Archive | Theology RSS feed for this section

The Empires of Woe

By on in Theology

The purpose of this post is to bring into view the ancient Neo-Babylonian empire and its long-term permanent effect upon the people and place of both Jerusalem and Judea of the Old Testament.

Introduction

Throughout numerous literary genres within the Old Testament were continued warnings by the prophetic voice and growing geopolitical circumstances throughout the Mediterranean region. The biblical historicity of the Neo-Babylonian empire gives deep and lasting theological messaging to captivate the hearts and minds of those who want to understand what Yahweh did to accomplish His sovereign purposes as He imposed upon the people of ancient Judah and its inhabitants at the capital of Jerusalem. Before, during, and after the upheaval and trauma brought to the people of Judea, Yahweh originated and shaped an empire of extraordinary power and strength to serve Him as an instrument of judgment, destruction, and displacement upon His people (Jer 21:7).

The Neo-Babylonian empire was formed and given the power to execute judgment upon Judah after it had plunged into apostasy by rejecting Yahweh through numerous covenant violations. Specifically, the people of Yahweh became involved in the widespread practice of idolatry, social injustice, and religious ritualism.¹ This paper attempts to demonstrate the outcome of covenant disobedience by describing the circumstances and conditions placed upon the people of God by the Neo-Babylonian empire. This research and analysis are an attempt to answer some questions about what life was like in Babylon. Particularly for the people of Yahweh as they went through their time of siege, captivity, and exile. The predatory nature of the Neo-Babylonian empire was a hammer on the hot iron of Israel’s history.

Background

Neo-Babylon’s rise to power was preceded by other powerful and notable historical figures, such as Hammurabi, the Amorite of ancient Old Babylonia.² Babylon’s presence among the surrounding table of nations became prominent through its advancements in civilization, but also over its rivalries, prior to the arrival of Israel in the land of Canaan. From continents in all cardinal directions, the nations of Egypt, Assyria, Persian, Media, Anatolia, Edom, Moab, Arabia, and others along the circumference of the Mediterranean Sea were dispersed around Palestine inhabited by the nation of Israel. Whether divided or united, the Northern and Southern Kingdoms of Israel were subject to the physical and spiritual pressures of people unlike them.

The geographical, political, social, and religious topography, of the regions surrounding Judea just after the time of the divided monarchy of Israel, presented a continuously corrosive influence upon the people of God until the incremental and certain conquest of the Babylonian empire was brought upon them until their inevitable, prophesied, and collective destruction (Jer. 46-49). Replete through Jeremiah’s account are the judgments of the nations called out by name. To include Judah and Jerusalem to eventually return to Babylon itself, the anger and judgment of Yahweh were upon nations. To execute divine punishment, Yahweh chose to rise up a fierce and undefeatable army with a leader that was militarily well-developed. Nebuchadnezzar II was the King of Babylon and its military leader at the time of its campaigns across the Ancient Near Eastern nations, as specified by the prophet Jeremiah. However, before the onslaught of Babylon toward the many nations under judgment, Nebuchadnezzar’s predecessors needed to defeat Assyria and its king.

In 722 B.C., Assyria invaded the Northern Kingdom of Israel (Samaria) through the leadership of Sennacherib. Assyria wiped out the Northern Kingdom of Israel and came to dominance throughout the region, while Judah progressively became further threatened and isolated until its destruction as prophesied (Isa. 39:6). The Neo-Babylonian empire would eventually confront and defeat Assyria through its rise to power until it finally collapsed in October of 626 B.C.³

To set the stage for Neo-Babylonian dominance, Nebuchadnezzar’s father Nabopolassar needed to destroy the cities of Assyria to include Nineveh, Haran, and Carchemish, even with Egyptian support from the South. As Yahweh rose up Assyria, and its king Sennacherib, as an instrument of judgment upon the Northern Kingdom of Israel, He also prepared Babylon to do the same with the Southern Kingdom of Judah. All the while, the newly formed Babylonian empire would execute judgment upon Assyria. Yahweh put together an instrument of divine justice through which He would destroy Jerusalem, Judah, and the neighboring nations. This is the historical scene in which the deportations, exile, and life in Babylon would begin for the Lord Yahweh’s people. As the Babylonian assaults upon Jerusalem and Judah would commence, the Babylonian exile became inevitable for God’s people of Israel.

Chronology

To see the scope of Israel’s plight, it is necessary to consider the timeline before, during, and after Yahweh’s judicious use of Babylon. Moreover, by looking across the course of events, it becomes evident that the Neo-Babylonian empire’s prescribed growth was predicated upon its defined purpose as intended by Yahweh. The intervals of time across the span of Babylon’s existence highly suggest that Yahweh raised the empire to serve a sovereign purpose.

By comparison, the author of Romans wrote that Yahweh raised the pharaoh of Egypt to show His power. And for His name to become known all over all the earth (Rom. 9:17). So, it stands to reason, just as Yahweh raised up the pharaoh of Egypt to oppose the exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt, He rose Nebuchadnezzar II of the Neo-Babylonian Empire to evict Israel from Canaan, their land of promise. As a cycle of epic events at a macro level, from Egypt to Assyria and Babylon, the same theme of transition under duress occurred.

Ante Neo-Babylonian Period

After the Assyrian conquest that involved the captivity of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, there were several decades of inactivity from Babylon until Nabopolassar rebelled to eventually prevail and establish footing as a nation independent of its oppressors. Once Nabopolassar became King of Babylon, a rapid succession of events, between 612 B.C. to 597 B.C., transpired where the newly situated empire became cemented in history as the latest superpower to begin its conquests of numerous nations. Most notably beginning from the battle of Carchemish in 605 B.C., Assyria and Egypt together were defeated to assure no further opposition could impede Babylon’s raids and further territorial exploits.⁴ The high concentration of activity right up to the capture of Jerusalem speaks to what the prophet Isaiah earlier foretold (Isa. 39:1-8, 2 Kgs. 20:12-18) to Hezekiah.

Post Neo-Babylonian Period

The Neo-Babylonian Empire was short-lived. From the time Nebuchadnezzar II’s father became King of Babylon in 626 B.C. to its fall to the Persians in 539 B.C. (Dan. 5:28), its dominance was a mere 87-years. As the duration of Judah’s captivity was 70-years (Dan. 9:2), the rough time alignment attests to what the purpose of the Neo-Babylonian empire was.

King Nebuchadnezzar was given rule over Babylon to prosecute conquests and develop the city into a functional state to host Judah and those of the diaspora. Nebuchadnezzar’s reign only lasted 42 years (605 – 562 B.C.).⁵ Moreover, Babylon became a short-term generational host until the time of the exile was fulfilled when Yahweh would again redeem Israel and bring them back into the land of Canaan (Jer. 32:15).

Once Babylon fell to the Persians in 539 B.C., the Ruler of Persia would become yet another instrument of Yahweh. Where the people of Israel would become liberated, Cyrus the Great granted the people in captivity the authorization to return to their land and resume their lives. While the historical account would make it appear that the intellectually astute King of Persia would permit the return of the Israelites, it was Yahweh all along who called and gifted Cyrus the Great.⁶ It was Isaiah the prophet who spoke of Cyrus as the “shepherd” of Yahweh (Isa.44:28) to subdue the nations once again as Babylon did before.

Campaigns

The first time Jerusalem’s occupants were deported to Babylon was in 605 B.C. A few years before that, Nebuchadnezzar invaded and destroyed Ashkelon of the Philistine people. Once the battle of Carchemish in Northern Mesopotamia was won, Nebuchadnezzar set out on a multi-year attack on numerous territories, including Gaza, Ekron, Egypt, Lachish, Elam, Tyre, and Anatolia, plus various others East of the Jordan river. His efforts concentrated South of the Fertile Crescent, and he invaded Jerusalem four separate times. The most significant occurrence was in 586 B.C. when Solomon’s temple was destroyed, but the people were deported for the third time. Later, in 582 B.C., Nebuchadnezzar deported Jews to Babylon a final time.

The catalog of targeted nations was historically outlined by the prophet Ezekiel comprehensively (Ezekiel 25-29). These seven nations under judgment also correspond to the prophet Jeremiah’s separate prophetic messages (Jer. 46-51). Moreover, Ezekiel made no mystery of what was to occur in Jerusalem during his ministry. Through acting out the forthcoming exile, the captivity of Judah was symbolized from his role-play by carrying baggage within sight of those with the city (Ezek 12:1-7). Ezekiel prophesied what has to befall Jerusalem and Judah by the Babylonian Empire (Ezek 12:13).

Invasion of Judah

By comparison to Jerusalem and other nations, the extent of destruction throughout Judah was relatively modest. At least archaeological research indicates discoveries that prove Nebuchadnezzar’s assault on Lachish and various other cities.⁷ The Lachish Ostracon IV, the Lachish letters discovered at Tell ed-Duweir in 1938 in Southern Palestine, indicates correspondence immediately before the siege of Babylonian forces at their walls.⁸ The devastation in Judah was of a direct bearing upon the entire land of promise. Yet, it is also of significance that Nebuchadnezzar assaulted Hazor in Northern Israel (Jer. 49:28).

As a matter of strategy, the conquests of Babylon were about the business of building an empire. Through strength and power by military force, King Nebuchadnezzar II plundered the treasures and valuables where they were searched and looted.⁹ Namely, of areas that possessed existing material resources, or wealth, and demonstrated an ability to pay tribute, produce labor, and assume vassal status to the formative Babylonian empire.

Siege of Jerusalem

The historical record of Nebuchadnezzar II’s siege against Jerusalem is confirmed across various passages of Scripture (2 Kgs, 24:20-25, Jer. 52:3-4, 2 Kgs 25:1, Jer. 39:1, 52:4). Israel’s reliance upon Egypt as allies to defeat the forces of Babylon proved ineffective. In fact, the Babylonian’s defeat of the Egyptians and Assyrians at Carchemish (Jer. 46:2) was a foreboding event to indicate further trouble ahead. Yahweh already foretold through His prophets that the new empire would prevail and that they would become subjugated to it (Jer. 4:16, 27). There was nothing that the leaders and occupants of Jerusalem could do to prevent the forthcoming judgment and onslaught once Yahweh’s people reached the point of no return. Jerusalem refused to repent (Jer. 5:3).

It was apparent that the lessons of Babylon’s predecessors against Northern Israel were not enough to inform them of what would happen to Judah. Sennacherib’s military exploits that destroyed Israel only about 136 years earlier (722 B.C.) did not make it clear enough to the people of Jerusalem and Judah what devastation would come to them. Correspondingly, the people of Southern Israel knew of impending judgment and disaster. Still, they did not heed the expected loss of life, possessions, and the land of which they were blessed in exchange for their return to covenant obedience to Yahweh.

The siege of Jerusalem is recounted in 2 Kings 24:1-7. The Babylonian Chronicle itself refers to the siege of Jerusalem (B.M. 21946; Jerusalem Chronicle) to corroborate the beginning of Nebuchadnezzar’s siege upon the city.¹⁰ With limited details about siege methodology, one could conclude that the type of siege machines applied during the battles against Assyria was applied to Jerusalem in due fashion.

Deportations to Babylon

There were four total major deportations from Babylon to Jerusalem over a duration of time. The first three deportations were in succession at intervals of time that correspond to changes in kingly rule over Jerusalem before and after it was destroyed. The first deportation under king Jehoiakim, appointed by Pharoah Neco of Egypt, occurred in 605 B.C. as Judah experienced a change in its vassal status from Egypt (609-605 B.C.) to Babylon (605-598 B.C.). To further empty Jerusalem, the second major deportation occurred in 597 B.C. under the leadership of Jehoiachin (Jehoiakim’s son). To correspond to the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, the city was further depleted of its population in 586 B.C. The fourth and final major deportation occurred in 581 B.C. (2 Kgs 25:8-21) as Judah was relegated to a dependent province under the governorship of Gedaliah (2 Kgs 25:22-26) as appointed by Nebuchadnezzar.¹¹

Captivity and Exile to Judah

The time of Babylonian exile for the people of Israel was crucial in their history. Most especially concerning their condition and reflection upon their circumstances and punishment as a guilty people before Yahweh. While in exile, they no longer had a temple to worship within, and while in exile, they had a multitude of transgressions to contemplate (Lam. 1:5). They were guilty of Baal worship (Jer. 32:35) and oppression of the poor (Jer. 5:28-29). As the people of Yahweh, Judah was situated in a foreign place to realize that He controls empires and shapes the events of history.¹²

Through the prophet Jeremiah, Yahweh instructed the people of Judah to settle in and live lives of relative normalcy while in captivity. Until their return decades later, they were to integrate into Babylonian society, participate in the economy, take up employment, and become productive members of the society. In Jeremiah’s letter to the exiles (Jer. 29:1-23), Yahweh specifies the duration of their exile (70-years) and instructs His people to pursue marriage, bear offspring, and guard against the deception that could set them adrift away from their devotion to their God. The biblical and theological point of the exile was to return the people of Judah to Yahweh.

Babylonian Dominance

During the time of the exile, while the people of Israel were rehabilitated, Babylon continued its dominance throughout the regions it conquered. Through its military campaigns, infrastructure development, territorial conflicts, treaties, and political accessions, the Neo-Babylonian empire underwent an unsustainable and rapid time of prosperity and security. The fear and terror that Babylon brought upon the Mediterranean nation’s conformance to the interests of King Nebuchadnezzar II that would pass away after his death.¹³ The root of Neo-Babylonian’s meteoric rise was Nebuchadnezzar by the will and control of Yahweh. As confessed by Nebuchadnezzar, it was Yahweh who does according to His will. The King of Babylon recognized that Yahweh, “the Most High” and “King of Heaven,” was in control and produced the events and circumstances brought about through Babylon (Dan. 4:34-37). Through the counsel and interpretive work of the prophet Daniel, King Nebuchadnezzar came to recognize that the purpose of the empire’s existence was to serve as an instrument of punishment and justice upon the nations while functioning as a generational host to Judah.

Society

If not purely through the prophet Daniel’s encounters with Nebuchadnezzar, the people of exiled Judah knew why the Neo-Babylonian empire came to exist. Babylon wielded power and strength to judge Judah, and the nations, it all originated from Yahweh, and they knew it. This perspective while Judah was away from their homeland added weight to their interpersonal circumstances among the Babylonians. The reality was, exiled Judah came to understand in advance that their captors were temporarily in their position of authority and supremacy. Because of the kingdoms to follow, empires would rise and fall to bring about the redemptive will of Yahweh according to the prophetic voice of Daniel. Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom was among the first to set the world stage for the rise and fall of Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome, and others down through the centuries.

Until then, in the daily lives of the Jews in Babylon, they were immersed in the culture and social norms of the Mesopotamian people. At the same time, the people of Judah retained their faith, life, and traditions to honor their cherished values and ancestors.¹⁴In general, life in the diaspora appeared bleak after the fall of Jerusalem and the exile of Judah to Babylon. The mindset of the Jews was certain to echo back to the time of Egyptian captivity, then to Assyria, and now to Babylon. To contemplate among themselves, would they ever learn and abide in Yahweh even if it were necessary to return to Him when they fall away or out of fellowship with Him. The body of Judah during and after their time in Babylon had some soul searching to do, especially in light of the evil behaviors of the historical judges that preceded them. They were sure to have a reputation among the Babylonian people and to the Mesopotamian population at large.

Culture, Politics, and Religion

It was usual for nations, kingdoms, or empires to appoint rulers and governors over vassal territories to assure sovereign continuity. To minimize conflicts of interest and maximize the likelihood of cooperation and loyalty, Nebuchadnezzar named successors to rulers, stewards, and governors of the vassal areas of Judea and Jerusalem. Just as Egypt had done before the Babylonian conquest, Pharoah Neco appointed Eliakim, given the name Jehoiakim, over Judah to serve from 609-598 B.C.¹⁵ Afterward, Jehoiakim was replaced by his son, Jehoiachin, an evil king, also known as Jeconiah (2 Chr. 36:9). Once the replacement king was confronted by Nebuchadnezzar and deported to Babylon, he was promptly replaced by Mattaniah, with an assigned name Zedekiah, under terms of an agreement in loyalty to Babylon.¹⁶

While the city of Babylon itself was sure to have its form of government under the kingship of Nebuchadnezzar, the Neo-Babylonian empire consisted of appointed or accepted rulers who were obligated to abide by terms that assured their well-being. To fund its projects, military, and infrastructure, it was necessary to keep tribute currencies and resources flowing to the Babylonian empire while securing ongoing allegiance even if under duress or threat of destruction and removal. The political conditions at the time were not merely in competition for resources or power to make policy and govern but to survive by cooperation and legal adherence to Babylonian requirements.

The social order of Babylon was held together by its veneration of Marduk. The foreign god, to the Jews, was recognized as the supreme ruler of the Mesopotamian universe.

Marduk was the god of Babylon.¹⁷ The people of Babylon associated Marduk as a political deity who was a storm god responsible for the delivery of rain and vegetation growth. From the pantheon of Old Babylonian tradition, Marduk became an amalgam of other gods as he attained their features as a form of lasting supremacy. The priests of Babylon linked Marduk to significant god activity and were akin to the god Baal of the Canaanites. Just as Baal was the storm god of the Canaanites,¹⁸ Marduk was the storm god of the Babylonians. Both were associated with the Baal cycle of Mesopotamian religious tradition.

The worship and prayer of the Babylonian people were directed to Marduk as a patron deity. Beneficial outcomes were expected from the god as a bartering matter to fulfill the needs of the people in support of water, vegetation, and agriculture. Art, gatherings, theater, education, and other cultural functions often centered around Marduk as a form of honor and community. The Babylonian people directed their hopes and aspirations to their god, Marduk.

Law and Trade

The range and methods of monetary revenue sources and barter came in the form of taxation (tribute) and redistribution of currency through labor and projects by which constructed materials were involved. The sale of primitive goods and services was abundant in support of public and private livelihoods of persons who would offer their competencies and materials. For example, stone workers, woodworkers, and carriages were typical occupations. Babylonian temples were a form of brothels as prostitutes accepted offerings from visitors or worshipers.¹⁹

Social order was often held together by a mixed and subjective type of “justice” stemming from the preferences of Nebuchadnezzar or by his decrees borne from the counsel of his officials. For example, Nebuchadnezzar “passed sentence” upon Zedekiah (Jer.52:9, 11), the last king of Judah, when he broke his sworn loyalty oath.²⁰ In this instance and others, Nebuchadnezzar was a vicious and brutal judge and executioner without any sense of mercy whatsoever to temper the perceptions of the Babylonian citizenry. Nebuchadnezzars’ absurdity of justice was further highlighted by the incident in which he was enraged because Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego would not bow before his constructed statue set before them (Dan. 3:8-29). While the three who were subjected to the furnace, in the cause of justice, were miraculously unharmed, Nebuchadnezzar’s officials herald a legal proclamation with an explicit penalty of death bearing no objection from the King (Dan. 3:4-6).

While Nebuchadnezzar was a brilliant military commander capable of putting nations to the sword, he was an accomplished practitioner of torture and violence. All while reigning as the king of the Neo-Babylonian empire, he was fecklessly inept when it came to the justice of his people, namely the subjects of Babylon at all levels. The façade of beauty, wealth, and splendor of his empire was paper-thin by its structures, assets, and looted treasures displaced by the judgments of Yahweh. The empire, as it was meant to be, was temporal with a termination date. As the king was unpredictable and inconsistent with maintaining order within his kingdom, the Neo-Babylonian empire was secured yet unstable. It was sure to fall once he was deceased eventually. His platitudes and acknowledgments about Yahweh as Most High were only meaningful insofar as an admission before the gods and his people that Yahweh is God.

Conclusion

When taking a long and careful look at the historical reality of the Neo-Babylonian empire, one might see the mystique or intriguing nature of its place in time. Its feats, accomplishments, and innovative contributions to following generations are a false weight of comparison to that which it was. The Neo-Babylonian empire was an exceedingly evil and profane place in which the people of Judea were to reside for a fixed duration of 70-years. By the very covenant violations that got Judah into severe trouble, idolatry, and injustice, they were further steeped in it during their time of exile. As Judah was instructed to muster normalcy, the people of God were to endure their exile until their liberation before the Neo-Babylonian empire’s destruction in 539 B.C., by Yahweh, through the hands of King Cyrus the Great of Persia.²¹

Citations

¹ Daniel J. Hays, Tremper Longman III, ed., The Message of the Prophets. A Survey of the Prophetic and Apocalyptic Books of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010), 64-67.
² Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008), 46.
³ Charles H. Dyer, “Jeremiah,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck, vol. 1 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 1125.
⁴ John D. Barry et al. Faithlife Study Bible. “Neo-Babylonian Empire Timeline Infographic” (Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2012).
⁵ Rose Book of Bible & Christian History Timelines, More than 6000 years at a glance (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2006), 7.
⁶ Ibid. Merrill, 503.
⁷ Michael A. Grisanti, “History of the Covenant People Course Notes” (unpublished course notes, TMU, 2018), 140.
⁸ James Bennett Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. with Supplement (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), 321.
⁹ Jack R. Lundbom, “Builders of Ancient Babylon: Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar II,” Journal of Bible and Theology, Vol.7 (2017), 160.
¹⁰ James Bennett Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. with Supplement. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), 563.
¹¹ D. J. Wiseman, “Babylonia,” ed. D. R. W. Wood et al., New Bible Dictionary (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 115.
¹² Rainer Albertz, Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003), 439.
¹³ David Helm, Daniel for You, ed. Carl Laferton (Surrey: The Good Book Company, 2015), 38-39.
¹⁴ Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008), 484.
¹⁵ Tremper Longman III, Raymond B. Dillard. An Introduction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 324.
¹⁶ Andrew E. Hill. “Jehoiachin,” Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988), 1102.
¹⁷ Tzvi Abusch, “Marduk,” ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst, Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (Leiden; Boston; Köln; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999), 543.
¹⁸ James R. Battenfield, “YHWH’s Refutation of the Baal Myth through the Actions of Elijah and Elisha,” in Israel’s Apostasy and Restoration Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison, edited by Avraham Gileadi (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988), 26.
¹⁹ Mark W. Chavalas, “Herodotus and Babylonian Women,” in Conversations with the Biblical World, Vol. 35 (2015), 22 (Leiden; Boston; Köln; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999), 34.
²⁰ Peter Coxon, “Nebuchadnezzar’s Hermeneutical Dilemma,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Vol. 66 (1995), 92.
²¹ Debra Reid, Martin H. Manser, Who’s Who of the Bible: Everything You Need to Know about Everyone Named in the Bible. Prod. Logos Systems Inc.(Oxford, England: Lion Books, 2013).

Bibliography

Abusch, Tzvi. Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. 2nd. Edited by Bob Becking, Peter W. van der Horst Karel van der Toorn. Leiden: Brill Publishers, 1998.
Albertz, Rainer. Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.
Archer, Gleason L. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Chicago: Moody, 2007.
Chavalas, Mark W. “Herodotus and Babylonian Women.” Conversations with the Biblical World 35, 2015: 22-52.
Coxon, Peter. “Nebuchadnezzar’s Hermeneutical Dilemma.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 1995: 87-97.
Debra Reid, Martin H. Manser. Who’s Who of the Bible: Everything You Need to Know about Everyone Named in the Bible. Prod. Logos Systems Inc. Oxford: Lion Books, 2013.
Grisanti, Michael A. History of the Covenant People, Course Notes. Santa Clarita, 06 02, 2021.
Hays, J. Daniel, and Tremper Longman III. ed., The Message of the Prophets. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010.
Helm, David. Daniel for You. Edited by Carl Laferton. Surrey: The Good Book Company, 2015.
Hill, Andrew E. Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988.
James Bennett Pritchard, ed. The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. with Supplement. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.
Koehler, Ludwig. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Edited by M.E.J. Richardson. Leiden: Brill Publishers, 2000.
Lundbom, Jack R. “Builders of Ancient Babylon: Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar II.” A Journal of Bible and Theology, 2017: 154-166.
Merrill, Eugene H. Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.
Rose Publishing; Illustrated edition. Rose Book of Bible & Christian History Time Lines. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2006.
Tremper Longman III, Raymond B. Dillard. An Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006.
Walvoord, John F., Zuck, Roy B. The Bible Knowledge Commentary. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1985.
Wiseman, D.J. Babylonia, New Bible Dictionary. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996.

The Polemical Pattern of Truth

By on in Theology

The purpose of this post is to bring into view how the Northern Kingdom of Israel diverted its loyalty and covenantal obligations from Yahweh to the foreign Baal gods and how the confrontation between Elijah and Baal’s prophets was instrumental toward the eventual advancement of God’s restorative purposes upon Israel. The prolonged drought pronounced upon Israel (1 Kgs. 17:1) before Elijah’s confrontation with Ahab, the sons of Israel, and the prophets of Baal (1 Kgs. 18:18-27) was to set the necessary conditions for what was meant for the people of Yahweh to endure. To recognize Yahweh as the one and only true God compared to the Baal of Canaan with its long mythological history originating from ancient Mesopotamia, a reset was necessary. It was in Yahweh’s interest to place the Northern Kingdom of Israel under hardship by drought and religious confrontation to declare His supremacy over any and all false gods.

Baal Worship in the Northern Kingdom

It was precisely the absence of rain preceding Elijah’s confrontation between Yahweh and the prophets of Baal that culminated into a demonstration of who was in control of the weather and all of Creation of itself (Is. 45:18). Historically, Ancient Near Eastern societies believed that rainfall and agricultural fertility were attributed to Baal as the principal god among a number within a pantheon of deities.¹ From Canaan to upper territories throughout Phoenicia and farther to the East, Baal worship was prevalent. With Baal as the deity object venerated for what a false god would return in exchange for the worship of the Mediterranean people. There was a pervading sense of dependency for favor and functional performance from the Baals.

Religious Context of Baalism in the Northern Kingdom

The dominant form of religious expression in the Northern Kingdom of Israel was by widespread adherence to Baalism.² For many years, the worship of Baal was ingrained within Israeli society and culture. Moreover, for generations, its leadership was participative of the idolatry condemned by Yahweh.³ From literary and archaeological data, there is a wealth of discoveries that describe what religious life was like during the span of the divided monarchy between Israel and Judah. Its historical foundations of idolatry were not personal or interpersonal but of a more practical and utilitarian rationale. Ancient forms of worship included rituals and ceremonies, a type of quid-pro-quo arrangement between worshipers and their gods of choice centered around economic, industry, war, health, sustenance, and other functional matters of interest. During the era of the divided monarchy of Israel, the polytheistic nature of religion throughout the Mediterranean and Mesopotamian regions was commonplace as it spanned across numerous nationalities, languages, and ethnicities.

Baalism, in particular, was of prominent interest as its belief had much to do with the livelihoods of people, crops, and livestock. As the Baals were worshipped, honored, and served, there were hopes and expectations from the people of Israel that demonstrated their trust and confidence in a foreign god that was in contradiction to the covenant stipulations placed upon them (Ex. 20:1-6). The seasonality associated with the ancient mythology of the Baal cycle held captive the persistent interest of the people of Yahweh, where they, as before, abandoned, neglected, or forgot about their true and living God (Judg. 2:11, 13; 3:7; 6:25–32; 8:33).

Origin of Baalism in the Northern Kingdom

Imported into the Northern Kingdom of Israel was the pagan deity ‘Baal’ from Queen Jezebel, the Phoenician wife of Ahab. While most scholars agree that this Baal was “in fact” Melqart, the chief Phoenician god of Tyre,⁴ Josephus explicitly informs his readers that it was Jezebel of Tyre who taught King Ahab to worship a plurality of her gods.⁵ Moreover, with Jezebel’s corrosive influence upon Ahab, she also developed a larger scale of Baalism’s reach within the Northern Kingdom of Israel’s population. To include state-sponsored acceptance and support of Baal and Ashera paired worship.⁶ The effect Baalism had upon the worship of Yahweh was devastating.

Some scholars prefer to recognize Baal-Shamem of Samaria, compared to Baal-Melqart of Tyre as the source of Baal incursion throughout Israel. The origin and presence of the Baal infestation, either way, are interpreted by the type of ritual activity among prophets that occurred among Baal prophets (1 Kgs. 18:26, 28-29), or by the fact, the Canaanites believed that Baal lived on Mount Carmel.⁷ Prior to the arrival of the Israelites into the land of Canaan, limited and pre-existing Baal worship was present from Ugaritic religious tradition centuries before.

Newly arrived Baal deities again were brought to the land of Israel, only this time from Queen Jezebel. Ahab’s marriage to Jezebel for political purposes brought about the added weight of polytheistic worship to Northern Israel, while Canaanites who occupied the area were already involved in Baal worship. Back to the time of conquest with remnant idolatry interspersed throughout the territory occupied by the tribe of Dan and further Northeast to the region of what would become Caesarea-Philippi. Mount Hermon, and its surrounding base, was widely known as cult-central among ancient societies at large between Israel, Aram, and Phoenicia as well. As Mount Carmel latitudinally Southwest of Mount Hermon was known for its stormy climate conditions from the Mediterranean Sea, Baal, the storm god, according to Ugaritic religious myths, epics, and legends, was attributed to this weather activity.⁸

Elijah’s Conflict with the Prophets of Baal

There is a clear polemical pattern within 1 Kings 17-18 as Yahweh is the clear opponent of Baal. The actions of Yahweh, through His prophet Elijah, were a systematic targeting of what confidence Baal devotees had in their false god. As Baal was accepted and worshiped, there were rituals, and sacrifices performed in exchange for agricultural well-being to support the necessities of life.⁹ Instead of Yahweh, where Israel’s loyalty belonged, Baal worshipers placed themselves on a trajectory of inevitable and ongoing confrontation with Yahweh, the one true God. The Baal polemic within the Old Testament traverses from the time of Moses to the divided monarchy and well beyond with the worship of false gods throughout Judea, Samaria, Asia Minor, and beyond.

Various accounts in Scripture across literary genres include poetry, wisdom writings, prophetic manuscripts, and narrated episodes that articulate the conditions by which Israel has placed itself within. Yahweh would, again and again, provide certainty and proof that He is the one and only true God (Isa. 46:9). While Israel would become steeped in idolatry, the judgment of Yahweh would abide on them, but He would again make clear that it was He who provided their needs, safety, and well-being. Historically, to the demise of Israel, they were worshiping demons (Deut. 32:17)¹⁰ and following the ritual practices of foreign peoples¹¹ who were of an evil influence.

Pronounced Drought Upon the Land of Canaan

The drought pronouncement by Ezekiel (1 Kgs. 17:1) was not a random form of judgment upon the people of Northern Israel. Just as the judgment was applied to the gods of Egypt (Ex. 12:12), a similar form of judgment was decreed against the Baal of Israel. All judgments were explicitly targeted against them where the devoted to false gods placed their trust and confidence. As Baal worshipers were expecting crops as an agricultural benefit of rainfall in control of a false god, Yahweh caused the drought, leading to famine and death.¹² As a sign of power originating from where it truly exists, there became observable certainty about the reasons harsh conditions were upon Ahab and the Northern Kingdom.

While Ahab inferred the source of the drought was Elijah (1 Kgs. 18:17), his loyalty to Baal persisted, even as he saw the power of Yahweh against his god. Ahab’s tacit recognition was an admission about who Yahweh was and that He actually controlled the rain, or the absence of it, and not Baal. Ahab’s counselor Obadiah knew of the polemical purpose by which the drought weighed upon the people of Northern Israel for 3-years. He understood the various forms of Baal rebuke Yahweh produced to bring judgment against the god of the Ahab, Jezebel, the Canaanites, and the enormous concentration of participants engaged in common idolatry (1 Kgs. 19:18). They were sure to recognize that there was not anything the gods could do about the judgments that befell them.

Contest between Elijah and the Prophets of Baal

While the miraculous events that occurred on Mount Carmel did not bring Israel back to faith in their God as intended,¹³ Yahweh’s purposes were met. At all levels, human, natural, and cosmic, there was a clear demonstration that Yahweh was God in control of the wind, rain, and fire. As by His control over all other forms of natural existence, He was due recognition, honor, and loyalty. More specifically, the period of drought was an apparent judgment against Baal in view of his adherents, and the violent exhibit between the prophet of Yahweh and Baal’s 450 prophets (Ezek. 18:22) was a judgment against the people. The famine upon the land was a judgment upon nature as it was no longer permitted to function as it was designed to produce with the presence of adequate hydration.

Elijah, the prophet of Yahweh, did not act on his own will when he sought to put the prophets of Baal under a trial on Mount Carmel. Upon the abode of Baal, where the prophets and the people of Baalism recognized the place of his power, the false god was allowed to perform and prove his existence through control over the weather and its elements. Before the people present at the event, the prophets of Baal pleaded with their deity without results. There was no answer and no consumption of the sacrifice placed upon the altar the prophets made for their god that did not exist (1 Kgs. 18:26).

While historically Yahweh provided for the needs of the people of Israel, they were still surprised when they witnessed the altar Elijah prepared entirely engulfed in fire that God cast upon the altar His prophet restored. Under conditions set common between Baal and Yahweh, while upon Baal’s territory, Yahweh prevailed before the people of Israel to demonstrate that He is God. To conclude the competition, it was their admission and verbal confession that, “The Lord, He is God; the Lord, He is God” (1 Kgs. 18:39).

Conclusion

The conflict between Elijah and the prophets of Baal was a historical and symbolic subset of a more comprehensive refutation against Baal over a long period. The false prophets, rituals, and claims were indicative of the absurdity of false gods and their devotees. With its long and elaborate mythological background, Baalism did not carry any power whatsoever and had no bearing upon the weather. Notwithstanding spiritual or cosmic entities masquerading as having beneficial powers, there was no Baal god, female consort, nor an adversary Mot, the god of death as referenced by the infamous Baal cycle.

Yahweh chose to make it clear across various polemical instances that He was the only God who is Creator, above all, and in full control of all categories of life, death, the weather, or any other claim of natural powers attributed to gods throughout pantheons of ancient lore. Yahweh repeatedly made it clear through Scripture that He alone is God. The historical conflict between Elijah and the prophets of Baal was a microcosm of the overall total struggle of God’s people to remain faithful and loyal to Him. As it is written, “How long will you hesitate between two opinions? If Yahweh is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him,” Ezekiel made it plain by the demonstration of God’s power, He is the Most-High, and there is no other like Him.

Citations

¹Greg Herrick, “Baalism in Canaanite Religion and Its Relation to Selected Old Testament Texts,” accessed June 14, 2021, https://bible.org/article/baalism-canaanite-religion-and-its-relation-selected-old-testament-texts, 6.
² Michael A. Grisanti, “BTS512, History of the Covenant People Course Notes” (unpublished course notes, The Master’s University, 2018), 8.
³ Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008), 365.
⁴ S. Ribichini, “Melqart,” ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst, Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (Leiden; Boston; Köln; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999), 565.
⁵ Flavius Josephus and William Whiston, The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1987), 236.
⁶ Michael A. Grisanti, “BTS512, History of the Covenant People Course Notes” (unpublished course notes, The Master’s University, 2018), 118.
⁷ Tom Constable, “Notes on Psalm 68,” part of Dr. Constable’s Expository (Bible Study) Notes (2021 edition), accessed June 14, 2021, https://planobiblechapel.org/tcon/notes/pdf/psalms.pdf, pg. 264.
⁸ James Bennett Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. with Supplement. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), 133.
⁹ Robert B. Chisholm, Jr., “The Polemic against Baalism in Israel’s Early History and Literature,” Bibliotheca Sacra 150 (July–September 1994): 268.
¹⁰Ludwig Koehler et al., The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994–2000), 1417.
¹¹ James Bennett Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. with Supplement. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), 348.
¹² James R. Battenfield, “YHWH’s Refutation of the Baal Myth through the Actions of Elijah and Elisha,” in Israel’s Apostasy and Restoration Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison, edited by Avraham Gileadi (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988), 25.
¹³ Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008), 361.

Bibliography

Battenfield, James R. YHWH’s Refutation of the Baal Myth through the Actions of Elijah and Elisha. Edited by Avraham Gileadi. Vol. Israel’s Apostasy and Restoration Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988.
Chisholm, Robert B. “The Polemic against Baalism in Israel’s Early History and Literature.” Bibliotheca Sacra 150, 1994: 267-283.
Constable, Thomas L. “https://planobiblechapel.org/.” Plano Bible Chapel. 2021. https://planobiblechapel.org/tcon/notes/pdf/1kings.pdf (accessed 06 16, 2021).
Grisanti, Michael A. “BTS512 History of the Covenant People, appendix pages.” unpublished course notes. The Master’s University, 2018.
Herrick, Greg. bible.org. July 24, 2004. https://bible.org/article/baalism-canaanite-religion-and-its-relation-selected-old-testament-texts (accessed 06 16, 2021).
James Bennett Pritchard, ed. The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. with Supplement. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.
Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Josephus -Complete and Unabridged. Translated by A.M. William Whiston. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1987.
Koehler, Ludwig, et.al., The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Edited by M.E.J. Richardson. Leiden: Brill Publishers, 2000.
Merrill, Eugene H. Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.
Ribichini, S. Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. 2nd. Edited by Bob Becking, Peter W. van der Horst Karel van der Toorn. Leiden: Brill Publishers, 1998.

The Gates of Babylon

By on in Theology

A forthcoming research project about the Neo-Babylonian empire involves quite a lot of preparation. Involving valid and credible source materials that together will help piece together the details of the ancient Mesopotamian civilization that carried significant weight throughout Scripture, historical tradition, and important literary records.

Thesis

Judah’s captivity by the Neo-Babylonian empire was their return to slavery. To become again governed by a people who worshiped foreign gods just as Egypt did before Israel’s exile. Yahweh did not return His people to Egypt, as their foreign gods were defeated. He delivered them over to other people who served and worshiped other false gods. As the people of Egypt, Canaan, and now Babylon served other gods, they were given to captivity due to their idolatry and betrayal of Yahweh. This paper attempts to answer what life was like in Babylon during Judah’s captivity.

Abstract

The research paper that I intend to develop and post centers around the Neo-Babylonian empire. The society, culture, geography, literature, and spiritual conditions of ancient Babylon are of high historical interest as they represented the heartbeat and dominance of the Mesopotamian region during Israel’s captivity. I expect to find a primitive and shallow “civilization” given to social disorder, polytheism, and frequent self-interest in contradiction to the covenant obligations given by Yahweh to Israel. Babylon would gather tribute, resources, and slaves to build infrastructures such as its institutions, utilities, residences, temples, plus fortifications from numerous conquests and conflicts imposed upon surrounding vassal nations. The Neo-Babylonian empire is most relevant with this paper as it concerns the time of Judah’s captivity. Characterization of the environment in which Judah was beset was sure to be steeped in various forms of trauma. This paper explores some of the causes of Judah’s hardship as physical and spiritual trauma as an outcome of their covenant abandonment.

Framework

Background
This collapse of Assyria was caused largely by the rise of another power-Babylon. In October 626 the Chaldean prince Nabopolassar had defeated the Assyrian army outside Babylon and claimed the throne in Babylon. The kingdom he founded came to be known as the Neo-Babylonian Empire. He consolidated his empire, and by 616 he was on the march to expand his territory. The combined army of the Babylonians and Medes destroyed Nineveh in 612.

Babylon’s rise and Assyria’s collapse created a realignment of power throughout the area. Judah, under Josiah, threw off the yoke of Assyrian dominion and enjoyed a brief period of national independence. This independence was shattered, however, by events in 609 B.C.¹

War
The first phase of Judah’s exile was approximately coincident with the accession of Nebuchadnezzar (605–562) to the throne of Babylon. The young prince, having engaged the Egyptians in battle at Carchemish in 605 and defeated them there, was deflected, by the untimely death of his father, from his further objective of removing them from Palestine.²

Society
They imbibed deeply of the society in which they lived, and yet they retained the cherished faith, life, and traditions of their ancestors.³

Culture
It is no coincidence that the awful judgment by God of His people and their exile from their homeland should have occurred under the Babylonians, the mightiest power on earth. Nor is it surprising that their deliverance and return should have been affected under the comparatively beneficent rule of Persia, Babylonia’s even greater successor. In both instances -captivity and return- human potentates and their gods are seen for what they really are – mere instruments in the hand of the omnipotent One who used them to accomplish His judging and saving work.⁴

Politics
The citizens of Jerusalem anointed Josiah’s second son Jehoahaz as king, but Neco promptly replaced him with his older brother Eliakim, assigning him a regnal name Jehoiakim (609-598 BC.) Jehoiakim tried his hand at power politics….”⁵

Literary
Those portions of Daniel’s prophecy which deal generally with Gentile affairs (the four kingdoms of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, the humiliation of that king in the episode of the fiery furnace and by his seven years of insanity, and also the experience of Belshazzar and Darius the Mede) were put into a linguistic medium which al the public could appreciate whether Jew or Gentile.⁶Prophecy
While Jeremiah is still under house arrest, Yahweh comes to him again with a message of hope regarding future restoration.⁷

Timeline
Significant historical events span from 710BC at the time of Hezekiah, to the fall of Babylon to Persia in 539BC. Infrastructure development, military campaigns, and invasions, royal accessions, territorial conflict, etc.⁸

Religion
A Babylonian Theogony. The gods are paired, male and female, the first two being Hain, an otherwise unknown male deity, and Earth. These two brought into existence the next pair of deities, Amakandu and Sea, as well as the city, Dunnu. In the subsequent lines of the text is found the stereotyped account of how, by means of incest and murder, one divine pair succeeded another. Only the names of one more pair, Lahar99, and River, are completely preserved. The names of the male consorts of Ga’um and Ningeshtinna are missing. The dates upon which each new god took control are given and these were obviously related to important festivals of the city, Dunnu.⁹

Economy
The Amarna Letters (484). When I went to Hamuniri (70) because of the sons of ‘Abdu-Ashirta when they were powerful against me and there was no breath of the mouth of the king to me, then I said to my lord: “Behold our city Byblos! (City in Lebanon). There is much wealth of the king in it, the property (75) of our forefathers. If the king does not intervene for the city, all the cities of the land of Canaan will (no longer) be his. Let the king not ignore this deed!”¹⁰

The Code of Hammurabi (99): If a merchant lent money at interest to a trader for the purpose of trading [and making purchases] and sent him out on the road, the trader shall … on the road [the money which was entrusted] to him.¹¹Cursory summaries of Hammurabi code inscriptions with respect to trade.

Laws
ANE Legal Texts. The tablet originally contained some sixteen paragraphs, of which only nine are well preserved. Peiser suggests a date in the time of Ashurbanipal, but what he regards as the remnants of a date is unquestionably a part of the legislation in §1. However, the script, orthography, and wording, all clearly indicate a date in the Neo-Babylonian Period.¹²

𒄩𒄠𒈬𒊏𒁉

Citations

______________________
1. Charles H. Dyer, “Jeremiah,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck, vol. 1 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 1125.
2. Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, Second Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 482.
3. Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, Second Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 484.
4. Eugene Merrill, Mark F. Rooker, Michael A Grisanti. The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament. (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2011), 412.
5. Tremper Longman III, Raymond B. Dillard. An Introduction to the Old Testament. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 324.
6. Gleason L. Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. (Chicago: Moody, 2007), 371.
7. Daniel J. Hays, Tremper Longman III. The Message of the Prophets. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010), 181.
8. John D. Barry et al. Faithlife Study Bible. Neo-Babylonian Empire Timeline Infographic. (Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2012)
9. James Bennett Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. with Supplement. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), 517.
10. Ibid. Pritchard, 484.
11. Ibid. Pritchard, 170.
12. Ibid. Pritchard, 197.

Bibliography

Coxon, Peter. “Nebuchadnezzar’s Hermeneutical Dilemma.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 1995: 87-97.
Delorme, Jean-Philippe. “Ezekiel: Identity Construction and the Exilic Period.” Journal of Biblical Literature, 2019: 121-141.
Eugene Merrill, Mark F. Rooker, Michael A Grisanti. The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament. Nashville: B&H Academic, 2011.
Hays, J. Daniel, and Tremper Longman III. The Message of the Prophets. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010.
Lundbom, Jack R. “Builders of Ancient Babylon: Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar II.” A Journal of the BIble and Theology, 2017: 154-166.
Merrill, Eugene H. Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.
Tremper Longman III, Raymond B. Dillard. An Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006.
Archer, Gleason L. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Chicago: Moody, 2007.
Coxon, Peter. “Nebuchadnezzar’s Hermeneutical Dilemma.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 1995: 87-97.
Delorme, Jean-Philippe. “Ezekiel: Identity Construction and the Exilic Period.” Journal of Biblical Literature, 2019: 121-141.
James Bennett Pritchard, ed. The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. with Supplement. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.
John D. Barry et al. Faithlife Study Bible. Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2012.
John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck. The Bible Knowledge Commentary. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1985.
Lundbom, Jack R. “Builders of Ancient Babylon: Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar II.” A Journal of Bible and Theology, 2017: 154-166.
Tremper Longman III, Raymond B. Dillard. An Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006.

The Theocratic Anointing

By on in Theology

The purpose of this post is to present an up-close look at the matter of theocratic anointing from historical examples given throughout Scripture. A cursory search of the terms “theocratic” and “anointing” from the Internet often returns search results such as “seven ways to win by theocratic activation and anointing of the Holy Spirit.” Such phrases and uses of the terms “anointing” and “theocratic” could carry unwanted and negative connotations among observers who view such proclamations as nonsense. For various reasons, it is of utmost importance to understand the functional meaning of the terms as there are significant historical and theological principles attached to such terms. Together, “theocratic anointing” evokes a meaningful interest concerning its presence within the Old and New Testaments as it bears substantial weight upon how Yahweh works and abides throughout creation for His Kingdom and glory.

Introduction

It is necessary to parse the phrase “theocratic anointing” given by inference among associated articles and Scripture references. As a sensitive subject matter, the topic concerns the work, activity, and presence of the Holy Spirit. It is unacceptable to form false conclusions and make unhelpful assertions about the Holy Spirit’s activity, especially as it concerns His identity and work. Of utmost concern are unhelpful conclusions or assertions stemming from what scholars, academics, and students interpret, or believe, and cast as valid activity of Yahweh. The gravity of this subject matter is beyond easy comprehension, but here is an attempt to hold it in high regard the topic by observations and tentative conclusions.

The ministry of the Holy Spirit (rû^aḥ YHWH) is in abundance throughout Scripture. Of concern here is the narrower interest in what the Spirit does as it concerns His appointment and enablement of certain people through the course of history. There become distinctions across His spectrum of activity throughout the various Old and New Testament covenants. With careful attention to detail, it becomes possible to see and understand that His associative presence among rulers, judges, craftsmen, and people of the Kingdom is an altogether different matter separate from the notion of His indwelling among those in Christ today. Whether before or after Pentecost, the presence and ministry of the Holy Spirit are widespread. Whether upon or within individuals or Kingdom people groups, the Holy Spirit at work from the beginning is sacred ground.

The Enablement of the Spirit

In Dr. Bookman’s dissertation concerning the periodic divine intervention of the Holy Spirit,¹ he wrote an excerpt of thoughts about Old Testament figures were subjects of divine enablement and “special enduement.” As instruments or vessels of divine intent, specific Old Testament categories of individuals were often made to govern and perform tasks they were otherwise incapable of performing in a suitable manner. A manner that was necessary for the formation of a Kingdom that was in Yahweh’s theocratic interests. Competencies, learning abilities, desires, skills, or personal faculties that were not inherent in rulers, judges, and selected craftsmen as highlighted among various Old Testament passages (e.g., Ex 31:3-5, Neh 9:20).

Theocratic Anointing

Dr. Bookman coined the term “Theocratic Anointing” to describe what occurs as a type of activity from the Holy Spirit as a matter of selective intervention within the Old Testament. It is in his article that specific ruling individuals were “vouchsafed” the enabling of the Spirit to equip him to function as the representative of Yahweh” (Bookman). By running an electronic scan of the term “theocratic” throughout Eugene H. Merrill’s book, “Kingdom of Priests,” it occasionally appears as having a political bearing and relevance around a specific Kingdom ideal.² From the inspiration of Scripture, the Holy Spirit, through the prophet Hosea, informs His readers that the theocratic appointment of Saul angered Yahweh (Hos 13:11). At the outset, when Israel desired a King to be like other nations, they rejected Yahweh (1 Sam 8:7). So as a matter of course, the “Kingdom” of Israel would undergo periods of hardship even with the selection of Saul and successive rulers later anointed by prophets to fulfill Yahweh’s theocratic interests.

Important Distinctions

While it appears that theocratic anointing is involvement or enduement “upon” an individual, it is said to not be “within” a person.³ As a point of contrast, in the Old Testament, the Spirit anoints God’s chosen people, such as given by the testimony of King David’s last words (2 Sam 23:1-2). In the New Testament, Apostle Paul calls attention to those in Christ who are anointed by Him and who also have God’s seal with His Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee (2 Cor 1:21-22). The conjunctions “and” plus “also” appear in numerous English translations between verses 21 and 22. To give confidence about separating the Holy Spirit’s anointing and His presence within those in Christ. From the New Testament’s perspective, the Spirit’s anointing is different from His indwelling.

There are various additional distinct attributes concerning the theocratic anointing of the Holy Spirit. Namely, it does not depend upon a person’s spiritual or carnal state, whether a person is saved or unsaved, or the person’s standing before God and others. The Spirit’s anointing is portable and can be applied or removed from a person at God’s will.

The Presence of the Spirit

The “Anointing” of the Holy Spirit means to set someone apart, to equip and authorize an individual for a task of spiritual importance.⁴There are numerous instances throughout Scripture that indicate the Holy Spirit’s presence that demonstrates this work for theocratic purposes. More specifically, for the growth and development of the Kingdom of God emergent from the Old Testament to the New. By tracing specific occurrences of the Holy Spirit’s anointing work in the Old Testament, there is a precise sequence of individual examples. Beginning with Moses, he was anointed to lead and guide the people of Yahweh. The Spirit of the Lord was upon him (Num 11:17). The same Spirit at work upon Moses was also given to seventy elders to serve with Moses to lead the Hebrew people (Num 11:17, 25).

Holy Spirit’s Ministry in the Old Testament

As Moses was to pass away into history, he placed his hands on Joshua, where he was given a spirit of wisdom (Deut 32:9) to lead the people into conquest and the land of Canaan. Within the course of Yahweh’s instructions to Joshua, He promised to be with him. To be strong, of great courage, and to abide by the Mosaic covenant, the presence of Yahweh was with Joshua so that the Hebrews would inherit the land promised to them. After the period of Joshua’s leadership and accomplishments, the anointing of the Spirit during the time of judges was evident. His presence among Othniel (Judg 3:10), Gideon (Judg 6:34), Jephthah (Judg 11:29), and Samson (Judge 14:6, 15:14) was of direct bearing upon each to bring about specific cause and effect outcomes.⁵ They were direct results of the presence and anointing of the Holy Spirit. While these four judges are highlighted by having specific scripture references, the presence of the Spirit was among others during that time, too.

After the period of the judges, the well-known biblical records of King Saul, King David, and Solomon attest to the Spirit’s presence individually among them as well. In the case of Saul, Yahweh gave him a new heart and caused him to prophesy. As the first King of the Hebrew people, he was anointed by that occurrence (1 Sam 10:10). Then again, as the Spirit rushed upon him, he rescued the people of Jabesh-gilead from the Ammonites (1 Sam 11:6) and became coronated as King of Israel shortly afterward. The slaughtering of the Ammonites was by Lord Yahweh’s anointing.

Once King Saul fell out of favor with God, the Spirit’s anointing was removed from Saul (1 Sam 16:14) and transferred from him to David, son of Jesse (1 Sam 16:13). It is recorded that a “harmful” or “evil” spirit was given to Saul. The anointing presence of Yahweh’s Spirit did not just vacate from Saul, but an evil supernatural entity replaced it. It is written that God allowed the presence of a demonic being to oppress Saul, but there is no evidence that it indwelt him.⁶ The presence of the Holy Spirit and His anointing continued to remain active upon Solomon and the rest of specific individuals, such as prophets, and priests, to assure the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies concerning the coming Messiah or “anointed one.”⁷

Holy Spirit’s Ministry in the New Testament

The Holy Spirit appears widespread throughout the Old and New Testaments. His presence and work are comprehensive across all covenants and involve creation, prophecy, sanctification, consecration, guidance, inspiration, conviction, mission, counseling, and so much more unique and specific to individuals as an anointing or divine enablement.

Two particular occurrences of the Spirit’s anointing concern Jesus’ baptism (Lk 3:22) and His proclamation of the Spirit upon Him while at a Galilee synagogue (Lk 4:18). In both instances, the Holy Spirit was “upon” Jesus as a matter of cause for the desired effect. In the first instance, His baptism was set upon Him as an anointing where He would immediately afterward defeat Satan, the enemy, during His temptation in the wilderness. As a king who would defeat a foe, Jesus overcame the temptation in the wilderness after the Holy Spirit anointed Him through John the Baptist at His baptism.

In fulfillment of Isaiah 61:1-2, Jesus proclaims that the Spirit of the Lord was upon Him and has anointed Him to become the second Moses (Lk 4:18-19). Here, he declared that He was the “anointed one” or, more precisely translated, the Messiah. As the Holy Spirit anointed rulers and judges of the Old Testament many years before, He much later anointed Jesus to fulfill a theocratic purpose. Namely, the arrival and development of the Kingdom of God on Earth.

The Work of the Spirit

While the anointing of the Spirit signified the presence of the Lord upon a recipient, He was at work to enable specific functions or capabilities and give power as intended to achieve a given purpose. The “anointing” did not signify an indwelling presence and work within or “inside” an individual. It was a specific external act to cause particular outcomes. Just as Saul was given the power to act and perform as King under unfavorable circumstances, his anointing made it possible to perform and work according to the presence of the Spirit upon him.

King David was acutely aware of his predecessor’s anointed status. In fact, he acknowledged King Saul’s anointing by calling him as such. David would not harm the Lord’s anointed. Moreover, once David became King and sinned against Yahweh and His people, he became acutely aware of the Spirit’s anointing removed from Saul. David’s plea was for Yahweh to keep him in His presence and to keep the Holy Spirit with him. He sought restoration in union with the interests of God and His Spirit upon him.

From a careful reading of the war encounter concerning Deborah of Ephraim against Sisera, a commander of Canaanite forces, she was a prophetess who was an anointed judge (Judg 4:4) over Israel. Her anointed status symbolized the presence and power of Yahweh.⁸ Consequently, Barak refused to follow Deborah’s advice concerning Yahweh’s instructions. He was aware that she was the Lord’s anointed, and he wanted to remain with her during the time of fighting until Yahweh destroyed Sisera’s army through Barak (Judg 4:15).

Conclusion

There are numerous historical examples from the Old Testament to the New where it is clear that the theocratic anointing of the Holy Spirit was a potent and effective force. The presence and work of the Spirit among numerous individuals across all covenants speak toward the ever-active involvement of Yahweh throughout humanity. All to fulfill prophecy and promises made concerning His Kingdom and rightful place as King, where all glory and honor belong to Him. The Holy Spirit’s anointing work among rulers, kings, prophets, priests, and selected individuals extended to key figures in the New Testament as well. Jesus the Messiah, John the Baptist, the Apostles, and many others throughout Church history also were enabled and made capable of completing the work of Yahweh and His Kingdom.

Citations

Dr. Douglas Bookman, “The Old Testament ‘Theocratic Anointing’ of the Holy Spirit.” The Official Blog of Bookman Ministries, 2009, https://therabbittrail.wordpress.com/2009/02/27/the-old-testament-“theocratic-anointing”-of-the-holy-spirit/. Accessed 1 Jun. 2021.
Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, Second Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 241, 339
Dr. Michael A. Grisanti, “History of the Covenant People,” Unpublished course notes, 76.
Martin H. Manser, Dictionary of Bible Themes: The Accessible and Comprehensive Tool for Topical Studies (London: Martin Manser, 2009).
Dr. Michael A. Grisanti, “History of the Covenant People,” Unpublished course notes, 75.
John F. MacArthur Jr., The MacArthur Study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006), 1 Sa 16:14.
J. A. Motyer, “Messiah in the Old Testament,” ed. D. R. W. Wood et al., New Bible Dictionary (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 753.
James S. Ackerman, “Prophecy and Warfare in Early Israel: A Study of the Deborah-Barak Story.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, #220, 1975: 5-13.

Bibliography

Ackerman, James S. “Prophecy and Warfare in Early Israel: A Study of the Deborah-Barak Story.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, #220, 1975: 5-13.
Bookman, Doug. The Rabbit Trail. 02 27, 2009. https://therabbittrail.wordpress.com/2009/02/27/the-old-testament-“theocratic-anointing”-of-the-holy-spirit/ (accessed 06 04, 2021).
Grisanti, Dr. Michael. “Judges and Saul.” History of the Covenant People. Santa Clarita: 06 01, 2021.
Grisanti, Michael A. History of the Covenant People Course Notes. Santa Clarita, 06 02, 2021.
MacArthur, John. MacArthur Study Bible NASB. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2006.
Manser, Martin H. Dictionary of Bible Themes: The Accessible and Comprehensive Tool for Topical Studies. London: Martin Manser, 2009.
McClain, Alva J. The Greatness of the Kingdom: An Inductive Study of the Kingdom of God. Winona Lake: BMH Books, 2001.
Motyer, J.A. Messiah In the Old Testament. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996.

The Consecration of Hē·rěm

By on in Theology

As recorded between the books of Joshua and Judges, numerous sites throughout Canaan were conquered. In total, within both books, 31 sites were destroyed, or a specific king was defeated¹ to demonstrate Israel’s growing and settled dominance throughout the land of Canaan. From an approach to the West, then South, and then to the North,² one city fell after another as a form of judgment from Yahweh, where He gave this land of conquest to the Israelites.

The conquest of Canaan was intended to deliver the land of Canaan to the Israelites. As specified by Numbers 33:51-56, the people of Israel were to dispossess the people of the land and dwell there within their promised inheritance. The direct destruction that was to occur was specifically toward objects of idolatry and false worship. Yet, as recorded in Judges 1:27-36, there were lapses in obedience where Israel did not drive out Canaanites among specific areas but instead enslaved them. As a precursor to spiritual failures ahead, this account typifies what was to happen to Israel (Num 33:56) in later years.³ Ultimately, the conquest would be placed on hold until Israel completed a period of testing (Judges 2:20-3:4).⁴

Scholars propose five models to “reconstruct reality” in apparent contradiction to the biblical text.⁵ Largely to account for variations in early and late date Exodus timelines and reconcile or contest the historical differences between Judges 1 and Joshua 21:43-45. The Merrill text, “Kingdom of Priests,” gives a close-up look at various additional models, too.

While carefully reading through Merrill’s accounts of Joshua’s campaigns, it becomes clear that there were times that Yahweh would fight for His people⁶ as some inhabitants of Canaan would become herem*, along with their forbidden possessions of false worship. As campaigns formed to traverse throughout the regions of Jericho, Judea, Samaria, and upper regional areas near Jezreel, territorial dominance continued in fulfillment of Yahweh’s instructions. Israel did not destroy all pre-existing infrastructure or wipe out all populations but instead displaced and destroyed relevant people where necessary. In general, and by overriding principle, Israel’s conquest was victorious, but the whole effort was mixed with disobedience and idolatry. Yahweh knew of the corrupting influence Canaanite culture would have upon Israel, which was why it was necessary to destroy everything that could have a negative bearing on God’s intent for His people.

Having today finished Hosea in my daily reading, these words prominently stood out, “we will say no more, ‘Our God,’ to the work of our hands.” (Hos 14:3).

The disobedience of Israel then was still the same matter long after Joshua’s conquest; it was then long after the same issue of idolatry. Then, before, and now it was and is a huge problem. The idolatry that brings apostasy is treachery before Yahweh and invites judgment. The God of Israel who loved His people and later as the people of “Ephraim” and Samaria fought for them and was as the dew of the land that they would take root, grow, and blossom.

As we read in Joshua, Yahweh inserted His people centrally into a region where large populations engaged in the worship of false gods. Moreover, the surrounding areas throughout Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, and Egypt encompassed Israel, where idolatry was widespread. Yet even while Israel invaded Canaan after making their way past Edom and Moab, they became an epicenter of judgment toward people and their gods over quite some time. Until the Kingdom of Yahweh was formed, from the time they stepped toward Canaan from the East, the distribution of continents circled about them as evil activity in many forms was present in abundance. The people of Israel were explicitly situated to serve as ground zero within a territory saturated in the worship of gods. They also were judged just as before as His people were delivered from Egypt.

It is helpful to recognize that individual tribes were responsible for eradicating people who were the inhabitants of Israel’s inherited land. For some reason, I earlier thought that the conquest was a single homogenous effort, and Israel swept through the various regions one after another as a whole. Sort of centralized waves of divide and conquer of peoples and false gods as a forthgoing campaign. Stages of successive advancement seem to indicate their concentration of focus, strength, and resources even as the tribes of Gad, Reuben, and the partial tribe of Manasseh gave their oath to fight and contribute to the removal of the Canaanites. However, it makes sense that by necessity the effort was concurrent and decentralized given the population variations in place with their respective geographic proportionality.

Israel was inserted into the land of Canaan after their time in Egypt to continue the judgment against the gods vis-a-vis the nations that encompassed them. While Israel was displaced from Egypt and delivered from slavery, Yahweh placed them among populations, and “gods” worshipped throughout the continents that surrounded them. Their displacement was a strategic positioning by Yahweh, from the false gods judged in one area to the limited destruction of Canaan and its gods. Short term, a formation of a Kingdom of one covenant, and long term, to set the stage for an everlasting kingdom of another.

* 3051 I. חֵרֶם (ḥē·rěm): n.masc.; ≡ Str 2764; TWOT 744a, 745a—1. LN 53.16–53.27 consecrated possession, i.e., a thing devoted to the LORD (Lev 27:21, ); 2. LN 20.31–20.60 thing set apart to utter destruction, given to the ban, i.e., a thing or person that will be destroyed as a consecration to the LORD (1Sa 15:21; Isa 43:28), see also domain LN 53.16–53.27
DBL Hebrew

Ludwig Koehler et al., The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994–2000), 354.

__________________

¹ Ralph K. Hawkins, “Joshua, Book of,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
² Michael A. Grisanti, History of the Covenant People, Module 3 Lectures: “Israel’s Exodus from Egypt”, 2021
³ Eugene H. Merrill, Mark F. Rooker, Michael A. Grisanti, “The Word and the World: An Introduction to the Old Testament” (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2011), 294.
⁴ Robert B. Chisholm Jr., Interpreting the Historical Books: An Exegetical Handbook, ed. David M. Howard Jr., Handbooks for Old Testament Exegesis (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic & Professional, 2006), 94.
⁵ David M. Howard Jr., Michael A. Grisanti, “Giving the Sense: Understanding and Using Old Testament Historical Texts” (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2003), 143-154.
⁶ Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, Second Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 126

The Topography of Time

By on in Theology

Among various ways of exploring the physical and spiritual geographies of the Ancient Near East, there are two categorical ways to understand the landscape of the Bible topically. Historical and Literary geography studies work together to render an understanding of biblical meaning to inform and spiritually affect readers.¹ An approach to Scripture that involves either of these categories helps form a framework to recognize the environment by which theological communication occurs through various forms of literary genre. The physical and associative properties of different lands we read about in the Bible carry significant weight and meaning.

Historical geography concerning a region centers simply around areas with different place names having varying characteristics. Such as topography, seasonality, climate, natural resources, and terrain features, it becomes further possible to understand events, cultures, and people’s worldview within a specific territory. At a surface level, historical events upon the lands of the Bible shape what readers come to comprehend and possibly believe about the purpose of its compilation. Readers can inductively or deductively reason and conclude what’s observed by following historical events. Namely, events within a geographical setting that have a bearing on what transpired to support the intent and breadth of its messaging.

As people of the flesh made of the natural elements of carbon and water, we remain connected to the land in which we reside. While society today is often detached from the natural world, it was far different from the numerous peoples of Scripture. From agriculture to dairy and fisheries, the people of the Bible were heavily dependent upon what the land would yield while geographically situated. Temperate rains and seasons of dry arid climates directly influenced where people would live, what they would plan, where they would go, and how they would worship.²

As narrative, poetic, and even apocalyptic literature plays out in Scripture, we see the historical interaction of people through their geographical setting. If historical geography is the canvas and ingredients of biblical lands, then literary geography is the paint, ink, and brushes by which associated language forms historical meaning. The land and the people of the Bible are connected to live out and communicate historical and theological messaging to shape our worldview and perspectives today concerning overall and detailed points of interest.

Christ was God incarnate, who lived while “locked in time and space.”³ As such, He was baptized (Mt 3:16-17) in the Jordan River. To thereafter go into a desolate wilderness to be tempted by the devil (Mt 4:1). The transition from one physical position to another with such contrast illustrates the area’s diverse nature in relative proximity to each other. Conversely, where Jesus spoke to the Apostle Peter, “on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Mt 16:18), they were located in Caesarea-Philippi. Specifically, as it was a widely known region having a high concentration of cultic activity, there is a large cave there that represented the gate to the underworld in the mind of pagans in the area.

Moreover, their immediate departure from Caesarea-Philippi to Mt Hermon was where the transfiguration occurred (disputed). It was a ground zero event in which Peter, James, and John witnessed the glorified Christ transformed before Elijah and Moses. Intentionally at the apex of cult central while in the territory of Bashan. Why did that happen specifically at that geographical location? Why did they go there? There are significant reasons for it, both of enormous historical and literary significance.

There are further geographical correlations that come to mind in a practical sense concerning water availability during times of Israel’s distress. When thinking about Hezekiah’s tunnel routed to within the walls of Jerusalem, the initial reason for its existence comes to mind. It was a source of water excavated in preparation for an expected siege from the forces of Babylon. We observe in Scripture that Hezekiah formed the pool and the water channel (2 Kings 20:20) to improve the survivability of Jerusalem’s occupants for a long duration.

As Hezekiah’s tunnel was channeled to bring water from the outside of the city of ancient Jerusalem, his whole effort is reminiscent of what Ahab did at Hazor in anticipation of an attack from Assyria. In 2 Kings 15:29, we read about how the occupants of Hazor were captured and taken to Assyria. However, before Assyria’s invasion, King Ahab hardened the city of Hazor. He dug a water shaft about 130 feet deep to a water table below, getting back to the early 10th century BC. Overall, there were 22 layers of strata below Tel Hazor.⁴ From the time of Joshua’s conquests when he burned Hazor to the ground (Jos 11:10-13) to the time of the Maccabees, the water source was of crucial importance to Northern Israel.⁵

The water system of Hazor vertically correlates to the water system of Hezekiah horizontally. From the historical account of the preparation of invasion from Assyria to the North, I conclude that Hezekiah prepared for the siege of Babylon as prophesied by Isaiah (2 Kings 20:16). While this comparison is not explicitly within Scripture, I think Hezekiah knew of the Hazor water system and applied it to the needs of Jerusalem in a similar manner. Hezekiah knew that what happened in Samaria by a foreign nation would befall Judah of a different foe as orchestrated by Yahweh. To minimize the loss of life and improve survivability, Hezekiah prepared the water system of Jerusalem, just as Ahab did for Hazor.

The people of Israel were situated biblically to appear coherent with what Yahweh intended in terms of their placement. The geological formations that preceded the Exodus supported the peoples of the Fertile Crescent. To include Abraham and many others, as evident within Scripture. I can’t help but wonder about God’s method to shape that region and its adjacent territories. From our reading and Dr. Grisanti’s lectures, we learn about why the people of Israel were in Canaan, but then “how” the canvas was set is of considerable interest. The reason or rationale concerning the tribes of Israel and their placement attests to their purpose. Especially as a kingdom of Priests, which carries the most weight in terms of our understanding. However, what’s of interest is the method Yahweh uses to form the diverse nature of the Ancient Near East.

Natural geological processes are evident, but what is the role of physical changes around the behavior of matter (solids, vapor, liquid, gases, etc.)? Various geographical locations host people of different cultures and languages with deposited natural resources. Yet, does the emergent existence of rock formations, vegetation, tides, atmospheres, topologies, rifts, valleys, etc., have some “say” or bearing on what God does? Or is it that the land and its elements are in a passive state? For example, consider these phrases throughout the Bible. We read about “living water,” “living rock,” “dead sea,” “mountains fall on us,” “rocks cry out,” and so forth. It seems as natural processes are participative; they are yet without consciousness. Are they in “witness” to God’s glory? That they glorify God by their state and behavior to accomplish His intended will?

We observe natural forces such as glaciers, winds, and rivers that carve valleys. And we see tectonic plate movements that form rifts and mountain ranges. There is either direct or indirect causation occurring that testifies to God’s work to include the human activity of utmost spiritual significance. So it would be of very high value to better understand the relationship between God and His living creation to see “how” physical design is either actively responsive or passively following natural processes through periodic intervention. Perhaps it’s neither, or maybe it’s both.

____________________

¹ John A. Beck, Discovery House Bible Atlas. Discovery House, 2015. 11-12.
² Ibid. Beck, 10.
³Barry J. Beitzel, The Moody Atlas of the Bible, p. 14.
⁴ Avraham Negev, The Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Holy Land (New York: Prentice-Hall Press, 1990).
⁵ John H. III Brangenberg and David K. Stabnow, “Hazor,” ed. Chad Brand et al., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003), 728.

The Tapestry of Antiquity

By on in Theology

A current Oxford dictionary defines the term “Historiography” as the study of writing about history. The etymological facts from the Greek language support that definition. However, a student of history should generally understand historiography as the interpretation of written and unwritten historical events as preserved from valid historical sources.1 The distinction made between the study of history and historiography is clearly articulated by what each is and does. Widely put, history concerns events of the past, while historiography is about interpreting historical facts. Historiography is a composition of its various contributing factors in either literary or nonliterary form.

Through formal or informal articles of written material, historiography informs us about people, places, and past events to communicate historical, biblical, and theological meaning. Often, a substantive meaning with numerous tangible and observable geographical locations, landmarks, and archaeological artifacts educates us and piques our interest. Most especially concerning historical significance with immense depth and range of written work that builds a comprehensive view of what happened back in time.

Like pieces of a puzzle, literary, physical, and metaphysical objects form the basis of recognizable materials for interpretation and understanding. Specifically, accurate analytical descriptions of those historical objects offer an interpretive value that builds coherent knowledge leading to a reliable and true meaning of interest. Historical things that are rooted in objective facts form substance through writings of intended communication, especially by literary genre or written materials and by unintended circumstances from physical materials, structures, or relics of the past such as art, attire, utensils, or pottery.

Historiography matters because by it, we understand objective facts about what happened in the past.

Researchers, scholars, and historians who have a low or indifferent view of Scripture can take it as suspect and theologically loaded, so they approach the Bible with blind objectivity at best. Virtually all scholars reject supernatural revelation2 while the historical meaning of Scripture is subordinate to its theological messaging. The concern of the Bible is not a linear and chronological account of narrative events to historically align with activities that occurred over time with sequential calendrical precision. Individuals who approach Scripture without confessional commitments will not (probably cannot) recognize its full authority and reliability to begin from. Consequently, efforts around the reconstruction of Israel’s historical events become more subjective around a mixed patchwork of speculation to build cases around.

There are numerous examples of how some scholars, historians, theologians, academics, or students view historical events of the Bible differently. The popular articles between Bryant Wood and Kathleen Kenyon illustrate the differences in outcomes concerning what happened during the raid and destruction of Jericho that Dr. Wood eventually validated through the analysis of pottery. His research, rooted in a theological commitment to Scripture, supported his approach to prevail over Ms. Kenyon’s assertions concerning what happened at Jericho, contrary to the biblical record.3 The primary difference between them was about the authority of Scripture.

There are further examples of historical details around the flood of Noah (Gen 6:9-9:17), as to whether it was global or local (i.e., John Walton, Tremper Longman III, Gleason Archer, and others). Or the Exodus matter (Ex 3-19) and its timeline during the correct era to comport with the biblical narrative. Moreover, ANE epics are often relied on as a source of comparison to dispute the historical accuracy or validity of the OT. At the same time, further research and archaeological discoveries continue to reveal historical certainties that align with biblical truth. Just not in a way that scholars, academics, or skeptics want to fit a flawed anti-supernatural worldview.

___________________

1. Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, Second Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 27–28.
2. Ibid, 21.
3. Bryant G. Wood Ph.D., Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence, Associates for Biblical Research, accessed May 10^th, 2021.
https://biblearchaeology.org/research/chronological-categories/conquest-of-canaan/2310-did-the-israelites-conquer-jericho-a-new-look-at-the-archaeological-evidence

The Evidence of Belief

By on in Theology

The purpose of this post is to present an up-close look at the Pharisees of the New Testament and their often-adversarial relationship with Jesus. The sharp differences between Pharisee beliefs and practices stood in sharp contrast with the teachings of Jesus. They often stood in opposition to Jesus’ actions and His teachings, whether by parables, instructions, direct rebuke, or exhortations. Jesus’ teachings and claims were magnified before the Pharisees of the first century as confrontations occurred with regularity. As a body of Judaic religious leaders, they rejected Jesus’ claims, His miraculous activity, and divinity as their Messiah as written about by the prophets.

Background

During examination between the Pharisees and Jesus’ views, the weight of authority to determine the defining validity of what Jesus spoke about in the gospels and, more generally, the Old and New Testaments as a whole rests with Scripture. There is a range of substantive issues between Pharisee beliefs and Jesus’ teachings accompanied by His activity and the indwelling Holy Spirit. The research here concerns the tension, friction, antagonism, and hostility from the Pharisees as narrated in the gospels with few exceptions.

To explicitly identify and characterize the Pharisees as a body of religious authorities, they were a group of Jewish individuals who required stringent adherence to ritual law and the tradition of their predecessors.¹ They were a pious religious party that was viewed by the common Israel populace as authoritative in matters of the Torah and Old Covenant requirements. The Pharisees were one group that carried authority among various others. They were recognized as custodians of the law but were not in adherence to it themselves (Mt 23:1-3). Throughout popular thought today, the Pharisees as a whole have a reputation of uptight legalism that often ran counter to the interests of Christ and His early followers, who were the Jews within Jerusalem, Judea, and surrounding territories.

History

To adequately enter into the world of the Pharisees of the New Testament, it is necessary to understand their background and the history that contributed to their religious beliefs. Their predecessors and origin are of some speculation and controversy, but proponents advocate their history as successors to the Hasidim. The Hasidean movement from the Maccabean era points to its contribution to the pious Jewish history during its struggles against Rome. The Hasideans were “mighty warriors of Israel, everyone who offered himself willingly to the law”² as therefore inferred there is speculation they were the Jewish ancestors of the separatist Pharisees.

Identified as among three sects of the Jews, the Pharisees were among the Sadducees and Essenes.³The ancient Jewish historian Josephus makes clear their distinctions in belief among each other concerning fate. Pharisees believed that individual persons were partially involved in their future through participatory actions. People were liable to fate but not controlled by it as a matter of certainty. By comparison, the Essenes believed that fate governs all things according to certain determinism. The Sadducees believed there was no such thing as fate and that the conduct of people was within their power that leads to self-controlled outcomes.

The Pharisees were people hyper-sensitive about adherence to the requirements of the Mosaic law as they were deeply concerned about the historical causes of Israel’s trauma by invasion, siege, captivity, and enslavement in Babylon (586 B.C.). Their views about what occurred concerning violations of the law led to divine punishment. Consequently, settled within them was the passion for adhering to the Mosaic law as they understood it from the Torah and writings of the prophets. The Pharisees were committed to abiding by the law in its moral, traditional, ceremonial, and ritual expressions to assure that no further possibility of divine judgment to follow. They were committed to the law to absorb it as a lifestyle and profession that often weighed on the common people as hardships and oppressive.

Beliefs & Doctrines

The Scribes at the time of the New Testament were the scholars that Pharisees often relied upon.⁴ They generally were not priests, but Rabbinic individuals dedicated to tradition, ritual purity, and accurate interpretation of the law. After a period of Israel’s rebellion against Rome, Pharisees became the governing body of Jewish life. They believed that Torah was a dynamic and living force for further doctrinal developments. This view of the Torah contributed to their open-ended perspective concerning the meaning of the written text. Yet additional doctrinal developments contributed to beliefs such as the resurrection of the body, final judgment, and rewards and punishment in the afterlife.⁵Over time, it became a matter of course that Pharisees would develop the oral law and assign equal weight to it compared to the written law based upon a rationale about setting up fencing around the Torah (Pirkē Aboth).⁶

The oral law largely stemmed from “holding to the tradition of elders” (Mark 7:3,5). With the Pharisaic view that the oral law was equally authoritative to the Torah, disputes with Jesus throughout the New Testament were inevitable and became pervasive. Jesus often disagreed with the formation of “law” by oral expression among Jewish ancestors. Throughout the gospels, Jesus interacted with the Pharisees more than any other group. Pharisees were often in confrontation with Jesus because of various interests concerning the Torah, the elders’ oral law, and traditions. Jesus railed against the Pharisees as “blind guides” and “hypocrites” (Matt 23:24-25) as they neglected and abandoned covenant principles in exchange for the technical details and requirements of ritual stipulations that originate from oral laws according to traditions.

Confrontations

The oral law primarily originated from “holding to the tradition of elders” (Mark 7:3,5). With the Pharisaic view that the oral law was equally authoritative to the Torah, disputes with Jesus throughout the New Testament were inevitable and became pervasive. Jesus often disagreed with the use and assertions of “law” by oral expression among Jewish ancestors. Throughout the gospels, the Pharisees opposed Jesus, His teachings, and His Ministry. While some accepted Jesus’ teachings and believed in Him, they were ultimately among those responsible for His crucifixion.

Within the gospels, there is a running list of hostile encounters from the Pharisees against Jesus. They demanded a sign to demonstrate His messianic status (Mt 12:38-42 pp Lk 11:29-32 See also Mt 16:1-4 pp Mk 8:11-12). They questioned Him on matters of the Law (Mt 19:3-9 pp Mk 10:2-9 See also Mt 22:15-22 pp Mk 12:13-17 pp Lk 20:20-26; Mt 22:34-40 pp Mk 12:28-34; Jn 8:3-11). They accused Him of blasphemy (Mt 9:2-7 pp Mk 2:3-12 pp Lk 5:17-26). They accused Him of being demon-possessed (Mt 9:32-34; 12:22-24; Mk 3:22). They criticized His healing people on the Sabbath (Mt 12:9-14; Mk 3:1-6; Lk 6:7; 14:1-6; Jn 9:13-16 Lk 7:36-39; 15:1-2; 19:37-40; Jn 8:13; 9:39-41).⁷While some Pharisees believed in Jesus (Acts 5:5), the prevailing sentiment of the Pharisees as a whole was in violent opposition to Jesus and His mission. In thoughts, words, and actions, they roiled in hatred for Yahweh incarnate as Messiah of their forefathers. In the gospel text, Jesus doesn’t parse His words to some of the Pharisees, but at them as a body of religious authorities He condemned. There are no prominent exceptions within the New Testament that weigh against the evil they directed toward the Son of God their Messiah.

It is useful to get a closer look at the interactive details between the Pharisees and Jesus to understand a pattern of objections. More importantly, for spiritually grave reasons, it is necessary to recognize and accept what Jesus meant when He said, “For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt 5:20). To get a clear view of what the differences were from the perspective of Christ, it is, therefore, necessary to recognize and understand His anger, parables, and authority over what transpired at each occurrence.

When taking a careful look at the angst and strife the Pharisees brought to Jesus, it becomes apparent there was a familiar pattern of animosity placed before Him. There was not an extensive range of root causes that explain the rejection and difficulties. The Pharisees held closely to the Torah, oral law, and traditions that all carried equal weight and ran counter to the teachings of Jesus. It is written that Jesus is the fulfillment of the law given by the Torah (Matt 5:17-18). Still, the oral law and the traditions of flawed men of Judaism who originated regulations and fencing around the law posed contradictions to their Messiah and Lord. Jesus called the Pharisees false teachers (Mt 15:14) and pointed to their error and neglect of the “weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness.” His disagreements with the Pharisees were fundamental. Their focus centered around man-centered requirements that were about rituals and meta details attached to the law that carried no weight of interest to Yahweh.

A close examination of Luke 12:1 gives a glimpse into Christ’s thinking. He spoke to His disciples, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.” This leaven is also separately referenced in Matthew 16:12 and Mark 8:15 to further its meaning around their mixing or oral law and tradition as having a pervasive souring effect. As the Pharisees had come to fear more deeply what could become of Israel by the abandonment of covenant stipulations of the law, they were building for themselves and others stringent requirements yet were not abiding by them. Christ’s disciples and followers were taught principles by direct instruction and parables that fulfilled the law from the heart while delivering a new covenant to them. Jesus’ teachings were not about abolishing the law but were about fulfilling it by satisfying its intent by principles of love, obedience, and goodwill from the heart.

As Pharisees were bent on abiding by the law of themselves, their fathers, and the Torah, they pressed Jesus about His teachings. They referred to Him as a teacher (Mt 12:38, Mk 12:13-14) while demanding to know by what authority He forgave, healed people, and gave instructions to others. Their objections to what Jesus taught were from a place of long-held self-derived power given and accepted by the Jewish government (i.e., Herod and temple priests) and the people they feared (Mk 11:32). There was a substantial religious and social weight upon their desire to know the authority by which Christ taught people and proclaimed His message. As it was necessary to validate the teachings of Jesus and its substance, the Pharisees questioned Him about His status. Not by what He taught, but by what He did.

The Pharisees wanted to know if Jesus thought He was the Messiah. Not if He was the Messiah, but if whether or not He thought of Himself as such. On more than one occasion, they questioned Him of this concern of theirs. They were in fear of His teachings and what it meant to the Jewish people subjected to the Roman empire. In their view, the teachings of Christ were disruptive to the legalistic tenets of Judaism, and tensions caused between Judaism and the populace of early Christianity would prove troublesome. The Pharisees were in fear of what could happen to them. It was a cultural arrogance and anxiety rooted in religious legalism over God and the Roman government, who opposed what their Messiah did and spoke.

As a case in point, consider the exchange between the Pharisees and Jesus after performing an exorcism (Lk 11:14-15). As before, during the encounter when He spoke of the two sons parable (Matt 32:28-32), the Pharisees questioned His authority then, too. In a setting where they were among people during the time of Jesus’ teaching, the Pharisees first asked of what authority He taught in the temple (Matt 21:23). Even worse, at a separate instance, the Pharisees blasphemed the Holy Spirit as they attributed His exorcism of a possessed man to Beelzebul, an ancient Canaanite god–the ruler of demons (Lk 11:15). Their condescension and inflammatory accusations on multiple occasions returned to their beliefs about the law.

Even under adversity, Jesus spoke of the belief of Pharisees. While they witnessed the work of John the Baptist in righteousness as to the law, they did not believe him. Yet, the despised tax collectors and prostitutes did believe him and were given entrance to the Kingdom. The accusatory beliefs of the Pharisees were not in alignment with what God and their forefathers expected. Jesus’ teachings were not contradictory to the Mosaic law but were the fulfillment of it through a new covenant of grace and repentance through Him.

The ordinary people of Israel held Pharisees in high regard.⁸ As they likely communicated to the common people, their interpretation of Scripture was on par with divine authority, which drew favorable attention to them to elevate their status. While the people also revered John the Baptist, they also respected their religious leaders. The conflicts between them often went unresolved even after the capture, trial, and death of Jesus. As religious leaders of the Jewish community, their presence at the temple and among the synagogues meant that they had developed relationships as friends and family. Relationships at a distance because of Pharisaic sensitivities to defilement. Their unrelenting focus upon ritual purity isolated them from people even amid fellowship among synagogues and the temple.

Not all Pharisees were hostile to Jesus. Several accounts within Scripture indicate some had come to believe in Him. In all cases, to infer a weight of belief, they placed in Jesus and His teachings faith over the Pharisees. There was among them a departure in the confidence of the oral law and tradition. Some dined with Jesus (Lk 7:36), others warned Him of danger (Lk 13:31), and leaders sought Him out to learn more and follow Him (Jn 3:1-2). While Pharisees became disciples, they effectively left behind Judaism, and the requirements of tradition, the oral law, and ritual cleanliness that often were barriers to what Jesus taught.

Paul the Apostle himself was a Pharisee who spoke of his status as a liability in exchange for the all-surpassing knowledge of Christ. He traded in his beliefs in the law for Christ and what He taught through the Holy Spirit and the course of His ministry (Php 3:4-11). As with Paul, even after the death, resurrection, and ascension, the Pharisees were a prominent religious party⁹ until the temple’s destruction in 70AD. Various Scripture references attested to the surrender of Pharisees to the Lord and became instrumental in the Kingdom’s development (Acts 15:5). They believed in Jesus’ teachings and abandoned their earlier way of understanding the Torah and covenantal intent.

Conclusion

Pharisaic beliefs of the first century became magnified by their interaction with Christ. Their beliefs illuminated during their encounters with Jesus helped to identify who they were as a religious party of ancient Judaism during the second temple period. There are surface-level details about what they believed with a bit of historical background given by the apocryphal sources of 1 and 2 Maccabees and Josephus. There are enough distinctions between them and other religious parties to understand their place and activity within Jewish history, but limited Jewish sources stand apart from later rabbinic literature.

The historical trauma of the Jewish people contributed to their desire to regain faithfulness to the Torah. However, they went too far. The Pharisees developed a comprehensive system of beliefs around oral law and tradition that ran counter to covenant principles. Along with the Priests, Scribes, Herodians, Sadducees, Sanhedrin, Essenes, and others, their inevitable rejection and condemnation of Christ was a necessary fulfillment of prophecy (Matt 21:42). To a large degree, the contrast between Christ’s teachings and their strongly held commitments represents the change of the old covenant to the new. With that change was enormous resistance that ushered in keeping a new “law” or covenant. Where those in Christ would by His teaching learn anew, “I give you a new law, that law is, “Love each other.” As I have loved you, so you also love each other.” Jesus’ fulfillment of the Torah accompanied His declaration that to love the Lord is the great and first commandment of the law. Then with the second commandment to love your neighbor as yourself. They are the two commandments that the law and the prophets depend on in support of the new covenant.

Citations

____________________________
1. Martin H. Manser, Dictionary of Bible Themes: The Accessible and Comprehensive Tool for Topical Studies (London: Martin Manser, 2009).
2. The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989), 1 Mac 2:42.
3. Flavius Josephus and William Whiston, The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1987), 346.
4. Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003), 516.
5. Ibid.
6. Robert Henry Charles, ed., Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, vol. 2 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913), 691.
7. Ibid. Manser.
8. Aaron Valdizan, “BTS521, Historical Background of the New Testament Course Notes,” Unpublished course notes, The Master’s University, 2018, 133
9. David Witthoff, ed., The Lexham Cultural Ontology Glossary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2014)

Incubation of a Kingdom

By on in Theology

The book entitled “Backgrounds of Early Christianity” by Everett Ferguson is a comprehensive survey of historiographical topics centered around the Mediterranean world of the first century. While topics span subject matter that primarily concentrated on what the first-century Christian world looked like within its historical setting, the book provides a limited and topical view of what significant events preceded it. Namely, the political and military histories to explain how and why ancient Empires flooded the area to achieve their objectives and interests. From historical Macedonia that gave rise to the Diadochi and its Ptolemaic and Seleucid empires to Rome and its rulership through conquest, administration, and oppression were conditions that set the context of what transpired during the first century.

Introduction

The historical conditions present during this period were not just political and militaristic. There were enormously significant social, cultural, religious, and philosophical advances favorable and corruptive. Altogether they were imported into the worlds of early Judaism and Christianity that had a direct and significant bearing upon lifestyle, language, education, and overall social order. While these conditions and pressures weighed heavily on the people of ancient Judeo-Christian development, the States, or governing bodies, changed from one to another, all having competing interests over time. Over time, from all geographical directions, there remained a persistent convergence of imported good and evil that imposed circumstances orchestrated upon the region that were not as deeply applied elsewhere beyond the perimeter of the Mediterranean.

Structure & Substance

Throughout the historical context of early Christianity, interwoven was the background of Greek culture, Roman authority, and their religious practices deeply rooted in ancient paganism. These key areas had a significant bearing on how society conducted itself while integrated within Jewish and Christian life. From government to everyday families in the area, social structures placed enormous weight upon how laws were originated and implemented. Local and regional economies required the support of governing authorities to provide stability for mixed cultures to form and produce the human outcomes sought by often unwanted influences. Intermingled within Jewish and Christian traditions were the new and advancing forms of thought and expression. When considering the reach of influential Greek and seductive Roman pressures brought to the region, there is a wide swath of social conditions that placed weight upon individuals and interrelated societies between Jews and neighboring nations.

The text in this review covers numerous areas of interest. From the mundane to the controversial, there are categories of social constructs that would take a long period to absorb and understand to recognize what lasting effect they had upon early Christianity. Military, law, slavery, trade, friendships, morality, family life, economies, taxes, personal attire, entertainment, education, athletics, music, art, literature, language, and so on are just the beginning of what deeply invaded the Jewish way of life among early Christians of the first century. Fundamental assumptions about the nature of human existence translated into how people of first-century Christianity were to live their lives.

Modes of expression were downstream from cultural beliefs that formed cultures of the first century. It is not accurate to conclude from the text that a single culture was formed to define a single set of beliefs. Yet, there were forms of European, Egyptian, and Aramaic lifestyles that shaped various categories of daily activity and the presence of influences and conditions by which they existed. It can be concluded that a primitive form of civilization emerged differently than what Yahweh earlier designed by covenantal intent with the nation of Israel. After the exilic period of the Jews and their return to build the second temple, the mandate of the Jews was transformed. There was no longer to be a kingdom of priests for the nations. Instead, the nations would intersperse throughout Mediterranean territories and Palestine, while the diaspora also added to the national incoherence of Israel.

The national purpose of the twelve tribes of Israel gave way to early Christianity with its twelve apostles of the Church. As such, the book covers the framework of cultural categories that formed and supported the primitive civilization of the region with numerous counter-intuitive specifics. For example, the range and quantity of gods served and worshipped among the Greeks were accepted and assimilated into Roman society, inhabiting its various conquered regions to include Israel. The polytheism of the time was an offset to Judaic and Christian thought yet was in place to construct the framework of social existence. Gentile education brought language, entertainment, holidays, and economic life embraced by much of the people of Israel and early Christianity.

The book covers at significant depth the formation and presence of numerous religious and philosophical beliefs that existed within first-century Christianity. These beliefs translated into groups of ideas and organizations stemming from Hellenistic and Roman thought. More specifically, the distinctions between religious expression and philosophical thought were presented as a clear and altogether foreign means of social interaction with an alien understanding of the world in which they lived. Philosophy and religion among the Greeks and Romans were often intertwined, with deities worshipped involving prayers, hymns, offerings, and observances that corresponded to popular social views.

Compared to other sections of the book, the author wrote at significant length and detail about the historical religions and philosophies of the time. The range of subject matter around these topics was given roughly equal weight around the other surrounding subjects of political histories, society, culture, early Judaism, and Christianity. It is entirely fitting that the author places an emphasis upon the philosophies and religions of the Gentiles who invaded Israel to provide the relevant discussions to follow. While the text serves as a useful handbook reference to get a clear understanding of specific subject matter, it is best to first read it through from beginning to end. The book works as a dictionary of topics researched, but it is best to understand the preceding and succeeding context. Before the discussion around first-century Judaism and emergent Christianity, the cultural context and background of Roman and Greek religion and philosophy are critical to recognize and understand. Especially around the time of Christ and the later missionary journeys of the apostle Paul throughout Asia Minor.

The spiritual world of false and foreign gods was revered and celebrated by many among the Gentile nations in and around Israel. The characteristics of foreign gods were personified and anthropomorphic in nature to largely serve a functional purpose that involved bartering. Especially among the Greek gods such as Artemis, Salus, Libertas, and Victoria, in exchange for reverence, worship, and service, the gods were to bestow benevolent outcomes to the efforts of Greco-Roman occupants of the Mediterranean world. Further around ancient and foreign gods were cults formed that organized around “sacramental” activities and roles to include rituals, festivals, sacrifices, and more. The book clarifies the personal practices of Greco-Roman religion and cults formed for deeper levels of devotion. The book is organized with topical partitioning that makes it clear and easy for readers to compare for further exploration and research.

The author presents a thorough and comprehensive section about the Greco-Roman philosophies of early Christianity. Philosophies that were often stemming from individual, influential, outspoke thought figures included Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, and numerous others. The book does an exceptional job at chronologically lining up what the systems of philosophical methods of understanding were to include its factions and derivative offshoots of Greco-Roman thinking. Separate from the intellectual figures were free-standing systems of belief about interpreted reality and the human condition. Namely, topics and originators of skepticism, cynicism, stoicism, epicureanism, and various others stand out in the book to situate their meaning amid the arrival and development of Christianity. The author makes it necessary to understand the extensive body of Greco-Roman schools of philosophy to recognize the background conditions in which Judaism and Christianity co-existed together.

From 620 pages of the text, the sections on early Judaism and formative Christianity equal roughly 36% of the total subject matter (220-pages between them). With the former two-thirds of the book’s material, a full and widened view of numerous historical factors set the backdrop and circumstances by which each becomes understood. Since Judaism itself extends back well beyond Alexander the Great and the conquests of Rome, the author covers these periods and earlier toward the intertestamental period.

Various ancient manuscripts accompany the historical authors of Judaism to gain a high degree of confidence about historical events, people, and developments. From the Persian period (538-332 B.C.) to the Roman period (63 B.C.), Jewish literature and authors provide source materials by which readers derive reliable historical facts around took place before the arrival of Christianity. The Jewish context within Israel is fundamental to understanding what occurred during the emergence and development of Christianity. The specific details in which Old and New Testament historical events occurred are written about the author by Jewish literature, both canonical and extra-biblical. A walkthrough of the Apocrypha, pseudepigrapha works, the Dead Sea Scrolls and various writings illustrate what forms or genres of Jewish literature covered history. A history by which readers gain an understanding of what led up to the intertestamental period. The time of Judaism during the first century is interconnected with Christianity in the ancient world. It is better to understand what categories of Jewish life existed throughout Judaism during the first century and who the major groups were during the time. These groups prominent within Judaism help the reader to understand what religious organizations and figures populated the New Testament scenes given within the gospels. Such as to include Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, Zealots, Samaritans, Essenes, and others, like the Sanhedrin and Rabbis, the prototypical organization of the Church and its roles arose to provide later and further context around roles, functions, and responsibilities. The ways in which Jewish religious authorities organized and were operated are covered in-depth down to different beliefs, whether they contradict or complement each other.

When pressing into these areas of first-century Judaism, it is informative to collect a running view of what transpired until Jewish Christianity. The author presents numerous meta details around literature, archaeological artifacts, and historical records that accompany biblical facts through the gospels and various epistles. References to visual artifacts like architectural remnants, coinage, papyri, inscriptions, tombs, and the writings of first-century authors altogether provide a composite picture of early Christianity.

Conclusion

This book serves as an ongoing standing reference for continuing biblical and theological studies. It contains highly valuable reference material with citations for research to broaden and deepen historical and technical depth. It is highly recommended in both printed and digital copies to efficiently absorb what materials were compiled here for the reader to further explore substantive meaning around early Christianity and the biblical text.

Framework of Prototypical Intent

By on in Theology

When following the apostle Paul in the book of Acts during his journeys to Asia Minor, it became apparent there were numerous synagogues he visited. Well before that, extending back into the intertestamental period and through the life of Christ, the synagogues of second-temple Israel were among Jewish populations throughout Mediterranean territories. They were gathering locations formed to provide various functions in the delivery of community services rooted in Judaism. The structure and organization of the synagogue were roughly common regardless of its geographical position as its purpose and similarities were centered on relationships among Jewish and God-fearing people. Moreover, the relationship of the Jewish members of a local synagogue appears to be deeply grounded in devotion to Yahweh according to tradition and covenant responsibilities as given by the Torah, the prophets, the writings, wisdom literature, and historical predecessors of influence within Judaism.

Functions

Activities surrounding the functional purpose of a synagogue were numerous. A synagogue operates as a Judaic community center that provides religious instruction with two areas of primary activity. Scripture reading and prayer together constituted the communicative activity between Yahweh and His people. Whether through Scripture by scrolls kept at a synagogue or from prayers, benedictions, and maledictions that were offered together before Yahweh, the Jewish people were socially together in congregations of fellowship and common belief.

Depending upon respective areas of concentration, a synagogue served as a site that operated as a Judaic community center. From the intertestamental period to first-century Judea and beyond, it was of significant influence as it continued to operate in service of Jewish communities. It served as an institution for religious instruction, it operated as a facility for meetings, and it functioned as a court for judgment and discipline. The local synagogue hosted students for academic work and school life.

Synagogue Recitals of Blessings & Woe

The Eighteen Tefillah of Shemoneh Esre (Amidah)

Blessed art Thou, O Lord, Our God and God of our fathers, God of Abraham, God of Isaac, and God of Jacob, the great, mighty, and revered God, God Most High, who art the Creator of heaven and earth, our Shield and the Shield of our fathers, our confidence from generation to generation. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, the Shield of Abraham!
Thou art mighty, who bringest low the proud, strong, and He that judgeth the ruthless, that liveth forever, that raiseth the dead, that maketh the wind to blow, that sendeth down the dew; that sustaineth the living, that quickeneth the dead; in the twinkling of an eye Thou makest salvation to spring forth for us. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who quickenest the dead!
Holy art Thou and Thy Name is to be feared, and there is no God beside Thee. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, the holy God!
O favor us, our Father, with knowledge from Thyself and understanding and discernment from Thy Torah. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who vouchsafest knowledge!
Cause us to return, O Lord, unto Thee, and let us return anew [in repentance] in our days as in the former time. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who delightest in repentance.
Forgive us, our Father, for we have sinned against Thee; blot out and cause our transgressions to pass from before Thine eyes, for great is Thy mercy. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who dost abundantly forgive!
Look upon our affliction and plead our cause, and redeem us for the sake of Thy Name. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, the Redeemer of Israel!
Heal us, O Lord our God, from the pain of our heart; and weariness and sighing do Thou cause to pass away from us; and cause Thou to rise up healing for our wounds. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who healest the sick of Thy people Israel!
Bless for us, O Lord our God, this year for our welfare, with every kind of the produce thereof, and bring near speedily the year of the end of our redemption; and give dew and rain upon the face of the earth and satisfy the world from the treasuries of Thy goodness, and do Thou give a blessing upon the work of our hands. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who blessest the years!
Blow the great horn for our liberation, and lift a banner to gather our exiles. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who gatherest the dispersed of Thy people Israel!
Restore our judges as at the first, and our counselors as at the beginning; and reign Thou over us, Thou alone. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who lovest judgment!
For apostates let there be no hope, and the dominion of arrogance [Rome] do Thou speedily root out in our days; and let the Nazarenes [Christians] and the heretics perish as in a moment, let them be blotted out of the book of the living and let them not be written with the righteous. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who humblest the arrogant!
Towards the righteous proselytes may Thy tender mercies be stirred; and bestow a good reward upon us together with those that do Thy will. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, the trust of the righteous!
Be merciful, O Lord our God, in Thy great mercy towards Israel Thy people, and towards Jerusalem Thy City, and towards Zion the abiding place of Thy glory, and towards Thy glory, and towards Thy temple and Thy habitation, and towards the kingdom of the house of David, Thy righteous anointed one. Blessed art Thou, O God, God of David, the Builder of Jerusalem!
Hear, O Lord our God, the sound of our prayer and have mercy upon us, for a God gracious and merciful art Thou. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who hearest prayer!
Accept us, O Lord our God, and dwell in Zion; and may Thy servants serve Thee in Jerusalem. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, whom in reverent fear we serve!
We give thanks to Thee, who art the Lord our God and the God of our fathers, for all the good things, the lovingkindness, and the mercy which Thou hast wrought and done with us and with our fathers before us: and if we said, Our feet slip, Thy lovingkindness, O Lord, upheld us. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, unto whom it is good to give thanks!
Bestow Thy peace upon Israel Thy people and upon Thy city and upon Thine inheritance and bless us, all of us together. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who makest peace!

Services

The influence a local synagogue had on Jewish life was most pronounced through its formation, activity, and how it was organized. Members of the synagogue were members of the community who also had social and market influence. Their attendance and participation had a bearing on trade, work, and daily life within the community. Their interpersonal and social obligations originated from principles taught and heard through the reading of Scripture within the local synagogue, and certainly more contemporary at the time through instruction whether oral or written. The study of Scripture and its audible intake made a lasting impression to inform beliefs and daily conduct. The absorption of God’s instructions through the Torah and other books of the Old Testament also shaped member’s views, adorations, and petitions as uttered by their prayers to Yahweh.

____________

Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003), 578–579.

The Measure of Seven

By on in Theology

While doing the research to understand the differences between the Jewish beliefs and practices of the Old Testament and those of the second temple period, I arrived at an area of interest that bears further exploration. As a matter of comparison between old and new covenant interpretation of Scripture, this is a useful reference between Judaism and Christianity. It so happens that from an earlier post, I also posted about the methods of interpretation from within the NT.

The Middot of Hillel

Middot in Hebrew means “measure” or “norms.” These are the seven principles, or methods used to interpret biblical meaning (OT) from Rabbi Hillel in the 1st century BC. An early form of Jewish hermeneutics around the study of Judaism that grew in number to 13 under Rabbi Ismael ben Elisha (100 A.D.) then to the 32 from Galilean Rabbi Eliezer ben Yose (150 A.D.). Beginning from the Greek influence of Hellenism upon Judaic thought, these principles remain in place for many centuries.¹

The beginning seven principles by name were as follows to have a bearing upon second temple Judaism.²

Qal wahomer
Inference from the less important to a more important case (lit., light to heavy), and vice versa.
Gezerah shawah
Inference by verbal analogy from one verse to another; where the same words are applied to two separate laws it follows that the same regulations and applications pertain to both.
Binyan ’ab mikathub ’ehad
Building up a family from a single text; when the same phrase is found in a number of passages, then a regulation found in one of them applies to all of them.
Binyan ’ab mikathub ’ehad
Building up a family from two texts; a principle is deduced by relating two texts together, and the principle can then be applied to other passages.
Kelal upherat
The general and the particular; a general principle may be restricted by a particularization of it in another verse, or conversely, a particular rule may be extended into a general principle.
Kayoze bo bemaqom ʾaher
Something similar in another passage; a difficulty in one text may be solved by comparing it with another that has points of general (though not necessarily verbal) similarity.
Dabar halamed meʾinyano
A meaning established by its context.

Mitigating Jewish Beliefs & Practices

Old Testament to second temple Judaism differences and conditions at the time of Christ. Several factors had a bearing on how OT biblical interpretation and NT authorship originated.

There was a greater adherence and devotion to the law during the second temple period as compared to the prior Old Testament era.³
During the Old Testament, and second temple periods, Jews of Judaism placed primacy of scripture upon the Torah. Jews of Christianity, during the second temple period, placed an emphasis on the Nevi’im and Ketuvim.⁴
From the second temple period, there was significant weight placed upon the oral law to accompany the written law as a way to govern everyday Jewish life.⁵ Whether for ceremonial, traditional, or “fencing” purposes, the oral law set up a type of Judaism that extended well beyond covenant intent.
During the apostolic period, there were various sects that had a bearing on the Jewish way of life and beliefs. The Essenes of Qumran, the Sadducees who controlled the Jerusalem Temple, the Pharisees with their Hasidim background, and additional sects were new or distinct in Judaism as compared to the earlier figures and groups in the Old Testament.
Since the prophets fell silent during the intertestamental period, they were replaced by the Scribes of the second temple period concerning matters of authority around the scriptures.⁶ Torah observance was of prominent interest to the Jews of Judaism during the second temple period which gave rise to the class of “professional scribes”.⁷

_________________________

¹ Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003), 545.
² Tosefta. Sanhedrin 7.11; Aboth de R. Nathan 37; Sifra 3a
³ Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 3rdEdition. (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2003), 539.
⁴ Ibid., 543.
⁵ Ibid., 542.
⁶ Valdizan, “Historical Background of the New Testament Course Notes,” Unpublished course notes, 2018, 133.
⁷ Valdizan, “Historical Background of the New Testament Module 6 Lectures,” Jewish Beliefs and Practices, Part 1.

Types & Shadows

By on in Theology

Thesis: The OT in the book of Revelation and John’s use of corresponding apocalyptic work in the book of Revelation. The following are presentation notes concerning the literary nature of the book of Revelation, not its eschatological intent.

The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation

The following is a look at second temple Jewish literature and OT material from the intertestamental period. The source material is the Hebrew Bible (the OT), Jews studying the OT of the same period, world, and cultural setting all current with John of Revelation. The Book of Revelation never uses an introductory formula to introduce OT references. John uses words and phrases from the OT into Revelation’s composition. John draws upon these words and phrases, not as quotes but as material to produce his content. The index of allusions and quotations in the Greek NT reveals that the book of Revelation contains more OT allusions than any other NT book. Yet, there is not a single quotation in the NT that references back to the OT.

John used bits and pieces to create his composition. His voice plus the phrases of meaning from the OT. It is, therefore, useful to understand what sources and OT passages that John was using. Was John using the MT or the LXX? Or both? What was the source text he used? Can the MT or LXX support or sustain what the author concludes? Was the author faithful to what the MT or the LXX says?

In the hindsight of Revelation, does John’s use of the OT articulate Jesus-influenced theology messianic interpretation that could have been obtained by using the MT or LXX prior to the first advent of Christ? Can John (or the reader of Revelation) still discern possible messianic interpretations obtained from the OT even before the Messiah arrived? If he can, then his use of the OT to produce the content of his apocalyptic work is legitimate.

John interprets the Old Testament in light of his experience with Jesus.

Ancient first-century approaches to the Bible should be included in hermeneutical methodologies. Old Testament content is repurposed and is legitimate.

John’s preference for literature was the prophets and poetic works (worship literature).

The Use of Daniel in Jewish Apocalyptic Literature and the Revelation of St. John

Three decades after DSS discoveries. Beale writes of John’s use of the Old Testament by categorizing his use of ancient scripture.

Categories & Methods of Interpretation

Segmentation: Segments of the OT are used as literary prototypes. John models his material after patterns he sees in the OT. He follows sequence or structure to build his content. Or “clusters” of allusions in the OT to use them in sections of Revelation. Reference Daniel 2 and 7 as examples from Revelation 13 and 17.

Thematic: The thematic use of the OT. The divine warrior, earthly cataclysm, eclipses, etc., are directed to apocalyptic messaging in the Revelation to produce content.

Analogical: The analogical use of the OT is used to repurpose well-known persons, places, and events to produce or illustrate imagery by analogy. Such as the Exodus plagues (Rev 8:6-12; the seven trumpets, Rev 16:2-13; the seven bowls) to illustrate the analogical use of the OT.

Universal: The universalization of OT application of what occurred to Israel to the rest of the world. The “Kingdom of Priests” principle concerning the Hebrews became applied to the Church (e.g., Rev 5:9-10). Material meant for Israel becomes universally applied to the Gentiles.

Informality: Informal direct prophetic fulfillment where John, the author of Revelation, sees the fulfillment of OT passages in Jesus or His return by implication and inference. For example, the allusion of Zechariah 12:10 concerns Rev 1:7, where “those whom they have pierced” is not a word-for-word reference but by palpable and undeniable inference around messianic fulfillment.

Typological: A non-verbal prophecy or foreshadowing of something to come. Present within the literature are synonyms that bear the concept of resemblance and similarity. A general definition identifies a biblical event, person, or institution that serves as an example or pattern for other events, persons, or institutions (Baker). Typological relationships exist between events, persons, or institutions that, through divine inspiration, foreshadow later patterns or specific events and conditions that happen later within salvation history. New Testament writers use typologies. —Compare Isaiah 22:22 with Rev 3:7b concerning the key of David as a foreshadow to the keys of Death and Hades (Rev 1:18). These two are linked together; the inference is that Jesus holds power over salvation and judgment since it comes through the line of David. David foreshadowed another king to come: Jesus. As a typology, John uses David as a foreshadow of Jesus in his messianic kingship, who has control over a kingdom.

Inversion: Some allusions are contradictory to the OT contextual meaning, but it’s a surface observation. Upon closer inspection, this category does not work. To see John is doing something subtle and unique. For example, some passages in Isaiah show Gentiles bowing down before Israel to recognize their elect status before YHWH (Isaiah 45:14, Isaiah 49:23, compared to Revelation 3:9). Revelation 3:9 inverts the imagery to concern the Church as to the Jews of Israel.

Style: The perceived imprecise use of the Greek language involved solecisms (grammatical mistakes) throughout the Revelation. John intentionally used Greek “errors” in the language to express his Semitic mind more precisely. They were deliberate efforts to intentionally say something specific in the way it is expressed in Hebrew. Solecisms are littered throughout the Revelation to make the reader look and understand what is occurring from the OT.

______________________

Michael Heiser, “Introducing The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation” (podcast), December 1st, 2020, accessed April 23rd, 2021, https://nakedbiblepodcast.com/podcast/naked-bible-352-introducing-the-old-testament-in-the-book-of-revelation/

G.K. Beale, “The Use of Daniel in Jewish Apocalyptic Literature and in the Revelation of St. John” (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2010)

Steve Moyise, “The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation”, The Library of New Testament Studies, (London, UK: T&T Clark Publishing, 2014)