete) acrostics include Pss. 9–10; 25; 34; 37;111; 145; Prov. 31:1–31; and probably Nah. 1:2–10.
The daughter of Caleb who was given as a wife to Othniel whenhe captured the city of Debir (Josh. 15:16–17; Judg. 1:12–13).Caleb gave her land in the Negev and later, at her request, the“upper and lower springs” as well (Josh. 15:18–19;Judg. 1:14–15).
A city in northern Palestine whose king was a vassal of theking of Hazor. When Jabin went to war against Joshua, he called forthe support of the king of Akshaph (Josh. 11:1), who is listed amongthe thirty-one kings defeated by Joshua (Josh. 12:20). Akshaph wasassigned to the tribe of Asher (Josh. 19:25).
This book, commonly referred to simply as Acts, is the sequelto the Gospel of Luke and records the exciting history of the firstthree decades of the early church. The book begins with the ascensionof Jesus, followed by his sending of the Holy Spirit, and ends withthe gospel message being proclaimed by Paul as a prisoner in thecapital city of the Roman Empire. In the pages in between, the readeris introduced to the key people, places, and events of this strategicand crucial time of Christian history. The book of Acts providesinsightful and inspiring reading. It forms the backdrop forunderstanding much of the NT (especially Paul’s letters), andit provides important models for the contemporary church.
HistoricalBackground
Inorder to understand the book of Acts, one must become familiar withits historical background. This includes understanding the book’sauthorship, recipients, and setting. In terms of authorship, the booktechnically is anonymous; however, there are good reasons for holdingto church history’s traditional view that its author is Luke.This tradition dates back to the early second century and issupported by internal evidence. This evidence further reveals thatLuke was a physician and close companion of the apostle Paul (infact, Luke was actually with Paul for some of the events that herecords in Acts; see the “we” passages, found in16:10–17; 20:5–15; 21:8–18; 27:1–28:16). Lukewas well educated, well traveled, and familiar with both the Jewishand the Greco-Roman worlds. He was a Hellenistic God-fearerand a Christian. He was also familiar with the Jewish Scriptures,Greco-Roman rhetoric, and ancient histories, thus making him theperfect candidate to write an accurate history of early Christianity.
Thespecific recipient of Acts is Theophilus (1:1). Theophilus could becharacterized as a relatively new believer of high social status, aperson educated in Greco-Roman rhetoric and history, and one whopossessed the financial means to promote and publish Luke’swork (both the Gospel of Luke and Acts). It is probable that in someway Theophilus served as a bridge to a wider readership. It seemslikely that Theophilus was Luke’s ideal reader (i.e., aninfluential Greco-Roman of high social standing).
Thespecific setting of Acts is difficult to determine; however, it seemsclear that the book was written during a time of crisis for thechurch. This crisis involved persecution and slander of Christians byboth Jews and Gentiles. Both groups were trying to persuade publicopinion against Christianity, including the opinion of Greco-Romanauthorities. The persecution and slander were taking their toll onthe church, and many Christians were demoralized and struggling toremain faithful as witnesses of Jesus. Christianity needed someone towrite a response to this crisis. This response had to do threethings: (1) accurately relate the history of the church toinfluential Greco-Romans of high social status; (2) show thatChristianity was an ancient religion (ancient religions wereconsidered to be legitimate by Roman authorities) and an asset to theRoman Empire, not a threat; (3) legitimize Christianity overagainst Judaism. The author of this reponse had to be someone who wasrespected both inside and outside of the Christian faith community,who knew the church’s history well, and who was educated inGreco-Roman rhetoric. What better authorial candidate than Luke?Finally, the church also needed a person of high social status andfinancial means to help publish and promote the work; thus,Theophilus was chosen.
Purpose
Thebook of Acts was written for a variety of purposes. These includeapologetics, legitimization, discipleship, and witness to salvation.The apologetic purpose of Acts focuses on how Christianity could berecognized as an ancient, honorable, and officially protectedreligion in the Roman Empire. Although Judaism had the status ofreligio licita (legal religion) with Roman authorities for most ofthe first century, Christianity encountered serious problems in thisrespect. Acts itself reveals a substantial amount of such evidence inthis regard. For example, 16:20–21 shows that at Philippi, Pauland Silas were charged with disturbing the peace by advocatingunlawful customs. In Thessalonica, the missionaries were accused ofdefying Caesar by promoting another king named “Jesus”(17:7). At Corinth, the charge was that of persuading the peopletoward unlawful worship (18:13). Later in Acts, Paul was charged bythe Jewish priestly leaders with being part of an unacceptable sectthat was stirring up riots in Jewish communities (24:5–9). In28:22, when Paul addressed the Roman Jews, they responded by sayingthat “people everywhere are talking against this sect[Christianity].” Such accusations, accompanied by the fact thatChristianity’s founder had been crucified by Roman authorities,made it difficult for the Christians to gain credibility.Christianity’s precarious position with Rome was furtherexacerbated by a strong Jewish campaign to separate from Christiansand to label them as sectarian. This strategy certainly intended forChristianity to be viewed by Rome as religio illicita (illegal orforbidden religion). Thus, Luke writes Acts to defend Christianity byshowing that it is not a replacement of Judaism, but rather itslegitimate continuation. Therefore, it should be accepted by theRoman authorities as a legal religion just as Judaism was accepted.
Luke’sapologetic message also appears to be directed inwardly, to astruggling church. This inward focus leads to Luke’s next mainpurpose: legitimization of the Christian faith for its adherents. Aspart of his defense, Luke intends to equip the church in the midst ofan identity crisis due to the constant threats of illegitimacy. Thisexplains Luke’s strategy of retelling the story of the church’sorigins so that followers of Christ would understand their trueposition from God’s perspective. Thus, Luke verifies fourthings: (1) the Jewish Scriptures prophesied a coming messiah,and Jesus matched these prophecies; (2) the resurrection wasforetold in Scripture and verified by eyewitnesses; (3) it wasGod’s plan all along for Gentiles to be included in God’sredemptive work; (4) Jews who rejected Jesus were acting in thesame way their ancestors did; therefore, believers should not besurprised by their negative reaction to Jesus. Luke uses stories suchas the one in Acts 2:41–47 to verify that salvation wasgenuinely being accomplished in the church and that Christians wereexperiencing the fulfillment of God’s ancient promises toIsrael. Luke’s writing is intended to encourage hiscontemporary church members to remain faithful in their service andwitness for the Lord. He reminds them that they are the true(legitimate) “people of God” and that God’s Spiritwill help them prevail and will give them abundant life even in themidst of hardship and persecution.
Anotherkey purpose of the book of Acts is to foster discipleship. Theprologues of both Luke’s Gospel and Acts verify that Luke iswriting to provide instruction and teaching for Theophilus (see Luke1:1–4; Acts 1:1–2). Part of this instruction reveals thatthe ascension of Jesus was not the end of his relationship with theworld, but rather a new beginning. Jesus’ departure did notmean abandonment; in fact, it meant just the opposite. Jesus verifieshis continuing presence and work in the world after his departurejust as he had lived and worked before. In other words, the sameSpirit who directed the ministry of Jesus is now going to direct theministry of Jesus’ followers. The rest of the book of Actsprovides instruction (with many personal examples) on how Christ canfulfill the ministry of believers through the power and direction ofthe Holy Spirit. Luke’s discipleship teaching includes helpingbelievers learn how to experience and follow God’s Spirit(chap. 2), to boldly witness for Christ in the midst of persecution(chaps. 3–4, 8, 14, 16–17, 19–28), to sacrificiallyshare resources with other Christians in need (chaps. 2, 4, 11), toresolve disputes within the church (chaps. 6, 15), and to take thegospel message of salvation to all people (chaps. 2, 11, 13–28).
Thebook of Acts places great emphasis on the message of salvation andthe responsibility given to believers to share this salvific messagewith all people. This salvation-witness concept is clearly one ofLuke’s key purposes for the book of Acts. The Pentecost eventof Acts 2 initiates the theme of salvation for all people and thussets the agenda for the rest of the book. In this passage, variousJews from many nations hear the good news in their own tongue, whichsuggests that this news is for peoples of all tongues and nations yetfor Jews first. The rest of Acts continues this theme of theuniversal scope of salvation. Luke makes it clear that this salvationcrosses all geographical, ethnic, and social boundaries. In Acts,Luke is bridging the gap between Jesus’ earthly ministry and alater generation of Christ followers who are to take the gospel to amuch wider geographical area with even greater ethnic diversity. Themessage of salvation should be joined with Luke’s emphasis onwitness. The centrality of the theme of witness in Acts is verifiedby Jesus’ words right before the ascension: “And you willbe my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and tothe ends of the earth” (1:8). The book of Acts tells the storyof how the early church received and obeyed the command of Jesus tobear witness of him to the ends of the earth.
LiteraryFeatures
Thesekey purposes of Acts are expounded through some distinctive literaryfeatures found in the book. One such literary feature is that thebook of Acts was written in a literary genre called “apologetichistoriography.” This genre can be defined as the story of asubgroup of people told by a member of the group who explains thegroup’s traditions and history while using Greco-Roman literaryfeatures. A good example of this literary genre is Josephus’sJewish Antiquities. Josephus tells the story of the Jews toGreco-Roman readers in hopes that they will better understand Jewishhistory and traditions and will accept the Jews in the largerGreco-Roman world. This appears to be exactly what Luke is doing inthe book of Acts for Christians. However, Luke is not giving adefense of a particular ethnic group; rather, he is defending amulticultural people who transcend ethnic and geographicalboundaries. In fact, this is a key part of Luke’s message.Throughout Acts, Luke is trying to explain why his religion is onethat crosses ethnic boundaries and is a universal religion inclusiveof all ethnicities. As Luke tells the story of Christianity, he iscareful to utilize Hellenistic literary features in order to connectwith his primary audience. Evidence of these Hellenistic literaryfeatures in the book of Acts includes a narrative style illustratingthe history through the personal experiences of key characters (Actstells the history of the early church through characters such asPeter and Paul), the frequent use of speeches, personal observationof at least part of the narrative while maintaining anonymity ofauthorship (the “we” passages of Acts), and the frequentuse of summaries to guide the narrative (Acts contains three majorsummaries [2:42–47; 4:32–37; 5:12–16] and a numberof minor summaries [6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; 28:31]).
Outlineand Survey
Actscan be outlined according to Jesus’ final words, recorded in1:8: “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you;and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea andSamaria, and to the ends of the earth.”
I.Witnesses in Jerusalem (1:1–8:3)II. Witnesses in Judeaand Samaria (8:4–12:25)III. Witnesses to the Ends of theEarth (13:1–28:31)
I.Witnesses in Jerusalem (Acts 1:1–8:3).Immediately following his ascension, Jesus tells his followers toreturn to Jerusalem and wait for the coming of the Holy Spirit. Theypromptly obey, and after ten days of waiting, the disciples aredramatically filled with the Holy Spirit and begin to share thegospel with those around them. This event occurs at the JewishPentecost festival, which was attended by Jews and Jewish proselytesfrom throughout the Roman Empire. After the Spirit comes atPentecost, Peter boldly preaches to the crowds, and over threethousand people respond with saving faith (2:41).
Lukenext provides an exciting summary of the Spirit-led life within theearly church. This life is characterized by the early believers’participation together in the sharing of worship activities, materialpossessions, and spiritual blessings (2:42–47). This summary isfollowed by several dramatic healing miracles accomplished throughPeter and the subsequent arrest of Christian leaders by Jewishreligious authorities. Instead of squelching the Christian movement,however, these arrests only enhance the spiritual revival and itsaccompanying miracles. This revival is characterized by extremegenerosity and unity within the early church (4:32–37).
Therevival joy, however, is marred by the deceitful actions of Ananiasand Sapphira, who lie to the church and to the Holy Spirit and arejudged by God with immediate death (5:1–11). This story provesthat God will go to extreme lengths to protect the unity of hischurch. Following more persecution and miracles, the disciples chooseseven men to oversee distribution of food to Hellenistic widows whohave been neglected in daily food distributions (6:1–7). One ofthese leaders, Stephen, is arrested and brought before the Sanhedrin.Stephen testifies boldly before the Jewish leaders and is promptlyexecuted by stoning (chap. 7). This execution is endorsed by Saul, azealous Pharisee who begins to lead fierce persecution against thechurch in Jerusalem (8:1–3).
II.Witnesses in Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:4–12:25).Saul’s persecution forces many of the early church believers toleave Jerusalem. These believers scatter throughout the surroundingareas of Judea and Samaria. As they scatter, however, they continueto preach the gospel (8:4). Philip preaches in Samaria and performsmany miraculous signs, producing a spiritual revival in the region.Hearing about this, the apostles send Peter and John to Samaria tominister to the Samaritans (8:18–25), thus confirming thecross-cultural nature of the gospel (Samaritans traditionally werehated by the Jews). Next Luke tells of Philip’s evangelizing ofan Ethiopian eunuch (8:26–40).
Followingthe Ethiopian’s belief in Jesus, the narrative tells of Saul’sdramatic conversion while traveling to Damascus to persecuteChristians there (9:1–19). Saul’s dramatic turnaround ismet with suspicion by the other disciples, but eventually he isaccepted by the believers with the help of Barnabas (9:27–30).Next Peter travels to the Judean countryside and heals the paralyticAeneas and raises Dorcas from the dead (9:32–42). Thesemiracles produce an exciting spiritual revival in the region.Following this, God gives Peter a vision to go to the coastal city ofCaesarea in order to minister to Cornelius, a Roman army officer.Cornelius is a God-fearer, and through Peter’s witness heresponds to the gospel message and receives the Holy Spirit (chap.10). Peter explains his actions with Cornelius to his concernedJewish companions and verifies that God has indeed included theGentiles in his plan of salvation (11:1–18).
Thisverification is followed by the report of what is happening in thechurch at Antioch, where Jews begin to share the gospel with largergroups of Gentiles (11:19–21). This cross-cultural evangelismproduces a spiritual revival in Antioch, causing the Jerusalem churchto send Barnabas to the large Syrian city to investigate (11:22–30).Barnabas confirms that God is indeed at work in Antioch and invitesSaul to come and help him disciple the new Gentile believers(11:25–26). Next Luke reports more persecution breaking outagainst Christians in Jerusalem, resulting in the arrest of James andPeter by King Herod. James is executed, but Peter miraculouslyescapes from prison with the help of an angel (12:1–19), andthe church continues to increase, spreading throughout the RomanEmpire.
III.Witnesses to the ends of the earth (Acts 13:1–28:31).Starting with chapter 13, the narrative shifts its focus from theministry of Peter to that of Paul (formerly Saul). The church atAntioch begins to take center stage over the church at Jerusalem.This church commissions Paul and Barnabas and sends them off on theirfirst missionary journey, accompanied by Barnabas’scousin John Mark. The missionaries first sail to Cyprus, where theypreach in synagogues and encounter a Jewish sorcerer, Bar-Jesus. Nextthey sail to Pamphylia, thus crossing into Asia Minor, and preach thegospel in Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe (this area wasknown as part of the region of Galatia). In these cities, Godprovides numerous miracles, and the missionaries experience a greatresponse to the gospel as well as much persecution because of thegospel. On one occasion, Paul is actually stoned and left for dead(14:19–20).
Unfazed,Paul and his team boldly continue their mission. Eventually, theyretrace their steps, strengthen the churches that they have started,and sail back to Syrian Antioch, where they give an exciting reportto the church (14:26–28). Following this report, Luke tells ofan important meeting of church leaders in Jerusalem. The subject ofthe meeting involves whether or not the new Gentile Christians shouldbe required to follow the Jewish laws and customs. After debating theissue, the leaders side with Paul, determining that the Gentilesshould not be burdened with Jewish laws and traditions, but simplymust live moral lives and not eat food that has been sacrificed toidols (chap. 15).
Followingthis meeting, Paul and Barnabas decide to make a second missionaryjourney. Unfortunately, the two missionaries get into a dispute overwhether to take John Mark with them again. The argument is such thatthe missionaries decide to separate, and Paul chooses a new partner,Silas. They travel by land back to Galatia. Barnabas takes John Markand sails to Cyprus. Paul and Silas return to Derbe and Lystra andthen make their way to Macedonia and Greece. They spend significanttime in Philippi, Thessalonica, and Corinth before returning toCaesarea and Antioch (chaps. 16–18). Following his return, Paulmakes a third missionary journey, revisiting churches in Galatia andPhrygia and staying in Ephesus for three years before visitingMacedonia and Greece for a second time.
Paulconcludes his third missionary journey with a trip to Jerusalem,where he is falsely accused of bringing a Gentile into the temple.This accusation creates a riot, and Paul is rescued by Romansoldiers, who arrest him and transfer him to a prison in Caesarea,where he spends two years awaiting trial under the rule of Felix andFestus (23:34–25:22). Paul eventually exercises his right as aRoman citizen to have his case heard by the emperor. He is sent toRome by boat and is shipwrecked on the island of Malta. Eventually hemakes his way to the capital city, where he is placed under housearrest. While in Rome, Paul maintains a rented house and is free toreceive visitors and write letters. In fact, it is thought that Paulpenned his “prison letters” during this time of housearrest (Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon). The narrativeof Acts ends with Paul ministering boldly in Rome while awaiting histrial.
Actsand the Contemporary Church
Thebook of Acts provides a model for today’s church on numeroustopics. These include understanding the role of the Holy Spirit,practicing community life within the church, dealing with hardshipand persecution, overcoming social injustices, and carrying outmissions.
Actsreveals that the key issue for Christians is learning to experienceand follow God’s Holy Spirit, who enables believers to be boldin their witness for Christ, generous in their physical and spiritualsupport of each other, and effective in their ministries. Actsconsistently reveals that one’s joy, power, and purpose comefrom the Holy Spirit. According to Acts, learning to follow anddepend upon God’s Holy Spirit is the key to having a healthychurch.
Actsalso shows that the Holy Spirit produces a unique community lifecharacterized by worship, generosity, blessing, and unity. Luke callsthis Spirit-led common life koinōnia, which is explained andillustrated in the first five chapters of Acts (see esp. 2:42–47).It should be the desire and goal of every church to re-create thiskoinōnia community first experienced by the primitive church inActs.
Inaddition to its koinōnia, the book of Acts serves as a model forthe church in overcoming persecution and hardship. The narrative ofActs consistently reveals the sovereign power of God in overcomingopposition. The early church found great joy and growth in the midstof hardship and persecution, and today’s church can do thesame.
Anotherimportant example for the church provided by Acts is in the area ofsocial justice. Luke’s primitive church consistently removedethnic prejudices, eliminated social hierarchy and status within thechurch, and elevated the role of women. Acts provides inspiration andguidance for today’s church in facing these same social issues.
Inaddition to overcoming social injustices, the church in Acts providesan excellent example of mission ministry. These believersconsistently revealed God’s heart for the nations and made it apriority to share the gospel with all people everywhere. Acts’emphasis on the universal nature of the gospel, the responsibility ofindividual Christians to witness for Christ, and the importance ofplanting new churches and discipling new believers sets a pattern fortoday’s church in the area of missions.
Theseexamples should serve to inspire and guide the contemporary church asit seeks to follow and experience the Holy Spirit, who is sopowerfully revealed in the book of Acts.
(1) Atown (modern Ain Kezbeh) in the territory of Judah (Josh. 15:44).Akzib is also mentioned in a negative context in Mic. 1:14, where theprophet plays on the meaning of ’akzab, “deceitful.”Akzib may appear in Gen. 38:5 [NIV: Kezib]; 1 Chron. 4:22 [NIV:Kozeba]. (2) Atown in the territory of Asher (Josh. 19:29) that Asher did notconquer (Judg. 1:31). Phoenician Akzib has been excavated and islocated on the Mediterranean coast between Acre (Akko) and Tyre(modern ez-Zib).
One of the southernmost towns allotted to the tribe of Judah(Josh. 15:22).
Two women who married men excluded from the Israeliteancestry. (1) Lamech’swife, in Cain’s genealogy (Gen. 4:19). (2) Esau’sHittite wife, mother of the Amalekites (Gen. 36:2). As daughter ofElon the Hittite, Adah may (Gen. 26:34) or may not (Gen. 36:2–3)be identical with Basemath.
(1) Thefather of Jedidah and grandfather of King Josiah (2 Kings 22:1).(2) Adescendant of Levi through Ethan (1 Chron. 6:41–42). (3) Adescendant of Benjamin through Shimei (1 Chron. 8:21). (4) Sonof Jeroham, and a priest who resettled in Judah (1 Chron. 9:12).(5) Thefather of Maaseiah, a commander under covenant with the priestJehoiada (2 Chron. 23:1). (6) Adescendant of Bani who was guilty of marrying foreign women (Ezra10:29). (7) Adescendant of Binnui also guilty of marrying foreign women (Ezra10:38–39). (8) Adescendant of Judah through Joiarib (Neh. 11:5). (9) Sonof Jeroham, and a priest who resettled in Jerusalem (Neh. 11:12;could be the same as #4).
One of Haman’s ten sons, all of whom were killed by theJews in the citadel of Susa, along with five hundred others. At therequest of Esther to King Xerxes, their corpses were then displayedby public hanging (Esther 9:7–14). Xerxes had permitted theJews the right “to destroy, kill and annihilate” theirattackers (8:11).
The name of a person and a word for “humankind.”That the Hebrew word ’adam can be both a personal name and areference to humankind provides the biblical writers with a valuablemeans of drawing theological conclusions important to the nature ofhumankind’s status before God. Unfortunately, in various placesit is unclear whether it is a proper name or a more general noun. Theorigin of the word is usually understood to be related to “red”or “red soil,” and the writer of Genesis makes the linkbetween “the man” and “the soil” moreapparent in Gen. 2:7, where man is said to have been created from’adamah (ground, earth).
Thefirst man was named “Adam.” Because of the difficultiesof the word ’adam serving as both a proper name and meaningsimply “human,” there is disagreement concerning when thetext of Gen. 1–3 is referring to humankind and when it isutilizing “Adam” as a reference to the first man’sname. This discussion often is driven by one’s explanation oforigins; however, the general rule applied by many Bible translationsis that the presence of the definite article (“the”)indicates that the author has humankind in mind, whereas its absenceindicates the use of the proper name.
Humankindwas created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27), who also uniquelybreathed into human beings his own breath (2:7), indicating adistinct capacity for relationship between them and God. Thisemphasis is furthered in the text by God’s granting tohumankind stewardship of the rest of his creation (1:28–30).The fall (Gen. 3) apparently arose out of the desire of human beingsto usurp God’s position and determine for themselves what isbeneficial and what is harmful (knowledge of good and evil). The stepof disobedience taken in consuming fruit from the forbidden tree haddire consequences for the relationships between men and women,humankind and creation, and humankind and God. The fall, however, didnot eliminate the reality that humankind is still in the image of Godand capable of continued relationship with him (5:1–3).
OtherOT passages rely on Adam for purposes of genealogy (Gen. 5:4;1 Chron. 1:1) but also begin to highlight some theologicalconceptions of him that would become significant in his descriptionelsewhere in Scripture. Job 31:33 may suggest a link between Adam’sattempt to cover his sin (Gen. 3:7, 10) and the propensity that humanbeings have to do the same (cf. Isa. 43:27). Psalm 8 expressesreflections concerning the creation of humankind, and the wonder ofGod’s interest and investment of himself in it. The writer ofEcclesiastes seemingly toils over the status of human beings inrelation to the earth, since the former die but the latter continues(Eccles. 1:3–4). Such passages demonstrate the corporateresponsibility that humankind bears for sin following Adam’sfirst sin and establish a framework through which the NT writers maybe able to address the most significant human problems.
Adamis the center of several significant references in the NT. Inparticular, passages such as Rom. 5:12–21 and 1 Cor.15:21–49 establish an Adam/Christ, or First Adam/Second Adamtypology. In the Romans passage, Paul draws on the Jewish concept ofcorporate identity in order to identify the status of death as commonthroughout all humanity because of the first Adam, and the hope ofsalvation and grace as available to all humanity because of thesecond Adam. The 1 Corinthians passage makes its argument alongsimilar lines; however, its interest is in the granting of thepossibility of resurrection to humanity in the second Adam, whoprovides a permanent body, while the first Adam only granted alimited body of dust.
Inother places in the NT the priority of Adam and his impact onhumanity are the source of theological reflection as well. Luke seemsto argue for the solidarity of Jesus with all of humanity by takinghis genealogy back to Adam (Luke 3). Paul draws on the priority ofAdam being created before Eve, as well as her deception by theserpent, as a rationale for not permitting women certain roles in thechurch (1 Tim. 2:13–14). The writer of Hebrews draws theconnection between humankind and Christ in order to highlight Jesus’unique capacity for dealing with the sinful human condition (Heb. 2).See also Adam, Town of; Adam and Eve.
The first human beings. According to Gen. 2, God created Adam(whose name means “humanity” and is related to the wordfor “ground”) from the dust of the ground and his ownbreath, showing that humankind is a part of creation but has aspecial relationship with God. This description contrasts with theBabylonian account of the creation of the first humans from the clayof the ground and the blood of a demon god (Qingu in the EnumaElish). The Bible thus presents a more dignified understanding of theplace of humankind in the world. God placed Adam in a garden in Eden(a name that means “delight” or “abundance”).Even so, God, noting that it was not good for Adam to be alone,created Eve (whose name means “living”), his femalecounterpart. She was created from Adam’s side (or rib),signifying their equality. She was to be his “helper,” aword that does not denote subordination, since elsewhere in the BibleGod is said to be the psalmist’s helper (Pss. 30:10; 54:4). Evewas Adam’s wife, and God pronounced that future marriage willbe characterized by leaving one’s parents, being joined as acouple, and consummating the relationship with sexual intercourse(Gen. 2:24).
Adamand Eve were to tend the garden of Eden. They were permitted to eatthe fruit of all the trees of the garden except for the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil. Eating the fruit of this tree,against God’s express prohibition, would be an assertion ofmoral independence that would meet with God’s punishment.
InGen. 3 the serpent convinced Eve that it would be good to eat thefruit of the forbidden tree. Adam was present with her as the serpentspoke, but he remained silent. After eating the fruit, Eve gave someto Adam, and he ate without protest. Both Adam and Eve were thereforeguilty of the first sin. The results were immediate, including thealienation of Adam and Eve, signaled by the fact that they could nolonger stand naked before each other without shame.
Adamand Eve were punished for their rebellion. Eve was punished in hermost intimate relationships. She would now experience increased painwhen giving birth, and her relationship with her husband would becomea power struggle as her desire to control him would be met with hisattempt to dominate her (Gen. 3:16). Adam felt the consequences ofhis action in his work, which now would be tinged with frustration(3:17–19). In addition, although they did not die immediately,they were removed from the garden and access to the tree of life, sodeath would be their ultimate end.
AfterAdam and Eve departed from the garden, they had children. We know ofCain and Abel, whose conflict is well known from Gen. 4. After thedeath of Abel, Eve gave birth to Seth. The genealogies of Cain (Gen.4:17–24) and Seth suggest that humanity is divided into thosewho resist and those who follow God (5:1–32). Surprisingly, inthe rest of the OT Adam is mentioned only in the first verse of thegenealogy in 1 Chron. 1, and Eve not at all (cf. Hos. 6:7).
Inthe NT, Adam is mentioned in the Lukan genealogy of Jesus (Luke 3:38)and in Rom. 5:12–21; 1 Cor. 15; 1 Tim. 2:13–14;Jude 14. In Romans, Paul associates Adam with the entry of sin anddeath into the world. Paul contrasts Adam with Christ. Whereas Adam’sact introduced sin and death, Christ’s act broughtreconciliation with God and life. Paul makes essentially the samepoint in 1 Cor. 15 (see esp. vv. 22, 45). Christians thus readGen. 3 through the commentary supplied by Paul and believe that itsupports the notion of original sin, that all humans are sinners frombirth.
Eveis mentioned twice in the NT. In 1 Tim. 2:11–15 Paulargues that women should learn quietly and not teach or haveauthority over men because Eve was created after Adam and was the onedeceived by the serpent. Debate surrounds the issue whether Paul hereaddresses a local situation or is citing a universal principle. Paulagain mentions the deception of Eve in 2 Cor. 11:3, but here heapplies it to men and women who are in danger of being deceived byfalse teachers.
(1) Afortified city in the tribal allotment to Naphtali, in northernPalestine (Josh. 19:36). (2) AHebrew word meaning “earth” or “ground.”Since the Hebrew word ’adam means either “human” orthe proper name “Adam,” wordplays appear early inGenesis: “there was no one [’adam] to work the ground[’adamah]” (2:5); “the Lord God formed a man[’adam] from the dust of the ground [’adamah]”(2:7); “to Adam [’adam] he said, . . . ‘Cursedis the ground [’adamah] because of you’ ”(3:17). The similarity of the words ’adam and ’adamahthus reminds Hebrew readers of the origin of humankind.
A stone known for its hardness. Twice the KJV uses “adamant,”as a metaphor for stubbornness (Ezek. 3:9; NIV: “hardeststone”) and hardness of heart (Zech. 7:12; NIV: “flint”).See also Flint.
The NIV and other translations list Adami Nekeb as a singlecity on the border of the tribal allotment to Naphtali. The KJV listsAdami and Nekeb as two separate cities on Naphtali’s border(Josh. 19:33).
The sixth month of the Hebrew civil calendar and the twelfthof the religious calendar, beginning during February. An extra Adarwas sometimes added to synchronize the Hebrew lunar calendar with thesolar year (Esther 3:7).
The third of twelve sons of Ishmael, Abraham’sfirstborn son by his Egyptian maidservant, Hagar (Gen. 25:13;1 Chron. 1:29).
A town of unknown location from which some Israelitesreturned from the Babylonian exile to Judah with Zerubbabel in 539 BCor soon after. These returning exiles were among those who could notestablish their genealogical connections to Israel. The NRSV andothers read “Addan” in Ezra 2:59 but “Addon”in Neh. 7:61, while the NIV reads “Addon” both places.
(1) Grandsonof Benjamin through Bela (1 Chron. 8:3), probably the sameperson as Ard (Gen. 46:21; Num. 26:40). (2) Acity on the southern border of Israel’s promised inheritance,also on the southern border of Judah’s tribal allotment (Josh.15:3). Known also as Hazar Addar (Num. 34:4).
An ancestor twenty-four generations before Jesus in Luke’sgenealogy. Addi was the son of Cosam and father of Melki (Luke 3:28).
A town of unknown location from which some Israelitesreturned from the Babylonian exile to Judah with Zerubbabel in 539 BCor soon after. These returning exiles were among those who could notestablish their genealogical connections to Israel. The NRSV andothers read “Addan” in Ezra 2:59 but “Addon”in Neh. 7:61, while the NIV reads “Addon” both places.
(1) Theancestor of two groups that returned to Judah from captivity inBabylon, one with Zerubbabel in 539 BC or soon after (Ezra 2:15 [cf.Neh. 7:20]), the other, led by Ebed, with Ezra around 458 BC (Ezra8:6). (2) Amember of the postexilic community who sealed the covenant renewalled by Ezra (Neh. 10:16). However, the names listed in Neh. 10:14–27may indicate families rather than individuals.
A descendant of Reuben through Shiza. Adina was one of “theThirty,” mighty men who strengthened David’s kingship.Adina also led a band of thirty soldiers (1 Chron. 11:42).
A word in the Hebrew text of 2 Sam. 23:8 that sometranslations (e.g., KJV, NASB) render as the name of a person. Since’adino and the following word, ha’etsno (“theEznite”), are awkward in the sentence and absent elsewhere inthe Bible, the NIV follows some LXX manuscripts and 1 Chron.11:11, substituting “raised his spear” for “Adinothe Eznite” (cf. ESV, RSV). See the NIV footnotes on 2 Sam.23:8.
One of the fourteen towns and villages allotted to the tribeof Judah in the western foothills of southern Canaan (Josh. 15:36).
The father of Shaphat, King David’s keeper of herds inthe valleys (1 Chron. 27:29).
One of the cities of the plain, associated with Sodom andGomorrah (Gen. 10:19; 14:2, 8; Deut. 29:23). Admah is notspecifically mentioned as being destroyed along with Sodom andGomorrah, but Deut. 29:23 and Hos. 11:8 mention the city’sdestruction in passages about divine judgment. Admah traditionallyhas been located at the southeastern end of the Dead Sea, althoughcurrent scholarship places it on the northeast side of the Dead Sea.
One of seven top-level officials under King Xerxes(Ahasuerus), who advised him to put away Queen Vashti because of herrefusal to obey the king’s command to appear before the banquet(Esther 1:14).
Ancient court systems reflected the needs, values, andstructures of the broader society. Not surprisingly, the courtsystems in nomadic and urban societies are quite different. Nomadiccourts were more informal, based more on custom than law. The contextof nomadic justice was located primarily within the family and clan.Those with disputes sought out elders and wise leaders to settlethem. Urban court systems used more-fixed institutions of judgesunder the supervision of priests and kings. Even in an urban systemthe court functioned on a case-by-case basis and drew little or nodistinction between criminal and civil offenses. Cases dealtprimarily with an injury and the compensation for the injury. Thebasic process involved stating a case before a judge, each sidecalling witnesses, and the judge giving a judgment.
OldTestament
Courtsin ancient Israel reflected features of both nomadic and urban courtsystems as well as the broader judicial practices of the ancient NearEast. In ancient Israel a case could be tried by the elders, a judge,a priest, or the king. The elders were heads of families and leadingcitizens. They sat at the city gate (Prov. 31:23), where they heardcases (Ruth 4:1–12), oversaw property transactions (Gen.23:10–20), settled disputes, and imposed penalties (Deut.22:18–19). As Israelite society developed, judges wereappointed from each tribe and town to administer justice (Deut.16:18). If a case was too difficult, the judge could transfer thecase to a higher court and judge (Exod. 18:21–22). Once ahigher court gave a verdict, the participants and lower courts werebound by the decision (Deut. 17:8–13). Priests distinguishedbetween the holy and the common, between clean and unclean (Lev.10:10). However, they could judge all types of cases, not justreligious ones (Deut. 21:5; Ezek. 44:23–24).
Withthe establishment of the monarchy, the king became the highest judge,and the elders and priests became minor judges. David appointedjudges from the Levites over all Israel to administer justice(1 Chron. 26:29), but he also heard cases himself. Solomonprovided the quintessential example of a wise judge as he settled thecase of the two women and the one remaining child (1 Kings3:16–28). Solomon moved the court from the city gate to the“Hall of Justice” in his palace (1 Kings 7:7).Jehoshaphat reformed Judah’s court system and established twocourts, one over cases concerning God, the other over casesconcerning the king (2 Chron. 19:5–11).
TheOT does not provide a detailed description of the Israelite courtprocedures; however, glimpses into the procedures can be piecedtogether from several passages. Whether at the city gate, sanctuary,or palace, a private person who appeared as a plaintiff initiated thejudicial action (Deut. 25:7–8). The parties stood before thejudge, while the judge was seated (Deut. 19:17). However, the judgestood to pronounce judgment (Isa. 3:13). The plaintiff was the satan,“accuser” or “adversary” (Ps. 109:6). Theaccusation could be given orally (Isa. 41:21) or in writing (Job31:35–36). There was no public prosecutor or defender. Eachparty brought its own case and witnesses. A conviction required atleast two witnesses (Num. 35:30; Deut. 19:15). Witnesses acceptedresponsibility for the sentence, which is why they had to throw thefirst stones when such a penalty was in order (Deut. 17:7; John 8:7).If they provided false testimony, they faced the punishment for thecrime about which they testified. Each side could produce physicalevidence to make its case (Deut. 22:13–17). If a case lackedsufficient evidence or witnesses, an oath or an ordeal could beundertaken to support one’s case (Exod. 22:6–10). Attimes, lots were cast to select a guilty individual (Josh. 7:14–15)or to end a quarrel (Prov. 18:18). After everything had beenexamined, the judge acquitted the innocent and condemned the guilty(Deut. 25:1). Depending upon the crime, the penalty could be a fine,compensation, bodily punishment, or even death. Jail was primarilyused for those awaiting trial and not as a punishment. If evidenceand witnesses were lacking and a murder went unsolved, then asacrifice was made to declare the community’s innocence and toatone for the community (Deut. 21:1–8).
Ideally,judges were just, righteous, fair, and defenders of the weak (Deut.16:18–20). Unfortunately, multiple examples exist of falsewitnesses (Deut. 19:18) and corrupt judges who accepted bribes,perverted justice, and showed favoritism (Exod. 23:3, 8; Mic. 3:11).Ultimately, God was the supreme judge of all, protector of the weak,just, and no respecter of persons.
NewTestament
Duringthe NT period numerous lesser Sanhedrins, or councils, administeredjustice in Jewish communities. The lesser Sanhedrins consisted oftwenty-three members, but the one in Jerusalem, the Great Sanhedrin,consisted of the high priest and seventy members comprised ofpriests, scribes, elders, and laity from among the Sadducees and thePharisees. The Great Sanhedrin was the supreme legislative andjudicial body, and it wielded its own police force (Acts 5:24–26).The Romans allowed the Great Sanhedrin broad authority over internaland religious matters, but they limited its ability to exercisecapital punishment (John 18:31). The deaths of Stephen and James wereprobably lynchings rather than formal executions. Clearly, the GreatSanhedrin had the authority to administer corporal punishment (2 Cor.11:24).
TheMishnah provides insight into the Great Sanhedrin’s judicialprocedure. However, several of the procedures stand in tension withthe procedures described in the Gospels concerning Jesus’trial. Cases were to be heard only during the day, but at least ahearing into the charges facing Jesus occurred at night. Theproceedings against Jesus were held at the high priest’s palaceinstead of properly at the court (John 18:13). Capital cases couldnot be heard the day before the Sabbath or a festival, but Jesus wascondemned on Friday during Passover.
Thetrials of Jesus and Paul fit well with what is known about Roman law.Roman regional rulers heard cases involving public order but usuallyleft smaller issues in the hands of local courts. For example,Pilate, a prefect, initially wanted to release Jesus, and Gallio, theproconsul of Achaia, refused to hear the charges against Paul. Suchofficials could also delay a decision for extended periods of time.Hoping to receive a bribe, the procurator Felix held Paul for twoyears without a judgment (Acts 24:26). Roman officials also had thediscretion to send defendants to their home province. Pilate sentJesus to Herod because Jesus was from Galilee, and Felix inquiredabout Paul’s home in Cilicia. When hearing a case, the Romanofficial gave the defendant and the accuser opportunities to maketheir respective cases and to call witnesses. Pilate gave Jesus anopportunity to defend himself, and Festus explained that it is “notthe Roman custom” to condemn someone who has not yet faced theaccusers and put on a defense against their charges (Acts 25:16). Asa Roman citizen, Paul was afforded rights in the court system. WhenPaul was imprisoned and beaten without trial, he demanded an apologyfrom the Philippian officials (16:37). Paul’s Roman citizenshipalso gave him the right to appeal to Caesar (25:11).
Paulexpected Christians to abide by the decisions of the courts (Rom.13:1–3), but he also encouraged Christians to avoid takingother Christians to court (1 Cor. 6:1–11) because theyshould be able to settle disputes within the church.
(1) Adescendant of Pahath-Moab guilty of marrying foreign women (Ezra10:30). (2) Thehead of Harim’s priestly family in the days of Joiakim (Neh.12:15).
(1) Aman of the tribe of Manasseh who commanded one thousand men anddefected to David during Saul’s reign (1 Chron. 12:20).(2) Aman from the tribe of Judah who commanded three hundred thousand ofthe experienced fighters whom Jehoshaphat stationed in Jerusalem(2 Chron. 17:14).
The leader of Bezek who was defeated by men of the tribes ofJudah and Simeon early in the conquest of Canaan. The Judahites andSimeonites cut off Adoni-Bezek’s thumbs and big toes; he viewedthe amputations as divine retribution for his taking the same actionagainst seventy kings (Judg. 1:4–7).
The Amorite king of Jerusalem who organized a five-citycoalition to attack the city of Gibeon after its capitulation toJoshua (Josh. 10:1–3). After their armies were routed by theIsraelites, Adoni-Zedek and his four allies hid in a cave. Joshuacaptured and executed them (Josh. 10:22–27).
(1) David’sfourth son, a rival to Solomon for the succession to David’sthrone. When David became old, Adonijah, whom David apparently didnot discipline properly (1 Kings 1:6), strengthened his claim onthe throne greatly by garnering the support of Joab and Abiathar(1:7), whose support Absalom had failed to win in his earlierrebellion. When David heard of Adonijah’s actions, heinstructed his leaders to install Solomon as king in Gihon, whichthey did so loudly that Adonijah and his supporters were able to hearthe commotion at their own feast (1:33–41). Solomon mercifullychose not to kill Adonijah for his treason (1:50–53). The peacebetween Solomon and Adonijah quickly came to an end when Adonijahrequested that Abishag the Shunammite, a virgin attendant of David,be given to him as a wife. Seeing this as another act of treason(2:22), Solomon ordered Benaiah son of Jehoiada to kill Adonijah,which he did prior to killing Joab also.
(2) Aman listed as one of those who sealed the postexilic covenant renewalled by Ezra (Neh. 10:16).
The ancestor of two groups that returned to Judah fromcaptivity in Babylon, one with Zerubbabel in 539 BC or soon after,and one with Ezra around 458 BC. Ezra and Nehemiah list returningdescendants of Adonikam with Zerubbabel at 666 and 667men, respectively (Ezra 2:13; Neh. 7:18). Three “last ones,”Eliphelet, Jeuel, and Shemaiah, family heads of Adonikam, returned toPalestine with Ezra, accompanied by sixty men (Ezra 8:13).
Son of Abda, Adoniram was overseer of forced labor for Davidand Solomon (2 Sam. 20:24; 1 Kings 4:6). In order tofinance and support his huge building campaigns, Solomon “put aheavy yoke” (1 Kings 12:4) on the people of Israel,including the conscription of thirty thousand Israelite men whomAdoniram oversaw (5:13–14). When Rehoboam unwisely threatenedto increase the burden on the Israelites (12:13–15), thenorthern tribes rebelled. Rehoboam sent Adoniram to assert hiscontrol over the northern tribes, but they stoned to death theunpopular Adoniram (12:18).
The voluntary process of granting the rights, privileges,responsibilities, and status of child or heir to an individual orgroup that was not originally born to the adopter. While birth occursnaturally, adoption occurs only through the exertion of will.
Atleast two significant figures in the OT were adopted. After Moses’birth mother kept him alive despite Pharaoh’s command to drownevery newborn Hebrew boy in the Nile (Exod. 1:22), Moses was,ironically, adopted by Pharaoh’s daughter (2:10). Esther, orHadassah, was adopted by her uncle (or cousin) Mordecai upon thedeath of her parents (Esther 2:7)—this adoption plays animportant part in Esther’s ability to prevent the Jewishextermination intended by Haman.
Althoughadoption is fairly uncommon in the OT, God’s adoption of Israelis of the utmost importance. It demonstrates God’s willingnessto initiate relationship with humankind, a truth that laterculminated in Jesus Christ. God chooses to adopt the nation of Israelas his child (Deut. 7:6; Isa. 1:2; Hos. 11:1) and more significantlyas his firstborn son (Exod. 4:22; Jer. 31:9). Thus God singles outIsrael among the nations of the earth, bestowing the highest possiblehonor.
Theconcept of adoption is more prevalent in the NT, primarily in theapostle Paul’s writings. Based on the belief that Israel’sexclusive position as the adopted firstborn son of God the Father isno longer deserved, the NT includes those who believe in Jesus Christas adopted children of God’s eternal family (John 1:12; 11:52;Gal. 4:5; Eph. 1:5; Phil. 2:15; 1 John 3:1). The adoptedchildren of God enjoy all the rights of a natural-born child,including the opportunity to call God “Father,” as Jesusdid (e.g., Matt. 5:16; Luke 12:32). Paul in particular uses adoptionto describe the Christian’s new relationship with God throughthe atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:15–16, 21–23;9:25–26).
One of fifteen cities in Judah and Benjamin that Rehoboamfortified in the wake of the division of his kingdom (2 Chron.11:9). Adoraim was situated in Judah, approximately twenty-five milessouthwest of Jerusalem. The city was apparently ineffective inhalting Pharaoh Shishak’s attack on Jerusalem (2 Chron.12:2–4; 1 Kings 14:25–26).
Son of Abda, Adoniram was overseer of forced labor for Davidand Solomon (2 Sam. 20:24; 1 Kings 4:6). In order tofinance and support his huge building campaigns, Solomon “put aheavy yoke” (1 Kings 12:4) on the people of Israel,including the conscription of thirty thousand Israelite men whomAdoniram oversaw (5:13–14). When Rehoboam unwisely threatenedto increase the burden on the Israelites (12:13–15), thenorthern tribes rebelled. Rehoboam sent Adoniram to assert hiscontrol over the northern tribes, but they stoned to death theunpopular Adoniram (12:18).
(1) Agod of the people of Sepharvaim. After the exile of the northernkingdom, the king of Assyria transplanted people from all over hisempire into the territory that he had taken from the Israelites. Eachof these people groups “made its own gods in the several townswhere they settled” (2 Kings 17:29). Those people who hadbeen transplanted from Sepharvaim established worship of Adrammelekand Anammelek in former Israelite territory by sacrificing their ownchildren in fire (2 Kings 17:31). Adrammelek (“Adar isking”) and Anammelek (“Anu is king”) were relatedto the Babylonian gods Adar, the sun god, and Anu, the moon goddess.
(2) Oneof the sons of the Assyrian emperor Sennacherib who, along with hisbrother Sharezer, assassinated his father in the temple of Nisrok andescaped to the land of Ararat. Esarhaddon, another son ofSennacherib, was next on the throne (2 Kings 19:37; Isa. 37:38).See also Anammelek.
(1) Agod of the people of Sepharvaim. After the exile of the northernkingdom, the king of Assyria transplanted people from all over hisempire into the territory that he had taken from the Israelites. Eachof these people groups “made its own gods in the several townswhere they settled” (2 Kings 17:29). Those people who hadbeen transplanted from Sepharvaim established worship of Adrammelekand Anammelek in former Israelite territory by sacrificing their ownchildren in fire (2 Kings 17:31). Adrammelek (“Adar isking”) and Anammelek (“Anu is king”) were relatedto the Babylonian gods Adar, the sun god, and Anu, the moon goddess.
(2) Oneof the sons of the Assyrian emperor Sennacherib who, along with hisbrother Sharezer, assassinated his father in the temple of Nisrok andescaped to the land of Ararat. Esarhaddon, another son ofSennacherib, was next on the throne (2 Kings 19:37; Isa. 37:38).See also Anammelek.
A port city on the northwest coast of modern Turkey. Todaythe city is known as Karatash. The city was of commercial importance,though its power peaked before the NT period. It was the center forworship of Castor and Pollux, Zeus’s twin sons. Paul, Luke,Aristarchus, and Julius the centurion sailed on a ship from this cityon their way to Rome (Acts 27:1–2).
The Adriatic Sea is a portion of the Mediterranean Sea thatseparates Italy from Greece. According to second-century documents,the extent of this sea may have included waters from Malta to thewestern coast of Crete. It was in these waters that Paul foundhimself adrift for fourteen days during his trip to Rome to plead hiscase before Caesar (Acts 27:27).
Son of Barzillai the Meholathite, who likely resided in AbelMeholah. Adriel married Merab, Saul’s oldest daughter, who hadpreviously been promised to David (1 Sam. 18:19), althoughseveral manuscripts report that he married Michal (2 Sam. 21:8).The marriage may have sealed a treaty between Adriel’scity-state and Saul’s kingdom. Five sons from this marriagewere among those whom David surrendered to the Gibeonites to beexecuted for Saul’s misdeeds.
A city in the western foothills of Judah, located aboutfifteen miles southwest of Jerusalem (Josh. 15:35). Prior to theconquest of Canaan, the patriarch Judah lived for some time inAdullam (Gen. 38:1–5). The Israelites conquered the cityseveral hundred years later under Joshua (Josh. 12:15), and Rehoboamfortified the city after the division of Israel (2 Chron. 11:7).
Adullambecame a refuge for David both before and after his enthronement.After fleeing from Saul to the Philistine city of Gath, David stayedat a cave in Adullam, and about four hundred men gathered to him,many of whom were discontented and troubled (1 Sam. 22:1–2).King David’s battles with the Philistines led him back to thestronghold at the cave of Adullam. In one memorable instance,Philistine forces were stationed near Jerusalem in the Valley ofRephaim and in Bethlehem, and three of David’s mighty men brokethrough Philistine lines and brought water back to David in thestronghold (2 Sam. 23:13–17; 1 Chron. 11:15).
Micahwarned the people of Adullam and several nearby cities that disasterwas imminent (Mic. 1:10–15); this materialized when Sennacheribcaptured all the fortified cities of Judah (Isa. 36:1). The Bibledoes not mention Adullam again until Nehemiah’s returnees fromexile reestablish an Israelite presence in the city during the timeof Artaxerxes (Neh. 11:30).
A city in the western foothills of Judah, located aboutfifteen miles southwest of Jerusalem (Josh. 15:35). Prior to theconquest of Canaan, the patriarch Judah lived for some time inAdullam (Gen. 38:1–5). The Israelites conquered the cityseveral hundred years later under Joshua (Josh. 12:15), and Rehoboamfortified the city after the division of Israel (2 Chron. 11:7).
Adullambecame a refuge for David both before and after his enthronement.After fleeing from Saul to the Philistine city of Gath, David stayedat a cave in Adullam, and about four hundred men gathered to him,many of whom were discontented and troubled (1 Sam. 22:1–2).King David’s battles with the Philistines led him back to thestronghold at the cave of Adullam. In one memorable instance,Philistine forces were stationed near Jerusalem in the Valley ofRephaim and in Bethlehem, and three of David’s mighty men brokethrough Philistine lines and brought water back to David in thestronghold (2 Sam. 23:13–17; 1 Chron. 11:15).
Micahwarned the people of Adullam and several nearby cities that disasterwas imminent (Mic. 1:10–15); this materialized when Sennacheribcaptured all the fortified cities of Judah (Isa. 36:1). The Bibledoes not mention Adullam again until Nehemiah’s returnees fromexile reestablish an Israelite presence in the city during the timeof Artaxerxes (Neh. 11:30).
A translation of the Hebrew word nokriah. The KJVtranslation, “strange woman,” is accurate, but “foreignwoman” is an even more literal rendering. The NIV translates it“wayward woman” or “wayward wife” (Prov. 2:17makes clear that she is guilty of marital unfaithfulness). The termis parallel to “prostitute” in Prov. 23:27 (ESV, NRSV;NIV: “adulterous woman”). Many prostitutes in ancientIsrael may have been foreigners; however, the use of this term in thebook of Proverbs is nonethnic, describing a woman who defiesIsraelite moral standards. The young man is promised that wisdom willguard him from the evil woman (2:16–19; 7:5), who by enticingwords (5:3) and provocative gestures (7:6–27) seeks to lead himinto sexual infidelity. In the teaching of Proverbs she is thecompetitor of Woman Wisdom (most clearly in 9:1–6, 13–18).
One of the sins forbidden in the Ten Commandments (Exod.20:14; Deut. 5:18). Narrowly interpreted, the prohibition forbidsextramarital relations with a married woman (Lev. 20:10), but it isapplied more broadly in Lev. 20 and Deut. 22–24 to cover avariety of sexual offenses.
Theprophets invoked the commandment in condemning God’s waywardpeople (Hos. 4:2; Jer. 7:9). They also used it as a metaphor forspiritual unfaithfulness to the God of the covenant (Hos. 3–4;Ezek. 16:30–34), as does Revelation for succumbing to falseteaching (Rev. 2:22).
Jesusbrought out the original force of the commandment, saying that alustful look amounted to adultery (Matt. 5:27–30). He listedthis commandment in Mark 10:19 (and pars.) when talking to the richyoung ruler. Paul and James also made clear that the prohibition wasstill in force (Rom. 2:22; 13:9; James 2:11). Jesus taught thatadultery springs from the unregenerate heart (Matt. 15:19 pars.), andfor Paul adultery was one of “the acts of the flesh”(Gal. 5:19).
TheOT penalty for adultery was stoning (Deut. 22:22–24), though itis not clear how rigorously this was enforced. Jesus forgave thewoman “caught in adultery” (John 8:3–11) and toldher not to repeat her sin. His leniency may have been motivated inpart by the hypocrisy of her accusers, who had let the guilty man gofree.
Theexception clause in Jesus’ teaching that forbids divorce andremarriage (“except for sexual immorality,” whichincludes adultery) is found in Matt. 5:32; 19:9. Matthew only spellsout what is implicit in Mark 10:11–12; Luke 16:18. Jesus statedthat if a man divorces his wife so as to marry another woman (moreattractive to him for some reason), this is nothing but legalizedadultery. The notorious example of Herod’s marriage to Herodiasmay be part of the background to this teaching (Mark 6:17).
,Pass ofA place name that occurs twice with respect todefining the border between Judah and Benjamin (Josh. 15:7; 18:17).It derives from the Hebrew word for either “ground”(“earth”) or “red.” Located on the leewardside of the Judean hills, the Pass of Adummim was part of the roadfrom Jerusalem to Jericho that connected the hill country andTransjordan through the Jordan Valley. Its underlying bedrock iscenomanian limestone, whose exfoliation and disintegration yields thered soil (terra rosa), from which the slope probably derives itsname. Several important biblical events occurred on this route,including the return of Michal to David (2 Sam. 3:14–16)and David’s flight from Absalom (2 Sam. 15–16). Onhis trips through Jericho to Jerusalem, Jesus traveled this route aswell. The ruggedness of this route informs the parable of the goodSamaritan, which Jesus told on his final trip along this route toJerusalem (Luke 10:25–42).
A translation of the Hebrew word nokriah. The KJVtranslation, “strange woman,” is accurate, but “foreignwoman” is an even more literal rendering. The NIV translates it“wayward woman” or “wayward wife” (Prov. 2:17makes clear that she is guilty of marital unfaithfulness). The termis parallel to “prostitute” in Prov. 23:27 (ESV, NRSV;NIV: “adulterous woman”). Many prostitutes in ancientIsrael may have been foreigners; however, the use of this term in thebook of Proverbs is nonethnic, describing a woman who defiesIsraelite moral standards. The young man is promised that wisdom willguard him from the evil woman (2:16–19; 7:5), who by enticingwords (5:3) and provocative gestures (7:6–27) seeks to lead himinto sexual infidelity. In the teaching of Proverbs she is thecompetitor of Woman Wisdom (most clearly in 9:1–6, 13–18).
A human or heavenly opponent. In Scripture (see esp. KJV,ESV, NRSV, NASB), “adversary” can refer to one whohinders or helps. Adversaries include David’s soldiers (2 Sam.19:22), David (1 Sam. 29:4), and God (Num. 22:22). God bothraises up (1 Kings 11:14) and delivers one from (Ps. 107:2)adversaries. In Job, the adversary (Heb. satan) works for God (Job1:7–12). In this passage, many translations treat “theadversary” as if it is the personal name of the Devil.
Several Hebrew terms in Job 16:19–20 have beentranslated “advocate” in various English versions. Thefirst (Job 16:19) is the Aramaic sahed, parallel to the Hebrew ’ed(“witness”). Sahed appears in Gen. 31:47 in the name thatLaban gave to the heap of stones marking the boundary between him andJacob. Jacob called it “Galeed” (“heap ofwitness”), and Laban called it “Jegar Sahadutha.”The Hebrew word melits (Job 16:20) can be translated “intercessor”or “advocate,” continuing the thought from v. 19;see also Job 33:23, where a melits is like an angel at a person’sside, giving instruction in what is right and intervening on theperson’s behalf. The complication arises because the morecommon meaning of the root lits is to mock or jeer; melits would be arelated noun. In this case, Job 16:20 is a contrast to the precedingadvocacy theme and instead refers to the friends who are deemedmockers. This fits better with the plural grammatical construction,and it also looks ahead to Job 17:2, where Job says that mockerssurround him. The comprehensive message of the passage, however, isthat Job knows that his advocate is in heaven, a testimony to Job’sunderstanding of the sovereignty of the God who has also afflictedhim, and a possible foreshadowing of the ministry of Jesus and theHoly Spirit.
InJohn 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7 the term paraklētos (lit., “calledalongside” [NRSV, NIV: “Advocate”; RSV:“Counselor”]) refers to the Holy Spirit, sent as theSpirit of truth. The advocacy roles of the Spirit are to remain withGod’s people, to teach, remind, and testify about Jesus, toconvict the world of guilt regarding sin, and to guide into alltruth. In 1 John 2:1 Jesus is the paraklētos who speaks indefense of his children. Just as Job 16:19–20 hinted attrinitarian implications regarding the divine advocate, so the NTreferences affirm the advocacy roles of the persons of the Godhead.See also Paraclete.
A paralytic living in the city of Lydda, near Joppa, inPalestine. Peter ended Aeneas’s eight-year confinement to bedby healing him, and as a result, many in Lydda and its environs wereconverted. See Acts 9:32–35.
Affliction is a condition of physical, mental, or spiritualdistress, or the cause of suffering. Afflictions may be a variety oftemporal, physical sufferings, such as infertility (Gen. 25:32;1 Sam. 1:11), injustice and toil (Gen. 31:42), slavery (Exod.1:12; 3:7, 17; 4:31; Deut. 26:6–7; Neh. 9:9), militaryoppression (Judg. 2:18; 10:18), loss (Ruth 1:21), displacement andmocking (2 Sam. 16:12), disease and disorders (Mark 3:10; 5:29,34; Luke 7:21; John 5:4; Acts 28:8), and famine (Acts 7:11).Affliction may be mental or spiritual, arising from the prospects oreffects of physical afflictions, feeling the futility of life(Eccles. 1:13), or concern for others in their afflictions (Isa.63:9; 2 Cor. 2:4).
Thereare several different causes and reasons for affliction, but there isno simple formula for determining the cause of one’safflictions, as Job reminds us. Clearly, Job is blameless (Job 1:1,8; 2:3), but his friends carry on wrongly in their assumptions thathis sins are to blame. The agents of affliction include God (2 Kings17:20; Nah. 1:12), Satan and/or demons (Job 1:12; Acts 5:16), otherpeople (Judg. 10:8; 2 Thess. 1:6), oneself (1 Kings 18:28),or the general condition of life (Job 5:7).
Thereasons for affliction also vary. One reason might be called “noreason,” in that “man is born to trouble as surely assparks fly upward” (Job 5:7). Troubles, afflictions, and sorrowjust happen. In retrospect, this is a condition of living in a cursedworld (Gen. 3). But this is a general consequence for the whole humanrace, not a punishment directed at a specific sin. The widespreadafflictions of the curse appear random. In various forms they preventus from turning to easy living as a refuge from broken relationshipsand therefore force us to look elsewhere. The intent is that we lookto God (see Hos. 5:15). Multiple specific reasons, however, may liebehind any particular affliction. They include punishment for sin(Deut. 29:22), often to induce repentance leading to restoration(Hos. 5:15; Zech. 10:9; 1 Cor. 11:30). Affliction may be dealtout by people as they sin against others (1 Sam. 1:7; 2 Sam.16:12; 2 Thess. 1:6). One’s own choices may have naturalconsequences (Prov. 11:24; 13:20; 19:9, 15; 22:3), or consequencescome due to a lack of leadership (Zech. 10:2). Some result from beingassociated with those going through afflictions (Num. 14:28–35;1 Kings 2:26), suffering afflictions due to following Christ(Matt. 13:21; John 15:18–20; Acts 20:23), or feeling empathyfor the afflicted (2 Cor. 2:4). Other afflictions are given astraining, prevention, or refining (Isa. 48:10; Rom. 5:3–5;2 Cor. 12:7; Heb. 12:5–13). Suffering affliction may alsobe substitutionary, on behalf of others (Isa. 53:4–7; and thesubstitutionary atonement of Christ generally).
Inresponse to others’ afflictions, we are called to sympathy,compassion, comfort, and justice. Appropriate responses to our ownafflictions range from patient endurance for the cause of Christ(James 5:11) to lamenting (the psalms and Christ’s example,Matt. 27:46).
The discharged placenta after a birth, the eating of whichalludes to consequences of disobedience to covenant stipulations(Deut. 28:57).
The only church-era prophet whose spoken words arerecorded in Scripture. Agabus was one of a company of prophetswho traveled from Jerusalem to the fledgling church at Antioch (Acts11:27–28). While in Antioch, Agabus predicted by the Spiritthat a great famine would come upon the world; Luke notes thatAgabus’s prophecy was fulfilled during the reign of Claudius.Agabus also prophesied at the close of Paul’s third missionaryjourney that Paul would be bound by the Jews at Jerusalem anddelivered to the Gentiles (Acts 21:10–11).
A title used for the king of the Amalekites, like “pharaoh”was used for the kings of Egypt. When Balak king of Moab hired Balaamto curse the Israelites, Balaam blessed Israel in an oracle,including a prophecy that Israel’s king would “be greaterthan Agag” (Num. 24:7). This indicates that Agag of theAmalekites was a prominent king at the time of the wildernesswanderings (see also Num. 24:20).
Godcommanded Saul to wipe out the Amalekites completely as retributionfor an attack on Israel (see Exod. 17:8–16), but Saul took Agagalive and spared some of the best of the Amalekites’ livestock(1 Sam. 15:7–9). Samuel confronted Saul about this act ofdisobedience, and Samuel himself then killed Agag (1 Sam.15:33).
Haman, the opponent of Mordecai, is identified as an Agagite(Esther 3:1, 10; 8:3, 5; 9:24). Given Mordecai’s descent fromKish, father of Saul (2:5), the term is intended to recall theAmalekite king (Agag) whom Saul spared (1 Sam. 15). See alsoAgag.
OldTestament
Preconditionsto love. Accordingto the OT, three preconditions must exist for us to know what itmeans to love.
First,we have the capacity for relationships because we are made in thelikeness of a personal God. God created us to reciprocate love backto him, in a relationship of mutual love.
Second,the true meaning of love depends on a true understanding of God,whose love causes him to pursue human beings even though their heartshave turned away from him for other substitute “loves.”This second point assumes that human beings still love, but they doso in a way distorted by sin. Sin causes human beings to live theirlives as though God did not exist. However, God in his mercy haschosen to intervene through his redemptive acts in history andthrough revelatory speech in order to deliver people from theblindness and corruption of sin. His pursuit of his unfaithful sonsand daughters gives us a picture of what true love looks like.
Third,God’s pursuit of human beings in history was by means ofelection and the establishment of a covenant. God chose to makehimself known to a particular people, those who would descend fromAbraham. God called Abraham to leave his country and go to a newplace that he would inherit as a new homeland, where his descendantswould be blessed (Gen. 12:1–3; 15; 17). God’s promise toAbraham took the form of an everlasting covenant, by which heguaranteed that he would fulfill what he had promised. He would bethe God of Abraham’s descendants, and they would be his people.They would receive the land of Canaan as an inheritance (17:6–8).In response, Abraham’s descendants were to obey God’scovenant by circumcising their male children (17:9–14). Thiscovenant would depend not on human faithfulness but on God’sfaithfulness. God would redeem this people to be his own specialpeople.
Severalgenerations later, God addressed the people through Moses, tellingthem that he chose them for no other reason than that he loved them(Deut. 7:7–8). Through Moses, God freed the people from theirslavery in Egypt and gave them the law. The law told them how to liveholy lives in response to God. It also included the provisions foratonement through the sacrificial system. In short, loving Godinvolved obeying his statutes.
Lovein wisdom books.The OT wisdom books Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes give us furtherinsight into the meaning of love. Proverbs exhorts its readers,“Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flowsfrom it” (4:23). One’s affections are the gateway to theallegiances of one’s heart. Once one’s affections havebeen hijacked by sinful passions, allegiance to God is subjugated toanother “master.” To the degree that sin usurps thethrone of the heart, it will steer the course of one’s actions(i.e., one’s “path”).
Inthe book of Job, Satan is convinced that Job serves God only becauseGod blesses Job, so Satan challenges God to let him afflict Job.Satan insists that if God removes Job’s blessings, Job willcurse God to his face (1:10–12). When God agrees to remove thehedge of protection and allows Job to suffer, the depth of Job’slove for God is vindicated. Although perplexed that God would allowhim to endure such suffering, he endures without forsaking God. Jobloved the giver more than his gifts, so his love did not turn tohatred when the gifts of God were removed.
Inthe book of Ecclesiastes, Qoheleth (the Teacher) reflects honestly onthe many vain pursuits and unexplainable dissonances thatcharacterize life “under the sun.” Only faith-filled lovefor God can enable one to live each moment of life with joy insteadof striving to find meaning in “under the sun” pursuits.This love chooses to trust the inscrutable wisdom of God in the faceof life’s many enigmas, uncertainties, and sufferings. One cando this honestly because of the belief that God’s just ruleover the affairs of the universe will be vindicated at the future dayof judgment (Eccles. 12:14).
Marriagemetaphor.The Bible uses the metaphor of marriage to describe God’scovenant relationship with his people (Isa. 54:5–8). Thismetaphor captures the intimate character of the relationship that Goddesires to have with his people. Marriage is the most intimate humanrelationship in two ways. First, marriage is a relationship in whichknowledge is the most intimate. A spouse can see many of the flawsthat are hidden from others. Thus, each spouse must accept and lovethe other for who that person is, in spite of his or herimperfections. Second, the depth and passion of the expressions oflove are most intimate in marriage. Consequently, there is no greaterpain than that caused by unfaithfulness to this covenant.
Sadly,as the story of the OT unfolds, God’s “wife”betrays him. How so? His people worship idols in their hearts (Ezek.14:1–5). Because God is jealous for the exclusive love of hispeople, idolatry is spiritual unfaithfulness. God wants both theallegiance and the affection of their hearts to be reservedexclusively for him. The people continue the formalities of worship,but their hearts have turned away from God. The book of Hoseaillustrates the sense of betrayal that God feels when his people arespiritually unfaithful. God tells Hosea to marry a woman who will beunfaithful to him. Subsequently, she leaves Hosea for one lover afteranother. This story is intended to give God’s people a vividpicture of how painful their spiritual betrayal of him is. His heartis crushed by the rebellious and idolatrous condition of his people.Hosea’s wife ends up on the market as a prostitute, and Godtells him to buy her back and love her again.
NewTestament
Thestory of God’s love for his people is expanded by what theFather did centuries later when he sent Jesus to pay the ransom forthe sins of his people so that they might be healed of theirrebellion and receive eternal life (John 3:16; 17:24). The death andresurrection of Christ were necessary because sin had to be atonedfor. This love is a free gift that comes to the one who trusts inChrist for forgiveness of sin and a new heart. The new heart inclinesone to please God. The gift of the Spirit enables one to bear the“fruit” of love (Gal. 5:22–23). As Abraham’sengrafted children (Gal. 3:7), believers are called by God to live aspilgrims on their way to a heavenly promised land (Heb. 11:9–10;1Pet. 2:11).
Christmodeled genuine love by serving us (Mark 10:42–45). His loveshould motivate us and enable us to practice sacrificial servicetoward others (Matt. 22:39; 1John 3:16). It should also causeus to practice forbearance, long-suffering, and forgiveness towardthose who wrong us (Matt. 18:21–35). It should cause us torepay evil with good (Rom. 12:14). Our love for truth should motivateus to act in the best interests of others (1Cor. 13:4–8)in the hope that they may become reconciled to God (2Tim.2:24–26).
A semiprecious quartz stone, composed largely of chalcedony,found in various colors, including white, orange or red, pale blue,and black. Agate is often formed in stripes or other patterns. Agatewas the eighth stone used on the breastpiece of judgment worn by thehigh priest in the most holy place (Exod. 28:19; 39:12). Agate alsoforms part of the foundations of the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:19).
The Bible says that on judgment day, God will evaluate thedeeds done during our lifetime (2 Cor. 5:10; Rev. 20:12). Godsaves us by grace alone, through faith alone, because of what Christalone has done; nevertheless, our works serve as the evidence or“fruit” of regeneration (Matt. 7:15–27). Works alsobecome God’s standard when the lost are condemned in hisheavenly court, since he “will repay each person according towhat they have done” and each person has, in fact, sinned (Rom.2:6; 3:23). But what will God do with young children and the mentallychallenged, neither of whom can understand God’s moral law wellenough to sin against it or obey it consciously? How will God treatpeople who could never understand the gospel no matter how clearly anevangelist presents it? The received answer to this question appealsto the idea that we must reach an “age of accountability”before God holds us responsible for our own deeds, and that this agevaries with the individual person. But does Scripture endorse thisidea?
Theparents of miscarried children and those whose children have died atan early age have the greatest emotional stake in the answer to thisquestion. They want to hear that they will see their children again;and the position taken here is that they will, though for a differentreason than the one commonly given. Specifically, we must not saythat the innocence of these children qualifies them for heaven,because Adam’s corruption affects us all (Rom. 5:12; cf. Pss.51:5; 58:3). Their inherited depravity could not show itself in overtsins, at least not at a very early age, but Scripture implies thatthey suffer from it nonetheless. Consequently, as with every case ofsalvation, the future of children and the mentally handicapped isdecided on the basis of God’s grace. They are guilty and standin need of the cross, as we all do. But would God apply the work ofChrist to them by the Spirit before they can function as moral agentsand respond consciously to the gospel? A circumstantial case can bemade for answering in the affirmative to this question, with thiscaveat: the argument given applies only to these special cases. Itdoes not encourage the view that unreached sinners are essentiallyinfants in God’s sight and thus justified by similararrangements.
Webegin by noting that God claims some people for his own purposes,even in infancy. He does so in John the Baptist’s case, fillinghim with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb (Luke 1:15).David and Jeremiah also see God’s hand upon them from theirearliest days (Ps. 22:10; Jer. 1:5), as does the apostle Paul (Gal.1:15). At a minimum, these texts show us that God can and, in somecases, has dealt with human beings before they could ever respondconsciously to him. David also expects to be personally reunited withhis deceased son, saying, “I will go to him, but he will notreturn to me” (2 Sam. 12:23). A final clue is the responseof Jesus to children during the days of his earthly life. He rebukeshis disciples for keeping children away from him, saying that God’skingdom belongs to “such as these” (Matt. 19:14; Mark10:14; cf. Matt. 18:3). Of course, these episodes are included mainlyto show adults what discipleship means, with special reference tohumility and self-forgetfulness. In following Jesus, we must care nomore for our social status and dignity than young children typicallydo. Yet one would not do well to argue that Jesus welcomes childreninto his company merely for illustrative purposes, as if they mean nomore to him than handy visual aids. The disciples place children lowon their Lord’s list of ministry priorities, and Jesus raisesthem all the way up. Our answer to this question must be an educatedguess, but the safest conclusion seems to be that while childrenstill need the cross, they receive its benefits consistently by othermeans and thus go to heaven when they die.
The age to come is the time when Christ will return andestablish his kingdom in all its fullness and glory. The Jews livingin intertestamental times experienced great persecution andsufferings and looked ahead in hope and anticipation to a futurecoming age of a messiah, with all its associated blessings. Both Johnthe Baptist and Jesus pointed to how this new age had already drawnnear with their message: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven hascome near” (Matt. 3:2; 4:17). Jesus taught that “thekingdom of God has come upon you” during his earthly ministry(Matt. 12:28), and he promised that anyone who has been born againcan “see” or “enter” the kingdom right then(using present-tense verbs in John 3:3, 5). At the same time, Jesuswas equally clear that the kingdom had not come in all its fullnessduring his earthly ministry, and he instructed his disciples tocontinue to look ahead and pray specifically, “your kingdomcome” (Matt. 6:10). Consequently, many have described thekingdom as being both “already” and “not yet”in the sense that God’s kingdom has already begun with Christ’sfirst coming, even though the fullness of the kingdom still lies inthe future. Thus, in one sense “the age to come” beganwith Jesus’ earthly ministry, especially his death andresurrection. Peter could also describe the giving of the Holy Spiriton Pentecost as taking place in “the last days” (Acts2:17), thus marking the beginning of the age to come. Consequently,believers find themselves living in the tension between alreadyexperiencing the transforming power of a new life in Christ and stillliving in what the Bible elsewhere describes as “the presentevil age” (Gal. 1:4) under the power of Satan as “the godof this age” (2 Cor. 4:4). The challenge for believers isto look ahead by faith and “lay up treasure for themselves as afirm foundation for the coming age” (1 Tim. 6:19), whenChrist will return and fully establish his kingdom. See also Advent,Second; Eschatology; Second Coming.
A Hararite whose son Shammah, one of the “three mightymen,” with divine help, single-handedly defended a field,defeating the Philistines (2 Sam. 23:9, 11–12).
In the OT, the law commanded respect for those in advancedyears (Lev. 19:32). The fifth commandment (Exod. 20:12) was primarilyaimed at the honoring (and supporting) of elderly parents (as impliedby Mark 7:9–13). The reward for caring for parents is stated inthe motivation clause attached to the commandment: “so that youmay live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you”(being an example of the reward matching the good deed).
Especiallyin OT wisdom literature, old age is viewed as a privilege (Prov.20:29) and a token of divine favor upon the righteous (Prov. 16:31;cf. Gen. 15:15). It was recognized that a person may be “oldbut foolish” (Eccles. 4:13), but more often age and wisdom werelinked. Since wisdom and insight come with experience (Job 12:20;15:9–10; 32:7), leaders and advisers were drawn from the ranksof the elderly. Hence, in both Testaments community and spiritualleaders are called “elders” (Ruth 4:2; Lam. 5:14; Acts14:23; 20:17). Rehoboam’s downfall was due in part to hisignoring the advice of “the elders” who had served hisfather, Solomon (1 Kings 12:6, 8).
Asign of oppressive conditions in the wake of the fall of Jerusalemwas a lack of respect for the old, who, like the very young andwomen, were vulnerable (Lam. 5:12). On the other hand, the futureblessing promised by the prophets included Israel having many elderlypeople (Isa. 65:20; Zech. 8:4).
Thereward of the godly person is to live long enough to see severalgenerations of descendants (Ps. 128:6), examples being Jacob (Gen.50:23) and Job (Job 42:16). The vindication of the Lord’sservant is phrased in traditional symbols of divine favor: “hewill see his offspring and prolong his days” (Isa. 53:10). Thefrailty of age is recognized (e.g., Ps. 71:9, 18; Eccles. 12:2–7),but the experience shared in Ps. 37:25–26 is that God isfaithful in providing and supporting.
Sayings attributed to Jesus that are outside the NT Gospels.The term is Greek for “unwritten things,” though it isused to indicate that these alleged sayings were written not in thecanonical Gospels but in other sources. Agrapha from Jesus appear inthe apocryphal Gospels, the church fathers, and in NT books otherthan the four Gospels (e.g., Acts 20:35; 1 Cor. 7:10; 11:23–25).The authenticity of the many sayings outside the NT is uncertain;each one should be judged on its own merit. The indication in John21:25 of the wide array of Jesus’ deeds and sayings known inearly Christianity should lead one to a point somewhere between blindacceptance of all agrapha and the outright rejection of them.
Agriculture is the practice of producing food throughcultivation and harvesting. For the biblical Israelites and theirancestors, it was one of the primary expressions of subsistence intheir economy and life. The priority of agricultural pursuits forIsrael’s worldview is indicated in the fact that it was amongthe first mandates given by God to man in the garden (Gen. 1:28–29).This primacy of place in agricultural concerns meant that care andstewardship of the land was the prerogative of every member ofsociety. In fact, individuals, the priesthood, and the monarchy couldall possess and care for the land (Num. 27:1–8; 35:1–8;1 Chron. 27:26–28).
Theprimary produce of the biblical farmer included cereals (wheat,barley, millet), legumes (beans, peas), olives, and grapes.Additional, less predominant crops included nuts (almonds, walnuts,pistachios), herbs (cumin, coriander, sesame), and vegetables(cucumbers, onions, greens). The production of the various crops waslargely limited to certain geographic regions of Israel (such as thecoastal plain or the plains of Moab) because much of the land was illsuited for agriculture, being rocky and arid.
Theentire calendar in most ancient Near Eastern societies centered onthe agricultural cycle, and many important biblical feasts includedsome connection with the seasonal calendar. For Israel, some of thefirst festivals were linked to the agricultural seasons (Exod.23:14–16; Lev. 23). Cereals were sown at the Feast ofBooths/Tabernacles (late October) and harvested in middle to latespring at the Feasts of Passover (March) and Weeks/Pentecost (May).Grapes and other fruit were harvested in late summer into the fall.
Theactual craft of agriculture involved the three steps of sowing,reaping, and threshing/production. The fields typically were plowedfollowing the first autumn rains, and sowing lasted about two months.Harvest season lasted seven months in all. Cereal products wentthrough the process of threshing, whereas fruits were immediatelyproduced into wine or dried. The practice of threshing the grainsmostly took place on threshing floors located adjacent to the fields.The threshing floors were designed as a circle, generally 25 to 40feet in diameter. Typically animals such as donkeys or oxen weredriven around the floor as the grains were fed into their paths andsubsequently crushed. The resulting broken husks were then throwninto the air, allowing the wind to carry away the chaff and producinga separated grain that could then be cleaned and processed for homeuse.
Besidesplaying a significant role in the practical matters of life,agricultural practices found numerous applications in the images andideals of the biblical writers (Judg. 8:2; 9:8–15; Ezek.17:6–10). The medium could be used to express both blessingsand curses. Several texts point to the cursing of agriculturalendeavors as a punishment from God. Ceremonial defilement was apossibility if proper methodology in sowing seeds was not followed(Lev. 19:19; Deut. 22:9). Similarly, Yahweh’s assessment ofIsrael’s failure to uphold the covenant commitments could leadto disease, locust attacks, crop failure, and total loss of the land(Deut. 28:40; Joel 1:4; Amos 7:1). Conversely, agricultural bountyand blessings were also a part of covenant stipulations. Indeed, manyof the offerings themselves were centered on agriculture (Lev. 2;Num. 18:8–32). Even the Sabbath rest itself was extended tomatters of agriculture and care for the land (Lev. 25:1–7).Finally, the covenant saw some of the greatest benefits of lifebefore Yahweh as being blessed through agricultural bounty (Deut.28:22; Amos 9:13). In a few cases, agricultural imagery cut bothways. For instance, the vine was an image that could expressjudgment, care, and restoration in both Judaism and Christianity(Isa. 5:1–8; John 15:1–11). Despite the link betweenagricultural realities and the covenant, the Scriptures are verycareful to distinguish Israel from the fertility cults of itsCanaanite neighbors (1 Kings 18:17–40; Hos. 2:8–9).This distinction also seems to have found expression in certain NTtexts (1 Cor. 6:15–20).
Several kings of the Jews, related by birth, had the name“Herod.” The Herods formed a royal dynasty thatflourished during the time of Christ and the early church. Thefounder of the dynasty was Antipater, who was appointed by Caesar in47 BC as procurator of Judea. The Herods, being partly Edomite(descended from Esau) as well as loyal servants of Rome, were neverfully accepted by their Jewish subjects. The family history wascharacterized by lust, intrigue, and bloodshed. They opposed theChristian faith, sometimes violently, being responsible for theattempted murder of Jesus (Matt. 2:16), the beheading of John theBaptist (Matt. 14:1–12), and the execution of the apostle James(Acts 12:2).
(1)Herod I (Herod the Great), son of Antipater, known as King Herod(Matt. 2:1; Luke 1:5). He ruled Palestine in the years 37–4 BCwith Roman consent. A skillful politician, he managed to retain thefavor of Rome by deftly switching allegiances when necessary. Acapable ruler in some respects, he engaged in extensive buildingworks. His finest project was the beautification of the temple, whichhe hoped would win Jewish favor. The rabbis would later say, “Whoeverhas not seen Herod’s building has not seen anything beautiful.”
Hisrule, however, was marred by paranoia, suspicion, and cruel jealousy.He had some of his wives and sons killed for suspected plotting. InMatthew’s Gospel he is visited by wise men looking for “onewho has been born king of the Jews.” Subsequently, he massacredthe male infants of Bethlehem, trying to rid himself of this new,royal challenger (Matt. 2:1–11). Upon his death, his kingdomwas divided among three of his sons, Herod Antipas, Herod Archelaus,and Herod Philip.
(2)Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, also known simply as Herod oras Herod the tetrarch (Matt. 14:1; Luke 3:19). He was givenjurisdiction over Galilee and Perea, which he ruled from 4 BC to AD39 (Luke 3:1). For this reason, when Pilate heard that Jesus camefrom Galilee, he sent him to Antipas for questioning (Luke 23:6–12).
Heis infamous for his role in the death of John the Baptist, whichlater haunted him (Matt. 14:1–12; Mark 6:14–29). Jesusreferred to him as “that fox,” alluding to his predatorydestructiveness for having killed John the Baptist, who criticizedhim for taking his half brother’s wife, Herodias, in marriage.He also sought to kill Jesus (Luke 13:31–32). Jesus warned thedisciples of the yeast of Herod (Mark 8:15). Yeast was a metaphorsometimes used to describe how evil spreads and corrupts the wholeperson, perhaps a reference to Herod’s lust for Herodias andhis murderous opposition to God’s word and Son. (See alsoAntipas.)
(3)Herod Archelaus, ethnarch of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea (4 BC–AD6) and son of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:22). (See also Archelaus.)
(4)Herod Philip, son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra of Jerusalem; hewas tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis in the years 4 BC–AD 34(Luke 3:1). He rebuilt Paneas and named it “Caesarea Philippi”after the emperor and himself (Matt. 16:13; Mark 8:27). Apparently,he married his niece SalomeIII, the daughter of Herodias andhis half brother Herod son of MariamneII.
(5)Herod (Philip), son of Herod the Great and MariamneII, he wasmarried to Herodias, who left him for his half brother Antipas (Matt.14:3; Mark 6:17; Luke 3:19). Though sharing a common name, this is adifferent son of Herod the Great than the Herod Philip of Luke 3:1.
(6)Herod Agrippa I, grandson of Herod the Great, also called “KingHerod” in Scripture (Acts 12:1). At the height of his power (r.AD 37–44), he ruled an area coextensive with that of hisgrandfather. He persecuted the early church, killing James thebrother of John. Encouraged by the Jews, he imprisoned Peter,intending to put him on trial, until an angel of God miraculouslyintervened to free him. He died prematurely in Caesarea when struckdown for not giving glory to God (Acts 12:20–25).
(7)Herod Agrippa II (reigned in Chalcis AD 48–52, in Iturea AD52–c. 93), the son of Herod AgrippaI. Prompted by thegovernor Festus, he gave audience to the apostle Paul to make hisdefense. He rejected Paul’s attempt to persuade him of thetruth of the Christian faith (Acts 25:13–27; 26).
An increase in internal bodily temperature abovenormal—98.6°F (37.0°C), with somevariation. The sensation often is associated with burning up from theinside (Job 30:30), what the rabbis call “fire of the bones”(b.Git.70a), along with chills and trembling. Malaria may have been asignificant and life-threatening cause. According to Galen, fever mayresult from either an excess of yellow bile, black bile, or phlegm(cacochymia), or from an excess of blood. In Leviticus it is linkedto a wasting away of the eyes (26:16; KJV: “ague”) andreflects God’s punishment for covenant disobedience (cf. Deut.28:22). Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law and the son of anofficial from fever (Matt. 8:14 pars.; John 4:52). Concerning theformer, Matthew cites from the prophet Isaiah as a fulfillment ofGod’s promise to forgive and heal his people.
The son of Jakeh whose oracle is recorded in Prov. 30. Agurdirects his oracle to Ithiel and Ukal (Prov. 30:1; see NIV mg.).
(1) Sonof Omri, king of Israel, whom he succeeded, reigning for twenty-twoyears (871–852 BC). His son Ahaziah followed him. The summaryof Ahab’s reign in 1 Kings 16:29–33 serves as aprologue to the Elijah narrative, identifying the issue that Elijahaddressed: Ahab’s patronage of Baal at the instigation of hisforeign wife, Jezebel. Ahab was not incorrigibly devoted to Baal,since he gave his children Yahwistic names: “Ahaziah,”“Jehoram,” and “Athaliah” are names thatcontain the element “Yah.” On the other hand, Jezebel wasa fanatical persecutor of the Lord’s prophets (1 Kings18:4, 13) and a supporter of the Sidonian brand of Baalism (18:19;19:1–2).
Ahabis condemned by the writer of 1 Kings in superlative terms:“Ahab . . . did more to provoke the Lord, the God ofIsrael, than did all the kings of Israel before him” (16:33).His apostasy prompted Elijah to announce to Ahab a divinely induceddrought (17:1). During the drought, Ahab displayed his wrongpriorities by seeking fodder for “horses and mules” (ofmilitary and economic use) while allowing Jezebel free rein inkilling God’s prophets (18:3–5). Ahab blamed the nation’stroubles on Elijah (18:17: “you troubler of Israel”), butit was his own policy that was at fault (18:18).
Ahabwas the second king in a relatively stable dynasty of four kings(Omri, Ahab, Ahaziah, Jehoram). It was a period of economicprosperity and military power. He built a lavish palace and fortifiedimportant cities (1 Kings 22:39). In 853 BC, at the battle ofKarkar on the Orontes, Shalmaneser III of Assyria faced awestern coalition. The Israelite contingent supplied by Ahab was thelargest (ten thousand foot soldiers, two thousand chariots). On theMoabite Stone, Mesha king of Moab recorded, “Omri was king ofIsrael and he afflicted Moab for many years” (line 5). Onlyafter Ahab’s death did Moab rebel (2 Kings 1:1; 3:5). Thedynasty ended in 842 BC with a prophetically inspired overthrow byJehu. In the account of this bloodbath, the royal house is repeatedlycalled “the house of Ahab” (e.g., 2 Kings 8:27; 9:7,8). Micah condemned Israel for following “all the practices ofAhab’s house” (Mic. 6:16). By his gross unfaithfulness,Ahab sowed the seeds of the destruction of his family.
Thepicture of Ahab in 1 Kings is one of a man of weak character whoallowed a ruthless wife to dominate him. It is plain that he believedthe predictions made by God’s prophets, humbling himself whencondemned by Elijah (21:27) and making (vain) efforts to preventMicaiah’s prophecy of doom coming true (22:30). Ahab tamelycomplied with Elijah’s instructions both before and after theMount Carmel contest (chap. 18). Ahab was under prophetic threat ofdeath after he released Ben-Hadad, Aramean (Syrian) king, who wasdevoted to destruction (20:42). Abuse of royal power by Jezebel (withAhab’s concurrence) meant the dispossession of traditionalsmall landowners such as Naboth and led to Elijah’s prophecy ofAhab’s gruesome death (21:19). Ahab failed externally (chap.20) and internally (chap. 21) in his role as king. In 1 Kings 22(cf. 2 Chron. 18) is a record of the carrying out of the deathsentence, for Ahab was killed at the siege of Ramoth Gilead, and asElijah had predicted, “the dogs licked up his blood”(22:38).
(2) Sonof Kolaiah, Ahab was a false prophet whom Jeremiah condemned in hisletter to the exiles (Jer. 29:21–23).
The third son of Benjamin, son of Jacob, according to1 Chron. 8:1. He is not listed in the genealogy in Gen. 46:21.
A descendant of Judah through Harum. Aharhel is the namedancestor of several families descended from Koz (1 Chron. 4:8).
A descendant of Levi through Meshillemoth. Ahzai was thegrandfather of Amashsai, one of the priestly family heads during thetime of Nehemiah who was chosen by lot to live in Jerusalem (Neh.11:13–14).
Ahasbai is identified in the NIV as “the Maakathite”and in the KJV as “the son of the Maachathite.” Hefathered Eliphelet, one of David’s mighty men (2 Sam.23:34).
The Hebrew form of King Xerxes’ Persian name. The NIVtranslates “Ahasuerus” as “Xerxes” and places“Ahasuerus” in a footnote (e.g., Ezra 4:6; Esther 1:1).The LXX of the book of Esther uses “Artaxerxes” forAhasuerus. See also Xerxes.
This word appears only in Ezra as the name of a place inBabylonia to which a canal flowed (Ezra 8:15). Ezra’s camp onthe Ahava Canal served as the launching point for his expedition toJerusalem during the reign of the Persian king Artaxerxes (Ezra8:31).
(1) Son ofJotham, king of Judah, and father of Hezekiah. His reign is describedin 2 Kings 16 and 2 Chron. 28, and his confrontation by theprophet Isaiah in Isa. 7:1–17. Isaiah’s oracle againstthe Philistines is dated the year of Ahaz’s death (Isa. 14:28).Hosea and Micah prophesied during his reign (Hos. 1:1; Mic. 1:1).Ahaz reigned for sixteen years (743–727 BC). He followed thesyncretistic pagan practices of the Israelite kings. When besieged bythe Syrian and Israelite kings, with the aim of replacing him with apuppet ruler (734 BC), he sent a massive tribute to elicit Assyrianprotection (2 Kings 16:5–9). This resulted in pro-Assyrianreligious compromise (16:10–18). The goal of Isaiah’sembassy to the fearful Ahaz was to encourage a response of faith(Isa. 7:9). Though Isaiah offered him any sign of his choosing, Ahazmasked his refusal in a facade of piety about not testing God(Isa.7:10–12; cf. Deut. 6:16). The hypocritical Ahaz did notwant a sign because he had no intention of trusting God in thisnational crisis. The exasperated prophet responded by announcing thesign of Immanuel.
(2) ABenjamite, a descendant of Saul (1 Chron. 8:35–36;9:41–42).
(1) Ahaziahbecame the eighth king over the northern kingdom of Israel after hisfather, Ahab, died in battle (1 Kings 22:40). He reigned foronly two years (852–851 BC) and “did evil in the eyes ofthe Lord,” serving and worshiping Baal (22:51–53).Ahaziah died following a fall through the lattice of his upperchamber, but not before being rebuked by the prophet Elijah forhaving consulted Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron, about recovering fromhis injury (2 Kings 1:2–17). Because he had no heir, hisbrother Jehoram (Joram) inherited the throne (1:17).
(2) Ahaziahthe son of Jehoram became the sixth king of Judah around 843 BC.During his one-year reign he received ungodly advice from his mother,Athaliah. He was a king who “did evil in the eyes of the Lord”(2 Kings 8:27). He became an ally of King Jehoram (Joram) ofIsrael against King Hazael of Aram, but both were killed in Jehu’srevolt (8:28–29; 9:16–29).
One of two sons of Abishur and Abihail; the other son wasMolid. Ahban appears in the genealogical record of the sons ofHezron, who was a son of the patriarch Judah (1 Chron. 2:29).
The ancestor of the Hushites, a clan of the tribe of Benjamin(1 Chron. 7:12).
(1) Aleader of the clans of the tribe of Gad. Ahi was son of Abdiel andgrandson of Guni (1 Chron. 5:15). (2) Adescendant of Asher through Shomer (1 Chron. 7:34).
One of the leaders of the people who sealed Nehemiah’sbinding agreement of reform (Neh. 10:26).
Son of Sharar (or Sakar [see 1 Chron. 11:35]), Ahiam wasone of three Hararites among David’s mighty men (2 Sam.23:33).
A descendant of Manasseh through Shemida (1 Chron.7:19).
(1) Sonof Ammishaddai and leader of the tribe of Dan. Ahiezer assembled thepeople of Dan when they encamped (Num. 2:25–26) and led them asthe tribe served as head of the Israelites’ rear guard (10:25).(2) Thechief of the skilled fighting men from Saul’s tribe of Benjaminwho allied themselves with David when Saul banished David from hispresence (1 Chron. 12:3).
(1) Adescendant of Asher through Shelomi. Ahihud was Asher’sappointed assistant to Moses for assigning the inheritance of thetribes of Israel that settled west of the Jordan River (Num. 34:27).(2) Adescendant of Benjamin through Gera (1 Chron. 8:7).
(1) Theprophet from Shiloh who superintended the division of Solomon’sunited kingdom (928 BC). He predicted to Jeroboam that he would tearaway ten tribes from the Davidic house (1 Kings 11:29–39).This prediction was fulfilled after Solomon’s death (1 Kings12:15; 2 Chron. 10:15). Certain events in Solomon’s reignwere written up in “the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite”(2 Chron. 9:29). Later, Jeroboam’s wife went in disguiseto Ahijah to inquire about her sick son. Ahijah predicted the deathof the child and the destruction of Jeroboam’s entire house asa punishment for idolatry (1 Kings 14:1–16). Bothpredictions came true (1 Kings 14:17–18; 15:29). (2) AnElide priest in the service of Saul (1 Sam. 14:3, 18). (3) Asecretary to King Solomon (1 Kings 4:3). (4) Thefather of Baasha, who conspired against Nadab, son of Jeroboam, andsucceeded him as king of Israel (1 Kings 15:27, 33; 21:22;2 Kings 9:9). (5) Sonof Jerahmeel, the brother of Caleb, from the tribe of Judah (1 Chron.2:25). (6) ABenjamite in the ancestry of Saul (1 Chron. 8:7). (7) Oneof David’s thirty mighty men (1 Chron. 11:36). (8) ALevite who was in charge of the treasuries in the time of David(1 Chron. 26:20 NRSV [NIV mg.]).
One of King Josiah’s royal advisers, Ahikam was the sonof Shaphan, King Josiah’s secretary. Ahikam was part of thedelegation that Josiah sent to the prophetess Huldah to inquire aboutthe future of the kingdom of Judah in light of its wickedness beforethe Lord (2 Kings 22:12–14). Ahikam supported Jeremiahduring the reign of Jehoiakim; this support saved Jeremiah from beingput to death by the people of Judah (Jer. 26:24). Nebuchadnezzarappointed Ahikam’s son Gedaliah as governor over the remnant inJudah after the Babylonian deportation (Jer. 40:5).
The father of Jehoshaphat, who was King David and KingSolomon’s recorder (2 Sam. 8:16; 1 Kings 4:3;1 Chron. 18:15), and of Baana, one of King Solomon’stwelve district governors appointed to supply provisions for the kingand the royal household (1 Kings 4:12).
(1) Thefather of Saul’s wife, Ahinoam (1 Sam. 14:50).
(2) Sonof Zadok the priest. As David fled from Jerusalem during his sonAbsalom’s conspiracy, he told Zadok and Abiathar, also apriest, to return with their sons to Jerusalem and to bring himinformation about Absalom’s military plans (2 Sam.15:27–29). When Zadok and Abiathar learned of Absalom’splans, they informed Ahimaaz and Abiathar’s son Jonathan.Ahimaaz and Jonathan had to flee to Bahurim and hide in a well whenAbsalom’s men learned of their presence in nearby En Rogel.After their pursuers could not find them, the two men delivered thenews to David (2 Sam. 17:15–22). Ahimaaz was eager toinform David of his son Absalom’s defeat and became the firstto tell David of his victory by outrunning another messenger.However, Ahimaaz concealed the news of Absalom’s death(18:19–33).
(3) KingSolomon’s district governor over Naphtali and husband ofBasemath, Solomon’s daughter (1 Kings 4:15).
(1) Ahiman,Sheshai, and Talmai, descendants of Anak, lived in Hebron when theIsraelite spies explored southern Canaan (Num. 13:22). DuringJoshua’s conquest, Caleb defeated Ahiman in Hebron after hisforces had conquered other adjacent territory (Josh. 15:24; Judg.1:8–10). (2) Agatekeeper of the temple who was among the first to return fromcaptivity in Babylon (1 Chron. 9:17).
A priest who allowed David and his men to eat the consecratedbread of the tabernacle (1 Sam. 21:1–6; cf. Mark 2:25–26).See also Abiathar.
A priest who allowed David and his men to eat the consecratedbread of the tabernacle (1 Sam. 21:1–6; cf. Mark 2:25–26).See also Abiathar.
A descendant of Levi through Elkanah (1 Chron. 6:25).“Elkanah” in 1 Chron. 6:26 may refer either to a sonof Ahimoth (NIV, RSV) or to the Elkanah of v. 25 (KJV, NASB).
Son of Iddo, Ahinadab was one of Solomon’s twelvedistrict governors “who supplied provisions for the king andthe royal household.” Ahinadab was governor over Mahanaim,which was east of the Jordan (1 Kings 4:14).
(1) Saul’swife, daughter of Ahimaaz and granddaughter of Zadok thepriest (1 Sam. 14:50). (2) Oneof David’s wives, known as “Ahinoam of Jezreel”(1 Sam. 25:43). When David fled to the Philistine city of Gath,he took Ahinoam and Abigail, his other wife (27:3). Ahinoam andAbigail settled in Ziklag, a Philistine city given to David byAchish. Amalekite raiders later destroyed Ziklag and took Ahinoam andthe other family of David and his men, but David recovered Ahinoam byovertaking and defeating the Amalekites (30:1–19). Ahinoam andAbigail accompanied David back to Hebron after Saul’s death andsettled there (2 Sam. 3:2). Her son Amnon was David’sfirstborn.
(1) Theson of Abinadab who, along with his brother Uzzah, attempted to bringthe Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem on a cart (2 Sam. 6:3–7;1 Chron. 13:7–10). When the oxen stumbled, Uzzah reachedout and grasped the ark to steady it, and God struck him down forthis “irreverent act” (2 Sam. 6:7). Ahio was infront of the cart at the time. (2) Afamily head within the tribe of Benjamin who lived in Jerusalem(1 Chron. 8:14). (3) Adescendant of Benjamin through Jeiel who also lived in Jerusalem(1 Chron. 8:31; 9:47).
Son of Enan and leader of the tribe of Naphtali. During thedesert census (Num. 1:1–4), Ahira was Naphtali’sassistant to Moses and Aaron. Ahira assembled the people of Naphtalifor encampment (Num. 2:29–30) and led them as they moved(10:27).
A descendant of Benjamin, ancestor of the Ahiramite clan.Ahiram appears in the record of the census that Moses and Eleazartook after the plague on the Israelites for their worship of the Baalof Peor (Num. 26:38).
The clan descended from Benjamin through Ahira. They appearin the record of the census of Israel taken after the plague (Num.26:38).
A descendant of Dan and father of Oholiab, a skilledcraftsman who assisted Bezalel son of Uri in furnishing thetabernacle (Exod. 31:6; 35:34).
A descendant of Dan and father of Oholiab, a skilledcraftsman who assisted Bezalel son of Uri in furnishing thetabernacle (Exod. 31:6; 35:34).
A family leader descended from Benjamin through Bilhan(1 Chron. 7:10).
One of King Solomon’s chief officials, Ahishar was incharge of Solomon’s palace (1 Kings 4:6).
A Gilonite from the town of Giloh, he was originally KingDavid’s most respected and wise adviser (2 Sam. 15:12;16:23). Ahithophel allied himself with King David’s son Absalomduring Absalom’s rebellion. When David heard of Ahithophel’sdefection, he prayed that the Lord would “turn Ahithophel’scounsel into foolishness” (15:31).
UponAhithophel’s suggestion, Absalom pitched a tent on the roof ofDavid’s palace in order to sleep openly with David’sconcubines (2 Sam. 16:20–22). Ahithophel also counseledAbsalom to make an aggressive, immediate attack upon his father’sforces while David was weary in his flight from Jerusalem (2 Sam.17:1–4). Absalom decided in favor of the more conservative planof Hushai the Arkite, who had suggested that Absalom attack aftergathering in Jerusalem all available Israelite soldiers (17:7–14).However, Hushai the Arkite was in league with David, and throughHushai’s purposefully poor advice the Lord frustrated “thegood advice of Ahithophel in order to bring disaster on Absalom”(17:14).
Ahithophelcommitted suicide in Giloh, presumably anticipating the defeat ofAbsalom and David’s reprisal for his treason (2 Sam.17:23). Jehoiada son of Benaiah and Abiathar succeeded Ahithophel ascounselors (1 Chron. 27:34).
Four men, all of the priestly line of Aaron. (1) Adescendant of Phinehas, brother of Ichabod, and father of Ahijah(1 Sam. 14:3). (2) Thefather of Ahimelek the priest, who aided David and his men (1 Sam.21:1–6). (3) Sonof Amariah and the father of Zadok, a priest during David’s andSolomon’s reigns (2 Sam. 8:17; 1 Chron. 6:7). (4) Thefather of Meraioth and ancestor of Azariah, who was the supervisor ofthe second temple (1 Chron. 9:11; Neh. 11:11).
A Canaanite city in northwestern Galilee that the tribe ofAsher did not conquer. Asher’s failure to conquer this andnearby Canaanite cities caused the intermingling of the Israelitesand the Canaanites within Asherite territory (Judg. 1:31–32).
(1) Awoman descended from Judah through Sheshan (1 Chron. 2:31).According to 1 Chron. 2:34, “Sheshan had no sons—onlydaughters.” However, the Hebrew phrase describing Ahlai in 2:31literally reads “and the sons of Sheshan: Ahlai.”Although the OT normally uses the term banim to speak of sons, it canalso refer to descendants or children. Thus, Ahlai was a daughter ofSheshan, probably the one whom Sheshan gave in marriage to hisservant Jarha (2:35). This would explain the unusual inclusion of adaughter in a genealogy. To eliminate the confusion, the NIVtranslates 2:31 as “Sheshan was the father of Ahlai.”(2) Thefather of Zabad, one of David’s thirty mighty men (1 Chron.11:41).
Grandson of Benjamin through Bela (1 Chron. 8:4). Ahoahwas the ancestor of the Ahohites Dodai (2 Sam. 23:9), Zalmon(2 Sam. 23:28), and Ilai (1 Chron. 11:29), all of whom wereassociated with David’s military.
A family name used to describe Dodai (2 Sam. 23:9),Zalmon (2 Sam. 23:28), and Ilai (1 Chron. 11:29),descendants of Ahoah (1 Chron. 8:4) and prominent military menduring the time of David.
Names that Ezekiel assigns to the northern kingdom of Israel(Oholah) and the southern kingdom of Judah (Oholibah) in hisgraphically sexual extended allegory about their unfaithfulness toGod (Ezek. 23). The meanings of the names are related to the Hebrewword for “tent” (ʾohel ),but their precise import is unclear (“Ohalah” means “hertent,” and “Oholibah” means “my tent is inher,” referring to Jerusalem as the location of the temple).The metaphor involves two sisters, Oholah and Oholibah, who aremarried to Yahweh. But the sisters are repeatedly unfaithful, goingafter other gods and making political alliances. Oholah’s loverwas Assyria, by whom she was condemned to defeat and exile.
The son of Ahisamak, of the tribe of Dan, he was a craftsmanextraordinaire. He is called an “engraver” who might workon wood or stone, a “designer,” and an “embroiderer”(Exod. 38:23). He was appointed by Moses to work with Bezalel inconstruction of the tabernacle (35:30–34).
Names that Ezekiel assigns to the northern kingdom of Israel(Oholah) and the southern kingdom of Judah (Oholibah) in hisgraphically sexual extended allegory about their unfaithfulness toGod (Ezek. 23). The meanings of the names are related to the Hebrewword for “tent” (ʾohel ),but their precise import is unclear (“Ohalah” means “hertent,” and “Oholibah” means “my tent is inher,” referring to Jerusalem as the location of the temple).The metaphor involves two sisters, Oholah and Oholibah, who aremarried to Yahweh. But the sisters are repeatedly unfaithful, goingafter other gods and making political alliances. Oholah’s loverwas Assyria, by whom she was condemned to defeat and exile.
(1)Awife of Esau. She was the daughter of Anah and granddaughter ofZibeon the Hivite (Gen. 36:2). She bore Esau three sons (36:5).(2)Oneof the chiefs of the Edomites (Gen. 36:41; 1Chron. 1:52).
A descendant of Judah through Jahath (1 Chron. 4:2). Thedescendants of Ahumai and his brother Lahad were the clans of theZorathites (see also 1 Chron. 2:52–53).
A descendant of Judah through Naarah (1 Chron. 4:6).“Ahuzzam” (NIV) and “Ahuzam” (KJV) are formsof the Hebrew word ’akhuzzah, meaning “possession”or “inheritance” (see Gen. 47:11).
The personal adviser to King Abimelek, king of thePhilistines in Gerar. Ahuzzath accompanied Abimelek and Phicol, thecommander of Abimelek’s forces, to make a treaty with Isaacafter they had ordered him to leave their territory because of hisgrowing power and prosperity (Gen. 26:26–31).
A descendant of Levi through Meshillemoth. Ahzai was thegrandfather of Amashsai, one of the priestly family heads during thetime of Nehemiah who was chosen by lot to live in Jerusalem (Neh.11:13–14).
The Hebrew term behind Ai means “the ruin.”Biblical Ai was situated east of Bethel in the highlands of Ephraimoverlooking the Jordan Valley. The commonly accepted location iset-Tell, “the heap,” a mound near present-day Deir Dibwan(ten miles north-northeast of Jerusalem). This determination is basedpartly on identification of Bethel with Beitin, which is challengedby some.
Excavationsat et-Tell reveal two periods of habitation: first, during the EarlyBronze Age (c. 3100–2400 BC), followed by an intervening spanof more than a millennium during which et-Tell was uninhabited, thenagain during Iron Age I (c. 1200–1050 BC).
Theearliest settlement was an unwalled village. Artifacts reveal amixture of local and foreign influences, with some early potteryresembling that of nearby Jericho. Later pottery shows traitsconsistent with northern Syria and Anatolia, suggesting migration ofpeoples from these regions. Around 3000 BC the village wasreconfigured to include an acropolis with a temple and palacecomplex, and a wall with four gates.
TheEarly Bronze Age city was destroyed several times, including once byan earthquake (evident from the collapse of the temple wall into arift opened in its foundation). Each time it was rebuilt and itsfortifications strengthened. Beginning c. 2700 BC, et-Tell fell underEgyptian influence, attested by Egyptian building techniques and thepresence of imported alabaster and stone vessels. This lasted untilc. 2550 BC, when the city’s wall was breached and the citadelfortifications burned. The city was sacked and abandoned c. 2400 BC.
Et-Tellwas resettled c. 1200 BC, possibly by persons fleeing the influx ofSea Peoples into the Eastern Mediterranean. The Iron Age Isettlement was considerably smaller than the Early Bronze Age city(three versus twenty-seven acres). Settlers built houses on theacropolis and terraced the mound for farming; however, no attempt wasmade to repair the walls or erect new fortifications. Discovery ofmultiple grain silos indicates a population increase c. 1125 BC. Lackof all but the earliest Iron Age ware suggests that et-Tell wasabandoned c. 1050 BC. Because its houses remained intact, the villageclearly was not destroyed.
Inthe Bible, Ai first appears as a landmark in Abram’s travels(Gen. 12:8; 13:3). In the book of Joshua, it figures prominently as alesser city in the initial conquest of Canaan (7:3; 10:2; but see8:25). Following Israel’s initial defeat (7:4–5), Joshuaproscribes Ai according to Yahweh’s instruction (8:2), slayingits inhabitants and hanging its king, then reducing the settlement toa ruin (8:25–28). This strikes fear into the neighboringpopulations (9:3–4; 10:1–2). The disproportionateattention given to its capture sets the conquest within a theologicalframework: victory depends on obedience to Yahweh. Ai later appearsin regard to those who are returning from exile in Babylon (Ezra2:28; Neh.7:32).
Comparisonof archaeological evidence from et-Tell with the traditional datingof the exodus (fifteenth century BC) reveals that the site wasunoccupied when Ai would have been sacked by Israel. This has ledsome to conclude that the account in Josh. 7–8 is etiological(a story explaining the source of the ruins at et-Tell) and thereforelegendary, or originally pertained to the sacking of another site—forexample, Bethel (8:17). Suggesting that Ai was a temporary strongholdduring the conquest, though possible, contradicts details of thebiblical account (see 8:1, 23, 25).
Evenif a late date for the exodus is proposed (thirteenth century BC),the Iron Age settlement at et-Tell was considerably smaller than thenarrative describes, populated by several hundred persons, notthousands (Josh. 8:25). Further, habitation persisted at et-Tell intothe period of the judges (contrast 8:28). Evidence of this sort leadssome to discount the conquest tradition in favor of a settlement(migration) model of Israel’s entry into the land of Canaan(see Judg. 3:5–6).
Itremains altogether possible that et-Tell has been incorrectlyidentified with biblical Ai, or that the evidence excavated at thesite is incomplete. In either case, further archaeologicalinvestigation may vindicate the biblical account of the conquest ofAi. It is equally possible, though, that the events of the conquestand settlement are more complex than the biblical narrativeindicates.
(1) AHorite, the eldest son of Zibeon who lived in Edom (Gen. 36:24;1 Chron. 1:40). (2) Thefather of Saul’s concubine Rizpah (2 Sam. 3:7).
A location named in connection with Migron and Mikmash (Isa.10:28) that may be the feminine form of “Ai.”
A town near Bethel approximately ten miles north ofJerusalem, appearing only in Neh. 11:31 (cf. Ayyah in 1 Chron.7:28). Perhaps another name for Ai. See Ai; Ayyah.
The Aijalon Valley provided access from the northernPhilistine Plain on the Mediterranean Sea through the foothills tothe hill country. The city of Aijalon was near the eastern endof the valley. During Israel’s conquest of Canaan, aconfederation of Canaanite cities attacked the Gibeonites, who hadmade an alliance with the Israelites (Josh. 9–10). TheIsraelites defeated the confederation forces at Gibeon and pursuedthem west through the Aijalon Valley. En route, God hurled largehailstones on them. Joshua’s prayer that the sun “bestill” over Gibeon and the moon over the Valley of Aijalon mayhave involved the darkening of the sun and moon by the heavy cloudsaccompanying the hailstorm. Some centuries later, after Jonathan andhis armor bearer attacked the Philistine outpost at Mikmash in thehill country, the Israelites struck them down from Mikmash to Aijalonin the valley (1 Sam. 14:31).
Thecity of Aijalon was among those given to the tribe of Dan (Josh.19:42; 21:24), but it was later affiliated with Ephraim (1 Chron.6:69) and inhabited by descendants of Benjamin (1 Chron. 8:13).Rehoboam built defensive cities, among them Aijalon, in preparationfor the forthcoming attack of Pharaoh Shishak (2 Chron. 11:5–12;cf. 1 Kings 14:26).
In Hebrew ’ayyelet hashakhar, a phrase found in thetitle of Ps. 22 and literally translated as “the doe of themorning.” It may refer to a song or tune.
(1) Acity marking the eastern border of the Promised Land in Num. 34:11.It is located northeast of the Sea of Galilee, possibly associatedwith Khirbet Ayun or Khirbet Dufna. (2) ALevitical city belonging to Simeon (Josh. 15:32; 19:7; 21:16;1 Chron. 4:32). Some scholars believe that the Josh. 21:16reference to Ain is a scribal error and should actually read “Ashan.”Other scholars consider the remaining three references a scribalerror as well and connect Ain with Rimmon, the city immediatelyfollowing Ain in these three lists, associating it with En-Rimmon.
What fills the space between the earth and heavens, providinga domain for flying birds (Gen. 1:6–8, 20–23; Deut.4:17). “Birds of the air,” or “birds in the sky,”is a common biblical expression (e.g., Gen. 1:26, 28, 30; 2:19–20;Pss. 8:8; 79:2; 104:12; Matt. 6:26; 8:20; 13:32). Moses threw sootinto the air, which led to the plague of boils on Egypt (Exod.9:8–12). People threw dust into the air as an expression ofmourning (Acts 22:23). Paul uses the images of boxing and speaking“into the air” to express futility (1 Cor. 9:26;14:9). As the boundary between earth and heaven, the air is whereChrist will meet his church at his coming (1 Thess. 4:17).Paul’s contemporaries also distinguished between lower, impureair (vapor) and upper, pure air (ether). Spirits haunted the vapor.Paul therefore claims that Satan is the evil spirit who rules the airbelow where Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father (Eph.1:20–23; 2:2).
(1) AHorite, the eldest son of Zibeon who lived in Edom (Gen. 36:24;1 Chron. 1:40). (2) Thefather of Saul’s concubine Rizpah (2 Sam. 3:7).
The Aijalon Valley provided access from the northernPhilistine Plain on the Mediterranean Sea through the foothills tothe hill country. The city of Aijalon was near the eastern endof the valley. During Israel’s conquest of Canaan, aconfederation of Canaanite cities attacked the Gibeonites, who hadmade an alliance with the Israelites (Josh. 9–10). TheIsraelites defeated the confederation forces at Gibeon and pursuedthem west through the Aijalon Valley. En route, God hurled largehailstones on them. Joshua’s prayer that the sun “bestill” over Gibeon and the moon over the Valley of Aijalon mayhave involved the darkening of the sun and moon by the heavy cloudsaccompanying the hailstorm. Some centuries later, after Jonathan andhis armor bearer attacked the Philistine outpost at Mikmash in thehill country, the Israelites struck them down from Mikmash to Aijalonin the valley (1 Sam. 14:31).
Thecity of Aijalon was among those given to the tribe of Dan (Josh.19:42; 21:24), but it was later affiliated with Ephraim (1 Chron.6:69) and inhabited by descendants of Benjamin (1 Chron. 8:13).Rehoboam built defensive cities, among them Aijalon, in preparationfor the forthcoming attack of Pharaoh Shishak (2 Chron. 11:5–12;cf. 1 Kings 14:26).
Son of Ezer, a descendant of Esau (Gen. 36:27; 1 Chron.1:42 [NRSV, NASB: “Jaakan”]).
(1) Thefather of Baal-Hanan, king of Edom (Gen. 36:38; 1 Chron.1:49). (2) Oneof Josiah’s officials among those sent to inquire of theprophet Huldah regarding the book of the law (2 Kings 22:12, 14).Akbor may have also been called “Abdon” (2 Chron.34:20). (3) Thefather of Jehoiakim’s officer Elnathan (Jer. 26:22; 36:12).Since Jehoiakim came to power shortly after Josiah, the father ofElnathan may be identical with Josiah’s official, describedabove.
The place where Judas Iscariot met his demise after betrayingJesus. According to the book of Acts, with the money he received forbetraying Jesus to the chief priests, he bought a field, where “hefell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilledout”; the inhabitants of Jerusalem called the field “Akeldama,”an Aramaic name meaning “field of blood” (Acts 1:18–19).According to Matt. 27:7–8, the field was purchased by the chiefpriests and subsequently used as a burial place for foreigners. Thetwo passages may be harmonized by supposing that (1) in the Actsaccount Luke means that Judas indirectly purchased the field becausehis money was used to purchase it; (2) Judas hanged himself, asMatthew says, but the rapidly decaying body fell from the rope andburst open, as Acts asserts; or (3) as so often with placenames, the original of the name was understood differently bydifferent people. Perhaps the place was known as “Field ofBlood” because it was purchased with blood money, but thesubsequent suicide of Judas at that location caused some earlyChristians to associate the name with his gory death there.
The king of Egypt (c. 1379–1362 BC) during theEighteenth Dynasty. He was also known as Amenhotep (or Amenhotpe) IV.He followed his father, Amenhotep III (1417–1379 BC), onthe throne. His best-known queen was Nefertiti, who bore him sixdaughters. His sons Smenkhare and Tutankhamen, who successivelysucceeded him on the throne, were the offspring of an unknown queen.
Akhenatenstarted ruling from Thebes, but he built a new capital, Akhetaten,today known as Amarna. He was the king of Egypt during the periodrepresented by the Amarna letters. These are letters written byCanaanite kings to their Egyptian overlord around the time Israelentered the Promised Land. The kings requested help, thoughapparently Egypt never sent it.
Akhenatenis best known for his religious innovations. He suppressed theworship of traditional cults, particularly that of the god Amun, infavor of the sole worship of the sun-disk, Aten. Scholars differ overwhether this move was the result of religious insight and piety orwas a political ploy to remove power from the priesthood in favor ofhis own power. The famous Hymn to Aten, however, shows significantpersonal piety. This hymn has been compared in content to Ps. 104,and some think that the Hymn to Aten influenced the writing of thatpsalm.
Almostimmediately after Akhenaten’s death, his innovations wererejected. His legacy was defaced, and he became known as the “hereticking.”
Son of Zadok and an ancestor of Jesus listed among thefourteen generations between the exile and the birth of Jesus (Matt.1:14).
One of the cities associated with and perhaps founded byNimrod (Gen. 10:10). Outside of the Bible, Akkad was known as thecenter of the empire established by Sargon the Great(mid-twenty-fourth century BC). His kingdom became known as theAkkadian Empire.
Akkadian was the language of the Babylonians and theAssyrians. It is the most widely attested of the East Semiticlanguages (see below), and its name comes from the identificationused by the Babylonians and Assyrians themselves (Akkadu, from thename of the Babylonian capital Akkad [e]). Europeanresearchers began the recovery of Akkadian during the seventeenthcentury. Its interpretation has been considered a relativelywell-settled question since around 1857, when Edward Hincks, JulesOppert, and Henry Creswick Rawlinson were able to produce similartranslations of the same unpublished text while workingindependently.
Linguistically,Akkadian is usually considered to be comprised of two main dialects,Babylonian and Assyrian. Eblaite, the other member of the EastSemitic group, is very closely related, however, and is sometimesclassed as a third dialect of Akkadian. The various dialects ofAkkadian are attested from as early as the middle of the thirdmillennium BC (Old Akkadian [and Eblaite]) until as late as the firstcentury AD (Late Babylonian). The following chronological divisionsare usually recognized for Babylonian and Assyrian:
OldBabylonia – 2000-1500 BC – Old Assyrian
MiddleBabylonian – 1500-1000 BC – Middle Assyrian
Neo-Babylonian– 1000-600 BC – Neo-Assyrian
LateBabylonia – 600 BC-AD 100
Atthe present time, as many as one million Akkadian texts have beenunearthed. The corpus is known to contain legal, administrative, andeconomic documents, as well as literary texts, religious material ofvarious types, and personal communications. The majority of thesetexts remain unpublished, however. Geographically, Assyrian dialectstend to be attested only at sites within the historical boundaries ofAssyria, whereas Babylonian texts have been found across a muchbroader range.
Akkadianis written using cuneiform (“wedge-shaped,” from Lat.cuneus, “wedge”) symbols, which may consist of one orseveral wedges, and usually it is written from left to right. Thewriting system is derived from Sumerian, a non-Semitic languagepredating the rise of Akkadian, and it is by any reasonableevaluation extremely complex. Individual signs may represent severaldifferent phonetic values (e.g., /ba/, /bab/, etc.), an individualword (e.g., “sheep,” “chariot,” etc.), oreven a particular grammatical concept (e.g., grammatical plurality,or the presence of a human or divine name). Signs may have multiplevalues even within the same text, and the proper reading for anyindividual sign must be determined by context and knowledge of theliterary genre under consideration.
Forthe purposes of biblical studies, some of the more significantAkkadian texts presently known are (1) those texts that resemblethe creation and flood accounts (Enuma Elish, Atrahasis Epic, Epic ofGilgamesh); (2) ancient Near Eastern treaty documents that aresimilar to Deuteronomy and pentateuchal legal material; (3) thearchives unearthed at Mari and Nuzi that recount various practices inthe patriarchal narratives; (4) historical records (e.g., Annalsof Sennacherib [cf. 2 Kings 10:34]); (5) city lamentswritten in Sumerian (cf. the book of Lamentations).
Mentioned once in the OT, Akko is one of the cities thatAsher failed to conquer (Judg. 1:31). Renamed “Ptolemais”during the Hasmonean period, this city was home to some believerswith whom Paul stayed for a day during his third missionary journey(Acts 21:7). Excavations at Tell el-Fukhkhar uncovered a long historyof urban settlement originating in the Middle Bronze Age I(2200–2000 BC). Strategically located at crossroads of coastaland inland roads, eight miles north of modern Haifa, the city playeda prominent role as a center of trade.
(1) Apriestly gatekeeper at the time of the early postexilic period (Ezra2:42; Neh. 7:45). He and his associates were stationed east at theKing’s Gate (1 Chron. 9:17). (2) Oneof the temple servants who returned with Zerubbabel (Ezra 2:45).(3) Apriestly gatekeeper at the time of Ezra and Nehemiah (Neh. 11:19;12:25). (4) ALevitical teacher of the law (Neh. 8:7) at the time of Ezra(conceivably identified with the Akkub of Ezra 2:45). (5) Adescendant of David through Jehoiakim and Zerubbabel in the periodafter the exile (1 Chron. 3:24).
This name (lit., “scorpions”) is actually ashortened form of maaleh ’aqrabbim (“ascent ofscorpions”). This is a mountain pass (NIV: “ScorpionPass”) that marks part of the southern boundary of Canaan’sborder, according to Num. 34:4; Josh. 15:3; Judg. 1:36. The pass isactually located southwest of the Dead Sea near the Arabah. The areaadjacent to this pass is Akrabattene, which is where Judas Maccabeusdefeated the Idumeans (1 Macc. 5:3).
The daughter of Caleb who was given as a wife to Othniel whenhe captured the city of Debir (Josh. 15:16–17; Judg. 1:12–13).Caleb gave her land in the Negev and later, at her request, the“upper and lower springs” as well (Josh. 15:18–19;Judg. 1:14–15).
A city in northern Palestine whose king was a vassal of theking of Hazor. When Jabin went to war against Joshua, he called forthe support of the king of Akshaph (Josh. 11:1), who is listed amongthe thirty-one kings defeated by Joshua (Josh. 12:20). Akshaph wasassigned to the tribe of Asher (Josh. 19:25).
(1) Atown (modern Ain Kezbeh) in the territory of Judah (Josh. 15:44).Akzib is also mentioned in a negative context in Mic. 1:14, where theprophet plays on the meaning of ’akzab, “deceitful.”Akzib may appear in Gen. 38:5 [NIV: Kezib]; 1 Chron. 4:22 [NIV:Kozeba]. (2) Atown in the territory of Asher (Josh. 19:29) that Asher did notconquer (Judg. 1:31). Phoenician Akzib has been excavated and islocated on the Mediterranean coast between Acre (Akko) and Tyre(modern ez-Zib).
(1) Sonof Beker and grandson of Benjamin (1 Chron. 7:8) who is notmentioned in the genealogies of Benjamin in the Pentateuch. (2) Sonof either Jehoaddah (1 Chron. 8:36) or Jadah (1 Chron.9:42). (3) ALevitical city in Benjamin (1 Chron. 6:60).
A town located in the Plain of Akko. This was part of theterritory allotted to the tribe of Asher (Josh. 19:26) during thedivision of the Promised Land.
A term of undetermined meaning that occurs in the heading ofPs. 46 and in 1 Chron. 15:20. Among the suggestions are that itmight denote a musical style, pitch, key, tune, change of octave, orfemale chorus.
(1) Aparticular sound that came from two silver trumpets that Godcommanded Moses to make (Num. 10:1–2). The sound functioned asa signal for the Israelites to break camp (10:5–6) and wasdifferentiated from other sounds that functioned as a signal for theIsraelites to gather together (10:7). (2) Asound used in war so that God would remember Israel and save themfrom their enemies (Num. 10:9; 31:6). (3) Asound signaling imminent war (Jer. 4:19) that was used by theprophets to signal destruction in oracles against Israel (Hos. 5:8).(4) Asound associated with the day of the Lord (Joel 2:1).
A constellation mentioned in Job 38:32. In Hebrew ’ayish,it is most often translated as “the Bear” (cf. ’ashin Job 9:9). It is the brightest star in the constellation Taurus.See also Arcturus.
(1) Sonof Beker and grandson of Benjamin (1 Chron. 7:8) who is notmentioned in the genealogies of Benjamin in the Pentateuch. (2) Sonof either Jehoaddah (1 Chron. 8:36) or Jadah (1 Chron.9:42). (3) ALevitical city in Benjamin (1 Chron. 6:60).
(1) Simon’sson (Mark 15:21), a member of a high-priestly family inJerusalem (Acts 4:6). (2) AJew in Ephesus (Acts 19:33). (3) Ametalworker who becomes the object of Paul’s discipline (1 Tim.1:20; 2 Tim. 4:14).
Alexander, born in 356 BC, was the son of Philip, king ofMacedon. The amazing, swift conquests of Alexander are alluded to inDaniel. Daniel 8:5–8 (cf. 2:40–43; 7:19–24)portrays Greece as the “goat” from the west, with anotable horn between its eyes (representing Alexander), which defeatsthe ram (the Medo-Persian army). This prophecy was fulfilled whenAlexander led the Greek armies across the Hellespont into Asia Minorin 334 BC and defeated the Persian forces at the river Granicus.Alexander again met and quickly defeated the Persians at Issus(“without touching the ground” [Dan. 8:5]). Alexanderthen turned south, moving down the Syrian coast and conquering Egyptwithout a blow. He then moved eastward, again defeating Darius thePersian for the last time, east of the Tigris River. Babylon, Susa,and Persepolis (the last two were capitals of Persia) all fell to theyoung warrior king. Alexander marched his armies as far eastward asthe Hydaspes River in India and won a decisive battle there. Becausehis armies refused to go any farther, however, Alexander was forcedto return to Persepolis and then to Babylon. There he died in 323 BCat the age of thirty-three.
Alexander’schief influence on posterity was Hellenization—the merging ofGreek culture with the customs of the peoples he conquered (Hellas isthe Greek word for “Greece”). Thus, koinē (“common”)Greek became a universal trade language of the Mediterranean regionfrom 330 BC to c. AD 300.
A type of tree used to build the terraces of Solomon’stemple (2 Chron. 9:11). It was imported from Ophir (2 Chron.9:10) and Lebanon (2 Chron. 2:8). It is the same tree sometimesrendered “almug” or “almugwood” (1 Kings10:11–12). Some suggest almug to be sandalwood or the clovetree. Its identity remains unknown.
A type of tree used to build the terraces of Solomon’stemple (2 Chron. 9:11). It was imported from Ophir (2 Chron.9:10) and Lebanon (2 Chron. 2:8). It is the same tree sometimesrendered “almug” or “almugwood” (1 Kings10:11–12). Some suggest almug to be sandalwood or the clovetree. Its identity remains unknown.
An Edomite chief from the genealogical line of Esau (Gen.36:40; 1 Chron. 1:51). At 1 Chron. 1:51 the NRSV and NASBuse the variant name “Aliah.”
The firstborn son of Shobal, a Horite clan chief from thegenealogical line of Seir (Gen. 36:23; 1 Chron. 1:40). At1 Chron. 1:40 the NRSV and NASB use the variant name “Alian.”
A person or group of people whose birthplace is other thanthe location in which they are currently residing. Genesis recordsGod’s covenant relationship with Abraham and his promise tocreate a vast nation from Abraham’s offspring (Gen. 17:8–20).In the OT context, a foreigner is a person not born into the nationof Israel, determined by lineage traceable to Jacob, son of Isaac,son of Abraham. Foreigners in the land of Israel were allowed topartake of the Passover only if it was done in accordance withIsraelite law (Exod. 12:48; Num. 9:14). The relationship betweenforeigners and the nation of Israel was not hostile. In fact, Godreminds Israel of their own sojourn in Egypt and gives specific lawsfor the fair treatment of foreigners in their midst (Exod. 23:9; Lev.19:10, 33–34; 23:22; 25:35; Deut. 10:19).
Inthe NT, the apostle Paul uses the concept with respect to a person’srelationship to the kingdom of God. In Ephesians he refers to thosewithout Christ as being “excluded from citizenship in Israeland foreigners to the covenants of the promise” (Eph. 2:12),meaning that they exist outside of God’s kingdom. Conversely,those believing in Christ have received “adoption as children”(Gal. 4:5 NRSV), meaning that they are no longer foreigners and arenow counted as citizens of God’s kingdom, as the offspring ofthe king clearly are.
A town located in the Plain of Akko. This was part of theterritory allotted to the tribe of Asher (Josh. 19:26) during thedivision of the Promised Land.
A town located in the Plain of Akko. This was part of theterritory allotted to the tribe of Asher (Josh. 19:26) during thedivision of the Promised Land.
Allegoryis the use of symbolism to express or represent certain truths. Itcan be understood in two different ways.
First,some writers intentionally express concepts that conceal behind theliteral meaning of their words a more significant meaning. Forexample, in John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress, Hopefulhelps Christian see Christ again so that he may avoid the WickedGate. Similarly, the dark wood where Dante loses himself at thebeginning of the Divine Comedy is intended by the author as a symbolof sin, and the three animals that he encounters there are symbolsfor three particular sins. In both cases, the author intentionallypresents the true meaning of the story through figures or symbols.This use of allegory is sometimes described as a prolonged metaphor.
Thesecond way allegory can be understood is as a perspective taken up bythe interpreter or reader. Here the reader assumes that the text hasa secondary or hidden meaning underlying the primary, literal meaningof the words. Often, but not always, this kind of allegoricalinterpretation ignores the literal sense of the words and at timesdenies the usefulness of the literal meaning all together.
Allegoryin the Bible.Some passages of Scripture come very close to the first use ofallegory: in Ezek. 17:2 God instructs the prophet to “set forthan allegory [NASB, NRSV: “riddle”] and tell the house ofIsrael a parable.” In the account that follows the prophetcarefully explains each element of the story: the first eagle isBabylon, the twigs carried to a land of trade are the captiveIsraelites taken to Babylon, and so forth. In Ezek. 24:2–14 theprophet gives a similar account, this time pointing out Israel’sunfaithfulness.
Jesus’parable of the sower (Matt. 13:1–9 pars.) comes very close tothis kind of allegory because each feature of the story is explainedby Jesus to convey his teaching regarding the kingdom (13:18–23pars.). However, care must be taken not to confuse the literarycategory of parable with this type of allegory. A parable is aparticular type of story that only at times bears a resemblance to anallegory.
Allegoricalinterpretation in the early church.The early church fathers, facing the need to distinguish Christianityfrom Judaism, focused on the person and work of Christ as a means ofreading the Bible (one might call this “christocentric”reading). They explained that the Jews could read the OT and yetreject Jesus as the Messiah because they read according to the letterand not according to the Spirit (“for the letter kills, but theSpirit gives life” [2 Cor. 3:6]). Therefore, the churchfathers claimed that the spiritual interpretation of the Bibleconveyed its true meaning—the sense that Jesus is the Sonof God.
TheAlexandrian fathers and allegorization. Clement,traditionally the third bishop of Rome (c. AD 96), provides a veryearly example of Christian allegorical interpretation. Referring tothe story of Rahab and the Israelite spies in Josh. 2, he argues thatthe scarlet cord is symbolic of a spiritual reality: “And inaddition they gave her a sign, that she should hang from her housesomething scarlet—making it clear that through the blood of theLord redemption will come to all who believe and hope in God”(1 Clem. 12:7). Another classic example of allegoricalinterpretation of the OT is the almost universally accepted earlyChristian understanding of Song of Songs. According to thisinterpretation, the literal sense of the song (romantic love) couldnot be its real meaning. Rather, the text refers to the relationshipbetween Christ and his church; thus, the woman represents the church,and the man represents Christ. The passage “He brought me tohis banqueting table, and his banner over me is love” (Song 2:4KJV) refers not to a romantic encounter between lovers but rather toChrist and his delight in the church.
Origen,an early Christian leader and influential biblical scholar fromAlexandria, argued that every passage in the Bible had a threefoldsense, corresponding to body, soul, and spirit: the literal, moral,and spiritual. Origen usually began with the literal sense of thewords, but he insisted that one should move on to the higher sense ofthe text (moral and spiritual) because it leads the believer closerto Christ. The only way to grasp the spiritual sense of the text,according to Origen, is through revelation. He also was one of thefirst to claim that Paul himself used allegorical interpretation: inhis identification of the wilderness rock with Christ (1 Cor.10:1–4) and of Sarah and Hagar with two covenants (Gal.4:22–26). It is debated whether these are examples of allegoryor of typology; much depends on how one defines both terms. Many drawa firm distinction between allegory, which derives from acorrespondence of ideas, and typology, which derives from acorrespondence between historical events. Even in contemporary debatesome insist that these passages rely more upon typologicalconnections than allegorical ones.
Allegoricalversus typological interpretation.In contrast to those church fathers who followed Origen and othersfrom Alexandria, the fathers of Antioch, especially Theodore ofMopsuestia (AD 350–428) and John Chrysostom (c. AD354–407), opposed finding the spiritual sense of the text bymeans of allegorical interpretation. Rather, these interpretersargued that the spiritual sense of the Bible is not allegorical butis to be found in the literal sense itself. Theodore, when challengedto account for the use of the term “allegory” (Gal. 4:24KJV, RSV, NRSV), argued that Paul used it to indicate a historicalcorrespondence; that is, Paul was interpreting the OT typologically.
Summary.Positively, allegory emphasizes that the Bible should be approachedspiritually, and that it should find practical application in thelife of the believer. Often allegory made it possible for the churchto apply obscure passages of the Bible that otherwise might have beenignored as irrelevant. Negatively, allegory largely removes the textof the Bible from history and fosters irresponsible and fancifulinterpretations. See also Typology.
A transliteration of the Hebrew phrase halelu yah. The firstword is an imperative form of the verb hallal, which means “topraise.” The second word is a derivation of the name of God,“Yahweh,” typically translated as “Lord,” andis the object of the verb. Thus, “hallelujah” means“praise the Lord.” This phrase has become idiomatic forChristian communities, so that the Hebrew pronunciation of“hallelujah” and its use as an exclamation of praise havebeen preserved. The phrase occurs twenty-four times in the Psalms,beginning at Ps. 104:35, and appears the most frequently in the lastfive psalms (Pss. 146–150).
(1) Sonof Beker and grandson of Benjamin (1 Chron. 7:8) who is notmentioned in the genealogies of Benjamin in the Pentateuch. (2) Sonof either Jehoaddah (1 Chron. 8:36) or Jadah (1 Chron.9:42). (3) ALevitical city in Benjamin (1 Chron. 6:60).
(1) Adescendant of Simeon, grandfather of Ziza (1 Chron. 4:37). (2) Aspecies of tree, most likely an oak (Gen. 35:8).
A location near Bethel that served as the burial place forDeborah, Rebekah’s nurse (Gen. 35:8). The phrase translatesliterally as “oak of weeping.”
A location near Bethel that served as the burial place forDeborah, Rebekah’s nurse (Gen. 35:8). The phrase translatesliterally as “oak of weeping.”
The allotment of land west of the Jordan among the nine and ahalf tribes was done by casting lots. The result of a lottery wasseen as being under God’s direction (Prov. 16:33), so thisprocedure reflected belief in God’s ownership of the PromisedLand. Moses commanded it (Num. 26:52–56), and Joshua carried itout at Shiloh (Josh. 13–19). The use of “lot” inPs. 16:5–6 as a metaphor recalls that the tribe of Levi wasgiven no allotment, only land from what was allotted to other tribes(Num. 18:20–24).
Divine titles using “almighty” indicate God’ssupreme, incomparable power. God is named “the Almighty”(shadday) throughout the OT, most frequently in Job. “GodAlmighty” (’el shadday) is concentrated in theGenesis patriarchal narratives (see also Exod. 6:3; Ezek. 10:5).
Inthe majority of its occurrences in the NIV, “Almighty”renders tsebaot (lit., “armies” [KJV, NRSV, NASB:“hosts”). Across the OT, “the Lord Almighty”connotes overwhelming forces, earthly and heavenly, under command ofIsrael’s divine warrior (1 Sam. 17:45; Judg. 5:20).Especially frequent in Jeremiah, Isaiah, Amos, Zechariah, andMalachi, it bolsters the prophetic message by leveraging God’sawesome power and authority (cf. James 5:4). Appropriately, the NTbook of Revelation marshals these concepts and repeatedly refers toGod as “almighty” ( pantokratōr).
The firstborn son of Joktan (Gen. 10:26; 1 Chron. 1:20),who lived in a territory in North Arabia.
A Levitical city within the territory of Benjamin (Josh.21:18), located northwest of Jerusalem within the immediate vicinityof Anathoth, which was the home of Jeremiah (Jer. 1:1). It is avariant of “Alemeth” (1 Chron. 6:60).
An area in Moab where the Israelites camped during theirwilderness wanderings located between Dibon Gad and the mountains ofAbarim (Num. 33:46–47). Some associate this place with BethDiblathaim, modern Deleilat esh-Sherqiyeh, located between Dibon andMadaba. Another possibility is that Almon is a daughter settlement ofBeth Diblathaim and is located nearby.
A tree found in Palestine as early as patriarchal timesproducing an edible nut and mild oil. It is among the first offlowering trees to bloom in the spring, with blossoms appearingbefore leaves. The Hebrew word (shaqed ) implies “watching,”“hastening,” or “awakening.” Jacob sentalmond delicacies to Joseph in Egypt (Gen. 43:11). The almond-treedesign of the seven-branched lampstands of the tabernacle and laterthe tabernacle (Exod. 25:33–34; 37:19–20) included almondblossoms on its “stems” and “bowls” fashionedafter the same flower. Aaron’s rod budded, blossomed, andproduced ripe almonds (Num. 17:8). In a play on words, God showedJeremiah an almond branch as a symbol of the dependability of divineforwardness. God was watching and about to act, fulfilling hispromises to punish the unfaithfulness of the people (Jer. 1:11–12).The usual allegorical interpretation of “the almond treeblossoms” (Eccles. 12:5) is a reference to an elderly person’shair turning white like the almond tree.
Provision for the extremely needy. Alms provide what isessential to human survival: food, clothing, and shelter (1 Tim.6:8). Of the three main expressions of Jewish and early Christianpiety, which included prayer and fasting (Matt. 6:1–18), givingto the destitute, literally “the practicing of mercy,”was the most highly prized and appears to have been broadly practiced(Tob. 12:8; 2 Clem. 16:4). The rabbis eventually legislatedagainst extreme almsgiving, fixing the limit at 20 percent ofone’s assets (b. Ketub. 50a; cf. 1 Cor. 13:3). Theinherent element of mercy suggests that the needy are not necessarilydeserving of the gift. Jesus grounded the practice in mindfulness ofGod’s mercy toward those blessed with surplus (Matt. 5:7) butwarned against giving for public recognition (6:1–4). Beggarswould gather around the temple, appealing to the charity of pilgrims(Acts 3:1–10). The early church took the initiative to care forthe destitute, particularly orphans and widows, a practice thatJames, the brother of Jesus, impressed upon Paul to maintain in thenon-Jewish wing of the church—something the apostle was happyto do, even collecting money for the needy in Jerusalem (Gal. 2:10;2 Cor. 9:1–5 [cf. James 1:27]). A communal fund wascollected in the local synagogue (m. Pe’ah 8:7). Trumpetswere blown on days of fasting as a reminder (b. Ber. 6b;b. Sanh. 35a; cf. Matt. 6:2). The early church directed most ofits giving to the poor (Tertullian, Apol. 39.6).
A type of tree used to build the terraces of Solomon’stemple (2 Chron. 9:11). It was imported from Ophir (2 Chron.9:10) and Lebanon (2 Chron. 2:8). It is the same tree sometimesrendered “almug” or “almugwood” (1 Kings10:11–12). Some suggest almug to be sandalwood or the clovetree. Its identity remains unknown.
A type of tree used to build the terraces of Solomon’stemple (2 Chron. 9:11). It was imported from Ophir (2 Chron.9:10) and Lebanon (2 Chron. 2:8). It is the same tree sometimesrendered “almug” or “almugwood” (1 Kings10:11–12). Some suggest almug to be sandalwood or the clovetree. Its identity remains unknown.
Two types of plants: a tree and a succulent. In the OT “aloe”probably refers to a spice derived from the modern eaglewood tree(Aquilaria agallocha), likely brought from India. The soft aromaticwood of the large and spreading tree constituted a drug, fragrant andhighly valued for perfume and incense (Ps. 45:8; Prov. 7:17; Song4:14). In the NT, a different plant is meant, Aloe vera. The aloinfrom the pulp of this succulent aloe leaf is the source of bitter,unpleasant-smelling, purgative medicine. The aloes that Nicodemusbrought to prepare the body of Jesus (John 19:38–40) may havebeen dissolved in water and used with myrrh, creating an expensiveproduct used for embalming.
Also rendered as “Bealoth” (Josh. 15:24), it wasa city in the extreme southern region of Judah (1 Kings 4:16).“Bealoth” can be translated as “(the dwelling placeof the) female Baals.” See also Bealoth.
(1) Thefather of the disciple James, who is always identified as “theson of Alphaeus” in order to distinguish him from James the sonof Zebedee (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). (2) Thefather of Levi the tax collector (Mark 2:14). Some have suggestedthat this individual is also the father of James the disciple, butthis is unlikely. Additionally, some have identified Cle(o)pas (Luke24:18; John 19:25) with one of the Alphaeus persons, but this isdoubtful.
Altars were places of sacrifice and worship constructed ofvarious materials. They could be either temporary or permanent. Somealtars were in the open air; others were set apart in a holy place.They could symbolize either God’s presense and protection orfalse worship that would lead to God’s judgment.
OldTestament
Noahand the patriarchs. Thefirst reference in the Bible is to an altar built by Noah after theflood (Gen. 8:20). This action suggests the sanctuary character ofthe mountain on which the ark landed, so that theologically the ark’sresting place was a (partial) return to Eden. The purpose of theextra clean animals loaded onto the ark was revealed (cf. 7:2–3).They were offered up as “burnt offerings,” symbolizingself-dedication to God at this point of new beginning for the humanrace.
Abrambuilt altars “to the Lord” at places where God appearedand spoke to him (Gen. 12:7) and where he encamped (12:8; 13:3–4,18). No sacrifice is explicitly mentioned in association with thesealtars. Thus, they may have had the character of monuments ormemorials of significant events. In association with Abram’saltars, he is said to have “called on the name of the Lord”(12:8)—that is, to pray. The elaborate cultic proceduresassociated with later Israelite altars (e.g., the mediation ofpriests) were absent in the patriarchal period. Succeedinggenerations followed the same practices: Isaac (26:25) and Jacob(33:20; 34:1, 3, 7). God’s test of Abraham involved the demandthat he sacrifice his son Isaac as a burnt offering. In obedience,Abraham built an altar for this purpose, but through God’sintervention a reprieve was granted, and a ram was substituted (22:9,13). Moses erected an altar after the defeat of Amalek at Rephidim,to commemorate this God-given victory (Exod. 17:15–16).
Mosesand the tabernacle.In the context of making the covenant with Israel at Sinai, God gaveMoses instructions on how to construct an altar (Exod. 20:24–26;cf. Josh. 8:31). It could be “an altar of earth” (ofsun-dried mud-brick construction?) or else made of loose naturalstones. The Israelites were expressly forbidden to use hewn stones,perhaps for fear of an idolatrous image being carved (making thisprohibition an application of Exod. 20:4; cf. Deut. 27:5–6).Even if the altar was large, it was not to be supplied with steps forthe priest to ascend, lest his nakedness be shown to God. Therequirement that priests wear undergarments reflects the same concern(Exod. 28:42–43). An altar made of twelve stones, the numberrepresenting the number of the tribes of Israel, was built by Mosesfor the covenant-making ceremony (Exod. 24:4), in which half theblood of the sacrifice was sprinkled on the altar (representing God?)and the other half on the people, the action symbolizing the covenantbond created (24:6–8).
Forthe tabernacle, a portable “altar of burnt offering” wasmade (Exod. 27:1–8; 38:1–7). It had wooden framessheathed in bronze and featured a horn at each corner. There was aledge around the altar halfway up its sides, from which was hungbronze grating, and it had four bronze rings into which poles wereslipped for transport. As part of the cultic ritual, blood wassmeared on the horns (29:12). This altar stood in the open air in thecourtyard of the tabernacle, near the entrance to the tabernacle.Included among the tabernacle furnishings was a smaller “altarof incense,” with molding around the top rim (30:1–10;37:25–28). This altar was, however, overlaid with gold, for itstood closer to God’s ritual presence, inside the tabernacle,“in front of the curtain that shields the Ark of the Covenantlaw,” the curtain that separated the most holy place from theholy place. The high priest placed fragrant incense on this altarevery morning and evening. The fact that this was a daily procedureand the description of the positioning of the tabernacle furnishingsin Exod. 40:26–28 (mentioning the altar of incense afterspeaking about the lampstand) might be taken as implying that theincense altar was in the holy place, but 1 Kings 6:22 and Heb.9:4 suggest that it was actually in the most holy place, near theark.
God,through Moses, instructed the people that on entering the PromisedLand they were to destroy all Canaanite altars along with the otherparaphernalia of their pagan worship (Deut. 7:5; 12:3). Bronze Agealtars discovered at Megiddo include horned limestone incense altarsand a large circular altar mounted by a flight of steps. In Josh. 22the crisis caused by the building of “an imposing altar”by the Transjordanian tribes was averted when these tribes explainedto the rest of the Israelites that it was intended as a replica ofthe altar outside the tabernacle and not for the offering ofsacrifices. The worship of all Israel at the one sanctuary bothexpressed and protected the religious unity and purity of the nationat this vital early stage of occupation of the land. In laternarratives, however, Gideon (Judg. 6), Samuel (1 Sam. 7:17),Saul (1 Sam. 14:35), and David (2 Sam. 24) are said tobuild altars for sacrifice and to have done so with impunity, and infact with the apparent approval of the biblical author. Theestablished custom of seeking sanctuary from threat of death in thenation’s shrine is reflected in 1 Kings 1:50–53;2:28–35, where Adonijah and Joab are described as “clingingto the horns of the altar.”
Solomon’stemple and rival worship centers.In the temple built by Solomon, the altar of incense that belonged tothe “inner sanctuary” was overlaid with gold (1 Kings6:20, 22). Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the temple wasmade before the bronze altar in the courtyard (1 Kings 8:22,54). The altar for sacrifices was much larger than the one that hadbeen in the tabernacle (1 Chron. 4:1 gives its dimensions).
Althoughmany of the psalms may originally have been used in worship in thefirst temple, there are surprisingly few references to the altar inthe Psalter (only Pss. 26:6; 43:4; 51:19; 84:3; 118:27). They expressthe psalmist’s devotion to God and the temple as the placewhere God’s presence is enjoyed as the highest blessing.
Afterthe division of the kingdom, Jeroboam offered sacrifices at the rivalaltar that he set up in Bethel (1 Kings 12:32–33). Anunnamed “man of God” (= prophet) predicted Josiah’sdesecration of this altar, which lay many years in the future(1 Kings 13:1–5). Amos and Hosea, who prophesied in thenorthern kingdom of the eighth century BC, condemned this and theother altars in that kingdom (e.g., Amos 3:14; Hos. 8:11–13).Ahab set up an altar to Baal in Samaria (1 Kings 16:32), and thesuppression of Yahwism by Jezebel included the throwing down of theLord’s altars in Israel (19:10, 14). The competition on MountCarmel between Elijah and the prophets of Baal involved rival altars(1 Kings 18), and Elijah’s twelve-stone altar recalls thatof Exod. 24, for he was calling the nation back to the exclusivemonotheism preached by Moses (1 Kings 18:30–32).
Withregard to the southern kingdom, the spiritual declension in the timeof Ahaz manifested itself in this king making an altar modeled on theAssyrian prototype that he had seen on a visit to Damascus (2 Kings16:10–14). He shifted the Lord’s altar from in front ofthe temple, where it had previously stood. Godly Hezekiah’sreligious reform included the removal of the altars at the highplaces that up to that time had been centers of deviant worship(2 Kings 18:4, 22). The apostasy of King Manasseh showed itselfin his rebuilding the high places that Hezekiah his father haddestroyed and in erecting altars to Baal (2 Kings 21), thusrepeating the sin of Ahab (cf. 1 Kings 16:32). Josiah’sreform included the destruction of all altars outside Jerusalem(2 Kings 23) and the centralizing of worship in the Jerusalemtemple.
InEzekiel’s vision of the new temple of the future, thesacrificial altar is its centerpiece (Ezek. 43:13–17). Thealtar was to be a large structure, with three-stepped stages and ahorn on each corner, and it was to be fitted with steps on itseastern side for the use of the priests.
Thesecond temple.The Israelites’ return from Babylonian exile was with theexpress aim of rebuilding the temple. The first thing that thepriests did was to build “the altar on its foundation”(i.e., its original base; Ezra 3:2–3). The returnees placed thealtar on the precise spot that it had occupied before the Babyloniansdestroyed it along with the temple. They took such care because theywanted to ensure that God would accept their sacrifices and so grantthem protection. At the very end of the OT period, the prophetMalachi condemned the insincerity of Israel’s worship that wasmanifested in substandard sacrifices being offered on God’saltar (Mal. 1:7, 10; 2:13).
NewTestament
Inthe NT, the altar is mentioned in a number of Jesus’ sayings(e.g., Matt. 5:23–24; 23:18–20). In the theology of thebook of Hebrews, which teaches about the priesthood of Jesus Christ(in the order of Melchizedek), the role of the priest is defined asone who “serve[s] at the altar” (7:13), and Christ’saltar (and that of Christ’s followers) is the cross on which heoffered himself as a sacrifice for sin (13:10). Another argument ofHebrews is that since on the most important day in the Jewish ritualcalendar (the Day of Atonement), the flesh of the sacrifice was noteaten (see Lev. 16:27), the eating of Jewish ceremonial foods is notrequired, nor is it of any spiritual value. The altar in the heavenlysanctuary is mentioned a number of times in the book of Revelation(6:9; 8:3, 5; 9:13; 11:1; 14:18; 16:7). It is most likely the altarof incense and is related to the prayers of God’s persecutedpeople, which are answered by the judgments of God upon the people ofthe earth.
A transliteration of Hebrew ’al-tashkhet (KJV:“Altaschith”; NASB: “Al-tashheth”), probablythe name of a tune for the singing of several psalms that appears intheir superscriptions (Pss. 57; 58; 59; 75). The NIV, NRSV, and ESVtranslate the phrase as “Do not destroy,” though “Letit not spoil” is another possibility.
A wilderness campsite, located between Dophkah and Rephidim,used by the Israelites following their exodus from Egypt (Num.33:13–14).
An Edomite chief from the genealogical line of Esau (Gen.36:40; 1 Chron. 1:51). At 1 Chron. 1:51 the NRSV and NASBuse the variant name “Aliah.”
The firstborn son of Shobal, a Horite clan chief from thegenealogical line of Seir (Gen. 36:23; 1 Chron. 1:40). At1 Chron. 1:40 the NRSV and NASB use the variant name “Alian.”
A city allotted to the tribe of Asher (Josh. 19:26). Thelocation of Amad is unknown.
Son of Helem, and the head of an Asherite family, he isdescribed as a brave warrior and outstanding leader (1 Chron.7:35, 40).
The Amalekites inhabited the Negev territory south of Judah(Num. 13:29). Amalek is described as “first among the nations”(Num. 24:20 [cf. 1 Sam. 27:8]); indeed, one story about it isset prior to the lifetime of its eponymous ancestor, Amalek (Gen.14:7). The OT represents the Amalekites as descended from Esau andthus related to the Edomites (Gen. 36:12, 16). Several texts refer to“the Amalekites and Canaanites,” suggesting that theformer were not considered a Canaanite people (e.g., Num. 14:45).
Thehistory of relations between the Amalekites and the Israelites is oneof perpetual hostility. The Amalekites attacked the Israelitesshortly after the Red Sea crossing. The outcome of the battleincluded a declaration of perpetual war between the Amalekites andthe God of Israel (Exod. 17:8–16; Deut. 25:17–19). Therewere several subsequent conflicts (Num. 14:45; Judg. 3:13; 6:3, 33;7:12; 10:12), continuing in the campaigns of Saul (1 Sam.15:1–9) and David (1 Sam. 27:8; 30:16–20).
Thefinal chapter in the historic struggle between Israel and theAmalekites is Mordecai and Esther’s confrontation with Haman,who is identified as an “Agagite”—that is, adescendant of Agag, the Amalekite king spared by Saul (Esther 3:1;cf. 1 Sam. 15:8).
The Amalekites inhabited the Negev territory south of Judah(Num. 13:29). Amalek is described as “first among the nations”(Num. 24:20 [cf. 1 Sam. 27:8]); indeed, one story about it isset prior to the lifetime of its eponymous ancestor, Amalek (Gen.14:7). The OT represents the Amalekites as descended from Esau andthus related to the Edomites (Gen. 36:12, 16). Several texts refer to“the Amalekites and Canaanites,” suggesting that theformer were not considered a Canaanite people (e.g., Num. 14:45).
Thehistory of relations between the Amalekites and the Israelites is oneof perpetual hostility. The Amalekites attacked the Israelitesshortly after the Red Sea crossing. The outcome of the battleincluded a declaration of perpetual war between the Amalekites andthe God of Israel (Exod. 17:8–16; Deut. 25:17–19). Therewere several subsequent conflicts (Num. 14:45; Judg. 3:13; 6:3, 33;7:12; 10:12), continuing in the campaigns of Saul (1 Sam.15:1–9) and David (1 Sam. 27:8; 30:16–20).
Thefinal chapter in the historic struggle between Israel and theAmalekites is Mordecai and Esther’s confrontation with Haman,who is identified as an “Agagite”—that is, adescendant of Agag, the Amalekite king spared by Saul (Esther 3:1;cf. 1 Sam. 15:8).
A southern city allotted to the tribe of Judah (Josh. 15:26).The site has not been definitely located, but it was likely in theNegev region.
A mountain mentioned in Song 4:8, associated with the morecommonly known Hermon. It is typically identified as a mountain atthe source of the Abana River (variant “Amana”; themodern Barada River). The modern name of the mountain is “JebelZebedani.”
From Latin servus a manu (lit., “servant by hand,”a servant with secretarial duties), this term refers to a scribehired to write from dictation. Jeremiah had a personal scribe,Baruch, who wrote his words by dictation (Jer. 36:4–32). Paulused the scribe Tertius to write Romans (Rom. 16:22). Silas may haveserved as Peter’s amanuensis for 1 Peter (1 Pet.5:12).
(1) Sonof Meraioth, a Levite descendant of Kohath through the line of Aaronand Eleazar; the father of Ahitub (1 Chron. 6:7, 52). (2) Sonof the priest who served in Solomon’s temple, Azariah, a Levitedescendant of Kohath through the line of Aaron and Eleazar; thefather of Ahitub (1 Chron. 6:11; see also Ezra 7:3). (3) Thesecond son of Hebron, a Levite; Moses’ cousin (1 Chron.23:19; 24:23). (4) Thechief priest in Jerusalem during the reign of Jehoshaphat (2 Chron.19:11). (5) Apriest who, along with others, assisted Kore with the distribution ofthe contributions made to God and the consecrated gifts during thereign of Hezekiah (2 Chron. 31:14–15). (6) Adescendant of Binnui who agreed to divorce his foreign wife duringthe time of Ezra (Ezra 10:42). (7) Oneof the priests who sealed the covenant to keep the law during thetime of Nehemiah (Neh. 10:3). (8) Anancestor of the provincial leader Athaiah, who settled in Jerusalemduring the time of Nehemiah (Neh. 11:4). (9) Apriest who returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel in the postexilicperiod (Neh. 12:2). (10) Anancestor of Zephaniah the prophet (Zeph. 1:1).
(1) Arelative of David (2 Sam. 19:13) who (according to the Hebrewtext; the Versions often harmonize) was the son of either Ithra theIsraelite (2 Sam. 17:25; 1 Kings 2:5) or Jether theIshmaelite (1 Chron. 2:17). Absalom, during the rebellionagainst David his father, appointed Amasa as the leader of his army.Following Absalom’s defeat, which included his death, Davidrequested that Amasa continue to serve as the military commander(2 Sam. 19:13). Upon his arrival in Jerusalem, David orderedAmasa to summon the men of Judah due to an uprising incited by theBenjamite Sheba and to return before the king within three days.Amasa arrived late; as a result, David sent men out under the commandof Abishai to pursue Sheba. When Amasa finally met up with the men,he was greeted by Joab, who killed him with a dagger. Once Amasa’sbody was removed from the road, the men followed Joab in pursuit ofSheba (2 Sam. 20:1–13).
(2) Sonof Hadlai who, along with other leaders in Ephraim, advised Israel torelease the prisoners and plunder taken from Judah (2 Chron.28:12).
(1) Ason of Elkanah, the father of one of the Levite clans (1 Chron.6:25). (2) Anancestor of Heman, a Levitical musician at the time of David(1 Chron. 6:35). He may be one of the Levites assigned the taskof blowing the trumpet before the Ark of the Covenant as it enteredJerusalem (1 Chron. 15:24). (3) Thechief of David’s elite troops called the “Thirty”(1 Chron. 12:18). Offering a Spirit-led pledge of allegiance andprayer for success, he joined David at Ziklag when David was banishedby Saul. (4) Anancestor of Mahath, a Levite who aided Hezekiah in the purificationof the temple (2 Chron. 29:12).
A priest who returned from the Babylonian captivity to livein Jerusalem (1Chron. 9:12). He may be the same person asAmashsai (Neh. 11:13).
A priest who returned from the Babylonian captivity to livein Jerusalem (1Chron. 9:12). He may be the same person asAmashsai (Neh. 11:13).
The son of Zikri who volunteered and was appointed as acommander of Jehoshaphat’s army. He was given charge over twohundred thousand warriors (2 Chron. 17:16).
A land “near the [Euphrates] river” from whereBalaam traveled in order to curse the Israelites (Num. 22:5). “Amaw”appears in the RSV, NRSV, and ESV, which follow an alternate readingof the Hebrew text. Other versions translate the phrase as either“native land” (NIV) or “land of the sons of hispeople” (NKJV), which follows the Hebrew text. Other ancientsources translate the phrase as “land of the Ammonites.”Some equate Amaw with the Mesopotamian city Amau.
(1) Theson of King Joash of Judah who succeeded him on the throne after themurder of his father (2 Kings 12:21). His reign is narrated in2 Kings 14:1–22; 2 Chron. 25. Amaziah was twenty-fiveyears of age when he became king, and he reigned twenty-nine years(798–769 BC). He was one of the better kings of Judah, thoughnot measuring up to David’s high standard (2 Kings 14:3).He executed those responsible for his father’s death but sparedtheir sons. Although he enjoyed military success against Edom, he wasensnared by Edomite idolatry. He provoked conflict with Jehoash, theIsraelite king, but he was humiliatingly defeated and captured. Theresult was the demolition of the wall of Jerusalem, the looting ofthe temple, and the taking of hostages. The Chronicler explains thisas a divine punishment for seeking the gods of Edom. Like his father,he was assassinated by conspirators, but he was succeeded by his sonAzariah (Uzziah).
(2) “Thepriest of Bethel” (Amos 7:10), which may signal that Amaziahwas head priest of this northern shrine, a position also suggested bythe authoritative way in which he rebuked and tried to silence Amos.In reporting Amos to King Jeroboam, he acted like a loyal stateemployee. He accused Amos of conspiracy against the king, but thewords that he attributed to Amos distort his message (7:11), forAmos’s words were not personally directed at Jeroboam, and theyomit the fact that Amos preached as God’s spokesman (cf. 7:9).In instructing Amos not to prophesy, Amaziah directly contradictedGod’s words (7:15–16). Amaziah’s opposition earnedhim an oracle personally directed at him and his priestly family(7:17), the only oracle of Amos against an individual. Amaziah woulddie “in an unclean country” (NIV mg.), preventing himfrom exercising priestly functions.
(3) Amember of the tribe of Simeon (1 Chron. 4:34).
(4) ALevite of the clan of Merari (1 Chron. 6:45).
An ambassador is the official representative of a king orgovernment outside the realm of that ruler. In terms of theunderlying Hebrew and Greek vocabulary, the concept of ambassador inthe Bible largely overlaps with that of messenger, for which thereare several biblical terms. In other words, ambassadors (in themodern sense) are not easily distinguished from the numerous biblicalmessengers in terms of vocabulary alone. However, several biblicalnarratives involve royal or government messengers operating in anofficial capacity, on behalf of Moses (Num. 20:14), Judah (Ezek.17:15), Babylon (2 Chron. 32:31), and Egypt (2 Chron.35:21; Isa. 30:4). Several of these ambassadors were charged withforging a treaty with a foreign power.
Paultwice describes his own evangelistic ministry as an embassy on behalfof God. In 2 Cor. 5:20 he describes himself as one of “Christ’sambassadors,” and in Eph. 6:20 paradoxically as an “ambassadorin chains,” referring to his incarceration.
A surprise attack by a party lying in wait in a concealedposition, often used in the Bible both literally and figuratively.Actual ambushes frequently appear in military contexts, with thoselying in ambush concealing themselves in a field or ravine, at a citygate, or behind hills. God commanded that Israel use an ambush toconquer Ai (Josh. 8). In Judg. 9 Abimelek and the citizens of Shechemeach ambushed the other, as the Israelites later did to the tribe ofBenjamin (Judg. 20). Later King Saul and his army lay in ambushbefore attacking the Amalekites (1 Sam. 15:5), and Jeroboam ofIsrael used an ambush against Judah after the nations sank into civilwar (2 Chron. 13:13). Groups also set ambushes to killindividuals, as the Philistines did numerous times against Samson(Judg. 16), and twice the apostle Paul’s enemies set ambushesto kill him (Acts 23:21; 25:3).
Onealso finds numerous figurative references to ambushes and lying inwait, most often where the authors use descriptions of ambushes todescribe various kinds of evil that people commit against each other.Evil persons commit acts of injustice and offensive words, describedas shooting (Ps. 64:4), bloodshed (Prov. 12:6), and even murder (Hos.6:9) committed from ambush. The figures also describe scenes fromnature and hunting: “Like a lion in cover he lies in wait. . . ; he catches the helpless and drags them off inhis net” (Ps. 10:9).
A transliteration of a Hebrew word from the root meaning “toverify, confirm,” therefore expressing support and agreement.The term is used in four ways: (1) To agree with a command(1 Kings 1:36), prophecy (Jer. 11:5; Rev. 1:7), or solemn oath(Num. 5:22), and as a concluding endorsement of an entire book (e.g.,Gal. 6:18; Jude 25; Rev. 22:21). (2) To give an affirmativeresponse and express grateful thanks to God in the context of worship(e.g., 1 Chron. 16:36; Ps. 41:13; Gal. 1:5; Eph. 3:21). (3) ByJesus to introduce important sayings. In the Synoptic Gospels asingle “amen” is used (Matt. 5:18; Mark 8:12), while inJohn’s Gospel the “amen” is doubled (John 1:51;3:3; 5:19). Some versions adapt the “amen” construction,translating it as, for example, “Very truly I tell you”(NIV) or “Truly I tell you” (NRSV). The formula points tothe unique authority of Jesus’ word in contrast to the OTprophets, who spoke in the name of the Lord. The construction has noparallel in OT literature, thus pointing to Christ’s exaltedstatus. (4) As a personal name for Christ. He is called “theAmen” in the letter to Laodicea (Rev. 3:14), alluding to Isa.65:16, where God is twice described as “the God of truth”(lit., “the God of amen”). Jesus is the true and faithfulwitness of the new creation in contrast to the lamentable failure ofthe Laodiceans, whose compromise and ineffective witness threatenedimminent judgment.
Throughhabitual use, the “amen” can become nothing more than aliturgical full stop, signifying the conclusion of a prayer. Inreality, it signifies wholehearted commitment to what has been saidor sung. The seriousness of the “amen” is seen in theinstructions of Moses to the people of God (Deut. 27:14–26).The power of the “amen” is rooted in Christ, who is the“Yes” of all God’s promises; this in turn becomesthe basis for the confident “Amen” of his people (2 Cor.1:20).
A gem of purple or violet quartz. Amethyst (Heb. ’akhlamah;Gk. amethystos) is the ninth of the twelve stones in the breastpieceof the high priest (Exod. 28:19; 39:12) and is the twelfth gem in thewall of the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:20).
This man is an ancestor of a family that belonged to the“servants of Solomon” (Ezra 2:57; Neh. 7:59 [under thename “Amon”]) and returned with Zerubbabel in 539 BC orsoon after. Little is known about this group except that they likelyperformed menial functions at the temple, since they are grouped withthe “temple servants” (see Nethinim). The name of thegroup suggests that they were formed during the period of Solomon,although they could have been so named because Solomon had the firsttemple built.
Amittai is twice mentioned as the father of Jonah (2 Kings14:25; Jon. 1:1). Like his famous son, Amittai may have been fromGath Hepher and lived in the mid-eighth century BC.
After Saul’s death, Ammah was the site of a battlebetween David’s army and forces loyal to Saul’s family(2 Sam. 2:24). David later recovered it from Philistine control(8:1).
(1) Atribal leader of Dan, he was one of those sent by Moses toreconnoiter the Promised Land (Num. 13:12). (2) Aresident of Lo Debar during the reign of David in the territoryof Manasseh (2 Sam. 9:4–5; 17:27). (3) Thefather of Bathshua (1 Chron. 3:5 [probably Bathsheba]). (4) Sonof Obed-Edom and a doorkeeper of the tabernacle in David’s time(1 Chron. 26:5).
Various tribal leaders in ancient Israel had a father withthis name, including Elishama of Ephraim (Num. 1:10; cf. 1 Chron.7:26), Shemuel of Simeon (Num. 34:20), and Pedahel of Naphtali (Num.34:28). Genealogical tables in 1 Chronicles also give it as thename for a Levitical official (7:26; 9:4). It also is the name of thefather of Talmai, the Aramean chieftain to whom Absalom fled forasylum after murdering his half brother Amnon (2 Sam. 13:37).
This name is found in the family records of both Judah andLevi. He was the father of Nahshon, tribal leader of Judah (Num. 1:7;2:3; 7:12, 17). His father was Ram (Ruth 4:19; 1 Chron. 2:10).For the Levites, an Amminadab is a descendant of Kohath and familyleader (1 Chron. 6:22; 15:10–11). See also Amminadib.
This word occurs only in Song 6:12 (KJV). If it is a propername (so LXX, KJV), the identity of the person is unknown (NIV mg.:“Amminadab”). The expression seems to mean “mypeople is princely” or something similar. English Bibles varywidely in their translations, though most seem to take the expressionas a reference to magnificent chariots fit for a bridal party. A goodtranslation might be: “Before I knew it, my desire placed me(among) the noble chariots of my people” (cf. NIV).
The tribal leader for Dan in the exodus generation (Num.1:12; 2:25; 7:66, 71; 10:25).
Son of Benaiah ben Jehoiada, he was a military divisionleader during David’s reign (1 Chron. 27:6).
Ben-Ammi was the son of Abraham’s nephew Lot and theyounger of Lot’s two daughters (Gen. 19:36–38). He isrepresented as the ancestor of the Ammonites, a Transjordanian peoplewho were a perennial threat to Israel from the wilderness periodthrough to David’s reign.
Thenation of Ammon was located east of the Jordan, just north of theDead Sea. Its capital was Rabbah, and it bordered Gad to the west,the half-tribe of Manasseh to the northwest, and Moab to the south(see also Deut. 3:16). Much of the source of their contention wasover the fertile land of Gilead, which encompassed the Jordan Riverand bordered Ephraim, the western tribe of Manasseh, Benjamin, andJudah.
Theexodus and the period of the judges. Accordingto the biblical record, while moving to enter Canaan, Moses and theIsraelites avoided Amman (Rabbah) and marched through Sihon instead(Num. 21:24–35). Later the Israelites were told explicitly notto attack the Ammonites, for that territory was given to thedescendants of Lot (Deut. 2:19, 37).
Thefirst conflict between the Ammonites and the Israelites is recordedin Judg. 3:13, where the Moabite king Eglon was allied with theAmmonites (and the Amalekites) against Ehud. In Judg. 10:6–7the Israelites are punished for their idolatry by being put under thethumb of the Philistines and the Ammonites. Jephthah led theGileadites against the Ammonites, who had provoked them to battle.This story is perhaps better known with respect to Jephthah’sfateful oath to Yahweh to offer up as a burnt offering whatever cameout of his door if Yahweh would give him victory over the Ammonites(Judg. 11). It was his daughter who came out to meet him. In Judg. 12the Ephraimites voiced their displeasure at not having been asked tojoin in the battle, so they came to Jephthah, threatening to burn hishouse down. Jephthah responded that he did call but they did notcome. A battle ensued between them, which sparked the famousshibboleth/sibboleth incident, in which Jephthah’s forces couldidentify Ephraimite opponents by their inability to pronounce the sh.
Themonarchy.During the early monarchic period, the Ammonite king Nahash besiegedJabesh of Gilead. Rather than negotiate, the Ammonites demanded thatthe right eye of every Jabeshite male be put out. They appealed toSaul for help, who came and slaughtered many and scattered the rest(1 Sam. 11:1–11). Saul’s act was remembered kindlywhen, after his death at the hand of the Philistines, the men ofJabesh brought back the bodies of Saul and his sons, burned them,buried the remains, and fasted for seven days (31:11–13). In1 Sam. 12:12 Samuel refers to the Nahash incident as the impetusfor the Israelites’ desire to be ruled by a king.
In2 Sam. 10–12 David conquers the Ammonite capitalof Rabbah, under the rule of Hanun son of Nahash (see also 1 Chron.19:1–20:3). This is the context in which David’s affairwith Bathsheba took place (2 Sam. 11–12). Uriah, herhusband, was killed while attacking Rabbah. During the revolt by hisson Absalom, David was given material aid from several sources, oneof which was “Shobi son of Nahash from Rabbah of the Ammonites”(2 Sam. 17:27).
Solomon’smarriages to foreign wives included Ammonites (1 Kings 11:1). Asa result, Solomon followed the foreign gods, including “Molekthe detestable god of the Ammonites” (11:5). It is notmentioned how many Ammonite wives Solomon had, but one of them,Naamah, was the mother of Rehoboam, the first king of Judah duringthe divided kingdom (14:31).
Thedivided kingdom.Later,during the divided monarchy, the Ammonites appear again. Ammon, Moab,and Edom formed a coalition against Jehoshaphat king of Judah(2 Chron. 20:1–30). Jehoshaphat was victorious with God’sassistance. Likewise, during the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, acoalition of Babylonian, Aramean, Moabite, and Ammonite forcesattacked him, although this time it was at God’s directionbecause “he did evil in the eyes of the Lord, just as hispredecessors had done” (2 Kings 23:36–24:6).According to 2 Chron. 26:8; 27:5, the Ammonites had earlierbrought tribute to Uzziah and his son Josiah.
TheAmmonites appear on the scene again just before the fall of Judah.During the reign of Zedekiah, a coalition of several nationsincluding Ammon was thwarted by God through Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon(Jer. 27:1–7).
Theexilic and postexilic periods.Ammonite opposition to Judah continued. According to Jer.41:10, 15, governor Gedaliah’s assassin found refuge among theAmmonites. Later, under Nehemiah, the Ammonites actively resisted therebuilding of Jerusalem (Neh. 4:1–3). In the postbiblicalperiod, the Ammonites are mentioned as those among whom Jason, whoslaughtered his fellow citizens, was given refuge (1 Macc. 4:26;5:7).
Inaddition to the historical books, the Ammonites are mentionednumerous times in the prophetic books. Isaiah predicts that Ephraimand Judah will together “swoop down” and subject Edom,Moab, and the Ammonites (11:14). Jeremiah prophesies against them atsome length (49:1–6), mainly because of the worship of Molek,although God will “restore the fortunes of the Ammonites”(v. 6). Likewise, Ezekiel prophesies the destruction of Ammon(21:28–32; 25:1–7, 10).
Eventually,Rabbah became a shell of its former self (see Jer. 25:5) and wasrebuilt by Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–246 BC), whorenamed the city “Philadelphia.” It became a city of theDecapolis (a group of ten Greek cities [see Matt. 4:25; Mark 5:20;7:31]).
Ben-Ammi was the son of Abraham’s nephew Lot and theyounger of Lot’s two daughters (Gen. 19:36–38). He isrepresented as the ancestor of the Ammonites, a Transjordanian peoplewho were a perennial threat to Israel from the wilderness periodthrough to David’s reign.
Thenation of Ammon was located east of the Jordan, just north of theDead Sea. Its capital was Rabbah, and it bordered Gad to the west,the half-tribe of Manasseh to the northwest, and Moab to the south(see also Deut. 3:16). Much of the source of their contention wasover the fertile land of Gilead, which encompassed the Jordan Riverand bordered Ephraim, the western tribe of Manasseh, Benjamin, andJudah.
Theexodus and the period of the judges. Accordingto the biblical record, while moving to enter Canaan, Moses and theIsraelites avoided Amman (Rabbah) and marched through Sihon instead(Num. 21:24–35). Later the Israelites were told explicitly notto attack the Ammonites, for that territory was given to thedescendants of Lot (Deut. 2:19, 37).
Thefirst conflict between the Ammonites and the Israelites is recordedin Judg. 3:13, where the Moabite king Eglon was allied with theAmmonites (and the Amalekites) against Ehud. In Judg. 10:6–7the Israelites are punished for their idolatry by being put under thethumb of the Philistines and the Ammonites. Jephthah led theGileadites against the Ammonites, who had provoked them to battle.This story is perhaps better known with respect to Jephthah’sfateful oath to Yahweh to offer up as a burnt offering whatever cameout of his door if Yahweh would give him victory over the Ammonites(Judg. 11). It was his daughter who came out to meet him. In Judg. 12the Ephraimites voiced their displeasure at not having been asked tojoin in the battle, so they came to Jephthah, threatening to burn hishouse down. Jephthah responded that he did call but they did notcome. A battle ensued between them, which sparked the famousshibboleth/sibboleth incident, in which Jephthah’s forces couldidentify Ephraimite opponents by their inability to pronounce the sh.
Themonarchy.During the early monarchic period, the Ammonite king Nahash besiegedJabesh of Gilead. Rather than negotiate, the Ammonites demanded thatthe right eye of every Jabeshite male be put out. They appealed toSaul for help, who came and slaughtered many and scattered the rest(1 Sam. 11:1–11). Saul’s act was remembered kindlywhen, after his death at the hand of the Philistines, the men ofJabesh brought back the bodies of Saul and his sons, burned them,buried the remains, and fasted for seven days (31:11–13). In1 Sam. 12:12 Samuel refers to the Nahash incident as the impetusfor the Israelites’ desire to be ruled by a king.
In2 Sam. 10–12 David conquers the Ammonite capitalof Rabbah, under the rule of Hanun son of Nahash (see also 1 Chron.19:1–20:3). This is the context in which David’s affairwith Bathsheba took place (2 Sam. 11–12). Uriah, herhusband, was killed while attacking Rabbah. During the revolt by hisson Absalom, David was given material aid from several sources, oneof which was “Shobi son of Nahash from Rabbah of the Ammonites”(2 Sam. 17:27).
Solomon’smarriages to foreign wives included Ammonites (1 Kings 11:1). Asa result, Solomon followed the foreign gods, including “Molekthe detestable god of the Ammonites” (11:5). It is notmentioned how many Ammonite wives Solomon had, but one of them,Naamah, was the mother of Rehoboam, the first king of Judah duringthe divided kingdom (14:31).
Thedivided kingdom.Later,during the divided monarchy, the Ammonites appear again. Ammon, Moab,and Edom formed a coalition against Jehoshaphat king of Judah(2 Chron. 20:1–30). Jehoshaphat was victorious with God’sassistance. Likewise, during the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, acoalition of Babylonian, Aramean, Moabite, and Ammonite forcesattacked him, although this time it was at God’s directionbecause “he did evil in the eyes of the Lord, just as hispredecessors had done” (2 Kings 23:36–24:6).According to 2 Chron. 26:8; 27:5, the Ammonites had earlierbrought tribute to Uzziah and his son Josiah.
TheAmmonites appear on the scene again just before the fall of Judah.During the reign of Zedekiah, a coalition of several nationsincluding Ammon was thwarted by God through Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon(Jer. 27:1–7).
Theexilic and postexilic periods.Ammonite opposition to Judah continued. According to Jer.41:10, 15, governor Gedaliah’s assassin found refuge among theAmmonites. Later, under Nehemiah, the Ammonites actively resisted therebuilding of Jerusalem (Neh. 4:1–3). In the postbiblicalperiod, the Ammonites are mentioned as those among whom Jason, whoslaughtered his fellow citizens, was given refuge (1 Macc. 4:26;5:7).
Inaddition to the historical books, the Ammonites are mentionednumerous times in the prophetic books. Isaiah predicts that Ephraimand Judah will together “swoop down” and subject Edom,Moab, and the Ammonites (11:14). Jeremiah prophesies against them atsome length (49:1–6), mainly because of the worship of Molek,although God will “restore the fortunes of the Ammonites”(v. 6). Likewise, Ezekiel prophesies the destruction of Ammon(21:28–32; 25:1–7, 10).
Eventually,Rabbah became a shell of its former self (see Jer. 25:5) and wasrebuilt by Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–246 BC), whorenamed the city “Philadelphia.” It became a city of theDecapolis (a group of ten Greek cities [see Matt. 4:25; Mark 5:20;7:31]).
(1) Thefirstborn son of King David (2 Sam. 3:2). He became infatuatedwith the beauty of his half sister Tamar. Then he listened to counselto deceive her and David. When she brought him a meal, he raped her.Afterward, he despised her. Tamar’s brother Absalom cared forher and later deceived Amnon and David by inviting Amnon to a feast.There Absalom had Amnon killed (2 Sam. 13). David is portrayedas an ineffective leader throughout. (2) Sonof Shimon in the genealogy of Judah (1 Chron. 4:20).
An Israelite priest who returned to Jerusalem from exile withZerubbabel (Neh. 12:7) and was the father of Eber (Neh. 12:20).
(1) Thefourteenth king of Judah (641–640 BC) and the son of Manasseh,he continued unrepentant in idolatrous worship. He was assassinatedby his officials in his second year as king (2 Kings 21:19–26;2 Chron. 33:21–25; Zeph. 1:4; 3:4, 11). (2) Agovernor of the city of Samaria under the kingship of Ahab of Israel(871–852 BC), to whom the king committed the prophet Micaiahfor uttering an unfavorable prophecy (1 Kings 22:26). (3) Oneof the descendants of the servants of Solomon who was among thereturnees from exile under the leadership of Zerubbabel (Neh. 7:59).(4) AnEgyptian god whose center was at the city of Thebes (Jer. 46:25).
One of the nations that occupied part of Canaan and theTransjordan (by the Jordan River) before Israel’s conquest.They appear in lists of the peoples (up to ten) occupying Canaan(e.g., Gen. 15:21; Exod. 3:8, 17; 23:23; Neh. 9:8). According to theTable of Nations (Gen. 10), they are descendants of Canaan, one ofthe sons of Ham. This territory was conquered by Abram and his forces(Gen. 14), and in fact Abram was living “near the great treesof Mamre the Amorite” (14:13). Later the Israelites remainenslaved for four generations because the sin of the Amorites has notreached its full measure (15:16).
Thename is of Akkadian origin (amurru) and refers to the western portionof Mesopotamia. By the end of the third millennium BC, Amorites wereabundant in Mesopotamian cities, which eventually led to Amoritecontrol over Babylon around 2000–1595 BC. During this timeBabylonian kings had Amorite names, one of whom was the famousHammurabi (1792–1750 BC).
TheAmorites were constantly in conflict with the Israelites. They wereto be driven out of Canaan, along with the other Canaanite peoples(Exod. 23:23; 33:2). In Num. 21:21 the Amorites are mentioned as onenation through which Israel would need to go in order to reachCanaan. King Sihon refused, a war ensued, and the Israelites werevictorious and settled in the land of the Amorites (Num. 21:31).
TheAmorites are mentioned numerous times throughout the OT. At times,the name simply represents the general population of Canaan (like“Canaanites” [e.g., Josh. 24:15]). This illustrates thatthroughout much of the biblical period Amorites were not so much aspecific ethnic or cultural designation, but had become assimilatedinto the general Canaanite population. This Amorite and mixedinfluence on Israel is expressed at length in Ezekiel’sallegory of unfaithful Jerusalem (Ezek. 16, esp. vv. 3, 45).
Amos was the first of the writing prophets, ministeringduring the long reigns of Uzziah (769–733 BC) and Jeroboam II(784–748 BC). During this period Judah and Israel wereprosperous and secure, which made Amos’s threats soundridiculous; however, they were quickly fulfilled. After Jeroboam’sdeath the northern kingdom rapidly deteriorated (ending in 722 BC).
Amoswas a noqed (“sheep raiser”), a word used of Mesha kingof Moab (2 Kings 3:4) and indicating a sheep breeder or dealer,not a rustic shepherd (ro’eh). Though a champion of the poor(Amos 2:6–7), Amos may have been wealthy, so that it was hisown social class that he criticized. His hometown of Tekoa, ten milessouth of Jerusalem, was a center for pastoral work. Amos calledhimself a boqer (“herdsman”), a word that does notspecify what animals he raised, and said that he cared for“sycamore-fig trees” (7:14). The fruit and leaves ofsycamores were used as winter feed for stock, so these were twolinked professional activities. Amos was no career prophet, andpresumably he eventually went back to his profession.
Amos’sJudean origins influenced his preaching to sinful Israel. The book ofthe prophecy of Amos begins with oracles against eight nations thatwere once part of the Davidic empire (1:3–2:16) and ends withthe promise of a restored Davidic empire (9:11–12). The factthat Amos was from the south yet spoke in the north hinted at acoming Davidic reunification of the twin nations. God’s wordsthrough Amos are pictured as coming from Zion (= Jerusalem), theDavidic capital (1:2).
Amos’sprophecy records what he “saw” (1:1), the word indicating“saw [in a vision],” and climaxes with five visions. Thepriest Amaziah used the term “seer” in a derogatorysense: “Get out, you seer!” (7:12). The altercation withAmaziah is the one incident of Amos’s ministry narrated(7:10–17). Amaziah accused him of sedition because he spoke atthe royal sanctuary of Bethel. Amos was told to “eat bread”(literally) back in Judah—that is, earn his living there—withAmaziah implying that Amos was commercially motivated. In response toAmaziah’s taunts, Amos said, “I was neither a prophet nora prophet’s son,” meaning not a prophet by profession,and he denied being a member of any prophetic guild (cf. “thesons of the prophets” in 2 Kings 2). Instead, Amosstressed the divine initiative and call that alone explained hisprophetic activities (7:15).
The father of the prophet Isaiah (2 Kings 19:2; Isa.1:1). All thirteen occurrences of this name appear in the phrase“Isaiah son of Amoz.” An ancient Hebrew seal reads “Amozthe scribe.”
A Greco-Roman city in northeast Greece that Paul passedthrough on his way to Thessalonica from Philippi on his secondmissionary journey (Acts 17:1). Amphipolis was the capital of thefirst district of Macedonia. It was located between Philippi andThessalonica, near the Aegean Sea.
A Christian in Rome who was greeted by Paul as one “whomI love in the Lord” (Rom. 16:8). Since “Ampliatus”typically was a slave name, it is likely that he either was currentlya slave or had been one in the past. Because he was known personallyby Paul, who had yet to visit Rome, he most likely met Paul beforecoming to Rome.
(1) Grandsonof Levi, son of Kohath (Exod. 6:16–18; 1 Chron. 6:1–2),and the father of Aaron, Moses, and Miriam (Exod. 6:20; 1 Chron.6:3). Within various Jewish traditions, Amram receives a generoustreatment (see Josephus, Ant. 2.210–23; L.A.B. 9), but thebiblical text includes specific mention of Amram only in genealogicallists. We are told, however, that his descendants, the Amramites,were responsible for the care of the sanctuary in the wilderness(Num. 3:27–28) and later for the treasuries (1 Chron.26:23–26). (2) Theson of Bani (Ezra 10:34) who, following the exile, was among thosecommanded by Ezra to “separate” from his foreign wife.
A member of a coalition of four kings who raided Canaanduring Abraham’s lifetime (Gen. 14:1, 9). They defeated fivelocal kings, plundered the area, and kidnapped Lot along with someother people. According to Gen. 14, Abraham set out and defeatedthese kings, recovered the plunder, and rescued Lot and the othercaptives. Amraphel was king of Shinar (i.e., Babylon). At one time,Amraphel was thought to be the famous Hammurabi, an early king ofBabylon, but today this identification is doubted. He may be anobscure minor king from the area of Babylon predating Hammurabi.
(1) Adescendant of Levi and ancestor of Ethan, a musician appointed byKing David (1 Chron. 6:46). (2) Adescendant of Levi and ancestor of Adaiah, a priest during the timeof Nehemiah (Neh. 11:12).
A city located in the hill country of Judah, one of thecities of the Anakites, along with Hebron and Debir. Joshua conqueredthese cities (Josh. 11:21) and gave them to the tribe of Judah as aninheritance (15:50).
(1) Oneof the sons of Zibeon, he was the father of Oholibamah, one of thewives of Esau (Gen. 36:2; 1 Chron. 1:40). Anah is credited witha discovery in the wilderness (Gen. 36:24). What he discovered issubject to debate (NIV, NASB: “hot springs”; KJV:“mules”; others suggest “spirits in the form ofserpents”). (2) Oneof the seven sons of Seir, and a chief among the Horites (Gen. 36:20,29; 1 Chron. 1:38, 41). The relationship between these two mennamed “Anah” is unclear due to textual difficulties.
A city located in the Jezreel Valley that belonged toIssachar (Josh. 19:19). Anaharath appears among the list of citiesconquered by Pharaoh Thutmose III (c. 1450 BC). It is identifiedwith modern Tell el-Mukharkhash, five miles southeast of Mount Tabor.
One of thirteen assistants who stood by Ezra during thereading of the law to the assembly of Israelites in Jerusalem (Neh.8:4). Anaiah is also listed among the “leaders of the people”(Neh. 10:22) who sealed the covenant with God following the hearingof the law.
The descendants of Anak, the Anakites (NRSV: “Anakim”),known for their height (Deut. 2:10, 21; 9:2), inhabited the Judeanhill country when Israelite spies entered the land (Num. 13:21–33;Deut. 1:28). The spies viewed them as Nephilim (Num. 13:33; cf. Gen.6:4). Arba, a hero among the Anakites, gave his name to Kiriath Arba(Josh. 14:15), later Hebron (Josh. 15:13–14; Judg. 1:20). TheAnakites were related to the Rephaites, originally from the regionsof Moab and Ammon but destroyed by the time of the conquest (Deut.2:10–11, 20–21). After Joshua completely destroyedAnakite habitations in the hill country, remnants moved westward andlived in the Philistine cities of Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod (Josh.11:21–22).
One of the sons of Mizraim (Gen. 10:13) and a grandson ofHam. The descendants of Ham became the peoples of North Africa andmay be equated with Cyrene in modern-day Libya.
One of the sons of Mizraim (Gen. 10:13) and a grandson ofHam. The descendants of Ham became the peoples of North Africa andmay be equated with Cyrene in modern-day Libya.
One of the gods (along with Adrammelek) worshiped by theSepharvites. Part of this worship included the sacrifice of children(2 Kings 17:31). Identification of this deity is uncertain, butit is associated with the Mesopotamian god Anu (the name means “Anuis king”). See also Adrammelek.
One of the gods (along with Adrammelek) worshiped by theSepharvites. Part of this worship included the sacrifice of children(2 Kings 17:31). Identification of this deity is uncertain, butit is associated with the Mesopotamian god Anu (the name means “Anuis king”). See also Adrammelek.
One of the “leaders of the people” who sealed thecovenant with God following Ezra’s public reading of the law(Neh. 10:26).
The son of Elioenai and last recorded descendant ofJehoiachin (1 Chron. 3:24). He is possibly mentioned in a letterfrom Jews to Bogoas, the Persian governor of Judah in the fifthcentury BC.
(1) Thefather of Maaseiah and grandfather of Azariah (Neh. 3:23). Somescholars identify him as Anan (Neh. 10:26) or Anani (1 Chron.3:24) since both names are shortened forms of “Ananiah.”(2) Alocation in Benjamin about four miles northwest of Jerusalem (Neh.11:32).
A Greek form of the common Hebrew name “Hananiah.”(1) Amember of the Jerusalem church whose death was followed by that ofhis wife, Sapphira, as a result of holding back part of theirpossessions (Acts 5:1–11). Peter rebuked Ananias and Sapphira’sdeception as lying to or testing “the Holy Spirit” (vv.3, 5). This incident is best understood against the background ofActs 2–4, which describes as closely related being “filledwith the Holy Spirit” (2:4; 4:31), the spread of the gospel(2:40; 4:4), and the communal sharing of possessions (2:44–45;4:32–37).
(2) Adisciple at Damascus who helped restore Saul’s eyesight andbaptized him in accordance with the Lord’s direction in avision (Acts 9). In Acts 22:12 Paul describes Ananias as “adevout observer of the law and highly respected by all the Jewsliving [at Damascus].” He was the one who informed Paul of hiscalling as a witness for Jesus to all people (22:12–15).
(3) Ahigh priest in Jerusalem during AD 47–58. He presided over theinterrogation of Paul at the Sanhedrin of Jerusalem (Acts 23:1–10)and testified against Paul before Felix (24:1). His character is wellillustrated in his command to strike Paul on the mouth, upon whichPaul calls him a “whitewashed wall” and sees him unfitfor the high priesthood (23:2–5). Being a pro-Roman figure,Ananias was assassinated by the Zealots in AD 66.
The father of Shamgar the judge (Judg. 3:31; 5:6). This nameis also associated with a Canaanite war goddess and with Egyptian andSyrian goddesses as well.
A transliterated Greek word meaning “curse” (seeNIV). Paul invokes it upon those who pervert or reject the gospel ofGod’s free grace in Christ. In such instances it is tantamountto pronouncing an outcome of eternal damnation (1 Cor. 16:22;Gal. 1:8–9). Such was Paul’s desire that his fellow Jewsbe saved that he could wish himself anathema on their behalf (Rom.9:3). In 1 Cor. 12:3 Paul says no one speaking by God’sSpirit can pronounce a curse (anathema) on Jesus. In the LXX, theanathema refers to what is offered to the deity. Sometimes thisoffering involved the complete destruction of what had beendedicated, a notable example being the cities of Canaan during thetime of Israel’s conquest (Num. 21:3; Josh. 7:1, 11–13).This sense is retained in the NT only in Luke 21:5.
(1) Anathoth(near modern ’Anata, which preserves the name) was just a fewmiles northeast of Jerusalem in the tribal allotment given toBenjamin. This village was assigned to the Levites (Josh. 21:18;1 Chron. 6:60). It was the village where Solomon sent Abiatharafter he was deposed from the priesthood (1 Kings 2:26).Anathoth was also the hometown of Abiezer, one of David’sthirty mighty men, as well as another of his warriors, Jehu (1 Chron.12:3). It was listed as a town that would be the object of judgmentbecause of the sins of God’s people (Isa. 10:30). After theexile, men from Anathoth returned from Babylon to Judah (Ezra 2:23),and the town itself was populated again (Neh. 11:32). The city’smost famous resident was the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. 1:1).(2) A descendantof Benjamin through his son Beker (1 Chron. 7:8). (3) Oneof the leaders who sealed the covenant renewal at the time of Ezraand Nehemiah (Neh. 10:19).
Refers to an inhabitant of Anathoth (1 Chron. 12:3 [KJV:“Antothite”]), a Levitical city in Benjamin (Josh. 15:24;1 Kings 4:16)
.A person from whom a person or group has descended in eithera physical or a spiritual sense. For Israel, the concept of one’sancestors and their God was of great significance in determining bothidentity and religious practice. Biblical concepts such as covenantand promise primarily found expression in the OT in terms of theancestral agreements established with God (Deut. 6:10; 9:5; 29:13;30:20; cf. Gen. 12:1–7). The effect of ancestors on one’sspiritual condition could have either positive or negativeimplications (Exod. 3:13; Josh. 24:14–15; 2 Tim. 1:5; Heb.11). The people of Israel are portrayed as suffering judgment bothfor their sins and for those of their ancestors, but also they couldfind repentance and hope because of the same relationships (Zech.1:4–6; Mal. 1:1–5).
Thereare thirteen primary genealogical lists in the OT and two in the NT,although there are numerous passages that include more limitedlineages to identify an individual. Genealogical lists could alsofunction to engender a notion of commonality of relationship outsidesingle family lines, such as when extended family genealogies aregiven (Gen. 10; 25:12–18; 36:1–30). For priests andkings, it was of utmost importance to be able to establish ancestralidentity. This necessity may have played a role in at least twodiscussions of Jesus. His genealogical lists in both Matt. 1 and Luke3 established his claim to the line of David, and his spiritualancestry in the person of Melchizedek in Heb. 7 granted him superiorstatus to the priesthood of Levi.
Worshipof ancestors, or the related but distinct cult of the dead, wascommon in nearly every culture with which Israel interacted and mayhave even found expression in popular practice among Israelites, asevidenced by the apparent leaving of gifts at several tomb locationsthroughout Palestine (cf. Ezek. 43:7–9). However, the biblicalrecord is consistent throughout that such practices were prohibited.Among laws centered on the topic of ancestral worship wererestrictions on consulting the dead at all (Deut. 18:11), givingofferings to the dead (Deut. 26:14), self-laceration for the dead(Deut. 14:1; Jer. 16:6), and seeking ancestors to foretell the future(Isa. 8:19; 65:4–8).
A device used to secure a ship or other vessel to the bottomof the sea to prevent it from drifting. There is no mention ofanchors in the OT, probably because the Israelites were not commonlya seagoing people. This term is, however, used in the NT,specifically in reference to Paul’s shipwreck (Acts 27) andmetaphorically to describe the security of our hope in Christ (Heb.6:19).
The designation “Ancient of Days” appears as atitle for the sovereign God seated on his heavenly throne in Daniel’svision of Dan. 7:9, 13, 22. In this symbolic image, the God’swhite clothing symbolizes purity and righteousness, his whitewool-like hair indicates his antiquity, and his fiery throne depictshis awesome power. In Daniel’s vision a second figure, theheavenly “Son of Man” (or, “one like a humanbeing”) comes with the clouds of heaven before the Ancient ofDays and receives authority, glory, sovereign power, the worship ofall nations, and an eternal kingdom (Dan. 7:13–14). In theGospels, Jesus identifies himself as this heavenly Son of Man whowill come with the clouds of heaven (Matt. 24:30; 26:64; Mark 13:26;14:62; Luke 21:27, 69).
Apassage relevant to the Ancient of Days in Dan. 7 is Rev. 1:14–16,where John sees a heavenly figure in whom is combined the features ofthe heavenly Son of Man and the Ancient of Days. Imagerycharacterizing the latter figure (white hair, fiery presence) is nowapplied to Jesus, indicating that the Son of Man is equal to theAncient of Days in glory and authority.
One of the twelve apostles and brother of Peter, his morefamous counterpart. Andrew came from Bethsaida in Galilee (John1:44), though he lived and worked with Peter in Capernaum as afisherman (Matt. 4:18). At first a disciple of John the Baptist, he,with an unnamed disciple (possibly John), transferred allegiance toJesus (John 1:35–40). His first recorded act was to bring hisbrother to Jesus (1:41–42). Subsequently, he was called byJesus to become a permanent follower (Matt. 4:19) and later wasappointed as an apostle (Matt. 10:2).
A Levitical town allotted to the Gershonites among the tribeof Issachar, meaning “two fountains” (1 Chron.6:73). Earlier it was known as En Gannim, meaning “fountainof gardens” (Josh. 19:21). It is identified with modern Jenin.
(1) AnAmorite chief who allied himself with Abraham in the pursuit of thefour kings who invaded Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 14:13, 24). (2) ALevitical town allotted to the Kohathites from among the tribe ofManasseh (1 Chron. 6:70).
Refers to an inhabitant of Anathoth (1 Chron. 12:3 [KJV:“Antothite”]), a Levitical city in Benjamin (Josh. 15:24;1 Kings 4:16)
The English word “angel” refers to nonhumanspirits, usually good. The biblical words usually translated “angel”(Heb. malak; Gk. angelos) mean “messenger” and can referto one sent by God or by human beings. A messenger must be utterlyloyal, reliable, and able to act confidentially (Prov. 13:17). Themessenger speaks and acts in the name of the sender (Gen. 24).
Messengerssent by God are not always angels. Yahweh’s prophets were hismessengers (Hag. 1:13), as were priests (Mal. 2:7).
OldTestament
Thereare few references to angels (plural) in the OT. In heaven theypraise God and worship him (Pss. 103:20; 148:2). God sends his angelsto accompany his people (Gen. 28:12; 32:1) and to protect them(Ps. 91:11) and once sent them to destroy Egypt (Ps. 78:49).
Anangel in human form was referred to as a “man of God”(Judg. 13:6), the same term used for a prophet (cf. 1 Kings13:14).
Angelsevoked fear and wonder. They are described as shining (Matt. 28:3;Acts 12:7). When humans bowed to worship angels, they were rebukedbecause God alone is to be worshiped (Rev. 22:8–9).
Godhimself, not being a part of the created order, cannot be seen. Inorder to communicate with people, he sometimes speaks through a formcalled “the angel of the Lord.” The angel of the Lordappeared to Abraham in human form (Gen. 18; cf. Josh. 5:13–15),but to Moses as fire (Exod. 3:2). When he spoke, it was God speaking(Exod. 3:4, 14). He guided and guarded Israel out of Egypt andthrough the desert (23:20–23). He appeared within the pillar offire or cloud (13:21–22; 14:19), being seen through the pillaron occasion as “the glory of the Lord” (16:7–10;24:16–17; 33:9–11; 40:17, 34–38), and later as hefilled Solomon’s temple (1 Kings 8:11).
Ina series of visions of the glory of the Lord (Ps. 18:7–15;Ezek. 1; Rev. 4:7) we encounter four “living creatures”called “cherubim” (Ezek. 10:20–22) that are notexplicitly identified as angels and whose visible appearance is parthuman and part animal. Their form was placed on the cover of the Arkof the Covenant (Exod. 25:18) and embroidered on the curtains of thetabernacle (26:1). Cherubim guarded the eastern entry into the gardenof Eden (Gen. 3:24), implying that Eden, the place where God appearedon earth, was now excluded from the area allocated to humankind.
InIsaiah’s vision of God’s glory, he describes, literally,“flaming ones” (Heb. seraphim) located above God andcrying, “Holy, holy, holy” (Isa. 6:1–7). All weknow of them is that they had six wings, whereas the cherubim hadfour (Ezek. 1:11). It may be that seraphim are not a separate classof angels but simply a description appropriate to all angels, sinceelsewhere we are told (Ps. 104:4; Heb. 1:7) that God’s angelsare “flames of fire.”
Angelsare also called “holy ones” (Deut. 33:2) and “spirits”or “winds” (Zech. 6:5; cf. Ps. 104:4). Since God’speople are also called “holy ones” (Dan. 7:27; NIV: “holypeople”), it may be difficult to know if a given reference isto angels or people (e.g., Deut. 33:3).
Angelsare first named in the book of Daniel: Gabriel, whose name means“hero of God” (8:16; 9:21; [cf. Luke 1:19, 26]); Michael,whose name means “who is like God?” (10:13, 21; 12:1 [cf.Jude 9; Rev. 12:7]) and who is also called “one of the chiefprinces,” “your prince,” and “the greatprince.” The Hebrew word for “prince” (sar) alsomeans “commander” (e.g., 1 Sam. 17:55) and thusmight refer to Michael’s standing as a commander of God’sangelic armies (cf. Jude 9, where he is called “archangel”).During the intertestamental period, texts outside the Scriptures tendto give more attention to angels in elaborate stories, introducingsuch names as Raphael and Uriel (see Tobit, 1 Enoch, etc.).
IntertestamentalPeriod and New Testament
Duringthe intertestamental period some Jews came to think that angelsranked higher than humans, since the Greeks asserted that anythingphysical was evil and only purely spiritual beings could be holy.Increasingly detailed stories about angels served to distance Godfrom the evils of physical reality. The myth of the fall of theangels arose during this time through a series of writings claimingto come from the pen of Enoch (1 Enoch), stimulating a largenumber of other writings. Some people even went so far as to worshipangels (Col. 2:18).
Somereferences to angels are difficult to understand. In Matt. 18:10Jesus warns people to treat children well because their angels haveconstant access to God. The simplest meaning is that angelicmessengers will tell God what has happened with these children.Rhoda’s reference to Peter’s “angel” as if itwere his ghost probably reflects a local superstition (Acts 12:15) ora sectarian Jewish belief that the righteous become angels when theydie. Paul’s comment that a woman should have “authorityover her own head” (i.e., her head covered) “because ofthe angels” (1 Cor. 11:10) remains something of a puzzle,and his unique reference to the language of angels appears to behyperbole (1 Cor. 13:1).
Paulwarns us that Satan can appear as “an angel of light,”meaning that he would work through one who claimed to bring a messagein accord with the gospel (2 Cor. 11:14). The devil has his“angels/messengers” (Matt. 25:41), although we knowlittle about them.
Angelsdo not marry, reproduce, or die (Matt. 22:30; Mark 12:25; Luke20:35–36). The NT affirms that angels rank below God’speople and serve them (1 Cor. 6:3; Heb.1:4–14; 2:5, 16),as they did Jesus (Matt. 4:11; Mark 1:13; cf. 1 Kings 19:5–7;Luke 22:43). Angels have limited understanding or knowledge of God’splans and purposes (1 Pet. 1:12), although they reveal God’sword (Rev. 1:1). They bring the spirits of God’s people toheaven when they die (Luke 16:22) and implement God’s judgmenton the last day (Matt. 13:39, 49; 16:27; 24:31; 25:31; Mark 8:38;13:27; Luke 9:26; 2 Thess. 1:7; Rev. 14:15–19). Theyrejoice when a sinner repents (Luke 15:10). Christians already standin the greater assembly that includes the angels (Heb.12:22).Eventually, Jesus will welcome his people into the heavenly courtroomin the presence of the angels (Luke 12:8–9; Rev. 3:5). See alsoArchangel.
The words “wrath” and “anger” areused in Bible translations for a variety of Hebrew and Greek wordsthat refer to the disposition of someone (including God) towardpersons (including oneself [Gen. 45:5]) or situations considered tobe seriously displeasing. There may be degrees of anger (Zech. 1:15),and it may be accompanied by other sentiments such as distress (Gen.45:5), hatred (Job 16:9), jealousy (Rom. 10:19), grief (Mark 3:5),and vengeance (Mic. 5:15).
Angermay be a proper response to sin or a sin-distorted world, as seen in,for example, Moses’ reaction to the golden calf (Exod. 32:19).Paul envisages an anger that does not necessarily involve sin (Eph.4:26). Jesus is said to display anger at the willful stubbornness ofhis contemporaries (Mark 3:5), and his response to the mourning forLazarus (John 11:33) might be rendered as “outrage,” ananger directed not so much at the mourners as at the ugliness ofdeath, the consequence of sin, and with thoughts, perhaps, of his ownimpending death necessitated by this fallen world.
Onthe other hand, a display of anger may be the result of distortedperceptions or values (Gen. 4:5–6). A tendency to anger inoneself needs to be kept in check (James 1:19) and in others needs tobe handled prudently (Prov. 15:1). Unchecked, anger may lead toviolence and murder (Gen. 49:6). In several NT lists anger isassociated with such other sinful behavior as quarreling, jealousy,selfishness, slander, malice, gossip, conceit, strife, idolatry,sorcery, and bitterness (2Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:20; Eph. 4:31;Col. 3:8).
InPs. 76:10 NLT (cf. ESV, NASB, NRSV) God is said to cause human angerto bring him praise (but see NIV, NET, where it is God’s wrathagainst human beings that brings him praise). Perhaps an instance ofthis is seen in Rom. 13:4–5, where the wrath of the civilauthority serves to maintain justice under God.
In 2Chron. 26:9; Neh. 3:19–20, 24–25reference is made to the “angle” (Heb. miqtsoa’) ofthe Jerusalem wall (NRSV: “the Angle”; KJV: “theturning of the wall”). It refers not to a main corner of thewall but perhaps to a projection of or indentation in the wall’scourse.
In 2Chron. 26:9; Neh. 3:19–20, 24–25reference is made to the “angle” (Heb. miqtsoa’) ofthe Jerusalem wall (NRSV: “the Angle”; KJV: “theturning of the wall”). It refers not to a main corner of thewall but perhaps to a projection of or indentation in the wall’scourse.
One of the sons of Shemida listed among the descendants ofManasseh (1 Chron. 7:19).
A town in the southern Judean hill country approximatelytwelve miles south of Hebron. Anim appears only in Josh. 15:50 and isidentified with Khirbet (ruin) Ghuwein et-Tahta, just north of theNegev.
The Bible does not offer a charter of animal rights, but theMosaic law does require what the rabbis call Tsa’ar Ba’aleiChayim, a prohibition against unnecessarily inflicting pain andsuffering on animals. The ox is entitled to food while it works(Deut. 25:4), a principle that Jesus and Paul apply to human beings(Matt. 10:10; Luke 10:7; 1 Tim. 5:18), and along with otherlivestock, a Sabbath every seventh day and year (Exod. 20:8–10;23:12; Lev. 25:6–7; Deut. 5:14). An ox or sheep could besacrificed only after remaining seven days with its mother (Lev.23:26–27). Killing an ox or sheep and her young on the same dayis not permitted (Lev. 23:28). Taking the mother along with the youngor eggs from a nest is not permitted (Deut. 22:6–7). The lawactually begins with the ideal setting of a garden, in which humanbeings and animals do not eat one another but rather live in peacefulharmony (Gen. 2:19–20). At the root of these laws is reverencefor all life: “The righteous care for the needs [lit., ‘life’]of their animals” (Prov. 12:10). Jesus teaches that not asingle sparrow is forgotten by or dies apart from the Father (Matt.10:29; Luke 12:6). At the time, sparrows were bought and sold in themarket as economic commodities, a cheap treat. The singular sacrificeof Jesus Christ has saved not only human beings but also countlesslives of would-be sacrificial victims.
Animals play a significant role in both their literalpresence in the biblical texts and in their figurative uses. From thebeginning of creation, animals were placed under the dominion andcare of humanity. The Bible is careful to highlight that humankind isa creation superior to animals and also has a responsibility to seeto the betterment of the animal kingdom (Gen. 1:28–30; 2:19–20;Deut. 25:4). Furthermore, the biblical record goes to some lengths todescribe the proper means by which humans and animals ought tofunction in this world and what lines ought not to be crossed (Exod.22:19; Lev. 18:23; Deut. 27:21).
Regardingthe consumption of animals, Genesis suggests that such was not thecase before the flood (cf. 1:30 with 9:3). Scripture separatesanimals into those that are unclean, those that are clean, and thosethat are permissible to be used in offerings. Although the rationalefor such distinctions has been the subject of considerable discussionfor some time among scholars, the similarities between theirdivisions and those of humanity (Gentile, Israelite, and priest) maysuggest that God utilized the animal kingdom and Israel’sinteraction with it as an ongoing reminder of Israel’s greaterrole in the world of humanity. Other proposed rationales fordistinguishing between clean and unclean animals include protectionof health, abstinence from pagan practices, the symbolic nature ofthe animal’s activities for desirable or unpleasant qualities,and the regulations being simply a test of Israel’sfaithfulness. Whatever the specific reason, it is clear that Godintended the food laws to function more generally as a means ofseparating Israel from the world (Lev. 11).
Occasionallyin the prophetic literature and more regularly in apocalyptic texts,animals serve a symbolic purpose in terms of either their physicalcharacteristics or the demeanor that they exuded (e.g., Isa. 30:6).The lion early on became a symbol of strength and ferocity and so wasutilized as a picture of the tribe of Judah, Satan, powerful enemies,and even God (Gen. 49:9; Amos 3:8; Nah. 2:11–12; 1 Pet.5:8; Rev. 5:5). The lamb was alternately used as a symbol ofinnocence, sacrifice, and naiveté (Isa. 53:6–7; Jer.11:19; John 1:29; 1 Pet. 1:19; Rev. 5:6). Other animalssymbolically used in Scripture include the serpent (Gen. 49:17), thedog (Isa. 56:10; 2 Pet. 2:22), the deer (Isa. 35:6; Hab. 3:19),the antelope (Isa. 51:20), and the bull or cow (Ps. 22:12; Amos4:1–4). Daniel used grotesque portrayals of animals tosymbolize the corrupted nature of human kingdoms that were inopposition to the cause of God (Dan. 7).
Formany animals listed in Scripture there is some level of disagreementabout their identity. For instance, the second animal listed in Exod.25:5; 26:14 is alternatively identified as a badger, a goat, aporpoise, a manatee, and as a reference not to a specific animal atall but rather to a type of leather. The last of these seems mostlikely because of availability and also because the specific animalsidentified as an option are unclean and seem ill-suited for use inconnection with tabernacle instruments. Behemoth of Job 40:15 hasbeen identified as an elephant, a water buffalo, or a hippopotamus,though the word itself simply means beast or cattle. The animalidentified as a chameleon in Lev. 11:30 is sometimes simply viewed asa large lizard or perhaps even a mole. Finally, the debate continuesconcerning the identity of the beast that swallowed Jonah (1:17),with most translators preferring to go the more reserved route of“huge fish” rather than the more traditional “whale.”The identification of animals in antiquity, and even up to thenineteenth century, seems to have centered as much on appearance asactual anatomy. This may explain why names applied loosely tocreatures that had a similar general appearance in earlier periodsfound misapplication in some earlier translations.
Froman ecological standpoint, God’s care and concern for animals(including but not limited to proper care and humane means ofslaughter), as well as his expectations of humankind as stewards ofthe animal kingdom, leave the clear impression that the biblicalideal for God’s people includes investing energy inpreservation. Perceptions of humankind as having unrestrained freedomto do with animals as they see fit seem at odds with the moreholistic view of human beings as both lords over creation andcaretakers of that which actually belongs to someone else.
The KJV rendering of the Greek word anēthon in Matt.23:23, more commonly translated as “dill” in otherversions. Dill is an herb grown for its seeds, used to add flavor incooking. As such, it was a consumable produce considered subject tothe laws of firstfruits and tithing.
A piece of jewelry worn around the ankle and mentioned oncein the Bible (Isa. 3:18 [NIV: “bangle”]). During thebiblical period anklets were most often made of bronze, althoughanklets of gold, silver, and iron have been found. Women usually worethem in groups of three or more. This explains the plural form ofthis term as well as the reference to the women of Zion and the“ornaments jingling on their ankles” (Isa. 3:16).
An elderly Jewish prophetess at the time of Jesus’birth. Anna is the daughter of Penuel, and she is from the tribe ofAsher (Luke 2:36). She was married for only seven years and thenremained a widow either for eighty-four years (NET) or until the ageof eighty-four (NIV, NRSV). This devout woman worshiped daily in theJerusalem temple and committed herself to prayer and fasting (2:37).Anna was present when the baby Jesus was dedicated, and she respondedin worship of God and spoke prophetically about the child (2:38).
In 1–2 Kings there are eighteen references to the“book of the annals of the kings of Israel” (e.g.,1 Kings 14:19; 15:31) and fifteen to the “book of theannals of the kings of Judah” (e.g., 1 Kings 14:29; 15:7).These (now lost) works may identify sources from which informationwas extracted or at least where further information about a king maybe obtained. The titles imply that it was the genius of the biblicalauthor to combine these histories and produce a coordinated historyof the two kingdoms.
An influential high priest who played a part in the trial anddeath of Jesus (John 18:12–24). Annas served as high priest inAD 6–15 and continued as high priest emeritus while hisson-in-law Caiaphas held that position in an official capacity.Immediately after Jesus was arrested (and before being sent toCaiaphas), he was brought to Annas, who questioned him about hisdisciples and teaching. His name heads the list of important membersof the Sanhedrin when Peter and John were arrested (Acts 4:6),suggesting that he was a dominant figure of the high-priestly party.
The act of announcing, usually associated with the arrival ofa significant figure. In church history the term has beenspecifically applied to the announcement of the arrival of a son toMary whose name would be called “Jesus” (Luke 1:26–35).More generally speaking, however, notice of the coming miraculousbirth of any child can appropriately be called an annunciation. Forinstance, the reporting of the coming of Isaac to Abraham and Sarah(Gen. 18:10), the arrival of Samson to Manoah and his wife (Judg.13:2–5), and the birth of John to Zechariah and Elizabeth (Luke1:11–20) could also be identified as annunciations. In eachcase, the arrival of the child is to a barren womb, and thus themiraculous intervention of God in the lives of the human families isemphasized. As is often the case when comparing the events of Jesus’life with earlier events, his coming took on a heightened importance.Only with the annunciation of Jesus did God reveal that the childwould be born of a virgin.
The OT priests and tabernacle furnishings were “anointed”(or “smeared”; Heb. mashakh [Exod. 28:41; 40:9]) as asign of separation to God (consecration) when Moses set up the culticinstitution. A number of times it is stated that kings were anointed(Judg. 9:8, 15)—such as Saul (1 Sam. 10:1), David (1 Sam.16:13), Absalom (2 Sam. 19:10), Solomon (1 Kings 1:39),Jehu (2 Kings 9:6), Joash (2 Kings 11:12), and Jehoahaz(2 Kings 23:30)—as a sign of appointment to and equippingfor sacral office. Anointing is only rarely linked to propheticoffice (1 Kings 19:16; Ps. 105:15; Isa. 61:1). David would notagree to slaying Saul because he was “the Lord’sanointed” (1 Sam. 24:6; 26:11). The two “who areanointed” to serve the Lord in Zech. 4:14 (presumably Joshuaand Zerubbabel) are, in literal translation of the Hebrew, “sonsof oil,” the agents of God’s blessing to Israel.
Thoughthere was no king in Israel at that stage, Hannah prayed in her songthat the Lord would give strength to “his king” and “hisanointed” (1 Sam. 2:10). The personal pronoun stressesthat the king/anointed derives power from and owes obedience to God.The OT never uses the absolute form “anointed”(mashiakh), but always “his anointed” (Pss. 2:2; 18:50),“your anointed” (84:9), or “my anointed”(132:17). “Messiah” (“anointed one”) is not atitle in the OT, though there is the hope of an ideal Davidic ruler(Isa. 9:6–7; 11:1). Daniel 9:25–26 is no exception, forthere is dispute over who or what is so designated. The title“Christ” (Gk. Christos) applied to Jesus in the NT is theGreek equivalent of the Hebrew word “Messiah” (Matt.16:16). When Paul uses the word order “Christ Jesus,” itis plainly titular (i.e., “the Messiah Jesus”).
Jesus’disciples anointed the sick with oil (Mark 6:13), and this becamesettled practice in praying for the sick (James 5:14).
The OT priests and tabernacle furnishings were “anointed”(or “smeared”; Heb. mashakh [Exod. 28:41; 40:9]) as asign of separation to God (consecration) when Moses set up the culticinstitution. A number of times it is stated that kings were anointed(Judg. 9:8, 15)—such as Saul (1 Sam. 10:1), David (1 Sam.16:13), Absalom (2 Sam. 19:10), Solomon (1 Kings 1:39),Jehu (2 Kings 9:6), Joash (2 Kings 11:12), and Jehoahaz(2 Kings 23:30)—as a sign of appointment to and equippingfor sacral office. Anointing is only rarely linked to propheticoffice (1 Kings 19:16; Ps. 105:15; Isa. 61:1). David would notagree to slaying Saul because he was “the Lord’sanointed” (1 Sam. 24:6; 26:11). The two “who areanointed” to serve the Lord in Zech. 4:14 (presumably Joshuaand Zerubbabel) are, in literal translation of the Hebrew, “sonsof oil,” the agents of God’s blessing to Israel.
Thoughthere was no king in Israel at that stage, Hannah prayed in her songthat the Lord would give strength to “his king” and “hisanointed” (1 Sam. 2:10). The personal pronoun stressesthat the king/anointed derives power from and owes obedience to God.The OT never uses the absolute form “anointed”(mashiakh), but always “his anointed” (Pss. 2:2; 18:50),“your anointed” (84:9), or “my anointed”(132:17). “Messiah” (“anointed one”) is not atitle in the OT, though there is the hope of an ideal Davidic ruler(Isa. 9:6–7; 11:1). Daniel 9:25–26 is no exception, forthere is dispute over who or what is so designated. The title“Christ” (Gk. Christos) applied to Jesus in the NT is theGreek equivalent of the Hebrew word “Messiah” (Matt.16:16). When Paul uses the word order “Christ Jesus,” itis plainly titular (i.e., “the Messiah Jesus”).
Jesus’disciples anointed the sick with oil (Mark 6:13), and this becamesettled practice in praying for the sick (James 5:14).
The OT priests and tabernacle furnishings were “anointed”(or “smeared”; Heb. mashakh [Exod. 28:41; 40:9]) as asign of separation to God (consecration) when Moses set up the culticinstitution. A number of times it is stated that kings were anointed(Judg. 9:8, 15)—such as Saul (1 Sam. 10:1), David (1 Sam.16:13), Absalom (2 Sam. 19:10), Solomon (1 Kings 1:39),Jehu (2 Kings 9:6), Joash (2 Kings 11:12), and Jehoahaz(2 Kings 23:30)—as a sign of appointment to and equippingfor sacral office. Anointing is only rarely linked to propheticoffice (1 Kings 19:16; Ps. 105:15; Isa. 61:1). David would notagree to slaying Saul because he was “the Lord’sanointed” (1 Sam. 24:6; 26:11). The two “who areanointed” to serve the Lord in Zech. 4:14 (presumably Joshuaand Zerubbabel) are, in literal translation of the Hebrew, “sonsof oil,” the agents of God’s blessing to Israel.
Thoughthere was no king in Israel at that stage, Hannah prayed in her songthat the Lord would give strength to “his king” and “hisanointed” (1 Sam. 2:10). The personal pronoun stressesthat the king/anointed derives power from and owes obedience to God.The OT never uses the absolute form “anointed”(mashiakh), but always “his anointed” (Pss. 2:2; 18:50),“your anointed” (84:9), or “my anointed”(132:17). “Messiah” (“anointed one”) is not atitle in the OT, though there is the hope of an ideal Davidic ruler(Isa. 9:6–7; 11:1). Daniel 9:25–26 is no exception, forthere is dispute over who or what is so designated. The title“Christ” (Gk. Christos) applied to Jesus in the NT is theGreek equivalent of the Hebrew word “Messiah” (Matt.16:16). When Paul uses the word order “Christ Jesus,” itis plainly titular (i.e., “the Messiah Jesus”).
Jesus’disciples anointed the sick with oil (Mark 6:13), and this becamesettled practice in praying for the sick (James 5:14).
>
An archaic word that means “at once” or“immediately” (Matt. 13:20; Mark 1:30 KJV).
>
These were the people who lived before the worldwide flood inNoah’s time. They were divided between two ancestral lines,those of Cain (Gen. 4:17–24) and Seth (Gen. 5). Although it iscommon to speak of the Cainites and Sethites, the second line isdepicted as starting with Adam, not Seth (5:3). To label one line asungodly and the other as godly is overly schematic. The generation ofthe flood was wholly wicked (Noah excepted), including the offspringof both Cain and Seth (6:5, 11), and was decimated by the flood as ajudgment upon universal sin. The line of Seth survived only becauseof God’s grace shown to Noah (6:8).
Thenames in the genealogy of Seth bear a striking resemblance to Cain’sdescendants (Cain/Kenan, Enoch/Enoch, Mehujael/Mahalalel, Irad/Jared,Methushael/Methuselah, Lamech/Lamech), again implying that the twolines were quite similar. Genesis 6:1–4, admittedly an obscurepassage, may depict intermarriage between the lines, reinforcing theguilt of the entire human race.
Theincrease in population in Gen. 6:1 fits with the procreation theme ofGen. 5. The 120-year limit decreed by God in Gen. 6:3 cannot lay downthe limit of a normal life span, for many people in Genesis livedwell beyond this supposed limit, and so it is best understood as anannouncement that 120 years remain until the flood.
Thefirst ancestral line climaxed with boastful, violent, and vengefulLamech, who tried to outdo his forefather Cain (Gen. 4:24). Thoughmorally corrupt, Cain’s descendants are credited withsignificant cultural and technological achievements.
Thegenealogy of Seth in Gen. 5 is given a fuller treatment than Cain’s,for his line survived the flood. It focuses on the first (Adam’s[vv. 1–5]), seventh (Enoch’s [vv. 21–24]), andninth generations (Lamech’s [vv. 5:28–31]), climaxingwith another Lamech, Noah’s father.
Thelongevity of the antediluvians is a notable feature (life spans of930 years, 912 years, etc.), but so too is the reign of death (notethe mournful refrain “and then he died” throughout Gen.5). The sole exception is godly Enoch (5:24). Sumerian lists show abelief that antediluvian kings reigned for thousands of years each.Figures for age and life span are not supplied so that we cancalculate the date of creation, nor are birth notices of “othersons and daughters” (e.g., 5:4, 6) inserted to explain whereCain got his wife. Despite the baneful effect of death, in theprovidence of God life continued.
In the list of clean animals in Deut. 14:5, “antelope”(Heb. te’o) may refer to the Arabian or desert oryx (NET: “wildoryx”). The oryx was eaten as food and offered in sacrifice;bones have been found at both domestic and religious sites. Althoughonly the size of a donkey, it has long, straight horns that it usesferociously in self-defense, and this gave it a reputation forstrength and bravery. Another possibility is the equally fierce waterbuffalo. When Isaiah describes Israel as an antelope lying in a net(Isa. 51:20), this image probably portrays the mighty fallen ratherthan the weak oppressed.
Threeother biblical animals belong to the modern category “antelope”:(1) the dishon (Deut. 14:5), sometimes translated “ibex”(NIV, NRSV) or “pygarg” (KJV [from the Greek for“white-rumped”]), but probably an antelope (NJB), eitherthe “addax” (NAB) or one of the two white-rumped Kobusantelope species known in Israel; (2) the tsebi, a gazelle(Deut. 12:15, 22; 14:5; 15:22; 2 Sam. 2:18; 1 Kings 4:23;1 Chron. 12:8; Prov. 6:5; Song 2:7, 9, 17; 3:5; 4:5; 7:3; 8:14;Isa. 13:14); (3) the yakhmur (NIV: “roe deer,”“roebuck”; NRSV: “roebuck”), possibly theBubal hartebeest (Deut. 14:5; 1 Kings 4:23).
One of the sons of Shashak, from the tribe of Benjamin. Hisname is found in the longer genealogy of Benjamin (1 Chron.8:24).
The study of human beings, their nature and origins. TheChristian understanding of anthropology stems from a biblical view ofhumankind’s relationship to God.
TheOrigin of Humankind
Accordingto Genesis, the creation of humankind took place on the sixth day ofthe creation week. The amount of narrative space allotted to this day(Gen. 1:24–31) testifies to the special importance of whathappened. Human beings were made on the same day as the animals.Human beings were not given a day of their own, showing that theyhave a certain kinship with the animals, although they are far morethan highly successful and adaptive mammals. This has implicationsfor the care of animals and of the environment generally. The valueof human beings and their special place in the created order is clearin passages such as Pss. 8:5–6; 104:14–15.
Createdin the image of God.Whenit came to the making of human beings, God deliberated over thiscrucial step (Gen. 1:26). The plural of exhortation in “Let usmake man in our image” signals that the decision to makehumankind was the most important one that God had made so far.Genesis 1 says that human beings are like God in some way.
Variousopinions have been canvassed as to what the “image” is.We cannot totally exclude the physical form of humans, given God’shumanoid form in OT appearances (theophanies; e.g., Isa. 6:1; Ezek.1:26; Amos 9:1). The image has sometimes been interpreted as a task,the exercising of dominion (Gen. 1:28), with humanity appointed ascreation’s king, ruling under God. But the image is betterunderstood as the precondition for rule rather than rule itself. Theimage shows human worth (Gen. 9:6) and differentiates humans from allother creatures. It is proper for the Bible to use anthropomorphiclanguage for God, for humans are remarkably like God. Both male andfemale are in the image of God (“in the image of God he createdthem; male and female he created them” [1:27]), so that thedivine image is not maleness, nor is sexual differentiation theimage. Commonly, the image of God is thought to be some peculiarquality of human beings—for example, rationality, speech, moralsense, personality, humans as relational beings.
Everycentury has its own view of what is the essence of humanity. However,nothing in the passage allows a choice among such alternatives. Thepoint of the passage is simply the fact of the likeness, with noexact definition being provided. The fact of the image is the basisof the divine prohibition of murder and of the strict penalty appliedto the transgressor (9:4–6). The fall into sin affected everyaspect of the human constitution, and the Bible does not minimize thefact of human sinfulness (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Rom. 3:10–18);nevertheless, humans are still in the image of God (Gen. 5:1–3;9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7). God’s plan of salvation is aimed atridding creation (and especially humanity) of the baneful effects ofsin, and this will be achieved through the work of Christ, who is theimage of God (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15–20; Heb. 1:1–3;2:5–18). The outcome will be the conformity of believers inChrist to his glorious image (Rom. 8:29–30; 2 Cor. 3.18).
Placein the created order.God’s purpose in giving human beings the divine image is “sothey may rule” (NET [Gen. 1:26b translated as a purposeclause]). The syntax suggests that the image is a presupposition ofdominion. It is plain that such a delegated authority makes humansstewards. The vegetarian diet of Gen.1:29 (there was no eating ofmeat at first) represents a limitation to the human right ofdominion. Adam’s naming of the animals was (in part) expressiveof his sovereignty over them (2:19). Later, Noah was charged to bringpairs of animals into the ark to preserve them alive (6:19–20),showing care for other creatures. The patriarchs tended flocks(13:2–9; 26:12–14), and Joseph’s relief measuressaved the lives of people and animals (47:15–18). The wantondestruction of the Promised Land was expressly forbidden (Deut.20:19–20). Humanity is accountable to God for the stewardshipof the earth. The divine command “be fruitful and multiply”(Gen. 1:28 NRSV) shows that God’s purpose is that the humanrace populate the whole earth.
AtGen. 2:7 the biblical narrative becomes thoroughly anthropocentric,picturing the little world that God establishes around the first man,so this account is quite different from the cosmic presentation ofGen. 1. In Gen. 1 humankind is the apex of a pyramid, the last andhighest of a series of creatures; in Gen. 2 the man is the center ofa circle, everything else made to fit around him, and his connectionto the physical earth is emphasized. In either view, a very specialplace is given to human beings in the created order. The two picturesare complementary, not contradictory.
The“man” (’adam) is formed from the “ground”(’adamah), with the related Hebrew words making a pun. Man’sname reminds him of his earthy origins. He is made from the “dust,”which hints at his coming death. He will return to the dust (Gen.3:19; cf. Job 10:8–9; Ps. 103:14; Isa. 29:16). The reference to“the breath of life” (Gen. 2:7) is due to the fact thatthis leaves a person at death (Job 34:14–15; Ps. 104:29–30),so man’s (potential) mortality is implied. Ironically, themaking of man is described using the language of death. What isdescribed in Gen. 2 is the making of the first man, from whom therest of the human race has descended, not the making of humankind,though the word ’adam can mean that in other contexts.
TheNature of Humankind
Body,soul, and spirit.Arguments over whether human nature is bipartite (body and soul) ortripartite (body, soul, spirit) are not to be decided by arbitraryappeal to isolated verses. Verses can be found in apparent supportfor both the first view (e.g., Matt. 10:28) and the second (e.g.,1 Thess. 5:23), but certainly the first scheme is much moreprevalent in the Bible. “Soul” and “spirit”can be used interchangeably (Eccles. 3:21; 12:7; Ezek. 18:31). Deathis marked by the parting of soul/spirit and body, but it would be amistake to think that human beings are made up of separate componentparts, or that the physical body is only a dispensable shell and notessential to true humanity. The physicality of human existence in the“body” is owned and celebrated in Scripture, part of thatbeing the positive attitude to sexuality when properly expressed(Song of Songs; 1 Cor. 7) and the nonascetic nature of biblicalethics (1 Cor. 10:31; Col. 2:23). The doctrine of theresurrection of the body is the fullest expression of this (1 Cor.15), in contrast to ancient Greek thought that viewed the body asinherently evil and understood salvation as the immortality of theliberated, disembodied soul.
Thedifferent words used in relation to persons are only intended torefer to and at times focus on different aspects of unified humannature. References to the “soul” may stress individualresponsibility (e.g., Ezek. 18:4 NASB: “The soul who sins willdie”). In Ps. 103:1–2, “O my soul” expressesemphatic self-encouragement to praise God and is in parallel with“all my inmost being”—that is, “my wholebeing” (an example of synecdoche: a part standing for the whole[cf. Ps. 35:10]). These are ways of referring to oneself as a personwho expresses will and intention (cf. Ps. 42:5–6, 11). The“flesh” is used to stress the weakness of mortal humanity(e.g., Isa. 40:6 RSV: “All flesh is grass”). The “heart”is the volitional center of a human being (Prov. 4:23; cf. Mark7:17–23). The emotional and empathetic reactions of humans aredescribed by reference to the organs: “liver,” “kidneys,”“bowels.”
Moralsand responsibility.In Gen. 2 the complexities of the man’s moral relation to Godand his relations with the soil, with the animals, and with the womanare explored. God deposited the man in the garden “to work itand take care of it” (2:15). The words chosen to designate theman’s work prior to the fall have an aura of worship aboutthem, for they are later used in the OT for the cultic actions ofserving and guarding within the sanctuary. The priests served byoffering sacrifices, and the Levites guarded the gates of the sacredprecinct. A theology of work as a religious vocation is presented.The man was a kind of king-priest in the garden of God.
Themoral responsibility of humanity is signaled from the beginning.God’s command gives permission for the man to eat from “anytree” except one (Gen. 2:16–17) and as such indicatesman’s freedom, so that this command is no great restriction.The wording “you are free to eat” reinforces the pointabout God’s generous provision. The prohibition is embedded inthe description of God’s fatherly care for the man and graciousact in placing him in the garden. The divine restriction is slightand not at all overbearing, though the serpent will seek to make itappear mean-spirited (3:1). The command and prohibition are the veryfirst words of God to the man, marking them out as of fundamentalimportance for the relationship between them. The prohibition (“youmust not eat . . .”) is an absolute one in thestyle of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21).What is placed before the man is a test that gives him theopportunity to express his loyalty to God. A relationship ofobedience and trust requires the possibility of choice and theopportunity to disobey (if that is what he wants to do). The moralnature and responsibility of individuals is not a late discovery bythe prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. 18); rather, it is the presuppositionbehind the Mosaic law, for the commands of the Decalogue (“youshall not . . .”) are phrased as commands toindividuals (as the Hebrew makes clear). On the other hand, theconcept of corporate responsibility is also present (e.g., Achan’spunishment in Josh. 7).
Relationships.Human beings are relational by nature, as the creation of the womanas a helper and partner for the first man makes plain (Gen. 2:18–25).Later in Scripture this is put in more general terms, so thatfriendship and mutual cooperation are shown to be essential to life(Eccles. 4:7–12). The body life of the church reflects the samefact and need (1 Cor. 12). In Psalms, human needs andvulnerability find their answer and fulfillment in God, with thepsalmist acknowledging his frailty and his creaturely dependence onGod (e.g., Ps. 90). This also shows the folly of sinful human pride,against which the prophets so often inveighed (e.g., Isa. 2:9,11–17, 22).
A special type of figure of speech that is quite common inthe Bible. Most figures of speech (metaphors, similes, etc.) work bybringing two very separate items into a comparative relationship byusing language that is directly appropriate for the one to createcolorful imagery for the other. Thus, figures of speech confront thereader with both points of similarity and points of dissimilarity.
Anthropomorphismis a figure of speech in which God is represented with human featuresor human characteristics. Anthropomorphisms abound in Scripture.Isaiah 59:1, for example, states: “Surely the arm of the Lordis not too short to save, nor his ear too dull to hear.”Likewise, note the colorful anthropomorphic description of God in Ps.104:2–3: “The Lord wraps himself in light as with agarment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent and lays the beamsof his upper chambers on their waters. He makes the clouds hischariot and rides on the wings of the wind.”
Infact, Scripture typically describes God with a wide range ofterminology normally associated with people and not with deity. TheBible refers to God as having hands, arms, feet, a face, a nose,breath, a voice, and ears. He walks, sits, hears, looks down, thinks,talks, remembers, gets angry, shouts, lives in a palace, holds court,prepares tables, anoints heads, builds houses, and pitches tents. Hehas a rod, staff, scepter, banner, garments, cloak, tent, throne,footstool, vineyard, field, chariot, shield, breastplate, helmet, andsword. He is identified as father, husband, king, judge, potter, andshepherd. All these are human actions or human features that are usedfiguratively to describe God and his actions.
Onthe other hand, scholars are divided over whether all of theseanthropomorphisms are really figures of speech. Perhaps some of themactually describe literal aspects of God. Perhaps some of the“anthropomorphic” similarities between human beings andGod are due to the fact that we are created in the image of God (Gen.1:27). Thus, we reflect similarity to him in some aspects anddissimilarity in many others. Since God is spirit, the description ofGod as “looking down” or the mention of his face would beanthropomorphism (i.e., figurative language). On the other hand, manyof God’s actions and emotions such as anger, love, patience,mercy, hurt, and compassion are probably literal realities. Althoughwe as human beings understand these emotions because we experiencethem, this does not necessarily mean that in regard to God they aremerely figurative. Although God does not have ears, he does, forexample, “get angry,” “love,” and “feelsorrow.”
The term “antichrist” (Gk. antichristos) is usedonly four times in the Bible (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John7). John warns his readers that it is already the last hour, and thatjust as they “have heard that the antichrist is coming, evennow many antichrists have come” (1 John 2:18; cf. 4:3).John defines the antichrist as the one who denies that God has comein the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ (1 John 2:22; 4:3;2 John 7).
Theconcept of antichrist-type figures surfaces elsewhere in the NT.Jesus mentions “false messiahs and false prophets” whowill “perform signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, eventhe elect” (Mark 13:22). Paul speaks of a “man oflawlessness” who will “oppose and will exalt himself overeverything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he setshimself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God”(2 Thess. 2:3–4). In Rev. 13 John describes the mostfamous antichrist figure of all: the “beast coming out of thesea.” Throughout the OT the false-prophet tradition (e.g.,Deut. 13; 18; Jer. 23; Ezek. 12–14) describes religiousindividuals from within the community who attempt to deceive God’speople. Also, there was a common belief in an oppressive ruler fromoutside the community who would persecute the righteous (e.g., Dan.8; 11). By the late first century, when Revelation was written,people would have been familiar with a host of pagan rulers who hadexalted themselves as gods (the king of Babylon [Isa. 14], thepharaoh [Ezek. 29], Antiochus Epiphanes [Dan. 11], and Roman emperorssuch as Caligula, Nero, and Domitian). The evil-ruler tradition andthe false-prophet tradition seem to converge in Rev. 13 as the beastfrom the sea (the antichrist) and the beast from the earth (the falseprophet).
Mostscholars agree that the original beast described in Rev. 13 was aRoman emperor (either Nero or Domitian) who demanded to be worshipedas God. Supported by a second beast, the cult of Caesar worshipenforced by priests throughout the empire, the imperial systemdemanded that Christians choose between two opposing confessions:Caesar is Lord or Jesus is Lord. More specifically, Revelationindicates that the “beast coming out of the sea” isempowered by Satan (vv. 1–2, 4), masquerades as Christ (vv. 1,3, 12, 14), accepts worship as a god (vv. 4, 8), wields extensivepower (vv. 4, 7), blasphemes and slanders God (vv. 1, 5–6), andruthlessly persecutes the saints (v. 7). The “beast comingout of the earth” (emperor cult) is also empowered by Satan(vv. 11, 14), promotes the worship of the first beast (vv. 12,14–15), performs signs and wonders designed to deceive (vv.13–15), and causes those who refused to worship the first beastto be put to death physically (v. 15) or economically (vv.16–17). But in spite of their final effort to take God’splace and conquer God’s people, Christ will return to destroythe antichrist and the false prophet in the lake of fire (17:8;19:19–21).
A metalloid that was used in the building of the temple inJerusalem (1 Chron. 29:2 [NIV: “turquoise”]). Stoneswere most likely set on or within antimony to signify elegance orwealth when building (Isa. 54:11). The Hebrew term comes from theroot pwk, meaning “to paint.” This reflects thesurrounding culture in which Egyptians used antimony’s sulfidecompound, antimony trisulfide, as cosmetics for their eyes (i.e.,“painting” their eyelids). The stable form of thiselement has a blue-white color that looks like silver. It was used asearly as 3000 BC in Mesopotamia as well as in Egypt from at least2000 BC onward. In Isa. 54:11 the KJV renders the Hebrew term as“fair colours.”
Antinomianism, which literally means “opposed to thelaw,” arose as a reaction against legalism, denying the needfor legal or moral restraints. The term itself does not appear inScripture, but the concept can be found in passages such as Rom.6:1–2, where Paul asks, “Shall we go on sinning so thatgrace may increase?” He is referring here to those who claimedthat the grace of God was a license to live without rules orboundaries. Paul answers with one of his strongest objections: “Byno means!” or “May it never be!” He then argues,“We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it anylonger?” Our new life in Christ frees us to live a life ofrighteousness before God; we must not return to slavery to sin (seeGal. 5:1).
Although there were sixteen cities named “Antioch”during the NT era, only two are mentioned in the NT: Pisidian Antiochand Syrian Antioch. Both cities are mentioned in the book of Acts.
Antiochof Pisidia.PisidianAntioch was visited by Paul and Barnabas during their firstmissionary journey. The visit would have occurred during the late 40sof the first century and is reported in Acts 13:13–52. Theauthor of Acts records this visit right after reporting on theconversion of a wealthy proconsul, Sergius Paulus, who ruled inCyprus. There is evidence that Sergius Paulus was from PisidianAntioch; thus it seems reasonable that his connections influenced themissionaries’ itinerary. After leaving Cyprus, the teamtraveled directly to Pisidian Antioch, which at the time was thecapital of the Roman province of Galatia. It also was an influentialRoman colony and as such was populated by veteran Roman soldiers andgiven special political privileges and prominence. The city was knownfor its breathtaking architecture and sculptures—the mostelaborate honoring Caesar Augustus. A number of Jews also lived inthe city, and the missionaries met with them in their synagogue andpreached the gospel. Their message created great interest andexcitement for the whole city. This response, however, made theJewish leaders jealous, and they began to speak abusively toward Pauland Barnabas, causing the missionaries to focus their ministry on theGentiles. The Jews ultimately persuaded their city leaders to expelPaul and Barnabas (Acts 13:45–51). The team, however, didreturn to the city on their way back to Syrian Antioch in order toencourage and strengthen the new disciples (14:21). It is alsoprobable that Paul returned to the city during his later missionaryjourneys.
Antiochof Syria.Themost important Antioch mentioned in the NT was the capital city ofthe Roman province of Syria. The city, mentioned frequently in thebook of Acts, played a strategic role in the advance of the gospel.Syrian Antioch was an important political, economic, and religiouscenter during the Roman period.
Antiochas a political center.Syrian Antioch maintained a massive population during this period ofhistory (as large as six hundred thousand people, by some estimates)and was the third-largest city in the Roman Empire, behind Alexandriaand Rome. Founded by one of Alexander the Great’s generals,Seleucus I Nicanor, in 300 BC, Antioch became Rome’smilitary headquarters for the eastern part of the empire primarilydue to its strategic location.
Antiochas an economic center.Antioch became a very important commercial center during the NT era.The city was located on the Orontes River and within fifteen miles ofa strategic commercial port on the Mediterranean Sea. Additionally,its large and diverse population combined with its numerous naturalresources and its location on the great trade route connecting Asiawith the Mediterranean world made Antioch a powerful commercial hub.
Antiochas a religious center.Antioch’s diverse population made for a great diversity ofreligions connected to the city. Its suburb of Daphne was a majorworship site for paganism, and the city maintained a large Jewishpopulation throughout its history. Additionally, it was to Antiochthat many Jerusalem Christians fled during the early persecution ofthe church. Here, for the first time, the Jewish Christians began tointentionally focus on sharing the gospel with Gentiles (Acts11:19–21). The result was a large, multicultural, and vibrantchurch. The church at Antioch was known for its ethnic and culturaldiversity, its generosity (sending an offering to Jerusalem during afamine [see 11:27–30]), and its heart for missions (serving asPaul’s headquarters for his three missionary journeys). Notsurprisingly, it was at Antioch that Christ followers were firstcalled “Christians” (11:26).
Antiochus IV Epiphanes (r. 175–164 BC) was theyounger son of Antiochus III, ruler of the Seleucid Empire. Thename “Epiphanes” means “manifest,” implying“manifest as a god.” Daniel 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11;1 Macc. 1:54–64 speak of his desecration of the Jerusalemtemple in 167 BC. Antiochus profaned the holy of holies by placing init a statue of Zeus and then sacrificing a pig to Zeus on the altar.Daniel 9:27, however, promises that the defiler of the temple(Antiochus) will be defeated, which occurred in 164 BC when JudasMaccabeus led the Jewish revolt that expelled the forces of Antiochusfrom Jerusalem (see 1 Macc. 4:36–61; cf. 6:1–17).
Antiochus IV Epiphanes (r. 175–164 BC) was theyounger son of Antiochus III, ruler of the Seleucid Empire. Thename “Epiphanes” means “manifest,” implying“manifest as a god.” Daniel 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11;1 Macc. 1:54–64 speak of his desecration of the Jerusalemtemple in 167 BC. Antiochus profaned the holy of holies by placing init a statue of Zeus and then sacrificing a pig to Zeus on the altar.Daniel 9:27, however, promises that the defiler of the temple(Antiochus) will be defeated, which occurred in 164 BC when JudasMaccabeus led the Jewish revolt that expelled the forces of Antiochusfrom Jerusalem (see 1 Macc. 4:36–61; cf. 6:1–17).
Antiochus IV Epiphanes (r. 175–164 BC) was theyounger son of Antiochus III, ruler of the Seleucid Empire. Thename “Epiphanes” means “manifest,” implying“manifest as a god.” Daniel 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11;1 Macc. 1:54–64 speak of his desecration of the Jerusalemtemple in 167 BC. Antiochus profaned the holy of holies by placing init a statue of Zeus and then sacrificing a pig to Zeus on the altar.Daniel 9:27, however, promises that the defiler of the temple(Antiochus) will be defeated, which occurred in 164 BC when JudasMaccabeus led the Jewish revolt that expelled the forces of Antiochusfrom Jerusalem (see 1 Macc. 4:36–61; cf. 6:1–17).
A shortened form of the name “Antipater.” (1) Oneof the sons of Herod the Great who ruled as tetrarch (“ruler ofa fourth [part]”) of Galilee and Perea (Luke 3:1). He wasresponsible for the imprisonment and subsequent beheading of John theBaptist (Matt. 14:1–12). He interviewed Jesus at lengthfollowing his arrest without getting a response (Luke 23:6–12).(2) Afaithful witness to the gospel who was martyred at Pergamum during aperiod of intense persecution when believers in that city were underpressure to renounce their faith in Christ (Rev. 2:13). See alsoHerod.
A city built by Herod the Great to honor his father,Antipater, in 9 BC. The city was built on the site of the ancientcity of Aphek. Roman soldiers took Paul to Antipatris from Jerusalemby night to avoid a plot on his life, and cavalry took him on toCaesarea the next day (Acts 23:31–33). The city was forty milesfrom Jerusalem and twenty-five miles from Caesarea on the Via Maris.
The primary military fortification of Jerusalem near theHerodian temple, also called the Antonia Fortress. The fortress wasbuilt in approximately AD 6 and served as a palatial residence forKing Herod and a barracks for the Roman troops. In addition, Herodrequired the garments of the high priest be housed in the tower. Thefortress, named by Herod after his friend Mark Antony, was actually amajor renovation of an existing Maccabean fortification. The fortresswas strategically located to overlook the temple so that a garrisoncould easily deal with any disturbance in the temple.
Thetower is not specifically mentioned in the NT, but the Jewishhistorian Josephus describes it in detail (J.W. 5.238–46). Thetower was built upon a rock, seventy-five feet high, overlooking thetemple and its courtyards. Josephus describes the tower as beinglavishly furnished like a palace, containing baths, courtyards, andspacious apartments. It was capable of housing numerous soldiers.
Thetower may have served as an official residence for the Romanprocurator. Thus, the tower’s courtyard has traditionally beenconsidered the site of Jesus’ trial before Pilate (John 18:28;19:13). However, Herod’s palace may have been used for theprocurator and as a residence of the governor. The pavement beneaththe modern convent Notre Dame de Sion was traditionallyconsidered to be from the courtyard of the tower, but it has beendated to the second century by recent archaeological work.
Thefortress was destroyed during Titus’s siege of Jerusalem in AD70, and the modern site of the tower has yet to be determinedconclusively.
One of the sons of Shashak, from the tribe of Benjamin. Hisname is found in the longer genealogy of Benjamin (1 Chron.8:24).
Refers to an inhabitant of Anathoth (1 Chron. 12:3 [KJV:“Antothite”]), a Levitical city in Benjamin (Josh. 15:24;1 Kings 4:16)
A descendant of Judah, and son of Koz (1 Chron. 4:8).
Anxiety is an inner disposition of restlessness over fearedor uncontrollable outcomes, and it can have debilitating effects (Ps.139:23; Prov. 12:25). Its opposite is not carelessness or apathy butrather confident trust in God (Ps. 37; Isa. 26:3–4). Jesusteaches his disciples to trust God’s daily care as a radicalalternative to anxiety (Matt. 6:25–34; cf. Eccles. 2:22), andJesus’ instruction and preparation free them from anxiety overfuture trials (Matt. 24:25; Mark 13:11). Scripture invites us to movefrom anxiety to peace by means of prayer (Pss. 94:19; 139:23; Phil.4:6; 1 Pet. 5:7).
In 1 Kings 10:22; 2 Chron. 9:21 apes (Heb. qof )are listed among the exotic luxuries that Solomon’s shipsbrought to him once every three years from Tarshish. These animalsare indicative of his immense wealth. In fact, there is no evidencethat true apes in the modern sense (which have no tails) were knownin the ancient Near East. The reference probably is to baboons, ofwhich several species were known: the yellow baboon, the Anubisbaboon, and the sacred or hamadryas baboon. All have long tails andlong faces and make a sound rather like the Hebrew word qof. See alsoBaboon.
A Christian greeted by Paul in Rom. 16:10 as one “whosefidelity to Christ has stood the test.” This appellationprobably refers to a Christian who has suffered persecution for thefaith and has remained faithful.
The KJV rendering of an Aramaic term used in Ezra 4:9; 5:6;6:6 (NIV: “officials”). At one time it was believed thatthe term referred to a tribe of people, but it seems to be a moregeneralized reference to a Persian bureaucrat or government officialranging in function from a representative of the king to aninspector.
The KJV rendering of an Aramaic term used in a list of theassociates of Rehum and Shimshai in their letter to the Persian kingArtaxerxes opposing the rebuilding of Jerusalem after the exile (Ezra4:9). The NIV translates the word “people from Persia”(cf. NRSV, ESV). “Sipporites” and “secretaries”(NASB, NET) have also been suggested.
(1) Themost significant Aphek in the Bible is about seven miles east of TelAviv. The springs nearby become the headwaters ofthe Yarqon River, flowing to the Mediterranean Sea. Traffic onthe international coastal route passing through Israel was forcedbetween the foothills to the east and the river, making this astrategic location. During the transition to the monarchy, thePhilistines were at Aphek when the Israelites attacked them fromEbenezer (1 Sam. 4:1) just east in the foothills. ThePhilistines won the battle, captured the ark, and continuedPhilistine control of the international coastal highway. At the endof Saul’s life, the Philistines mustered their troops at thisnorthern “boundary” of the Philistine plain beforesetting off to challenge Israel for control of the Jezreel Valley(1 Sam. 29:1).
(2) Asher’stribal boundary, north of Mount Carmel, indicates an Aphek near theMediterranean Sea (Josh. 19:30) from which the Canaanites were notdislodged (Judg. 1:31).
(3) TheArameans attacked the northern kingdom at a third Aphek on the eastside of the Sea of Galilee (1 Kings 20:26–30; see also2 Kings 13:17). The Arabic Fiq preserves this place name. Herodrebuilt the city on the coastal plain, renaming it “Antipatris”after his father. When Paul was sent to Caesarea after the plot onhis life was uncovered, the soldiers with him went as far asAntipatris (Acts 23:31–32).
A town situated in the central hills of Judah near Hebron(Josh. 15:53). Its exact location is unknown.
Aphiah was an ancestor of King Saul (1 Sam. 9:1) fromthe tribe of Benjamin. The meaning of the name is uncertain.
(1) Themost significant Aphek in the Bible is about seven miles east of TelAviv. The springs nearby become the headwaters ofthe Yarqon River, flowing to the Mediterranean Sea. Traffic onthe international coastal route passing through Israel was forcedbetween the foothills to the east and the river, making this astrategic location. During the transition to the monarchy, thePhilistines were at Aphek when the Israelites attacked them fromEbenezer (1 Sam. 4:1) just east in the foothills. ThePhilistines won the battle, captured the ark, and continuedPhilistine control of the international coastal highway. At the endof Saul’s life, the Philistines mustered their troops at thisnorthern “boundary” of the Philistine plain beforesetting off to challenge Israel for control of the Jezreel Valley(1 Sam. 29:1).
(2) Asher’stribal boundary, north of Mount Carmel, indicates an Aphek near theMediterranean Sea (Josh. 19:30) from which the Canaanites were notdislodged (Judg. 1:31).
(3) TheArameans attacked the northern kingdom at a third Aphek on the eastside of the Sea of Galilee (1 Kings 20:26–30; see also2 Kings 13:17). The Arabic Fiq preserves this place name. Herodrebuilt the city on the coastal plain, renaming it “Antipatris”after his father. When Paul was sent to Caesarea after the plot onhis life was uncovered, the soldiers with him went as far asAntipatris (Acts 23:31–32).
A location literally translated as “dust” (Mic.1:10). Because of the wordplay in this verse and the lack of evidencefor a location with this name, it is possible that it is identicalwith Ophrah. This would leave three options: (1) a locationwithin the territory of the tribe of Benjamin (Josh. 18:23; 1 Sam.13:17); (2) a location within the territory of the tribe ofManasseh (Judg. 6:11); (3) the home of the son of Meonothai(1 Chron. 4:14). See also Ophrah.
The KJV rendering of the name “Happizzez”(1 Chron. 24:15).
A sacred bull worshiped in Egypt, apparently a representationof the Egyptian god Ptah. Jeremiah may mention the bull in hisridicule of the people’s idolatry in his taunt “Why hasApis fled?” (Jer. 46:15 NRSV [following the LXX]), though thiswould require a textual change from the Hebrew text, which reads“mighty ones” (’abbirim).
The final book of the Bible is known by its opening line:“The revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:1 ESV, NRSV, KJV).This phrase could indicate a “revelation about Jesus Christ”(the main character), or a “revelation from Jesus Christ”(the primary giver of the message to John; so NIV), or, as manybelieve, some of both.
Inpowerful language and vivid imagery, Revelation presents theconclusion to God’s grand story of salvation, in which hedefeats evil, reverses the curse of sin, restores creation, and livesforever among his people. Although the details are often difficult tounderstand, the main idea of Revelation is clear: God is in controland will successfully accomplish his purposes. In the end, God wins.As a transformative vision, Revelation empowers its readers/listenersto persevere faithfully in a fallen world until their Lord returns.
Genreand Historical Context
Genre.Revelation is best understood in light of its literary genre and itshistorical context. The literary genre of Revelation—letter,prophecy, and apocalyptic literature—explains much of thestrangeness of the book. The entire book is a single letter to sevenchurches in Asia Minor (note the letter greeting in 1:4–5 andthe benediction in 22:21). John is commanded to write what he seesand send it to the seven churches (1:11). A letter to seven churchesis in reality a letter to the whole church, since the number “seven”symbolizes wholeness or completeness in Revelation. NT letters wereintended to be read aloud to the gathering of Christians, and thesame is true of Revelation. The book opens with a blessing on the onewho reads the letter aloud and on those who listen (1:3) and closeswith a stern warning to anyone (reader or listener) who changes thebook (22:18–19). Like other NT letters, Revelation alsoaddresses a specific situation. For this reason, any approach toRevelation that ignores the situation faced by the seven churcheswill fail to grasp its central message. Many say that the message ofRevelation extends beyond the first century, but it certainly doesnot ignore its first audience.
Revelationis also a letter that is prophetic. In both the opening (1:3) and theclosing (22:7, 10, 18–19), the book is described as a“prophecy” (cf. 19:10). In 22:9 the angel identifies Johnas a prophet: “I am a fellow servant with you and with yourfellow prophets.” As a prophetic book in line with OT propheticbooks, Revelation contains both prediction about the future andproclamation about God’s will for the present, with emphasisfalling on the latter.
Finally,Revelation is a prophetic letter that is apocalyptic. In the openingphrase, “the revelation of Jesus Christ,” the term“revelation” is a translation of the Greek termapokalypsis,meaning “to unveil” or “to reveal” what hasbeen hidden. Most believe that apocalyptic literature grew out ofHebrew prophecy. The OT books of Daniel and Zechariah are oftenassociated with apocalyptic literature, and there were many Jewishapocalypses written during the time between the Testaments (e.g.,1–2Enoch, 2–3Baruch, 4Ezra).
Inapocalyptic literature there is a revelation from God to somewell-known human figure through a heavenly intermediary. God promisesto intervene in human history, to defeat evil, and to establish hisrightful rule. Such is the case with Revelation, which assumes asituation where God’s people are threatened by hostile powers.God is portrayed as sovereign, and he promises to intervene soon todestroy evil. Through bizarre visions and imagery common toapocalyptic literature, those who hear Revelation are transported toanother world for much-needed heavenly perspective. As the hearersmove outside their hopeless circumstances and see God winning the waragainst evil, their perspective is reshaped, and they are empoweredto persevere faithfully. They are simultaneously called to live holyand blameless lives as they worship the one, true God.
Historicalcontext.Along with understanding the literary genre of Revelation, one mustgrasp its historical context in order to read the book responsibly.Revelation itself describes a historical situation where someChristians are suffering for their faith with the real possibilitythat the suffering could become more intense and widespread. Johnhimself has been exiled to the island of Patmos because of hiswitness for Jesus (1:9). Antipas, a Christian in Pergamum, has beenput to death for his faith (2:13). In his message to the church atSmyrna, Jesus indicates that they should not be surprised by whatthey are about to suffer (2:10). The book also includes severalreferences to pagan powers shedding the blood of God’s people(6:10; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2). Revelation addresses a situation inwhich pagan political power has formed a partnership with falsereligion. Those who claim to follow Christ are facing mountingpressure to conform to this ungodly partnership at the expense ofloyalty to Christ.
Thetwo primary possibilities for the date of Revelation are a timeshortly after the death of Nero (AD 68–69) or a date near theendof Domitian’s reign (AD 95). Although there is solidevidence for both dates, the majority opinion at present favors adate during the reign of Domitian, when persecution threatened tospread across the Roman Empire. The imperial cult (i.e., the worshipof the Roman emperor) was a powerful force to be reckoned withprimarily because it united religious, political, social, andeconomic elements into a single force. As chapters 2–3indicate, not every Christian was remaining faithful in thisdifficult environment. Some were compromising in order to avoidreligious or economic persecution. Revelation has a pointed messagefor those who are standing strong as well as for those who arecompromising, and this central message ties into the overall purposeof the book.
Purposeand Interpretation
Theoverall purpose of Revelation is to comfort those who are facingpersecution and to warn those who are compromising with the worldsystem. During times of oppression, the righteous suffer and thewicked seem to prosper. This raises the question “Who is Lord?”Revelation says that Jesus is Lord in spite of how things appear, andhe will return soon to establish his eternal kingdom. Those facingpersecution find hope through a renewed perspective, and those whoare compromising are warned to repent. Revelation’s goal is totransform the audience to follow Jesus faithfully.
Thereare five main theories about how Revelation should be interpreted:preterist, historicist, futurist, idealist, and eclectic. Thepreterist theory views Revelation as relating only to the time inwhich John lived rather than to any future period. John communicatesto first-century readers how God plans to deliver them from thewickedness of the Roman Empire. The historicist theory argues thatRevelation gives an overview of the major movements of church historyfrom the first century until the return of Christ. The futuristtheory claims that most of Revelation (usually chaps. 4–22)deals with a future time just before the end of history. The idealisttheory maintains that Revelation is a symbolic portrayal of theongoing conflict between good and evil. Revelation offers timelessspiritual truths to encourage Christians of all ages. The eclectictheory combines the strengths of several of the other theories (e.g.,a message to the original audience, a timeless spiritual message, andsome future fulfillment), while avoiding their weaknesses.
Outlineand Structure
Therehave been many attempts to understand how Revelation is organized.Some see a threefold structure based on 1:19:
Whatyou have seen (past) (1:1–20)
Whatis now (present) (2:1–3:21)
Whatwill take place later (future) (4:1–22:21)
Otherssee the book organized around seven dramatic scenes with interludesoccurring throughout:
Prologue(1:1–8)
Act1: Seven Oracles (1:9–3:22)
Act2: Seven Seals (6:1–17)
Act3: Seven Trumpets (8:1–9:21)
Act4: Seven Signs (12:1–14:20)
Act5: Seven Bowls (16:1–21)
Act6: Seven Visions (19:1–20:15)
Act7: Seven Prophecies (21:2–22:17)
Epilogue(22:18–21)
Thefollowing outline provides an overview of Revelation in ten stages:
I.Introduction (1:1–20)
II.Messages to the Seven Churches (2:1–3:22)
III.Vision of the Heavenly Throne Room (4:1–5:14)
IV.Opening of the Seven Seals (6:1–8:1)
V.Sounding of the Seven Trumpets (8:2–11:19)
VI.The People of God versus the Powers of Evil (12:1–14:20)
VII.Pouring Out of the Seven Bowls (15:1–16:21)
VIII.Judgment and Fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5)
IX.God’s Ultimate Victory (19:6–22:5)
X.Conclusion (22:6–21)
I.Introduction (1:1–20).Chapter 1 includes both a prologue (1:1–8) and John’scommission to write what he sees (1:9–20). John’s visionfocuses on the risen, glorified Christ and his continued presenceamong the seven churches.
II.Messages to the seven churches (2:1–3:22).Chapters 2–3 contain messages to seven churches of Asia Minor:Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, andLaodicea. The seven messages follow a similar literary pattern: adescription of Jesus, a commendation, an accusation, an exhortationcoupled with either warning or encouragement, an admonition tolisten, and a promise to those who overcome. These messages reflectthe twin dangers faced by the church: persecution and compromise.
III.Vision of the heavenly throne room (4:1–5:14).In chapters 4–5 the scene shifts to the heavenly throne room,where God reigns in majestic power. All of heaven worships theCreator and the Lion-Lamb (Jesus), who alone is qualified to open thescroll because of his sacrificial death.
IV.Opening of the seven seals (6:1–8:1).The unveiling of God’s ultimate victory formally begins here.This section begins the first of a series of three judgment visions(seals, trumpets, and bowls), with seven elements each. When thesixth seal is opened, the question is asked, “Who can withstandit?” Chapter 7 provides the answer with its two visions ofGod’s people; only those belonging to God can withstand theoutpouring of the Lamb’s wrath.
V.Sounding of the seven trumpets (8:2–11:19).The trumpet judgments, patterned after the plagues of Egypt, revealGod’s judgment upon a wicked world. Again, before the seventhelement in the series, there is an interval with two visions(10:1–11; 11:1–14) that instruct and encourage God’speople.
VI.The people of God versus the powers of evil (12:1–14:20).Chapter12 offers the main reason why God’s people face hostility inthis world. They are caught up in the larger conflict between God andSatan (the dragon). Although Satan was defeated by the death andresurrection of Christ, he continues to oppose the people of God.Chapter 13 introduces Satan’s two agents: the beast from thesea and the beast from the earth. The dragon and the two beastsconstitute an unholy trinity bent on seducing and destroying God’speople. As another interval, chapter 14 offers a glimpse of the finalfuture that God has in store for his people. One day the Lamb and hisfollowers will stand on Mount Zion and sing a new song of redemption.
VII.Pouring out of the seven bowls (15:1–16:21).The seven golden bowls follow the trumpets and seals as the finalseries of seven judgments. As the bowls of God’s wrath arepoured out on an unrepentant world, the plagues are devastatingindicators of God’s anger toward sin and evil. The onlyresponse from the “earth dwellers” (MSG; NIV:“inhabitants of the earth” [17:2, 8]; this is a commonterm in Revelation for unbelievers) is to curse God rather thanrepent (16:9, 11, 21).
VIII.Judgment and fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5). Thissection depicts the death of Babylon, a pagan power said to be “drunkwith the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those whobore testimony to Jesus” (17:6). The funeral laments for thedeceased Babylon of chapter 18 give way to a celebration as God’speople rejoice over Babylon’s downfall (19:1–5).
IX.God’s ultimate victory (19:6–22:5). Thisclimactic section describes God’s ultimate victory over eviland the final reward for the people of God. This scene includes thereturn of Christ for his bride (19:6–16), Christ’s defeatof the two beasts and their allies (19:17–21), the binding ofSatan and the millennial reign (20:1–6), the final defeat ofSatan (20:7–10), and the final judgment and the death of deathitself (20:11–15). Chapter 21 features a description of the newheaven and new earth, where God’s long-standing promise to liveamong his people is fully realized.
X.Conclusion (22:6–21).Revelation closes with final blessings for those who heed the messageof the book and warnings for those who do not. Jesus’ promiseto return soon is met with John’s prayer, “Come, LordJesus” (22:20).
Charactersand Themes
Theforegoing outlines are helpful for understanding Revelation, butperhaps an even better way to grasp the message of the book is tolook closely at its main characters and story line. The followingseven themes capture the overall theological message of this dynamicprophetic-apocalyptic letter.
1.God.Revelation presents God as a central character in the story. He issovereign and firmly in control of history, as his description from1:4–8 suggests: “the Alpha and the Omega” (thebeginning and the end), “the one who is, and who was, and whois to come” (God of the past, the present, and the future), and“the Lord God, ... the Almighty” (ruler overthe universe). The throne room vision of chapters 4–5 alsoclearly asserts God’s sovereign rule. The throne of God itselfstands as a central symbol in the book, representing God’ssovereignty over all things. As a main character, God rightlyreceives worship. He is worshiped because he is the creator (e.g.,4:11; 14:7) and the righteous judge who condemns evil and vindicateshis people (15:3–4; 16:5–7; 19:1–2). Revelationalso describes God as one who desires to be fully and intimatelypresent with his people. God cares for and protects his people (e.g.,7:2–3; 14:1; 21:4). As the book closes, God announces thefulfillment of his long-standing promise to live among his people(21:6–7; cf. Exod. 29:45–46; Lev. 26:11–12). God’schildren have unhindered access to their loving Father as they servehim, see his face, and bear his name—all in his presence(22:1–5).
2.God’s enemies.Although God reigns supreme, he has enemies who oppose him and hispeople. As God’s chief enemy, Satan (also known as the dragon,the devil, the serpent, the accuser) works through worldly systemswith the intent of thwarting God’s plan. Chapter 12 summarizesthis cosmic conflict. In that scene, God defeats the dragon, who thenturns his anger against the woman and the rest of her offspring. Thedragon’s evil partners include the beast fromthe sea(traditionally called the “antichrist”) and the beastfrom the earth (the “false prophet”). The first beastoften has been identified with Rome, the dominant pagan power in thefirst century, although the reference likely extends beyond Rome toany political-economic power that demands absolute allegiance (see13:1–8; 19:19–20; 20:10). The second beast usesmiraculous signs to deceive people into worshiping the first beast.This opponent represents religious power organized in support of thefirst beast (13:11–18; 19:20; 20:10). The dragon, the beastfrom the sea, and the false prophet constitute the unholy trinity.God’s enemies also include people (usually called the“inhabitants of the earth”) who follow the beast (13:8,12), indulge in the ways of this world (17:2), and persecutebelievers (6:10; 11:10).
3.The Lamb of God. Jesus,the Lamb of God, plays a central role in God’s redemptive plan.In Revelation the Lamb is clearly identified as a divine figure whoshares in the authority, glory, and worship reserved for God (5:6,9–14; 7:10, 17; 12:10; 21:22–23; 22:1, 3). Expressionsthat refer to God are also used of Jesus, thereby affirming Jesus’deity (e.g., “Alpha and Omega,” “Lord” [seealso 1:4–5]). Revelation highlights the Lamb’ssacrificial death as the key to his victory over evil, paradoxicalthough it may be (1:5, 18; 5:9). As the slaughtered yet risen Lamb(1:17–18), Jesus is able to identify with his suffering people(1:9; 12:17; 20:4). The Lamb promises to return as the warrior-judgeto defeat God’s enemies and rescue God’s people (1:7;3:11; 16:15; 19:11–21). The famous battle with the forces ofevil is recorded in 19:20: “But the beast was captured, andwith it the false prophet.” The two beasts are then condemnedto the lake of fire, and their followers become the banquet meal forthe birds of prey.
4.God’s people.The people of God figure prominently in the book of Revelation. Johnuses a variety of terms and images to portray God’s people(e.g., church, saints, great multitude, bride of the Lamb, newJerusalem). These people have been redeemed by the Lamb, and theycontinue to rely upon his sacrificial death in spite of opposition(1:5; 5:9; 14:3–4). They are a genuinely multicultural people,as indicated by the seven uses of a fourfold formula: every “tribe,language, people, and nation” (5:9; 7:9; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; cf.17:15). They are also a persecuted people (1:9; 2:9–10; 7:14;11:9–10; 12:10; 13:16–17) and at times even a martyredpeople (6:9–11; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2; 20:4). ThroughoutRevelation, God’s people are characterized as those who obeythe commandments of God (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 14:12; 20:4; 22:9) andwho hold fast to the testimony of Jesus (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 19:10;20:4). They are a tempted people who are warned throughout the bookto endure in faith (13:10; 14:12; 18:4). Like their Savior, theyconquer evil by holding fast to their confession even to the point ofdeath (12:11).
5.God’s judgment.God’s judgment of evil plays a crucial role in the book. Thecentral section of Revelation contains three series of sevenjudgments: the seals (6:1–8:1), the trumpets (8:2–11:19),and the bowls (15:1–16:21). God sends these plagues on hisenemies to demonstrate his power and to vindicate his people. Theseimages of judgment also encourage repentance and remind people thatGod will win the battle against evil. Using two images ofjudgment—the grain harvest (14:14–16) and the winepress(14:17–20)—chapter 14 presents a clear choice: fear andglorify God (14:7) or face God’s inescapable and eternaljudgment (14:11, 19). God’s final judgment on “Babylonthe great, the mother of prostitutes” is reported in 17:1–19:6.Babylon represents the worldly system that has blasphemed God andpersecuted his people. God’s final judgment of the satanictrinity, their followers, and death itself is described in 19:11–21;20:7–15. Evil has been destroyed, preparing the way for therestoration of creation.
6.The paradise of God.The story culminates in God’s ultimate restoration of hispeople and his creation—the paradise of God. What God began todo in Gen. 1–2 he now completes in Rev. 21–22. The riverof life replaces the sea. The tree of life supplies food for all.God’s throne as a symbol of God’s sovereign rule over allreality serves as the source of life. God has kept his promise toconquer his enemies, vindicate his people, and restore his creation.The Abrahamic covenant of Gen. 12, that God would bless “allpeoples on earth” (v.3), is fulfilled as the tree of lifeprovides healing for the nations (Rev. 22:2). The new heaven and newearth is identified primarily as the place where God lives among hispeople (22:4). In the paradise of God there will be no more Satan orsin or death or evil of any kind. God’s people will bask in hisglory and respond in worship.
7.The present struggle.A final theme of Revelation is the believer’s struggle to liveout God’s story in the present. The Lamb’s followers relyupon the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus for their victory,but they continue to live in enemy territory. They long for the newheaven and new earth, but they must wage war in the present againstthe forces of evil. Jesus challenges the seven churches to “overcome”or “conquer,” a requirement for inheriting his promisesof eternal life, provision, justice, victory, and the presence of God(21:7). A voice from heaven summarizes what it means to overcome:“They [Christians] triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood ofthe Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love theirlives so much as to shrink from death” (12:11).
Theytriumph in the same way that Jesus triumphed: victory throughfaithfulness, even if it includes suffering. This calls for rejectingfalse teaching, resisting idolatry, living righteously, and refusingto compromise. Triumphing includes authentic faith that results inobedience to Jesus. Above all, to triumph or overcome means to followthe Lamb.
Theseseven themes of Revelation reveal how the book offers hope to thosewho are suffering for the cause of Christ and warning to those whoare compromising with the world. Revelation presents the finalchapter in God’s grand plan to defeat evil, reverse the curseof sin, transform creation, and live forever among his people. Forfirst-century readers or twenty-first-century readers, Revelationoffers a dramatic and empowering vision of what it means to followJesus.
The word “apocalypse” means “revelation.”It is used in Rev. 1:1 to identify what follows as information thatwould otherwise be known only in heaven. “Apocalyptic”therefore refers to uncovering something that is hidden—revealingsecrets. It focuses on the gracious acts of God whereby he informshis servants of his plans and purposes about what is happening andwill happen on earth. Scholars have identified those texts thatresemble the form of the book of Revelation as “apocalypticliterature,” including the visions of Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel,and Zechariah.
Apocalyptictexts also appear outside of the Bible, although many of them areinspired by biblical accounts. The record of Enoch’s journeyinto the heavens (Gen. 5:24) stimulated the imagination of manyduring the Second Temple period, resulting in the production of alarge number of apocalyptic works purporting to record what Enochlearned while in the heavens. These then formed the basis for adistinctive, and ultimately misguided, interpretation of contemporaryJewish experience (see, e.g., 1 Enoch, Jubilees). The popularityof apocalyptic literature grew significantly after the appearance ofJohn’s Revelation, particularly in later gnostic literature andthe works of various forms of Jewish mysticism.
Thegenre of apocalyptic literature.Forthere to be apocalyptic literature, some things must be accepted astrue: God exists and is in sovereign control over what happens onearth; God has a plan, and humankind cannot know anything of thatplan unless it be revealed. This literature claims to be the resultof a gracious act of God. It may be delivered through a vision of Godhimself. Alternately, it might involve seeing things in the heavenseither as a vision or as a guided tour.
God’srevelation occurred in many ways on many occasions (Heb. 1:1–2).The entire Bible is, in this sense, an apocalypse—a revelation.Some forms of this revelation, however, are easier to understand thanothers.
Asa literary form, apocalyptic literature might best be described asverbal cartoons. The images that are so graphically portrayed wouldhave had, for the original readers, something of the instant impactthat a political cartoon might have on us today. In order tounderstand such images, one must be familiar with the symbols beingused. The cartoons and posters from the two World Wars—in whichanimals such as the lion of England, the Russian bear, the Uncle Samcharacter, and bestial monsters depicted the enemy at the time—area sufficient example to shed light on how the original readers wouldhave read these biblical works. To understand individual picturessuch as the beast of Rev. 13 or the four-headed leopard of Dan. 7,one had to know something of the specific historical background.
Earlierimages could be adapted and reapplied. So, for example, Joseph’svision of his family as the sun, moon, and stars (Gen. 37:9) is usedto identify the woman of Rev. 12:1 as the personification of thenation of Israel—the line from which the Savior would come.
God’srevelation to his people.Apocalyptic literature functions in much the same way that Jesus usedhis parables (Matt. 13:11). It is often used in situations whereGod’s people appear to be under physical threat. The symbolsand the patterns used enable those on the inside to follow what ishappening while leaving those on the outside none the wiser. Theability of God’s people to understand the revelation identifiesand discriminates them from God’s enemies, who appear confused.
Apocalypticliterature is not always about the future, let alone about the end ofthe world. Mostly it is designed to enable the believer to see pastthe confusions and fears of present experience, and to be remindedthat God is in control and that everything is going according to hisplans and purposes. God’s plans may include calling upon hispeople to face a range of challenges or to suffer persecution. Thesevisions enable believers to see meaning and purpose in theseexperiences and to keep their focus faithfully on God.
Thebook of Job offers some insight into the nature of apocalypticliterature, even though it is not usually regarded as such. Thenarrator (without explaining how he knows these things) begins byinforming the reader of the events that transpired in God’sheavenly court. This enables the reader (unlike Job or his friends)to put Job’s experience in proper context. Eliphaz’schallenge then has powerful irony when he asks Job, “Do youlisten in on God’s council? Do you have a monopoly on wisdom?”(15:8). The resolution of their deliberations is made possible onlywhen God comes to earth in visible form and reveals his judgment onthe matter. This is designed to evoke not a blind faith but aninformed faithfulness that allows for the reality of God’ssuperior wisdom and his right to determine all things for his glory.
Whenthe king had a dream in Gen. 41:15–16 (cf. Dan. 2:27–28),the point is made that no one can discover the mind of God. However,God has graciously revealed his plans to his servants, who can thenexplain them to a world that lives in darkness and ignorance of thesethings.
Theone who received such revelations often needs an interpreting angel(Dan. 7:16; Zech. 1:9; cf. Gen. 28:10–17; Exod. 3:1–6).The seer, like the reader, is initially confused. The interpretingangel answers the seer’s questions, and the reader can in turnunderstand what is happening.
Understandingapocalyptic literature.Given the historical distance between the modern reader and theoriginal authors of the biblical apocalyptic texts, we might betempted to think that they cannot be understood with any certainty.They are nonetheless God’s revelation to his people and weregiven with the intention that they be understood. Comprehending anapocalyptic vision requires us to search the Scriptures to see howthese symbols and patterns were interpreted, and then to see how theyare again used to give us some insight into God’s power, grace,and calling upon his people in each age.
Forexample, the beasts representing four successive kingdoms (Dan.7:1–7, 15–23) later are redrawn into a composite symbolof any contemporary human power operating under Satan’s rule(Rev. 13:1–3). The similarities between Babylon and Romeidentified both as agents of Satan’s regime; the connectionthen became an apocalyptic accusation (1 Pet. 5:13) offeringassurance to God’s people. Herod’s attempt to kill Jesus(Matt. 2:16) follows the pattern of Pharaoh’s attempt on Israel(Exod. 1–2), so the picture of Satan as the red dragonattacking the woman giving birth identifies the one behind Herod’sactions while pointing to the God who brought his people out of Egyptas the one who will save those who put their trust in Jesus.
The word “apocrypha” is derived from a Greek wordmeaning “secret” or “hidden” and refers totexts regarded by some Jews and Christians as religiously valuablebut not meeting the criteria of canonicity. The more specific title“New Testament Apocrypha” distinguishes certain writingsfrom those commonly referred to as “the Apocrypha,” acollection of works written by Jews (with later Christian editing inplaces) between approx. 200 BC and AD 90, recognized as Scripture byRoman Catholic and Orthodox Churches but generally rejected byProtestants (see Apocrypha, Old Testament). What is loosely calledNew Testament Apocrypha is no single collection but actually a vast,amorphous corpus that can only be selectively discussed here. (TheApostolic Fathers, texts written mainly in the late first century andsecond century, and later church fathers are not considered here aspart of this grouping.) In broadest terms, these texts concernthemselves with Jesus Christ and his apostles, but often from aperspective that differs from the NT portraits. Nevertheless, many ofthe works appear to be either dependent upon or influenced by thegenres and characters of the NT, principally gospels, letters,apostolic acts, and apocalypse.
Thesewritings remain outside of the Christian canon for the followingreasons. First, the texts, at least in their final form, werepublished in the postapostolic period (the second century), whereasall of the NT writings were believed to have been written by anapostle (Matthew, John, Paul, Peter) or an apostolic associate (Mark,Luke). Some apocryphal writings (e.g., Gospel of Thomas) may simplyadapt earlier, apostolic tradition. Second, the point of view inthese writings does not represent a broad constituency in the earlychurch. Some appear to reflect the ideology of various gnosticgroups, which became prominent in the second century throughout theMediterranean, with centers in Antioch in Syria and Alexandria inEgypt. Although a diverse phenomenon, gnosticism generally embracedsecret knowledge as a vehicle for salvation from the material world,a development of extreme Platonism. Therefore, Jesus saves through anesoteric teaching, not his atoning death. The diminution of the crossled to the orthodox rejection of this perspective. In attempting torefute gnostics, Irenaeus of Lyons (died c. AD 195) appropriates whathe calls the “rule of faith” (regula fidei), which waspassed on by the apostles and everywhere accepted by the churches(Haer. 1.8.1; 1.9.4). Other apocryphal texts appear to represent aconservative Jewish-Christian perspective. The church graduallyshifted from being primarily a Jewish religious group that acceptednon-Jews to what Christians themselves described as a “thirdrace” in distinction from Jews and pagans. Relationshipsbetween Jews and Christians continued to sour because of mutualpersecution, competition, and misunderstanding. By the secondcentury, some Christian writers claimed God had rejected Israel(e.g., the author of Epistle of Barnabas). Many texts emphasizecelibacy, fasting, and other rigorously ascetic practices, which gobeyond the moderate guidelines in the NT. These factors contributedto the marginalization of Jewish believers in Jesus, making theirwritings suspect. Like the gnostic texts, the primary concern was adiminished Christology. Consequently, many of these writings were notcopied (and therefore preserved) by Christian copyists and thuseventually were lost. However, many texts were discovered at NagHammadi in Egypt in 1945. Scraps of papyri have also been recoveredfrom various sites in the dry sands of the desert. But many of theapocryphal writings survive only in fragments (e.g., Acts of Paul ).
TheNew Testament Apocrypha provide a window into the various waysChristians attempted to live out their faith in Jesus Christ, therise of ascetic monasticism, and why orthodox Christianity ultimatelyparted ways with both rabbinic Judaism and gnosticism. The diversityof the church’s past may provide context and insight for thechallenges of the present.
Gospels
Theapocryphal Gospels often amplify or add to material that is morelimited in the canonical Gospels. This is especially the case withJesus’ youth and the passion narrative. The Infancy Gospel ofThomas depicts, among other things, the child Jesus making sparrowsout of clay and then bringing them to life. The Gospel of Peter,which dates probably from the middle of the second century and islikely dependent on Mark’s Gospel, begins with Jesus’trial and breaks off in what is presumably a resurrection appearanceto a group of disciples. According to some scholars, the Gospel ofPeter is cited by Origen (c. AD 185–255) as evidence thatJesus’ purported brothers were Joseph’s from an earliermarriage, thereby protecting the perpetual virginity of Mary (Comm.ser. Matt. 10.17). This gospel reflects a strong anti-Jewish bias.The Protevangelium of James relates the miraculous birth of Jesus’mother, Mary.
Otherapocryphal Gospels single out a particular apostle who alone is givenspecial revelation. A complete version of the Gospel of Thomas wasdiscovered among the Nag Hammadi writings and is perhaps the earliestapocryphal gospel. The emphasis on Thomas suggests a Syrianprovenance. Containing little narrative, the text is primarily acollection of Jesus’ sayings (loosely grouped according totheme), some of which are dependent on the Gospel of Luke (e.g., 47,104). James, the brother of the Lord, is given prominence (12), butthere are also polemics against traditional Jewish piety: prayer,fasting, alms, and circumcision (6, 14, 53, 104). The Gospel ofJudas, which is dated to around the middle of the second century andsurvives in one or two copies, consists primarily of dialoguesbetween Judas Iscariot and Jesus during his passion. Judas ispresented as the only disciple to recognize Jesus’ true originand identity. In response, Jesus praises him: “You will exceedall of [the other apostles]. For you will sacrifice the man thatclothes me” (43). This text reflects a gnostic point of view(probably Sethian, representing a group that venerated the biblicalfigure of Seth and viewed Jesus as his reincarnation, as in theApocryphon of John, the Gospel of the Egyptians, and the Apocalypseof Paul ). Whereas Peter makes a confession of faith inthe canonical Gospels, Judas says, “I know who you are andwhere you have come from. You are from the immortal realm of Barbelo”(35). (In gnostic mythology, Barbelo [Coptic for “GreatEmission”] is the divine Mother of all, who is often describedas the “Forethought of the Father,” the “InfiniteOne.”) The Gospel of Judas has Jesus reject the God of Israel(21) and attack the Christian church and its leadership (26–27).
Thechurch fathers often mention Jewish gospels (Gospel of the Hebrews,Gospel of the Nazarenes, Gospel of the Ebionites), including a Hebrewversion of Matthew (Irenaeus, Haer. 3.1.1; Eusebius, Hist. eccl.6.25.4). Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 150–215) cites a sayingof Jesus from the Gospel of the Hebrews: “He that marvels shallreign, and he that has reigned shall rest” (Strom. 2.9.45;5.14.96). Epiphanius (c. AD 310/320–403) preserves part of theGospel of the Ebionites: “It came to pass that John wasbaptizing, and Pharisees and all Jerusalem went out to him and werebaptized. And John had a garment of camel’s hair and a leathergirdle about his waist, and his food, it is said, was wild honey, thetaste of which was that of manna, as a cake dipped in oil”(Pan. 30.13.4–5). The Ebionites (the “poor”) were aJewish-Christian group. The wording may reflect a vegetarianperspective, a popular form of asceticism, which annoyed Epiphanius,who claimed that the Ebionites “were resolved to make the wordof truth into a lie and to put a cake in the place of locusts.”However, the text only claims that the wild honey had the taste ofmanna, “as a cake dipped in oil.” The discovery of papyriin Egypt has also provided agrapha (unwritten sayings) of Jesus.Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 840 depicts a debate between Jesus and aPharisaic chief priest over viewing the holy utensils in the templein an impure state.
ApostolicActs
Thissubgenre typically involves a narrative of an apostle’smissionary activity (e.g., Andrew, Peter, John, Paul, Philip) fromthe time of Jesus’ resurrection to his own martyrdom (or, inthe case of John, simply his death). Books of acts also feature otherimportant individuals in the early history of the church, such asBarnabas and even Pilate. Some function to explain how the Christianfaith reached a community. The Acts of Thomas, which originatesprobably in Syrian Christianity, depicts his missionary activity inIndia. They are partly dependent on Luke’s book of Acts, butthey reflect a greater interest in biographical detail. The Acts ofPaul and Thecla provides a physical description of the apostle: “aman of small stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in a goodstate of body, with eyebrows meeting and nose somewhat hooked, fullof friendliness.” Contrary to popular assumption and theimpression that one gets from Paul’s letters (2 Cor.10:10), the depiction in its cultural context is flattering. Theclais presented as a young, engaged woman from a prominent family inIconium. She believes Paul’s gospel, which emphasizes sexualabstinence (see 1 Cor. 7:1–16). She breaks off herengagement, and the apostle permits her to become a teacher. Thedetails may be a reaction against developments in the early church,which struggled over sexuality and women’s roles in leadership.In the Acts of Peter, Luke’s presentation of a conflict betweenSimon Magus and Simon Peter is greatly expanded; this versiondescribes, among other things, Simon Magus levitating over Rome, onlyto be grounded by the prayers of Peter (4, 6, 9, 11–18, 23,31).
Letters
Theletter genre was not especially popular for those writing Christianapocryphal literature. In one letter, Abgar, king of Edessa, writesJesus, inviting him to visit his city. Jesus responds with acourteous letter relating that he must fulfill his mission but,following his ascension, will send a disciple (see Eusebius, Hist.eccl. 1.13). There are also fourteen letters between Paul and theStoic philosopher Seneca (c. 4 BC–AD 65). No one treats theseletters as authentic, but they do provide insight into earlyChristian curiosities. Paul mentions a letter to the Laodiceans,which has not survived (Col. 4:16), so someone in the fourth centuryor earlier patched together phrases mainly from Philippians andGalatians to provide such a letter. The work known as3 Corinthians, which contains a letter from the Corinthianchurch and Paul’s reply, probably serves the same purpose.
Apocalypses
Anapocalypse features a seer who receives revelation from asupernatural revealer. Apocalypses are attributed to, among others,Paul, Peter, Thomas, Stephen, and James. They typically featurerevelations made by Jesus to his disciples in the period between hisresurrection and ascension. The book of Revelation appears to havehad little influence on these works. Many of them are gnostic. Butthe Apocalypse of Peter, which most likely originated in PalestinianJewish Christianity during the Bar Kokhba Revolt (AD 132–135),was highly valued, particularly for its depiction of hell, in whichtwenty-one sinners suffer in ways appropriate to their sin.
Apocrypha,Old Testament–The Greek word apokrypha means “hidden”or “concealed,” and later it came to refer to religiousbooks considered to be of inferior quality to the OT and the NT.During the third century, several church fathers (e.g., Origen [d.253], Irenaeus [d. c. 200], Tertullian [d. 220]) used this term todistinguish these works from canonical works. Currently, the phrase“Old Testament Apocrypha” refers to Jewish literary workswritten between approximately 200 BC and AD 90 that were included inthe earliest Greek codices of the LXX.
TheApocrypha and the Development of the Canon
Bythe first century AD, many Jews believed that prophecy continued onlyuntil about the time of Ezra, around the end of the fifth century BC,and thus several of the apocryphal works were associated with famousbiblical characters such as Jeremiah, Baruch, or Solomon, most likelyin order to give them credibility. In Matt. 23:34–35; Luke11:49–51 Jesus appears to limit the OT canon to the books knownto be in the Jewish canon. Both passages record Jesus stating thatthe Jewish nation will be held responsible for the blood of theprophets from “the blood of Abel” (see Gen. 4:8–10),the first recorded murder, “to the blood of Zechariah”(see 2 Chron. 24:20–22), the last recorded murder. Theimplication is that biblical history spans from Genesis to Chronicles(most likely the last book in the order of the Hebrew Bible at thetime of Jesus), which is equivalent to saying from Genesis to Malachiin the English Bible.
Basedupon this evidence, it is doubtful that the early Jews everconsidered the apocryphal works part of their canon. In reality, theearly Greek codices were Christian collections from the fourth tofifth centuries AD. Apparently, by that time there were significantquestions concerning which books made up the OT canon. By the end ofthe first century AD, Christians had been dispersed all over theRoman Empire, so it is more than likely that few Christians wouldhave had contact with Jews or exposure to their scriptural canon. Itis reasonable to assume that during this period of uncertainty, theapocryphal books were thought by some to be part of the Jewish OTcanon. A major turning point occurred in the fourth century AD whenJerome (c. 345–420) was asked to write a standardizedtranslation of the Latin Bible. Jerome used original Greek and Hebrewtexts to correct his Latin translation. He did not believe that theapocryphal books were part of the OT since they were not included inthe Hebrew manuscripts. Nevertheless, some argue that he was coercedinto adding them to the Latin Vulgate by Augustine of Hippo(354–430), who believed that at least part of the apocryphalbooks were to be included in the OT canon. The Latin Vulgate becamethe standard translation of the Roman Catholic Church for well over athousand years, and thus the Old Testament Apocrypha were graduallyaccepted in the church. Another major turning point occurred duringthe Protestant Reformation when Luther’s views were argued atthe Council of Trent (convened three times between 1545 and 1563)that the Apocrypha were not part of the OT canon. The Roman CatholicChurch had used 2 Macc. 12:43–45 to substantiate itsdoctrines of purgatory and praying for the dead; likewise Tobit andother apocryphal works were used to substantiate works ofrighteousness (i.e, not faith alone for salvation). On April 8, 1546,at the Council of Trent, the Roman Catholic Church decreed that theApocrypha were indeed part of the Christian canon and pronouncedanathema upon those who disagreed.
Sincethe time of Luther, Protestants have rejected the canonicity of theApocrypha. However, the Roman Catholic Church has argued that fifteenapocryphal works are part of their authoritative Scriptures. TheGreek Orthodox Church includes two additional works (3 Maccabees;Psalm 151) in its authoritative canon.
Argumentsagainst including Apocryphal Books in the Canon
Thereare significant arguments for not including these books in thechurch’s authoritative canon.
1. TheNT never cites any apocryphal books as inspired; Jesus’ usageof Scripture suggests that only the books in the Hebrew Bible wereauthoritative (Matt. 23:34–35; Luke 11:50–51).
2. Noneof the apocryphal books claims to be the word of the Lord, as do manyOT books (Num. 35:1, 9; Josh. 1:1; Isa. 1:10, 18, 24; Jer. 1:2; Ezek.1:3; Hos. 1:1; Joel 1:1).
3. TheOT canon is confirmed by many sources: 2 Esd. 14:45 (twenty-fourbooks); Josephus, Ag. Ap. 1.37–42 (twenty-two books);Melito (all OT books except perhaps Esther); the Jerusalem List (allthirty-nine books); Origen (twenty-two books). All of these sourceslist the same thirty-nine OT books except that they are groupeddifferently (with the exception of Melito, who may omit Esther).
4. Thereis little evidence to suggest that there were two different OTcanons, one that developed in Palestine and one in Egypt. In fact,Philo, a Jew from Alexandria, never quotes from an apocryphal book asauthoritative.
5. Thereare significant historical inaccuracies in the Apocrypha. Forexample, the events in the book of Tobit (1:3–5) arechronologically incompatible: Tobit is said to live in Nineveh about722 BC and yet also to have seen the division of the united kingdomin about 931 BC.
6. Thereare theological inconsistencies. For example, 2 Macc. 12:43–45espouses praying for the dead, but canonical books maintain thatdecisions about one’s eternal destiny can be made only beforedeath (Heb. 9:27). Eleven out of fifteen apocryphal books containsome type of inaccuracies. Those that do not either are very short(i.e., Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Young Men; Prayer ofManasseh) or their content makes it difficult to determine if theycontain errors (i.e., Wisdom of Solomon; Susanna).
7. Manyearly church fathers spoke against the canonicity of much or all ofthe Apocrypha (Melito, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius,Jerome); no major church father accepted all of the apocryphal booksuntil Augustine. The apocryphal books have never been universallyaccepted by the church.
8. Theearliest list of OT canon by Melito (c. AD 170) does not includethem.
9. Duringthe Council of Trent, Martin Luther’s views against thecanonicity of the Apocrypha were discussed, citing the NT, earlychurch fathers, and Jewish teachers in support. The Roman CatholicChurch responded by canonizing the Apocrypha.
TheBooks of the Old Testament Apocrypha
Eventhough the apocryphal books should not be considered part of theauthoritative canon, they are useful for understanding Jewish thoughtand interests in the intertestamental period and the development ofcertain concepts during this period (e.g., the importance of theTorah, the apocalyptic view of history, the kingdom of God).
Traditionally,the Apocrypha consisted of fifteen books that were included in RomanCatholic Bibles and were usually identified as deuterocanonical(i.e., second canon) works. However, more recently this number hasbeen reduced to thirteen since 4 Ezra (sometimes called 2 Esdrasor Apocalypse of Ezra) and the Prayer of Manasseh were never found inthe oldest Greek codices of the LXX: Vaticanus (c. AD 350),Sinaiticus (c. AD 400), and Alexandrinus (c. AD 450). These two worksare now correctly considered pseudepigraphal books (i.e., falsewritings that were never thought to be part of the biblical canon).
Thelist below follows the Roman Catholic canon. In addition to thesetexts, several other writings are included in the Greek Orthodox,Armenian, Georgian, Syriac, and Ethiopian canons: 3 Maccabees,4 Maccabees, Psalm 151, Psalms 152–55, 1 Enoch, Jubilees,2 Baruch (Letter of Baruch), 3 Baruch (Apocalypse ofBaruch), 4 Baruch (Paralipomena of Jeremiah), and 1–3Megabyan (Ethiopic Maccabees).
Booksincluded in the Old Testament Apocrypha.Thefollowing thirteen books are included in the Old Testament Apocrypha.
• Wisdomof Solomon (latter part of the first century BC): This work containsJewish wisdom traditions and describes the benefits of wisdom and thejoys that accompany righteous living, as well as punishments for thewicked.
• Sirach(or Ecclesiasticus; c. 180 BC): This book is very similar to thebiblical book of Proverbs, also containing Jewish wisdom traditions.It includes moral and ethical maxims, proverbs, songs of praise,theological and philosophical reflections on life, and customs of theday.
• Tobit(c. 180 BC): A romantic story teaching that God comes to the aid ofthose who remain faithful to his laws. Tobit, a righteous Israeliteliving in Nineveh, is an example to the rest of the captives even inthe midst of great adversities. Tobit becomes blind and prays to Godto restore his sight. At the same time in Media, Sarah, Tobit’sniece, who had lost seven bridegrooms in succession, prays to God fordeliverance from the demon Asmodeus. God sends the angel Raphael todeliver them both.
• Judith(c. 150 BC): Nebuchadnezzar sends Holofernes to punish the peoplewest of Babylon for their insubordination. The author exhorts theJews to remain obedient to the law amid foreign occupation by theBabylonians. The people of Judea pray to God for help; in answer,Judith beguiles Holofernes, gets him thoroughly drunk, and thendecapitates him.
• 1 Esdras(or 3 Ezra; c. second to first century BC): This book is aretelling of parts of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. It beginsabruptly describing the reinstitution of the Passover by King Josiahin Jerusalem about 622/621 BC and continues to Ezra’s reformsabout 458 BC. The majority of the book emphasizes Ezra’sreforms.
• 1 Maccabees(c. latter part of the second century BC): This book describes Judeanhistory and especially the military campaigns of the Maccabees fromthe accession of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) in about 175 BC to thereign of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 BC). This work is a veryaccurate history and is the primary source of recorded events duringthis period.
• 2 Maccabees(c. end of second century to beginning of first century BC): Thisbook is much more theologically oriented than 1 Maccabees inrecording events of Jewish history from the time of the high priestOnias III and the Syrian king Seleucus IV (c. 180 BC) tothe defeat of Nicanor’s army (c. 161 BC). It appears to adoptan anti-Hasmonean viewpoint by highlighting concepts such as theresurrection of the body and the efficacious nature of martyrdom.
• Baruch(c. second to first century BC): This claims to be a letter fromBaruch to those living in Jerusalem. It begins with a confirmationthat Jerusalem was destroyed because of Israel’s sinfulness andwas to be read on a feast day as a confession of their sin (1:14).
• Epistleof Jeremiah (third to first century BC): The date of this work is nowconfirmed by a first-century BC Greek manuscript from Cave 7 ofQumran. The text contains 72 or 73 verses and is most likelyinfluenced by Jer. 10:1–16. This letter, supposedly fromJeremiah to Jewish captives soon to be taken to Babylon, describesthe folly of worshiping idols.
• Additionsto Esther (c. second to first century BC): These six additions (e.g.,Mordecai’s dream and its interpretation, prayers of Mordecaiand Esther) to the Greek text of Esther apparently were introduced tohighlight the religious aspect of the story that the author felt waslacking.
• Susanna(c. second to first century BC): This work and the next two wereadded to the book of Daniel sometime during the first century BC.Susanna is tried and found guilty because of the lies that two eldersof Israel told about her after she refused their sexual advances.Daniel, however, inspired by God, cross-examines the two men, provesthat they have lied, and exonerates Susanna.
• Beland the Dragon (c. second to first century BC): This work containstwo stories demonstrating the wisdom of Daniel. In the first, heoutwits the priests of Bel who go each night through a secretentrance to eat the offerings left for Bel. Daniel reveals theirdeception and proves their great statue of Bel, the patron deity ofBabylon, to be a worthless idol. In the second story, Daniel isthrown into the lions’ den for killing a dragon that theBabylonians believed to be a god. However, the angel of the Lordprotects Daniel and brings Habakkuk from Judea with food for him. Onthe seventh day, Daniel is removed from the lions’ den and hisenemies are thrown in.
• Prayerof Azariah and Song of the Three Young Men (c. second to firstcentury BC): Before being thrown into the fiery furnace (cf. Dan.3:23), Abednego (“Azariah” in Hebrew) prays, asking Godto bring glory to his name through this ordeal. Then follows the songof the three young men (Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego), who singpraise and glory to God.
Booksno longer in the Old Testament Apocrypha. Thefollowing two books are no longer included in the Old TestamentApocrypha.
• 2 Esdras(or 4 Ezra, Apocalypse of Ezra; c. first century AD): Anapocalyptic book dealing with the problem of evil in the world, ormore specifically why an all-powerful, loving God allows such greatevils to befall humankind. The reason why turns out to be humansinfulness.
• Prayerof Manasseh (c. second to first century BC): According to 2 Chron.33:10–13, Manasseh prayed to God while in captivity and askedfor forgiveness for his many sins. God responds by forgiving him andallowing him to return to Israel. This work purports to record thisamazing prayer.
A town in eastern Macedonia visited by Paul on his secondmissionary journey (Acts 17:1). It is located north of the ChalcidianMountains on the Egnatian Way between Amphipolis and Thessalonica. Itis usually associated with the modern city of Pollina.
The most significant role that Apollos plays in the NT is,interestingly, not related to the narrative about him or his servicein the advance of the gospel. The name “Apollos” was usedby immature Christians in Corinth as a figurehead for their group.They competed with other Corinthian groups for status and honor,following the practices of the secular culture with little Christiandiscernment. Apollos’s outstanding communication skills,knowledge, and skill at argumentation fit the secular Corinthiancultural values of intellect, knowledge, wisdom, and rhetoricalskill. The group may have used his name without his approval and notin his presence. Apparently, Apollos was rather put off by theCorinthians; Paul asked Apollos to go to Corinth, but he preferred tominister in Ephesus (1 Cor. 16:12).
Apolloswas born in Alexandria (Acts 18:24) and probably educated there. Hecame to Ephesus, perhaps on business, after Paul had left the cityduring his second missionary journey. In addition to his knowledge ofthe OT, Apollos had been instructed in the way of the Lord (i.e.,partial Jesus tradition) and was teaching accurately his knowledge ofJesus. He knew only the baptism of John—that is, the baptism ofrepentance. When Priscilla and Aquila “explained to him the wayof God more adequately” (18:26), this probably entailed anexplanation of the atoning significance of Jesus’ death, God’svindication of Jesus in the resurrection, and the personal experienceof the Holy Spirit for all believers. After ministering in Ephesus(18:24), he went to Corinth (19:1; cf. 1 Cor. 3), where he wasable to overwhelm the Jews in argument that Jesus was the Christ(Acts 18:28). Apollos returned to Ephesus sometime thereafter and waspresent in that city when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians (1 Cor.16:8). Apollos probably remained a faithful member of the Paulinemissionary band, for he is mentioned later in Paul’s letter toTitus and was probably a courier of that letter with Zenas (Titus3:13).
Somehave suggested that Apollos was the author of Hebrews, but this isonly speculation.
The Greek name, meaning “destroyer,” for theangel of the Abyss, the bottomless pit. The Hebrew form is “Abaddon”(Rev. 9:11). The name may derive from Apollo, an important Greek god.
Although apostasy originally referred to a political revoltor rebellion, in the Bible this term is used specifically to describerebellion against God. While there is a sense in which every humanbeing has consciously and deliberately sinned and fallen short ofGod’s standards (Rom. 3:23), apostasy is normally used only inreference to those who have known the truth but later flagrantly andhigh-handedly turn their back on it and reject God.
Apostasyinvolves a turning back from the faith on the part of those who werepreviously considered believers. Paul warns, “The Spiritclearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith andfollow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons” (1 Tim.4:1). Peter similarly tells believers, “Be on your guard sothat you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fallfrom your secure position” (2 Pet. 3:17). This abandoningor falling away from the faith necessarily involves individuals whoat one time appeared to possess faith. The author of Hebrews pointsout the unlikelihood of restoration of “those who have oncebeen enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have sharedin the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of Godand the powers of the coming age, and who have fallen away”(6:4–6) and those who “deliberately keep on sinning,”since “no sacrifice for sins is left” (10:26).
Thereare many examples of individuals who began well and ended poorly.Israel’s king Saul is a tragic illustration of a downwardspiral from being chosen by God to flagrant disobedience. Paulencouraged Timothy to “fight the battle well” by “holdingon to faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and sohave suffered shipwreck with regard to the faith.” Among themare “Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satanto be taught not to blaspheme” (1 Tim. 1:18–20).Jude wrote his short epistle to encourage his readers to “contendfor the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holypeople. For certain individuals whose condemnation was written aboutlong ago have secretly slipped in among you” (vv. 3–4).As Paul looked ahead to the future, he warned how the time will come“when people will not put up with sound doctrine,” butwill have “itching ears” and “will turn their earsaway from the truth and turn aside to myths” (2 Tim.4:3–4). Peter similarly spoke of how there would be “falseteachers among you” who “will secretly introducedestructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who boughtthem,” and how “many will follow their depraved conductand will bring the way of truth into disrepute” (2 Pet.2:1–2). Jesus warned that in the future “false messiahsand false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miraclesto deceive, if possible, even the elect” (Matt. 24:24). Jesusdid not say that any of the elect will be deceived, but he did saythat the false teaching would be so subtle that even the elect couldalmost be deceived.
Thetopic of apostasy raises a number of difficult questions, includingwhether people can lose their salvation, as well as how to ministerto friends and loved ones who have rejected the faith they once helddear. Although Christians are divided on the claim “once saved,always saved,” it is important to note that only God is able tosee into a person’s heart and evaluate the person’sspiritual condition. God may yet bring those who are still alive backto faith in himself before they die, and even those who have alreadydied may have repented in their final moments of consciousnessunbeknownst to any observers. Apostasy is different from backslidingin that it is more serious and permanent, yet we may not always beable to distinguish one from the other until eternity.
Apostasyis clearly presented in Scripture as a possible spiritual danger forbelievers. Paul warns, “If you think you are standing firm, becareful that you don’t fall!” (1 Cor. 10:12). Theonly appropriate response is to make every effort “to work outyour salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil. 2:12).
Although apostasy originally referred to a political revoltor rebellion, in the Bible this term is used specifically to describerebellion against God. While there is a sense in which every humanbeing has consciously and deliberately sinned and fallen short ofGod’s standards (Rom. 3:23), apostasy is normally used only inreference to those who have known the truth but later flagrantly andhigh-handedly turn their back on it and reject God.
Apostasyinvolves a turning back from the faith on the part of those who werepreviously considered believers. Paul warns, “The Spiritclearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith andfollow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons” (1 Tim.4:1). Peter similarly tells believers, “Be on your guard sothat you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fallfrom your secure position” (2 Pet. 3:17). This abandoningor falling away from the faith necessarily involves individuals whoat one time appeared to possess faith. The author of Hebrews pointsout the unlikelihood of restoration of “those who have oncebeen enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have sharedin the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of Godand the powers of the coming age, and who have fallen away”(6:4–6) and those who “deliberately keep on sinning,”since “no sacrifice for sins is left” (10:26).
Thereare many examples of individuals who began well and ended poorly.Israel’s king Saul is a tragic illustration of a downwardspiral from being chosen by God to flagrant disobedience. Paulencouraged Timothy to “fight the battle well” by “holdingon to faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and sohave suffered shipwreck with regard to the faith.” Among themare “Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satanto be taught not to blaspheme” (1 Tim. 1:18–20).Jude wrote his short epistle to encourage his readers to “contendfor the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holypeople. For certain individuals whose condemnation was written aboutlong ago have secretly slipped in among you” (vv. 3–4).As Paul looked ahead to the future, he warned how the time will come“when people will not put up with sound doctrine,” butwill have “itching ears” and “will turn their earsaway from the truth and turn aside to myths” (2 Tim.4:3–4). Peter similarly spoke of how there would be “falseteachers among you” who “will secretly introducedestructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who boughtthem,” and how “many will follow their depraved conductand will bring the way of truth into disrepute” (2 Pet.2:1–2). Jesus warned that in the future “false messiahsand false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miraclesto deceive, if possible, even the elect” (Matt. 24:24). Jesusdid not say that any of the elect will be deceived, but he did saythat the false teaching would be so subtle that even the elect couldalmost be deceived.
Thetopic of apostasy raises a number of difficult questions, includingwhether people can lose their salvation, as well as how to ministerto friends and loved ones who have rejected the faith they once helddear. Although Christians are divided on the claim “once saved,always saved,” it is important to note that only God is able tosee into a person’s heart and evaluate the person’sspiritual condition. God may yet bring those who are still alive backto faith in himself before they die, and even those who have alreadydied may have repented in their final moments of consciousnessunbeknownst to any observers. Apostasy is different from backslidingin that it is more serious and permanent, yet we may not always beable to distinguish one from the other until eternity.
Apostasyis clearly presented in Scripture as a possible spiritual danger forbelievers. Paul warns, “If you think you are standing firm, becareful that you don’t fall!” (1 Cor. 10:12). Theonly appropriate response is to make every effort “to work outyour salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil. 2:12).
A title designating members of the group of twelve disciples(Matt. 10:2–4; Mark 3:16–19; Luke 6:13–16) whoreceived Jesus’ teaching (Luke 17:5) and to whom he grantedauthority (Mark 6:7, 30; Luke 9:1, 10). Matthias later replaced JudasIscariot (Acts 1:24). These apostles provided leadership to the earlychurch in Jerusalem (Acts 15:6), performed miracles (Acts 2:43;2 Cor. 12:12), and faced persecution (Acts 5:18) as theytestified to Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 4:33; 5:32). Broaderusage of the term includes witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection(1 Cor. 15:7), James the brother of Jesus (Gal. 1:19), Barnabasand Paul (Acts 14:14), and possibly Silas (1 Thess. 2:6) andAndronicus and Junias/Junia (Rom. 16:7). Paul regularly speaks of hiscalling in apostolic terms (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor.1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1;Titus 1:1), while Peter similarly self-identifies (1 Pet. 1:1;2 Pet. 1:1). The word is once used of Jesus himself (Heb. 3:1).
Often referred to as the Jerusalem council, this is themeeting recorded in Acts 15 between representatives of the church atAntioch (most notably Paul and Barnabas) and of the Jerusalem church(led by James and Peter). The council was convened to address thequestion of whether Gentile Christians should be required to becircumcised and to keep the Mosaic law. Certain Jewish Christians whowere Pharisees had asked that Gentiles observe the law upon coming tofaith in Christ. Paul, Barnabas, and others opposed such a move andcalled for the meeting in Jerusalem. At the meeting, the councilmembers sided in large measure with the position of Paul andBarnabas, concluding that Gentiles need not be circumcised or submitto Mosaic law, though they still asked Gentile believers to abstainfrom food sacrificed to idols, blood, meat from strangled animals,and sexual immorality (vv. 19–21). Many scholars have suggestedthat Paul gives his own account of this meeting in Gal. 2:1–10,though others have maintained that he is describing a differentoccasion than the events of Acts 15. See also Acts of the Apostles.
An assortment of Christian writings likely from the firstthrough the third centuries AD. In view of their early date and theconjectured association of their authors with the apostles, scholarsbegan labeling these writings the “Apostolic Fathers.”Some of these writings enjoyed immense popularity within variousparts of the early church. Many early Christians considered differentones among them to be sacred Scripture. Many of them found places inancient codices with writings of the NT. They remain some of theearliest extant Christian writings, produced around or shortly afterthe writings of the NT. They constitute an invaluable resource forstudying Christianity shortly following the period of the apostles.Concerning the Bible, they offer scholars early evidence of howdifferent early Christians viewed and handled the writings of ourBible. While they attest to the importance or even scriptural statusof many of our biblical writings, they also witness to a similarstatus for other writings among ancient Christians, writings notincluded within the Protestant canon of Scripture. The traditionalcontents of the Apostolic Fathers are as follows.
1 Clement.A lengthy letter sent by “the church of God which sojourns inRome to the church of God which sojourns in Corinth.” LaterChristian traditions identify the author as a certain Clement,supposedly the third bishop of Rome after Peter. This seems unlikely,however, because the type of bishop conceived of by the latertradition did not exist in Rome around the end of the first century,when 1 Clement was written by an unknown author. Many otherearly Christian writings feature or are (falsely) attributed to thisClement as well. Apparently, news reached Rome that some of theyounger men in the Corinthian congregation had usurped authority fromthe older, established leaders. The letter urges the Corinthians toavoid jealousy and to submit to their established leaders. It oftenuses passages from the OT and from several writings of the NT,including some of Paul’s letters. It also quotes Wisdom ofSolomon (a writing in the Apocrypha) in addition to another writingunknown to us now. Many early Christians came to hold 1 Clementitself in high regard. Some considered it to be Scripture.
2 Clement.A short sermon on Isa. 54:1 from the middle of the second century ADby an unknown author, though later tradition attributes it toClement. It encourages Christians to endurance and repentance so thatthey may enjoy eternal life and experience the resurrection. It drawsfrom numerous writings that the author considered sacred to persuadethe audience: Isaiah, Ezekiel, an unknown writing, and some words ofJesus. It shows awareness of Matthew, Luke, 1 Corinthians,Ephesians, and possibly James, Hebrews, and 1 Peter. Severalsayings from Jesus that it deploys are best preserved in the Gospelof Thomas and the Gospel of the Egyptians.
Lettersof Ignatius.Acollection of seven letters to different churches and to Polycarp bythe bishop Ignatius in the early second century AD as he was beingtaken to Rome for execution. He commonly stresses the dangers offalse teaching, the unity of the church only in the bishop, and thevalue and necessity of his impending martyrdom. Scholarstraditionally understand Ignatius to have been primarily concernedwith docetic and Jewish tendencies in his warnings against falseteachers. He relied heavily on Paul, especially as a model martyr whoshared in the sufferings of Christ and whose martyrdom benefitted thechurch, but, unlike 1 Clement, he drew little from the OT. Itseems certain that he used Matthew, 1 Corinthians, andEphesians. Minimal evidence exists for his use of Luke, while echoesfrom other Pauline letters (Romans, Galatians, Philippians,Colossians, and 1 Thessalonians) are common, as are parallelswith 1 Clement, 2 Clement, and Shepherd of Hermas. Itremains unclear whether such echoes and parallels demonstrateliterary knowledge or simply widespread traditions ultimatelystemming from those documents.
Letterof Polycarp to the Philippians.Ignatius mentored Polycarp, who died as a martyr in the mid-secondcentury, having served as a bishop for forty years. Polycarp wrotethis letter, the lone surviving writing from him, to the Philippiansin response to their request for a discussion of righteousness and aproblem with a certain elder. He stresses the connection betweenright behavior and right beliefs. He drew heavily from various NTwritings, especially Pauline writings. He also seems to haveconsidered 1 Clement to have the same authoritative status asPaul’s letters.
Martyrdomof Polycarp.A writing of unknown date that describes the martyrdom of Polycarp.Polycarp, an old man, is to be executed unless he renounces Christ.According to the account, Polycarp famously responds, “Foreighty-six years I have been his servant, and he has done me nowrong. How can I blaspheme my King who has saved me?” (Mart.Pol. 9:3). Most or all of the account is clearly legendary. It alsoexplicitly describes Polycarp’s death through the lens ofJesus’ death as represented in the Gospels.
Didache.This writing, whose title means “teaching,” datesanywhere from the mid-first to the mid-second century AD. It possiblystems from an early group of Christians who wrestled with how to keepthe Jewish law as part of their following Jesus. It discusses the“two ways,” of life and of death; baptism and the Lord’sSupper (though focusing on the purifying nature of water and withoutmentioning Jesus’ words of institution or his sacrificialdeath); and the necessity of endurance for salvation at the end.Scholars debate whether the Gospel of Matthew used the Didache.
Epistleof Barnabas.Awriting from the mid-second century AD later falsely attributed toPaul’s traveling companion Barnabas. It wrestles with a commonearly Christian issue: how to relate God’s new action in Christto the Jewish Scriptures and to God’s relation to Jews.Especially through engaging in a long-standing Greco-Roman practiceof allegorically interpreting sacred writings, Barnabas argues thatthe OT always “really” pointed to Jesus and Christians.The laws were never meant to be kept literally, and Israel hasforfeited its covenant with God because it misunderstood the laws,engaged in idolatry, and was disobedient. The epistle also stressesthe urgent nature of the present time and the necessity forChristians to endure and to live rightly in order to experience finalsalvation. Like Jude in the NT, the author cites the pseudepigraphicwork 1 Enoch. He also cites and uses like Scripture Wisdom ofSolomon, 4 Ezra, and several unknown writings. Many earlyChristians also considered Barnabas to be Scripture and used it assuch.
Shepherdof Hermas.A lengthy early Christian apocalypse from the second century AD inRome. It wrestles with issues of postbaptismal sin, the possibilitiesof repentance, and the relations of the rich and the poor. It focusesparticularly on observing God’s commands and self-control anddoes not contain much theological speculation about Christ. The HolySpirit and angels take on many of Christ’s functions. It rarelydirectly uses the OT, though it does constantly echo Jewish wisdomtradition. Similar to Barnabas, many early Christians treated it as asacred writing.
Epistleto Diognetus.A short second- or third-century apology for Christians, which alsostresses the tangible aspects of Christian piety and service towardothers.
Fragmentsof Papias.Fragments of the now lost writings of Papias, an important earlyChristian leader contemporary with Polycarp. They give us some of theearliest Christian reflection on the authorship and composition ofMatthew and Mark, as well as thoughts on the millennium. Papiasmentions his preference for the “living voice” ofeyewitnesses of Jesus as opposed to the writings of those who werenot. He thus participates in a common ancient Mediterraneansensitivity about authentic sources.
The KJV term for a “perfumer” or “perfume-maker”(see NIV). Perfumers mixed aromatic oils and spices to createointments for medicinal, cosmetic, or religious purposes. Aprofessional perfumer was required to prepare anointing oils andincense used in worship at the tabernacle (Exod. 30:25, 37; Neh.3:8). See also Perfume, Perfumer.
Son of Nadab and the father of Ishi (1 Chron. 2:30–31)in the family of Jerahmeel. He was a descendant of Judah.
In the Roman Empire all citizens possessed the right ofappeal to Caesar, stemming from the time of Augustus. There is somedispute as to how long it took for this right to be applied to theprovinces, and in some cases Roman citizens were refused theirrights. In the NT, Paul availed himself of this right in Acts 25 whenhe appeared before Festus. Paul was brought to trial by the Jewishleaders on false charges that he had led a Gentile into the temple.Festus asked him to return to Jerusalem for trial, but Paul, warythat the Jews would try to kill him, asked that his case be heard bythe emperor. Paul was granted his appeal and sent to Rome, eventhough it was later determined he had done nothing wrong. Acts endswith Paul awaiting trial in Rome.
In the KJV the “caul of the liver” describes theupper lobe or “covering” of that organ, reserved alongwith the kidneys and the fat on the kidneys and other visceral organsto be burned upon the altar as food for God (e.g., Exod. 29:13; Lev.3:10 [NIV: “long lobe of the liver”]). In one text in theKJV “caul” denotes a headband (Isa. 3:18), and in anotherthe covering or encasement of the heart (the pericardium), to beripped open by God, rampaging like a mother bear robbed of her cubs(Hos. 13:8).
A Christian at Colossae greeted by Paul (Philem. 2). Apphiamay be Philemon’s wife and Archippus’s mother. If so, asa wealthier member of the church in her home, she would have servedas a patroness (cf. 1 Cor. 16:19). Since Paul addresses her as“sister,” some have concluded that she held a leadershiprole in the Colossian church.
The Forum of Appius (KJV: “Appii Forum”) was amarket station forty-three miles south of Rome on the Appian Way.Some Roman believers traveled to this town to meet Paul on his way toimprisonment in Rome (Acts 28:15).
The Forum of Appius (KJV: “Appii Forum”) was amarket station forty-three miles south of Rome on the Appian Way.Some Roman believers traveled to this town to meet Paul on his way toimprisonment in Rome (Acts 28:15).
The Hebrew word tappuakh is most often rendered “apple(tree),” though some have suggested other fruits, arguing thatthe apple was not introduced into biblical lands until after theperiod of the OT.
InSong of Songs, the man is said to be an apple tree among the trees ofthe forest (Song 2:3). He provides shade for the woman, who partakesof the tree’s fruit. Later in the same book, the appletree is also the location of lovemaking; the woman says that the manarouses her under the apple tree (Song 8:5). The apple treestands out among all the other trees by its fruit and its scent. Inlove poetry it provides an ideal setting for intimacy because of itsshade and the intimations of fruitfulness (fertility). In Song 2:5,apples are mentioned along with raisin cakes as food that willsustain the woman in her lovemaking, thus serving as a kind ofaphrodisiac. In an equally sensuous passage (Song 7:8), the woman’sbreath is said to smell like apples, thus implying that she ispleasant to be near as the man kisses her.
Excludingreferences to the “apple of the eye,” the apple treeoccurs outside of Song of Songs only in Joel 1:12 and Prov. 25:11. InJoel 1:12, the apple tree is listed among trees that will bedestroyed in the context of God’s judgment. In other words, thefertility of the orchards and forests will disappear. Proverbs 25:11compares words spoken at the right time to golden apples set in asilver basket, a highly desirable combination. See also Apple of theEye.
This English and Hebrew idiom (lit., “the little man ofthe eye,” a reference to the pupil) designates a thing of valueto the beholder. God values and protects Jacob (Deut. 32:10) and thecity of Jerusalem (Zech. 2:8). The psalmist desires to be the appleof God’s eye (Ps. 17:8) and to enjoy safety from the wicked. Inthe father’s exhortations to the son in Proverbs, the son isurged to keep the law as the apple of his eye (Prov. 7:2).
The Hebrew word tappuakh is most often rendered “apple(tree),” though some have suggested other fruits, arguing thatthe apple was not introduced into biblical lands until after theperiod of the OT.
InSong of Songs, the man is said to be an apple tree among the trees ofthe forest (Song 2:3). He provides shade for the woman, who partakesof the tree’s fruit. Later in the same book, the appletree is also the location of lovemaking; the woman says that the manarouses her under the apple tree (Song 8:5). The apple treestands out among all the other trees by its fruit and its scent. Inlove poetry it provides an ideal setting for intimacy because of itsshade and the intimations of fruitfulness (fertility). In Song 2:5,apples are mentioned along with raisin cakes as food that willsustain the woman in her lovemaking, thus serving as a kind ofaphrodisiac. In an equally sensuous passage (Song 7:8), the woman’sbreath is said to smell like apples, thus implying that she ispleasant to be near as the man kisses her.
Excludingreferences to the “apple of the eye,” the apple treeoccurs outside of Song of Songs only in Joel 1:12 and Prov. 25:11. InJoel 1:12, the apple tree is listed among trees that will bedestroyed in the context of God’s judgment. In other words, thefertility of the orchards and forests will disappear. Proverbs 25:11compares words spoken at the right time to golden apples set in asilver basket, a highly desirable combination. See also Apple of theEye.
KJV and RSV translation of a Hebrew word in Gen. 3:7 (khagor,khagorah; NIV: “coverings”; NRSV: “loincloth”)that refers to a garment that was wrapped around the body’smidsection. The garment was very basic in nature and served thepurpose of maintaining modesty once maturity had been reached. In theNT, the apron appears to be outerwear of some sort. Aprons (andhandkerchiefs) that had touched Paul’s skin were used to healthe sick (Acts 19:12).
A conduit used to transport water from one place to another.It could be either a trough cut into rock or soil, or pipes made fromstone or other materials. Aqueducts were used in OT times totransport water into cities from nearby springs. The “aqueductof the Upper Pool” in Jerusalem is mentioned in 2 Kings18:17; Isa. 7:3; 36:2. Its location is uncertain, though it is saidto be “on the road to the Washerman’s Field.”Hezekiah’s tunnel was an underground aqueduct that took waterfrom the Gihon Spring to the Pool of Siloam (2 Kings 20:20). Theconduit was in existence prior to Hezekiah, but he fortified andimproved it in preparation for an imminent attack by the Assyriansinstigated by his rebellion against them (2 Chron. 32:1–3,30). (See also Tunnel.)
InNT times, the Romans built many aqueducts to carry water from springsand mountain streams to cities. Often these were undergroundconduits, but also they were constructed as large, arched structuresmade of stone and mortar that gradually sloped downward. The remainsof an impressive Roman aqueduct that transported water from theCarmel Mountains to the coast can still be seen in the ruins ofCaesarea Maritima. The reference in Rev. 3:14–22 to the“lukewarm” church at Laodicea likely alludes to the tepidwater that arrived via aqueduct from springs five miles south of thecity.
Aquila and Priscilla were important coworkers with theapostle Paul in his missionary effort. They joined Paul incooperative efforts and also worked in relative independence. Theywere Christian workers in what came to be important centers of earlyChristianity: Corinth, Ephesus, and Rome.
Aquilawas a Jew from Pontus, the husband of Priscilla (the diminutive form,“Prisca,” is used by Paul in his letters). Mentioned insix verses in the NT as a pair, four of these list Priscilla first,probably indicating her wealth, social status, or prominence inthe Christian community. They probably heard and trusted in thegospel in Rome and left that city after the expulsion edict ofClaudius (Acts 18:2). Paul met them in Corinth, where they housed andprobably worked their trade with him (18:3) before traveling withPaul to Ephesus (18:18–19). They provided hospitality toApollos while in Ephesus, also demonstrating knowledge of the faithand teaching skill when they explained the way of God more adequatelyto him (18:26). People of some financial means, they were able totravel and to house churches in Ephesus (1 Cor. 16:19) and Rome(Rom. 16:3–5). In Rom. 16:4 Paul mentions that they “riskedtheir lives” for him, and that the churches of the Gentileswere grateful to them, probably indicating sponsorship of housechurches, teaching ministry, and other missionary work. Since theyare first in the list of greetings in Rom. 16:3, it is likely thatthey were prominent Christians in Rome. They later traveled back toEphesus (2 Tim. 4:19).
Aquila and Priscilla were important coworkers with theapostle Paul in his missionary effort. They joined Paul incooperative efforts and also worked in relative independence. Theywere Christian workers in what came to be important centers of earlyChristianity: Corinth, Ephesus, and Rome.
Aquilawas a Jew from Pontus, the husband of Priscilla (the diminutive form,“Prisca,” is used by Paul in his letters). Mentioned insix verses in the NT as a pair, four of these list Priscilla first,probably indicating her wealth, social status, or prominence inthe Christian community. They probably heard and trusted in thegospel in Rome and left that city after the expulsion edict ofClaudius (Acts 18:2). Paul met them in Corinth, where they housed andprobably worked their trade with him (18:3) before traveling withPaul to Ephesus (18:18–19). They provided hospitality toApollos while in Ephesus, also demonstrating knowledge of the faithand teaching skill when they explained the way of God more adequatelyto him (18:26). People of some financial means, they were able totravel and to house churches in Ephesus (1 Cor. 16:19) and Rome(Rom. 16:3–5). In Rom. 16:4 Paul mentions that they “riskedtheir lives” for him, and that the churches of the Gentileswere grateful to them, probably indicating sponsorship of housechurches, teaching ministry, and other missionary work. Since theyare first in the list of greetings in Rom. 16:3, it is likely thatthey were prominent Christians in Rome. They later traveled back toEphesus (2 Tim. 4:19).
A Moabite term used as the name of a city (Deut. 2:18, 29), aregion (Deut. 2:9), or both. As a city, Ar is located near the ArnonRiver (Num. 21:28), the northern border of Moab (Num. 21:15). Isaiahpredicts the destruction of Ar (Isa. 15:1). No one site has beenassociated with this place. Ar can also mean “city” ingeneral, not just a specific location. As a region, Ar can besynonymous with Moab.
Son of Jether, and a leader in the tribe of Asher (1 Chron.7:38). The meaning of the name is uncertain.
A town located in the hill country southwest of Hebron. Thiswas part of the territory allotted to the tribe of Judah (Josh.15:52). It is possibly the home of Paarai the Arbite, one of David’smen (2 Sam. 23:35).
One of several major topographical features of Israel (Deut.1:7; Josh. 11:16). The Arabah corresponds to the Great Rift Valleyrunning north to south through the land. Situated within it is theJordan River Valley, which extends southward from the Sea of Galilee(Kinnereth) sixty-five miles to the Dead Sea (Sea of the Arabah). TheDead Sea and its surroundings are also part of it, as is the desertregion to the south, which extends 103 miles to the Gulf of Aqaba.Almost the entire region sits below sea level, with the Sea ofGalilee roughly seven hundred feet below, and the Dead Sea thirteenhundred feet below.
TheHebrew for “Arabah” (ha’arabah), where the term ispreceded by the article, refers to the whole or a portion of thisterritory (see Deut. 1:1; Josh. 12:1; 1 Sam. 23:24). Conversely,the plural form occurs in connection with two specific localities.The first, “the plains of Moab” (’arebot moab),lies north of the Dead Sea and east of the Jordan. Here theIsraelites encamped prior to entering Canaan (Num. 22:1), and Moabled Israel into apostasy (25:1–3). The second census was takenhere prior to the crossing of the Jordan (26:3–4). Mosesdelivered his final addresses on the plains of Moab and died in itsvicinity (Deut. 34:1). The second, “the plains of Jericho”(’arebot yerikho), lies opposite the first, west of the Jordan.Here the Israelites entered Canaan (Josh. 4:13). Here too theIsraelite males were circumcised and the Passover celebrated (Josh.5). Finally, it was here that manna ceased (Josh. 5:12). Much later,Judah’s last king, Zedekiah, was apprehended in the plains ofJericho while fleeing the Babylonians (2 Kings 25:1–5).
“Theway of the Arabah” (derek ha’arabah) occurs five times,once indicating a road leading from the Gulf of Aqaba (Deut. 2:8),possibly the King’s Highway (see Num. 20:17, 21). Elsewhere theconstruction indicates a course or direction (2 Sam. 4:7;2 Kings 25:4). Without the article, ’arabah is rendered“desert,” “wasteland,” or “wilderness”(e.g., Job 39:6), and the Arabah could be conceived of as a desert orlowland generally (Isa. 33:9; Zech. 14:10).
Incontemporary usage, “Arabah” applies exclusively to theregion south of the Dead Sea. See also Valley of the Arabah.
A large peninsula lying between the Red Sea on the west andthe Persian Gulf on the east. In the Bible the term is actuallyseldom used (2 Chron. 9:14; Isa. 21:13; Jer. 25:24; Ezek. 27:21;30:5; Gal. 1:17; 4:25), and when it is, it refers more to the generalarea than to any specific group of people or geographic location. Itseems to stand as a designation for that expanse of land that lies tothe south and east of Canaan and the Transjordan peoples. On severaloccasions the term “Arabs” is used to designate thepeople from those regions (2 Chron. 17:11; 21:16; 22:1; 26:7;Neh. 4:7; Acts 2:11). Elsewhere they are referred to as “easternpeoples” (Gen. 29:1; Judg. 6:3, 33; 7:12; 8:10) or “peopleof the East” (1 Kings 4:30; Job 1:3; Jer. 49:28; Ezek.25:4; 25:10). In Gen. 25:6 Arabia is referred to as the “landof the east,” and in Isa. 2:6 simply as “the East”(although this may refer simply to Syria and Mesopotamia).
Clearly,Arabia is a presence in the Scripture, although its role is notnearly as dominant or even as clear as that of other nations orregions, whether superpowers such as Babylon, Assyria, and Egypt orlesser nations such as the Ammonites or the variousCanaanite peoples. Still, the importance of Arabia should not beoverlooked.
Likemany other peoples in the OT, how these people are evaluated bybiblical writers is diverse, which is compounded by the fact that thevarious referents for “Arabs” or “Arabia” canonly really be determined, if at all, from a close examination of thecontext. Nevertheless, we see that “all the kings of Arabia andthe governors of the territories” gave gifts to Solomon(2 Chron. 9:14). The Arabs are also said to bring tribute toJehoshaphat (17:11). Elsewhere in the historical books theirrelationship with the Israelites is more hostile (e.g., 2 Chron.21:16; 22:1; Neh. 4:7).
Neitherdo they escape the attention of the prophets. In Isa. 21:13–16their troubles are predicted at the hands of other nations (notablythe Babylonians and the Assyrians, both of whom waged battles atlater points in Israel’s history). Isaiah also refers toDedanites and Kedar, the first being an Arabian tribe and the seconda home of Bedouin tribes. Both references assume their nomadiclifestyle. According to Jer. 25:24, they will be among many nationswho will drink of the cup of God’s wrath. According to Ezek.30:5, Arabia will fall by the sword (Nebuchadnezzar’s) as oneof several allies of Egypt.
Inthe NT, Arabs were among those present at Pentecost (Acts 2:11).After his conversion Paul journeyed to Arabia (Gal. 1:17), by whichis meant the Nabatean kingdom, stretching from the Transjordansouthwest toward the Sinai Peninsula. Interestingly, Paul’sreference to Mount Sinai as being in Arabia (Gal. 4:25) may suggest alocation other than the traditional one of the Sinai Peninsula—forexample, across the Gulf of Aqaba (the eastern arm of the Red Sea) inor near Midian (see Exod. 2:11–3:3)—although there is noconsensus on this matter.
The NASB transliteration of the name of the brook mentionedin Isa. 15:7. The NIV translates it as “Ravine of the Poplars,”the KJV as “brook of the willows,” and the NRSV as“Wadi of the Willows.” This brook may be associated withthe wadi el-Chesa in Moab at the southern end of the Dead Sea.
(1) ACanaanite city located in the Negev Desert, approximately eighteenmiles northeast of Beersheba. This was the site of the defeat by theking of Arad when the Israelites attempted a southern entrance intoCanaan, the result of which was the capture of several of their ownpeople (Num. 21:1; 33:40). Later, the king of Arad is listed amongthe conquered kings of Canaan (Josh. 12:14). The city was destroyedand renamed “Hormah” (Num. 21:2–3). The area isalso mentioned as a reference point for the land of the Kenites, thedescendants of Moses’ father-in-law (Judg. 1:16).
Alarge, fortified city of approximately twenty-two acres existed onthis site in the Early Bronze Age II (3000–2700 BC).Apparently, the Arad of this period had extensive trade connectionswith Egypt, as may be inferred from the discovery of numerousEgyptian ceramic pieces and pottery, or ostraca. The site wasabandoned in the Late Bronze Age I (1550–1400 BC) and notresettled until the Early Iron Age (1200–1000 BC), when asquared fortress was built on its ruins. A temple/shrine built duringthe Iron Age is perhaps the most significant discovery in Tel Arad.There is remarkable similarity between the details of the buildingplans of this temple/shrine and the description of the tabernacle inExod. 27 and the Solomonic temple in 1 Kings 6. In addition tothis Arad temple, numerous ostraca with inscriptions in Hebrew,Aramaic, Greek, and Arabic have been discovered. Although fragmented,the inscriptions found on these ostraca appear to be letters tocommanders of Arad with military and administrative instruction. Thissite was clearly associated with the worship of Yahweh, as oneostraca mentions the “House of Yahweh.” It remainsunknown, however, if this refers to the Arad shrine or to theSolomonic temple.
(2) Sonof Beriah (1 Chron. 8:15).
(1) Thehead of the family of Babylonian exiles who are listed as returneesunder the leadership of several Jewish leaders, one being Zerubbabel(Ezra 2:5; Neh. 7:10). Later in the postexilic period, Tobiah, theadversary of Nehemiah, married a woman from the family of Arah (Neh.6:18). (2) Sonof Ulla, listed in the preexilic genealogy of the tribe of Asher(1 Chron. 7:39).
(1) Shem’sson (Gen. 10:22; 1 Chron. 1:17) and ancestor to the Arameans.(2) Kemuel’sson, grandson of Abraham’s brother Nahor (Gen. 22:21).(3) Shemer’sson in the genealogy of Asher (1 Chron. 7:34). (4) TheKJV has “Aram” in the genealogy of Christ (Matt. 1:3;Luke 3:33), whereas other translations have “Ram”(consistently in the Luke passage; the Matthew reference has furthercomplications and thus the versions differ, only some having Ram[KJV, NIV, NASB] and others Ami [NRSV, NLT, NET]). (5) Animportant Aramean nation located in modern Syria. Many Englishtranslations inaccurately refer to this state as “Syria.”
A small buffer state northeast of Israel, it was among agroup of Syrian states that combined to attack Israel after David’smessage of sympathy to the Ammonites was misconstrued (1 Chron.19:6–7).
A small buffer state northeast of Israel, it was among agroup of Syrian states that combined to attack Israel after David’smessage of sympathy to the Ammonites was misconstrued (1 Chron.19:6–7).
Literally, “Aram of the Two Rivers.” This isa region of the northern Euphrates above the point where it is joinedby the River Harbor in the west of what is now Syria, and thusnorthwest of Mesopotamia proper. Associated with the patriarchs, itsproximity to Israel also made it a place from which opposition mightcome. Genesis 24:10 notes that it was here that Abraham’sservant came to the city of Nahor and met Rebekah at the well, whileDeut. 23:4 indicates that this was Balaam’s home region.Cushan-Rishathaim, Israel’s first foreign oppressor in Judges,came from here (Judg. 3:8), while both 1 Chron. 19:6 and thetitle of Ps. 60 indicate that the Ammonites hired mercenaries fromthe region when engaged in war against David.
A minor state in the Anti-Lebanon among a group of Syrianstates that attacked Israel after David’s message of sympathyto the Ammonites was misconstrued (1 Chron. 19:6), but which heultimately defeated (2 Sam. 8:3; cf. Ps. 60:1). See also Zobah.
Descendants of Shem (Gen. 10:22) and Nahor (Gen. 22:21)identified in the LXX and English translations as “Syrians.”According to the patriarchal narratives in Genesis, Arameansoriginated from Upper Mesopotamia in the early second millennium.Abraham is referred to as a “wandering Aramean” (Deut.26:5), which suggests that the Hebrews descended from Arameans.
TheArameans gradually grew until increasing numbers, famine, drought, orother agents forced them to spread east and west. Their easternexpansion faced opposition by the Assyrian Empire, whose sourcesrecord numerous conflicts between their kings and the “Ahlamu”(the Assyrian reference to the Arameans).
Thewestern expansion impacted ancient Israel as early as the days ofSaul (1 Sam. 14:47). David defeated the alliance of theAmmonites with the Aramean king Hadadezer (2 Sam. 8:3–8;10–12). King Asa of Judah made a treaty with an Aramean king inhis war against Baasha of Israel (1 Kings 15:16–22). KingAhab was defeated and killed in his battles with the Arameans(1 Kings 22:1–38). Later, God provided a “deliverer”(possibly an Assyrian king or officer), which relieved Arameanpressures upon Israel (2 Kings 13:3–5). This allowedJehoash of Israel to defeat the Arameans and regain previously lostterritories. In the eighth century BC the Aramean king Rezin, inalliance with Israel and Tyre, attempted to force Ahaz of Judah intotheir league to oppose the growing Assyrian threat (2 Kings16:5–9; Isa. 7:1–9). By the end of the eighth century,all Aramean territories had become provinces in the Assyrian Empire.
Verylittle is known about Aramean society. They were nomadic pastoralistswho established tribal states throughout Mesopotamia. By the ninthcentury BC, these states developed into monarchies, their kingscompeting for power and greater territories. There was never anAramean empire. Although the Arameans were polytheistic, Hadad wasthe most prominent deity and the patron of the kings. The Aramaiclanguage had a long-lasting influence in the ancient world. It wasadopted as the official language of international diplomacy duringthe time of the Persian Empire and remained so even into theHellenistic era.
An archaic way of referring to a woman from Aram/Syria (NIV:“Aramean”). The only use of the term is found in the KJVof 1 Chron. 7:14 in reference to the mother of Makir, a son ofManasseh.
The son of Dishan mentioned in the genealogy of Seir the Horite (Gen.36:28; 1 Chron. 1:42). Aran became a clan of Edom.
Ararat refers to a mountainous region in eastern Asia Minor.The LXX uses “Armenia” for Ararat (except at Isa. 37:38),implying the modern country of Armenia or eastern Turkey (Kurdistan),two hundred miles southeast of the Black Sea around Lake Van (cf.Josephus, Ant. 1.3).
Asearly as the thirteenth century BC, Assyrian texts call this area“Urartu” (inscription of Shalmaneser I). As akingdom, Urartu reached its peak of power in the eighth century. Thesame location occurs in 2 Kings 19:37 (cf. Isa. 37:38). Thesetexts show that Ararat could be the enemy not only of Assyria(2 Kings 19:37) but also of Babylon (Jer. 51:27). Along with thekingdoms of Minni and Ashkenaz, Ararat is summoned by God to fightagainst Babylon and vindicate Zion. In God’s hands such nationsare instruments, and God’s supremacy will be preserved.
Thebest-known reference to Ararat is as the location where Noah’sark comes to rest after the flood. Genesis 8:4 actually speaks of the“mountains of Ararat,” not one particular mountain. InGen. 8:2–14 the perspective is of the rain stopping and thefloodwaters slowly receding in an extended process during which theark is deposited on the Ararat mountain range. Tradition has favoredAgri Dag, an extinct volcano rising 16,916 feet on the northeasternborder of Turkey, as a viable site for Ararat. See also Armenia.
Five times within the lists of David’s mighty men thedesignation “Hararite” appears (2Sam. 23:11, 33[2×]; 1Chron. 11:34–35). Those called “Hararites”presumably came from a place called “Harar” (note, e.g.,the NLT of 2Sam. 23:11: “Shammah son of Agee fromHarar”); however, Harar is not mentioned directly in the Bible,and its location remains unknown. “Ararite” wasapparently a Hebrew alternative spelling for “Hararite”(2Sam. 23:33; see the NASB).
A Jebusite (called “Ornan” in Chronicles) whosold David a threshing floor on which the king constructed an altar(2 Sam. 24:16–25; 1 Chron. 21:15–27). Thisstory legitimized the locale for the construction of the Solomonictemple (1 Chron. 22:1; 2 Chron. 3:1) by asserting that itwas the place where the sacrifice of David averted the destroyingangel of pestilence (2 Sam. 24:16, 25).
A man whose name literally means “four,” Arba wasthe leader of the Anakites, a tribe of giants (Deut. 2:10, 21; 9:2)that lived near Hebron. The town was originally called Kirath Arba(“city of Arba”; Josh. 14:15; 15:13; 21:11).
A resident of Beth-araba (2 Sam. 23:31) or moregenerally the Arabah or Jordan Valley. See also Abi-Albon.
Paarai the Arbite appears in David’s list of thirtymighty men (2 Sam. 23:35), showing that he came from the villageof Arab, located in the hill country near Hebron (Josh. 15:52). Seealso Arab.
One who serves as a facilitator of reconciliation between twoparties. The role of a mediator was taken by different individualsand offices in the OT, as seen in Abraham interceding for Sodom andGomorrah (Gen. 18:22–32), Moses asking God to forgive Israel(Exod. 32:31–32), and the Israelites begging Moses to speak toGod on their behalf (Exod. 20:19). In addition, judges, prophets,kings, and priests assumed intermediary functions at times. Mediationfunctions bidirectionally: from God to humans, and from humans toGod. The prophets are quintessentially the first kind of mediators(God to humans), while the priests took, mostly, the second function(humans to God).
Inthe NT, the role of mediator is given to Christ, since he alone, asGod incarnate, is qualified for it (the “one mediator betweenGod and mankind” [1Tim. 2:5]). This implies that insomuchas reconciliation between sinful humankind and a holy God isconceivable, Christ alone can facilitate that mediation.
Hebrewsdevelops a theology of mediation by comparing Christ to angels,Moses, and the prophets, declaring that Christ is superior to each inevery aspect. Hebrews says that Christ is the mediator of a new andbetter covenant (8:6; 9:15; 12:24). Many NT passages present Christengaging in prophetic ministry as he proclaims and interprets God’swill for the lost world. His priestly work consists not only ofgiving himself as the ultimate sacrifice but also of interceding forhumans before God and giving the “priestly blessing” fromhis heavenly abode.
Christ’smediation is to be appreciated in terms of both who he is and what hehas done. The eternal mystery surrounding Christ is his incarnateperson (God-man) and his atoning death (cleansing all guilt). Throughthe patristic period and the following scholastic movement,theological reflection on Christ was channeled to the meaning ofincarnation, emphasizing Christ’s unique status as both trueGod and true human that makes redemptive work possible.
Bycomparison, the Protestant Reformers brought Christ’s salvificand mediatory work into the forefront of their theology. The Reformedtradition developed the mediatory role of Christ in a threefoldmanner: prophet, priest, and king.
The KJV translation of a Hebrew word (’elam) morecommonly translated “porch” or “portico”(even in its own translation elsewhere) in Ezek. 40:16–36. Theword refers to an entrance room or foyer to the main building of thetemple (1 Kings 6:3; 7:12–21) and in one place to acovered porch (7:6). This entrance to the temple measured thirty feetwide and fifteen feet deep. The height of the room is generallybelieved to be thirty feet, though this is uncertain because of acorruption of the original text (compare 1 Kings 6:3 with2 Chron. 3:4). This vestibule also was the location of the twonamed pillars, Jakin and Boaz, and was richly adorned with gold.
Archaeology is the scientific study of the material remainsof past human life and activities. It can also be described as theprocedure by which ancient artifacts are recovered, identified, andinterpreted. Archaeology deals with both the prehistorical andhistorical periods and encompasses both written (epigraphical) andunwritten (artifactual) discoveries. Even though literary remains(inscriptions, ostraca [potsherds], seals) are typically the subjectof other disciplines, archaeological investigation usually isresponsible for their discovery. Without archaeology much of theavailable written evidence would have remained buried forever in theground. Unwritten materials include everything made by humans, suchas fortifications, pottery, tools, jewelry, and weapons.
Biblicalarchaeology more narrowly focuses on the material remains of Israeland its neighboring countries that relate to the biblical period andnarrative. For example, ancient texts recovered from sites such asMari, Ugarit, Ebla, and Amarna shed valuable light on the biblicalrecord and on the history and religion of the ancient Near East.Biblical archaeology may be understood as the process of correlatingarchaeological evidence with the biblical record. Archaeology and theBible are closely related because they inform each other. Thus, eventhough archaeology and biblical studies are independent disciplines,they are certainly interrelated.
TheHistory of Biblical Archaeology
Tounderstand better the meaning of biblical archaeology, it isnecessary to briefly trace its history. Before the 1800s little wasknown about the Bible’s background, despite its central role inthe religion and culture of the world, because the Bible was theprimary source for access to the history of ancient Israel and itsneighbors. There were few sources to which the Scripture historianscould appeal besides the apocryphal writings and the works ofJosephus, because the early Greek historians (Herodotus andThucydides) were of limited value, given their interest in the “majorplayers” of history.
Thediscovery of the Rosetta Stone (dated 196 BC) in 1799 and itsdecipherment in 1822 by J. F. Champollion opened wide the doorsto ancient Egypt’s history. Within twenty-five years, by thedecipherment of Akkadian cuneiform by Henry Rawlinson (1846), theworld had the key to reading and interpreting thousands of tabletsand monumental texts from ancient Babylonia, Assyria, and even theland of the Hittites. These two major developments allowed the voicesfrom the ancient world of the Bible to speak once more and encouragedhistorians to look at the Bible as supported by the background datacoming from the rest of the ancient Near East. As a result of thesedevelopments, a new interest was kindled in ancient Near Easterncultures and the material remains (realia) that they left behind,coupled with a renewed interest in the setting of the biblical text.
Initialexcavations of biblical sites.Thebeginnings of scientific exploration of Palestine can be traced to1838 when American Edward Robinson (geographer and explorer) aided bythe Arabist Eli Smith undertook a historic trip to the Holy Land andsucceeded in identifying over one hundred biblical sites, effectivelylaying the foundations for biblical archaeology and geography. Thisled to the establishment of the British Palestine Exploration Fund in1865 for the purpose of exploring Palestine systematically andscientifically, and to several of the geographic surveys of westernPalestine and Transjordan.
Thebeginning of major excavations of biblical sites was not far behind,and in 1890 William M. F. Petrie (a renowned Egyptologist then)initiated what is widely regarded as the first modern archaeologicalexcavation in the Holy Land. He excavated Tell el-Hesi(identification still uncertain) in the northern Negev, and his workunderlies archaeological inquiry in the Holy Land to this day. Morespecifically, Petrie laid the foundations of modern archaeology byhis application of stratigraphy and ceramic typology.
Stratigraphyis the technique of digging a tell (a cone-shaped mound that containsthe remains of successive human occupation over a long period oftime) layer by layer while carefully separating and recording thecontents of each occupational layer. This technique tries to untanglethese layers in the reverse order (the older layers of occupation arealways below the newer layers) of their deposition and to reconstructthe history of a site period by period.
Typologyis the technique of classifying artifacts based on their externalcharacteristics (shape, ware, and decoration). Pottery is consideredan accurate tool for dating the occupational layers of a tell, andceramic typology is the art of charting changes in local potterystyles. By analyzing the pottery lying within successive layers atHesi, Petrie was able to construct a relative chronological frameworkfor Palestine. To arrive at a more absolute chronology, theresearchers from Palestine usually need (especially in the earlierperiods) to correlate their findings with similar styles fromneighboring areas, such as Egypt and Mesopotamia, where there areavailable written records and astronomically fixed dates.
BeforeWorld War I, the first and only American excavation in Palestinethat deserves mention is that of George A. Reisner and architectClarence S. Fisher between 1908 and 1910 at Sebastiyeh (biblicalSamaria). The rest are usually considered to have resembled “treasurehunts.” By the use of systematic digging and recording inPalestine, the Reisner-Fisher method, which was far morecomprehensive and meticulous than Petrie’s, greatly improvedPalestinian archaeology.
Thefirst golden age.The “golden age” of American excavation in Palestinefollowed a few decades later, after World War I in the 1920s and1930s. Numerous and well-financed archaeological digs started at thefollowing biblical sites: Ai, Bethel, Beth-shean, Beth-shemesh,Beth-zur, Debir, Gibeah, Jericho, Mizpah, Samaria, Shechem, andothers. All of these excavations, however, were overshadowed by thework of Orientalist W. F. Albright at Tell Beit Mirsim (identitystill disputed, but perhaps Debir).
Itwas Albright and those of the American school in Jerusalem (now theAlbright Institute of Archaeology) who dominated the scene in theseformative years. Albright refined Petrie’s methodology andintegrated very well archaeology, biblical research, and ancient NearEastern studies, thus establishing biblical (and Palestinian)archaeology as a discipline in its own right. He also envisioned an“archaeological revolution” that would open up the lands,peoples, and lost sites of the ancient Near East so that the Biblewould be better understood and also gain new credibility. Hecertainly was reacting against the spirit of his time, when steriledebates of textual and literary criticism (especially of theskeptical variety) were prevalent in both European and Americanliberalism, and this seems to have led some to believe thatarchaeology’s primary function was to “prove the Bibletrue.”
Thesecond golden age.A second “golden age” of biblical archaeology is usuallyconsidered to have arrived after World War II when variousforeign teams worked throughout the Middle East in cooperation withlocal archaeologists, a trend that continues today. The archaeologyof Palestine advanced rapidly, with significant improvements in thetechniques of digging and recording. The greatest influence onarchaeological method at this time belongs to Kathleen Kenyon(English excavator of Jericho [Tell es-Sultan]), whosestratigraphical method (known as the Wheeler-Kenyon method) is usedeven today by excavators, with modifications. Other importantarchaeologists who contributed significantly to the biblicalarchaeology movement are Yigael Yadin of Israel and G. E. Wrightof the United States.
Duringthe height of its prominence and promise, biblical archaeology becamean important component for the biblical theology movement and alsofor Christian apologetics (especially as represented by Joseph Freeof Wheaton College). In fact, one of the greatest theologians in thebiblical theology movement, G. E. Wright, was also Albright’sstudent. He conducted a major excavation at Tell Balath (biblicalShechem), following the Wheeler-Kenyon method and emphasizing potterychronology in the tradition of the Albright school. More important,Shechem was a training ground for many American archaeologists whereWright created a new school of field archaeology.
Thenew archaeology.In the 1960s, under the influence of the social and natural sciences,the “new archaeology” that developed tended to focus onthe comprehensive study of humans as species (and not on historicalissues). William G. Dever (a student and follower of G. E.Wright at the important Tel Gezer project) argued forcefully andsuccessfully for the “liberation” of Near Easternarchaeology from biblical studies and preferred the term (prevalenttoday in most American schools) “Syro-Palestinian archaeology.”Today, with very few exceptions (e.g., Harvard University), mostAmerican universities offer classes in the archaeology ofSyria-Palestine (this was apparently Albright’s old alternateterm for biblical archaeology), not in biblical archaeology. The nameof the popular magazine Biblical Archaeologist was also changed toAncient Near Eastern Archaeology, despite protests from many of itsreaders.
Thenew archaeology began with the realization in the 1960s that muchdata of potential significance has been overlooked, and perhaps evenvital evidence has been discarded. New questions and methodsdeveloped from the frustration that old questions have not beenanswered satisfactorily. The temporal and geographical horizons ofthe new archaeology broadened to include the Paleolithic period(c. 100,000 BC) through the Ottoman era (AD 1922), and attentionis now paid to the neglected periods of Judaism and earlyChristianity.
Moreimportant, the composition of the dig staff broadened considerably toinclude a much larger body of scientists to assist in answering thenew questions posed. Today, the field archaeologists (besideshistorians, linguists, and ceramic experts) are supported bygeologists, anthropologists, paleoethnobotanists, zoologists,climatologists, hydrologists, ethnographers, and, more recently,statisticians and computer experts. It is clear that the newarchaeology is done in a very interdisciplinary way. The Tell Hesbanand Khirbat en-Nahas excavations (both in Jordan) are good models ofthis type of interdisciplinary research. Bones, seeds, and otherorganic materials are now saved and carefully recorded to addressquestions related to economic strategies, social differentiation,diet, disease, and the like. Soil and pollen samples are taken,extensive regional and environmental surveys are carried out, andmaterial culture samples and artifacts are submitted forsophisticated analysis. It is ironic (according to Dever) that thisnew and “secular” archaeology, while demanding moreautonomy from the Bible, promises to contribute even more to biblicalstudies as it grows in precision and sophistication.
Thenew archaeology and Syro-Palestinian archaeology of today haveadvantages and disadvantages. They have the advantages of staff whoare better equipped and trained, as well as educated volunteers whousually have genuine interest in their work. More important, theirconclusions have the advantage of being based on data that is morescientifically obtained and analyzed. Many of the digs run fieldschools modeled on the ones from the Gezer project (1964–1973),which trained hundreds of student volunteers. These are all good anduseful for both participants and their projects, but they have led tosignificant rises in the costs of an excavation. Thus, a typicalsix-week season is estimated now to cost in excess of one hundredthousand dollars. Since the new archaeology has led to a“secularization” of biblical archaeology and churches andseminaries have gradually stopped sponsoring these projects, thefunds have had to come increasingly from federal and public sourcesof support. The National Endowment for the Humanities (and privatedonors later) became the major source of funds in the 1970s.
Approachesto the Bible in Modern Archaeology
Thereis no doubt that the new archaeology has introduced many usefulscientific improvements in the field. (Of course, these scientificimprovements were embraced by both biblical and Syro-Palestinianarchaeologists in the 1970s, and the distinction between these twogroups has become largely imaginary.) At the same time, however, ithas brought new biases against the biblical text. The Bible, inDever’s view, was never intended as a historical document andshould be viewed with “considerable suspicion” forreconstructing the history of the ancient Near East. Otherarchaeologists in the field (and also historians) have an even morenegative attitude toward the Bible. However, it must be emphasizedthat all (or at least most) agree that the Bible has its role in thearchaeology of Syria-Palestine. The question has to do with how theBible should be used.
Maximalistand minimalist approaches.The two schools of thought that seem the loudest in the debate amongbiblical and/or Syro-Palestinian archaeologists are usually labeled“maximalist” and “minimalist.” (To theseKenneth A. Kitchen adds the label “factualist.”According to Kitchen, the agenda of a “factualist” isneither to prove nor to disprove any theory concerning the earlyhistory of Israel, but simply to examine the facts and let the dataspeak for itself.)
Themaximalist school has a strong view of the historical reliability ofScripture and emphasizes synergy between archaeology and biblicalstudies. Others consider this to be a naive approach to Scripture andan uncritical acceptance of the information that it tries tocommunicate. The maximalists follow the scholarship of W. F.Albright and his student John Bright, and they assume that the OTspeaks of historical realities. When seeking to reconstruct thehistory of ancient Israel, they readily and confidently refer to thebiblical record as a valid and significant source for their research.They are also confident that when all the data is in, a biblicalhistory of Israel (aided by archaeology) will exhibit a closecorrespondence with the real history of Israel.
Theminimalist school is generally skeptical concerning the historicalreliability of the biblical text. Many advocates of this approachargue that the OT was written primarily during the Hellenistic period(it certainly is postexilic), centuries after the events that itclaims to describe. A community around Jerusalem created thetraditions found in the Bible in order to give account for themselvesand their distinctive religious notions and practices. According tothis approach, any correlation between the Bible and thearchaeological record is suspect a priori. When there aretensions between biblical and extrabiblical records (includingarchaeology), the extrabiblical records are to be preferred asevidence, and the contradictions are usually emphasized to underminethe reliability of the Bible as a historical source.
Theminimalist movement has developed gradually. Although a century agothere were many who questioned the historicity of the first chaptersof Genesis, most accepted the essential historicity of thepatriarchs, the exodus from Egypt under Moses, the conquest of Canaanby Joshua, the historicity of David and Solomon, and the rest of theOT narrative. During the past forty years, however, serious doubt hasbeen cast on all of these events.
Thestance of the minimalists led to peculiar (and rarely settled)controversies over issues such as the legitimacy of reading “thehouse of David” in the Tel Dan inscription (discovered in1993), the Siloam Tunnel inscription (which overlaps with 2 Chron.32 and is traditionally ascribed to Hezekiah), the very existence ofJerusalem during the days of David and Solomon, and even theexistence of these two kings.
Afresh approach.Is there a way to move beyond the current state of the debate? Somebelieve that there is hope by using a fresh approach to biblicalarchaeology, one that follows in the footsteps of Lawrence Stager andPhilip King (see their book, Life in Biblical Israel ).This approach does not try to reconstruct history or simplyilluminate the Bible; rather, it seeks to enter into the world of theancients to acquire a fuller understanding of Israelite society andits literary record through the combined use of artifacts, sociology,and ethnography. Textual and archaeological data are brought into ahistorical discourse by “selecting and interpreting themthrough the problematics of social history.” Thus, biblicalarchaeology in the older sense is making a comeback by hearkeningback to the integrative works of the nineteenth century, but withvast amounts of new data. This “new biblical archaeology”should not be driven by apologetic purposes and should not aim to“prove the truth of the Bible.” It should have moremodest and realistic goals, considering the limitations ofarchaeology (see below).
Evangelicalarchaeologists, confident in the truth of the Bible (which can standby itself despite its many attacks from within and without), shouldhave as their goal the understanding of the biblical world in itsgeographical, cultural, and historical setting. They should usearchaeology and linguistics to correlate biblical texts and ancientartifacts against the background of the historical and geographicalsetting. When historical questions are posed, the cumulative evidenceshould lead to probability and plausibility rather than a defensivequest for final proof. This attempt to follow historical probabilityvis-à-vis the Bible is different from setting out a prioriwith a defensive Bible-proving agenda.
Thisnew approach will not make the Scriptures say more than judiciousassessment of the evidence will allow (a problem that plagues someconservative interpreters), but neither will it cast undue skepticismon the Scriptures’ historical value (the problem of theminimalists). It endeavors to pay close attention both to theliterary nature and intentions of the biblical text and to thefragmentary nature of the archaeological record.
Thesenew biblical archaeologists do not set out again “to prove theBible.” Instead, they seek to situate the texts of the OT intheir historical and cultural contexts and to demonstrate howawareness of the extrabiblical world can open new doors into theBible. Their goals are more modest, not because of a lower view ofScripture, but rather because of a clearer understanding of thelimitations and fragmentary nature of archaeology despite itsconsiderable refinement in the recent decades.
TheLimitations of Archaeology
Archaeologyhas limitations because of the vast amount of time and area to becovered and because of the hazards of preservation. Objects of wood,leatherwork, basketry, papyrus, and cloth rarely survive, and metals(especially precious metals) were frequently recycled. It is alsoimportant to realize that no biblical site has ever been completelyexcavated, and most of the excavations tend to pay greater attentionto the major buildings (citadels, temples, palaces) rather than thehomes of the general population.
Onlyin recent years have accurate methods of stratification and recordingenabled comparisons to be made between sites, and the reliability ofsome foundational excavations in the Holy Land is rightly questionedby the finds from newer excavations (e.g., Megiddo, Gezer, and Hazorare being reexcavated in part to clarify and answer questions raisedby previous excavations and debates). This is understandable becausemost of the foundational excavations in the Holy Land did not haveaccess to the accurate methods of stratification, recording, andscientific analysis available today. Many useful artifacts andespecially organic objects were routinely discarded in the earlierexcavations.
Ingeneral, earlier levels of a site are more likely to have beendisturbed by the activities of later periods, and it was very commonfor older buildings (and sometimes even monumental inscriptions) tobe dismantled and the (stone) blocks reused for later buildings oreven roads. The objects that archaeologists discover survive and aremost often found by accident. Consequently, given the limitations andpitfalls of archaeology (especially the way it was done in theearliest part of the twentieth century), one must have realistic andmore modest expectations about what archaeology can recover, andrealize that the further one goes in time, the less archaeologicalinformation may be available for comparison and useful analysis. Addto this that some of the central characters of the Bible (e.g.,Abraham, Moses, most of the judges, Ezra) were not major players inthe world of their time, and that some important sites have neverbeen excavated (e.g., Damascus, Hebron), and it becomes clear thatthere are considerable reasons to have more realistic and modestexpectations about what archaeology can accomplish.
Therole and possibility of accurately interpreting archaeologicalremains should also be taken into consideration, especially sincethere are well-documented cases in which the interpretation of theexcavator has turned out to be false (e.g., the “DegeneratedAshtoreth Plaque” of R. A. S. Macalister from Gezer).Anyone who has ever participated in an archaeological excavation ledby a group of experts in the field can remember debates that tookplace among these experts, not only about the dating of variouspieces of pottery, but even about the role and dating of well-definedand visible monumental architecture. While this is understandable anddesirable, and many times leads to the refinement and corrections ofunwarranted early assumptions, the process shows the difficultyinherent in interpreting the fragmentary remains of a deadcivilization far removed from our times and settings.
MaterialRemains and Written Sources
Itis a sobering fact that archaeology cannot provide the basis forhistory. Material remains can reveal climate changes and theirimpact, sequences of human cultures and their products, traces ofdestruction and desertion, changes in building techniques and art.Nevertheless, the persons involved remain anonymous, their thoughts,motives and faith a mystery, and the specific events of their timeslargely unknown (e.g., the destruction by fire of Lachish IIcould not have been accurately dated and related without the biblicalreport in Jer. 34:7). It is the written documents (many timesrecovered through archaeology) that can reveal the names of kings andkingdoms, their dates and deeds, and the fruits of their thinking inliterature. It is the testimony of these texts, rightly evaluated,that can add the “flesh and features” to the “bones”archaeology discovers (Allan Millard).
Onthe other hand, the material remains of life (pottery, jewelry,tools, weapons, cultic objects, architecture, etc.) as recoveredthrough archaeology can bring color to the textual references.Nevertheless, the written sources are essential and provide the mostvaluable information for recovering the history and faith of anyancient nation. It is the duty of the biblical scholar andarchaeologist to interpret correctly the available data fromSyria-Palestine and to arrive at plausible explanations concerningthe biblical world. The combination of texts (biblical andextrabiblical), material culture (archaeology), geography, andhistory holds considerable promise to help scholars better define thecontext of Scripture.
Thereis no doubt that this approach to archaeology holds considerablepotential as it is generating more material than is possible for anyperson (or even school) to encompass. As one of the most quicklychanging social sciences today, both in theoretical advances and newdata, archaeology is and will be the source of new insights intobiblical life and times. It seems that the “archaeologicalrevolution” predicted by W. F. Albright is far from over;it probably has only begun.
Theevidence for this revolution from the evangelical field is visible invarious ways. The rest of this entry briefly presents some selectivearchaeological data that helps define the context and thatcomplements (since the writers of the Bible were selective in theirreporting), challenges, or confirms the narrative of the Bible. Thedata should help the interpreter of the Bible bridge thegeographical, temporal, and cultural gap that leads to the ancientwriter.
TheCannanite (Bronze) Age (3300–1200 BC)
EarlyBronze Age.Towns with mud-brick walls begin to appear in Canaan in the EarlyBronze Age I (before 3000 BC). Evidence of occupation in thethird millennium is found at Beth-yerah, Beth-shan, Gezer, Jerusalem,Jericho, Arad, Megiddo, and Ai, among others. There was a differencebetween the pottery of the north (Beth-yerah) and that of the south,while the most striking development was that of the fine “KhirbetKerak” ware.
MiddleBronze Age.About 2200 BC (Middle Bronze Age I) there arrived a distinctivenomadic people identified with the Amorites of the Bible (Num. 13:29;Josh. 5:1; 10:6). They had distinctive burial customs, pottery, andweapons that show connection with the city-states of Syria. It ismost likely that their kings included the Asiatic “ForeignRulers” (Hyksos) who conquered Egypt in the eighteenth centuryBC. This was a time of wealth and frequent warfare between cities. Itseems that the Middle Bronze Age was a time when seminomadic groups(including a group called “Habiru,” who are also found inthe Late Bronze Age) infiltrated the land between defended towns. Itis possible that the patriarchs were among these Habiru, whoinfiltrated mostly the hill country and the Negev. In fact, it isdemonstrable from a comparison with the eighteenth-century BC textsfrom Mari (on the Euphrates River) that the pastoral traditions ofGenesis fit the early second-millennium BC context much better thanlater periods.
Thetowns and houses of the Middle Bronze Age were violently destroyed inthe fifteenth century BC, most likely by the Egyptians, who expelledthe Hyksos. Despite the trade that seems to have continued with theeastern Mediterranean (Mycenaean pottery), the hill towns ofPalestine were now poorer and fewer than the coastal cities. Thissituation is clearly reflected in the Amarna letters between thekings of Canaan and Egypt. The major cities were reoccupied, but manyof them were destroyed later in the thirteenth century.
LateBronze Age.It is in the Late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 BC) that thebiblical account is usually challenged by the archaeologicaldiscoveries. Even if one accepts the reasonable interpretation thatJoshua burned only three cities (Jericho, Ai, Hazor) in his campaign(see Josh. 6:24; 8:28; 11:13), the evidence of destruction from bothJericho and Ai is highly questionable. Thus, while it is widelybelieved that Jericho was abandoned around 1325 BC, the fallen wallsonce thought to belong to this period were dated much earlier byKathleen Kenyon (Early Bronze). The evidence from Ai (et-Tell) iseven less promising, unless Bryan Wood is correct in hisidentification of Ai with Khirbet el-Maqatir.
Basedon the apparent lack of change in material culture during the LateBronze Age, mainstream archaeologists commonly classify theIsraelites as dissident Canaanites who moved into the hill country.
Althoughit cannot be conclusively demonstrated from archaeology that theIsraelites were not Canaanites but rather came to Canaan from theoutside, the mainstream interpretation has serious problems of itsown. There was clearly a new pattern of simple farming in the hills,characterized by four-room houses whose inhabitants used manycollared-rim jars, and there is an almost complete absence of pigbones (which usually are found in the Canaanite cities) in thehill-country sites. More important, there is strong evidence that theIsraelites were worshiping their own national God (YHWH) by the ninthcentury BC, in sharp contrast to the polytheistic religion of Canaan(as illuminated by the culture in neighboring Ugarit). The personalnames of individuals in the eighth and seventh centuries BC arealmost exclusively Yahwistic.
Anothervery significant change is the abandonment of the shrines in towns ofthe Late Bronze Age. Not a single site can be identified in whichworship continued from the Late Bronze Age well into the Iron Age (itseems that by 1000 BC the Canaanites disappeared as an entity in thearea occupied by Israel). It is highly unlikely that the Canaaniteswho moved from towns into the hill-country sites would have abandonedtheir divinities (whose need they must have felt greatly while facingthe uncertainties of the wilderness), and it is even more unlikelythat people who had come from different towns with different deitieswould have accepted almost universally a new patron deity of obscureprovenance. The continuity in material culture of a nation that wasto take over the homes and all the equipment of the Canaanites shouldnot be surprising in light of the commands of the Bible (Deut.6:10–11). The almost universal rise of the worship of the Godof Israel, and the mention of Israel as a group of people in theStela of Merneptah (c. 1208 BC), argue forcefully that theIsraelites were not really Canaanites.
TheIsraelite (Iron) Age (1200–586 BC)
Bythe twelfth century, the Philistine settlement of southwest Canaan isattested by a new type of pottery with Late Mycenaean affinities.This new type of pottery was found throughout Philistia, theShephelah, and as far north as Joppa. Wealthy and well-constructedCanaanite cities held out for at least another century (Beth-Shean,Gezer, and Megiddo?). The evidence for Israelites comes from thesmall villages throughout the hill country and Galilee.Traditionally, as mentioned above, they are recognized by theirfour-room houses, large number of storage pits for grain, largestorage jars with thick-collared rims, and preference for terracinghillsides for farming.
Archaeologically,it is very difficult to attribute the construction ofcities to any king of the united monarchy (but see the recentdiscovery below). Saul had a citadel at Gibeah (Tell el-Fûl),and the first fortification there has been attributed to him. Itshows the adoption of a new fortification system of casemate wall,characteristic of this period. Similar casemate walls have been foundat Shechem, Beth-shemesh, and Beit Mirsim (and later even in Moab). Asmall town at Megiddo, whose houses form a defensive ring around theperimeter of the mound, has been attributed to David.
Though1 Kings 9:15 reports how Solomon built up Hazor, Megiddo, andGezer, the dating of the six-chambered gates found in all of thesesites and the related walls is still being debated. A much morerecent excavation from Khirbat en-Nahas in Jordan has foundindustrial-scale production of copper in a region and at a time thatcorrelates well with the narrative about Solomon (see 1 Kings7:46).
Anothervery recent and impressive find comes from Khirbet Qeiyafa (mostlikely Shaaraim [Josh. 15:36; 1 Sam. 17:52; 1 Chron.4:31–32]). This site, located in the western part of the highShephelah (near Azekah), was recently excavated by Yosef Garfinkeland Saar Ganor of Hebrew University, Jerusalem. On the basis of fourburnt olive pits tested at Oxford University, the excavators datedthis fortified city to the time of David. They concluded that themassive construction of the city wall (which required two hundredthousand tons of stone) supports the existence of a centralizedpolitical organization, a state—a conclusion that hasfar-reaching implications for the disputed chronology of Iron Age IIA(1000–900 BC). They also found a five-line inscription,indicating that writing was practiced in the region. This inscriptionis important because it seems to be the longest proto-Canaaniteinscription ever found, and the earliest Hebrew inscription known todate.
TheHellenistic-Roman Period (332 BC and Following)
Herodthe Great (37–4 BC) was the ambitious ruler who carried throughmost of the grand building projects that still dot the Holy Landtoday. At Jerusalem, which is still being excavated, the massivewalls that he built for the platform of the temple are still visibletoday both above and below the ground. Other ruins associated withHerod have been found at Caesarea, Jericho, Herodium (nearBethlehem), Masada, and also in Jordan.
Oneof the most important inscriptions for NT studies (especially theGospels) was found by the Italian excavators of Caesarea. Theseexcavators found that the inscription refers to Pontius Pilate,prefect of Judea. Other inscriptions from Greece and Turkey areconnected with the events described in Acts and Paul’s letters.Thus, in Corinth a door inscription (“Synagogue of theHebrews”) may indicate the place where Paul preached (Acts18:4). Excavations there revealed a text naming Erastus as abenefactor. This may be the city treasurer of Rom. 16:23. Near Lystrainscriptions record the dedication to Zeus of a statue of Hermes bysome Lycaonians, and nearby was a stone altar for Zeus and Hermes.This explains the identification of Barnabas with Zeus (Jupiter) andPaul with Hermes (Mercury) in Acts 14:11–12.
Itis clear from the selective sample of data presented here that thefield of archaeology has contributed considerably to the context andunderstanding of the biblical world. All the signs and recentexcavations suggest that there are continuing and exciting prospectsto be found in the newer (biblical) archaeology.
Archaeology is the scientific study of the material remainsof past human life and activities. It can also be described as theprocedure by which ancient artifacts are recovered, identified, andinterpreted. Archaeology deals with both the prehistorical andhistorical periods and encompasses both written (epigraphical) andunwritten (artifactual) discoveries. Even though literary remains(inscriptions, ostraca [potsherds], seals) are typically the subjectof other disciplines, archaeological investigation usually isresponsible for their discovery. Without archaeology much of theavailable written evidence would have remained buried forever in theground. Unwritten materials include everything made by humans, suchas fortifications, pottery, tools, jewelry, and weapons.
Biblicalarchaeology more narrowly focuses on the material remains of Israeland its neighboring countries that relate to the biblical period andnarrative. For example, ancient texts recovered from sites such asMari, Ugarit, Ebla, and Amarna shed valuable light on the biblicalrecord and on the history and religion of the ancient Near East.Biblical archaeology may be understood as the process of correlatingarchaeological evidence with the biblical record. Archaeology and theBible are closely related because they inform each other. Thus, eventhough archaeology and biblical studies are independent disciplines,they are certainly interrelated.
TheHistory of Biblical Archaeology
Tounderstand better the meaning of biblical archaeology, it isnecessary to briefly trace its history. Before the 1800s little wasknown about the Bible’s background, despite its central role inthe religion and culture of the world, because the Bible was theprimary source for access to the history of ancient Israel and itsneighbors. There were few sources to which the Scripture historianscould appeal besides the apocryphal writings and the works ofJosephus, because the early Greek historians (Herodotus andThucydides) were of limited value, given their interest in the “majorplayers” of history.
Thediscovery of the Rosetta Stone (dated 196 BC) in 1799 and itsdecipherment in 1822 by J. F. Champollion opened wide the doorsto ancient Egypt’s history. Within twenty-five years, by thedecipherment of Akkadian cuneiform by Henry Rawlinson (1846), theworld had the key to reading and interpreting thousands of tabletsand monumental texts from ancient Babylonia, Assyria, and even theland of the Hittites. These two major developments allowed the voicesfrom the ancient world of the Bible to speak once more and encouragedhistorians to look at the Bible as supported by the background datacoming from the rest of the ancient Near East. As a result of thesedevelopments, a new interest was kindled in ancient Near Easterncultures and the material remains (realia) that they left behind,coupled with a renewed interest in the setting of the biblical text.
Initialexcavations of biblical sites.Thebeginnings of scientific exploration of Palestine can be traced to1838 when American Edward Robinson (geographer and explorer) aided bythe Arabist Eli Smith undertook a historic trip to the Holy Land andsucceeded in identifying over one hundred biblical sites, effectivelylaying the foundations for biblical archaeology and geography. Thisled to the establishment of the British Palestine Exploration Fund in1865 for the purpose of exploring Palestine systematically andscientifically, and to several of the geographic surveys of westernPalestine and Transjordan.
Thebeginning of major excavations of biblical sites was not far behind,and in 1890 William M. F. Petrie (a renowned Egyptologist then)initiated what is widely regarded as the first modern archaeologicalexcavation in the Holy Land. He excavated Tell el-Hesi(identification still uncertain) in the northern Negev, and his workunderlies archaeological inquiry in the Holy Land to this day. Morespecifically, Petrie laid the foundations of modern archaeology byhis application of stratigraphy and ceramic typology.
Stratigraphyis the technique of digging a tell (a cone-shaped mound that containsthe remains of successive human occupation over a long period oftime) layer by layer while carefully separating and recording thecontents of each occupational layer. This technique tries to untanglethese layers in the reverse order (the older layers of occupation arealways below the newer layers) of their deposition and to reconstructthe history of a site period by period.
Typologyis the technique of classifying artifacts based on their externalcharacteristics (shape, ware, and decoration). Pottery is consideredan accurate tool for dating the occupational layers of a tell, andceramic typology is the art of charting changes in local potterystyles. By analyzing the pottery lying within successive layers atHesi, Petrie was able to construct a relative chronological frameworkfor Palestine. To arrive at a more absolute chronology, theresearchers from Palestine usually need (especially in the earlierperiods) to correlate their findings with similar styles fromneighboring areas, such as Egypt and Mesopotamia, where there areavailable written records and astronomically fixed dates.
BeforeWorld War I, the first and only American excavation in Palestinethat deserves mention is that of George A. Reisner and architectClarence S. Fisher between 1908 and 1910 at Sebastiyeh (biblicalSamaria). The rest are usually considered to have resembled “treasurehunts.” By the use of systematic digging and recording inPalestine, the Reisner-Fisher method, which was far morecomprehensive and meticulous than Petrie’s, greatly improvedPalestinian archaeology.
Thefirst golden age.The “golden age” of American excavation in Palestinefollowed a few decades later, after World War I in the 1920s and1930s. Numerous and well-financed archaeological digs started at thefollowing biblical sites: Ai, Bethel, Beth-shean, Beth-shemesh,Beth-zur, Debir, Gibeah, Jericho, Mizpah, Samaria, Shechem, andothers. All of these excavations, however, were overshadowed by thework of Orientalist W. F. Albright at Tell Beit Mirsim (identitystill disputed, but perhaps Debir).
Itwas Albright and those of the American school in Jerusalem (now theAlbright Institute of Archaeology) who dominated the scene in theseformative years. Albright refined Petrie’s methodology andintegrated very well archaeology, biblical research, and ancient NearEastern studies, thus establishing biblical (and Palestinian)archaeology as a discipline in its own right. He also envisioned an“archaeological revolution” that would open up the lands,peoples, and lost sites of the ancient Near East so that the Biblewould be better understood and also gain new credibility. Hecertainly was reacting against the spirit of his time, when steriledebates of textual and literary criticism (especially of theskeptical variety) were prevalent in both European and Americanliberalism, and this seems to have led some to believe thatarchaeology’s primary function was to “prove the Bibletrue.”
Thesecond golden age.A second “golden age” of biblical archaeology is usuallyconsidered to have arrived after World War II when variousforeign teams worked throughout the Middle East in cooperation withlocal archaeologists, a trend that continues today. The archaeologyof Palestine advanced rapidly, with significant improvements in thetechniques of digging and recording. The greatest influence onarchaeological method at this time belongs to Kathleen Kenyon(English excavator of Jericho [Tell es-Sultan]), whosestratigraphical method (known as the Wheeler-Kenyon method) is usedeven today by excavators, with modifications. Other importantarchaeologists who contributed significantly to the biblicalarchaeology movement are Yigael Yadin of Israel and G. E. Wrightof the United States.
Duringthe height of its prominence and promise, biblical archaeology becamean important component for the biblical theology movement and alsofor Christian apologetics (especially as represented by Joseph Freeof Wheaton College). In fact, one of the greatest theologians in thebiblical theology movement, G. E. Wright, was also Albright’sstudent. He conducted a major excavation at Tell Balath (biblicalShechem), following the Wheeler-Kenyon method and emphasizing potterychronology in the tradition of the Albright school. More important,Shechem was a training ground for many American archaeologists whereWright created a new school of field archaeology.
Thenew archaeology.In the 1960s, under the influence of the social and natural sciences,the “new archaeology” that developed tended to focus onthe comprehensive study of humans as species (and not on historicalissues). William G. Dever (a student and follower of G. E.Wright at the important Tel Gezer project) argued forcefully andsuccessfully for the “liberation” of Near Easternarchaeology from biblical studies and preferred the term (prevalenttoday in most American schools) “Syro-Palestinian archaeology.”Today, with very few exceptions (e.g., Harvard University), mostAmerican universities offer classes in the archaeology ofSyria-Palestine (this was apparently Albright’s old alternateterm for biblical archaeology), not in biblical archaeology. The nameof the popular magazine Biblical Archaeologist was also changed toAncient Near Eastern Archaeology, despite protests from many of itsreaders.
Thenew archaeology began with the realization in the 1960s that muchdata of potential significance has been overlooked, and perhaps evenvital evidence has been discarded. New questions and methodsdeveloped from the frustration that old questions have not beenanswered satisfactorily. The temporal and geographical horizons ofthe new archaeology broadened to include the Paleolithic period(c. 100,000 BC) through the Ottoman era (AD 1922), and attentionis now paid to the neglected periods of Judaism and earlyChristianity.
Moreimportant, the composition of the dig staff broadened considerably toinclude a much larger body of scientists to assist in answering thenew questions posed. Today, the field archaeologists (besideshistorians, linguists, and ceramic experts) are supported bygeologists, anthropologists, paleoethnobotanists, zoologists,climatologists, hydrologists, ethnographers, and, more recently,statisticians and computer experts. It is clear that the newarchaeology is done in a very interdisciplinary way. The Tell Hesbanand Khirbat en-Nahas excavations (both in Jordan) are good models ofthis type of interdisciplinary research. Bones, seeds, and otherorganic materials are now saved and carefully recorded to addressquestions related to economic strategies, social differentiation,diet, disease, and the like. Soil and pollen samples are taken,extensive regional and environmental surveys are carried out, andmaterial culture samples and artifacts are submitted forsophisticated analysis. It is ironic (according to Dever) that thisnew and “secular” archaeology, while demanding moreautonomy from the Bible, promises to contribute even more to biblicalstudies as it grows in precision and sophistication.
Thenew archaeology and Syro-Palestinian archaeology of today haveadvantages and disadvantages. They have the advantages of staff whoare better equipped and trained, as well as educated volunteers whousually have genuine interest in their work. More important, theirconclusions have the advantage of being based on data that is morescientifically obtained and analyzed. Many of the digs run fieldschools modeled on the ones from the Gezer project (1964–1973),which trained hundreds of student volunteers. These are all good anduseful for both participants and their projects, but they have led tosignificant rises in the costs of an excavation. Thus, a typicalsix-week season is estimated now to cost in excess of one hundredthousand dollars. Since the new archaeology has led to a“secularization” of biblical archaeology and churches andseminaries have gradually stopped sponsoring these projects, thefunds have had to come increasingly from federal and public sourcesof support. The National Endowment for the Humanities (and privatedonors later) became the major source of funds in the 1970s.
Approachesto the Bible in Modern Archaeology
Thereis no doubt that the new archaeology has introduced many usefulscientific improvements in the field. (Of course, these scientificimprovements were embraced by both biblical and Syro-Palestinianarchaeologists in the 1970s, and the distinction between these twogroups has become largely imaginary.) At the same time, however, ithas brought new biases against the biblical text. The Bible, inDever’s view, was never intended as a historical document andshould be viewed with “considerable suspicion” forreconstructing the history of the ancient Near East. Otherarchaeologists in the field (and also historians) have an even morenegative attitude toward the Bible. However, it must be emphasizedthat all (or at least most) agree that the Bible has its role in thearchaeology of Syria-Palestine. The question has to do with how theBible should be used.
Maximalistand minimalist approaches.The two schools of thought that seem the loudest in the debate amongbiblical and/or Syro-Palestinian archaeologists are usually labeled“maximalist” and “minimalist.” (To theseKenneth A. Kitchen adds the label “factualist.”According to Kitchen, the agenda of a “factualist” isneither to prove nor to disprove any theory concerning the earlyhistory of Israel, but simply to examine the facts and let the dataspeak for itself.)
Themaximalist school has a strong view of the historical reliability ofScripture and emphasizes synergy between archaeology and biblicalstudies. Others consider this to be a naive approach to Scripture andan uncritical acceptance of the information that it tries tocommunicate. The maximalists follow the scholarship of W. F.Albright and his student John Bright, and they assume that the OTspeaks of historical realities. When seeking to reconstruct thehistory of ancient Israel, they readily and confidently refer to thebiblical record as a valid and significant source for their research.They are also confident that when all the data is in, a biblicalhistory of Israel (aided by archaeology) will exhibit a closecorrespondence with the real history of Israel.
Theminimalist school is generally skeptical concerning the historicalreliability of the biblical text. Many advocates of this approachargue that the OT was written primarily during the Hellenistic period(it certainly is postexilic), centuries after the events that itclaims to describe. A community around Jerusalem created thetraditions found in the Bible in order to give account for themselvesand their distinctive religious notions and practices. According tothis approach, any correlation between the Bible and thearchaeological record is suspect a priori. When there aretensions between biblical and extrabiblical records (includingarchaeology), the extrabiblical records are to be preferred asevidence, and the contradictions are usually emphasized to underminethe reliability of the Bible as a historical source.
Theminimalist movement has developed gradually. Although a century agothere were many who questioned the historicity of the first chaptersof Genesis, most accepted the essential historicity of thepatriarchs, the exodus from Egypt under Moses, the conquest of Canaanby Joshua, the historicity of David and Solomon, and the rest of theOT narrative. During the past forty years, however, serious doubt hasbeen cast on all of these events.
Thestance of the minimalists led to peculiar (and rarely settled)controversies over issues such as the legitimacy of reading “thehouse of David” in the Tel Dan inscription (discovered in1993), the Siloam Tunnel inscription (which overlaps with 2 Chron.32 and is traditionally ascribed to Hezekiah), the very existence ofJerusalem during the days of David and Solomon, and even theexistence of these two kings.
Afresh approach.Is there a way to move beyond the current state of the debate? Somebelieve that there is hope by using a fresh approach to biblicalarchaeology, one that follows in the footsteps of Lawrence Stager andPhilip King (see their book, Life in Biblical Israel ).This approach does not try to reconstruct history or simplyilluminate the Bible; rather, it seeks to enter into the world of theancients to acquire a fuller understanding of Israelite society andits literary record through the combined use of artifacts, sociology,and ethnography. Textual and archaeological data are brought into ahistorical discourse by “selecting and interpreting themthrough the problematics of social history.” Thus, biblicalarchaeology in the older sense is making a comeback by hearkeningback to the integrative works of the nineteenth century, but withvast amounts of new data. This “new biblical archaeology”should not be driven by apologetic purposes and should not aim to“prove the truth of the Bible.” It should have moremodest and realistic goals, considering the limitations ofarchaeology (see below).
Evangelicalarchaeologists, confident in the truth of the Bible (which can standby itself despite its many attacks from within and without), shouldhave as their goal the understanding of the biblical world in itsgeographical, cultural, and historical setting. They should usearchaeology and linguistics to correlate biblical texts and ancientartifacts against the background of the historical and geographicalsetting. When historical questions are posed, the cumulative evidenceshould lead to probability and plausibility rather than a defensivequest for final proof. This attempt to follow historical probabilityvis-à-vis the Bible is different from setting out a prioriwith a defensive Bible-proving agenda.
Thisnew approach will not make the Scriptures say more than judiciousassessment of the evidence will allow (a problem that plagues someconservative interpreters), but neither will it cast undue skepticismon the Scriptures’ historical value (the problem of theminimalists). It endeavors to pay close attention both to theliterary nature and intentions of the biblical text and to thefragmentary nature of the archaeological record.
Thesenew biblical archaeologists do not set out again “to prove theBible.” Instead, they seek to situate the texts of the OT intheir historical and cultural contexts and to demonstrate howawareness of the extrabiblical world can open new doors into theBible. Their goals are more modest, not because of a lower view ofScripture, but rather because of a clearer understanding of thelimitations and fragmentary nature of archaeology despite itsconsiderable refinement in the recent decades.
TheLimitations of Archaeology
Archaeologyhas limitations because of the vast amount of time and area to becovered and because of the hazards of preservation. Objects of wood,leatherwork, basketry, papyrus, and cloth rarely survive, and metals(especially precious metals) were frequently recycled. It is alsoimportant to realize that no biblical site has ever been completelyexcavated, and most of the excavations tend to pay greater attentionto the major buildings (citadels, temples, palaces) rather than thehomes of the general population.
Onlyin recent years have accurate methods of stratification and recordingenabled comparisons to be made between sites, and the reliability ofsome foundational excavations in the Holy Land is rightly questionedby the finds from newer excavations (e.g., Megiddo, Gezer, and Hazorare being reexcavated in part to clarify and answer questions raisedby previous excavations and debates). This is understandable becausemost of the foundational excavations in the Holy Land did not haveaccess to the accurate methods of stratification, recording, andscientific analysis available today. Many useful artifacts andespecially organic objects were routinely discarded in the earlierexcavations.
Ingeneral, earlier levels of a site are more likely to have beendisturbed by the activities of later periods, and it was very commonfor older buildings (and sometimes even monumental inscriptions) tobe dismantled and the (stone) blocks reused for later buildings oreven roads. The objects that archaeologists discover survive and aremost often found by accident. Consequently, given the limitations andpitfalls of archaeology (especially the way it was done in theearliest part of the twentieth century), one must have realistic andmore modest expectations about what archaeology can recover, andrealize that the further one goes in time, the less archaeologicalinformation may be available for comparison and useful analysis. Addto this that some of the central characters of the Bible (e.g.,Abraham, Moses, most of the judges, Ezra) were not major players inthe world of their time, and that some important sites have neverbeen excavated (e.g., Damascus, Hebron), and it becomes clear thatthere are considerable reasons to have more realistic and modestexpectations about what archaeology can accomplish.
Therole and possibility of accurately interpreting archaeologicalremains should also be taken into consideration, especially sincethere are well-documented cases in which the interpretation of theexcavator has turned out to be false (e.g., the “DegeneratedAshtoreth Plaque” of R. A. S. Macalister from Gezer).Anyone who has ever participated in an archaeological excavation ledby a group of experts in the field can remember debates that tookplace among these experts, not only about the dating of variouspieces of pottery, but even about the role and dating of well-definedand visible monumental architecture. While this is understandable anddesirable, and many times leads to the refinement and corrections ofunwarranted early assumptions, the process shows the difficultyinherent in interpreting the fragmentary remains of a deadcivilization far removed from our times and settings.
MaterialRemains and Written Sources
Itis a sobering fact that archaeology cannot provide the basis forhistory. Material remains can reveal climate changes and theirimpact, sequences of human cultures and their products, traces ofdestruction and desertion, changes in building techniques and art.Nevertheless, the persons involved remain anonymous, their thoughts,motives and faith a mystery, and the specific events of their timeslargely unknown (e.g., the destruction by fire of Lachish IIcould not have been accurately dated and related without the biblicalreport in Jer. 34:7). It is the written documents (many timesrecovered through archaeology) that can reveal the names of kings andkingdoms, their dates and deeds, and the fruits of their thinking inliterature. It is the testimony of these texts, rightly evaluated,that can add the “flesh and features” to the “bones”archaeology discovers (Allan Millard).
Onthe other hand, the material remains of life (pottery, jewelry,tools, weapons, cultic objects, architecture, etc.) as recoveredthrough archaeology can bring color to the textual references.Nevertheless, the written sources are essential and provide the mostvaluable information for recovering the history and faith of anyancient nation. It is the duty of the biblical scholar andarchaeologist to interpret correctly the available data fromSyria-Palestine and to arrive at plausible explanations concerningthe biblical world. The combination of texts (biblical andextrabiblical), material culture (archaeology), geography, andhistory holds considerable promise to help scholars better define thecontext of Scripture.
Thereis no doubt that this approach to archaeology holds considerablepotential as it is generating more material than is possible for anyperson (or even school) to encompass. As one of the most quicklychanging social sciences today, both in theoretical advances and newdata, archaeology is and will be the source of new insights intobiblical life and times. It seems that the “archaeologicalrevolution” predicted by W. F. Albright is far from over;it probably has only begun.
Theevidence for this revolution from the evangelical field is visible invarious ways. The rest of this entry briefly presents some selectivearchaeological data that helps define the context and thatcomplements (since the writers of the Bible were selective in theirreporting), challenges, or confirms the narrative of the Bible. Thedata should help the interpreter of the Bible bridge thegeographical, temporal, and cultural gap that leads to the ancientwriter.
TheCannanite (Bronze) Age (3300–1200 BC)
EarlyBronze Age.Towns with mud-brick walls begin to appear in Canaan in the EarlyBronze Age I (before 3000 BC). Evidence of occupation in thethird millennium is found at Beth-yerah, Beth-shan, Gezer, Jerusalem,Jericho, Arad, Megiddo, and Ai, among others. There was a differencebetween the pottery of the north (Beth-yerah) and that of the south,while the most striking development was that of the fine “KhirbetKerak” ware.
MiddleBronze Age.About 2200 BC (Middle Bronze Age I) there arrived a distinctivenomadic people identified with the Amorites of the Bible (Num. 13:29;Josh. 5:1; 10:6). They had distinctive burial customs, pottery, andweapons that show connection with the city-states of Syria. It ismost likely that their kings included the Asiatic “ForeignRulers” (Hyksos) who conquered Egypt in the eighteenth centuryBC. This was a time of wealth and frequent warfare between cities. Itseems that the Middle Bronze Age was a time when seminomadic groups(including a group called “Habiru,” who are also found inthe Late Bronze Age) infiltrated the land between defended towns. Itis possible that the patriarchs were among these Habiru, whoinfiltrated mostly the hill country and the Negev. In fact, it isdemonstrable from a comparison with the eighteenth-century BC textsfrom Mari (on the Euphrates River) that the pastoral traditions ofGenesis fit the early second-millennium BC context much better thanlater periods.
Thetowns and houses of the Middle Bronze Age were violently destroyed inthe fifteenth century BC, most likely by the Egyptians, who expelledthe Hyksos. Despite the trade that seems to have continued with theeastern Mediterranean (Mycenaean pottery), the hill towns ofPalestine were now poorer and fewer than the coastal cities. Thissituation is clearly reflected in the Amarna letters between thekings of Canaan and Egypt. The major cities were reoccupied, but manyof them were destroyed later in the thirteenth century.
LateBronze Age.It is in the Late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 BC) that thebiblical account is usually challenged by the archaeologicaldiscoveries. Even if one accepts the reasonable interpretation thatJoshua burned only three cities (Jericho, Ai, Hazor) in his campaign(see Josh. 6:24; 8:28; 11:13), the evidence of destruction from bothJericho and Ai is highly questionable. Thus, while it is widelybelieved that Jericho was abandoned around 1325 BC, the fallen wallsonce thought to belong to this period were dated much earlier byKathleen Kenyon (Early Bronze). The evidence from Ai (et-Tell) iseven less promising, unless Bryan Wood is correct in hisidentification of Ai with Khirbet el-Maqatir.
Basedon the apparent lack of change in material culture during the LateBronze Age, mainstream archaeologists commonly classify theIsraelites as dissident Canaanites who moved into the hill country.
Althoughit cannot be conclusively demonstrated from archaeology that theIsraelites were not Canaanites but rather came to Canaan from theoutside, the mainstream interpretation has serious problems of itsown. There was clearly a new pattern of simple farming in the hills,characterized by four-room houses whose inhabitants used manycollared-rim jars, and there is an almost complete absence of pigbones (which usually are found in the Canaanite cities) in thehill-country sites. More important, there is strong evidence that theIsraelites were worshiping their own national God (YHWH) by the ninthcentury BC, in sharp contrast to the polytheistic religion of Canaan(as illuminated by the culture in neighboring Ugarit). The personalnames of individuals in the eighth and seventh centuries BC arealmost exclusively Yahwistic.
Anothervery significant change is the abandonment of the shrines in towns ofthe Late Bronze Age. Not a single site can be identified in whichworship continued from the Late Bronze Age well into the Iron Age (itseems that by 1000 BC the Canaanites disappeared as an entity in thearea occupied by Israel). It is highly unlikely that the Canaaniteswho moved from towns into the hill-country sites would have abandonedtheir divinities (whose need they must have felt greatly while facingthe uncertainties of the wilderness), and it is even more unlikelythat people who had come from different towns with different deitieswould have accepted almost universally a new patron deity of obscureprovenance. The continuity in material culture of a nation that wasto take over the homes and all the equipment of the Canaanites shouldnot be surprising in light of the commands of the Bible (Deut.6:10–11). The almost universal rise of the worship of the Godof Israel, and the mention of Israel as a group of people in theStela of Merneptah (c. 1208 BC), argue forcefully that theIsraelites were not really Canaanites.
TheIsraelite (Iron) Age (1200–586 BC)
Bythe twelfth century, the Philistine settlement of southwest Canaan isattested by a new type of pottery with Late Mycenaean affinities.This new type of pottery was found throughout Philistia, theShephelah, and as far north as Joppa. Wealthy and well-constructedCanaanite cities held out for at least another century (Beth-Shean,Gezer, and Megiddo?). The evidence for Israelites comes from thesmall villages throughout the hill country and Galilee.Traditionally, as mentioned above, they are recognized by theirfour-room houses, large number of storage pits for grain, largestorage jars with thick-collared rims, and preference for terracinghillsides for farming.
Archaeologically,it is very difficult to attribute the construction ofcities to any king of the united monarchy (but see the recentdiscovery below). Saul had a citadel at Gibeah (Tell el-Fûl),and the first fortification there has been attributed to him. Itshows the adoption of a new fortification system of casemate wall,characteristic of this period. Similar casemate walls have been foundat Shechem, Beth-shemesh, and Beit Mirsim (and later even in Moab). Asmall town at Megiddo, whose houses form a defensive ring around theperimeter of the mound, has been attributed to David.
Though1 Kings 9:15 reports how Solomon built up Hazor, Megiddo, andGezer, the dating of the six-chambered gates found in all of thesesites and the related walls is still being debated. A much morerecent excavation from Khirbat en-Nahas in Jordan has foundindustrial-scale production of copper in a region and at a time thatcorrelates well with the narrative about Solomon (see 1 Kings7:46).
Anothervery recent and impressive find comes from Khirbet Qeiyafa (mostlikely Shaaraim [Josh. 15:36; 1 Sam. 17:52; 1 Chron.4:31–32]). This site, located in the western part of the highShephelah (near Azekah), was recently excavated by Yosef Garfinkeland Saar Ganor of Hebrew University, Jerusalem. On the basis of fourburnt olive pits tested at Oxford University, the excavators datedthis fortified city to the time of David. They concluded that themassive construction of the city wall (which required two hundredthousand tons of stone) supports the existence of a centralizedpolitical organization, a state—a conclusion that hasfar-reaching implications for the disputed chronology of Iron Age IIA(1000–900 BC). They also found a five-line inscription,indicating that writing was practiced in the region. This inscriptionis important because it seems to be the longest proto-Canaaniteinscription ever found, and the earliest Hebrew inscription known todate.
TheHellenistic-Roman Period (332 BC and Following)
Herodthe Great (37–4 BC) was the ambitious ruler who carried throughmost of the grand building projects that still dot the Holy Landtoday. At Jerusalem, which is still being excavated, the massivewalls that he built for the platform of the temple are still visibletoday both above and below the ground. Other ruins associated withHerod have been found at Caesarea, Jericho, Herodium (nearBethlehem), Masada, and also in Jordan.
Oneof the most important inscriptions for NT studies (especially theGospels) was found by the Italian excavators of Caesarea. Theseexcavators found that the inscription refers to Pontius Pilate,prefect of Judea. Other inscriptions from Greece and Turkey areconnected with the events described in Acts and Paul’s letters.Thus, in Corinth a door inscription (“Synagogue of theHebrews”) may indicate the place where Paul preached (Acts18:4). Excavations there revealed a text naming Erastus as abenefactor. This may be the city treasurer of Rom. 16:23. Near Lystrainscriptions record the dedication to Zeus of a statue of Hermes bysome Lycaonians, and nearby was a stone altar for Zeus and Hermes.This explains the identification of Barnabas with Zeus (Jupiter) andPaul with Hermes (Mercury) in Acts 14:11–12.
Itis clear from the selective sample of data presented here that thefield of archaeology has contributed considerably to the context andunderstanding of the biblical world. All the signs and recentexcavations suggest that there are continuing and exciting prospectsto be found in the newer (biblical) archaeology.
A chief or first angel. The word “archangel”refers to a particular class of angels; it also refers to a rank inthe angelic hierarchy. In the OT, no particular angel is identifiedas the highest in the angelic hierarchy. Michael and Gabriel are thetwo named angels in the OT. In the book of Daniel, Michael isidentified as “one of the chief princes,” which is takento mean archangels (10:13). The distinction between Michael andGabriel in the book of Daniel is that of function, not hierarchy.Michael functions as a warrior (10:13, 21; 12:1), whereas Gabrielfunctions as a revealer of mysteries (8:16; 9:21). In the NT,Michael is specifically called “the archangel” and is thedivine warrior who contends with the devil over the body of Moses(Jude 9); and Michael and his angels engage in a heavenly battleagainst Satan and his angels (Rev. 12:7). In 1 Thess. 4:16 theimagery used is of God as a divine warrior par excellence who comesdown from heaven with a shout, with the voice of his archangel, andwith a trumpet declaring his victory as he comes to gather hispeople.
Angelologyis more developed in Second Temple period (intertestamental)literature, wherein the identities and functions of angels areclarified. The archangels comprise one class of angels within theangelic hierarchy. Scripture refers to other classes of angels, suchas cherubim (e.g., Gen. 3:24; Exod. 25:18–22; Pss. 18:10;80:10; 99:1), seraphim (Isa. 6:2, 6), watchers (Dan. 4:13, 17, 23),Satan and fallen angels (Matt. 9:34; 25:41; Eph. 2:2; 2 Pet.2:4; Jude 6; Rev. 10:12). For example, 1 En. 6 gives the namesof the twenty fallen watchers (cf. Gen. 6:1–4), and 1 En.20 has the earliest reference to the seven archangels: Uriel,Raphael, Raguel, Michael, Zerachiel, Gabriel, and Remiel. There are,however, other lists that give alternate names to the sevenarchangels. In 3 En. 17:1–3 the archangels are Michael,Gabriel, Shatqiel, Baradiel, Shachaqiel, Baraqiel, and Sidriel. Inthe Testament of Solomon four of the seven archangels are mentioned:Michael, Ouriel, Raphael, and Gabriel (1:6; 2:4; 5:9; 18:6). In thebook of Tobit, the angel Raphael disguises himself in human form andfinally reveals his identity thus: “I am Raphael, one of theseven angels, who stand ready and enter before the glory of the Lord”(12:15; cf. Rev. 8:2).
Thearchangels also perform various other functions. In Tobit, Raphaelfunctions as a protective guide and healer. In 3 En. 17:1–3the seven archangels are in charge of the seven heavens, and each isaccompanied by 496,000 ministering angels. In Rev. 12:7–9Michael commands the angel army that battles the dragon and its army.In T. Levi 3:3–6 the archangels are regarded as templepersonnel; they serve and offer proprietary sacrifices on behalf ofall the sins of ignorance of the righteous ones in uppermost heaven,the holy of holies (cf. Jub. 2:2; 1 En. 14:23). In a similarfashion, in Rev. 8:1–10:11 the seven angels appear before Godand also serve at the altar to offer incense and to take the prayersof the saints before the throne. See also Angel.
The son of Herod the Great who, following his father’sdeath and by permission from the Roman emperor Augustus, ruled overJudea, Samaria, and Idumea (Edom) from 4 BC to AD 6. Archelaus ismentioned once in the NT (Matt. 2:22). Joseph, warned by an angel ofthe Lord, had taken Jesus and Mary to Egypt to escape the murderousintentions of Herod the Great. After the death of Herod, Joseph wastold to return to Israel, but on arriving he discovered thatArchelaus now governed Judea. Being afraid of him and warned in adream, he settled in Nazareth in the district of Galilee, an arearuled by another of Herod’s sons, Antipas.
Thereason for Joseph’s apprehension is not explained, but itaccords well with what is known of Archelaus from incidents recordedby the Jewish historian Josephus. Archelaus had placed an offensiveRoman eagle over the gate of the temple. Two Jewish rabbis, Judas andMatthias, urged their disciples to tear down this idolatrous symboland were executed. At a Passover festival an insurrection broke out,but in the reprisals that followed many innocent pilgrims were amongthe three thousand who were executed. Archelaus had inherited hisfather’s cruelty, and no Jew was safe in his territory.Eventually, he was removed by the Romans for incompetence, and histerritories were placed under the direct rule of Rome. This explainswhy the province of Judea was ruled by Roman procurators during thepublic ministry of Jesus.
Archaeology is the scientific study of the material remainsof past human life and activities. It can also be described as theprocedure by which ancient artifacts are recovered, identified, andinterpreted. Archaeology deals with both the prehistorical andhistorical periods and encompasses both written (epigraphical) andunwritten (artifactual) discoveries. Even though literary remains(inscriptions, ostraca [potsherds], seals) are typically the subjectof other disciplines, archaeological investigation usually isresponsible for their discovery. Without archaeology much of theavailable written evidence would have remained buried forever in theground. Unwritten materials include everything made by humans, suchas fortifications, pottery, tools, jewelry, and weapons.
Biblicalarchaeology more narrowly focuses on the material remains of Israeland its neighboring countries that relate to the biblical period andnarrative. For example, ancient texts recovered from sites such asMari, Ugarit, Ebla, and Amarna shed valuable light on the biblicalrecord and on the history and religion of the ancient Near East.Biblical archaeology may be understood as the process of correlatingarchaeological evidence with the biblical record. Archaeology and theBible are closely related because they inform each other. Thus, eventhough archaeology and biblical studies are independent disciplines,they are certainly interrelated.
TheHistory of Biblical Archaeology
Tounderstand better the meaning of biblical archaeology, it isnecessary to briefly trace its history. Before the 1800s little wasknown about the Bible’s background, despite its central role inthe religion and culture of the world, because the Bible was theprimary source for access to the history of ancient Israel and itsneighbors. There were few sources to which the Scripture historianscould appeal besides the apocryphal writings and the works ofJosephus, because the early Greek historians (Herodotus andThucydides) were of limited value, given their interest in the “majorplayers” of history.
Thediscovery of the Rosetta Stone (dated 196 BC) in 1799 and itsdecipherment in 1822 by J. F. Champollion opened wide the doorsto ancient Egypt’s history. Within twenty-five years, by thedecipherment of Akkadian cuneiform by Henry Rawlinson (1846), theworld had the key to reading and interpreting thousands of tabletsand monumental texts from ancient Babylonia, Assyria, and even theland of the Hittites. These two major developments allowed the voicesfrom the ancient world of the Bible to speak once more and encouragedhistorians to look at the Bible as supported by the background datacoming from the rest of the ancient Near East. As a result of thesedevelopments, a new interest was kindled in ancient Near Easterncultures and the material remains (realia) that they left behind,coupled with a renewed interest in the setting of the biblical text.
Initialexcavations of biblical sites.Thebeginnings of scientific exploration of Palestine can be traced to1838 when American Edward Robinson (geographer and explorer) aided bythe Arabist Eli Smith undertook a historic trip to the Holy Land andsucceeded in identifying over one hundred biblical sites, effectivelylaying the foundations for biblical archaeology and geography. Thisled to the establishment of the British Palestine Exploration Fund in1865 for the purpose of exploring Palestine systematically andscientifically, and to several of the geographic surveys of westernPalestine and Transjordan.
Thebeginning of major excavations of biblical sites was not far behind,and in 1890 William M. F. Petrie (a renowned Egyptologist then)initiated what is widely regarded as the first modern archaeologicalexcavation in the Holy Land. He excavated Tell el-Hesi(identification still uncertain) in the northern Negev, and his workunderlies archaeological inquiry in the Holy Land to this day. Morespecifically, Petrie laid the foundations of modern archaeology byhis application of stratigraphy and ceramic typology.
Stratigraphyis the technique of digging a tell (a cone-shaped mound that containsthe remains of successive human occupation over a long period oftime) layer by layer while carefully separating and recording thecontents of each occupational layer. This technique tries to untanglethese layers in the reverse order (the older layers of occupation arealways below the newer layers) of their deposition and to reconstructthe history of a site period by period.
Typologyis the technique of classifying artifacts based on their externalcharacteristics (shape, ware, and decoration). Pottery is consideredan accurate tool for dating the occupational layers of a tell, andceramic typology is the art of charting changes in local potterystyles. By analyzing the pottery lying within successive layers atHesi, Petrie was able to construct a relative chronological frameworkfor Palestine. To arrive at a more absolute chronology, theresearchers from Palestine usually need (especially in the earlierperiods) to correlate their findings with similar styles fromneighboring areas, such as Egypt and Mesopotamia, where there areavailable written records and astronomically fixed dates.
BeforeWorld War I, the first and only American excavation in Palestinethat deserves mention is that of George A. Reisner and architectClarence S. Fisher between 1908 and 1910 at Sebastiyeh (biblicalSamaria). The rest are usually considered to have resembled “treasurehunts.” By the use of systematic digging and recording inPalestine, the Reisner-Fisher method, which was far morecomprehensive and meticulous than Petrie’s, greatly improvedPalestinian archaeology.
Thefirst golden age.The “golden age” of American excavation in Palestinefollowed a few decades later, after World War I in the 1920s and1930s. Numerous and well-financed archaeological digs started at thefollowing biblical sites: Ai, Bethel, Beth-shean, Beth-shemesh,Beth-zur, Debir, Gibeah, Jericho, Mizpah, Samaria, Shechem, andothers. All of these excavations, however, were overshadowed by thework of Orientalist W. F. Albright at Tell Beit Mirsim (identitystill disputed, but perhaps Debir).
Itwas Albright and those of the American school in Jerusalem (now theAlbright Institute of Archaeology) who dominated the scene in theseformative years. Albright refined Petrie’s methodology andintegrated very well archaeology, biblical research, and ancient NearEastern studies, thus establishing biblical (and Palestinian)archaeology as a discipline in its own right. He also envisioned an“archaeological revolution” that would open up the lands,peoples, and lost sites of the ancient Near East so that the Biblewould be better understood and also gain new credibility. Hecertainly was reacting against the spirit of his time, when steriledebates of textual and literary criticism (especially of theskeptical variety) were prevalent in both European and Americanliberalism, and this seems to have led some to believe thatarchaeology’s primary function was to “prove the Bibletrue.”
Thesecond golden age.A second “golden age” of biblical archaeology is usuallyconsidered to have arrived after World War II when variousforeign teams worked throughout the Middle East in cooperation withlocal archaeologists, a trend that continues today. The archaeologyof Palestine advanced rapidly, with significant improvements in thetechniques of digging and recording. The greatest influence onarchaeological method at this time belongs to Kathleen Kenyon(English excavator of Jericho [Tell es-Sultan]), whosestratigraphical method (known as the Wheeler-Kenyon method) is usedeven today by excavators, with modifications. Other importantarchaeologists who contributed significantly to the biblicalarchaeology movement are Yigael Yadin of Israel and G. E. Wrightof the United States.
Duringthe height of its prominence and promise, biblical archaeology becamean important component for the biblical theology movement and alsofor Christian apologetics (especially as represented by Joseph Freeof Wheaton College). In fact, one of the greatest theologians in thebiblical theology movement, G. E. Wright, was also Albright’sstudent. He conducted a major excavation at Tell Balath (biblicalShechem), following the Wheeler-Kenyon method and emphasizing potterychronology in the tradition of the Albright school. More important,Shechem was a training ground for many American archaeologists whereWright created a new school of field archaeology.
Thenew archaeology.In the 1960s, under the influence of the social and natural sciences,the “new archaeology” that developed tended to focus onthe comprehensive study of humans as species (and not on historicalissues). William G. Dever (a student and follower of G. E.Wright at the important Tel Gezer project) argued forcefully andsuccessfully for the “liberation” of Near Easternarchaeology from biblical studies and preferred the term (prevalenttoday in most American schools) “Syro-Palestinian archaeology.”Today, with very few exceptions (e.g., Harvard University), mostAmerican universities offer classes in the archaeology ofSyria-Palestine (this was apparently Albright’s old alternateterm for biblical archaeology), not in biblical archaeology. The nameof the popular magazine Biblical Archaeologist was also changed toAncient Near Eastern Archaeology, despite protests from many of itsreaders.
Thenew archaeology began with the realization in the 1960s that muchdata of potential significance has been overlooked, and perhaps evenvital evidence has been discarded. New questions and methodsdeveloped from the frustration that old questions have not beenanswered satisfactorily. The temporal and geographical horizons ofthe new archaeology broadened to include the Paleolithic period(c. 100,000 BC) through the Ottoman era (AD 1922), and attentionis now paid to the neglected periods of Judaism and earlyChristianity.
Moreimportant, the composition of the dig staff broadened considerably toinclude a much larger body of scientists to assist in answering thenew questions posed. Today, the field archaeologists (besideshistorians, linguists, and ceramic experts) are supported bygeologists, anthropologists, paleoethnobotanists, zoologists,climatologists, hydrologists, ethnographers, and, more recently,statisticians and computer experts. It is clear that the newarchaeology is done in a very interdisciplinary way. The Tell Hesbanand Khirbat en-Nahas excavations (both in Jordan) are good models ofthis type of interdisciplinary research. Bones, seeds, and otherorganic materials are now saved and carefully recorded to addressquestions related to economic strategies, social differentiation,diet, disease, and the like. Soil and pollen samples are taken,extensive regional and environmental surveys are carried out, andmaterial culture samples and artifacts are submitted forsophisticated analysis. It is ironic (according to Dever) that thisnew and “secular” archaeology, while demanding moreautonomy from the Bible, promises to contribute even more to biblicalstudies as it grows in precision and sophistication.
Thenew archaeology and Syro-Palestinian archaeology of today haveadvantages and disadvantages. They have the advantages of staff whoare better equipped and trained, as well as educated volunteers whousually have genuine interest in their work. More important, theirconclusions have the advantage of being based on data that is morescientifically obtained and analyzed. Many of the digs run fieldschools modeled on the ones from the Gezer project (1964–1973),which trained hundreds of student volunteers. These are all good anduseful for both participants and their projects, but they have led tosignificant rises in the costs of an excavation. Thus, a typicalsix-week season is estimated now to cost in excess of one hundredthousand dollars. Since the new archaeology has led to a“secularization” of biblical archaeology and churches andseminaries have gradually stopped sponsoring these projects, thefunds have had to come increasingly from federal and public sourcesof support. The National Endowment for the Humanities (and privatedonors later) became the major source of funds in the 1970s.
Approachesto the Bible in Modern Archaeology
Thereis no doubt that the new archaeology has introduced many usefulscientific improvements in the field. (Of course, these scientificimprovements were embraced by both biblical and Syro-Palestinianarchaeologists in the 1970s, and the distinction between these twogroups has become largely imaginary.) At the same time, however, ithas brought new biases against the biblical text. The Bible, inDever’s view, was never intended as a historical document andshould be viewed with “considerable suspicion” forreconstructing the history of the ancient Near East. Otherarchaeologists in the field (and also historians) have an even morenegative attitude toward the Bible. However, it must be emphasizedthat all (or at least most) agree that the Bible has its role in thearchaeology of Syria-Palestine. The question has to do with how theBible should be used.
Maximalistand minimalist approaches.The two schools of thought that seem the loudest in the debate amongbiblical and/or Syro-Palestinian archaeologists are usually labeled“maximalist” and “minimalist.” (To theseKenneth A. Kitchen adds the label “factualist.”According to Kitchen, the agenda of a “factualist” isneither to prove nor to disprove any theory concerning the earlyhistory of Israel, but simply to examine the facts and let the dataspeak for itself.)
Themaximalist school has a strong view of the historical reliability ofScripture and emphasizes synergy between archaeology and biblicalstudies. Others consider this to be a naive approach to Scripture andan uncritical acceptance of the information that it tries tocommunicate. The maximalists follow the scholarship of W. F.Albright and his student John Bright, and they assume that the OTspeaks of historical realities. When seeking to reconstruct thehistory of ancient Israel, they readily and confidently refer to thebiblical record as a valid and significant source for their research.They are also confident that when all the data is in, a biblicalhistory of Israel (aided by archaeology) will exhibit a closecorrespondence with the real history of Israel.
Theminimalist school is generally skeptical concerning the historicalreliability of the biblical text. Many advocates of this approachargue that the OT was written primarily during the Hellenistic period(it certainly is postexilic), centuries after the events that itclaims to describe. A community around Jerusalem created thetraditions found in the Bible in order to give account for themselvesand their distinctive religious notions and practices. According tothis approach, any correlation between the Bible and thearchaeological record is suspect a priori. When there aretensions between biblical and extrabiblical records (includingarchaeology), the extrabiblical records are to be preferred asevidence, and the contradictions are usually emphasized to underminethe reliability of the Bible as a historical source.
Theminimalist movement has developed gradually. Although a century agothere were many who questioned the historicity of the first chaptersof Genesis, most accepted the essential historicity of thepatriarchs, the exodus from Egypt under Moses, the conquest of Canaanby Joshua, the historicity of David and Solomon, and the rest of theOT narrative. During the past forty years, however, serious doubt hasbeen cast on all of these events.
Thestance of the minimalists led to peculiar (and rarely settled)controversies over issues such as the legitimacy of reading “thehouse of David” in the Tel Dan inscription (discovered in1993), the Siloam Tunnel inscription (which overlaps with 2 Chron.32 and is traditionally ascribed to Hezekiah), the very existence ofJerusalem during the days of David and Solomon, and even theexistence of these two kings.
Afresh approach.Is there a way to move beyond the current state of the debate? Somebelieve that there is hope by using a fresh approach to biblicalarchaeology, one that follows in the footsteps of Lawrence Stager andPhilip King (see their book, Life in Biblical Israel ).This approach does not try to reconstruct history or simplyilluminate the Bible; rather, it seeks to enter into the world of theancients to acquire a fuller understanding of Israelite society andits literary record through the combined use of artifacts, sociology,and ethnography. Textual and archaeological data are brought into ahistorical discourse by “selecting and interpreting themthrough the problematics of social history.” Thus, biblicalarchaeology in the older sense is making a comeback by hearkeningback to the integrative works of the nineteenth century, but withvast amounts of new data. This “new biblical archaeology”should not be driven by apologetic purposes and should not aim to“prove the truth of the Bible.” It should have moremodest and realistic goals, considering the limitations ofarchaeology (see below).
Evangelicalarchaeologists, confident in the truth of the Bible (which can standby itself despite its many attacks from within and without), shouldhave as their goal the understanding of the biblical world in itsgeographical, cultural, and historical setting. They should usearchaeology and linguistics to correlate biblical texts and ancientartifacts against the background of the historical and geographicalsetting. When historical questions are posed, the cumulative evidenceshould lead to probability and plausibility rather than a defensivequest for final proof. This attempt to follow historical probabilityvis-à-vis the Bible is different from setting out a prioriwith a defensive Bible-proving agenda.
Thisnew approach will not make the Scriptures say more than judiciousassessment of the evidence will allow (a problem that plagues someconservative interpreters), but neither will it cast undue skepticismon the Scriptures’ historical value (the problem of theminimalists). It endeavors to pay close attention both to theliterary nature and intentions of the biblical text and to thefragmentary nature of the archaeological record.
Thesenew biblical archaeologists do not set out again “to prove theBible.” Instead, they seek to situate the texts of the OT intheir historical and cultural contexts and to demonstrate howawareness of the extrabiblical world can open new doors into theBible. Their goals are more modest, not because of a lower view ofScripture, but rather because of a clearer understanding of thelimitations and fragmentary nature of archaeology despite itsconsiderable refinement in the recent decades.
TheLimitations of Archaeology
Archaeologyhas limitations because of the vast amount of time and area to becovered and because of the hazards of preservation. Objects of wood,leatherwork, basketry, papyrus, and cloth rarely survive, and metals(especially precious metals) were frequently recycled. It is alsoimportant to realize that no biblical site has ever been completelyexcavated, and most of the excavations tend to pay greater attentionto the major buildings (citadels, temples, palaces) rather than thehomes of the general population.
Onlyin recent years have accurate methods of stratification and recordingenabled comparisons to be made between sites, and the reliability ofsome foundational excavations in the Holy Land is rightly questionedby the finds from newer excavations (e.g., Megiddo, Gezer, and Hazorare being reexcavated in part to clarify and answer questions raisedby previous excavations and debates). This is understandable becausemost of the foundational excavations in the Holy Land did not haveaccess to the accurate methods of stratification, recording, andscientific analysis available today. Many useful artifacts andespecially organic objects were routinely discarded in the earlierexcavations.
Ingeneral, earlier levels of a site are more likely to have beendisturbed by the activities of later periods, and it was very commonfor older buildings (and sometimes even monumental inscriptions) tobe dismantled and the (stone) blocks reused for later buildings oreven roads. The objects that archaeologists discover survive and aremost often found by accident. Consequently, given the limitations andpitfalls of archaeology (especially the way it was done in theearliest part of the twentieth century), one must have realistic andmore modest expectations about what archaeology can recover, andrealize that the further one goes in time, the less archaeologicalinformation may be available for comparison and useful analysis. Addto this that some of the central characters of the Bible (e.g.,Abraham, Moses, most of the judges, Ezra) were not major players inthe world of their time, and that some important sites have neverbeen excavated (e.g., Damascus, Hebron), and it becomes clear thatthere are considerable reasons to have more realistic and modestexpectations about what archaeology can accomplish.
Therole and possibility of accurately interpreting archaeologicalremains should also be taken into consideration, especially sincethere are well-documented cases in which the interpretation of theexcavator has turned out to be false (e.g., the “DegeneratedAshtoreth Plaque” of R. A. S. Macalister from Gezer).Anyone who has ever participated in an archaeological excavation ledby a group of experts in the field can remember debates that tookplace among these experts, not only about the dating of variouspieces of pottery, but even about the role and dating of well-definedand visible monumental architecture. While this is understandable anddesirable, and many times leads to the refinement and corrections ofunwarranted early assumptions, the process shows the difficultyinherent in interpreting the fragmentary remains of a deadcivilization far removed from our times and settings.
MaterialRemains and Written Sources
Itis a sobering fact that archaeology cannot provide the basis forhistory. Material remains can reveal climate changes and theirimpact, sequences of human cultures and their products, traces ofdestruction and desertion, changes in building techniques and art.Nevertheless, the persons involved remain anonymous, their thoughts,motives and faith a mystery, and the specific events of their timeslargely unknown (e.g., the destruction by fire of Lachish IIcould not have been accurately dated and related without the biblicalreport in Jer. 34:7). It is the written documents (many timesrecovered through archaeology) that can reveal the names of kings andkingdoms, their dates and deeds, and the fruits of their thinking inliterature. It is the testimony of these texts, rightly evaluated,that can add the “flesh and features” to the “bones”archaeology discovers (Allan Millard).
Onthe other hand, the material remains of life (pottery, jewelry,tools, weapons, cultic objects, architecture, etc.) as recoveredthrough archaeology can bring color to the textual references.Nevertheless, the written sources are essential and provide the mostvaluable information for recovering the history and faith of anyancient nation. It is the duty of the biblical scholar andarchaeologist to interpret correctly the available data fromSyria-Palestine and to arrive at plausible explanations concerningthe biblical world. The combination of texts (biblical andextrabiblical), material culture (archaeology), geography, andhistory holds considerable promise to help scholars better define thecontext of Scripture.
Thereis no doubt that this approach to archaeology holds considerablepotential as it is generating more material than is possible for anyperson (or even school) to encompass. As one of the most quicklychanging social sciences today, both in theoretical advances and newdata, archaeology is and will be the source of new insights intobiblical life and times. It seems that the “archaeologicalrevolution” predicted by W. F. Albright is far from over;it probably has only begun.
Theevidence for this revolution from the evangelical field is visible invarious ways. The rest of this entry briefly presents some selectivearchaeological data that helps define the context and thatcomplements (since the writers of the Bible were selective in theirreporting), challenges, or confirms the narrative of the Bible. Thedata should help the interpreter of the Bible bridge thegeographical, temporal, and cultural gap that leads to the ancientwriter.
TheCannanite (Bronze) Age (3300–1200 BC)
EarlyBronze Age.Towns with mud-brick walls begin to appear in Canaan in the EarlyBronze Age I (before 3000 BC). Evidence of occupation in thethird millennium is found at Beth-yerah, Beth-shan, Gezer, Jerusalem,Jericho, Arad, Megiddo, and Ai, among others. There was a differencebetween the pottery of the north (Beth-yerah) and that of the south,while the most striking development was that of the fine “KhirbetKerak” ware.
MiddleBronze Age.About 2200 BC (Middle Bronze Age I) there arrived a distinctivenomadic people identified with the Amorites of the Bible (Num. 13:29;Josh. 5:1; 10:6). They had distinctive burial customs, pottery, andweapons that show connection with the city-states of Syria. It ismost likely that their kings included the Asiatic “ForeignRulers” (Hyksos) who conquered Egypt in the eighteenth centuryBC. This was a time of wealth and frequent warfare between cities. Itseems that the Middle Bronze Age was a time when seminomadic groups(including a group called “Habiru,” who are also found inthe Late Bronze Age) infiltrated the land between defended towns. Itis possible that the patriarchs were among these Habiru, whoinfiltrated mostly the hill country and the Negev. In fact, it isdemonstrable from a comparison with the eighteenth-century BC textsfrom Mari (on the Euphrates River) that the pastoral traditions ofGenesis fit the early second-millennium BC context much better thanlater periods.
Thetowns and houses of the Middle Bronze Age were violently destroyed inthe fifteenth century BC, most likely by the Egyptians, who expelledthe Hyksos. Despite the trade that seems to have continued with theeastern Mediterranean (Mycenaean pottery), the hill towns ofPalestine were now poorer and fewer than the coastal cities. Thissituation is clearly reflected in the Amarna letters between thekings of Canaan and Egypt. The major cities were reoccupied, but manyof them were destroyed later in the thirteenth century.
LateBronze Age.It is in the Late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 BC) that thebiblical account is usually challenged by the archaeologicaldiscoveries. Even if one accepts the reasonable interpretation thatJoshua burned only three cities (Jericho, Ai, Hazor) in his campaign(see Josh. 6:24; 8:28; 11:13), the evidence of destruction from bothJericho and Ai is highly questionable. Thus, while it is widelybelieved that Jericho was abandoned around 1325 BC, the fallen wallsonce thought to belong to this period were dated much earlier byKathleen Kenyon (Early Bronze). The evidence from Ai (et-Tell) iseven less promising, unless Bryan Wood is correct in hisidentification of Ai with Khirbet el-Maqatir.
Basedon the apparent lack of change in material culture during the LateBronze Age, mainstream archaeologists commonly classify theIsraelites as dissident Canaanites who moved into the hill country.
Althoughit cannot be conclusively demonstrated from archaeology that theIsraelites were not Canaanites but rather came to Canaan from theoutside, the mainstream interpretation has serious problems of itsown. There was clearly a new pattern of simple farming in the hills,characterized by four-room houses whose inhabitants used manycollared-rim jars, and there is an almost complete absence of pigbones (which usually are found in the Canaanite cities) in thehill-country sites. More important, there is strong evidence that theIsraelites were worshiping their own national God (YHWH) by the ninthcentury BC, in sharp contrast to the polytheistic religion of Canaan(as illuminated by the culture in neighboring Ugarit). The personalnames of individuals in the eighth and seventh centuries BC arealmost exclusively Yahwistic.
Anothervery significant change is the abandonment of the shrines in towns ofthe Late Bronze Age. Not a single site can be identified in whichworship continued from the Late Bronze Age well into the Iron Age (itseems that by 1000 BC the Canaanites disappeared as an entity in thearea occupied by Israel). It is highly unlikely that the Canaaniteswho moved from towns into the hill-country sites would have abandonedtheir divinities (whose need they must have felt greatly while facingthe uncertainties of the wilderness), and it is even more unlikelythat people who had come from different towns with different deitieswould have accepted almost universally a new patron deity of obscureprovenance. The continuity in material culture of a nation that wasto take over the homes and all the equipment of the Canaanites shouldnot be surprising in light of the commands of the Bible (Deut.6:10–11). The almost universal rise of the worship of the Godof Israel, and the mention of Israel as a group of people in theStela of Merneptah (c. 1208 BC), argue forcefully that theIsraelites were not really Canaanites.
TheIsraelite (Iron) Age (1200–586 BC)
Bythe twelfth century, the Philistine settlement of southwest Canaan isattested by a new type of pottery with Late Mycenaean affinities.This new type of pottery was found throughout Philistia, theShephelah, and as far north as Joppa. Wealthy and well-constructedCanaanite cities held out for at least another century (Beth-Shean,Gezer, and Megiddo?). The evidence for Israelites comes from thesmall villages throughout the hill country and Galilee.Traditionally, as mentioned above, they are recognized by theirfour-room houses, large number of storage pits for grain, largestorage jars with thick-collared rims, and preference for terracinghillsides for farming.
Archaeologically,it is very difficult to attribute the construction ofcities to any king of the united monarchy (but see the recentdiscovery below). Saul had a citadel at Gibeah (Tell el-Fûl),and the first fortification there has been attributed to him. Itshows the adoption of a new fortification system of casemate wall,characteristic of this period. Similar casemate walls have been foundat Shechem, Beth-shemesh, and Beit Mirsim (and later even in Moab). Asmall town at Megiddo, whose houses form a defensive ring around theperimeter of the mound, has been attributed to David.
Though1 Kings 9:15 reports how Solomon built up Hazor, Megiddo, andGezer, the dating of the six-chambered gates found in all of thesesites and the related walls is still being debated. A much morerecent excavation from Khirbat en-Nahas in Jordan has foundindustrial-scale production of copper in a region and at a time thatcorrelates well with the narrative about Solomon (see 1 Kings7:46).
Anothervery recent and impressive find comes from Khirbet Qeiyafa (mostlikely Shaaraim [Josh. 15:36; 1 Sam. 17:52; 1 Chron.4:31–32]). This site, located in the western part of the highShephelah (near Azekah), was recently excavated by Yosef Garfinkeland Saar Ganor of Hebrew University, Jerusalem. On the basis of fourburnt olive pits tested at Oxford University, the excavators datedthis fortified city to the time of David. They concluded that themassive construction of the city wall (which required two hundredthousand tons of stone) supports the existence of a centralizedpolitical organization, a state—a conclusion that hasfar-reaching implications for the disputed chronology of Iron Age IIA(1000–900 BC). They also found a five-line inscription,indicating that writing was practiced in the region. This inscriptionis important because it seems to be the longest proto-Canaaniteinscription ever found, and the earliest Hebrew inscription known todate.
TheHellenistic-Roman Period (332 BC and Following)
Herodthe Great (37–4 BC) was the ambitious ruler who carried throughmost of the grand building projects that still dot the Holy Landtoday. At Jerusalem, which is still being excavated, the massivewalls that he built for the platform of the temple are still visibletoday both above and below the ground. Other ruins associated withHerod have been found at Caesarea, Jericho, Herodium (nearBethlehem), Masada, and also in Jordan.
Oneof the most important inscriptions for NT studies (especially theGospels) was found by the Italian excavators of Caesarea. Theseexcavators found that the inscription refers to Pontius Pilate,prefect of Judea. Other inscriptions from Greece and Turkey areconnected with the events described in Acts and Paul’s letters.Thus, in Corinth a door inscription (“Synagogue of theHebrews”) may indicate the place where Paul preached (Acts18:4). Excavations there revealed a text naming Erastus as abenefactor. This may be the city treasurer of Rom. 16:23. Near Lystrainscriptions record the dedication to Zeus of a statue of Hermes bysome Lycaonians, and nearby was a stone altar for Zeus and Hermes.This explains the identification of Barnabas with Zeus (Jupiter) andPaul with Hermes (Mercury) in Acts 14:11–12.
Itis clear from the selective sample of data presented here that thefield of archaeology has contributed considerably to the context andunderstanding of the biblical world. All the signs and recentexcavations suggest that there are continuing and exciting prospectsto be found in the newer (biblical) archaeology.
Archers were significant to warfare. As early as 2370 BC thecomposite bow emerged as an adaptation to the equipment of enemies.Usually stationed on city walls (2 Sam. 11:24), archers gainedmore mobility through chariots (2 Kings 9:24).
Incontrast to the shepherding patriarchs (e.g., Isaac, Jacob), thenonchosen line is self-reliant, symbolized by their bows (Ishmael[Gen. 21:16], Esau [27:3]). Except for Jonathan (1 Sam. 20:20),most of the archers of the OT are foreigners (1 Sam. 31:3;1 Kings 22:34; 1 Chron. 10:3; 2 Chron. 35:23), withsome Israelites (1 Sam. 2:4; 1 Chron. 8:40).
Apparently a group from the area of Uruk who weretransplanted to Israel by the Assyrians at the collapse of thenorthern kingdom. In the KJV of Ezra 4:9 the Archevites (NIV: “Uruk”;NRSV: “people of Erech”; NET: “Erechites”)are identified as part of the group that wrote a letter to KingArtaxerxes complaining about the rebuilding of Jerusalem.Chronologically, these letters to Artaxerxes belong to a later timethan that of Zerubbabel.
A Christian whom Paul encouraged to complete “theministry you have received in the Lord” (Col. 4:17) and calleda “fellow soldier” (Philem. 2). Since he is greeted inPhilemon immediately after Philemon and Apphia, he is frequentlyunderstood to have been a close relative and a member of theirhousehold, perhaps a son or a brother. Archippus’s relationshipto Philemon and Apphia cannot be verified either way. Paul describedhim as a “fellow soldier,” which probably indicates aposition of leadership. The nature of the ministry received from theLord that Paul refers to in Col. 4:17 is not specified.
(1)Apeople group descended from Canaan, Ham’s son (Gen. 10:17;1 Chron. 1:15). These peoples were most likely residents ofIrqata, modern Tell Arqa, located eighty miles north of Sidon inSyria. The city was conquered by Tiglath-pileser III of Assyriaand by Thutmose III of Egypt. It appears in the Amarna lettersand was renamed “Caesarea Libani” during the Romanperiod. (2)Aclan located southwest of Bethel that became part of Benjamin (Josh.16:2). Hushai, David’s counselor, was an Arkite (2 Sam.15:32; 16:16; 17:5, 14; 1 Chron. 27:33). Their territory was thesouthern boundary marker of the tribe of Joseph (Josh. 16:2) andincluded the town of Ataroth (Num. 32:3, 34).
Architecture is the technology and the art of design andconstruction. The technology of architecture includes anunderstanding of mathematical and engineering principles; the art ofarchitecture focuses attention on interest and beauty in design. Thecreative imagination of the architect is constantly considering howto artfully manage form and function in the design and constructionprocess.
Architectureand the Bible
Theterm “architecture” does not occur in most Englishtranslations of the Bible. There is, however, evidence of andreference to the architectural activity of God’s people. Inaddition, Israel and the church were contextualized in significantarchitectural periods (Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Roman), so themajor empires of the biblical period often influenced the design andconstruction of cities, temples, and structures referenced in thebiblical text. Architecture offers biblical studies a way to betterunderstand the historical intentions of the Bible. By means ofarchitectural investigation, the history and the heritage of pastcivilizations are illuminated. As a result, our reading of thebiblical text is enhanced.
Whenwe investigate the biblical text with attention to the technology andart of architecture, two perspectives emerge. First, architecturedraws our attention to the background of the biblical text. Incertain biblical texts we learn about the design and the constructionthat took place in Egypt, Assyria, and Palestine during majorbiblical events. For example, the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsoccurred during times of expansion and development in the Eighteenthto Twentieth Dynasties of Egypt (i.e., New Kingdom, sixteenth toeleventh centuries BC). For these periods, we gain knowledge aboutcapital relocations along with temple and pyramid constructions. Welearn that during the conquest, Israel took over existing Canaanitecities in keeping with the Mosaic policies. The architecture ofPalestine enables us to better understand the form and function ofthese infrastructures.
Second,architecture draws our attention to the theological implications ofthe form and function of structures designed by God. In keeping withthe scope of architecture, we are forced to understand that what Goddesigned for altars, the ark, the tabernacle, and the temples of thepast and the future included more than just the functionalrequirements of a nation’s religious system. The interpreter ofthe biblical text must consider how the design of these structureselicits response and communicates meaning. These structures are alsowindows on the social, political, and economic aspects of theIsraelite nation.
OldTestament
Citiesand fortifications.The biblical record makes reference to architectural structures,materials, and furnishings. Cities are referenced frequentlythroughout the OT canon. The city is obviously the context forarchitectural expression. The cities of the Bible are not describedin extensive detail. We learn that Cain was a city builder who namedhis work after his son Enoch. The architectural feature of citiesmentioned most often is the city gates (Gen. 19:1; 23:10, 18; Deut.17:5; Josh. 2:5; 7:5; 20:4; Judg. 5:8). This was an important placefor city life and activity (Gen. 23:1; Prov. 31:31). There was alsosinister activity at city gates. Abner, for example, was killed inthe city gate (2 Sam. 3:22–30). In addition, executionsfor covenant violations were carried out at the city gate (Deut.17:5). There was more than one city gate, as we learn from thepostexilic construction activity of Ezra and Nehemiah.
Withinthe city there was a strong tower. The people of Babel usedthoroughly baked bricks instead of stone and tar for mortar in orderto build the city and the tower that was designed to reach to theheavens (Gen. 11:3–4). A city tower functioned as a place ofrefuge for the people within the city limits (Judg. 9:49–51).
Citieswere protected by a wall system (Lev. 25:29) that also provided spacefor housing (Josh. 2:15). The conquest of Jericho recounts thefamiliar defeat of that city by the very unconventional destructionof its walls (Josh. 6:20). A city square is another feature of thecity architecture (Judg. 19:15–17) that served the public needsof the community.
Thebiblical descriptions of Jerusalem offer a measure of insight intoits architecture. During the rebuilding process in the postexilicperiod, Nehemiah comments on both the construction and the buildingmaterials (Neh. 2:8; 13:31; cf. Ezra 6:4) and the spacious nature ofthe city (Neh. 7:4). From another perspective, the psalmist comments,“Jerusalem is built like a city that is closely compactedtogether” (Ps. 122:3).
Beyondthese textual details we learn through the writings of the prophetsthat cities are the subject of God’s wrath for covenantviolation (Jer. 6:6; Hos. 11:6; Mic. 5:11). Despite this, the nationof Israel is not left without the hope of restoration. The prophetsalso anticipated the return of the people along with the restorationof the city infrastructure (Amos 9:14; Mal. 1:4).
Thetemple and sacred structures.Theother architectural features referenced by the writers of Scriptureinclude altars, the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, and the temple.The tent and the tabernacle were also outfitted with unique furnitureitems described in detail and expertly crafted. The constructionprojects of Solomon are detailed in 1 Kings 5–7. Solomon,like David, pursued his architectural ambitions. The book of Ezekielgives extensive architectural detail for the construction of a futuretemple in which God will reign and rule (Ezek. 40–48).
Thetemple and royal residences were made of stone with cedar roofing.The chamber buildings that surrounded the temple were three storieshigh. The interior walls and ceilings were lined with cedar to coverall the stone (1 Kings 6:1–10). In all the constructiondetails for the temple, the text does not elaborate on architecturalstyle. Perhaps the builders were influenced to some degree by thestyles of the major periods.
Whatare the theological implications related to the form and function ofthe sacred structures in the biblical material? The first is that Godis the ultimate designer of Israel’s architecture. God’ssignature work certainly is not the tabernacle or the Solomonictemple, but rather the created realm. The beauty and the complexitiesof the created world continue to draw attention to God’s beautyand intelligence. As the psalmist declares, the creation, which Goddesigned, is a constant source of praise (Ps. 19).
God’sskill and artistic beauty as a master architect are reflected also inthe revelation of his plans for the sacred structures of Israel tothe nation’s artisans. The skill that the artisans manifestedin the construction process was also a gift from God (Exod. 35:35;2 Chron. 2:14).
Thestructures designed by God for construction were primarily for him.This is understandable because the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsincluded long desert pilgrimages and the related tent dwelling.References to homes and houses in the book of Leviticus are not aboutdesign and construction but about function. The domestic home must befree of mildew (Lev. 14:34–41) and thus clean according to thestandards of the law. The construction of Davidic and Solomonic homesis given attention in Scripture (2 Sam. 5:11; 7:1; 1 Kings7:1–12).
Thetabernacle and the temple were divine residences (Exod. 30:6; 40:34;2 Sam. 7:5; 1 Kings 8:11). For this reason, the design andfunction of each structure reflected the glorious worth of God andreminded the nation of its own uncleanness. Beyond the structures oftemple and tabernacle, the city of Jerusalem was privileged to be theresting place of the “Name” (i.e., presence) of the Lord(2 Chron. 6:5–6) and to have David as the chosen ruler(2 Chron. 6:34).
Thehistory of Israel reveals that the sustainability of these sacredstructures was influenced by physical and spiritual factors. Godoccupied the structures or met with Israel at these sacred places aslong as Israel conformed to the terms of the Mosaic covenant (1 Sam.4:21; 1 Kings 9:6–9). During the monarchy, kings whodeparted from Torah would strip the temple to pay tribute to foreignoverlords (2 Kings 24:13) or would modify the function of thestructure to accommodate the worship of foreign gods (see 2 Kings23). Although there were periodic times of rebuilding the sacredstructures, sustainability was short lived. The ideology of thesacred structures anticipates a future time when their originalfunction will be replaced with the opportunity to live in God’spresence forever.
NewTestament
TheNT refers only rarely to architects or architecture. Hebrews 11:10speaks of God as the “architect [technitēs] and builder”of the heavenly Jerusalem. Paul refers to the church as the temple ofGod. Jesus Christ is the foundation, and Christian leaders arebuilding upon that foundation with either gold, silver, and costlystones or wood, hay, and straw (1 Cor. 3:10–17; cf. 6:19;2 Cor. 6:16).
Interms of physical buildings, the church of the NT was a house church.During the time of Christ the significant architectural structureswere the temple and synagogues. Herod the Great was the major builderof the time, whose impressive temple dominated the landscape of theJerusalem area. Although the synagogue was a central structure duringthe life of Christ and the early church, function is emphasized overform in the biblical material. The synagogue was a place for prayer,Scripture study, and the administration of justice (Luke 4:16–30;Acts 13:15; 14:1).
Thefocus of the NT is also on the church’s function instead of itsarchitectural form. The church, however, prospered and grew in thecontext of a significant Hellenistic architectural period (300 BC toAD 300). In this period the Seleucids were responsible forestablishing large Greek cities across western and central Asia. Theprimary construction material continued to be the mud-brick, whichresulted in rapidly decaying buildings. Although cities continued tobe laid out in a grid format, a more dynamic, hilly format was beingintroduced. The homes in these cities often were built withcourtyards like ones in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The temples of theHellenistic period were designed with landscaping and terracing,along with porticoed enclosures and stairways.
Thebook of Revelation closes the canon with extensive detail about thenew city of Jerusalem, which God will design and build (Rev. 21) andwhich will function to serve his sovereign purposes as creator andredeemer.
In Ezra 6:1 the KJV translates the Hebrew phrase betsiprayya’ as “house of the rolls,” referring toarchives stored in the royal treasury of Babylon. Most modernversions render the phrase as “archives.” King Dariusordered the archives to be searched to determine whether Cyrus had infact issued orders for the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem(Ezra 5:17). Similar archives were kept by most royal dynasties inthe ancient Near East.
The KJV rendering of a constellation mentioned in Job 9:9;38:32 (NIV, NRSV, NASB: “Bear”). The constellation inquestion has been identified alternatively as Ursa Major and UrsaMinor (“the bear”) or as the Dipper (TEV). As with otherconstellations in the Bible, the purpose of its mention is toacknowledge the vast ordering of the universe at the hands of God andthe immensity of his power and sovereignty. See also Aldebaran.
(1) Sonof Benjamin (Gen. 46:21). (2) Sonof Bela and grandson of Benjamin (Num. 26:40), called “Addar”in 1 Chron. 8:3 (erroneously?), who was the progenitor of asignificant clan, the Ardites, in the tribe of Benjamin.
One of three sons of Caleb by his wife Azubah (1 Chron.2:18).
The son of Gad who fathered a significant clan, the Arelites,in the tribe of Gad (Gen. 46:16; Num. 26:17).
A name used for members of the famous Athenian council, theAreopagus. Dionysius, one of the few converts of Paul’spreaching in Athens, held such a position (Acts 17:34 KJV).
(1) Alimestone hill (also known as Mars Hill) in Athens, situatednorthwest of the famous Acropolis. (2) Anancient and prestigious council of Athenians that met on Mars Hilland in former days exercised judicial and legislative authority. Paulwas invited to address the Areopagus and explain his teaching aboutJesus and the resurrection. Among the converts from this occasion,two are named: Dionysius, himself a council member, and Damaris, awoman about whom nothing else is said (Acts 17:16–34).
The name of several Arabian kings. Paul mentions Aretas, kingof Arabia Petraea and father-in-law of Herod Antipas, who divorcedhis daughter to marry Herodias, his brother’s wife (see Mark6:17 pars.). This led to war and the subsequent destruction ofAntipas’s army, which the people blamed on his murder of Johnthe Baptist (Josephus, Ant. 8.116). Following the death of EmperorTiberius (AD 37), Aretas apparently had gained control of Damascus,where Paul, being pursued by the king’s ethnarch, escaped in abasket through a window in the wall (Acts 9:25; 2 Cor.11:32–33).
(1) Aman killed alongside King Pekahiah of Israel duringPekah’s revolt (2 Kings 15:25). However, many scholarsbelieve that this is a scribal error and that this reference to Argobis misplaced from v. 29, thus referring to a place instead of aperson. Some Bible translations omit this name from this versealtogether. (See also Arieh.) (2) Aregion in Bashan in Moab taken over by the Israelites after theydefeated King Og (Num. 21:33–35; Deut. 3:4). This region wasassigned to half of the tribe of Manasseh (Deut. 3:13–14). Jairdefeated the cities in the region and renamed them (1 Kings4:13). This area is located east of the Sea of Galilee. More specificboundaries are harder to define, and the boundaries of this regionmay have shifted over time.
One of Haman’s ten sons, who were killed by the Jewsand whose corpses were hung in public at the request of Esther toKing Xerxes (Ahasuerus) of Persia (Esther 9:7–14).
One of Haman’s ten sons, who were killed by the Jewsand whose corpses were hung in public at the request of Esther toKing Xerxes (Ahasuerus) of Persia (Esther 9:7–14).
Arieh, along with Argob, is either one of Pekah’sfellow conspirators in the assassination of Pekahiah, king of Israel,or one of his victims (2 Kings 15:25). The text is unclear (seealso Argob).
(1) Oneof the men sent by Ezra to Iddo in Kasiphia to bring back ministersfor the temple (Ezra 8:16). (2) Aterm used of two Moabite warriors killed by Benaiah (ESV: “twoariels of Moab”; NIV: “Moab’s two mightiestwarriors”; NRSV, NASB, NET: “two sons of Ariel of Moab”;2 Sam. 23:20; 1 Chron. 11:22). (3) Apoetic term used to refer to Jerusalem (Isa. 29:1–10). In Isa.29:2 (NIV, NET) the prophecy compares “Ariel” (Jerusalem)with an “altar hearth” (cf. ’ariel, “altarhearth,” in Ezek. 43:15–16).
A town of Judea whose exact location is uncertain. It ismentioned in all four Gospels, only in connection with Joseph, a richman and member of the Sanhedrin, in whose tomb Jesus was laid (Matt.27:57; Mark 15:43; Luke 23:51; John 19:38).
(1) Theking of Ellasar who joined a coalition against five kings of the DeadSea region (Gen. 14:1, 9). Abram was swept up in this conflictbecause his nephew Lot was captured in Sodom (14:12). Severalsimilar-sounding names (for both Arioch and Ellasar) are known fromextrabiblical sources, though none of them can be identified withconfidence with the biblical king. (2) Thecaptain of the guard in the court of Nebuchadnezzar who was commandedto kill the wise men of Babylon, including Daniel (Dan. 2:14–15).Arioch protected Daniel by warning him of the king’s order andthen securing an audience for Daniel with the king (2:24–25).
One of Haman’s ten sons, all of whom were killed by theJews after their father had been hung on the gallows that he builtfor Mordecai (Esther 7:10; 9:7–10). King Xerxes grantedEsther’s request that their corpses be hung in public(9:13–14).
A native of Thessalonica who was a close companion of Paul.Associated with Paul’s Gentile mission, he and Gaius wereseized by a mob and brought to the theater in Ephesus (Acts 19:29).Later he journeyed to Jerusalem (possibly as one of the delegates ofthe Macedonian churches) accompanying the collection for poor relief(Acts 20:4). When Paul appealed for his case to be heard by Caesar,Aristarchus sailed with him to Rome (Acts 27:2). Writing from prisonin Rome, Paul commends him as a Jewish coworker (along with Mark andJustus) and fellow prisoner (Col. 4:10, 11; Philem. 24).
The head of a household greeted by Paul (Rom. 16:10).According to church tradition, he was the brother of Barnabas and oneof the seventy disciples, who eventually became a missionary toBritain. Others have suggested that he was the son of Aristobulus,grandson of Herod the Great and brother of Agrippa I.
God announced to Noah that he was going to destroy all theinhabitants of the earth and commanded him to build an “ark”(Heb. tebah; Gen. 6:14–16). Apart from the Genesis floodnarrative, Exod. 2:3–5 is the only other passage in the Biblewhere this word is used, there for the ark of bulrushes in which theinfant Moses was placed. Both arks were made waterproof by a coatingof pitch (tar). An ark is something built to save people fromdrowning. It is not the name of a kind of boat as such (e.g., yacht),but rather a geometric boxlike shape. The ark was without rudder,sail, or any navigational aid.
Noahwas told to make it of “gopher wood” (Heb. goper), whichthe early Jewish Aramaic translations (Targumim) identified as cedar(NIV, NRSV, NET: “cypress wood”). The Hebrew word goperoccurs only here in the Bible, but the Akkadian equivalent (kupru) isfound at a similar point in the Epic of Gilgamesh. It was, then, theright kind of wood for a boat. The ark was to have “rooms”—thatis, cubicles (lit., “nests”)—for the differentanimals to be housed in and kept apart from other animals.
Afterthe general description of the ark (Gen. 6:14), details were providedby God on how to build it (6:15). Its length (300 cubits), width (50cubits), and height (30 cubits) were specified. “Cubit”literally means “forearm” (the distance from elbow to tipof middle finger), so the ark was approximately 450 feet (140 meters)long, 75 feet (23 meters) wide, and 45 feet (13.5 meters) high (seeNIV mg.). We cannot be exactly sure if “roof” (6:16) isthe correct translation of the Hebrew word tsohar, which may refer toa hatchway or skylight (Vulg.: fenestra [“window”]; notethe NIV 1984 mg.: “Make an opening for light”). Anotherpossibility is “pitched roof.” The usual Hebrew word,gag, is not used because that refers to a flat roof (see Josh. 2:6,8; 2 Sam. 11:2). The instruction to “finish it to a cubitabove” (RSV) refers to the pitch of the roof or its overhang.The “window” (Heb. khallon) that Noah opens in Gen. 8:6is probably to be equated with this skylight in the roof, not awindow in the side (since Noah cannot see out). In Gen. 8:13 Noahremoves the “covering” (Heb. mikseh) from the ark, so asto see the surface of the earth. (Gen. 5:1-32; Gen. 6:1-22; Gen7:1-24; Gen. 8:1-22).
Theark was to have a door in its side, which was closed by God (Gen.6:16; 7:16). The structure was also to have three decks, whichsuggests that the ark was viewed as a microcosmos, with its threelevels matching sky, earth, and sea. Genesis 6:17 explains why an arkis needed. The destruction will be by means of water, and the arkwill carry Noah and his family (eight persons), as well as at leastone pair of every living creature. The NT refers to Noah’sconstruction of the ark (Heb. 11:7; 1 Pet. 3:20) and hisentering it (Matt. 24:38; Luke 17:27).
The KJV term for the watertight “papyrus basket”(NIV) in which Moses’ mother placed him to save him fromPharaoh’s decree that all Hebrew infant boys be drowned in theNile (Exod. 2:3).
A sacred cultic object, in the shape of a box, thatrepresented the presence of God among the Israelites. The ark (Heb.’aron), constructed in wood, measured 45 inches long, 27 incheswide, and 27 inches high (Exod. 25:10), and it was transported bymeans of two poles inserted on either side of the ark. The mostimportant aspects of the ark were the cover and the cherubim attachedto the ark cover. Blood was ritually sprinkled on the cover, whichwas the designated place of atonement. In the earliest accounts, theark became the place of atonement, meeting, and revelation betweenGod and Israel.
Ina few instances the Hebrew word ’aron also denotes a collectionbox (NIV: “chest”) in the temple (2 Kings 12:9–10;2 Chron. 24:8, 10–11), and in one case it refers toJoseph’s sarcophagus, or coffin (Gen. 50:26). The Scripturesmention the ark 195 times, frequently (82 times) in association withthe Lord or God, resulting in expressions such as “the Ark ofthe Covenant of the Lord,” the “ark of the God ofIsrael,” and the “ark of God.”
TheFunction and Locations of the Ark
Theark was housed first in the portable sanctuary or tabernacle used forworship in early Israelite history, and Exodus and Deuteronomy notethat it served as a receptacle for the “testimony” or twotablets of the Ten Commandments. Consequently, the ark is oftenreferred to as the “ark of the testimony,” since theHebrew word for “testimony” is synonymous with the commonHebrew word for “covenant” (Pss. 25:10; 132:12), and thedesignations of the container as the “Ark of the Covenant”(Deut. 9:9, 15) and as “the ark of the testimony” (Exod.27:8; 31:18) seem interchangeable. The NT notes that the ark alsocontained a gold jar of manna and Aaron’s blossoming rod (Heb.9:4; cf. Exod. 16:32–34; Num. 17:8–10). The location ofthe ark became associated with the centralized place of gathering andworship by the Israelites. Moses composed what has come to be calledthe “Song of the Ark” (Num. 10:35–36), signifyingthe ark’s role in preceding the nomadic Israelites in thewilderness and indicating where they should rest.
Inthe book of Joshua, the ark led the people in conquest (3:1–5:1;6:1–25). The crossing of the Jordan (3:7–11) amid dryground, when carrying the ark into the river caused the waters to beswept in a heap, depicts the supernatural relationship between theark and the presence of God. The ark became so closely associatedwith the divine presence that the Israelites assumed that thepresence of God resided within the ark. Only the consecratedLevitical priests could carry the ark, which was covered by threelayers of cloth in order to conceal it from the people (Num. 4:5–6,15, 18–20), who had to remain at least a thousand yards away.In 2 Sam. 6:2–7 the oxen carrying the ark stumbled, andUzzah, who was not a priest, reached out and touched the ark tosteady it, resulting in his death (cf. 1 Chron. 13:7–10).Following the entry into the Promised Land, the ark abided at theGilgal sanctuary, and eventually it shifted from Bethel to Shiloh.
Thefunction of the ark as the place where the tribal confederacy soughtdivine counsel for holy war led also to employing the ark as a warsymbol, carried forth into battle to assure victory (Josh. 6:4–21).This use of the ark most likely originates from ancient Near Easternreligious concepts and practices that associated the presence of agod with an emblematic war throne useful for divination and successin battle. The expression “the Lord Almighty, who is enthronedbetween the cherubim” links God’s roles as king andwarrior, reinforcing the ark as God’s throne or his “footstool”(1 Sam. 4:4), symbolic of the invisibly enthroned deity. OtherCanaanite deities, including El, had footstools that resembledgold-plated and ornate boxes upon which to rest their feet,signifying their regal authority and military power. In 1 Chron.28 the ark is referred to as God’s “footstool,” andthe psalmist enjoins the people to gather and worship at God’sfootstool (Ps. 99:5). Similarly, Ps. 132, a liturgical poem linked tothe formal procession of the ark, refers to the “footstool of[God]” as the centralized place of worship.
TheArk of the Covenant rested in the Shiloh temple in the custody of Eliuntil it was captured by the Philistines, who possessed it in theirterritory for seven months (1 Sam. 4–6). The loss of theark was mourned as symbolizing the abandonment or departure of God’spresence, and yet its capture emphasized the Israelites’ falsepresumptions concerning the ark as a guarantor of military successand reinforced the fact that God could not be manipulated. Followinga plague inflicted by God upon the Philistines, the ark was returnedand remained at Kiriath Jearim for twenty years (6:21–7:2).
Eventually,King David transported the ark to the city of Jerusalem, reinforcingthe political and cultic importance of the location. Here it remainedin a “tent” until it was placed in Solomon’s temple(2 Sam. 6:17; 7:2). The ark disappeared sometime during the latemonarchical period; its capture is not listed in the temple assetsseized by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:13–17). The ark wasnever replaced after the return from the Babylonian exile, andJeremiah declared that the ark should not be remade (Jer. 3:16). Theark is not mentioned in Ezekiel’s description of the new temple(Ezek. 40–48).
Thebook of Hebrews mentions the ark in relation to its prominence andpurpose in the temple (9:4–5). In addition, Heb. 9:1–14contrasts the application of Christ’s own blood in the heavenlyholy place with the priestly sprinkling of blood on the “mercyseat” (NIV: “atonement cover”) of the ark.Revelation 11:19 speaks of the ark of God’s covenant beinglocated in the heavens.
TheArk and the Holiness of God
TheArk of the Covenant underscores the holiness of God and his necessaryseparation from sin. The holiness or consecration of those whoapproach God at the ark signifies the importance of cleansing fromimpurity as a prerequisite to maintaining the covenant relationshipwith God. Although the ark and the presence of God became inseparablylinked in the minds of the Israelites, God’s promise to bepresent among them did not imply a spatial or corporeal limitation.The law tablets contained in the ark are inextricably linked with theglory of God’s presence and the point of covenant accessibilitythrough the word of God. The portable nature of the ark, and the tentin which it was housed, emphasizes that God’s presence orrevelation is not limited to a specific location.
TheNT also concretizes the ark to the holiness of God and his law. Godis both merciful and just; his holiness requires propitiation forsin, and his mercy provides it through the blood atonementaccomplished through the death and resurrection of Christ. Christ’ssufficient and efficacious vicarious sacrifice on the cross replacedthe yearly ritual necessary to secure the salvation and forgivenessof God’s people, highlighting the superiority of Christ andsalvation by grace through faith in his redemptive work on the cross.The sacrificial death of Christ provides infinite atonement andreconciliation for believers, who affirm God’s immanence whileat the same time acknowledging his sovereignty and transcendence.Believers look forward to the literal and physical return of Christ,when they will realize the fulfillment of God’s promise to livewith and among them eternally.
A sacred cultic object, in the shape of a box, thatrepresented the presence of God among the Israelites. The ark (Heb.’aron), constructed in wood, measured 45 inches long, 27 incheswide, and 27 inches high (Exod. 25:10), and it was transported bymeans of two poles inserted on either side of the ark. The mostimportant aspects of the ark were the cover and the cherubim attachedto the ark cover. Blood was ritually sprinkled on the cover, whichwas the designated place of atonement. In the earliest accounts, theark became the place of atonement, meeting, and revelation betweenGod and Israel.
Ina few instances the Hebrew word ’aron also denotes a collectionbox (NIV: “chest”) in the temple (2 Kings 12:9–10;2 Chron. 24:8, 10–11), and in one case it refers toJoseph’s sarcophagus, or coffin (Gen. 50:26). The Scripturesmention the ark 195 times, frequently (82 times) in association withthe Lord or God, resulting in expressions such as “the Ark ofthe Covenant of the Lord,” the “ark of the God ofIsrael,” and the “ark of God.”
TheFunction and Locations of the Ark
Theark was housed first in the portable sanctuary or tabernacle used forworship in early Israelite history, and Exodus and Deuteronomy notethat it served as a receptacle for the “testimony” or twotablets of the Ten Commandments. Consequently, the ark is oftenreferred to as the “ark of the testimony,” since theHebrew word for “testimony” is synonymous with the commonHebrew word for “covenant” (Pss. 25:10; 132:12), and thedesignations of the container as the “Ark of the Covenant”(Deut. 9:9, 15) and as “the ark of the testimony” (Exod.27:8; 31:18) seem interchangeable. The NT notes that the ark alsocontained a gold jar of manna and Aaron’s blossoming rod (Heb.9:4; cf. Exod. 16:32–34; Num. 17:8–10). The location ofthe ark became associated with the centralized place of gathering andworship by the Israelites. Moses composed what has come to be calledthe “Song of the Ark” (Num. 10:35–36), signifyingthe ark’s role in preceding the nomadic Israelites in thewilderness and indicating where they should rest.
Inthe book of Joshua, the ark led the people in conquest (3:1–5:1;6:1–25). The crossing of the Jordan (3:7–11) amid dryground, when carrying the ark into the river caused the waters to beswept in a heap, depicts the supernatural relationship between theark and the presence of God. The ark became so closely associatedwith the divine presence that the Israelites assumed that thepresence of God resided within the ark. Only the consecratedLevitical priests could carry the ark, which was covered by threelayers of cloth in order to conceal it from the people (Num. 4:5–6,15, 18–20), who had to remain at least a thousand yards away.In 2 Sam. 6:2–7 the oxen carrying the ark stumbled, andUzzah, who was not a priest, reached out and touched the ark tosteady it, resulting in his death (cf. 1 Chron. 13:7–10).Following the entry into the Promised Land, the ark abided at theGilgal sanctuary, and eventually it shifted from Bethel to Shiloh.
Thefunction of the ark as the place where the tribal confederacy soughtdivine counsel for holy war led also to employing the ark as a warsymbol, carried forth into battle to assure victory (Josh. 6:4–21).This use of the ark most likely originates from ancient Near Easternreligious concepts and practices that associated the presence of agod with an emblematic war throne useful for divination and successin battle. The expression “the Lord Almighty, who is enthronedbetween the cherubim” links God’s roles as king andwarrior, reinforcing the ark as God’s throne or his “footstool”(1 Sam. 4:4), symbolic of the invisibly enthroned deity. OtherCanaanite deities, including El, had footstools that resembledgold-plated and ornate boxes upon which to rest their feet,signifying their regal authority and military power. In 1 Chron.28 the ark is referred to as God’s “footstool,” andthe psalmist enjoins the people to gather and worship at God’sfootstool (Ps. 99:5). Similarly, Ps. 132, a liturgical poem linked tothe formal procession of the ark, refers to the “footstool of[God]” as the centralized place of worship.
TheArk of the Covenant rested in the Shiloh temple in the custody of Eliuntil it was captured by the Philistines, who possessed it in theirterritory for seven months (1 Sam. 4–6). The loss of theark was mourned as symbolizing the abandonment or departure of God’spresence, and yet its capture emphasized the Israelites’ falsepresumptions concerning the ark as a guarantor of military successand reinforced the fact that God could not be manipulated. Followinga plague inflicted by God upon the Philistines, the ark was returnedand remained at Kiriath Jearim for twenty years (6:21–7:2).
Eventually,King David transported the ark to the city of Jerusalem, reinforcingthe political and cultic importance of the location. Here it remainedin a “tent” until it was placed in Solomon’s temple(2 Sam. 6:17; 7:2). The ark disappeared sometime during the latemonarchical period; its capture is not listed in the temple assetsseized by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:13–17). The ark wasnever replaced after the return from the Babylonian exile, andJeremiah declared that the ark should not be remade (Jer. 3:16). Theark is not mentioned in Ezekiel’s description of the new temple(Ezek. 40–48).
Thebook of Hebrews mentions the ark in relation to its prominence andpurpose in the temple (9:4–5). In addition, Heb. 9:1–14contrasts the application of Christ’s own blood in the heavenlyholy place with the priestly sprinkling of blood on the “mercyseat” (NIV: “atonement cover”) of the ark.Revelation 11:19 speaks of the ark of God’s covenant beinglocated in the heavens.
TheArk and the Holiness of God
TheArk of the Covenant underscores the holiness of God and his necessaryseparation from sin. The holiness or consecration of those whoapproach God at the ark signifies the importance of cleansing fromimpurity as a prerequisite to maintaining the covenant relationshipwith God. Although the ark and the presence of God became inseparablylinked in the minds of the Israelites, God’s promise to bepresent among them did not imply a spatial or corporeal limitation.The law tablets contained in the ark are inextricably linked with theglory of God’s presence and the point of covenant accessibilitythrough the word of God. The portable nature of the ark, and the tentin which it was housed, emphasizes that God’s presence orrevelation is not limited to a specific location.
TheNT also concretizes the ark to the holiness of God and his law. Godis both merciful and just; his holiness requires propitiation forsin, and his mercy provides it through the blood atonementaccomplished through the death and resurrection of Christ. Christ’ssufficient and efficacious vicarious sacrifice on the cross replacedthe yearly ritual necessary to secure the salvation and forgivenessof God’s people, highlighting the superiority of Christ andsalvation by grace through faith in his redemptive work on the cross.The sacrificial death of Christ provides infinite atonement andreconciliation for believers, who affirm God’s immanence whileat the same time acknowledging his sovereignty and transcendence.Believers look forward to the literal and physical return of Christ,when they will realize the fulfillment of God’s promise to livewith and among them eternally.
(1)Apeople group descended from Canaan, Ham’s son (Gen. 10:17;1 Chron. 1:15). These peoples were most likely residents ofIrqata, modern Tell Arqa, located eighty miles north of Sidon inSyria. The city was conquered by Tiglath-pileser III of Assyriaand by Thutmose III of Egypt. It appears in the Amarna lettersand was renamed “Caesarea Libani” during the Romanperiod. (2)Aclan located southwest of Bethel that became part of Benjamin (Josh.16:2). Hushai, David’s counselor, was an Arkite (2 Sam.15:32; 16:16; 17:5, 14; 1 Chron. 27:33). Their territory was thesouthern boundary marker of the tribe of Joseph (Josh. 16:2) andincluded the town of Ataroth (Num. 32:3, 34).
Denoting the forearm of human beings or the shoulder ofanimals, the arm is frequently used as an image of power. Often usedwith the adjectives “outstretched,” “mighty,”or “holy,” God’s arm represents his power increating the heavens and the earth (Jer. 27:5; cf. Ps. 89:10) and inredeeming his people in the exodus (Exod. 6:6; Deut. 4:34; Ps.136:12; Jer. 32:21) and from the exile (1 Kings 8:41; Ezek.20:33–34). The same image is evoked in describing God’spunishment of the disobedient Israelites (Jer. 21:5) as well as theenemy nations (Isa. 30:30; 48:14).
Commonly believed to be the place of the final, cataclysmicbattle that climaxes in the visible return of Christ (Rev. 16:16).The literal rendering “mount of Megiddo” is somewhatproblematic, for there is no Mount of Megiddo. The apocalypticindications relate Zech. 12:11 (the only apocalyptic reference toMegiddo, although there it is the “plain of Megiddo”)with Ezek. 38–39 (where the final battle in history takes placeon the “mountains of Israel”). At the least, Armageddonrepresents the place where the kings of the world will gather for thefinal battle before God judges the world. The choice of Megiddo mayresult from the fact that it was the place where the righteousIsraelites repeatedly fought off attacks by wicked nations (cf.2 Kings 23:29).
In the KJV, the name of the place to which the murderers ofthe Assyrian king Sennacherib escaped in 2 Kings 19:37 (cf. Isa.37:38). The NIV and NRSV, following the Hebrew word, have “Ararat.”Armenia connects eastern Asia Minor (today Turkey) to the Iranianplateau. See also Ararat.
A band worn around the upper arm. These bands were part ofthe spoil collected by the Israelites during their destruction ofcertain Midianites (Num. 31:50), and one was taken from Saul afterhis death by the Amalekite who killed him on Mount Gilboa (2 Sam.1:10).
The son of Saul and Rizpah who, along with his brotherMephibosheth and five of Saul’s grandsons, was handed over tothe Gibeonites by David as a form of retribution for Saul’sslaughter of the Gibeonite people (2 Sam. 21).
The Bible depicts war and warlike acts throughout. The armsare both offensive and defensive in nature. The most common types ofoffensive weapons are swords, axes, spears, bows and arrows, slings,and stones. Defensive weapons include the shield and the helmet. Anarmy’s arsenal was usually kept in a storehouse called anarmory (1 Kings 10:17; Isa. 22:8; Neh. 3:19).
Arms
Sword.In the OT, the word “sword” (khereb) appears for thefirst time in Gen. 3:24 after Adam and Eve have been evicted from thegarden of Eden. A flaming sword was placed there “to guard theway to the tree of life.” Thus, the first use of the sword isdefensive. Later in Genesis, Jacob’s sons use swords to avengethe rape of their sister Dinah (Gen. 34:25–26). In most casesthe word describes the weapon of choice for most of antiquity. Swordswere manufactured of iron (1 Sam. 13:19; Joel 3:10). Some wereshort and easy to maneuver (Judg. 3:16), while others were long andheavy (1 Sam. 21:9). They could be single- or double-edged, andthey were worn in a sheath or scabbard (1 Sam. 17:51; 2 Sam.20:8). The sword was also supported by a girdle made of leatherstudded with nails (1 Sam. 18:4; 2 Sam. 20:8). Sometimes,the sword was used figuratively to speak of God’s judgment(Lev. 26:6; Isa. 1:20; Jer. 47:6; 50:35–37; Ezek. 21:9, 28;Hos. 11:6). In the NT, the most common word describing a sword is theGreek machaira, which is used to describe the weapons wielded by themob that came to arrest Jesus (Matt. 26:47, 55; Mark 14:48), as wellas the weapon used by Peter to cut off Malchus’s ear (John18:10). Another Greek word translated “sword” isrhomphaia, which describes a longer sword, generally worn over one’sshoulder (Rev. 1:16; 6:8; 19:21). The word “sword” isalso used figuratively in the NT. The word of God is designated as“the sword of the Spirit” (Eph. 6:17) and as a“double-edged sword” (Heb. 4:12).
Spear.Four main words in the Bible are translated as “spear” or“javelin.” The Hebrew word romakh is translated “spear”or “javelin,” and it appears fifteen times in the OT. Thespear was made of iron (Joel 3:10), and those who fell prey to itnever survived its penetration (Num. 25:7; 1 Kings 18:28). Theother Hebrew word used for the spear is khanit, which appears aboutfifty times in the OT. It is used to describe Goliath’s spearwhen he fought David (1 Sam. 17:7), Saul’s spear when hehurled it at David (1 Sam. 18:10–11), and theAssyrian-made “glittering” spear (Nah. 3:3). The thirdword is khidon, which appears about ten times in the OT. It describesa weapon in the arsenals of Joshua (Josh. 8:18, 26), Goliath (1 Sam.17:6), and the Babylonians (Jer. 6:23). In the NT, the word “spear”(Gk. longchē) occurs only once, referring to the weapon used topierce Jesus’ side at his crucifixion (John 19:34).
Bowand arrow.The bow and arrow was an important offensive weapon in Israel and thesurrounding cultures. In the Bible, bow and arrow, either incombination or individually, appear in both a literal (2 Kings9:24; Isa. 37:33) and a figurative sense (Pss. 11:2; 64:7; Isa. 49:2;Lam. 3:12; Zech. 9:13). There is extrabiblical evidence suggestingthat the Egyptians and the Syrians also used the bow and arrow aspart of their military arsenal.
Sling.Primitive but effective, the sling was used not only in Israel butalso in Egypt and Babylon. Easy to manufacture, it used stones asammunition; thus it was the weapon of choice for those lacking rawmaterial to build weapons made of metal. Besides David’s use ofthe sling in his encounter with Goliath (1 Sam. 17:40), men fromthe tribe of Benjamin used the sling with remarkable accuracy (Judg.20:16).
Ax.Besides its primary role for cutting down trees (Deut. 19:5; Judg.9:48; Jer. 10:3), the ax probably was used in war as well. (See alsoAx, Ax Head.)
Armor
Shield.The shield is one of the most ancient defense weapons. Two Hebrewwords are used to depict a shield. The magen appears for the firsttime in Gen. 15:1, where it is used figuratively to speak of God’sprotection of Abraham. It is used in the same manner one other time,in Deut. 33:29. It is frequently used as a figure of speech by thepsalmists to denote the same idea of divine protection (Pss. 3:3;7:10; 18:2, 30; 28:7; 33:20; 59:11; 84:9, 11; 115:9–11;119:114; 144:2). When used literally, the term refers to a shieldmade of wood and sometimes overlaid with leather. Solomon used goldto manufacture shields (1 Kings 10:17), while Rehoboammanufactured them of bronze (1 Kings 14:27). This type of shieldwas used as a defensive weapon by the Israelites throughout theirhistory (Judg. 5:8; 1 Chron. 5:18; 2 Chron. 9:16; 14:8;17:17; 23:9; Neh. 4:16). It was also used by the Syrians (Isa. 22:6),Assyrians (Isa. 37:33), Egyptians (Jer. 46:3), and Persians (Ezek.27:10). The other Hebrew term translated “shield” istsinnah. This was larger than the magen and was meant to cover thefighter’s entire body. It was the type of shield carried byGoliath’s shield bearer (1 Sam. 17:7, 41), manufactured byKing Solomon (1 Kings 10:16), used by the Gadites who joinedDavid while fleeing from Saul (1 Chron. 12:8), and used byIsrael’s army during the reigns of Rehoboam (2 Chron.11:12) and Asa (2 Chron. 14:8). The Greek word thyreos is theLXX rendering of the Hebrew tsinnah, and it appears only once in theNT. Paul uses the word figuratively when speaking about the “shieldof faith” (Eph. 6:16).
Helmet.The helmet had the obvious defensive purpose of protecting acombatant’s head. It was made of leather or light metal, suchas bronze (1 Sam. 17:5, 38). In both Testaments, salvation isspoken of figuratively as a “helmet” (Isa. 59:17; Eph.6:17; 1 Thess. 5:8).
Coatof mail.Body armor was used for the protection of the warrior not only inIsrael but also in other ancient Near Eastern nations. The Hebrewterm shiryon is variously translated as “coat of mail”(ESV, RSV, NRSV), “coat of scale armor” (NIV), or“habergeon” (KJV). Goliath wore this type of body armor(1 Sam. 17:5, 38), and his was manufactured of bronze. Despitewearing a shiryon, Israel’s king Ahab was fatally wounded inbattle (1 Kings 22:34). In an attempt to strengthen Judah’smilitary power, King Uzziah also provided coats of mail for his army(2 Chron. 26:14). It was also used during postexilic times,Nehemiah’s workers having benefited from its protection (Neh.4:16). Shiryon (Gk. thorax) is used figuratively to speak of a“breastplate” of righteousness and of love (Isa. 59:17;Eph. 6:14; 1 Thess. 5:8).
The Bible depicts war and warlike acts throughout. The armsare both offensive and defensive in nature. The most common types ofoffensive weapons are swords, axes, spears, bows and arrows, slings,and stones. Defensive weapons include the shield and the helmet. Anarmy’s arsenal was usually kept in a storehouse called anarmory (1 Kings 10:17; Isa. 22:8; Neh. 3:19).
Arms
Sword.In the OT, the word “sword” (khereb) appears for thefirst time in Gen. 3:24 after Adam and Eve have been evicted from thegarden of Eden. A flaming sword was placed there “to guard theway to the tree of life.” Thus, the first use of the sword isdefensive. Later in Genesis, Jacob’s sons use swords to avengethe rape of their sister Dinah (Gen. 34:25–26). In most casesthe word describes the weapon of choice for most of antiquity. Swordswere manufactured of iron (1 Sam. 13:19; Joel 3:10). Some wereshort and easy to maneuver (Judg. 3:16), while others were long andheavy (1 Sam. 21:9). They could be single- or double-edged, andthey were worn in a sheath or scabbard (1 Sam. 17:51; 2 Sam.20:8). The sword was also supported by a girdle made of leatherstudded with nails (1 Sam. 18:4; 2 Sam. 20:8). Sometimes,the sword was used figuratively to speak of God’s judgment(Lev. 26:6; Isa. 1:20; Jer. 47:6; 50:35–37; Ezek. 21:9, 28;Hos. 11:6). In the NT, the most common word describing a sword is theGreek machaira, which is used to describe the weapons wielded by themob that came to arrest Jesus (Matt. 26:47, 55; Mark 14:48), as wellas the weapon used by Peter to cut off Malchus’s ear (John18:10). Another Greek word translated “sword” isrhomphaia, which describes a longer sword, generally worn over one’sshoulder (Rev. 1:16; 6:8; 19:21). The word “sword” isalso used figuratively in the NT. The word of God is designated as“the sword of the Spirit” (Eph. 6:17) and as a“double-edged sword” (Heb. 4:12).
Spear.Four main words in the Bible are translated as “spear” or“javelin.” The Hebrew word romakh is translated “spear”or “javelin,” and it appears fifteen times in the OT. Thespear was made of iron (Joel 3:10), and those who fell prey to itnever survived its penetration (Num. 25:7; 1 Kings 18:28). Theother Hebrew word used for the spear is khanit, which appears aboutfifty times in the OT. It is used to describe Goliath’s spearwhen he fought David (1 Sam. 17:7), Saul’s spear when hehurled it at David (1 Sam. 18:10–11), and theAssyrian-made “glittering” spear (Nah. 3:3). The thirdword is khidon, which appears about ten times in the OT. It describesa weapon in the arsenals of Joshua (Josh. 8:18, 26), Goliath (1 Sam.17:6), and the Babylonians (Jer. 6:23). In the NT, the word “spear”(Gk. longchē) occurs only once, referring to the weapon used topierce Jesus’ side at his crucifixion (John 19:34).
Bowand arrow.The bow and arrow was an important offensive weapon in Israel and thesurrounding cultures. In the Bible, bow and arrow, either incombination or individually, appear in both a literal (2 Kings9:24; Isa. 37:33) and a figurative sense (Pss. 11:2; 64:7; Isa. 49:2;Lam. 3:12; Zech. 9:13). There is extrabiblical evidence suggestingthat the Egyptians and the Syrians also used the bow and arrow aspart of their military arsenal.
Sling.Primitive but effective, the sling was used not only in Israel butalso in Egypt and Babylon. Easy to manufacture, it used stones asammunition; thus it was the weapon of choice for those lacking rawmaterial to build weapons made of metal. Besides David’s use ofthe sling in his encounter with Goliath (1 Sam. 17:40), men fromthe tribe of Benjamin used the sling with remarkable accuracy (Judg.20:16).
Ax.Besides its primary role for cutting down trees (Deut. 19:5; Judg.9:48; Jer. 10:3), the ax probably was used in war as well. (See alsoAx, Ax Head.)
Armor
Shield.The shield is one of the most ancient defense weapons. Two Hebrewwords are used to depict a shield. The magen appears for the firsttime in Gen. 15:1, where it is used figuratively to speak of God’sprotection of Abraham. It is used in the same manner one other time,in Deut. 33:29. It is frequently used as a figure of speech by thepsalmists to denote the same idea of divine protection (Pss. 3:3;7:10; 18:2, 30; 28:7; 33:20; 59:11; 84:9, 11; 115:9–11;119:114; 144:2). When used literally, the term refers to a shieldmade of wood and sometimes overlaid with leather. Solomon used goldto manufacture shields (1 Kings 10:17), while Rehoboammanufactured them of bronze (1 Kings 14:27). This type of shieldwas used as a defensive weapon by the Israelites throughout theirhistory (Judg. 5:8; 1 Chron. 5:18; 2 Chron. 9:16; 14:8;17:17; 23:9; Neh. 4:16). It was also used by the Syrians (Isa. 22:6),Assyrians (Isa. 37:33), Egyptians (Jer. 46:3), and Persians (Ezek.27:10). The other Hebrew term translated “shield” istsinnah. This was larger than the magen and was meant to cover thefighter’s entire body. It was the type of shield carried byGoliath’s shield bearer (1 Sam. 17:7, 41), manufactured byKing Solomon (1 Kings 10:16), used by the Gadites who joinedDavid while fleeing from Saul (1 Chron. 12:8), and used byIsrael’s army during the reigns of Rehoboam (2 Chron.11:12) and Asa (2 Chron. 14:8). The Greek word thyreos is theLXX rendering of the Hebrew tsinnah, and it appears only once in theNT. Paul uses the word figuratively when speaking about the “shieldof faith” (Eph. 6:16).
Helmet.The helmet had the obvious defensive purpose of protecting acombatant’s head. It was made of leather or light metal, suchas bronze (1 Sam. 17:5, 38). In both Testaments, salvation isspoken of figuratively as a “helmet” (Isa. 59:17; Eph.6:17; 1 Thess. 5:8).
Coatof mail.Body armor was used for the protection of the warrior not only inIsrael but also in other ancient Near Eastern nations. The Hebrewterm shiryon is variously translated as “coat of mail”(ESV, RSV, NRSV), “coat of scale armor” (NIV), or“habergeon” (KJV). Goliath wore this type of body armor(1 Sam. 17:5, 38), and his was manufactured of bronze. Despitewearing a shiryon, Israel’s king Ahab was fatally wounded inbattle (1 Kings 22:34). In an attempt to strengthen Judah’smilitary power, King Uzziah also provided coats of mail for his army(2 Chron. 26:14). It was also used during postexilic times,Nehemiah’s workers having benefited from its protection (Neh.4:16). Shiryon (Gk. thorax) is used figuratively to speak of a“breastplate” of righteousness and of love (Isa. 59:17;Eph. 6:14; 1 Thess. 5:8).
The army of Israel was primarily a volunteer military forcedirected by God and his word. Deuteronomy 20 establishes theguidelines for warfare, Num. 1 describes organization, and Num. 2:17highlights God’s strategic position as commander in the sacredevent of war. Israelite warriors were men twenty years and older fromthe nation’s tribes, clans, and families. The Levites wereappointed tabernacle caretakers and not counted in the census formilitary duties. The priest was responsible for addressing the nationprior to a battle and then leading the battle procession inconnection with the Ark of the Covenant.
TheIsraelite army structure is not overly developed in the biblicalmaterial. Under God as commander in chief was the king, who thenworked in connection with his commanders and officers to executeGod’s will by means of a tribal confederation. Prior to themonarchy, God worked through Moses and Joshua to rally the men forbattle. Samuel warned the nation that the king would abuse thevolunteerism of the army and take their sons and make them rendermilitary service with his chariots and horses (1 Sam. 8:11–12).This warning was realized under the leadership of Solomon andRehoboam. Army divisions included a list of family heads, commandersof thousands, commanders of hundreds, and their officers. Inaddition, a period of their service was noted (1 Chron. 27).
Armysize was not a matter of importance for success in battle. God asdivine warrior led the nation in battle and determined the outcome inkeeping with his sovereign purposes. Only a few Israelites werenecessary to defeat thousands (Lev. 26:8; Deut. 32:8). The defeat ofPharaoh and his army in the exodus and the conquest provides the mostdramatic premonarchy illustrations of God’s defiance of thenumbers. During the monarchy, God orchestrated the defeat of the vastAramean army with a smaller Israelite army (1 Kings 20:27). Onthe other hand, when the Israelites were disobedient to the covenant,they would be put to flight (Josh. 7).
TheIsraelite army fought all kinds of battles under God’sdirection. War was a sacred event that involved, for example, themaking of sacrifices (1 Sam. 13), consecration of oneself (Josh.3:5), abstinence (1 Sam. 21:5; 2 Sam. 11:11), the ritualcleanness of the camp (Deut. 23:9–4), the leadership of priestand prophet (Josh. 6; Jer. 34), and the presence of the ark.
A descendant of Hananiah mentioned in the genealogy in1 Chronicles that records the postexilic descent of the line ofDavid (1 Chron. 3:21).
An ancestor of Jesus mentioned in some manuscripts of Luke3:33 (followed by NRSV, NET) but thought to be the same descendant ofHezron as Ram (so NIV; KJV has Aram; 1 Chron. 2:9–10; Ruth4:19) and Aram (Matt. 1:4).
The wadi and gorge that runs into the east side of the DeadSea opposite En Gedi. It formed the northern boundary of Moab(Num. 22:36; Judg. 11:18) and southern boundary of the kingdom ofSihon the Amorite (Deut. 2:24, 36). Its first mention in the OT is asa campsite of the migrating Israelites (Num. 21:13–36). TheIsraelites captured all the territory of the Transjordan north of theArnon River (Deut. 3:8–17; 4:48; Josh. 12:1–2). This wasgiven as an inheritance by Moses to the tribes of Reuben and Gad andto the half-tribe of Manasseh (Josh. 13:8–33). In the days ofJephthah, the Ammonite king attempted unsuccessfully to regain theterritory from the Arnon to the Jabbok Rivers (Judg. 11). DuringJehu’s reign, the Syrian king Hazael captured from Israel theTransjordan territory as far south as the Arnon Gorge (2 Kings10:32–33). It is also mentioned in prophetic poetry inconnection with Moab (Isa. 16:2; Jer. 48:20).
The sixth son of Gad and founder of the Arodites (Num.26:17). He is called “Arodi” in the parallel genealogy inGen. 46:16. Despite the different spellings, there is no doubt thatthe two genealogies list the same person.
(1) Asettlement on the northern rim of a deep gorge along the Arnon River(modern Wadi Mujib in Jordan), east of the Dead Sea. Because thegorge served as a natural border for surrounding territories, Aroerwas a strategically attractive stronghold. The ancient site has beenidentified with Khirbet ’Ara’ir, and excavations haveuncovered a fortress from the Late Bronze Age (1300–1200 BC),with evidence of earlier rudimentary constructions. Aroer wascontrolled by Sihon the Amorite until Moses defeated him (Deut. 2:36;4:48; Josh. 12:2) and incorporated the settlement within Reuben’sterritory (Deut. 3:12; Josh. 13:9, 16), although Gad was involved inrebuilding it (Num. 32:34). Later, the settlement likely marked thestarting point for David’s census (2 Sam. 24:5). TheMoabite Stone (line 26) reports that Mesha, king of Moab, rebuiltAroer after conquering it (c. 940 BC). Later, Hazael of Syria gaineddominance over the Transjordan as far south as Aroer (2 Kings10:33; cf. Isa. 17:2). By Jeremiah’s time, Aroer had once againcome under Moab’s control (Jer. 48:19).
(2) Acity in Transjordan near Rabbah (modern Amman). This Aroer, part ofGad’s territory, bordered Ammonite land (Josh. 13:25; cf. Judg.11:33).
(3) Acity located fourteen miles southeast of Beersheba in the Negev,where David distributed spoils from his encounter with the Amalekites(1 Sam. 30:28; cf. 1 Chron. 11:44). Excavations at modern’Ar’arah have not yet confirmed its identification withthe ancient city since the earliest remains date only from theseventh century BC.
(1) Theson of Shem and grandson of Noah, born two years after the flood(Gen. 10:22; 11:11–13; cf. 1 Chron. 1:17–18, 24).Arphaxad fathered Shelah at age thirty-five, although the genealogyin Luke 3:36, following the LXX, inserts Cainan between Arphaxad andShelah. Arphaxad had other sons and daughters and lived to be 438years old. Shem’s genealogy in Gen. 11 traces Abram’sancestry through Arphaxad’s line. (2) Aruler of the Medes in Ecbatana (modern Hamadan in Iran), whomNebuchadnezzar defeated (Jdt. 1:1, 5, 13, 15).
The capital city of Bit-Agusi in northern Syria identifiedwith modern Tell Erfad, about twenty-five miles north of Aleppo. Itwas conquered twice by the Assyrians, once in 740 BC byTiglath-pileser III and again in 720 BC by Sargon II. TheAssyrians taunted Israel with the destruction of this city as proofthat their God could not stop the Assyrian advance (2 Kings18:34; 19:13; Isa. 10:9; 36:19; 37:13). Jeremiah mentions Arpad in aprophecy against Damascus in Syria (49:23). Arpad is spelled “Arphad”in the KJV of Isa. 36:19; 37:13.
(1) Theson of Shem and grandson of Noah, born two years after the flood(Gen. 10:22; 11:11–13; cf. 1 Chron. 1:17–18, 24).Arphaxad fathered Shelah at age thirty-five, although the genealogyin Luke 3:36, following the LXX, inserts Cainan between Arphaxad andShelah. Arphaxad had other sons and daughters and lived to be 438years old. Shem’s genealogy in Gen. 11 traces Abram’sancestry through Arphaxad’s line. (2) Aruler of the Medes in Ecbatana (modern Hamadan in Iran), whomNebuchadnezzar defeated (Jdt. 1:1, 5, 13, 15).
Artaxerxes I (Longimanus) was the fourth king of thePersian Empire (464–424 BC), after Cyrus, Cambyses (notmentioned in the Bible), and Darius. It was an appeal by provincialofficials to Artaxerxes at the beginning of his reign that brought ahalt to an early attempt to repair the walls of Jerusalem (Ezra4:7–23). Ezra went up to Jerusalem in the seventh year of hisreign (458 BC; Ezra 7:7). The appearance of beneficence inArtaxerxes’ decree (7:11–26) was spoiled by therevelation of the self-serving political motivation behind itsapparent generosity (7:23). Ezra’s nonuse of the sweepingpowers given to him by Artaxerxes further suggests that Persian royalassistance might not be the kind of help really needed by God’speople. Nehemiah returned to Jerusalem in the twentieth year ofArtaxerxes’ reign (445 BC; Neh. 1:1). The positive impressionmade on the reader by Artaxerxes’ personal favoritism towardNehemiah, allowing him to return to rebuild the walls of his nativecity, Jerusalem (Neh. 2:3, 5), is undercut by Nehemiah’sdisparagement of his royal master (1:11: “this man”).Nehemiah’s second mission took place sometime later than thethirty-second year of Artaxerxes’ reign (5:14; 13:6) but beforethe king’s death.
Artemas was an early Greek convert to Christianity. His namereflects that his parents viewed him as a gift from the Greek goddessArtemis. Both he and Tychicus are mentioned as possible substitutesfor Titus in Crete so that Titus could join Paul in Nicopolis (Titus3:12). An ancient tradition suggests that Artemas was one of theseventy-two disciples mentioned in Luke 10:1–20 and that healso became the bishop of Lystra.
(1) Inclassical Greek mythology, Artemis is the goddess of the hunt, andshe has associations with woods, wildlife, and chastity. She was thedaughter of Zeus and Leto, and the twin sister of Apollo, born on theisland of Delos.
(2) Artemisof the Ephesians is a conflation of several goddess traditions. TheCarians and the Lelegians worshiped the “Great Mother”during the Late Bronze Age (1550–1200 BC) in Ephesus. Cybeleand Hecate were among other goddesses worshiped in the region. Withthe arrival of the Iconians at Ephesus around 1000 BC, aspects ofthese and other Asiatic traditions eventually merged with those ofthe Greek Artemis. By the NT era, the well-established iconography ofthe resulting patroness of Ephesus depicts her with several rows ofsmall, egglike ornaments across her chest (thought to be breasts) anda mural crown on her head.
Templesto Artemis at Ephesus included a clay-floored structure from theeighth century BC, later destroyed by flood. A replacement waserected around 550 BC, funded by the Lydian king Croesus. Called the“Artemesion,” it was numbered among the seven wonders ofthe world compiled by Herodotus. However, it was burned by thefame-seeking arsonist Herostratus on July 21, 356 BC, the birth dateof Alexander the Great. (Plutarch suggests that Artemis was toopreoccupied with the birth of Alexander to intervene.) A spectacularreplacement was finally completed about 200 BC, and it persisted intothe NT era.
Bythen Artemis was known as the protector, nurturer, and overseer ofEphesus. Cult practices became a source of civic identity and pride,especially the procession along the Sacred Way, when her statue,dressed by women devotees, was carried to the temple by night, bathedin light. Temple rituals overseen by priestesses involved incense andanimal sacrifice; women appealed to her for aid with marriage,childbirth, and child rearing.
Theonly mention of Artemis in the Bible is in Acts 19:23–41, theincident of the Ephesian riot and demonstration in the amphitheater.This was instigated by Demetrius the silversmith over his concernsthat Paul’s ministry was creating an economic hazard for himand his tradesmen, who made silver shrines of Artemis. They alsofeared that the temple and Artemis herself would suffer a decline instature. The intercession of the city clerk eventually quieted themob, but not until they had spent two hours chanting, “Great isArtemis of the Ephesians!”
A city that served as one of Solomon’s twelveadministrative districts (1 Kings 4:10) under Ben-Hesed,governor of the third district over Sokoh and the land of Hepher.This indicates that the city was southeast of Dor and southwest ofMegiddo in the northern Plain of Sharon. It is likely located at themodern site of ’Arrabeh in the territory of Manasseh, ninemiles north of Samaria.
A town in which Abimelek lived (Judg. 9:41). Abimelek wasGideon’s son who was born to him by his concubine in Shechem(Judg. 8:31). Arumah is where Abimelek remained while Gaal, son ofEbed, was trying to overthrow Shechem (Judg. 9:26–41).
Arvad was the northernmost of the Phoenician cities. With itsnatural harbor, it became one of the most important Phoenician ports,along with Byblos, Tyre, and Sidon. The Arvadites were a Canaanitetribe (Gen. 10:18; 1 Chron. 1:16) known to provide Tyre withoarsmen and guards (Ezek. 27:8, 11).
Arvad was the northernmost of the Phoenician cities. With itsnatural harbor, it became one of the most important Phoenician ports,along with Byblos, Tyre, and Sidon. The Arvadites were a Canaanitetribe (Gen. 10:18; 1 Chron. 1:16) known to provide Tyre withoarsmen and guards (Ezek. 27:8, 11).
A steward of King Elah who lived in Tirzah. It was in Arza’shome that Elah, in a drunken stupor, was assassinated by Zimri(1 Kings 16:9).
(1) Thethird king of Judah (1 Kings 15:8–24; 2 Chron.14:1–16:14), succeeding his father, Abijah, and reigning forforty-one years (908–867 BC). Early in his life, Asa was a goodking, obeying God and removing the worship of foreign gods from theland. He even removed an idolatrous object that his own grandmotherMaakah had set up and removed her from leadership in the land. As aresult, God blessed him, even providing a tremendous military victoryover Zerah, an Ethiopian leader who had attacked Judah with amillion-man army (2 Chron. 14:9–15). Later in life,however, he showed a lack of confidence in God when he enlistedthe king of Aram to help him against the encroachment of Baasha,the king of Israel, even paying him with gold and silver objects fromthe temple. Although Baasha withdrew, Asa’s actions caught upwith him when he developed a serious foot disease, from which hedied.
(2) ALevite who resettled in Jerusalem after the exile (1 Chron.9:16).
(1) Oneof the three sons of Zeruiah. He and his brothers, Joab and Abishai,were nephews of David who served prominently in his army. Asahel wasnoted as a swift runner (2 Sam. 2:18). His speed and persistencecost him his life at the hands of Abner and led to a division betweenDavid and Joab. Abner had been King Saul’s general. After Saulwas killed by the Philistines, Abner sided with Saul’s sonIsh-Bosheth for two years. Most of Israel followed Ish-Bosheth, whileJudah followed David. In one battle, Abner and the men of Israel wereput to flight (2:17). The swift Asahel decided to chase Abner down.Abner warned him off, but Asahel refused to relent, so when he caughtup, Abner killed him. When a rift developed between Ish-Bosheth andAbner, Abner determined to bring the loyalty of Israel over to David.He met peaceably with David toward that end. But when Joab heard, hewas upset. He tricked Abner into a meeting without David’sknowledge and killed him in revenge for Asahel’s death.
(2) ALevite who taught in the cities of Judah during the reign ofJehoshaphat (2 Chron. 17:8). (3) ALevite who assisted in collecting resources for cleansing the templeduring the reign of Hezekiah (2 Chron. 31:13). (4) Thefather of Jonathan, who was one of those who resisted Ezra’sattempts to force Jewish men to divorce their pagan wives (Ezra10:15).
(1) Aservant of King Josiah and a member of the group sent to Huldah tohear Yahweh’s decrees concerning the Book of the Law (2 Kings22:11–20). (2) Aclan leader within the tribe of Simeon who participated in thecapture of the Valley of Gedor from the Meunites (1 Chron.4:34–43). (3) ALevite descendant of Merari who assisted in moving the Ark of theCovenant from Obed-Edom to Jerusalem (1 Chron. 6:30; 15:6, 11).(4) Aleader who returned from the exile (1 Chron. 9:5). There is somedebate concerning his ancestry. The normal vocalization suggests thathe was from Shiloh; an alternate vocalization proposed is “Shelah,”so that all three sons of Judah are mentioned in the text.
(1) Oneof the Levites appointed by David to lead in worship. Asaph was partof the procession to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem.Along with Heman and Ethan, also mentioned in the Psalter, he wasappointed by the Levites to the bronze cymbals (1 Chron. 15:19).Subsequently, David assigned Asaph continuing duties (16:7, 37). Heserved further under Solomon at the dedication of the temple(2 Chron. 5:11–14). Asaph is described as singer (1 Chron.15:17), the chief (15:19), who played cymbals (15:19), gave thanks toGod (16:7), ministered before the ark (16:37), prophesied underdirection of the king (25:2), and gave direction to his sons (25:2).The sons of Asaph served under his direction (25:2), prophesied andsang with lyres, harps, and cymbals (25:1, 6), and served asgatekeepers (26:1). The descendants of Asaph continued these dutiesafter the exile (Ezra 2:41; 3:10; Neh. 11:22; 12:46). Twelve psalmsare associated with Asaph (Pss. 50; 73–83). They reflect hisprophetic ministry by including sections of prophecy or of Godspeaking. God’s covenant and justice are frequent topics ofthese psalms.
(2) Thefather of Joah, a secretary to Hezekiah (2 Kings 18:18, 37).
(3)The keeper of King Artaxerxes’ forest who provided timber forNehemiah’s building projects in Jerusalem (Neh. 2:8).
The last of the four sons of Jehallelel (1 Chron. 4:16).The LXX renders his name as Eserael, which some believe to be analternate form of “Israel.”
Son of Asaph (1 Chron. 25:2), he was one of thesanctuary musicians appointed by David. He is most likely identicalwith Jesarelah (1 Chron. 25:14) and Azarel (1 Chron.25:18). His name is translated as “God holds.”
The visible and bodily ascent of Jesus from earth to heavenconcluding his earthly ministry, which then continued through thepromised Holy Spirit, given at Pentecost.
Adetailed historical account of the ascension is given only by Luke(Luke 24:51; Acts 1:4–11 [cf. Mark 16:19, in the longer endingto Mark’s Gospel]). The event, however, was anticipated inJohn’s Gospel (John 6:62; 20:17).
Theascension is frequently implied throughout the NT by reference to thecomplex of events that began with the death of Jesus and ended withhis session at the right hand of God in glory. Paul writes of thedivine-human Christ’s ascent to the heavenly realms as thebeginning of his supreme cosmic reign in power (Eph. 1:20–23)and as the basis for holy living (Col. 3:1–4; 1 Tim.3:16). In Hebrews, the ascension is a crucial stage that marks offthe completed work of Jesus on earth, in which he offered himself asthe perfect and final sacrifice for sin (9:24–26), from hiscontinuing work in heaven as our great high priest, which isdescribed in terms of sympathy (4:14–16) and intercession(7:25). Peter makes the most direct reference to the ascension,explaining that Jesus, who suffered, is resurrected and “hasgone into heaven” (1 Pet. 3:22). Therefore, just as Jesus,the righteous sufferer, was vindicated by God, so too will his peoplewho suffer for doing good.
Paulunderstands the OT as predicting Christ’s ascension (Eph.4:7–10; cf. Ps. 68:18) and containing incidents that in someway prefigure it (2 Kings 2:11–12).
Theascension is significant for at least three reasons. First, Christ’sdeath could not have full effect until he entered the heavenlysanctuary. From heaven he acts as advocate and communicates tobelievers through the Holy Spirit all the gifts and blessings that hedied on the cross to gain (Heb. 4:14–16; 1 John 2:1).Second, glorified humanity is now in God’s presence,guaranteeing that we likewise will be raised up with body and soul toshare the glory yet to be revealed (John 14:2; 17:24; Eph. 2:4–6).Third, the ascension previews the manner of Christ’s secondcoming (Acts 1:11). Jesus’ ascension was followed by hisenthronement in heaven, where he reigns (1 Cor. 15:25) and fromwhich he will physically return in the same glorified body as judge(Luke 21:27). See also Advent, Second; Second Coming.
The daughter of Potiphera, priest of On in Egypt, she wasgiven as wife to Joseph and became the mother of Manasseh and Ephraim(Gen. 41:45, 50–52; 46:20). An ancient fictional novel-likewriting, Joseph and Aseneth, narrates a story of her conversion tomarry Joseph. Its date and authorship remain unknown, though likelyit was written between the first century BC and the third century AD.
The name of a person, a tribe of Israel, and possibly a city.The relationship of these three grows out of the biblical propensityfor identifying groups and places by the ancestor who founded it.(1) Theeighth son of Jacob. He was born to Jacob by Zilpah, Leah’shandmaid (Gen. 30:12–13). (2) Somehave identified the mention in Josh. 17:7 of Asher as a marker fromwhich Manasseh proceeds in the north as a reference to the city; morelikely, however, it simply refers to the shared borders of the twotribes. See also Asher, Tribe of.
A translation of the Hebrew word ’oren, a type of treementioned in Isa. 44:14 as a source of wood for making an idol.English translations variously identify the tree as a fir, pine,laurel, or, based on alternative manuscripts, cedar.
A city in the southern lowlands of Judah, slightly northwestof Beersheba. It was first given to the tribe of Judah (Josh. 15:42)and later reassigned to the tribe of Simeon (Josh. 19:7; 1 Chron.4:32). It is possibly the same city listed as a city of refuge andgiven to the Levites (1 Chron. 6:59), although it is elsewherecalled “Ain” (Josh. 21:16).
Son of Asaph (1 Chron. 25:2), he was one of thesanctuary musicians appointed by David. He is most likely identicalwith Jesarelah (1 Chron. 25:14) and Azarel (1 Chron.25:18). His name is translated as “God holds.”
At 1 Chron. 4:21, the KJV has “house of Ashbea,”while the NIV has “Beth Ashbea” (similarly, NRSV, NET),in reference to a guild of linen workers. It is uncertain whether theproper name “Ashbea” refers to a person or a place.
The son of Benjamin and head of the Ashbelites who immigratedto Egypt with Jacob (Gen. 46:21; 1 Chron. 8:1). The nameliterally means “man of Baal.” He is also called“Jediael” in 1 Chron. 7:6.
The first son of Gomer, who is the first son of Japheth (Gen.10:2–3); thus Ashkenaz is a great-grandson of Noah. A “kingdomof Ashkenaz” appears along with those of Ararat and Minni,which were called upon to oppose Babylon (Jer. 51:27). The name isassociated with the neo-Assyrian Ishkuza, which Herodotus records asbeing the Scythians.
One of five principal cities of the Philistines (Josh. 13:3).Ashdod was situated in the coastal plane of Canaan, roughly two andone-half miles inland from the Mediterranean Sea, near the maincoastal route sometimes called the “Way of the Philistines.”The site has been identified (Tel Ashdod) and extensivelyinvestigated.
HistoricalOverview
Ashdodpredates the Philistine presence in the Eastern Mediterranean. Thefirst fortified settlement dates to the Middle Bronze Age (2200–1550BC). Records from Ugarit (Late Bronze Age [1550–1200 BC])reveal that Ashdod participated in the trading of dyed garments andwool (substantiated by the presence of murex shells in situ),and that its population was largely West Semitic. Discovery of partof a stone doorjamb bearing a partial hieroglyphic inscriptiondenoting a high-ranking Egyptian official suggests that Ashdod wasadditionally the site of an Egyptian stronghold palace. Incursion ofSea Peoples into the region began in the late thirteenth century BC.A layer of ash indicates that Ashdod was partly destroyed at thistime. This is followed by evidence of a Philistine presence at Ashdodbeginning in the early twelfth century BC.
ThePhilistines thrived at Ashdod during the Early Iron Age (1200–1000BC). Expansions of the walls about the acropolis and settlement ofthe lower city indicate a growing population. Destruction of thecity’s fortifications during the first half of the tenthcentury BC may be attributed to Pharaoh Siamon (960 BC) or possiblyto a campaign later in David’s reign.
Ashdod’sfortifications were rebuilt, although they were partly destroyed c.760 BC (perhaps by Uzziah [2 Chron. 26:6]). In 712/711 BC theAssyrian army, under orders from Sargon II, sacked Ashdod (Isa.20:1). The remains of some three thousand persons attest to thisevent, as do three fragments from a victory stela discovered at theacropolis. Ashdod was an Assyrian vassal until Assyria’scollapse, at which point Ashdod became vulnerable to Egypt, then toBabylon. Pharaoh Psamtik I sacked the city after a lengthy siege (c.640 BC), and Nebuchadnezzar II later subjugated it (c. 600 BC).Items bearing Hebrew inscriptions indicate trade with Judah duringthe latter seventh century BC.
Ashdoddeclined during the Babylonian period (626–539 BC) but regainedprominence under the Persians, becoming an administrative center forthe region. Ashdod (now called “Azotus”) furtherprospered during the Hellenistic period (post-332 BC), up to the timeit was captured by John Hyrcanus (114 BC). The town again dwindled insignificance during the Roman period relative to the nearby port,Ashdod Yam, and was destroyed during the First Jewish Revolt (AD 67),although habitation persisted into the Byzantine period.
Ashdodin the Bible
Ashdodis mentioned in relation to both the overall success of the Israeliteconquest of Canaan (Josh. 11:22; the feared Anakim remained only inPhilistine territory [see Num. 13:28]) and its unfinished nature(Josh. 13:3). Joshua 15:46–47 lists Ashdod in the territoryallotted to Judah. That this territory remained largely unconqueredby Israel features prominently in the narrative of Judges and Samuel.
Whenthe Ark of the Covenant was captured by the Philistines (1 Sam.4), it was taken to Dagon’s temple at Ashdod (5:1–2).Excavation of Tel Ashdod has yet to identify this cult site, althoughan incense stand portraying a procession of musicians may pertain toDagon’s cult (see 1 Sam. 10:5). In 1 Macc. 10:84 isreported Jonathan’s burning of Azotus (Ashdod) and destructionof Dagon’s temple during the Hellenistic period.
Amongthe prophets, oracles portend the destruction of Ashdod and the otherPhilistine cities (Amos 1:6–8; Zeph. 2:4; Zech. 9:5–6).Jeremiah 25:20 mentions “the people left at Ashdod,”possibly alluding to Psamtik I’s destruction of the city.Conspicuously absent is any mention of Gath, which by this time hadbeen subjugated or destroyed (1 Chron. 1:18; 2 Chron. 26:6;also 2 Kings 12:17).
Referenceis also made to Ashdodites. Notably, “the people of Ashdod”were among those opposed to the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s wallsduring the postexilic period (Neh. 4:7). Intermarriage with the“women from Ashdod” was common among returning Jews (Neh.13:23), and “the language of Ashdod” was spoken by theirchildren (Neh. 13:24).
Overall,the biblical testimony concerning Ashdod coheres remarkably well withthe archaeological evidence from Tel Ashdod.
In the KJV this refers to Mount Pisgah, which is in Moab,northeast of the Dead Sea (Deut. 3:17; 4:49; Josh. 12:3; 13:20). Inother English translations it is commonly taken literally, “slopesof Pisgah.”
The name of a person, a tribe of Israel, and possibly a city.The relationship of these three grows out of the biblical propensityfor identifying groups and places by the ancestor who founded it.(1) Theeighth son of Jacob. He was born to Jacob by Zilpah, Leah’shandmaid (Gen. 30:12–13). (2) Somehave identified the mention in Josh. 17:7 of Asher as a marker fromwhich Manasseh proceeds in the north as a reference to the city; morelikely, however, it simply refers to the shared borders of the twotribes. See also Asher, Tribe of.
A cult object as well as a goddess attested throughout theLevant.
Inthe OT, Asherah refers primarily to a wooden cult object (see Deut.16:21). That these were objects and not trees is evident fromdescriptions of their (NIV: “Asherah poles”) being“made” (1 Kings 14:15) and “set up”(14:23). The word appears in common cultic settings—uponhilltops and under leafy trees (1 Kings 14:23; 2 Kings17:10)—and even in Yahweh’s temple (2 Kings 23:6).They appear also with other cult objects, notably altars and “sacredstones” (Exod. 34:13), and idols and incense stands (2 Chron.34:4). Whether the Asherah poles were carved images is uncertain,though presumably they provided a stand-in for the goddess or deity.
TheIsraelites were instructed to destroy the Asherah poles upon enteringCanaan (Exod. 34:13; also Deut. 7:5; 12:3). Instead, they fashionedtheir own (1 Kings 14:15, 23), assimilating them into worship ofYahweh (2 Kings 23:6). Later efforts at removing the poles weresporadic and temporary (compare 2 Kings 18:4 with 21:3, 7).Despite the apparent pervasiveness of these cult objects,archaeologists have yet to retrieve one.
Ina handful of instances, “Asherah” denotes a deity. InJudg. 3:7 “the Asherahs” (here indicating “goddesses”)is grammatically parallel to “the Baals”; likewise“Asherah” corresponds to Baal and “the starryhosts,” designating a specific deity (2 Kings 23:4). In1 Kings 18:19 Elijah speaks of the “prophets of Asherah,”who presumably spoke in the goddess’s name.
TwiceAsherah is associated with her cult object: 1 Kings 15:13(= 2 Chron. 15:16) mentions “an abominable thing”made “for Asherah,” which the NIV renders as “arepulsive image for the worship of Asherah”; 2 Kings 21:7mentions “the carved likeness of Asherah,” rendered as“the carved Asherah pole” (NIV). In 2 Kings 23:7 thenarrator refers to a place where women did “weaving forAsherah.” It is unclear what these weavings were, thoughpossibly they were cult garments or coverings for the cult image.
Outsidethe Bible, Asherah is attested in Mesopotamian, Hittite, andPhilistine texts. The most comprehensive portrait of the goddess,however, comes from the Ras Shamra tablets (Ugarit). Designated“Athirat,” she was consort to El and Mother of the gods(who are called “the seventy sons of Athirat”). She isfurther designated as “Lady Athirat of the Sea” (in theBaal myth Sea is Athirat’s son); alternate renderings include“the Lady who treads on the Sea,” and “Lady Athiratof the Day.” In the Kirta Epic, Athirat is portrayed as thepatron goddess of Tyre and Sidon (see Ashtaroth).
Inscriptionsdiscovered at Khirbet el-Qom and Kuntillet ‘Ajrud (associatedwith Iron Age Israel) mention Yahweh and “his Asherah.”Disagreement exists over whether the term here reflects a cultobject, a shrine, or the goddess. Also debated is whether thisrepresents a combination of Yahwistic belief or a form of Yahwismpredating monotheism.
Domestic fires, sacrifices, or large conflagrations producedashes (1 Kings 20:38 KJV; 2 Kings 23:4; Job 2:8; Ps.147:16). Ashes had physical and figurative significance. With dustand sackcloth, ashes were placed on the head and body to signifymourning and grief (2 Sam. 13:19; Job 2:8), personal or national(Esther 4:3; Isa. 58:5), or repentance (Jon. 3:6; Matt. 11:21). Suchgrief was associated with prayer and fasting.
Figuratively,persons or things could be viewed as worthless through the imagery ofashes (Isa. 44:20), and ashes could communicate destruction and humanmortality when used with dust (Gen. 18:27; Job 30:19; Ezek. 27:30;Mal. 3:19; see also Sir. 10:9; 17:32). Ashes of the red heifer werespecial and used for ritual cleansing (Num. 19:9–10, 17–19).
Son of either Hezron or Caleb (1 Chron. 2:24). TheHebrew text suggests that he was conceived in Caleb Ephrathah, whileother ancient versions suggest that he was born to Caleb andEphrathah after the death of Hezron. If the latter is correct, he maybe identified as the same person as Hur in 1 Chron. 2:19. Healso perhaps established the village of Tekoa, since he is identifiedas the “father” or “founder” of Tekoa(1 Chron. 2:24; 4:5).
A deity of unknown origin made and worshiped by the people inHamath after being relocated to Samaria by Sargon II (lateeighth century BC; 2 Kings 17:30). One possible interpretationof “Ashima” is that it means “the name” andthus refers to Anat or Astarte or Asherah, all manifestations ofBaal. A form of this name was found at the Jewish community inElephantine c. 400 BC as a consort of Yahweh. Another possiblereference to Ashima is found in Amos 8:14, where Israel swore oathsby the “sin of Samaria” (NRSV: “Ashimah ofSamaria”), “shame” being another possibletranslation of the word “Ashima.”
One of five principal cities of the Philistines (Josh. 13:3).It was situated approximately midway between Ashdod (north) and Gaza(south) on the shore of the Mediterranean Sea.
HistoricalOverview
Evidenceof settlement dates to the Neolithic period (8300–4500 BC),although the earliest references to the city stem from the Middle andLate Bronze Ages (2200–1200 BC). Ashkelon is mentioned amongthe Egyptian Execration texts (nineteenth century BC) as an enemy ofEgypt and in the Amarna tablets (1400 BC), where the city’sruler affirms fealty to the pharaoh. Excavation confirms an Egyptianpresence at Ashkelon during the Late Bronze Age; the city remainedunder Egyptian control until the incursion of the Sea Peoples (earlytwelfth century BC), after which Ashkelon was occupied by thePhilistines.
Ashkelonremained under Philistine control until Tiglath-pileser III’scampaigns against Syria and Israel (734–732 BC), when it becamean Assyrian vassal. During Sennacherib’s reign Ashkelon’sking joined Hezekiah in revolt against Assyria and was deported (701BC). In 604 BC, following Assyria’s demise, Nebuchadnezzardestroyed Ashkelon and deported the survivors, several of whomreceived rations at the Babylonian court (cf. Dan. 1:5).
Duringthe Persian period Ashkelon was reestablished as a Tyrian marketcity, thus becoming prosperous once more. The city was neverconquered by the Hasmoneans (mid-second to mid-first centuries BC;1 Macc. 10:86; 11:60), and eventually it asserted itsindependence, signified by the minting of its own coins (beginning111 BC). Herod the Great was purportedly a native of Ashkelon, and helavished the city with public works projects. During the First JewishRevolt, Ashkelon successfully defended itself against Jewish attack.
Excavationshave located the council house and an elaborately painted tomb (Romanperiod), as well as the remains of a church and a synagogue(Byzantine period). Ashkelon came under Muslim control (seventhcentury AD), then briefly under Crusader control (AD 1153). The citywas destroyed by Saladin (AD 1191) as he retreated before Richard theLionheart.
Ashkelonin the Bible
Ashkelonwas listed among the territory still to be conquered at the end ofJoshua’s life (Josh. 13:3). Judah took the city but ultimatelywas unable to keep it (Judg. 1:18–19). The OT subsequentlyreckoned Ashkelon as part of Philistine territory, beginning withJudg. 14:19, which recounts one of Samson’s exploits.
Ashkelonshared in the affliction visited on the Philistines for taking theArk of the Covenant, which they attempted to forestall by reparationsor “sympathetic magic” (1 Sam. 6:17 [the “goldtumors” were likely meant to bear away the source of thePhilistines’ suffering]). Ashkelon and Gath represent thePhilistines overall as David anticipates their response to news ofSaul’s and Jonathan’s deaths (2 Sam. 1:20).
Theremaining references occur in the prophets, who portended thedestruction of Ashkelon and the other Philistine cities at varioustimes (Jer. 25:20; 47:5, 7; Amos 1:8; Zeph. 2:4, 7; Zech. 9:5).Notably, Zeph. 2:7 expected that Judah would finally take possessionof Ashkelon.
The first son of Gomer, who is the first son of Japheth (Gen.10:2–3); thus Ashkenaz is a great-grandson of Noah. A “kingdomof Ashkenaz” appears along with those of Ararat and Minni,which were called upon to oppose Babylon (Jer. 51:27). The name isassociated with the neo-Assyrian Ishkuza, which Herodotus records asbeing the Scythians.
(1) Acity in the lowlands, probably related to the modern ruin Aslin(Josh. 15:33). (2) Acity in the southern lowlands in the district of Libnah (Josh.15:43). Both of these cities were in the allotment of Judah.
The chief eunuch in the court of King Nebuchadnezzar (Dan.1:3), whom the king charged with the task of bringing in and trainingsome young Israelite men to serve in his court. Ashpenaz changed thenames of Daniel and his three friends to Babylonian names. Followingthe king’s orders, he refused to let the four young men followa strict diet of vegetables and water, but Daniel found a way toavoid the diet required by Nebuchadnezzar.
Asriel was a great-grandson of Manasseh (Num. 26:31); lesslikely, he was the son of Gilead (1 Chron. 7:14). The Asrieliteswere given land on the western side of the Jordan (Josh. 17:2).
(1) Agoddess attested in Syro-Phoenicia, Palestine, and Egypt. In theBible, “Ashtaroth” (preceded by the Hebrew article) isgenerally regarded as the plural form of the deity’s name (NIV:“the Ashtoreths”; NRSV: “the Astartes”; NET:“the Ashtars”). It occurs all but once in conjunctionwith other deities, most often Baal or “the Baals” (Judg.2:13; 1 Sam. 12:10), but also with the gods of neighboringpeoples (Judg. 10:6) or “foreign gods” (1 Sam. 7:3).“Ashtaroth” broadly designates goddesses whom Israelpursued rather than the true God, Yahweh. In 1 Sam. 31:10 ismentioned a Philistine temple devoted to “the Ashtoreths.”In this instance, “Ashtaroth” perhaps should be renderedas “Ashtoreth” (but see the following discussion).
Thesingular form, rendered in the NIV as “Ashtoreth” (NRSV,NET: “Astarte”), occurs exclusively in connection with“the goddess of the Sidonians.” Solomon worshipedAshtoreth (1 Kings 11:5); consequently, the true God, Yahweh,instigated the secession of the northern tribes (1 Kings 11:31,33). Josiah later destroyed the shrine that Solomon built forAshtoreth (2 Kings 23:13). “Ashtoreth” may reflectthe imposition of the vowels for bosheth (“shame”) ontothe deity’s name. Alternately, it is proposed that “Ashtaroth”is the Hebrew vocalization of the deity’s name (a singular termthat doubles as a plural) while “Ashtoreth” is thePhoenician vocalization.
TheBible refers to this goddess as a foreign deity, and it is nosurprise that ancient Near Eastern texts attest her name. In Ugarit,Ashtoreth was known as Astarte. She appears infrequently in themythological texts and is usually mentioned in conjunction with thegoddess Anat. Astarte (like Anat) was El’s daughter and is alsoassumed to have been Baal’s consort. Direct evidence for thelatter is wanting; however, the designation “Astarte-name-of-Baal”suggests that Astarte embodied Baal’s honor or was hiscounterpart.
Anoted attribute of Astarte is her beauty (alluded to in the KirtaEpic), indicating for some a sensual nature. Elsewhere she isportrayed as a hunter, suggesting a martial aspect. Astarte isidentified with the Mesopotamian goddess Ishtar in pantheon lists andalso in the epithets “Astarte of Mari” and “Astarteof Hur” (though here “Astarte” may be a designationfor “goddess”). This, along with the later associationwith Aphrodite, has furthered perception of Astarte as a fertilitygoddess. An association with (planetary) Venus is also proposed butis unattested at Ugarit.
InEgypt, adoption of Semitic deities such as Astarte became widespreadduring the New Kingdom period and following (after 1570 BC). Astarteand Anat were appropriated as daughters of Re and consorts of Seth(identified with Baal). In one text Anat and Astarte are described aspregnant without giving birth, likely a manifestation of theirassociation with Seth, god of disorder. Foremost, though, Astarte wasa war goddess, depicted naked on horseback with weapons in hand. Hercult centered on the delta city of Pi-Ramesse, where her temple waslocated. Astarte’s prevalence in Egypt was purportedlycomparable to Asherah’s in Palestine.
Amongthe Phoenicians, veneration of Astarte was also widespread. Shebecame the predominant female deity at Tyre and Sidon, overshadowingdevotion to Asherah. Several of Sidon’s kings bore the title“priest of Astarte.”
Duringthe Hellenistic and Roman periods, Atargatis (a combination ofAstarte and Anat) received worship throughout Syria. (See alsoAsherah.)
(2) Acity associated with Og, king of Bashan (Deut. 1:4). “Ashtaroth”(without the Hebrew article) designates an Amorite city captured bythe Israelites en route to the plains of Moab (Num. 21:33–35).The region was allotted to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Josh.12:30–31), and the city to the Levites (1 Chron. 6:71).
BiblicalAshtaroth is identified with Tell Ashtaroth, situated along theKing’s Highway, twenty miles east of the Sea of Galilee andtwelve miles northwest of Dera (Edrei). The city is mentioned in theEgyptian Execration texts (nineteenth century BC), in records ofcities conquered by Thutmose III (fifteenth century BC), and inthe Amarna tablets (fourteenth century BC). In 732 BC,Tiglath-pileser III deported Ashtaroth’s population.
A city in Gilead near, or possibly also known as, AshterothKarnaim or Ashtaroth. It was inhabited by the Rephaim and subdued byKedorlaomer king of Elam in the time of Abraham (Gen. 14:5). Amosmakes a wordplay with the name of the city, which means“double-horned” and thus symbolizes strength. TheIsraelites boast of defeating a city whose name is synonymous withmilitary might (Amos 6:13).
(1) Agoddess attested in Syro-Phoenicia, Palestine, and Egypt. In theBible, “Ashtaroth” (preceded by the Hebrew article) isgenerally regarded as the plural form of the deity’s name (NIV:“the Ashtoreths”; NRSV: “the Astartes”; NET:“the Ashtars”). It occurs all but once in conjunctionwith other deities, most often Baal or “the Baals” (Judg.2:13; 1 Sam. 12:10), but also with the gods of neighboringpeoples (Judg. 10:6) or “foreign gods” (1 Sam. 7:3).“Ashtaroth” broadly designates goddesses whom Israelpursued rather than the true God, Yahweh. In 1 Sam. 31:10 ismentioned a Philistine temple devoted to “the Ashtoreths.”In this instance, “Ashtaroth” perhaps should be renderedas “Ashtoreth” (but see the following discussion).
Thesingular form, rendered in the NIV as “Ashtoreth” (NRSV,NET: “Astarte”), occurs exclusively in connection with“the goddess of the Sidonians.” Solomon worshipedAshtoreth (1 Kings 11:5); consequently, the true God, Yahweh,instigated the secession of the northern tribes (1 Kings 11:31,33). Josiah later destroyed the shrine that Solomon built forAshtoreth (2 Kings 23:13). “Ashtoreth” may reflectthe imposition of the vowels for bosheth (“shame”) ontothe deity’s name. Alternately, it is proposed that “Ashtaroth”is the Hebrew vocalization of the deity’s name (a singular termthat doubles as a plural) while “Ashtoreth” is thePhoenician vocalization.
TheBible refers to this goddess as a foreign deity, and it is nosurprise that ancient Near Eastern texts attest her name. In Ugarit,Ashtoreth was known as Astarte. She appears infrequently in themythological texts and is usually mentioned in conjunction with thegoddess Anat. Astarte (like Anat) was El’s daughter and is alsoassumed to have been Baal’s consort. Direct evidence for thelatter is wanting; however, the designation “Astarte-name-of-Baal”suggests that Astarte embodied Baal’s honor or was hiscounterpart.
Anoted attribute of Astarte is her beauty (alluded to in the KirtaEpic), indicating for some a sensual nature. Elsewhere she isportrayed as a hunter, suggesting a martial aspect. Astarte isidentified with the Mesopotamian goddess Ishtar in pantheon lists andalso in the epithets “Astarte of Mari” and “Astarteof Hur” (though here “Astarte” may be a designationfor “goddess”). This, along with the later associationwith Aphrodite, has furthered perception of Astarte as a fertilitygoddess. An association with (planetary) Venus is also proposed butis unattested at Ugarit.
InEgypt, adoption of Semitic deities such as Astarte became widespreadduring the New Kingdom period and following (after 1570 BC). Astarteand Anat were appropriated as daughters of Re and consorts of Seth(identified with Baal). In one text Anat and Astarte are described aspregnant without giving birth, likely a manifestation of theirassociation with Seth, god of disorder. Foremost, though, Astarte wasa war goddess, depicted naked on horseback with weapons in hand. Hercult centered on the delta city of Pi-Ramesse, where her temple waslocated. Astarte’s prevalence in Egypt was purportedlycomparable to Asherah’s in Palestine.
Amongthe Phoenicians, veneration of Astarte was also widespread. Shebecame the predominant female deity at Tyre and Sidon, overshadowingdevotion to Asherah. Several of Sidon’s kings bore the title“priest of Astarte.”
Duringthe Hellenistic and Roman periods, Atargatis (a combination ofAstarte and Anat) received worship throughout Syria. (See alsoAsherah.)
(2) Acity associated with Og, king of Bashan (Deut. 1:4). “Ashtaroth”(without the Hebrew article) designates an Amorite city captured bythe Israelites en route to the plains of Moab (Num. 21:33–35).The region was allotted to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Josh.12:30–31), and the city to the Levites (1 Chron. 6:71).
BiblicalAshtaroth is identified with Tell Ashtaroth, situated along theKing’s Highway, twenty miles east of the Sea of Galilee andtwelve miles northwest of Dera (Edrei). The city is mentioned in theEgyptian Execration texts (nineteenth century BC), in records ofcities conquered by Thutmose III (fifteenth century BC), and inthe Amarna tablets (fourteenth century BC). In 732 BC,Tiglath-pileser III deported Ashtaroth’s population.
One of the sons of Shem, Ashur is usually identified as theprogenitor of the Assyrian people (Gen. 10:22). The name “Ashur”is also associated synonymously with the nation of Assyria, beingapplied to the people, capital, god, and whole of the nation itself.According to Gen. 10, the people would have been descendants of Shemand therefore Semitic, like the children of Israel.
In 668 BC Ashurbanipal succeeded his father, Esarhaddon, inAssyria, while his brother Shamash-shum-ukin became the ruler ofBabylon. Esarhaddon had made his vassals swear loyalty to the twosons before his death. They were able to rule peacefully alongsideeach other for seventeen years, with Ashurbanipal as the superior.Then a civil war broke out between them in 651 BC, which Ashurbanipalwon, though at great cost. Less is known of him after this victory,and perhaps the decline of Assyria begins at that point.
Earlyin his reign he conquered Egypt as far south as Thebes, while to theeast he defeated the Medes, which helped pave the way for the rise ofthe Persians. He may be the king who captured Manasseh (2 Chron.33:11–12).
Ashurbanipalhad not been intended for the throne until an older brother died.This meant that his education had been different than it would havebeen as a crown prince. Most significantly, he learned to read andwrite Assyrian cuneiform texts, a formidable task. But as king hecollected an impressive library of “canonical” works,which has been invaluable to historians since its rediscovery.
The Hebrew vocalization of a group identified as part of thebrief kingdom of Saul’s son Ish-Bosheth (2 Sam. 2:9;several modern versions read “Ashurites”). Thisvocalization, however, is largely in doubt due to disagreement inancient texts and the fact that this group would otherwise be unknownto us. Therefore, many interpreters believe that the originalreference was to either the Asherites or the Gesherites.
In Gen. 25:3, the Ashurites are listed among the descendantsof Dedan, the grandson of Abraham by Keturah. While some think theAshurites here are to be considered the foundation of the Assyriankingdom, more likely this is a reference to a tribe near Egypt thatis mentioned in South Arabian inscriptions. The KJV also identifies“the company of the Ashurites” (bat-’ashurim) inEzek. 27:6 as ivory workers for Tyre, but most modern translations,using alternate word division and vowels for the Hebrew, take this asa reference to a type of wood, not a people group. See also Ashuri.
A descendant of Asher, from the house of Japhlet (1 Chron.7:33).
A Roman province in western Asia Minor, not to be confusedwith the modern designation for the larger continent. The exactboundaries are difficult to determine, but the region, formed in133–130 BC, and since the time of Augustus ruled by proconsuls,included the older kingdoms of Mysia, Lydia, Caria, and part ofPhrygia, as well as several islands. Paul and his companions enjoyedan especially successful mission in Asia (Acts 19:10, 22, 26–27;Rom. 16:5). He later wrote letters to Christians in Colossae andEphesus (Ephesians; 1 Timothy). Inscriptions attest to thewealth of many Ephesians. Through Timothy, Paul warns those pursuingwealth in the city (1 Tim. 6:9–10; cf. Rev. 3:17). Theapostle John eventually settled in Ephesus and later was exiled tothe island of Patmos, where he wrote to the seven churches of Asia(Rev. 1:4–3:22).
Asia Minor, the land area of modern-day Turkey, was initiallysettled by the Hatti people between 2500 and 2000 BC. Toward the endof that period, the Indo-European Hittites, drawn to the mildclimate, began a slow settlement alongside the indigenous Hattis,mixing peaceably with them. By 1750 BC, the Hittites had become thedominant people group.
Inthe twelfth century BC the Hittites fell to the Sea Peoples. Theydeveloped coastal cities along the Aegean, which by the eighthcentury were conquered by the Greeks. The Lydian king Croesus came topower in 560 BC in Sardis and subdued the Greeks, only to fall in 546BC to Cyrus of Persia. In 334–333 BC Alexander the Greatdefeated the Persians in two key battles and won Asia Minor. AfterAlexander’s death, one of his generals, Seleucus, took over.Then, in 190 BC the Romans defeated the Seleucids and assumedcontrol. This inaugurated an extended period of peace, during whichtime Jewish communities of the Diaspora settled throughout theregion.
Themissionary journeys of the apostle Paul (Saul of Tarsus) took himinto and around much of Asia Minor, and directly or indirectly he wasresponsible for the establishment of most of the first-centurychurches there. The following cities of Asia Minor are mentioned inthe NT.
EasternMediterranean
Tarsus.The birthplace of the apostle Paul (Acts 9:11; 21:39; 22:3), Tarsusis located on the Mediterranean coast, nine miles northeast ofmodern-day Mersin. Tarsus became the capital of the Roman province ofCilicia in 67 BC. Cleopatra and Mark Antony met and built their fleetin this grand city. When his life was threatened after hisconversion, Paul was sent to Tarsus from Jerusalem (9:30).
Antioch.Antioch (Antakya) is located just inland from the Mediterraneancoast, on the east bank of the Orontes River. Jewish and Gentilebelievers who fled Jerusalem after the death of Stephen planted achurch here, where followers of Jesus were first called “Christians.”Barnabas brought Saul from Tarsus to Antioch, where they laboredtogether for a year, teaching the church, prior to setting off ontheir first missionary journey (Acts 11:19–30). Paul laterreturned, along with Silas, bearing the requirements for Gentilebelievers from the Jerusalem council (15:22–35).
SouthernPorts
Seleucia.Known today as Samandağ, Seleucia was Antioch’s port, theplace from which Saul, Barnabas, and John Mark embarked on theirfirst missionary journey in AD 47 (Acts 13:4).
Pergain Pamphylia.Perga is just east of Antalya on the southern Mediterranean coast.Archimedes’ student Apollonius the mathematician lived here inthe late third century BC. On their first missionary journey, Pauland Barnabas disembarked in Perga for destinations in southwesternAsia Minor, while John Mark left them to return to Jerusalem (Acts13:13–14). On their return trip of the same journey, Paul andBarnabas stopped in Perga again, this time preaching before headingto Attalia (14:25).
Galatia
Thefollowing cities became part of the politically defined Romanprovince of Galatia in 25 BC. They are to be distinguished fromethnic Galatia, which is a region further north, around modern-dayAnkara.
PisidianAntioch.Modern Yalvaç, or Pisidian Antioch, is northeast of Isparta inthe lake region. On their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabaspreached in the synagogue here and generated enormous interest in thegospel (Acts 13:14–43). The following Sabbath, nearly theentire city came out to listen to them. Jealous Jewish leadersincited a persecution, causing Paul and Barnabas to reorient theirministry to Gentiles and then leave the region for Iconium(13:26–51). They returned on their way back to Antioch tostrengthen the disciples and appoint elders (14:21–23).
Iconium.Iconium, today called Konya, is about sixty-five miles southeast ofPisidian Antioch. It is one of the most ancient settlements of theregion, dating to the third millennium BC. Paul and Barnabas preachedin the synagogue here on their first missionary journey, initiallywinning Jewish and Gentile converts but angering other Jews. Paul andBarnabas eventually feared for their safety and escaped to Lystra andDerbe (Acts 14:1–6). However, they came back on the return tripto Antioch (14:21–23). Iconium is also noteworthy as the homeof the ascetic St. Thecla from the apocryphal second-centuryChristian text Acts of Paul and Thecla.
Lystra.Frequently mentioned with Derbe (Acts 14:6; 16:1), Lystra (modernHatunsaray) is nineteen miles south of Iconium. Paul and Barnabasfled here from Iconium and preached. Paul healed a lame man, and as aresult he and Barnabas were presumed by the enthusiastic crowd to beZeus and Hermes. At the instigation of Paul’s Jewish opponents,the crowd’s sentiments turned, and Paul was nearly stoned todeath. He and Barnabas left for Derbe the following day (14:6–20),but they came back on their return trip (14:21–23). Paulreturned on his second missionary journey, where he met his protégé,Timothy (16:1–2).
Derbe.About fifty miles southeast of Lystra and slightly north ofpresent-day Karaman is Derbe. Paul and Barnabas fled here afterPaul’s stoning in Lystra on their first missionary journey,preached the gospel, made many disciples, and appointed elders (Acts14:21–23). Among the disciples likely was Gaius, who lateraccompanied Paul during his third missionary journey (Acts 20:4).
WesternAegean Ports
Troas.Troas was a major northwest seaport located about twelve milessouthwest of Troy. On his second missionary journey, Paul, travelingwith Silas and Timothy, was prevented from entering Bithynia by theSpirit of Christ and went instead to Troas. Here he had a visionbeckoning him to Macedonia, which he promptly obeyed (Acts 16:6–11).Because this is the first of the so-called “we” passagesin Acts, Luke may have joined the group here (16:10). Paul alsostopped at Troas on the return to Jerusalem from his third missionaryjourney. There he raised Eutychus after the latter’s traumaticfall (20:4–12). Troas is mentioned twice more, suggesting thatPaul spent time here in addition to the above visits (2 Cor.2:12–13; 2 Tim. 4:13).
Adramyttium.A few miles south of Troas was the port of Adramyttium. It was theorigin of the ship that transported Paul from Caesarea to Myra aroundAD 60 en route to Rome (Acts 27:2).
Assos.Assos is an acropolis sitting 774 feet above sea level, up from thevillage of Behramkale. It overlooks the Bay of Edremit and has asplendid view of Lesbos. Doric columns from the seventh-century BCtemple of Athena are prominent at the site. According to Acts20:13–14, on his return from his third missionary journey, Paulwent overland from Troas to Assos, and there he joined his travelingcompanions on their ship. From here on the way to Miletus, they madeseveral nearby island stops off the coast of Asia Minor: Mitylene onLesbos, Chios, and Samos (20:14–16).
Miletus.Located about twenty miles south of Ephesus, at the point where theMeander River met the Gulf of Latmus (now silted over), was theimportant southwestern seaport of Miletus. The city was significantin the NT era for its four harbors. A center for commerce,scholarship, geometry, and science, it was also the prototype forprinciples of city planning later applied throughout the RomanEmpire. On his third missionary journey, Paul’s farewell to theEphesian elders took place here (Acts 20:15–38). Later he leftthe ill Trophimus in Miletus (2 Tim. 4:20).
SouthwesternPorts
Patara.Sitting on the Mediterranean coast at the mouth of the Xanthus River,about forty miles west of present-day Demre, Patara was a flourishingharbor and commercial center in antiquity. Paul changed ships here ashe returned to Jerusalem from his third missionary journey, afterisland stops in Kos and Rhodes (Acts 21:1–2).
Myra.Myra is a coastal ruin due south of present-day Demre. In the NT era,the seaport featured a Roman theater, Roman baths, and two rock-cutnecropolises. Here, Paul changed ships around AD 60 on his way toRome while in the custody of a centurion (Acts 27:5). Myra is perhapsbest known as the home of the fourth-century bishop St. Nicholas,who was from nearby Patara.
Cnidus.At the tip of the long, narrow Datca peninsula on the extremesouthwestern corner of Asia Minor lies Cnidus. Founded around 360 BC,the acropolis rises 1,000 feet above sea level. The port included twoharbors and four theaters but was most famous for its fourth-centuryBC statue of Aphrodite, carved by the Athenian sculptor Praxiteles.Around AD 60 the ship carrying Paul to Rome stopped here because ofslow winds and changed course (Acts 27:7).
SevenChurches of Revelation; Lycus Valley
Theseven churches of Rev. 1–3 lay along a north-south ellipticalroute in western Asia Minor. Laodicea, the seventh, forms a tightgeographic triangle with Hierapolis and Colossae in the Lycus Valley.
Ephesus.Known today as Selçuk, ancient Ephesus is located on theAegean coast of Asia Minor at the mouth of the Cayster River. It wasfounded in the eleventh century BC by the Ionians and later ruledsuccessively by the Athenians, Spartans, Persians, and Greeks. Romangovernance began in 190 BC. Later, Ephesus became the capital of theprovince of Asia, as well as its most important commercial center.During the NT era, the Artemision (see Artemis) was an importantpilgrimage site.
Paulstopped in Ephesus briefly on his second missionary journey, leavingPriscilla and Aquila. They later encountered and mentored Apollosthere (Acts 18:19–26). On his third journey, Paul remained inEphesus for three years, teaching, performing miracles, and healingthe sick (19:1–22) until the riot incited by Demetrius thesilversmith (20:1). He wrote 1 Corinthians in Ephesus (1 Cor.16:8) and later wrote to the Ephesians from his Roman prison cell(Eph. 3:1) as well as to Timothy in Ephesus (1 Tim. 1:3).
InRev. 2:1–7 the Ephesian church is commended for itsperseverance but chastised for having lost its first love.
Smyrna.Smyrna (modern İzmir) is located about thirty-five miles northalong the coast from Ephesus. In 195 BC it became the first city inAsia Minor to erect a temple for the imperial cult, and by the nextcentury it was known as “the ornament of Asia.” In itsletter, which mentions no negatives, the church is encouraged to befaithful in its suffering (Rev. 2:8–11).
Pergamum.About seventy miles north of Smyrna is Pergamum (modern Bergama). Thedazzling acropolis sits one thousand feet high and about sixteenmiles inland from the Aegean. The Attalids, who ruled 263–133BC, allied Pergamum with Rome and built it into a major religious andintellectual center, constructing the great altar to Zeus Soter, thetemple to Athena Nicephorus, and the large complex dedicated toAsclepius Soter. They also established a ruler cult and built alibrary containing two hundred thousand volumes, which at its peakwas second only to the library at Alexandria.
Theletter to the church (Rev. 2:12–17) references Satan’sthrone, which many believe to be a reference to the altar to Zeus.The church is commended for its faithfulness and yet is admonishedfor tolerating those advocating pagan practices within the community.
Thyatira.Thyatira (now called Akhisar) is about thirty-five miles southeast ofPergamum. It was mainly noted as having a significant concentrationof trade guilds, especially those connected with textiles. Lydia,Paul’s disciple and host in Philippi, was a dealer in purplecloth from Thyatira (Acts 16:14). The church is commended for itsgood deeds but criticized for tolerating the false teacher Jezebel(Rev. 2:18–29).
Sardis.Forty-five miles east of Smyrna, on the banks of the Pactolus, isSardis, where Croesus, the sixth-century BC Lydian king, was said tohave panned for gold. He also built an impressive Ionic temple toArtemis here. Archaeological evidence points to the presence of asignificant Jewish community in Sardis, about which the NT is silent.
Theletter to Sardis is a stern warning to wake up, highlighting thechurch’s incomplete deeds and impurity (Rev. 3:1–6).
Philadelphia.Philadelphia (modern Alaşehir) is twenty-six miles southwest ofSardis on the Cogamis River. The city was noted for its wineproduction, and it was nicknamed “Little Athens” duringthe Roman era. Its letter is thoroughly positive; the church iscommended for its deeds and faithfulness (Rev. 3:7–13).
Laodicea.Laodicea is located about a hundred miles east of Ephesus, in avalley where the Lycus River joins the Meander; Hierapolis is just tothe north, and Colossae just to the east. Laodicea was founded in thethird century BC by the Seleucid king Antiochus II, who named itafter his wife. Cicero served as proconsul there in 51 BC.
Laodiceawas a prosperous city, a center for banking, eye salve (“Phrygianpowder”), and wool production. Its water was supplied viaaqueducts from Hierapolis’s hot springs, but it arrivedlukewarm and heavy with mineral impurities—no match for eitherits hot source or Colossae’s cold springs. The Laodicean letteremploys all of this background in its harsh message to the church,which it describes as tepid, poor, blind, and naked (Rev. 3:14–22).
Hierapolis.Eight miles to the north of Laodicea, Hierapolis sits atop dramaticwhite cliffs created by its hot springs (Col. 4:13). The city washome to the reputed entrance to the underworld, the Plutonium, andhad an enormous necropolis.
Colossae.Colossae, ten miles east of Laodicea, was a center for dyed red wool.Although wealthy in the late fourth century BC, it was later eclipsedby Laodicea.
Thechurches in Laodicea, Hierapolis, and Colossae (the oldest of thethree cities) were begun by Epaphras and shared letters, includingPaul’s letter to the Colossians (Col. 4:13–16). The slaveOnesimus carried it, along with the Letter to Philemon, to Colossae,where Philemon hosted the house church (Col. 4:9; Philem. 10–12).
A title of honor given to certain men who resided in theRoman province of Asia. The exact nature of their role and purpose isopen to some debate, but it is generally agreed that they were partof an influential ruling class, with possible ties to the emperorcult of Rome. Paul had friends in this class, and they played a rolein keeping him from danger in Ephesus by advising him not to go intothe theater (Acts 19:31).
A prince in the tribe of Simeon during the reign of Hezekiahand the great-grandfather of Jehu (1 Chron. 4:35–40). Inintertestamental literature, “Asiel” is the name of anancestor of Tobit (Tob. 1:1) and of one of the five scribes underEzra involved in the restoration of the Scriptures (2 Esd.14:24).
One of five principal cities of the Philistines (Josh. 13:3).It was situated approximately midway between Ashdod (north) and Gaza(south) on the shore of the Mediterranean Sea.
HistoricalOverview
Evidenceof settlement dates to the Neolithic period (8300–4500 BC),although the earliest references to the city stem from the Middle andLate Bronze Ages (2200–1200 BC). Ashkelon is mentioned amongthe Egyptian Execration texts (nineteenth century BC) as an enemy ofEgypt and in the Amarna tablets (1400 BC), where the city’sruler affirms fealty to the pharaoh. Excavation confirms an Egyptianpresence at Ashkelon during the Late Bronze Age; the city remainedunder Egyptian control until the incursion of the Sea Peoples (earlytwelfth century BC), after which Ashkelon was occupied by thePhilistines.
Ashkelonremained under Philistine control until Tiglath-pileser III’scampaigns against Syria and Israel (734–732 BC), when it becamean Assyrian vassal. During Sennacherib’s reign Ashkelon’sking joined Hezekiah in revolt against Assyria and was deported (701BC). In 604 BC, following Assyria’s demise, Nebuchadnezzardestroyed Ashkelon and deported the survivors, several of whomreceived rations at the Babylonian court (cf. Dan. 1:5).
Duringthe Persian period Ashkelon was reestablished as a Tyrian marketcity, thus becoming prosperous once more. The city was neverconquered by the Hasmoneans (mid-second to mid-first centuries BC;1 Macc. 10:86; 11:60), and eventually it asserted itsindependence, signified by the minting of its own coins (beginning111 BC). Herod the Great was purportedly a native of Ashkelon, and helavished the city with public works projects. During the First JewishRevolt, Ashkelon successfully defended itself against Jewish attack.
Excavationshave located the council house and an elaborately painted tomb (Romanperiod), as well as the remains of a church and a synagogue(Byzantine period). Ashkelon came under Muslim control (seventhcentury AD), then briefly under Crusader control (AD 1153). The citywas destroyed by Saladin (AD 1191) as he retreated before Richard theLionheart.
Ashkelonin the Bible
Ashkelonwas listed among the territory still to be conquered at the end ofJoshua’s life (Josh. 13:3). Judah took the city but ultimatelywas unable to keep it (Judg. 1:18–19). The OT subsequentlyreckoned Ashkelon as part of Philistine territory, beginning withJudg. 14:19, which recounts one of Samson’s exploits.
Ashkelonshared in the affliction visited on the Philistines for taking theArk of the Covenant, which they attempted to forestall by reparationsor “sympathetic magic” (1 Sam. 6:17 [the “goldtumors” were likely meant to bear away the source of thePhilistines’ suffering]). Ashkelon and Gath represent thePhilistines overall as David anticipates their response to news ofSaul’s and Jonathan’s deaths (2 Sam. 1:20).
Theremaining references occur in the prophets, who portended thedestruction of Ashkelon and the other Philistine cities at varioustimes (Jer. 25:20; 47:5, 7; Amos 1:8; Zeph. 2:4, 7; Zech. 9:5).Notably, Zeph. 2:7 expected that Judah would finally take possessionof Ashkelon.
An ancestor of temple servants (Nethinim) who returned toJerusalem after the Babylonian captivity under the leadership ofZerubbabel in 539 BC or soon after (Ezra 2:50 [missing from the listin Neh. 7]). The fact that many of the names in the list are foreign(“Asnah” appears to be Egyptian) has led to the beliefthat they were originally prisoners of war who were pressed intoservice to do menial tasks as they assisted the Levites.
The Aramaic name of Ashurbanipal, who was the son ofEsarhaddon, grandson of Sennacherib, and the last great king ofAssyria (r. 668–627 BC). He is mentioned once in the Bible, inEzra 4:10, which notes that he deported several people groups toSamaria and elsewhere in Trans-Euphrates. More notably, he createdthe great cuneiform library in Nineveh.
A generic term applied to any number of poisonous snakes inolder translations of the biblical text. In its place, most modernversions use “viper” or “cobra” in bothTestaments. Whatever the actual species of snake, the creature isused in imagery suggesting severe danger that seeps like poison intoevery crevice of one’s being. This poisonous nature could beapplied to a lascivious lifestyle (Deut. 32:33), the temptation ofriches (Job 20:14, 16), a lying tongue (Rom. 3:13), or justwickedness in general (Ps. 58:4). In one instance (Isa. 11:8), thisdanger is utilized to relate the radical transformation of realitythat Yahweh’s salvation of the world will one day bring, whenchildren will be able to play in the serpent’s nest withoutfear.
One of Haman’s ten sons, who were killed by the Jewsunder a permission of self-defense granted by King Xerxes (Ahasuerus)(Esther 8:11). At the request of Esther to the king, their corpseswere hung in public display (9:7–14).
Asriel was a great-grandson of Manasseh (Num. 26:31); lesslikely, he was the son of Gilead (1 Chron. 7:14). The Asrieliteswere given land on the western side of the Jordan (Josh. 17:2).
Asriel was a great-grandson of Manasseh (Num. 26:31); lesslikely, he was the son of Gilead (1 Chron. 7:14). The Asrieliteswere given land on the western side of the Jordan (Josh. 17:2).
This animal appears in the accounts of Jesus’ triumphalentry into Jerusalem (Matt. 21:1–11; Mark 11:1–11; Luke19:28–44; John 12:12–16). The term “colt” isa translation of the Greek word pōlos, which designates a “younganimal.” These Gospel accounts fulfill and allude to OTpassages such as Gen. 49:11; Zech. 9:9, where the LXX employs pōlosto translate the Hebrew word ’ayir. Although ’ayir doesnot technically denote a “colt” or a “foal”(rather, it designates a “male donkey” or “jackass”),it is usually translated that way due to the employment of pōlosin the LXX and the Gospels. While two donkeys—a mother and herfoal—appear in Matthew’s account (21:2, 7), Zechariah’sprophecy refers only to a single “purebred male donkey.”
Arising when Felix was procurator of Judea (AD 52–60),a group of revolutionary Jews favored freedom and equality to thepoint of opposing any kind of human rule (even Jewish). The group iscalled the Sicarii, after the short dagger they often used (Lat.sica). Josephus reports that they would conceal the daggers undertheir clothing, assassinate their enemies in broad daylight,especially during festivals, and escape in the crowd, sometimesfeigning surprise and indignation at the murder and thus removingsuspicion against themselves (Josephus, Ant. 20.8.5; J.W. 2.13.3).This original cloak-and-dagger group is mentioned in the NT only atActs 21:38, where the commander of the soldiers arresting Paulassumed that he was an Egyptian revolutionary who had led fourthousand Assassins (ESV, NASB; Gk. sikarioi; NIV: “terrorists”).Although certainly zealous in their actions, the Assassins’relationship to the Zealots is debated. See also Zealots.
An archaic term for one who tries or attempts. In the KJV theword refers specifically to one who tries or tests metal in order todetermine the amount of precious metal present, and then is appliedin a metaphorical sense to those who test the spiritual mettle ofpeople. Jeremiah’s call identifies him as one who would testthe metals, or purity, of the people of Israel (Jer. 6:27).
Primarily, the Israelite community united by a common bond to(or in covenant with) their God (Deut. 33:4; Josh. 8:35; 18:1;1 Kings 8:5). Previous scholarship distinguished congregation(’edah) from assembly (qahal ), defining the former asthe gathering of Israelites for a specific goal and the latter as thegathering of Israel as the special (covenant) people of God. Thisviewpoint was anchored in the LXX’s preponderant rendition of’edah as synagōgē and qahal as ekklēsia. Thissharp distinction between the two terms can no longer be sustained.The difference in the frequency of the two terms in the Hebrew Biblecorresponds to the growth of the Scriptures: ’edah predominatesin Genesis through Numbers, whereas qahal occurs more often inDeuteronomy, the Former Prophets, the Latter Prophets, and theWritings. The association of the verbal form of qahal with both nouns(’edah and qahal ) further buttresses the point (Exod.35:1; Lev. 8:3; Num. 1:18; 10:7; Judg. 20:1; 21:5–8; 1 Chron.13:2–5).
Theterms also refer to Israelite gatherings for special purposes such asworship, war, lawcourt, and councils. They also refer to theassemblage of other peoples or beings such as divine beings,evildoers or enemies, beasts, and bees.
TheNT uses both ekklēsia and synagōgē to refer tosynagogue gatherings (Acts 7:38; 13:43). English versions translateboth terms as either “congregation” or “assembly.”These translations render the ekklēsia in Heb. 2:12 as either“assembly” or “congregation,” whereas theytranslate synagōgē in James 2:2 as “assembly”or “meeting.” See also Church.
One of the sons of Shem, Ashur is usually identified as theprogenitor of the Assyrian people (Gen. 10:22). The name “Ashur”is also associated synonymously with the nation of Assyria, beingapplied to the people, capital, god, and whole of the nation itself.According to Gen. 10, the people would have been descendants of Shemand therefore Semitic, like the children of Israel.
In Gen. 25:3, the Ashurites are listed among the descendantsof Dedan, the grandson of Abraham by Keturah. While some think theAshurites here are to be considered the foundation of the Assyriankingdom, more likely this is a reference to a tribe near Egypt thatis mentioned in South Arabian inscriptions. The KJV also identifies“the company of the Ashurites” (bat-’ashurim) inEzek. 27:6 as ivory workers for Tyre, but most modern translations,using alternate word division and vowels for the Hebrew, take this asa reference to a type of wood, not a people group. See also Ashuri.
(1) Sonof Korah, and head of one of the Korahite clans (Exod. 6:24). (2) Twodescendants of Korah several generations into his genealogy (1 Chron.6:22–23). (3) Possiblyone of the sons of Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) in 1 Chron. 3:17 (sothe KJV), but here the word most likely indicates an appellation ofJehoiachin himself (NIV: “Jehoiachin the captive” [see2 Chron. 36:9–10]), not a separate proper name (cf. LXX:Iechonia-asir).
A seaport in the Aegean Sea. Paul met Luke and others thereon his return trip following his third missionary journey (Acts20:13–14).
In 668 BC Ashurbanipal succeeded his father, Esarhaddon, inAssyria, while his brother Shamash-shum-ukin became the ruler ofBabylon. Esarhaddon had made his vassals swear loyalty to the twosons before his death. They were able to rule peacefully alongsideeach other for seventeen years, with Ashurbanipal as the superior.Then a civil war broke out between them in 651 BC, which Ashurbanipalwon, though at great cost. Less is known of him after this victory,and perhaps the decline of Assyria begins at that point.
Earlyin his reign he conquered Egypt as far south as Thebes, while to theeast he defeated the Medes, which helped pave the way for the rise ofthe Persians. He may be the king who captured Manasseh (2 Chron.33:11–12).
Ashurbanipalhad not been intended for the throne until an older brother died.This meant that his education had been different than it would havebeen as a crown prince. Most significantly, he learned to read andwrite Assyrian cuneiform texts, a formidable task. But as king hecollected an impressive library of “canonical” works,which has been invaluable to historians since its rediscovery.
Geographyand Origins
Thegeographic center of Assyria consisted of a triangle between theKurdish mountains, the Tigris River, and the Upper Zab River (whichflows into the Tigris). This triangle sits within the modern-daycountry of Iraq and for the most part contained the four mostimportant cities in the history of ancient Assyria: Ashur, Nineveh,Arbela, and Calah. At the height of its power, the Assyrian Empirestretched far beyond this geographical region, but this heartlandserved as the political and social base throughout its history.
Althoughthere were some individual city-states such as Ashur and Nineveh inthis heartland during the third millennium BC, Assyria as a unifiedpolitical entity did not arise until the mid-second millennium. Otherthan a brief alliance of some of the city-states under Shamshi-Adad Iin the eighteenth century BC, which was not called Assyria, the firstAssyrian political state began with Ashur-uballit I (c.1364–1329 BC). From the earliest times the lack of certainresources in the heartland and the location of these city-statesalong major trading routes made commerce a central component of theAssyrian economy.
Politicaland Military History
TheMiddle Assyrian Period (1364–934 BC).The first great ruler of Assyria was Ashur-uballit I, who ruledfor thirty-five years. During his reign, he controlled Babylon to thesouth, but during the fifty years following his death, hisdescendants lost control of Babylon due to the rise of the Kassitedynasty there. In 1273 BC, with the rise of Ashur-uballit’sgreat-grandson Shalmaneser I, Assyria began to grow into anempire that dominated the ancient Near East. He defeated the Hittitesand the Arameans and annexed the territory of Mitanni, to the west.The brutal method of warfare and treatment of captives for whichAssyria would become famous can already be seen in Shalmaneser’sdescriptions of his military campaigns.
Afterthe death of Shalmaneser I, his son Tukulti-Ninurta I (c.1243–1207 BC) expanded the Assyrian state even more through aseries of successful military campaigns. He defeated the resurgingHittites to the west and a number of people groups in the mountainsto the north and east. But most important, he conquered and reclaimedBabylon to the south. This had two significant implications. WithBabylon now subdued, the only major check on Assyrian power waseliminated, leaving the Assyrians free to expand. Second, elements ofBabylonian culture were more easily appropriated into Assyrianculture. It even appears that the statue of the god Marduk wascarried from Babylon back to Assyria. Eventually Tukulti-Ninurta wasassassinated in a palace revolt led by his son. The internal strifeof the empire (which came to fruition in this coup), coupled withexternal factors that resulted in an increased threat from the west,resulted in a period of decline for the Assyrian Empire that wouldlast a little less than a century.
AlthoughAssyria regained internal stability and prosperity underAshur-resha-ishi I (c. 1132–1115 BC), the next resurgenceof Assyrian power came with the ascension of Tiglath-pileser I(1114–1076 BC) to the throne. At the very beginning of hisreign, Tiglath-pileser successfully countered an attack from the westby the Mushku. His successful campaign against the Mushku began anexpansion to the west that brought territory and spoils to theAssyrian Empire but also resulted in conflict with the Arameans, whowere based in Syria but interested in expanding into Mesopotamia.When Tiglath-pileser’s troops clashed with Aramean forces atJebel Bishri in central Syria, the Assyrian victory resulted in theacquisition of all of Syria and allowed Tiglath-pileser to press theborders of the Assyrian Empire all the way to the Mediterranean Sea.To the south Tiglath-pileser also led successful campaigns thatresulted in the capture of major Babylonian cities such as Babylonand Sippar. By the time of his death in 1076 BC, the Assyrian Empirestretched from the Mediterranean Sea in the west to the Arabian Gulfin the southeast, a dominance unrivaled in the previous history ofthe ancient Near East. This sweeping success of Tiglath-pileser alsoresulted in cultural developments, including substantial buildingprojects and the compilation of legislation and edicts byprofessional scribes.
TheNeo-Assyrian Empire (934–612 BC).After the death of Tiglath-pileser, Assyria entered another period ofdecline due to the absence of a sufficient administrative structureto rule the enormous territory of the empire as well as theincreasing pressure by the Arameans. However, Assyria again gainedstability under Ashur-dan II (c. 934–912 BC). He began to renewmilitary campaigns to recover lands previously held and fortified thecapital city of Ashur. His two successors, Adad-nirari II(911–891 BC) and Tukulti-Ninurta II (890–884 BC),continued the successful military campaigns and ambitious buildingprojects. This revival of the Assyrian Empire under Ashur-dan IImarks the beginning of what historians call the Neo-Assyrian Empire,an era of power that would last for three hundred years and grow tosupersede the accomplishments of all prior Assyrian reigns.
In883 BC Ashurnasirpal II came to power. Under him the Assyrianarmy became better organized and thus more efficient and engaged inmilitary campaigns regularly instead of sporadically. There was alsoan increase in the brutality exercised by the Assyrian army in orderto dissuade smaller states from attempting to resist Assyria’sexpansion. Ashurnasirpal II also built the small town of Calahinto a major city and relocated the capital of Assyria there.
Shortlyafter inheriting the Assyrian empire in 858 BC, Ashurnasirpal II’sson Shalmaneser III turned his attention to the north and thewest and began moving to assert Assyrian control over thoseterritories. In 853 BC he dismantled a northern alliance and thenproceeded southward. At Qarqar Shalmaneser’s forces clashedwith the Damascus coalition, which consisted of a number of nations,including Israel under King Ahab, that had banded together to resistthe Assyrian encroachment. This battle is not mentioned in the Bible,but the lopsided nature of the victory claimed by the Assyrians seemsoverstated, since Shalmaneser continued to fight against the Damascuscoalition over the next decade. By 841 BC, King Jehu of Israel, Tyre,and Sidon had voluntarily submitted to Assyrian control. AsShalmaneser grew old, he delegated more and more authority to thoseunder him, creating friction among his subordinates and sons over thedirection of the monarchy. Even though Shalmaneser’s sonShamshi-Adad V (823–811 BC) emerged as the monarch afterhis father’s death, instability within the kingdom and therapidly increasing external threat of the Urartian Empire to thenorth resulted in a weakening of the Assyrian Empire that would lastfor almost a century until the rise of Tiglath-pileser III in744 BC.
Withthe ascension of Tiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC) to thethrone, the empire entered a hundred-year period that would be thegolden age of Assyrian rule in the ancient Near East. In addition toreclaiming lands lost in the previous century to Urartu, hereasserted Assyrian control over Damascus, Hamath, Byblos, Tyre, andSamaria. Shortly afterward, King Pekah of Israel and King Rezin ofDamascus banded together to resist Assyrian hegemony in what iscalled the “Syro-Ephraimite coalition.” When they triedto force King Ahaz of Judah to join them, he appealed toTiglath-pileser for help in exchange for fealty, against the counselof Isaiah (see 2 Kings 16; 2 Chron. 28; Isa. 7). In 734 BCTiglath-pileser crushed the coalition, captured Gaza, and developedit into a trade center between Assyria and Egypt. In addition toimproving the military and restructuring the administration of theempire, Tiglath-pileser instituted the policy of deporting andexiling subjects who rebelled against him, a policy that hissuccessors would continue.
Thenext king over Assyria, Shalmaneser V, ruled for only about fouryears (726–722 BC). His chief importance is that he conqueredSamaria, the capital of the northern kingdom of Israel (see 2 Kings17–18), though he was killed around the same time. The nextking, Sargon II (721–705 BC), exiled the northernIsraelites and settled in their place peoples from Syria andBabylonia. Sargon also built an entirely new capital, Dur-Sharrukin,just a few miles north of Nineveh.
In704 BC Sargon’s son Sennacherib came to the throne andestablished the Assyrian capital at Nineveh. The kingdom of Judah andits capital, Jerusalem, became a top priority for Sennacherib becauseJudah was not only refusing submission to Assyria but also allyingitself with Egypt and Ethiopia against Assyria. In 701 BC Sennacheribinvaded Palestine, and at Eltekeh the Assyrian forces clashed with acoalition of Egyptian and Ethiopian forces that had come to the aidof Hezekiah, king of Judah. After defeating these forces, Sennacheribmarched toward Jerusalem. Along the way he laid waste to the Judeancountryside and exiled the inhabitants. The brunt of the damage wasdone in the Shephelah region, especially the city of Lachish.Although Sennacherib is not named explicitly, these are thecircumstances that seem to be reflected in Mic. 1:8–16. WhenSennacherib’s army reached Jerusalem, it laid siege to thecapital city. Although Sennacherib had gone to Libnah, he sent hisRabshakeh (a senior official in the Assyrian army) to press hisclaims. The account of the ensuing standoff between Hezekiah and theRabshakeh is given in three places in the Bible: 2 Kings 18–19;2 Chron. 32; and Isa. 36–37. According to the Bible, theangel of the Lord slaughtered much of the Assyrian army, forcing thesurvivors to retreat and thus delivering Jerusalem. Variant accountsare given by Josephus (Ant. 10.1.4–5) and Herodotus (Hist.2.141).
Afterthe death of Sennacherib in 681 BC, his son Esarhaddon took controlof the Assyrian Empire until 669 BC. During his reign Assyria gainedsuperficial control of Egypt. Before his death he appointedAshurbanipal as his heir over Assyria (668–612 BC), but he madeShamash-shuma-ukin the king over Babylonia. This fateful moveeventually led to the downfall of Assyria because it resulted incivil war. With its resources already depleted by the vast empire,Assyria crumbled in the late seventh century BC to a coalition ofBabylonian, Median, and Scythian forces. The end came quickly, and in612 BC Nineveh was sacked (see the book of Nahum) and theNeo-Babylonian Empire was born.
Cultureand Religion
Akey characteristic of Assyrian culture was militarism. War was notsimply a means of survival but also lay at the heart of the entireAssyrian social structure, from the king down to the poorest peasant.Assyrian inscriptions are replete with boasting about militarycampaigns and victories, which were a central requirement for aking’s reign to be considered successful. Among the generalpopulation, the duty of a warrior was held in high esteem, and allmen were viewed as potential soldiers.
Becauseof the militaristic and imperial bent of the culture, the societyenjoyed a high standard of living under successful monarchs. Inaddition to the natural bounty of the Assyrian heartland, the controlover a large area of subjected vassal states resulted in enrichmentthrough taxes and tributes. The militaristic character of the cultureis also evident in the Assyrian’s favorite forms of recreation:hunting, archery, and javelin throwing, among others.
However,even though Assyrian culture could be quite prosperous, there waslittle literary production. Instead, the Assyrians were largelycontent to borrow from the Babylonians for works on science,religion, and history. During his reign Ashurbanipal sent servantsthroughout Babylonia to collect as much Babylonian literature ascould be found. He then assembled a library in Nineveh to house thesetexts. The library contained a large number of reference works on thepractice of divination and lexical works. There are also literaryworks such as myths and epics, hymns and prayers, and some historicalaccounts.
Assyrianreligion was also influenced by Babylonian beliefs and practices.Both cultures were polytheistic, though there are lists that give ahierarchical order of certain gods. The principal god of the Assyrianculture was Ashur, but the goddess Ishtar and the gods Ninurta,Shamash, Adad, and Sin were also important. The Babylonian deitiesMarduk, Enlil, and Nebo also found their way into Assyrian religiouspractice, and the most important religious festival in Assyria, theNew Year’s festival, was heavily influenced by Babylonianreligion. Each god or goddess had a cultic center with a ziggurat andpriests and a schedule of religious rituals. In Assyrian religion theking played an especially prominent role because he was the chiefpriest and, though not actually divine, was considered to be therepresentative of the deity, and his presence was required at somereligious ceremonies such as the New Year’s festival.
Bythe time of the Neo-Assyrian period, divination played an importantrole in Assyrian religion because it was believed that one could readthe will of the gods, including the events of the future, throughhighly developed rituals. Those who had been trained in divination,frequently Babylonians, could discern the signs through extispicy(examining the entrails of sacrificial animals), hepatoscopy (readinganimal livers), astrology (studying the stars), or other unusualevents such as dreams or birth defects. This religious environmentalso produced widespread use of witchcraft and magic, which providedan avenue of religious involvement for the commoner not available inthe official cults.
(1) Agoddess attested in Syro-Phoenicia, Palestine, and Egypt. In theBible, “Ashtaroth” (preceded by the Hebrew article) isgenerally regarded as the plural form of the deity’s name (NIV:“the Ashtoreths”; NRSV: “the Astartes”; NET:“the Ashtars”). It occurs all but once in conjunctionwith other deities, most often Baal or “the Baals” (Judg.2:13; 1 Sam. 12:10), but also with the gods of neighboringpeoples (Judg. 10:6) or “foreign gods” (1 Sam. 7:3).“Ashtaroth” broadly designates goddesses whom Israelpursued rather than the true God, Yahweh. In 1 Sam. 31:10 ismentioned a Philistine temple devoted to “the Ashtoreths.”In this instance, “Ashtaroth” perhaps should be renderedas “Ashtoreth” (but see the following discussion).
Thesingular form, rendered in the NIV as “Ashtoreth” (NRSV,NET: “Astarte”), occurs exclusively in connection with“the goddess of the Sidonians.” Solomon worshipedAshtoreth (1 Kings 11:5); consequently, the true God, Yahweh,instigated the secession of the northern tribes (1 Kings 11:31,33). Josiah later destroyed the shrine that Solomon built forAshtoreth (2 Kings 23:13). “Ashtoreth” may reflectthe imposition of the vowels for bosheth (“shame”) ontothe deity’s name. Alternately, it is proposed that “Ashtaroth”is the Hebrew vocalization of the deity’s name (a singular termthat doubles as a plural) while “Ashtoreth” is thePhoenician vocalization.
TheBible refers to this goddess as a foreign deity, and it is nosurprise that ancient Near Eastern texts attest her name. In Ugarit,Ashtoreth was known as Astarte. She appears infrequently in themythological texts and is usually mentioned in conjunction with thegoddess Anat. Astarte (like Anat) was El’s daughter and is alsoassumed to have been Baal’s consort. Direct evidence for thelatter is wanting; however, the designation “Astarte-name-of-Baal”suggests that Astarte embodied Baal’s honor or was hiscounterpart.
Anoted attribute of Astarte is her beauty (alluded to in the KirtaEpic), indicating for some a sensual nature. Elsewhere she isportrayed as a hunter, suggesting a martial aspect. Astarte isidentified with the Mesopotamian goddess Ishtar in pantheon lists andalso in the epithets “Astarte of Mari” and “Astarteof Hur” (though here “Astarte” may be a designationfor “goddess”). This, along with the later associationwith Aphrodite, has furthered perception of Astarte as a fertilitygoddess. An association with (planetary) Venus is also proposed butis unattested at Ugarit.
InEgypt, adoption of Semitic deities such as Astarte became widespreadduring the New Kingdom period and following (after 1570 BC). Astarteand Anat were appropriated as daughters of Re and consorts of Seth(identified with Baal). In one text Anat and Astarte are described aspregnant without giving birth, likely a manifestation of theirassociation with Seth, god of disorder. Foremost, though, Astarte wasa war goddess, depicted naked on horseback with weapons in hand. Hercult centered on the delta city of Pi-Ramesse, where her temple waslocated. Astarte’s prevalence in Egypt was purportedlycomparable to Asherah’s in Palestine.
Amongthe Phoenicians, veneration of Astarte was also widespread. Shebecame the predominant female deity at Tyre and Sidon, overshadowingdevotion to Asherah. Several of Sidon’s kings bore the title“priest of Astarte.”
Duringthe Hellenistic and Roman periods, Atargatis (a combination ofAstarte and Anat) received worship throughout Syria. (See alsoAsherah.)
(2) Acity associated with Og, king of Bashan (Deut. 1:4). “Ashtaroth”(without the Hebrew article) designates an Amorite city captured bythe Israelites en route to the plains of Moab (Num. 21:33–35).The region was allotted to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Josh.12:30–31), and the city to the Levites (1 Chron. 6:71).
BiblicalAshtaroth is identified with Tell Ashtaroth, situated along theKing’s Highway, twenty miles east of the Sea of Galilee andtwelve miles northwest of Dera (Edrei). The city is mentioned in theEgyptian Execration texts (nineteenth century BC), in records ofcities conquered by Thutmose III (fifteenth century BC), and inthe Amarna tablets (fourteenth century BC). In 732 BC,Tiglath-pileser III deported Ashtaroth’s population.
(1) Agoddess attested in Syro-Phoenicia, Palestine, and Egypt. In theBible, “Ashtaroth” (preceded by the Hebrew article) isgenerally regarded as the plural form of the deity’s name (NIV:“the Ashtoreths”; NRSV: “the Astartes”; NET:“the Ashtars”). It occurs all but once in conjunctionwith other deities, most often Baal or “the Baals” (Judg.2:13; 1 Sam. 12:10), but also with the gods of neighboringpeoples (Judg. 10:6) or “foreign gods” (1 Sam. 7:3).“Ashtaroth” broadly designates goddesses whom Israelpursued rather than the true God, Yahweh. In 1 Sam. 31:10 ismentioned a Philistine temple devoted to “the Ashtoreths.”In this instance, “Ashtaroth” perhaps should be renderedas “Ashtoreth” (but see the following discussion).
Thesingular form, rendered in the NIV as “Ashtoreth” (NRSV,NET: “Astarte”), occurs exclusively in connection with“the goddess of the Sidonians.” Solomon worshipedAshtoreth (1 Kings 11:5); consequently, the true God, Yahweh,instigated the secession of the northern tribes (1 Kings 11:31,33). Josiah later destroyed the shrine that Solomon built forAshtoreth (2 Kings 23:13). “Ashtoreth” may reflectthe imposition of the vowels for bosheth (“shame”) ontothe deity’s name. Alternately, it is proposed that “Ashtaroth”is the Hebrew vocalization of the deity’s name (a singular termthat doubles as a plural) while “Ashtoreth” is thePhoenician vocalization.
TheBible refers to this goddess as a foreign deity, and it is nosurprise that ancient Near Eastern texts attest her name. In Ugarit,Ashtoreth was known as Astarte. She appears infrequently in themythological texts and is usually mentioned in conjunction with thegoddess Anat. Astarte (like Anat) was El’s daughter and is alsoassumed to have been Baal’s consort. Direct evidence for thelatter is wanting; however, the designation “Astarte-name-of-Baal”suggests that Astarte embodied Baal’s honor or was hiscounterpart.
Anoted attribute of Astarte is her beauty (alluded to in the KirtaEpic), indicating for some a sensual nature. Elsewhere she isportrayed as a hunter, suggesting a martial aspect. Astarte isidentified with the Mesopotamian goddess Ishtar in pantheon lists andalso in the epithets “Astarte of Mari” and “Astarteof Hur” (though here “Astarte” may be a designationfor “goddess”). This, along with the later associationwith Aphrodite, has furthered perception of Astarte as a fertilitygoddess. An association with (planetary) Venus is also proposed butis unattested at Ugarit.
InEgypt, adoption of Semitic deities such as Astarte became widespreadduring the New Kingdom period and following (after 1570 BC). Astarteand Anat were appropriated as daughters of Re and consorts of Seth(identified with Baal). In one text Anat and Astarte are described aspregnant without giving birth, likely a manifestation of theirassociation with Seth, god of disorder. Foremost, though, Astarte wasa war goddess, depicted naked on horseback with weapons in hand. Hercult centered on the delta city of Pi-Ramesse, where her temple waslocated. Astarte’s prevalence in Egypt was purportedlycomparable to Asherah’s in Palestine.
Amongthe Phoenicians, veneration of Astarte was also widespread. Shebecame the predominant female deity at Tyre and Sidon, overshadowingdevotion to Asherah. Several of Sidon’s kings bore the title“priest of Astarte.”
Duringthe Hellenistic and Roman periods, Atargatis (a combination ofAstarte and Anat) received worship throughout Syria. (See alsoAsherah.)
(2) Acity associated with Og, king of Bashan (Deut. 1:4). “Ashtaroth”(without the Hebrew article) designates an Amorite city captured bythe Israelites en route to the plains of Moab (Num. 21:33–35).The region was allotted to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Josh.12:30–31), and the city to the Levites (1 Chron. 6:71).
BiblicalAshtaroth is identified with Tell Ashtaroth, situated along theKing’s Highway, twenty miles east of the Sea of Galilee andtwelve miles northwest of Dera (Edrei). The city is mentioned in theEgyptian Execration texts (nineteenth century BC), in records ofcities conquered by Thutmose III (fifteenth century BC), and inthe Amarna tablets (fourteenth century BC). In 732 BC,Tiglath-pileser III deported Ashtaroth’s population.
A person who studies the stars and their supposed effect onhuman personality and history. Such individuals were well known inboth Mesopotamia and Egypt, though the former is more represented inthe biblical texts.
Inseveral places the OT prophets either ridicule or attack astrologersand their practice (Isa. 47:13; Dan. 2:27; 4:7; 5:7, 11; Amos 5:26),and the practice is strictly forbidden in the law codes (Deut. 4:19).Although there are several texts that may apply to astrology in theNT, the only explicit mention of the practice is in connection withthe magi (Matt. 2) and Simon, Bar-jesus, and Elymas (Acts 8:9; 13:6,8). However, in light of admonitions against astrology and the factthat it is an affront to faith in God, the birth narrative of Jesusshould not be read as an approval of the practice but rather as anextraordinary event in which the heavens themselves proclaim thecoming of the one born “king of the Jews” (Matt. 2:2).
The KJV transliteration of a Hebrew word in 1 Chron.26:15, 17 that more-recent versions translate as “storehouse”(NIV) or “gatehouse” (ESV).
Called “Aswan” in the NIV and mentioned inprophecies against Egypt, this southern Egyptian village (modernAswan) is located on the east bank of the Nile, just north of thefirst cataract of the Nile, at the southern border of ancient Egypt(Ezek. 29:10; 30:6). Aswan was valued for its granite quarries, whosestones were called “syenite.” Syene’s fate wasclosely tied to nearby Elephantine Island.
A Roman Christian greeted by Paul at the end of his letter tothe church in Rome (Rom. 16:14).
After Jacob’s death in Egypt, Joseph and a largecompany with him set out to bury Jacob, according to hisinstructions, in the cave near the field of Machpelah that Abrahamhad bought from the Hittites. Along the way, they stopped for sevendays and mourned at the threshing floor of Atad (Gen. 50:10–12).“Atad” is likely the name of the owner of the threshingfloor (for an analogous phrase, see 2 Sam. 6:6; 24:16, 18),although it could be part of the name of the threshing floor itself.In Judg. 9:14–15; Ps. 58:9, atad simply means “thorn.”
The second wife of Jerahmeel, and the mother of Onam(1 Chron. 2:26).
(1) Atown captured by the tribe of Gad from Og of Bashan and Sihon of theAmorites (Num. 32:3, 34). This town is mentioned on the Moabite Stone(lines 10–11) as being defeated by King Mesha around 830 BC. Itis most likely identified with modern Khirbet Attarus. (2) Aborder town between Benjamin and Ephraim on the west side of theJordan (Josh. 16:2, 7). This town was previously controlled by theArchites. It is not clear if this Ataroth is the same as AtarothAddar mentioned in Josh. 16:5.
A city on the southeastern border of Ephraim with Benjamin(Josh. 16:5; 18:13). It is most likely to be identified with KhirbetAttara.
(1) Thehead of a clan that was part of the early return to Judah fromBabylonian captivity in 539 BC or soon after (Ezra 2:16; Neh. 7:21).Ater is also listed as one who sealed the covenant renewal led byEzra (Neh. 10:17). (2) Apriestly gatekeeper at the time of the early postexilic period (Ezra2:42; Neh. 7:45).
A location to which David sent some of his plunder when hearrived in Ziklag (1 Sam. 30:30). Some associate this locationwith Ether (Josh. 15:42; 19:7) because the location Ashan is foundalongside both Ether and Athak in their respective lists.
A descendant of Judah who, after returning from the exile inBabylon, settled in Jerusalem (Neh. 11:4).
A location to which David sent some of his plunder when hearrived in Ziklag (1 Sam. 30:30). Some associate this locationwith Ether (Josh. 15:42; 19:7) because the location Ashan is foundalongside both Ether and Athak in their respective lists.
(1) Daughterof Ahab and Jezebel, later the wife of the Judean king Jehoram andthe mother of the succeeding short-lived king, Ahaziah (2 Kings8:25–27; 2 Chron. 22:2). On first introduction to theBible reader, she is ominously described as “a granddaughter ofOmri king of Israel,” a dynasty that profoundly damaged thespiritual life of the northern kingdom. Through her, this infectionentered the southern kingdom. She encouraged her son Ahaziah tofollow “the ways of the house of Ahab,” promoting thefalse worship of Baal in Jerusalem (2 Chron. 22:3). On the deathof her son at the hands of Jehu, she exterminated the royal family ofJudah and reigned over the land (2 Kings 11). Only Joash, theinfant son of Ahaziah, escaped the purge and remained hidden for sixyears. In the seventh year of her reign (836 BC) Jehoiada thepriest brought Joash out of hiding and organized a palace coupagainst Athaliah, and she was executed. The destruction of theparaphernalia of Baal worship and slaying of the priest of Baalfollowed immediately on her death.
(2) Sonof Jeroham, a Benjamite, who returned from exile (1 Chron.8:26).
(3) Thefather of Jeshaiah, whose son, with seventy members of this layfamily, returned from exile with Ezra (Ezra 8:7).
The route that the Israelites were taking into Canaan whenthey were attacked by the king of Arad (Num. 21:1). The Israelitesprayed and then retaliated, defeating their attackers. This route hasbeen identified as south of the Dead Sea. The meaning of this word isuncertain; some Greek versions translate the word as “spies”(see also the KJV).
Athens is located five miles northeast of the port of Piraeuson the Saronic Gulf. It was the chief city of the ancient Greekprovince of Attica (2 Macc. 9:15; Acts 17:15–18; 18:1;1 Thess. 3:1) and is the capital of modern Greece. The name“Athens” probably derived from the name of the goddessAthena.
Asearly as the fourth millennium BC there was already evidence ofsettlement, and during the Mycenaean period (c. 1300–1225 BC)Athens was a fortified city. However, it was in the fifth century BC,under the reign of Pericles (495–429 BC), that the glory ofAthens reached its zenith. During this time the Parthenon was built,and arts, philosophy, drama, and Greek culture were developed totheir highest point. The Romans conquered the city in 146 BC, but itcontinued to be an intellectual and cultural center. With the fall ofthe Roman Empire, Athens’s importance declined as well.
Paulvisited this city on his second missionary journey. His debate withthe Greek philosophers in the agora (the marketplace) brought himbefore the city council of Athens, the Areopagus, where religiousmatters were settled (Acts 17:16–34). Traditionally, the siteis identified as Mars Hill, located on the west side of theAcropolis. Interestingly, Paul founded no church in Athens.
A Jew who was influenced by Ezra’s admonitions to sendaway his foreign wife as an act of faithfulness to the covenant (Ezra10:28).
The English word “atonement” comes from anAnglo-Saxon word, “onement,” with the preposition “at”;thus “at-onement,” or “at unity.” In someways this word has more in common with the idea of reconciliationthan our modern concept of atonement, which, while having “oneness”as its result, emphasizes rather the idea of how that unity isachieved, by someone “atone-ing” for a wrong or wrongsdone. Atonement, in Christian theology, concerns how Christ achievedthis “onement” between God and sinful humanity.
Theneed for atonement comes from the separation that has come aboutbetween God and humanity because of sin. In both Testaments there isthe understanding that God has distanced himself from his creatureson account of their rebellion. Isaiah tells the people of Judah,“Your iniquities have separated you from your God”(59:2). And Paul talks about how we were “God’s enemies”(Rom. 5:10). So atonement is the means provided by God to effectreconciliation. The atonement is required on account of God’sholiness and justice.
OldTestament
Inthe OT, the sacrificial system was the means by which sins wereatoned for, ritual purity was restored, iniquities were forgiven, andan amicable relationship between God and the offerer of the sacrificewas reestablished. Moses tells the Israelites that God has given themthe blood of the sacrificial animals “to make atonement foryourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement forone’s life” (Lev. 17:11). In essence, this is the basicoperating principle for atonement in the OT—the offering of theblood of a slaughtered animal in place of the life of the offerer.However, there have been significant scholarly debates regardingwhether this accurately portrays the ancient Israelite understandingof atonement.
Themeaning of “to atone.”First, there is disagreement over the precise meaning of the Hebrewword kapar (“to atone”). Among the more popularsuggestions are these: to cover, to remove, to wipe out, to appease,to make amends, to redeem or ransom, to forgive, and to avert/divert.Of late, one very influential theory is that atonement has little ornothing to do with the individual offerer, but serves only to purifythe tabernacle or temple and the furniture within from the impuritiesthat attach to them on account of the community’s sin. Thistheory, though most probably correct in what it affirms,unnecessarily restricts the effects of atonement to the tabernacleand furniture. There are, to be sure, texts that specifically mentionatonement being made for the altar (e.g., Exod. 29:36–37; Lev.8:15). But the repeated affirmation for most of the texts inLeviticus and Numbers is that the atonement is made for the offerer(e.g., Lev. 1:4; 4:20, 26); atonement results in forgiveness of sinfor the one bringing the offering. As far as the precise meaning ofkapar is concerned, it may be that some of the suggested meaningsoverlap and that a particular concept is more prevalent in somepassages, and another one in others.
Therehas also been debate over the significance of the offerer laying ahand on the head of the sacrificial animal (e.g., Lev. 1:4; 3:2).This has traditionally been understood as an identification of theofferer with the sacrifice and a transference of the offerer’ssins to the sacrifice. Recently this has been disputed and theargument made instead that it only signifies that the animal doesindeed belong to the offerer, who therefore has the right to offerit. But again, this is unduly restrictive; it should rather be seenas complementary to what has traditionally been understood by thisgesture. Indeed, in the rite for the Day of Atonement, when thepriest lays his hands on the one goat, confesses Israel’s sinand wickedness, and in doing so is said to be putting them on thegoat’s head (Lev. 16:21), this would seem to affirm thecorrectness of the traditional understanding. The sacrifice is thusbest seen as substitutionary: it takes the place of the offerer; itdies in his stead.
Therelationship between God and the offerer. Second,granted that the word kapar has to do with the forgiveness of sins,the question arises as to the exact effect that it has on therelationship between God and the offerer. The question here iswhether the effect is expiation or propitiation. Does the offeringexpiate the sin—wipe it out, erase it, remove it? Or does itpropitiate the one to whom the sacrifice is offered? That is, does itappease and placate God, so that the threat of God’s wrath isremoved? In one respect, the distinction seems artificial; it seemslogical that expiation naturally results in propitiation. On theother hand, the modern-day tendency to deny that God could possiblybe a God of wrath makes the question relevant. In any case, there arecertainly, in both religious and nonreligious contexts, passageswhere something like “appease” or “pacify”appears to be a proper rendering of kapar (Gen. 32:20; Exod. 32:30;Num. 16:46–47; 25:1–13; 1 Sam. 3:14). The effect ofatonement is that sins are removed and forgiven, and God is appeased.
Inconjunction with this last point, it is also important to note thatthere are a number of places where it is said that God does thekapar, that God is the one who makes atonement. Deuteronomy 21:8calls upon God, literally, to “atone [NIV: “accept thisatonement”] for your people, Israel.” In Deut. 32:43 Godwill “make atonement for his land and people.” Psalm 65:3(ESV) states that God “atone[s] for our transgressions”(ESV). Hezekiah prays in 2 Chron. 30:18, “May the Lord,who is good, pardon [atone for] everyone.” In Ps. 78:38 (ESV),God is said to have “atoned” for Israel’s iniquity.Psalm 79:9 (ESV) asks God to “atone for our sins for yourname’s sake.” In Isa. 43:3 kapar is translated as“ransom,” and God says to Israel that he gave “Egyptfor your ransom.” In Ezek. 16:63 God declares that he will“make atonement” for all the sins that Israel hascommitted. It may be that in most of these passages “atone”is to be understood as a synonym of “forgive.” However,as many commentators have noted, in at least some of these passages,the thought is that God is either being called upon to take or istaking upon himself the role of high priest, atoning for the sins ofthe people. It is important to remember God’s declaration inLev. 17:11 that he has given to the Israelites the blood of thesacrificial animals to make atonement for their sins. Atonement, nomatter how it is conceived of or carried out, is a gift that Godgraciously grants to his covenant people.
Thatleads to a consideration of one particularly relevant passage, Isa.52:13–53:12. In this text a figure referred to as “my[the Lord’s] servant” (52:13) is described as one who“took up our pain and bore our suffering” (53:4). He was“pierced for our transgressions” and “crushed forour iniquities” (53:5). “The Lord has laid on him theiniquity of us all” (53:6). And then we are told, “Yet itwas the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,”and that “the Lord makes his life an offering for sin [NASB:“guilt offering”]” (53:10). There are many issueswith regard to the proper interpretation of this “Servant Song”(as it is often called), one of them being whether the termtranslated “guilt offering” should really be thought ofalong the lines of the guilt offering described in the book ofLeviticus (5:14–6:7; 7:1–10). But if the traditionalChristian understanding of this passage is correct, we have here apicture of God himself assuming the role of priest and atoning forthe sins of his people by placing their iniquities and sins on hisservant, a figure regarded by Jesus and the apostles in the NT to beGod’s very own son, Christ Jesus.
NewTestament
Therelationship between the Testaments.When we come to the NT, four very important initial points should bemade.
First,God’s wrath against sin and sinners is just as much a NTconsideration as an OT one. God still considers those who are sinfuland unrighteous to be his “enemies” (Rom. 5:10; Col.1:21). Wrath and punishment await those who do not confess JesusChrist as Lord (John 3:36; Rom. 2:5; Eph. 2:3). Atonement is themeans of averting this wrath.
Second,salvation is promised to those who come to God by faith in ChristJesus, but there is still the problem of how God can, at the sametime, be “just” himself and yet also be the one who“justifies” sinners and declares them righteous (Rom.3:26). God will not simply declare sinners to be justified unless hisown justness is also upheld. Atonement is the way by which God isboth just and justifier.
Third,as we saw in the OT that, ultimately, God is the one who atones, soalso in the NT God is the one who provides the means for atonement.It is by his gracious initiative that atonement becomes possible. IfJesus’ death is the means by which atonement is achieved, it isGod himself who “presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement”(Rom. 3:25). It was God himself who “so loved the world that hegave his one and only Son” (John 3:16). God himself “senthis Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins” (1 John4:10). God “did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for usall” (Rom. 8:32). Additionally, Christ himself was not anunwilling victim; he was actively involved in the accomplishing ofatonement by his death (Luke 9:31; John 10:15–18; Heb. 9:14).
Fourth,the atoning sacrifice of the Son was necessary because, ultimately,the OT sacrifices could not really have provided the necessaryatonement: “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goatsto take away sins” (Heb. 10:4).
Portrayalsof Christ’s work of atonement.It has become common of late to refer to the different “images”or “metaphors” of atonement that appear in the NT. Thisis understandable on one level, but on another level there issomething misleading about it. So, for example, when the NT authorsspeak of Christ as a sacrifice for sin, it is not at all clear thatthey intend for the reader to take this as imagery. Rather, Christreally is a sacrifice, offered by God the Father, to take away sins,and to bear in his own body the penalty that should have been placedon the sinner. Christ’s sacrifice has an organic connection tothe OT sacrificial system, as the “full, final sacrifice.”The author of Hebrews would not have considered this to be imagery.In fact, a better case could be made that, from his perspective,Christ was the real sacrifice, and all the instances of sacrifice inthe OT were the imagery (Heb. 10:1). So as we look at the differentportrayals of Christ in his work of atonement in the NT, some ofthese may best be categorized as imagery or metaphor, while othersperhaps are better described as a “facet” of, or a“window” on, the atonement. It should also be noted thatthe individual portrayals do not exclude the others, and in somecases they overlap.
• Ransom.Some passages in the NT speak of Christ’s death as a ransompaid to set us free (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; 1 Tim. 2:6; Heb.9:15). The same Greek word translated “ransom” in thesepassages is rendered as “redeem” or “redemption”in other passages (Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14). Other forms of the same wordare also translated “redeem” or “redemption”in Gal. 3:13–14; 4:5; Titus 2:14; Heb. 9:12; 1 Pet.1:18–19; Rev. 14:3. A near synonym of these words is used inRev. 5:9; 14:4, referring to how Christ “purchased”people by his blood. In most of these cases the picture is that ofslaves who have been ransomed, redeemed, or purchased from the slavemarket. Sometimes this is referred to as an “economic”view of atonement, though this label seems a bit crass, for thepurchase is not of a commodity but of human lives at the expense ofChrist’s own life and blood. To ask the question as to whom theransom was paid is probably taking the picture too far. But those whoare ransomed are redeemed from a life of slavery to sin and to thelaw.
• Cursebearer. In Gal. 3:13–14, noted above, there is also the pictureof Christ as one who bore the curse of the law in our place. Thelanguage is especially striking because rather than saying thatChrist bore the curse, Paul says that Christ became “a curse.”This is an especially forceful way of saying that Christ fully tookinto his own person the curse that was meant for us.
• Penaltybearer. Closely related to “curse bearer,” this portrayaldepicts Christ as one who has borne the legal consequences of oursins, consequences that we should have suffered; rather, becauseChrist has borne the penalty, we are now declared to be righteous andno longer subject to condemnation. This idea stands behind much ofthe argumentation that Paul uses in Romans and Galatians, and it alsointersects with the other portrayals. Passages representative of thispicture are Rom. 3:24–26; 4:25; 5:8–21; 8:32–34;Gal. 3:13–14; Eph. 2:15. It is also what should be understoodby Peter’s description of Christ’s death as “thejust for the unjust” in 1 Pet. 3:18 (NASB, NET), as wellas in 2 Cor. 5:21, where Paul states that Christ has become “sinfor us” so that we might become the “righteousness ofGod.”
• Propitiation.There are four passages where the NIV uses “atonement” or“atoning” in the translation to reflect either the Greekverb hilaskomai or related nouns hilastērion or hilasmos. Thisis the word group that the LXX regularly uses to translate the Hebrewverb kapar and related nouns. There has been much debate about theprecise meaning of the word in these four NT texts, in particular, asto whether it means to “expiate” (“remove guilt”)or to “propitiate” (“appease” or “avertwrath”). The better arguments have been advanced in favor of“propitiate”; at the very least, propitiation is impliedin expiation. The wrath that we should have suffered on account ofour sins has been suffered by Jesus Christ instead. Although thespecific word is not used, this is the understanding as well in thosepassages where it is said either that Christ died “for oursins” (1 Cor. 15:3), “gave himself for our sins”(Gal. 1:4), “bore our sins” (1 Pet. 2:24), or thathis blood was poured out “for the forgiveness of sins”(Matt. 26:28; cf. Eph. 1:7).
• Passover.In 1 Cor. 5:7 Paul states that “Christ, our Passover lamb,has been sacrificed.” Although the Passover has nottraditionally been thought of as a sacrifice for sin (though manyscholars would argue that it was), at the very least we shouldrecognize a substitutionary concept at play in Paul’s use ofthe Passover idea. A lamb died so that the firstborn would not. TheGospel of John seems to have the same understanding. Early in theGospel, Jesus is proclaimed as the “Lamb of God, who takes awaythe sin of the world” (John 1:29). And then in his account ofJesus’ passion, John narrates that his crucifixion wasprecisely at the same time as the slaying of the Passover lambs (John19:14).
• Sacrifice.This theme has already been touched on in the other portraits above,but it is important to recognize the significance of this concept inthe NT and especially in the book of Hebrews. There, Christ isportrayed as both sacrifice and the high priest who offers thesacrifice (2:17; 7:27; 9:11–28; 10:10–21; 12:24). Hecame, not as some have argued, to show the uselessness of thesacrificial system, but rather to be the “full, finalsacrifice” within that system, “that he might makeatonement for the sins of the people” (2:17).
Ofcourse, it is not just the death of Christ that secures ourredemption. His entire earthly life, as well as his resurrection andheavenly intercessory work, must also be recognized. But with regardto the work of atonement per se, Christ’s earthly life,his sinless “active obedience,” is what qualifies him tobe the perfect sacrifice. His resurrection is the demonstration ofGod’s acceptance of Christ’s sacrifice (he “wasraised to life for our justification” [Rom. 4:25]). But it wasparticularly his death that provided atonement for our sins.
The mercy seat, or “atonement cover” (NIV, NLT),was the cover on the ark of the covenant in the tabernacle and theplace of atonement for Israel (Exod. 25:21). It was made of puregold, forty-five inches long, and twenty-seven inches wide (25:17).Above the mercy seat were two cherubim made of gold, one at each end(25:18–20). There, God spoke with Moses (Num. 7:89). Uponentering the holiest place, the priest was required to burn incenseover the mercy seat; otherwise, he would face judgment and die (Lev.16:13). On the Day of Atonement the blood of the bull and the goatwas sprinkled on the mercy seat.
Inthe NT, the Greek term hilastērion is used for the mercy seatitself (Heb. 9:5) and for the “sacrifice of atonement” or“propitiation” (Rom. 3:25), the blood of which wasdripped onto the mercy seat. In Rom. 3:25 Christ himself isidentified as the hilastērion, the sacrifice of atonement forour sins.
Its name meaning “crowns of the house of Joab,”this town is listed in the genealogy of Hur, a descendant of Judah(1 Chron. 2:54). Although its exact location is unknown, it wassomewhere near Bethlehem.
One of the towns built by the descendants of Gad on the eastside of the Jordan River. This is the land that was conquered fromSihon, king of the Amorites, and Og, king of Bashan (Num. 32:35).
(1) Grandsonof Sheshan, a descendant of Judah. He was born to Sheshan’sdaughter and the Egyptian slave Jarha (1 Chron. 2:35–36).(2) Oneof David’s warriors from the tribe of Gad who came to help himat Ziklag (1 Chron. 12:11). (3) Sonof Rehoboam (and grandson of Solomon) by his wife Maakah, whomRehoboam loved more than any of his other wives (2 Chron.11:20).
Founded by Attalus I Philadelphus of Pergamum (159–138BC) on Asia Minor’s southern coast near the mouth of theCestrus (Aksu) River, Attalia (modern Antalya or Adalia) served as aport city for Perga. Paul passed through Attalia on his firstmissionary campaign (Acts 14:25–26). See also Asia Minor,Cities of.
An auxiliary unit in the Roman army made up of non-Romancitizens who could gain citizenship through their service. Thisparticular unit was stationed in Syria and held some level of favoras related to its association with the famed emperor. The centurionsof this cohort escorted Paul on his journey from Caesarea to Rome(Acts 27:1 [NIV: “Imperial Regiment”]).
Title given by the Roman senate to the emperor Octavian (r.31 BC–AD 14) in 27 BC, meaning “august,” “revered,”or “exalted.” Augustus was the ruler of the Roman Empirewhen Jesus was born and ordered the census that led Joseph and Maryto Bethlehem (Luke 2:1). Octavian was born in 63 BC and later adoptedby Julius Caesar as his heir.
Hefirst gained power upon Julius Caesar’s death in 44 BC.Initially, Octavian ruled as part of a triumvirate with Antony andMarcus Lepidus, supposedly in order to avenge the murder of Caesar.He gained sole control of Rome at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC,defeating Antony and Cleopatra, both of whom committed suicide. Inthe next year, Octavian annexed Egypt into the Roman Empire. TheRoman senate bestowed on him the name “Augustus” in 27 BCto honor him for his victories. From that point on, he was known asCaesar Augustus. The title “Augustus” was handed down toOctavian’s successors as emperors.
Augustusappointed Herod the Great to his position of power despite Herod’sinitial support of Antony. Augustus is known for establishing theRoman Empire and becoming its first emperor. The Senate declared hima god at his death.
“Author of life” is a title applied to Jesus byPeter in Acts 3:15 (KJV: “Prince of life”), where he usesit ironically to highlight that people had killed the one who was thesource of life. Elsewhere, the Greek word behind “author”(archēgos) is translated as “prince,” “leader,”“captain,” or “pioneer” (Acts 5:31; Heb.2:10; 12:2).
“Author of life” is a title applied to Jesus byPeter in Acts 3:15 (KJV: “Prince of life”), where he usesit ironically to highlight that people had killed the one who was thesource of life. Elsewhere, the Greek word behind “author”(archēgos) is translated as “prince,” “leader,”“captain,” or “pioneer” (Acts 5:31; Heb.2:10; 12:2).
The concept of authority in Scripture includes two distinctelements. First, a person has authority in various settings if he orshe has the right to tell others what to do and decide how mattersshould be arranged. Second, a person has authority if he or she hasnot only the right to rule, as in the first case, but also the powerto control, so that what this person decrees actually happens. Whenthe angel of the Lord tells Hagar, “Go back to your mistressand submit to her,” he employs the first aspect of authority(Gen. 16:9). Hagar must do what Sarah tells her to do. The same senseof authority operates in Deut. 1:15, where Moses recalls, “So Itook the leading men of your tribes, wise and respected men, andappointed them to have authority over you” (cf. Exod.18:13–27). On the other hand, when Yahweh says of his word, “Itwill not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire andachieve the purpose for which I sent it,” the second sense ofauthority also plays a role (Isa. 55:11; cf. Heb. 4:12). Likewiseregarding the one who “overcomes” in the book ofRevelation: the Son gives the church authority, and its people rulethe nations “with an iron scepter” (2:26–27). Bothideas—forensic right and power to effect—arise in thatcontext.
Theauthority of Christ is a prominent theme of the Gospels, beingevidence of his deity and messianic status. In Matthew’sGospel, for instance, the Sermon on the Mount concludes with thecrowd’s wonder that Jesus teaches “as one who hadauthority,” unlike the teachers of the law (7:28–29).Jesus then displays his authority over diseases (8:1–10),natural forces (8:26–27), and demonic entities (8:28–32),culminating in his authority to forgive sins (9:6) and resuscitatethe dead (9:18–26). Mark and Luke also include parallelpassages that emphasize the authority of Christ over similar domains.John’s Gospel highlights the authority of Jesus to judge(5:27), to lay down his life and take it up again (10:18), and togrant eternal life to those who abide in him (17:2). The authority ofChrist over all events, even the worst of them, is the grand theme ofthe book of Revelation. Jesus has the right and power to rule for thesake of his church, overcoming all powers that usurp authority inopposition to him (Rev. 4–5; 13; 20). Finally, even the GreatCommission proclaims the supreme authority of Christ (Matt. 28:18;cf. Eph. 1:21; Col. 2:10). With God, we expect authority as right andas power always to coincide in the end.
Onthis same trajectory, the church must submit to authority, first toGod and then to human rulers, in the latter case when it can be donein good conscience. Paul’s references to Jesus as “Lord”throughout the Corinthian letters highlight his authority over thosewhom he has “bought at a price” (1 Cor. 6:9–20).For his own part, Paul can implicitly “pull rank” on theCorinthians, citing his own God-given authority over them (2 Cor.10:8; 13:10; cf. 1 Tim. 4:2). No one should “lord it over”others (Luke 22:25–26), but even when they do, the servant mustrespect the master’s authority (1 Pet. 2:17–19).Wives must submit to the servant leadership of their husbands (Eph.5:22), children must obey their parents (Eph. 6:1–3), slavesmust yield to their masters (Eph. 6:5–8), andlaypersons must obey the church’s elders (Heb. 13:17).
Respectfor authority also extends to secular governments, whatever thecharacter of their leaders. Even though Saul had intended to killDavid (1 Sam. 20:33), David is outraged that anyone would killSaul (2 Sam. 1:14). The apostle Paul has many reasons todistrust secular governments and defy their authority; yet when he issubjected to official abuse, he respects Rome’s laws (Acts16:16–40; 21–28). In Rom. 13:1–6 Paul commands thechurch to be subject to governing authorities, assuming that God hasestablished them, so that “whoever rebels against the authorityis rebelling against what God has instituted” (v. 2). In1 Tim. 2:1–3 the church is called to prayer for secularrulers. These passages do not require obedience to human authorityeven when it conflicts with the will of God (Acts 5:29), but they doprevent the church from hindering the gospel with outbreaks ofrevolutionary enthusiasm.
Geographical location whose residents were deported by theAssyrians and resettled in Samaria shortly after 721 BC (2 Kings17:24). The biblical text explains that after their resettlement, “each national group made its own gods” (2 Kings 17:29–31).Since the Avvites made Nibhaz and Tartak, it is almost certain thatAvva should be identified with the Elamite city Ama, especially sinceAkkadian m is often rendered w in Hebrew (the Hebrew w often isspelled v in English). Their deities were Ibnahaza and Dirtaq. It ispossible that this is the same city as Ivvah (2 Kings 18:34;19:13; Isa. 37:13).
Meaning “idolatry” or “wickedness,”the name of certain locations. (1) Abbreviatedform of “Beth-Aven,” meaning “house of idolatry,”Hosea’s name for Bethel (10:8). (2) “Valleyof Aven,” where Syria was to be punished, mentioned in Amos’scriticism of Syria (Amos 1:5). It may be the plain between Lebanonand Anti-Lebanon. (3) Termused by Ezekiel as a derisive pun on the Egyptian city “On”(Heliopolis), center for the worship of the sun god, Re, in hisprophecy against the wickedness of Egypt (Ezek. 30:17).
The term “avenger” occurs sixteen times in theNIV, usually in the phrase “avenger of blood” ( go’elhaddam). The Hebrew word go’el may be translated “redeemer,”“avenger,” or “near relative” and referred toa kinsman who acted on behalf of a close relative. The term was usedof one who avenged (repaid) the death of a murdered relative (Num.35:12), received restitution for crimes against a deceased relative(Num. 5:7–8), bought back family property that had been sold(Lev. 25:25), purchased a relative who had been sold into slavery(Lev. 25:48–49), or married a relative’s widow in orderto raise up heirs for her deceased husband (levirate marriage) (Deut.25:5–10). The “avenger of blood” refersspecifically to the first of these functions, a murder victim’snear relative who would exact justice by executing the murderer. Thiswas in line with the OT principle of “eye for an eye” and“tooth for a tooth” (Exod. 21:24; Lev. 24:20; Deut.19:21). Punishment was to be in proportion to the degree and severityof a crime. In the NT, this role of justice is assigned to governmentauthorities (Rom. 13:4).
Thisprocedure for justice for the avenger of blood is found in Num.35:9–27; Deut. 19:11–13; Josh. 20. If a person was foundguilty of intentional murder on the testimony of two or threewitnesses (Deut. 17:6; 19:15), the avenger of blood served asexecutioner.
Incases of accidental manslaughter, the accused could flee to one ofsix cities of refuge, where the city assembly would judge the caseand provide protection from the avenger of blood (Num. 35:6–34;Deut. 4:41–43; 19:1–14; Josh. 20:1–9). Numbers35:12 designates that “they will be places of refuge from theavenger, so that anyone accused of murder may not die before theystand trial before the assembly” (cf. Josh. 20:9). Deuteronomy19:4–7 explains the necessity of this protection: the avengermay be filled with rage and take revenge without concern for whetherthe death was accidental or intentional. If the accused left the cityof refuge, the avenger of blood could take his life (Num. 35:27).This held true until the death of the high priest, at which time theaccused could leave the city without fear of reprisal. The primarypurpose of the laws related to the avenger of blood was to provideconsistent justice and so reduce blood feuds and continued cycles ofretaliation and revenge.
The city of the Edomite king Hadad son of Badad (Gen. 36:35;1 Chron. 1:46). The site has not been identified.
A month of the Jewish calendar corresponding to lateMarch/early April. It is the month during which the Israelites weredelivered from Egypt (Exod. 13:4) and the Passover was celebrated(Exod. 23:15; 34:18; Deut. 16:1). In Neh. 2:1 and Esther 3:7 themonth is called “Nisan.” See also Nisan.
Geographical location whose residents were deported by theAssyrians and resettled in Samaria shortly after 721 BC (2 Kings17:24). The biblical text explains that after their resettlement, “each national group made its own gods” (2 Kings 17:29–31).Since the Avvites made Nibhaz and Tartak, it is almost certain thatAvva should be identified with the Elamite city Ama, especially sinceAkkadian m is often rendered w in Hebrew (the Hebrew w often isspelled v in English). Their deities were Ibnahaza and Dirtaq. It ispossible that this is the same city as Ivvah (2 Kings 18:34;19:13; Isa. 37:13).
Although little else is known about either one, Avvim was acity within Benjamin’s borders (Josh. 18:23), and the Avviteswere a people who lived in the coastal region prior to the arrival ofthe Philistines and were destroyed by the Caphtorites (Deut. 2:23).
Although little else is known about either one, Avvim was acity within Benjamin’s borders (Josh. 18:23), and the Avviteswere a people who lived in the coastal region prior to the arrival ofthe Philistines and were destroyed by the Caphtorites (Deut. 2:23).
Awe mingles dread with wonder, especially toward God (Ps.33:8 KJV). Translations use “awe” almost exclusively forGod and his deeds. Modern translations use “awe,”“awesome,” and “awe-inspiring” to rendernumerous Hebrew and Greek terms.
TheBible never records a person encountering God without being visiblyshaken by God’s awesomeness. Awe is a personal disposition morethan an emotional state. In God’s presence Moses hides his face(Exod. 3:6), and Isaiah declares, “Woe to me!” (Isa.6:5).
The son and successor of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. In Hebrewtradition, he is known by the name “Evil-Merodach”(derived from “Awel-Marduk,” a variant of the Babylonianname “Amel-Marduk”). Reigning in the years 562/561–560BC, he pardoned King Jehoiachin of Judah, who had been imprisoned byNebuchadnezzar. Thereafter, Jehoiachin dined at the king’stable (2 Kings 25:27–30; Jer. 52:31–34; confirmed byBabylonian records). Allegedly because of his ineffective policies,his brother-in-law Neriglissar murdered him and usurped the throne.
Awe mingles dread with wonder, especially toward God (Ps.33:8 KJV). Translations use “awe” almost exclusively forGod and his deeds. Modern translations use “awe,”“awesome,” and “awe-inspiring” to rendernumerous Hebrew and Greek terms.
TheBible never records a person encountering God without being visiblyshaken by God’s awesomeness. Awe is a personal disposition morethan an emotional state. In God’s presence Moses hides his face(Exod. 3:6), and Isaiah declares, “Woe to me!” (Isa.6:5).
A tool used to bore holes in objects. In biblical times thisinstrument could have been made out of stone, bone, or metal. One ofthe uses for this tool in ancient times included the piercing of ears(Exod. 21:6; Deut. 15:17). Such piercing was done to servants as ameans of marking them as permanent slaves.
A deck covering on ships (Ezek. 27:7) used to shieldpassengers from the sun. A different vocalization of the Hebrewelsewhere also refers to the covering on Noah’s ark (Gen. 8:13)and the tabernacle (Exod. 26:14).
The ax is an edge tool comprising a heavy end with asharpened blade attached to a wooden handle, and it is used forchopping into trees and logs (Judg. 9:48; Isa. 10:34). The ax is oneof a complement of metal tools, along with the hammer, saw,plowshare, sickle, pickax, and goad (cf. 1 Kings 6:7). Similaritems are the knife, sword, and spear.
Theearliest metallic ax heads were copper and date as far back as 4000BC. As the material culture of the Near East advanced, copperimplements were replaced by bronze and finally iron. Bronze Age axeshad a bronze hollow cylinder that slid over the wood shaft, with ashort mass of bronze off to one side that widened and flattened intoa sharp blade. They were dangerous to use. So many accidentalinjuries and deaths occurred due to the head slipping off the shaftthat Israel’s law used it as an example of unintentional death(Deut. 19:5).
In1 Sam. 13:19–20 the Philistines are shown to becontrolling metallurgical technology. To prevent Israel fromfashioning “modern” weapons of war, they would not permitIsrael to work any metal for agricultural or other uses. Thus, Sauland his son Jonathan were the only Israelites of that time to haveswords. Much later, well into the Iron Age, the premium value placedon a good iron ax head is seen in the anecdote in which an ax headfell off the handle and into the water, and the workman lamented toGod’s prophet Elisha that the item was borrowed (2 Kings6:1–6). Such was its worth that the prophet miraculouslyrestored it.
Theax has symbolic value in the Bible. Axes cut, and “cutting off”is a common theme in the law. Those who break the covenant are “cutoff” from the people (Exod. 31:14). Thus, John the Baptistcried, “The ax is already at the root of the trees” tocut off unrepentant Israelites (Matt. 3:10).
The ax is an edge tool comprising a heavy end with asharpened blade attached to a wooden handle, and it is used forchopping into trees and logs (Judg. 9:48; Isa. 10:34). The ax is oneof a complement of metal tools, along with the hammer, saw,plowshare, sickle, pickax, and goad (cf. 1 Kings 6:7). Similaritems are the knife, sword, and spear.
Theearliest metallic ax heads were copper and date as far back as 4000BC. As the material culture of the Near East advanced, copperimplements were replaced by bronze and finally iron. Bronze Age axeshad a bronze hollow cylinder that slid over the wood shaft, with ashort mass of bronze off to one side that widened and flattened intoa sharp blade. They were dangerous to use. So many accidentalinjuries and deaths occurred due to the head slipping off the shaftthat Israel’s law used it as an example of unintentional death(Deut. 19:5).
In1 Sam. 13:19–20 the Philistines are shown to becontrolling metallurgical technology. To prevent Israel fromfashioning “modern” weapons of war, they would not permitIsrael to work any metal for agricultural or other uses. Thus, Sauland his son Jonathan were the only Israelites of that time to haveswords. Much later, well into the Iron Age, the premium value placedon a good iron ax head is seen in the anecdote in which an ax headfell off the handle and into the water, and the workman lamented toGod’s prophet Elisha that the item was borrowed (2 Kings6:1–6). Such was its worth that the prophet miraculouslyrestored it.
Theax has symbolic value in the Bible. Axes cut, and “cutting off”is a common theme in the law. Those who break the covenant are “cutoff” from the people (Exod. 31:14). Thus, John the Baptistcried, “The ax is already at the root of the trees” tocut off unrepentant Israelites (Matt. 3:10).
A city mentioned in 1 Chron. 7:28. It was part of thepossessions of Ephraim and, in some traditions, has been equated withAi. Although the Greek tradition identifies the city with Gaza, thisseems unlikely.
(1) ABenjamite and descendant of Saul, through Jonathan, who fathered sixsons (1 Chron. 8:37–38). (2) InZech. 14:5 (most versions citing the Greek) the prophet mentions theflight of Israel from Jerusalem to a place outside the city that sometranslations leave as a proper name, “Azal” or “Azel.”The Hebrew word has a preposition and may be rendered as “nearto” or “beside.”
The father of Shaphan, Josiah’s scribe who played arole in discovering the Book of the Law (2 Kings 22:3; 2 Chron.34:8).
The father of Jeshua, who was one of the Levites who sealedthe covenant with God following Ezra’s public reading of thelaw in Jerusalem (Neh. 10:9).
In the KJV, “Azareel” or “Azarael.”(1) Oneof David’s ambidextrous warriors, who was related to, butrebelled against, Saul (1 Chron. 12:6). (2) Oneof the musicians appointed by David for work in the sanctuary(1 Chron. 25:18). (3) Sonof Jeroham, commander over the tribe of Dan, appointed by David(1 Chron. 27:22). (4) Oneof the priests guilty of marrying a foreign wife (Ezra 10:41).(5) Thefather of Amashsai, who was appointed to live and serve in Jerusalemwhen Nehemiah was governor (Neh. 11:13). (6) Oneof the musicians who celebrated the completion of the wall (Neh.12:36 [perhaps the same person as in 11:13]).
(1) Anofficial in Solomon’s administration, the high priest (1 Kings4:2). (2) Asecond official, son of Nathan, in Solomon’s administration, incharge of district officers (1 Kings 4:5). (3) Theking of Judah around 769–733 BC (also known as Uzziah). Helikely ruled as coregent with his father starting in 792 BC before hewas sole ruler. The account of his rule is recorded in 2 Kings14:21–22; 15:1–7; 2 Chron. 26:1–23. (See alsoUzziah.) (4) Adescendant of Judah through Ethan (1 Chron. 2:8). (5) Anotherdescendant of Judah through Obed, whose son is also called “Azariah”(1 Chron. 2:38–39). (6) Adescendant of Levi through his father, Ahimaaz, and the father ofJohanan (1 Chron. 6:9). (7) Adescendant of Levi through his father, Johanan. This Azariah is saidto have served in Solomon’s temple and was the father ofAmariah (1 Chron. 6:10–11).
(8) Adescendant of Levi through his father, Hilkiah, and the father ofSeraiah (1 Chron. 6:13–14). Ezra the scribe was the son ofSeraiah and a descendant of this Azariah (Ezra 7:1). (9) Atemple musician, a Kohathite (1 Chron. 6:36). (10) Apriest, son of Hilkiah (1 Chron. 9:11), likely the same as theAzariah in 1 Chron. 6:13–14. (11) Aprophet during the reign of King Asa (910–869 BC) whoencouraged the king to purify the worship of Judah (2 Chron.15:1–8). (12) Twoof King Jehoshaphat’s (870–848 BC) seven sons. They wereall given many gifts, but the eldest brother, Jehoram, became king ofJudah (2 Chron. 21:2). The NIV differentiates by calling one son“Azariahu.” (13) Sonof Jehoram, and a military commander who entered into an alliancewith the priest Jehoiada against Athaliah (2 Chron. 23:1) inorder to install Joash as king (836–798 BC).
(14) Sonof Obed, and a military commander who entered into an alliance withJehoiada against Athaliah (2 Chron. 23:1). (15) Apriest who took the lead in confronting King Uzziah when he burnedincense to the Lord in the sacred precincts of the temple (2 Chron.26:17, 20). (16) Sonof Jehohanan, and an Ephraimite leader who confronted the army ofSamaria under Pekah (752–732 BC) and demanded that they returnJudean prisoners to their homes (2 Chron. 28:12). (17) Sonof Jehallelel, and a Gershonite priest from the tribe of Levi whosupported Hezekiah’s (727–698 BC) religious reforms(2 Chron. 29:12). (18) Thefather of Joel, a Levite who supported Hezekiah’s religiousreforms (2 Chron. 29:12). (19) Thechief priest during the reign of Hezekiah (2 Chron. 31:10–13).(20) Sonof Meraioth, a descendant of Aaron, and an ancestor of Ezra (Ezra7:3). (21) Sonof Maaseiah, and a builder of the wall of Jerusalem under Nehemiah(Neh. 3:23).
(22) Aman who returned to Jerusalem from Babylonian captivity withZerubbabel (Neh. 7:7). (23) Apriest who aided Ezra in teaching the people the law (Neh. 8:7).(24) Oneof those who sealed the covenant that was proclaimed when the wall ofJerusalem was rebuilt (Neh. 10:2). (25) Aleader of Judah who participated in the ceremony that dedicated thewall of Jerusalem at the time of Nehemiah (Neh. 12:33). (26) Theson of Hoshaiah who, along with Johanan son of Kareah and others,rejected the word of God through Jeremiah to stay in Judah ratherthan flee to Egypt (Jer. 43:2). (27) Oneof the three friends of Daniel who experienced captivity in Babylonbeginning in 605 BC; he was renamed “Abednego” (Dan.1:7). He refused to worship Nebuchadnezzar’s golden statue andwas thrown into the fiery furnace, from which God saved him (Dan.1:6, 11, 19; 2:17).
Variant of the name “Azariah,” one of the sevensons of Jehoshaphat listed in 2 Chron. 21:2 (see NIV, NASB,NET).
A descendant of Reuben (1 Chron. 5:8).
Azazel appears only in Lev. 16 (NIV: “scapegoat”),instructions for the Day of Atonement, on which lots were cast overtwo goats, one for God and the other for Azazel. After sacrificingthe first goat, the high priest confessed the Israelites’wickedness over the second goat and sent it into the desert.
Thereare multiple interpretations of the Hebrew word ’aza’zel,one of which is “the goat [’ez] of removal.” Theterm “scapegoat” (originally “escapegoat”)comes from this interpretation. Nevertheless, a goat “for thegoat of escape” is redundant. Instead, “Azazel” islikely the name of a demon of the wilderness. In 1 En. 8–13Azazel is developed into a significant malevolent celestial creature.
(1) Alyre player and music leader during the reign of David (1 Chron.15:21). (2) Thefather of Hoshea, one of the leaders of the tribe of Ephraim duringthe reign of David (1 Chron. 27:20). (3) ALevite and temple overseer during the reign of Hezekiah (2 Chron.31:13).
The father of a Nehemiah, known only from Neh. 3:16. Azbuk’sson ruled a half-district in Judah and helped the renowned Nehemiahrepair Jerusalem’s wall.
Between the protected hill country of Judah and the opencoastal plain lies a range of low rolling hills cut through bysignificant valleys. Toward the western end of the Elah Valley,Azekah stands guard. Because of its strategic location, it played animportant role in critical conflicts between Israel and its enemies.
AsJoshua and the Israelites routed the Jerusalem confederation (Josh.10), the enemies of Israel fled westward from the central Benjaminplateau, through the Aijalon Valley, and south beyond Azekah. Somecenturies later, the major threat to Israel was the Philistinepresence on the coast. The Philistines sought to expand their controlinto the hill country and camped on the south side of the Elah Valleybetween Sokoh and Azekah; the Israelites were on the opposite side ofthe valley. David challenged and killed the Philistine champion,Goliath, and the Philistines fled west past Azekah toward Ekron, oneof their own cities (1 Sam. 17).
AfterSolomon’s death, Rehoboam fortified a ring of cities to protectthe southern kingdom. Among them was Azekah (2 Chron. 11:5–12),southwest of Jerusalem. At the end of the Judean monarchy, theBabylonians attacked Jerusalem and the other cities that were stillholding out. Lachish and Azekah were the only fortified cities leftin Judah (Jer. 34:6–7). A poignant letter discovered in thegate area of Lachish reads, “We were watching for the smokesignals of Lachish . . . because we do not see Azekah”(Lachish letter 4).
Theinheritance of the tribe of Judah included Azekah among nearly fortyother towns in the Shephelah region (Josh. 15:33–44). Thesetribal demographics continued into the postexilic period (Neh.11:30).
(1) ABenjamite and descendant of Saul, through Jonathan, who fathered sixsons (1 Chron. 8:37–38). (2) InZech. 14:5 (most versions citing the Greek) the prophet mentions theflight of Israel from Jerusalem to a place outside the city that sometranslations leave as a proper name, “Azal” or “Azel.”The Hebrew word has a preposition and may be rendered as “nearto” or “beside.”
A town that was part of the traditional allotment given tothe tribe of Judah, Simeon, or two towns with the same name. Ezem waslocated in the Negev area of Judah (Josh. 15:29) and also was part ofthe allotment given to the tribe of Simeon (Josh. 19:3; 1Chron.4:29). Simeon’s tribal allotment was entirely surrounded by theallotment of Judah, so confusion about the town is not impossible.The exact location of the town is unknown.
The head of a clan that was part of the early return to Judahfrom Babylonian captivity in 539 BC or soon after (Ezra 2:12; Neh.7:17). The same clan sent Johanan and 110 men at the time of Ezraaround 458 BC (Ezra 8:12). Azgad is also listed as one who sealed thecovenant renewal led by Ezra (Neh. 10:15).
A shortened form of the name “Jaaziel” in1 Chron. 15:20 (KJV, ESV). He was one of the musicians whoplayed when the ark was moved from the house of Obed-Edom to the Cityof David.
One of the Israelites who repented of marrying a foreignwoman after hearing Ezra’s charge of guilt concerning thematter (Ezra 10:27).
(1) Oneof David’s mighty men, part of the thirty mighty men (2 Sam.23:31; 1 Chron. 11:33). He was from Bahurim near Jerusalem.(2) Sonof Jehoaddah, a descendant of Saul through Jonathan (1 Chron.8:36; 9:42). (3) Thefather of Jeziel and Pelet of the tribe of Benjamin (1 Chron.12:3). This Azmaveth is possibly the same as the Azmaveth of thethirty mighty men. (4) Theson of Adiel in charge of the palace treasury under David (1 Chron.27:25). (5) Atown north of Jerusalem where forty-two men returned from exile (Ezra2:24; Neh. 7:28). The town supplied singers for the dedication of thewall (Neh. 12:29). The town is also known as Beth Azmaveth andBethasmoth. This village is identified with modern Hizmeh, five milesnorth of Jerusalem.
A place on the southern border of the land promised to Israeland allotted to Judah (Num. 34:4; Josh. 15:4) in the area of KadeshBarnea. Some identify the site with Ain el-Qoseimeh, while othersbelieve that it should be identified with Ain Muweileh.
A location in the southwestern region of Naphtali (Josh.19:34). Some identify the name with a city, while others believe thatit was simply a landmark in the area of Tabor.
An otherwise unknown postexilic ancestor of Jesus mentionedonly in Matt. 1:13–14 as the son of Eliakim and the father ofZadok.
The Greek name for the Philistine city of Ashdod, wherePhilip preached (Acts 8:40).
(1) Apatriarch of the eastern half-tribe of Manasseh (1 Chron. 5:24).(2) Thefather of Jerimoth, an official in the service of David from thetribe of Naphtali (1 Chron. 27:19). (3) Thefather of Seraiah, who was ordered to arrest Jeremiah and Baruch byJehoiakim (Jer. 36:26).
(1) Aleader in Ahaz’s palace who was slain by an Ephraimite alongwith a prince and the vizier of Ahaz (2 Chron. 28:7). (2) Apostexilic descendant of David (1 Chron. 3:23). (3) Adescendant of Benjamin and King Saul (1 Chron. 8:38). (4) Thegrandfather of Shemaiah, a Levite leader who settled inJerusalem following the return from the exile (1 Chron. 9:14;Neh. 11:15).
(1) Thewife of Caleb who bore him three sons (1 Chron. 2:18–19).(2) Themother of King Jehoshaphat and daughter of Shilhi (1 Kings22:42; 2 Chron. 20:31).
(1) Thefather of the prophet Hananiah, a contemporary of Jeremiah in thedays of Zedekiah (Jer. 28:1). (2) Thefather of Jaazaniah, a figure known to Ezekiel (Ezek. 11:1).Jaazaniah is identified as a wicked leader in Jerusalem. (3) Oneof the signatories of the covenant under Nehemiah (Neh. 10:17).
The biblical site of Gaza is located at Tell Harube/Tell’Azza, which is beneath the modern Palestinian city of Gaza. Itis strategically situated in southern Palestine near the Egyptianborder and is approximately three miles from the Mediterranean Sea.Initial excavations were led by W.J. Phythian-Adams in 1922under the auspices of the Palestine Exploration Fund. Additionalexcavations were directed by Asher Ovadiah in 1967 and 1976.
Inthe Late Bronze Age (1550–1200 BC), Gaza was under the controlof Egypt. It is first mentioned in the annals of ThutmoseIII asthe provincial capital of Canaan, and it functioned as an Egyptianadministrative center in the Amarna and Taanach letters. At thebeginning of the Iron Age (1200 BC), the Sea Peoples (especially thePhilistines) took control of this coastal region. This scenario isreflected in Deut. 2:23, which states that the Caphtorites (i.e., thePhilistines) displaced the Avvites. Joshua 11:22 also states thatafter the Israelite conquest, the giant Anakim only remained in Gaza,Gath, and Ashdod (they were most likely assimilated into Philistineculture, perhaps as mercenaries). These three cities, along withEkron and Ashkelon, comprise the Philistine Pentapolis (Josh. 13:3;1Sam. 6:17–18). The Pentapolis remained unconquered atthe end of Joshua’s life (Josh. 13:3), even though Ekron,Ashdod, and Gaza were included in Judah’s allotment (15:45–47).The Judahites took brief control of Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, whichthey were unable to maintain due to the Philistines’ employmentof “iron chariots” on the plains (Judg. 1:18–19).During the period of the judges, Gaza is prominently featured in theexploits of Samson. The city is described as having a gate and amultistoried temple (Judg. 16:1–3, 26). After David’sconquests of the Philistines, King Solomon is said to have dominionover a vast region including Gaza (1Kings 4:24). In the secondhalf of the eighth century BC, Gaza became an Assyrian vassal (underTiglath-pileserIII). King Hezekiah also briefly subdued theregion (2Kings 18:8), but Gaza remained an Assyrian vassaluntil the end of the seventh century, when the city was brieflyoccupied by Pharaoh NechoII and then fell to Nebuchadnezzar(see Jer. 47:1–2, 5). Gaza is mentioned in a number ofprophetic oracles against Philistia (Jer. 25:20; 47:1; Amos 1:6–7;Zeph. 2:4; Zech. 9:5). It appears only one time in the NT, whenPhilip is traveling toward Gaza and encounters the Ethiopian eunuch(Acts 8:26).
The father of Paltiel, a leader in the tribe of Issachar whorepresented his tribe when the allotments of the land of Canaan weredistributed (Num. 34:26).
(1) Thefather of the prophet Hananiah, a contemporary of Jeremiah in thedays of Zedekiah (Jer. 28:1). (2) Thefather of Jaazaniah, a figure known to Ezekiel (Ezek. 11:1).Jaazaniah is identified as a wicked leader in Jerusalem. (3) Oneof the signatories of the covenant under Nehemiah (Neh. 10:17).