Tag Archives | ANE

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 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.