Judecătorii 17
1 Era un om din muntele lui Efraim, numit Mica.
2 El a zis mamei sale: ,,Cei o mie o sută de sicli de argint, cari ţi s-au luat, şi pentru cari ai blestemat chiar în auzul urechilor mele, argintul acesta este în mânile mele, eu îl luasem.`` Şi mamă-sa a zis: ,,Binecuvântat să fie fiul meu de Domnul!``
3 El a dat înapoi mamei sale cei o mie o sută sicli de argint; şi mamă-sa a zis: ,,Închin cu mâna mea argintul acesta Domnului, ca să fac cu el fiului meu un chip cioplit şi un chip turnat; şi astfel ţi-l voi da înapoi.``
4 El a dat argintul înapoi mamei sale. Mamă-sa a luat două sute sicli de argint, şi a dat argintul la argintar, care a făcut din el un chip cioplit şi un chip turnat. Chipurile au fost aduse în casa lui Mica.
5 Mica acesta avea o casă a lui Dumnezeu; a făcut un efod şi terafimi, şi a sfinţit pe unul din fiii lui ca preot.
6 În vremea aceea, nu era împărat în Israel. Fiecare făcea ce-i plăcea.
7 Era un tânăr în Betleemul lui Iuda, din familia lui Iuda; era Levit, şi locuia pentru o vreme acolo.
8 Omul acesta a plecat din cetatea Betleemul lui Iuda, să-şi caute o locuinţă potrivită. Urmându-şi drumul, a ajuns în muntele lui Efraim la casa lui Mica.
9 Mica i-a zis: ,,De unde vii?`` El i-a răspuns: ,,Eu sânt Levit, din Betleemul lui Iuda, şi merg să-mi caut o locuinţă potrivită.``
10 Mica i-a zis: ,,Rămâi la mine; tu să-mi fii tată şi preot, şi eu îţi voi da zece sicli de argint pe an, hainele de cari vei avea nevoie, şi mijloace de trai.``
11 Şi Levitul a intrat la el. S-a hotărât astfel să rămână la omul acesta, care a privit pe tânăr ca pe unul din fiii lui.
12 Mica a sfinţit pe Levit, şi tânărul acesta i-a slujit ca preot şi a locuit în casa lui.
13 Şi Mica a zis: ,,Acum, ştiu că Domnul îmi va face bine, fiindcă am ca preot pe Levitul acesta.``
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":8312,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cursed Curse","title_en":"Cursed Curse","content_ro":"<h3>CURSE, CURSED<\/h3>\n<p>Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaganBeliefs\">Pagan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work calamity on one’s enemies. In some pagan cultures, curses were written on clay jars that were then smashed, symbolically initiating or effecting the intended curse.<\/p>\n<p>Tombs were protected against would-be desecrators by means of curses. Royal inscriptions were protected by maledictions aimed at anyone who might alter, destroy, or defy the written decree (Ezr 6:11-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinOldTestamentTimes\">Curses in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Among the Hebrews a curse, valid only within a covenant framework overseen by God, was spoken for the sake of justice. In the OT the curse was an integral part of a covenant relationship—between God and the community, between God and an individual, or among members of the community. To break the terms of a covenant was to merit the covenant curse or curses. A curse invoked under other conditions was powerless. “Like a sparrow in its flitting, like a swallow in its flying, a curse that is causeless does not alight” (Prv 26:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). A curse could be retracted by pronouncing a blessing (Ex 12:32; Jgs 17:1-2; 2 Sm 21:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law forbade the cursing of parents (Ex 21:17; cf. Prv 20:20; Mt 15:4), the ruler (Ex 22:28), and the deaf (Lv 19:14). A man who suspected his wife of unfaithfulness could require that she submit to a test administered by the priest that would result in a curse upon her if she was guilty (Nm 5:11-31). Individuals might pronounce a curse upon themselves to show the truthfulness of their assertions or promises (Nm 5:19-22; Jb 31:7-10, 16-22; Ps 137:5-6). In the NT the apostle Peter followed the OT practice when he used a curse to deny that he knew Jesus (Mk 14:71). Certain men who wished to kill the apostle Paul proved their sincerity by such a solemn curse (Acts 23:12, 14, 21). Cursing God was punishable by death (Lv 24:10-16; cf. Ex 22:28; Is 8:21-22).<\/p>\n<p>Curses in Bible history include God’s curse on the serpent, Adam, and Eve (Gn 3:14-19); on Cain (4:11-12); on those who might curse the patriarch Abraham and his descendants (12:3); and on those who put their trust in human strength instead of in the Lord (Jer 17:5). When the people of Israel passed through Moab on their way to the Promised Land, Moab’s king, Balak, hired Balaam to curse the Israelites; he and Balaam learned, however, that they could not curse those whom God had blessed (Nm 22–24). Joshua cursed anyone who might try to rebuild Jericho (Jos 6:26; fulfilled in 1 Kgs 16:34). King Saul made a curse that almost cost his son Jonathan’s life (1 Sm 14:24, 43-45). Many other curses are mentioned in the OT (see, e.g., Gn 9:25; 49:5-7; Jos 9:22-23; Jgs 9:7-21, 57; 2 Sm 16:5-13; 1 Kgs 21:17-24; 2 Kgs 2:24; Mal 2:2; 4:6). The pronouncement of “woe” (<span>nlt<\/span> “destruction”) is also the language of curse (Is 5:8-23; cf. Mt 23:13-33, where “alas” and “woe” can be used synonymously and may be either an exclamation of sorrow or of impending doom and calamity).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 109 contains a lengthy imprecation against the psalmist’s enemies, evidently because they had spoken some words against him falsely (see also Pss 58:6-11; 69:19-28; 143:12). The prophet Jeremiah was not averse to calling on God to punish his tormentors (Jer 11:20; 12:3; 15:15; 17:18; 18:21-22; 20:11-12) or asking God not to forgive them (18:23). Such imprecations against one’s enemies are difficult for Christians today to understand because they contrast sharply with the NT commands to “bless those who curse you” (Lk 6:28; cf. Rom 12:14). Jesus’ injunction to “love your enemies” (Mt 5:44) may be intended to point beyond the cursing practiced in the OT to a fuller understanding of God’s command to love one’s neighbor as oneself.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Curses<\/h5>\n<p>Protection of a contract or treaty by invoking a curse on the violator was common in OT times. Sometimes a covenant was sealed by cutting up an animal and having the covenanting individuals walk between the severed pieces; the slain animal symbolized the curse to befall the violator. God agreed to submit to such a curse on himself if he broke the covenant he made with the patriarch Abraham (Gn 15:7-21). Later, God accused the leaders and people of Israel of breaking their covenant with him and warned them of the consequences to follow (Jer 34:18-19). An essential part of the covenant God made with Israel at Mt Sinai was the promise of blessings for keeping the covenant and curses for breaking it (Dt 11:26-28; 27:15-26; 28:15-68; 30:19; cf. Lv 26:3-39). Israel suffered those curses in the time of the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel; the covenant breakers, including the king, were threatened with a curse (Jer 11:3; Ez 17:11-21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ban on “Devoted Things”<\/h5>\n<p>A special kind of curse was the ban or anathema. Strictly speaking, it was a vow to devote persons, animals, or objects under such a curse to God. In some cases the priests could use objects that had fallen under the ban (Nm 18:14; Ez 44:29), but that provision did not apply to living beings. All persons or animals under the ban were sacrificed or destroyed (Lv 27:28-29). The ban was commonly used in Israel’s wars against its pagan neighbors. Sometimes everything was declared anathema (Jos 6:17-19), but normally only persons and heathen images were destroyed (Dt 2:34; 3:6; 7:2, 25-26—not even the melted gold of images was to be kept). To violate the ban by preserving any part of the cursed things was to come under the ban oneself. Because Achan did not respect the ban placed upon Jericho, the terms of that curse came upon all Israel until Achan confessed and was executed (Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the Jews did not practice the anathema (or ban) by putting people to death; people who violated a curse were excommunicated and put out of the congregation of Israel (Ezr 10:8). That meant that the person was no longer part of God’s people and was considered “dead.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinNewTestamentTimes\">Curses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Jewish synagogues practiced excommunication, or anathema, in the NT period (Lk 6:22; Jn 9:22; 12:42; 16:2). Later, Christians excommunicated persons by declaring them outside of the redeemed community (Mt 18:17) or “delivered to Satan” (1 Cor 5:5; 1 Tm 1:20). Both practices stemmed from the OT ban. Unlike that curse, however, the excommunication could be removed as soon as the person repented.<\/p>\n<p>Since the anathema branded a person as “rejected” or “cursed by God,” Saul of Tarsus, before his conversion, tried to compel Christians to renounce Christ by calling him accursed (cf. Acts 26:11). Later, as an apostle, Paul (Saul) warned that no one speaking by the Spirit of God could call Jesus accursed (1 Cor 12:3). Paul pronounced anathema (destined for judgment and perdition) upon anyone who preached another gospel than the one he and the other apostles preached (Gal 1:8-9). Paul said he wished he could be accursed, cut off from salvation and the people of God, if that could lead to the salvation of his fellow Israelites (Rom 9:3). His desire reflected the love of Christ, who accepted the “curse of the law” upon himself in submitting to suffering and death on the cross in order to redeem human beings from that curse (Gal 3:8-14; cf. Dt 21:22-23). The NT promises that a time will come when “there shall no longer be any curse” (Rv 22:3, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> War, Holy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CURSE, CURSED<\/h3>\n<p>Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaganBeliefs\">Pagan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work calamity on one’s enemies. In some pagan cultures, curses were written on clay jars that were then smashed, symbolically initiating or effecting the intended curse.<\/p>\n<p>Tombs were protected against would-be desecrators by means of curses. Royal inscriptions were protected by maledictions aimed at anyone who might alter, destroy, or defy the written decree (Ezr 6:11-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinOldTestamentTimes\">Curses in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Among the Hebrews a curse, valid only within a covenant framework overseen by God, was spoken for the sake of justice. In the OT the curse was an integral part of a covenant relationship—between God and the community, between God and an individual, or among members of the community. To break the terms of a covenant was to merit the covenant curse or curses. A curse invoked under other conditions was powerless. “Like a sparrow in its flitting, like a swallow in its flying, a curse that is causeless does not alight” (Prv 26:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). A curse could be retracted by pronouncing a blessing (Ex 12:32; Jgs 17:1-2; 2 Sm 21:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law forbade the cursing of parents (Ex 21:17; cf. Prv 20:20; Mt 15:4), the ruler (Ex 22:28), and the deaf (Lv 19:14). A man who suspected his wife of unfaithfulness could require that she submit to a test administered by the priest that would result in a curse upon her if she was guilty (Nm 5:11-31). Individuals might pronounce a curse upon themselves to show the truthfulness of their assertions or promises (Nm 5:19-22; Jb 31:7-10, 16-22; Ps 137:5-6). In the NT the apostle Peter followed the OT practice when he used a curse to deny that he knew Jesus (Mk 14:71). Certain men who wished to kill the apostle Paul proved their sincerity by such a solemn curse (Acts 23:12, 14, 21). Cursing God was punishable by death (Lv 24:10-16; cf. Ex 22:28; Is 8:21-22).<\/p>\n<p>Curses in Bible history include God’s curse on the serpent, Adam, and Eve (Gn 3:14-19); on Cain (4:11-12); on those who might curse the patriarch Abraham and his descendants (12:3); and on those who put their trust in human strength instead of in the Lord (Jer 17:5). When the people of Israel passed through Moab on their way to the Promised Land, Moab’s king, Balak, hired Balaam to curse the Israelites; he and Balaam learned, however, that they could not curse those whom God had blessed (Nm 22–24). Joshua cursed anyone who might try to rebuild Jericho (Jos 6:26; fulfilled in 1 Kgs 16:34). King Saul made a curse that almost cost his son Jonathan’s life (1 Sm 14:24, 43-45). Many other curses are mentioned in the OT (see, e.g., Gn 9:25; 49:5-7; Jos 9:22-23; Jgs 9:7-21, 57; 2 Sm 16:5-13; 1 Kgs 21:17-24; 2 Kgs 2:24; Mal 2:2; 4:6). The pronouncement of “woe” (<span>nlt<\/span> “destruction”) is also the language of curse (Is 5:8-23; cf. Mt 23:13-33, where “alas” and “woe” can be used synonymously and may be either an exclamation of sorrow or of impending doom and calamity).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 109 contains a lengthy imprecation against the psalmist’s enemies, evidently because they had spoken some words against him falsely (see also Pss 58:6-11; 69:19-28; 143:12). The prophet Jeremiah was not averse to calling on God to punish his tormentors (Jer 11:20; 12:3; 15:15; 17:18; 18:21-22; 20:11-12) or asking God not to forgive them (18:23). Such imprecations against one’s enemies are difficult for Christians today to understand because they contrast sharply with the NT commands to “bless those who curse you” (Lk 6:28; cf. Rom 12:14). Jesus’ injunction to “love your enemies” (Mt 5:44) may be intended to point beyond the cursing practiced in the OT to a fuller understanding of God’s command to love one’s neighbor as oneself.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Curses<\/h5>\n<p>Protection of a contract or treaty by invoking a curse on the violator was common in OT times. Sometimes a covenant was sealed by cutting up an animal and having the covenanting individuals walk between the severed pieces; the slain animal symbolized the curse to befall the violator. God agreed to submit to such a curse on himself if he broke the covenant he made with the patriarch Abraham (Gn 15:7-21). Later, God accused the leaders and people of Israel of breaking their covenant with him and warned them of the consequences to follow (Jer 34:18-19). An essential part of the covenant God made with Israel at Mt Sinai was the promise of blessings for keeping the covenant and curses for breaking it (Dt 11:26-28; 27:15-26; 28:15-68; 30:19; cf. Lv 26:3-39). Israel suffered those curses in the time of the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel; the covenant breakers, including the king, were threatened with a curse (Jer 11:3; Ez 17:11-21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ban on “Devoted Things”<\/h5>\n<p>A special kind of curse was the ban or anathema. Strictly speaking, it was a vow to devote persons, animals, or objects under such a curse to God. In some cases the priests could use objects that had fallen under the ban (Nm 18:14; Ez 44:29), but that provision did not apply to living beings. All persons or animals under the ban were sacrificed or destroyed (Lv 27:28-29). The ban was commonly used in Israel’s wars against its pagan neighbors. Sometimes everything was declared anathema (Jos 6:17-19), but normally only persons and heathen images were destroyed (Dt 2:34; 3:6; 7:2, 25-26—not even the melted gold of images was to be kept). To violate the ban by preserving any part of the cursed things was to come under the ban oneself. Because Achan did not respect the ban placed upon Jericho, the terms of that curse came upon all Israel until Achan confessed and was executed (Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the Jews did not practice the anathema (or ban) by putting people to death; people who violated a curse were excommunicated and put out of the congregation of Israel (Ezr 10:8). That meant that the person was no longer part of God’s people and was considered “dead.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinNewTestamentTimes\">Curses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Jewish synagogues practiced excommunication, or anathema, in the NT period (Lk 6:22; Jn 9:22; 12:42; 16:2). Later, Christians excommunicated persons by declaring them outside of the redeemed community (Mt 18:17) or “delivered to Satan” (1 Cor 5:5; 1 Tm 1:20). Both practices stemmed from the OT ban. Unlike that curse, however, the excommunication could be removed as soon as the person repented.<\/p>\n<p>Since the anathema branded a person as “rejected” or “cursed by God,” Saul of Tarsus, before his conversion, tried to compel Christians to renounce Christ by calling him accursed (cf. Acts 26:11). Later, as an apostle, Paul (Saul) warned that no one speaking by the Spirit of God could call Jesus accursed (1 Cor 12:3). Paul pronounced anathema (destined for judgment and perdition) upon anyone who preached another gospel than the one he and the other apostles preached (Gal 1:8-9). Paul said he wished he could be accursed, cut off from salvation and the people of God, if that could lead to the salvation of his fellow Israelites (Rom 9:3). His desire reflected the love of Christ, who accepted the “curse of the law” upon himself in submitting to suffering and death on the cross in order to redeem human beings from that curse (Gal 3:8-14; cf. Dt 21:22-23). The NT promises that a time will come when “there shall no longer be any curse” (Rv 22:3, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> War, Holy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CURSE, CURSED Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense. Pagan Beliefs Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work ca...","summary_en":"CURSE, CURSED Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense. Pagan Beliefs Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work ca...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10997,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tribe of Ephraim","title_en":"Tribe of Ephraim","content_ro":"<h3>EPHRAIM, Tribe of<\/h3>\n<p>Tribe descended from the patriarch Joseph’s second son. Both Ephraim and his brother Manasseh were regarded as sons also by their grandfather Jacob and became his heirs.<\/p>\n<p>Many Bible commentators think that in naming his son Ephraim (Gn 41:52), Joseph was making a play on words based on a Hebrew root meaning “to be fruitful.” In support of this theory they note that the hill country later assigned to Ephraim’s tribe was one of the most fertile areas in Palestine, and at present is still planted with vines and fruit trees, such as olive, pomegranate, and carob. Prior to Israelite settlement, the area was wooded (Jos 17:18). During the monarchy, wild animals still roamed there (2 Kgs 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to determine the exact limits of Ephraim’s territory, since it is often mentioned with Manasseh’s tribe. Ephraim was allotted land in the heart of Canaan, the Promised Land, between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. One half of Manasseh’s allotment formed Ephraim’s northern boundary (Jos 16:5-9).<\/p>\n<p>Ephraim became a great tribe, and its members often held prominent positions. The first census taken in the wilderness lists the total of Ephraimite soldiers as 40,500 (Nm 1:33). After the wilderness wanderings, the number of warriors dropped to 32,500 (26:37). In Israel’s encampment around the tabernacle, Ephraim was the leader of the western camp, supported by the tribes of Manasseh and Benjamin (2:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua the son of Nun, one of the 12 spies, was descended from Ephraim (Nm 13:8, “Hoshea”). Under Joshua’s leadership, Ephraim and the other tribes conquered Canaan and received their promised inheritance (Jos 16).<\/p>\n<p>In the days of the judges, the Ephraimites felt slighted when they were not called upon to assist others in their battles. They quarreled with Gideon because of his belated invitation to help against the Midianites (Jgs 8:1-6), as well as with Jephthah of Gilead, who defeated the Ammonites (12:1-6). The judge Abdon came from Ephraim’s tribe (v 13). The idolatrous Micah (17:1), as well as the prophet Samuel, lived in Ephraim (1 Sm 1:1). The military and political importance of the Ephraimites is reflected in the Song of Deborah (Jgs 5:14), an ancient biblical poem.<\/p>\n<p>Judah was Ephraim’s main rival, and even under David, that animosity was evident (2 Sm 18; 19:41–20:22). Discontent in the north with Solomon’s rule (1 Kgs 11:26-40), combined with a foolish decision by Rehoboam, Solomon’s son, brought about the division of the kingdom. The 10 northern tribes (Israel) were then ruled by Jeroboam I.<\/p>\n<p>After the northern tribes seceded, the capitals of the northern kingdom—Shechem, Tirzah, and Samaria—were situated in Ephraim. The establishment of Samaria by King Omri of Israel gave the Ephraimites more direct access to the great north-south trunk road (Via Maris) through the western plain. This contact with trade routes gave the northern kingdom greater world consciousness and brought greater temptation to depart from God and his commands.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets proclaimed that Ephraim and the other northern tribes would one day be reunited with the southern kingdom of Judah in the messianic kingdom (Hos 1:11). The division introduced by Jeroboam I would be healed when a king descended from David would rule over Judah, Ephraim, and all the tribes of Israel (Ez 37).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ephraim (Person); Ephraim (Place) #1; Israel, History of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EPHRAIM, Tribe of<\/h3>\n<p>Tribe descended from the patriarch Joseph’s second son. Both Ephraim and his brother Manasseh were regarded as sons also by their grandfather Jacob and became his heirs.<\/p>\n<p>Many Bible commentators think that in naming his son Ephraim (Gn 41:52), Joseph was making a play on words based on a Hebrew root meaning “to be fruitful.” In support of this theory they note that the hill country later assigned to Ephraim’s tribe was one of the most fertile areas in Palestine, and at present is still planted with vines and fruit trees, such as olive, pomegranate, and carob. Prior to Israelite settlement, the area was wooded (Jos 17:18). During the monarchy, wild animals still roamed there (2 Kgs 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to determine the exact limits of Ephraim’s territory, since it is often mentioned with Manasseh’s tribe. Ephraim was allotted land in the heart of Canaan, the Promised Land, between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. One half of Manasseh’s allotment formed Ephraim’s northern boundary (Jos 16:5-9).<\/p>\n<p>Ephraim became a great tribe, and its members often held prominent positions. The first census taken in the wilderness lists the total of Ephraimite soldiers as 40,500 (Nm 1:33). After the wilderness wanderings, the number of warriors dropped to 32,500 (26:37). In Israel’s encampment around the tabernacle, Ephraim was the leader of the western camp, supported by the tribes of Manasseh and Benjamin (2:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua the son of Nun, one of the 12 spies, was descended from Ephraim (Nm 13:8, “Hoshea”). Under Joshua’s leadership, Ephraim and the other tribes conquered Canaan and received their promised inheritance (Jos 16).<\/p>\n<p>In the days of the judges, the Ephraimites felt slighted when they were not called upon to assist others in their battles. They quarreled with Gideon because of his belated invitation to help against the Midianites (Jgs 8:1-6), as well as with Jephthah of Gilead, who defeated the Ammonites (12:1-6). The judge Abdon came from Ephraim’s tribe (v 13). The idolatrous Micah (17:1), as well as the prophet Samuel, lived in Ephraim (1 Sm 1:1). The military and political importance of the Ephraimites is reflected in the Song of Deborah (Jgs 5:14), an ancient biblical poem.<\/p>\n<p>Judah was Ephraim’s main rival, and even under David, that animosity was evident (2 Sm 18; 19:41–20:22). Discontent in the north with Solomon’s rule (1 Kgs 11:26-40), combined with a foolish decision by Rehoboam, Solomon’s son, brought about the division of the kingdom. The 10 northern tribes (Israel) were then ruled by Jeroboam I.<\/p>\n<p>After the northern tribes seceded, the capitals of the northern kingdom—Shechem, Tirzah, and Samaria—were situated in Ephraim. The establishment of Samaria by King Omri of Israel gave the Ephraimites more direct access to the great north-south trunk road (Via Maris) through the western plain. This contact with trade routes gave the northern kingdom greater world consciousness and brought greater temptation to depart from God and his commands.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets proclaimed that Ephraim and the other northern tribes would one day be reunited with the southern kingdom of Judah in the messianic kingdom (Hos 1:11). The division introduced by Jeroboam I would be healed when a king descended from David would rule over Judah, Ephraim, and all the tribes of Israel (Ez 37).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ephraim (Person); Ephraim (Place) #1; Israel, History of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EPHRAIM, Tribe of Tribe descended from the patriarch Joseph’s second son. Both Ephraim and his brother Manasseh were regarded as sons also by their grandfather Jacob and became his heirs. Many Bible commentators think that in naming his son Ephraim (Gn 41:52), Joseph was making a play on words based on a Hebrew root meaning “to be fruitful.” In support of this theory they note that the hill country later assigned to Ephraim’s tribe was one of the most fertile areas in Palestine, and at presen...","summary_en":"EPHRAIM, Tribe of Tribe descended from the patriarch Joseph’s second son. Both Ephraim and his brother Manasseh were regarded as sons also by their grandfather Jacob and became his heirs. Many Bible commentators think that in naming his son Ephraim (Gn 41:52), Joseph was making a play on words based on a Hebrew root meaning “to be fruitful.” In support of this theory they note that the hill country later assigned to Ephraim’s tribe was one of the most fertile areas in Palestine, and at presen...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17139,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Idolatry Idols","title_en":"Idolatry Idols","content_ro":"<h3>IDOLS, IDOLATRY<\/h3>\n<p>Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (<span>rsv<\/span>) around the altar, they cut themselves with swords and lances (1 Kgs 18:26-29). Baal worship was widely followed by Israel during the period of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Abraham’s ancestors were worshipers of idols in Mesopotamia (Jos 24:2). Archaeological excavations in that area have revealed the images of numerous deities, and Mesopotamian religious literature reveals the gross polytheism out of which Abraham came. The tendency of the Israelites toward idolatry was in part the expression of the universal human longing for a god one can see and know through the physical senses.<\/p>\n<p>Most of the idolatry of the Israelites was borrowed from their neighbors. During the more than 400 years that the descendants of Jacob spent in Egypt, they were exposed to polytheistic idolatry, which influenced their religious mind-set. At Sinai, while Moses was receiving the Ten Commandments from the Lord, the people were demanding that Aaron make gods for them (Ex 32:1-6). He fashioned a golden calf, following an Egyptian form, for the whole bovine family was worshiped in Egypt—the Apis bull, the Hathor cow, and the Mnevis calf.<\/p>\n<p>It was after his stay in Egypt (1 Kgs 11:40) that Jeroboam became king of Israel and set up golden calves, one at Bethel and one at Dan (12:26-33), an action that earned him the label as being the one who made Israel sin (2 Kgs 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>Already in patriarchal times there are references to the teraphim, or household gods. Examples of these idols have been found at Ur of the Chaldees, Nuzi, and other sites, and are referred to in the cuneiform tablets. The teraphim that Rachel stole from Laban could be hidden in her camel’s saddlebag (Gn 31:34). It seems, however, that in the time of David such idols were larger, for when Saul’s men came to kill David, Michal, David’s wife and the daughter of Saul, helped David to escape and then took such an image and placed it in a bed to make the men think that David was sick (1 Sm 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>The prohibition of idolatry is explicitly stated in the second commandment (Ex 20:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>): “Do not make idols of any kind, whether in the shape of birds or animals or fish. You must never worship or bow down to them, for I, the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, am a jealous God who will not share your affection with any other god!” (cf. Ex 34:17; Lv 19:4; 26:1; Dt 4:15-19; 27:1-5). This commandment is an extension or auxiliary of the first, for it seeks to preserve God’s uniqueness and to protect his glory. The definition of idolatry was broadened during the time of Samuel, who confronted King Saul with the charge that stubbornness is the same as idolatry (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Previous to the conquest of Canaan, the Lord kept warning Israel against marrying members of the native populace, which he had ordered Israel to annihilate. This measure was intended to prevent the weakening of moral life in Israel (Ex 34:16; Dt 7:3-4). This principle is again expanded in the NT (cf. 1 Cor 15:33; 2 Cor 6:14). The history of Israel demonstrated the practicality of the prohibition against such marriages, for they inevitably led to apostasy. Perhaps the saddest example is Solomon (1 Kgs 11:1-8). When Solomon was old, his wives turned his heart to other gods, so that he was not wholly true to the Lord his God (v 4).<\/p>\n<p>In the time of the judges there was an infamous case of idol worship (Jgs 17:1–18:31). The mother of an Ephraimite named Micah took 200 pieces of silver and had a silversmith make them into a graven image for her son. He also had a shrine, an ephod, and teraphim. He hired a wandering Levite to be his priest, but men from the tribe of Dan came along and took the Levite, the image, and all the accoutrements and set up this idol at Dan and used it as an object of their worship (18:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture the kings of Israel are evaluated on the basis of what they did with respect to the “high places” and idols. Asa removed all the idols his ancestors had made (1 Kgs 15:12) and would not let Maacah be queen mother because she had an abominable image made for Asherah. He cut down and burned the image (v 13). The Israelite king Ahab, however, was an idolater (1 Kgs 21:26; cf. 16:30-33).<\/p>\n<p>Hezekiah destroyed the high places, broke down the pillars, and cut down the Asherim (2 Kgs 18:4; 2 Chr 31:1). He also put an end to a strange cult that illustrates the insidious nature of idolatry. The bronze serpent that Moses lifted up on a pole to save the Israelites from death by snakebite (Nm 21:9; cf. Jn 3:14) had been preserved until the time of Hezekiah. It had been given the name Nehushtan, and people venerated it and burned incense to it. Hezekiah destroyed it (2 Kgs 18:4) because what had been an instrument for good had become a thing of evil.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah described the making of an idol in human form (Is 40:19-20; 44:9-17). Images were cast in a mold using molten metal (40:19; 44:10). Statues were forged by smiths (44:12), carved from wood (44:13-17), and overlaid with precious metal (40:19). Small clay images and plaques were also molded and fired in a kiln, and statues were sculptured from stone. The psalmist spoke out against idols and images (Pss 96:5; 97:7; 106:34-39) and the helplessness of idols is described in Psalms 115:4-8 and 135:15-18.<\/p>\n<p>The northern and southern kingdoms of Israel went into captivity because they forsook God and served idols. The Jews were well aware that idolatry had brought them into captivity, and during their time in Babylon, they developed an abhorrence to idols that has characterized Judaism to this very day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The fullest discussion in the NT on idolatry <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatreia<\/span><em>)<\/em> and the idolworshiper <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatres<\/span><em>)<\/em> is found in Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians. In an earlier (no longer extant) epistle, Paul had told the Corinthians not to associate with those who called themselves believers but were still idol worshipers (1 Cor 5:9-11). After that letter the Corinthians must have asked Paul for clarification on this matter. Thus, in this epistle Paul provides a response to their question; the “idol worshiper” is mentioned in 5:10-11, 6:9, 10:7, and “idolatry” is spoken of in 10:14.<\/p>\n<p>The terms, “idolatry” and “idol worshiper,” are related to two other expressions: (1) “idol” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolon<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:4; 10:19; 12:2; and (2) “food sacrificed to idols” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolothutos<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:1, 4, 7; 10:19. The kind of idolatry that Paul condemns is that which involved Christians offering sacrifices to idols and then partaking of the food that had been sacrificed to them. The participants are called idol worshipers because their involvement in idolatrous sacrifices was perceived as having fellowship with demons. Paul strictly prohibited the eating of sacrificial food at the popular temples in the presence of idol-demons. As such, he shared the same view about idols as most Jews in his day. For the Jews, idols and heathen deities were identical. (See 1 Thes 1:9, where Paul contrasts “idols” with “the living and <em>true<\/em> God.”) To Paul, idols in and of themselves were nothing (1 Cor 8:4); behind the idol, however, was a demon (10:20).<\/p>\n<p>The eating of sacrificial food at the cultic meals in pagan temples was censured by Paul because it was understood that the participants thereby became united to demons (see 1 Cor 10:19-21). However, Paul had no problem with those who purchased food that had been left over from these events and that was later sold in the marketplace. In his judgment, if they ate it at home, they were not participating in idolatry. They could eat this food with a good conscience—unless, of course, in doing so they would be the means of destroying a weaker believer. For the sake of such believers, one should abstain. This was a matter of conscience (10:25-29). But going to pagan festivities and eating meals offered to idols was not permitted in any form.<\/p>\n<p>The Corinthians had participated in these meals regularly before they became Christians and apparently had continued to do so after their conversion. In Corinth such meals were the regular practice both at national festivals and private celebrations. The “gods” (whom Paul considered “demons”) were thought to be present at these events because the sacrifices were made to them. Thus, to participate in these events was to join oneself to demons and thereby become an idol worshiper. The ancient Israelites had been carried away into idolatry by their pagan neighbors on several occasions when they were enticed to participate in these pagan celebrations (e.g., Nm 25; cf. Ex 32:6). The festivities involved all sorts of licentiousness. In 1 Corinthians 10, Paul referred to this apostasy of the Israelites and used it as a negative example. Because the Israelites became involved in pagan festivities, they were carried away into idolatry and fornication, which incited God’s wrath and brought destruction.<\/p>\n<p>In other Pauline Epistles, idolatry is mentioned but not with the kind of definition and extended discussion that is found in 1 Corinthians. Nonetheless, Paul speaks out against actual idolatry and what we might call figurative idolatry (i.e., idolatry in the sense of desiring something above God).<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 1:18-32 sexual licentiousness and other sins are ultimately traced to idolatry. The Gentiles, who should have known that God existed, as evidenced in creation and conscience, abandoned the immortal, invisible God in exchange for mortal, visible images (i.e., idols). Because of this abandonment, God gave them over to do the filthy things their hearts desired (Rom 1:24). Thus, idolatry is included in Paul’s list of what he calls “the works of the flesh” (see Gal 5:19-20). And those who are idol worshipers are included in the catalog of all those evil people who will not inherit the kingdom of God (see 1 Cor 6:9).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 5:5 Paul again includes idolaters among those who will not inherit the kingdom of God. However, such idolaters are not just those who go to pagan temples and worship idols; they are those who are greedy or covetous. According to superior manuscript evidence, the verse reads, “No fornicator or impure person or greedy person, which is the same as an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.” The point seems to be that the greedy, covetous person who makes his desires his god is much the same as an idolater. Thus, covetousness and idolatry are made synonymous. The parallel passage, Colossians 3:5, makes this explicit, which literally says covetousness is idolatry.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Gods and Goddesses; Grove; High Place.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>IDOLS, IDOLATRY<\/h3>\n<p>Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (<span>rsv<\/span>) around the altar, they cut themselves with swords and lances (1 Kgs 18:26-29). Baal worship was widely followed by Israel during the period of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Abraham’s ancestors were worshipers of idols in Mesopotamia (Jos 24:2). Archaeological excavations in that area have revealed the images of numerous deities, and Mesopotamian religious literature reveals the gross polytheism out of which Abraham came. The tendency of the Israelites toward idolatry was in part the expression of the universal human longing for a god one can see and know through the physical senses.<\/p>\n<p>Most of the idolatry of the Israelites was borrowed from their neighbors. During the more than 400 years that the descendants of Jacob spent in Egypt, they were exposed to polytheistic idolatry, which influenced their religious mind-set. At Sinai, while Moses was receiving the Ten Commandments from the Lord, the people were demanding that Aaron make gods for them (Ex 32:1-6). He fashioned a golden calf, following an Egyptian form, for the whole bovine family was worshiped in Egypt—the Apis bull, the Hathor cow, and the Mnevis calf.<\/p>\n<p>It was after his stay in Egypt (1 Kgs 11:40) that Jeroboam became king of Israel and set up golden calves, one at Bethel and one at Dan (12:26-33), an action that earned him the label as being the one who made Israel sin (2 Kgs 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>Already in patriarchal times there are references to the teraphim, or household gods. Examples of these idols have been found at Ur of the Chaldees, Nuzi, and other sites, and are referred to in the cuneiform tablets. The teraphim that Rachel stole from Laban could be hidden in her camel’s saddlebag (Gn 31:34). It seems, however, that in the time of David such idols were larger, for when Saul’s men came to kill David, Michal, David’s wife and the daughter of Saul, helped David to escape and then took such an image and placed it in a bed to make the men think that David was sick (1 Sm 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>The prohibition of idolatry is explicitly stated in the second commandment (Ex 20:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>): “Do not make idols of any kind, whether in the shape of birds or animals or fish. You must never worship or bow down to them, for I, the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, am a jealous God who will not share your affection with any other god!” (cf. Ex 34:17; Lv 19:4; 26:1; Dt 4:15-19; 27:1-5). This commandment is an extension or auxiliary of the first, for it seeks to preserve God’s uniqueness and to protect his glory. The definition of idolatry was broadened during the time of Samuel, who confronted King Saul with the charge that stubbornness is the same as idolatry (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Previous to the conquest of Canaan, the Lord kept warning Israel against marrying members of the native populace, which he had ordered Israel to annihilate. This measure was intended to prevent the weakening of moral life in Israel (Ex 34:16; Dt 7:3-4). This principle is again expanded in the NT (cf. 1 Cor 15:33; 2 Cor 6:14). The history of Israel demonstrated the practicality of the prohibition against such marriages, for they inevitably led to apostasy. Perhaps the saddest example is Solomon (1 Kgs 11:1-8). When Solomon was old, his wives turned his heart to other gods, so that he was not wholly true to the Lord his God (v 4).<\/p>\n<p>In the time of the judges there was an infamous case of idol worship (Jgs 17:1–18:31). The mother of an Ephraimite named Micah took 200 pieces of silver and had a silversmith make them into a graven image for her son. He also had a shrine, an ephod, and teraphim. He hired a wandering Levite to be his priest, but men from the tribe of Dan came along and took the Levite, the image, and all the accoutrements and set up this idol at Dan and used it as an object of their worship (18:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture the kings of Israel are evaluated on the basis of what they did with respect to the “high places” and idols. Asa removed all the idols his ancestors had made (1 Kgs 15:12) and would not let Maacah be queen mother because she had an abominable image made for Asherah. He cut down and burned the image (v 13). The Israelite king Ahab, however, was an idolater (1 Kgs 21:26; cf. 16:30-33).<\/p>\n<p>Hezekiah destroyed the high places, broke down the pillars, and cut down the Asherim (2 Kgs 18:4; 2 Chr 31:1). He also put an end to a strange cult that illustrates the insidious nature of idolatry. The bronze serpent that Moses lifted up on a pole to save the Israelites from death by snakebite (Nm 21:9; cf. Jn 3:14) had been preserved until the time of Hezekiah. It had been given the name Nehushtan, and people venerated it and burned incense to it. Hezekiah destroyed it (2 Kgs 18:4) because what had been an instrument for good had become a thing of evil.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah described the making of an idol in human form (Is 40:19-20; 44:9-17). Images were cast in a mold using molten metal (40:19; 44:10). Statues were forged by smiths (44:12), carved from wood (44:13-17), and overlaid with precious metal (40:19). Small clay images and plaques were also molded and fired in a kiln, and statues were sculptured from stone. The psalmist spoke out against idols and images (Pss 96:5; 97:7; 106:34-39) and the helplessness of idols is described in Psalms 115:4-8 and 135:15-18.<\/p>\n<p>The northern and southern kingdoms of Israel went into captivity because they forsook God and served idols. The Jews were well aware that idolatry had brought them into captivity, and during their time in Babylon, they developed an abhorrence to idols that has characterized Judaism to this very day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The fullest discussion in the NT on idolatry <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatreia<\/span><em>)<\/em> and the idolworshiper <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatres<\/span><em>)<\/em> is found in Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians. In an earlier (no longer extant) epistle, Paul had told the Corinthians not to associate with those who called themselves believers but were still idol worshipers (1 Cor 5:9-11). After that letter the Corinthians must have asked Paul for clarification on this matter. Thus, in this epistle Paul provides a response to their question; the “idol worshiper” is mentioned in 5:10-11, 6:9, 10:7, and “idolatry” is spoken of in 10:14.<\/p>\n<p>The terms, “idolatry” and “idol worshiper,” are related to two other expressions: (1) “idol” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolon<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:4; 10:19; 12:2; and (2) “food sacrificed to idols” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolothutos<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:1, 4, 7; 10:19. The kind of idolatry that Paul condemns is that which involved Christians offering sacrifices to idols and then partaking of the food that had been sacrificed to them. The participants are called idol worshipers because their involvement in idolatrous sacrifices was perceived as having fellowship with demons. Paul strictly prohibited the eating of sacrificial food at the popular temples in the presence of idol-demons. As such, he shared the same view about idols as most Jews in his day. For the Jews, idols and heathen deities were identical. (See 1 Thes 1:9, where Paul contrasts “idols” with “the living and <em>true<\/em> God.”) To Paul, idols in and of themselves were nothing (1 Cor 8:4); behind the idol, however, was a demon (10:20).<\/p>\n<p>The eating of sacrificial food at the cultic meals in pagan temples was censured by Paul because it was understood that the participants thereby became united to demons (see 1 Cor 10:19-21). However, Paul had no problem with those who purchased food that had been left over from these events and that was later sold in the marketplace. In his judgment, if they ate it at home, they were not participating in idolatry. They could eat this food with a good conscience—unless, of course, in doing so they would be the means of destroying a weaker believer. For the sake of such believers, one should abstain. This was a matter of conscience (10:25-29). But going to pagan festivities and eating meals offered to idols was not permitted in any form.<\/p>\n<p>The Corinthians had participated in these meals regularly before they became Christians and apparently had continued to do so after their conversion. In Corinth such meals were the regular practice both at national festivals and private celebrations. The “gods” (whom Paul considered “demons”) were thought to be present at these events because the sacrifices were made to them. Thus, to participate in these events was to join oneself to demons and thereby become an idol worshiper. The ancient Israelites had been carried away into idolatry by their pagan neighbors on several occasions when they were enticed to participate in these pagan celebrations (e.g., Nm 25; cf. Ex 32:6). The festivities involved all sorts of licentiousness. In 1 Corinthians 10, Paul referred to this apostasy of the Israelites and used it as a negative example. Because the Israelites became involved in pagan festivities, they were carried away into idolatry and fornication, which incited God’s wrath and brought destruction.<\/p>\n<p>In other Pauline Epistles, idolatry is mentioned but not with the kind of definition and extended discussion that is found in 1 Corinthians. Nonetheless, Paul speaks out against actual idolatry and what we might call figurative idolatry (i.e., idolatry in the sense of desiring something above God).<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 1:18-32 sexual licentiousness and other sins are ultimately traced to idolatry. The Gentiles, who should have known that God existed, as evidenced in creation and conscience, abandoned the immortal, invisible God in exchange for mortal, visible images (i.e., idols). Because of this abandonment, God gave them over to do the filthy things their hearts desired (Rom 1:24). Thus, idolatry is included in Paul’s list of what he calls “the works of the flesh” (see Gal 5:19-20). And those who are idol worshipers are included in the catalog of all those evil people who will not inherit the kingdom of God (see 1 Cor 6:9).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 5:5 Paul again includes idolaters among those who will not inherit the kingdom of God. However, such idolaters are not just those who go to pagan temples and worship idols; they are those who are greedy or covetous. According to superior manuscript evidence, the verse reads, “No fornicator or impure person or greedy person, which is the same as an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.” The point seems to be that the greedy, covetous person who makes his desires his god is much the same as an idolater. Thus, covetousness and idolatry are made synonymous. The parallel passage, Colossians 3:5, makes this explicit, which literally says covetousness is idolatry.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Gods and Goddesses; Grove; High Place.<\/p>","summary_ro":"IDOLS, IDOLATRY Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (rsv) around the altar, they cut themselves with...","summary_en":"IDOLS, IDOLATRY Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (rsv) around the altar, they cut themselves with...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21208,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Judges","title_en":"Book of Judges","content_ro":"<h3>JUDGES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book reflects a final editing of the material in the period of the early monarchy. It may well be a polemic for the righteous rule of David over against the kingship of Saul, which was molded by a secular, Canaanite conception of kingship rather than by the law of God. The author was almost certainly not Samuel, as traditionally thought, but a later compiler who relied on ancient written materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Though the judges succeeded in giving the tribes some rest from the incursions of surrounding enemies, the Israelites were continually harassed over long periods of time. Scholarly opinion differs on the duration of the period of the judges. The dating of the exodus affects the dating of the beginning of the judges. Those who take an early date for the exodus put the beginning around 1370–1360 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas others propose a date close to the end of the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. A related issue pertains to the chronology of the judges. Does Judges give a chronological, sequential account of the period, or is the book a representative account of judges from various parts of Canaan and Transjordan who “judged” a region, a tribe, or several tribes simultaneously?<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteraryFramework\">Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the stories in the book bear the marks of literary creativity. The stories are classics in their own right. The poetry of Deborah’s song (Jgs 5) is very moving, and the fable of Jotham (9:8-15) is a fine example of figurative speech. The care given to the stories is also reflected in the construction of the book. There are two introductions: a political one (Jgs 1:1–2:5) and a socioreligious one (2:6–3:6). The political introduction connects Judges with the story of the Conquest, when the tribes attempted to occupy the land. It prepares the reader for the political and military problems of the era of the judges. The socioreligious introduction explains why Israel had so many adversities, why the institution of the judges arose, and why the Lord never gave Israel the promised lasting rest from its enemies. The main body of the book is the story of the judges (3:7–16:31). References to the minor judges (six in all) are set within the stories of the major judges in increasing frequency. As is evident from the schema, the number of minor judges increased in frequency in proportion to the decrease in number of major judges: two major, one minor; two major, two minor; one major, three minor; one major. There is a total of 12 judges, representative of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the listing of 12 judges, representative of the various parts of Canaan and Transjordan, is to demonstrate that all tribes throughout the conquered territories experienced grave difficulties from a variety of enemies: Arameans, Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Canaanites, and Philistines. Israel was hard pressed on nearly all its frontiers. The appendixes (chs 17–21), together with the two introductions, form the framework of the book. The political and socioreligious problems (1:1–3:6) are presented by way of several stories in the last chapters. The final editor who gave the book its canonical shape purposefully framed the stories of the judges so as to show lack of movement. The successes of the previous stages in redemptive history came to a standstill in the ebb and flow of the judges. Though the Lord delivered his people in many ways, they returned to the problems described in 1:1–3:6. The appendixes describe Israel’s problems representative of the period of the judges, when “there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for deliverance, and God’s raising up of a judge reflects a deuteronomic perspective with its warnings concerning disobedience and judgment. The repetitiveness of the cycle supports the contention of the anonymous narrator that Israel remained unchanged by the grace of God. However, in spite of the moral, religious, and political anarchy as well as the civil wars, the last chapter shows that the tribes are still concerned with each other’s welfare. Though the unity of God’s people has been gravely challenged, the situation is not hopeless. The book ends on a note of hope—hope for a king who may deliver Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Thus, there are several purposes of the book: (1) to demonstrate the meaninglessness of this stage in Israel’s development; (2) to explain why the tribes did not occupy all the land promised to the patriarchs; (3) to justify the way of God, who was gracious and patient with Israel’s repeated acts of disobedience; (4) to set forth the legitimacy of a “shepherd” king in contrast to a despotic form of kingship; and (5) to explain the urgent need for a new momentum, lest Israel succumb to the Philistines and intertribal warfare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Political Introduction (1:1–2:5)<\/h5>\n<p>In Joshua 1–12 the warfare under Joshua is portrayed as a mobilization of Canaanite forces against Israel. By the intervention of the Lord, the Canaanite resistance was put down and the land was occupied by the tribes (chs 13–21). Joshua 13–21, however, clearly shows that each tribe had problems ridding its territory of pockets of Canaanite resistance, which were usually centered around heavily guarded and well-fortified cities (cf. 13:2-6, 13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua emphasizes the successes and minimizes the problems, whereas the prologue to Judges sets the stage for the whole book by openly addressing Israel’s problems and failures. As the book unfolds, it is precisely these problems and failures that in due time bring Israel to the brink of disaster.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the judges began with the death of Joshua (Jgs 1:1; 2:8-9). The Israelites had inherited a legacy from Joshua: the law of the Lord (Jos 23:6; 24:26), the land, a challenge to obey the Lord (24:14-27), and a promise of God’s presence and help in subduing the Canaanites (23:5, 10).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah and Simeon (Jgs 1:2-20)<\/h6>\n<p>The prominence of Judah and Caleb parallels the position of Judah in Joshua (Jos 14:6–15:63; cf. also the house of Joseph, Jgs 1:22-29; cf. Jos 16–17). Judah was victorious over the cruel Adoni-bezek, who ruled over Bezek, a town of uncertain location. Judah successfully occupied the hill country, the Negev, and the western foothills. They even took Jerusalem, or an outlying suburb identified with Jerusalem (Jos 1:8), but could not retain control there (v 21) until David’s conquest of the city (2 Sm 5:6-9). Judah was victorious over the Canaanites in the region of Hebron, already conquered under Joshua (Jos 10:36). Hebron, also known as Kiriath-arba (“city of four” or “tetrapolis”), was a powerful ally of Jerusalem (v 3) and had been able to rally military support for a new assault on Israel, even after its first defeat. Caleb received Hebron, as Moses had promised (Jgs 1:20; cf. Jos 15:13). After the victory over Hebron, Judah extended its control over the southern hill country by an attack on Debir (Jgs 1:11-15; cf. Jos 15:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Kenites (Jgs 1:16), descendants of Jethro and therefore related to Moses by marriage, settled in the Negev around Arad and the City of Palms, which here probably refers to Tamar rather than Jericho.<\/p>\n<p>Judah secured the southern border by a victory over the Canaanites at Hormah (Jgs 1:17; cf. Nm 14:45; 21:3; Dt 1:44) and the coastal plain by victories at Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron. However, Judah’s successes in the coastal plain were resisted by a well-armed Canaanite force (Jgs 1:18-19). It occupied the Judean hill country and the Negev, but could not retain control over the plains. The Philistines were soon to take control over Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, and incorporate them into their pentapolis.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin (1:21)<\/h6>\n<p>Jerusalem was situated on the border between Judah and Benjamin. Judah took the city or a suburb (Jos 1:8) but was too far removed to retain control over it. Benjamin was too weak to subdue the Jebusites. Only David succeeded in this (2 Sm 5:6-9); he incorporated it into Judah (cf. Jos 15:63), even though it originally was allotted to Benjamin (Jos 18:28).<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph: Ephraim and Manasseh (1:22-29)<\/h6>\n<p>Ephraim took Bethel, known from the patriarchal stories as a significant cultic site (Gn 12:8; 13:3-4; 28:19; 31:13; 35:1-15). However, Manasseh was unsuccessful in taking the fortified cities in the valley of Jezreel (Esdraelon): Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor, Ibleam, and Megiddo. These cities controlled traffic along the east-west and north–south roads as well as the important passes through the Carmel range and the ford of the Jordan. Ephraim could not take full possession of the coastal plain, controlled by Gezer. The success of both Ephraim and Manasseh was limited.<\/p>\n<h6>The Other Four Tribes (1:30-36)<\/h6>\n<p>The other four tribes in Canaan receive brief mention. They, too, were only partially successful. Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and especially Dan did not fully succeed in driving out the Canaanites. At best they later subjected most of them to forced labor.<\/p>\n<h6>The Failure of Israel (2:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>The failure to subdue the land and to wipe out the Canaanites and their culture led to intermarriage and idolatry (cf. Ex 23:33; 34:12-16; Nm 33:55; Dt 7:2-5, 16; Jos 23:7, 12).<\/p>\n<p>The identity of “the angel of the Lord” who appears at Bokim is far from certain. It may be a reference to the Lord himself, to an angelic messenger, or to a prophet (cf. Jgs 6:8). He rebuked the people in the prophetic spirit and pronounced God’s judgment as taking the form of continual confrontation between Israel and the Canaanites (2:3). Their weeping and sacrificing were to no avail (2:4-5; cf. Mal 2:13). Israel stood condemned within a generation after Joshua’s death.<\/p>\n<h5>The Theological Introduction (2:6–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>The theological introduction begins where Joshua left off (Jos 24:28-31). The generation of Joshua was characterized by loyalty, but their loyalty to the Lord did not last long after the excitement of the Conquest and the demonstration of God’s presence (Jgs 2:10). Israel served Canaanite gods (Baal and Astarte) instead. Baal was the storm god, symbolic of rain and fertility, and Astarte was his cohort. The plural (Baals and Ashtaroth, 2:11-13) signifies the many local ways in which the Canaanite gods were worshiped. The religious unity was broken up into a great diversity. Thus Israel angered the Lord (vv 12-14), who sent them enemies and plunderers. Israel was unsuccessful in dealing with them, as Moses and Joshua had forewarned (Dt 28:25, 33; Jos 23:13, 16). The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for mercy, and deliverance is found throughout Judges. The people were rooted in the apostasy of their forefathers, even though the previous generation had been sensitive to God. Israel did not submit to the leadership of the judges, except to free itself from the oppressors. In fulfillment of the curses of the covenant, God swore not to give his people rest but to test them and to train them for warfare (Jgs 3:1-4), so that they might learn to respond to the challenges of a real world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Judges of Israel (3:7–16:31)<\/h5>\n<h6>Othniel (3:7-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Othniel is a transitional figure, linking the Conquest and the judges. He had involved himself in the conquest of Kiriath-sepher and was related to Caleb as his cousin and son-in-law (1:13). He repelled the Arameans led by Cushan-rishathaim, so that the land enjoyed peace for some 40 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ehud (3:12-30)<\/h6>\n<p>The Moabites, allied with the Ammonites and Amalekites, came against Israel from the east and oppressed them for 18 years under the leadership of Eglon. Ehud led the mission to bring tribute to Eglon at his palace, located probably by Jericho (the City of Palms). Ehud was uniquely qualified for this mission; being left-handed, he was able to use his double-edged sword in an unsuspecting manner to stab the king. Ehud’s success was the result of careful plotting and the element of surprise. He paid the tribute and left, only to return with a supposed oracle from the gods. The king fell for the deception and was murdered. The delay at the Moabite court gave the Israelites an opportunity to bring their forces together at the fords of the Jordan. Ehud’s success was complete; no Moabite escaped, and Israel enjoyed peace for 80 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Shamgar (3:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Shamgar’s exploits were against the Philistines in the coastal plains. He had a non-Israelite name but was probably an Israelite by birth. Like Samson he fought the Philistines with an unconventional weapon (an ox goad). His name is also mentioned in the song of Deborah (5:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Deborah and Barak (4:1–5:31)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative now turns to the Canaanite aggressors in the north under the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor, and Sisera, of Harosheth-haggoyim (4:1-3). The ruins of Hazor (Jos 11:13) had been rebuilt, and another Jabin (cf. v 1) ruled over the region. He had regained his military power, as he had as many as 900 chariots of iron. He oppressed Israel for 20 years (Jgs 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>God had a prophetess in Israel who led his people during this dark time (4:4). She rendered judgments under a palm tree in southern Ephraim near Benjamin (v 5). She called on Barak to muster the armies of Naphtali and Zebulun, the tribes affected by the Canaanite raids, and to engage Sisera in a surprise attack by the Kishon River (vv 6-7). Barak’s hesitancy led him to request Deborah’s presence, which resulted in his forfeiture of the honor of killing Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite forces (vv 8-10). The Lord gave success to the surprise attack from Mt Tabor, so that the Canaanites were routed, unable to use their heavy chariots, which were mired down in the swamps of the Jezreel Valley (5:20-22). The Canaanites were routed, and Sisera was killed by Jael, the wife of Heber, a Kenite who had separated from the Kenites around Arad (4:17-18; cf. 1:16). She offered him hospitality, as her family had friendly relations with the Canaanites, but heroically put him to death with a tent peg (4:18-21; 5:26-27). In successive campaigns the Israelites gained freedom from Jabin, until they destroyed his power (4:24).<\/p>\n<p>The song of Deborah (ch 5) celebrates, in poetic fashion, the victory over Jabin. It is one of the oldest poems in the Bible. It praises the God of Israel as the King who comes to protect his covenant people, and before whom the mountains move (5:2-3). He is the God of Mt Sinai (Jgs 5:4-5; cf. Dt 33:2; Ps 68:7-8; Hb 3:3-4). Though the oppressors had despoiled Israel and had made the roads unsafe for travel, and Israel was unable to defend itself (Jgs 5:6-8), the Lord raised up Deborah and Barak to lead the nobles to war (vv 9-13). They came from Ephraim, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar, and Naphtali (vv 14-15a, 18), but the Transjordan tribes and Asher did not want to get involved (vv 15b-17). The song then moves to the battle scene, where torrential rains bogged the chariots down (vv 19-23). Jael is celebrated as “most blessed of women,” who used her simple way of life to bring an end to Sisera (vv 24-27). She stands in contrast to Sisera’s mother, who is portrayed with all her culture waiting in vain for Sisera’s return with all of his spoils (vv 28-30). The Lord has used the simple to confound the powerful. The conclusion is a prayer for God’s judgment on all of Israel’s enemies (Jgs 5:31a; cf. Ps 68:1-3).<\/p>\n<h6>Gideon (6:1–8:35)<\/h6>\n<p>Israel’s rest for 40 years (Jgs 5:31b) was disturbed by the invasion of Midianites and Amalekites from the East (6:1-3). They destroyed the economy by invading the country at harvesttime (vv 4-6). In response to Israel’s cry, God sent a prophet with a message similar to that of the angel of the Lord (2:1-5). Then an angel appeared to Gideon and called him to lead the people in battle (6:11-14). The Lord assured him of his presence (v 16) by a sign (vv 17-22). Gideon knew that he had been visited by the Lord and built an altar called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Peace” in Ophrah (v 24). He responded by destroying the cultic site dedicated to Baal and Asherah at Ophrah (vv 25-28) and by initiating worship at the new altar (v 28). Baal did not protect his own altar (vv 29-32), even when challenged by Gideon’s father (v 31). Consequently, Gideon was known as Jerubbaal (meaning, “let Baal contend with him,” v 32).<\/p>\n<p>Next, Gideon mustered an army of 32,000 men from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali (6:35; cf. 7:3b). In order to assure himself of the Lord’s presence, he asked for another sign: the sign of the fleece (6:36-40). It must be kept in mind that Gideon lived in an area in which the wonders of God had been scarce (v 13) and that he, like Moses, needed reassurance that God was with him. God responded to his growing faith. Gideon went forth with a greatly reduced army of 300 against the enemy. Of his original army, 22,000 had left because they were afraid (7:2-3; cf. Dt 20:8). Another 9,700 were sent home, though they were valiant men (7:4-8). After assuring Gideon by a dream of an enemy soldier, God used the 300 in a marvelous way to confound the Midianites (vv 9-15). God gave Israel victory over the Midianite leaders Oreb, Zeeb, Zebah, and Zalmunna (7:16–8:21). Gideon wisely avoided a possible military confrontation with Ephraim (8:1-3), pursued the enemy deep into the Transjordan, and punished the leaders of Succoth and Penuel, who did not assist him (vv 4-9, 13-16).<\/p>\n<p>This glorious victory created a new wave of interest in the idea of kingship. The men of Israel wished to establish the family of Gideon as their royal dynasty (8:22). Gideon refused, and instead wrongly set up an ephod, cast from the gold taken in battle (vv 23-27). The ephod was probably used for cultic practices, possibly divination (cf. 17:5).<\/p>\n<p>Gideon’s era also came to an end. He was God’s instrument, giving Israel rest for 40 years. He fathered 70 sons and died in old age. God had richly blessed him, even though he had led Israel astray with his ephod. Thereafter, Israel returned to Baal worship (8:33-35).<\/p>\n<p>In the wake of Gideon’s era, his son Abimelech attempted to establish dynastic continuity by having himself installed as king at Shechem (9:1-6). With the support of his relatives at Shechem, Abimelech had all his brothers killed except Jotham (vv 4-5). After Abimelech’s coronation, Jotham set forth his opposition to his brother in a proverbial manner (vv 7-20), and went into hiding. Three years later Abimelech’s evil schemes entrapped him when the citizens of Shechem rebelled. He furiously attacked the city and destroyed it. A short time later, however, he was wounded at Thebez by a millstone dropped by a woman from the tower in which she had sought refuge from him. His servant put him out of his misery as per his request. This episode demonstrates how bad a despotic king may be. Again, God’s justice prevailed.<\/p>\n<h6>Tola (10:1-2)<\/h6>\n<p>Tola was a minor judge from Issachar who judged Israel for 23 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jair (10:3-5)<\/h6>\n<p>Jair was a minor judge from Gilead who judged Israel for 22 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jephthah (10:6–12:7)<\/h6>\n<p>A recapitulation (10:6-16) of the cycle (idolatry, enemies, cry for help, momentary repentance) sets the introduction to the Jephthah narrative. Under attack from the Ammonites, the elders of Gilead requested help from Jephthah (10:17–11:8), who promised to help them on the condition that he remain their leader even after the war (vv 9-10). At a solemn ceremony he becomes their “head” at Mizpah (v 11). Jephthah opened up correspondence with the Ammonite king, in which he argued for Israel’s rights on the basis of the Israelites’ historic claim to the land as granted to them by the Lord (vv 12–27). Instead of going out immediately to war, he hoped that “the <span>Lord<\/span>, the Judge” would settle the dispute (v 27); but the Ammonite king was unimpressed. When the Spirit of God came over him, Jephthah led Israel into battle, but only after making a rash vow. He was victorious but found out that his vow to sacrifice whatever came first out of his house required him to sacrifice his daughter. Debate continues as to whether he offered her up as a human sacrifice or whether she sacrificed marriage (see discussion under Jephthah).<\/p>\n<p>The Ephraimites seemed to have had an insatiable desire for war. Earlier they had complained to Gideon, who successfully defused their threats (8:1-3). Jephthah fought them, however, because the Israelites living in Transjordan had been reviled as “renegades” (12:1-4). Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed by the fords of the Jordan in this civil war. Thereafter, Jephthah ruled for only six years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ibzan (12:8-10)<\/h6>\n<p>Ibzan was a minor judge from Bethlehem who ruled Israel for seven years.<\/p>\n<h6>Elon (12:11)<\/h6>\n<p>A minor judge from Zebulun, Elon ruled Israel for ten years.<\/p>\n<h6>Abdon (12:13-15)<\/h6>\n<p>Abdon was a minor judge from Pirathon, the location of which is uncertain. He ruled for eight years.<\/p>\n<h6>Samson (13:1–16:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Samson’s greatness in the history of redemption is due to his miraculous birth (13:1-24), his service as a Nazirite (13:7; cf. Nm 6:1-21), the repeated overpowering by the Spirit of the Lord (Jgs 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14), the single-handed exploits against the Philistines (Ashkelon, 14:19; the fields, 15:1-6; Ramath Etam, 15:7-17; Gaza, 16:1-3, 23-30), and his occasional dependence on the Lord (15:18-19; 16:28-30). However, his personal life was flawed because of his weakness for Philistine women (chs 14, 16). Having been seduced by Delilah, he was imprisoned at Gaza. He died in the collapse of Dagon’s temple, praying that the Lord would permit him to get revenge (16:28-30). He was buried in his father’s tomb in the territory of Dan (16:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue (17–21)<\/h5>\n<p>The cyclical nature of Israel’s existence was without movement. Rest from enemies was always temporary. Israel was not yet ready for dynastic kingship, and whatever one may say of the three years of Abimelech, it was a kingship of the worst sort. Israel vacillated between idolatry and belief in the true Lord. The period of the judges was unstable, marked by petty individualism and provincialism. Yet God remained sovereign in the affairs of his people. The epilogue contains two stories: the story of Micah and the Danite migration (chs 17–18) and the civil war (chs 19–21). The epilogue is bound together by the phrase “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25, <span>niv<\/span>). The symmetric recurrence (two times in each narrative) emphasizes the anarchy and inability of the tribes to unite together to serve God as a covenant people.<\/p>\n<h6>Micah and the Danites (17–18)<\/h6>\n<p>Micah was an Ephraimite who established a shrine and hired one of his own sons, and then a Levite from Bethlehem, to serve as its priests (ch 17). Unable to keep their patrimony, the Danites left to establish themselves at the foot of Mt Hermon. They took the idols and the Levite from Micah’s shrine and set up a cultic city at the newly established city of Dan, built on the ruins of Laish (ch 18). Thus, they set up a cultic center that rivaled the tabernacle at Shiloh (18:31).<\/p>\n<h6>The Civil War (19–21)<\/h6>\n<p>The people of Gibeah, which belonged to Benjamin, sexually abused the concubine of a Levite so that she died. Like the Levite of chapters 17 and 18, she was from Bethlehem (19:1). Dramatically, the Levite sent pieces of her corpse to all the tribes, which assembled against the Benjamites because they protected the criminals of Gibeah (19:29–20:19). In the ensuing battle the population of Benjamin was decimated (20:20-48). The 11 tribes gave them 400 virgins taken in a civil war against Jabesh-gilead (21:6-15). These were not enough, however. Because of the threat of the extinction of Benjamin and the vow not to give their daughters in marriage to any Benjamite, the Israelites devised a plan by which the Benjamites could take Israelite virgins dancing in the festival at Shiloh. Benjamin thus was able to rebuild its towns and settlements.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gideon; Jephthah; Samson.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDGES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book reflects a final editing of the material in the period of the early monarchy. It may well be a polemic for the righteous rule of David over against the kingship of Saul, which was molded by a secular, Canaanite conception of kingship rather than by the law of God. The author was almost certainly not Samuel, as traditionally thought, but a later compiler who relied on ancient written materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Though the judges succeeded in giving the tribes some rest from the incursions of surrounding enemies, the Israelites were continually harassed over long periods of time. Scholarly opinion differs on the duration of the period of the judges. The dating of the exodus affects the dating of the beginning of the judges. Those who take an early date for the exodus put the beginning around 1370–1360 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas others propose a date close to the end of the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. A related issue pertains to the chronology of the judges. Does Judges give a chronological, sequential account of the period, or is the book a representative account of judges from various parts of Canaan and Transjordan who “judged” a region, a tribe, or several tribes simultaneously?<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteraryFramework\">Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the stories in the book bear the marks of literary creativity. The stories are classics in their own right. The poetry of Deborah’s song (Jgs 5) is very moving, and the fable of Jotham (9:8-15) is a fine example of figurative speech. The care given to the stories is also reflected in the construction of the book. There are two introductions: a political one (Jgs 1:1–2:5) and a socioreligious one (2:6–3:6). The political introduction connects Judges with the story of the Conquest, when the tribes attempted to occupy the land. It prepares the reader for the political and military problems of the era of the judges. The socioreligious introduction explains why Israel had so many adversities, why the institution of the judges arose, and why the Lord never gave Israel the promised lasting rest from its enemies. The main body of the book is the story of the judges (3:7–16:31). References to the minor judges (six in all) are set within the stories of the major judges in increasing frequency. As is evident from the schema, the number of minor judges increased in frequency in proportion to the decrease in number of major judges: two major, one minor; two major, two minor; one major, three minor; one major. There is a total of 12 judges, representative of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the listing of 12 judges, representative of the various parts of Canaan and Transjordan, is to demonstrate that all tribes throughout the conquered territories experienced grave difficulties from a variety of enemies: Arameans, Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Canaanites, and Philistines. Israel was hard pressed on nearly all its frontiers. The appendixes (chs 17–21), together with the two introductions, form the framework of the book. The political and socioreligious problems (1:1–3:6) are presented by way of several stories in the last chapters. The final editor who gave the book its canonical shape purposefully framed the stories of the judges so as to show lack of movement. The successes of the previous stages in redemptive history came to a standstill in the ebb and flow of the judges. Though the Lord delivered his people in many ways, they returned to the problems described in 1:1–3:6. The appendixes describe Israel’s problems representative of the period of the judges, when “there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for deliverance, and God’s raising up of a judge reflects a deuteronomic perspective with its warnings concerning disobedience and judgment. The repetitiveness of the cycle supports the contention of the anonymous narrator that Israel remained unchanged by the grace of God. However, in spite of the moral, religious, and political anarchy as well as the civil wars, the last chapter shows that the tribes are still concerned with each other’s welfare. Though the unity of God’s people has been gravely challenged, the situation is not hopeless. The book ends on a note of hope—hope for a king who may deliver Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Thus, there are several purposes of the book: (1) to demonstrate the meaninglessness of this stage in Israel’s development; (2) to explain why the tribes did not occupy all the land promised to the patriarchs; (3) to justify the way of God, who was gracious and patient with Israel’s repeated acts of disobedience; (4) to set forth the legitimacy of a “shepherd” king in contrast to a despotic form of kingship; and (5) to explain the urgent need for a new momentum, lest Israel succumb to the Philistines and intertribal warfare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Political Introduction (1:1–2:5)<\/h5>\n<p>In Joshua 1–12 the warfare under Joshua is portrayed as a mobilization of Canaanite forces against Israel. By the intervention of the Lord, the Canaanite resistance was put down and the land was occupied by the tribes (chs 13–21). Joshua 13–21, however, clearly shows that each tribe had problems ridding its territory of pockets of Canaanite resistance, which were usually centered around heavily guarded and well-fortified cities (cf. 13:2-6, 13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua emphasizes the successes and minimizes the problems, whereas the prologue to Judges sets the stage for the whole book by openly addressing Israel’s problems and failures. As the book unfolds, it is precisely these problems and failures that in due time bring Israel to the brink of disaster.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the judges began with the death of Joshua (Jgs 1:1; 2:8-9). The Israelites had inherited a legacy from Joshua: the law of the Lord (Jos 23:6; 24:26), the land, a challenge to obey the Lord (24:14-27), and a promise of God’s presence and help in subduing the Canaanites (23:5, 10).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah and Simeon (Jgs 1:2-20)<\/h6>\n<p>The prominence of Judah and Caleb parallels the position of Judah in Joshua (Jos 14:6–15:63; cf. also the house of Joseph, Jgs 1:22-29; cf. Jos 16–17). Judah was victorious over the cruel Adoni-bezek, who ruled over Bezek, a town of uncertain location. Judah successfully occupied the hill country, the Negev, and the western foothills. They even took Jerusalem, or an outlying suburb identified with Jerusalem (Jos 1:8), but could not retain control there (v 21) until David’s conquest of the city (2 Sm 5:6-9). Judah was victorious over the Canaanites in the region of Hebron, already conquered under Joshua (Jos 10:36). Hebron, also known as Kiriath-arba (“city of four” or “tetrapolis”), was a powerful ally of Jerusalem (v 3) and had been able to rally military support for a new assault on Israel, even after its first defeat. Caleb received Hebron, as Moses had promised (Jgs 1:20; cf. Jos 15:13). After the victory over Hebron, Judah extended its control over the southern hill country by an attack on Debir (Jgs 1:11-15; cf. Jos 15:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Kenites (Jgs 1:16), descendants of Jethro and therefore related to Moses by marriage, settled in the Negev around Arad and the City of Palms, which here probably refers to Tamar rather than Jericho.<\/p>\n<p>Judah secured the southern border by a victory over the Canaanites at Hormah (Jgs 1:17; cf. Nm 14:45; 21:3; Dt 1:44) and the coastal plain by victories at Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron. However, Judah’s successes in the coastal plain were resisted by a well-armed Canaanite force (Jgs 1:18-19). It occupied the Judean hill country and the Negev, but could not retain control over the plains. The Philistines were soon to take control over Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, and incorporate them into their pentapolis.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin (1:21)<\/h6>\n<p>Jerusalem was situated on the border between Judah and Benjamin. Judah took the city or a suburb (Jos 1:8) but was too far removed to retain control over it. Benjamin was too weak to subdue the Jebusites. Only David succeeded in this (2 Sm 5:6-9); he incorporated it into Judah (cf. Jos 15:63), even though it originally was allotted to Benjamin (Jos 18:28).<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph: Ephraim and Manasseh (1:22-29)<\/h6>\n<p>Ephraim took Bethel, known from the patriarchal stories as a significant cultic site (Gn 12:8; 13:3-4; 28:19; 31:13; 35:1-15). However, Manasseh was unsuccessful in taking the fortified cities in the valley of Jezreel (Esdraelon): Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor, Ibleam, and Megiddo. These cities controlled traffic along the east-west and north–south roads as well as the important passes through the Carmel range and the ford of the Jordan. Ephraim could not take full possession of the coastal plain, controlled by Gezer. The success of both Ephraim and Manasseh was limited.<\/p>\n<h6>The Other Four Tribes (1:30-36)<\/h6>\n<p>The other four tribes in Canaan receive brief mention. They, too, were only partially successful. Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and especially Dan did not fully succeed in driving out the Canaanites. At best they later subjected most of them to forced labor.<\/p>\n<h6>The Failure of Israel (2:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>The failure to subdue the land and to wipe out the Canaanites and their culture led to intermarriage and idolatry (cf. Ex 23:33; 34:12-16; Nm 33:55; Dt 7:2-5, 16; Jos 23:7, 12).<\/p>\n<p>The identity of “the angel of the Lord” who appears at Bokim is far from certain. It may be a reference to the Lord himself, to an angelic messenger, or to a prophet (cf. Jgs 6:8). He rebuked the people in the prophetic spirit and pronounced God’s judgment as taking the form of continual confrontation between Israel and the Canaanites (2:3). Their weeping and sacrificing were to no avail (2:4-5; cf. Mal 2:13). Israel stood condemned within a generation after Joshua’s death.<\/p>\n<h5>The Theological Introduction (2:6–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>The theological introduction begins where Joshua left off (Jos 24:28-31). The generation of Joshua was characterized by loyalty, but their loyalty to the Lord did not last long after the excitement of the Conquest and the demonstration of God’s presence (Jgs 2:10). Israel served Canaanite gods (Baal and Astarte) instead. Baal was the storm god, symbolic of rain and fertility, and Astarte was his cohort. The plural (Baals and Ashtaroth, 2:11-13) signifies the many local ways in which the Canaanite gods were worshiped. The religious unity was broken up into a great diversity. Thus Israel angered the Lord (vv 12-14), who sent them enemies and plunderers. Israel was unsuccessful in dealing with them, as Moses and Joshua had forewarned (Dt 28:25, 33; Jos 23:13, 16). The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for mercy, and deliverance is found throughout Judges. The people were rooted in the apostasy of their forefathers, even though the previous generation had been sensitive to God. Israel did not submit to the leadership of the judges, except to free itself from the oppressors. In fulfillment of the curses of the covenant, God swore not to give his people rest but to test them and to train them for warfare (Jgs 3:1-4), so that they might learn to respond to the challenges of a real world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Judges of Israel (3:7–16:31)<\/h5>\n<h6>Othniel (3:7-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Othniel is a transitional figure, linking the Conquest and the judges. He had involved himself in the conquest of Kiriath-sepher and was related to Caleb as his cousin and son-in-law (1:13). He repelled the Arameans led by Cushan-rishathaim, so that the land enjoyed peace for some 40 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ehud (3:12-30)<\/h6>\n<p>The Moabites, allied with the Ammonites and Amalekites, came against Israel from the east and oppressed them for 18 years under the leadership of Eglon. Ehud led the mission to bring tribute to Eglon at his palace, located probably by Jericho (the City of Palms). Ehud was uniquely qualified for this mission; being left-handed, he was able to use his double-edged sword in an unsuspecting manner to stab the king. Ehud’s success was the result of careful plotting and the element of surprise. He paid the tribute and left, only to return with a supposed oracle from the gods. The king fell for the deception and was murdered. The delay at the Moabite court gave the Israelites an opportunity to bring their forces together at the fords of the Jordan. Ehud’s success was complete; no Moabite escaped, and Israel enjoyed peace for 80 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Shamgar (3:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Shamgar’s exploits were against the Philistines in the coastal plains. He had a non-Israelite name but was probably an Israelite by birth. Like Samson he fought the Philistines with an unconventional weapon (an ox goad). His name is also mentioned in the song of Deborah (5:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Deborah and Barak (4:1–5:31)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative now turns to the Canaanite aggressors in the north under the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor, and Sisera, of Harosheth-haggoyim (4:1-3). The ruins of Hazor (Jos 11:13) had been rebuilt, and another Jabin (cf. v 1) ruled over the region. He had regained his military power, as he had as many as 900 chariots of iron. He oppressed Israel for 20 years (Jgs 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>God had a prophetess in Israel who led his people during this dark time (4:4). She rendered judgments under a palm tree in southern Ephraim near Benjamin (v 5). She called on Barak to muster the armies of Naphtali and Zebulun, the tribes affected by the Canaanite raids, and to engage Sisera in a surprise attack by the Kishon River (vv 6-7). Barak’s hesitancy led him to request Deborah’s presence, which resulted in his forfeiture of the honor of killing Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite forces (vv 8-10). The Lord gave success to the surprise attack from Mt Tabor, so that the Canaanites were routed, unable to use their heavy chariots, which were mired down in the swamps of the Jezreel Valley (5:20-22). The Canaanites were routed, and Sisera was killed by Jael, the wife of Heber, a Kenite who had separated from the Kenites around Arad (4:17-18; cf. 1:16). She offered him hospitality, as her family had friendly relations with the Canaanites, but heroically put him to death with a tent peg (4:18-21; 5:26-27). In successive campaigns the Israelites gained freedom from Jabin, until they destroyed his power (4:24).<\/p>\n<p>The song of Deborah (ch 5) celebrates, in poetic fashion, the victory over Jabin. It is one of the oldest poems in the Bible. It praises the God of Israel as the King who comes to protect his covenant people, and before whom the mountains move (5:2-3). He is the God of Mt Sinai (Jgs 5:4-5; cf. Dt 33:2; Ps 68:7-8; Hb 3:3-4). Though the oppressors had despoiled Israel and had made the roads unsafe for travel, and Israel was unable to defend itself (Jgs 5:6-8), the Lord raised up Deborah and Barak to lead the nobles to war (vv 9-13). They came from Ephraim, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar, and Naphtali (vv 14-15a, 18), but the Transjordan tribes and Asher did not want to get involved (vv 15b-17). The song then moves to the battle scene, where torrential rains bogged the chariots down (vv 19-23). Jael is celebrated as “most blessed of women,” who used her simple way of life to bring an end to Sisera (vv 24-27). She stands in contrast to Sisera’s mother, who is portrayed with all her culture waiting in vain for Sisera’s return with all of his spoils (vv 28-30). The Lord has used the simple to confound the powerful. The conclusion is a prayer for God’s judgment on all of Israel’s enemies (Jgs 5:31a; cf. Ps 68:1-3).<\/p>\n<h6>Gideon (6:1–8:35)<\/h6>\n<p>Israel’s rest for 40 years (Jgs 5:31b) was disturbed by the invasion of Midianites and Amalekites from the East (6:1-3). They destroyed the economy by invading the country at harvesttime (vv 4-6). In response to Israel’s cry, God sent a prophet with a message similar to that of the angel of the Lord (2:1-5). Then an angel appeared to Gideon and called him to lead the people in battle (6:11-14). The Lord assured him of his presence (v 16) by a sign (vv 17-22). Gideon knew that he had been visited by the Lord and built an altar called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Peace” in Ophrah (v 24). He responded by destroying the cultic site dedicated to Baal and Asherah at Ophrah (vv 25-28) and by initiating worship at the new altar (v 28). Baal did not protect his own altar (vv 29-32), even when challenged by Gideon’s father (v 31). Consequently, Gideon was known as Jerubbaal (meaning, “let Baal contend with him,” v 32).<\/p>\n<p>Next, Gideon mustered an army of 32,000 men from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali (6:35; cf. 7:3b). In order to assure himself of the Lord’s presence, he asked for another sign: the sign of the fleece (6:36-40). It must be kept in mind that Gideon lived in an area in which the wonders of God had been scarce (v 13) and that he, like Moses, needed reassurance that God was with him. God responded to his growing faith. Gideon went forth with a greatly reduced army of 300 against the enemy. Of his original army, 22,000 had left because they were afraid (7:2-3; cf. Dt 20:8). Another 9,700 were sent home, though they were valiant men (7:4-8). After assuring Gideon by a dream of an enemy soldier, God used the 300 in a marvelous way to confound the Midianites (vv 9-15). God gave Israel victory over the Midianite leaders Oreb, Zeeb, Zebah, and Zalmunna (7:16–8:21). Gideon wisely avoided a possible military confrontation with Ephraim (8:1-3), pursued the enemy deep into the Transjordan, and punished the leaders of Succoth and Penuel, who did not assist him (vv 4-9, 13-16).<\/p>\n<p>This glorious victory created a new wave of interest in the idea of kingship. The men of Israel wished to establish the family of Gideon as their royal dynasty (8:22). Gideon refused, and instead wrongly set up an ephod, cast from the gold taken in battle (vv 23-27). The ephod was probably used for cultic practices, possibly divination (cf. 17:5).<\/p>\n<p>Gideon’s era also came to an end. He was God’s instrument, giving Israel rest for 40 years. He fathered 70 sons and died in old age. God had richly blessed him, even though he had led Israel astray with his ephod. Thereafter, Israel returned to Baal worship (8:33-35).<\/p>\n<p>In the wake of Gideon’s era, his son Abimelech attempted to establish dynastic continuity by having himself installed as king at Shechem (9:1-6). With the support of his relatives at Shechem, Abimelech had all his brothers killed except Jotham (vv 4-5). After Abimelech’s coronation, Jotham set forth his opposition to his brother in a proverbial manner (vv 7-20), and went into hiding. Three years later Abimelech’s evil schemes entrapped him when the citizens of Shechem rebelled. He furiously attacked the city and destroyed it. A short time later, however, he was wounded at Thebez by a millstone dropped by a woman from the tower in which she had sought refuge from him. His servant put him out of his misery as per his request. This episode demonstrates how bad a despotic king may be. Again, God’s justice prevailed.<\/p>\n<h6>Tola (10:1-2)<\/h6>\n<p>Tola was a minor judge from Issachar who judged Israel for 23 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jair (10:3-5)<\/h6>\n<p>Jair was a minor judge from Gilead who judged Israel for 22 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jephthah (10:6–12:7)<\/h6>\n<p>A recapitulation (10:6-16) of the cycle (idolatry, enemies, cry for help, momentary repentance) sets the introduction to the Jephthah narrative. Under attack from the Ammonites, the elders of Gilead requested help from Jephthah (10:17–11:8), who promised to help them on the condition that he remain their leader even after the war (vv 9-10). At a solemn ceremony he becomes their “head” at Mizpah (v 11). Jephthah opened up correspondence with the Ammonite king, in which he argued for Israel’s rights on the basis of the Israelites’ historic claim to the land as granted to them by the Lord (vv 12–27). Instead of going out immediately to war, he hoped that “the <span>Lord<\/span>, the Judge” would settle the dispute (v 27); but the Ammonite king was unimpressed. When the Spirit of God came over him, Jephthah led Israel into battle, but only after making a rash vow. He was victorious but found out that his vow to sacrifice whatever came first out of his house required him to sacrifice his daughter. Debate continues as to whether he offered her up as a human sacrifice or whether she sacrificed marriage (see discussion under Jephthah).<\/p>\n<p>The Ephraimites seemed to have had an insatiable desire for war. Earlier they had complained to Gideon, who successfully defused their threats (8:1-3). Jephthah fought them, however, because the Israelites living in Transjordan had been reviled as “renegades” (12:1-4). Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed by the fords of the Jordan in this civil war. Thereafter, Jephthah ruled for only six years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ibzan (12:8-10)<\/h6>\n<p>Ibzan was a minor judge from Bethlehem who ruled Israel for seven years.<\/p>\n<h6>Elon (12:11)<\/h6>\n<p>A minor judge from Zebulun, Elon ruled Israel for ten years.<\/p>\n<h6>Abdon (12:13-15)<\/h6>\n<p>Abdon was a minor judge from Pirathon, the location of which is uncertain. He ruled for eight years.<\/p>\n<h6>Samson (13:1–16:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Samson’s greatness in the history of redemption is due to his miraculous birth (13:1-24), his service as a Nazirite (13:7; cf. Nm 6:1-21), the repeated overpowering by the Spirit of the Lord (Jgs 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14), the single-handed exploits against the Philistines (Ashkelon, 14:19; the fields, 15:1-6; Ramath Etam, 15:7-17; Gaza, 16:1-3, 23-30), and his occasional dependence on the Lord (15:18-19; 16:28-30). However, his personal life was flawed because of his weakness for Philistine women (chs 14, 16). Having been seduced by Delilah, he was imprisoned at Gaza. He died in the collapse of Dagon’s temple, praying that the Lord would permit him to get revenge (16:28-30). He was buried in his father’s tomb in the territory of Dan (16:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue (17–21)<\/h5>\n<p>The cyclical nature of Israel’s existence was without movement. Rest from enemies was always temporary. Israel was not yet ready for dynastic kingship, and whatever one may say of the three years of Abimelech, it was a kingship of the worst sort. Israel vacillated between idolatry and belief in the true Lord. The period of the judges was unstable, marked by petty individualism and provincialism. Yet God remained sovereign in the affairs of his people. The epilogue contains two stories: the story of Micah and the Danite migration (chs 17–18) and the civil war (chs 19–21). The epilogue is bound together by the phrase “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25, <span>niv<\/span>). The symmetric recurrence (two times in each narrative) emphasizes the anarchy and inability of the tribes to unite together to serve God as a covenant people.<\/p>\n<h6>Micah and the Danites (17–18)<\/h6>\n<p>Micah was an Ephraimite who established a shrine and hired one of his own sons, and then a Levite from Bethlehem, to serve as its priests (ch 17). Unable to keep their patrimony, the Danites left to establish themselves at the foot of Mt Hermon. They took the idols and the Levite from Micah’s shrine and set up a cultic city at the newly established city of Dan, built on the ruins of Laish (ch 18). Thus, they set up a cultic center that rivaled the tabernacle at Shiloh (18:31).<\/p>\n<h6>The Civil War (19–21)<\/h6>\n<p>The people of Gibeah, which belonged to Benjamin, sexually abused the concubine of a Levite so that she died. Like the Levite of chapters 17 and 18, she was from Bethlehem (19:1). Dramatically, the Levite sent pieces of her corpse to all the tribes, which assembled against the Benjamites because they protected the criminals of Gibeah (19:29–20:19). In the ensuing battle the population of Benjamin was decimated (20:20-48). The 11 tribes gave them 400 virgins taken in a civil war against Jabesh-gilead (21:6-15). These were not enough, however. Because of the threat of the extinction of Benjamin and the vow not to give their daughters in marriage to any Benjamite, the Israelites devised a plan by which the Benjamites could take Israelite virgins dancing in the festival at Shiloh. Benjamin thus was able to rebuild its towns and settlements.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gideon; Jephthah; Samson.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDGES, Book of Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail. Preview • Author • Date • Li...","summary_en":"JUDGES, Book of Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail. Preview • Author • Date • Li...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25535,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Micah (Person)","title_en":"Micah (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>MICAH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Ephraimite judge who had idols made and then hired a Levite to become his priest (Jgs 17–18).<\/li>\n<li>2. Shimei’s descendant from Reuben’s tribe (1 Chr 5:5).<\/li>\n<li>3. Alternate spelling of Mica, Mephibosheth’s son and the great-grandson of King Saul, in 1 Chronicles 8:34-35; 9:40-41. <em>See<\/em> Mica #1.<\/li>\n<li>4. KJV spelling of Mica, Zicri’s son, in 1 Chronicles 9:15. <em>See<\/em> Mica #2.<\/li>\n<li>5. Levite and Uzziel’s son from Kohath’s clan, whose temple responsibilities included care of the furniture and equipment (1 Chr 23:20; 24:24-25).<\/li>\n<li>6. Alternate spelling of Micaiah, Acbor’s father, in 2 Chronicles 34:20. <em>See<\/em> Micaiah #2.<\/li>\n<li>7. Prophet and author of the OT book that bears his name (Mi 1:1). A native of Moresheth, a town about 21 miles (33.8 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem, Micah prophesied to both northern and southern kingdoms during the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah (750–686 <span>BC<\/span>). According to Micah 1:9, he was still prophesying in 701 <span>BC<\/span> when the Assyrian armies under Sennacherib (cf. Is 36–37) besieged Jerusalem. About 100 years later, Micah is used as an example of an early prophet who predicted the destruction of Jerusalem (cf. Jer 26:16-19).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Micah, Book of; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MICAH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Ephraimite judge who had idols made and then hired a Levite to become his priest (Jgs 17–18).<\/li>\n<li>2. Shimei’s descendant from Reuben’s tribe (1 Chr 5:5).<\/li>\n<li>3. Alternate spelling of Mica, Mephibosheth’s son and the great-grandson of King Saul, in 1 Chronicles 8:34-35; 9:40-41. <em>See<\/em> Mica #1.<\/li>\n<li>4. KJV spelling of Mica, Zicri’s son, in 1 Chronicles 9:15. <em>See<\/em> Mica #2.<\/li>\n<li>5. Levite and Uzziel’s son from Kohath’s clan, whose temple responsibilities included care of the furniture and equipment (1 Chr 23:20; 24:24-25).<\/li>\n<li>6. Alternate spelling of Micaiah, Acbor’s father, in 2 Chronicles 34:20. <em>See<\/em> Micaiah #2.<\/li>\n<li>7. Prophet and author of the OT book that bears his name (Mi 1:1). A native of Moresheth, a town about 21 miles (33.8 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem, Micah prophesied to both northern and southern kingdoms during the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah (750–686 <span>BC<\/span>). According to Micah 1:9, he was still prophesying in 701 <span>BC<\/span> when the Assyrian armies under Sennacherib (cf. Is 36–37) besieged Jerusalem. About 100 years later, Micah is used as an example of an early prophet who predicted the destruction of Jerusalem (cf. Jer 26:16-19).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Micah, Book of; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MICAH (Person) 1. Ephraimite judge who had idols made and then hired a Levite to become his priest (Jgs 17–18). 2. Shimei’s descendant from Reuben’s tribe (1 Chr 5:5). 3. Alternate spelling of Mica, Mephibosheth’s son and the great-grandson of King Saul, in 1 Chronicles 8:34-35; 9:40-41. See Mica #1. 4. KJV spelling of Mica, Zicri’s son, in 1 Chronicles 9:15. See Mica #2. 5. Levite and Uzziel’s son from Kohath’s clan, whose temple responsibilities included care of the furniture and equipment ...","summary_en":"MICAH (Person) 1. Ephraimite judge who had idols made and then hired a Levite to become his priest (Jgs 17–18). 2. Shimei’s descendant from Reuben’s tribe (1 Chr 5:5). 3. Alternate spelling of Mica, Mephibosheth’s son and the great-grandson of King Saul, in 1 Chronicles 8:34-35; 9:40-41. See Mica #1. 4. KJV spelling of Mica, Zicri’s son, in 1 Chronicles 9:15. See Mica #2. 5. Levite and Uzziel’s son from Kohath’s clan, whose temple responsibilities included care of the furniture and equipment ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31337,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Priests and Levites","title_en":"Priests and Levites","content_ro":"<h3>PRIESTS AND LEVITES<\/h3>\n<p>Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levites fulfilled a variety of essentially religious duties and were equivalent approximately to the clergy in modern times. They were professional men and were supported for their full-time religious work.<\/p>\n<p>The role of the priesthood may be seen most clearly in the context of Israelite religion as a whole. At the heart of religion was a relationship with God; to be an Israelite or a Jew was to know and maintain a continuous relationship with the living God. This relationship found its outward expression in a variety of contexts: the covenant, the temple, worship, and every facet of daily life. Thus religion, understood as a relationship, had two perspectives: the relationship with God and that with fellow human beings. It had both a personal and a communal dimension to it. The priests were the guardians and servants of this life of relationship, which was at the heart of OT religion; all their functions can best be understood within the context of a relationship between God and Israel. The prophets, too, were servants of the covenant relationship. While the priests functioned as the normal servants of religion, the prophets’ role was more that of calling a delinquent people back to the relationship with God in times of crisis.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, there are frequent references to both priests and Levites; in a number of biblical texts, however, the distinction is not clear (see, e.g., Dt 18:1-8). From the scholarly point of view, the precise relationship between priests and Levites is a continuing problem that has not yet been fully resolved. In general terms, only the sons of Aaron were to assume the role of priests; all other Levites would have religious functions, though technically they would not be priests. While this distinction is clear in most biblical texts, in others there is lack of certainty and clarity. It is clear, however, that <em>priests<\/em> (Levites descended from Aaron) and <em>Levites<\/em> (other than the descendants of Aaron) all had professional religious duties to perform. The precise nature of those duties varied from time to time in the course of Israel’s history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>• The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>• The Priests<\/p>\n<p>• The Levites<\/p>\n<p>• The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheOriginsofthePriesthood\">The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood in Israel began during the time of Moses and Aaron. The exodus from Egypt was not only the liberation of a group of Hebrew slaves but also the birth of the nation of Israel. The nation that was born in the exodus was given its constitution in the covenant of Sinai. The law of this covenant established the foundations and origins of Israelite priesthood. It provides insight into the three basic categories to be considered: the high priest, the priests, and the Levites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHighPriest\">The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>Any large and complex organization requires a head or leader, and this was true also of the Hebrew priesthood (though in its early days it was a small organization). The covenant was established through Moses, the prophet, through whom God gave the offer and substance of the covenant relationship; religious life within the covenant was to be the primary responsibility of Aaron, who was the first and chief priest.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of Israel’s priesthood, it is probable that the high priest’s office was relatively informal; he was chief or leader among his fellow priests. The office was significant, nevertheless, and involved a special ritual of investiture, special clothing, and certain special responsibilities. While the high priest’s duties were similar in principle to those of other priests, he had certain exclusive responsibilities. To some extent, his duties were administrative, pertaining to all the priests of whom he had charge. But his position was more weighty than that of an administrator; just as all priests were the servants and guardians of the covenant relationship, so the high priest was chief servant and chief guardian. In his hands rested spiritual responsibility for the entire people of God, and therein lay the true honor and gravity of his position.<\/p>\n\n<p>This spiritual seniority of the high priest is seen most clearly in certain tasks he undertook within Israel’s life of worship. The clearest example may be seen in the annual observation of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). On that day alone, the high priest entered the Holy of Holies and, standing before the “mercy seat,” he sought God’s forgiveness and mercy for the whole nation of Israel (Lv 16:1-19). It is in that ceremony that Israel’s covenant faith is seen most clearly. Israel’s religion was one of relationship with a holy God, and human evil disrupted that relationship. While all worship and sacrifices throughout the year were concerned with the continuation of the relationship, the Day of Atonement was the most solemn day of the year, in which the attention of all the people focused upon the meaning of their existence. Life held meaning only if the relationship with God could be maintained; the high priest had the great honor and heavy burden of seeking God’s mercy for all Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The special clothing worn by the high priest was symbolic of the nature and importance of his office; although all the symbolism cannot be determined, some of it is made clear in the biblical text. There are three particular themes in the symbolism. The first is beauty. The sense of beauty emerges from the quality and design of all the items of clothing, together with the use of color and precious stones. But beauty is dominant in the breastplate; the Hebrew word translated approximately as “breastplate” has as its basic sense “beauty” or “excellence.” The clothing symbolizes beauty, while beauty describes the office; the two other themes associated with the symbolism bring out the excellence of the office.<\/p>\n<p>The second theme is the role of the priest as representative of Israel before God. This essential dimension of the office of the high priest is explicitly identified in the names of the tribes of Israel in the two onyx stones in the ephod, and in the 12 precious stones attached to the breastplate. The high priest entered God’s presence to seek deliverance from God’s judgment (the breastplate is identified with judgment; Ex 28:15) for his people and in order to keep the people constantly in God’s remembrance (v 12), as symbolized by the two onyx stones. The third theme is the role of high priest as the representative of God to Israel. This dimension of the office is seen in the Urim and Thummim, kept in the breastpiece, by means of which God made known his will to Israel. The high priest, Aaron, fully robed, was a splendid figure, and the splendor of his garments indicated the magnificence of the office with which he had been entrusted.<\/p>\n<p>The high priesthood was to be passed on within the family (for the high priest was expected to be a married man), although in later history the practice was not always adhered to. On Aaron’s death, the office passed to Eleazar, one of his four sons.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriests\">The Priests<\/p>\n<p>Priests took office not as the result of a particular vocation but by virtue of priestly descent. Thus the first priests were the four sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These four were ordained at the same time that Aaron was ordained high priest (Ex 28:1). Like him, they had special clothing, which was basically similar, though it lacked the distinctive garments of the high priest (the special ephod, the breastpiece, and the crown). The priesthood would be passed down through their sons.<\/p>\n<p>The sanctity of the priestly office was such that it was preserved from degeneration through specific laws. A man must be a descendant of Aaron to be a priest, but he was also required to meet a variety of other qualifications. He would not marry a divorcée or a former prostitute (Lv 21:7). If he was afflicted by certain kinds of disease or congenital defects, he was barred from priestly office (e.g., blindness, lameness, mutilation, being a hunchback or dwarf; vv 16-23). The principle involved was similar to that applying to animals used in sacrifice—only those free from defect or blemish were suitable for divine service.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of the priesthood there is some information provided in the biblical text concerning the specific duties of the priests. Eleazar had overall responsibility for the tabernacle and its offerings (Nm 4:16); assisted Moses in a number of duties, such as numbering the people and dividing the land (26:1-2; 32:2); and later served as an adviser to Joshua. Ithamar was responsible for the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 38:21) and supervised the families of the Gershonites and Merarites (Nm 4:28-33). Nadab and Abihu, however, died soon after their ordination as a result of a sinful act in their priestly duties (Lv 10:1-7), which may have been related in part to drunkenness (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Priestly duties, in general, fell into three areas (Dt 33:8-10). First, priests were responsible, in conjunction with the high priest, for declaring God’s will to the people. Second, they had responsibilities in religious education; they were to teach to Israel God’s ordinances and law (v 10). Third, they were to be the servants of the tabernacle, participating in Israel’s sacrifices and worship. There were a number of other duties that may have fallen to them, which they would have shared with the Levites in general.<\/p>\n<p>The priests, along with all other Levites, did not own any land, as did the other Israelite tribes. Their task was to be entirely in the direct service to God. The absence of land, however, meant that they could not support and feed themselves as could other men and women. Consequently, the law specified that they could be supported for their services by the people as a whole. They were to receive, from worshipers, portions of animals that were brought to the tabernacle, as well as corn, wine, oil, and wool.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLevites\">The Levites<\/p>\n<p>This term includes the priests, in a broad sense, for the sons of Aaron belonged to the tribe of Levi. For practical purposes, however, the Levites were those of the tribe other than the priests. The Levites also functioned in the service of the tabernacle, though they had a subordinate position. They, too, were professional men and were paid in money and in kind for their services. Though they did not inherit tribal territory of their own, there were a number of cities set aside for their use (Nm 35:1-8), and pasturelands were designated outside those cities for their livestock.<\/p>\n<p>The Levites were divided into three principal families, the descendants of Kohath, Gershon, and Merari (Nm 4). Each of these families had particular responsibilities with respect to the care and transport of the tabernacle. The sons of Kohath carried the tabernacle furniture (after it had been covered by the priests), the sons of Gershon cared for the coverings and screens, and the sons of Merari carried and erected the tabernacle’s frame. The priests, by contrast, were responsible for the transportation of the ark of the covenant. The role of each Levite, as servant of the tabernacle, was restricted; he undertook his professional duties between the ages of 25 and 50 (8:24-26).<\/p>\n<p>Although many of the duties of the Levites were of a mundane nature, they also had a very significant religious role. The law required that all the firstborn, including firstborn sons, be given to God, recalling the slaying of the firstborn at the exodus from Egypt. The Levites’ role in religion was that of being accepted by God in the place of the firstborn sons of Israel (Nm 3:11-13); their cattle, too, were accepted in place of the Israelites’ firstborn cattle. In the census taken in the time of Moses, the firstborn Israelites exceeded the number of the Levites, and a five-shekel redemption fee had to be paid into the priestly coffers for each person in excess (vv 40-51). The representative and substitutionary nature of the Levites can be seen in Israelite religion. Like the priests, they played a part in the larger activity of mediation between God and Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The law of Deuteronomy specifies a number of duties that may have fallen upon both priests and Levites (though the texts are ambiguous). These duties included participation in the activity of the law courts as judges, perhaps with special reference to religious crimes (Dt 17:8-9), taking care of the Book of the Law (v 18), controlling the lives and health of lepers (24:8), and participating directly in the conduct of covenant renewal ceremonies (27:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHistoryoftheInstitution\">The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>In theory, the covenant law of Moses determined the nature and course of the offices of priests and Levites for the future history of Israel. In practice, however, changing historical circumstances and changes in the shape of Israel’s religion and culture altered the shape of the priesthood and the role of the Levites from time to time. And even more significantly, the persons who held the offices shaped them and their effectiveness through their faithfulness or unfaithfulness.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood before the Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>In the time of Joshua, the priests continued to undertake their important task of carrying the ark of the covenant. The Levites assisted in the division and allocation of the newly acquired land among the Israelite tribes. In Joshua 21, there is a detailed list of the allocation of cities to both priests and Levites, in fulfillment of the earlier legislation. In the days of the settlement, beyond the Conquest, there is some evidence that the Levites took over the priestly duty of transporting the ark (1 Sm 6:15; 2 Sm 15:24).<\/p>\n<p>The writer of the book of Judges has recorded two stories that illuminate the lives of particular Levites. The first, the story of Micah (Jgs 17–18), describes the establishment of a local shrine in which Micah’s son was appointed as a priest (though he was not of Levite or Aaronic descent). Later, Micah hired an itinerant Levite to function as a priest in his shrine, though subsequently that Levite was persuaded to serve the tribe of Dan as a priest. It is difficult to fit the details of this story into the theoretical model of priests and Levites, though the story may illustrate the confused state of Israel’s religion at the time. What is particularly significant is that the role of the Levite-priest was primarily oracular (18:5-6). The second story in Judges is the rather horrifying account of a Levite and his concubine (ch 19). The story illustrates the moral decline and lack of law and order in Israel at the time, but it sheds little light on the role of the Levites.<\/p>\n<p>More information is provided about the priesthood during the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, immediately before the establishment of the monarchy. The tabernacle (by now probably a semipermanent structure) and the ark of the covenant were located in Shiloh. The priest in charge of the sanctuary in Shiloh was Eli, who may have been a descendant of Aaron’s son Ithamar. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, also served as priests, indicating that the principle of family descent was still operative with respect to the priesthood. But although Eli was a faithful priest, his two sons abused the office.<\/p>\n<p>The precise role of Samuel in this period is unclear. He was primarily a judge and a prophet, but it is difficult to determine whether he was also a priest. In the historical narrative, he is not called a priest, though Psalm 99:6 might be interpreted to indicate his priestly office. There are a number of passages, however, that indicate he acted like a priest. For example, he offered sacrifices (1 Sm 7:9-10); as a young man he served in the sanctuary of Shiloh and wore an ephod (ch 2). Furthermore, one of the biblical genealogies implies priestly descent (1 Chr 6:23-30). Nevertheless, he is not normally identified as a priest and the introduction to his story refers to him as an Ephraimite, by descent from his father (1 Sm 1:1), not a Levite. If the priest is perceived as a permanent servant of the sanctuary, as was Eli, then it is clear that Samuel was not a priest. But the priestly role of Samuel may perhaps be related to the fact that his mother “lent” him to God (v 28) while he was still a boy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Time of David and Solomon<\/h5>\n<p>Several radical changes took place during the reign of David and Solomon. These were a result, primarily, of the establishment of a permanent temple in Jerusalem and the installation of the ark of the covenant there. During the time of Saul, the first king of Israel, the social structure was essentially the same as it had been in the time of the judges. Saul, as king, was a military leader, but his relationship to religion and the priesthood was not clearly determined.<\/p>\n<p>David changed the situation in many important respects. After his capture of the city of Jerusalem, he made that place the political and religious capital of his nation. The religious centrality of Jerusalem was assured by moving the ark of the covenant there, together with the tabernacle. Jerusalem now became the permanent location of the ark, and therefore the permanent center of religion; at the same time, the various regional shrines, which had developed in the premonarchical period, were gradually eliminated.<\/p>\n<p>These changes had numerous implications for the priesthood and the Levites. During David’s reign, there were two principal priests, Abiathar and Zadok. Abiathar, a former priest of Nob, had joined David before his rise to power; he appears to have been a descendant of Eli, and through him of Ithamar, one of Aaron’s sons. Zadok’s background is less clear, though his lineage appears to go back to Aaron’s other son, Eleazar. These two priests are always named together in the texts describing David’s reign, and Zadok is always mentioned before Abiathar. Although neither is explicitly identified as high priest in the ancient texts, there is some evidence to suggest that Abiathar functioned as high priest (1 Kgs 2:35); in NT times, he is identified as such (Mk 2:26). Zadok, during David’s reign, may have been particularly responsible for the care of the ark of the covenant (2 Sm 15:24-25). These two priests had a significant position in David’s royal establishment; they may also have shared overall responsibility for the priests, whose lives were now centered on the Jerusalem temple.<\/p>\n<p>Much of David’s time was focused upon the preparations for building a permanent temple for God. In the preparation for the temple, and in its completion during the reign of King Solomon, the new activities of the Levites may be seen. (The construction of a permanent temple automatically removed their former responsibilities related to the care and transportation of the tabernacle.) Large numbers of Levites were employed as laborers in the actual building of the temple. Others found new tasks in the worship of God in the tabernacle during David’s reign and in the temple upon its completion. To the Levites, and especially to Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, was given primary responsibility for the music of worship; this involved not only singing but also the playing of a variety of instruments in the temple’s orchestra or band. The Levites had also a variety of other tasks; they worked as gatekeepers at the sanctuary, assisted the priests in the preparation of sacrifices, kept the sanctuary clean, and functioned as general administrative and legal officers (1 Chr 23:1-32). Other Levites functioned as bankers, with primary responsibility for the temple treasuries (26:20-28).<\/p>\n<p>Following David’s death, there was a dispute over the royal succession, from which Solomon emerged as the new king. During his reign, the temple was brought to its completion and the regular worship of the nation was conducted there. In the matter of succession, however, Abiathar had supported a losing candidate, and when Solomon was made king, he lost his important office in the royal court. During Solomon’s reign, the control of the priesthood passed into the hands of Zadok.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Divided Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>The great empire, which had been built by David and maintained by Solomon, collapsed after Solomon’s death. From the ruins, two new and relatively insignificant states emerged. The southern kingdom, Judah, retained Jerusalem as its capital and the temple as its center of worship. The northern kingdom, Israel, located its first capital at Shechem, from where it was later moved to Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>In the southern state of Judah, the priests and Levites continued to function normally within the Jerusalem temple. The office of high priest continued to be passed on by descent within the family of Zadok, who had held office in Solomon’s reign. The continuity of office in this family was to be retained down into the time of the second temple, when the Zadokite succession was interrupted about 171 <span>BC<\/span>. Nevertheless, for all the continuity of religion in Jerusalem, all was not well with religion in Judah, neither during the reign of its first king, Rehoboam, nor during the reigns of his successors. During Rehoboam’s reign, there was a decline in religion and also in the priesthood, when popular forms of religion were introduced as a result of foreign influence (1 Kgs 14:22-24). The history of the southern kingdom was marked by periods of religious decline followed by reform, often as a result of the activities of the prophets. The role of the priesthood was all too rarely one of spiritual leadership, and the priests themselves were often the subject of criticism by the prophets (e.g., Jer 2:8, 26).<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom, whose first king was Jeroboam I, inevitably had to introduce some radical changes in religion. Jeroboam could not recognize the temple of Jerusalem, partly because it lay outside his state and partly because it was intimately associated with the royal line of David. Jeroboam established two principal shrines in his kingdom, both of which were to retain importance during the relatively short life of the northern kingdom (200 years). The first was at Bethel, in the southern part of his kingdom near the border of Judah (it was only about 12 miles, or 19.3 kilometers, north of Jerusalem). The second shrine, or sanctuary, was at Dan, in the far northern part of his kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Both these sanctuaries had ancient associations with the Hebrew traditions. Bethel is referred to as early as the time of Abram (Gn 12:8), and the sanctuary at Dan is known from the history of the judges (Jgs 18). There may indeed have been priests and Levites still residing in these two places, descendants of the former servants of the sanctuaries. But Jeroboam established a non-Levitical priesthood to serve in these sanctuaries and in various smaller shrines or “high places,” thereby cutting off the religious tradition of the northern state even more radically from that of Judah. The royal sanctuary at Bethel, so close to the Jerusalem temple, may have been set up in deliberate competition with the Judean sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p>The history of the priesthood in the northern kingdom is no more impressive than that of Judah. Many of the prophets, including Amos, Hosea, and Jeremiah, condemned the northern sanctuaries and their priests. Hosea was forceful in his condemnation: “As marauders lie in ambush for a man, so do bands of priests; they murder on the road to Shechem, committing shameful crimes” (Hos 6:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Those to whom the spiritual lives of the chosen people had been entrusted only rarely lived up to their responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h5>Priests and Levites during and after the Exile<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom came to its end in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, defeated by the armies of Assyria, but religious life continued in Judah for a while longer. Eventually, the end of the southern state came about 586 <span>BC<\/span>; the defeat of the state by the Babylonians was accompanied by the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple (Lam 2:20). The Babylonian commander took Seraiah, the high priest, and Zephaniah, his assistant, to Riblah, where, along with other officials, they were executed (2 Kgs 25:18-21). Then a policy of exile was established by the Babylonians; the most important and influential people of Judah were deported to Babylon, while the less significant were allowed to remain, for they were unlikely to cause trouble. Of those exiled from Judah, many may have been priests (Jer 29:1), for they were men of influence. By way of contrast, it seems likely that a much smaller number of Levites was exiled, reflecting perhaps their inferior social position.<\/p>\n<p>In the city of Jerusalem there was little normal religious life during the years of the exile; the altar had been destroyed and was not restored until after the exile. No doubt some kind of activity continued, but it was an impoverished form of religion. Most of the priests were in exile in Babylon, but they could not function, for there was no temple or sanctuary. Ezekiel implies that God himself was the only “sanctuary” for the exiles (Ez 11:16). Not until the return from exile and the restoration of Jerusalem and its temple could the normal functions of priests and Levites resume.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian Empire was defeated, the new Persian conquerors instituted a policy whereby the Hebrew exiles could return to their homeland. Of those returning, 4,289 are designated as priests and members of priestly families, while only 341 were Levites (Ezr 2:36-42); the imbalance probably reflects the imbalance in the number of those exiled initially. Under Joshua (Jeshua), the priest, and Zerubbabel, work began on the restoration. The priests played a significant role in the first year of the return, in the restoration of the altar in Jerusalem, so that sacrifice and worship to God could resume. Once the altar had been restored, the work began on the temple itself in the second year of the return. In this work, both the priests and the Levites were involved, and the laying of new foundations for the temple began. When the foundation had been laid, both priests, in their vestments, and Levites, in their role as singers and musicians, participated in the ceremony of dedication (3:8-13). Again, when the temple had been rebuilt, both priests and Levites participated in the ceremony of dedication (6:16-18). The restoration, however, was concerned with more than buildings; it also involved a moral and religious component. Though priests and Levites helped in this task, they were also affected by it. Many, for example, had married foreign wives (9:1), and thus had to conform to Ezra’s reform laws.<\/p>\n<p>To some extent, the priests and Levites resumed their normal duties in the worship of the postexilic period. The priests were engaged in the conduct of the temple worship. The Levites assisted, as temple servants (Neh 11:3), as treasurers and collectors of tithes (10:37-39), and as instructors or teachers of the law of God (8:7-9). Nevertheless, the history of the priesthood after the exile is not free of blemish. Condemnation of the abuses of the priestly office was delivered by the prophet Malachi (Mal 1:6–2:9). Malachi catalogues a list of priestly evils reminiscent of the evil priests who lived during the time of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest continued after the exile among the descendants of Zadok, being held first by Joshua (Hg 1:1). The different political circumstances, however, changed the nature of the high priestly office. Whereas in the days of the monarchy the high priest was subservient to the king, there was no king, in the proper sense, after the exile. From a political perspective, the Jews were members of a province or colony; for practical purposes, they were a community based upon a common religion. The high priest was no longer subject to the secular authority of a Jewish king, but his religious authority was considerable, and in some ways his functions were similar to those of a king in preexilic times.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood in the Maccabean Period<\/h5>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, some changes took place in the priesthood, particularly with respect to the office of high priest, which marked the end of the OT era and set the background for the NT period. Judea, in the second century, was ruled by the Seleucid kings, who had inherited a portion of the massive Greek Empire established by Alexander the Great. The Judean province was controlled internally under the high priesthood, whose authority was received from the Seleucid kings.<\/p>\n<p>For the first three decades of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood remained with the Zadokite line of descent. The high priests were members of the (Zadokite) Oniad family: first, Onias III (198–174 <span>BC<\/span>); then Jason, brother of Onias III (174–171 <span>BC<\/span>). It was in the period of Jason that there began a series of events that would terminate the Zadokite tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Onias III had opposed the Hellenization policy of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), which threatened to undermine the Jewish faith. Antiochus replaced Onias by Jason, who in effect purchased the high priesthood from the Seleucid king. In purchasing the priestly office, Jason had set a dangerous precedent; although he was of Zadokite descent, his act implied that the office could be bought and that descent was not vital. The opponents of Jason, the Tobiads, were able to remove him from office and have their own candidate, Menelaus (who was not a Zadokite), appointed in his place. This act resulted in a civil war between those supporting Jason and those supporting Menelaus, and the war in turn culminated in ruthless repressive measures by Antiochus Epiphanes; there were massacres in Jerusalem, and the temple was desecrated (167 <span>BC<\/span>). The desecration of the temple led to the Maccabean revolt, as a result of which the Jews regained their independence for a short time. Menelaus retained the office of high priest until 161 <span>BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Alcimus (161–159 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>There then followed a period during which there was no high priest for seven years. The political climate, however, was such that it became unlikely that the Zadokite line would ever regain the high priesthood, which had been established in the time of King Solomon. The Maccabean Jonathan gained control of Jerusalem, and in 152 <span>BC<\/span>, with the approval of the Seleucid king, he was formally invested with the high priest’s robes of office. He was succeeded as high priest and ruler by his brother Simon in 143 <span>BC<\/span>, who also held the office with the approval of the Seleucids (Demetrius II). But in the third year of his reign (140 <span>BC<\/span>), the high priesthood of Simon received public approval in a great religious assembly, and the family of Simon became “high priest forever” (1 Macc 14:41-47). That event marked the real termination of the Zadokite tradition and the foundation of the Hasmonean line.<\/p>\n<p>The establishment of the high priestly office outside the Zadokite line did not go without challenge. It is probable that a sect within Judaism, now known as the Essenes, was born in reaction to the high priesthood of Simon. The Essenes (better known for the Dead Sea Scrolls) appear to have been founded by a Zadokite priest who rejected the authenticity and authority of Simon. Thus, in a limited sense, the Zadokite priests continued to survive.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriesthoodinNewTestamentTimes\">The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>In the early NT period, both priests and Levites continued to function within the Jewish religion. Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, was a priest belonging to the division of Abijah (Lk 1:5), and his wife was also of priestly descent. When Zechariah was visited by an angel, he was engaged at the time in priestly duties in the Jerusalem temple—various divisions of priests took responsibility for the temple services for a period of time and then returned to their homes (v 23), as another division took over. The distinction between priests and Levites is also maintained in the NT (Jn 1:19) and appears in Jesus’ parable concerning the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:31-32). Both priests and Levites were among the earliest converts to Christianity; Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36), and several priests responded to the proclamation of the gospel (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest is frequently referred to in the NT. Several high priests are named, the plurality of current and former holders of the office reflecting the nature of the position as an essentially political appointment (as distinct from its oldest definition, that of an office passing from father to son on the death of the father). The two most significant high priests in the NT are those who held office during the lifetime of Jesus. Annas was high priest about <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 15, but even after he ceased to hold the office formally, he continued to exert considerable influence through his son-in-law, the high priest Caiaphas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 18–36). Both were significant figures in the trial of Jesus. At a later date, Ananias, son of Nedebaeus, was high priest (c. <span>AD<\/span> 47–58) and president of the Sanhedrin during the time in which Paul was brought to trial.<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood held considerable authority in NT times. Most internal and religious matters in the Roman province of Judea were within the authority of the Sanhedrin, which functioned as a kind of provincial government, though its powers were limited in certain matters by Rome. Its membership included the ruling and former high priests and a large number of Sadducees, many of whom belonged to influential priestly families. This priestly influence in the Sanhedrin was indicative of the important role of the temple in Jewish life during the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 70, following the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a radical change came about in the significance of the priesthood in Judaism. The end of the temple removed in effect the purpose for the existence of the priesthood. Although the priesthood continued after a fashion until the Bar-Kochba rebellion in <span>AD<\/span> 135, its days were numbered after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Since the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, Judaism has developed without priests, and its course down to the present century has been charted by the rabbis, the spiritual descendants of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priesthood.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PRIESTS AND LEVITES<\/h3>\n<p>Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levites fulfilled a variety of essentially religious duties and were equivalent approximately to the clergy in modern times. They were professional men and were supported for their full-time religious work.<\/p>\n<p>The role of the priesthood may be seen most clearly in the context of Israelite religion as a whole. At the heart of religion was a relationship with God; to be an Israelite or a Jew was to know and maintain a continuous relationship with the living God. This relationship found its outward expression in a variety of contexts: the covenant, the temple, worship, and every facet of daily life. Thus religion, understood as a relationship, had two perspectives: the relationship with God and that with fellow human beings. It had both a personal and a communal dimension to it. The priests were the guardians and servants of this life of relationship, which was at the heart of OT religion; all their functions can best be understood within the context of a relationship between God and Israel. The prophets, too, were servants of the covenant relationship. While the priests functioned as the normal servants of religion, the prophets’ role was more that of calling a delinquent people back to the relationship with God in times of crisis.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, there are frequent references to both priests and Levites; in a number of biblical texts, however, the distinction is not clear (see, e.g., Dt 18:1-8). From the scholarly point of view, the precise relationship between priests and Levites is a continuing problem that has not yet been fully resolved. In general terms, only the sons of Aaron were to assume the role of priests; all other Levites would have religious functions, though technically they would not be priests. While this distinction is clear in most biblical texts, in others there is lack of certainty and clarity. It is clear, however, that <em>priests<\/em> (Levites descended from Aaron) and <em>Levites<\/em> (other than the descendants of Aaron) all had professional religious duties to perform. The precise nature of those duties varied from time to time in the course of Israel’s history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>• The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>• The Priests<\/p>\n<p>• The Levites<\/p>\n<p>• The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheOriginsofthePriesthood\">The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood in Israel began during the time of Moses and Aaron. The exodus from Egypt was not only the liberation of a group of Hebrew slaves but also the birth of the nation of Israel. The nation that was born in the exodus was given its constitution in the covenant of Sinai. The law of this covenant established the foundations and origins of Israelite priesthood. It provides insight into the three basic categories to be considered: the high priest, the priests, and the Levites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHighPriest\">The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>Any large and complex organization requires a head or leader, and this was true also of the Hebrew priesthood (though in its early days it was a small organization). The covenant was established through Moses, the prophet, through whom God gave the offer and substance of the covenant relationship; religious life within the covenant was to be the primary responsibility of Aaron, who was the first and chief priest.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of Israel’s priesthood, it is probable that the high priest’s office was relatively informal; he was chief or leader among his fellow priests. The office was significant, nevertheless, and involved a special ritual of investiture, special clothing, and certain special responsibilities. While the high priest’s duties were similar in principle to those of other priests, he had certain exclusive responsibilities. To some extent, his duties were administrative, pertaining to all the priests of whom he had charge. But his position was more weighty than that of an administrator; just as all priests were the servants and guardians of the covenant relationship, so the high priest was chief servant and chief guardian. In his hands rested spiritual responsibility for the entire people of God, and therein lay the true honor and gravity of his position.<\/p>\n\n<p>This spiritual seniority of the high priest is seen most clearly in certain tasks he undertook within Israel’s life of worship. The clearest example may be seen in the annual observation of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). On that day alone, the high priest entered the Holy of Holies and, standing before the “mercy seat,” he sought God’s forgiveness and mercy for the whole nation of Israel (Lv 16:1-19). It is in that ceremony that Israel’s covenant faith is seen most clearly. Israel’s religion was one of relationship with a holy God, and human evil disrupted that relationship. While all worship and sacrifices throughout the year were concerned with the continuation of the relationship, the Day of Atonement was the most solemn day of the year, in which the attention of all the people focused upon the meaning of their existence. Life held meaning only if the relationship with God could be maintained; the high priest had the great honor and heavy burden of seeking God’s mercy for all Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The special clothing worn by the high priest was symbolic of the nature and importance of his office; although all the symbolism cannot be determined, some of it is made clear in the biblical text. There are three particular themes in the symbolism. The first is beauty. The sense of beauty emerges from the quality and design of all the items of clothing, together with the use of color and precious stones. But beauty is dominant in the breastplate; the Hebrew word translated approximately as “breastplate” has as its basic sense “beauty” or “excellence.” The clothing symbolizes beauty, while beauty describes the office; the two other themes associated with the symbolism bring out the excellence of the office.<\/p>\n<p>The second theme is the role of the priest as representative of Israel before God. This essential dimension of the office of the high priest is explicitly identified in the names of the tribes of Israel in the two onyx stones in the ephod, and in the 12 precious stones attached to the breastplate. The high priest entered God’s presence to seek deliverance from God’s judgment (the breastplate is identified with judgment; Ex 28:15) for his people and in order to keep the people constantly in God’s remembrance (v 12), as symbolized by the two onyx stones. The third theme is the role of high priest as the representative of God to Israel. This dimension of the office is seen in the Urim and Thummim, kept in the breastpiece, by means of which God made known his will to Israel. The high priest, Aaron, fully robed, was a splendid figure, and the splendor of his garments indicated the magnificence of the office with which he had been entrusted.<\/p>\n<p>The high priesthood was to be passed on within the family (for the high priest was expected to be a married man), although in later history the practice was not always adhered to. On Aaron’s death, the office passed to Eleazar, one of his four sons.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriests\">The Priests<\/p>\n<p>Priests took office not as the result of a particular vocation but by virtue of priestly descent. Thus the first priests were the four sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These four were ordained at the same time that Aaron was ordained high priest (Ex 28:1). Like him, they had special clothing, which was basically similar, though it lacked the distinctive garments of the high priest (the special ephod, the breastpiece, and the crown). The priesthood would be passed down through their sons.<\/p>\n<p>The sanctity of the priestly office was such that it was preserved from degeneration through specific laws. A man must be a descendant of Aaron to be a priest, but he was also required to meet a variety of other qualifications. He would not marry a divorcée or a former prostitute (Lv 21:7). If he was afflicted by certain kinds of disease or congenital defects, he was barred from priestly office (e.g., blindness, lameness, mutilation, being a hunchback or dwarf; vv 16-23). The principle involved was similar to that applying to animals used in sacrifice—only those free from defect or blemish were suitable for divine service.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of the priesthood there is some information provided in the biblical text concerning the specific duties of the priests. Eleazar had overall responsibility for the tabernacle and its offerings (Nm 4:16); assisted Moses in a number of duties, such as numbering the people and dividing the land (26:1-2; 32:2); and later served as an adviser to Joshua. Ithamar was responsible for the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 38:21) and supervised the families of the Gershonites and Merarites (Nm 4:28-33). Nadab and Abihu, however, died soon after their ordination as a result of a sinful act in their priestly duties (Lv 10:1-7), which may have been related in part to drunkenness (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Priestly duties, in general, fell into three areas (Dt 33:8-10). First, priests were responsible, in conjunction with the high priest, for declaring God’s will to the people. Second, they had responsibilities in religious education; they were to teach to Israel God’s ordinances and law (v 10). Third, they were to be the servants of the tabernacle, participating in Israel’s sacrifices and worship. There were a number of other duties that may have fallen to them, which they would have shared with the Levites in general.<\/p>\n<p>The priests, along with all other Levites, did not own any land, as did the other Israelite tribes. Their task was to be entirely in the direct service to God. The absence of land, however, meant that they could not support and feed themselves as could other men and women. Consequently, the law specified that they could be supported for their services by the people as a whole. They were to receive, from worshipers, portions of animals that were brought to the tabernacle, as well as corn, wine, oil, and wool.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLevites\">The Levites<\/p>\n<p>This term includes the priests, in a broad sense, for the sons of Aaron belonged to the tribe of Levi. For practical purposes, however, the Levites were those of the tribe other than the priests. The Levites also functioned in the service of the tabernacle, though they had a subordinate position. They, too, were professional men and were paid in money and in kind for their services. Though they did not inherit tribal territory of their own, there were a number of cities set aside for their use (Nm 35:1-8), and pasturelands were designated outside those cities for their livestock.<\/p>\n<p>The Levites were divided into three principal families, the descendants of Kohath, Gershon, and Merari (Nm 4). Each of these families had particular responsibilities with respect to the care and transport of the tabernacle. The sons of Kohath carried the tabernacle furniture (after it had been covered by the priests), the sons of Gershon cared for the coverings and screens, and the sons of Merari carried and erected the tabernacle’s frame. The priests, by contrast, were responsible for the transportation of the ark of the covenant. The role of each Levite, as servant of the tabernacle, was restricted; he undertook his professional duties between the ages of 25 and 50 (8:24-26).<\/p>\n<p>Although many of the duties of the Levites were of a mundane nature, they also had a very significant religious role. The law required that all the firstborn, including firstborn sons, be given to God, recalling the slaying of the firstborn at the exodus from Egypt. The Levites’ role in religion was that of being accepted by God in the place of the firstborn sons of Israel (Nm 3:11-13); their cattle, too, were accepted in place of the Israelites’ firstborn cattle. In the census taken in the time of Moses, the firstborn Israelites exceeded the number of the Levites, and a five-shekel redemption fee had to be paid into the priestly coffers for each person in excess (vv 40-51). The representative and substitutionary nature of the Levites can be seen in Israelite religion. Like the priests, they played a part in the larger activity of mediation between God and Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The law of Deuteronomy specifies a number of duties that may have fallen upon both priests and Levites (though the texts are ambiguous). These duties included participation in the activity of the law courts as judges, perhaps with special reference to religious crimes (Dt 17:8-9), taking care of the Book of the Law (v 18), controlling the lives and health of lepers (24:8), and participating directly in the conduct of covenant renewal ceremonies (27:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHistoryoftheInstitution\">The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>In theory, the covenant law of Moses determined the nature and course of the offices of priests and Levites for the future history of Israel. In practice, however, changing historical circumstances and changes in the shape of Israel’s religion and culture altered the shape of the priesthood and the role of the Levites from time to time. And even more significantly, the persons who held the offices shaped them and their effectiveness through their faithfulness or unfaithfulness.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood before the Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>In the time of Joshua, the priests continued to undertake their important task of carrying the ark of the covenant. The Levites assisted in the division and allocation of the newly acquired land among the Israelite tribes. In Joshua 21, there is a detailed list of the allocation of cities to both priests and Levites, in fulfillment of the earlier legislation. In the days of the settlement, beyond the Conquest, there is some evidence that the Levites took over the priestly duty of transporting the ark (1 Sm 6:15; 2 Sm 15:24).<\/p>\n<p>The writer of the book of Judges has recorded two stories that illuminate the lives of particular Levites. The first, the story of Micah (Jgs 17–18), describes the establishment of a local shrine in which Micah’s son was appointed as a priest (though he was not of Levite or Aaronic descent). Later, Micah hired an itinerant Levite to function as a priest in his shrine, though subsequently that Levite was persuaded to serve the tribe of Dan as a priest. It is difficult to fit the details of this story into the theoretical model of priests and Levites, though the story may illustrate the confused state of Israel’s religion at the time. What is particularly significant is that the role of the Levite-priest was primarily oracular (18:5-6). The second story in Judges is the rather horrifying account of a Levite and his concubine (ch 19). The story illustrates the moral decline and lack of law and order in Israel at the time, but it sheds little light on the role of the Levites.<\/p>\n<p>More information is provided about the priesthood during the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, immediately before the establishment of the monarchy. The tabernacle (by now probably a semipermanent structure) and the ark of the covenant were located in Shiloh. The priest in charge of the sanctuary in Shiloh was Eli, who may have been a descendant of Aaron’s son Ithamar. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, also served as priests, indicating that the principle of family descent was still operative with respect to the priesthood. But although Eli was a faithful priest, his two sons abused the office.<\/p>\n<p>The precise role of Samuel in this period is unclear. He was primarily a judge and a prophet, but it is difficult to determine whether he was also a priest. In the historical narrative, he is not called a priest, though Psalm 99:6 might be interpreted to indicate his priestly office. There are a number of passages, however, that indicate he acted like a priest. For example, he offered sacrifices (1 Sm 7:9-10); as a young man he served in the sanctuary of Shiloh and wore an ephod (ch 2). Furthermore, one of the biblical genealogies implies priestly descent (1 Chr 6:23-30). Nevertheless, he is not normally identified as a priest and the introduction to his story refers to him as an Ephraimite, by descent from his father (1 Sm 1:1), not a Levite. If the priest is perceived as a permanent servant of the sanctuary, as was Eli, then it is clear that Samuel was not a priest. But the priestly role of Samuel may perhaps be related to the fact that his mother “lent” him to God (v 28) while he was still a boy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Time of David and Solomon<\/h5>\n<p>Several radical changes took place during the reign of David and Solomon. These were a result, primarily, of the establishment of a permanent temple in Jerusalem and the installation of the ark of the covenant there. During the time of Saul, the first king of Israel, the social structure was essentially the same as it had been in the time of the judges. Saul, as king, was a military leader, but his relationship to religion and the priesthood was not clearly determined.<\/p>\n<p>David changed the situation in many important respects. After his capture of the city of Jerusalem, he made that place the political and religious capital of his nation. The religious centrality of Jerusalem was assured by moving the ark of the covenant there, together with the tabernacle. Jerusalem now became the permanent location of the ark, and therefore the permanent center of religion; at the same time, the various regional shrines, which had developed in the premonarchical period, were gradually eliminated.<\/p>\n<p>These changes had numerous implications for the priesthood and the Levites. During David’s reign, there were two principal priests, Abiathar and Zadok. Abiathar, a former priest of Nob, had joined David before his rise to power; he appears to have been a descendant of Eli, and through him of Ithamar, one of Aaron’s sons. Zadok’s background is less clear, though his lineage appears to go back to Aaron’s other son, Eleazar. These two priests are always named together in the texts describing David’s reign, and Zadok is always mentioned before Abiathar. Although neither is explicitly identified as high priest in the ancient texts, there is some evidence to suggest that Abiathar functioned as high priest (1 Kgs 2:35); in NT times, he is identified as such (Mk 2:26). Zadok, during David’s reign, may have been particularly responsible for the care of the ark of the covenant (2 Sm 15:24-25). These two priests had a significant position in David’s royal establishment; they may also have shared overall responsibility for the priests, whose lives were now centered on the Jerusalem temple.<\/p>\n<p>Much of David’s time was focused upon the preparations for building a permanent temple for God. In the preparation for the temple, and in its completion during the reign of King Solomon, the new activities of the Levites may be seen. (The construction of a permanent temple automatically removed their former responsibilities related to the care and transportation of the tabernacle.) Large numbers of Levites were employed as laborers in the actual building of the temple. Others found new tasks in the worship of God in the tabernacle during David’s reign and in the temple upon its completion. To the Levites, and especially to Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, was given primary responsibility for the music of worship; this involved not only singing but also the playing of a variety of instruments in the temple’s orchestra or band. The Levites had also a variety of other tasks; they worked as gatekeepers at the sanctuary, assisted the priests in the preparation of sacrifices, kept the sanctuary clean, and functioned as general administrative and legal officers (1 Chr 23:1-32). Other Levites functioned as bankers, with primary responsibility for the temple treasuries (26:20-28).<\/p>\n<p>Following David’s death, there was a dispute over the royal succession, from which Solomon emerged as the new king. During his reign, the temple was brought to its completion and the regular worship of the nation was conducted there. In the matter of succession, however, Abiathar had supported a losing candidate, and when Solomon was made king, he lost his important office in the royal court. During Solomon’s reign, the control of the priesthood passed into the hands of Zadok.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Divided Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>The great empire, which had been built by David and maintained by Solomon, collapsed after Solomon’s death. From the ruins, two new and relatively insignificant states emerged. The southern kingdom, Judah, retained Jerusalem as its capital and the temple as its center of worship. The northern kingdom, Israel, located its first capital at Shechem, from where it was later moved to Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>In the southern state of Judah, the priests and Levites continued to function normally within the Jerusalem temple. The office of high priest continued to be passed on by descent within the family of Zadok, who had held office in Solomon’s reign. The continuity of office in this family was to be retained down into the time of the second temple, when the Zadokite succession was interrupted about 171 <span>BC<\/span>. Nevertheless, for all the continuity of religion in Jerusalem, all was not well with religion in Judah, neither during the reign of its first king, Rehoboam, nor during the reigns of his successors. During Rehoboam’s reign, there was a decline in religion and also in the priesthood, when popular forms of religion were introduced as a result of foreign influence (1 Kgs 14:22-24). The history of the southern kingdom was marked by periods of religious decline followed by reform, often as a result of the activities of the prophets. The role of the priesthood was all too rarely one of spiritual leadership, and the priests themselves were often the subject of criticism by the prophets (e.g., Jer 2:8, 26).<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom, whose first king was Jeroboam I, inevitably had to introduce some radical changes in religion. Jeroboam could not recognize the temple of Jerusalem, partly because it lay outside his state and partly because it was intimately associated with the royal line of David. Jeroboam established two principal shrines in his kingdom, both of which were to retain importance during the relatively short life of the northern kingdom (200 years). The first was at Bethel, in the southern part of his kingdom near the border of Judah (it was only about 12 miles, or 19.3 kilometers, north of Jerusalem). The second shrine, or sanctuary, was at Dan, in the far northern part of his kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Both these sanctuaries had ancient associations with the Hebrew traditions. Bethel is referred to as early as the time of Abram (Gn 12:8), and the sanctuary at Dan is known from the history of the judges (Jgs 18). There may indeed have been priests and Levites still residing in these two places, descendants of the former servants of the sanctuaries. But Jeroboam established a non-Levitical priesthood to serve in these sanctuaries and in various smaller shrines or “high places,” thereby cutting off the religious tradition of the northern state even more radically from that of Judah. The royal sanctuary at Bethel, so close to the Jerusalem temple, may have been set up in deliberate competition with the Judean sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p>The history of the priesthood in the northern kingdom is no more impressive than that of Judah. Many of the prophets, including Amos, Hosea, and Jeremiah, condemned the northern sanctuaries and their priests. Hosea was forceful in his condemnation: “As marauders lie in ambush for a man, so do bands of priests; they murder on the road to Shechem, committing shameful crimes” (Hos 6:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Those to whom the spiritual lives of the chosen people had been entrusted only rarely lived up to their responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h5>Priests and Levites during and after the Exile<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom came to its end in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, defeated by the armies of Assyria, but religious life continued in Judah for a while longer. Eventually, the end of the southern state came about 586 <span>BC<\/span>; the defeat of the state by the Babylonians was accompanied by the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple (Lam 2:20). The Babylonian commander took Seraiah, the high priest, and Zephaniah, his assistant, to Riblah, where, along with other officials, they were executed (2 Kgs 25:18-21). Then a policy of exile was established by the Babylonians; the most important and influential people of Judah were deported to Babylon, while the less significant were allowed to remain, for they were unlikely to cause trouble. Of those exiled from Judah, many may have been priests (Jer 29:1), for they were men of influence. By way of contrast, it seems likely that a much smaller number of Levites was exiled, reflecting perhaps their inferior social position.<\/p>\n<p>In the city of Jerusalem there was little normal religious life during the years of the exile; the altar had been destroyed and was not restored until after the exile. No doubt some kind of activity continued, but it was an impoverished form of religion. Most of the priests were in exile in Babylon, but they could not function, for there was no temple or sanctuary. Ezekiel implies that God himself was the only “sanctuary” for the exiles (Ez 11:16). Not until the return from exile and the restoration of Jerusalem and its temple could the normal functions of priests and Levites resume.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian Empire was defeated, the new Persian conquerors instituted a policy whereby the Hebrew exiles could return to their homeland. Of those returning, 4,289 are designated as priests and members of priestly families, while only 341 were Levites (Ezr 2:36-42); the imbalance probably reflects the imbalance in the number of those exiled initially. Under Joshua (Jeshua), the priest, and Zerubbabel, work began on the restoration. The priests played a significant role in the first year of the return, in the restoration of the altar in Jerusalem, so that sacrifice and worship to God could resume. Once the altar had been restored, the work began on the temple itself in the second year of the return. In this work, both the priests and the Levites were involved, and the laying of new foundations for the temple began. When the foundation had been laid, both priests, in their vestments, and Levites, in their role as singers and musicians, participated in the ceremony of dedication (3:8-13). Again, when the temple had been rebuilt, both priests and Levites participated in the ceremony of dedication (6:16-18). The restoration, however, was concerned with more than buildings; it also involved a moral and religious component. Though priests and Levites helped in this task, they were also affected by it. Many, for example, had married foreign wives (9:1), and thus had to conform to Ezra’s reform laws.<\/p>\n<p>To some extent, the priests and Levites resumed their normal duties in the worship of the postexilic period. The priests were engaged in the conduct of the temple worship. The Levites assisted, as temple servants (Neh 11:3), as treasurers and collectors of tithes (10:37-39), and as instructors or teachers of the law of God (8:7-9). Nevertheless, the history of the priesthood after the exile is not free of blemish. Condemnation of the abuses of the priestly office was delivered by the prophet Malachi (Mal 1:6–2:9). Malachi catalogues a list of priestly evils reminiscent of the evil priests who lived during the time of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest continued after the exile among the descendants of Zadok, being held first by Joshua (Hg 1:1). The different political circumstances, however, changed the nature of the high priestly office. Whereas in the days of the monarchy the high priest was subservient to the king, there was no king, in the proper sense, after the exile. From a political perspective, the Jews were members of a province or colony; for practical purposes, they were a community based upon a common religion. The high priest was no longer subject to the secular authority of a Jewish king, but his religious authority was considerable, and in some ways his functions were similar to those of a king in preexilic times.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood in the Maccabean Period<\/h5>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, some changes took place in the priesthood, particularly with respect to the office of high priest, which marked the end of the OT era and set the background for the NT period. Judea, in the second century, was ruled by the Seleucid kings, who had inherited a portion of the massive Greek Empire established by Alexander the Great. The Judean province was controlled internally under the high priesthood, whose authority was received from the Seleucid kings.<\/p>\n<p>For the first three decades of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood remained with the Zadokite line of descent. The high priests were members of the (Zadokite) Oniad family: first, Onias III (198–174 <span>BC<\/span>); then Jason, brother of Onias III (174–171 <span>BC<\/span>). It was in the period of Jason that there began a series of events that would terminate the Zadokite tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Onias III had opposed the Hellenization policy of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), which threatened to undermine the Jewish faith. Antiochus replaced Onias by Jason, who in effect purchased the high priesthood from the Seleucid king. In purchasing the priestly office, Jason had set a dangerous precedent; although he was of Zadokite descent, his act implied that the office could be bought and that descent was not vital. The opponents of Jason, the Tobiads, were able to remove him from office and have their own candidate, Menelaus (who was not a Zadokite), appointed in his place. This act resulted in a civil war between those supporting Jason and those supporting Menelaus, and the war in turn culminated in ruthless repressive measures by Antiochus Epiphanes; there were massacres in Jerusalem, and the temple was desecrated (167 <span>BC<\/span>). The desecration of the temple led to the Maccabean revolt, as a result of which the Jews regained their independence for a short time. Menelaus retained the office of high priest until 161 <span>BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Alcimus (161–159 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>There then followed a period during which there was no high priest for seven years. The political climate, however, was such that it became unlikely that the Zadokite line would ever regain the high priesthood, which had been established in the time of King Solomon. The Maccabean Jonathan gained control of Jerusalem, and in 152 <span>BC<\/span>, with the approval of the Seleucid king, he was formally invested with the high priest’s robes of office. He was succeeded as high priest and ruler by his brother Simon in 143 <span>BC<\/span>, who also held the office with the approval of the Seleucids (Demetrius II). But in the third year of his reign (140 <span>BC<\/span>), the high priesthood of Simon received public approval in a great religious assembly, and the family of Simon became “high priest forever” (1 Macc 14:41-47). That event marked the real termination of the Zadokite tradition and the foundation of the Hasmonean line.<\/p>\n<p>The establishment of the high priestly office outside the Zadokite line did not go without challenge. It is probable that a sect within Judaism, now known as the Essenes, was born in reaction to the high priesthood of Simon. The Essenes (better known for the Dead Sea Scrolls) appear to have been founded by a Zadokite priest who rejected the authenticity and authority of Simon. Thus, in a limited sense, the Zadokite priests continued to survive.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriesthoodinNewTestamentTimes\">The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>In the early NT period, both priests and Levites continued to function within the Jewish religion. Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, was a priest belonging to the division of Abijah (Lk 1:5), and his wife was also of priestly descent. When Zechariah was visited by an angel, he was engaged at the time in priestly duties in the Jerusalem temple—various divisions of priests took responsibility for the temple services for a period of time and then returned to their homes (v 23), as another division took over. The distinction between priests and Levites is also maintained in the NT (Jn 1:19) and appears in Jesus’ parable concerning the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:31-32). Both priests and Levites were among the earliest converts to Christianity; Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36), and several priests responded to the proclamation of the gospel (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest is frequently referred to in the NT. Several high priests are named, the plurality of current and former holders of the office reflecting the nature of the position as an essentially political appointment (as distinct from its oldest definition, that of an office passing from father to son on the death of the father). The two most significant high priests in the NT are those who held office during the lifetime of Jesus. Annas was high priest about <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 15, but even after he ceased to hold the office formally, he continued to exert considerable influence through his son-in-law, the high priest Caiaphas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 18–36). Both were significant figures in the trial of Jesus. At a later date, Ananias, son of Nedebaeus, was high priest (c. <span>AD<\/span> 47–58) and president of the Sanhedrin during the time in which Paul was brought to trial.<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood held considerable authority in NT times. Most internal and religious matters in the Roman province of Judea were within the authority of the Sanhedrin, which functioned as a kind of provincial government, though its powers were limited in certain matters by Rome. Its membership included the ruling and former high priests and a large number of Sadducees, many of whom belonged to influential priestly families. This priestly influence in the Sanhedrin was indicative of the important role of the temple in Jewish life during the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 70, following the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a radical change came about in the significance of the priesthood in Judaism. The end of the temple removed in effect the purpose for the existence of the priesthood. Although the priesthood continued after a fashion until the Bar-Kochba rebellion in <span>AD<\/span> 135, its days were numbered after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Since the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, Judaism has developed without priests, and its course down to the present century has been charted by the rabbis, the spiritual descendants of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priesthood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PRIESTS AND LEVITES Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levit...","summary_en":"PRIESTS AND LEVITES Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levit...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45911,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:1","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:1–21:25<\/strong> These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:1–21:25<\/strong> These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:1–21:25 These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.","summary_en":"17:1–21:25 These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45912,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:1","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:1<\/strong> <em>Micah<\/em> is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the <span>Lord<\/span>?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • <em>The hill country of Ephraim<\/em> was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:1<\/strong> <em>Micah<\/em> is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the <span>Lord<\/span>?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • <em>The hill country of Ephraim<\/em> was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:1 Micah is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the Lord?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • The hill country of Ephraim was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).","summary_en":"17:1 Micah is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the Lord?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • The hill country of Ephraim was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73537,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:1","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:1–21:25<\/strong> These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:1–21:25<\/strong> These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:1–21:25 These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.","summary_en":"17:1–21:25 These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73538,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:1","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:1<\/strong> <em>Micah<\/em> is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the <span>Lord<\/span>?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • <em>The hill country of Ephraim<\/em> was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:1<\/strong> <em>Micah<\/em> is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the <span>Lord<\/span>?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • <em>The hill country of Ephraim<\/em> was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:1 Micah is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the Lord?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • The hill country of Ephraim was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).","summary_en":"17:1 Micah is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the Lord?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • The hill country of Ephraim was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101163,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:1","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:1–21:25<\/strong> These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:1–21:25<\/strong> These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:1–21:25 These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.","summary_en":"17:1–21:25 These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101164,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:1","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:1<\/strong> <em>Micah<\/em> is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the <span>Lord<\/span>?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • <em>The hill country of Ephraim<\/em> was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:1<\/strong> <em>Micah<\/em> is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the <span>Lord<\/span>?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • <em>The hill country of Ephraim<\/em> was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:1 Micah is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the Lord?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • The hill country of Ephraim was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).","summary_en":"17:1 Micah is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the Lord?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • The hill country of Ephraim was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128789,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:1","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:1–21:25<\/strong> These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:1–21:25<\/strong> These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:1–21:25 These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.","summary_en":"17:1–21:25 These two epilogues (chs 17–18 and chs 19–21) attest that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot endure. During the relentless march toward social disintegration and civil war, the refrain, “In those days Israel had no king,” occurs four times, and “all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” is added twice (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership spiraled downward and culminated in chaos. Something was clearly missing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128790,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:1","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:1<\/strong> <em>Micah<\/em> is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the <span>Lord<\/span>?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • <em>The hill country of Ephraim<\/em> was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:1<\/strong> <em>Micah<\/em> is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the <span>Lord<\/span>?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • <em>The hill country of Ephraim<\/em> was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:1 Micah is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the Lord?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • The hill country of Ephraim was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).","summary_en":"17:1 Micah is the short form of a name that means “Who is like the Lord?” The name highlights the contrast between the Lord and a carved image or cast idol. • The hill country of Ephraim was a natural gathering place in central Israel (17:7-8; 18:2, 13; 19:1, 16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61054,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Social Chaos in Judges","title_en":"Social Chaos in Judges","content_ro":"<h3>Social Chaos in Judges<\/h3>\n<p>While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strife within and between tribes reflects covenant disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>Second, the breakdown of civil society is also evidenced throughout the book. Abimelech’s murder of Gideon’s sons, Jephthah’s apparent sacrifice of his daughter, and Samson’s acts of revenge toward the Philistines highlight the depravity and lack of civility that characterized this period.<\/p>\n<p>Third, religious apostasy was widespread in those days. The “evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight” committed by the Israelites was repeatedly connected to idolatry (Judg 2:11-13; 3:7; 10:6). The altar to Baal and the Asherah pole in Gideon’s town of Ophrah (6:25-30) indicate flagrant abandonment of the Lord, as do the worship of the golden ephod made by Gideon (8:27) and the return to worshiping Baal after Gideon’s death (8:33-35). Samson’s intermarriage with the Philistines also directly contradicted the covenant commands (see Deut 7:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Social chaos culminates in the closing chapters (Judg 17–21). The incident of Micah, the Levite, and the Danites (chs 17–18) combines religious irregularities with lawless marauding, theft, and violence. The climactic final epilogue (chs 19–21) describes a tragic civil war and the utter abandonment of civility. Marital breakdown, inhospitality, rape, and murder (ch 19) led to the near elimination of the Benjamites (ch 20), who were spared only by the complete decimation of a historic city (Jabesh-gilead) and a sham ceremony in which maidens were seized to become wives (21:6-23). Little wonder that the book concludes, “In those days Israel had no king; all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” (21:25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Judg 5:6-8; 6:25-27; 8:1-35; 12:1-15; 17:1–21:25; Ps 11:2-7; Prov 28:2-3; Jer 5:7-9; 12:1-17; Mic 3:9-12; 7:2-7; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Social Chaos in Judges<\/h3>\n<p>While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strife within and between tribes reflects covenant disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>Second, the breakdown of civil society is also evidenced throughout the book. Abimelech’s murder of Gideon’s sons, Jephthah’s apparent sacrifice of his daughter, and Samson’s acts of revenge toward the Philistines highlight the depravity and lack of civility that characterized this period.<\/p>\n<p>Third, religious apostasy was widespread in those days. The “evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight” committed by the Israelites was repeatedly connected to idolatry (Judg 2:11-13; 3:7; 10:6). The altar to Baal and the Asherah pole in Gideon’s town of Ophrah (6:25-30) indicate flagrant abandonment of the Lord, as do the worship of the golden ephod made by Gideon (8:27) and the return to worshiping Baal after Gideon’s death (8:33-35). Samson’s intermarriage with the Philistines also directly contradicted the covenant commands (see Deut 7:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Social chaos culminates in the closing chapters (Judg 17–21). The incident of Micah, the Levite, and the Danites (chs 17–18) combines religious irregularities with lawless marauding, theft, and violence. The climactic final epilogue (chs 19–21) describes a tragic civil war and the utter abandonment of civility. Marital breakdown, inhospitality, rape, and murder (ch 19) led to the near elimination of the Benjamites (ch 20), who were spared only by the complete decimation of a historic city (Jabesh-gilead) and a sham ceremony in which maidens were seized to become wives (21:6-23). Little wonder that the book concludes, “In those days Israel had no king; all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” (21:25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Judg 5:6-8; 6:25-27; 8:1-35; 12:1-15; 17:1–21:25; Ps 11:2-7; Prov 28:2-3; Jer 5:7-9; 12:1-17; Mic 3:9-12; 7:2-7; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Social Chaos in Judges While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strif...","summary_en":"Social Chaos in Judges While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strif...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88680,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Social Chaos in Judges","title_en":"Social Chaos in Judges","content_ro":"<h3>Social Chaos in Judges<\/h3>\n<p>While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strife within and between tribes reflects covenant disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>Second, the breakdown of civil society is also evidenced throughout the book. Abimelech’s murder of Gideon’s sons, Jephthah’s apparent sacrifice of his daughter, and Samson’s acts of revenge toward the Philistines highlight the depravity and lack of civility that characterized this period.<\/p>\n<p>Third, religious apostasy was widespread in those days. The “evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight” committed by the Israelites was repeatedly connected to idolatry (Judg 2:11-13; 3:7; 10:6). The altar to Baal and the Asherah pole in Gideon’s town of Ophrah (6:25-30) indicate flagrant abandonment of the Lord, as do the worship of the golden ephod made by Gideon (8:27) and the return to worshiping Baal after Gideon’s death (8:33-35). Samson’s intermarriage with the Philistines also directly contradicted the covenant commands (see Deut 7:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Social chaos culminates in the closing chapters (Judg 17–21). The incident of Micah, the Levite, and the Danites (chs 17–18) combines religious irregularities with lawless marauding, theft, and violence. The climactic final epilogue (chs 19–21) describes a tragic civil war and the utter abandonment of civility. Marital breakdown, inhospitality, rape, and murder (ch 19) led to the near elimination of the Benjamites (ch 20), who were spared only by the complete decimation of a historic city (Jabesh-gilead) and a sham ceremony in which maidens were seized to become wives (21:6-23). Little wonder that the book concludes, “In those days Israel had no king; all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” (21:25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Judg 5:6-8; 6:25-27; 8:1-35; 12:1-15; 17:1–21:25; Ps 11:2-7; Prov 28:2-3; Jer 5:7-9; 12:1-17; Mic 3:9-12; 7:2-7; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Social Chaos in Judges<\/h3>\n<p>While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strife within and between tribes reflects covenant disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>Second, the breakdown of civil society is also evidenced throughout the book. Abimelech’s murder of Gideon’s sons, Jephthah’s apparent sacrifice of his daughter, and Samson’s acts of revenge toward the Philistines highlight the depravity and lack of civility that characterized this period.<\/p>\n<p>Third, religious apostasy was widespread in those days. The “evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight” committed by the Israelites was repeatedly connected to idolatry (Judg 2:11-13; 3:7; 10:6). The altar to Baal and the Asherah pole in Gideon’s town of Ophrah (6:25-30) indicate flagrant abandonment of the Lord, as do the worship of the golden ephod made by Gideon (8:27) and the return to worshiping Baal after Gideon’s death (8:33-35). Samson’s intermarriage with the Philistines also directly contradicted the covenant commands (see Deut 7:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Social chaos culminates in the closing chapters (Judg 17–21). The incident of Micah, the Levite, and the Danites (chs 17–18) combines religious irregularities with lawless marauding, theft, and violence. The climactic final epilogue (chs 19–21) describes a tragic civil war and the utter abandonment of civility. Marital breakdown, inhospitality, rape, and murder (ch 19) led to the near elimination of the Benjamites (ch 20), who were spared only by the complete decimation of a historic city (Jabesh-gilead) and a sham ceremony in which maidens were seized to become wives (21:6-23). Little wonder that the book concludes, “In those days Israel had no king; all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” (21:25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Judg 5:6-8; 6:25-27; 8:1-35; 12:1-15; 17:1–21:25; Ps 11:2-7; Prov 28:2-3; Jer 5:7-9; 12:1-17; Mic 3:9-12; 7:2-7; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Social Chaos in Judges While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strif...","summary_en":"Social Chaos in Judges While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strif...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116306,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Social Chaos in Judges","title_en":"Social Chaos in Judges","content_ro":"<h3>Social Chaos in Judges<\/h3>\n<p>While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strife within and between tribes reflects covenant disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>Second, the breakdown of civil society is also evidenced throughout the book. Abimelech’s murder of Gideon’s sons, Jephthah’s apparent sacrifice of his daughter, and Samson’s acts of revenge toward the Philistines highlight the depravity and lack of civility that characterized this period.<\/p>\n<p>Third, religious apostasy was widespread in those days. The “evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight” committed by the Israelites was repeatedly connected to idolatry (Judg 2:11-13; 3:7; 10:6). The altar to Baal and the Asherah pole in Gideon’s town of Ophrah (6:25-30) indicate flagrant abandonment of the Lord, as do the worship of the golden ephod made by Gideon (8:27) and the return to worshiping Baal after Gideon’s death (8:33-35). Samson’s intermarriage with the Philistines also directly contradicted the covenant commands (see Deut 7:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Social chaos culminates in the closing chapters (Judg 17–21). The incident of Micah, the Levite, and the Danites (chs 17–18) combines religious irregularities with lawless marauding, theft, and violence. The climactic final epilogue (chs 19–21) describes a tragic civil war and the utter abandonment of civility. Marital breakdown, inhospitality, rape, and murder (ch 19) led to the near elimination of the Benjamites (ch 20), who were spared only by the complete decimation of a historic city (Jabesh-gilead) and a sham ceremony in which maidens were seized to become wives (21:6-23). Little wonder that the book concludes, “In those days Israel had no king; all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” (21:25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Judg 5:6-8; 6:25-27; 8:1-35; 12:1-15; 17:1–21:25; Ps 11:2-7; Prov 28:2-3; Jer 5:7-9; 12:1-17; Mic 3:9-12; 7:2-7; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Social Chaos in Judges<\/h3>\n<p>While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strife within and between tribes reflects covenant disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>Second, the breakdown of civil society is also evidenced throughout the book. Abimelech’s murder of Gideon’s sons, Jephthah’s apparent sacrifice of his daughter, and Samson’s acts of revenge toward the Philistines highlight the depravity and lack of civility that characterized this period.<\/p>\n<p>Third, religious apostasy was widespread in those days. The “evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight” committed by the Israelites was repeatedly connected to idolatry (Judg 2:11-13; 3:7; 10:6). The altar to Baal and the Asherah pole in Gideon’s town of Ophrah (6:25-30) indicate flagrant abandonment of the Lord, as do the worship of the golden ephod made by Gideon (8:27) and the return to worshiping Baal after Gideon’s death (8:33-35). Samson’s intermarriage with the Philistines also directly contradicted the covenant commands (see Deut 7:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Social chaos culminates in the closing chapters (Judg 17–21). The incident of Micah, the Levite, and the Danites (chs 17–18) combines religious irregularities with lawless marauding, theft, and violence. The climactic final epilogue (chs 19–21) describes a tragic civil war and the utter abandonment of civility. Marital breakdown, inhospitality, rape, and murder (ch 19) led to the near elimination of the Benjamites (ch 20), who were spared only by the complete decimation of a historic city (Jabesh-gilead) and a sham ceremony in which maidens were seized to become wives (21:6-23). Little wonder that the book concludes, “In those days Israel had no king; all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” (21:25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Judg 5:6-8; 6:25-27; 8:1-35; 12:1-15; 17:1–21:25; Ps 11:2-7; Prov 28:2-3; Jer 5:7-9; 12:1-17; Mic 3:9-12; 7:2-7; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Social Chaos in Judges While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strif...","summary_en":"Social Chaos in Judges While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strif...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143932,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Social Chaos in Judges","title_en":"Social Chaos in Judges","content_ro":"<h3>Social Chaos in Judges<\/h3>\n<p>While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strife within and between tribes reflects covenant disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>Second, the breakdown of civil society is also evidenced throughout the book. Abimelech’s murder of Gideon’s sons, Jephthah’s apparent sacrifice of his daughter, and Samson’s acts of revenge toward the Philistines highlight the depravity and lack of civility that characterized this period.<\/p>\n<p>Third, religious apostasy was widespread in those days. The “evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight” committed by the Israelites was repeatedly connected to idolatry (Judg 2:11-13; 3:7; 10:6). The altar to Baal and the Asherah pole in Gideon’s town of Ophrah (6:25-30) indicate flagrant abandonment of the Lord, as do the worship of the golden ephod made by Gideon (8:27) and the return to worshiping Baal after Gideon’s death (8:33-35). Samson’s intermarriage with the Philistines also directly contradicted the covenant commands (see Deut 7:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Social chaos culminates in the closing chapters (Judg 17–21). The incident of Micah, the Levite, and the Danites (chs 17–18) combines religious irregularities with lawless marauding, theft, and violence. The climactic final epilogue (chs 19–21) describes a tragic civil war and the utter abandonment of civility. Marital breakdown, inhospitality, rape, and murder (ch 19) led to the near elimination of the Benjamites (ch 20), who were spared only by the complete decimation of a historic city (Jabesh-gilead) and a sham ceremony in which maidens were seized to become wives (21:6-23). Little wonder that the book concludes, “In those days Israel had no king; all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” (21:25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Judg 5:6-8; 6:25-27; 8:1-35; 12:1-15; 17:1–21:25; Ps 11:2-7; Prov 28:2-3; Jer 5:7-9; 12:1-17; Mic 3:9-12; 7:2-7; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Social Chaos in Judges<\/h3>\n<p>While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strife within and between tribes reflects covenant disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>Second, the breakdown of civil society is also evidenced throughout the book. Abimelech’s murder of Gideon’s sons, Jephthah’s apparent sacrifice of his daughter, and Samson’s acts of revenge toward the Philistines highlight the depravity and lack of civility that characterized this period.<\/p>\n<p>Third, religious apostasy was widespread in those days. The “evil in the <span>Lord<\/span>’s sight” committed by the Israelites was repeatedly connected to idolatry (Judg 2:11-13; 3:7; 10:6). The altar to Baal and the Asherah pole in Gideon’s town of Ophrah (6:25-30) indicate flagrant abandonment of the Lord, as do the worship of the golden ephod made by Gideon (8:27) and the return to worshiping Baal after Gideon’s death (8:33-35). Samson’s intermarriage with the Philistines also directly contradicted the covenant commands (see Deut 7:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Social chaos culminates in the closing chapters (Judg 17–21). The incident of Micah, the Levite, and the Danites (chs 17–18) combines religious irregularities with lawless marauding, theft, and violence. The climactic final epilogue (chs 19–21) describes a tragic civil war and the utter abandonment of civility. Marital breakdown, inhospitality, rape, and murder (ch 19) led to the near elimination of the Benjamites (ch 20), who were spared only by the complete decimation of a historic city (Jabesh-gilead) and a sham ceremony in which maidens were seized to become wives (21:6-23). Little wonder that the book concludes, “In those days Israel had no king; all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” (21:25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Judg 5:6-8; 6:25-27; 8:1-35; 12:1-15; 17:1–21:25; Ps 11:2-7; Prov 28:2-3; Jer 5:7-9; 12:1-17; Mic 3:9-12; 7:2-7; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Social Chaos in Judges While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strif...","summary_en":"Social Chaos in Judges While the book of Judges celebrates divine rescue through heroes, it also chronicles the inadequacy of the status quo. A decline in individual piety throughout the period was accompanied by a rise in social dysfunction, powerfully expressed in chapter 5 (e.g., 5:6-8). Three features of the times stand out: First, the tribes had little ability to function in unison, even when faced by a common enemy (see, e.g., the Gideon and Jephthah stories; chs 8, 12). The civil strif...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":26209,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Money Changer","title_en":"Money Changer","content_ro":"<h3>MONEY CHANGER<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient profession that undertook many of the services performed by the modern banker, particularly in the area of exchanging the currency of one country or province into that of another, or of exchanging small coins for coins of greater value or vice versa. Naturally, a fee was charged for such a service.<\/p>\n<p>Standardized coinage as such does not go back beyond the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. In earlier periods pieces of silver were weighed out in payment for commodities (Gn 20:16; 37:28; Jgs 17:2). Once the standardized coin was adopted in Asia Minor the idea was copied in other lands, but since coins differed from country to country, equivalents had to be worked out by the money changers.<\/p>\n<p>The need for such procedures was particularly important in Palestine, where every adult male Jew had to pay a half-shekel offering (Ex 30:11-16). Jews from various countries who came to pay this sum might bring a variety of types of coinage. Temple authorities had to authorize a coin appropriate for the purpose. This was the silver Tyrian half-shekel or tetradrachma (cf. Mt 17:27, where Peter was told to pay the temple tax for Jesus and himself with the coin he found in the mouth of a fish). The Mishnah states (<em>Sheqalim<\/em> 1:3) that money changers operated in the provinces on the 15th of the month of Adar (the month before the Passover) to collect this tax. Ten days before the Passover the money changers moved to the temple courts to assist Jews from foreign countries.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus encountered the money changers in the temple courtyard when he “cleansed the temple” (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-16; Lk 19:45-46; Jn 2:13-22). The reason for this action has been a matter of debate. Worshipers needed to procure the half-shekel to pay their tax. But they needed also to purchase birds, animals, or cake offerings in some cases. This wholesale activity in buying and money changing seemed inappropriate in the temple precincts, which constituted a sacred area (cf. Mk 11:16), although Jesus evidently approved the payment of the temple tax as such (Mt 8:4; 17:24-26; Mk 1:44; Lk 5:14). There is also the possibility that the charge made by money changers and by those who sold sacrificial birds and animals was exorbitant, whether for their own profit or for the profit of the temple authorities. Such operations could be carried on at a suitable distance from the sacred area so that the haggling and noise associated with such activities in an Eastern setting did not unnecessarily disturb the prayer and the offering of sacrifices carried on in the temple courts (cf. Jer 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Coins; Money.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MONEY CHANGER<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient profession that undertook many of the services performed by the modern banker, particularly in the area of exchanging the currency of one country or province into that of another, or of exchanging small coins for coins of greater value or vice versa. Naturally, a fee was charged for such a service.<\/p>\n<p>Standardized coinage as such does not go back beyond the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. In earlier periods pieces of silver were weighed out in payment for commodities (Gn 20:16; 37:28; Jgs 17:2). Once the standardized coin was adopted in Asia Minor the idea was copied in other lands, but since coins differed from country to country, equivalents had to be worked out by the money changers.<\/p>\n<p>The need for such procedures was particularly important in Palestine, where every adult male Jew had to pay a half-shekel offering (Ex 30:11-16). Jews from various countries who came to pay this sum might bring a variety of types of coinage. Temple authorities had to authorize a coin appropriate for the purpose. This was the silver Tyrian half-shekel or tetradrachma (cf. Mt 17:27, where Peter was told to pay the temple tax for Jesus and himself with the coin he found in the mouth of a fish). The Mishnah states (<em>Sheqalim<\/em> 1:3) that money changers operated in the provinces on the 15th of the month of Adar (the month before the Passover) to collect this tax. Ten days before the Passover the money changers moved to the temple courts to assist Jews from foreign countries.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus encountered the money changers in the temple courtyard when he “cleansed the temple” (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-16; Lk 19:45-46; Jn 2:13-22). The reason for this action has been a matter of debate. Worshipers needed to procure the half-shekel to pay their tax. But they needed also to purchase birds, animals, or cake offerings in some cases. This wholesale activity in buying and money changing seemed inappropriate in the temple precincts, which constituted a sacred area (cf. Mk 11:16), although Jesus evidently approved the payment of the temple tax as such (Mt 8:4; 17:24-26; Mk 1:44; Lk 5:14). There is also the possibility that the charge made by money changers and by those who sold sacrificial birds and animals was exorbitant, whether for their own profit or for the profit of the temple authorities. Such operations could be carried on at a suitable distance from the sacred area so that the haggling and noise associated with such activities in an Eastern setting did not unnecessarily disturb the prayer and the offering of sacrifices carried on in the temple courts (cf. Jer 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Coins; Money.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MONEY CHANGER Ancient profession that undertook many of the services performed by the modern banker, particularly in the area of exchanging the currency of one country or province into that of another, or of exchanging small coins for coins of greater value or vice versa. Naturally, a fee was charged for such a service. Standardized coinage as such does not go back beyond the seventh century BC. In earlier periods pieces of silver were weighed out in payment for commodities (Gn 20:16; 37:28; ...","summary_en":"MONEY CHANGER Ancient profession that undertook many of the services performed by the modern banker, particularly in the area of exchanging the currency of one country or province into that of another, or of exchanging small coins for coins of greater value or vice versa. Naturally, a fee was charged for such a service. Standardized coinage as such does not go back beyond the seventh century BC. In earlier periods pieces of silver were weighed out in payment for commodities (Gn 20:16; 37:28; ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45913,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:2","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:2-3<\/strong> Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • <em>I heard you place a curse:<\/em> The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • <em>1,100 pieces:<\/em> This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> bless you:<\/em> Micah’s mother was hoping that the blessing would effectively neutralize her earlier curse.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:2-3<\/strong> Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • <em>I heard you place a curse:<\/em> The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • <em>1,100 pieces:<\/em> This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> bless you:<\/em> Micah’s mother was hoping that the blessing would effectively neutralize her earlier curse.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:2-3 Micah’s mother was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • I heard you place a curse: The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • 1,100 pieces: This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • The Lord bless you: Micah’s mother was hoping that...","summary_en":"17:2-3 Micah’s mother was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • I heard you place a curse: The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • 1,100 pieces: This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • The Lord bless you: Micah’s mother was hoping that...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73539,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:2","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:2-3<\/strong> Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • <em>I heard you place a curse:<\/em> The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • <em>1,100 pieces:<\/em> This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> bless you:<\/em> Micah’s mother was hoping that the blessing would effectively neutralize her earlier curse.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:2-3<\/strong> Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • <em>I heard you place a curse:<\/em> The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • <em>1,100 pieces:<\/em> This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> bless you:<\/em> Micah’s mother was hoping that the blessing would effectively neutralize her earlier curse.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:2-3 Micah’s mother was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • I heard you place a curse: The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • 1,100 pieces: This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • The Lord bless you: Micah’s mother was hoping that...","summary_en":"17:2-3 Micah’s mother was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • I heard you place a curse: The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • 1,100 pieces: This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • The Lord bless you: Micah’s mother was hoping that...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101165,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:2","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:2-3<\/strong> Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • <em>I heard you place a curse:<\/em> The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • <em>1,100 pieces:<\/em> This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> bless you:<\/em> Micah’s mother was hoping that the blessing would effectively neutralize her earlier curse.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:2-3<\/strong> Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • <em>I heard you place a curse:<\/em> The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • <em>1,100 pieces:<\/em> This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> bless you:<\/em> Micah’s mother was hoping that the blessing would effectively neutralize her earlier curse.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:2-3 Micah’s mother was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • I heard you place a curse: The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • 1,100 pieces: This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • The Lord bless you: Micah’s mother was hoping that...","summary_en":"17:2-3 Micah’s mother was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • I heard you place a curse: The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • 1,100 pieces: This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • The Lord bless you: Micah’s mother was hoping that...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128791,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:2","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:2-3<\/strong> Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • <em>I heard you place a curse:<\/em> The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • <em>1,100 pieces:<\/em> This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> bless you:<\/em> Micah’s mother was hoping that the blessing would effectively neutralize her earlier curse.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:2-3<\/strong> Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • <em>I heard you place a curse:<\/em> The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • <em>1,100 pieces:<\/em> This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> bless you:<\/em> Micah’s mother was hoping that the blessing would effectively neutralize her earlier curse.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:2-3 Micah’s mother was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • I heard you place a curse: The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • 1,100 pieces: This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • The Lord bless you: Micah’s mother was hoping that...","summary_en":"17:2-3 Micah’s mother was indulgent and idolatrous, yet she invoked the Lord’s name in both cursing and blessing. • I heard you place a curse: The words uttered in curses and blessings were understood to have power, particularly if the speaker had the authority to utter such pronouncements (cp. Gen 27; Isa 55:11). • 1,100 pieces: This same large number was given to Delilah (Judg 16:5). It was probably Micah’s mother’s life savings or dowry. • The Lord bless you: Micah’s mother was hoping that...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":35398,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Silversmith","title_en":"Silversmith","content_ro":"<h3>SILVERSMITH<\/h3>\n<p>One who refined silver-bearing ore and then cast it or beat it into the desired shape. Silversmiths produced musical instruments like trumpets (Nm 10:2), bases on which the frame of the tabernacle rested (Ex 26:19-25), and objects for use in the tabernacle and temple (Nm 7:13-85), as well as ornaments for private use. Silversmiths also made religious statues for false worship (Ex 20:23; Jgs 17:4). The silversmith Demetrius (Acts 19:24) made silver shrines for Artemis at Ephesus. The profession was well known in NT times (2 Tm 2:20; Rv 9:20).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SILVERSMITH<\/h3>\n<p>One who refined silver-bearing ore and then cast it or beat it into the desired shape. Silversmiths produced musical instruments like trumpets (Nm 10:2), bases on which the frame of the tabernacle rested (Ex 26:19-25), and objects for use in the tabernacle and temple (Nm 7:13-85), as well as ornaments for private use. Silversmiths also made religious statues for false worship (Ex 20:23; Jgs 17:4). The silversmith Demetrius (Acts 19:24) made silver shrines for Artemis at Ephesus. The profession was well known in NT times (2 Tm 2:20; Rv 9:20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SILVERSMITH One who refined silver-bearing ore and then cast it or beat it into the desired shape. Silversmiths produced musical instruments like trumpets (Nm 10:2), bases on which the frame of the tabernacle rested (Ex 26:19-25), and objects for use in the tabernacle and temple (Nm 7:13-85), as well as ornaments for private use. Silversmiths also made religious statues for false worship (Ex 20:23; Jgs 17:4). The silversmith Demetrius (Acts 19:24) made silver shrines for Artemis at Ephesus. T...","summary_en":"SILVERSMITH One who refined silver-bearing ore and then cast it or beat it into the desired shape. Silversmiths produced musical instruments like trumpets (Nm 10:2), bases on which the frame of the tabernacle rested (Ex 26:19-25), and objects for use in the tabernacle and temple (Nm 7:13-85), as well as ornaments for private use. Silversmiths also made religious statues for false worship (Ex 20:23; Jgs 17:4). The silversmith Demetrius (Acts 19:24) made silver shrines for Artemis at Ephesus. T...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35670,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Smith","title_en":"Smith","content_ro":"<h3>SMITH<\/h3>\n<p>Worker in metals; a blacksmith. The earliest metalworker mentioned in the Bible is Tubal-cain (Gn 4:22). The term covers metalworkers of all kinds: copper, bronze, iron, silver, and gold. Silversmiths are mentioned in Judges 17:4 and Acts 19:24. Ironsmiths were rare or even nonexistent in Israel up to the time of Samuel, and the Israelites had to go to the Philistine smiths to have their iron tools sharpened (1 Sm 13:19). In the days of the kings, Israelite smiths were active and were subsequently taken into captivity by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kgs 24:14-16; Jer 24:1; 29:2). Details of the work of the smith are given in several accounts (Prv 25:4; Is 44:12; 54:16). The smiths mentioned in Zechariah 1:20 are probably ironsmiths or blacksmiths.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Stones, Precious.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SMITH<\/h3>\n<p>Worker in metals; a blacksmith. The earliest metalworker mentioned in the Bible is Tubal-cain (Gn 4:22). The term covers metalworkers of all kinds: copper, bronze, iron, silver, and gold. Silversmiths are mentioned in Judges 17:4 and Acts 19:24. Ironsmiths were rare or even nonexistent in Israel up to the time of Samuel, and the Israelites had to go to the Philistine smiths to have their iron tools sharpened (1 Sm 13:19). In the days of the kings, Israelite smiths were active and were subsequently taken into captivity by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kgs 24:14-16; Jer 24:1; 29:2). Details of the work of the smith are given in several accounts (Prv 25:4; Is 44:12; 54:16). The smiths mentioned in Zechariah 1:20 are probably ironsmiths or blacksmiths.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Stones, Precious.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SMITH Worker in metals; a blacksmith. The earliest metalworker mentioned in the Bible is Tubal-cain (Gn 4:22). The term covers metalworkers of all kinds: copper, bronze, iron, silver, and gold. Silversmiths are mentioned in Judges 17:4 and Acts 19:24. Ironsmiths were rare or even nonexistent in Israel up to the time of Samuel, and the Israelites had to go to the Philistine smiths to have their iron tools sharpened (1 Sm 13:19). In the days of the kings, Israelite smiths were active and were s...","summary_en":"SMITH Worker in metals; a blacksmith. The earliest metalworker mentioned in the Bible is Tubal-cain (Gn 4:22). The term covers metalworkers of all kinds: copper, bronze, iron, silver, and gold. Silversmiths are mentioned in Judges 17:4 and Acts 19:24. Ironsmiths were rare or even nonexistent in Israel up to the time of Samuel, and the Israelites had to go to the Philistine smiths to have their iron tools sharpened (1 Sm 13:19). In the days of the kings, Israelite smiths were active and were s...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45914,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:4","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:4-5<\/strong> We are not told what Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the <em>shrine<\/em> (literally <em>house of gods<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:4-5<\/strong> We are not told what Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the <em>shrine<\/em> (literally <em>house of gods<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:4-5 We are not told what Micah’s mother did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the shrine (literally house of gods).","summary_en":"17:4-5 We are not told what Micah’s mother did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the shrine (literally house of gods).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73540,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:4","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:4-5<\/strong> We are not told what Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the <em>shrine<\/em> (literally <em>house of gods<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:4-5<\/strong> We are not told what Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the <em>shrine<\/em> (literally <em>house of gods<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:4-5 We are not told what Micah’s mother did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the shrine (literally house of gods).","summary_en":"17:4-5 We are not told what Micah’s mother did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the shrine (literally house of gods).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101166,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:4","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:4-5<\/strong> We are not told what Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the <em>shrine<\/em> (literally <em>house of gods<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:4-5<\/strong> We are not told what Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the <em>shrine<\/em> (literally <em>house of gods<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:4-5 We are not told what Micah’s mother did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the shrine (literally house of gods).","summary_en":"17:4-5 We are not told what Micah’s mother did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the shrine (literally house of gods).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128792,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:4","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:4-5<\/strong> We are not told what Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the <em>shrine<\/em> (literally <em>house of gods<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:4-5<\/strong> We are not told what Micah’s <em>mother<\/em> did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the <em>shrine<\/em> (literally <em>house of gods<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:4-5 We are not told what Micah’s mother did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the shrine (literally house of gods).","summary_en":"17:4-5 We are not told what Micah’s mother did with the other 900 shekels. Perhaps they went to pay for the shrine (literally house of gods).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":10946,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ephod (Garment)","title_en":"Ephod (Garment)","content_ro":"<h3>EPHOD (Garment)<\/h3>\n<p>Upper garment worn during religious services associated with the tabernacle or temple. “Ephod” generally referred to the ornamented vest that the high priest wore over a blue robe (Ex 28:31). Included with the ephod were the Urim and Thummim, the sacred lots. Sometimes “ephod” meant the complete dress of the high priest (1 Sm 2:28; 23:6, 9; 30:7) or similar garments worn by lesser priests.<\/p>\n<p>Made of dyed material and fine linen, the garment was embroidered in blue, purple, scarlet, and gold. At the upper end were attached two shoulder straps, each having an onyx stone inscribed with the names of Israel’s 12 tribes. The breastplate, also containing the tribal names, was bound to the ephod by an elaborate series of cords and chains (Ex 28:22-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish writers suggest various appearances for the ephod: (1) apronlike, covering the body from the chest to the heels; (2) enveloping the body only from the waist down, the upper body being covered by the breastplate; or (3) sleeved and jacketlike, with the middle of the breast uncovered so the breastplate could be inserted easily.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the Babylonian exile, the ephod served as a means of revelation from God, especially concerning military operations. Abiathar the priest brought the ephod into David’s camp on one occasion for consulting the Lord (1 Sm 23:6-9; 30:7). It is uncertain whether the priest donned or held the ephod whole, seeking counsel from the Lord by means of the Urim and Thummim.<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the judges, the ephod was often misused, as by Gideon (Jgs 8:27), Micah (17:5), and Jonathan, grandson of Moses (18:30; cf. vv 14, 17, 20). Either the garment itself or an image that represented God, on which the garment was placed, was worshiped as the people sought revelation in a manner condemned by God. Household idols (teraphim) were also associated with this ungodly practice (17:5; Hos 3:4).<\/p>\n<p>Besides the high priest, other priests wore an ephod for certain religious services (1 Sm 22:18), and even Samuel (2:18) and David (2 Sm 6:14) wore one. By the postexilic period, and perhaps as early as Solomon, the ephod was no longer consulted (Ezr 2:63; Neh 7:65). There was no need for ephod or Urim revelation once there was the more complete revelation of the prophetic ministry promised by Moses (Dt 18:15-22). However, the high priest continued to wear this vestment until the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priests and Levites.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EPHOD (Garment)<\/h3>\n<p>Upper garment worn during religious services associated with the tabernacle or temple. “Ephod” generally referred to the ornamented vest that the high priest wore over a blue robe (Ex 28:31). Included with the ephod were the Urim and Thummim, the sacred lots. Sometimes “ephod” meant the complete dress of the high priest (1 Sm 2:28; 23:6, 9; 30:7) or similar garments worn by lesser priests.<\/p>\n<p>Made of dyed material and fine linen, the garment was embroidered in blue, purple, scarlet, and gold. At the upper end were attached two shoulder straps, each having an onyx stone inscribed with the names of Israel’s 12 tribes. The breastplate, also containing the tribal names, was bound to the ephod by an elaborate series of cords and chains (Ex 28:22-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish writers suggest various appearances for the ephod: (1) apronlike, covering the body from the chest to the heels; (2) enveloping the body only from the waist down, the upper body being covered by the breastplate; or (3) sleeved and jacketlike, with the middle of the breast uncovered so the breastplate could be inserted easily.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the Babylonian exile, the ephod served as a means of revelation from God, especially concerning military operations. Abiathar the priest brought the ephod into David’s camp on one occasion for consulting the Lord (1 Sm 23:6-9; 30:7). It is uncertain whether the priest donned or held the ephod whole, seeking counsel from the Lord by means of the Urim and Thummim.<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the judges, the ephod was often misused, as by Gideon (Jgs 8:27), Micah (17:5), and Jonathan, grandson of Moses (18:30; cf. vv 14, 17, 20). Either the garment itself or an image that represented God, on which the garment was placed, was worshiped as the people sought revelation in a manner condemned by God. Household idols (teraphim) were also associated with this ungodly practice (17:5; Hos 3:4).<\/p>\n<p>Besides the high priest, other priests wore an ephod for certain religious services (1 Sm 22:18), and even Samuel (2:18) and David (2 Sm 6:14) wore one. By the postexilic period, and perhaps as early as Solomon, the ephod was no longer consulted (Ezr 2:63; Neh 7:65). There was no need for ephod or Urim revelation once there was the more complete revelation of the prophetic ministry promised by Moses (Dt 18:15-22). However, the high priest continued to wear this vestment until the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priests and Levites.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EPHOD (Garment) Upper garment worn during religious services associated with the tabernacle or temple. “Ephod” generally referred to the ornamented vest that the high priest wore over a blue robe (Ex 28:31). Included with the ephod were the Urim and Thummim, the sacred lots. Sometimes “ephod” meant the complete dress of the high priest (1 Sm 2:28; 23:6, 9; 30:7) or similar garments worn by lesser priests. Made of dyed material and fine linen, the garment was embroidered in blue, purple, scarl...","summary_en":"EPHOD (Garment) Upper garment worn during religious services associated with the tabernacle or temple. “Ephod” generally referred to the ornamented vest that the high priest wore over a blue robe (Ex 28:31). Included with the ephod were the Urim and Thummim, the sacred lots. Sometimes “ephod” meant the complete dress of the high priest (1 Sm 2:28; 23:6, 9; 30:7) or similar garments worn by lesser priests. Made of dyed material and fine linen, the garment was embroidered in blue, purple, scarl...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21322,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Judges","title_en":"Book of Judges","content_ro":"<h3>JUDGES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book reflects a final editing of the material in the period of the early monarchy. It may well be a polemic for the righteous rule of David over against the kingship of Saul, which was molded by a secular, Canaanite conception of kingship rather than by the law of God. The author was almost certainly not Samuel, as traditionally thought, but a later compiler who relied on ancient written materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Though the judges succeeded in giving the tribes some rest from the incursions of surrounding enemies, the Israelites were continually harassed over long periods of time. Scholarly opinion differs on the duration of the period of the judges. The dating of the exodus affects the dating of the beginning of the judges. Those who take an early date for the exodus put the beginning around 1370–1360 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas others propose a date close to the end of the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. A related issue pertains to the chronology of the judges. Does Judges give a chronological, sequential account of the period, or is the book a representative account of judges from various parts of Canaan and Transjordan who “judged” a region, a tribe, or several tribes simultaneously?<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteraryFramework\">Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the stories in the book bear the marks of literary creativity. The stories are classics in their own right. The poetry of Deborah’s song (Jgs 5) is very moving, and the fable of Jotham (9:8-15) is a fine example of figurative speech. The care given to the stories is also reflected in the construction of the book. There are two introductions: a political one (Jgs 1:1–2:5) and a socioreligious one (2:6–3:6). The political introduction connects Judges with the story of the Conquest, when the tribes attempted to occupy the land. It prepares the reader for the political and military problems of the era of the judges. The socioreligious introduction explains why Israel had so many adversities, why the institution of the judges arose, and why the Lord never gave Israel the promised lasting rest from its enemies. The main body of the book is the story of the judges (3:7–16:31). References to the minor judges (six in all) are set within the stories of the major judges in increasing frequency. As is evident from the schema, the number of minor judges increased in frequency in proportion to the decrease in number of major judges: two major, one minor; two major, two minor; one major, three minor; one major. There is a total of 12 judges, representative of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the listing of 12 judges, representative of the various parts of Canaan and Transjordan, is to demonstrate that all tribes throughout the conquered territories experienced grave difficulties from a variety of enemies: Arameans, Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Canaanites, and Philistines. Israel was hard pressed on nearly all its frontiers. The appendixes (chs 17–21), together with the two introductions, form the framework of the book. The political and socioreligious problems (1:1–3:6) are presented by way of several stories in the last chapters. The final editor who gave the book its canonical shape purposefully framed the stories of the judges so as to show lack of movement. The successes of the previous stages in redemptive history came to a standstill in the ebb and flow of the judges. Though the Lord delivered his people in many ways, they returned to the problems described in 1:1–3:6. The appendixes describe Israel’s problems representative of the period of the judges, when “there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for deliverance, and God’s raising up of a judge reflects a deuteronomic perspective with its warnings concerning disobedience and judgment. The repetitiveness of the cycle supports the contention of the anonymous narrator that Israel remained unchanged by the grace of God. However, in spite of the moral, religious, and political anarchy as well as the civil wars, the last chapter shows that the tribes are still concerned with each other’s welfare. Though the unity of God’s people has been gravely challenged, the situation is not hopeless. The book ends on a note of hope—hope for a king who may deliver Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Thus, there are several purposes of the book: (1) to demonstrate the meaninglessness of this stage in Israel’s development; (2) to explain why the tribes did not occupy all the land promised to the patriarchs; (3) to justify the way of God, who was gracious and patient with Israel’s repeated acts of disobedience; (4) to set forth the legitimacy of a “shepherd” king in contrast to a despotic form of kingship; and (5) to explain the urgent need for a new momentum, lest Israel succumb to the Philistines and intertribal warfare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Political Introduction (1:1–2:5)<\/h5>\n<p>In Joshua 1–12 the warfare under Joshua is portrayed as a mobilization of Canaanite forces against Israel. By the intervention of the Lord, the Canaanite resistance was put down and the land was occupied by the tribes (chs 13–21). Joshua 13–21, however, clearly shows that each tribe had problems ridding its territory of pockets of Canaanite resistance, which were usually centered around heavily guarded and well-fortified cities (cf. 13:2-6, 13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua emphasizes the successes and minimizes the problems, whereas the prologue to Judges sets the stage for the whole book by openly addressing Israel’s problems and failures. As the book unfolds, it is precisely these problems and failures that in due time bring Israel to the brink of disaster.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the judges began with the death of Joshua (Jgs 1:1; 2:8-9). The Israelites had inherited a legacy from Joshua: the law of the Lord (Jos 23:6; 24:26), the land, a challenge to obey the Lord (24:14-27), and a promise of God’s presence and help in subduing the Canaanites (23:5, 10).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah and Simeon (Jgs 1:2-20)<\/h6>\n<p>The prominence of Judah and Caleb parallels the position of Judah in Joshua (Jos 14:6–15:63; cf. also the house of Joseph, Jgs 1:22-29; cf. Jos 16–17). Judah was victorious over the cruel Adoni-bezek, who ruled over Bezek, a town of uncertain location. Judah successfully occupied the hill country, the Negev, and the western foothills. They even took Jerusalem, or an outlying suburb identified with Jerusalem (Jos 1:8), but could not retain control there (v 21) until David’s conquest of the city (2 Sm 5:6-9). Judah was victorious over the Canaanites in the region of Hebron, already conquered under Joshua (Jos 10:36). Hebron, also known as Kiriath-arba (“city of four” or “tetrapolis”), was a powerful ally of Jerusalem (v 3) and had been able to rally military support for a new assault on Israel, even after its first defeat. Caleb received Hebron, as Moses had promised (Jgs 1:20; cf. Jos 15:13). After the victory over Hebron, Judah extended its control over the southern hill country by an attack on Debir (Jgs 1:11-15; cf. Jos 15:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Kenites (Jgs 1:16), descendants of Jethro and therefore related to Moses by marriage, settled in the Negev around Arad and the City of Palms, which here probably refers to Tamar rather than Jericho.<\/p>\n<p>Judah secured the southern border by a victory over the Canaanites at Hormah (Jgs 1:17; cf. Nm 14:45; 21:3; Dt 1:44) and the coastal plain by victories at Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron. However, Judah’s successes in the coastal plain were resisted by a well-armed Canaanite force (Jgs 1:18-19). It occupied the Judean hill country and the Negev, but could not retain control over the plains. The Philistines were soon to take control over Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, and incorporate them into their pentapolis.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin (1:21)<\/h6>\n<p>Jerusalem was situated on the border between Judah and Benjamin. Judah took the city or a suburb (Jos 1:8) but was too far removed to retain control over it. Benjamin was too weak to subdue the Jebusites. Only David succeeded in this (2 Sm 5:6-9); he incorporated it into Judah (cf. Jos 15:63), even though it originally was allotted to Benjamin (Jos 18:28).<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph: Ephraim and Manasseh (1:22-29)<\/h6>\n<p>Ephraim took Bethel, known from the patriarchal stories as a significant cultic site (Gn 12:8; 13:3-4; 28:19; 31:13; 35:1-15). However, Manasseh was unsuccessful in taking the fortified cities in the valley of Jezreel (Esdraelon): Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor, Ibleam, and Megiddo. These cities controlled traffic along the east-west and north–south roads as well as the important passes through the Carmel range and the ford of the Jordan. Ephraim could not take full possession of the coastal plain, controlled by Gezer. The success of both Ephraim and Manasseh was limited.<\/p>\n<h6>The Other Four Tribes (1:30-36)<\/h6>\n<p>The other four tribes in Canaan receive brief mention. They, too, were only partially successful. Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and especially Dan did not fully succeed in driving out the Canaanites. At best they later subjected most of them to forced labor.<\/p>\n<h6>The Failure of Israel (2:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>The failure to subdue the land and to wipe out the Canaanites and their culture led to intermarriage and idolatry (cf. Ex 23:33; 34:12-16; Nm 33:55; Dt 7:2-5, 16; Jos 23:7, 12).<\/p>\n<p>The identity of “the angel of the Lord” who appears at Bokim is far from certain. It may be a reference to the Lord himself, to an angelic messenger, or to a prophet (cf. Jgs 6:8). He rebuked the people in the prophetic spirit and pronounced God’s judgment as taking the form of continual confrontation between Israel and the Canaanites (2:3). Their weeping and sacrificing were to no avail (2:4-5; cf. Mal 2:13). Israel stood condemned within a generation after Joshua’s death.<\/p>\n<h5>The Theological Introduction (2:6–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>The theological introduction begins where Joshua left off (Jos 24:28-31). The generation of Joshua was characterized by loyalty, but their loyalty to the Lord did not last long after the excitement of the Conquest and the demonstration of God’s presence (Jgs 2:10). Israel served Canaanite gods (Baal and Astarte) instead. Baal was the storm god, symbolic of rain and fertility, and Astarte was his cohort. The plural (Baals and Ashtaroth, 2:11-13) signifies the many local ways in which the Canaanite gods were worshiped. The religious unity was broken up into a great diversity. Thus Israel angered the Lord (vv 12-14), who sent them enemies and plunderers. Israel was unsuccessful in dealing with them, as Moses and Joshua had forewarned (Dt 28:25, 33; Jos 23:13, 16). The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for mercy, and deliverance is found throughout Judges. The people were rooted in the apostasy of their forefathers, even though the previous generation had been sensitive to God. Israel did not submit to the leadership of the judges, except to free itself from the oppressors. In fulfillment of the curses of the covenant, God swore not to give his people rest but to test them and to train them for warfare (Jgs 3:1-4), so that they might learn to respond to the challenges of a real world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Judges of Israel (3:7–16:31)<\/h5>\n<h6>Othniel (3:7-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Othniel is a transitional figure, linking the Conquest and the judges. He had involved himself in the conquest of Kiriath-sepher and was related to Caleb as his cousin and son-in-law (1:13). He repelled the Arameans led by Cushan-rishathaim, so that the land enjoyed peace for some 40 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ehud (3:12-30)<\/h6>\n<p>The Moabites, allied with the Ammonites and Amalekites, came against Israel from the east and oppressed them for 18 years under the leadership of Eglon. Ehud led the mission to bring tribute to Eglon at his palace, located probably by Jericho (the City of Palms). Ehud was uniquely qualified for this mission; being left-handed, he was able to use his double-edged sword in an unsuspecting manner to stab the king. Ehud’s success was the result of careful plotting and the element of surprise. He paid the tribute and left, only to return with a supposed oracle from the gods. The king fell for the deception and was murdered. The delay at the Moabite court gave the Israelites an opportunity to bring their forces together at the fords of the Jordan. Ehud’s success was complete; no Moabite escaped, and Israel enjoyed peace for 80 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Shamgar (3:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Shamgar’s exploits were against the Philistines in the coastal plains. He had a non-Israelite name but was probably an Israelite by birth. Like Samson he fought the Philistines with an unconventional weapon (an ox goad). His name is also mentioned in the song of Deborah (5:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Deborah and Barak (4:1–5:31)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative now turns to the Canaanite aggressors in the north under the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor, and Sisera, of Harosheth-haggoyim (4:1-3). The ruins of Hazor (Jos 11:13) had been rebuilt, and another Jabin (cf. v 1) ruled over the region. He had regained his military power, as he had as many as 900 chariots of iron. He oppressed Israel for 20 years (Jgs 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>God had a prophetess in Israel who led his people during this dark time (4:4). She rendered judgments under a palm tree in southern Ephraim near Benjamin (v 5). She called on Barak to muster the armies of Naphtali and Zebulun, the tribes affected by the Canaanite raids, and to engage Sisera in a surprise attack by the Kishon River (vv 6-7). Barak’s hesitancy led him to request Deborah’s presence, which resulted in his forfeiture of the honor of killing Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite forces (vv 8-10). The Lord gave success to the surprise attack from Mt Tabor, so that the Canaanites were routed, unable to use their heavy chariots, which were mired down in the swamps of the Jezreel Valley (5:20-22). The Canaanites were routed, and Sisera was killed by Jael, the wife of Heber, a Kenite who had separated from the Kenites around Arad (4:17-18; cf. 1:16). She offered him hospitality, as her family had friendly relations with the Canaanites, but heroically put him to death with a tent peg (4:18-21; 5:26-27). In successive campaigns the Israelites gained freedom from Jabin, until they destroyed his power (4:24).<\/p>\n<p>The song of Deborah (ch 5) celebrates, in poetic fashion, the victory over Jabin. It is one of the oldest poems in the Bible. It praises the God of Israel as the King who comes to protect his covenant people, and before whom the mountains move (5:2-3). He is the God of Mt Sinai (Jgs 5:4-5; cf. Dt 33:2; Ps 68:7-8; Hb 3:3-4). Though the oppressors had despoiled Israel and had made the roads unsafe for travel, and Israel was unable to defend itself (Jgs 5:6-8), the Lord raised up Deborah and Barak to lead the nobles to war (vv 9-13). They came from Ephraim, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar, and Naphtali (vv 14-15a, 18), but the Transjordan tribes and Asher did not want to get involved (vv 15b-17). The song then moves to the battle scene, where torrential rains bogged the chariots down (vv 19-23). Jael is celebrated as “most blessed of women,” who used her simple way of life to bring an end to Sisera (vv 24-27). She stands in contrast to Sisera’s mother, who is portrayed with all her culture waiting in vain for Sisera’s return with all of his spoils (vv 28-30). The Lord has used the simple to confound the powerful. The conclusion is a prayer for God’s judgment on all of Israel’s enemies (Jgs 5:31a; cf. Ps 68:1-3).<\/p>\n<h6>Gideon (6:1–8:35)<\/h6>\n<p>Israel’s rest for 40 years (Jgs 5:31b) was disturbed by the invasion of Midianites and Amalekites from the East (6:1-3). They destroyed the economy by invading the country at harvesttime (vv 4-6). In response to Israel’s cry, God sent a prophet with a message similar to that of the angel of the Lord (2:1-5). Then an angel appeared to Gideon and called him to lead the people in battle (6:11-14). The Lord assured him of his presence (v 16) by a sign (vv 17-22). Gideon knew that he had been visited by the Lord and built an altar called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Peace” in Ophrah (v 24). He responded by destroying the cultic site dedicated to Baal and Asherah at Ophrah (vv 25-28) and by initiating worship at the new altar (v 28). Baal did not protect his own altar (vv 29-32), even when challenged by Gideon’s father (v 31). Consequently, Gideon was known as Jerubbaal (meaning, “let Baal contend with him,” v 32).<\/p>\n<p>Next, Gideon mustered an army of 32,000 men from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali (6:35; cf. 7:3b). In order to assure himself of the Lord’s presence, he asked for another sign: the sign of the fleece (6:36-40). It must be kept in mind that Gideon lived in an area in which the wonders of God had been scarce (v 13) and that he, like Moses, needed reassurance that God was with him. God responded to his growing faith. Gideon went forth with a greatly reduced army of 300 against the enemy. Of his original army, 22,000 had left because they were afraid (7:2-3; cf. Dt 20:8). Another 9,700 were sent home, though they were valiant men (7:4-8). After assuring Gideon by a dream of an enemy soldier, God used the 300 in a marvelous way to confound the Midianites (vv 9-15). God gave Israel victory over the Midianite leaders Oreb, Zeeb, Zebah, and Zalmunna (7:16–8:21). Gideon wisely avoided a possible military confrontation with Ephraim (8:1-3), pursued the enemy deep into the Transjordan, and punished the leaders of Succoth and Penuel, who did not assist him (vv 4-9, 13-16).<\/p>\n<p>This glorious victory created a new wave of interest in the idea of kingship. The men of Israel wished to establish the family of Gideon as their royal dynasty (8:22). Gideon refused, and instead wrongly set up an ephod, cast from the gold taken in battle (vv 23-27). The ephod was probably used for cultic practices, possibly divination (cf. 17:5).<\/p>\n<p>Gideon’s era also came to an end. He was God’s instrument, giving Israel rest for 40 years. He fathered 70 sons and died in old age. God had richly blessed him, even though he had led Israel astray with his ephod. Thereafter, Israel returned to Baal worship (8:33-35).<\/p>\n<p>In the wake of Gideon’s era, his son Abimelech attempted to establish dynastic continuity by having himself installed as king at Shechem (9:1-6). With the support of his relatives at Shechem, Abimelech had all his brothers killed except Jotham (vv 4-5). After Abimelech’s coronation, Jotham set forth his opposition to his brother in a proverbial manner (vv 7-20), and went into hiding. Three years later Abimelech’s evil schemes entrapped him when the citizens of Shechem rebelled. He furiously attacked the city and destroyed it. A short time later, however, he was wounded at Thebez by a millstone dropped by a woman from the tower in which she had sought refuge from him. His servant put him out of his misery as per his request. This episode demonstrates how bad a despotic king may be. Again, God’s justice prevailed.<\/p>\n<h6>Tola (10:1-2)<\/h6>\n<p>Tola was a minor judge from Issachar who judged Israel for 23 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jair (10:3-5)<\/h6>\n<p>Jair was a minor judge from Gilead who judged Israel for 22 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jephthah (10:6–12:7)<\/h6>\n<p>A recapitulation (10:6-16) of the cycle (idolatry, enemies, cry for help, momentary repentance) sets the introduction to the Jephthah narrative. Under attack from the Ammonites, the elders of Gilead requested help from Jephthah (10:17–11:8), who promised to help them on the condition that he remain their leader even after the war (vv 9-10). At a solemn ceremony he becomes their “head” at Mizpah (v 11). Jephthah opened up correspondence with the Ammonite king, in which he argued for Israel’s rights on the basis of the Israelites’ historic claim to the land as granted to them by the Lord (vv 12–27). Instead of going out immediately to war, he hoped that “the <span>Lord<\/span>, the Judge” would settle the dispute (v 27); but the Ammonite king was unimpressed. When the Spirit of God came over him, Jephthah led Israel into battle, but only after making a rash vow. He was victorious but found out that his vow to sacrifice whatever came first out of his house required him to sacrifice his daughter. Debate continues as to whether he offered her up as a human sacrifice or whether she sacrificed marriage (see discussion under Jephthah).<\/p>\n<p>The Ephraimites seemed to have had an insatiable desire for war. Earlier they had complained to Gideon, who successfully defused their threats (8:1-3). Jephthah fought them, however, because the Israelites living in Transjordan had been reviled as “renegades” (12:1-4). Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed by the fords of the Jordan in this civil war. Thereafter, Jephthah ruled for only six years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ibzan (12:8-10)<\/h6>\n<p>Ibzan was a minor judge from Bethlehem who ruled Israel for seven years.<\/p>\n<h6>Elon (12:11)<\/h6>\n<p>A minor judge from Zebulun, Elon ruled Israel for ten years.<\/p>\n<h6>Abdon (12:13-15)<\/h6>\n<p>Abdon was a minor judge from Pirathon, the location of which is uncertain. He ruled for eight years.<\/p>\n<h6>Samson (13:1–16:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Samson’s greatness in the history of redemption is due to his miraculous birth (13:1-24), his service as a Nazirite (13:7; cf. Nm 6:1-21), the repeated overpowering by the Spirit of the Lord (Jgs 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14), the single-handed exploits against the Philistines (Ashkelon, 14:19; the fields, 15:1-6; Ramath Etam, 15:7-17; Gaza, 16:1-3, 23-30), and his occasional dependence on the Lord (15:18-19; 16:28-30). However, his personal life was flawed because of his weakness for Philistine women (chs 14, 16). Having been seduced by Delilah, he was imprisoned at Gaza. He died in the collapse of Dagon’s temple, praying that the Lord would permit him to get revenge (16:28-30). He was buried in his father’s tomb in the territory of Dan (16:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue (17–21)<\/h5>\n<p>The cyclical nature of Israel’s existence was without movement. Rest from enemies was always temporary. Israel was not yet ready for dynastic kingship, and whatever one may say of the three years of Abimelech, it was a kingship of the worst sort. Israel vacillated between idolatry and belief in the true Lord. The period of the judges was unstable, marked by petty individualism and provincialism. Yet God remained sovereign in the affairs of his people. The epilogue contains two stories: the story of Micah and the Danite migration (chs 17–18) and the civil war (chs 19–21). The epilogue is bound together by the phrase “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25, <span>niv<\/span>). The symmetric recurrence (two times in each narrative) emphasizes the anarchy and inability of the tribes to unite together to serve God as a covenant people.<\/p>\n<h6>Micah and the Danites (17–18)<\/h6>\n<p>Micah was an Ephraimite who established a shrine and hired one of his own sons, and then a Levite from Bethlehem, to serve as its priests (ch 17). Unable to keep their patrimony, the Danites left to establish themselves at the foot of Mt Hermon. They took the idols and the Levite from Micah’s shrine and set up a cultic city at the newly established city of Dan, built on the ruins of Laish (ch 18). Thus, they set up a cultic center that rivaled the tabernacle at Shiloh (18:31).<\/p>\n<h6>The Civil War (19–21)<\/h6>\n<p>The people of Gibeah, which belonged to Benjamin, sexually abused the concubine of a Levite so that she died. Like the Levite of chapters 17 and 18, she was from Bethlehem (19:1). Dramatically, the Levite sent pieces of her corpse to all the tribes, which assembled against the Benjamites because they protected the criminals of Gibeah (19:29–20:19). In the ensuing battle the population of Benjamin was decimated (20:20-48). The 11 tribes gave them 400 virgins taken in a civil war against Jabesh-gilead (21:6-15). These were not enough, however. Because of the threat of the extinction of Benjamin and the vow not to give their daughters in marriage to any Benjamite, the Israelites devised a plan by which the Benjamites could take Israelite virgins dancing in the festival at Shiloh. Benjamin thus was able to rebuild its towns and settlements.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gideon; Jephthah; Samson.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDGES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book reflects a final editing of the material in the period of the early monarchy. It may well be a polemic for the righteous rule of David over against the kingship of Saul, which was molded by a secular, Canaanite conception of kingship rather than by the law of God. The author was almost certainly not Samuel, as traditionally thought, but a later compiler who relied on ancient written materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Though the judges succeeded in giving the tribes some rest from the incursions of surrounding enemies, the Israelites were continually harassed over long periods of time. Scholarly opinion differs on the duration of the period of the judges. The dating of the exodus affects the dating of the beginning of the judges. Those who take an early date for the exodus put the beginning around 1370–1360 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas others propose a date close to the end of the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. A related issue pertains to the chronology of the judges. Does Judges give a chronological, sequential account of the period, or is the book a representative account of judges from various parts of Canaan and Transjordan who “judged” a region, a tribe, or several tribes simultaneously?<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteraryFramework\">Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the stories in the book bear the marks of literary creativity. The stories are classics in their own right. The poetry of Deborah’s song (Jgs 5) is very moving, and the fable of Jotham (9:8-15) is a fine example of figurative speech. The care given to the stories is also reflected in the construction of the book. There are two introductions: a political one (Jgs 1:1–2:5) and a socioreligious one (2:6–3:6). The political introduction connects Judges with the story of the Conquest, when the tribes attempted to occupy the land. It prepares the reader for the political and military problems of the era of the judges. The socioreligious introduction explains why Israel had so many adversities, why the institution of the judges arose, and why the Lord never gave Israel the promised lasting rest from its enemies. The main body of the book is the story of the judges (3:7–16:31). References to the minor judges (six in all) are set within the stories of the major judges in increasing frequency. As is evident from the schema, the number of minor judges increased in frequency in proportion to the decrease in number of major judges: two major, one minor; two major, two minor; one major, three minor; one major. There is a total of 12 judges, representative of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the listing of 12 judges, representative of the various parts of Canaan and Transjordan, is to demonstrate that all tribes throughout the conquered territories experienced grave difficulties from a variety of enemies: Arameans, Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Canaanites, and Philistines. Israel was hard pressed on nearly all its frontiers. The appendixes (chs 17–21), together with the two introductions, form the framework of the book. The political and socioreligious problems (1:1–3:6) are presented by way of several stories in the last chapters. The final editor who gave the book its canonical shape purposefully framed the stories of the judges so as to show lack of movement. The successes of the previous stages in redemptive history came to a standstill in the ebb and flow of the judges. Though the Lord delivered his people in many ways, they returned to the problems described in 1:1–3:6. The appendixes describe Israel’s problems representative of the period of the judges, when “there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for deliverance, and God’s raising up of a judge reflects a deuteronomic perspective with its warnings concerning disobedience and judgment. The repetitiveness of the cycle supports the contention of the anonymous narrator that Israel remained unchanged by the grace of God. However, in spite of the moral, religious, and political anarchy as well as the civil wars, the last chapter shows that the tribes are still concerned with each other’s welfare. Though the unity of God’s people has been gravely challenged, the situation is not hopeless. The book ends on a note of hope—hope for a king who may deliver Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Thus, there are several purposes of the book: (1) to demonstrate the meaninglessness of this stage in Israel’s development; (2) to explain why the tribes did not occupy all the land promised to the patriarchs; (3) to justify the way of God, who was gracious and patient with Israel’s repeated acts of disobedience; (4) to set forth the legitimacy of a “shepherd” king in contrast to a despotic form of kingship; and (5) to explain the urgent need for a new momentum, lest Israel succumb to the Philistines and intertribal warfare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Political Introduction (1:1–2:5)<\/h5>\n<p>In Joshua 1–12 the warfare under Joshua is portrayed as a mobilization of Canaanite forces against Israel. By the intervention of the Lord, the Canaanite resistance was put down and the land was occupied by the tribes (chs 13–21). Joshua 13–21, however, clearly shows that each tribe had problems ridding its territory of pockets of Canaanite resistance, which were usually centered around heavily guarded and well-fortified cities (cf. 13:2-6, 13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua emphasizes the successes and minimizes the problems, whereas the prologue to Judges sets the stage for the whole book by openly addressing Israel’s problems and failures. As the book unfolds, it is precisely these problems and failures that in due time bring Israel to the brink of disaster.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the judges began with the death of Joshua (Jgs 1:1; 2:8-9). The Israelites had inherited a legacy from Joshua: the law of the Lord (Jos 23:6; 24:26), the land, a challenge to obey the Lord (24:14-27), and a promise of God’s presence and help in subduing the Canaanites (23:5, 10).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah and Simeon (Jgs 1:2-20)<\/h6>\n<p>The prominence of Judah and Caleb parallels the position of Judah in Joshua (Jos 14:6–15:63; cf. also the house of Joseph, Jgs 1:22-29; cf. Jos 16–17). Judah was victorious over the cruel Adoni-bezek, who ruled over Bezek, a town of uncertain location. Judah successfully occupied the hill country, the Negev, and the western foothills. They even took Jerusalem, or an outlying suburb identified with Jerusalem (Jos 1:8), but could not retain control there (v 21) until David’s conquest of the city (2 Sm 5:6-9). Judah was victorious over the Canaanites in the region of Hebron, already conquered under Joshua (Jos 10:36). Hebron, also known as Kiriath-arba (“city of four” or “tetrapolis”), was a powerful ally of Jerusalem (v 3) and had been able to rally military support for a new assault on Israel, even after its first defeat. Caleb received Hebron, as Moses had promised (Jgs 1:20; cf. Jos 15:13). After the victory over Hebron, Judah extended its control over the southern hill country by an attack on Debir (Jgs 1:11-15; cf. Jos 15:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Kenites (Jgs 1:16), descendants of Jethro and therefore related to Moses by marriage, settled in the Negev around Arad and the City of Palms, which here probably refers to Tamar rather than Jericho.<\/p>\n<p>Judah secured the southern border by a victory over the Canaanites at Hormah (Jgs 1:17; cf. Nm 14:45; 21:3; Dt 1:44) and the coastal plain by victories at Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron. However, Judah’s successes in the coastal plain were resisted by a well-armed Canaanite force (Jgs 1:18-19). It occupied the Judean hill country and the Negev, but could not retain control over the plains. The Philistines were soon to take control over Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, and incorporate them into their pentapolis.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin (1:21)<\/h6>\n<p>Jerusalem was situated on the border between Judah and Benjamin. Judah took the city or a suburb (Jos 1:8) but was too far removed to retain control over it. Benjamin was too weak to subdue the Jebusites. Only David succeeded in this (2 Sm 5:6-9); he incorporated it into Judah (cf. Jos 15:63), even though it originally was allotted to Benjamin (Jos 18:28).<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph: Ephraim and Manasseh (1:22-29)<\/h6>\n<p>Ephraim took Bethel, known from the patriarchal stories as a significant cultic site (Gn 12:8; 13:3-4; 28:19; 31:13; 35:1-15). However, Manasseh was unsuccessful in taking the fortified cities in the valley of Jezreel (Esdraelon): Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor, Ibleam, and Megiddo. These cities controlled traffic along the east-west and north–south roads as well as the important passes through the Carmel range and the ford of the Jordan. Ephraim could not take full possession of the coastal plain, controlled by Gezer. The success of both Ephraim and Manasseh was limited.<\/p>\n<h6>The Other Four Tribes (1:30-36)<\/h6>\n<p>The other four tribes in Canaan receive brief mention. They, too, were only partially successful. Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and especially Dan did not fully succeed in driving out the Canaanites. At best they later subjected most of them to forced labor.<\/p>\n<h6>The Failure of Israel (2:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>The failure to subdue the land and to wipe out the Canaanites and their culture led to intermarriage and idolatry (cf. Ex 23:33; 34:12-16; Nm 33:55; Dt 7:2-5, 16; Jos 23:7, 12).<\/p>\n<p>The identity of “the angel of the Lord” who appears at Bokim is far from certain. It may be a reference to the Lord himself, to an angelic messenger, or to a prophet (cf. Jgs 6:8). He rebuked the people in the prophetic spirit and pronounced God’s judgment as taking the form of continual confrontation between Israel and the Canaanites (2:3). Their weeping and sacrificing were to no avail (2:4-5; cf. Mal 2:13). Israel stood condemned within a generation after Joshua’s death.<\/p>\n<h5>The Theological Introduction (2:6–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>The theological introduction begins where Joshua left off (Jos 24:28-31). The generation of Joshua was characterized by loyalty, but their loyalty to the Lord did not last long after the excitement of the Conquest and the demonstration of God’s presence (Jgs 2:10). Israel served Canaanite gods (Baal and Astarte) instead. Baal was the storm god, symbolic of rain and fertility, and Astarte was his cohort. The plural (Baals and Ashtaroth, 2:11-13) signifies the many local ways in which the Canaanite gods were worshiped. The religious unity was broken up into a great diversity. Thus Israel angered the Lord (vv 12-14), who sent them enemies and plunderers. Israel was unsuccessful in dealing with them, as Moses and Joshua had forewarned (Dt 28:25, 33; Jos 23:13, 16). The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for mercy, and deliverance is found throughout Judges. The people were rooted in the apostasy of their forefathers, even though the previous generation had been sensitive to God. Israel did not submit to the leadership of the judges, except to free itself from the oppressors. In fulfillment of the curses of the covenant, God swore not to give his people rest but to test them and to train them for warfare (Jgs 3:1-4), so that they might learn to respond to the challenges of a real world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Judges of Israel (3:7–16:31)<\/h5>\n<h6>Othniel (3:7-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Othniel is a transitional figure, linking the Conquest and the judges. He had involved himself in the conquest of Kiriath-sepher and was related to Caleb as his cousin and son-in-law (1:13). He repelled the Arameans led by Cushan-rishathaim, so that the land enjoyed peace for some 40 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ehud (3:12-30)<\/h6>\n<p>The Moabites, allied with the Ammonites and Amalekites, came against Israel from the east and oppressed them for 18 years under the leadership of Eglon. Ehud led the mission to bring tribute to Eglon at his palace, located probably by Jericho (the City of Palms). Ehud was uniquely qualified for this mission; being left-handed, he was able to use his double-edged sword in an unsuspecting manner to stab the king. Ehud’s success was the result of careful plotting and the element of surprise. He paid the tribute and left, only to return with a supposed oracle from the gods. The king fell for the deception and was murdered. The delay at the Moabite court gave the Israelites an opportunity to bring their forces together at the fords of the Jordan. Ehud’s success was complete; no Moabite escaped, and Israel enjoyed peace for 80 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Shamgar (3:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Shamgar’s exploits were against the Philistines in the coastal plains. He had a non-Israelite name but was probably an Israelite by birth. Like Samson he fought the Philistines with an unconventional weapon (an ox goad). His name is also mentioned in the song of Deborah (5:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Deborah and Barak (4:1–5:31)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative now turns to the Canaanite aggressors in the north under the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor, and Sisera, of Harosheth-haggoyim (4:1-3). The ruins of Hazor (Jos 11:13) had been rebuilt, and another Jabin (cf. v 1) ruled over the region. He had regained his military power, as he had as many as 900 chariots of iron. He oppressed Israel for 20 years (Jgs 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>God had a prophetess in Israel who led his people during this dark time (4:4). She rendered judgments under a palm tree in southern Ephraim near Benjamin (v 5). She called on Barak to muster the armies of Naphtali and Zebulun, the tribes affected by the Canaanite raids, and to engage Sisera in a surprise attack by the Kishon River (vv 6-7). Barak’s hesitancy led him to request Deborah’s presence, which resulted in his forfeiture of the honor of killing Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite forces (vv 8-10). The Lord gave success to the surprise attack from Mt Tabor, so that the Canaanites were routed, unable to use their heavy chariots, which were mired down in the swamps of the Jezreel Valley (5:20-22). The Canaanites were routed, and Sisera was killed by Jael, the wife of Heber, a Kenite who had separated from the Kenites around Arad (4:17-18; cf. 1:16). She offered him hospitality, as her family had friendly relations with the Canaanites, but heroically put him to death with a tent peg (4:18-21; 5:26-27). In successive campaigns the Israelites gained freedom from Jabin, until they destroyed his power (4:24).<\/p>\n<p>The song of Deborah (ch 5) celebrates, in poetic fashion, the victory over Jabin. It is one of the oldest poems in the Bible. It praises the God of Israel as the King who comes to protect his covenant people, and before whom the mountains move (5:2-3). He is the God of Mt Sinai (Jgs 5:4-5; cf. Dt 33:2; Ps 68:7-8; Hb 3:3-4). Though the oppressors had despoiled Israel and had made the roads unsafe for travel, and Israel was unable to defend itself (Jgs 5:6-8), the Lord raised up Deborah and Barak to lead the nobles to war (vv 9-13). They came from Ephraim, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar, and Naphtali (vv 14-15a, 18), but the Transjordan tribes and Asher did not want to get involved (vv 15b-17). The song then moves to the battle scene, where torrential rains bogged the chariots down (vv 19-23). Jael is celebrated as “most blessed of women,” who used her simple way of life to bring an end to Sisera (vv 24-27). She stands in contrast to Sisera’s mother, who is portrayed with all her culture waiting in vain for Sisera’s return with all of his spoils (vv 28-30). The Lord has used the simple to confound the powerful. The conclusion is a prayer for God’s judgment on all of Israel’s enemies (Jgs 5:31a; cf. Ps 68:1-3).<\/p>\n<h6>Gideon (6:1–8:35)<\/h6>\n<p>Israel’s rest for 40 years (Jgs 5:31b) was disturbed by the invasion of Midianites and Amalekites from the East (6:1-3). They destroyed the economy by invading the country at harvesttime (vv 4-6). In response to Israel’s cry, God sent a prophet with a message similar to that of the angel of the Lord (2:1-5). Then an angel appeared to Gideon and called him to lead the people in battle (6:11-14). The Lord assured him of his presence (v 16) by a sign (vv 17-22). Gideon knew that he had been visited by the Lord and built an altar called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Peace” in Ophrah (v 24). He responded by destroying the cultic site dedicated to Baal and Asherah at Ophrah (vv 25-28) and by initiating worship at the new altar (v 28). Baal did not protect his own altar (vv 29-32), even when challenged by Gideon’s father (v 31). Consequently, Gideon was known as Jerubbaal (meaning, “let Baal contend with him,” v 32).<\/p>\n<p>Next, Gideon mustered an army of 32,000 men from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali (6:35; cf. 7:3b). In order to assure himself of the Lord’s presence, he asked for another sign: the sign of the fleece (6:36-40). It must be kept in mind that Gideon lived in an area in which the wonders of God had been scarce (v 13) and that he, like Moses, needed reassurance that God was with him. God responded to his growing faith. Gideon went forth with a greatly reduced army of 300 against the enemy. Of his original army, 22,000 had left because they were afraid (7:2-3; cf. Dt 20:8). Another 9,700 were sent home, though they were valiant men (7:4-8). After assuring Gideon by a dream of an enemy soldier, God used the 300 in a marvelous way to confound the Midianites (vv 9-15). God gave Israel victory over the Midianite leaders Oreb, Zeeb, Zebah, and Zalmunna (7:16–8:21). Gideon wisely avoided a possible military confrontation with Ephraim (8:1-3), pursued the enemy deep into the Transjordan, and punished the leaders of Succoth and Penuel, who did not assist him (vv 4-9, 13-16).<\/p>\n<p>This glorious victory created a new wave of interest in the idea of kingship. The men of Israel wished to establish the family of Gideon as their royal dynasty (8:22). Gideon refused, and instead wrongly set up an ephod, cast from the gold taken in battle (vv 23-27). The ephod was probably used for cultic practices, possibly divination (cf. 17:5).<\/p>\n<p>Gideon’s era also came to an end. He was God’s instrument, giving Israel rest for 40 years. He fathered 70 sons and died in old age. God had richly blessed him, even though he had led Israel astray with his ephod. Thereafter, Israel returned to Baal worship (8:33-35).<\/p>\n<p>In the wake of Gideon’s era, his son Abimelech attempted to establish dynastic continuity by having himself installed as king at Shechem (9:1-6). With the support of his relatives at Shechem, Abimelech had all his brothers killed except Jotham (vv 4-5). After Abimelech’s coronation, Jotham set forth his opposition to his brother in a proverbial manner (vv 7-20), and went into hiding. Three years later Abimelech’s evil schemes entrapped him when the citizens of Shechem rebelled. He furiously attacked the city and destroyed it. A short time later, however, he was wounded at Thebez by a millstone dropped by a woman from the tower in which she had sought refuge from him. His servant put him out of his misery as per his request. This episode demonstrates how bad a despotic king may be. Again, God’s justice prevailed.<\/p>\n<h6>Tola (10:1-2)<\/h6>\n<p>Tola was a minor judge from Issachar who judged Israel for 23 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jair (10:3-5)<\/h6>\n<p>Jair was a minor judge from Gilead who judged Israel for 22 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jephthah (10:6–12:7)<\/h6>\n<p>A recapitulation (10:6-16) of the cycle (idolatry, enemies, cry for help, momentary repentance) sets the introduction to the Jephthah narrative. Under attack from the Ammonites, the elders of Gilead requested help from Jephthah (10:17–11:8), who promised to help them on the condition that he remain their leader even after the war (vv 9-10). At a solemn ceremony he becomes their “head” at Mizpah (v 11). Jephthah opened up correspondence with the Ammonite king, in which he argued for Israel’s rights on the basis of the Israelites’ historic claim to the land as granted to them by the Lord (vv 12–27). Instead of going out immediately to war, he hoped that “the <span>Lord<\/span>, the Judge” would settle the dispute (v 27); but the Ammonite king was unimpressed. When the Spirit of God came over him, Jephthah led Israel into battle, but only after making a rash vow. He was victorious but found out that his vow to sacrifice whatever came first out of his house required him to sacrifice his daughter. Debate continues as to whether he offered her up as a human sacrifice or whether she sacrificed marriage (see discussion under Jephthah).<\/p>\n<p>The Ephraimites seemed to have had an insatiable desire for war. Earlier they had complained to Gideon, who successfully defused their threats (8:1-3). Jephthah fought them, however, because the Israelites living in Transjordan had been reviled as “renegades” (12:1-4). Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed by the fords of the Jordan in this civil war. Thereafter, Jephthah ruled for only six years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ibzan (12:8-10)<\/h6>\n<p>Ibzan was a minor judge from Bethlehem who ruled Israel for seven years.<\/p>\n<h6>Elon (12:11)<\/h6>\n<p>A minor judge from Zebulun, Elon ruled Israel for ten years.<\/p>\n<h6>Abdon (12:13-15)<\/h6>\n<p>Abdon was a minor judge from Pirathon, the location of which is uncertain. He ruled for eight years.<\/p>\n<h6>Samson (13:1–16:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Samson’s greatness in the history of redemption is due to his miraculous birth (13:1-24), his service as a Nazirite (13:7; cf. Nm 6:1-21), the repeated overpowering by the Spirit of the Lord (Jgs 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14), the single-handed exploits against the Philistines (Ashkelon, 14:19; the fields, 15:1-6; Ramath Etam, 15:7-17; Gaza, 16:1-3, 23-30), and his occasional dependence on the Lord (15:18-19; 16:28-30). However, his personal life was flawed because of his weakness for Philistine women (chs 14, 16). Having been seduced by Delilah, he was imprisoned at Gaza. He died in the collapse of Dagon’s temple, praying that the Lord would permit him to get revenge (16:28-30). He was buried in his father’s tomb in the territory of Dan (16:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue (17–21)<\/h5>\n<p>The cyclical nature of Israel’s existence was without movement. Rest from enemies was always temporary. Israel was not yet ready for dynastic kingship, and whatever one may say of the three years of Abimelech, it was a kingship of the worst sort. Israel vacillated between idolatry and belief in the true Lord. The period of the judges was unstable, marked by petty individualism and provincialism. Yet God remained sovereign in the affairs of his people. The epilogue contains two stories: the story of Micah and the Danite migration (chs 17–18) and the civil war (chs 19–21). The epilogue is bound together by the phrase “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25, <span>niv<\/span>). The symmetric recurrence (two times in each narrative) emphasizes the anarchy and inability of the tribes to unite together to serve God as a covenant people.<\/p>\n<h6>Micah and the Danites (17–18)<\/h6>\n<p>Micah was an Ephraimite who established a shrine and hired one of his own sons, and then a Levite from Bethlehem, to serve as its priests (ch 17). Unable to keep their patrimony, the Danites left to establish themselves at the foot of Mt Hermon. They took the idols and the Levite from Micah’s shrine and set up a cultic city at the newly established city of Dan, built on the ruins of Laish (ch 18). Thus, they set up a cultic center that rivaled the tabernacle at Shiloh (18:31).<\/p>\n<h6>The Civil War (19–21)<\/h6>\n<p>The people of Gibeah, which belonged to Benjamin, sexually abused the concubine of a Levite so that she died. Like the Levite of chapters 17 and 18, she was from Bethlehem (19:1). Dramatically, the Levite sent pieces of her corpse to all the tribes, which assembled against the Benjamites because they protected the criminals of Gibeah (19:29–20:19). In the ensuing battle the population of Benjamin was decimated (20:20-48). The 11 tribes gave them 400 virgins taken in a civil war against Jabesh-gilead (21:6-15). These were not enough, however. Because of the threat of the extinction of Benjamin and the vow not to give their daughters in marriage to any Benjamite, the Israelites devised a plan by which the Benjamites could take Israelite virgins dancing in the festival at Shiloh. Benjamin thus was able to rebuild its towns and settlements.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gideon; Jephthah; Samson.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDGES, Book of Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail. Preview • Author • Date • Li...","summary_en":"JUDGES, Book of Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail. Preview • Author • Date • Li...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37110,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teraphim*","title_en":"Teraphim*","content_ro":"<h3>TERAPHIM*<\/h3>\n<p>Idols associated with pagan magical rites. In the OT, the term is often translated “household gods,” indicative of talismans, which were kept in family shrines (Gn 31:19, 34). These were the idols that Rachel stole from her father and that occasioned Laban’s angry pursuit. Many have postulated that Laban’s anger reflects a Nuzian tradition where ownership of the household gods conferred inheritance rights to the owner. It is more likely that Rachel stole the teraphim simply to ensure good luck and safety.<\/p>\n<p>Teraphim are also mentioned in connection with Micah’s attempt to establish a private priesthood (Jgs 17:5). When the Danites moved to Laish, they stole Micah’s teraphim and ephod for oracular use (18:14-20, 31). Teraphim were typically small idols but on occasion could be life-size as well. David escaped from Saul when Michal placed a teraphim in his bed as a dummy (1 Sm 19:13-16). During Israel’s kingdom period, teraphim continued to be used in heretical cultic practices. Josiah attempted to rid the country of teraphim, wizards, and mediums, but his reforms appear to have been temporary (2 Kgs 23:24). The prophets regularly condemned the use of teraphim, identifying them with heathen abominations (Ez 21:21; Hos 3:4; Zec 10:2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Idols, Idolatry.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TERAPHIM*<\/h3>\n<p>Idols associated with pagan magical rites. In the OT, the term is often translated “household gods,” indicative of talismans, which were kept in family shrines (Gn 31:19, 34). These were the idols that Rachel stole from her father and that occasioned Laban’s angry pursuit. Many have postulated that Laban’s anger reflects a Nuzian tradition where ownership of the household gods conferred inheritance rights to the owner. It is more likely that Rachel stole the teraphim simply to ensure good luck and safety.<\/p>\n<p>Teraphim are also mentioned in connection with Micah’s attempt to establish a private priesthood (Jgs 17:5). When the Danites moved to Laish, they stole Micah’s teraphim and ephod for oracular use (18:14-20, 31). Teraphim were typically small idols but on occasion could be life-size as well. David escaped from Saul when Michal placed a teraphim in his bed as a dummy (1 Sm 19:13-16). During Israel’s kingdom period, teraphim continued to be used in heretical cultic practices. Josiah attempted to rid the country of teraphim, wizards, and mediums, but his reforms appear to have been temporary (2 Kgs 23:24). The prophets regularly condemned the use of teraphim, identifying them with heathen abominations (Ez 21:21; Hos 3:4; Zec 10:2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Idols, Idolatry.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TERAPHIM* Idols associated with pagan magical rites. In the OT, the term is often translated “household gods,” indicative of talismans, which were kept in family shrines (Gn 31:19, 34). These were the idols that Rachel stole from her father and that occasioned Laban’s angry pursuit. Many have postulated that Laban’s anger reflects a Nuzian tradition where ownership of the household gods conferred inheritance rights to the owner. It is more likely that Rachel stole the teraphim simply to ensur...","summary_en":"TERAPHIM* Idols associated with pagan magical rites. In the OT, the term is often translated “household gods,” indicative of talismans, which were kept in family shrines (Gn 31:19, 34). These were the idols that Rachel stole from her father and that occasioned Laban’s angry pursuit. Many have postulated that Laban’s anger reflects a Nuzian tradition where ownership of the household gods conferred inheritance rights to the owner. It is more likely that Rachel stole the teraphim simply to ensur...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45915,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:5","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:5<\/strong> <em>ephod:<\/em> See study note on 8:27. • <em>household idols:<\/em> Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing <em>one of his sons as his personal priest<\/em> was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:5<\/strong> <em>ephod:<\/em> See study note on 8:27. • <em>household idols:<\/em> Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing <em>one of his sons as his personal priest<\/em> was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:5 ephod: See study note on 8:27. • household idols: Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing one of his sons as his personal priest was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.","summary_en":"17:5 ephod: See study note on 8:27. • household idols: Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing one of his sons as his personal priest was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73541,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:5","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:5<\/strong> <em>ephod:<\/em> See study note on 8:27. • <em>household idols:<\/em> Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing <em>one of his sons as his personal priest<\/em> was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:5<\/strong> <em>ephod:<\/em> See study note on 8:27. • <em>household idols:<\/em> Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing <em>one of his sons as his personal priest<\/em> was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:5 ephod: See study note on 8:27. • household idols: Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing one of his sons as his personal priest was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.","summary_en":"17:5 ephod: See study note on 8:27. • household idols: Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing one of his sons as his personal priest was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101167,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:5","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:5<\/strong> <em>ephod:<\/em> See study note on 8:27. • <em>household idols:<\/em> Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing <em>one of his sons as his personal priest<\/em> was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:5<\/strong> <em>ephod:<\/em> See study note on 8:27. • <em>household idols:<\/em> Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing <em>one of his sons as his personal priest<\/em> was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:5 ephod: See study note on 8:27. • household idols: Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing one of his sons as his personal priest was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.","summary_en":"17:5 ephod: See study note on 8:27. • household idols: Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing one of his sons as his personal priest was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128793,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:5","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:5<\/strong> <em>ephod:<\/em> See study note on 8:27. • <em>household idols:<\/em> Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing <em>one of his sons as his personal priest<\/em> was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:5<\/strong> <em>ephod:<\/em> See study note on 8:27. • <em>household idols:<\/em> Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing <em>one of his sons as his personal priest<\/em> was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:5 ephod: See study note on 8:27. • household idols: Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing one of his sons as his personal priest was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.","summary_en":"17:5 ephod: See study note on 8:27. • household idols: Cp. Gen 31:19-32; 2 Kgs 23:24; Zech 10:2. The Bible mocks the inabilities of these personal deities. Micah’s installing one of his sons as his personal priest was triply irregular: The father was meant to be the religious head of the household (Deut 6:7; Job 1:5), only descendants of Aaron were to be priests (Exod 28:1–29:37; 30:30-33; 40:12-15), and priests were for the whole community of Israel, not for individuals or families.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":21209,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Judges","title_en":"Book of Judges","content_ro":"<h3>JUDGES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book reflects a final editing of the material in the period of the early monarchy. It may well be a polemic for the righteous rule of David over against the kingship of Saul, which was molded by a secular, Canaanite conception of kingship rather than by the law of God. The author was almost certainly not Samuel, as traditionally thought, but a later compiler who relied on ancient written materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Though the judges succeeded in giving the tribes some rest from the incursions of surrounding enemies, the Israelites were continually harassed over long periods of time. Scholarly opinion differs on the duration of the period of the judges. The dating of the exodus affects the dating of the beginning of the judges. Those who take an early date for the exodus put the beginning around 1370–1360 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas others propose a date close to the end of the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. A related issue pertains to the chronology of the judges. Does Judges give a chronological, sequential account of the period, or is the book a representative account of judges from various parts of Canaan and Transjordan who “judged” a region, a tribe, or several tribes simultaneously?<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteraryFramework\">Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the stories in the book bear the marks of literary creativity. The stories are classics in their own right. The poetry of Deborah’s song (Jgs 5) is very moving, and the fable of Jotham (9:8-15) is a fine example of figurative speech. The care given to the stories is also reflected in the construction of the book. There are two introductions: a political one (Jgs 1:1–2:5) and a socioreligious one (2:6–3:6). The political introduction connects Judges with the story of the Conquest, when the tribes attempted to occupy the land. It prepares the reader for the political and military problems of the era of the judges. The socioreligious introduction explains why Israel had so many adversities, why the institution of the judges arose, and why the Lord never gave Israel the promised lasting rest from its enemies. The main body of the book is the story of the judges (3:7–16:31). References to the minor judges (six in all) are set within the stories of the major judges in increasing frequency. As is evident from the schema, the number of minor judges increased in frequency in proportion to the decrease in number of major judges: two major, one minor; two major, two minor; one major, three minor; one major. There is a total of 12 judges, representative of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the listing of 12 judges, representative of the various parts of Canaan and Transjordan, is to demonstrate that all tribes throughout the conquered territories experienced grave difficulties from a variety of enemies: Arameans, Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Canaanites, and Philistines. Israel was hard pressed on nearly all its frontiers. The appendixes (chs 17–21), together with the two introductions, form the framework of the book. The political and socioreligious problems (1:1–3:6) are presented by way of several stories in the last chapters. The final editor who gave the book its canonical shape purposefully framed the stories of the judges so as to show lack of movement. The successes of the previous stages in redemptive history came to a standstill in the ebb and flow of the judges. Though the Lord delivered his people in many ways, they returned to the problems described in 1:1–3:6. The appendixes describe Israel’s problems representative of the period of the judges, when “there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for deliverance, and God’s raising up of a judge reflects a deuteronomic perspective with its warnings concerning disobedience and judgment. The repetitiveness of the cycle supports the contention of the anonymous narrator that Israel remained unchanged by the grace of God. However, in spite of the moral, religious, and political anarchy as well as the civil wars, the last chapter shows that the tribes are still concerned with each other’s welfare. Though the unity of God’s people has been gravely challenged, the situation is not hopeless. The book ends on a note of hope—hope for a king who may deliver Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Thus, there are several purposes of the book: (1) to demonstrate the meaninglessness of this stage in Israel’s development; (2) to explain why the tribes did not occupy all the land promised to the patriarchs; (3) to justify the way of God, who was gracious and patient with Israel’s repeated acts of disobedience; (4) to set forth the legitimacy of a “shepherd” king in contrast to a despotic form of kingship; and (5) to explain the urgent need for a new momentum, lest Israel succumb to the Philistines and intertribal warfare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Political Introduction (1:1–2:5)<\/h5>\n<p>In Joshua 1–12 the warfare under Joshua is portrayed as a mobilization of Canaanite forces against Israel. By the intervention of the Lord, the Canaanite resistance was put down and the land was occupied by the tribes (chs 13–21). Joshua 13–21, however, clearly shows that each tribe had problems ridding its territory of pockets of Canaanite resistance, which were usually centered around heavily guarded and well-fortified cities (cf. 13:2-6, 13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua emphasizes the successes and minimizes the problems, whereas the prologue to Judges sets the stage for the whole book by openly addressing Israel’s problems and failures. As the book unfolds, it is precisely these problems and failures that in due time bring Israel to the brink of disaster.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the judges began with the death of Joshua (Jgs 1:1; 2:8-9). The Israelites had inherited a legacy from Joshua: the law of the Lord (Jos 23:6; 24:26), the land, a challenge to obey the Lord (24:14-27), and a promise of God’s presence and help in subduing the Canaanites (23:5, 10).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah and Simeon (Jgs 1:2-20)<\/h6>\n<p>The prominence of Judah and Caleb parallels the position of Judah in Joshua (Jos 14:6–15:63; cf. also the house of Joseph, Jgs 1:22-29; cf. Jos 16–17). Judah was victorious over the cruel Adoni-bezek, who ruled over Bezek, a town of uncertain location. Judah successfully occupied the hill country, the Negev, and the western foothills. They even took Jerusalem, or an outlying suburb identified with Jerusalem (Jos 1:8), but could not retain control there (v 21) until David’s conquest of the city (2 Sm 5:6-9). Judah was victorious over the Canaanites in the region of Hebron, already conquered under Joshua (Jos 10:36). Hebron, also known as Kiriath-arba (“city of four” or “tetrapolis”), was a powerful ally of Jerusalem (v 3) and had been able to rally military support for a new assault on Israel, even after its first defeat. Caleb received Hebron, as Moses had promised (Jgs 1:20; cf. Jos 15:13). After the victory over Hebron, Judah extended its control over the southern hill country by an attack on Debir (Jgs 1:11-15; cf. Jos 15:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Kenites (Jgs 1:16), descendants of Jethro and therefore related to Moses by marriage, settled in the Negev around Arad and the City of Palms, which here probably refers to Tamar rather than Jericho.<\/p>\n<p>Judah secured the southern border by a victory over the Canaanites at Hormah (Jgs 1:17; cf. Nm 14:45; 21:3; Dt 1:44) and the coastal plain by victories at Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron. However, Judah’s successes in the coastal plain were resisted by a well-armed Canaanite force (Jgs 1:18-19). It occupied the Judean hill country and the Negev, but could not retain control over the plains. The Philistines were soon to take control over Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, and incorporate them into their pentapolis.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin (1:21)<\/h6>\n<p>Jerusalem was situated on the border between Judah and Benjamin. Judah took the city or a suburb (Jos 1:8) but was too far removed to retain control over it. Benjamin was too weak to subdue the Jebusites. Only David succeeded in this (2 Sm 5:6-9); he incorporated it into Judah (cf. Jos 15:63), even though it originally was allotted to Benjamin (Jos 18:28).<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph: Ephraim and Manasseh (1:22-29)<\/h6>\n<p>Ephraim took Bethel, known from the patriarchal stories as a significant cultic site (Gn 12:8; 13:3-4; 28:19; 31:13; 35:1-15). However, Manasseh was unsuccessful in taking the fortified cities in the valley of Jezreel (Esdraelon): Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor, Ibleam, and Megiddo. These cities controlled traffic along the east-west and north–south roads as well as the important passes through the Carmel range and the ford of the Jordan. Ephraim could not take full possession of the coastal plain, controlled by Gezer. The success of both Ephraim and Manasseh was limited.<\/p>\n<h6>The Other Four Tribes (1:30-36)<\/h6>\n<p>The other four tribes in Canaan receive brief mention. They, too, were only partially successful. Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and especially Dan did not fully succeed in driving out the Canaanites. At best they later subjected most of them to forced labor.<\/p>\n<h6>The Failure of Israel (2:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>The failure to subdue the land and to wipe out the Canaanites and their culture led to intermarriage and idolatry (cf. Ex 23:33; 34:12-16; Nm 33:55; Dt 7:2-5, 16; Jos 23:7, 12).<\/p>\n<p>The identity of “the angel of the Lord” who appears at Bokim is far from certain. It may be a reference to the Lord himself, to an angelic messenger, or to a prophet (cf. Jgs 6:8). He rebuked the people in the prophetic spirit and pronounced God’s judgment as taking the form of continual confrontation between Israel and the Canaanites (2:3). Their weeping and sacrificing were to no avail (2:4-5; cf. Mal 2:13). Israel stood condemned within a generation after Joshua’s death.<\/p>\n<h5>The Theological Introduction (2:6–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>The theological introduction begins where Joshua left off (Jos 24:28-31). The generation of Joshua was characterized by loyalty, but their loyalty to the Lord did not last long after the excitement of the Conquest and the demonstration of God’s presence (Jgs 2:10). Israel served Canaanite gods (Baal and Astarte) instead. Baal was the storm god, symbolic of rain and fertility, and Astarte was his cohort. The plural (Baals and Ashtaroth, 2:11-13) signifies the many local ways in which the Canaanite gods were worshiped. The religious unity was broken up into a great diversity. Thus Israel angered the Lord (vv 12-14), who sent them enemies and plunderers. Israel was unsuccessful in dealing with them, as Moses and Joshua had forewarned (Dt 28:25, 33; Jos 23:13, 16). The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for mercy, and deliverance is found throughout Judges. The people were rooted in the apostasy of their forefathers, even though the previous generation had been sensitive to God. Israel did not submit to the leadership of the judges, except to free itself from the oppressors. In fulfillment of the curses of the covenant, God swore not to give his people rest but to test them and to train them for warfare (Jgs 3:1-4), so that they might learn to respond to the challenges of a real world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Judges of Israel (3:7–16:31)<\/h5>\n<h6>Othniel (3:7-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Othniel is a transitional figure, linking the Conquest and the judges. He had involved himself in the conquest of Kiriath-sepher and was related to Caleb as his cousin and son-in-law (1:13). He repelled the Arameans led by Cushan-rishathaim, so that the land enjoyed peace for some 40 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ehud (3:12-30)<\/h6>\n<p>The Moabites, allied with the Ammonites and Amalekites, came against Israel from the east and oppressed them for 18 years under the leadership of Eglon. Ehud led the mission to bring tribute to Eglon at his palace, located probably by Jericho (the City of Palms). Ehud was uniquely qualified for this mission; being left-handed, he was able to use his double-edged sword in an unsuspecting manner to stab the king. Ehud’s success was the result of careful plotting and the element of surprise. He paid the tribute and left, only to return with a supposed oracle from the gods. The king fell for the deception and was murdered. The delay at the Moabite court gave the Israelites an opportunity to bring their forces together at the fords of the Jordan. Ehud’s success was complete; no Moabite escaped, and Israel enjoyed peace for 80 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Shamgar (3:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Shamgar’s exploits were against the Philistines in the coastal plains. He had a non-Israelite name but was probably an Israelite by birth. Like Samson he fought the Philistines with an unconventional weapon (an ox goad). His name is also mentioned in the song of Deborah (5:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Deborah and Barak (4:1–5:31)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative now turns to the Canaanite aggressors in the north under the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor, and Sisera, of Harosheth-haggoyim (4:1-3). The ruins of Hazor (Jos 11:13) had been rebuilt, and another Jabin (cf. v 1) ruled over the region. He had regained his military power, as he had as many as 900 chariots of iron. He oppressed Israel for 20 years (Jgs 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>God had a prophetess in Israel who led his people during this dark time (4:4). She rendered judgments under a palm tree in southern Ephraim near Benjamin (v 5). She called on Barak to muster the armies of Naphtali and Zebulun, the tribes affected by the Canaanite raids, and to engage Sisera in a surprise attack by the Kishon River (vv 6-7). Barak’s hesitancy led him to request Deborah’s presence, which resulted in his forfeiture of the honor of killing Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite forces (vv 8-10). The Lord gave success to the surprise attack from Mt Tabor, so that the Canaanites were routed, unable to use their heavy chariots, which were mired down in the swamps of the Jezreel Valley (5:20-22). The Canaanites were routed, and Sisera was killed by Jael, the wife of Heber, a Kenite who had separated from the Kenites around Arad (4:17-18; cf. 1:16). She offered him hospitality, as her family had friendly relations with the Canaanites, but heroically put him to death with a tent peg (4:18-21; 5:26-27). In successive campaigns the Israelites gained freedom from Jabin, until they destroyed his power (4:24).<\/p>\n<p>The song of Deborah (ch 5) celebrates, in poetic fashion, the victory over Jabin. It is one of the oldest poems in the Bible. It praises the God of Israel as the King who comes to protect his covenant people, and before whom the mountains move (5:2-3). He is the God of Mt Sinai (Jgs 5:4-5; cf. Dt 33:2; Ps 68:7-8; Hb 3:3-4). Though the oppressors had despoiled Israel and had made the roads unsafe for travel, and Israel was unable to defend itself (Jgs 5:6-8), the Lord raised up Deborah and Barak to lead the nobles to war (vv 9-13). They came from Ephraim, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar, and Naphtali (vv 14-15a, 18), but the Transjordan tribes and Asher did not want to get involved (vv 15b-17). The song then moves to the battle scene, where torrential rains bogged the chariots down (vv 19-23). Jael is celebrated as “most blessed of women,” who used her simple way of life to bring an end to Sisera (vv 24-27). She stands in contrast to Sisera’s mother, who is portrayed with all her culture waiting in vain for Sisera’s return with all of his spoils (vv 28-30). The Lord has used the simple to confound the powerful. The conclusion is a prayer for God’s judgment on all of Israel’s enemies (Jgs 5:31a; cf. Ps 68:1-3).<\/p>\n<h6>Gideon (6:1–8:35)<\/h6>\n<p>Israel’s rest for 40 years (Jgs 5:31b) was disturbed by the invasion of Midianites and Amalekites from the East (6:1-3). They destroyed the economy by invading the country at harvesttime (vv 4-6). In response to Israel’s cry, God sent a prophet with a message similar to that of the angel of the Lord (2:1-5). Then an angel appeared to Gideon and called him to lead the people in battle (6:11-14). The Lord assured him of his presence (v 16) by a sign (vv 17-22). Gideon knew that he had been visited by the Lord and built an altar called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Peace” in Ophrah (v 24). He responded by destroying the cultic site dedicated to Baal and Asherah at Ophrah (vv 25-28) and by initiating worship at the new altar (v 28). Baal did not protect his own altar (vv 29-32), even when challenged by Gideon’s father (v 31). Consequently, Gideon was known as Jerubbaal (meaning, “let Baal contend with him,” v 32).<\/p>\n<p>Next, Gideon mustered an army of 32,000 men from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali (6:35; cf. 7:3b). In order to assure himself of the Lord’s presence, he asked for another sign: the sign of the fleece (6:36-40). It must be kept in mind that Gideon lived in an area in which the wonders of God had been scarce (v 13) and that he, like Moses, needed reassurance that God was with him. God responded to his growing faith. Gideon went forth with a greatly reduced army of 300 against the enemy. Of his original army, 22,000 had left because they were afraid (7:2-3; cf. Dt 20:8). Another 9,700 were sent home, though they were valiant men (7:4-8). After assuring Gideon by a dream of an enemy soldier, God used the 300 in a marvelous way to confound the Midianites (vv 9-15). God gave Israel victory over the Midianite leaders Oreb, Zeeb, Zebah, and Zalmunna (7:16–8:21). Gideon wisely avoided a possible military confrontation with Ephraim (8:1-3), pursued the enemy deep into the Transjordan, and punished the leaders of Succoth and Penuel, who did not assist him (vv 4-9, 13-16).<\/p>\n<p>This glorious victory created a new wave of interest in the idea of kingship. The men of Israel wished to establish the family of Gideon as their royal dynasty (8:22). Gideon refused, and instead wrongly set up an ephod, cast from the gold taken in battle (vv 23-27). The ephod was probably used for cultic practices, possibly divination (cf. 17:5).<\/p>\n<p>Gideon’s era also came to an end. He was God’s instrument, giving Israel rest for 40 years. He fathered 70 sons and died in old age. God had richly blessed him, even though he had led Israel astray with his ephod. Thereafter, Israel returned to Baal worship (8:33-35).<\/p>\n<p>In the wake of Gideon’s era, his son Abimelech attempted to establish dynastic continuity by having himself installed as king at Shechem (9:1-6). With the support of his relatives at Shechem, Abimelech had all his brothers killed except Jotham (vv 4-5). After Abimelech’s coronation, Jotham set forth his opposition to his brother in a proverbial manner (vv 7-20), and went into hiding. Three years later Abimelech’s evil schemes entrapped him when the citizens of Shechem rebelled. He furiously attacked the city and destroyed it. A short time later, however, he was wounded at Thebez by a millstone dropped by a woman from the tower in which she had sought refuge from him. His servant put him out of his misery as per his request. This episode demonstrates how bad a despotic king may be. Again, God’s justice prevailed.<\/p>\n<h6>Tola (10:1-2)<\/h6>\n<p>Tola was a minor judge from Issachar who judged Israel for 23 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jair (10:3-5)<\/h6>\n<p>Jair was a minor judge from Gilead who judged Israel for 22 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jephthah (10:6–12:7)<\/h6>\n<p>A recapitulation (10:6-16) of the cycle (idolatry, enemies, cry for help, momentary repentance) sets the introduction to the Jephthah narrative. Under attack from the Ammonites, the elders of Gilead requested help from Jephthah (10:17–11:8), who promised to help them on the condition that he remain their leader even after the war (vv 9-10). At a solemn ceremony he becomes their “head” at Mizpah (v 11). Jephthah opened up correspondence with the Ammonite king, in which he argued for Israel’s rights on the basis of the Israelites’ historic claim to the land as granted to them by the Lord (vv 12–27). Instead of going out immediately to war, he hoped that “the <span>Lord<\/span>, the Judge” would settle the dispute (v 27); but the Ammonite king was unimpressed. When the Spirit of God came over him, Jephthah led Israel into battle, but only after making a rash vow. He was victorious but found out that his vow to sacrifice whatever came first out of his house required him to sacrifice his daughter. Debate continues as to whether he offered her up as a human sacrifice or whether she sacrificed marriage (see discussion under Jephthah).<\/p>\n<p>The Ephraimites seemed to have had an insatiable desire for war. Earlier they had complained to Gideon, who successfully defused their threats (8:1-3). Jephthah fought them, however, because the Israelites living in Transjordan had been reviled as “renegades” (12:1-4). Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed by the fords of the Jordan in this civil war. Thereafter, Jephthah ruled for only six years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ibzan (12:8-10)<\/h6>\n<p>Ibzan was a minor judge from Bethlehem who ruled Israel for seven years.<\/p>\n<h6>Elon (12:11)<\/h6>\n<p>A minor judge from Zebulun, Elon ruled Israel for ten years.<\/p>\n<h6>Abdon (12:13-15)<\/h6>\n<p>Abdon was a minor judge from Pirathon, the location of which is uncertain. He ruled for eight years.<\/p>\n<h6>Samson (13:1–16:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Samson’s greatness in the history of redemption is due to his miraculous birth (13:1-24), his service as a Nazirite (13:7; cf. Nm 6:1-21), the repeated overpowering by the Spirit of the Lord (Jgs 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14), the single-handed exploits against the Philistines (Ashkelon, 14:19; the fields, 15:1-6; Ramath Etam, 15:7-17; Gaza, 16:1-3, 23-30), and his occasional dependence on the Lord (15:18-19; 16:28-30). However, his personal life was flawed because of his weakness for Philistine women (chs 14, 16). Having been seduced by Delilah, he was imprisoned at Gaza. He died in the collapse of Dagon’s temple, praying that the Lord would permit him to get revenge (16:28-30). He was buried in his father’s tomb in the territory of Dan (16:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue (17–21)<\/h5>\n<p>The cyclical nature of Israel’s existence was without movement. Rest from enemies was always temporary. Israel was not yet ready for dynastic kingship, and whatever one may say of the three years of Abimelech, it was a kingship of the worst sort. Israel vacillated between idolatry and belief in the true Lord. The period of the judges was unstable, marked by petty individualism and provincialism. Yet God remained sovereign in the affairs of his people. The epilogue contains two stories: the story of Micah and the Danite migration (chs 17–18) and the civil war (chs 19–21). The epilogue is bound together by the phrase “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25, <span>niv<\/span>). The symmetric recurrence (two times in each narrative) emphasizes the anarchy and inability of the tribes to unite together to serve God as a covenant people.<\/p>\n<h6>Micah and the Danites (17–18)<\/h6>\n<p>Micah was an Ephraimite who established a shrine and hired one of his own sons, and then a Levite from Bethlehem, to serve as its priests (ch 17). Unable to keep their patrimony, the Danites left to establish themselves at the foot of Mt Hermon. They took the idols and the Levite from Micah’s shrine and set up a cultic city at the newly established city of Dan, built on the ruins of Laish (ch 18). Thus, they set up a cultic center that rivaled the tabernacle at Shiloh (18:31).<\/p>\n<h6>The Civil War (19–21)<\/h6>\n<p>The people of Gibeah, which belonged to Benjamin, sexually abused the concubine of a Levite so that she died. Like the Levite of chapters 17 and 18, she was from Bethlehem (19:1). Dramatically, the Levite sent pieces of her corpse to all the tribes, which assembled against the Benjamites because they protected the criminals of Gibeah (19:29–20:19). In the ensuing battle the population of Benjamin was decimated (20:20-48). The 11 tribes gave them 400 virgins taken in a civil war against Jabesh-gilead (21:6-15). These were not enough, however. Because of the threat of the extinction of Benjamin and the vow not to give their daughters in marriage to any Benjamite, the Israelites devised a plan by which the Benjamites could take Israelite virgins dancing in the festival at Shiloh. Benjamin thus was able to rebuild its towns and settlements.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gideon; Jephthah; Samson.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDGES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book reflects a final editing of the material in the period of the early monarchy. It may well be a polemic for the righteous rule of David over against the kingship of Saul, which was molded by a secular, Canaanite conception of kingship rather than by the law of God. The author was almost certainly not Samuel, as traditionally thought, but a later compiler who relied on ancient written materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Though the judges succeeded in giving the tribes some rest from the incursions of surrounding enemies, the Israelites were continually harassed over long periods of time. Scholarly opinion differs on the duration of the period of the judges. The dating of the exodus affects the dating of the beginning of the judges. Those who take an early date for the exodus put the beginning around 1370–1360 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas others propose a date close to the end of the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. A related issue pertains to the chronology of the judges. Does Judges give a chronological, sequential account of the period, or is the book a representative account of judges from various parts of Canaan and Transjordan who “judged” a region, a tribe, or several tribes simultaneously?<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteraryFramework\">Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the stories in the book bear the marks of literary creativity. The stories are classics in their own right. The poetry of Deborah’s song (Jgs 5) is very moving, and the fable of Jotham (9:8-15) is a fine example of figurative speech. The care given to the stories is also reflected in the construction of the book. There are two introductions: a political one (Jgs 1:1–2:5) and a socioreligious one (2:6–3:6). The political introduction connects Judges with the story of the Conquest, when the tribes attempted to occupy the land. It prepares the reader for the political and military problems of the era of the judges. The socioreligious introduction explains why Israel had so many adversities, why the institution of the judges arose, and why the Lord never gave Israel the promised lasting rest from its enemies. The main body of the book is the story of the judges (3:7–16:31). References to the minor judges (six in all) are set within the stories of the major judges in increasing frequency. As is evident from the schema, the number of minor judges increased in frequency in proportion to the decrease in number of major judges: two major, one minor; two major, two minor; one major, three minor; one major. There is a total of 12 judges, representative of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the listing of 12 judges, representative of the various parts of Canaan and Transjordan, is to demonstrate that all tribes throughout the conquered territories experienced grave difficulties from a variety of enemies: Arameans, Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Canaanites, and Philistines. Israel was hard pressed on nearly all its frontiers. The appendixes (chs 17–21), together with the two introductions, form the framework of the book. The political and socioreligious problems (1:1–3:6) are presented by way of several stories in the last chapters. The final editor who gave the book its canonical shape purposefully framed the stories of the judges so as to show lack of movement. The successes of the previous stages in redemptive history came to a standstill in the ebb and flow of the judges. Though the Lord delivered his people in many ways, they returned to the problems described in 1:1–3:6. The appendixes describe Israel’s problems representative of the period of the judges, when “there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for deliverance, and God’s raising up of a judge reflects a deuteronomic perspective with its warnings concerning disobedience and judgment. The repetitiveness of the cycle supports the contention of the anonymous narrator that Israel remained unchanged by the grace of God. However, in spite of the moral, religious, and political anarchy as well as the civil wars, the last chapter shows that the tribes are still concerned with each other’s welfare. Though the unity of God’s people has been gravely challenged, the situation is not hopeless. The book ends on a note of hope—hope for a king who may deliver Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Thus, there are several purposes of the book: (1) to demonstrate the meaninglessness of this stage in Israel’s development; (2) to explain why the tribes did not occupy all the land promised to the patriarchs; (3) to justify the way of God, who was gracious and patient with Israel’s repeated acts of disobedience; (4) to set forth the legitimacy of a “shepherd” king in contrast to a despotic form of kingship; and (5) to explain the urgent need for a new momentum, lest Israel succumb to the Philistines and intertribal warfare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Political Introduction (1:1–2:5)<\/h5>\n<p>In Joshua 1–12 the warfare under Joshua is portrayed as a mobilization of Canaanite forces against Israel. By the intervention of the Lord, the Canaanite resistance was put down and the land was occupied by the tribes (chs 13–21). Joshua 13–21, however, clearly shows that each tribe had problems ridding its territory of pockets of Canaanite resistance, which were usually centered around heavily guarded and well-fortified cities (cf. 13:2-6, 13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua emphasizes the successes and minimizes the problems, whereas the prologue to Judges sets the stage for the whole book by openly addressing Israel’s problems and failures. As the book unfolds, it is precisely these problems and failures that in due time bring Israel to the brink of disaster.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the judges began with the death of Joshua (Jgs 1:1; 2:8-9). The Israelites had inherited a legacy from Joshua: the law of the Lord (Jos 23:6; 24:26), the land, a challenge to obey the Lord (24:14-27), and a promise of God’s presence and help in subduing the Canaanites (23:5, 10).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah and Simeon (Jgs 1:2-20)<\/h6>\n<p>The prominence of Judah and Caleb parallels the position of Judah in Joshua (Jos 14:6–15:63; cf. also the house of Joseph, Jgs 1:22-29; cf. Jos 16–17). Judah was victorious over the cruel Adoni-bezek, who ruled over Bezek, a town of uncertain location. Judah successfully occupied the hill country, the Negev, and the western foothills. They even took Jerusalem, or an outlying suburb identified with Jerusalem (Jos 1:8), but could not retain control there (v 21) until David’s conquest of the city (2 Sm 5:6-9). Judah was victorious over the Canaanites in the region of Hebron, already conquered under Joshua (Jos 10:36). Hebron, also known as Kiriath-arba (“city of four” or “tetrapolis”), was a powerful ally of Jerusalem (v 3) and had been able to rally military support for a new assault on Israel, even after its first defeat. Caleb received Hebron, as Moses had promised (Jgs 1:20; cf. Jos 15:13). After the victory over Hebron, Judah extended its control over the southern hill country by an attack on Debir (Jgs 1:11-15; cf. Jos 15:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Kenites (Jgs 1:16), descendants of Jethro and therefore related to Moses by marriage, settled in the Negev around Arad and the City of Palms, which here probably refers to Tamar rather than Jericho.<\/p>\n<p>Judah secured the southern border by a victory over the Canaanites at Hormah (Jgs 1:17; cf. Nm 14:45; 21:3; Dt 1:44) and the coastal plain by victories at Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron. However, Judah’s successes in the coastal plain were resisted by a well-armed Canaanite force (Jgs 1:18-19). It occupied the Judean hill country and the Negev, but could not retain control over the plains. The Philistines were soon to take control over Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, and incorporate them into their pentapolis.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin (1:21)<\/h6>\n<p>Jerusalem was situated on the border between Judah and Benjamin. Judah took the city or a suburb (Jos 1:8) but was too far removed to retain control over it. Benjamin was too weak to subdue the Jebusites. Only David succeeded in this (2 Sm 5:6-9); he incorporated it into Judah (cf. Jos 15:63), even though it originally was allotted to Benjamin (Jos 18:28).<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph: Ephraim and Manasseh (1:22-29)<\/h6>\n<p>Ephraim took Bethel, known from the patriarchal stories as a significant cultic site (Gn 12:8; 13:3-4; 28:19; 31:13; 35:1-15). However, Manasseh was unsuccessful in taking the fortified cities in the valley of Jezreel (Esdraelon): Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor, Ibleam, and Megiddo. These cities controlled traffic along the east-west and north–south roads as well as the important passes through the Carmel range and the ford of the Jordan. Ephraim could not take full possession of the coastal plain, controlled by Gezer. The success of both Ephraim and Manasseh was limited.<\/p>\n<h6>The Other Four Tribes (1:30-36)<\/h6>\n<p>The other four tribes in Canaan receive brief mention. They, too, were only partially successful. Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and especially Dan did not fully succeed in driving out the Canaanites. At best they later subjected most of them to forced labor.<\/p>\n<h6>The Failure of Israel (2:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>The failure to subdue the land and to wipe out the Canaanites and their culture led to intermarriage and idolatry (cf. Ex 23:33; 34:12-16; Nm 33:55; Dt 7:2-5, 16; Jos 23:7, 12).<\/p>\n<p>The identity of “the angel of the Lord” who appears at Bokim is far from certain. It may be a reference to the Lord himself, to an angelic messenger, or to a prophet (cf. Jgs 6:8). He rebuked the people in the prophetic spirit and pronounced God’s judgment as taking the form of continual confrontation between Israel and the Canaanites (2:3). Their weeping and sacrificing were to no avail (2:4-5; cf. Mal 2:13). Israel stood condemned within a generation after Joshua’s death.<\/p>\n<h5>The Theological Introduction (2:6–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>The theological introduction begins where Joshua left off (Jos 24:28-31). The generation of Joshua was characterized by loyalty, but their loyalty to the Lord did not last long after the excitement of the Conquest and the demonstration of God’s presence (Jgs 2:10). Israel served Canaanite gods (Baal and Astarte) instead. Baal was the storm god, symbolic of rain and fertility, and Astarte was his cohort. The plural (Baals and Ashtaroth, 2:11-13) signifies the many local ways in which the Canaanite gods were worshiped. The religious unity was broken up into a great diversity. Thus Israel angered the Lord (vv 12-14), who sent them enemies and plunderers. Israel was unsuccessful in dealing with them, as Moses and Joshua had forewarned (Dt 28:25, 33; Jos 23:13, 16). The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for mercy, and deliverance is found throughout Judges. The people were rooted in the apostasy of their forefathers, even though the previous generation had been sensitive to God. Israel did not submit to the leadership of the judges, except to free itself from the oppressors. In fulfillment of the curses of the covenant, God swore not to give his people rest but to test them and to train them for warfare (Jgs 3:1-4), so that they might learn to respond to the challenges of a real world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Judges of Israel (3:7–16:31)<\/h5>\n<h6>Othniel (3:7-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Othniel is a transitional figure, linking the Conquest and the judges. He had involved himself in the conquest of Kiriath-sepher and was related to Caleb as his cousin and son-in-law (1:13). He repelled the Arameans led by Cushan-rishathaim, so that the land enjoyed peace for some 40 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ehud (3:12-30)<\/h6>\n<p>The Moabites, allied with the Ammonites and Amalekites, came against Israel from the east and oppressed them for 18 years under the leadership of Eglon. Ehud led the mission to bring tribute to Eglon at his palace, located probably by Jericho (the City of Palms). Ehud was uniquely qualified for this mission; being left-handed, he was able to use his double-edged sword in an unsuspecting manner to stab the king. Ehud’s success was the result of careful plotting and the element of surprise. He paid the tribute and left, only to return with a supposed oracle from the gods. The king fell for the deception and was murdered. The delay at the Moabite court gave the Israelites an opportunity to bring their forces together at the fords of the Jordan. Ehud’s success was complete; no Moabite escaped, and Israel enjoyed peace for 80 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Shamgar (3:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Shamgar’s exploits were against the Philistines in the coastal plains. He had a non-Israelite name but was probably an Israelite by birth. Like Samson he fought the Philistines with an unconventional weapon (an ox goad). His name is also mentioned in the song of Deborah (5:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Deborah and Barak (4:1–5:31)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative now turns to the Canaanite aggressors in the north under the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor, and Sisera, of Harosheth-haggoyim (4:1-3). The ruins of Hazor (Jos 11:13) had been rebuilt, and another Jabin (cf. v 1) ruled over the region. He had regained his military power, as he had as many as 900 chariots of iron. He oppressed Israel for 20 years (Jgs 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>God had a prophetess in Israel who led his people during this dark time (4:4). She rendered judgments under a palm tree in southern Ephraim near Benjamin (v 5). She called on Barak to muster the armies of Naphtali and Zebulun, the tribes affected by the Canaanite raids, and to engage Sisera in a surprise attack by the Kishon River (vv 6-7). Barak’s hesitancy led him to request Deborah’s presence, which resulted in his forfeiture of the honor of killing Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite forces (vv 8-10). The Lord gave success to the surprise attack from Mt Tabor, so that the Canaanites were routed, unable to use their heavy chariots, which were mired down in the swamps of the Jezreel Valley (5:20-22). The Canaanites were routed, and Sisera was killed by Jael, the wife of Heber, a Kenite who had separated from the Kenites around Arad (4:17-18; cf. 1:16). She offered him hospitality, as her family had friendly relations with the Canaanites, but heroically put him to death with a tent peg (4:18-21; 5:26-27). In successive campaigns the Israelites gained freedom from Jabin, until they destroyed his power (4:24).<\/p>\n<p>The song of Deborah (ch 5) celebrates, in poetic fashion, the victory over Jabin. It is one of the oldest poems in the Bible. It praises the God of Israel as the King who comes to protect his covenant people, and before whom the mountains move (5:2-3). He is the God of Mt Sinai (Jgs 5:4-5; cf. Dt 33:2; Ps 68:7-8; Hb 3:3-4). Though the oppressors had despoiled Israel and had made the roads unsafe for travel, and Israel was unable to defend itself (Jgs 5:6-8), the Lord raised up Deborah and Barak to lead the nobles to war (vv 9-13). They came from Ephraim, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar, and Naphtali (vv 14-15a, 18), but the Transjordan tribes and Asher did not want to get involved (vv 15b-17). The song then moves to the battle scene, where torrential rains bogged the chariots down (vv 19-23). Jael is celebrated as “most blessed of women,” who used her simple way of life to bring an end to Sisera (vv 24-27). She stands in contrast to Sisera’s mother, who is portrayed with all her culture waiting in vain for Sisera’s return with all of his spoils (vv 28-30). The Lord has used the simple to confound the powerful. The conclusion is a prayer for God’s judgment on all of Israel’s enemies (Jgs 5:31a; cf. Ps 68:1-3).<\/p>\n<h6>Gideon (6:1–8:35)<\/h6>\n<p>Israel’s rest for 40 years (Jgs 5:31b) was disturbed by the invasion of Midianites and Amalekites from the East (6:1-3). They destroyed the economy by invading the country at harvesttime (vv 4-6). In response to Israel’s cry, God sent a prophet with a message similar to that of the angel of the Lord (2:1-5). Then an angel appeared to Gideon and called him to lead the people in battle (6:11-14). The Lord assured him of his presence (v 16) by a sign (vv 17-22). Gideon knew that he had been visited by the Lord and built an altar called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Peace” in Ophrah (v 24). He responded by destroying the cultic site dedicated to Baal and Asherah at Ophrah (vv 25-28) and by initiating worship at the new altar (v 28). Baal did not protect his own altar (vv 29-32), even when challenged by Gideon’s father (v 31). Consequently, Gideon was known as Jerubbaal (meaning, “let Baal contend with him,” v 32).<\/p>\n<p>Next, Gideon mustered an army of 32,000 men from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali (6:35; cf. 7:3b). In order to assure himself of the Lord’s presence, he asked for another sign: the sign of the fleece (6:36-40). It must be kept in mind that Gideon lived in an area in which the wonders of God had been scarce (v 13) and that he, like Moses, needed reassurance that God was with him. God responded to his growing faith. Gideon went forth with a greatly reduced army of 300 against the enemy. Of his original army, 22,000 had left because they were afraid (7:2-3; cf. Dt 20:8). Another 9,700 were sent home, though they were valiant men (7:4-8). After assuring Gideon by a dream of an enemy soldier, God used the 300 in a marvelous way to confound the Midianites (vv 9-15). God gave Israel victory over the Midianite leaders Oreb, Zeeb, Zebah, and Zalmunna (7:16–8:21). Gideon wisely avoided a possible military confrontation with Ephraim (8:1-3), pursued the enemy deep into the Transjordan, and punished the leaders of Succoth and Penuel, who did not assist him (vv 4-9, 13-16).<\/p>\n<p>This glorious victory created a new wave of interest in the idea of kingship. The men of Israel wished to establish the family of Gideon as their royal dynasty (8:22). Gideon refused, and instead wrongly set up an ephod, cast from the gold taken in battle (vv 23-27). The ephod was probably used for cultic practices, possibly divination (cf. 17:5).<\/p>\n<p>Gideon’s era also came to an end. He was God’s instrument, giving Israel rest for 40 years. He fathered 70 sons and died in old age. God had richly blessed him, even though he had led Israel astray with his ephod. Thereafter, Israel returned to Baal worship (8:33-35).<\/p>\n<p>In the wake of Gideon’s era, his son Abimelech attempted to establish dynastic continuity by having himself installed as king at Shechem (9:1-6). With the support of his relatives at Shechem, Abimelech had all his brothers killed except Jotham (vv 4-5). After Abimelech’s coronation, Jotham set forth his opposition to his brother in a proverbial manner (vv 7-20), and went into hiding. Three years later Abimelech’s evil schemes entrapped him when the citizens of Shechem rebelled. He furiously attacked the city and destroyed it. A short time later, however, he was wounded at Thebez by a millstone dropped by a woman from the tower in which she had sought refuge from him. His servant put him out of his misery as per his request. This episode demonstrates how bad a despotic king may be. Again, God’s justice prevailed.<\/p>\n<h6>Tola (10:1-2)<\/h6>\n<p>Tola was a minor judge from Issachar who judged Israel for 23 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jair (10:3-5)<\/h6>\n<p>Jair was a minor judge from Gilead who judged Israel for 22 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jephthah (10:6–12:7)<\/h6>\n<p>A recapitulation (10:6-16) of the cycle (idolatry, enemies, cry for help, momentary repentance) sets the introduction to the Jephthah narrative. Under attack from the Ammonites, the elders of Gilead requested help from Jephthah (10:17–11:8), who promised to help them on the condition that he remain their leader even after the war (vv 9-10). At a solemn ceremony he becomes their “head” at Mizpah (v 11). Jephthah opened up correspondence with the Ammonite king, in which he argued for Israel’s rights on the basis of the Israelites’ historic claim to the land as granted to them by the Lord (vv 12–27). Instead of going out immediately to war, he hoped that “the <span>Lord<\/span>, the Judge” would settle the dispute (v 27); but the Ammonite king was unimpressed. When the Spirit of God came over him, Jephthah led Israel into battle, but only after making a rash vow. He was victorious but found out that his vow to sacrifice whatever came first out of his house required him to sacrifice his daughter. Debate continues as to whether he offered her up as a human sacrifice or whether she sacrificed marriage (see discussion under Jephthah).<\/p>\n<p>The Ephraimites seemed to have had an insatiable desire for war. Earlier they had complained to Gideon, who successfully defused their threats (8:1-3). Jephthah fought them, however, because the Israelites living in Transjordan had been reviled as “renegades” (12:1-4). Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed by the fords of the Jordan in this civil war. Thereafter, Jephthah ruled for only six years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ibzan (12:8-10)<\/h6>\n<p>Ibzan was a minor judge from Bethlehem who ruled Israel for seven years.<\/p>\n<h6>Elon (12:11)<\/h6>\n<p>A minor judge from Zebulun, Elon ruled Israel for ten years.<\/p>\n<h6>Abdon (12:13-15)<\/h6>\n<p>Abdon was a minor judge from Pirathon, the location of which is uncertain. He ruled for eight years.<\/p>\n<h6>Samson (13:1–16:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Samson’s greatness in the history of redemption is due to his miraculous birth (13:1-24), his service as a Nazirite (13:7; cf. Nm 6:1-21), the repeated overpowering by the Spirit of the Lord (Jgs 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14), the single-handed exploits against the Philistines (Ashkelon, 14:19; the fields, 15:1-6; Ramath Etam, 15:7-17; Gaza, 16:1-3, 23-30), and his occasional dependence on the Lord (15:18-19; 16:28-30). However, his personal life was flawed because of his weakness for Philistine women (chs 14, 16). Having been seduced by Delilah, he was imprisoned at Gaza. He died in the collapse of Dagon’s temple, praying that the Lord would permit him to get revenge (16:28-30). He was buried in his father’s tomb in the territory of Dan (16:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue (17–21)<\/h5>\n<p>The cyclical nature of Israel’s existence was without movement. Rest from enemies was always temporary. Israel was not yet ready for dynastic kingship, and whatever one may say of the three years of Abimelech, it was a kingship of the worst sort. Israel vacillated between idolatry and belief in the true Lord. The period of the judges was unstable, marked by petty individualism and provincialism. Yet God remained sovereign in the affairs of his people. The epilogue contains two stories: the story of Micah and the Danite migration (chs 17–18) and the civil war (chs 19–21). The epilogue is bound together by the phrase “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25, <span>niv<\/span>). The symmetric recurrence (two times in each narrative) emphasizes the anarchy and inability of the tribes to unite together to serve God as a covenant people.<\/p>\n<h6>Micah and the Danites (17–18)<\/h6>\n<p>Micah was an Ephraimite who established a shrine and hired one of his own sons, and then a Levite from Bethlehem, to serve as its priests (ch 17). Unable to keep their patrimony, the Danites left to establish themselves at the foot of Mt Hermon. They took the idols and the Levite from Micah’s shrine and set up a cultic city at the newly established city of Dan, built on the ruins of Laish (ch 18). Thus, they set up a cultic center that rivaled the tabernacle at Shiloh (18:31).<\/p>\n<h6>The Civil War (19–21)<\/h6>\n<p>The people of Gibeah, which belonged to Benjamin, sexually abused the concubine of a Levite so that she died. Like the Levite of chapters 17 and 18, she was from Bethlehem (19:1). Dramatically, the Levite sent pieces of her corpse to all the tribes, which assembled against the Benjamites because they protected the criminals of Gibeah (19:29–20:19). In the ensuing battle the population of Benjamin was decimated (20:20-48). The 11 tribes gave them 400 virgins taken in a civil war against Jabesh-gilead (21:6-15). These were not enough, however. Because of the threat of the extinction of Benjamin and the vow not to give their daughters in marriage to any Benjamite, the Israelites devised a plan by which the Benjamites could take Israelite virgins dancing in the festival at Shiloh. Benjamin thus was able to rebuild its towns and settlements.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gideon; Jephthah; Samson.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDGES, Book of Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail. Preview • Author • Date • Li...","summary_en":"JUDGES, Book of Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail. Preview • Author • Date • Li...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21747,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"King","title_en":"King","content_ro":"<h3>KING<\/h3>\n<p>The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span> (king) occurs more than 2,000 times in the Hebrew OT. It may refer to God (Ps 95:3) or to human rulers. Generally it designates one invested with ultimate authority and power over his subjects. In the OT, the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span> designates the ruler of a tribe (“the kings of Midian,” Nm 31:8), a city (Jericho, Ai; cf. Jos 12:9-24, where 31 kings of city-states conquered by the Israelites are listed), a nation (Israel, Judah, Ammon, Moab, Aram), or an international power (such as Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, or Persia). Other words may also refer to royalty. The Philistines introduced the title <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">seren<\/span> (lord) into Hebrew vocabulary. The five Philistine cities were ruled by five lords. Another word for an Israelite king is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nagid<\/span> (ruler). Both Saul and David were anointed as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nagid<\/span> over Israel (1 Sm 10:1; 16:13). In the NT and the Septuagint, the Greek version of the OT, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileus<\/span> has a meaning similar to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span><em>.<\/em> The NT <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileus<\/span> refers to secular rulers living in the first century, kings of Israel, rulers of the past, and the divine King, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “King of kings,” attributed to Jesus (1 Tm 6:15), is a Hebrew expression meaning supreme or greatest king. For example, in Ezekiel’s prediction of the fall of Tyre, Nebuchadnezzar is named the “king of kings” (Ez 26:7). The great rulers of Assyria and Babylon introduced this title. Before their time, rulers were called either “king” or “great king,” as in 2 Kings 18:28: “Hear the word of the great king, the king of Assyria” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Later rulers had their titles adjusted to keep up with the expanse of their empires.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"KingshipinIsrael\">Kingship in Israel<\/p>\n<p>God chose Abraham as the father of nations; through him and his descendants the messianic rule would be established on earth. In his promises to Abraham, God repeatedly assured him that he would become the father of a mighty nation, to whom God would give the land of Canaan, and that kings would arise from his descendants (Gn 17:6). Abraham showed his acceptance of the rule of God over his family by obeying God’s command to be circumcised, which set the clan of Abraham apart for the service of God (vv 10-14). The ultimate purpose of God’s relation with Abraham and his descendants was that God would be King over Israel and that his people would show their acceptance of his rule by their faithful obedience to him (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of the covenant was God’s expectation of loyalty to his rule. Abraham and his descendants were to exercise their God-given “rule” over the nations by living in fellowship with the great King. Thus the Lord reestablished his dominion over mankind. Through Abraham and his descendants, he would raise up a “royal nation” to whom the full privileges of rule over his creation would be restored.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord also made a covenant with Israel. This covenant was a sovereign administration of grace and promise by which the Lord consecrated the people unto himself by the sanctions of divine law and by his very presence. The nation, witnessing God’s care for them, had to learn that by their obedience to God’s expectations the theocratic kingdom might become a reality on earth. In the Sinaitic covenant the theocracy (the rule of God) was established. Israel was entrusted with the commandments, so that they might show themselves to be a theocratic nation, as God revealed to Moses: “Now if you will obey me and keep my covenant, you will be my own special treasure from among all the nations of the earth; for all the earth belongs to me. And you will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:5-6, <span>nlt<\/span>). They were God’s elect for the sake of the nations; through Israel’s priestly obedience and intercession, the whole earth might know the Creator-Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>The qualities of God’s kingship were power, glory, fidelity, wisdom, concern, service, delegation of power to man, blessing and protection, just rule, judgment, vindication, and deliverance. Israel’s kingship was to be no different from God’s. Their varied and sometimes complex laws taught Israel to distinguish between what was holy and common, clean and unclean, the ways of God and the ways of the nations. The ways of God enhanced love, fidelity, justice, peace, harmony, service, concern for others, wise living, defense of the needy, and judgment of the guilty. The ways of the kingdoms of the world all too often promoted selfishness, anarchy, despotism, and disregard for justice.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord also instituted an organizational structure designed to promote his theocratic purposes. In the wilderness Moses and the chosen leaders of Israel (Ex 18:19-26; Nm 11:24-25; cf. Dt 1:15-18) were God’s instruments for upholding his kingship in Israel. Upon Moses’ death, Joshua took over the theocratic rule. The Lord was with him as he had been with Moses, and all Israel recognized the continuity of God’s rule in Joshua’s leadership (Dt 34:9; Jos 3:7; 4:14). Like Moses had before his death, Joshua charged the leadership and Israel to persevere in the gracious covenant relationship (Jos 23–24). However, Israel perished because of its greed, immorality, strife, and idolatry. During the period of the judges, each one did what was right in his own eyes (Jgs 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). There was no king in the land in those days. The judges were military leaders whom the Lord raised up to deliver his people from their foreign oppressors. But God remained King, regardless of the fact that Israel lived as if he were not. The period of the judges demonstrated that apostate Israel, disobedient to their King, was unsuccessful in dealing with the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The theocratic leadership was restored to Israel by the ministry of Samuel. He was born into a Levitical family and served the Lord at the Shiloh tabernacle. He was called to be a prophet—an office which had not been filled since Moses’ death (1 Sm 3:20-21). He was recognized as a judge in Israel (7:15). In Samuel the offices of priest, prophet, and king were combined. He is never called king, as his lifestyle was that of a prophet rather than that of a ruler. The carefully calculated request of the people for a king was a rejection of Samuel’s ministry. The people were not satisfied with the spiritual, charismatic leadership of Samuel. In their search for a more dynamic leader they found in the kings of the surrounding nations attractive elements: power, manifestation of glory, and stability. Thus far the tribes had experienced several civil wars that endangered the unity of Israel. It was thought that a king would remedy all of the social and political problems. Though God had foreseen the days of the monarchy in the law (Dt 17:14-20), the people were motivated to introduce the kingship for secular rather than religious reasons: “Give us a king like all the other nations have” (1 Sm 8:5); “We want to be like the nations around us. Our king will govern us and lead us into battle” (v 20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Samuel never accepted the idea of kingship; it was foreign to the theocratic ideal.<\/p>\n<p>The crucial difference between kingship in Israel and kingship in neighboring lands lay in the fact that God endowed the king of Israel with his Spirit to establish his rule on earth. God ruled for his people, and his people benefited was from his rule; he was their provider, protector, and divine warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Samuel was instrumental in anointing Saul (a sad example of kingship) and David (a good example of kingly rule under God). Saul’s kingship revealed a despotic, uncaring attitude and self-aggrandizement. He was intent on establishing his dynasty, while not caring sufficiently for the people of God. Therefore, the Lord rejected his kingship (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>David’s kingship, in contrast to Saul’s, was in line with God’s because it reflected the glory of Yahweh’s kingship. David’s life and rule are taken up in the two books of Samuel as a commentary on the pros and cons of kingship. Positively, David was a man after God’s heart, who sought the will of God, repented of his sin, and sought the glory of God. Negatively, David failed in his personal and family life to uphold the high standards of God’s law. Yet God was pleased to choose David’s dynasty as the lineage through which Jesus Christ would come. The prophet Nathan assured David that his dynasty would last: “Your dynasty and your kingdom will continue for all time before me, and your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sm 7:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). But God did not promise that it would be immune from prosecution or banishment.<\/p>\n<p>The outstanding qualities of the kingship of David and his son Solomon reflect the true theocratic intention: concern for the Lord, for a heart of wisdom and integrity, and for the well-being of God’s people. Concern for the Lord found expression in the preparation for and actual building of the temple (cf. Ps 132). Concern for integrity and wisdom is clearly evident, especially in David’s response to Nathan’s rebuke (2 Sm 12) and in Solomon’s request to have a heart of wisdom (1 Kgs 3). Concern for the people comes to expression in their securing the borders against enemies, achieving national unification, and bringing opportunity for economic growth. The era of David and Solomon represented a true reflection of God’s kingship on earth.<\/p>\n<p>The accounts in Kings and Chronicles unfold the subsequent history of kingship in Israel and Judah. The good kings followed the examples provided by David and Solomon in securing Jerusalem against foreign invaders, in supplying for the needs of the temple, in having God’s people instructed in the word of God, and in modeling their rule after the law of Moses. A good Davidic king loved the Lord, the temple, the law, and God’s people. He served them as a good shepherd. Evil kings were those who rejected this model of kingship in favor of the pagan models. So Omri and Ahab introduced the Phoenician culture with its Baalism, utterly disregarding the heritage of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The Davidic king was treated as a member of God’s household, being a “son” of the great King (cf. 2 Sm 7:14-16; Ps 2:6-7). The Davidic king was to be loyal to the great King, Yahweh. He, like Moses and Joshua, received his orders directly from the Lord; but unlike with Moses, the word of the Lord was mediated through the prophets. He, like Moses and Joshua, was expected to serve his God and his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessiah-King\">The Messiah-King<\/p>\n<p>The descendants of David failed to maintain and expand the theocracy. By the eighth and seventh centuries <span>BC<\/span>, it was apparent that even the greatest kings were dwarfed by the stature of David and Solomon. The prophets (Is 9:2-7; 11:1-9; Jer 33:14-16; Ez 34:22-31; Mi 5:2-5) spoke of another king, the Messiah, a descendant of David who would rule permanently and by whose rule the reign of God would extend to the ends of the earth. He would put down all opposition to God’s rule, remove all enemies, and bring in an era of universal peace and righteousness. The Messiah-King would reveal the perfections of divine rule, as the Spirit of God would be upon him. His kingship would be marked by service to the people of God, so that they would be a well-cared-for flock; he would serve them as their shepherd.<\/p>\n<p>In the coming of Jesus the messianic kingdom is more clearly revealed. He is the King of whom the angels said, “The Savior—yes, the Messiah, the Lord—has been born tonight in Bethlehem, the city of David!” (Lk 2:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). These magnificent words show continuity with the prophetic word. Jesus is the Savior, whose role includes deliverance from sin but also deliverance from all causes of adversity, evil, and the effects of the curse. His mission pertains to both forgiveness and to the establishment of peace on earth (1:77-79). In this light we must look at Jesus’ ministry of healing, feeding, opposing the forces of evil, suffering, and teaching as the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth. He is the King who serves, fights against the demonic powers, and overcomes. The resurrection marks his victory, and he is crowned with glory by being seated at the right hand of the Father (Acts 2:33-36; cf. 1 Cor 15:25). In being the Savior he is none other than Christ the Lord. The early apostolic preaching proclaimed that Jesus is the Messiah of God and the Lord. The lordship of Jesus is corollary to his being the Messiah. To those who call on him, he is the Savior-Messiah-Lord (Rom 10:9-15), but to those who reject him, he is the divine warrior, before whom all knees will bow and who will bring in the era of the Father’s judgment (cf. Rv 1:12-16; 19:11-21).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught his disciples that at his coming in glory he would be seated on his throne and all mankind would pay him obeisance. The enemies of God will be cast out from his presence, and the people of God will fully inherit the kingdom (Mt 25:31-46). In accordance with Jesus’ teaching, the members of his body, the church, are expected to work out the theocratic ideal in their lives, that by their works and faith they may glorify the Father and show that they are his (Jn 17:20-26; cf. Mt 25:33-40). This is the biblical manner of witness that Israel failed to give and that the church is privileged to give; as Paul wrote to Timothy:<\/p>\n<p>I command you before God, who gives life to all, and before Christ Jesus, . . . that you obey his commands with all purity. Then no one can find fault with you from now until our Lord Jesus Christ returns. For at the right time Christ will be revealed from heaven by the blessed and only almighty God, the King of kings and Lord of lords. He alone can never die, and he lives in light so brilliant that no human can approach him. No one has ever seen him, nor ever will. To him be honor and power forever. Amen. (1 Tm 6:13-16, <span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Then Paul gives several instructions as to how the people of God must demonstrate their allegiance to Jesus. Throughout the book of Revelation, Jesus is viewed as King over the church (Rv 4:2, 9-11; 5:1, 9-13). At his return his kingship will be established. At this time, the enemies of the cross will see the one whom they have rejected and will bow before the messianic King (1 Cor 15:25-28). “After that the end will come, when he [Jesus] will turn the Kingdom over to God the Father, having put down all enemies of every kind” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KING<\/h3>\n<p>The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span> (king) occurs more than 2,000 times in the Hebrew OT. It may refer to God (Ps 95:3) or to human rulers. Generally it designates one invested with ultimate authority and power over his subjects. In the OT, the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span> designates the ruler of a tribe (“the kings of Midian,” Nm 31:8), a city (Jericho, Ai; cf. Jos 12:9-24, where 31 kings of city-states conquered by the Israelites are listed), a nation (Israel, Judah, Ammon, Moab, Aram), or an international power (such as Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, or Persia). Other words may also refer to royalty. The Philistines introduced the title <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">seren<\/span> (lord) into Hebrew vocabulary. The five Philistine cities were ruled by five lords. Another word for an Israelite king is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nagid<\/span> (ruler). Both Saul and David were anointed as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nagid<\/span> over Israel (1 Sm 10:1; 16:13). In the NT and the Septuagint, the Greek version of the OT, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileus<\/span> has a meaning similar to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span><em>.<\/em> The NT <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileus<\/span> refers to secular rulers living in the first century, kings of Israel, rulers of the past, and the divine King, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “King of kings,” attributed to Jesus (1 Tm 6:15), is a Hebrew expression meaning supreme or greatest king. For example, in Ezekiel’s prediction of the fall of Tyre, Nebuchadnezzar is named the “king of kings” (Ez 26:7). The great rulers of Assyria and Babylon introduced this title. Before their time, rulers were called either “king” or “great king,” as in 2 Kings 18:28: “Hear the word of the great king, the king of Assyria” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Later rulers had their titles adjusted to keep up with the expanse of their empires.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"KingshipinIsrael\">Kingship in Israel<\/p>\n<p>God chose Abraham as the father of nations; through him and his descendants the messianic rule would be established on earth. In his promises to Abraham, God repeatedly assured him that he would become the father of a mighty nation, to whom God would give the land of Canaan, and that kings would arise from his descendants (Gn 17:6). Abraham showed his acceptance of the rule of God over his family by obeying God’s command to be circumcised, which set the clan of Abraham apart for the service of God (vv 10-14). The ultimate purpose of God’s relation with Abraham and his descendants was that God would be King over Israel and that his people would show their acceptance of his rule by their faithful obedience to him (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of the covenant was God’s expectation of loyalty to his rule. Abraham and his descendants were to exercise their God-given “rule” over the nations by living in fellowship with the great King. Thus the Lord reestablished his dominion over mankind. Through Abraham and his descendants, he would raise up a “royal nation” to whom the full privileges of rule over his creation would be restored.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord also made a covenant with Israel. This covenant was a sovereign administration of grace and promise by which the Lord consecrated the people unto himself by the sanctions of divine law and by his very presence. The nation, witnessing God’s care for them, had to learn that by their obedience to God’s expectations the theocratic kingdom might become a reality on earth. In the Sinaitic covenant the theocracy (the rule of God) was established. Israel was entrusted with the commandments, so that they might show themselves to be a theocratic nation, as God revealed to Moses: “Now if you will obey me and keep my covenant, you will be my own special treasure from among all the nations of the earth; for all the earth belongs to me. And you will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:5-6, <span>nlt<\/span>). They were God’s elect for the sake of the nations; through Israel’s priestly obedience and intercession, the whole earth might know the Creator-Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>The qualities of God’s kingship were power, glory, fidelity, wisdom, concern, service, delegation of power to man, blessing and protection, just rule, judgment, vindication, and deliverance. Israel’s kingship was to be no different from God’s. Their varied and sometimes complex laws taught Israel to distinguish between what was holy and common, clean and unclean, the ways of God and the ways of the nations. The ways of God enhanced love, fidelity, justice, peace, harmony, service, concern for others, wise living, defense of the needy, and judgment of the guilty. The ways of the kingdoms of the world all too often promoted selfishness, anarchy, despotism, and disregard for justice.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord also instituted an organizational structure designed to promote his theocratic purposes. In the wilderness Moses and the chosen leaders of Israel (Ex 18:19-26; Nm 11:24-25; cf. Dt 1:15-18) were God’s instruments for upholding his kingship in Israel. Upon Moses’ death, Joshua took over the theocratic rule. The Lord was with him as he had been with Moses, and all Israel recognized the continuity of God’s rule in Joshua’s leadership (Dt 34:9; Jos 3:7; 4:14). Like Moses had before his death, Joshua charged the leadership and Israel to persevere in the gracious covenant relationship (Jos 23–24). However, Israel perished because of its greed, immorality, strife, and idolatry. During the period of the judges, each one did what was right in his own eyes (Jgs 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). There was no king in the land in those days. The judges were military leaders whom the Lord raised up to deliver his people from their foreign oppressors. But God remained King, regardless of the fact that Israel lived as if he were not. The period of the judges demonstrated that apostate Israel, disobedient to their King, was unsuccessful in dealing with the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The theocratic leadership was restored to Israel by the ministry of Samuel. He was born into a Levitical family and served the Lord at the Shiloh tabernacle. He was called to be a prophet—an office which had not been filled since Moses’ death (1 Sm 3:20-21). He was recognized as a judge in Israel (7:15). In Samuel the offices of priest, prophet, and king were combined. He is never called king, as his lifestyle was that of a prophet rather than that of a ruler. The carefully calculated request of the people for a king was a rejection of Samuel’s ministry. The people were not satisfied with the spiritual, charismatic leadership of Samuel. In their search for a more dynamic leader they found in the kings of the surrounding nations attractive elements: power, manifestation of glory, and stability. Thus far the tribes had experienced several civil wars that endangered the unity of Israel. It was thought that a king would remedy all of the social and political problems. Though God had foreseen the days of the monarchy in the law (Dt 17:14-20), the people were motivated to introduce the kingship for secular rather than religious reasons: “Give us a king like all the other nations have” (1 Sm 8:5); “We want to be like the nations around us. Our king will govern us and lead us into battle” (v 20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Samuel never accepted the idea of kingship; it was foreign to the theocratic ideal.<\/p>\n<p>The crucial difference between kingship in Israel and kingship in neighboring lands lay in the fact that God endowed the king of Israel with his Spirit to establish his rule on earth. God ruled for his people, and his people benefited was from his rule; he was their provider, protector, and divine warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Samuel was instrumental in anointing Saul (a sad example of kingship) and David (a good example of kingly rule under God). Saul’s kingship revealed a despotic, uncaring attitude and self-aggrandizement. He was intent on establishing his dynasty, while not caring sufficiently for the people of God. Therefore, the Lord rejected his kingship (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>David’s kingship, in contrast to Saul’s, was in line with God’s because it reflected the glory of Yahweh’s kingship. David’s life and rule are taken up in the two books of Samuel as a commentary on the pros and cons of kingship. Positively, David was a man after God’s heart, who sought the will of God, repented of his sin, and sought the glory of God. Negatively, David failed in his personal and family life to uphold the high standards of God’s law. Yet God was pleased to choose David’s dynasty as the lineage through which Jesus Christ would come. The prophet Nathan assured David that his dynasty would last: “Your dynasty and your kingdom will continue for all time before me, and your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sm 7:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). But God did not promise that it would be immune from prosecution or banishment.<\/p>\n<p>The outstanding qualities of the kingship of David and his son Solomon reflect the true theocratic intention: concern for the Lord, for a heart of wisdom and integrity, and for the well-being of God’s people. Concern for the Lord found expression in the preparation for and actual building of the temple (cf. Ps 132). Concern for integrity and wisdom is clearly evident, especially in David’s response to Nathan’s rebuke (2 Sm 12) and in Solomon’s request to have a heart of wisdom (1 Kgs 3). Concern for the people comes to expression in their securing the borders against enemies, achieving national unification, and bringing opportunity for economic growth. The era of David and Solomon represented a true reflection of God’s kingship on earth.<\/p>\n<p>The accounts in Kings and Chronicles unfold the subsequent history of kingship in Israel and Judah. The good kings followed the examples provided by David and Solomon in securing Jerusalem against foreign invaders, in supplying for the needs of the temple, in having God’s people instructed in the word of God, and in modeling their rule after the law of Moses. A good Davidic king loved the Lord, the temple, the law, and God’s people. He served them as a good shepherd. Evil kings were those who rejected this model of kingship in favor of the pagan models. So Omri and Ahab introduced the Phoenician culture with its Baalism, utterly disregarding the heritage of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The Davidic king was treated as a member of God’s household, being a “son” of the great King (cf. 2 Sm 7:14-16; Ps 2:6-7). The Davidic king was to be loyal to the great King, Yahweh. He, like Moses and Joshua, received his orders directly from the Lord; but unlike with Moses, the word of the Lord was mediated through the prophets. He, like Moses and Joshua, was expected to serve his God and his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessiah-King\">The Messiah-King<\/p>\n<p>The descendants of David failed to maintain and expand the theocracy. By the eighth and seventh centuries <span>BC<\/span>, it was apparent that even the greatest kings were dwarfed by the stature of David and Solomon. The prophets (Is 9:2-7; 11:1-9; Jer 33:14-16; Ez 34:22-31; Mi 5:2-5) spoke of another king, the Messiah, a descendant of David who would rule permanently and by whose rule the reign of God would extend to the ends of the earth. He would put down all opposition to God’s rule, remove all enemies, and bring in an era of universal peace and righteousness. The Messiah-King would reveal the perfections of divine rule, as the Spirit of God would be upon him. His kingship would be marked by service to the people of God, so that they would be a well-cared-for flock; he would serve them as their shepherd.<\/p>\n<p>In the coming of Jesus the messianic kingdom is more clearly revealed. He is the King of whom the angels said, “The Savior—yes, the Messiah, the Lord—has been born tonight in Bethlehem, the city of David!” (Lk 2:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). These magnificent words show continuity with the prophetic word. Jesus is the Savior, whose role includes deliverance from sin but also deliverance from all causes of adversity, evil, and the effects of the curse. His mission pertains to both forgiveness and to the establishment of peace on earth (1:77-79). In this light we must look at Jesus’ ministry of healing, feeding, opposing the forces of evil, suffering, and teaching as the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth. He is the King who serves, fights against the demonic powers, and overcomes. The resurrection marks his victory, and he is crowned with glory by being seated at the right hand of the Father (Acts 2:33-36; cf. 1 Cor 15:25). In being the Savior he is none other than Christ the Lord. The early apostolic preaching proclaimed that Jesus is the Messiah of God and the Lord. The lordship of Jesus is corollary to his being the Messiah. To those who call on him, he is the Savior-Messiah-Lord (Rom 10:9-15), but to those who reject him, he is the divine warrior, before whom all knees will bow and who will bring in the era of the Father’s judgment (cf. Rv 1:12-16; 19:11-21).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught his disciples that at his coming in glory he would be seated on his throne and all mankind would pay him obeisance. The enemies of God will be cast out from his presence, and the people of God will fully inherit the kingdom (Mt 25:31-46). In accordance with Jesus’ teaching, the members of his body, the church, are expected to work out the theocratic ideal in their lives, that by their works and faith they may glorify the Father and show that they are his (Jn 17:20-26; cf. Mt 25:33-40). This is the biblical manner of witness that Israel failed to give and that the church is privileged to give; as Paul wrote to Timothy:<\/p>\n<p>I command you before God, who gives life to all, and before Christ Jesus, . . . that you obey his commands with all purity. Then no one can find fault with you from now until our Lord Jesus Christ returns. For at the right time Christ will be revealed from heaven by the blessed and only almighty God, the King of kings and Lord of lords. He alone can never die, and he lives in light so brilliant that no human can approach him. No one has ever seen him, nor ever will. To him be honor and power forever. Amen. (1 Tm 6:13-16, <span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Then Paul gives several instructions as to how the people of God must demonstrate their allegiance to Jesus. Throughout the book of Revelation, Jesus is viewed as King over the church (Rv 4:2, 9-11; 5:1, 9-13). At his return his kingship will be established. At this time, the enemies of the cross will see the one whom they have rejected and will bow before the messianic King (1 Cor 15:25-28). “After that the end will come, when he [Jesus] will turn the Kingdom over to God the Father, having put down all enemies of every kind” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KING The word melek (king) occurs more than 2,000 times in the Hebrew OT. It may refer to God (Ps 95:3) or to human rulers. Generally it designates one invested with ultimate authority and power over his subjects. In the OT, the word melek designates the ruler of a tribe (“the kings of Midian,” Nm 31:8), a city (Jericho, Ai; cf. Jos 12:9-24, where 31 kings of city-states conquered by the Israelites are listed), a nation (Israel, Judah, Ammon, Moab, Aram), or an international power (such as Eg...","summary_en":"KING The word melek (king) occurs more than 2,000 times in the Hebrew OT. It may refer to God (Ps 95:3) or to human rulers. Generally it designates one invested with ultimate authority and power over his subjects. In the OT, the word melek designates the ruler of a tribe (“the kings of Midian,” Nm 31:8), a city (Jericho, Ai; cf. Jos 12:9-24, where 31 kings of city-states conquered by the Israelites are listed), a nation (Israel, Judah, Ammon, Moab, Aram), or an international power (such as Eg...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33714,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Samuel (Person)","title_en":"Samuel (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>SAMUEL (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Last of the judges, his name means “name of God” or “his name is El” (El is the name of the God of strength and power). The play on words in 1 Samuel 1:20 (cf. Ex 2:10) is not intended to be an explanation of the meaning of Samuel’s name; Hannah’s words recall only her prayer and the circumstances surrounding her son’s birth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PersonalHistory\">Personal History<\/p>\n<p>Samuel’s parents were a devout couple who went annually to the sanctuary at Shiloh (1 Sm 1:3). His father, Elkanah, was a Levite (1 Chr 6:26) and a resident in Ramah, territory of Ephraim. His mother, Hannah, was unable to bear children early in their marriage. Elkanah had a second wife, Peninnah.<\/p>\n<p>On a visit to Shiloh, Hannah prayed in the sanctuary (1 Sm 1:6-11), vowing that, if the Lord would give her a son, she would dedicate him as a Nazirite (Nm 6:1-21) to God’s service for life. The Lord heard Hannah’s prayer and granted her request. She had no other children until after Samuel’s dedication.<\/p>\n<p>When Samuel was presented to Eli and began his service in the sanctuary, he bowed before the Lord and “worshiped the <span>Lord<\/span> there” (1 Sm 1:28). Three ingredients—a feeling of worth, a knowledge of his parents’ love (cf. 2:19), and a sense of purpose—laid the foundation of his personality and his future accomplishments.<\/p>\n<p>Further proof of Samuel’s valuable early training is evidenced in 1 Samuel 2. Eli’s sons had followed the licentious practices of the pagan religions about them. Eli was old, indulgent, and powerless to restrain them. Samuel neither developed irreverence for Eli nor followed his sons in the path of evil. God determined to judge Eli and his house for their sins. When God announced his purpose to Samuel, Samuel responded with reverence and respect. His personal and spiritual growth indicated that he had been marked out as a future prophet of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p> When everyone did what was right in his or her own eyes (cf. Jgs 17:6; 21:25), God allowed an adjacent nation to serve as his instrument to chasten his people, until a judge arose to deliver them. When the Philistines again invaded the land (1 Sm 4–6), the Israelites mustered their army at Ebenezer, only to be defeated. Believing that the ark of the covenant would guarantee success, they sent to Shiloh for it. The next day the Israelites were again defeated and the ark captured. When this news reached Eli, he fell from his stool and died.<\/p>\n<p>Twenty years elapsed before Samuel’s name is mentioned again (1 Sm 7:2-3). Evidently, following the destruction of Shiloh (cf. Jer 7:12-14; 26:6, 9; Ps 78:60), he lived in Ramah and went on annual preaching missions that included Bethel, Gilgal, and Mizpah, “judging” the people in these places (cf. Dt 16:18-22; 17:8-13). Samuel probably also founded “schools of the prophets” during this period. Schools were established at Bethel (1 Sm 10:5; 2 Kgs 2:3), Gilgal (2 Kgs 4:38), Ramah (1 Sm 19:20), and elsewhere (2 Kgs 2:5), perhaps as a natural outgrowth of Samuel’s ministry.<\/p>\n<p>After a 20-year ministry, Samuel thought it timely to move toward spiritual and national unification. He convened a meeting at Mizpah (1 Sm 7). There, with a symbolic rite expressive of deep humiliation and in keeping with the libations of a treaty, the Israelites poured out water on the ground, fasted, and prayed.<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines mistook the nature of the convocation and decided to attack the defenseless worshipers, who entreated Samuel to pray for them. He offered a sacrifice and the Lord sent a violent thunderstorm, causing the invaders to flee in panic. The pursuing Israelites won a significant victory at Ebenezer (1 Sm 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>In Samuel’s declining years, the elders rejected his leadership in favor of a king (1 Sm 8). Following earnest prayer, he received new direction from the Lord, acceded to their request, and later anointed Saul prince over God’s people. Samuel then summoned the Israelites to Mizpah, where God’s choice was made official, and Saul was hailed as king. Following Saul’s victory over Nahash (ch 11), Samuel at Gilgal confirmed Saul’s kingship. Thereafter, Samuel retired to Ramah to train men to carry on his ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Samuel twice had to reprove Saul, first for impatience and disobedience (1 Sm 13:5-14), and then for disobeying the express command of the Lord (15:20-23), who rejected him as king. Samuel was then sent to the home of Jesse in Bethlehem, where he anointed David as the chosen one of the Lord (16:1-13).<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel 25:1 is a brief account of Samuel’s passing, when all Israel gathered together and mourned for him. He was buried in Ramah. The only subsequent mention of Samuel is in 1 Samuel 28. Summoned by the witch of Endor at Saul’s request, Samuel announced that on the following day Saul and his sons would die in battle (vv 4-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Character\">Character<\/p>\n<p>Samuel overcame many problems through piety, perseverance, and dedication to the service of the Lord. His overriding concern was for the good of his people. Wise and courageous, he boldly rebuked king, elders, and people when necessary, always from the sure ground of the revealed will of God.<\/p>\n<p>While Samuel served as judge and priest, he was preeminently a prophet. Through his ministry the spiritual life of the Israelites improved. In inaugurating the monarchy, he led the people from tribal disunity to national solidarity. He appointed gatekeepers to the tent of meeting (1 Chr 9:17-26), organized observance of the Passover so memorably that it was still spoken about in Josiah’s day (2 Chr 35:18), put into writing how a king and his kingdom should be (1 Sm 10:25), and penned “The Chronicles of Samuel the Seer” (1 Chr 29:29).<\/p>\n<p>Samuel well deserves a place among the great men of faith (Heb 11:32). He was the last of the judges (1 Sm 7:6, 15-17) and the first of the prophets (1 Sm 3:20; Acts 3:24; 13:20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Samuel, Books of First and Second.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SAMUEL (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Last of the judges, his name means “name of God” or “his name is El” (El is the name of the God of strength and power). The play on words in 1 Samuel 1:20 (cf. Ex 2:10) is not intended to be an explanation of the meaning of Samuel’s name; Hannah’s words recall only her prayer and the circumstances surrounding her son’s birth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PersonalHistory\">Personal History<\/p>\n<p>Samuel’s parents were a devout couple who went annually to the sanctuary at Shiloh (1 Sm 1:3). His father, Elkanah, was a Levite (1 Chr 6:26) and a resident in Ramah, territory of Ephraim. His mother, Hannah, was unable to bear children early in their marriage. Elkanah had a second wife, Peninnah.<\/p>\n<p>On a visit to Shiloh, Hannah prayed in the sanctuary (1 Sm 1:6-11), vowing that, if the Lord would give her a son, she would dedicate him as a Nazirite (Nm 6:1-21) to God’s service for life. The Lord heard Hannah’s prayer and granted her request. She had no other children until after Samuel’s dedication.<\/p>\n<p>When Samuel was presented to Eli and began his service in the sanctuary, he bowed before the Lord and “worshiped the <span>Lord<\/span> there” (1 Sm 1:28). Three ingredients—a feeling of worth, a knowledge of his parents’ love (cf. 2:19), and a sense of purpose—laid the foundation of his personality and his future accomplishments.<\/p>\n<p>Further proof of Samuel’s valuable early training is evidenced in 1 Samuel 2. Eli’s sons had followed the licentious practices of the pagan religions about them. Eli was old, indulgent, and powerless to restrain them. Samuel neither developed irreverence for Eli nor followed his sons in the path of evil. God determined to judge Eli and his house for their sins. When God announced his purpose to Samuel, Samuel responded with reverence and respect. His personal and spiritual growth indicated that he had been marked out as a future prophet of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p> When everyone did what was right in his or her own eyes (cf. Jgs 17:6; 21:25), God allowed an adjacent nation to serve as his instrument to chasten his people, until a judge arose to deliver them. When the Philistines again invaded the land (1 Sm 4–6), the Israelites mustered their army at Ebenezer, only to be defeated. Believing that the ark of the covenant would guarantee success, they sent to Shiloh for it. The next day the Israelites were again defeated and the ark captured. When this news reached Eli, he fell from his stool and died.<\/p>\n<p>Twenty years elapsed before Samuel’s name is mentioned again (1 Sm 7:2-3). Evidently, following the destruction of Shiloh (cf. Jer 7:12-14; 26:6, 9; Ps 78:60), he lived in Ramah and went on annual preaching missions that included Bethel, Gilgal, and Mizpah, “judging” the people in these places (cf. Dt 16:18-22; 17:8-13). Samuel probably also founded “schools of the prophets” during this period. Schools were established at Bethel (1 Sm 10:5; 2 Kgs 2:3), Gilgal (2 Kgs 4:38), Ramah (1 Sm 19:20), and elsewhere (2 Kgs 2:5), perhaps as a natural outgrowth of Samuel’s ministry.<\/p>\n<p>After a 20-year ministry, Samuel thought it timely to move toward spiritual and national unification. He convened a meeting at Mizpah (1 Sm 7). There, with a symbolic rite expressive of deep humiliation and in keeping with the libations of a treaty, the Israelites poured out water on the ground, fasted, and prayed.<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines mistook the nature of the convocation and decided to attack the defenseless worshipers, who entreated Samuel to pray for them. He offered a sacrifice and the Lord sent a violent thunderstorm, causing the invaders to flee in panic. The pursuing Israelites won a significant victory at Ebenezer (1 Sm 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>In Samuel’s declining years, the elders rejected his leadership in favor of a king (1 Sm 8). Following earnest prayer, he received new direction from the Lord, acceded to their request, and later anointed Saul prince over God’s people. Samuel then summoned the Israelites to Mizpah, where God’s choice was made official, and Saul was hailed as king. Following Saul’s victory over Nahash (ch 11), Samuel at Gilgal confirmed Saul’s kingship. Thereafter, Samuel retired to Ramah to train men to carry on his ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Samuel twice had to reprove Saul, first for impatience and disobedience (1 Sm 13:5-14), and then for disobeying the express command of the Lord (15:20-23), who rejected him as king. Samuel was then sent to the home of Jesse in Bethlehem, where he anointed David as the chosen one of the Lord (16:1-13).<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel 25:1 is a brief account of Samuel’s passing, when all Israel gathered together and mourned for him. He was buried in Ramah. The only subsequent mention of Samuel is in 1 Samuel 28. Summoned by the witch of Endor at Saul’s request, Samuel announced that on the following day Saul and his sons would die in battle (vv 4-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Character\">Character<\/p>\n<p>Samuel overcame many problems through piety, perseverance, and dedication to the service of the Lord. His overriding concern was for the good of his people. Wise and courageous, he boldly rebuked king, elders, and people when necessary, always from the sure ground of the revealed will of God.<\/p>\n<p>While Samuel served as judge and priest, he was preeminently a prophet. Through his ministry the spiritual life of the Israelites improved. In inaugurating the monarchy, he led the people from tribal disunity to national solidarity. He appointed gatekeepers to the tent of meeting (1 Chr 9:17-26), organized observance of the Passover so memorably that it was still spoken about in Josiah’s day (2 Chr 35:18), put into writing how a king and his kingdom should be (1 Sm 10:25), and penned “The Chronicles of Samuel the Seer” (1 Chr 29:29).<\/p>\n<p>Samuel well deserves a place among the great men of faith (Heb 11:32). He was the last of the judges (1 Sm 7:6, 15-17) and the first of the prophets (1 Sm 3:20; Acts 3:24; 13:20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Samuel, Books of First and Second.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SAMUEL (Person) Last of the judges, his name means “name of God” or “his name is El” (El is the name of the God of strength and power). The play on words in 1 Samuel 1:20 (cf. Ex 2:10) is not intended to be an explanation of the meaning of Samuel’s name; Hannah’s words recall only her prayer and the circumstances surrounding her son’s birth. Personal History Samuel’s parents were a devout couple who went annually to the sanctuary at Shiloh (1 Sm 1:3). His father, Elkanah, was a Levite (1 Chr ...","summary_en":"SAMUEL (Person) Last of the judges, his name means “name of God” or “his name is El” (El is the name of the God of strength and power). The play on words in 1 Samuel 1:20 (cf. Ex 2:10) is not intended to be an explanation of the meaning of Samuel’s name; Hannah’s words recall only her prayer and the circumstances surrounding her son’s birth. Personal History Samuel’s parents were a devout couple who went annually to the sanctuary at Shiloh (1 Sm 1:3). His father, Elkanah, was a Levite (1 Chr ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61152,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Monarchy","title_en":"Monarchy","content_ro":"<h3>Monarchy<\/h3>\n<p>One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs, so kings reigned either on behalf of the gods or as presumed gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites envied other nations and were not interested in the long-term implications of monarchy, in spite of Samuel’s warnings (1 Sam 8:10-18). Several hundred years of monarchy would prove that Samuel’s apprehensions were justified: Wicked kings eventually led God’s chosen nation into foreign domination and exile. Yet God used the monarchy to fulfill his purposes, as he would provide the Messiah through David and his dynasty, establishing an eternal kingdom (see 2 Sam 7:8-16; Matt 21:1-11; Rev 5:5; 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 17:14-20; 33:5; Judg 17:6; 21:25; 1 Sam 8:5-22; 10:1, 24-25; 2 Sam 7:8-16; Ps 89:35-37; Eccl 8:2-5; Isa 33:22; Matt 21:1-11; 22:42-46; 27:11; 1 Tim 1:17; 1 Pet 2:13-14; Rev 5:5; 11:15; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Monarchy<\/h3>\n<p>One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs, so kings reigned either on behalf of the gods or as presumed gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites envied other nations and were not interested in the long-term implications of monarchy, in spite of Samuel’s warnings (1 Sam 8:10-18). Several hundred years of monarchy would prove that Samuel’s apprehensions were justified: Wicked kings eventually led God’s chosen nation into foreign domination and exile. Yet God used the monarchy to fulfill his purposes, as he would provide the Messiah through David and his dynasty, establishing an eternal kingdom (see 2 Sam 7:8-16; Matt 21:1-11; Rev 5:5; 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 17:14-20; 33:5; Judg 17:6; 21:25; 1 Sam 8:5-22; 10:1, 24-25; 2 Sam 7:8-16; Ps 89:35-37; Eccl 8:2-5; Isa 33:22; Matt 21:1-11; 22:42-46; 27:11; 1 Tim 1:17; 1 Pet 2:13-14; Rev 5:5; 11:15; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Monarchy One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs,...","summary_en":"Monarchy One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88778,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Monarchy","title_en":"Monarchy","content_ro":"<h3>Monarchy<\/h3>\n<p>One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs, so kings reigned either on behalf of the gods or as presumed gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites envied other nations and were not interested in the long-term implications of monarchy, in spite of Samuel’s warnings (1 Sam 8:10-18). Several hundred years of monarchy would prove that Samuel’s apprehensions were justified: Wicked kings eventually led God’s chosen nation into foreign domination and exile. Yet God used the monarchy to fulfill his purposes, as he would provide the Messiah through David and his dynasty, establishing an eternal kingdom (see 2 Sam 7:8-16; Matt 21:1-11; Rev 5:5; 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 17:14-20; 33:5; Judg 17:6; 21:25; 1 Sam 8:5-22; 10:1, 24-25; 2 Sam 7:8-16; Ps 89:35-37; Eccl 8:2-5; Isa 33:22; Matt 21:1-11; 22:42-46; 27:11; 1 Tim 1:17; 1 Pet 2:13-14; Rev 5:5; 11:15; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Monarchy<\/h3>\n<p>One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs, so kings reigned either on behalf of the gods or as presumed gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites envied other nations and were not interested in the long-term implications of monarchy, in spite of Samuel’s warnings (1 Sam 8:10-18). Several hundred years of monarchy would prove that Samuel’s apprehensions were justified: Wicked kings eventually led God’s chosen nation into foreign domination and exile. Yet God used the monarchy to fulfill his purposes, as he would provide the Messiah through David and his dynasty, establishing an eternal kingdom (see 2 Sam 7:8-16; Matt 21:1-11; Rev 5:5; 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 17:14-20; 33:5; Judg 17:6; 21:25; 1 Sam 8:5-22; 10:1, 24-25; 2 Sam 7:8-16; Ps 89:35-37; Eccl 8:2-5; Isa 33:22; Matt 21:1-11; 22:42-46; 27:11; 1 Tim 1:17; 1 Pet 2:13-14; Rev 5:5; 11:15; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Monarchy One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs,...","summary_en":"Monarchy One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116404,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Monarchy","title_en":"Monarchy","content_ro":"<h3>Monarchy<\/h3>\n<p>One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs, so kings reigned either on behalf of the gods or as presumed gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites envied other nations and were not interested in the long-term implications of monarchy, in spite of Samuel’s warnings (1 Sam 8:10-18). Several hundred years of monarchy would prove that Samuel’s apprehensions were justified: Wicked kings eventually led God’s chosen nation into foreign domination and exile. Yet God used the monarchy to fulfill his purposes, as he would provide the Messiah through David and his dynasty, establishing an eternal kingdom (see 2 Sam 7:8-16; Matt 21:1-11; Rev 5:5; 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 17:14-20; 33:5; Judg 17:6; 21:25; 1 Sam 8:5-22; 10:1, 24-25; 2 Sam 7:8-16; Ps 89:35-37; Eccl 8:2-5; Isa 33:22; Matt 21:1-11; 22:42-46; 27:11; 1 Tim 1:17; 1 Pet 2:13-14; Rev 5:5; 11:15; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Monarchy<\/h3>\n<p>One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs, so kings reigned either on behalf of the gods or as presumed gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites envied other nations and were not interested in the long-term implications of monarchy, in spite of Samuel’s warnings (1 Sam 8:10-18). Several hundred years of monarchy would prove that Samuel’s apprehensions were justified: Wicked kings eventually led God’s chosen nation into foreign domination and exile. Yet God used the monarchy to fulfill his purposes, as he would provide the Messiah through David and his dynasty, establishing an eternal kingdom (see 2 Sam 7:8-16; Matt 21:1-11; Rev 5:5; 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 17:14-20; 33:5; Judg 17:6; 21:25; 1 Sam 8:5-22; 10:1, 24-25; 2 Sam 7:8-16; Ps 89:35-37; Eccl 8:2-5; Isa 33:22; Matt 21:1-11; 22:42-46; 27:11; 1 Tim 1:17; 1 Pet 2:13-14; Rev 5:5; 11:15; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Monarchy One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs,...","summary_en":"Monarchy One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144030,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Monarchy","title_en":"Monarchy","content_ro":"<h3>Monarchy<\/h3>\n<p>One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs, so kings reigned either on behalf of the gods or as presumed gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites envied other nations and were not interested in the long-term implications of monarchy, in spite of Samuel’s warnings (1 Sam 8:10-18). Several hundred years of monarchy would prove that Samuel’s apprehensions were justified: Wicked kings eventually led God’s chosen nation into foreign domination and exile. Yet God used the monarchy to fulfill his purposes, as he would provide the Messiah through David and his dynasty, establishing an eternal kingdom (see 2 Sam 7:8-16; Matt 21:1-11; Rev 5:5; 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 17:14-20; 33:5; Judg 17:6; 21:25; 1 Sam 8:5-22; 10:1, 24-25; 2 Sam 7:8-16; Ps 89:35-37; Eccl 8:2-5; Isa 33:22; Matt 21:1-11; 22:42-46; 27:11; 1 Tim 1:17; 1 Pet 2:13-14; Rev 5:5; 11:15; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Monarchy<\/h3>\n<p>One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs, so kings reigned either on behalf of the gods or as presumed gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites envied other nations and were not interested in the long-term implications of monarchy, in spite of Samuel’s warnings (1 Sam 8:10-18). Several hundred years of monarchy would prove that Samuel’s apprehensions were justified: Wicked kings eventually led God’s chosen nation into foreign domination and exile. Yet God used the monarchy to fulfill his purposes, as he would provide the Messiah through David and his dynasty, establishing an eternal kingdom (see 2 Sam 7:8-16; Matt 21:1-11; Rev 5:5; 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 17:14-20; 33:5; Judg 17:6; 21:25; 1 Sam 8:5-22; 10:1, 24-25; 2 Sam 7:8-16; Ps 89:35-37; Eccl 8:2-5; Isa 33:22; Matt 21:1-11; 22:42-46; 27:11; 1 Tim 1:17; 1 Pet 2:13-14; Rev 5:5; 11:15; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Monarchy One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs,...","summary_en":"Monarchy One reason the nation of Israel wanted a king was to be “like all the other nations.” The institution of kingship in other ancient Near Eastern nations was almost two thousand years old by the time of Saul and David, especially in the Egyptian and Babylonian empires. Other much smaller nations—such as Philistia, Moab, and Edom—also had kings with permanent bureaucracies and standing armies. Kings were believed to be the chosen instruments through which deities governed human affairs,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":4498,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bethlehem","title_en":"Bethlehem","content_ro":"<h3>BETHLEHEM<\/h3>\n<li>1. “City of David” and the birthplace of Jesus Christ, five miles (8 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. This city is sometimes called Bethlehem-judah (<span>kjv<\/span>) or Ephrath (Gn 35:19; Mi 5:2) to distinguish it from the Bethlehem of Zebulun.<\/li>\n<p>As an early Canaanite settlement, it was associated with the patriarchs, for Rachel died and was buried in its vicinity (Gn 35:16, 19; 48:7). The earliest known historical reference to Bethlehem occurs in the Amarna texts (14th century <span>BC<\/span>) in which battle reports refer to <em>bitil u-lahama<\/em> south of Jerusalem. The name may have meant “house of (the goddess) Lahama.” A branch of Caleb’s family settled there, and Caleb’s son Salma was known as “the father of Bethlehem” (1 Chr 2:51). Bethlehem was the home of a young Levite who served as priest to Micah (Jgs 17:7-8), and of Boaz, Ruth, Obed, and Jesse, the Bethlehemite, David’s father (Ru 4:11, 17; 1 Sm 16:18).<\/p>\n<p>Bethlehem was the birthplace of David (1 Sm 17:12) and the home of one of David’s mighty men, Elhanan (2 Sm 23:24; 1 Chr 11:26). It was the scene of a daring exploit by three of David’s warriors; they broke through the cordon of Philistine marauders occupying Bethlehem to bring David water from the well (or cistern) near the city gate of his hometown (2 Sm 23:14-17). Much later, Bethlehem is mentioned as being adjacent to the village of Geruth-kimham, where Jews fleeing from the Babylonians stayed en route to Egypt (Jer 41:17). People from Bethlehem were among those returning from the Babylonian exile (Ezr 2:21; Neh 7:26; 1 Esd 5:17).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was born there, Bethlehem was only a village (Mt 2:1-16; Lk 2:4-6, 15; Jn 7:42). Under the census decree of Caesar Augustus, Joseph had to go to Bethlehem “because he was of the house and lineage of David” (Lk 2:4). The family may still have had property there. The birth of Jesus possibly took place in a cave in the rocks outside the town. The early Christian writer Justin Martyr thought so, as did Origen some years later. Origen frequently resided in the Holy Land and wrote, “In Bethlehem you are shown the cave where he was born, and within the cave the manger where he was wrapped in swaddling clothes.”<\/p>\n<p>Jerome later described the grotto over which the Emperor Constantine had built a basilica. In excavations in 1934–35, evidence indicated a second period of building in the reign of Justinian (<span>AD<\/span> 527–565), when Constantine’s basilica was extended beyond its original proportions. Steps lead down to the grotto, the rectangular shape of which suggests that Constantine’s builders reshaped the original. But there is no description of the grotto prior to the construction of Constantine’s basilica.<\/p>\n<li>2. Town in Zebulun (Jos 19:15), probably the home of the judge Ibzan (Jgs 12:8-10), an early ruler of Israel. It is identified today with the village of Beit Lahm, some seven miles (11.3 kilometers) northwest of Nazareth.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>BETHLEHEM<\/h3>\n<li>1. “City of David” and the birthplace of Jesus Christ, five miles (8 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. This city is sometimes called Bethlehem-judah (<span>kjv<\/span>) or Ephrath (Gn 35:19; Mi 5:2) to distinguish it from the Bethlehem of Zebulun.<\/li>\n<p>As an early Canaanite settlement, it was associated with the patriarchs, for Rachel died and was buried in its vicinity (Gn 35:16, 19; 48:7). The earliest known historical reference to Bethlehem occurs in the Amarna texts (14th century <span>BC<\/span>) in which battle reports refer to <em>bitil u-lahama<\/em> south of Jerusalem. The name may have meant “house of (the goddess) Lahama.” A branch of Caleb’s family settled there, and Caleb’s son Salma was known as “the father of Bethlehem” (1 Chr 2:51). Bethlehem was the home of a young Levite who served as priest to Micah (Jgs 17:7-8), and of Boaz, Ruth, Obed, and Jesse, the Bethlehemite, David’s father (Ru 4:11, 17; 1 Sm 16:18).<\/p>\n<p>Bethlehem was the birthplace of David (1 Sm 17:12) and the home of one of David’s mighty men, Elhanan (2 Sm 23:24; 1 Chr 11:26). It was the scene of a daring exploit by three of David’s warriors; they broke through the cordon of Philistine marauders occupying Bethlehem to bring David water from the well (or cistern) near the city gate of his hometown (2 Sm 23:14-17). Much later, Bethlehem is mentioned as being adjacent to the village of Geruth-kimham, where Jews fleeing from the Babylonians stayed en route to Egypt (Jer 41:17). People from Bethlehem were among those returning from the Babylonian exile (Ezr 2:21; Neh 7:26; 1 Esd 5:17).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was born there, Bethlehem was only a village (Mt 2:1-16; Lk 2:4-6, 15; Jn 7:42). Under the census decree of Caesar Augustus, Joseph had to go to Bethlehem “because he was of the house and lineage of David” (Lk 2:4). The family may still have had property there. The birth of Jesus possibly took place in a cave in the rocks outside the town. The early Christian writer Justin Martyr thought so, as did Origen some years later. Origen frequently resided in the Holy Land and wrote, “In Bethlehem you are shown the cave where he was born, and within the cave the manger where he was wrapped in swaddling clothes.”<\/p>\n<p>Jerome later described the grotto over which the Emperor Constantine had built a basilica. In excavations in 1934–35, evidence indicated a second period of building in the reign of Justinian (<span>AD<\/span> 527–565), when Constantine’s basilica was extended beyond its original proportions. Steps lead down to the grotto, the rectangular shape of which suggests that Constantine’s builders reshaped the original. But there is no description of the grotto prior to the construction of Constantine’s basilica.<\/p>\n<li>2. Town in Zebulun (Jos 19:15), probably the home of the judge Ibzan (Jgs 12:8-10), an early ruler of Israel. It is identified today with the village of Beit Lahm, some seven miles (11.3 kilometers) northwest of Nazareth.<\/li>","summary_ro":"BETHLEHEM 1. “City of David” and the birthplace of Jesus Christ, five miles (8 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. This city is sometimes called Bethlehem-judah (kjv) or Ephrath (Gn 35:19; Mi 5:2) to distinguish it from the Bethlehem of Zebulun. As an early Canaanite settlement, it was associated with the patriarchs, for Rachel died and was buried in its vicinity (Gn 35:16, 19; 48:7). The earliest known historical reference to Bethlehem occurs in the Amarna texts (14th century BC) in which battle...","summary_en":"BETHLEHEM 1. “City of David” and the birthplace of Jesus Christ, five miles (8 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. This city is sometimes called Bethlehem-judah (kjv) or Ephrath (Gn 35:19; Mi 5:2) to distinguish it from the Bethlehem of Zebulun. As an early Canaanite settlement, it was associated with the patriarchs, for Rachel died and was buried in its vicinity (Gn 35:16, 19; 48:7). The earliest known historical reference to Bethlehem occurs in the Amarna texts (14th century BC) in which battle...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20462,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jonathan","title_en":"Jonathan","content_ro":"<h3>JONATHAN<\/h3>\n<li> 1. Levite from Bethlehem in Judah, a descendant of Gershom, son of Moses (cf. 1 Chr 23:14-15); he was a priest first to Micah in Ephraim and later to Dan’s tribe during the period of the judges (Jgs 17:7-10; 18:30).<\/li>\n<li> 2. Benjamite, the firstborn son of Saul and the father of Meribbaal (1 Sm 14:49; 1 Chr 8:33-34). Jonathan was a valiant warrior (1 Sm 13:2-4; 14:1-15; 2 Sm 1:22) and a devoted friend to David (1 Sm 18:1-5; 19:1-7). He was eventually killed, along with his brothers, by the Philistines at Mt Gilboa (1 Sm 31:2; 1 Chr 10:2).<\/li>\n<li> 3. Son of the high priest Abiathar and one of David’s loyal servants (2 Sm 15:27, 36; 17:17, 20; 1 Kgs 1:42-43).<\/li>\n<li> 4. Shimei’s son and the nephew of David (2 Sm 21:21; 1 Chr 20:7).<\/li>\n<li> 5. Son of Shagee the Hararite and one of David’s mighty warriors (2 Sm 23:33; 1 Chr 11:34).<\/li>\n<li> 6. Judahite, Jada’s son, the brother of Jether, and the father of Peleth and Zaza (1 Chr 2:32-33).<\/li>\n<li> 7. Son of Uzziah and one of David’s treasurers (1 Chr 27:25).<\/li>\n<li> 8. David’s relative who served as counselor and scribe in the royal household (1 Chr 27:32).<\/li>\n<li> 9. Ebed’s father. Ebed returned with Ezra to Judah following the Babylonian captivity (Ezr 8:6).<\/li>\n<li>10. Asahel’s son, who, with Jahzeiah, opposed Ezra’s suggestion that the sons of Israel should divorce the foreign woman they had married since returning to Palestine from exile (Ezr 10:15).<\/li>\n<li>11. Levite, the son of Joiada, the father of Jaddua, and a descendant of Jeshua, the high priest (Neh 12:11). He is perhaps the same man as Jehohanan (or Johanan), Eliashib’s grandson, in Ezra 10:6 (cf. Neh 12:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Jehohanan #4.<\/li>\n<li>12. Priest and the head of Malluch’s house during the days of Joiakim the high priest (Neh 12:14).<\/li>\n<li>13. Priest, father of Zechariah, and a descendant of Asaph (Neh 12:35).<\/li>\n<li>14. Secretary in whose house Jeremiah was at one point imprisoned during the reign of King Zedekiah of Judah (Jer 37:15, 20; 38:26).<\/li>\n<li>15. Kareah’s son who sought protection under Gedaliah (Jer 40:8).<\/li>\n<li>16. Youngest son of Mattathias and brother of Judas Maccabeus. When Judas Maccabeus was killed in battle with Bacchides (1 Macc 9:18), his brother Jonathan became his successor (vv 28-31). Jonathan continued the struggle against Syria for three years with a small band of guerrillas. But the Syrians were busy with an internal struggle for political power, and so, in 157 <span>BC<\/span>, made peace with him. The political machinations in Syria worked to Jonathan’s advantage, and five years later he became high priest in Jerusalem and administrator of Judea (10:1-11). Under his management, Jewish territory and power increased. This occurred partly because Jonathan was able to play the Syrian political rivals against one another. One of these was Tryphon, a pretender to the Syrian throne who saw that his influence was threatened by Jonathan’s power. So in 143 <span>BC<\/span> he decided to overthrow the Jewish leader. Jonathan was taken prisoner by Tryphon through treachery and eventually killed, leaving his brother Simon to lead the Jews (1 Macc 12–13).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JONATHAN<\/h3>\n<li> 1. Levite from Bethlehem in Judah, a descendant of Gershom, son of Moses (cf. 1 Chr 23:14-15); he was a priest first to Micah in Ephraim and later to Dan’s tribe during the period of the judges (Jgs 17:7-10; 18:30).<\/li>\n<li> 2. Benjamite, the firstborn son of Saul and the father of Meribbaal (1 Sm 14:49; 1 Chr 8:33-34). Jonathan was a valiant warrior (1 Sm 13:2-4; 14:1-15; 2 Sm 1:22) and a devoted friend to David (1 Sm 18:1-5; 19:1-7). He was eventually killed, along with his brothers, by the Philistines at Mt Gilboa (1 Sm 31:2; 1 Chr 10:2).<\/li>\n<li> 3. Son of the high priest Abiathar and one of David’s loyal servants (2 Sm 15:27, 36; 17:17, 20; 1 Kgs 1:42-43).<\/li>\n<li> 4. Shimei’s son and the nephew of David (2 Sm 21:21; 1 Chr 20:7).<\/li>\n<li> 5. Son of Shagee the Hararite and one of David’s mighty warriors (2 Sm 23:33; 1 Chr 11:34).<\/li>\n<li> 6. Judahite, Jada’s son, the brother of Jether, and the father of Peleth and Zaza (1 Chr 2:32-33).<\/li>\n<li> 7. Son of Uzziah and one of David’s treasurers (1 Chr 27:25).<\/li>\n<li> 8. David’s relative who served as counselor and scribe in the royal household (1 Chr 27:32).<\/li>\n<li> 9. Ebed’s father. Ebed returned with Ezra to Judah following the Babylonian captivity (Ezr 8:6).<\/li>\n<li>10. Asahel’s son, who, with Jahzeiah, opposed Ezra’s suggestion that the sons of Israel should divorce the foreign woman they had married since returning to Palestine from exile (Ezr 10:15).<\/li>\n<li>11. Levite, the son of Joiada, the father of Jaddua, and a descendant of Jeshua, the high priest (Neh 12:11). He is perhaps the same man as Jehohanan (or Johanan), Eliashib’s grandson, in Ezra 10:6 (cf. Neh 12:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Jehohanan #4.<\/li>\n<li>12. Priest and the head of Malluch’s house during the days of Joiakim the high priest (Neh 12:14).<\/li>\n<li>13. Priest, father of Zechariah, and a descendant of Asaph (Neh 12:35).<\/li>\n<li>14. Secretary in whose house Jeremiah was at one point imprisoned during the reign of King Zedekiah of Judah (Jer 37:15, 20; 38:26).<\/li>\n<li>15. Kareah’s son who sought protection under Gedaliah (Jer 40:8).<\/li>\n<li>16. Youngest son of Mattathias and brother of Judas Maccabeus. When Judas Maccabeus was killed in battle with Bacchides (1 Macc 9:18), his brother Jonathan became his successor (vv 28-31). Jonathan continued the struggle against Syria for three years with a small band of guerrillas. But the Syrians were busy with an internal struggle for political power, and so, in 157 <span>BC<\/span>, made peace with him. The political machinations in Syria worked to Jonathan’s advantage, and five years later he became high priest in Jerusalem and administrator of Judea (10:1-11). Under his management, Jewish territory and power increased. This occurred partly because Jonathan was able to play the Syrian political rivals against one another. One of these was Tryphon, a pretender to the Syrian throne who saw that his influence was threatened by Jonathan’s power. So in 143 <span>BC<\/span> he decided to overthrow the Jewish leader. Jonathan was taken prisoner by Tryphon through treachery and eventually killed, leaving his brother Simon to lead the Jews (1 Macc 12–13).<\/li>","summary_ro":"JONATHAN 1. Levite from Bethlehem in Judah, a descendant of Gershom, son of Moses (cf. 1 Chr 23:14-15); he was a priest first to Micah in Ephraim and later to Dan’s tribe during the period of the judges (Jgs 17:7-10; 18:30). 2. Benjamite, the firstborn son of Saul and the father of Meribbaal (1 Sm 14:49; 1 Chr 8:33-34). Jonathan was a valiant warrior (1 Sm 13:2-4; 14:1-15; 2 Sm 1:22) and a devoted friend to David (1 Sm 18:1-5; 19:1-7). He was eventually killed, along with his brothers, by the...","summary_en":"JONATHAN 1. Levite from Bethlehem in Judah, a descendant of Gershom, son of Moses (cf. 1 Chr 23:14-15); he was a priest first to Micah in Ephraim and later to Dan’s tribe during the period of the judges (Jgs 17:7-10; 18:30). 2. Benjamite, the firstborn son of Saul and the father of Meribbaal (1 Sm 14:49; 1 Chr 8:33-34). Jonathan was a valiant warrior (1 Sm 13:2-4; 14:1-15; 2 Sm 1:22) and a devoted friend to David (1 Sm 18:1-5; 19:1-7). He was eventually killed, along with his brothers, by the...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45916,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:7","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:7-8<\/strong> Not much about this <em>Levite<\/em> fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for <em>another place to live<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:7-8<\/strong> Not much about this <em>Levite<\/em> fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for <em>another place to live<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:7-8 Not much about this Levite fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for another place to live.","summary_en":"17:7-8 Not much about this Levite fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for another place to live.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73542,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:7","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:7-8<\/strong> Not much about this <em>Levite<\/em> fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for <em>another place to live<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:7-8<\/strong> Not much about this <em>Levite<\/em> fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for <em>another place to live<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:7-8 Not much about this Levite fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for another place to live.","summary_en":"17:7-8 Not much about this Levite fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for another place to live.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101168,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:7","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:7-8<\/strong> Not much about this <em>Levite<\/em> fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for <em>another place to live<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:7-8<\/strong> Not much about this <em>Levite<\/em> fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for <em>another place to live<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:7-8 Not much about this Levite fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for another place to live.","summary_en":"17:7-8 Not much about this Levite fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for another place to live.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128794,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:7","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:7-8<\/strong> Not much about this <em>Levite<\/em> fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for <em>another place to live<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:7-8<\/strong> Not much about this <em>Levite<\/em> fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for <em>another place to live<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:7-8 Not much about this Levite fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for another place to live.","summary_en":"17:7-8 Not much about this Levite fits into orthodox biblical categories. Some Levites were priests, while others were temple servants (cp. Num 3–4). Levites were scattered throughout Israel (Gen 49:5-7; Josh 21). This young man, apparently a descendant of Gershom (Judg 18:30; cp. Exod 2:21-22), was based in Judah, but not in a Levitical town, and was looking for another place to live.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":25873,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Minerals* and Metals","title_en":"Minerals* and Metals","content_ro":"<h3>MINERALS* AND METALS<\/h3>\n<p>A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions.<\/p>\n<p>In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for toolmaking goes back to the Stone Age; the quarrying of stone for building is also an ancient craft. In particular, metals, native gold, copper, and meteoric iron were known and used in the Middle East before 4000 <span>BC<\/span>. From 4000 to 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, native silver became known as well as copper and lead ores. The art of smelting was discovered probably almost by accident, resulting in the production of alloys like bronze. Then the reduction of oxidized iron was discovered. From 3000 to 2000 <span>BC<\/span>, important advances were made. Copper sulfides and tin oxides were reduced to metal, and metallic tin and copper became important items of trade.<\/p>\n<p>In the years 2000 to 1000 <span>BC<\/span>, bellows came into use for furnaces, and iron was reduced from its ores and forged. The art of making brass from copper and zinc was discovered about 1500 <span>BC<\/span> but did not become significant till somewhat later. Bronze, known for many centuries, was made sometimes with a high tin content to form speculum for mirrors. By this time the Israelites were settled in the land and the kingdom was established. From 1000 <span>BC<\/span> to the start of the Christian era, the production of metals, especially iron, greatly expanded. A form of steel was made and used for weapons and tools.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of David and Solomon, the Israelites had learned many skills in the preparation and working of metals. Under David, Edom, with its rich copper and iron deposits, was conquered (2 Sm 8:13-14) and there was a lot of activity in the casting of metals in the Jordan Valley (1 Kgs 7:13-14, 45-46). In this activity Solomon had the assistance of Hiram, a Phoenician artisan. Israelite tradition associated the origins of metallurgy with Tubal-cain (Gn 4:22), who is said to have forged all kinds of tools out of bronze and iron. Deuteronomy 8:9 refers to the presence of iron and copper in the land to which Israel was going.<\/p>\n<p>While the Israelites eventually undertook their own metalworking processes, it is evident from 1 Samuel 13:19-22 that on at least one occasion, in the days of Philistine domination, they were obliged to have their agricultural tools made by their enemies. Similarly, the manufacture of cult vessels for Solomon’s temple was supervised by Phoenician artisans (1 Kgs 7:13-50).<\/p>\n<p>Minerals, metals, and precious stones were also important items of trade. Israel was never a land rich in these commodities and was obliged to import a wide variety of them. The visit of the queen of Sheba was partly diplomatic and partly for trade (1 Kgs 10:2, 10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Metals and precious stones featured also among the booty carried off by invaders, notably—but not only—by the Egyptians and Assyrians. These items were in constant demand as they were needed for agriculture and making weapons of war, and for the manufacture of jewelry and items of personal adornment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Minerals\">Minerals<\/p>\n<p>A mineral is an inorganic substance with a definite chemical composition and structure, sometimes occurring alone or sometimes combined with others. “Ore” refers to any mineral or mineral aggregate containing chemical compounds of metals in sufficient quantity and grade to make the extraction of the metal commercially profitable. The essential element, the metal, occurs in nature as a chemical compound, such as a sulfide, an oxide, a carbonate, or some other compound, though the sulfides and oxides are the most common. Minerals exhibit a variety of properties, such as color, luster, crystal form, cleavage, fracture, hardness, and density, which help in their identification and exercise control on the commercial and industrial uses of the particular mineral.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Metals\">Metals<\/p>\n<p>A metal in its pure form is a chemically pure element with its own fixed physical properties, such as density, tensile strength, crystalline structure, melting point, ductility, conductivity, and the like. Metals form alloys with other metals, but this process destroys their purity. In both the ancient world and the modern world the alloy is extremely important.<\/p>\n<p>In order to obtain a pure metal, the ore in which the metal is contained must be smelted—a process known as metallurgy. In ancient Israel pure metals were widely used—among them were gold, silver, iron, and lead. Yet alloys such as bronze and brass were even more widely used.<\/p>\n<h5>Metallurgy and Metal Extraction<\/h5>\n<p>The method of producing hard wrought iron was discovered by the Hittites of Asia Minor about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>, and was taken up by the Philistines (1 Sm 13:19-20). At first, the iron obtained from simple furnaces was drawn off and hammered to drive out slag (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4). Later, the addition of carbon produced an early form of steel.<\/p>\n<p>The lead sulfide ore is heated with lime in a flow of air. A slag with rock particles forms. The air is then cut off and the temperature is raised. Finally, the lead flows free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT refers to the mining of silver (Jb 28:1), the refining of the metal (Zec 13:9; Mal 3:3), the melting of scrap metals or jeweler’s remnants (Ez 22:20-22), and of multiple refinings in a crucible (Prv 17:3; 27:21) to produce refined silver (1 Chr 29:4; Ps 12:6; Prv 10:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Specific Metals<\/h5>\n<p>Although several OT passages suggest that the science of metallurgy was known in biblical times, comparatively little archaeological evidence is available. The processing plants were small and were used for the treatment of copper and iron. The archaeological record is far from complete, but the general impression is that metallic ores were comparatively rare in Palestine; imports must have been considerable. However, numerous molds for casting agricultural and military tools have come to light in excavations. Evidently, some refined metal was available locally, but perhaps most of it was imported. The metal was then heated and poured into the appropriate earthenware or pottery mold.<\/p>\n<p>There are many references to metals in the Bible, but especially to gold, silver, iron, and lead. While copper was widely used, it was normally in the form of its alloys, bronze and brass. There are comparatively few references to tin as such, though it was used in manufacturing bronze. Similarly zinc, though used in the manufacture of brass, is not mentioned in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Gold is referred to hundreds of times in the OT and NT, more frequently than any other metal. It is often mentioned together with silver, and in the majority of cases silver is mentioned first, reflecting a time when gold was less valued.<\/p>\n<p>Gold was used in the manufacture of ornaments for personal use (Gn 24:53; 41:42; Ex 3:22; 11:2; 12:35). Gold was important in worship both in Israel and among the non-Israelites. References to pagan gods occur in several passages (Ex 20:23; 32:2-4; Ps 115:4; Is 2:20; 30:22; 31:7; 40:19; 46:6; Hos 8:4). It seems that the gold was melted down and later engraved so that the replicas could be called both molten images (Ex 32:24) and graven images. The tabernacle and the temple used a great deal of gold. The wooden ark was covered inside and outside with gold (25:11). Other timber pieces were overlaid with gold (25:11; 1 Kgs 6:20-22, 30).<\/p>\n<p>The vessels and utensils used in the tabernacle and temple were made of “pure gold”: the cherubim (Ex 25:18; 37:7), the mercy seat (25:17; 37:6), the candlestick (Ex 25:31; Zec 4:2), various vessels (Ex 25:38; 2 Kgs 24:13), chains to carry the ephod (Ex 28:14), and the bells on the high priest’s robe. The high priest’s crown, ephod, and breastplate were also of gold (39:2-30). The offerings collected for the manufacture of such articles in the wilderness include golden dishes weighing 120 shekels (Nm 7:86). The more lavishly adorned temple apparently used more gold than the tabernacle (1 Kgs 6:20-28; 1 Chr 29:2-7; 2 Chr 3:4–4:22). The number of specific references to gold in the tabernacle and temple is far too great to mention all of them here. The large amount of gold used in the temple was attractive to invaders, who would strip the temple of its gold and carry it off as booty (1 Kgs 14:26; 2 Kgs 16:8; 18:14; 24:13; 25:15; 2 Chr 12:9).<\/p>\n<p>Gold had commercial value. It was imported in Solomon’s day, and up to 666 talents were brought to Israel annually (1 Kgs 10:14). Hiram of Tyre gave Solomon 120 talents of gold (9:14), possibly as a loan. Certainly Solomon used a lot of gold in the temple (10:16-17). Gold was useful, too, for buying off an enemy (2 Kgs 16:8) or simply as tribute (18:14). Evidence of this comes also from the Assyrian annals, where the tribute taken from various lands often included gold.<\/p>\n<p>The possession of gold was not in itself an evil thing, but preoccupation with its accumulation was condemned (Jb 28:15-17; Prv 3:14; 8:10, 19; 16:16). The possession of wisdom and the knowledge of God was of greater value than the possession of much gold (Pss 19:10; 119:72, 127; Prv 20:15). Job rejected trust in gold (Jb 31:24). Gold would not save a man in the day of judgment (Zep 1:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT gold was regarded as perishable (Jas 5:3; 1 Pt 1:18) and as an unnecessary burden to carry (Mt 10:9; Acts 3:6). The wearing of a gold ring was certainly no measure of a man’s worth (Jas 2:2); indeed, both Paul and Peter forbade it (1 Tm 2:9; 1 Pt 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>The use of gold in itself was no measure of piety. The elders of Revelation 4:4 wore golden crowns, but the great harlot was “bedecked with gold” (Rv 17:4), as was the harlot city Babylon (18:16). By contrast, there are some positive statements in the NT about the value of gold (3:18). The wise men brought gold to the infant Jesus as a symbol of his kingly character (Mt 2:11), and the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, was a city of gold, clear as glass (Rv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, silver is mentioned in several connections. Being a precious metal, once considered more precious than gold, it was regularly used in commerce for the payments of debts. Small pieces of silver were weighed into a balance against a standard weight. Abraham bought the cave at Machpelah as a burial place for Sarah for 400 shekels of silver and weighed out the “money” according to the weight’s current value with the merchant (Gn 23:15-16). Joseph’s brothers received 20 pieces of silver in payment for Joseph (37:28), and Benjamin was given a money gift by Joseph in pieces of silver (45:22).<\/p>\n<p>There are other examples of payment in silver for commodities or services (Gn 20:16; Ex 21:32; Lv 27:16; Jos 24:32; Jgs 17:10; 2 Sm 24:24; Neh 7:72; Jb 28:15; Is 7:23; 46:6; Am 2:6; 8:6). Silver was a measure of a man’s wealth (Gn 13:2; 24:35; Ex 25:3; Nm 22:18; Dt 7:25; Zep 1:18; Hg 2:8; Zec 6:11). An unusual comment in 1 Kings 10:21 notes that in Solomon’s day “it was not considered as anything,” apparently because it was so plentiful. It was regularly taken as booty (Jos 6:19; 7:21; 1 Kgs 15:18). Sometimes the drinking cup of an important man was made of silver (Gn 44:2). Sometimes, too, a royal crown was made of gold and silver (Zec 6:11). It was important in the manufacture of personal ornaments (Gn 24:53; Ex 3:22; 12:35), and one example is given of ornaments of gold studded with silver (Sg 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>The process of refining silver was used as a metaphor for the trying of people’s hearts (Ps 66:10; Is 48:10), and the tarnishing and deterioration of silver was a picture of the disintegration of one’s character (Is 1:22; Jer 6:30). God’s Word is pictured as “pure” silver refined and purified in a furnace. Despite silver’s great value, wisdom excels it (Job 28:15; Prv 3:14; 8:19; 10:20; 16:16; 22:1; 25:11).<\/p>\n<p>Native copper is mentioned in Deuteronomy 8:9, though the reference may be to one of its ores. More commonly, biblical references are to brass, the alloy of copper and zinc. However, the chemical analysis of copper-based tools and implements during the middle and late Bronze Ages (c. 2000–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) shows that the material was bronze. References to brass in the <span>kjv<\/span> are therefore to bronze.<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, copper in the form of alloys (bronze and brass) was widely used. Bronze coinage was well known and this may be the sense of Matthew 10:9. The widow’s mite was a tiny bronze coin, the lepton. Bronze utensils and vessels were well known (Rv 9:20; 18:12). The reference to “sounding brass” (<span>kjv<\/span>) in 1 Corinthians 13:1 may actually be to brass, which was a bright, shining alloy, and was used in musical instruments. In the vision of John in Revelation (Rv 1:15; 2:18), the Son of Man had feet of fine brass (<span>nlt<\/span> “bronze”).<\/p>\n<p>The Iron Age began in Palestine about 1200 <span>BC<\/span>, that is, in the days of the judges, though native iron had been known in Egypt in the predynastic period. Archaeological evidence suggests that the smelting of iron ore was discovered by the Hittites about 1400 <span>BC<\/span>. The Philistines seem to have introduced iron to Palestine about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>. In the days of Moses an encounter with the Midianites produced much tribute, among which iron is mentioned (Nm 31:22). When Israel captured Jericho, the spoils included iron (Jos 6:24). Manasseh’s half-tribe also took booty including iron (22:8). In the days of the judges the Canaanites were equipped with chariots of iron (Jos 17:16-18; Jgs 1:19; 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>These early references point to the arrival of iron at the start of the Iron Age. The Philistines enjoyed a local monopoly in its use (1 Sm 13:19-21), and their mighty warrior Goliath was armed with an iron spear (17:7). It was not long, however, before Israel learned the use of iron (2 Sm 12:31; 23:7). Evidently, by Solomon’s time, iron was widely used, because builders of the temple were forbidden to use iron tools (1 Kgs 6:7). The false prophet Zedekiah in Ahab’s day used the horns of iron to thrust toward Syria as he spoke of their defeat (22:11).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah in the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> referred to iron (Is 10:34), and Jeremiah later spoke of the metal in several places (Jer 1:18; 6:28; 11:4; 15:12; 17:1; 28:13-14). Ezekiel made use of an iron plate in one of his symbolic actions (Ez 4:3), referred to iron in his description of smelting (22:18, 20), and listed it as a commodity for trade (27:12, 19). The prophet Amos spoke of threshing instruments of iron (Am 1:3). Micah used iron as a symbol for military might (Mi 4:13). The book of Daniel makes several references to it (Dn 2:33-35, 40-45; 4:15, 23; 7:7, 19).<\/p>\n<p>By Roman times, iron weapons were the regular implements of war. Gates of iron were used to close prisons (Acts 12:10), and in a symbolic usage powerful rulers were said to rule with a rod of iron (Rv 2:27; 9:9; 12:5; 19:15). The term “iron” was used also in some metaphorical expressions. The smelting of iron was a symbol of testing and suffering (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4; Ez 22:18), a pillar of iron was symbolic of strength (Jer 1:18), and an iron rod of harsh rule (Ps 2:9; Rv 2:27; 12:5; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Coppersmith; Goldsmith; Ironsmith; Mason, Masonry; Silversmith; Stones, Precious.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MINERALS* AND METALS<\/h3>\n<p>A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions.<\/p>\n<p>In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for toolmaking goes back to the Stone Age; the quarrying of stone for building is also an ancient craft. In particular, metals, native gold, copper, and meteoric iron were known and used in the Middle East before 4000 <span>BC<\/span>. From 4000 to 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, native silver became known as well as copper and lead ores. The art of smelting was discovered probably almost by accident, resulting in the production of alloys like bronze. Then the reduction of oxidized iron was discovered. From 3000 to 2000 <span>BC<\/span>, important advances were made. Copper sulfides and tin oxides were reduced to metal, and metallic tin and copper became important items of trade.<\/p>\n<p>In the years 2000 to 1000 <span>BC<\/span>, bellows came into use for furnaces, and iron was reduced from its ores and forged. The art of making brass from copper and zinc was discovered about 1500 <span>BC<\/span> but did not become significant till somewhat later. Bronze, known for many centuries, was made sometimes with a high tin content to form speculum for mirrors. By this time the Israelites were settled in the land and the kingdom was established. From 1000 <span>BC<\/span> to the start of the Christian era, the production of metals, especially iron, greatly expanded. A form of steel was made and used for weapons and tools.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of David and Solomon, the Israelites had learned many skills in the preparation and working of metals. Under David, Edom, with its rich copper and iron deposits, was conquered (2 Sm 8:13-14) and there was a lot of activity in the casting of metals in the Jordan Valley (1 Kgs 7:13-14, 45-46). In this activity Solomon had the assistance of Hiram, a Phoenician artisan. Israelite tradition associated the origins of metallurgy with Tubal-cain (Gn 4:22), who is said to have forged all kinds of tools out of bronze and iron. Deuteronomy 8:9 refers to the presence of iron and copper in the land to which Israel was going.<\/p>\n<p>While the Israelites eventually undertook their own metalworking processes, it is evident from 1 Samuel 13:19-22 that on at least one occasion, in the days of Philistine domination, they were obliged to have their agricultural tools made by their enemies. Similarly, the manufacture of cult vessels for Solomon’s temple was supervised by Phoenician artisans (1 Kgs 7:13-50).<\/p>\n<p>Minerals, metals, and precious stones were also important items of trade. Israel was never a land rich in these commodities and was obliged to import a wide variety of them. The visit of the queen of Sheba was partly diplomatic and partly for trade (1 Kgs 10:2, 10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Metals and precious stones featured also among the booty carried off by invaders, notably—but not only—by the Egyptians and Assyrians. These items were in constant demand as they were needed for agriculture and making weapons of war, and for the manufacture of jewelry and items of personal adornment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Minerals\">Minerals<\/p>\n<p>A mineral is an inorganic substance with a definite chemical composition and structure, sometimes occurring alone or sometimes combined with others. “Ore” refers to any mineral or mineral aggregate containing chemical compounds of metals in sufficient quantity and grade to make the extraction of the metal commercially profitable. The essential element, the metal, occurs in nature as a chemical compound, such as a sulfide, an oxide, a carbonate, or some other compound, though the sulfides and oxides are the most common. Minerals exhibit a variety of properties, such as color, luster, crystal form, cleavage, fracture, hardness, and density, which help in their identification and exercise control on the commercial and industrial uses of the particular mineral.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Metals\">Metals<\/p>\n<p>A metal in its pure form is a chemically pure element with its own fixed physical properties, such as density, tensile strength, crystalline structure, melting point, ductility, conductivity, and the like. Metals form alloys with other metals, but this process destroys their purity. In both the ancient world and the modern world the alloy is extremely important.<\/p>\n<p>In order to obtain a pure metal, the ore in which the metal is contained must be smelted—a process known as metallurgy. In ancient Israel pure metals were widely used—among them were gold, silver, iron, and lead. Yet alloys such as bronze and brass were even more widely used.<\/p>\n<h5>Metallurgy and Metal Extraction<\/h5>\n<p>The method of producing hard wrought iron was discovered by the Hittites of Asia Minor about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>, and was taken up by the Philistines (1 Sm 13:19-20). At first, the iron obtained from simple furnaces was drawn off and hammered to drive out slag (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4). Later, the addition of carbon produced an early form of steel.<\/p>\n<p>The lead sulfide ore is heated with lime in a flow of air. A slag with rock particles forms. The air is then cut off and the temperature is raised. Finally, the lead flows free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT refers to the mining of silver (Jb 28:1), the refining of the metal (Zec 13:9; Mal 3:3), the melting of scrap metals or jeweler’s remnants (Ez 22:20-22), and of multiple refinings in a crucible (Prv 17:3; 27:21) to produce refined silver (1 Chr 29:4; Ps 12:6; Prv 10:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Specific Metals<\/h5>\n<p>Although several OT passages suggest that the science of metallurgy was known in biblical times, comparatively little archaeological evidence is available. The processing plants were small and were used for the treatment of copper and iron. The archaeological record is far from complete, but the general impression is that metallic ores were comparatively rare in Palestine; imports must have been considerable. However, numerous molds for casting agricultural and military tools have come to light in excavations. Evidently, some refined metal was available locally, but perhaps most of it was imported. The metal was then heated and poured into the appropriate earthenware or pottery mold.<\/p>\n<p>There are many references to metals in the Bible, but especially to gold, silver, iron, and lead. While copper was widely used, it was normally in the form of its alloys, bronze and brass. There are comparatively few references to tin as such, though it was used in manufacturing bronze. Similarly zinc, though used in the manufacture of brass, is not mentioned in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Gold is referred to hundreds of times in the OT and NT, more frequently than any other metal. It is often mentioned together with silver, and in the majority of cases silver is mentioned first, reflecting a time when gold was less valued.<\/p>\n<p>Gold was used in the manufacture of ornaments for personal use (Gn 24:53; 41:42; Ex 3:22; 11:2; 12:35). Gold was important in worship both in Israel and among the non-Israelites. References to pagan gods occur in several passages (Ex 20:23; 32:2-4; Ps 115:4; Is 2:20; 30:22; 31:7; 40:19; 46:6; Hos 8:4). It seems that the gold was melted down and later engraved so that the replicas could be called both molten images (Ex 32:24) and graven images. The tabernacle and the temple used a great deal of gold. The wooden ark was covered inside and outside with gold (25:11). Other timber pieces were overlaid with gold (25:11; 1 Kgs 6:20-22, 30).<\/p>\n<p>The vessels and utensils used in the tabernacle and temple were made of “pure gold”: the cherubim (Ex 25:18; 37:7), the mercy seat (25:17; 37:6), the candlestick (Ex 25:31; Zec 4:2), various vessels (Ex 25:38; 2 Kgs 24:13), chains to carry the ephod (Ex 28:14), and the bells on the high priest’s robe. The high priest’s crown, ephod, and breastplate were also of gold (39:2-30). The offerings collected for the manufacture of such articles in the wilderness include golden dishes weighing 120 shekels (Nm 7:86). The more lavishly adorned temple apparently used more gold than the tabernacle (1 Kgs 6:20-28; 1 Chr 29:2-7; 2 Chr 3:4–4:22). The number of specific references to gold in the tabernacle and temple is far too great to mention all of them here. The large amount of gold used in the temple was attractive to invaders, who would strip the temple of its gold and carry it off as booty (1 Kgs 14:26; 2 Kgs 16:8; 18:14; 24:13; 25:15; 2 Chr 12:9).<\/p>\n<p>Gold had commercial value. It was imported in Solomon’s day, and up to 666 talents were brought to Israel annually (1 Kgs 10:14). Hiram of Tyre gave Solomon 120 talents of gold (9:14), possibly as a loan. Certainly Solomon used a lot of gold in the temple (10:16-17). Gold was useful, too, for buying off an enemy (2 Kgs 16:8) or simply as tribute (18:14). Evidence of this comes also from the Assyrian annals, where the tribute taken from various lands often included gold.<\/p>\n<p>The possession of gold was not in itself an evil thing, but preoccupation with its accumulation was condemned (Jb 28:15-17; Prv 3:14; 8:10, 19; 16:16). The possession of wisdom and the knowledge of God was of greater value than the possession of much gold (Pss 19:10; 119:72, 127; Prv 20:15). Job rejected trust in gold (Jb 31:24). Gold would not save a man in the day of judgment (Zep 1:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT gold was regarded as perishable (Jas 5:3; 1 Pt 1:18) and as an unnecessary burden to carry (Mt 10:9; Acts 3:6). The wearing of a gold ring was certainly no measure of a man’s worth (Jas 2:2); indeed, both Paul and Peter forbade it (1 Tm 2:9; 1 Pt 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>The use of gold in itself was no measure of piety. The elders of Revelation 4:4 wore golden crowns, but the great harlot was “bedecked with gold” (Rv 17:4), as was the harlot city Babylon (18:16). By contrast, there are some positive statements in the NT about the value of gold (3:18). The wise men brought gold to the infant Jesus as a symbol of his kingly character (Mt 2:11), and the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, was a city of gold, clear as glass (Rv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, silver is mentioned in several connections. Being a precious metal, once considered more precious than gold, it was regularly used in commerce for the payments of debts. Small pieces of silver were weighed into a balance against a standard weight. Abraham bought the cave at Machpelah as a burial place for Sarah for 400 shekels of silver and weighed out the “money” according to the weight’s current value with the merchant (Gn 23:15-16). Joseph’s brothers received 20 pieces of silver in payment for Joseph (37:28), and Benjamin was given a money gift by Joseph in pieces of silver (45:22).<\/p>\n<p>There are other examples of payment in silver for commodities or services (Gn 20:16; Ex 21:32; Lv 27:16; Jos 24:32; Jgs 17:10; 2 Sm 24:24; Neh 7:72; Jb 28:15; Is 7:23; 46:6; Am 2:6; 8:6). Silver was a measure of a man’s wealth (Gn 13:2; 24:35; Ex 25:3; Nm 22:18; Dt 7:25; Zep 1:18; Hg 2:8; Zec 6:11). An unusual comment in 1 Kings 10:21 notes that in Solomon’s day “it was not considered as anything,” apparently because it was so plentiful. It was regularly taken as booty (Jos 6:19; 7:21; 1 Kgs 15:18). Sometimes the drinking cup of an important man was made of silver (Gn 44:2). Sometimes, too, a royal crown was made of gold and silver (Zec 6:11). It was important in the manufacture of personal ornaments (Gn 24:53; Ex 3:22; 12:35), and one example is given of ornaments of gold studded with silver (Sg 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>The process of refining silver was used as a metaphor for the trying of people’s hearts (Ps 66:10; Is 48:10), and the tarnishing and deterioration of silver was a picture of the disintegration of one’s character (Is 1:22; Jer 6:30). God’s Word is pictured as “pure” silver refined and purified in a furnace. Despite silver’s great value, wisdom excels it (Job 28:15; Prv 3:14; 8:19; 10:20; 16:16; 22:1; 25:11).<\/p>\n<p>Native copper is mentioned in Deuteronomy 8:9, though the reference may be to one of its ores. More commonly, biblical references are to brass, the alloy of copper and zinc. However, the chemical analysis of copper-based tools and implements during the middle and late Bronze Ages (c. 2000–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) shows that the material was bronze. References to brass in the <span>kjv<\/span> are therefore to bronze.<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, copper in the form of alloys (bronze and brass) was widely used. Bronze coinage was well known and this may be the sense of Matthew 10:9. The widow’s mite was a tiny bronze coin, the lepton. Bronze utensils and vessels were well known (Rv 9:20; 18:12). The reference to “sounding brass” (<span>kjv<\/span>) in 1 Corinthians 13:1 may actually be to brass, which was a bright, shining alloy, and was used in musical instruments. In the vision of John in Revelation (Rv 1:15; 2:18), the Son of Man had feet of fine brass (<span>nlt<\/span> “bronze”).<\/p>\n<p>The Iron Age began in Palestine about 1200 <span>BC<\/span>, that is, in the days of the judges, though native iron had been known in Egypt in the predynastic period. Archaeological evidence suggests that the smelting of iron ore was discovered by the Hittites about 1400 <span>BC<\/span>. The Philistines seem to have introduced iron to Palestine about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>. In the days of Moses an encounter with the Midianites produced much tribute, among which iron is mentioned (Nm 31:22). When Israel captured Jericho, the spoils included iron (Jos 6:24). Manasseh’s half-tribe also took booty including iron (22:8). In the days of the judges the Canaanites were equipped with chariots of iron (Jos 17:16-18; Jgs 1:19; 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>These early references point to the arrival of iron at the start of the Iron Age. The Philistines enjoyed a local monopoly in its use (1 Sm 13:19-21), and their mighty warrior Goliath was armed with an iron spear (17:7). It was not long, however, before Israel learned the use of iron (2 Sm 12:31; 23:7). Evidently, by Solomon’s time, iron was widely used, because builders of the temple were forbidden to use iron tools (1 Kgs 6:7). The false prophet Zedekiah in Ahab’s day used the horns of iron to thrust toward Syria as he spoke of their defeat (22:11).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah in the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> referred to iron (Is 10:34), and Jeremiah later spoke of the metal in several places (Jer 1:18; 6:28; 11:4; 15:12; 17:1; 28:13-14). Ezekiel made use of an iron plate in one of his symbolic actions (Ez 4:3), referred to iron in his description of smelting (22:18, 20), and listed it as a commodity for trade (27:12, 19). The prophet Amos spoke of threshing instruments of iron (Am 1:3). Micah used iron as a symbol for military might (Mi 4:13). The book of Daniel makes several references to it (Dn 2:33-35, 40-45; 4:15, 23; 7:7, 19).<\/p>\n<p>By Roman times, iron weapons were the regular implements of war. Gates of iron were used to close prisons (Acts 12:10), and in a symbolic usage powerful rulers were said to rule with a rod of iron (Rv 2:27; 9:9; 12:5; 19:15). The term “iron” was used also in some metaphorical expressions. The smelting of iron was a symbol of testing and suffering (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4; Ez 22:18), a pillar of iron was symbolic of strength (Jer 1:18), and an iron rod of harsh rule (Ps 2:9; Rv 2:27; 12:5; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Coppersmith; Goldsmith; Ironsmith; Mason, Masonry; Silversmith; Stones, Precious.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MINERALS* AND METALS A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions. In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for t...","summary_en":"MINERALS* AND METALS A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions. In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for t...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":23020,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tribe of Levi","title_en":"Tribe of Levi","content_ro":"<h3>LEVI, Tribe of<\/h3>\n<p>Israelite tribe taking its name from the third son of Leah and Jacob (Gn 29:34). The meaning of the name (“attached”) is a pun on Leah’s position as an unloved wife: now that she has borne three sons to Jacob, surely he will be “attached” to her. Elsewhere, by a similar pun, the tribe of Levi is described as “attached” to Aaron (Nm 18:2).<\/p>\n<p>Levi appears with Simeon at the treacherous slaughter of the inhabitants of Canaanite Shechem (Gn 34:25-29). This brings Jacob’s rebuke at the time (v 30) and his deathbed curse (49:5-7), foretelling that the descendants of Levi and Simeon will be scattered throughout Israel. This does not seem a likely background for God’s priestly tribe, but so it proved to be, for it was as a priestly tribe that Levi was scattered through Israel, while Simeon merely melted into the desert south of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>At first Levi was apparently a “secular” tribe like any other. True, Moses and Aaron were of Levi (Ex 2:1), but no stress is laid on this. Levi’s later position was God’s reward for its costly faithfulness when Israel rebelled against God (32:25-29); this inaugurated the “covenant with Levi” (Nm 18:19). Henceforth the tribe of Levi would be accepted by God instead of Israel’s firstborn sons, who belonged to him by the law of “firstfruits” (3:11-13). Levi, as a tribe, could therefore own no tribal territory: God himself was their inheritance (18:20). However, they were given 48 villages, with their pasturelands, in which to live (Jos 21:1-42). These included the six cities of refuge (ch 20).<\/p>\n<p>Since Levi could not amass wealth, the tribe was to be supported by gifts and tithes (Nm 18:21); like the widow, orphan, and stranger, they were commended to the care of God’s people (Dt 14:29). Since they were God’s tribe, Joab was unwilling to include Levi in David’s census (1 Chr 21:6; cf. Nm 1:49). Naturally, Levi did not serve in war except in a religious capacity (2 Chr 20:21). Their service pertained to the meeting tent (Nm 1:50-53) and later the temple (1 Chr 23:25-32). Within Levi the Bible makes a clear distinction between (1) the high priest (sometimes merely called “the priest,” 1 Sm 1:9), who came from one branch of Aaron’s family; (2) the rest of the priests, also of particular families; and (3) a mass of subordinate Levites, who had lesser tasks. In early days they packed and moved the portable tent of meeting (Nm 1:50-51), as well as did other duties; in later days they served as porters and choristers (1 Chr 16:42). The duties of Levi are summarized in Deuteronomy 33:8-11, where oracular guidance and theological instruction are just as important as their priestly duties. It is therefore no surprise that Jehoshaphat later used them as teachers of law (2 Chr 17:7-9). Nevertheless, the ordinary Israelite thought of them primarily as priestly (Jgs 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>Later references to the lasting covenant with Levi are found in Jeremiah 33:20-26 and Malachi 3:3-4. Members of the tribe returned from the exile (Ezr 2:36-42), apparently more coming from the priestly than the wider Levitical section. Barnabas, in NT days, belonged to the tribe of Levi (Acts 4:36). Indeed, among modern Jews, wherever the surname Levy is found, a member of the tribe probably lives on.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priests and Levites.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEVI, Tribe of<\/h3>\n<p>Israelite tribe taking its name from the third son of Leah and Jacob (Gn 29:34). The meaning of the name (“attached”) is a pun on Leah’s position as an unloved wife: now that she has borne three sons to Jacob, surely he will be “attached” to her. Elsewhere, by a similar pun, the tribe of Levi is described as “attached” to Aaron (Nm 18:2).<\/p>\n<p>Levi appears with Simeon at the treacherous slaughter of the inhabitants of Canaanite Shechem (Gn 34:25-29). This brings Jacob’s rebuke at the time (v 30) and his deathbed curse (49:5-7), foretelling that the descendants of Levi and Simeon will be scattered throughout Israel. This does not seem a likely background for God’s priestly tribe, but so it proved to be, for it was as a priestly tribe that Levi was scattered through Israel, while Simeon merely melted into the desert south of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>At first Levi was apparently a “secular” tribe like any other. True, Moses and Aaron were of Levi (Ex 2:1), but no stress is laid on this. Levi’s later position was God’s reward for its costly faithfulness when Israel rebelled against God (32:25-29); this inaugurated the “covenant with Levi” (Nm 18:19). Henceforth the tribe of Levi would be accepted by God instead of Israel’s firstborn sons, who belonged to him by the law of “firstfruits” (3:11-13). Levi, as a tribe, could therefore own no tribal territory: God himself was their inheritance (18:20). However, they were given 48 villages, with their pasturelands, in which to live (Jos 21:1-42). These included the six cities of refuge (ch 20).<\/p>\n<p>Since Levi could not amass wealth, the tribe was to be supported by gifts and tithes (Nm 18:21); like the widow, orphan, and stranger, they were commended to the care of God’s people (Dt 14:29). Since they were God’s tribe, Joab was unwilling to include Levi in David’s census (1 Chr 21:6; cf. Nm 1:49). Naturally, Levi did not serve in war except in a religious capacity (2 Chr 20:21). Their service pertained to the meeting tent (Nm 1:50-53) and later the temple (1 Chr 23:25-32). Within Levi the Bible makes a clear distinction between (1) the high priest (sometimes merely called “the priest,” 1 Sm 1:9), who came from one branch of Aaron’s family; (2) the rest of the priests, also of particular families; and (3) a mass of subordinate Levites, who had lesser tasks. In early days they packed and moved the portable tent of meeting (Nm 1:50-51), as well as did other duties; in later days they served as porters and choristers (1 Chr 16:42). The duties of Levi are summarized in Deuteronomy 33:8-11, where oracular guidance and theological instruction are just as important as their priestly duties. It is therefore no surprise that Jehoshaphat later used them as teachers of law (2 Chr 17:7-9). Nevertheless, the ordinary Israelite thought of them primarily as priestly (Jgs 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>Later references to the lasting covenant with Levi are found in Jeremiah 33:20-26 and Malachi 3:3-4. Members of the tribe returned from the exile (Ezr 2:36-42), apparently more coming from the priestly than the wider Levitical section. Barnabas, in NT days, belonged to the tribe of Levi (Acts 4:36). Indeed, among modern Jews, wherever the surname Levy is found, a member of the tribe probably lives on.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priests and Levites.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEVI, Tribe of Israelite tribe taking its name from the third son of Leah and Jacob (Gn 29:34). The meaning of the name (“attached”) is a pun on Leah’s position as an unloved wife: now that she has borne three sons to Jacob, surely he will be “attached” to her. Elsewhere, by a similar pun, the tribe of Levi is described as “attached” to Aaron (Nm 18:2). Levi appears with Simeon at the treacherous slaughter of the inhabitants of Canaanite Shechem (Gn 34:25-29). This brings Jacob’s rebuke at th...","summary_en":"LEVI, Tribe of Israelite tribe taking its name from the third son of Leah and Jacob (Gn 29:34). The meaning of the name (“attached”) is a pun on Leah’s position as an unloved wife: now that she has borne three sons to Jacob, surely he will be “attached” to her. Elsewhere, by a similar pun, the tribe of Levi is described as “attached” to Aaron (Nm 18:2). Levi appears with Simeon at the treacherous slaughter of the inhabitants of Canaanite Shechem (Gn 34:25-29). This brings Jacob’s rebuke at th...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28534,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ordination Ordain","title_en":"Ordination Ordain","content_ro":"<h3>ORDAIN, ORDINATION<\/h3>\n<p>The act of officially investing someone with religious authority. Several synonyms are “appoint,” “institute,” “make,” and “establish.” In current usage, the words “ordain” and “ordination” are applied to persons, signifying selection and appointment to God’s service.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the OT, emphasis falls upon God’s choosing and appointing whom he wills. Priestly functions passed very early from the head of each household to the divinely chosen tribe of Levi (Dt 33:8-11; Jgs 17:13). Through all subsequent clan rivalries—“Zadokite,” “Aaronic,” “Hasmonean”—this claim to inherited privilege persisted. Divine appointment through Levi was traced back to Moses (Ex 4:14; 28:41; 29:9), claimed for the Ephraimite Samuel (1 Chr 6:28), and still celebrated by Sirach (Ecclus 45:6-22, c. 180 <span>BC<\/span>). As the book of Hebrews states (Heb 5:1, 4), no one takes the honor upon himself; he is “called by God, as Aaron was,” by birth into an inherited status.<\/p>\n<p>The first Levites were presented at the tabernacle in the presence of the people, and acknowledged by “the laying on of hands” (Nm 8:10, 14-18). Similarly, Moses received instructions for the week-long consecration of Aaron and his sons, with elaborate sacrifices, vestments, anointing, and ritual (Ex 29; Lv 8). In both cases, the careful preservation of these detailed instructions suggests that the ceremonies were retained, to some degree, in later years, though no repetition is recorded.<\/p>\n<p>Alongside the priests there existed establishments of recognized prophets, or prophetic communities, sometimes with royal patronage (1 Sm 10:5; 1 Kgs 1:9-10; 18:17-19; 20:35; 22:5-28; 2 Kgs 2:3-7; 23:2). The line of prophecy was also traced back to earliest days (see Gn 20:7; Dt 34:10; Jgs 4:4; Jer 7:25). The phrase “sons of the prophets,” and an obscure hint in Jeremiah 35:4, may imply that prophecy, like priesthood, was sometimes hereditary, but the manner of appointment and installation is unknown. The outstanding prophets were frequently opposed to the prophetic “schools” (Elijah, 1 Kgs 17; Micaiah, 1 Kgs 22:5-28; Jeremiah, Jer 27:14-16; 28). Such men were appointed by direct, divine call (1 Kgs 17:1; 21:17; Is 6; Jer 1; Am 7:15), though by God’s instruction Elisha was called and anointed by Elijah (1 Kgs 19:16; cf. Is 61:1). Authentication of the prophet’s message lay not in appropriate installation ceremonies but in its self-evident truth; in the case of predictions, in their fulfillment (1 Kgs 22:13-14, 26-28; Jer 28:5-9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Christian ordination is also a matter of divine choice. Neither Jesus, nor any disciple, came from the professional religious classes. In ordaining the 12 apostles, Jesus called to him those whom he desired, later insisting, “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you” (Jn 15:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). The selection of Matthias rested upon prayer and the divine lot (Acts 1:24-26). Paul contended that he had been set apart by God before he was born and did not receive his apostleship from or through men (Gal 1:1, 15). Paul and Barnabas were commissioned by direction of the Spirit during worship, probably through a Christian prophet. Similarly, Timothy was first chosen as assistant to Paul by prophetic utterances that pointed to him (1 Tm 1:18; 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>At Corinth, various ministries of speaking, teaching, healing, and administration were directly conferred as gifts of the Spirit, who apportions as he sees fit (1 Cor 12:8-11, 28; cf. Eph 4:11). Elders of the church at Ephesus were made guardians of the flock by the Holy Spirit (Acts 20:28). The divine prerogative is everywhere clear: any attempt to obtain the privilege of ministry by personal initiative and unworthy means meets with sharpest condemnation (8:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, the assembled church “nominated” Barsabbas and Matthias before submitting the final choice to God (Acts 1:15, 23). The believers chose the seven servers, then presented them to the apostles (6:2-6). An assembled church, at the Spirit’s command, commissioned and sent off Paul and Barnabas (13:3). Paul and Barnabas themselves appointed elders (14:23), as Titus is instructed to do (Ti 1:5), and probably Timothy also (1 Tm 5:22). Elders at Lystra and Iconium, with Paul, obeying a Christian prophet, appointed Timothy to leadership (1 Tm 4:14; 2 Tm 1:6). By the time letters were written to Timothy and Titus, elaborate lists of qualifications were required for church leaders (1 Tm 3:1-13; 2 Tm 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>The congregation of believers also participated in selecting leaders. This could have involved prayer, fasting, and casting lots (Acts 1:26; 6:6; 13:2-3; 14:23); sometimes “selection by hands” (Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">cheirotonein<\/span><em>,<\/em> originally meaning “election by raising hands,” later “selection by pointing to”; cf. Acts 14:23; 2 Cor 8:19); and sometimes selection by group choice (Acts 1:15, 23; 6:2-5; 13:3; 16:2; 1 Tm 4:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Foreordination.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ORDAIN, ORDINATION<\/h3>\n<p>The act of officially investing someone with religious authority. Several synonyms are “appoint,” “institute,” “make,” and “establish.” In current usage, the words “ordain” and “ordination” are applied to persons, signifying selection and appointment to God’s service.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the OT, emphasis falls upon God’s choosing and appointing whom he wills. Priestly functions passed very early from the head of each household to the divinely chosen tribe of Levi (Dt 33:8-11; Jgs 17:13). Through all subsequent clan rivalries—“Zadokite,” “Aaronic,” “Hasmonean”—this claim to inherited privilege persisted. Divine appointment through Levi was traced back to Moses (Ex 4:14; 28:41; 29:9), claimed for the Ephraimite Samuel (1 Chr 6:28), and still celebrated by Sirach (Ecclus 45:6-22, c. 180 <span>BC<\/span>). As the book of Hebrews states (Heb 5:1, 4), no one takes the honor upon himself; he is “called by God, as Aaron was,” by birth into an inherited status.<\/p>\n<p>The first Levites were presented at the tabernacle in the presence of the people, and acknowledged by “the laying on of hands” (Nm 8:10, 14-18). Similarly, Moses received instructions for the week-long consecration of Aaron and his sons, with elaborate sacrifices, vestments, anointing, and ritual (Ex 29; Lv 8). In both cases, the careful preservation of these detailed instructions suggests that the ceremonies were retained, to some degree, in later years, though no repetition is recorded.<\/p>\n<p>Alongside the priests there existed establishments of recognized prophets, or prophetic communities, sometimes with royal patronage (1 Sm 10:5; 1 Kgs 1:9-10; 18:17-19; 20:35; 22:5-28; 2 Kgs 2:3-7; 23:2). The line of prophecy was also traced back to earliest days (see Gn 20:7; Dt 34:10; Jgs 4:4; Jer 7:25). The phrase “sons of the prophets,” and an obscure hint in Jeremiah 35:4, may imply that prophecy, like priesthood, was sometimes hereditary, but the manner of appointment and installation is unknown. The outstanding prophets were frequently opposed to the prophetic “schools” (Elijah, 1 Kgs 17; Micaiah, 1 Kgs 22:5-28; Jeremiah, Jer 27:14-16; 28). Such men were appointed by direct, divine call (1 Kgs 17:1; 21:17; Is 6; Jer 1; Am 7:15), though by God’s instruction Elisha was called and anointed by Elijah (1 Kgs 19:16; cf. Is 61:1). Authentication of the prophet’s message lay not in appropriate installation ceremonies but in its self-evident truth; in the case of predictions, in their fulfillment (1 Kgs 22:13-14, 26-28; Jer 28:5-9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Christian ordination is also a matter of divine choice. Neither Jesus, nor any disciple, came from the professional religious classes. In ordaining the 12 apostles, Jesus called to him those whom he desired, later insisting, “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you” (Jn 15:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). The selection of Matthias rested upon prayer and the divine lot (Acts 1:24-26). Paul contended that he had been set apart by God before he was born and did not receive his apostleship from or through men (Gal 1:1, 15). Paul and Barnabas were commissioned by direction of the Spirit during worship, probably through a Christian prophet. Similarly, Timothy was first chosen as assistant to Paul by prophetic utterances that pointed to him (1 Tm 1:18; 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>At Corinth, various ministries of speaking, teaching, healing, and administration were directly conferred as gifts of the Spirit, who apportions as he sees fit (1 Cor 12:8-11, 28; cf. Eph 4:11). Elders of the church at Ephesus were made guardians of the flock by the Holy Spirit (Acts 20:28). The divine prerogative is everywhere clear: any attempt to obtain the privilege of ministry by personal initiative and unworthy means meets with sharpest condemnation (8:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, the assembled church “nominated” Barsabbas and Matthias before submitting the final choice to God (Acts 1:15, 23). The believers chose the seven servers, then presented them to the apostles (6:2-6). An assembled church, at the Spirit’s command, commissioned and sent off Paul and Barnabas (13:3). Paul and Barnabas themselves appointed elders (14:23), as Titus is instructed to do (Ti 1:5), and probably Timothy also (1 Tm 5:22). Elders at Lystra and Iconium, with Paul, obeying a Christian prophet, appointed Timothy to leadership (1 Tm 4:14; 2 Tm 1:6). By the time letters were written to Timothy and Titus, elaborate lists of qualifications were required for church leaders (1 Tm 3:1-13; 2 Tm 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>The congregation of believers also participated in selecting leaders. This could have involved prayer, fasting, and casting lots (Acts 1:26; 6:6; 13:2-3; 14:23); sometimes “selection by hands” (Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">cheirotonein<\/span><em>,<\/em> originally meaning “election by raising hands,” later “selection by pointing to”; cf. Acts 14:23; 2 Cor 8:19); and sometimes selection by group choice (Acts 1:15, 23; 6:2-5; 13:3; 16:2; 1 Tm 4:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Foreordination.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ORDAIN, ORDINATION The act of officially investing someone with religious authority. Several synonyms are “appoint,” “institute,” “make,” and “establish.” In current usage, the words “ordain” and “ordination” are applied to persons, signifying selection and appointment to God’s service. In the Old Testament Throughout the OT, emphasis falls upon God’s choosing and appointing whom he wills. Priestly functions passed very early from the head of each household to the divinely chosen tribe of Lev...","summary_en":"ORDAIN, ORDINATION The act of officially investing someone with religious authority. Several synonyms are “appoint,” “institute,” “make,” and “establish.” In current usage, the words “ordain” and “ordination” are applied to persons, signifying selection and appointment to God’s service. In the Old Testament Throughout the OT, emphasis falls upon God’s choosing and appointing whom he wills. Priestly functions passed very early from the head of each household to the divinely chosen tribe of Lev...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45917,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:13","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:13<\/strong> The contract <em>priest<\/em>, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> would <em>bless<\/em> him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed <em>Levite<\/em> could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:13<\/strong> The contract <em>priest<\/em>, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> would <em>bless<\/em> him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed <em>Levite<\/em> could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:13 The contract priest, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that the Lord would bless him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed Levite could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).","summary_en":"17:13 The contract priest, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that the Lord would bless him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed Levite could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73543,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:13","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:13<\/strong> The contract <em>priest<\/em>, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> would <em>bless<\/em> him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed <em>Levite<\/em> could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:13<\/strong> The contract <em>priest<\/em>, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> would <em>bless<\/em> him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed <em>Levite<\/em> could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:13 The contract priest, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that the Lord would bless him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed Levite could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).","summary_en":"17:13 The contract priest, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that the Lord would bless him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed Levite could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101169,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:13","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:13<\/strong> The contract <em>priest<\/em>, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> would <em>bless<\/em> him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed <em>Levite<\/em> could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:13<\/strong> The contract <em>priest<\/em>, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> would <em>bless<\/em> him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed <em>Levite<\/em> could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:13 The contract priest, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that the Lord would bless him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed Levite could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).","summary_en":"17:13 The contract priest, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that the Lord would bless him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed Levite could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128795,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Judecătorii 17:13","title_en":"Study Note: Judecătorii 17:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>17:13<\/strong> The contract <em>priest<\/em>, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> would <em>bless<\/em> him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed <em>Levite<\/em> could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>17:13<\/strong> The contract <em>priest<\/em>, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> would <em>bless<\/em> him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed <em>Levite<\/em> could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"17:13 The contract priest, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that the Lord would bless him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed Levite could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).","summary_en":"17:13 The contract priest, in Micah’s view, conferred some additional legitimacy on the shrine, though his expectation that the Lord would bless him was based on superstition rather than obedience to the Lord. Micah’s abandonment of God’s covenant would bring a curse on him that no unemployed Levite could ward off. Micah was not the last Israelite to seek out a priest or Levite in an attempt to legitimize irregular religious practices (cp. 1 Kgs 12:28-31; 2 Kgs 16:10-18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Judecătorii 17
— 13 versete
Judecătorii 17
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse