Numerous examples of prophetic usage originate from meaning within the Psalms, as illustrated in the reading this week. There are numerous connections from the Psalms to the prophets and the gospel writers. An example comes to mind concerning Psalm 22.
As Psalm 22 is widely known as a messianic, and it is prophetically echoed in the life of Christ and what He accomplished, as made evident by the Apostle Matthew (Matt 27:32-55). The psalm wasn’t originally about the crucifixion of Jesus, but it certainly carried prophetic weight and meaning at the time of the crucifixion (i.e., the already but not yet principle of prophecy). Specifically, Psalm 22 projects forward a later reference to the prophet Amos concerning the “cows of Bashan” or bovines of Bashan (Amos 4:1-2). Psalm 22:12-13 reads as follows:
12Many bulls encompass me; strong bulls of Bashan surround me; 13they open wide their mouths at me, like a ravening and roaring lion.
The prophetic implication from Amos 4:1-2 is compared as follows:
1“Hear this word, you cows of Bashan, who are on the mountain of Samaria, who oppress the poor, who crush the needy, who say to your husbands, ‘Bring, that we may drink!’ 2The Lord God has sworn by his holiness that, behold, the days are coming upon you, when they shall take you away with hooks, even the last of you with fishhooks.
The prophet Amos much later than the time of David (author of Ps 22) is a reference back to the bulls of Bashan from the mountains of Samaria. That is, by implication, the “cows of Bashan” are of the mountains of Samaria (cultic area of Caesarea-Philippi, Mt Hermon, region of Dan) who were temple priestesses who served “the gods” as deities in the form of idols or golden calves. The “gods” reference, who oppressed the poor and needy (Ps 82:4), is likely a source that informed the prophet Amos concerning judgment to befall Israel because of their worship of demonic entities (Deut 32:1). The prophet Amos recognized the association between the territory of Bashan and demonic activity related to idolatry.
Fast forward to the first century and second temple period, as Jesus was surrounded by the “Bulls of Bashan,” Matthew knew of what David wrote of the demonic entities who were many that surrounded Him. They opened wide their anthropomorphic mouths at Him during His execution (Ps 22:13). The bulls of Bashan intertextually connect back to both Amos and the messianic psalm with integrated meaning around the cultural and historical evil present in Northern Israel. In my view, this was the reason Christ’s transfiguration with prophets Moses and Elijah took place on Mt Hermon to reclaim humanity and bring the Kingdom of God to Earth right before His crucifixion in Jerusalem. Mt Hermon is in Bashan, and Jesus knew who the bulls of Bashan were. He knew of Israel’s history of demon worship.
The death of Jesus on the cross is of further meaning from Psalm and Amos as it is written concerning the work He accomplished to overcome sin and death. The spiritual entities present at the time of His crucifixion were prophesied in the text of Psalm 22 and in plain sight for the connections made with sufficient research. Further in the reading of Psalm 22, and from materials the psalmists and prophets read, the inference is that the bulls of Bashan were the sons of God referenced in Ps 82:1. The text insinuates that connections are carefully made between the psalms and prophets. However, it takes more than just passive reading to originate those connections. – Further reading into Psalm 22, who were the dogs referenced in Ps 22:16? Who were the Roman soldiers who crucified Jesus? Gentiles. Gentiles in Jewish culture are referred to as “dogs.” The personified connections made throughout the psalm for prophetic inference toward later use permit the reader to make connections not otherwise apparent.
These are the type of connections made throughout the psalms and the prophets. This time, about elohim as disembodied dead, spiritual powers (Eph 6:12), and the sons of God, or watchers/angels that the prophet Daniel wrote about (Dan 4:13-17). Further substantive meaning concerning the Son of Man (Daniel’s cloud rider), divine transgressions, and so forth at length is steeped in material that the poets and prophets were certainly aware of.
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
1 Greg 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. 10 Ludwig 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.
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 unfaithful spouse imagery in Hosea’s book is common to the same type of betrayal that we read about among the major prophets (Jeremiah 3:1, Ezekiel 16:32). The prophets describe how the rejection of a marriage covenant in a person-to-person context makes more directly relatable the abandonment of the divine covenant between Yahweh and His people. His people have rejected Him; they are akin to a prostitute wife who leaves her husband. The comparison carries far less weight as a wife leaves her a husband compared to God and His people, but the betrayal is felt in a tangible and lasting way among people obligated to their covenant with God. The disloyalty felt brings substantial pain in both scenarios in a hurtful and memorable way.
Today, the message of Hosea reminds us of what a violation of a covenant oath looks like. It is a rupture of intimacy, both physically and spiritually, in the context of a marriage that does not honor exclusivity. Where in the Mosaic covenant, Yahweh explicitly forbids idolatry (Exodus 20:3), He informs His people that they were to have no other gods besides Him. If His people were to have and worship gods other than Him, that by definition is idolatry and is the same as adultery in a spiritual sense. Specifically, between Yahweh’s people and the other gods they worship or serve. Putting another god, or anything, above or before God Most High was the first commandment He gave to His people. Down through the centuries, it was also a commandment that His people often broke. With significant influence among neighboring nations and their own hearts, they participated in the behaviors that Yahweh sought to keep them from.
The principles given to us between Hosea and Gomer (husband and wife) offer insights into what people do spiritually to stray or outright reject God their creator. As Yahweh sought to maintain a fruitful relationship with His people Israel, He loved and cared for them in ways that speak to us today. Whereas, the “gods” of today are not ancient idols, figurines, or images that are worshiped and treasured; they are instead anything and everything that love and honor more than God. Examples include status, people, success, material objects, hobbies, or interests that occupy people’s hearts and desires beyond what He intended. It is where creation is worshiped, served, or held in higher esteem over the Creator, which is the modern equivalent to ancient idolatry, or spiritual adultery, that God forbids.
The God of the universe, who made everything, is rightfully and necessarily served and worshiped over anything and anything else. To not abide by our Lord Yahweh’s wishes in this is offensive to Him. Through our free agency, He entrusts us to seek, honor, and love Him. If we do not, we miss out on the blessings, or may even stand condemned while God does not delight in the destruction of the wicked who reject Him (Ezekiel 33:11). Yahweh is a jealous God (Exodus 20:5) who can become offended and hurt. So, as we learn of Him and trust Him, we must do all we can to remain faithful to Him as we set Him above anything and everything else. He is worthy of all glory and the source of life and healing we trust Him to provide.
In the New Testament, we read about how becoming a friend of the world puts God’s people at enmity with Him (James 4:4). To recognize and want all the same values, traditions, interests, and core beliefs as secular society, some individuals or churches come into opposition of Christ. Similarly, as there were numerous false deities in the ancient Near East, the people of nations surrounding Israel engaged in idol worship where it was forbidden to place anything above the value and supremacy of God. Yet, as the major prophets write about in explicit detail, that is exactly what God’s people did.
Like other nations, Israel wanted to serve wood and stone, or objects made with their own hands to worship and serve. Even worse, they participated in child sacrifices and served false gods to gain favor. Inevitable and growing destructive behaviors were carried out among the pagan nations to have a severely consequential influence on Israel. As we read in Ezekiel 20:32, we come to understand that the people of Israel wanted to be like other nations to form their own religious worldview and worship creation, or false deities rather than their Creator.
Today, modern Christians look upon the systems and objects of desire formed by modern society, and we want the same for ourselves. Too often, not just in an incidental, or healthy way, but as a preeminently common value above Yahweh. To have a bearing on how we are educated, entertained, governed, and how we are made prosperous and secure through economic beliefs and policies. All of which we adopt for ourselves while having separate priorities apart from Christ (Isaiah 53:6). As “being in the world yet not of the world” does not bear practical meaning to affect life choices, use of time, money, attention, behaviors, thinking, etc. All Christians are called to place Christ as LORD over everything and anything.
The full integration of secular society and the local church caters to its guests, members, and the public with initiatives, programs, or appeal with well-developed marketing messages absent the gospel or hardships that accompany abundant and eternal life in Christ. Compromise against biblical principles of service, living, and morality becomes inevitable. A church given to social appeal dilutes its purpose and mission as it caters to the “what’s in it for me” mindset. If an individual or group’s lifestyle, “self-truth,” or preferences cannot be accommodated, then secular churches lapse, temporarily or otherwise, into concession in its desire to serve a false “god.” A false god honored by how it operates. Moreover, social influences and pressures upon an individual can have a significant bearing on a Christian that does not honor Christ as Lord. A person is then inevitably subjected to the honor required of what seems right at best (Prov 14:12).
It is necessary to love others and steward creation, but love for Yahweh is most urgent.
