1
După aceea, David a bătut pe Filisteni şi i-a smerit, şi a luat din mâna Filistenilor cârmuirea capitalei lor.
2
A bătut pe Moabiţi, şi i-a măsurat cu o frânghie, punându-i să se culce la pământ; a măsurat două frânghii ca să-i omoare, şi o frânghie plină, ca să-i lase vii. Şi Moabiţii au fost supuşi lui David, şi i-au plătit... un bir.
3
David a bătut pe Hadadezer, fiul lui Rehob, împăratul din Ţoba, când s-a dus să-şi aşeze iarăş stăpânirea peste râul Eufrat.
4
David i-a luat o mie şapte sute de călăreţi şi douăzeci de mii de pedeştri; a tăiat vinele cailor de trăsură şi n-a păstrat cai decât pentru o sută de cară.
5
Sirienii din Damasc au venit în ajutorul lui Hadadezer, împăratul din Ţoba, şi David a ucis douăzeci şi două de mii de Sirieni.
6
David a pus strajă în Siria Damascului. Şi Sirienii au fost supuşi lui David, şi i-au plătit un bir. Domnul ocrotea pe David ori unde se ducea.
7
Şi David a luat scuturile de aur, pe cari le aveau slujitorii lui Hadadezer, şi le-a adus la Ierusalim.
8
Împăratul David a mai luat multă aramă din Betah şi din Berotai, cetăţile lui Hadadezer.
9
Toi, împăratul Hamatului, a auzit că David bătuse toată oştirea lui Hadadezer,
10
şi a trimes pe fiul său Ioram la împăratul David, ca să-i ureze de bine, şi să-l laude că a pornit lupta împotriva lui Hadadezer şi că l-a bătut. Căci Toi era în război cu Hadadezer. Ioram a adus vase de argint, vase de aur, şi vase de aramă.
11
Împăratul David le-a închinat Domnului, cum închinase şi argintul şi aurul luat dela toate neamurile pe cari le biruise,
12
din Siria, din Moab, dela fiii lui Amon, dela Filisteni, dela Amalec, şi din prada dela Hadadezer, fiul lui Rehob, împăratul din Ţoba.
13
La întoarcerea dela biruinţa lui asupra Sirienilor, David şi-a făcut iarăş un nume, bătând în Valea Sării optsprezece mii de Edomiţi.
14
A pus străji în Edom, a pus străji în tot Edomul. Şi tot Edomul a fost supus lui David. Domnul ocrotea pe David pretutindeni pe unde mergea.
15
David a împărăţit peste Israel, şi făcea judecată şi dreptate la tot poporul lui.
16
Ioab, fiul Ţeruiei, era mai mare peste oştire; Iosafat, fiul lui Ahilud, era mai mare peste scriitori;
17
Ţadoc, fiul lui Ahitub, şi Ahimelec, fiul lui Abiatar, erau preoţi; Seraia era logofăt;
18
Benaia, fiul lui Iehoiada, era căpetenia Cheretiţilor şi a Peletiţilor; şi fiii lui David erau mari dregători.
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":41138,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Philistines","title_en":"The Philistines","content_ro":"<h3>The Philistines<\/h3>\n<p>The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 <span>BC<\/span> and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath.<\/p>\n<p>Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advances in iron technology made them an almost invincible foe (see 1 Sam 13:19-22). They were constant adversaries of the Israelites in the days of the judges (approximately 1350–1050 <span>BC<\/span>) and the early united monarchy (approximately 1050–970 <span>BC<\/span>). Saul eventually died in battle against the Philistines (1 Sam 31:1-13). David, however, vanquished them before becoming king (1 Sam 18:20-30; 19:8; 23:1-5) and continued to gain victory over them during his reign (2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22). While the Philistines never completely disappeared while Israel was a nation (2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18), David effectively ended this menacing threat.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel, God used the Philistines to eliminate the sinful family of Eli (1 Sam 4:10-22). The Philistines were also God’s tool for building David’s military and political career (1 Sam 17:32-58; 18:20-30). They distracted Saul when he was about to capture David (1 Sam 23:26-28), provided David with refuge from Saul (1 Sam 21:10-15; 27:1-12), prevented David from having to fight his own people (1 Sam 29:1-11), and by killing Saul and his sons (1 Sam 31:1-13), opened the way for David to become king. In the end, however, the Philistines experienced God’s judgment (see Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:13-14; Judg 3:1-3; Judg 13:1–16:31; 1 Sam 5:1–6:18; 13:16–14:23; 21:10-15; 23:1-5, 26-28; 31:1-10; 2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22; 2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:10-11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18-19; Isa 2:6; Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8; 9:7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Philistines<\/h3>\n<p>The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 <span>BC<\/span> and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath.<\/p>\n<p>Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advances in iron technology made them an almost invincible foe (see 1 Sam 13:19-22). They were constant adversaries of the Israelites in the days of the judges (approximately 1350–1050 <span>BC<\/span>) and the early united monarchy (approximately 1050–970 <span>BC<\/span>). Saul eventually died in battle against the Philistines (1 Sam 31:1-13). David, however, vanquished them before becoming king (1 Sam 18:20-30; 19:8; 23:1-5) and continued to gain victory over them during his reign (2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22). While the Philistines never completely disappeared while Israel was a nation (2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18), David effectively ended this menacing threat.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel, God used the Philistines to eliminate the sinful family of Eli (1 Sam 4:10-22). The Philistines were also God’s tool for building David’s military and political career (1 Sam 17:32-58; 18:20-30). They distracted Saul when he was about to capture David (1 Sam 23:26-28), provided David with refuge from Saul (1 Sam 21:10-15; 27:1-12), prevented David from having to fight his own people (1 Sam 29:1-11), and by killing Saul and his sons (1 Sam 31:1-13), opened the way for David to become king. In the end, however, the Philistines experienced God’s judgment (see Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:13-14; Judg 3:1-3; Judg 13:1–16:31; 1 Sam 5:1–6:18; 13:16–14:23; 21:10-15; 23:1-5, 26-28; 31:1-10; 2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22; 2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:10-11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18-19; Isa 2:6; Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8; 9:7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Philistines The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 BC and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath. Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advan...","summary_en":"The Philistines The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 BC and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath. Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advan...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68764,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Philistines","title_en":"The Philistines","content_ro":"<h3>The Philistines<\/h3>\n<p>The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 <span>BC<\/span> and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath.<\/p>\n<p>Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advances in iron technology made them an almost invincible foe (see 1 Sam 13:19-22). They were constant adversaries of the Israelites in the days of the judges (approximately 1350–1050 <span>BC<\/span>) and the early united monarchy (approximately 1050–970 <span>BC<\/span>). Saul eventually died in battle against the Philistines (1 Sam 31:1-13). David, however, vanquished them before becoming king (1 Sam 18:20-30; 19:8; 23:1-5) and continued to gain victory over them during his reign (2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22). While the Philistines never completely disappeared while Israel was a nation (2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18), David effectively ended this menacing threat.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel, God used the Philistines to eliminate the sinful family of Eli (1 Sam 4:10-22). The Philistines were also God’s tool for building David’s military and political career (1 Sam 17:32-58; 18:20-30). They distracted Saul when he was about to capture David (1 Sam 23:26-28), provided David with refuge from Saul (1 Sam 21:10-15; 27:1-12), prevented David from having to fight his own people (1 Sam 29:1-11), and by killing Saul and his sons (1 Sam 31:1-13), opened the way for David to become king. In the end, however, the Philistines experienced God’s judgment (see Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:13-14; Judg 3:1-3; Judg 13:1–16:31; 1 Sam 5:1–6:18; 13:16–14:23; 21:10-15; 23:1-5, 26-28; 31:1-10; 2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22; 2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:10-11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18-19; Isa 2:6; Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8; 9:7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Philistines<\/h3>\n<p>The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 <span>BC<\/span> and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath.<\/p>\n<p>Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advances in iron technology made them an almost invincible foe (see 1 Sam 13:19-22). They were constant adversaries of the Israelites in the days of the judges (approximately 1350–1050 <span>BC<\/span>) and the early united monarchy (approximately 1050–970 <span>BC<\/span>). Saul eventually died in battle against the Philistines (1 Sam 31:1-13). David, however, vanquished them before becoming king (1 Sam 18:20-30; 19:8; 23:1-5) and continued to gain victory over them during his reign (2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22). While the Philistines never completely disappeared while Israel was a nation (2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18), David effectively ended this menacing threat.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel, God used the Philistines to eliminate the sinful family of Eli (1 Sam 4:10-22). The Philistines were also God’s tool for building David’s military and political career (1 Sam 17:32-58; 18:20-30). They distracted Saul when he was about to capture David (1 Sam 23:26-28), provided David with refuge from Saul (1 Sam 21:10-15; 27:1-12), prevented David from having to fight his own people (1 Sam 29:1-11), and by killing Saul and his sons (1 Sam 31:1-13), opened the way for David to become king. In the end, however, the Philistines experienced God’s judgment (see Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:13-14; Judg 3:1-3; Judg 13:1–16:31; 1 Sam 5:1–6:18; 13:16–14:23; 21:10-15; 23:1-5, 26-28; 31:1-10; 2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22; 2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:10-11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18-19; Isa 2:6; Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8; 9:7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Philistines The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 BC and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath. Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advan...","summary_en":"The Philistines The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 BC and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath. Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advan...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96390,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Philistines","title_en":"The Philistines","content_ro":"<h3>The Philistines<\/h3>\n<p>The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 <span>BC<\/span> and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath.<\/p>\n<p>Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advances in iron technology made them an almost invincible foe (see 1 Sam 13:19-22). They were constant adversaries of the Israelites in the days of the judges (approximately 1350–1050 <span>BC<\/span>) and the early united monarchy (approximately 1050–970 <span>BC<\/span>). Saul eventually died in battle against the Philistines (1 Sam 31:1-13). David, however, vanquished them before becoming king (1 Sam 18:20-30; 19:8; 23:1-5) and continued to gain victory over them during his reign (2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22). While the Philistines never completely disappeared while Israel was a nation (2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18), David effectively ended this menacing threat.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel, God used the Philistines to eliminate the sinful family of Eli (1 Sam 4:10-22). The Philistines were also God’s tool for building David’s military and political career (1 Sam 17:32-58; 18:20-30). They distracted Saul when he was about to capture David (1 Sam 23:26-28), provided David with refuge from Saul (1 Sam 21:10-15; 27:1-12), prevented David from having to fight his own people (1 Sam 29:1-11), and by killing Saul and his sons (1 Sam 31:1-13), opened the way for David to become king. In the end, however, the Philistines experienced God’s judgment (see Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:13-14; Judg 3:1-3; Judg 13:1–16:31; 1 Sam 5:1–6:18; 13:16–14:23; 21:10-15; 23:1-5, 26-28; 31:1-10; 2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22; 2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:10-11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18-19; Isa 2:6; Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8; 9:7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Philistines<\/h3>\n<p>The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 <span>BC<\/span> and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath.<\/p>\n<p>Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advances in iron technology made them an almost invincible foe (see 1 Sam 13:19-22). They were constant adversaries of the Israelites in the days of the judges (approximately 1350–1050 <span>BC<\/span>) and the early united monarchy (approximately 1050–970 <span>BC<\/span>). Saul eventually died in battle against the Philistines (1 Sam 31:1-13). David, however, vanquished them before becoming king (1 Sam 18:20-30; 19:8; 23:1-5) and continued to gain victory over them during his reign (2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22). While the Philistines never completely disappeared while Israel was a nation (2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18), David effectively ended this menacing threat.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel, God used the Philistines to eliminate the sinful family of Eli (1 Sam 4:10-22). The Philistines were also God’s tool for building David’s military and political career (1 Sam 17:32-58; 18:20-30). They distracted Saul when he was about to capture David (1 Sam 23:26-28), provided David with refuge from Saul (1 Sam 21:10-15; 27:1-12), prevented David from having to fight his own people (1 Sam 29:1-11), and by killing Saul and his sons (1 Sam 31:1-13), opened the way for David to become king. In the end, however, the Philistines experienced God’s judgment (see Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:13-14; Judg 3:1-3; Judg 13:1–16:31; 1 Sam 5:1–6:18; 13:16–14:23; 21:10-15; 23:1-5, 26-28; 31:1-10; 2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22; 2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:10-11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18-19; Isa 2:6; Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8; 9:7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Philistines The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 BC and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath. Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advan...","summary_en":"The Philistines The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 BC and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath. Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advan...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124016,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Philistines","title_en":"The Philistines","content_ro":"<h3>The Philistines<\/h3>\n<p>The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 <span>BC<\/span> and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath.<\/p>\n<p>Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advances in iron technology made them an almost invincible foe (see 1 Sam 13:19-22). They were constant adversaries of the Israelites in the days of the judges (approximately 1350–1050 <span>BC<\/span>) and the early united monarchy (approximately 1050–970 <span>BC<\/span>). Saul eventually died in battle against the Philistines (1 Sam 31:1-13). David, however, vanquished them before becoming king (1 Sam 18:20-30; 19:8; 23:1-5) and continued to gain victory over them during his reign (2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22). While the Philistines never completely disappeared while Israel was a nation (2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18), David effectively ended this menacing threat.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel, God used the Philistines to eliminate the sinful family of Eli (1 Sam 4:10-22). The Philistines were also God’s tool for building David’s military and political career (1 Sam 17:32-58; 18:20-30). They distracted Saul when he was about to capture David (1 Sam 23:26-28), provided David with refuge from Saul (1 Sam 21:10-15; 27:1-12), prevented David from having to fight his own people (1 Sam 29:1-11), and by killing Saul and his sons (1 Sam 31:1-13), opened the way for David to become king. In the end, however, the Philistines experienced God’s judgment (see Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:13-14; Judg 3:1-3; Judg 13:1–16:31; 1 Sam 5:1–6:18; 13:16–14:23; 21:10-15; 23:1-5, 26-28; 31:1-10; 2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22; 2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:10-11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18-19; Isa 2:6; Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8; 9:7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Philistines<\/h3>\n<p>The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 <span>BC<\/span> and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath.<\/p>\n<p>Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advances in iron technology made them an almost invincible foe (see 1 Sam 13:19-22). They were constant adversaries of the Israelites in the days of the judges (approximately 1350–1050 <span>BC<\/span>) and the early united monarchy (approximately 1050–970 <span>BC<\/span>). Saul eventually died in battle against the Philistines (1 Sam 31:1-13). David, however, vanquished them before becoming king (1 Sam 18:20-30; 19:8; 23:1-5) and continued to gain victory over them during his reign (2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22). While the Philistines never completely disappeared while Israel was a nation (2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18), David effectively ended this menacing threat.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel, God used the Philistines to eliminate the sinful family of Eli (1 Sam 4:10-22). The Philistines were also God’s tool for building David’s military and political career (1 Sam 17:32-58; 18:20-30). They distracted Saul when he was about to capture David (1 Sam 23:26-28), provided David with refuge from Saul (1 Sam 21:10-15; 27:1-12), prevented David from having to fight his own people (1 Sam 29:1-11), and by killing Saul and his sons (1 Sam 31:1-13), opened the way for David to become king. In the end, however, the Philistines experienced God’s judgment (see Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:13-14; Judg 3:1-3; Judg 13:1–16:31; 1 Sam 5:1–6:18; 13:16–14:23; 21:10-15; 23:1-5, 26-28; 31:1-10; 2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1; 21:15-22; 2 Kgs 18:8; 2 Chr 17:10-11; 21:16-17; 26:6-7; 28:18-19; Isa 2:6; Ezek 25:15-17; Amos 1:6-8; 9:7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Philistines The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 BC and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath. Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advan...","summary_en":"The Philistines The Philistines, situated on the southeast coastal plain of the Mediterranean, were part of a larger group of maritime immigrants from the Aegean area known by the Egyptians as the “Sea Peoples.” They settled on Palestine’s lower coastal plain around 1200 BC and established the five cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath. Far from being unsophisticated, the Philistines were politically capable and technologically advanced. They were also fierce warriors. Their advan...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8735,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"David","title_en":"David","content_ro":"<h3>DAVID<\/h3>\n<p>Israel’s most important king. David’s kingdom represented the epitome of Israel’s power and influence during the nation’s OT history.<\/p>\n<p>The two books in the OT devoted to David’s reign are 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. His earlier years are recorded in 1 Samuel, beginning at chapter 16. Almost half of the biblical psalms are ascribed to David. His importance extends into the NT, where he is identified as an ancestor of Jesus Christ and forerunner of the messianic king.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Early Years<\/p>\n<p>• Preparation for Kingship<\/p>\n<p>• David as King<\/p>\n<p>David’s Lasting Influence<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarlyYears\">Early Years<\/p>\n<h5>Family<\/h5>\n<p>David was the youngest son in Jesse’s family, part of Judah’s tribe. The family lived in Bethlehem, about six miles (10 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. His great-grandmother was Ruth, from the land of Moab (Ru 4:18-22). Genealogies in both the OT and the NT trace David’s lineage back to Judah, son of the patriarch Jacob (1 Chr 2:3-15; Mt 1:3-6; Lk 3:31-33).<\/p>\n<h5>Training and Talents<\/h5>\n<p>Little is known about David’s early life. As a boy, he took care of his father’s sheep, risking his life to kill attacking bears and lions. Later, David publicly acknowledged God’s help and strength in protecting the flocks under his care (1 Sm 17:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>David was an accomplished musician. He had developed his ability as a harpist so well that, when a musician was needed at the royal court of King Saul, someone immediately recommended David.<\/p>\n<p>In Jesse’s family, David was regarded as unimportant. When the nationally known prophet Samuel visited Jesse’s home, all the older sons were on hand to meet him; David was tending the sheep. Samuel had been instructed by God to anoint a king from Jesse’s family, not knowing beforehand which son to anoint. Sensing divine restraint as seven brothers passed before him, he made further inquiry. When he learned that Jesse had one other son, David was immediately summoned. David was anointed by Samuel and endowed with the Spirit of the Lord (1 Sm 16:1-13). Whatever Jesse and his family understood by that anointing, it seems to have made no immediate change in David’s pattern of living. He continued to tend the sheep.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparationforKingship\">Preparation for Kingship<\/p>\n<p>During his youth, David was willing to serve others, even though he had been anointed king. It was his willingness to take supplies to three of his older brothers in the army that gave him his opportunity for national fame.<\/p>\n<p>As a young man, David was also sensitive toward God. While greeting his brothers on the battlefield, he was disturbed by the Philistine Goliath’s defiance of God’s armies. Although rebuked by his brothers, David accepted the challenge to take on Goliath. He had a reasonable confidence that God, who had helped him encounter a lion and a bear, would aid him against a champion warrior. So, with faith in God and using his ability to sling stones, David killed Goliath (1 Sm 17:12-58).<\/p>\n<h5>National Fame<\/h5>\n<p>Killing Goliath made David a hero to the nation of Israel. It also brought him into close relationship with the royal family of Saul. But success and national acclaim brought on the jealousy of Saul and ultimately resulted in David’s expulsion from the land of Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Royal Court<\/h5>\n<p>Saul promised his oldest daughter, Merab, to David in marriage, but then Saul went back on the promise and offered David another daughter, Michal. The dowry of trophies from dead Philistines demanded by Saul was designed to bring about David’s death at Philistine hands. But again David was victorious. Women sang praises of his exploits, intensifying Saul’s jealousy and further endangering David’s life (1 Sm 18:6-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime, David and Saul’s son Jonathan developed a deep friendship. When they made a covenant, Jonathan gave David his choicest military equipment (sword, bow, and belt). Although Saul tried to turn Jonathan against David, the friendship deepened. Because Saul was trying to kill him, David had to flee from the court and live as a fugitive.<\/p>\n<p>After Jonathan had warned David of Saul’s continuing designs on his life, David went to Ramah to see the prophet Samuel. Together they went to Naioth, near Ramah. After sending several groups of men after David, Saul finally went with them himself. All his attempts to seize David were thwarted by the Spirit of God, who caused Saul and his men to prophesy all night in religious fervor (1 Sm 19).<\/p>\n<p>Conferring again with Jonathan, David realized that Saul’s jealousy had developed into hatred. Jonathan, aware that David would be the future king of Israel, requested assurance that his descendants would receive protection under David’s rule (1 Sm 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Life as a Fugitive<\/h5>\n<p>Fleeing from Saul, David stopped at Nob. By deceiving Ahimelech, who was officiating as priest there, David obtained food supplies and Goliath’s sword (kept as a trophy). An Edomite named Doeg, chief of Saul’s herdsmen, saw what happened at Nob. David continued his flight, taking refuge temporarily in Gath with King Achish (1 Sm 21), then finding shelter in the cave of Adullam, located 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) southwest of Bethlehem. There his relatives and about 400 fighting men joined him. He went to Mizpeh in Moab, appealing to the Moabite king for protection, especially for his parents. When the prophet Gad warned him not to stay there, David moved back to Judah to the Hereth woods (1 Sm 22:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>David’s freedom of movement enraged Saul, who charged his own people with conspiracy. When Doeg reported what he had witnessed at Nob, Saul executed Ahimelech and 84 other priests, then massacred all of Nob’s inhabitants. One priest named Abiathar escaped to report Saul’s atrocities to David, who assured him of protection (1 Sm 22:6-23).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines were always ready to take advantage of any weakness in Israel. David’s reprisal after a Philistine raid on Keilah, 12 miles (19.3 kilometers) southwest of Bethlehem, gave Saul an opportunity to attack David, who escaped to the wilderness of Ziph, a desert area near Hebron. David and Jonathan met for the last time in that wilderness. Pursued by Saul’s army, David fled still farther south. He was almost encircled in uninhabited country near Maon when Saul had to march his army off to respond to a Philistine attack (1 Sm 23).<\/p>\n<p>At his next place of refuge, En-gedi, on the western shore of the Dead Sea, David was attacked by Saul with 3,000 soldiers. David had an opportunity to kill Saul but refused to harm the “Lord’s anointed” king of Israel. Learning of David’s loyalty, Saul confessed his sin in seeking David’s life (1 Sm 24).<\/p>\n<p>During the years they roamed the wilderness in the Maon\/Ziph\/En-gedi area, David’s band provided protection for Nabal, a rich man living in Maon with large flocks of sheep at Carmel. In exchange for that protection, David proposed that Nabal share some of his wealth. Nabal’s scorn angered David, but Nabal’s wife, Abigail, appealed to David not to take revenge. When Abigail told Nabal of his narrow escape, he was evidently so shocked that he had a heart seizure. He died ten days later, and Abigail later became David’s wife (1 Sm 25).<\/p>\n<p>Once more Saul came with an army of 3,000 men into the Ziph Desert to find David, and David again passed up an opportunity to harm the king. Finally realizing the folly of seeking David’s life, Saul abandoned pursuit (1 Sm 26).<\/p>\n<h5>Refuge in Philistia<\/h5>\n<p>David continued to feel unsafe in Saul’s kingdom. Returning to Gath in Philistine country, he was welcomed by King Achish. His followers were allotted the city of Ziklag, where they lived for about 16 months, attracting new recruits from Judah and the rest of Israel (1 Sm 27; 1 Chr 12:19-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistine army, marching up to the Megiddo Valley to fight Saul’s army, was uneasy with David’s guerrillas in their rear column, so the commanders put pressure on Achish to dismiss David. When he returned to Ziklag, David found that the city had just been raided by the Amalekites. He pursued the enemy, rescued his people and goods, and divided the spoils with those who had remained behind to guard the supplies (1 Sm 29–30). Meanwhile, the Philistines routed the Israelites at Mt Gilboa, killing Jonathan and two of Saul’s other sons in a fierce battle. Saul, badly wounded, killed himself with his own sword (ch 31).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DavidasKing\">David as King<\/p>\n<p>David ruled over Israel for about 40 years, although the accounts of his reign do not contain enough information for an exact chronology. He began his rule at Hebron and reigned over Judah’s territory for seven or eight years. With the death of Saul’s successor, Ishbosheth, David was recognized as king by all the tribes and made Jerusalem his capital. During the next decade, he unified Israel through military and economic expansion. Then came approximately 10 years of disruption in the royal family. The last years of David’s reign seem to have been devoted to plans for the Jerusalem temple, which was built in the reign of his son Solomon.<\/p>\n<h5>The Years in Hebron<\/h5>\n<p>David was subjected to an unusually rugged period of training for his kingship. Serving under Saul, he gained experience in military exploits against the Philistines. Then, during his fugitive wanderings in the desert area of southern Judah, he ingratiated himself with the landholders and sheep raisers by giving them protection. Being recognized as an outlaw of Israel even enabled him to negotiate diplomatic relations with Moab and Philistia.<\/p>\n<p>David was in Philistine country when news came to him that both Saul and Jonathan had been slain. In a beautiful elegy he paid tribute to his friend Jonathan as well as to King Saul (2 Sm 1).<\/p>\n<p>Sure of God’s guidance, David returned to his home, where the leaders of Judah anointed him king at Hebron. He sent a message of commendation to the men of Jabesh for providing a respectable burial for King Saul, probably also bidding for their support.<\/p>\n<p>Confusion probably swept through Israel when Saul was killed, because the Philistines occupied much of the land. Various leaders gathered whatever fighting men they could find, as old tribal loyalties reasserted themselves. David had most of Judah’s tribe firmly behind him.<\/p>\n<p>A kind of civil war broke out between the followers of David and those of Saul, with David gaining the allegiance of more and more people. Saul’s general, Abner, eventually negotiated peace with David, who requested the restoration of Michal as his wife, indicating that he held no animosity toward Saul’s dynasty. With the consent of Saul’s son Ishbosheth, whom Abner had enthroned as king, Abner went to Hebron and pledged Israel’s support for David. But Abner was killed by Joab, one of David’s captains, in a family vendetta, and soon afterward Ishbosheth was assassinated. David publicly mourned Abner’s death and had Ishbosheth’s two murderers executed. Thus, when Saul’s dynasty ended, David was seen by the people not so much as a challenger but as a logical successor. Hence, he was recognized as king by all Israel (2 Sm 2–4).<\/p>\n<h5>Consolidation in Jerusalem<\/h5>\n<p>When the Israelites turned to David as king, the Philistines became alarmed and attacked (2 Sm 5; 1 Chr 14:8-17). David was strong enough to defeat them and thus unify the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In search of a more central location for his capital, David turned toward the city of Jerusalem, a Jebusite stronghold. Joab responded to his challenge to conquer the city and was rewarded by being made general of David’s army. Jerusalem became known as the “city of David” (1 Chr 11:4-9).<\/p>\n<p>In the same way that he had organized his earliest followers into an effective guerrilla band (1 Chr 11:1–12:22) at Hebron, David began organizing the whole nation (12:23-40). Once established in Jerusalem, he quickly gained recognition from the Phoenicians, contracting for their artisans to build him a magnificent palace in the new capital (14:1-2). He also made sure that Jerusalem would become Israel’s religious center (2 Sm 6; 1 Chr 13–16). His abortive attempt to move the ark of the covenant by oxcart (cf. Nm 4) reminded the powerful king that he still had to do things God’s way to be successful.<\/p>\n<p>With Jerusalem well established as the nation’s capital, David intended to build God a temple. He shared his plan with the prophet Nathan, whose immediate response was positive. That night, however, God sent a message via Nathan that David should not build the temple. David’s throne would be established eternally, the prophet said, and unlike Saul, King David would have a son to succeed him and perpetuate the kingdom; that son would build the temple (2 Sm 7; 1 Chr 17).<\/p>\n<h5>Prosperity and Supremacy<\/h5>\n<p>Little is recorded about the expansion of David’s rule from the tribal area of Judah to a vast empire stretching from the Nile River of Egypt to regions of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. Nothing in secular history negates the biblical perspective that David had the most powerful kingdom in the heart of that “Fertile Crescent” about 1000 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>It is likely that skirmishes with the Philistines to the west were frequent until they finally became subservient to David and paid him tribute. In Saul’s day the Philistines had enjoyed a monopoly on the use of iron (1 Sm 13:19-21). The fact that David freely used iron near the end of his reign (1 Chr 22:3) hints at profound economic changes in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>David’s kingdom expanded southward as he built military garrisons in Edomite territory. Beyond Edom, he controlled the Moabites and Amalekites, who paid him tribute in silver and gold. To the northeast, Israelite domination was extended over the Ammonites and the Arameans, whose capital was Damascus. David’s treatment of both friends and enemies seemed to contribute to the strength of his kingdom (2 Sm 8–10). Although he was a brilliant military strategist who used all the means and resources available to bring Israel success, David was humble enough to glorify God (2 Sm 22; see Ps 18).<\/p>\n<h5>Sin in the Royal Family<\/h5>\n<p>A lengthy section of the book of 2 Samuel (chs 11–20) gives a remarkably frank account of sin, crime, and rebellion in David’s family. The king’s own imperfections are clearly portrayed; the king of Israel himself could not escape God’s judgement when he did wrong.<\/p>\n<p>Although polygamy was then a Near Eastern status symbol, it was forbidden for a king of Israel (Dt 17:17). David practiced polygamy, however; some of his marriages undoubtedly had political implications (such as his marriages to Saul’s daughter Michal and to princess Maacah of Geshur). Flagrant sins of incest, murder, and rebellion in his family brought David much suffering and almost cost him the throne.<\/p>\n<p>David’s sin of adultery with Bathsheba, committed at the height of his military success and territorial expansion, led him further into evil: he planned a strategy to have Bathsheba’s husband, Uriah, killed on the front line of battle. David seems to have excluded God from consideration in that segment of his personal life. Yet when the prophet Nathan confronted the king with his sins, David acknowledged his guilt. He confessed his sin and pleaded with God for forgiveness (as in Pss 32 and 51). God forgave him, but for nearly ten years David endured the consequences of his lack of self-restraint and his failure to exercise discipline in his family. Although unsurpassed in military and diplomatic strategy, David lacked strength of character in his domestic affairs. Evil fermented in his own house; the father’s self-indulgence was soon reflected in Amnon’s crime of incest, followed by Absalom’s murder of his brother.<\/p>\n<p>Having incurred his father’s disfavor, Absalom took refuge in Geshur with his mother’s people for three years. Joab, David’s general, was eventually able to reconcile David with his alienated son. Absalom, however, having taken advantage of his position in the royal family to gain a following, went to Hebron, staged a surprise rebellion, and proclaimed himself king throughout Israel. His strong following posed such a threat that David fled from Jerusalem. David, still a master strategist, gained time through a ruse to organize his forces and put down his son’s rebellion. Absalom was killed while trying to flee; his death plunged David into grief.<\/p>\n<p>On his return to Jerusalem, David had to work at undoing the damage caused by Absalom’s revolt. His own tribe of Judah, for example, had supported Absalom. Another rebellion, fomented by Sheba of Benjamin’s tribe, had to be suppressed by Joab before the nation could settle down.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Last Years<\/h5>\n<p>Although David was not permitted to build the temple in Jerusalem, he made extensive preparations for that project during the last years of his reign. He stockpiled materials and organized the kingdom for efficient use of domestic and foreign labor. He also outlined details for religious worship in the new structure (1 Chr 21–29).<\/p>\n<p>The military and civic organization developed by David was probably patterned after Egyptian practice. The army, rigidly controlled by officers of proven loyalty to the king, included mercenaries. The king also appointed trusted supervisors over farms, livestock, and orchards in various parts of his empire (1 Chr 27:25-31).<\/p>\n<p>David took, or at least began, a census of Israel (2 Sm 24; 1 Chr 21). The incompleteness of the accounts leaves unanswered such questions as the reason for God’s punishment. The king overruled Joab’s objection and insisted that the census be taken. Since David later seemed keenly aware that he had sinned in taking the census, it may be that he was motivated by pride to ascertain his exact military strength (approx. 1.5 million men). God may also have been judging the people for their support of the rebellions of Absalom and Sheba.<\/p>\n<p>Through the prophet Gad, David was given a choice of punishments for his sin. He chose a three-day pestilence. As David and the elders repented, they saw an angel on the threshing floor of the Jebusite Ornan (Araunah). David offered sacrifice there and prayed for his people. Later he purchased the threshing floor, located just outside the city of Jerusalem, concluding that it should be the site for the temple to be built by his son Solomon (1 Chr 21:28–22:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DavidsLastingInfluence\">David’s Lasting Influence<\/p>\n<h5>The Writer of Psalms<\/h5>\n<p>The OT book of Psalms became one of the most popular books in ancient Israel, and has remained so among countless millions of people throughout the centuries. These words of praise prepared by David were intended for use in the temple worship (2 Chr 29:30). The 73 psalms ascribed to David generally grew out of his own relationship to God and to other persons.<\/p>\n\n<p>David probably compiled Book I of the book of Psalms (1–41) and Book IV (90–106), since most of those psalms were written by David himself. Other psalms of his (Pss 51–71) are in Book II (42–72), which was probably compiled by Solomon. As those psalms were used for worship in later generations, various people added others until the time of Ezra.<\/p>\n<p>David’s psalms provided much of the poetry that was set to music for Israel’s worship. His organization of the priests and Levites and his provision of instruments for worship (2 Chr 7:6; 8:14) set the pattern for generations to come in the religious life of Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>David in the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>David, recognized as the greatest Israelite king, is often mentioned as a standard of comparison in the writings of the OT prophets. Isaiah (as in Is 7:2, 13; 22:22) and Jeremiah often referred to their contemporary kings as belonging to the “house” or “throne” of David. Contrasting David with some of his descendants who did not honor God, both Isaiah and Jeremiah predicted a messianic ruler who would establish justice and righteousness on the throne of David forever (Is 9:7; Jer 33:15). When Isaiah described the coming ruler, he identified him as being from the lineage of Jesse, David’s father (Is 11:1-10). Predicting a period of universal peace, Isaiah saw the capital in “Zion,” identified with the city of David (2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel promised the restoration of David as king in an eschatological and messianic sense (Ez 37:24-25), and of “my servant David” as Israel’s shepherd (34:23). Hosea likewise identified the future ruler as King David (Hos 3:5). Amos assured the people that God would restore the “tabernacle” of David (Am 9:11) so that they could again dwell in safety. Zechariah referred five times to the “house of David” (in Zec 12–13, <span>rsv<\/span>), encouraging the hope of a restoration of David’s glorious dynasty. The concept of the eternal throne promised to David during his reign was delineated in the message of the prophets even while they were announcing judgments to come on the rulers and people of their time.<\/p>\n<h5>David in the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>David is frequently mentioned by the Gospel writers, who established Jesus’ identity as the “son of David.” The covenant God made with David was that an eternal king would come from David’s family (Mt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mk 10:48; 12:35; Lk 18:38-39; 20:41). According to Mark 11:10 and John 7:42, the Jews of Jesus’ day expected the Messiah (Christ) to be a descendant of David. While stating that Jesus came from the lineage of David, the Gospels also clearly teach that Jesus was the Son of God (Mt 22:41-45; Mk 12:35-37; Lk 20:41-44).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Acts, David is recognized as the recipient of God’s promises that were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. David is also seen as a prophet whom the Holy Spirit inspired to write the psalms (Acts 1:16; 2:22-36; 4:25; 13:26-39).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Revelation, Jesus is designated as having the “key of David” (Rv 3:7), and as being “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David” (5:5). Jesus is quoted as asserting that “I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star” (22:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Israel, History of; King; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DAVID<\/h3>\n<p>Israel’s most important king. David’s kingdom represented the epitome of Israel’s power and influence during the nation’s OT history.<\/p>\n<p>The two books in the OT devoted to David’s reign are 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. His earlier years are recorded in 1 Samuel, beginning at chapter 16. Almost half of the biblical psalms are ascribed to David. His importance extends into the NT, where he is identified as an ancestor of Jesus Christ and forerunner of the messianic king.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Early Years<\/p>\n<p>• Preparation for Kingship<\/p>\n<p>• David as King<\/p>\n<p>David’s Lasting Influence<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarlyYears\">Early Years<\/p>\n<h5>Family<\/h5>\n<p>David was the youngest son in Jesse’s family, part of Judah’s tribe. The family lived in Bethlehem, about six miles (10 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. His great-grandmother was Ruth, from the land of Moab (Ru 4:18-22). Genealogies in both the OT and the NT trace David’s lineage back to Judah, son of the patriarch Jacob (1 Chr 2:3-15; Mt 1:3-6; Lk 3:31-33).<\/p>\n<h5>Training and Talents<\/h5>\n<p>Little is known about David’s early life. As a boy, he took care of his father’s sheep, risking his life to kill attacking bears and lions. Later, David publicly acknowledged God’s help and strength in protecting the flocks under his care (1 Sm 17:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>David was an accomplished musician. He had developed his ability as a harpist so well that, when a musician was needed at the royal court of King Saul, someone immediately recommended David.<\/p>\n<p>In Jesse’s family, David was regarded as unimportant. When the nationally known prophet Samuel visited Jesse’s home, all the older sons were on hand to meet him; David was tending the sheep. Samuel had been instructed by God to anoint a king from Jesse’s family, not knowing beforehand which son to anoint. Sensing divine restraint as seven brothers passed before him, he made further inquiry. When he learned that Jesse had one other son, David was immediately summoned. David was anointed by Samuel and endowed with the Spirit of the Lord (1 Sm 16:1-13). Whatever Jesse and his family understood by that anointing, it seems to have made no immediate change in David’s pattern of living. He continued to tend the sheep.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparationforKingship\">Preparation for Kingship<\/p>\n<p>During his youth, David was willing to serve others, even though he had been anointed king. It was his willingness to take supplies to three of his older brothers in the army that gave him his opportunity for national fame.<\/p>\n<p>As a young man, David was also sensitive toward God. While greeting his brothers on the battlefield, he was disturbed by the Philistine Goliath’s defiance of God’s armies. Although rebuked by his brothers, David accepted the challenge to take on Goliath. He had a reasonable confidence that God, who had helped him encounter a lion and a bear, would aid him against a champion warrior. So, with faith in God and using his ability to sling stones, David killed Goliath (1 Sm 17:12-58).<\/p>\n<h5>National Fame<\/h5>\n<p>Killing Goliath made David a hero to the nation of Israel. It also brought him into close relationship with the royal family of Saul. But success and national acclaim brought on the jealousy of Saul and ultimately resulted in David’s expulsion from the land of Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Royal Court<\/h5>\n<p>Saul promised his oldest daughter, Merab, to David in marriage, but then Saul went back on the promise and offered David another daughter, Michal. The dowry of trophies from dead Philistines demanded by Saul was designed to bring about David’s death at Philistine hands. But again David was victorious. Women sang praises of his exploits, intensifying Saul’s jealousy and further endangering David’s life (1 Sm 18:6-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime, David and Saul’s son Jonathan developed a deep friendship. When they made a covenant, Jonathan gave David his choicest military equipment (sword, bow, and belt). Although Saul tried to turn Jonathan against David, the friendship deepened. Because Saul was trying to kill him, David had to flee from the court and live as a fugitive.<\/p>\n<p>After Jonathan had warned David of Saul’s continuing designs on his life, David went to Ramah to see the prophet Samuel. Together they went to Naioth, near Ramah. After sending several groups of men after David, Saul finally went with them himself. All his attempts to seize David were thwarted by the Spirit of God, who caused Saul and his men to prophesy all night in religious fervor (1 Sm 19).<\/p>\n<p>Conferring again with Jonathan, David realized that Saul’s jealousy had developed into hatred. Jonathan, aware that David would be the future king of Israel, requested assurance that his descendants would receive protection under David’s rule (1 Sm 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Life as a Fugitive<\/h5>\n<p>Fleeing from Saul, David stopped at Nob. By deceiving Ahimelech, who was officiating as priest there, David obtained food supplies and Goliath’s sword (kept as a trophy). An Edomite named Doeg, chief of Saul’s herdsmen, saw what happened at Nob. David continued his flight, taking refuge temporarily in Gath with King Achish (1 Sm 21), then finding shelter in the cave of Adullam, located 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) southwest of Bethlehem. There his relatives and about 400 fighting men joined him. He went to Mizpeh in Moab, appealing to the Moabite king for protection, especially for his parents. When the prophet Gad warned him not to stay there, David moved back to Judah to the Hereth woods (1 Sm 22:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>David’s freedom of movement enraged Saul, who charged his own people with conspiracy. When Doeg reported what he had witnessed at Nob, Saul executed Ahimelech and 84 other priests, then massacred all of Nob’s inhabitants. One priest named Abiathar escaped to report Saul’s atrocities to David, who assured him of protection (1 Sm 22:6-23).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines were always ready to take advantage of any weakness in Israel. David’s reprisal after a Philistine raid on Keilah, 12 miles (19.3 kilometers) southwest of Bethlehem, gave Saul an opportunity to attack David, who escaped to the wilderness of Ziph, a desert area near Hebron. David and Jonathan met for the last time in that wilderness. Pursued by Saul’s army, David fled still farther south. He was almost encircled in uninhabited country near Maon when Saul had to march his army off to respond to a Philistine attack (1 Sm 23).<\/p>\n<p>At his next place of refuge, En-gedi, on the western shore of the Dead Sea, David was attacked by Saul with 3,000 soldiers. David had an opportunity to kill Saul but refused to harm the “Lord’s anointed” king of Israel. Learning of David’s loyalty, Saul confessed his sin in seeking David’s life (1 Sm 24).<\/p>\n<p>During the years they roamed the wilderness in the Maon\/Ziph\/En-gedi area, David’s band provided protection for Nabal, a rich man living in Maon with large flocks of sheep at Carmel. In exchange for that protection, David proposed that Nabal share some of his wealth. Nabal’s scorn angered David, but Nabal’s wife, Abigail, appealed to David not to take revenge. When Abigail told Nabal of his narrow escape, he was evidently so shocked that he had a heart seizure. He died ten days later, and Abigail later became David’s wife (1 Sm 25).<\/p>\n<p>Once more Saul came with an army of 3,000 men into the Ziph Desert to find David, and David again passed up an opportunity to harm the king. Finally realizing the folly of seeking David’s life, Saul abandoned pursuit (1 Sm 26).<\/p>\n<h5>Refuge in Philistia<\/h5>\n<p>David continued to feel unsafe in Saul’s kingdom. Returning to Gath in Philistine country, he was welcomed by King Achish. His followers were allotted the city of Ziklag, where they lived for about 16 months, attracting new recruits from Judah and the rest of Israel (1 Sm 27; 1 Chr 12:19-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistine army, marching up to the Megiddo Valley to fight Saul’s army, was uneasy with David’s guerrillas in their rear column, so the commanders put pressure on Achish to dismiss David. When he returned to Ziklag, David found that the city had just been raided by the Amalekites. He pursued the enemy, rescued his people and goods, and divided the spoils with those who had remained behind to guard the supplies (1 Sm 29–30). Meanwhile, the Philistines routed the Israelites at Mt Gilboa, killing Jonathan and two of Saul’s other sons in a fierce battle. Saul, badly wounded, killed himself with his own sword (ch 31).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DavidasKing\">David as King<\/p>\n<p>David ruled over Israel for about 40 years, although the accounts of his reign do not contain enough information for an exact chronology. He began his rule at Hebron and reigned over Judah’s territory for seven or eight years. With the death of Saul’s successor, Ishbosheth, David was recognized as king by all the tribes and made Jerusalem his capital. During the next decade, he unified Israel through military and economic expansion. Then came approximately 10 years of disruption in the royal family. The last years of David’s reign seem to have been devoted to plans for the Jerusalem temple, which was built in the reign of his son Solomon.<\/p>\n<h5>The Years in Hebron<\/h5>\n<p>David was subjected to an unusually rugged period of training for his kingship. Serving under Saul, he gained experience in military exploits against the Philistines. Then, during his fugitive wanderings in the desert area of southern Judah, he ingratiated himself with the landholders and sheep raisers by giving them protection. Being recognized as an outlaw of Israel even enabled him to negotiate diplomatic relations with Moab and Philistia.<\/p>\n<p>David was in Philistine country when news came to him that both Saul and Jonathan had been slain. In a beautiful elegy he paid tribute to his friend Jonathan as well as to King Saul (2 Sm 1).<\/p>\n<p>Sure of God’s guidance, David returned to his home, where the leaders of Judah anointed him king at Hebron. He sent a message of commendation to the men of Jabesh for providing a respectable burial for King Saul, probably also bidding for their support.<\/p>\n<p>Confusion probably swept through Israel when Saul was killed, because the Philistines occupied much of the land. Various leaders gathered whatever fighting men they could find, as old tribal loyalties reasserted themselves. David had most of Judah’s tribe firmly behind him.<\/p>\n<p>A kind of civil war broke out between the followers of David and those of Saul, with David gaining the allegiance of more and more people. Saul’s general, Abner, eventually negotiated peace with David, who requested the restoration of Michal as his wife, indicating that he held no animosity toward Saul’s dynasty. With the consent of Saul’s son Ishbosheth, whom Abner had enthroned as king, Abner went to Hebron and pledged Israel’s support for David. But Abner was killed by Joab, one of David’s captains, in a family vendetta, and soon afterward Ishbosheth was assassinated. David publicly mourned Abner’s death and had Ishbosheth’s two murderers executed. Thus, when Saul’s dynasty ended, David was seen by the people not so much as a challenger but as a logical successor. Hence, he was recognized as king by all Israel (2 Sm 2–4).<\/p>\n<h5>Consolidation in Jerusalem<\/h5>\n<p>When the Israelites turned to David as king, the Philistines became alarmed and attacked (2 Sm 5; 1 Chr 14:8-17). David was strong enough to defeat them and thus unify the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In search of a more central location for his capital, David turned toward the city of Jerusalem, a Jebusite stronghold. Joab responded to his challenge to conquer the city and was rewarded by being made general of David’s army. Jerusalem became known as the “city of David” (1 Chr 11:4-9).<\/p>\n<p>In the same way that he had organized his earliest followers into an effective guerrilla band (1 Chr 11:1–12:22) at Hebron, David began organizing the whole nation (12:23-40). Once established in Jerusalem, he quickly gained recognition from the Phoenicians, contracting for their artisans to build him a magnificent palace in the new capital (14:1-2). He also made sure that Jerusalem would become Israel’s religious center (2 Sm 6; 1 Chr 13–16). His abortive attempt to move the ark of the covenant by oxcart (cf. Nm 4) reminded the powerful king that he still had to do things God’s way to be successful.<\/p>\n<p>With Jerusalem well established as the nation’s capital, David intended to build God a temple. He shared his plan with the prophet Nathan, whose immediate response was positive. That night, however, God sent a message via Nathan that David should not build the temple. David’s throne would be established eternally, the prophet said, and unlike Saul, King David would have a son to succeed him and perpetuate the kingdom; that son would build the temple (2 Sm 7; 1 Chr 17).<\/p>\n<h5>Prosperity and Supremacy<\/h5>\n<p>Little is recorded about the expansion of David’s rule from the tribal area of Judah to a vast empire stretching from the Nile River of Egypt to regions of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. Nothing in secular history negates the biblical perspective that David had the most powerful kingdom in the heart of that “Fertile Crescent” about 1000 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>It is likely that skirmishes with the Philistines to the west were frequent until they finally became subservient to David and paid him tribute. In Saul’s day the Philistines had enjoyed a monopoly on the use of iron (1 Sm 13:19-21). The fact that David freely used iron near the end of his reign (1 Chr 22:3) hints at profound economic changes in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>David’s kingdom expanded southward as he built military garrisons in Edomite territory. Beyond Edom, he controlled the Moabites and Amalekites, who paid him tribute in silver and gold. To the northeast, Israelite domination was extended over the Ammonites and the Arameans, whose capital was Damascus. David’s treatment of both friends and enemies seemed to contribute to the strength of his kingdom (2 Sm 8–10). Although he was a brilliant military strategist who used all the means and resources available to bring Israel success, David was humble enough to glorify God (2 Sm 22; see Ps 18).<\/p>\n<h5>Sin in the Royal Family<\/h5>\n<p>A lengthy section of the book of 2 Samuel (chs 11–20) gives a remarkably frank account of sin, crime, and rebellion in David’s family. The king’s own imperfections are clearly portrayed; the king of Israel himself could not escape God’s judgement when he did wrong.<\/p>\n<p>Although polygamy was then a Near Eastern status symbol, it was forbidden for a king of Israel (Dt 17:17). David practiced polygamy, however; some of his marriages undoubtedly had political implications (such as his marriages to Saul’s daughter Michal and to princess Maacah of Geshur). Flagrant sins of incest, murder, and rebellion in his family brought David much suffering and almost cost him the throne.<\/p>\n<p>David’s sin of adultery with Bathsheba, committed at the height of his military success and territorial expansion, led him further into evil: he planned a strategy to have Bathsheba’s husband, Uriah, killed on the front line of battle. David seems to have excluded God from consideration in that segment of his personal life. Yet when the prophet Nathan confronted the king with his sins, David acknowledged his guilt. He confessed his sin and pleaded with God for forgiveness (as in Pss 32 and 51). God forgave him, but for nearly ten years David endured the consequences of his lack of self-restraint and his failure to exercise discipline in his family. Although unsurpassed in military and diplomatic strategy, David lacked strength of character in his domestic affairs. Evil fermented in his own house; the father’s self-indulgence was soon reflected in Amnon’s crime of incest, followed by Absalom’s murder of his brother.<\/p>\n<p>Having incurred his father’s disfavor, Absalom took refuge in Geshur with his mother’s people for three years. Joab, David’s general, was eventually able to reconcile David with his alienated son. Absalom, however, having taken advantage of his position in the royal family to gain a following, went to Hebron, staged a surprise rebellion, and proclaimed himself king throughout Israel. His strong following posed such a threat that David fled from Jerusalem. David, still a master strategist, gained time through a ruse to organize his forces and put down his son’s rebellion. Absalom was killed while trying to flee; his death plunged David into grief.<\/p>\n<p>On his return to Jerusalem, David had to work at undoing the damage caused by Absalom’s revolt. His own tribe of Judah, for example, had supported Absalom. Another rebellion, fomented by Sheba of Benjamin’s tribe, had to be suppressed by Joab before the nation could settle down.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Last Years<\/h5>\n<p>Although David was not permitted to build the temple in Jerusalem, he made extensive preparations for that project during the last years of his reign. He stockpiled materials and organized the kingdom for efficient use of domestic and foreign labor. He also outlined details for religious worship in the new structure (1 Chr 21–29).<\/p>\n<p>The military and civic organization developed by David was probably patterned after Egyptian practice. The army, rigidly controlled by officers of proven loyalty to the king, included mercenaries. The king also appointed trusted supervisors over farms, livestock, and orchards in various parts of his empire (1 Chr 27:25-31).<\/p>\n<p>David took, or at least began, a census of Israel (2 Sm 24; 1 Chr 21). The incompleteness of the accounts leaves unanswered such questions as the reason for God’s punishment. The king overruled Joab’s objection and insisted that the census be taken. Since David later seemed keenly aware that he had sinned in taking the census, it may be that he was motivated by pride to ascertain his exact military strength (approx. 1.5 million men). God may also have been judging the people for their support of the rebellions of Absalom and Sheba.<\/p>\n<p>Through the prophet Gad, David was given a choice of punishments for his sin. He chose a three-day pestilence. As David and the elders repented, they saw an angel on the threshing floor of the Jebusite Ornan (Araunah). David offered sacrifice there and prayed for his people. Later he purchased the threshing floor, located just outside the city of Jerusalem, concluding that it should be the site for the temple to be built by his son Solomon (1 Chr 21:28–22:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DavidsLastingInfluence\">David’s Lasting Influence<\/p>\n<h5>The Writer of Psalms<\/h5>\n<p>The OT book of Psalms became one of the most popular books in ancient Israel, and has remained so among countless millions of people throughout the centuries. These words of praise prepared by David were intended for use in the temple worship (2 Chr 29:30). The 73 psalms ascribed to David generally grew out of his own relationship to God and to other persons.<\/p>\n\n<p>David probably compiled Book I of the book of Psalms (1–41) and Book IV (90–106), since most of those psalms were written by David himself. Other psalms of his (Pss 51–71) are in Book II (42–72), which was probably compiled by Solomon. As those psalms were used for worship in later generations, various people added others until the time of Ezra.<\/p>\n<p>David’s psalms provided much of the poetry that was set to music for Israel’s worship. His organization of the priests and Levites and his provision of instruments for worship (2 Chr 7:6; 8:14) set the pattern for generations to come in the religious life of Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>David in the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>David, recognized as the greatest Israelite king, is often mentioned as a standard of comparison in the writings of the OT prophets. Isaiah (as in Is 7:2, 13; 22:22) and Jeremiah often referred to their contemporary kings as belonging to the “house” or “throne” of David. Contrasting David with some of his descendants who did not honor God, both Isaiah and Jeremiah predicted a messianic ruler who would establish justice and righteousness on the throne of David forever (Is 9:7; Jer 33:15). When Isaiah described the coming ruler, he identified him as being from the lineage of Jesse, David’s father (Is 11:1-10). Predicting a period of universal peace, Isaiah saw the capital in “Zion,” identified with the city of David (2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel promised the restoration of David as king in an eschatological and messianic sense (Ez 37:24-25), and of “my servant David” as Israel’s shepherd (34:23). Hosea likewise identified the future ruler as King David (Hos 3:5). Amos assured the people that God would restore the “tabernacle” of David (Am 9:11) so that they could again dwell in safety. Zechariah referred five times to the “house of David” (in Zec 12–13, <span>rsv<\/span>), encouraging the hope of a restoration of David’s glorious dynasty. The concept of the eternal throne promised to David during his reign was delineated in the message of the prophets even while they were announcing judgments to come on the rulers and people of their time.<\/p>\n<h5>David in the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>David is frequently mentioned by the Gospel writers, who established Jesus’ identity as the “son of David.” The covenant God made with David was that an eternal king would come from David’s family (Mt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mk 10:48; 12:35; Lk 18:38-39; 20:41). According to Mark 11:10 and John 7:42, the Jews of Jesus’ day expected the Messiah (Christ) to be a descendant of David. While stating that Jesus came from the lineage of David, the Gospels also clearly teach that Jesus was the Son of God (Mt 22:41-45; Mk 12:35-37; Lk 20:41-44).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Acts, David is recognized as the recipient of God’s promises that were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. David is also seen as a prophet whom the Holy Spirit inspired to write the psalms (Acts 1:16; 2:22-36; 4:25; 13:26-39).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Revelation, Jesus is designated as having the “key of David” (Rv 3:7), and as being “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David” (5:5). Jesus is quoted as asserting that “I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star” (22:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Israel, History of; King; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DAVID Israel’s most important king. David’s kingdom represented the epitome of Israel’s power and influence during the nation’s OT history. The two books in the OT devoted to David’s reign are 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. His earlier years are recorded in 1 Samuel, beginning at chapter 16. Almost half of the biblical psalms are ascribed to David. His importance extends into the NT, where he is identified as an ancestor of Jesus Christ and forerunner of the messianic king. Preview • Early Years ...","summary_en":"DAVID Israel’s most important king. David’s kingdom represented the epitome of Israel’s power and influence during the nation’s OT history. The two books in the OT devoted to David’s reign are 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. His earlier years are recorded in 1 Samuel, beginning at chapter 16. Almost half of the biblical psalms are ascribed to David. His importance extends into the NT, where he is identified as an ancestor of Jesus Christ and forerunner of the messianic king. Preview • Early Years ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22515,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Land","title_en":"Land","content_ro":"<h3>LAND<\/h3>\n<p>The relationship of humans to the land is a prominent theme in the OT. In Genesis the earth with its dry land was created as a place for humans to dwell in fellowship with God. Humans were given the task of subduing the earth and ruling over the animal creation to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator. Subsequent to humanity’s fall into sin they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived. They were driven from the Garden of Eden, and the earth became cursed. They were forced to toil and sweat in order to subdue the earth and provide for their own subsistence because the harvest was choked by thorns and thistles.<\/p>\n<p>After murdering his brother, Cain receives an individual intensification of the land curse as punishment. He is told that the earth will not yield its produce for him even with hard labor, forcing him to wander from one place to another. With no permanent homeland, Cain is denied the enjoyment of rest and prosperity. Because of sin, the important human aspiration for a sense of place is refused to Cain (Gn 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>After the Flood, which was God’s judgment on an exceedingly wicked human race, humans again provoked God’s wrath; the construction of the Tower of Babel exalts human might apart from God. God intervenes to confuse the people’s language and “scatter them abroad upon the face of the earth” (11:9). Genesis 1–11 is thus characterized by a sequence of narratives describing land loss with its attendant deprivations as a consequence of sin and rebellion against God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LandandtheAbrahamicCovenant\">Land and the Abrahamic Covenant<\/p>\n<p>In the time of Abraham, God intervened in human affairs to provide a special homeland for a select group of people who are set apart unto himself. It is here that the Promised Land theme is introduced in Scripture. God said to Abraham, “Leave your country, your relatives, and your father’s house, and go to the land that I will show you. I will cause you to become the father of a great nation” (Gn 12:1-2, <span>nlt<\/span>). This promise to Abraham is enlarged upon in Genesis 12:7; 13:14-18; 15:7-21; 17:7-8. Abraham is told that the land of Canaan is to be the “everlasting possession” of his descendants (17:8).<\/p>\n<p>The OT narrative then traces Abraham’s line of descent through Isaac and Jacob, and tells of the migration of Jacob’s family to Egypt, where during approximately four centuries they became a great and numerous people. During this period, the promise of possession of the land of Canaan is reiterated (Gn 28:15; 35:11-12; 46:3-4; 50:24) and held before Abraham’s descendants as an integral feature of God’s covenantal promises.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LandandtheMosaicCovenant\">Land and the Mosaic Covenant<\/p>\n<p>When God called Moses to lead the Israelites out of Egypt, he associated Moses’ task with the fulfillment of the promises to the patriarchs: “I have remembered my covenant with them. . . . I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. . . . I will bring you into the land I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It will be your very own property” (Ex 6:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Israel is to be delivered from Egypt for two reasons: first, in order to be established as God’s covenant people at Mt Sinai, and second, in order to possess the land promised to their fathers. It is of utmost significance, however, that with the establishment of the Mosaic covenant the continued possession of the land is made dependent on obedience. Should Israel violate the covenantal obligations, it will bring upon itself the covenant curses, the most severe of which is banishment from the Promised Land (Lv 26:32-33). This does not mean that God will abandon his people and the land totally or forever, because God also promises that when the people repent, “then I will remember my covenant with Jacob . . . and I will remember the land” (Lv 26:42, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of King David, the promise of land received at least a provisional fulfillment. Although it is true that initial fulfillment occurred when Joshua entered the land, at that time the territory did not extend to the borders promised Abraham (Gn 15:18) and much of the land that was occupied still contained pockets of resistance by the former inhabitants (Jos 13:1-6; Jgs 1). It was not until the time of David that the land was fully possessed as originally promised (2 Sm 8; 1 Kgs 4:21, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The responsibility of the king to observe the law, and the connection between covenantal obedience and possession of the land is again made clear when Solomon dedicates the temple (1 Kgs 9:4-9). Disobedience will bring not only expulsion from the land but also the destruction of the temple.<\/p>\n<p>The subsequent history of the divided-kingdom era is for the most part a history of covenant abrogation, by the people as well as the kings. The Lord sent repeated warnings through the prophets that such disobedience could only lead to expulsion from the land. But their message fell on deaf ears (Is 6:11-12; Am 5:27; 7:17; Hos 9:17). The kings repeatedly proved themselves to be unworthy of the office.<\/p>\n<p>As the people persisted in their evil way, Jeremiah announced that Nebuchadnezzar was to be the Lord’s agent to drive them from the land (Jer 21:2; 22:25; 25:8-9; 27:6; 28:14; 29:21). However, Jeremiah and other prophets also looked beyond the exile to a future restoration and return to the land (Jer 32:6-25). Historically, this was accomplished under the rule of Cyrus the Great of Persia (538 <span>BC<\/span>) and is described in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.<\/p>\n<p>A difficulty of interpretation arises in finding an adequate fulfillment of certain prophecies of the return (cf. Ez 37; Am 9:14-15), which envision great prosperity and permanent possession of the land under the rule of a Davidic king. The intertestamental period does not seem to be a suitable fulfillment for these predictions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LandandtheNewCovenant\">Land and the New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the land theme is much less prominent and seems mostly to be given a spiritual symbolism. The writer of Hebrews suggests that Abraham understood the land promise as something that pointed beyond a merely geographical fulfillment to a higher and far more satisfying heavenly home. Realizing the imperfection and transitory nature of all that this world offers, Abraham looked beyond the temporal fulfillment of the land promise for a city whose builder and maker is God (Heb 11:10), and he sought a “better country, that is, a heavenly one” (v 16). In the NT it appears that Israel’s land promise and entrance into Canaan is to be understood as typifying something of the future heavenly rest awaiting God’s people (Heb 3–4). Perhaps this explains the OT stress on the connection between Israel’s living in obedience to God’s law and their possession of the land. When the Israelites do not typify a condition of holiness, they disqualify themselves from typifying a condition of blessedness, and thus are either denied access to or driven from the land. The NT indicates that it is God’s purpose to prepare an eternal homeland for his people where the rule of the divine King is direct and just, where all things are subject to his will, where death and sin are abolished, and where the needs of his people are completely satisfied (Heb 11:13-16; Rv 21).<\/p>\n<p>The OT land promises have been viewed by some as having only typical significance. In the light of Christ’s incarnation any statement of Scripture concerning a future for the land is to be interpreted as fulfilled in a spiritual sense in the church. The church is now the new Israel and heir of the OT promises. Because God’s kingdom is now a spiritual reality, it is considered a misunderstanding of the OT to expect yet future fulfillments of the OT prophecies of Israel’s return to the land and an establishment of a period of peace and prosperity under the rule of Christ, the Son of David (cf. Is 2:1-5; 11:6-11; Ez 37; Am 9:14-15). To abide in Christ is considered an adequate fulfillment of the physical and geographical promises of the OT economy.<\/p>\n<p>Others, while not denying typical significance for these OT realities, would suggest that the land promises are still operative in the physical and geographical categories in which they were given. It is pointed out that Paul argues in Romans 9–11 that there is yet a future for national Israel. In spite of Israel’s history of disobedience, climaxing in the rejection of the Messiah, the election and calling of God is irrevocable, and Israel is yet to be reingrafted in the olive tree from which it had previously been cut off. Luke says that Jerusalem will be trodden down by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled (Lk 21:24), indicating that there is to be a future time when Jerusalem will again be possessed by the Jewish nation. This does not necessarily mean that one must view the present state of Israel as the direct fulfillment of the OT promises of return to the land. The OT indicates that the return will be occasioned by belief (Dt 30:1-16). The present return is in unbelief. At the same time, the remarkable preservation of the Jewish people over the centuries and the recent reestablishment of the nation are perhaps to be understood as anticipations or signs of a future and more complete realization of the OT land promises.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAND<\/h3>\n<p>The relationship of humans to the land is a prominent theme in the OT. In Genesis the earth with its dry land was created as a place for humans to dwell in fellowship with God. Humans were given the task of subduing the earth and ruling over the animal creation to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator. Subsequent to humanity’s fall into sin they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived. They were driven from the Garden of Eden, and the earth became cursed. They were forced to toil and sweat in order to subdue the earth and provide for their own subsistence because the harvest was choked by thorns and thistles.<\/p>\n<p>After murdering his brother, Cain receives an individual intensification of the land curse as punishment. He is told that the earth will not yield its produce for him even with hard labor, forcing him to wander from one place to another. With no permanent homeland, Cain is denied the enjoyment of rest and prosperity. Because of sin, the important human aspiration for a sense of place is refused to Cain (Gn 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>After the Flood, which was God’s judgment on an exceedingly wicked human race, humans again provoked God’s wrath; the construction of the Tower of Babel exalts human might apart from God. God intervenes to confuse the people’s language and “scatter them abroad upon the face of the earth” (11:9). Genesis 1–11 is thus characterized by a sequence of narratives describing land loss with its attendant deprivations as a consequence of sin and rebellion against God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LandandtheAbrahamicCovenant\">Land and the Abrahamic Covenant<\/p>\n<p>In the time of Abraham, God intervened in human affairs to provide a special homeland for a select group of people who are set apart unto himself. It is here that the Promised Land theme is introduced in Scripture. God said to Abraham, “Leave your country, your relatives, and your father’s house, and go to the land that I will show you. I will cause you to become the father of a great nation” (Gn 12:1-2, <span>nlt<\/span>). This promise to Abraham is enlarged upon in Genesis 12:7; 13:14-18; 15:7-21; 17:7-8. Abraham is told that the land of Canaan is to be the “everlasting possession” of his descendants (17:8).<\/p>\n<p>The OT narrative then traces Abraham’s line of descent through Isaac and Jacob, and tells of the migration of Jacob’s family to Egypt, where during approximately four centuries they became a great and numerous people. During this period, the promise of possession of the land of Canaan is reiterated (Gn 28:15; 35:11-12; 46:3-4; 50:24) and held before Abraham’s descendants as an integral feature of God’s covenantal promises.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LandandtheMosaicCovenant\">Land and the Mosaic Covenant<\/p>\n<p>When God called Moses to lead the Israelites out of Egypt, he associated Moses’ task with the fulfillment of the promises to the patriarchs: “I have remembered my covenant with them. . . . I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. . . . I will bring you into the land I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It will be your very own property” (Ex 6:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Israel is to be delivered from Egypt for two reasons: first, in order to be established as God’s covenant people at Mt Sinai, and second, in order to possess the land promised to their fathers. It is of utmost significance, however, that with the establishment of the Mosaic covenant the continued possession of the land is made dependent on obedience. Should Israel violate the covenantal obligations, it will bring upon itself the covenant curses, the most severe of which is banishment from the Promised Land (Lv 26:32-33). This does not mean that God will abandon his people and the land totally or forever, because God also promises that when the people repent, “then I will remember my covenant with Jacob . . . and I will remember the land” (Lv 26:42, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of King David, the promise of land received at least a provisional fulfillment. Although it is true that initial fulfillment occurred when Joshua entered the land, at that time the territory did not extend to the borders promised Abraham (Gn 15:18) and much of the land that was occupied still contained pockets of resistance by the former inhabitants (Jos 13:1-6; Jgs 1). It was not until the time of David that the land was fully possessed as originally promised (2 Sm 8; 1 Kgs 4:21, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The responsibility of the king to observe the law, and the connection between covenantal obedience and possession of the land is again made clear when Solomon dedicates the temple (1 Kgs 9:4-9). Disobedience will bring not only expulsion from the land but also the destruction of the temple.<\/p>\n<p>The subsequent history of the divided-kingdom era is for the most part a history of covenant abrogation, by the people as well as the kings. The Lord sent repeated warnings through the prophets that such disobedience could only lead to expulsion from the land. But their message fell on deaf ears (Is 6:11-12; Am 5:27; 7:17; Hos 9:17). The kings repeatedly proved themselves to be unworthy of the office.<\/p>\n<p>As the people persisted in their evil way, Jeremiah announced that Nebuchadnezzar was to be the Lord’s agent to drive them from the land (Jer 21:2; 22:25; 25:8-9; 27:6; 28:14; 29:21). However, Jeremiah and other prophets also looked beyond the exile to a future restoration and return to the land (Jer 32:6-25). Historically, this was accomplished under the rule of Cyrus the Great of Persia (538 <span>BC<\/span>) and is described in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.<\/p>\n<p>A difficulty of interpretation arises in finding an adequate fulfillment of certain prophecies of the return (cf. Ez 37; Am 9:14-15), which envision great prosperity and permanent possession of the land under the rule of a Davidic king. The intertestamental period does not seem to be a suitable fulfillment for these predictions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LandandtheNewCovenant\">Land and the New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the land theme is much less prominent and seems mostly to be given a spiritual symbolism. The writer of Hebrews suggests that Abraham understood the land promise as something that pointed beyond a merely geographical fulfillment to a higher and far more satisfying heavenly home. Realizing the imperfection and transitory nature of all that this world offers, Abraham looked beyond the temporal fulfillment of the land promise for a city whose builder and maker is God (Heb 11:10), and he sought a “better country, that is, a heavenly one” (v 16). In the NT it appears that Israel’s land promise and entrance into Canaan is to be understood as typifying something of the future heavenly rest awaiting God’s people (Heb 3–4). Perhaps this explains the OT stress on the connection between Israel’s living in obedience to God’s law and their possession of the land. When the Israelites do not typify a condition of holiness, they disqualify themselves from typifying a condition of blessedness, and thus are either denied access to or driven from the land. The NT indicates that it is God’s purpose to prepare an eternal homeland for his people where the rule of the divine King is direct and just, where all things are subject to his will, where death and sin are abolished, and where the needs of his people are completely satisfied (Heb 11:13-16; Rv 21).<\/p>\n<p>The OT land promises have been viewed by some as having only typical significance. In the light of Christ’s incarnation any statement of Scripture concerning a future for the land is to be interpreted as fulfilled in a spiritual sense in the church. The church is now the new Israel and heir of the OT promises. Because God’s kingdom is now a spiritual reality, it is considered a misunderstanding of the OT to expect yet future fulfillments of the OT prophecies of Israel’s return to the land and an establishment of a period of peace and prosperity under the rule of Christ, the Son of David (cf. Is 2:1-5; 11:6-11; Ez 37; Am 9:14-15). To abide in Christ is considered an adequate fulfillment of the physical and geographical promises of the OT economy.<\/p>\n<p>Others, while not denying typical significance for these OT realities, would suggest that the land promises are still operative in the physical and geographical categories in which they were given. It is pointed out that Paul argues in Romans 9–11 that there is yet a future for national Israel. In spite of Israel’s history of disobedience, climaxing in the rejection of the Messiah, the election and calling of God is irrevocable, and Israel is yet to be reingrafted in the olive tree from which it had previously been cut off. Luke says that Jerusalem will be trodden down by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled (Lk 21:24), indicating that there is to be a future time when Jerusalem will again be possessed by the Jewish nation. This does not necessarily mean that one must view the present state of Israel as the direct fulfillment of the OT promises of return to the land. The OT indicates that the return will be occasioned by belief (Dt 30:1-16). The present return is in unbelief. At the same time, the remarkable preservation of the Jewish people over the centuries and the recent reestablishment of the nation are perhaps to be understood as anticipations or signs of a future and more complete realization of the OT land promises.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAND The relationship of humans to the land is a prominent theme in the OT. In Genesis the earth with its dry land was created as a place for humans to dwell in fellowship with God. Humans were given the task of subduing the earth and ruling over the animal creation to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator. Subsequent to humanity’s fall into sin they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived. They were dr...","summary_en":"LAND The relationship of humans to the land is a prominent theme in the OT. In Genesis the earth with its dry land was created as a place for humans to dwell in fellowship with God. Humans were given the task of subduing the earth and ruling over the animal creation to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator. Subsequent to humanity’s fall into sin they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived. They were dr...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25495,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Metheg-Ammah*","title_en":"Metheg-Ammah*","content_ro":"<h3>METHEG-AMMAH*<\/h3>\n<p>Place (whose name means “Bridle of the Mother City”) conquered by David (2 Sm 8:1, <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Most likely it refers to the Philistine capital, Gath (1 Chr 18:1). The capital city was often referred to as the “mother” city, and surrounding cities as “daughters”; the “bridle” represented control or authority.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>METHEG-AMMAH*<\/h3>\n<p>Place (whose name means “Bridle of the Mother City”) conquered by David (2 Sm 8:1, <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Most likely it refers to the Philistine capital, Gath (1 Chr 18:1). The capital city was often referred to as the “mother” city, and surrounding cities as “daughters”; the “bridle” represented control or authority.<\/p>","summary_ro":"METHEG-AMMAH* Place (whose name means “Bridle of the Mother City”) conquered by David (2 Sm 8:1, nlt mg). Most likely it refers to the Philistine capital, Gath (1 Chr 18:1). The capital city was often referred to as the “mother” city, and surrounding cities as “daughters”; the “bridle” represented control or authority.","summary_en":"METHEG-AMMAH* Place (whose name means “Bridle of the Mother City”) conquered by David (2 Sm 8:1, nlt mg). Most likely it refers to the Philistine capital, Gath (1 Chr 18:1). The capital city was often referred to as the “mother” city, and surrounding cities as “daughters”; the “bridle” represented control or authority.","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28764,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Palestine*","title_en":"Palestine*","content_ro":"<h3>PALESTINE*<\/h3>\n<p>Country on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea, also known as Canaan and Israel. Palestine was situated at the west end of the Fertile Crescent—that arching stretch of highly productive land that ran from the Persian Gulf through Mesopotamia and Syria to Egypt. Palestine lay in a unique position, for it constituted a land bridge between Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two primary cultural centers of the ancient Near East. It also served as a connection between the continents of Asia and Africa and as a continental link between Africa and Europe. Trade moved by well-defined routes as goods were brought into the Fertile Crescent from as far as northern Europe, India, and south of Egypt. The same roads were followed by prospective conquerors as they moved their armies from area to area in quest of power and wealth.<\/p>\n<p>It was the land promised by God to Abraham and his descendants, the homeland of God’s chosen people, and the geographical scene for much of biblical history. It has become a land sacred to three great world religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Physically, Palestine is a kind of microcosm. In a stretch of 150 miles (241.4 kilometers) one can find almost every kind of climate and terrain known on the earth. It has fertile plains, sandy deserts, rocky wastes, forests, mountains, lakes, and rivers. With such a variety in so small an area, the land provides sharp contrasts. In the north, Mt Hermon stands perpetually snowcapped at an altitude of about 9,100 feet (2,773.7 meters), while a scant 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) distant in the subtropical depression of the Jordan Valley is the Dead Sea, representing the deepest spot on the earth.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Territory<\/p>\n<p>• Climate<\/p>\n<p>• Geography<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>This land has been known by many names over its long history. The country seems to have been named after the maritime region, perhaps because this was the area that most foreigners contacted. So the land was called Canaan and later named after Philistia. In the table of nations, Canaan is said to have extended from Sidon in the north toward Gerar as far as Gaza and east toward the Cities of the Plain (Gn 10:19). The name Canaan appears in the Bible; the first occurrence of the name as that of a country or region is in Genesis 11:31.<\/p>\n<p>After the Israelite conquest of Canaan, the country was known as the land of Israel (1 Sm 13:19; 1 Chr 22:2). With the division of the kingdom in the reign of Rehoboam (930 <span>BC<\/span>), the name Israel went with the northern kingdom, and the southern kingdom was known as Judah (later, Judea).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Territory\">Territory<\/p>\n<p>The earliest reference to the extent of Palestine appears in the promise of the land to Abraham and to his descendants (Gn 15:18-21). Here the borders are given as the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) in the southwest to the Euphrates River in the northeast. It is further defined in terms of the peoples who occupied it at that time, 10 in all, including the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites. In Genesis 17:8 the land is called simply “all the land of Canaan.”<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave more detailed directions to Moses concerning the borders of the land that Israel was to occupy (Nm 34:1-12). The southern boundary was to be from the River of Egypt to the south of Kadesh-barnea and along the wilderness of Zin to the southern extremity of the Dead Sea. The western boundary was the Mediterranean, the northern border was set at the entrance to Hamath, and the eastern limit was the Jordan River and the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n<p>The greatest extent of the Promised Land is seen in the Lord’s declaration to Moses that he would set the bounds of Israel from the Red Sea to the Sea of the Philistines (Mediterranean) and from the wilderness to the Euphrates River (Ex 23:31). Historically, during the period of the judges and the reign of Saul, Israel did not conquer the land that had been given to the tribes in the division under Joshua. The military strength of David and the diplomacy of Solomon enabled them to achieve a marked expansion of Israelite rule. David defeated Hadadezer, king of Zobah, and thus pushed his northern frontier to the Euphrates River; he defeated Syria, Ammon, Moab, Edom, and Amalek, enlarging the kingdom also to the east and south (2 Sm 8:1-14; 1 Chr 18:1-13). Solomon had a fleet of merchant ships stationed at Ezion-geber on the Gulf of Aqaba. He also engaged in copper mining in that area.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Climate\">Climate<\/p>\n<p>It has been said that the climate of Palestine is more varied than that of any other area of comparable size in the world. Generally, the climate may be described as temperate; at Jerusalem, for example, the temperature extremes range from 26°F (-3.3°C) to 107°F (41.6°C), and the average annual rainfall is about 20 inches (50.8 centimeters). The coastal plain is warmer and has been compared to the east coast of Florida. The average annual temperature at Jaffa (Joppa) is 67° F (19.4°C). The Jordan Valley in the area of the Dead Sea is subtropical; in summer its temperatures may reach 120°F (48.8°C).<\/p>\n<p>Rainfall is seasonal, with rain coming in the cooler months of the year as the prevailing west wind brings moisture over the comparatively colder land area, much like the “lake effect” snows of the Great Lakes region of the United States. The rainy season extends from October to April. Within this time the Israelites singled out two periods (Jer 5:24; Jl 2:23), the former rain and the latter rain, with the former rain occurring in the months of October and November and the latter rain falling in March and April. The coastal area receives about 28 inches (71.1 centimeters) of rain annually, while the average for the country in general is 22 to 24 inches (55.9–70 centimeters).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>For purposes of description, the land of Palestine may be conveniently divided into five longitudinal sections:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Maritime or Coastal Plain<\/p>\n<li>2. The Shephelah<\/li>\n<li>3. The Western Plateau or Hill Country<\/li>\n<li>4. The Arabah or Jordan Valley<\/li>\n<li>5. The Eastern Plateau or Transjordan<\/li>\n<p>These divisions are based essentially on differences in elevation, but other geographic elements also serve to mark their limits or otherwise distinguish them.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Maritime or Coastal Plain<\/h5>\n<p>The Maritime or Coastal Plain may be divided into three separate plains from south to north: the plain of Philistia, the plain of Sharon, and the plain of Acre.<\/p>\n<p>1. The plain of Philistia begins with the Wadi el-Arish, or River of Egypt, and extends north to the Nahr el-Auja, about five miles (8 kilometers) north of Joppa. This plain is about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers) long and reaches its greatest width in the latitude of Gaza, where it measures about 30 miles (48.3 kilometers). Along the Mediterranean there were dunes of sand, but for the most part, this area was very fertile and admirably suited for the production of grain.<\/p>\n<li>2. The plain of Sharon is not sharply demarcated from the Philistine plain and was probably under Philistine control, but the OT recognizes it as a separate entity (cf. Sg 2:1; Is 65:10). The plain extends north to Mt Carmel. On the coast are the town of Dor, which is mentioned in “The Tale of Wenamon,” and the city of Caesarea, where Herod the Great did much building.<\/li>\n<li>3. Beyond the promontory of Carmel lies a bay on which was situated the city named Ptolemais (Acts 21:7), also known as Acre or Acco (Jgs 1:31). Here a narrow plain stretches some 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to the Ladder of Tyre (Ras en-Nakurah). The Kishon River (Jgs 4:7, 13; 1 Kgs 18:40) flows through this plain to the sea.<\/li>\n<h5>The Shephelah<\/h5>\n<p>The Shephelah constitutes a kind of “midlands,” intermediate between the lowlands of the coastal plain and the highlands of the Western Plateau, with an elevation of about 500 to 1,000 feet (152.4– 304.8 meters) and a width of only a few miles. It extends from the valley of Aijalon to Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p>The valleys of the Shephelah produced grain crops, while the hills were well suited for grapes and olives. The region was very important strategically, because it afforded approaches to Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<h5>The Western Plateau or Hill Country<\/h5>\n<p>The Western Plateau or Hill Country ranges from 1,000 to 4,000 feet (304.8–609.6 meters) in elevation and covers some 150 miles (241.4 kilometers) from Lebanon to Beersheba. It may also be divided into three areas: Galilee, Samaria, and Judea.<\/p>\n<p>1. Galilee may be regarded as two parts, Upper Galilee (2,000–4,000 feet, or 609.6–1,219.2 meters) and Lower Galilee (below 2,000 feet, or 609.6 meters). The area was agricultural and pastoral, like much of Palestine, and was open to invasion. The highways that traversed Galilee made it a cosmopolitan district, so that Isaiah 9:1 calls it “Galilee of the nations.”<\/p>\n<li>2. Samaria was also suitable for crops and pasture. The brothers of Joseph were grazing their flocks in the plain of Dothan when Joseph visited them and became the victim of their conspiracy (Gn 37:17).<\/li>\n<li>3. Judea has an elevation of about 2,000 to 3,500 feet (609.6–1,066.8 meters) and reaches some 60 miles (96.5 kilometers) from Bethel to Beersheba. The city of Jerusalem stands at an elevation of 2,654 feet (808.9 meters), surrounded by mountains and valleys that served as part of its defense system (Ps 125:2). This was the heart of the nation, for from the time of David onward, the capital was here, and more important, the ark of the covenant had been brought here during David’s reign. As the Lord had long foretold, Jerusalem had become the center of his worship; here Solomon built the temple, one of the greatest structures ever made.<\/li>\n<h5>The Arabah or Jordan Valley<\/h5>\n<p>The Arabah or Jordan Valley presents the extremes of height and depth. Mt Hermon rises to 9,166 feet (2,793.8 meters), while the surface of the Dead Sea lies 1,275 feet (395 meters) below sea level, and at its deepest part the sea plunges another 1,300 feet (396.2 meters).<\/p>\n<p>1. The North Arabah or Upper Jordan Valley. The Jordan River has four sources, all near Mt Hermon. The Jordan flows through what was Lake Huleh, now partly drained and designated as a wildlife refuge. Two miles (3.2 kilometers) below the Huleh basin is the Bridge of Jacob’s Daughters, by which the old road to Damascus crossed the river. The Jordan then flows into a gorge some 1,200 feet (365.8 meters) deep.<\/p>\n<li>2. The Sea of Galilee, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) from Huleh, has an elevation of -685 feet (-208.8 meters). It measures 15 by 8 miles (24.1 by 12.9 kilometers), with a maximum depth of 750 feet (228.6 meters). The shape of the lake gave it the OT name, Chinnereth, meaning “harp” (Nm 34:11; Jos 13:27). In the NT it was also called the Lake of Gennesaret (Lk 5:1) and the Sea of Tiberias (Jn 6:1; 21:1).<\/li>\n<li>3. The Middle Arabah, or Ghor. The name Jordan means “descender”; in the 60 miles or 96.5 kilometers (in a straight line) from the outlet of the Sea of Galilee to the northern end of the Dead Sea there is a fall of more than 600 feet (182.9 meters), or 10 feet per mile. The river flows in a series of S-curves or zigzags, so that its actual course between Galilee and the Dead Sea covers some 200 miles (321.8 kilometers).<\/li>\n<p>This stretch of the Jordan Valley is known as the Ghor, or Rift. Six miles (9.7 kilometers) below the Sea of Galilee the Yarmuk River enters from the east. Some smaller streams empty into the Jordan, but the next river of consequence is the Jabbok (Gn 32:22). Just south of the Sea of Galilee the Ghor is about four miles (6.4 kilometers) wide; near Beth-shan it reaches seven miles (11.3 kilometers) wide; beyond that for some 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the mountains close in on the river on both sides, narrowing the valley to two to three miles (3.2 to 4.8 kilometers); near Jericho it broadens to about 12 miles (19.3 kilometers).<\/p>\n<li>4. The Dead Sea is unique. Its surface is the deepest point on the face of the earth and its waters are of tremendous wealth. In the OT it is known as the Salt Sea (Gn 14:3; Nm 34:12; Jos 12:3) and the Sea of Arabah (Jos 12:3). Josephus calls it Lake Asphaltitis.<\/li>\n<p>This body of water is 46 miles (74 kilometers) long, 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) wide, and 1,300 feet (396.2 meters) deep and consists of about 25 percent mineral matter, making it a chemical deposit of great value. In addition to the flow of the Jordan, the Dead Sea receives the water of other streams, such as the Arnon River on the east. Much of the runoff of the seasonal rains also finds its way into the Salt Sea. Temperatures in the valley may reach 120° F (48.8° C) in summer; with the extreme humidity the climate is very debilitating and almost unbearable. It is estimated that the daily evaporation from the sea is 6 to 8 million tons (5.4–7.3 million metric tons).<\/p>\n<li>5. The Southern Arabah, mostly a barren wilderness, extends from the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Aqaba, a distance of 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). There is a gradual ascent from the Dead Sea to a watershed just west of Petra. Near the tip of the Gulf of Aqaba were the ports of Elath (modern Eilat) and Ezion-geber.<\/li>\n<h5>The Eastern Plateau or Transjordan<\/h5>\n<p>The Eastern Plateau, or Transjordan, was not named as part of the land of promise, but it was taken by the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half of Manasseh. The region is better supplied with water than the Western Plateau and has perennial streams, such as the Yarmuk, Jabbok, and Arnon. A principal north-south road was the King’s Highway, followed by the Israelites during the exodus (Nm 21:22) and probably also the route taken by the invading kings of Genesis 14.<\/p>\n<p>The northern section of Transjordan was known as Bashan, noted for its cattle (Ps 22:12; Ez 39:18) and for its oak trees (Is 2:13; Zec 11:2).<\/p>\n<p>Gilead, famed for its balm (Gn 37:25; Jer 8:22), was often mentioned in the OT (e.g., Dt 3:10-16; Jgs 11). It extended from the Yarmuk River to the city of Heshbon. This area was heavily forested in David’s time (cf. 2 Sm 18:8).<\/p>\n<p>In Palestine proper there were two important divisions: the plain of Esdraelon and the Negev. The plain of Esdraelon, often associated prophetically with Armageddon, lies between Galilee and Samaria. This is one of the most fertile areas of Palestine and also was the scene of numerous battles. The plain was guarded by fortress cities on its southern side (Megiddo, Ibleam, and Taanach). In the OT the valley of Jezreel was not regarded as a part of Esdraelon but as the valley between the hill of Moreh and Mt Gilboa. At the eastern end was the stronghold of Beth-shan.<\/p>\n<p>In the extreme south of the land is the wilderness area called the Negev, or South Country. This begins in the region of Beersheba and extends roughly to Kadesh-barnea. A district of infrequent and irregular rainfall, its agriculture is restricted, although a nomadic pastoral life has been widely practiced there. <em>See<\/em> Arabah; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Dead Sea; Decapolis; Sea of Galilee; Jordan River; Negev; Shephelah; Transjordan.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PALESTINE*<\/h3>\n<p>Country on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea, also known as Canaan and Israel. Palestine was situated at the west end of the Fertile Crescent—that arching stretch of highly productive land that ran from the Persian Gulf through Mesopotamia and Syria to Egypt. Palestine lay in a unique position, for it constituted a land bridge between Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two primary cultural centers of the ancient Near East. It also served as a connection between the continents of Asia and Africa and as a continental link between Africa and Europe. Trade moved by well-defined routes as goods were brought into the Fertile Crescent from as far as northern Europe, India, and south of Egypt. The same roads were followed by prospective conquerors as they moved their armies from area to area in quest of power and wealth.<\/p>\n<p>It was the land promised by God to Abraham and his descendants, the homeland of God’s chosen people, and the geographical scene for much of biblical history. It has become a land sacred to three great world religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Physically, Palestine is a kind of microcosm. In a stretch of 150 miles (241.4 kilometers) one can find almost every kind of climate and terrain known on the earth. It has fertile plains, sandy deserts, rocky wastes, forests, mountains, lakes, and rivers. With such a variety in so small an area, the land provides sharp contrasts. In the north, Mt Hermon stands perpetually snowcapped at an altitude of about 9,100 feet (2,773.7 meters), while a scant 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) distant in the subtropical depression of the Jordan Valley is the Dead Sea, representing the deepest spot on the earth.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Territory<\/p>\n<p>• Climate<\/p>\n<p>• Geography<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>This land has been known by many names over its long history. The country seems to have been named after the maritime region, perhaps because this was the area that most foreigners contacted. So the land was called Canaan and later named after Philistia. In the table of nations, Canaan is said to have extended from Sidon in the north toward Gerar as far as Gaza and east toward the Cities of the Plain (Gn 10:19). The name Canaan appears in the Bible; the first occurrence of the name as that of a country or region is in Genesis 11:31.<\/p>\n<p>After the Israelite conquest of Canaan, the country was known as the land of Israel (1 Sm 13:19; 1 Chr 22:2). With the division of the kingdom in the reign of Rehoboam (930 <span>BC<\/span>), the name Israel went with the northern kingdom, and the southern kingdom was known as Judah (later, Judea).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Territory\">Territory<\/p>\n<p>The earliest reference to the extent of Palestine appears in the promise of the land to Abraham and to his descendants (Gn 15:18-21). Here the borders are given as the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) in the southwest to the Euphrates River in the northeast. It is further defined in terms of the peoples who occupied it at that time, 10 in all, including the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites. In Genesis 17:8 the land is called simply “all the land of Canaan.”<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave more detailed directions to Moses concerning the borders of the land that Israel was to occupy (Nm 34:1-12). The southern boundary was to be from the River of Egypt to the south of Kadesh-barnea and along the wilderness of Zin to the southern extremity of the Dead Sea. The western boundary was the Mediterranean, the northern border was set at the entrance to Hamath, and the eastern limit was the Jordan River and the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n<p>The greatest extent of the Promised Land is seen in the Lord’s declaration to Moses that he would set the bounds of Israel from the Red Sea to the Sea of the Philistines (Mediterranean) and from the wilderness to the Euphrates River (Ex 23:31). Historically, during the period of the judges and the reign of Saul, Israel did not conquer the land that had been given to the tribes in the division under Joshua. The military strength of David and the diplomacy of Solomon enabled them to achieve a marked expansion of Israelite rule. David defeated Hadadezer, king of Zobah, and thus pushed his northern frontier to the Euphrates River; he defeated Syria, Ammon, Moab, Edom, and Amalek, enlarging the kingdom also to the east and south (2 Sm 8:1-14; 1 Chr 18:1-13). Solomon had a fleet of merchant ships stationed at Ezion-geber on the Gulf of Aqaba. He also engaged in copper mining in that area.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Climate\">Climate<\/p>\n<p>It has been said that the climate of Palestine is more varied than that of any other area of comparable size in the world. Generally, the climate may be described as temperate; at Jerusalem, for example, the temperature extremes range from 26°F (-3.3°C) to 107°F (41.6°C), and the average annual rainfall is about 20 inches (50.8 centimeters). The coastal plain is warmer and has been compared to the east coast of Florida. The average annual temperature at Jaffa (Joppa) is 67° F (19.4°C). The Jordan Valley in the area of the Dead Sea is subtropical; in summer its temperatures may reach 120°F (48.8°C).<\/p>\n<p>Rainfall is seasonal, with rain coming in the cooler months of the year as the prevailing west wind brings moisture over the comparatively colder land area, much like the “lake effect” snows of the Great Lakes region of the United States. The rainy season extends from October to April. Within this time the Israelites singled out two periods (Jer 5:24; Jl 2:23), the former rain and the latter rain, with the former rain occurring in the months of October and November and the latter rain falling in March and April. The coastal area receives about 28 inches (71.1 centimeters) of rain annually, while the average for the country in general is 22 to 24 inches (55.9–70 centimeters).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>For purposes of description, the land of Palestine may be conveniently divided into five longitudinal sections:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Maritime or Coastal Plain<\/p>\n<li>2. The Shephelah<\/li>\n<li>3. The Western Plateau or Hill Country<\/li>\n<li>4. The Arabah or Jordan Valley<\/li>\n<li>5. The Eastern Plateau or Transjordan<\/li>\n<p>These divisions are based essentially on differences in elevation, but other geographic elements also serve to mark their limits or otherwise distinguish them.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Maritime or Coastal Plain<\/h5>\n<p>The Maritime or Coastal Plain may be divided into three separate plains from south to north: the plain of Philistia, the plain of Sharon, and the plain of Acre.<\/p>\n<p>1. The plain of Philistia begins with the Wadi el-Arish, or River of Egypt, and extends north to the Nahr el-Auja, about five miles (8 kilometers) north of Joppa. This plain is about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers) long and reaches its greatest width in the latitude of Gaza, where it measures about 30 miles (48.3 kilometers). Along the Mediterranean there were dunes of sand, but for the most part, this area was very fertile and admirably suited for the production of grain.<\/p>\n<li>2. The plain of Sharon is not sharply demarcated from the Philistine plain and was probably under Philistine control, but the OT recognizes it as a separate entity (cf. Sg 2:1; Is 65:10). The plain extends north to Mt Carmel. On the coast are the town of Dor, which is mentioned in “The Tale of Wenamon,” and the city of Caesarea, where Herod the Great did much building.<\/li>\n<li>3. Beyond the promontory of Carmel lies a bay on which was situated the city named Ptolemais (Acts 21:7), also known as Acre or Acco (Jgs 1:31). Here a narrow plain stretches some 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to the Ladder of Tyre (Ras en-Nakurah). The Kishon River (Jgs 4:7, 13; 1 Kgs 18:40) flows through this plain to the sea.<\/li>\n<h5>The Shephelah<\/h5>\n<p>The Shephelah constitutes a kind of “midlands,” intermediate between the lowlands of the coastal plain and the highlands of the Western Plateau, with an elevation of about 500 to 1,000 feet (152.4– 304.8 meters) and a width of only a few miles. It extends from the valley of Aijalon to Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p>The valleys of the Shephelah produced grain crops, while the hills were well suited for grapes and olives. The region was very important strategically, because it afforded approaches to Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<h5>The Western Plateau or Hill Country<\/h5>\n<p>The Western Plateau or Hill Country ranges from 1,000 to 4,000 feet (304.8–609.6 meters) in elevation and covers some 150 miles (241.4 kilometers) from Lebanon to Beersheba. It may also be divided into three areas: Galilee, Samaria, and Judea.<\/p>\n<p>1. Galilee may be regarded as two parts, Upper Galilee (2,000–4,000 feet, or 609.6–1,219.2 meters) and Lower Galilee (below 2,000 feet, or 609.6 meters). The area was agricultural and pastoral, like much of Palestine, and was open to invasion. The highways that traversed Galilee made it a cosmopolitan district, so that Isaiah 9:1 calls it “Galilee of the nations.”<\/p>\n<li>2. Samaria was also suitable for crops and pasture. The brothers of Joseph were grazing their flocks in the plain of Dothan when Joseph visited them and became the victim of their conspiracy (Gn 37:17).<\/li>\n<li>3. Judea has an elevation of about 2,000 to 3,500 feet (609.6–1,066.8 meters) and reaches some 60 miles (96.5 kilometers) from Bethel to Beersheba. The city of Jerusalem stands at an elevation of 2,654 feet (808.9 meters), surrounded by mountains and valleys that served as part of its defense system (Ps 125:2). This was the heart of the nation, for from the time of David onward, the capital was here, and more important, the ark of the covenant had been brought here during David’s reign. As the Lord had long foretold, Jerusalem had become the center of his worship; here Solomon built the temple, one of the greatest structures ever made.<\/li>\n<h5>The Arabah or Jordan Valley<\/h5>\n<p>The Arabah or Jordan Valley presents the extremes of height and depth. Mt Hermon rises to 9,166 feet (2,793.8 meters), while the surface of the Dead Sea lies 1,275 feet (395 meters) below sea level, and at its deepest part the sea plunges another 1,300 feet (396.2 meters).<\/p>\n<p>1. The North Arabah or Upper Jordan Valley. The Jordan River has four sources, all near Mt Hermon. The Jordan flows through what was Lake Huleh, now partly drained and designated as a wildlife refuge. Two miles (3.2 kilometers) below the Huleh basin is the Bridge of Jacob’s Daughters, by which the old road to Damascus crossed the river. The Jordan then flows into a gorge some 1,200 feet (365.8 meters) deep.<\/p>\n<li>2. The Sea of Galilee, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) from Huleh, has an elevation of -685 feet (-208.8 meters). It measures 15 by 8 miles (24.1 by 12.9 kilometers), with a maximum depth of 750 feet (228.6 meters). The shape of the lake gave it the OT name, Chinnereth, meaning “harp” (Nm 34:11; Jos 13:27). In the NT it was also called the Lake of Gennesaret (Lk 5:1) and the Sea of Tiberias (Jn 6:1; 21:1).<\/li>\n<li>3. The Middle Arabah, or Ghor. The name Jordan means “descender”; in the 60 miles or 96.5 kilometers (in a straight line) from the outlet of the Sea of Galilee to the northern end of the Dead Sea there is a fall of more than 600 feet (182.9 meters), or 10 feet per mile. The river flows in a series of S-curves or zigzags, so that its actual course between Galilee and the Dead Sea covers some 200 miles (321.8 kilometers).<\/li>\n<p>This stretch of the Jordan Valley is known as the Ghor, or Rift. Six miles (9.7 kilometers) below the Sea of Galilee the Yarmuk River enters from the east. Some smaller streams empty into the Jordan, but the next river of consequence is the Jabbok (Gn 32:22). Just south of the Sea of Galilee the Ghor is about four miles (6.4 kilometers) wide; near Beth-shan it reaches seven miles (11.3 kilometers) wide; beyond that for some 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the mountains close in on the river on both sides, narrowing the valley to two to three miles (3.2 to 4.8 kilometers); near Jericho it broadens to about 12 miles (19.3 kilometers).<\/p>\n<li>4. The Dead Sea is unique. Its surface is the deepest point on the face of the earth and its waters are of tremendous wealth. In the OT it is known as the Salt Sea (Gn 14:3; Nm 34:12; Jos 12:3) and the Sea of Arabah (Jos 12:3). Josephus calls it Lake Asphaltitis.<\/li>\n<p>This body of water is 46 miles (74 kilometers) long, 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) wide, and 1,300 feet (396.2 meters) deep and consists of about 25 percent mineral matter, making it a chemical deposit of great value. In addition to the flow of the Jordan, the Dead Sea receives the water of other streams, such as the Arnon River on the east. Much of the runoff of the seasonal rains also finds its way into the Salt Sea. Temperatures in the valley may reach 120° F (48.8° C) in summer; with the extreme humidity the climate is very debilitating and almost unbearable. It is estimated that the daily evaporation from the sea is 6 to 8 million tons (5.4–7.3 million metric tons).<\/p>\n<li>5. The Southern Arabah, mostly a barren wilderness, extends from the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Aqaba, a distance of 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). There is a gradual ascent from the Dead Sea to a watershed just west of Petra. Near the tip of the Gulf of Aqaba were the ports of Elath (modern Eilat) and Ezion-geber.<\/li>\n<h5>The Eastern Plateau or Transjordan<\/h5>\n<p>The Eastern Plateau, or Transjordan, was not named as part of the land of promise, but it was taken by the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half of Manasseh. The region is better supplied with water than the Western Plateau and has perennial streams, such as the Yarmuk, Jabbok, and Arnon. A principal north-south road was the King’s Highway, followed by the Israelites during the exodus (Nm 21:22) and probably also the route taken by the invading kings of Genesis 14.<\/p>\n<p>The northern section of Transjordan was known as Bashan, noted for its cattle (Ps 22:12; Ez 39:18) and for its oak trees (Is 2:13; Zec 11:2).<\/p>\n<p>Gilead, famed for its balm (Gn 37:25; Jer 8:22), was often mentioned in the OT (e.g., Dt 3:10-16; Jgs 11). It extended from the Yarmuk River to the city of Heshbon. This area was heavily forested in David’s time (cf. 2 Sm 18:8).<\/p>\n<p>In Palestine proper there were two important divisions: the plain of Esdraelon and the Negev. The plain of Esdraelon, often associated prophetically with Armageddon, lies between Galilee and Samaria. This is one of the most fertile areas of Palestine and also was the scene of numerous battles. The plain was guarded by fortress cities on its southern side (Megiddo, Ibleam, and Taanach). In the OT the valley of Jezreel was not regarded as a part of Esdraelon but as the valley between the hill of Moreh and Mt Gilboa. At the eastern end was the stronghold of Beth-shan.<\/p>\n<p>In the extreme south of the land is the wilderness area called the Negev, or South Country. This begins in the region of Beersheba and extends roughly to Kadesh-barnea. A district of infrequent and irregular rainfall, its agriculture is restricted, although a nomadic pastoral life has been widely practiced there. <em>See<\/em> Arabah; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Dead Sea; Decapolis; Sea of Galilee; Jordan River; Negev; Shephelah; Transjordan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PALESTINE* Country on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea, also known as Canaan and Israel. Palestine was situated at the west end of the Fertile Crescent—that arching stretch of highly productive land that ran from the Persian Gulf through Mesopotamia and Syria to Egypt. Palestine lay in a unique position, for it constituted a land bridge between Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two primary cultural centers of the ancient Near East. It also served as a connection between the continents of A...","summary_en":"PALESTINE* Country on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea, also known as Canaan and Israel. Palestine was situated at the west end of the Fertile Crescent—that arching stretch of highly productive land that ran from the Persian Gulf through Mesopotamia and Syria to Egypt. Palestine lay in a unique position, for it constituted a land bridge between Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two primary cultural centers of the ancient Near East. It also served as a connection between the continents of A...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33833,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Books of First and Second Samuel","title_en":"Books of First and Second Samuel","content_ro":"<h3>SAMUEL, Books of First and Second<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>First and Second Samuel derive their names from the individual whom God used to establish kingship in Israel. Samuel is the most prominent figure in the early narratives of 1 Samuel. His key role in leading the nation of Israel through the transition from the period of the judges to that of the monarchy warrants the use of his name as the title for the book.<\/p>\n<p>These books, however, have not always been so designated, nor was the material originally divided into two books. As far as is known, the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT dating from the third century <span>BC<\/span>) translators were the first to separate the material of Samuel into two books (they made a similar division in the material of Kings). The Hebrew original of these books was written, as is characteristic of Hebrew, with symbols only for consonants and none for vowels. When translated into Greek, it was necessary to use symbols for both vowels and consonants, thus greatly lengthening the manuscript. Presumably the practical consideration of the length of the scroll was the cause for dividing the material of both Samuel and Kings into two books (scrolls) instead of retaining just one. The Septuagint translators, recognizing the continuity of content and emphasis in Samuel and Kings, designated what is now known as 1 and 2 Samuel as “The First and Second Books of Kingdoms” and then designated what now is known as 1 and 2 Kings as “The Third and Fourth Books of Kingdoms.” The Latin Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible prepared by Jerome in the late fourth century <span>AD<\/span>) slightly modified the Septuagint titles to “First, Second, Third, and Fourth Kings.” These titles were utilized all through the Middle Ages and were modified into our present titles by the Protestant Reformers in the 16th century <span>AD<\/span> in agreement with Jewish rabbinic tradition. The Reformers, however, retained the division into two books, and this has been followed in modern English versions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>Even though Samuel is prominent in the early part of the book, and the book bears his name in our English versions, it is clear that he is not the author of the entirety of 1 and 2 Samuel. Samuel’s death is recorded in 1 Samuel 25:1, prior to the time of the accession of David to the throne in place of Saul. Who wrote the material of 1 and 2 Samuel if it was not Samuel? On the basis of the statement in 1 Chronicles 29:29, it has been suggested by some that Samuel composed the early narratives of the book and that his work was later supplemented by the writings of the prophets Nathan and Gad. Others have suggested one of David’s contemporaries, such as Ahimaaz (2 Sm 15:27, 36; 17:17), Hushai (2 Sm 15:32; 16:16), or Zabud (1 Kgs 4:5). Presumably, these men would have had access to the writings of Samuel, Nathan, and Gad, as well as to other sources (see 2 Sm 1:18) pertaining to the life and reigns of Saul and David. Who the real author was, however, cannot be determined from available evidence. Whoever it was, it is clear that he lived after the death of Solomon and the division of the kingdom in 930 <span>BC<\/span> (see references to “Israel in Judah” in 1 Sm 11:8; 17:52; 18:16; 2 Sm 5:5; 24:1-9; and “kings of Judah” in 1 Sm 27:6). Thus, 1 and 2 Samuel was published in its final form sometime after 930 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The theme binding together the narratives of 1 and 2 Samuel pertains to the relationship between kingship and the covenant. Kingship as requested by the people was a denial of the covenant; kingship as instituted by Samuel was compatible with the covenant; kingship as practiced by Saul failed to correspond to the covenantal idea; and kingship as practiced by David was an imperfect but true representation of the ideal of the covenantal king.<\/p>\n<p>It has often been pointed out that there is ambivalence in the description of the establishment of kingship in Israel (1 Sm 8–12), because in some places it seems to be suggested that kingship is improper for Israel, while in other places it seems to be suggested that kingship was God’s will for his people. Resolution to this tension is provided in 1 Samuel 12, when Samuel inaugurates Saul as Israel’s first king in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony by which Israel renews its allegiance to the Lord. Here it becomes clear that kingship in itself was not wrong for Israel; God desired Israel to have a king. But kingship of the type Israel desired (“like the other nations”) and for the reasons she wanted a king (to give a sense of national security and lead her to victory in battle) involved a denial of the Lord as her ultimate sovereign. Samuel defined the role of the king in Israel and presented Saul to the people in a ceremony in which they renewed their allegiance to the Lord. The monarchy in Israel was first established in a form that was compatible with the covenant. The king in Israel, as every other citizen of the nation, was to be subject to the law of the Lord and to the word of the prophet. From this perspective, the author depicts the reign of Saul as failing to correspond to the covenantal requirements, while the reign of David, although imperfect, reflected the covenantal ideal.<\/p>\n<p>There are at least two other important themes recorded in 1 and 2 Samuel. The first of these is that David conquers and acquires the land promised to Abraham. It is in the time of David that Israel’s borders are extended from Egypt to the Euphrates, as had been promised. A second event of major significance for the remainder of the Bible is David’s selection of Jerusalem to be the political and religious center of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Samuel (1 Sm 1–7)<\/h5>\n<h6>Samuel’s Youth (1 Sm 1–3)<\/h6>\n<p>God granted the request of Hannah for a son after a long period of barrenness. She named her son Samuel (a wordplay on the Hebrew expression “heard of God”) and dedicated him to the service of the Lord—with Eli the priest at the tabernacle in Shiloh. Hannah’s beautiful song of praise to God, who hears and answers prayer (2:1-10), exalts the sovereignty of God and prophetically anticipates not only the establishment of kingship in Israel but ultimately the highest fulfillment of the royal office in Christ himself (v 10). The evil practices of the sons of the priest Eli are described in verses 11-26. These men not only used their office for personal gain (vv 12-17) but also committed immoral acts with the women serving at the entrance to the tabernacle (v 22). Although Eli rebuked his sons (vv 22-25), his warnings were too little too late. It was in this lax environment that Samuel grew up (vv 18-21, 26).<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel 2:27-36, an unnamed prophet pronounced judgment on Eli and his priestly line. The prediction of the imminent death of Hophni and Phinehas, Eli’s sons, was fulfilled when the Philistines took the ark and destroyed the tabernacle at Shiloh (4:11; Jer 7:14). In 1 Samuel 3:1–4:1, Samuel is called to be a prophet, and he too is given a message of judgment for the house of Eli (3:11-14). As the reliability of Samuel’s words are attested, it is recognized by the people that he was a true prophet of the Lord (3:19–4:1).<\/p>\n\n<h6>The Loss and Return of the Ark (1 Sm 4–6)<\/h6>\n<p>In a battle with the Philistines, the prophecy of 2:27-36 and 3:11-14 was partially fulfilled. The Israelites were defeated, the ark was taken, and Hophni and Phinehas were killed. Upon hearing the report of these calamities, Eli also died (4:17-18). The Philistines placed the ark of the Lord in the temple of their god Dagon in Ashdod (5:1-2). However, when the idol of Dagon broke in pieces and fell before the ark and a plague broke out in Ashdod, the ark was moved to Gath. When the plague broke out in Gath, it was moved to Ekron. When the plague erupted in Ekron, the Philistines were compelled to return the ark to Israel—as a test, it was placed on a cart pulled by two nursing cows. These cows, going against their motherly instincts, left their penned-up calves and headed for the Israelite border and the town of Beth-shemesh (6:1-21). By this the Lord demonstrated that the victory over the Israelites and the capture of the ark could not be attributed to the Philistines’ god Dagon.<\/p>\n<h6>The Defeat of the Philistines (1 Sm 7)<\/h6>\n<p>Twenty years went by. Samuel assured the people of deliverance from Philistine oppression if they would confess their sin and turn from the worship of Baals and Ashtaroths. He called for a national assembly at Mizpah to renew allegiance to the Lord. While the Israelites were assembled, the Philistines attacked and the Lord gave the Israelites a miraculous victory, thereby demonstrating that obedience to covenant obligations would ensure national security (see Ex 23:22; Dt 20:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>Kingship Established in Israel (1 Sm 8–12)<\/h5>\n<h6>The People Request a King (1 Sm 8:1-22)<\/h6>\n<p>When Samuel was an old man, the elders of the nation approached him and requested that he give them a king. Samuel immediately perceived that their request was tantamount to a rejection of the Lord, who was their King, for the people desired a king “like the other nations”—as a symbol of national unity and military security. Nevertheless, the Lord told Samuel to give the people a king. At the same time, however, he told Samuel to warn the people concerning what having a king “like the nations” would mean. The warning, descriptive of the practices of contemporary Canaanite kings, fell on deaf ears; the people persisted in their desire for a king.<\/p>\n<h6>Samuel Privately Anoints Saul (1 Sm 9:1–10:16)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative of Saul’s search for the lost donkeys of his father and his encounter with Samuel in the process of his search is given to explain how Samuel and Saul first met, and how the Lord indicated to Samuel who the person was that he was to anoint as Israel’s first king (9:16-17). After Samuel privately anointed Saul (10:1), he was given three signs to confirm that his new calling came from the Lord.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul Publicly Chosen by Lot at Mizpah (1 Sm 10:17-27)<\/h6>\n<p>After the private designation and anointing of Saul to be king (9:1–10:16), Samuel convened a national assembly at Mizpah to make the Lord’s choice known to the people (10:20-24) and to define the king’s task (v 25). Again, at this assembly, Samuel emphasized that the people had rejected the Lord in requesting a king because they sought a king for the wrong reasons and failed to recognize the Lord’s past faithfulness in delivering them from their enemies. But again it was clear that the time for kingship in Israel had come and it was the Lord’s desire to give the people a king. Samuel’s explanation of the “regulations of the kingship” was an important step in resolving the tension between, on the one hand, Israel’s sin in desiring a king, and on the other, the Lord’s intent to give them a king. This document, which was preserved at the tabernacle, probably contained an enlarged version of the “law of the king” in Deuteronomy 17:14-20 and spelled out regulations governing the role of the king in Israel for the benefit of both the king and the people. This document undoubtedly distinguished Israelite kingship from that of the kings of the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul Leads Israel to Victory over the Ammonites (1 Sm 11:1-13)<\/h6>\n<p>When Nahash, king of the Ammonites, attacked Jabesh-gilead, a town east of the Jordan in the territory of Manasseh, Saul left his farmwork to lead a volunteer army in support of the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead. The victory over the Ammonites under Saul’s leadership placed another seal of divine approval on his selection to be king. Saul attributed the victory to the Lord rather than to his own military strategies.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul Inaugurated as King (1 Sm 11:14–12:25)<\/h6>\n<p>The victory at Jabesh-gilead prompted Samuel to call for a national assembly at Gilgal to renew the kingdom and make Saul king (11:14-15). At the Gilgal assembly, Samuel led the people in confessing the sin of their initial request for a king and in renewing their allegiance to the Lord. In the context of this covenant renewal ceremony, Saul was formally inaugurated in his office as king. By inaugurating Saul in this manner, Samuel effectively provided for covenantal continuity in the transition from the period of the judges to that of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<h5>Saul Rejected as King (1 Sm 13–15)<\/h5>\n<h6>Saul’s Disobedience (1 Sm 13:1-22)<\/h6>\n<p>When Saul was threatened with an imminent attack from the Philistines, he gathered troops at Gilgal and awaited Samuel, as he had been instructed (10:8; 13:8). When it appeared that Samuel would not come within the prearranged time, Saul became impatient and offered a sacrifice himself (13:9). Just as the sacrifice was completed, Samuel appeared and rebuked Saul for not keeping the commandment of the Lord. In disobeying Samuel’s previous instructions, Saul had violated a fundamental requirement of his office. He was seriously mistaken in thinking he could strengthen Israel’s hand against the Philistines by sacrifice to the Lord when this was done in violation of the Lord’s specific command. Samuel told Saul that because of his disobedience his dynasty would not endure (v 14).<\/p>\n<h6>Jonathan’s Victory (1 Sm 13:23–14:52)<\/h6>\n<p>Saul’s son Jonathan and Jonathan’s armor bearer skillfully and courageously attacked a Philistine outpost, killing about 20 men (14:8-14). The Lord used this defeat, along with an earthquake, to bring panic to the entire Philistine force. In the meantime, Saul sought divine guidance on whether to join the fray with his own forces. When the Lord’s answer did not come immediately, Saul concluded that waiting for the Lord’s word might jeopardize his military advantage. Here again he demonstrated that he trusted more in his own insight than in waiting upon the Lord. Saul further damaged his own stature in the eyes of his troops by pronouncing a foolish curse on any who would eat food before the battle was won. This nearly cost Jonathan his life; he was spared only because of the intervention of the troops in his defense.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul Rejected as King (1 Sm 15:1-35)<\/h6>\n<p>Saul was commanded by the Lord through Samuel to attack the Amalekites and totally destroy them, sparing neither human nor animal life. The Amalekites had previously attempted to destroy Israel shortly after their exodus from Egypt while journeying to Sinai (Ex 17:8-16). Saul disobeyed the Lord in sparing the best of the animals for sacrifice and in sparing Agag, the Amalekite king. The Lord sent Samuel again to rebuke Saul for his disobedience. Samuel charged Saul with rebellion against the Lord and told him that, because he had rejected the word of the Lord, the Lord had rejected him as king.<\/p>\n<h5>Saul and David (1 Sm 16:1—2 Sm 1:27)<\/h5>\n<h6>Samuel Anoints David (1 Sm 16:1-13)<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord instructed Samuel to go to the house of Jesse in Bethlehem to anoint one of his sons to be king in place of Saul. By divine leading, Jesse’s youngest son, David, was shown to be the one whom the Lord had chosen. When Samuel anointed him as king, the Spirit of the Lord came upon him with power.<\/p>\n<h6>David in the Service of Saul (1 Sm 16:14–17:58)<\/h6>\n<p>When Saul became plagued by an evil spirit, his attendants sought a harpist whose music would soothe him. David was the one chosen for this purpose. The position at the court, however, was not permanent, and David divided his time between the court and his home duties. In due time, the Philistines, led by the giant Goliath, encamped against the Israelites. Goliath challenged any Israelite who dared to meet him in individual combat. No Israelite ventured to accept his challenge until David, who was visiting the camp of the Israelite forces to bring food to his brothers, heard the challenge and responded in the strength and power of the Lord. The Lord gave David a great victory because he acknowledged that “the battle is the <span>Lord<\/span>’s” (17:47, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h6>Saul’s Hatred toward David (1 Sm 18:1–19:24)<\/h6>\n<p>In the aftermath of David’s victory over Goliath, Saul’s son Jonathan pledged loyalty to David in a covenant of friendship. As David achieved further successes in leading Israel’s armies, and as his public acclaim grew, Saul began to fear that David was a threat to his throne (18:14-16, 28-30). Saul, hating David, made several attempts to kill him (18:17, 25; 19:1, 10). David was finally forced to flee and sought refuge with Samuel at Ramah. When Saul and three of his messengers went to Ramah to arrest David, they were so overcome by the Spirit of God that they were incapable of fulfilling their mission.<\/p>\n<h6>David and Jonathan (1 Sm 20:1-42)<\/h6>\n<p>David’s absence from the royal table at the new moon festival provoked Saul to again threaten David’s life. Jonathan met with David at a prearranged place to inform him of the danger and say good-bye. Jonathan and David again pledged themselves to mutual loyalty and kindness. In the encounter it is clear that both men knew that David, not Jonathan, would be the successor to Saul on the throne of Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>David at Nob (1 Sm 21:1-9)<\/h6>\n<p>David went to the priest Ahimelech at Nob and, indicating he was on a secret mission for Saul, asked for bread and for the sword of Goliath, both of which were given to him. One of Saul’s servants, Doeg the Edomite, who was at Nob, observed the transaction.<\/p>\n<h6>David at Gath (1 Sm 21:10-15)<\/h6>\n<p>David then went into Philistine territory to King Achish at Gath. When his identity was discovered, he feigned insanity in order to escape.<\/p>\n<h6>David at Adullam (1 Sm 22:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>From Gath David went to the cave of Adullam where he was joined by about 400 supporters. He took his parents to Moab for their own protection and then returned to the Forest of Hereth in Judah.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul Kills the Priests at Nob (1 Sm 22:6-23)<\/h6>\n<p>Doeg the Edomite reported to Saul that Ahimelech the priest had given assistance to David. At Saul’s command Doeg massacred all the priests at Nob except Abiathar, who escaped with the ephod and joined David.<\/p>\n<h6>David at Keilah (1 Sm 23:1-13)<\/h6>\n<p>David and his men delivered the citizens of Keilah from Philistine raiders but were forced to leave the city when it was apparent that its unthankful inhabitants were prepared to hand David over to Saul.<\/p>\n<h6>David in the Desert of Ziph (1 Sm 23:14-29)<\/h6>\n<p>While David was in the desert of Ziph, he was encouraged by a visit from Jonathan, who again pledged to him his loyalty. Although the Ziphites promised to aid Saul in capturing David, a Philistine attack forced Saul to abandon his attempt to apprehend him.<\/p>\n<h6>David Spares Saul’s Life (1 Sm 24:1-22)<\/h6>\n<p>While hiding deep in a cave at En-gedi, David was unexpectedly provided the opportunity to take Saul’s life when Saul relieved himself at the entrance to the cave. Nevertheless, because Saul was “the anointed of the Lord,” David spared his life and shamed him into confessing his own wickedness. David did this by showing Saul a piece of his robe that he had cut off while Saul was in the entrance to the cave.<\/p>\n<h6>David, Nabal, and Abigail (1 Sm 25:1-44)<\/h6>\n<p>David was badly mistreated by a sheepherder named Nabal. David was deterred, however, from foolishly taking the man’s life by the discerning words of Nabal’s wife, Abigail. Shortly after this incident, Nabal died and David took Abigail as his wife.<\/p>\n<h6>David Spares Saul’s Life a Second Time (1 Sm 26:1-25)<\/h6>\n<p>For a second time, the Ziphites joined Saul in attempting to capture David. While Saul and his men were sleeping, David and Abishai crept into their camp and took Saul’s spear and water jug. On the next day, David was again able to demonstrate to Saul that he did not seek to steal the kingship from his hands.<\/p>\n<h6>David among the Philistines (1 Sm 27:1-12)<\/h6>\n<p>David eventually became weary of hiding from Saul in Israelite territory; in a time of discouragement, he went again to Philistia to seek refuge beyond Saul’s reach. Ingratiating himself with Achish, a Philistine ruler, he was given the town of Ziklag as a place for himself and his men to reside. From Ziklag, David raided various tribes inhabiting the area south of Philistia, but deceived Achish into thinking he was raiding the territory of Judah.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul and the Medium of Endor (1 Sm 28:1-25)<\/h6>\n<p>The Philistines again gathered an army to fight Israel, and Saul, terrified and seemingly anticipating an imminent defeat, vainly sought for some word from the Lord concerning the outcome of the battle. When this was denied, he went in disguise to a medium at Endor and requested her to bring up to him the spirit of Samuel. Saul was told by this spirit that Israel would be defeated and that he and his sons would die in the upcoming battle.<\/p>\n<h6>The Philistines Mistrust David (1 Sm 29:1-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Although Achish desired David to join the Philistine army in its battle with Israel, the other Philistine commanders mistrusted him and forced Achish to send David and his men back to Ziklag. This turn of events rescued David from a serious dilemma created by his apparent friendship with Achish.<\/p>\n<h6>David Defeats the Amalekites (1 Sm 30:1-31)<\/h6>\n<p>Upon returning to Ziklag, David discovered that in his absence the city had been raided and burned by the Amalekites and that their wives, children, and cattle had been taken captive. After inquiring of the Lord through Abiathar the priest, David and his men went in pursuit of the Amalekites and recovered all they had taken and more. He divided the plunder among his troops and sent gifts from it to various towns in Judah.<\/p>\n<h6>The Death of Saul and His Sons (1 Sm 31:1—2 Sm 1:27)<\/h6>\n<p>As had been predicted, the battle with the Philistines ended in a disastrous defeat for Israel, in which Saul took his own life after being seriously wounded. Jonathan and two other sons of Saul were killed. David mourned for Saul and Jonathan and exalted their memory in his tribute to them recorded in 2 Samuel 1:19-27.<\/p>\n<h5>David (2 Sm 2–24)<\/h5>\n\n<h6>David Anointed King over Judah (2 Sm 2:1-7)<\/h6>\n<p>Subsequent to Saul’s death, the Lord instructed David to go to Hebron, where the tribe of Judah anointed him as their king.<\/p>\n<h6>David, Ishbosheth, and Abner (2 Sm 2:8–4:12)<\/h6>\n<p>Although David became king over Judah, the remaining tribes—under the influence of Abner, commander of Saul’s army—recognized Ishbosheth as Saul’s successor (2:8-10). Ishbosheth was a son of Saul who had survived the battle with the Philistines. Conflict quickly broke out between the men of David, led by Joab, and the men of Ishbosheth, led by Abner. In this conflict Asahel, Joab’s brother, was slain by Abner. As David grew stronger and Ishbosheth weaker, Abner shifted his allegiance from Ishbosheth to David (3:1-21). Joab, however, avenged the blood of his brother Asahel by murdering Abner under the pretense of negotiating with him. Although David detested this act, mourned for Abner, and cursed Joab, the crime was not punished until early in the reign of Solomon (see 1 Kgs 2:5-6, 29-34). Shortly afterward, Ishbosheth was killed by two soldiers, who brought his head to David at Hebron, expecting to be rewarded (2 Sm 4:1-8). David, however, had them both put to death. The only male survivor of Saul’s line was the crippled son of Jonathan named Mephibosheth.<\/p>\n<h6>David King over All Israel (2 Sm 5)<\/h6>\n<p>After Ishbosheth’s death, David was made king over all the tribes at Hebron. One of David’s first acts as king was to capture the fortress of Zion from the Jebusites. David established Zion as his capital and built a palace there for his residence.<\/p>\n<h6>The Ark Brought to Jerusalem (2 Sm 6)<\/h6>\n<p>Recognizing the importance of the ark as a symbol of God’s presence with his people, David determined that it should be brought to Jerusalem from the obscurity of the house of Abinadab in Kiriath-jearim, where it had remained throughout the entirety of Saul’s reign. Violation of prescriptions for handling the ark led to the death of Uzzah, one of Abinadab’s sons, and delayed the ark’s conveyance to Jerusalem for three months. In a second attempt David led a joyful procession into the city of Jerusalem, where the ark was placed in a tent that had been prepared for it.<\/p>\n<h6>David, Nathan, and the Temple (2 Sm 7)<\/h6>\n<p>It soon became David’s desire to build a temple to house the ark and provide a center for Israel’s worship of the Lord. The Lord told David through Nathan the prophet that he was not to build the Lord a house (temple) but that the Lord would build him a house (a dynasty) that would endure forever. Here the line of the promised seed is narrowed to the house of David within the tribe of Judah. This promise finds its fulfillment in the birth of Jesus, who was the “son of David, the son of Abraham” (see Mt 1:1). It would be the task of Solomon, David’s son, to construct the temple (2 Sm 7:13).<\/p>\n<h6>David’s Victories (2 Sm 8)<\/h6>\n<p>David was able to defeat numerous surrounding peoples, to extend Israel’s borders, and to establish a time of prosperity and rest for the nation.<\/p>\n<h6>David and Mephibosheth (2 Sm 9)<\/h6>\n<p>Remembering his covenant with Jonathan (see 1 Sm 18:1-3; 20:13-16, 42), David inquired concerning survivors of the house of Saul to whom he could show kindness. When Mephibosheth was sought out, David brought him to the court to enjoy the honor of eating at the king’s table.<\/p>\n<h6>David and Bathsheba (2 Sm 10–12)<\/h6>\n<p>During a war with the Ammonites, David committed adultery with the wife of one of his soldiers, Uriah the Hittite. When Bathsheba became pregnant, David attempted to get Uriah to sleep with her. When this failed, David arranged for Uriah’s certain death in battle. These sinful acts provoked God’s wrath (2 Sm 12:10-12) and David experienced the bitter fruits of his misconduct during the remainder of his life.<\/p>\n<h6>Amnon, Absalom, and Tamar (2 Sm 13)<\/h6>\n<p>David’s oldest son, Amnon, feigned sickness in order to arrange for his half sister, Tamar, to care for him. When Tamar refused Amnon’s sexual advances to her, he raped her. This incident enraged Tamar’s full brother Absalom, who determined to avenge his sister by killing Amnon. Absalom waited two years and then arranged for the murder of Amnon during the festivities of the time of sheepshearing. He then fled to Geshur, a small city-state in Syria, where his maternal grandfather was king.<\/p>\n<h6>David and Absalom (2 Sm 14–19)<\/h6>\n<p>Absalom remained in exile for three years until Joab arranged for his return by securing a renunciation of blood revenge from David (14:1-27). Upon Absalom’s return, however, David refused to see him for two years, until they were finally reconciled. In this whole episode David sidestepped the issues of repentance and justice and took no effective disciplinary action. In the meantime Absalom conspired to take the throne from David his father by attempting to discredit his administration of justice, and by seeking to win the favor of the people and members of David’s court. After four years, Absalom proclaimed himself king in Hebron and gathered sufficient military strength to force his father to flee from Jerusalem (ch 15). Failure to immediately pursue David led to the defeat of Absalom’s forces and to Absalom’s own death at the hand of Joab, David’s commander. David mourned for his son Absalom (19:1-8), but he was able to return to Jerusalem and to reestablish his government. David disciplined Joab for killing Absalom by replacing him as commander of his troops with Amasa.<\/p>\n<h6>Rebellion of Sheba (2 Sm 20)<\/h6>\n<p>In the unsettled conditions immediately after David’s return to Jerusalem, another abortive revolt was attempted by Sheba of the tribe of Benjamin. Joab, in defiance of David’s disciplinary action, killed Amasa, pursued Sheba, and crushed his revolt.<\/p>\n<h6>David and the Gibeonites (2 Sm 21:1-14)<\/h6>\n<p>At some unspecified time during David’s reign, the land suffered a three-year famine. It was revealed to David by the Lord that the famine was due to Saul’s violation of an Israelite treaty with the Gibeonites (see Jos 9:15, 18-27). This offense was atoned for by giving seven descendants of Saul to the Gibeonites for execution.<\/p>\n<h6>David and the Philistines (2 Sm 21:15-22)<\/h6>\n<p>In this pericope four episodes of heroic accomplishments by David’s mighty men against the Philistines are recounted.<\/p>\n<h6>David’s Song of Praise (2 Sm 22)<\/h6>\n<p>In a beautiful song of praise, David described his deliverance from his enemies and the help with which the Lord sustained him. The same song occurs with minor variations in Psalm 18.<\/p>\n<h6>David’s Last Words (2 Sm 23:1-7)<\/h6>\n<p>In a brief statement, David acknowledges the work of God’s Spirit in enabling him to speak God’s word, and proclaims his confidence in the realization of the Lord’s promise to him and his dynasty.<\/p>\n<h6>David’s Mighty Men (2 Sm 23:8-39)<\/h6>\n<p>This pericope contains a list of 37 of David’s warriors and a description of some of their accomplishments.<\/p>\n<h6>The Census and David’s Punishment (2 Sm 24:1-25)<\/h6>\n<p>David’s decision to take a census of his fighting men reflected an improper trust in military-political organization and power. The Lord judged him by sending a plague on the land that killed many people. At the word of the Lord through Gad the prophet, David built an altar on the threshing floor of Araunah, which was later to become the site of the temple (see 2 Chr 3:1). The Lord responded to David’s sacrifices and prayers on behalf of the people; the plague was stopped.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> David; Samuel (Person); Saul #2.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SAMUEL, Books of First and Second<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>First and Second Samuel derive their names from the individual whom God used to establish kingship in Israel. Samuel is the most prominent figure in the early narratives of 1 Samuel. His key role in leading the nation of Israel through the transition from the period of the judges to that of the monarchy warrants the use of his name as the title for the book.<\/p>\n<p>These books, however, have not always been so designated, nor was the material originally divided into two books. As far as is known, the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT dating from the third century <span>BC<\/span>) translators were the first to separate the material of Samuel into two books (they made a similar division in the material of Kings). The Hebrew original of these books was written, as is characteristic of Hebrew, with symbols only for consonants and none for vowels. When translated into Greek, it was necessary to use symbols for both vowels and consonants, thus greatly lengthening the manuscript. Presumably the practical consideration of the length of the scroll was the cause for dividing the material of both Samuel and Kings into two books (scrolls) instead of retaining just one. The Septuagint translators, recognizing the continuity of content and emphasis in Samuel and Kings, designated what is now known as 1 and 2 Samuel as “The First and Second Books of Kingdoms” and then designated what now is known as 1 and 2 Kings as “The Third and Fourth Books of Kingdoms.” The Latin Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible prepared by Jerome in the late fourth century <span>AD<\/span>) slightly modified the Septuagint titles to “First, Second, Third, and Fourth Kings.” These titles were utilized all through the Middle Ages and were modified into our present titles by the Protestant Reformers in the 16th century <span>AD<\/span> in agreement with Jewish rabbinic tradition. The Reformers, however, retained the division into two books, and this has been followed in modern English versions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>Even though Samuel is prominent in the early part of the book, and the book bears his name in our English versions, it is clear that he is not the author of the entirety of 1 and 2 Samuel. Samuel’s death is recorded in 1 Samuel 25:1, prior to the time of the accession of David to the throne in place of Saul. Who wrote the material of 1 and 2 Samuel if it was not Samuel? On the basis of the statement in 1 Chronicles 29:29, it has been suggested by some that Samuel composed the early narratives of the book and that his work was later supplemented by the writings of the prophets Nathan and Gad. Others have suggested one of David’s contemporaries, such as Ahimaaz (2 Sm 15:27, 36; 17:17), Hushai (2 Sm 15:32; 16:16), or Zabud (1 Kgs 4:5). Presumably, these men would have had access to the writings of Samuel, Nathan, and Gad, as well as to other sources (see 2 Sm 1:18) pertaining to the life and reigns of Saul and David. Who the real author was, however, cannot be determined from available evidence. Whoever it was, it is clear that he lived after the death of Solomon and the division of the kingdom in 930 <span>BC<\/span> (see references to “Israel in Judah” in 1 Sm 11:8; 17:52; 18:16; 2 Sm 5:5; 24:1-9; and “kings of Judah” in 1 Sm 27:6). Thus, 1 and 2 Samuel was published in its final form sometime after 930 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The theme binding together the narratives of 1 and 2 Samuel pertains to the relationship between kingship and the covenant. Kingship as requested by the people was a denial of the covenant; kingship as instituted by Samuel was compatible with the covenant; kingship as practiced by Saul failed to correspond to the covenantal idea; and kingship as practiced by David was an imperfect but true representation of the ideal of the covenantal king.<\/p>\n<p>It has often been pointed out that there is ambivalence in the description of the establishment of kingship in Israel (1 Sm 8–12), because in some places it seems to be suggested that kingship is improper for Israel, while in other places it seems to be suggested that kingship was God’s will for his people. Resolution to this tension is provided in 1 Samuel 12, when Samuel inaugurates Saul as Israel’s first king in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony by which Israel renews its allegiance to the Lord. Here it becomes clear that kingship in itself was not wrong for Israel; God desired Israel to have a king. But kingship of the type Israel desired (“like the other nations”) and for the reasons she wanted a king (to give a sense of national security and lead her to victory in battle) involved a denial of the Lord as her ultimate sovereign. Samuel defined the role of the king in Israel and presented Saul to the people in a ceremony in which they renewed their allegiance to the Lord. The monarchy in Israel was first established in a form that was compatible with the covenant. The king in Israel, as every other citizen of the nation, was to be subject to the law of the Lord and to the word of the prophet. From this perspective, the author depicts the reign of Saul as failing to correspond to the covenantal requirements, while the reign of David, although imperfect, reflected the covenantal ideal.<\/p>\n<p>There are at least two other important themes recorded in 1 and 2 Samuel. The first of these is that David conquers and acquires the land promised to Abraham. It is in the time of David that Israel’s borders are extended from Egypt to the Euphrates, as had been promised. A second event of major significance for the remainder of the Bible is David’s selection of Jerusalem to be the political and religious center of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Samuel (1 Sm 1–7)<\/h5>\n<h6>Samuel’s Youth (1 Sm 1–3)<\/h6>\n<p>God granted the request of Hannah for a son after a long period of barrenness. She named her son Samuel (a wordplay on the Hebrew expression “heard of God”) and dedicated him to the service of the Lord—with Eli the priest at the tabernacle in Shiloh. Hannah’s beautiful song of praise to God, who hears and answers prayer (2:1-10), exalts the sovereignty of God and prophetically anticipates not only the establishment of kingship in Israel but ultimately the highest fulfillment of the royal office in Christ himself (v 10). The evil practices of the sons of the priest Eli are described in verses 11-26. These men not only used their office for personal gain (vv 12-17) but also committed immoral acts with the women serving at the entrance to the tabernacle (v 22). Although Eli rebuked his sons (vv 22-25), his warnings were too little too late. It was in this lax environment that Samuel grew up (vv 18-21, 26).<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Samuel 2:27-36, an unnamed prophet pronounced judgment on Eli and his priestly line. The prediction of the imminent death of Hophni and Phinehas, Eli’s sons, was fulfilled when the Philistines took the ark and destroyed the tabernacle at Shiloh (4:11; Jer 7:14). In 1 Samuel 3:1–4:1, Samuel is called to be a prophet, and he too is given a message of judgment for the house of Eli (3:11-14). As the reliability of Samuel’s words are attested, it is recognized by the people that he was a true prophet of the Lord (3:19–4:1).<\/p>\n\n<h6>The Loss and Return of the Ark (1 Sm 4–6)<\/h6>\n<p>In a battle with the Philistines, the prophecy of 2:27-36 and 3:11-14 was partially fulfilled. The Israelites were defeated, the ark was taken, and Hophni and Phinehas were killed. Upon hearing the report of these calamities, Eli also died (4:17-18). The Philistines placed the ark of the Lord in the temple of their god Dagon in Ashdod (5:1-2). However, when the idol of Dagon broke in pieces and fell before the ark and a plague broke out in Ashdod, the ark was moved to Gath. When the plague broke out in Gath, it was moved to Ekron. When the plague erupted in Ekron, the Philistines were compelled to return the ark to Israel—as a test, it was placed on a cart pulled by two nursing cows. These cows, going against their motherly instincts, left their penned-up calves and headed for the Israelite border and the town of Beth-shemesh (6:1-21). By this the Lord demonstrated that the victory over the Israelites and the capture of the ark could not be attributed to the Philistines’ god Dagon.<\/p>\n<h6>The Defeat of the Philistines (1 Sm 7)<\/h6>\n<p>Twenty years went by. Samuel assured the people of deliverance from Philistine oppression if they would confess their sin and turn from the worship of Baals and Ashtaroths. He called for a national assembly at Mizpah to renew allegiance to the Lord. While the Israelites were assembled, the Philistines attacked and the Lord gave the Israelites a miraculous victory, thereby demonstrating that obedience to covenant obligations would ensure national security (see Ex 23:22; Dt 20:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>Kingship Established in Israel (1 Sm 8–12)<\/h5>\n<h6>The People Request a King (1 Sm 8:1-22)<\/h6>\n<p>When Samuel was an old man, the elders of the nation approached him and requested that he give them a king. Samuel immediately perceived that their request was tantamount to a rejection of the Lord, who was their King, for the people desired a king “like the other nations”—as a symbol of national unity and military security. Nevertheless, the Lord told Samuel to give the people a king. At the same time, however, he told Samuel to warn the people concerning what having a king “like the nations” would mean. The warning, descriptive of the practices of contemporary Canaanite kings, fell on deaf ears; the people persisted in their desire for a king.<\/p>\n<h6>Samuel Privately Anoints Saul (1 Sm 9:1–10:16)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative of Saul’s search for the lost donkeys of his father and his encounter with Samuel in the process of his search is given to explain how Samuel and Saul first met, and how the Lord indicated to Samuel who the person was that he was to anoint as Israel’s first king (9:16-17). After Samuel privately anointed Saul (10:1), he was given three signs to confirm that his new calling came from the Lord.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul Publicly Chosen by Lot at Mizpah (1 Sm 10:17-27)<\/h6>\n<p>After the private designation and anointing of Saul to be king (9:1–10:16), Samuel convened a national assembly at Mizpah to make the Lord’s choice known to the people (10:20-24) and to define the king’s task (v 25). Again, at this assembly, Samuel emphasized that the people had rejected the Lord in requesting a king because they sought a king for the wrong reasons and failed to recognize the Lord’s past faithfulness in delivering them from their enemies. But again it was clear that the time for kingship in Israel had come and it was the Lord’s desire to give the people a king. Samuel’s explanation of the “regulations of the kingship” was an important step in resolving the tension between, on the one hand, Israel’s sin in desiring a king, and on the other, the Lord’s intent to give them a king. This document, which was preserved at the tabernacle, probably contained an enlarged version of the “law of the king” in Deuteronomy 17:14-20 and spelled out regulations governing the role of the king in Israel for the benefit of both the king and the people. This document undoubtedly distinguished Israelite kingship from that of the kings of the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul Leads Israel to Victory over the Ammonites (1 Sm 11:1-13)<\/h6>\n<p>When Nahash, king of the Ammonites, attacked Jabesh-gilead, a town east of the Jordan in the territory of Manasseh, Saul left his farmwork to lead a volunteer army in support of the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead. The victory over the Ammonites under Saul’s leadership placed another seal of divine approval on his selection to be king. Saul attributed the victory to the Lord rather than to his own military strategies.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul Inaugurated as King (1 Sm 11:14–12:25)<\/h6>\n<p>The victory at Jabesh-gilead prompted Samuel to call for a national assembly at Gilgal to renew the kingdom and make Saul king (11:14-15). At the Gilgal assembly, Samuel led the people in confessing the sin of their initial request for a king and in renewing their allegiance to the Lord. In the context of this covenant renewal ceremony, Saul was formally inaugurated in his office as king. By inaugurating Saul in this manner, Samuel effectively provided for covenantal continuity in the transition from the period of the judges to that of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<h5>Saul Rejected as King (1 Sm 13–15)<\/h5>\n<h6>Saul’s Disobedience (1 Sm 13:1-22)<\/h6>\n<p>When Saul was threatened with an imminent attack from the Philistines, he gathered troops at Gilgal and awaited Samuel, as he had been instructed (10:8; 13:8). When it appeared that Samuel would not come within the prearranged time, Saul became impatient and offered a sacrifice himself (13:9). Just as the sacrifice was completed, Samuel appeared and rebuked Saul for not keeping the commandment of the Lord. In disobeying Samuel’s previous instructions, Saul had violated a fundamental requirement of his office. He was seriously mistaken in thinking he could strengthen Israel’s hand against the Philistines by sacrifice to the Lord when this was done in violation of the Lord’s specific command. Samuel told Saul that because of his disobedience his dynasty would not endure (v 14).<\/p>\n<h6>Jonathan’s Victory (1 Sm 13:23–14:52)<\/h6>\n<p>Saul’s son Jonathan and Jonathan’s armor bearer skillfully and courageously attacked a Philistine outpost, killing about 20 men (14:8-14). The Lord used this defeat, along with an earthquake, to bring panic to the entire Philistine force. In the meantime, Saul sought divine guidance on whether to join the fray with his own forces. When the Lord’s answer did not come immediately, Saul concluded that waiting for the Lord’s word might jeopardize his military advantage. Here again he demonstrated that he trusted more in his own insight than in waiting upon the Lord. Saul further damaged his own stature in the eyes of his troops by pronouncing a foolish curse on any who would eat food before the battle was won. This nearly cost Jonathan his life; he was spared only because of the intervention of the troops in his defense.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul Rejected as King (1 Sm 15:1-35)<\/h6>\n<p>Saul was commanded by the Lord through Samuel to attack the Amalekites and totally destroy them, sparing neither human nor animal life. The Amalekites had previously attempted to destroy Israel shortly after their exodus from Egypt while journeying to Sinai (Ex 17:8-16). Saul disobeyed the Lord in sparing the best of the animals for sacrifice and in sparing Agag, the Amalekite king. The Lord sent Samuel again to rebuke Saul for his disobedience. Samuel charged Saul with rebellion against the Lord and told him that, because he had rejected the word of the Lord, the Lord had rejected him as king.<\/p>\n<h5>Saul and David (1 Sm 16:1—2 Sm 1:27)<\/h5>\n<h6>Samuel Anoints David (1 Sm 16:1-13)<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord instructed Samuel to go to the house of Jesse in Bethlehem to anoint one of his sons to be king in place of Saul. By divine leading, Jesse’s youngest son, David, was shown to be the one whom the Lord had chosen. When Samuel anointed him as king, the Spirit of the Lord came upon him with power.<\/p>\n<h6>David in the Service of Saul (1 Sm 16:14–17:58)<\/h6>\n<p>When Saul became plagued by an evil spirit, his attendants sought a harpist whose music would soothe him. David was the one chosen for this purpose. The position at the court, however, was not permanent, and David divided his time between the court and his home duties. In due time, the Philistines, led by the giant Goliath, encamped against the Israelites. Goliath challenged any Israelite who dared to meet him in individual combat. No Israelite ventured to accept his challenge until David, who was visiting the camp of the Israelite forces to bring food to his brothers, heard the challenge and responded in the strength and power of the Lord. The Lord gave David a great victory because he acknowledged that “the battle is the <span>Lord<\/span>’s” (17:47, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h6>Saul’s Hatred toward David (1 Sm 18:1–19:24)<\/h6>\n<p>In the aftermath of David’s victory over Goliath, Saul’s son Jonathan pledged loyalty to David in a covenant of friendship. As David achieved further successes in leading Israel’s armies, and as his public acclaim grew, Saul began to fear that David was a threat to his throne (18:14-16, 28-30). Saul, hating David, made several attempts to kill him (18:17, 25; 19:1, 10). David was finally forced to flee and sought refuge with Samuel at Ramah. When Saul and three of his messengers went to Ramah to arrest David, they were so overcome by the Spirit of God that they were incapable of fulfilling their mission.<\/p>\n<h6>David and Jonathan (1 Sm 20:1-42)<\/h6>\n<p>David’s absence from the royal table at the new moon festival provoked Saul to again threaten David’s life. Jonathan met with David at a prearranged place to inform him of the danger and say good-bye. Jonathan and David again pledged themselves to mutual loyalty and kindness. In the encounter it is clear that both men knew that David, not Jonathan, would be the successor to Saul on the throne of Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>David at Nob (1 Sm 21:1-9)<\/h6>\n<p>David went to the priest Ahimelech at Nob and, indicating he was on a secret mission for Saul, asked for bread and for the sword of Goliath, both of which were given to him. One of Saul’s servants, Doeg the Edomite, who was at Nob, observed the transaction.<\/p>\n<h6>David at Gath (1 Sm 21:10-15)<\/h6>\n<p>David then went into Philistine territory to King Achish at Gath. When his identity was discovered, he feigned insanity in order to escape.<\/p>\n<h6>David at Adullam (1 Sm 22:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>From Gath David went to the cave of Adullam where he was joined by about 400 supporters. He took his parents to Moab for their own protection and then returned to the Forest of Hereth in Judah.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul Kills the Priests at Nob (1 Sm 22:6-23)<\/h6>\n<p>Doeg the Edomite reported to Saul that Ahimelech the priest had given assistance to David. At Saul’s command Doeg massacred all the priests at Nob except Abiathar, who escaped with the ephod and joined David.<\/p>\n<h6>David at Keilah (1 Sm 23:1-13)<\/h6>\n<p>David and his men delivered the citizens of Keilah from Philistine raiders but were forced to leave the city when it was apparent that its unthankful inhabitants were prepared to hand David over to Saul.<\/p>\n<h6>David in the Desert of Ziph (1 Sm 23:14-29)<\/h6>\n<p>While David was in the desert of Ziph, he was encouraged by a visit from Jonathan, who again pledged to him his loyalty. Although the Ziphites promised to aid Saul in capturing David, a Philistine attack forced Saul to abandon his attempt to apprehend him.<\/p>\n<h6>David Spares Saul’s Life (1 Sm 24:1-22)<\/h6>\n<p>While hiding deep in a cave at En-gedi, David was unexpectedly provided the opportunity to take Saul’s life when Saul relieved himself at the entrance to the cave. Nevertheless, because Saul was “the anointed of the Lord,” David spared his life and shamed him into confessing his own wickedness. David did this by showing Saul a piece of his robe that he had cut off while Saul was in the entrance to the cave.<\/p>\n<h6>David, Nabal, and Abigail (1 Sm 25:1-44)<\/h6>\n<p>David was badly mistreated by a sheepherder named Nabal. David was deterred, however, from foolishly taking the man’s life by the discerning words of Nabal’s wife, Abigail. Shortly after this incident, Nabal died and David took Abigail as his wife.<\/p>\n<h6>David Spares Saul’s Life a Second Time (1 Sm 26:1-25)<\/h6>\n<p>For a second time, the Ziphites joined Saul in attempting to capture David. While Saul and his men were sleeping, David and Abishai crept into their camp and took Saul’s spear and water jug. On the next day, David was again able to demonstrate to Saul that he did not seek to steal the kingship from his hands.<\/p>\n<h6>David among the Philistines (1 Sm 27:1-12)<\/h6>\n<p>David eventually became weary of hiding from Saul in Israelite territory; in a time of discouragement, he went again to Philistia to seek refuge beyond Saul’s reach. Ingratiating himself with Achish, a Philistine ruler, he was given the town of Ziklag as a place for himself and his men to reside. From Ziklag, David raided various tribes inhabiting the area south of Philistia, but deceived Achish into thinking he was raiding the territory of Judah.<\/p>\n<h6>Saul and the Medium of Endor (1 Sm 28:1-25)<\/h6>\n<p>The Philistines again gathered an army to fight Israel, and Saul, terrified and seemingly anticipating an imminent defeat, vainly sought for some word from the Lord concerning the outcome of the battle. When this was denied, he went in disguise to a medium at Endor and requested her to bring up to him the spirit of Samuel. Saul was told by this spirit that Israel would be defeated and that he and his sons would die in the upcoming battle.<\/p>\n<h6>The Philistines Mistrust David (1 Sm 29:1-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Although Achish desired David to join the Philistine army in its battle with Israel, the other Philistine commanders mistrusted him and forced Achish to send David and his men back to Ziklag. This turn of events rescued David from a serious dilemma created by his apparent friendship with Achish.<\/p>\n<h6>David Defeats the Amalekites (1 Sm 30:1-31)<\/h6>\n<p>Upon returning to Ziklag, David discovered that in his absence the city had been raided and burned by the Amalekites and that their wives, children, and cattle had been taken captive. After inquiring of the Lord through Abiathar the priest, David and his men went in pursuit of the Amalekites and recovered all they had taken and more. He divided the plunder among his troops and sent gifts from it to various towns in Judah.<\/p>\n<h6>The Death of Saul and His Sons (1 Sm 31:1—2 Sm 1:27)<\/h6>\n<p>As had been predicted, the battle with the Philistines ended in a disastrous defeat for Israel, in which Saul took his own life after being seriously wounded. Jonathan and two other sons of Saul were killed. David mourned for Saul and Jonathan and exalted their memory in his tribute to them recorded in 2 Samuel 1:19-27.<\/p>\n<h5>David (2 Sm 2–24)<\/h5>\n\n<h6>David Anointed King over Judah (2 Sm 2:1-7)<\/h6>\n<p>Subsequent to Saul’s death, the Lord instructed David to go to Hebron, where the tribe of Judah anointed him as their king.<\/p>\n<h6>David, Ishbosheth, and Abner (2 Sm 2:8–4:12)<\/h6>\n<p>Although David became king over Judah, the remaining tribes—under the influence of Abner, commander of Saul’s army—recognized Ishbosheth as Saul’s successor (2:8-10). Ishbosheth was a son of Saul who had survived the battle with the Philistines. Conflict quickly broke out between the men of David, led by Joab, and the men of Ishbosheth, led by Abner. In this conflict Asahel, Joab’s brother, was slain by Abner. As David grew stronger and Ishbosheth weaker, Abner shifted his allegiance from Ishbosheth to David (3:1-21). Joab, however, avenged the blood of his brother Asahel by murdering Abner under the pretense of negotiating with him. Although David detested this act, mourned for Abner, and cursed Joab, the crime was not punished until early in the reign of Solomon (see 1 Kgs 2:5-6, 29-34). Shortly afterward, Ishbosheth was killed by two soldiers, who brought his head to David at Hebron, expecting to be rewarded (2 Sm 4:1-8). David, however, had them both put to death. The only male survivor of Saul’s line was the crippled son of Jonathan named Mephibosheth.<\/p>\n<h6>David King over All Israel (2 Sm 5)<\/h6>\n<p>After Ishbosheth’s death, David was made king over all the tribes at Hebron. One of David’s first acts as king was to capture the fortress of Zion from the Jebusites. David established Zion as his capital and built a palace there for his residence.<\/p>\n<h6>The Ark Brought to Jerusalem (2 Sm 6)<\/h6>\n<p>Recognizing the importance of the ark as a symbol of God’s presence with his people, David determined that it should be brought to Jerusalem from the obscurity of the house of Abinadab in Kiriath-jearim, where it had remained throughout the entirety of Saul’s reign. Violation of prescriptions for handling the ark led to the death of Uzzah, one of Abinadab’s sons, and delayed the ark’s conveyance to Jerusalem for three months. In a second attempt David led a joyful procession into the city of Jerusalem, where the ark was placed in a tent that had been prepared for it.<\/p>\n<h6>David, Nathan, and the Temple (2 Sm 7)<\/h6>\n<p>It soon became David’s desire to build a temple to house the ark and provide a center for Israel’s worship of the Lord. The Lord told David through Nathan the prophet that he was not to build the Lord a house (temple) but that the Lord would build him a house (a dynasty) that would endure forever. Here the line of the promised seed is narrowed to the house of David within the tribe of Judah. This promise finds its fulfillment in the birth of Jesus, who was the “son of David, the son of Abraham” (see Mt 1:1). It would be the task of Solomon, David’s son, to construct the temple (2 Sm 7:13).<\/p>\n<h6>David’s Victories (2 Sm 8)<\/h6>\n<p>David was able to defeat numerous surrounding peoples, to extend Israel’s borders, and to establish a time of prosperity and rest for the nation.<\/p>\n<h6>David and Mephibosheth (2 Sm 9)<\/h6>\n<p>Remembering his covenant with Jonathan (see 1 Sm 18:1-3; 20:13-16, 42), David inquired concerning survivors of the house of Saul to whom he could show kindness. When Mephibosheth was sought out, David brought him to the court to enjoy the honor of eating at the king’s table.<\/p>\n<h6>David and Bathsheba (2 Sm 10–12)<\/h6>\n<p>During a war with the Ammonites, David committed adultery with the wife of one of his soldiers, Uriah the Hittite. When Bathsheba became pregnant, David attempted to get Uriah to sleep with her. When this failed, David arranged for Uriah’s certain death in battle. These sinful acts provoked God’s wrath (2 Sm 12:10-12) and David experienced the bitter fruits of his misconduct during the remainder of his life.<\/p>\n<h6>Amnon, Absalom, and Tamar (2 Sm 13)<\/h6>\n<p>David’s oldest son, Amnon, feigned sickness in order to arrange for his half sister, Tamar, to care for him. When Tamar refused Amnon’s sexual advances to her, he raped her. This incident enraged Tamar’s full brother Absalom, who determined to avenge his sister by killing Amnon. Absalom waited two years and then arranged for the murder of Amnon during the festivities of the time of sheepshearing. He then fled to Geshur, a small city-state in Syria, where his maternal grandfather was king.<\/p>\n<h6>David and Absalom (2 Sm 14–19)<\/h6>\n<p>Absalom remained in exile for three years until Joab arranged for his return by securing a renunciation of blood revenge from David (14:1-27). Upon Absalom’s return, however, David refused to see him for two years, until they were finally reconciled. In this whole episode David sidestepped the issues of repentance and justice and took no effective disciplinary action. In the meantime Absalom conspired to take the throne from David his father by attempting to discredit his administration of justice, and by seeking to win the favor of the people and members of David’s court. After four years, Absalom proclaimed himself king in Hebron and gathered sufficient military strength to force his father to flee from Jerusalem (ch 15). Failure to immediately pursue David led to the defeat of Absalom’s forces and to Absalom’s own death at the hand of Joab, David’s commander. David mourned for his son Absalom (19:1-8), but he was able to return to Jerusalem and to reestablish his government. David disciplined Joab for killing Absalom by replacing him as commander of his troops with Amasa.<\/p>\n<h6>Rebellion of Sheba (2 Sm 20)<\/h6>\n<p>In the unsettled conditions immediately after David’s return to Jerusalem, another abortive revolt was attempted by Sheba of the tribe of Benjamin. Joab, in defiance of David’s disciplinary action, killed Amasa, pursued Sheba, and crushed his revolt.<\/p>\n<h6>David and the Gibeonites (2 Sm 21:1-14)<\/h6>\n<p>At some unspecified time during David’s reign, the land suffered a three-year famine. It was revealed to David by the Lord that the famine was due to Saul’s violation of an Israelite treaty with the Gibeonites (see Jos 9:15, 18-27). This offense was atoned for by giving seven descendants of Saul to the Gibeonites for execution.<\/p>\n<h6>David and the Philistines (2 Sm 21:15-22)<\/h6>\n<p>In this pericope four episodes of heroic accomplishments by David’s mighty men against the Philistines are recounted.<\/p>\n<h6>David’s Song of Praise (2 Sm 22)<\/h6>\n<p>In a beautiful song of praise, David described his deliverance from his enemies and the help with which the Lord sustained him. The same song occurs with minor variations in Psalm 18.<\/p>\n<h6>David’s Last Words (2 Sm 23:1-7)<\/h6>\n<p>In a brief statement, David acknowledges the work of God’s Spirit in enabling him to speak God’s word, and proclaims his confidence in the realization of the Lord’s promise to him and his dynasty.<\/p>\n<h6>David’s Mighty Men (2 Sm 23:8-39)<\/h6>\n<p>This pericope contains a list of 37 of David’s warriors and a description of some of their accomplishments.<\/p>\n<h6>The Census and David’s Punishment (2 Sm 24:1-25)<\/h6>\n<p>David’s decision to take a census of his fighting men reflected an improper trust in military-political organization and power. The Lord judged him by sending a plague on the land that killed many people. At the word of the Lord through Gad the prophet, David built an altar on the threshing floor of Araunah, which was later to become the site of the temple (see 2 Chr 3:1). The Lord responded to David’s sacrifices and prayers on behalf of the people; the plague was stopped.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> David; Samuel (Person); Saul #2.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SAMUEL, Books of First and Second Preview • Name • Author and Date • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Name First and Second Samuel derive their names from the individual whom God used to establish kingship in Israel. Samuel is the most prominent figure in the early narratives of 1 Samuel. His key role in leading the nation of Israel through the transition from the period of the judges to that of the monarchy warrants the use of his name as the title for the book. These books, howeve...","summary_en":"SAMUEL, Books of First and Second Preview • Name • Author and Date • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Name First and Second Samuel derive their names from the individual whom God used to establish kingship in Israel. Samuel is the most prominent figure in the early narratives of 1 Samuel. His key role in leading the nation of Israel through the transition from the period of the judges to that of the monarchy warrants the use of his name as the title for the book. These books, howeve...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46611,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-18<\/strong> The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-18<\/strong> The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-18 The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).","summary_en":"8:1-18 The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74237,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-18<\/strong> The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-18<\/strong> The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-18 The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).","summary_en":"8:1-18 The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101863,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-18<\/strong> The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-18<\/strong> The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-18 The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).","summary_en":"8:1-18 The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129489,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-18<\/strong> The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-18<\/strong> The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-18 The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).","summary_en":"8:1-18 The expansion of David’s empire through military victories (8:1-14) and the establishment of his royal bureaucracy (8:15-18) fulfilled God’s promise of a famous name (7:9; cp. 8:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":41056,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moab and Ammon","title_en":"Moab and Ammon","content_ro":"<h3>Moab and Ammon<\/h3>\n<p>The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated by Sihon, the Amorite king who ruled at Heshbon (see Num 21:13, 26). After Israel defeated Sihon, King Balak of Moab feared that Israel might conquer his land, and Moab waged war against them (Num 22:1–25:3; Josh 24:9). From that time onward, Moab and Israel were often in conflict (Judg 3:12-30; 1 Sam 14:47; 2 Sam 8:2; 2 Kgs 3), but there were also periods of peace (Ruth 1:1-2) between them. A Moabite woman named Ruth displayed great kindness to her tragedy-plagued Israelite mother-in-law, Naomi, and she came to be part of the family line that produced King David and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites traced their ancestry to Ammon, son of the younger daughter of Lot (Gen 19:36-38). They settled in an area of the Transjordan northeast of the Dead Sea. When the Israelites arrived in the area after leaving Egypt, God instructed them not to try to occupy Ammonite territory, as it had already been given to the descendants of Lot (Deut 2:18-19, 37). The Ammonites helped the Moabites oppose Israel and were excluded from the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation (Deut 23:3-6; Neh 13:1-2; see Num 22:1–25:3). Thereafter the Ammonites were frequent enemies of Israel (Judg 10–11; 1 Sam 11; 14:47; 1 Chr 20:1-3; 2 Chr 20:1-24), though David seems to have allied with them for a time (2 Sam 17:27-29; 23:37).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 23:3-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moab and Ammon<\/h3>\n<p>The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated by Sihon, the Amorite king who ruled at Heshbon (see Num 21:13, 26). After Israel defeated Sihon, King Balak of Moab feared that Israel might conquer his land, and Moab waged war against them (Num 22:1–25:3; Josh 24:9). From that time onward, Moab and Israel were often in conflict (Judg 3:12-30; 1 Sam 14:47; 2 Sam 8:2; 2 Kgs 3), but there were also periods of peace (Ruth 1:1-2) between them. A Moabite woman named Ruth displayed great kindness to her tragedy-plagued Israelite mother-in-law, Naomi, and she came to be part of the family line that produced King David and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites traced their ancestry to Ammon, son of the younger daughter of Lot (Gen 19:36-38). They settled in an area of the Transjordan northeast of the Dead Sea. When the Israelites arrived in the area after leaving Egypt, God instructed them not to try to occupy Ammonite territory, as it had already been given to the descendants of Lot (Deut 2:18-19, 37). The Ammonites helped the Moabites oppose Israel and were excluded from the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation (Deut 23:3-6; Neh 13:1-2; see Num 22:1–25:3). Thereafter the Ammonites were frequent enemies of Israel (Judg 10–11; 1 Sam 11; 14:47; 1 Chr 20:1-3; 2 Chr 20:1-24), though David seems to have allied with them for a time (2 Sam 17:27-29; 23:37).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 23:3-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moab and Ammon The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated...","summary_en":"Moab and Ammon The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68682,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moab and Ammon","title_en":"Moab and Ammon","content_ro":"<h3>Moab and Ammon<\/h3>\n<p>The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated by Sihon, the Amorite king who ruled at Heshbon (see Num 21:13, 26). After Israel defeated Sihon, King Balak of Moab feared that Israel might conquer his land, and Moab waged war against them (Num 22:1–25:3; Josh 24:9). From that time onward, Moab and Israel were often in conflict (Judg 3:12-30; 1 Sam 14:47; 2 Sam 8:2; 2 Kgs 3), but there were also periods of peace (Ruth 1:1-2) between them. A Moabite woman named Ruth displayed great kindness to her tragedy-plagued Israelite mother-in-law, Naomi, and she came to be part of the family line that produced King David and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites traced their ancestry to Ammon, son of the younger daughter of Lot (Gen 19:36-38). They settled in an area of the Transjordan northeast of the Dead Sea. When the Israelites arrived in the area after leaving Egypt, God instructed them not to try to occupy Ammonite territory, as it had already been given to the descendants of Lot (Deut 2:18-19, 37). The Ammonites helped the Moabites oppose Israel and were excluded from the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation (Deut 23:3-6; Neh 13:1-2; see Num 22:1–25:3). Thereafter the Ammonites were frequent enemies of Israel (Judg 10–11; 1 Sam 11; 14:47; 1 Chr 20:1-3; 2 Chr 20:1-24), though David seems to have allied with them for a time (2 Sam 17:27-29; 23:37).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 23:3-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moab and Ammon<\/h3>\n<p>The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated by Sihon, the Amorite king who ruled at Heshbon (see Num 21:13, 26). After Israel defeated Sihon, King Balak of Moab feared that Israel might conquer his land, and Moab waged war against them (Num 22:1–25:3; Josh 24:9). From that time onward, Moab and Israel were often in conflict (Judg 3:12-30; 1 Sam 14:47; 2 Sam 8:2; 2 Kgs 3), but there were also periods of peace (Ruth 1:1-2) between them. A Moabite woman named Ruth displayed great kindness to her tragedy-plagued Israelite mother-in-law, Naomi, and she came to be part of the family line that produced King David and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites traced their ancestry to Ammon, son of the younger daughter of Lot (Gen 19:36-38). They settled in an area of the Transjordan northeast of the Dead Sea. When the Israelites arrived in the area after leaving Egypt, God instructed them not to try to occupy Ammonite territory, as it had already been given to the descendants of Lot (Deut 2:18-19, 37). The Ammonites helped the Moabites oppose Israel and were excluded from the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation (Deut 23:3-6; Neh 13:1-2; see Num 22:1–25:3). Thereafter the Ammonites were frequent enemies of Israel (Judg 10–11; 1 Sam 11; 14:47; 1 Chr 20:1-3; 2 Chr 20:1-24), though David seems to have allied with them for a time (2 Sam 17:27-29; 23:37).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 23:3-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moab and Ammon The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated...","summary_en":"Moab and Ammon The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96308,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moab and Ammon","title_en":"Moab and Ammon","content_ro":"<h3>Moab and Ammon<\/h3>\n<p>The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated by Sihon, the Amorite king who ruled at Heshbon (see Num 21:13, 26). After Israel defeated Sihon, King Balak of Moab feared that Israel might conquer his land, and Moab waged war against them (Num 22:1–25:3; Josh 24:9). From that time onward, Moab and Israel were often in conflict (Judg 3:12-30; 1 Sam 14:47; 2 Sam 8:2; 2 Kgs 3), but there were also periods of peace (Ruth 1:1-2) between them. A Moabite woman named Ruth displayed great kindness to her tragedy-plagued Israelite mother-in-law, Naomi, and she came to be part of the family line that produced King David and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites traced their ancestry to Ammon, son of the younger daughter of Lot (Gen 19:36-38). They settled in an area of the Transjordan northeast of the Dead Sea. When the Israelites arrived in the area after leaving Egypt, God instructed them not to try to occupy Ammonite territory, as it had already been given to the descendants of Lot (Deut 2:18-19, 37). The Ammonites helped the Moabites oppose Israel and were excluded from the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation (Deut 23:3-6; Neh 13:1-2; see Num 22:1–25:3). Thereafter the Ammonites were frequent enemies of Israel (Judg 10–11; 1 Sam 11; 14:47; 1 Chr 20:1-3; 2 Chr 20:1-24), though David seems to have allied with them for a time (2 Sam 17:27-29; 23:37).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 23:3-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moab and Ammon<\/h3>\n<p>The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated by Sihon, the Amorite king who ruled at Heshbon (see Num 21:13, 26). After Israel defeated Sihon, King Balak of Moab feared that Israel might conquer his land, and Moab waged war against them (Num 22:1–25:3; Josh 24:9). From that time onward, Moab and Israel were often in conflict (Judg 3:12-30; 1 Sam 14:47; 2 Sam 8:2; 2 Kgs 3), but there were also periods of peace (Ruth 1:1-2) between them. A Moabite woman named Ruth displayed great kindness to her tragedy-plagued Israelite mother-in-law, Naomi, and she came to be part of the family line that produced King David and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites traced their ancestry to Ammon, son of the younger daughter of Lot (Gen 19:36-38). They settled in an area of the Transjordan northeast of the Dead Sea. When the Israelites arrived in the area after leaving Egypt, God instructed them not to try to occupy Ammonite territory, as it had already been given to the descendants of Lot (Deut 2:18-19, 37). The Ammonites helped the Moabites oppose Israel and were excluded from the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation (Deut 23:3-6; Neh 13:1-2; see Num 22:1–25:3). Thereafter the Ammonites were frequent enemies of Israel (Judg 10–11; 1 Sam 11; 14:47; 1 Chr 20:1-3; 2 Chr 20:1-24), though David seems to have allied with them for a time (2 Sam 17:27-29; 23:37).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 23:3-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moab and Ammon The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated...","summary_en":"Moab and Ammon The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123934,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moab and Ammon","title_en":"Moab and Ammon","content_ro":"<h3>Moab and Ammon<\/h3>\n<p>The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated by Sihon, the Amorite king who ruled at Heshbon (see Num 21:13, 26). After Israel defeated Sihon, King Balak of Moab feared that Israel might conquer his land, and Moab waged war against them (Num 22:1–25:3; Josh 24:9). From that time onward, Moab and Israel were often in conflict (Judg 3:12-30; 1 Sam 14:47; 2 Sam 8:2; 2 Kgs 3), but there were also periods of peace (Ruth 1:1-2) between them. A Moabite woman named Ruth displayed great kindness to her tragedy-plagued Israelite mother-in-law, Naomi, and she came to be part of the family line that produced King David and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites traced their ancestry to Ammon, son of the younger daughter of Lot (Gen 19:36-38). They settled in an area of the Transjordan northeast of the Dead Sea. When the Israelites arrived in the area after leaving Egypt, God instructed them not to try to occupy Ammonite territory, as it had already been given to the descendants of Lot (Deut 2:18-19, 37). The Ammonites helped the Moabites oppose Israel and were excluded from the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation (Deut 23:3-6; Neh 13:1-2; see Num 22:1–25:3). Thereafter the Ammonites were frequent enemies of Israel (Judg 10–11; 1 Sam 11; 14:47; 1 Chr 20:1-3; 2 Chr 20:1-24), though David seems to have allied with them for a time (2 Sam 17:27-29; 23:37).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 23:3-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moab and Ammon<\/h3>\n<p>The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated by Sihon, the Amorite king who ruled at Heshbon (see Num 21:13, 26). After Israel defeated Sihon, King Balak of Moab feared that Israel might conquer his land, and Moab waged war against them (Num 22:1–25:3; Josh 24:9). From that time onward, Moab and Israel were often in conflict (Judg 3:12-30; 1 Sam 14:47; 2 Sam 8:2; 2 Kgs 3), but there were also periods of peace (Ruth 1:1-2) between them. A Moabite woman named Ruth displayed great kindness to her tragedy-plagued Israelite mother-in-law, Naomi, and she came to be part of the family line that produced King David and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites traced their ancestry to Ammon, son of the younger daughter of Lot (Gen 19:36-38). They settled in an area of the Transjordan northeast of the Dead Sea. When the Israelites arrived in the area after leaving Egypt, God instructed them not to try to occupy Ammonite territory, as it had already been given to the descendants of Lot (Deut 2:18-19, 37). The Ammonites helped the Moabites oppose Israel and were excluded from the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation (Deut 23:3-6; Neh 13:1-2; see Num 22:1–25:3). Thereafter the Ammonites were frequent enemies of Israel (Judg 10–11; 1 Sam 11; 14:47; 1 Chr 20:1-3; 2 Chr 20:1-24), though David seems to have allied with them for a time (2 Sam 17:27-29; 23:37).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 23:3-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moab and Ammon The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated...","summary_en":"Moab and Ammon The Moabites were descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter (Gen 19:36-38). They settled on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea. Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland divided by ravines. Even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, but its location on the King’s Highway was strategically important (see Num 21:21-22; Judg 11:15-18). Prior to the Israelites’ passage through the Transjordan, the Moabites were dominated...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9555,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Dibon","title_en":"Dibon","content_ro":"<h3>DIBON<\/h3>\n<li>1. City in Moab, east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. It was located on the King’s Highway in Amorite territory and was a camping station for the Israelites during the exodus. Israel asked permission of Sihon, the Amorite king, to pass through his territory, but he refused. Israel then fought and defeated Sihon, thus gaining control of Dibon (Nm 21:30). Following the Hebrew conquest of Palestine and its division among the 12 tribes, Dibon was given to Gad (32:3, 34), being also referred to as Dibon-gad (33:45-46). One biblical reference assigns it to Reuben (Jos 13:17).<\/li>\n<p>During the period of the judges, Moab under King Eglon oppressed Israel and apparently retook Dibon. It was probably recovered under the leadership of Ehud (Jgs 3:12-30). Subsequently, Dibon was ruled by Israel under King David (2 Sm 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the preexilic period Dibon was again under Moabite influence (Is 15:2; Jer 48:18, 22). Isaiah condemned Dibon (Dimon) as chief among the wicked cities of Moab (Is 15:9). Dimon is probably a play on words (from the root “blood”) predicting Dibon’s bloody and disastrous fate.<\/p>\n<p>In 1868 excavations uncovered the famous Moabite Stone at Dibon, erected by Mesha, king of Moab, who built “Qarhah” as his capital. This may have been a new capital city replacing Dibon, or a renaming of Dibon by Mesha. Most likely “Qarhah” referred to the fact that Dibon was built on two elevations. The higher one was Qarhah, the defensive citadel of the city, surrounded by a wall and possessing a water reservoir, several cisterns, the royal palace, and a shrine (“high place,” Is 15:2) to Chemosh, the principal god of Moab.<\/p>\n<p>Excavations conducted in 1950–56 at Dibon (modern Dhiban) uncovered remains of the city from a period about 3000 <span>BC<\/span>. Evidence indicated that it contained only a nomadic population in the period 2100–1300 <span>BC<\/span> and that it was settled again about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>. The earliest excavations found five city walls, the oldest dating to about 3000 <span>BC<\/span>. The heaviest wall was from 7½ to almost 11 feet (2 to 3 meters) thick, built with large, well-squared blocks, and is considered to have been built in Mesha’s time.<\/p>\n<li>2. Town in the Negev of Judah inhabited by Babylonian exiles who returned to Palestine during Nehemiah’s time (Neh 11:25).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>DIBON<\/h3>\n<li>1. City in Moab, east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. It was located on the King’s Highway in Amorite territory and was a camping station for the Israelites during the exodus. Israel asked permission of Sihon, the Amorite king, to pass through his territory, but he refused. Israel then fought and defeated Sihon, thus gaining control of Dibon (Nm 21:30). Following the Hebrew conquest of Palestine and its division among the 12 tribes, Dibon was given to Gad (32:3, 34), being also referred to as Dibon-gad (33:45-46). One biblical reference assigns it to Reuben (Jos 13:17).<\/li>\n<p>During the period of the judges, Moab under King Eglon oppressed Israel and apparently retook Dibon. It was probably recovered under the leadership of Ehud (Jgs 3:12-30). Subsequently, Dibon was ruled by Israel under King David (2 Sm 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the preexilic period Dibon was again under Moabite influence (Is 15:2; Jer 48:18, 22). Isaiah condemned Dibon (Dimon) as chief among the wicked cities of Moab (Is 15:9). Dimon is probably a play on words (from the root “blood”) predicting Dibon’s bloody and disastrous fate.<\/p>\n<p>In 1868 excavations uncovered the famous Moabite Stone at Dibon, erected by Mesha, king of Moab, who built “Qarhah” as his capital. This may have been a new capital city replacing Dibon, or a renaming of Dibon by Mesha. Most likely “Qarhah” referred to the fact that Dibon was built on two elevations. The higher one was Qarhah, the defensive citadel of the city, surrounded by a wall and possessing a water reservoir, several cisterns, the royal palace, and a shrine (“high place,” Is 15:2) to Chemosh, the principal god of Moab.<\/p>\n<p>Excavations conducted in 1950–56 at Dibon (modern Dhiban) uncovered remains of the city from a period about 3000 <span>BC<\/span>. Evidence indicated that it contained only a nomadic population in the period 2100–1300 <span>BC<\/span> and that it was settled again about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>. The earliest excavations found five city walls, the oldest dating to about 3000 <span>BC<\/span>. The heaviest wall was from 7½ to almost 11 feet (2 to 3 meters) thick, built with large, well-squared blocks, and is considered to have been built in Mesha’s time.<\/p>\n<li>2. Town in the Negev of Judah inhabited by Babylonian exiles who returned to Palestine during Nehemiah’s time (Neh 11:25).<\/li>","summary_ro":"DIBON 1. City in Moab, east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. It was located on the King’s Highway in Amorite territory and was a camping station for the Israelites during the exodus. Israel asked permission of Sihon, the Amorite king, to pass through his territory, but he refused. Israel then fought and defeated Sihon, thus gaining control of Dibon (Nm 21:30). Following the Hebrew conquest of Palestine and its division among the 12 tribes, Dibon was given to Gad (32:3, 34), being...","summary_en":"DIBON 1. City in Moab, east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. It was located on the King’s Highway in Amorite territory and was a camping station for the Israelites during the exodus. Israel asked permission of Sihon, the Amorite king, to pass through his territory, but he refused. Israel then fought and defeated Sihon, thus gaining control of Dibon (Nm 21:30). Following the Hebrew conquest of Palestine and its division among the 12 tribes, Dibon was given to Gad (32:3, 34), being...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26150,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Moabites Moab","title_en":"Moabites Moab","content_ro":"<h3>MOAB, MOABITES<\/h3>\n<p>Name of a small kingdom in central Transjordan and also its inhabitants. The land of Moab was situated on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea; the escarpment of the Jordan Rift formed an effective boundary between Moab and Judah. Moab’s northern boundary shifted in accordance with the kingdom’s military might, with the Heshbon vicinity forming the northern limit of Moab in periods of strength, and the Arnon River (modern Wadi el-Mojib) functioning as the northern border in times of weakness. The kingdom’s eastern boundary was formed by the fringe of the Syrian desert, since the latter demarcated Moab’s agricultural zone. On the south, Moab was separated from Edom by the Zered River (modern Wadi el-Hesa). Thus, even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, measuring only about 60 miles (96.5 kilometers) north-south by about 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) east-west.<\/p>\n<p>Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland that is divided by numerous ravines. Running through the heart of Moab is the King’s Highway, a route that probably had military and commercial importance throughout this region’s history (Nm 21:21-22; Jgs 11:17). The plateau has always been famous for its abundant pasturage (2 Kgs 3:4), and Moab’s soil and climate are quite suitable for growing wheat and barley.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginandHistory\">Origin and History<\/p>\n<p>According to Genesis 19:37, the Moabites descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter. Deuteronomy 2:10-11, a passage whose context relates to the Moabites at the time of the Hebrew invasion, says that the pre-Moabite inhabitants of this region were the Emim, but the connection between Lot’s descendants, the Emim, and the occupants of Moab at the time of the Hebrew invasion is not identified. There is thus far no specific information concerning the establishing of the Moabite kingdom proper, which existed from around 1300 <span>BC<\/span> to 600 <span>BC<\/span>. Knowledge of this period of Moabite history and culture is derived from archaeological and textual sources, including Egyptian, Assyrian, and OT texts.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the Israelites’ passage through Transjordan, the Moabites had lost control of the land north of the Arnon and were dominated by Sihon, the Amorite king who ruled at Heshbon (Nm 21:13, 26). Having been refused permission to travel through Edom and Moab along the King’s Highway, the Hebrews defeated Sihon in one of their most celebrated military campaigns. Fearing that Israel might conquer his land, King Balak of Moab waged war against the Hebrews (Nm 22:6; Jos 24:9) and hired the Mesopotamian diviner, Balaam, to pronounce a curse upon his enemies (Nm 22–24). The tribes of Reuben and Gad settled in Sihon’s territory, and the Arnon formed the border between Israel and Moab (ch 32). From the time of the Israelites’ apostasy at Shittim onward (ch 25), the Moabite tableland north of the Arnon was a source of contention between Moab and Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Until his assassination by Ehud, the Moabite king Eglon oppressed the Hebrew tribes on both sides of the Jordan (Jgs 3:12-30). By Jephthah’s day, northern Moab was once again under Israelite control (11:26). Obviously, as the book of Ruth indicates, there were also periods in which Moab and Israel lived in peace.<\/p>\n<p>During the reigns of Saul and David, from the late-11th until the mid-10th centuries <span>BC<\/span>, Moab and Israel were at war, with the latter usually holding the upper hand (1 Sm 14:47; 2 Sm 8:2). Solomon’s harem included Moabite women, and he also built a high place for Chemosh, the chief god of the Moabites (1 Kgs 11:1, 7). Following the division of the Israelite monarchy in 930 <span>BC<\/span>, Moab experienced a brief period of independence, but this ended when Omri and Ahab dominated the Moabites and their king, Mesha, during the ninth century <span>BC<\/span>. (The famous Moabite Stone, which describes Mesha’s conflict with the Omride dynasty, and several shorter texts demonstrate that the language of Moab was closely related to OT Hebrew.) Conflict between Moab and her neighbors (e.g., Israel, Judah, Edom, and most importantly, Assyria) continued until the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the Moabite kingdom early in the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Ez 25:8-11). This conflict is documented in the Assyrian literature, which indicates that Moab became an Assyrian vassal in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, and in the OT (2 Kgs 3; 10:32-33; 13:20; 24:2). Indeed, the enmity between Moab, Israel, and Judah is especially evident in a series of prophetic oracles leveled against the Moabites (Is 15–16; Jer 9:25-26; 48; Am 2:1-3; Zep 2:8-11). These passages call attention to some of the major towns in ancient Moab (Nebo, Medeba, Heshbon, Dibon, Ar, Kir, and Horonaim).<\/p>\n<p>Following the Babylonian conquest, the region of Moab fell under Persian control and was occupied by various Arab peoples, most notably the Nabateans. Although a Moabite state was never reestablished, people of Moabite ancestry were recognized in late OT times (Ezr 9:1; Neh 13:1, 23), since the postexilic Jewish community was concerned about observing the law recorded in Deuteronomy 23:3-6. In <span>AD<\/span> 106 the region of Moab became part of the Roman province of Arabia. Archaeological research has added much to the body of information that relates to Moabite history and culture from the prehistoric through Ottoman periods.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Religion\">Religion<\/p>\n<p>During the third and second millennia <span>BC<\/span>, Moabite religion was probably similar to that practiced by the Canaanites, though the religion of Moab eventually developed into a relatively distinct system. Although other deities were worshiped by the Moabites, Chemosh was their national god. The OT refers to the Moabites as “people of Chemosh” (Nm 21:29; Jer 48:46), and the frequent appearance of “Chemosh” in Moabite personal names points to this god’s elevated status. In general, the Moabite Stone’s dozen references to Chemosh portray him as a god of war who leads his people against their enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Divine guidance and favor were sought, and diviners and oracles were respected (Nm 22–24). A priesthood (Jer 48:7) and sacrificial system (Nm 22:40–23:30; 25:1-5; 2 Kgs 3:27; Jer 48:35) were important aspects of Moabite religion. No Moabite sanctuary has been discovered, but their existence is mentioned in the Moabite Stone and the OT (1 Kgs 11:7; 2 Kgs 23:13). Elaborately furnished tombs, like those found at Dibon, point to the Moabites’ belief in the afterlife.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Moabite Stone.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MOAB, MOABITES<\/h3>\n<p>Name of a small kingdom in central Transjordan and also its inhabitants. The land of Moab was situated on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea; the escarpment of the Jordan Rift formed an effective boundary between Moab and Judah. Moab’s northern boundary shifted in accordance with the kingdom’s military might, with the Heshbon vicinity forming the northern limit of Moab in periods of strength, and the Arnon River (modern Wadi el-Mojib) functioning as the northern border in times of weakness. The kingdom’s eastern boundary was formed by the fringe of the Syrian desert, since the latter demarcated Moab’s agricultural zone. On the south, Moab was separated from Edom by the Zered River (modern Wadi el-Hesa). Thus, even at its peak, ancient Moab encompassed a relatively small territory, measuring only about 60 miles (96.5 kilometers) north-south by about 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) east-west.<\/p>\n<p>Most of Moab is gently rolling tableland that is divided by numerous ravines. Running through the heart of Moab is the King’s Highway, a route that probably had military and commercial importance throughout this region’s history (Nm 21:21-22; Jgs 11:17). The plateau has always been famous for its abundant pasturage (2 Kgs 3:4), and Moab’s soil and climate are quite suitable for growing wheat and barley.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginandHistory\">Origin and History<\/p>\n<p>According to Genesis 19:37, the Moabites descended from Moab, the son of Lot and his oldest daughter. Deuteronomy 2:10-11, a passage whose context relates to the Moabites at the time of the Hebrew invasion, says that the pre-Moabite inhabitants of this region were the Emim, but the connection between Lot’s descendants, the Emim, and the occupants of Moab at the time of the Hebrew invasion is not identified. There is thus far no specific information concerning the establishing of the Moabite kingdom proper, which existed from around 1300 <span>BC<\/span> to 600 <span>BC<\/span>. Knowledge of this period of Moabite history and culture is derived from archaeological and textual sources, including Egyptian, Assyrian, and OT texts.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the Israelites’ passage through Transjordan, the Moabites had lost control of the land north of the Arnon and were dominated by Sihon, the Amorite king who ruled at Heshbon (Nm 21:13, 26). Having been refused permission to travel through Edom and Moab along the King’s Highway, the Hebrews defeated Sihon in one of their most celebrated military campaigns. Fearing that Israel might conquer his land, King Balak of Moab waged war against the Hebrews (Nm 22:6; Jos 24:9) and hired the Mesopotamian diviner, Balaam, to pronounce a curse upon his enemies (Nm 22–24). The tribes of Reuben and Gad settled in Sihon’s territory, and the Arnon formed the border between Israel and Moab (ch 32). From the time of the Israelites’ apostasy at Shittim onward (ch 25), the Moabite tableland north of the Arnon was a source of contention between Moab and Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Until his assassination by Ehud, the Moabite king Eglon oppressed the Hebrew tribes on both sides of the Jordan (Jgs 3:12-30). By Jephthah’s day, northern Moab was once again under Israelite control (11:26). Obviously, as the book of Ruth indicates, there were also periods in which Moab and Israel lived in peace.<\/p>\n<p>During the reigns of Saul and David, from the late-11th until the mid-10th centuries <span>BC<\/span>, Moab and Israel were at war, with the latter usually holding the upper hand (1 Sm 14:47; 2 Sm 8:2). Solomon’s harem included Moabite women, and he also built a high place for Chemosh, the chief god of the Moabites (1 Kgs 11:1, 7). Following the division of the Israelite monarchy in 930 <span>BC<\/span>, Moab experienced a brief period of independence, but this ended when Omri and Ahab dominated the Moabites and their king, Mesha, during the ninth century <span>BC<\/span>. (The famous Moabite Stone, which describes Mesha’s conflict with the Omride dynasty, and several shorter texts demonstrate that the language of Moab was closely related to OT Hebrew.) Conflict between Moab and her neighbors (e.g., Israel, Judah, Edom, and most importantly, Assyria) continued until the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the Moabite kingdom early in the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Ez 25:8-11). This conflict is documented in the Assyrian literature, which indicates that Moab became an Assyrian vassal in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, and in the OT (2 Kgs 3; 10:32-33; 13:20; 24:2). Indeed, the enmity between Moab, Israel, and Judah is especially evident in a series of prophetic oracles leveled against the Moabites (Is 15–16; Jer 9:25-26; 48; Am 2:1-3; Zep 2:8-11). These passages call attention to some of the major towns in ancient Moab (Nebo, Medeba, Heshbon, Dibon, Ar, Kir, and Horonaim).<\/p>\n<p>Following the Babylonian conquest, the region of Moab fell under Persian control and was occupied by various Arab peoples, most notably the Nabateans. Although a Moabite state was never reestablished, people of Moabite ancestry were recognized in late OT times (Ezr 9:1; Neh 13:1, 23), since the postexilic Jewish community was concerned about observing the law recorded in Deuteronomy 23:3-6. In <span>AD<\/span> 106 the region of Moab became part of the Roman province of Arabia. Archaeological research has added much to the body of information that relates to Moabite history and culture from the prehistoric through Ottoman periods.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Religion\">Religion<\/p>\n<p>During the third and second millennia <span>BC<\/span>, Moabite religion was probably similar to that practiced by the Canaanites, though the religion of Moab eventually developed into a relatively distinct system. Although other deities were worshiped by the Moabites, Chemosh was their national god. The OT refers to the Moabites as “people of Chemosh” (Nm 21:29; Jer 48:46), and the frequent appearance of “Chemosh” in Moabite personal names points to this god’s elevated status. In general, the Moabite Stone’s dozen references to Chemosh portray him as a god of war who leads his people against their enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Divine guidance and favor were sought, and diviners and oracles were respected (Nm 22–24). A priesthood (Jer 48:7) and sacrificial system (Nm 22:40–23:30; 25:1-5; 2 Kgs 3:27; Jer 48:35) were important aspects of Moabite religion. No Moabite sanctuary has been discovered, but their existence is mentioned in the Moabite Stone and the OT (1 Kgs 11:7; 2 Kgs 23:13). Elaborately furnished tombs, like those found at Dibon, point to the Moabites’ belief in the afterlife.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Moabite Stone.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MOAB, MOABITES Name of a small kingdom in central Transjordan and also its inhabitants. The land of Moab was situated on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea; the escarpment of the Jordan Rift formed an effective boundary between Moab and Judah. Moab’s northern boundary shifted in accordance with the kingdom’s military might, with the Heshbon vicinity forming the northern limit of Moab in periods of strength, and the Arnon River (modern Wadi el-Mojib) functioning as the northern ...","summary_en":"MOAB, MOABITES Name of a small kingdom in central Transjordan and also its inhabitants. The land of Moab was situated on the high plateau immediately east of the Dead Sea; the escarpment of the Jordan Rift formed an effective boundary between Moab and Judah. Moab’s northern boundary shifted in accordance with the kingdom’s military might, with the Heshbon vicinity forming the northern limit of Moab in periods of strength, and the Arnon River (modern Wadi el-Mojib) functioning as the northern ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27794,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Numbers","title_en":"Book of Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>NUMBERS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, <em>Numeri.<\/em> The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The question of the authorship of Numbers is part of the larger question of the authorship of the Pentateuch. Until the appearance of the higher-critical documentary theories of the 19th century, the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was almost universally held by both Jews and Christians alike. This time-honored tradition is supported by the Pentateuch itself (e.g., Ex 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Nm 33:2; Dt 31:9, 24), the rest of the OT (e.g., Jos 23:6; Jgs 3:4; Mal 4:4), as well as Jesus’ teaching (e.g., Jn 5:46-47), and the rest of the NT (e.g., Acts 28:23; Rom 10:19; 1 Cor 9:9). Although discrepancies in the Pentateuch were widely and openly acknowledged, nevertheless Moses, the 15th-century <span>BC<\/span> lawgiver, was affirmed as the primary author of the Pentateuchal literature.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<h5>Sinai Peninsula<\/h5>\n<p>The historical background of Numbers begins primarily in the geographical region of the Sinai Peninsula of the mid-second millennium <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai Peninsula is in the shape of an inverted triangle with the base on the north. It is approximately 240 miles (386.2 kilometers) long from north to south and 175 miles (281.6 kilometers) wide at the northern base, with an area of approximately 22,000 square miles (56,980 square kilometers). It is bounded on the north by the Mediterranean Sea and the southern border of Canaan, on the west by the Bitter Lakes and the Gulf of Suez, and on the east by the Arabah and the Gulf of Aqaba. Beginning in the north at the Mediterranean coast and moving south, for about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the soil is sandy. South of this coastal plain is a high plateau (Et-Tih) of gravel and limestone (about 2,500 feet, or 762 meters, above sea level), stretching south into the peninsula for approximately 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). Rising above the plateau at this point is a granite mountain formation with peaks up to 8,000 feet (2,438.4 meters) above sea level. In this mountainous region at the apex of the peninsular triangle, Jebel Musa (7,363 feet, or 2,244.2 meters, high), the traditional site where Israel camped before Mt Sinai and Moses received the law, rises above the plain.<\/p>\n<p>The peninsula itself is comprised of five wilderness areas. In the north and immediately east of the land of Goshen is the approximately 40-mile- or 64.4-kilometer-wide wilderness of Shur, which runs past the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) to the region of Kadesh-barnea and northeast to Beersheba. East of this region is the wilderness of Zin, extending east from the wilderness of Shur to the southern tip of the Dead Sea. Kadesh-barnea is located on its southern border (Nm 20:1; 33:36). South of the wilderness of Shur is the wilderness of Etham, and east of this wilderness in the east-central region of Sinai is the great wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19). Kadesh-barnea is on the northern border of this territory (Nm 13:26). In this area the Israelites spent 38 of their 40 years of wandering. Southwest of the wilderness of Paran, on the western slopes of the peninsula, not far from the granite mountains standing in the southern apex of the triangle, is the wilderness of Sin.<\/p>\n<p>While the region is generally desolate and barren, it is not impassable or incapable of sustaining travelers. Wells and springs dot both the western and eastern borders at reasonable distances from each other. The water table is fairly close to ground level, making the digging of wells possible (Nm 20:17; 21:16-18). The limestone rocks are also capable of holding great amounts of water (20:11). Vegetation is sparse except around the more permanent streams where vegetation and date palms flourish. The rainy season in winter is approximately 20 days. Quail (11:31-32) are known to migrate across the peninsula to Europe in the spring.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Peoples Israel Confronted<\/h5>\n<h6>Amalekites and Canaanites (14:25, 43-45; 24:20)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amalekites were descendants of Amalek, son of Eliphaz and grandson of Esau (Gn 36:12, 16). They were generally a nomadic people. In the Sinai Peninsula they were the first to war against Israel at Rephidim (cf. Nm 24:20), perhaps the Wadi Refayid in southwest Sinai (Ex 17:8-16), before Israel reached Horeb. A year later, the Amalekites settled in the hills and valleys north of Kadesh-barnea. In league with the Canaanites, the inhabitants of Palestine, they blocked the effort of Israel to invade the land of promise from the south (Nm 14:45). Israel’s will to wage war appears to have been completely broken for years to come.<\/p>\n<h6>Edomites (20:14-21; 21:4, 10-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Edom, or Seir (24:18), is the territory south of the Dead Sea occupied by Esau’s descendants. Stretching from its northern border at the Wadi Zered (21:12), which flowed into the Dead Sea at its southern tip, 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) south to the Gulf of Aqaba, it occupied both sides of the Arabah, with Kadesh-barnea again standing on the edge of its western border (20:16), giving it a land area of approximately 4,000 square miles (10,360 square kilometers). It is a rugged mountain region with peaks rising to 3,500 feet (1,066.8 meters). The “king’s highway,” an ancient trade route from Damascus through the Transjordan to the Gulf of Aqaba, passed through its territory and major cities, Bozrah and Leman. While Edom was not fertile, it did have cultivable areas (20:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>During Israel’s march to the Transjordan region, Edom refused to let Israel journey directly east from Kadesh through its territory but forced Israel to move southeast into and up the Arabah (21:4, 11). In spite of this hostility to God’s people, Israel was forbidden to attack (Dt 2:2-8) or to hate the Edomites (23:7), and so Edom was spared from destruction during the conquest of the land. The area was later conquered by David (2 Sm 8:13-14) according to Balaam’s prophecy (Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<h6>Arad (21:1-3)<\/h6>\n<p>Arad was a south Canaanite settlement in the Negev. Its king, after fighting against Israel and taking some captives, was later defeated at Hormah.<\/p>\n<h6>Moabites (21:11-15; 22:1–24:25)<\/h6>\n<p>Moab, occupied by the descendants of Lot (Gn 19:37), is the territory east of the Dead Sea lying primarily between the Wadi Arnon (Nm 21:13) and the Wadi Zered with a land area of approximately 1,400 square miles (3,626 square kilometers).<\/p>\n<p>In the late middle Bronze Age, the Moabites had overflowed their main plateau and had extended well to the north of the Arnon all the way to the northern end of the Dead Sea (21:20). At the time of the events recorded in Numbers, however, the Amorites occupied the area from Arnon all the way north to the Wadi Jabbok (vv 13, 21-24), having earlier taken this land from Moab (vv 26-30). The Moabite kingdom was highly organized, with agriculture and livestock, splendid buildings, distinctive pottery, and strong fortifications around her borders. Its god was Chemosh (v 29).<\/p>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab during the period of the conquest, in league with Midian, hired Balaam to curse Israel (chs 22–24). When this failed, the two heathen powers sought to neutralize Israel by luring the people of God into the worship of Chemosh and into idolatry (25:1-2). In the war that ensued, Israel defeated Midian (31:1-18), but by God’s express command (Dt 2:9-13) spared Moab. But as Balaam had prophesied earlier (Nm 24:17), David in the 11th century warred against and defeated Moab (2 Sm 8:2, 13-14).<\/p>\n<h6>Amorites (21:21-35)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amorites, the people who had occupied northern Moabite territory (Nm 21:25-30), were descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:16) who had scattered throughout the hill country on both sides of the Jordan River. Heshbon was their capital city. Both Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan were Amorite kings (Dt 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As for Bashan (Nm 21:33-35; cf. Dt 1:4; 3:1-12), it is the fertile grazing region (Nm 32:1-5) east of the Sea of Kinnereth (Galilee), whose northern border extended to Mt Hermon and whose southern border, while normally the river Yarmuk, in the Mosaic age was the Wadi Jabbok (Jos 12:4-5). Its land area covered approximately 5,000 square miles (12,950 square kilometers). Its major cities were Ashtaroth, Edrei, and Golan. After the conquest of the land, this territory fell to the half-tribe of Manasseh, with Gad occupying southern Gilead, and Reuben the region south to the Wadi Arnon.<\/p>\n<h6>Midianites (25:16-18; 31:1-54)<\/h6>\n<p>The Midianites, descendants of Abraham through the concubine Keturah (Gn 25:2), were desert dwellers in Transjordan from Moab to the region south of Edom. The elders of Moab and Midian cooperated in hiring Balaam to curse Israel (Nm 22:4-7). Later, when that effort proved fruitless, the Midianites, again with Moab, led Israel into idolatry and immorality (25:1-6, 14-15). Cozbi, the Midianite woman who was executed for her wickedness (25:8), was the daughter of Zur, one of the five Midianite kings confederate with the Amorite king Sihon (Jos 13:21) who were later killed in Israel’s holy war against Midian (Nm 31:8). This war with Midian apparently broke the back of any remaining Amorite resistance, for Joshua 13:15-23 clearly intimates that as a result the tribe of Reuben occupied this territory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Numbers serves a twofold purpose. First, as a historical book, it contains the account of Israel’s fortunes from Mt Sinai to the plains of Moab on the eve of the conquest of Canaan—that almost-40-year period spent in the wilderness of Sinai and in Transjordan (1447–1407 <span>BC<\/span>). While recounting Israel’s many failures and God’s many faithful acts, it depicts Moses, Israel’s leader, in all of his greatness and in all of his weakness. The two army rolls (chs 2 and 26) introduce the “acts” of the main drama of its history: the first in preparation for entering the land, which failed due to Israel’s unbelief; the second, after the death of the entire generation that left Egypt, in preparation for the successful invasion of Canaan under Joshua’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Second, in line with Paul’s general belief that “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope” (Rom 15:4, <span>rsv<\/span>), and in keeping with his specific teaching that “these things [that befell Israel in the wilderness] happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor 10:11, <span>rsv<\/span>), Numbers serves a doctrinal, typical, and hortatory purpose (cf. v 12). Historical events are divinely invested with spiritual truths, thereby becoming object lessons for the Christian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to register (Nm 1:18) the men able to go to war (vv 2-3). The total number of soldiers in Israel was 603,550 (v 46). The Levites were not numbered in this roll (vv 47-54), since they were to be set apart for special service pertaining to the tabernacle.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 2<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses concerning the arrangement of the tribes while encamped and on the march. With the tabernacle in the center of the camp, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, totaling 186,400 (v 9), were to camp on the east; Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, totaling 151,450 (v 16), were to camp on the south; Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, totaling 108,100 (v 24), were to camp on the west; and Dan, Asher, and Naphtali, totaling 157,600 (v 31), were to camp on the north.<\/p>\n<p>On the march, Judah’s east group (v 9) was to set out first, followed by Reuben’s south group (v 16). The Levites with the tabernacle were to follow (v 17). Then Ephraim’s west group (v 24) was to follow the Levites, with Dan’s north group (v 31) bringing up the rear. This means that the Levites were flanked by two groups, before and behind.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 3<\/h5>\n<p>Aaron, the great-grandson of Levi through Kohath (Ex 6:16-20), and his descendants were designated to serve as priests at the tabernacle (Nm 3:2-3). The remaining descendants of Levi, from the families of Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, were to serve the Aaronic line at the tabernacle (vv 5-10). The Gershonites were responsible for the tabernacle coverings, hangings, and screens (vv 25-26); the Kohathites were responsible for the “furniture” in the tabernacle (v 31); and the Merarites were responsible for the frames, bars, and foundations for the tabernacle (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed Moses to number the three Levitical families. Gershon’s descendants, totaling 7,500 (v 22), were to camp on the west, between the western group of tribes and the tabernacle. Kohath’s descendants, totaling 8,600 (v 28), were to camp on the south, between the southern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Merari’s descendants, totaling 6,200 (v 34), were to camp on the north, between the northern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Moses and the Aaronic family were to camp on the east, between the eastern group of tribes and the tabernacle (v 38). Both in camp and on the march, then, the tabernacle was in the midst of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The census of Israel’s firstborn males disclosed 273 more male babies than Levites (vv 40-46), and since the Levites were a ransom for Israelite males on a one-to-one basis, the 273 additional male children had to be ransomed by atonement money (vv 46-51).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 4<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Moses that only Levites between the ages of 30 and 50 were to serve at the tabernacle. A census disclosed that there were 2,750 Kohathites (v 36), 2,630 Gershonites (v 40), and 3,200 Merarites (v 44), making a total of 8,580 (v 48) who were eligible to serve the Aaronic priests.<\/p>\n<p>God further ordered the Aaronic priests, when the tabernacle was being dismantled for the march, to cover all the tabernacle “furniture” before the Kohathites even looked at them (v 20) lest the Kohathites, either looking at or touching them (v 15), should die (vv 15, 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 5<\/h5>\n<p>For ceremonial purposes, God demanded that lepers, those with a bodily discharge, and those who had touched the dead, must be put outside the camp until they were purified (vv 1-4). Furthermore, God instructed those making restitution for a wrongdoing, if the wronged person was no longer alive, to give the restitution price to a priest (vv 5-10).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, if a woman was suspected by her husband of infidelity but there was no evidence of such, the woman was to undergo a trial by water ordeal to relieve the man of his suspicions. The priest was to give her holy water with dust from the floor of the tabernacle in it to drink. If she was guilty, the water by divine direction would cause her pain, make her abdomen swell, and her thigh waste away (vv 11-31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 6<\/h5>\n<p>Laws pertaining to the Nazirite were given next. A Nazirite was a person who determined to take a vow to separate himself wholly to the Lord. To dramatize this separation, the Nazirite was to drink no intoxicating beverage, let the hair grow long, and touch no dead body (vv 3-6). Should he defile himself, he was to follow prescribed rules for ceremonial cleansing (vv 9-12). When his vow had run its course, he was to follow prescribed rules for terminating his vow (vv 13-21). Finally, God instructed the Aaronic priesthood concerning the blessing they were to pronounce upon the Israelite worshiper (vv 22-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 7<\/h5>\n<p>The leaders in Israel brought six wagons and twelve oxen for use in the transfer of the tabernacle (7:3). Moses gave two wagons and four oxen to the Gershonites (v 7), and four wagons and eight oxen to the Merarites (v 8). (The Kohathites were to carry the “furniture” of the tabernacle on their shoulders, v 9.) For twelve consecutive days, to consecrate the altar after it was anointed (vv 10, 88), the tribal leaders, in the order of march (cf. ch 2), brought similar offerings. God demonstrated his pleasure with this gesture by speaking to Moses from the mercy seat (v 89).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 8<\/h5>\n<p>God granted the prerogative to light the seven-branched lampstand to the Aaronic priests (vv 1-4). Following divine instructions, Moses and Aaron consecrated the Levites to the service of the tabernacle by means of a purification ceremony (vv 5-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 9:1–10:10<\/h5>\n<p>For the benefit of the worshiper who was ceremonially unclean or away on a journey at the time of the Passover, God granted permission to observe the Passover a month later (vv 6-12; see also ch 27).<\/p>\n<p>God gave final instructions to the people before their departure from Sinai. They were to prepare for marching when they saw the cloud ascending from the tabernacle, and they were to stop at the place where the cloud settled down (9:15-23). The people were to assemble at the tabernacle if two silver trumpets were blown; only the leaders were to come if one was blown; and at the blast of a military alarm, the several groups of tribes were to prepare for an immediate march (10:1-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 10:11–14:45<\/h5>\n<p>The next section recounts the march from Sinai to Kadesh-barnea, a period of time approximately one and a half to two months in length (cf. 10:11; 13:20). Almost immediately the people began to complain as they passed through the terrible wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19), angering the Lord at Taberah (Nm 11:1-3) and at Kibroth-hattaavah (Nm 11:4-35; Pss 78:26-31; 106:13-15). Miriam and Aaron challenged Moses’ sole right to speak for God to the people, which resulted in temporary leprosy as punishment for Miriam (doubtless the leader in the provocation). Through Moses’ intercession, the two were forgiven (Nm 12). Out of this event, however, came the remarkable description of Moses’ relationship to God as a unique means of revelation (vv 6-8).<\/p>\n<p>From Paran (Kadesh-barnea) Moses dispatched the spies to survey the land (ch 13). Deuteronomy 1:22 suggests that the plan to spy out the land originated with the people, with Moses (at God’s behest) acquiescing. At the end of 40 days, they returned. Only Caleb and Joshua urged the people to advance to the conquest; the other 10 spies spoke of foes too formidable for them to defeat. The people, greatly discouraged, attempted to stone Caleb and Joshua (Nm 14:10), and were prevented from doing so only by the sudden appearance of the glory cloud at the tabernacle. God swore in his wrath (Nm 14:21; cf. Heb 3:7–4:10) that, with the exception of Caleb and Joshua, none of that generation would enter the land of promise (Nm 14:21-35). He then struck down the 10 unbelieving spies (v 37). Presumptuously, and in spite of God’s express command to the contrary (Dt 1:42), Israel attempted to advance on the land, leaving Moses and the ark of the covenant in the camp. They were challenged by the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Israel remained in this general area with tribal families fanning out over the wilderness and settling around springs and oases (Dt 1:46). Numbers 15:1–21:20 relates the account of the 38 years of wilderness wandering. Much of this time was probably spent around Kadesh-barnea (Dt 1:46).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 15<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given (Nm 15:1-21). Also, the procedure to be followed when an Israelite committed a sin deliberately and defiantly was spelled out in terms of excommunication: there was no atonement for such an attitude (vv 22-31). A Sabbath violator was executed (vv 32-36), perhaps as an illustration of the foregoing legislation. Finally, to assist them in obeying God’s laws, the Israelites were instructed to tie blue tassels to their outer garments as reminders (vv 37-41).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 16<\/h5>\n<p>Korah challenged Aaron’s high priesthood, and Dathan, Abiram, and On challenged Moses’ leadership (vv 1-14). God, at Moses’ word, opened up the earth and swallowed the offenders (Nm 16:32; cf. Dt 9:6; Ps 106:16-18). Korah is regarded in the NT (Jude 1:11) as a classic example of a rebellious malcontent.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 26:11 states that Korah’s young children did not perish with him. Perhaps they became the ancestors of the “sons of Korah,” the sacred musicians of the temple who composed 12 Korahite psalms (Pss 42–49, 84–85, 87–88).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 17<\/h5>\n<p>God then instructed the leaders of each tribe to bring rods, 12 in all, to write the names of the tribes upon them (with Aaron’s name on Levi’s rod), and to deposit them in the tabernacle. The following day, Aaron’s rod had sprouted with blossoms and ripe almonds, thus vindicating Aaron’s special high-priestly status.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 18–19<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given. In 18:1-7, the full responsibility for the priestly service was given to the Aaronic priests—a very natural consequence of the preceding chapter. The Levites were to assist the Aaronic order (v 6). Since the tribe of Levi received no land inheritance, they were to be supported from the offerings of the people (vv 8-20).<\/p>\n<p>In 19:1-22 instructions concerning ceremonial impurity were given. When an Israelite became ceremonially unclean through contact with death (vv 11-16), God required that he be purified from his sin (vv 9, 17) by the sprinkling of specially prepared water upon him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 20<\/h5>\n<p>With Israel once again at Kadesh on the southern border of the wilderness of Zin in the first month of the 40th year of wandering, Miriam died and was buried (v 1). According to the encampment list in chapter 33, 18 encampments may have occurred for Israel since the nation had last been at this site (cf. 33:18-36).<\/p>\n<p>At this time the nation complained once again because there was little water (20:2). Moses, at God’s instruction, brought forth water from a rock (vv 8-11), but because of a gross infraction by Moses and Aaron on this occasion, God announced that they would not be permitted to lead Israel in the conquest of the land (vv 12, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The chapter closes with Edom refusing Israel passage across its territory (vv 14-21) and Aaron dying on Mt Hor on the border of Edom (vv 22-29) in the fifth month of the 40th year (33:38). Eleazar, Aaron’s son, assumed the office of high priest.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 21<\/h5>\n<p>After a quick victory over Arad (vv 1-3), Israel started south to encircle Edom. Becoming impatient with God and with Moses, the people expressed their disgust with God’s provision of manna. The Lord sent poisonous snakes to the camp, causing many to die. But at God’s command Moses fashioned a snake out of bronze and placed it atop a standard. All who looked to the bronze snake survived (vv 4-10). The bronze snake was preserved and later was destroyed by Hezekiah, the symbol having become by his time an idol (2 Kgs 18:4). Later still, Jesus drew an analogy between these wicked sinners looking to the bronze snake and being delivered and men looking to him by faith and being saved (Jn 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Leaving that fateful place, Israel journeyed into and up the Arabah, crossed the Wadi Zered in an eastern swing around Moab, finally crossing the Arnon into Amorite territory. Journeying north, they camped at Pisgah (Nm 21:10-20).<\/p>\n<p>At this point the conquest of the Transjordan begins. In quick succession Israel defeated Sihon of Heshbon (vv 21-31) and Og of Bashan (vv 33-35) and settled in the plains of Moab (22:1). This encampment was the scene for the remainder of the activities of Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua 1–3. In a real sense, one can say the wilderness wanderings were now over.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the place, then, to summarize the spiritual condition of Israel on the eve of the conquest of Canaan. Numbers makes it quite evident that the entire generation that left Egypt, with the exception of Joshua and Caleb, was to die in the wilderness because of its apostasy (cf. Am 5:25), unbelief, and general failure to keep covenant with God. None of the generation of male children born in the wilderness had been circumcised (Jos 5:2-9). Psalm 90 underscores Israel as the recipient of God’s wrath in the wilderness. It is in this pitiable spiritual condition that Israel arrived on the plains of Moab.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 22–24<\/h5>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab, frightened by Israel’s presence, joined with Midian to hire Balaam, the false prophet, to curse Israel. For gain, Balaam agreed (2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11), but God prevented him, causing him rather to bless Israel in his four oracular utterances (Nm 23:7-10, 18-24; 24:3-9, 15-19) and to predict the destruction of Moab, Edom, Amalek (24:20), the Kenites (24:21), and Asshur (24:24). With that, Balak and Balaam separated. Balaam, in collusion with Midian, agreed to counsel Israel to commit idolatry and immorality (31:16). And so, where Balak failed to turn the Lord against Israel, Balaam succeeded (ch 25).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 25<\/h5>\n<p>Israel sinned against God by idolatrous and immoral acts with the people of Moab (vv 1-3). In carrying out the command of God to destroy the reprobate Israelites, Phinehas killed Zimri and Cozbi, the latter being a daughter of one of the five kings of Midian (vv 4-14). This event provided the occasion for God to declare a holy war against Midian (vv 16-18; cf. ch 31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 26<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to take a roll of the men of the second generation who were capable of warring against Israel’s enemies. The total number came to 601,730 (v 51), a reduction of 1,820 men from the first count. With a smaller force than the first generation, Israel conquered Canaan, clearly indicating that Israel could have spared itself the years of wandering if only the nation had obeyed God 38 years before Kadesh. The Levites totaled 23,000 males a month old and upward (vv 57-62).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 27<\/h5>\n<p>At the request of the daughters of Zelophehad (cf. 26:33) that they be granted the right to inherit their father’s possessions since he had no sons, the Lord agreed that they could, using the occasion to give further laws of inheritance (vv 1-11).<\/p>\n<p>Reminded that he would soon die in Abarim, Moses requested that God appoint his successor. God selected Joshua, and Moses commissioned him (vv 12-23).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 28–30<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation regarding offerings for various occasions was given. God also instructed Moses to inform the people concerning vows. When a man made a vow, it was inviolable (30:2), but if a woman made a vow, the man (father, husband) responsible for her could nullify it if he felt that it was rash (vv 1-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 31<\/h5>\n<p>The account of the holy war declared against Midian in 25:16-18 is given. With Phinehas accompanying 12,000 warriors, Israel defeated Midian, killing Balaam along with the five kings and many male adults of Midian (31:1-8). The Midianite women and children were taken captive, but Moses commanded that all the male children and the nonvirgin women be killed (vv 9-18). One must not conclude that this war meant the end of Midian as such, for Midian later proved a formidable foe of Israel in the time of the judges (Jgs 6).<\/p>\n<p>After the battle, the warriors were instructed to purify themselves, their clothing, and the booty from the war before coming into the camp (Nm 31:19-24). Furthermore, they were instructed to divide the booty in half and to contribute one-fifth of one percent of their half to the high priest (“the Lord’s tribute”). The other half was divided among the people who had remained in camp, after the Levites received a two percent contribution (vv 25-31).<\/p>\n<p>Verses 32-47 give the tally of the booty after its division into two parts and the amount that was given from each part to Eleazar and the Levites. The tally is said by some to be too high to be authentic, but there is no evidence that disputes the recorded figures.<\/p>\n<p>In thanksgiving to God because no Israelite had been killed in the war (v 49) and to make atonement for themselves (v 50), the army officers brought a special offering of gold trinkets to Moses and Eleazar, which was placed in the tabernacle as a memorial (vv 48-54).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 32<\/h5>\n<p>At their request and on the condition that they aid the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan, Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh were allotted the Transjordan region. Moses earnestly besought the Lord to change his mind about not permitting him to enter the land of promise (Dt 3:23-27). But God would not let him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 33–34<\/h5>\n<p>At God’s command, Moses kept a written record of Israel’s itinerary from Egypt to the plains of Moab. Here is biblical evidence of the Mosaic authorship of Numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The boundaries of the Promised Land were now given. The southern boundary would run from the southern tip of the Dead Sea, south of Kadesh-barnea up to the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish), and on to the Mediterranean Sea (34:3-5). The western boundary would be the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea itself (v 6). The northern boundary, not realized until the times of David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:3-12; 1 Kgs 8:65), was to extend from the Mediterranean Sea east to Hamath, at the head of the Orontes River (Nm 34:7-9). The eastern boundary was to be practically on a vertical line, with the Jordan Valley running north to the northern boundary (vv 10-12). The nine and a half tribes were to divide this area among themselves (vv 13-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then selected the men who were to bear the responsibility of dividing the land of Canaan among the western tribes after the conquest (vv 16-29).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 35<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Israel to give 48 cities throughout the land on both sides of the Jordan to the Levites for a permanent possession (vv 1-8), since that tribe was not included in the land allotments to the other tribes. The number of cities each tribe was to give was to be determined by its size (v 8). Six of the Levitical cities, three on each side of the Jordan, were to be designated “cities of refuge” for the manslayer (v 6; cf. Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>Legislation concerning the manslayer follows (vv 9-34). If the slayer committed murder, the kinsman avenger had the right to fulfill his role as executioner (vv 16-21). If, however, the killing was unintentional, the manslayer was to flee to the nearest city of refuge for a trial. If found innocent of murder, he was assigned to remain within the city of refuge until the death of the high priest. If he left the city before then, the kinsman avenger was permitted to execute him (vv 22-34).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 36<\/h5>\n<p>Basing their question on the earlier law established in chapter 27, the leaders from Manasseh asked whether an heiress should be allowed to marry outside her tribe, with the accompanying transfer of property from one tribe to another that would ensue. God directed that an heiress would have to marry within her tribe (vv 1-12).<\/p>\n<p>The last verse of the book refers to all the laws given in the plains of Moab (26:1–36:12; cf. Lv 27:34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalTeaching\">Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Numbers God is revealed as the unchangingly faithful God of the covenant (Nm 23:19). This faithfulness to his covenant required that he both guide and care for his people and punish their sins against him. But no impediment was so great that God’s design to bring his people to the land of promise was thwarted (11:23).<\/p>\n<p>Both by his wrathful reaction to Israel’s sin and by the numerous priestly laws, God highlights his awesome holiness. The legislation expressly teaches that the person who approaches God must be clean. Even to look with unholy eyes upon the holiness of God meant death (4:20).<\/p>\n<p>His sovereignty over all of life is evident from the attention he displays over even the minutest aspects of life. The phrase “And the Lord said unto Moses” occurs over 50 times, and the words that follow in each case deal with all kinds of matters.<\/p>\n<p>As the God of the covenant, God’s “christological” character is also apparent. God’s blessing and faithfulness reflect the christological motif. Finally, Moses’ prophetic leadership (Acts 7:37-38) and intercessory ministry (e.g., Nm 11:2; 12:13; 14:19), in the Aaronic priesthood (e.g., ch 16), in the animal sacrifices (cf. 19:9; Heb 9:13), and in the symbols (the manna, the water, the bronze snake) foreshadow the future Christ.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s responses to God, the people depict all of human sinfulness and faithlessness. Israel’s wanderings illustrate the results of unbelief. The punishments of Israel prove the maxim of Numbers 32:23: “But if you fail to keep your word, then you will have sinned against the <span>Lord<\/span>, and you may be sure that your sin will find you out” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Numbers forcefully teaches that safety and blessing are to be found only in trust in the Lord. Only he is capable of bringing men and women to the place of rest (Heb 4:9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Deuteronomy, Book of; Exodus, Book of; Genesis, Book of; Leviticus, Book of; Moses; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NUMBERS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, <em>Numeri.<\/em> The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The question of the authorship of Numbers is part of the larger question of the authorship of the Pentateuch. Until the appearance of the higher-critical documentary theories of the 19th century, the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was almost universally held by both Jews and Christians alike. This time-honored tradition is supported by the Pentateuch itself (e.g., Ex 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Nm 33:2; Dt 31:9, 24), the rest of the OT (e.g., Jos 23:6; Jgs 3:4; Mal 4:4), as well as Jesus’ teaching (e.g., Jn 5:46-47), and the rest of the NT (e.g., Acts 28:23; Rom 10:19; 1 Cor 9:9). Although discrepancies in the Pentateuch were widely and openly acknowledged, nevertheless Moses, the 15th-century <span>BC<\/span> lawgiver, was affirmed as the primary author of the Pentateuchal literature.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<h5>Sinai Peninsula<\/h5>\n<p>The historical background of Numbers begins primarily in the geographical region of the Sinai Peninsula of the mid-second millennium <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai Peninsula is in the shape of an inverted triangle with the base on the north. It is approximately 240 miles (386.2 kilometers) long from north to south and 175 miles (281.6 kilometers) wide at the northern base, with an area of approximately 22,000 square miles (56,980 square kilometers). It is bounded on the north by the Mediterranean Sea and the southern border of Canaan, on the west by the Bitter Lakes and the Gulf of Suez, and on the east by the Arabah and the Gulf of Aqaba. Beginning in the north at the Mediterranean coast and moving south, for about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the soil is sandy. South of this coastal plain is a high plateau (Et-Tih) of gravel and limestone (about 2,500 feet, or 762 meters, above sea level), stretching south into the peninsula for approximately 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). Rising above the plateau at this point is a granite mountain formation with peaks up to 8,000 feet (2,438.4 meters) above sea level. In this mountainous region at the apex of the peninsular triangle, Jebel Musa (7,363 feet, or 2,244.2 meters, high), the traditional site where Israel camped before Mt Sinai and Moses received the law, rises above the plain.<\/p>\n<p>The peninsula itself is comprised of five wilderness areas. In the north and immediately east of the land of Goshen is the approximately 40-mile- or 64.4-kilometer-wide wilderness of Shur, which runs past the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) to the region of Kadesh-barnea and northeast to Beersheba. East of this region is the wilderness of Zin, extending east from the wilderness of Shur to the southern tip of the Dead Sea. Kadesh-barnea is located on its southern border (Nm 20:1; 33:36). South of the wilderness of Shur is the wilderness of Etham, and east of this wilderness in the east-central region of Sinai is the great wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19). Kadesh-barnea is on the northern border of this territory (Nm 13:26). In this area the Israelites spent 38 of their 40 years of wandering. Southwest of the wilderness of Paran, on the western slopes of the peninsula, not far from the granite mountains standing in the southern apex of the triangle, is the wilderness of Sin.<\/p>\n<p>While the region is generally desolate and barren, it is not impassable or incapable of sustaining travelers. Wells and springs dot both the western and eastern borders at reasonable distances from each other. The water table is fairly close to ground level, making the digging of wells possible (Nm 20:17; 21:16-18). The limestone rocks are also capable of holding great amounts of water (20:11). Vegetation is sparse except around the more permanent streams where vegetation and date palms flourish. The rainy season in winter is approximately 20 days. Quail (11:31-32) are known to migrate across the peninsula to Europe in the spring.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Peoples Israel Confronted<\/h5>\n<h6>Amalekites and Canaanites (14:25, 43-45; 24:20)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amalekites were descendants of Amalek, son of Eliphaz and grandson of Esau (Gn 36:12, 16). They were generally a nomadic people. In the Sinai Peninsula they were the first to war against Israel at Rephidim (cf. Nm 24:20), perhaps the Wadi Refayid in southwest Sinai (Ex 17:8-16), before Israel reached Horeb. A year later, the Amalekites settled in the hills and valleys north of Kadesh-barnea. In league with the Canaanites, the inhabitants of Palestine, they blocked the effort of Israel to invade the land of promise from the south (Nm 14:45). Israel’s will to wage war appears to have been completely broken for years to come.<\/p>\n<h6>Edomites (20:14-21; 21:4, 10-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Edom, or Seir (24:18), is the territory south of the Dead Sea occupied by Esau’s descendants. Stretching from its northern border at the Wadi Zered (21:12), which flowed into the Dead Sea at its southern tip, 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) south to the Gulf of Aqaba, it occupied both sides of the Arabah, with Kadesh-barnea again standing on the edge of its western border (20:16), giving it a land area of approximately 4,000 square miles (10,360 square kilometers). It is a rugged mountain region with peaks rising to 3,500 feet (1,066.8 meters). The “king’s highway,” an ancient trade route from Damascus through the Transjordan to the Gulf of Aqaba, passed through its territory and major cities, Bozrah and Leman. While Edom was not fertile, it did have cultivable areas (20:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>During Israel’s march to the Transjordan region, Edom refused to let Israel journey directly east from Kadesh through its territory but forced Israel to move southeast into and up the Arabah (21:4, 11). In spite of this hostility to God’s people, Israel was forbidden to attack (Dt 2:2-8) or to hate the Edomites (23:7), and so Edom was spared from destruction during the conquest of the land. The area was later conquered by David (2 Sm 8:13-14) according to Balaam’s prophecy (Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<h6>Arad (21:1-3)<\/h6>\n<p>Arad was a south Canaanite settlement in the Negev. Its king, after fighting against Israel and taking some captives, was later defeated at Hormah.<\/p>\n<h6>Moabites (21:11-15; 22:1–24:25)<\/h6>\n<p>Moab, occupied by the descendants of Lot (Gn 19:37), is the territory east of the Dead Sea lying primarily between the Wadi Arnon (Nm 21:13) and the Wadi Zered with a land area of approximately 1,400 square miles (3,626 square kilometers).<\/p>\n<p>In the late middle Bronze Age, the Moabites had overflowed their main plateau and had extended well to the north of the Arnon all the way to the northern end of the Dead Sea (21:20). At the time of the events recorded in Numbers, however, the Amorites occupied the area from Arnon all the way north to the Wadi Jabbok (vv 13, 21-24), having earlier taken this land from Moab (vv 26-30). The Moabite kingdom was highly organized, with agriculture and livestock, splendid buildings, distinctive pottery, and strong fortifications around her borders. Its god was Chemosh (v 29).<\/p>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab during the period of the conquest, in league with Midian, hired Balaam to curse Israel (chs 22–24). When this failed, the two heathen powers sought to neutralize Israel by luring the people of God into the worship of Chemosh and into idolatry (25:1-2). In the war that ensued, Israel defeated Midian (31:1-18), but by God’s express command (Dt 2:9-13) spared Moab. But as Balaam had prophesied earlier (Nm 24:17), David in the 11th century warred against and defeated Moab (2 Sm 8:2, 13-14).<\/p>\n<h6>Amorites (21:21-35)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amorites, the people who had occupied northern Moabite territory (Nm 21:25-30), were descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:16) who had scattered throughout the hill country on both sides of the Jordan River. Heshbon was their capital city. Both Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan were Amorite kings (Dt 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As for Bashan (Nm 21:33-35; cf. Dt 1:4; 3:1-12), it is the fertile grazing region (Nm 32:1-5) east of the Sea of Kinnereth (Galilee), whose northern border extended to Mt Hermon and whose southern border, while normally the river Yarmuk, in the Mosaic age was the Wadi Jabbok (Jos 12:4-5). Its land area covered approximately 5,000 square miles (12,950 square kilometers). Its major cities were Ashtaroth, Edrei, and Golan. After the conquest of the land, this territory fell to the half-tribe of Manasseh, with Gad occupying southern Gilead, and Reuben the region south to the Wadi Arnon.<\/p>\n<h6>Midianites (25:16-18; 31:1-54)<\/h6>\n<p>The Midianites, descendants of Abraham through the concubine Keturah (Gn 25:2), were desert dwellers in Transjordan from Moab to the region south of Edom. The elders of Moab and Midian cooperated in hiring Balaam to curse Israel (Nm 22:4-7). Later, when that effort proved fruitless, the Midianites, again with Moab, led Israel into idolatry and immorality (25:1-6, 14-15). Cozbi, the Midianite woman who was executed for her wickedness (25:8), was the daughter of Zur, one of the five Midianite kings confederate with the Amorite king Sihon (Jos 13:21) who were later killed in Israel’s holy war against Midian (Nm 31:8). This war with Midian apparently broke the back of any remaining Amorite resistance, for Joshua 13:15-23 clearly intimates that as a result the tribe of Reuben occupied this territory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Numbers serves a twofold purpose. First, as a historical book, it contains the account of Israel’s fortunes from Mt Sinai to the plains of Moab on the eve of the conquest of Canaan—that almost-40-year period spent in the wilderness of Sinai and in Transjordan (1447–1407 <span>BC<\/span>). While recounting Israel’s many failures and God’s many faithful acts, it depicts Moses, Israel’s leader, in all of his greatness and in all of his weakness. The two army rolls (chs 2 and 26) introduce the “acts” of the main drama of its history: the first in preparation for entering the land, which failed due to Israel’s unbelief; the second, after the death of the entire generation that left Egypt, in preparation for the successful invasion of Canaan under Joshua’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Second, in line with Paul’s general belief that “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope” (Rom 15:4, <span>rsv<\/span>), and in keeping with his specific teaching that “these things [that befell Israel in the wilderness] happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor 10:11, <span>rsv<\/span>), Numbers serves a doctrinal, typical, and hortatory purpose (cf. v 12). Historical events are divinely invested with spiritual truths, thereby becoming object lessons for the Christian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to register (Nm 1:18) the men able to go to war (vv 2-3). The total number of soldiers in Israel was 603,550 (v 46). The Levites were not numbered in this roll (vv 47-54), since they were to be set apart for special service pertaining to the tabernacle.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 2<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses concerning the arrangement of the tribes while encamped and on the march. With the tabernacle in the center of the camp, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, totaling 186,400 (v 9), were to camp on the east; Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, totaling 151,450 (v 16), were to camp on the south; Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, totaling 108,100 (v 24), were to camp on the west; and Dan, Asher, and Naphtali, totaling 157,600 (v 31), were to camp on the north.<\/p>\n<p>On the march, Judah’s east group (v 9) was to set out first, followed by Reuben’s south group (v 16). The Levites with the tabernacle were to follow (v 17). Then Ephraim’s west group (v 24) was to follow the Levites, with Dan’s north group (v 31) bringing up the rear. This means that the Levites were flanked by two groups, before and behind.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 3<\/h5>\n<p>Aaron, the great-grandson of Levi through Kohath (Ex 6:16-20), and his descendants were designated to serve as priests at the tabernacle (Nm 3:2-3). The remaining descendants of Levi, from the families of Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, were to serve the Aaronic line at the tabernacle (vv 5-10). The Gershonites were responsible for the tabernacle coverings, hangings, and screens (vv 25-26); the Kohathites were responsible for the “furniture” in the tabernacle (v 31); and the Merarites were responsible for the frames, bars, and foundations for the tabernacle (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed Moses to number the three Levitical families. Gershon’s descendants, totaling 7,500 (v 22), were to camp on the west, between the western group of tribes and the tabernacle. Kohath’s descendants, totaling 8,600 (v 28), were to camp on the south, between the southern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Merari’s descendants, totaling 6,200 (v 34), were to camp on the north, between the northern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Moses and the Aaronic family were to camp on the east, between the eastern group of tribes and the tabernacle (v 38). Both in camp and on the march, then, the tabernacle was in the midst of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The census of Israel’s firstborn males disclosed 273 more male babies than Levites (vv 40-46), and since the Levites were a ransom for Israelite males on a one-to-one basis, the 273 additional male children had to be ransomed by atonement money (vv 46-51).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 4<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Moses that only Levites between the ages of 30 and 50 were to serve at the tabernacle. A census disclosed that there were 2,750 Kohathites (v 36), 2,630 Gershonites (v 40), and 3,200 Merarites (v 44), making a total of 8,580 (v 48) who were eligible to serve the Aaronic priests.<\/p>\n<p>God further ordered the Aaronic priests, when the tabernacle was being dismantled for the march, to cover all the tabernacle “furniture” before the Kohathites even looked at them (v 20) lest the Kohathites, either looking at or touching them (v 15), should die (vv 15, 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 5<\/h5>\n<p>For ceremonial purposes, God demanded that lepers, those with a bodily discharge, and those who had touched the dead, must be put outside the camp until they were purified (vv 1-4). Furthermore, God instructed those making restitution for a wrongdoing, if the wronged person was no longer alive, to give the restitution price to a priest (vv 5-10).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, if a woman was suspected by her husband of infidelity but there was no evidence of such, the woman was to undergo a trial by water ordeal to relieve the man of his suspicions. The priest was to give her holy water with dust from the floor of the tabernacle in it to drink. If she was guilty, the water by divine direction would cause her pain, make her abdomen swell, and her thigh waste away (vv 11-31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 6<\/h5>\n<p>Laws pertaining to the Nazirite were given next. A Nazirite was a person who determined to take a vow to separate himself wholly to the Lord. To dramatize this separation, the Nazirite was to drink no intoxicating beverage, let the hair grow long, and touch no dead body (vv 3-6). Should he defile himself, he was to follow prescribed rules for ceremonial cleansing (vv 9-12). When his vow had run its course, he was to follow prescribed rules for terminating his vow (vv 13-21). Finally, God instructed the Aaronic priesthood concerning the blessing they were to pronounce upon the Israelite worshiper (vv 22-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 7<\/h5>\n<p>The leaders in Israel brought six wagons and twelve oxen for use in the transfer of the tabernacle (7:3). Moses gave two wagons and four oxen to the Gershonites (v 7), and four wagons and eight oxen to the Merarites (v 8). (The Kohathites were to carry the “furniture” of the tabernacle on their shoulders, v 9.) For twelve consecutive days, to consecrate the altar after it was anointed (vv 10, 88), the tribal leaders, in the order of march (cf. ch 2), brought similar offerings. God demonstrated his pleasure with this gesture by speaking to Moses from the mercy seat (v 89).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 8<\/h5>\n<p>God granted the prerogative to light the seven-branched lampstand to the Aaronic priests (vv 1-4). Following divine instructions, Moses and Aaron consecrated the Levites to the service of the tabernacle by means of a purification ceremony (vv 5-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 9:1–10:10<\/h5>\n<p>For the benefit of the worshiper who was ceremonially unclean or away on a journey at the time of the Passover, God granted permission to observe the Passover a month later (vv 6-12; see also ch 27).<\/p>\n<p>God gave final instructions to the people before their departure from Sinai. They were to prepare for marching when they saw the cloud ascending from the tabernacle, and they were to stop at the place where the cloud settled down (9:15-23). The people were to assemble at the tabernacle if two silver trumpets were blown; only the leaders were to come if one was blown; and at the blast of a military alarm, the several groups of tribes were to prepare for an immediate march (10:1-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 10:11–14:45<\/h5>\n<p>The next section recounts the march from Sinai to Kadesh-barnea, a period of time approximately one and a half to two months in length (cf. 10:11; 13:20). Almost immediately the people began to complain as they passed through the terrible wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19), angering the Lord at Taberah (Nm 11:1-3) and at Kibroth-hattaavah (Nm 11:4-35; Pss 78:26-31; 106:13-15). Miriam and Aaron challenged Moses’ sole right to speak for God to the people, which resulted in temporary leprosy as punishment for Miriam (doubtless the leader in the provocation). Through Moses’ intercession, the two were forgiven (Nm 12). Out of this event, however, came the remarkable description of Moses’ relationship to God as a unique means of revelation (vv 6-8).<\/p>\n<p>From Paran (Kadesh-barnea) Moses dispatched the spies to survey the land (ch 13). Deuteronomy 1:22 suggests that the plan to spy out the land originated with the people, with Moses (at God’s behest) acquiescing. At the end of 40 days, they returned. Only Caleb and Joshua urged the people to advance to the conquest; the other 10 spies spoke of foes too formidable for them to defeat. The people, greatly discouraged, attempted to stone Caleb and Joshua (Nm 14:10), and were prevented from doing so only by the sudden appearance of the glory cloud at the tabernacle. God swore in his wrath (Nm 14:21; cf. Heb 3:7–4:10) that, with the exception of Caleb and Joshua, none of that generation would enter the land of promise (Nm 14:21-35). He then struck down the 10 unbelieving spies (v 37). Presumptuously, and in spite of God’s express command to the contrary (Dt 1:42), Israel attempted to advance on the land, leaving Moses and the ark of the covenant in the camp. They were challenged by the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Israel remained in this general area with tribal families fanning out over the wilderness and settling around springs and oases (Dt 1:46). Numbers 15:1–21:20 relates the account of the 38 years of wilderness wandering. Much of this time was probably spent around Kadesh-barnea (Dt 1:46).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 15<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given (Nm 15:1-21). Also, the procedure to be followed when an Israelite committed a sin deliberately and defiantly was spelled out in terms of excommunication: there was no atonement for such an attitude (vv 22-31). A Sabbath violator was executed (vv 32-36), perhaps as an illustration of the foregoing legislation. Finally, to assist them in obeying God’s laws, the Israelites were instructed to tie blue tassels to their outer garments as reminders (vv 37-41).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 16<\/h5>\n<p>Korah challenged Aaron’s high priesthood, and Dathan, Abiram, and On challenged Moses’ leadership (vv 1-14). God, at Moses’ word, opened up the earth and swallowed the offenders (Nm 16:32; cf. Dt 9:6; Ps 106:16-18). Korah is regarded in the NT (Jude 1:11) as a classic example of a rebellious malcontent.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 26:11 states that Korah’s young children did not perish with him. Perhaps they became the ancestors of the “sons of Korah,” the sacred musicians of the temple who composed 12 Korahite psalms (Pss 42–49, 84–85, 87–88).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 17<\/h5>\n<p>God then instructed the leaders of each tribe to bring rods, 12 in all, to write the names of the tribes upon them (with Aaron’s name on Levi’s rod), and to deposit them in the tabernacle. The following day, Aaron’s rod had sprouted with blossoms and ripe almonds, thus vindicating Aaron’s special high-priestly status.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 18–19<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given. In 18:1-7, the full responsibility for the priestly service was given to the Aaronic priests—a very natural consequence of the preceding chapter. The Levites were to assist the Aaronic order (v 6). Since the tribe of Levi received no land inheritance, they were to be supported from the offerings of the people (vv 8-20).<\/p>\n<p>In 19:1-22 instructions concerning ceremonial impurity were given. When an Israelite became ceremonially unclean through contact with death (vv 11-16), God required that he be purified from his sin (vv 9, 17) by the sprinkling of specially prepared water upon him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 20<\/h5>\n<p>With Israel once again at Kadesh on the southern border of the wilderness of Zin in the first month of the 40th year of wandering, Miriam died and was buried (v 1). According to the encampment list in chapter 33, 18 encampments may have occurred for Israel since the nation had last been at this site (cf. 33:18-36).<\/p>\n<p>At this time the nation complained once again because there was little water (20:2). Moses, at God’s instruction, brought forth water from a rock (vv 8-11), but because of a gross infraction by Moses and Aaron on this occasion, God announced that they would not be permitted to lead Israel in the conquest of the land (vv 12, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The chapter closes with Edom refusing Israel passage across its territory (vv 14-21) and Aaron dying on Mt Hor on the border of Edom (vv 22-29) in the fifth month of the 40th year (33:38). Eleazar, Aaron’s son, assumed the office of high priest.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 21<\/h5>\n<p>After a quick victory over Arad (vv 1-3), Israel started south to encircle Edom. Becoming impatient with God and with Moses, the people expressed their disgust with God’s provision of manna. The Lord sent poisonous snakes to the camp, causing many to die. But at God’s command Moses fashioned a snake out of bronze and placed it atop a standard. All who looked to the bronze snake survived (vv 4-10). The bronze snake was preserved and later was destroyed by Hezekiah, the symbol having become by his time an idol (2 Kgs 18:4). Later still, Jesus drew an analogy between these wicked sinners looking to the bronze snake and being delivered and men looking to him by faith and being saved (Jn 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Leaving that fateful place, Israel journeyed into and up the Arabah, crossed the Wadi Zered in an eastern swing around Moab, finally crossing the Arnon into Amorite territory. Journeying north, they camped at Pisgah (Nm 21:10-20).<\/p>\n<p>At this point the conquest of the Transjordan begins. In quick succession Israel defeated Sihon of Heshbon (vv 21-31) and Og of Bashan (vv 33-35) and settled in the plains of Moab (22:1). This encampment was the scene for the remainder of the activities of Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua 1–3. In a real sense, one can say the wilderness wanderings were now over.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the place, then, to summarize the spiritual condition of Israel on the eve of the conquest of Canaan. Numbers makes it quite evident that the entire generation that left Egypt, with the exception of Joshua and Caleb, was to die in the wilderness because of its apostasy (cf. Am 5:25), unbelief, and general failure to keep covenant with God. None of the generation of male children born in the wilderness had been circumcised (Jos 5:2-9). Psalm 90 underscores Israel as the recipient of God’s wrath in the wilderness. It is in this pitiable spiritual condition that Israel arrived on the plains of Moab.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 22–24<\/h5>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab, frightened by Israel’s presence, joined with Midian to hire Balaam, the false prophet, to curse Israel. For gain, Balaam agreed (2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11), but God prevented him, causing him rather to bless Israel in his four oracular utterances (Nm 23:7-10, 18-24; 24:3-9, 15-19) and to predict the destruction of Moab, Edom, Amalek (24:20), the Kenites (24:21), and Asshur (24:24). With that, Balak and Balaam separated. Balaam, in collusion with Midian, agreed to counsel Israel to commit idolatry and immorality (31:16). And so, where Balak failed to turn the Lord against Israel, Balaam succeeded (ch 25).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 25<\/h5>\n<p>Israel sinned against God by idolatrous and immoral acts with the people of Moab (vv 1-3). In carrying out the command of God to destroy the reprobate Israelites, Phinehas killed Zimri and Cozbi, the latter being a daughter of one of the five kings of Midian (vv 4-14). This event provided the occasion for God to declare a holy war against Midian (vv 16-18; cf. ch 31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 26<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to take a roll of the men of the second generation who were capable of warring against Israel’s enemies. The total number came to 601,730 (v 51), a reduction of 1,820 men from the first count. With a smaller force than the first generation, Israel conquered Canaan, clearly indicating that Israel could have spared itself the years of wandering if only the nation had obeyed God 38 years before Kadesh. The Levites totaled 23,000 males a month old and upward (vv 57-62).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 27<\/h5>\n<p>At the request of the daughters of Zelophehad (cf. 26:33) that they be granted the right to inherit their father’s possessions since he had no sons, the Lord agreed that they could, using the occasion to give further laws of inheritance (vv 1-11).<\/p>\n<p>Reminded that he would soon die in Abarim, Moses requested that God appoint his successor. God selected Joshua, and Moses commissioned him (vv 12-23).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 28–30<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation regarding offerings for various occasions was given. God also instructed Moses to inform the people concerning vows. When a man made a vow, it was inviolable (30:2), but if a woman made a vow, the man (father, husband) responsible for her could nullify it if he felt that it was rash (vv 1-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 31<\/h5>\n<p>The account of the holy war declared against Midian in 25:16-18 is given. With Phinehas accompanying 12,000 warriors, Israel defeated Midian, killing Balaam along with the five kings and many male adults of Midian (31:1-8). The Midianite women and children were taken captive, but Moses commanded that all the male children and the nonvirgin women be killed (vv 9-18). One must not conclude that this war meant the end of Midian as such, for Midian later proved a formidable foe of Israel in the time of the judges (Jgs 6).<\/p>\n<p>After the battle, the warriors were instructed to purify themselves, their clothing, and the booty from the war before coming into the camp (Nm 31:19-24). Furthermore, they were instructed to divide the booty in half and to contribute one-fifth of one percent of their half to the high priest (“the Lord’s tribute”). The other half was divided among the people who had remained in camp, after the Levites received a two percent contribution (vv 25-31).<\/p>\n<p>Verses 32-47 give the tally of the booty after its division into two parts and the amount that was given from each part to Eleazar and the Levites. The tally is said by some to be too high to be authentic, but there is no evidence that disputes the recorded figures.<\/p>\n<p>In thanksgiving to God because no Israelite had been killed in the war (v 49) and to make atonement for themselves (v 50), the army officers brought a special offering of gold trinkets to Moses and Eleazar, which was placed in the tabernacle as a memorial (vv 48-54).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 32<\/h5>\n<p>At their request and on the condition that they aid the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan, Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh were allotted the Transjordan region. Moses earnestly besought the Lord to change his mind about not permitting him to enter the land of promise (Dt 3:23-27). But God would not let him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 33–34<\/h5>\n<p>At God’s command, Moses kept a written record of Israel’s itinerary from Egypt to the plains of Moab. Here is biblical evidence of the Mosaic authorship of Numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The boundaries of the Promised Land were now given. The southern boundary would run from the southern tip of the Dead Sea, south of Kadesh-barnea up to the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish), and on to the Mediterranean Sea (34:3-5). The western boundary would be the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea itself (v 6). The northern boundary, not realized until the times of David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:3-12; 1 Kgs 8:65), was to extend from the Mediterranean Sea east to Hamath, at the head of the Orontes River (Nm 34:7-9). The eastern boundary was to be practically on a vertical line, with the Jordan Valley running north to the northern boundary (vv 10-12). The nine and a half tribes were to divide this area among themselves (vv 13-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then selected the men who were to bear the responsibility of dividing the land of Canaan among the western tribes after the conquest (vv 16-29).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 35<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Israel to give 48 cities throughout the land on both sides of the Jordan to the Levites for a permanent possession (vv 1-8), since that tribe was not included in the land allotments to the other tribes. The number of cities each tribe was to give was to be determined by its size (v 8). Six of the Levitical cities, three on each side of the Jordan, were to be designated “cities of refuge” for the manslayer (v 6; cf. Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>Legislation concerning the manslayer follows (vv 9-34). If the slayer committed murder, the kinsman avenger had the right to fulfill his role as executioner (vv 16-21). If, however, the killing was unintentional, the manslayer was to flee to the nearest city of refuge for a trial. If found innocent of murder, he was assigned to remain within the city of refuge until the death of the high priest. If he left the city before then, the kinsman avenger was permitted to execute him (vv 22-34).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 36<\/h5>\n<p>Basing their question on the earlier law established in chapter 27, the leaders from Manasseh asked whether an heiress should be allowed to marry outside her tribe, with the accompanying transfer of property from one tribe to another that would ensue. God directed that an heiress would have to marry within her tribe (vv 1-12).<\/p>\n<p>The last verse of the book refers to all the laws given in the plains of Moab (26:1–36:12; cf. Lv 27:34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalTeaching\">Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Numbers God is revealed as the unchangingly faithful God of the covenant (Nm 23:19). This faithfulness to his covenant required that he both guide and care for his people and punish their sins against him. But no impediment was so great that God’s design to bring his people to the land of promise was thwarted (11:23).<\/p>\n<p>Both by his wrathful reaction to Israel’s sin and by the numerous priestly laws, God highlights his awesome holiness. The legislation expressly teaches that the person who approaches God must be clean. Even to look with unholy eyes upon the holiness of God meant death (4:20).<\/p>\n<p>His sovereignty over all of life is evident from the attention he displays over even the minutest aspects of life. The phrase “And the Lord said unto Moses” occurs over 50 times, and the words that follow in each case deal with all kinds of matters.<\/p>\n<p>As the God of the covenant, God’s “christological” character is also apparent. God’s blessing and faithfulness reflect the christological motif. Finally, Moses’ prophetic leadership (Acts 7:37-38) and intercessory ministry (e.g., Nm 11:2; 12:13; 14:19), in the Aaronic priesthood (e.g., ch 16), in the animal sacrifices (cf. 19:9; Heb 9:13), and in the symbols (the manna, the water, the bronze snake) foreshadow the future Christ.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s responses to God, the people depict all of human sinfulness and faithlessness. Israel’s wanderings illustrate the results of unbelief. The punishments of Israel prove the maxim of Numbers 32:23: “But if you fail to keep your word, then you will have sinned against the <span>Lord<\/span>, and you may be sure that your sin will find you out” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Numbers forcefully teaches that safety and blessing are to be found only in trust in the Lord. Only he is capable of bringing men and women to the place of rest (Heb 4:9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Deuteronomy, Book of; Exodus, Book of; Genesis, Book of; Leviticus, Book of; Moses; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NUMBERS, Book of Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, Numeri. The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4. Preview • Author • Background • Purpose • Content • Theological Teaching Author The question of the authorship o...","summary_en":"NUMBERS, Book of Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, Numeri. The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4. Preview • Author • Background • Purpose • Content • Theological Teaching Author The question of the authorship o...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46612,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:2","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:2<\/strong> <em>Moab<\/em> was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • <em>two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared:<\/em> This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:2<\/strong> <em>Moab<\/em> was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • <em>two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared:<\/em> This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:2 Moab was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared: This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).","summary_en":"8:2 Moab was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared: This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74238,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:2","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:2<\/strong> <em>Moab<\/em> was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • <em>two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared:<\/em> This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:2<\/strong> <em>Moab<\/em> was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • <em>two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared:<\/em> This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:2 Moab was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared: This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).","summary_en":"8:2 Moab was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared: This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101864,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:2","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:2<\/strong> <em>Moab<\/em> was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • <em>two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared:<\/em> This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:2<\/strong> <em>Moab<\/em> was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • <em>two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared:<\/em> This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:2 Moab was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared: This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).","summary_en":"8:2 Moab was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared: This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129490,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:2","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:2<\/strong> <em>Moab<\/em> was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • <em>two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared:<\/em> This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:2<\/strong> <em>Moab<\/em> was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • <em>two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared:<\/em> This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:2 Moab was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared: This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).","summary_en":"8:2 Moab was on the east side of the Dead Sea. Earlier, the people of Moab had provided David’s parents with refuge during Saul’s reign (1 Sam 22:3-4); David’s great-grandmother, Ruth, was from Moab. For whatever reason, no such fraternal relationship existed any longer. • two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared: This is the only time in 2 Samuel that David executed captives taken in battle (see Num 21:29; 24:17; Deut 2:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":41590,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Arameans","title_en":"Arameans","content_ro":"<h3>Arameans<\/h3>\n<p>The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5).<\/p>\n<p>When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread out to the east, west, and north. By around 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Aramean tribes had spread throughout Syria and had expanded into northern Transjordan. They set up a number of powerful Aramean city-states, including Zobah and Damascus, that came into conflict with the Israelites beginning in the time of David (see 2 Sam 8:3-8; 10:6-25).<\/p>\n<p>After Solomon’s death and the division of Israel into northern and southern kingdoms, Aramean Damascus became a powerful and opportunistic player in the political struggles between the two states. When war broke out between Israel and Judah in the years 890–880 <span>BC<\/span>, King Asa of Israel sought aid from Ben-hadad I of Damascus (1 Kgs 15:18-19). Roughly thirty years later, in the early 850s <span>BC<\/span>, Ben-hadad invaded Israel, but Ahab defeated him both at Samaria (20:1-21) and at Aphek the following year (20:22-34). After three years of peace between Israel and Damascus, hostilities broke out again in 853 <span>BC<\/span>, resulting in the battle in which Ahab was killed (22:29-37). Aramean Damascus continued to inflict losses on the kingdom of Israel for the next several decades (see 2 Kgs 8:28-29; 12:17-18; 13:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, the Aramean city-states began feeling pressure from Assyria. Damascus was first defeated by Assyria around 838 <span>BC<\/span> and was forced to become a tribute-paying vassal of Assyria in 803 <span>BC<\/span>. The resulting weakness of Damascus helped enable Jehoash (798–782 <span>BC<\/span>) to defeat the Arameans and expel them from Israel’s territory around 795 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 13:14-25). Later, Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to force Damascus to pay tribute to him (see 2 Kgs 14:28).<\/p>\n<p>Around 738 <span>BC<\/span> the Arameans of Damascus joined forces with Israel to subjugate Judah. They captured much land, but their siege of Jerusalem was unsuccessful (2 Kgs 16:5; see also 2 Chr 28:5). At this time of seeming success for Damascus, the prophets Isaiah and Amos predicted the city’s doom (Isa 8:4; 17:1; Amos 1:3-5). But rather than trust in God, King Ahaz of Judah turned to the Assyrians for protection, who responded to his gifts by sacking Damascus and exiling its population in 733\/732 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 16:7-11). Damascus was no longer an independent city-state.<\/p>\n<p>The language of the Arameans, Aramaic, eventually became the language for diplomacy and administration all over the Near East (see, e.g., 2 Kgs 18:26). During the Exile, the Jews adopted the Aramaic language; portions of Ezra and Daniel are written in Aramaic. Aramaic was the <em>lingua franca<\/em> from Egypt to India during the Persian period and was widely spoken in Palestine in Jesus’ day (see Mark 5:41; 1 Cor 16:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:22-23; 22:20-21; 25:20; 28:1-7; Deut 26:5; 2 Sam 8:3-4; 10:17-19; 1 Kgs 15:18; 1 Kgs 20:1-34; 22:29-37; 2 Kgs 13:25; 16:9-13; 17:24-34; Hos 12:12; Amos 1:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Arameans<\/h3>\n<p>The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5).<\/p>\n<p>When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread out to the east, west, and north. By around 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Aramean tribes had spread throughout Syria and had expanded into northern Transjordan. They set up a number of powerful Aramean city-states, including Zobah and Damascus, that came into conflict with the Israelites beginning in the time of David (see 2 Sam 8:3-8; 10:6-25).<\/p>\n<p>After Solomon’s death and the division of Israel into northern and southern kingdoms, Aramean Damascus became a powerful and opportunistic player in the political struggles between the two states. When war broke out between Israel and Judah in the years 890–880 <span>BC<\/span>, King Asa of Israel sought aid from Ben-hadad I of Damascus (1 Kgs 15:18-19). Roughly thirty years later, in the early 850s <span>BC<\/span>, Ben-hadad invaded Israel, but Ahab defeated him both at Samaria (20:1-21) and at Aphek the following year (20:22-34). After three years of peace between Israel and Damascus, hostilities broke out again in 853 <span>BC<\/span>, resulting in the battle in which Ahab was killed (22:29-37). Aramean Damascus continued to inflict losses on the kingdom of Israel for the next several decades (see 2 Kgs 8:28-29; 12:17-18; 13:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, the Aramean city-states began feeling pressure from Assyria. Damascus was first defeated by Assyria around 838 <span>BC<\/span> and was forced to become a tribute-paying vassal of Assyria in 803 <span>BC<\/span>. The resulting weakness of Damascus helped enable Jehoash (798–782 <span>BC<\/span>) to defeat the Arameans and expel them from Israel’s territory around 795 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 13:14-25). Later, Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to force Damascus to pay tribute to him (see 2 Kgs 14:28).<\/p>\n<p>Around 738 <span>BC<\/span> the Arameans of Damascus joined forces with Israel to subjugate Judah. They captured much land, but their siege of Jerusalem was unsuccessful (2 Kgs 16:5; see also 2 Chr 28:5). At this time of seeming success for Damascus, the prophets Isaiah and Amos predicted the city’s doom (Isa 8:4; 17:1; Amos 1:3-5). But rather than trust in God, King Ahaz of Judah turned to the Assyrians for protection, who responded to his gifts by sacking Damascus and exiling its population in 733\/732 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 16:7-11). Damascus was no longer an independent city-state.<\/p>\n<p>The language of the Arameans, Aramaic, eventually became the language for diplomacy and administration all over the Near East (see, e.g., 2 Kgs 18:26). During the Exile, the Jews adopted the Aramaic language; portions of Ezra and Daniel are written in Aramaic. Aramaic was the <em>lingua franca<\/em> from Egypt to India during the Persian period and was widely spoken in Palestine in Jesus’ day (see Mark 5:41; 1 Cor 16:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:22-23; 22:20-21; 25:20; 28:1-7; Deut 26:5; 2 Sam 8:3-4; 10:17-19; 1 Kgs 15:18; 1 Kgs 20:1-34; 22:29-37; 2 Kgs 13:25; 16:9-13; 17:24-34; Hos 12:12; Amos 1:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Arameans The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5). When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread ou...","summary_en":"Arameans The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5). When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread ou...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69216,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Arameans","title_en":"Arameans","content_ro":"<h3>Arameans<\/h3>\n<p>The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5).<\/p>\n<p>When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread out to the east, west, and north. By around 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Aramean tribes had spread throughout Syria and had expanded into northern Transjordan. They set up a number of powerful Aramean city-states, including Zobah and Damascus, that came into conflict with the Israelites beginning in the time of David (see 2 Sam 8:3-8; 10:6-25).<\/p>\n<p>After Solomon’s death and the division of Israel into northern and southern kingdoms, Aramean Damascus became a powerful and opportunistic player in the political struggles between the two states. When war broke out between Israel and Judah in the years 890–880 <span>BC<\/span>, King Asa of Israel sought aid from Ben-hadad I of Damascus (1 Kgs 15:18-19). Roughly thirty years later, in the early 850s <span>BC<\/span>, Ben-hadad invaded Israel, but Ahab defeated him both at Samaria (20:1-21) and at Aphek the following year (20:22-34). After three years of peace between Israel and Damascus, hostilities broke out again in 853 <span>BC<\/span>, resulting in the battle in which Ahab was killed (22:29-37). Aramean Damascus continued to inflict losses on the kingdom of Israel for the next several decades (see 2 Kgs 8:28-29; 12:17-18; 13:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, the Aramean city-states began feeling pressure from Assyria. Damascus was first defeated by Assyria around 838 <span>BC<\/span> and was forced to become a tribute-paying vassal of Assyria in 803 <span>BC<\/span>. The resulting weakness of Damascus helped enable Jehoash (798–782 <span>BC<\/span>) to defeat the Arameans and expel them from Israel’s territory around 795 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 13:14-25). Later, Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to force Damascus to pay tribute to him (see 2 Kgs 14:28).<\/p>\n<p>Around 738 <span>BC<\/span> the Arameans of Damascus joined forces with Israel to subjugate Judah. They captured much land, but their siege of Jerusalem was unsuccessful (2 Kgs 16:5; see also 2 Chr 28:5). At this time of seeming success for Damascus, the prophets Isaiah and Amos predicted the city’s doom (Isa 8:4; 17:1; Amos 1:3-5). But rather than trust in God, King Ahaz of Judah turned to the Assyrians for protection, who responded to his gifts by sacking Damascus and exiling its population in 733\/732 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 16:7-11). Damascus was no longer an independent city-state.<\/p>\n<p>The language of the Arameans, Aramaic, eventually became the language for diplomacy and administration all over the Near East (see, e.g., 2 Kgs 18:26). During the Exile, the Jews adopted the Aramaic language; portions of Ezra and Daniel are written in Aramaic. Aramaic was the <em>lingua franca<\/em> from Egypt to India during the Persian period and was widely spoken in Palestine in Jesus’ day (see Mark 5:41; 1 Cor 16:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:22-23; 22:20-21; 25:20; 28:1-7; Deut 26:5; 2 Sam 8:3-4; 10:17-19; 1 Kgs 15:18; 1 Kgs 20:1-34; 22:29-37; 2 Kgs 13:25; 16:9-13; 17:24-34; Hos 12:12; Amos 1:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Arameans<\/h3>\n<p>The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5).<\/p>\n<p>When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread out to the east, west, and north. By around 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Aramean tribes had spread throughout Syria and had expanded into northern Transjordan. They set up a number of powerful Aramean city-states, including Zobah and Damascus, that came into conflict with the Israelites beginning in the time of David (see 2 Sam 8:3-8; 10:6-25).<\/p>\n<p>After Solomon’s death and the division of Israel into northern and southern kingdoms, Aramean Damascus became a powerful and opportunistic player in the political struggles between the two states. When war broke out between Israel and Judah in the years 890–880 <span>BC<\/span>, King Asa of Israel sought aid from Ben-hadad I of Damascus (1 Kgs 15:18-19). Roughly thirty years later, in the early 850s <span>BC<\/span>, Ben-hadad invaded Israel, but Ahab defeated him both at Samaria (20:1-21) and at Aphek the following year (20:22-34). After three years of peace between Israel and Damascus, hostilities broke out again in 853 <span>BC<\/span>, resulting in the battle in which Ahab was killed (22:29-37). Aramean Damascus continued to inflict losses on the kingdom of Israel for the next several decades (see 2 Kgs 8:28-29; 12:17-18; 13:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, the Aramean city-states began feeling pressure from Assyria. Damascus was first defeated by Assyria around 838 <span>BC<\/span> and was forced to become a tribute-paying vassal of Assyria in 803 <span>BC<\/span>. The resulting weakness of Damascus helped enable Jehoash (798–782 <span>BC<\/span>) to defeat the Arameans and expel them from Israel’s territory around 795 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 13:14-25). Later, Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to force Damascus to pay tribute to him (see 2 Kgs 14:28).<\/p>\n<p>Around 738 <span>BC<\/span> the Arameans of Damascus joined forces with Israel to subjugate Judah. They captured much land, but their siege of Jerusalem was unsuccessful (2 Kgs 16:5; see also 2 Chr 28:5). At this time of seeming success for Damascus, the prophets Isaiah and Amos predicted the city’s doom (Isa 8:4; 17:1; Amos 1:3-5). But rather than trust in God, King Ahaz of Judah turned to the Assyrians for protection, who responded to his gifts by sacking Damascus and exiling its population in 733\/732 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 16:7-11). Damascus was no longer an independent city-state.<\/p>\n<p>The language of the Arameans, Aramaic, eventually became the language for diplomacy and administration all over the Near East (see, e.g., 2 Kgs 18:26). During the Exile, the Jews adopted the Aramaic language; portions of Ezra and Daniel are written in Aramaic. Aramaic was the <em>lingua franca<\/em> from Egypt to India during the Persian period and was widely spoken in Palestine in Jesus’ day (see Mark 5:41; 1 Cor 16:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:22-23; 22:20-21; 25:20; 28:1-7; Deut 26:5; 2 Sam 8:3-4; 10:17-19; 1 Kgs 15:18; 1 Kgs 20:1-34; 22:29-37; 2 Kgs 13:25; 16:9-13; 17:24-34; Hos 12:12; Amos 1:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Arameans The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5). When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread ou...","summary_en":"Arameans The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5). When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread ou...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96842,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Arameans","title_en":"Arameans","content_ro":"<h3>Arameans<\/h3>\n<p>The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5).<\/p>\n<p>When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread out to the east, west, and north. By around 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Aramean tribes had spread throughout Syria and had expanded into northern Transjordan. They set up a number of powerful Aramean city-states, including Zobah and Damascus, that came into conflict with the Israelites beginning in the time of David (see 2 Sam 8:3-8; 10:6-25).<\/p>\n<p>After Solomon’s death and the division of Israel into northern and southern kingdoms, Aramean Damascus became a powerful and opportunistic player in the political struggles between the two states. When war broke out between Israel and Judah in the years 890–880 <span>BC<\/span>, King Asa of Israel sought aid from Ben-hadad I of Damascus (1 Kgs 15:18-19). Roughly thirty years later, in the early 850s <span>BC<\/span>, Ben-hadad invaded Israel, but Ahab defeated him both at Samaria (20:1-21) and at Aphek the following year (20:22-34). After three years of peace between Israel and Damascus, hostilities broke out again in 853 <span>BC<\/span>, resulting in the battle in which Ahab was killed (22:29-37). Aramean Damascus continued to inflict losses on the kingdom of Israel for the next several decades (see 2 Kgs 8:28-29; 12:17-18; 13:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, the Aramean city-states began feeling pressure from Assyria. Damascus was first defeated by Assyria around 838 <span>BC<\/span> and was forced to become a tribute-paying vassal of Assyria in 803 <span>BC<\/span>. The resulting weakness of Damascus helped enable Jehoash (798–782 <span>BC<\/span>) to defeat the Arameans and expel them from Israel’s territory around 795 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 13:14-25). Later, Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to force Damascus to pay tribute to him (see 2 Kgs 14:28).<\/p>\n<p>Around 738 <span>BC<\/span> the Arameans of Damascus joined forces with Israel to subjugate Judah. They captured much land, but their siege of Jerusalem was unsuccessful (2 Kgs 16:5; see also 2 Chr 28:5). At this time of seeming success for Damascus, the prophets Isaiah and Amos predicted the city’s doom (Isa 8:4; 17:1; Amos 1:3-5). But rather than trust in God, King Ahaz of Judah turned to the Assyrians for protection, who responded to his gifts by sacking Damascus and exiling its population in 733\/732 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 16:7-11). Damascus was no longer an independent city-state.<\/p>\n<p>The language of the Arameans, Aramaic, eventually became the language for diplomacy and administration all over the Near East (see, e.g., 2 Kgs 18:26). During the Exile, the Jews adopted the Aramaic language; portions of Ezra and Daniel are written in Aramaic. Aramaic was the <em>lingua franca<\/em> from Egypt to India during the Persian period and was widely spoken in Palestine in Jesus’ day (see Mark 5:41; 1 Cor 16:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:22-23; 22:20-21; 25:20; 28:1-7; Deut 26:5; 2 Sam 8:3-4; 10:17-19; 1 Kgs 15:18; 1 Kgs 20:1-34; 22:29-37; 2 Kgs 13:25; 16:9-13; 17:24-34; Hos 12:12; Amos 1:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Arameans<\/h3>\n<p>The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5).<\/p>\n<p>When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread out to the east, west, and north. By around 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Aramean tribes had spread throughout Syria and had expanded into northern Transjordan. They set up a number of powerful Aramean city-states, including Zobah and Damascus, that came into conflict with the Israelites beginning in the time of David (see 2 Sam 8:3-8; 10:6-25).<\/p>\n<p>After Solomon’s death and the division of Israel into northern and southern kingdoms, Aramean Damascus became a powerful and opportunistic player in the political struggles between the two states. When war broke out between Israel and Judah in the years 890–880 <span>BC<\/span>, King Asa of Israel sought aid from Ben-hadad I of Damascus (1 Kgs 15:18-19). Roughly thirty years later, in the early 850s <span>BC<\/span>, Ben-hadad invaded Israel, but Ahab defeated him both at Samaria (20:1-21) and at Aphek the following year (20:22-34). After three years of peace between Israel and Damascus, hostilities broke out again in 853 <span>BC<\/span>, resulting in the battle in which Ahab was killed (22:29-37). Aramean Damascus continued to inflict losses on the kingdom of Israel for the next several decades (see 2 Kgs 8:28-29; 12:17-18; 13:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, the Aramean city-states began feeling pressure from Assyria. Damascus was first defeated by Assyria around 838 <span>BC<\/span> and was forced to become a tribute-paying vassal of Assyria in 803 <span>BC<\/span>. The resulting weakness of Damascus helped enable Jehoash (798–782 <span>BC<\/span>) to defeat the Arameans and expel them from Israel’s territory around 795 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 13:14-25). Later, Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to force Damascus to pay tribute to him (see 2 Kgs 14:28).<\/p>\n<p>Around 738 <span>BC<\/span> the Arameans of Damascus joined forces with Israel to subjugate Judah. They captured much land, but their siege of Jerusalem was unsuccessful (2 Kgs 16:5; see also 2 Chr 28:5). At this time of seeming success for Damascus, the prophets Isaiah and Amos predicted the city’s doom (Isa 8:4; 17:1; Amos 1:3-5). But rather than trust in God, King Ahaz of Judah turned to the Assyrians for protection, who responded to his gifts by sacking Damascus and exiling its population in 733\/732 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 16:7-11). Damascus was no longer an independent city-state.<\/p>\n<p>The language of the Arameans, Aramaic, eventually became the language for diplomacy and administration all over the Near East (see, e.g., 2 Kgs 18:26). During the Exile, the Jews adopted the Aramaic language; portions of Ezra and Daniel are written in Aramaic. Aramaic was the <em>lingua franca<\/em> from Egypt to India during the Persian period and was widely spoken in Palestine in Jesus’ day (see Mark 5:41; 1 Cor 16:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:22-23; 22:20-21; 25:20; 28:1-7; Deut 26:5; 2 Sam 8:3-4; 10:17-19; 1 Kgs 15:18; 1 Kgs 20:1-34; 22:29-37; 2 Kgs 13:25; 16:9-13; 17:24-34; Hos 12:12; Amos 1:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Arameans The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5). When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread ou...","summary_en":"Arameans The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5). When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread ou...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124468,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Arameans","title_en":"Arameans","content_ro":"<h3>Arameans<\/h3>\n<p>The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5).<\/p>\n<p>When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread out to the east, west, and north. By around 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Aramean tribes had spread throughout Syria and had expanded into northern Transjordan. They set up a number of powerful Aramean city-states, including Zobah and Damascus, that came into conflict with the Israelites beginning in the time of David (see 2 Sam 8:3-8; 10:6-25).<\/p>\n<p>After Solomon’s death and the division of Israel into northern and southern kingdoms, Aramean Damascus became a powerful and opportunistic player in the political struggles between the two states. When war broke out between Israel and Judah in the years 890–880 <span>BC<\/span>, King Asa of Israel sought aid from Ben-hadad I of Damascus (1 Kgs 15:18-19). Roughly thirty years later, in the early 850s <span>BC<\/span>, Ben-hadad invaded Israel, but Ahab defeated him both at Samaria (20:1-21) and at Aphek the following year (20:22-34). After three years of peace between Israel and Damascus, hostilities broke out again in 853 <span>BC<\/span>, resulting in the battle in which Ahab was killed (22:29-37). Aramean Damascus continued to inflict losses on the kingdom of Israel for the next several decades (see 2 Kgs 8:28-29; 12:17-18; 13:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, the Aramean city-states began feeling pressure from Assyria. Damascus was first defeated by Assyria around 838 <span>BC<\/span> and was forced to become a tribute-paying vassal of Assyria in 803 <span>BC<\/span>. The resulting weakness of Damascus helped enable Jehoash (798–782 <span>BC<\/span>) to defeat the Arameans and expel them from Israel’s territory around 795 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 13:14-25). Later, Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to force Damascus to pay tribute to him (see 2 Kgs 14:28).<\/p>\n<p>Around 738 <span>BC<\/span> the Arameans of Damascus joined forces with Israel to subjugate Judah. They captured much land, but their siege of Jerusalem was unsuccessful (2 Kgs 16:5; see also 2 Chr 28:5). At this time of seeming success for Damascus, the prophets Isaiah and Amos predicted the city’s doom (Isa 8:4; 17:1; Amos 1:3-5). But rather than trust in God, King Ahaz of Judah turned to the Assyrians for protection, who responded to his gifts by sacking Damascus and exiling its population in 733\/732 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 16:7-11). Damascus was no longer an independent city-state.<\/p>\n<p>The language of the Arameans, Aramaic, eventually became the language for diplomacy and administration all over the Near East (see, e.g., 2 Kgs 18:26). During the Exile, the Jews adopted the Aramaic language; portions of Ezra and Daniel are written in Aramaic. Aramaic was the <em>lingua franca<\/em> from Egypt to India during the Persian period and was widely spoken in Palestine in Jesus’ day (see Mark 5:41; 1 Cor 16:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:22-23; 22:20-21; 25:20; 28:1-7; Deut 26:5; 2 Sam 8:3-4; 10:17-19; 1 Kgs 15:18; 1 Kgs 20:1-34; 22:29-37; 2 Kgs 13:25; 16:9-13; 17:24-34; Hos 12:12; Amos 1:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Arameans<\/h3>\n<p>The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5).<\/p>\n<p>When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread out to the east, west, and north. By around 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Aramean tribes had spread throughout Syria and had expanded into northern Transjordan. They set up a number of powerful Aramean city-states, including Zobah and Damascus, that came into conflict with the Israelites beginning in the time of David (see 2 Sam 8:3-8; 10:6-25).<\/p>\n<p>After Solomon’s death and the division of Israel into northern and southern kingdoms, Aramean Damascus became a powerful and opportunistic player in the political struggles between the two states. When war broke out between Israel and Judah in the years 890–880 <span>BC<\/span>, King Asa of Israel sought aid from Ben-hadad I of Damascus (1 Kgs 15:18-19). Roughly thirty years later, in the early 850s <span>BC<\/span>, Ben-hadad invaded Israel, but Ahab defeated him both at Samaria (20:1-21) and at Aphek the following year (20:22-34). After three years of peace between Israel and Damascus, hostilities broke out again in 853 <span>BC<\/span>, resulting in the battle in which Ahab was killed (22:29-37). Aramean Damascus continued to inflict losses on the kingdom of Israel for the next several decades (see 2 Kgs 8:28-29; 12:17-18; 13:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, the Aramean city-states began feeling pressure from Assyria. Damascus was first defeated by Assyria around 838 <span>BC<\/span> and was forced to become a tribute-paying vassal of Assyria in 803 <span>BC<\/span>. The resulting weakness of Damascus helped enable Jehoash (798–782 <span>BC<\/span>) to defeat the Arameans and expel them from Israel’s territory around 795 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 13:14-25). Later, Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to force Damascus to pay tribute to him (see 2 Kgs 14:28).<\/p>\n<p>Around 738 <span>BC<\/span> the Arameans of Damascus joined forces with Israel to subjugate Judah. They captured much land, but their siege of Jerusalem was unsuccessful (2 Kgs 16:5; see also 2 Chr 28:5). At this time of seeming success for Damascus, the prophets Isaiah and Amos predicted the city’s doom (Isa 8:4; 17:1; Amos 1:3-5). But rather than trust in God, King Ahaz of Judah turned to the Assyrians for protection, who responded to his gifts by sacking Damascus and exiling its population in 733\/732 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 16:7-11). Damascus was no longer an independent city-state.<\/p>\n<p>The language of the Arameans, Aramaic, eventually became the language for diplomacy and administration all over the Near East (see, e.g., 2 Kgs 18:26). During the Exile, the Jews adopted the Aramaic language; portions of Ezra and Daniel are written in Aramaic. Aramaic was the <em>lingua franca<\/em> from Egypt to India during the Persian period and was widely spoken in Palestine in Jesus’ day (see Mark 5:41; 1 Cor 16:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 10:22-23; 22:20-21; 25:20; 28:1-7; Deut 26:5; 2 Sam 8:3-4; 10:17-19; 1 Kgs 15:18; 1 Kgs 20:1-34; 22:29-37; 2 Kgs 13:25; 16:9-13; 17:24-34; Hos 12:12; Amos 1:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Arameans The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5). When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread ou...","summary_en":"Arameans The Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem (Gen 10:22-23; cp. Gen 22:20-21). Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gen 25:20; 28:1-7). Jacob lived for some twenty years with them in Aramean territory (Gen 28–31; Hos 12:12), and the people of Israel remembered that their forefathers were (at least culturally) Arameans (Deut 26:5). When the Arameans emerged into history around the time of Abraham, they were settled around the central Euphrates, from which they spread ou...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":2527,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Aram-Zobah","title_en":"Aram-Zobah","content_ro":"<h3>ARAM-ZOBAH<\/h3>\n<p>Syrian territory ruled in David’s time by King Hadadezer, whom David defeated (2 Sm 8:3). This form of the name occurs in the title to Psalm 60. <em>See<\/em> Zobah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ARAM-ZOBAH<\/h3>\n<p>Syrian territory ruled in David’s time by King Hadadezer, whom David defeated (2 Sm 8:3). This form of the name occurs in the title to Psalm 60. <em>See<\/em> Zobah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ARAM-ZOBAH Syrian territory ruled in David’s time by King Hadadezer, whom David defeated (2 Sm 8:3). This form of the name occurs in the title to Psalm 60. See Zobah.","summary_en":"ARAM-ZOBAH Syrian territory ruled in David’s time by King Hadadezer, whom David defeated (2 Sm 8:3). This form of the name occurs in the title to Psalm 60. See Zobah.","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11294,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Euphrates River","title_en":"Euphrates River","content_ro":"<h3>EUPHRATES RIVER<\/h3>\n<p>Largest river in western Asia, formed by the union of two rivers in Asia Minor, the Kara-Su and the Murat-Suyu. Its source is in central Armenia. The river flows generally in a southeasterly direction for some 1,800 miles (2,896.2 kilometers) until it reaches the Persian Gulf. At Korna, about 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) from the gulf, it joins with the Tigris River. The Euphrates is shallow until it combines with the Tigris and can be navigated for about 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) by small boats only. After the union of the Tigris and Euphrates, ocean liners can proceed as far as Basra. Melting snows at the source cause the river to rise from about the middle of March until about June. Control and storage of water in flood canals during the overflow of the river made possible abundant harvests that sustained large populations in antiquity.<\/p>\n<p>The Euphrates was one of four branches issuing from the river that watered the Garden of Eden (Gn 2:14). In the promises made to Abraham, the northern boundary of the land of Israel was to be the upper division of the river (Gn 15:18; Dt 1:7; 11:24). These boundaries were approximately reached during the period of kings David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:3; 10:16; 1 Kgs 4:24). The Euphrates is called “the river” (Nm 22:5; Dt 11:24; Jos 24:3, 14) or “the great river” (Jos 1:4). People living east of the Euphrates referred to Israel and its surrounding territories to the west as “beyond the river” (Ezr 4:10; Neh 2:7-9). It was to this river that Jeremiah sent Seraiah with a book of prophecies relating to the destruction of Babylon. After reading them, Seraiah was told to throw the book into the Euphrates as a symbol of the way Babylon would sink to rise no more (Jer 51:63).<\/p>\n<p>Two NT references to the Euphrates appear in the book of Revelation (Rv 9:14; 16:12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Babylon, Babylonia; Mesopotamia.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EUPHRATES RIVER<\/h3>\n<p>Largest river in western Asia, formed by the union of two rivers in Asia Minor, the Kara-Su and the Murat-Suyu. Its source is in central Armenia. The river flows generally in a southeasterly direction for some 1,800 miles (2,896.2 kilometers) until it reaches the Persian Gulf. At Korna, about 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) from the gulf, it joins with the Tigris River. The Euphrates is shallow until it combines with the Tigris and can be navigated for about 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) by small boats only. After the union of the Tigris and Euphrates, ocean liners can proceed as far as Basra. Melting snows at the source cause the river to rise from about the middle of March until about June. Control and storage of water in flood canals during the overflow of the river made possible abundant harvests that sustained large populations in antiquity.<\/p>\n<p>The Euphrates was one of four branches issuing from the river that watered the Garden of Eden (Gn 2:14). In the promises made to Abraham, the northern boundary of the land of Israel was to be the upper division of the river (Gn 15:18; Dt 1:7; 11:24). These boundaries were approximately reached during the period of kings David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:3; 10:16; 1 Kgs 4:24). The Euphrates is called “the river” (Nm 22:5; Dt 11:24; Jos 24:3, 14) or “the great river” (Jos 1:4). People living east of the Euphrates referred to Israel and its surrounding territories to the west as “beyond the river” (Ezr 4:10; Neh 2:7-9). It was to this river that Jeremiah sent Seraiah with a book of prophecies relating to the destruction of Babylon. After reading them, Seraiah was told to throw the book into the Euphrates as a symbol of the way Babylon would sink to rise no more (Jer 51:63).<\/p>\n<p>Two NT references to the Euphrates appear in the book of Revelation (Rv 9:14; 16:12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Babylon, Babylonia; Mesopotamia.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EUPHRATES RIVER Largest river in western Asia, formed by the union of two rivers in Asia Minor, the Kara-Su and the Murat-Suyu. Its source is in central Armenia. The river flows generally in a southeasterly direction for some 1,800 miles (2,896.2 kilometers) until it reaches the Persian Gulf. At Korna, about 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) from the gulf, it joins with the Tigris River. The Euphrates is shallow until it combines with the Tigris and can be navigated for about 1,200 miles (1,930.8 ...","summary_en":"EUPHRATES RIVER Largest river in western Asia, formed by the union of two rivers in Asia Minor, the Kara-Su and the Murat-Suyu. Its source is in central Armenia. The river flows generally in a southeasterly direction for some 1,800 miles (2,896.2 kilometers) until it reaches the Persian Gulf. At Korna, about 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) from the gulf, it joins with the Tigris River. The Euphrates is shallow until it combines with the Tigris and can be navigated for about 1,200 miles (1,930.8 ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14942,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hadadezer","title_en":"Hadadezer","content_ro":"<h3>HADADEZER<\/h3>\n<p>King of Zobah in Syria during David’s reign in Israel. He apparently ruled a region from Ammon in the south to the Euphrates in the east. According to 2 Samuel 8:3-12 (see also 1 Chr 18:3-10, <span>kjv<\/span> “Hadarezer”), Hadadezer attempted to restore his power. David engaged him in battle at the river Euphrates and defeated him. When the Syrians came to his aid, David defeated them and occupied Damascus. In 2 Samuel 10 David sent servants to comfort Hanun when his father—Nahash, king of Ammon—died. The servants were mistreated and humiliated (v 4). So David sent Joab against Ammon after Ammon allied with Syria as protection against Israel (v 6). Joab defeated the combined armies (vv 15-19; see also 1 Chr 19:16, 19). After Joab’s victory, Hadadezer sent more troops from “beyond the river.” The armies met at Helam, David was victorious, and Hadadezer begged for peace, thereby becoming a tributary to Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Syria, Syrians.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HADADEZER<\/h3>\n<p>King of Zobah in Syria during David’s reign in Israel. He apparently ruled a region from Ammon in the south to the Euphrates in the east. According to 2 Samuel 8:3-12 (see also 1 Chr 18:3-10, <span>kjv<\/span> “Hadarezer”), Hadadezer attempted to restore his power. David engaged him in battle at the river Euphrates and defeated him. When the Syrians came to his aid, David defeated them and occupied Damascus. In 2 Samuel 10 David sent servants to comfort Hanun when his father—Nahash, king of Ammon—died. The servants were mistreated and humiliated (v 4). So David sent Joab against Ammon after Ammon allied with Syria as protection against Israel (v 6). Joab defeated the combined armies (vv 15-19; see also 1 Chr 19:16, 19). After Joab’s victory, Hadadezer sent more troops from “beyond the river.” The armies met at Helam, David was victorious, and Hadadezer begged for peace, thereby becoming a tributary to Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Syria, Syrians.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HADADEZER King of Zobah in Syria during David’s reign in Israel. He apparently ruled a region from Ammon in the south to the Euphrates in the east. According to 2 Samuel 8:3-12 (see also 1 Chr 18:3-10, kjv “Hadarezer”), Hadadezer attempted to restore his power. David engaged him in battle at the river Euphrates and defeated him. When the Syrians came to his aid, David defeated them and occupied Damascus. In 2 Samuel 10 David sent servants to comfort Hanun when his father—Nahash, king of Ammon...","summary_en":"HADADEZER King of Zobah in Syria during David’s reign in Israel. He apparently ruled a region from Ammon in the south to the Euphrates in the east. According to 2 Samuel 8:3-12 (see also 1 Chr 18:3-10, kjv “Hadarezer”), Hadadezer attempted to restore his power. David engaged him in battle at the river Euphrates and defeated him. When the Syrians came to his aid, David defeated them and occupied Damascus. In 2 Samuel 10 David sent servants to comfort Hanun when his father—Nahash, king of Ammon...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27939,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Numbers","title_en":"Book of Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>NUMBERS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, <em>Numeri.<\/em> The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The question of the authorship of Numbers is part of the larger question of the authorship of the Pentateuch. Until the appearance of the higher-critical documentary theories of the 19th century, the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was almost universally held by both Jews and Christians alike. This time-honored tradition is supported by the Pentateuch itself (e.g., Ex 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Nm 33:2; Dt 31:9, 24), the rest of the OT (e.g., Jos 23:6; Jgs 3:4; Mal 4:4), as well as Jesus’ teaching (e.g., Jn 5:46-47), and the rest of the NT (e.g., Acts 28:23; Rom 10:19; 1 Cor 9:9). Although discrepancies in the Pentateuch were widely and openly acknowledged, nevertheless Moses, the 15th-century <span>BC<\/span> lawgiver, was affirmed as the primary author of the Pentateuchal literature.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<h5>Sinai Peninsula<\/h5>\n<p>The historical background of Numbers begins primarily in the geographical region of the Sinai Peninsula of the mid-second millennium <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai Peninsula is in the shape of an inverted triangle with the base on the north. It is approximately 240 miles (386.2 kilometers) long from north to south and 175 miles (281.6 kilometers) wide at the northern base, with an area of approximately 22,000 square miles (56,980 square kilometers). It is bounded on the north by the Mediterranean Sea and the southern border of Canaan, on the west by the Bitter Lakes and the Gulf of Suez, and on the east by the Arabah and the Gulf of Aqaba. Beginning in the north at the Mediterranean coast and moving south, for about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the soil is sandy. South of this coastal plain is a high plateau (Et-Tih) of gravel and limestone (about 2,500 feet, or 762 meters, above sea level), stretching south into the peninsula for approximately 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). Rising above the plateau at this point is a granite mountain formation with peaks up to 8,000 feet (2,438.4 meters) above sea level. In this mountainous region at the apex of the peninsular triangle, Jebel Musa (7,363 feet, or 2,244.2 meters, high), the traditional site where Israel camped before Mt Sinai and Moses received the law, rises above the plain.<\/p>\n<p>The peninsula itself is comprised of five wilderness areas. In the north and immediately east of the land of Goshen is the approximately 40-mile- or 64.4-kilometer-wide wilderness of Shur, which runs past the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) to the region of Kadesh-barnea and northeast to Beersheba. East of this region is the wilderness of Zin, extending east from the wilderness of Shur to the southern tip of the Dead Sea. Kadesh-barnea is located on its southern border (Nm 20:1; 33:36). South of the wilderness of Shur is the wilderness of Etham, and east of this wilderness in the east-central region of Sinai is the great wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19). Kadesh-barnea is on the northern border of this territory (Nm 13:26). In this area the Israelites spent 38 of their 40 years of wandering. Southwest of the wilderness of Paran, on the western slopes of the peninsula, not far from the granite mountains standing in the southern apex of the triangle, is the wilderness of Sin.<\/p>\n<p>While the region is generally desolate and barren, it is not impassable or incapable of sustaining travelers. Wells and springs dot both the western and eastern borders at reasonable distances from each other. The water table is fairly close to ground level, making the digging of wells possible (Nm 20:17; 21:16-18). The limestone rocks are also capable of holding great amounts of water (20:11). Vegetation is sparse except around the more permanent streams where vegetation and date palms flourish. The rainy season in winter is approximately 20 days. Quail (11:31-32) are known to migrate across the peninsula to Europe in the spring.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Peoples Israel Confronted<\/h5>\n<h6>Amalekites and Canaanites (14:25, 43-45; 24:20)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amalekites were descendants of Amalek, son of Eliphaz and grandson of Esau (Gn 36:12, 16). They were generally a nomadic people. In the Sinai Peninsula they were the first to war against Israel at Rephidim (cf. Nm 24:20), perhaps the Wadi Refayid in southwest Sinai (Ex 17:8-16), before Israel reached Horeb. A year later, the Amalekites settled in the hills and valleys north of Kadesh-barnea. In league with the Canaanites, the inhabitants of Palestine, they blocked the effort of Israel to invade the land of promise from the south (Nm 14:45). Israel’s will to wage war appears to have been completely broken for years to come.<\/p>\n<h6>Edomites (20:14-21; 21:4, 10-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Edom, or Seir (24:18), is the territory south of the Dead Sea occupied by Esau’s descendants. Stretching from its northern border at the Wadi Zered (21:12), which flowed into the Dead Sea at its southern tip, 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) south to the Gulf of Aqaba, it occupied both sides of the Arabah, with Kadesh-barnea again standing on the edge of its western border (20:16), giving it a land area of approximately 4,000 square miles (10,360 square kilometers). It is a rugged mountain region with peaks rising to 3,500 feet (1,066.8 meters). The “king’s highway,” an ancient trade route from Damascus through the Transjordan to the Gulf of Aqaba, passed through its territory and major cities, Bozrah and Leman. While Edom was not fertile, it did have cultivable areas (20:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>During Israel’s march to the Transjordan region, Edom refused to let Israel journey directly east from Kadesh through its territory but forced Israel to move southeast into and up the Arabah (21:4, 11). In spite of this hostility to God’s people, Israel was forbidden to attack (Dt 2:2-8) or to hate the Edomites (23:7), and so Edom was spared from destruction during the conquest of the land. The area was later conquered by David (2 Sm 8:13-14) according to Balaam’s prophecy (Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<h6>Arad (21:1-3)<\/h6>\n<p>Arad was a south Canaanite settlement in the Negev. Its king, after fighting against Israel and taking some captives, was later defeated at Hormah.<\/p>\n<h6>Moabites (21:11-15; 22:1–24:25)<\/h6>\n<p>Moab, occupied by the descendants of Lot (Gn 19:37), is the territory east of the Dead Sea lying primarily between the Wadi Arnon (Nm 21:13) and the Wadi Zered with a land area of approximately 1,400 square miles (3,626 square kilometers).<\/p>\n<p>In the late middle Bronze Age, the Moabites had overflowed their main plateau and had extended well to the north of the Arnon all the way to the northern end of the Dead Sea (21:20). At the time of the events recorded in Numbers, however, the Amorites occupied the area from Arnon all the way north to the Wadi Jabbok (vv 13, 21-24), having earlier taken this land from Moab (vv 26-30). The Moabite kingdom was highly organized, with agriculture and livestock, splendid buildings, distinctive pottery, and strong fortifications around her borders. Its god was Chemosh (v 29).<\/p>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab during the period of the conquest, in league with Midian, hired Balaam to curse Israel (chs 22–24). When this failed, the two heathen powers sought to neutralize Israel by luring the people of God into the worship of Chemosh and into idolatry (25:1-2). In the war that ensued, Israel defeated Midian (31:1-18), but by God’s express command (Dt 2:9-13) spared Moab. But as Balaam had prophesied earlier (Nm 24:17), David in the 11th century warred against and defeated Moab (2 Sm 8:2, 13-14).<\/p>\n<h6>Amorites (21:21-35)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amorites, the people who had occupied northern Moabite territory (Nm 21:25-30), were descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:16) who had scattered throughout the hill country on both sides of the Jordan River. Heshbon was their capital city. Both Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan were Amorite kings (Dt 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As for Bashan (Nm 21:33-35; cf. Dt 1:4; 3:1-12), it is the fertile grazing region (Nm 32:1-5) east of the Sea of Kinnereth (Galilee), whose northern border extended to Mt Hermon and whose southern border, while normally the river Yarmuk, in the Mosaic age was the Wadi Jabbok (Jos 12:4-5). Its land area covered approximately 5,000 square miles (12,950 square kilometers). Its major cities were Ashtaroth, Edrei, and Golan. After the conquest of the land, this territory fell to the half-tribe of Manasseh, with Gad occupying southern Gilead, and Reuben the region south to the Wadi Arnon.<\/p>\n<h6>Midianites (25:16-18; 31:1-54)<\/h6>\n<p>The Midianites, descendants of Abraham through the concubine Keturah (Gn 25:2), were desert dwellers in Transjordan from Moab to the region south of Edom. The elders of Moab and Midian cooperated in hiring Balaam to curse Israel (Nm 22:4-7). Later, when that effort proved fruitless, the Midianites, again with Moab, led Israel into idolatry and immorality (25:1-6, 14-15). Cozbi, the Midianite woman who was executed for her wickedness (25:8), was the daughter of Zur, one of the five Midianite kings confederate with the Amorite king Sihon (Jos 13:21) who were later killed in Israel’s holy war against Midian (Nm 31:8). This war with Midian apparently broke the back of any remaining Amorite resistance, for Joshua 13:15-23 clearly intimates that as a result the tribe of Reuben occupied this territory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Numbers serves a twofold purpose. First, as a historical book, it contains the account of Israel’s fortunes from Mt Sinai to the plains of Moab on the eve of the conquest of Canaan—that almost-40-year period spent in the wilderness of Sinai and in Transjordan (1447–1407 <span>BC<\/span>). While recounting Israel’s many failures and God’s many faithful acts, it depicts Moses, Israel’s leader, in all of his greatness and in all of his weakness. The two army rolls (chs 2 and 26) introduce the “acts” of the main drama of its history: the first in preparation for entering the land, which failed due to Israel’s unbelief; the second, after the death of the entire generation that left Egypt, in preparation for the successful invasion of Canaan under Joshua’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Second, in line with Paul’s general belief that “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope” (Rom 15:4, <span>rsv<\/span>), and in keeping with his specific teaching that “these things [that befell Israel in the wilderness] happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor 10:11, <span>rsv<\/span>), Numbers serves a doctrinal, typical, and hortatory purpose (cf. v 12). Historical events are divinely invested with spiritual truths, thereby becoming object lessons for the Christian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to register (Nm 1:18) the men able to go to war (vv 2-3). The total number of soldiers in Israel was 603,550 (v 46). The Levites were not numbered in this roll (vv 47-54), since they were to be set apart for special service pertaining to the tabernacle.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 2<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses concerning the arrangement of the tribes while encamped and on the march. With the tabernacle in the center of the camp, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, totaling 186,400 (v 9), were to camp on the east; Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, totaling 151,450 (v 16), were to camp on the south; Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, totaling 108,100 (v 24), were to camp on the west; and Dan, Asher, and Naphtali, totaling 157,600 (v 31), were to camp on the north.<\/p>\n<p>On the march, Judah’s east group (v 9) was to set out first, followed by Reuben’s south group (v 16). The Levites with the tabernacle were to follow (v 17). Then Ephraim’s west group (v 24) was to follow the Levites, with Dan’s north group (v 31) bringing up the rear. This means that the Levites were flanked by two groups, before and behind.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 3<\/h5>\n<p>Aaron, the great-grandson of Levi through Kohath (Ex 6:16-20), and his descendants were designated to serve as priests at the tabernacle (Nm 3:2-3). The remaining descendants of Levi, from the families of Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, were to serve the Aaronic line at the tabernacle (vv 5-10). The Gershonites were responsible for the tabernacle coverings, hangings, and screens (vv 25-26); the Kohathites were responsible for the “furniture” in the tabernacle (v 31); and the Merarites were responsible for the frames, bars, and foundations for the tabernacle (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed Moses to number the three Levitical families. Gershon’s descendants, totaling 7,500 (v 22), were to camp on the west, between the western group of tribes and the tabernacle. Kohath’s descendants, totaling 8,600 (v 28), were to camp on the south, between the southern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Merari’s descendants, totaling 6,200 (v 34), were to camp on the north, between the northern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Moses and the Aaronic family were to camp on the east, between the eastern group of tribes and the tabernacle (v 38). Both in camp and on the march, then, the tabernacle was in the midst of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The census of Israel’s firstborn males disclosed 273 more male babies than Levites (vv 40-46), and since the Levites were a ransom for Israelite males on a one-to-one basis, the 273 additional male children had to be ransomed by atonement money (vv 46-51).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 4<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Moses that only Levites between the ages of 30 and 50 were to serve at the tabernacle. A census disclosed that there were 2,750 Kohathites (v 36), 2,630 Gershonites (v 40), and 3,200 Merarites (v 44), making a total of 8,580 (v 48) who were eligible to serve the Aaronic priests.<\/p>\n<p>God further ordered the Aaronic priests, when the tabernacle was being dismantled for the march, to cover all the tabernacle “furniture” before the Kohathites even looked at them (v 20) lest the Kohathites, either looking at or touching them (v 15), should die (vv 15, 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 5<\/h5>\n<p>For ceremonial purposes, God demanded that lepers, those with a bodily discharge, and those who had touched the dead, must be put outside the camp until they were purified (vv 1-4). Furthermore, God instructed those making restitution for a wrongdoing, if the wronged person was no longer alive, to give the restitution price to a priest (vv 5-10).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, if a woman was suspected by her husband of infidelity but there was no evidence of such, the woman was to undergo a trial by water ordeal to relieve the man of his suspicions. The priest was to give her holy water with dust from the floor of the tabernacle in it to drink. If she was guilty, the water by divine direction would cause her pain, make her abdomen swell, and her thigh waste away (vv 11-31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 6<\/h5>\n<p>Laws pertaining to the Nazirite were given next. A Nazirite was a person who determined to take a vow to separate himself wholly to the Lord. To dramatize this separation, the Nazirite was to drink no intoxicating beverage, let the hair grow long, and touch no dead body (vv 3-6). Should he defile himself, he was to follow prescribed rules for ceremonial cleansing (vv 9-12). When his vow had run its course, he was to follow prescribed rules for terminating his vow (vv 13-21). Finally, God instructed the Aaronic priesthood concerning the blessing they were to pronounce upon the Israelite worshiper (vv 22-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 7<\/h5>\n<p>The leaders in Israel brought six wagons and twelve oxen for use in the transfer of the tabernacle (7:3). Moses gave two wagons and four oxen to the Gershonites (v 7), and four wagons and eight oxen to the Merarites (v 8). (The Kohathites were to carry the “furniture” of the tabernacle on their shoulders, v 9.) For twelve consecutive days, to consecrate the altar after it was anointed (vv 10, 88), the tribal leaders, in the order of march (cf. ch 2), brought similar offerings. God demonstrated his pleasure with this gesture by speaking to Moses from the mercy seat (v 89).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 8<\/h5>\n<p>God granted the prerogative to light the seven-branched lampstand to the Aaronic priests (vv 1-4). Following divine instructions, Moses and Aaron consecrated the Levites to the service of the tabernacle by means of a purification ceremony (vv 5-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 9:1–10:10<\/h5>\n<p>For the benefit of the worshiper who was ceremonially unclean or away on a journey at the time of the Passover, God granted permission to observe the Passover a month later (vv 6-12; see also ch 27).<\/p>\n<p>God gave final instructions to the people before their departure from Sinai. They were to prepare for marching when they saw the cloud ascending from the tabernacle, and they were to stop at the place where the cloud settled down (9:15-23). The people were to assemble at the tabernacle if two silver trumpets were blown; only the leaders were to come if one was blown; and at the blast of a military alarm, the several groups of tribes were to prepare for an immediate march (10:1-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 10:11–14:45<\/h5>\n<p>The next section recounts the march from Sinai to Kadesh-barnea, a period of time approximately one and a half to two months in length (cf. 10:11; 13:20). Almost immediately the people began to complain as they passed through the terrible wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19), angering the Lord at Taberah (Nm 11:1-3) and at Kibroth-hattaavah (Nm 11:4-35; Pss 78:26-31; 106:13-15). Miriam and Aaron challenged Moses’ sole right to speak for God to the people, which resulted in temporary leprosy as punishment for Miriam (doubtless the leader in the provocation). Through Moses’ intercession, the two were forgiven (Nm 12). Out of this event, however, came the remarkable description of Moses’ relationship to God as a unique means of revelation (vv 6-8).<\/p>\n<p>From Paran (Kadesh-barnea) Moses dispatched the spies to survey the land (ch 13). Deuteronomy 1:22 suggests that the plan to spy out the land originated with the people, with Moses (at God’s behest) acquiescing. At the end of 40 days, they returned. Only Caleb and Joshua urged the people to advance to the conquest; the other 10 spies spoke of foes too formidable for them to defeat. The people, greatly discouraged, attempted to stone Caleb and Joshua (Nm 14:10), and were prevented from doing so only by the sudden appearance of the glory cloud at the tabernacle. God swore in his wrath (Nm 14:21; cf. Heb 3:7–4:10) that, with the exception of Caleb and Joshua, none of that generation would enter the land of promise (Nm 14:21-35). He then struck down the 10 unbelieving spies (v 37). Presumptuously, and in spite of God’s express command to the contrary (Dt 1:42), Israel attempted to advance on the land, leaving Moses and the ark of the covenant in the camp. They were challenged by the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Israel remained in this general area with tribal families fanning out over the wilderness and settling around springs and oases (Dt 1:46). Numbers 15:1–21:20 relates the account of the 38 years of wilderness wandering. Much of this time was probably spent around Kadesh-barnea (Dt 1:46).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 15<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given (Nm 15:1-21). Also, the procedure to be followed when an Israelite committed a sin deliberately and defiantly was spelled out in terms of excommunication: there was no atonement for such an attitude (vv 22-31). A Sabbath violator was executed (vv 32-36), perhaps as an illustration of the foregoing legislation. Finally, to assist them in obeying God’s laws, the Israelites were instructed to tie blue tassels to their outer garments as reminders (vv 37-41).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 16<\/h5>\n<p>Korah challenged Aaron’s high priesthood, and Dathan, Abiram, and On challenged Moses’ leadership (vv 1-14). God, at Moses’ word, opened up the earth and swallowed the offenders (Nm 16:32; cf. Dt 9:6; Ps 106:16-18). Korah is regarded in the NT (Jude 1:11) as a classic example of a rebellious malcontent.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 26:11 states that Korah’s young children did not perish with him. Perhaps they became the ancestors of the “sons of Korah,” the sacred musicians of the temple who composed 12 Korahite psalms (Pss 42–49, 84–85, 87–88).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 17<\/h5>\n<p>God then instructed the leaders of each tribe to bring rods, 12 in all, to write the names of the tribes upon them (with Aaron’s name on Levi’s rod), and to deposit them in the tabernacle. The following day, Aaron’s rod had sprouted with blossoms and ripe almonds, thus vindicating Aaron’s special high-priestly status.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 18–19<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given. In 18:1-7, the full responsibility for the priestly service was given to the Aaronic priests—a very natural consequence of the preceding chapter. The Levites were to assist the Aaronic order (v 6). Since the tribe of Levi received no land inheritance, they were to be supported from the offerings of the people (vv 8-20).<\/p>\n<p>In 19:1-22 instructions concerning ceremonial impurity were given. When an Israelite became ceremonially unclean through contact with death (vv 11-16), God required that he be purified from his sin (vv 9, 17) by the sprinkling of specially prepared water upon him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 20<\/h5>\n<p>With Israel once again at Kadesh on the southern border of the wilderness of Zin in the first month of the 40th year of wandering, Miriam died and was buried (v 1). According to the encampment list in chapter 33, 18 encampments may have occurred for Israel since the nation had last been at this site (cf. 33:18-36).<\/p>\n<p>At this time the nation complained once again because there was little water (20:2). Moses, at God’s instruction, brought forth water from a rock (vv 8-11), but because of a gross infraction by Moses and Aaron on this occasion, God announced that they would not be permitted to lead Israel in the conquest of the land (vv 12, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The chapter closes with Edom refusing Israel passage across its territory (vv 14-21) and Aaron dying on Mt Hor on the border of Edom (vv 22-29) in the fifth month of the 40th year (33:38). Eleazar, Aaron’s son, assumed the office of high priest.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 21<\/h5>\n<p>After a quick victory over Arad (vv 1-3), Israel started south to encircle Edom. Becoming impatient with God and with Moses, the people expressed their disgust with God’s provision of manna. The Lord sent poisonous snakes to the camp, causing many to die. But at God’s command Moses fashioned a snake out of bronze and placed it atop a standard. All who looked to the bronze snake survived (vv 4-10). The bronze snake was preserved and later was destroyed by Hezekiah, the symbol having become by his time an idol (2 Kgs 18:4). Later still, Jesus drew an analogy between these wicked sinners looking to the bronze snake and being delivered and men looking to him by faith and being saved (Jn 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Leaving that fateful place, Israel journeyed into and up the Arabah, crossed the Wadi Zered in an eastern swing around Moab, finally crossing the Arnon into Amorite territory. Journeying north, they camped at Pisgah (Nm 21:10-20).<\/p>\n<p>At this point the conquest of the Transjordan begins. In quick succession Israel defeated Sihon of Heshbon (vv 21-31) and Og of Bashan (vv 33-35) and settled in the plains of Moab (22:1). This encampment was the scene for the remainder of the activities of Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua 1–3. In a real sense, one can say the wilderness wanderings were now over.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the place, then, to summarize the spiritual condition of Israel on the eve of the conquest of Canaan. Numbers makes it quite evident that the entire generation that left Egypt, with the exception of Joshua and Caleb, was to die in the wilderness because of its apostasy (cf. Am 5:25), unbelief, and general failure to keep covenant with God. None of the generation of male children born in the wilderness had been circumcised (Jos 5:2-9). Psalm 90 underscores Israel as the recipient of God’s wrath in the wilderness. It is in this pitiable spiritual condition that Israel arrived on the plains of Moab.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 22–24<\/h5>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab, frightened by Israel’s presence, joined with Midian to hire Balaam, the false prophet, to curse Israel. For gain, Balaam agreed (2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11), but God prevented him, causing him rather to bless Israel in his four oracular utterances (Nm 23:7-10, 18-24; 24:3-9, 15-19) and to predict the destruction of Moab, Edom, Amalek (24:20), the Kenites (24:21), and Asshur (24:24). With that, Balak and Balaam separated. Balaam, in collusion with Midian, agreed to counsel Israel to commit idolatry and immorality (31:16). And so, where Balak failed to turn the Lord against Israel, Balaam succeeded (ch 25).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 25<\/h5>\n<p>Israel sinned against God by idolatrous and immoral acts with the people of Moab (vv 1-3). In carrying out the command of God to destroy the reprobate Israelites, Phinehas killed Zimri and Cozbi, the latter being a daughter of one of the five kings of Midian (vv 4-14). This event provided the occasion for God to declare a holy war against Midian (vv 16-18; cf. ch 31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 26<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to take a roll of the men of the second generation who were capable of warring against Israel’s enemies. The total number came to 601,730 (v 51), a reduction of 1,820 men from the first count. With a smaller force than the first generation, Israel conquered Canaan, clearly indicating that Israel could have spared itself the years of wandering if only the nation had obeyed God 38 years before Kadesh. The Levites totaled 23,000 males a month old and upward (vv 57-62).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 27<\/h5>\n<p>At the request of the daughters of Zelophehad (cf. 26:33) that they be granted the right to inherit their father’s possessions since he had no sons, the Lord agreed that they could, using the occasion to give further laws of inheritance (vv 1-11).<\/p>\n<p>Reminded that he would soon die in Abarim, Moses requested that God appoint his successor. God selected Joshua, and Moses commissioned him (vv 12-23).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 28–30<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation regarding offerings for various occasions was given. God also instructed Moses to inform the people concerning vows. When a man made a vow, it was inviolable (30:2), but if a woman made a vow, the man (father, husband) responsible for her could nullify it if he felt that it was rash (vv 1-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 31<\/h5>\n<p>The account of the holy war declared against Midian in 25:16-18 is given. With Phinehas accompanying 12,000 warriors, Israel defeated Midian, killing Balaam along with the five kings and many male adults of Midian (31:1-8). The Midianite women and children were taken captive, but Moses commanded that all the male children and the nonvirgin women be killed (vv 9-18). One must not conclude that this war meant the end of Midian as such, for Midian later proved a formidable foe of Israel in the time of the judges (Jgs 6).<\/p>\n<p>After the battle, the warriors were instructed to purify themselves, their clothing, and the booty from the war before coming into the camp (Nm 31:19-24). Furthermore, they were instructed to divide the booty in half and to contribute one-fifth of one percent of their half to the high priest (“the Lord’s tribute”). The other half was divided among the people who had remained in camp, after the Levites received a two percent contribution (vv 25-31).<\/p>\n<p>Verses 32-47 give the tally of the booty after its division into two parts and the amount that was given from each part to Eleazar and the Levites. The tally is said by some to be too high to be authentic, but there is no evidence that disputes the recorded figures.<\/p>\n<p>In thanksgiving to God because no Israelite had been killed in the war (v 49) and to make atonement for themselves (v 50), the army officers brought a special offering of gold trinkets to Moses and Eleazar, which was placed in the tabernacle as a memorial (vv 48-54).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 32<\/h5>\n<p>At their request and on the condition that they aid the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan, Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh were allotted the Transjordan region. Moses earnestly besought the Lord to change his mind about not permitting him to enter the land of promise (Dt 3:23-27). But God would not let him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 33–34<\/h5>\n<p>At God’s command, Moses kept a written record of Israel’s itinerary from Egypt to the plains of Moab. Here is biblical evidence of the Mosaic authorship of Numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The boundaries of the Promised Land were now given. The southern boundary would run from the southern tip of the Dead Sea, south of Kadesh-barnea up to the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish), and on to the Mediterranean Sea (34:3-5). The western boundary would be the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea itself (v 6). The northern boundary, not realized until the times of David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:3-12; 1 Kgs 8:65), was to extend from the Mediterranean Sea east to Hamath, at the head of the Orontes River (Nm 34:7-9). The eastern boundary was to be practically on a vertical line, with the Jordan Valley running north to the northern boundary (vv 10-12). The nine and a half tribes were to divide this area among themselves (vv 13-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then selected the men who were to bear the responsibility of dividing the land of Canaan among the western tribes after the conquest (vv 16-29).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 35<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Israel to give 48 cities throughout the land on both sides of the Jordan to the Levites for a permanent possession (vv 1-8), since that tribe was not included in the land allotments to the other tribes. The number of cities each tribe was to give was to be determined by its size (v 8). Six of the Levitical cities, three on each side of the Jordan, were to be designated “cities of refuge” for the manslayer (v 6; cf. Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>Legislation concerning the manslayer follows (vv 9-34). If the slayer committed murder, the kinsman avenger had the right to fulfill his role as executioner (vv 16-21). If, however, the killing was unintentional, the manslayer was to flee to the nearest city of refuge for a trial. If found innocent of murder, he was assigned to remain within the city of refuge until the death of the high priest. If he left the city before then, the kinsman avenger was permitted to execute him (vv 22-34).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 36<\/h5>\n<p>Basing their question on the earlier law established in chapter 27, the leaders from Manasseh asked whether an heiress should be allowed to marry outside her tribe, with the accompanying transfer of property from one tribe to another that would ensue. God directed that an heiress would have to marry within her tribe (vv 1-12).<\/p>\n<p>The last verse of the book refers to all the laws given in the plains of Moab (26:1–36:12; cf. Lv 27:34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalTeaching\">Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Numbers God is revealed as the unchangingly faithful God of the covenant (Nm 23:19). This faithfulness to his covenant required that he both guide and care for his people and punish their sins against him. But no impediment was so great that God’s design to bring his people to the land of promise was thwarted (11:23).<\/p>\n<p>Both by his wrathful reaction to Israel’s sin and by the numerous priestly laws, God highlights his awesome holiness. The legislation expressly teaches that the person who approaches God must be clean. Even to look with unholy eyes upon the holiness of God meant death (4:20).<\/p>\n<p>His sovereignty over all of life is evident from the attention he displays over even the minutest aspects of life. The phrase “And the Lord said unto Moses” occurs over 50 times, and the words that follow in each case deal with all kinds of matters.<\/p>\n<p>As the God of the covenant, God’s “christological” character is also apparent. God’s blessing and faithfulness reflect the christological motif. Finally, Moses’ prophetic leadership (Acts 7:37-38) and intercessory ministry (e.g., Nm 11:2; 12:13; 14:19), in the Aaronic priesthood (e.g., ch 16), in the animal sacrifices (cf. 19:9; Heb 9:13), and in the symbols (the manna, the water, the bronze snake) foreshadow the future Christ.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s responses to God, the people depict all of human sinfulness and faithlessness. Israel’s wanderings illustrate the results of unbelief. The punishments of Israel prove the maxim of Numbers 32:23: “But if you fail to keep your word, then you will have sinned against the <span>Lord<\/span>, and you may be sure that your sin will find you out” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Numbers forcefully teaches that safety and blessing are to be found only in trust in the Lord. Only he is capable of bringing men and women to the place of rest (Heb 4:9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Deuteronomy, Book of; Exodus, Book of; Genesis, Book of; Leviticus, Book of; Moses; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NUMBERS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, <em>Numeri.<\/em> The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The question of the authorship of Numbers is part of the larger question of the authorship of the Pentateuch. Until the appearance of the higher-critical documentary theories of the 19th century, the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was almost universally held by both Jews and Christians alike. This time-honored tradition is supported by the Pentateuch itself (e.g., Ex 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Nm 33:2; Dt 31:9, 24), the rest of the OT (e.g., Jos 23:6; Jgs 3:4; Mal 4:4), as well as Jesus’ teaching (e.g., Jn 5:46-47), and the rest of the NT (e.g., Acts 28:23; Rom 10:19; 1 Cor 9:9). Although discrepancies in the Pentateuch were widely and openly acknowledged, nevertheless Moses, the 15th-century <span>BC<\/span> lawgiver, was affirmed as the primary author of the Pentateuchal literature.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<h5>Sinai Peninsula<\/h5>\n<p>The historical background of Numbers begins primarily in the geographical region of the Sinai Peninsula of the mid-second millennium <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai Peninsula is in the shape of an inverted triangle with the base on the north. It is approximately 240 miles (386.2 kilometers) long from north to south and 175 miles (281.6 kilometers) wide at the northern base, with an area of approximately 22,000 square miles (56,980 square kilometers). It is bounded on the north by the Mediterranean Sea and the southern border of Canaan, on the west by the Bitter Lakes and the Gulf of Suez, and on the east by the Arabah and the Gulf of Aqaba. Beginning in the north at the Mediterranean coast and moving south, for about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the soil is sandy. South of this coastal plain is a high plateau (Et-Tih) of gravel and limestone (about 2,500 feet, or 762 meters, above sea level), stretching south into the peninsula for approximately 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). Rising above the plateau at this point is a granite mountain formation with peaks up to 8,000 feet (2,438.4 meters) above sea level. In this mountainous region at the apex of the peninsular triangle, Jebel Musa (7,363 feet, or 2,244.2 meters, high), the traditional site where Israel camped before Mt Sinai and Moses received the law, rises above the plain.<\/p>\n<p>The peninsula itself is comprised of five wilderness areas. In the north and immediately east of the land of Goshen is the approximately 40-mile- or 64.4-kilometer-wide wilderness of Shur, which runs past the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) to the region of Kadesh-barnea and northeast to Beersheba. East of this region is the wilderness of Zin, extending east from the wilderness of Shur to the southern tip of the Dead Sea. Kadesh-barnea is located on its southern border (Nm 20:1; 33:36). South of the wilderness of Shur is the wilderness of Etham, and east of this wilderness in the east-central region of Sinai is the great wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19). Kadesh-barnea is on the northern border of this territory (Nm 13:26). In this area the Israelites spent 38 of their 40 years of wandering. Southwest of the wilderness of Paran, on the western slopes of the peninsula, not far from the granite mountains standing in the southern apex of the triangle, is the wilderness of Sin.<\/p>\n<p>While the region is generally desolate and barren, it is not impassable or incapable of sustaining travelers. Wells and springs dot both the western and eastern borders at reasonable distances from each other. The water table is fairly close to ground level, making the digging of wells possible (Nm 20:17; 21:16-18). The limestone rocks are also capable of holding great amounts of water (20:11). Vegetation is sparse except around the more permanent streams where vegetation and date palms flourish. The rainy season in winter is approximately 20 days. Quail (11:31-32) are known to migrate across the peninsula to Europe in the spring.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Peoples Israel Confronted<\/h5>\n<h6>Amalekites and Canaanites (14:25, 43-45; 24:20)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amalekites were descendants of Amalek, son of Eliphaz and grandson of Esau (Gn 36:12, 16). They were generally a nomadic people. In the Sinai Peninsula they were the first to war against Israel at Rephidim (cf. Nm 24:20), perhaps the Wadi Refayid in southwest Sinai (Ex 17:8-16), before Israel reached Horeb. A year later, the Amalekites settled in the hills and valleys north of Kadesh-barnea. In league with the Canaanites, the inhabitants of Palestine, they blocked the effort of Israel to invade the land of promise from the south (Nm 14:45). Israel’s will to wage war appears to have been completely broken for years to come.<\/p>\n<h6>Edomites (20:14-21; 21:4, 10-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Edom, or Seir (24:18), is the territory south of the Dead Sea occupied by Esau’s descendants. Stretching from its northern border at the Wadi Zered (21:12), which flowed into the Dead Sea at its southern tip, 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) south to the Gulf of Aqaba, it occupied both sides of the Arabah, with Kadesh-barnea again standing on the edge of its western border (20:16), giving it a land area of approximately 4,000 square miles (10,360 square kilometers). It is a rugged mountain region with peaks rising to 3,500 feet (1,066.8 meters). The “king’s highway,” an ancient trade route from Damascus through the Transjordan to the Gulf of Aqaba, passed through its territory and major cities, Bozrah and Leman. While Edom was not fertile, it did have cultivable areas (20:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>During Israel’s march to the Transjordan region, Edom refused to let Israel journey directly east from Kadesh through its territory but forced Israel to move southeast into and up the Arabah (21:4, 11). In spite of this hostility to God’s people, Israel was forbidden to attack (Dt 2:2-8) or to hate the Edomites (23:7), and so Edom was spared from destruction during the conquest of the land. The area was later conquered by David (2 Sm 8:13-14) according to Balaam’s prophecy (Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<h6>Arad (21:1-3)<\/h6>\n<p>Arad was a south Canaanite settlement in the Negev. Its king, after fighting against Israel and taking some captives, was later defeated at Hormah.<\/p>\n<h6>Moabites (21:11-15; 22:1–24:25)<\/h6>\n<p>Moab, occupied by the descendants of Lot (Gn 19:37), is the territory east of the Dead Sea lying primarily between the Wadi Arnon (Nm 21:13) and the Wadi Zered with a land area of approximately 1,400 square miles (3,626 square kilometers).<\/p>\n<p>In the late middle Bronze Age, the Moabites had overflowed their main plateau and had extended well to the north of the Arnon all the way to the northern end of the Dead Sea (21:20). At the time of the events recorded in Numbers, however, the Amorites occupied the area from Arnon all the way north to the Wadi Jabbok (vv 13, 21-24), having earlier taken this land from Moab (vv 26-30). The Moabite kingdom was highly organized, with agriculture and livestock, splendid buildings, distinctive pottery, and strong fortifications around her borders. Its god was Chemosh (v 29).<\/p>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab during the period of the conquest, in league with Midian, hired Balaam to curse Israel (chs 22–24). When this failed, the two heathen powers sought to neutralize Israel by luring the people of God into the worship of Chemosh and into idolatry (25:1-2). In the war that ensued, Israel defeated Midian (31:1-18), but by God’s express command (Dt 2:9-13) spared Moab. But as Balaam had prophesied earlier (Nm 24:17), David in the 11th century warred against and defeated Moab (2 Sm 8:2, 13-14).<\/p>\n<h6>Amorites (21:21-35)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amorites, the people who had occupied northern Moabite territory (Nm 21:25-30), were descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:16) who had scattered throughout the hill country on both sides of the Jordan River. Heshbon was their capital city. Both Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan were Amorite kings (Dt 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As for Bashan (Nm 21:33-35; cf. Dt 1:4; 3:1-12), it is the fertile grazing region (Nm 32:1-5) east of the Sea of Kinnereth (Galilee), whose northern border extended to Mt Hermon and whose southern border, while normally the river Yarmuk, in the Mosaic age was the Wadi Jabbok (Jos 12:4-5). Its land area covered approximately 5,000 square miles (12,950 square kilometers). Its major cities were Ashtaroth, Edrei, and Golan. After the conquest of the land, this territory fell to the half-tribe of Manasseh, with Gad occupying southern Gilead, and Reuben the region south to the Wadi Arnon.<\/p>\n<h6>Midianites (25:16-18; 31:1-54)<\/h6>\n<p>The Midianites, descendants of Abraham through the concubine Keturah (Gn 25:2), were desert dwellers in Transjordan from Moab to the region south of Edom. The elders of Moab and Midian cooperated in hiring Balaam to curse Israel (Nm 22:4-7). Later, when that effort proved fruitless, the Midianites, again with Moab, led Israel into idolatry and immorality (25:1-6, 14-15). Cozbi, the Midianite woman who was executed for her wickedness (25:8), was the daughter of Zur, one of the five Midianite kings confederate with the Amorite king Sihon (Jos 13:21) who were later killed in Israel’s holy war against Midian (Nm 31:8). This war with Midian apparently broke the back of any remaining Amorite resistance, for Joshua 13:15-23 clearly intimates that as a result the tribe of Reuben occupied this territory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Numbers serves a twofold purpose. First, as a historical book, it contains the account of Israel’s fortunes from Mt Sinai to the plains of Moab on the eve of the conquest of Canaan—that almost-40-year period spent in the wilderness of Sinai and in Transjordan (1447–1407 <span>BC<\/span>). While recounting Israel’s many failures and God’s many faithful acts, it depicts Moses, Israel’s leader, in all of his greatness and in all of his weakness. The two army rolls (chs 2 and 26) introduce the “acts” of the main drama of its history: the first in preparation for entering the land, which failed due to Israel’s unbelief; the second, after the death of the entire generation that left Egypt, in preparation for the successful invasion of Canaan under Joshua’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Second, in line with Paul’s general belief that “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope” (Rom 15:4, <span>rsv<\/span>), and in keeping with his specific teaching that “these things [that befell Israel in the wilderness] happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor 10:11, <span>rsv<\/span>), Numbers serves a doctrinal, typical, and hortatory purpose (cf. v 12). Historical events are divinely invested with spiritual truths, thereby becoming object lessons for the Christian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to register (Nm 1:18) the men able to go to war (vv 2-3). The total number of soldiers in Israel was 603,550 (v 46). The Levites were not numbered in this roll (vv 47-54), since they were to be set apart for special service pertaining to the tabernacle.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 2<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses concerning the arrangement of the tribes while encamped and on the march. With the tabernacle in the center of the camp, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, totaling 186,400 (v 9), were to camp on the east; Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, totaling 151,450 (v 16), were to camp on the south; Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, totaling 108,100 (v 24), were to camp on the west; and Dan, Asher, and Naphtali, totaling 157,600 (v 31), were to camp on the north.<\/p>\n<p>On the march, Judah’s east group (v 9) was to set out first, followed by Reuben’s south group (v 16). The Levites with the tabernacle were to follow (v 17). Then Ephraim’s west group (v 24) was to follow the Levites, with Dan’s north group (v 31) bringing up the rear. This means that the Levites were flanked by two groups, before and behind.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 3<\/h5>\n<p>Aaron, the great-grandson of Levi through Kohath (Ex 6:16-20), and his descendants were designated to serve as priests at the tabernacle (Nm 3:2-3). The remaining descendants of Levi, from the families of Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, were to serve the Aaronic line at the tabernacle (vv 5-10). The Gershonites were responsible for the tabernacle coverings, hangings, and screens (vv 25-26); the Kohathites were responsible for the “furniture” in the tabernacle (v 31); and the Merarites were responsible for the frames, bars, and foundations for the tabernacle (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed Moses to number the three Levitical families. Gershon’s descendants, totaling 7,500 (v 22), were to camp on the west, between the western group of tribes and the tabernacle. Kohath’s descendants, totaling 8,600 (v 28), were to camp on the south, between the southern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Merari’s descendants, totaling 6,200 (v 34), were to camp on the north, between the northern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Moses and the Aaronic family were to camp on the east, between the eastern group of tribes and the tabernacle (v 38). Both in camp and on the march, then, the tabernacle was in the midst of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The census of Israel’s firstborn males disclosed 273 more male babies than Levites (vv 40-46), and since the Levites were a ransom for Israelite males on a one-to-one basis, the 273 additional male children had to be ransomed by atonement money (vv 46-51).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 4<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Moses that only Levites between the ages of 30 and 50 were to serve at the tabernacle. A census disclosed that there were 2,750 Kohathites (v 36), 2,630 Gershonites (v 40), and 3,200 Merarites (v 44), making a total of 8,580 (v 48) who were eligible to serve the Aaronic priests.<\/p>\n<p>God further ordered the Aaronic priests, when the tabernacle was being dismantled for the march, to cover all the tabernacle “furniture” before the Kohathites even looked at them (v 20) lest the Kohathites, either looking at or touching them (v 15), should die (vv 15, 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 5<\/h5>\n<p>For ceremonial purposes, God demanded that lepers, those with a bodily discharge, and those who had touched the dead, must be put outside the camp until they were purified (vv 1-4). Furthermore, God instructed those making restitution for a wrongdoing, if the wronged person was no longer alive, to give the restitution price to a priest (vv 5-10).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, if a woman was suspected by her husband of infidelity but there was no evidence of such, the woman was to undergo a trial by water ordeal to relieve the man of his suspicions. The priest was to give her holy water with dust from the floor of the tabernacle in it to drink. If she was guilty, the water by divine direction would cause her pain, make her abdomen swell, and her thigh waste away (vv 11-31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 6<\/h5>\n<p>Laws pertaining to the Nazirite were given next. A Nazirite was a person who determined to take a vow to separate himself wholly to the Lord. To dramatize this separation, the Nazirite was to drink no intoxicating beverage, let the hair grow long, and touch no dead body (vv 3-6). Should he defile himself, he was to follow prescribed rules for ceremonial cleansing (vv 9-12). When his vow had run its course, he was to follow prescribed rules for terminating his vow (vv 13-21). Finally, God instructed the Aaronic priesthood concerning the blessing they were to pronounce upon the Israelite worshiper (vv 22-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 7<\/h5>\n<p>The leaders in Israel brought six wagons and twelve oxen for use in the transfer of the tabernacle (7:3). Moses gave two wagons and four oxen to the Gershonites (v 7), and four wagons and eight oxen to the Merarites (v 8). (The Kohathites were to carry the “furniture” of the tabernacle on their shoulders, v 9.) For twelve consecutive days, to consecrate the altar after it was anointed (vv 10, 88), the tribal leaders, in the order of march (cf. ch 2), brought similar offerings. God demonstrated his pleasure with this gesture by speaking to Moses from the mercy seat (v 89).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 8<\/h5>\n<p>God granted the prerogative to light the seven-branched lampstand to the Aaronic priests (vv 1-4). Following divine instructions, Moses and Aaron consecrated the Levites to the service of the tabernacle by means of a purification ceremony (vv 5-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 9:1–10:10<\/h5>\n<p>For the benefit of the worshiper who was ceremonially unclean or away on a journey at the time of the Passover, God granted permission to observe the Passover a month later (vv 6-12; see also ch 27).<\/p>\n<p>God gave final instructions to the people before their departure from Sinai. They were to prepare for marching when they saw the cloud ascending from the tabernacle, and they were to stop at the place where the cloud settled down (9:15-23). The people were to assemble at the tabernacle if two silver trumpets were blown; only the leaders were to come if one was blown; and at the blast of a military alarm, the several groups of tribes were to prepare for an immediate march (10:1-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 10:11–14:45<\/h5>\n<p>The next section recounts the march from Sinai to Kadesh-barnea, a period of time approximately one and a half to two months in length (cf. 10:11; 13:20). Almost immediately the people began to complain as they passed through the terrible wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19), angering the Lord at Taberah (Nm 11:1-3) and at Kibroth-hattaavah (Nm 11:4-35; Pss 78:26-31; 106:13-15). Miriam and Aaron challenged Moses’ sole right to speak for God to the people, which resulted in temporary leprosy as punishment for Miriam (doubtless the leader in the provocation). Through Moses’ intercession, the two were forgiven (Nm 12). Out of this event, however, came the remarkable description of Moses’ relationship to God as a unique means of revelation (vv 6-8).<\/p>\n<p>From Paran (Kadesh-barnea) Moses dispatched the spies to survey the land (ch 13). Deuteronomy 1:22 suggests that the plan to spy out the land originated with the people, with Moses (at God’s behest) acquiescing. At the end of 40 days, they returned. Only Caleb and Joshua urged the people to advance to the conquest; the other 10 spies spoke of foes too formidable for them to defeat. The people, greatly discouraged, attempted to stone Caleb and Joshua (Nm 14:10), and were prevented from doing so only by the sudden appearance of the glory cloud at the tabernacle. God swore in his wrath (Nm 14:21; cf. Heb 3:7–4:10) that, with the exception of Caleb and Joshua, none of that generation would enter the land of promise (Nm 14:21-35). He then struck down the 10 unbelieving spies (v 37). Presumptuously, and in spite of God’s express command to the contrary (Dt 1:42), Israel attempted to advance on the land, leaving Moses and the ark of the covenant in the camp. They were challenged by the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Israel remained in this general area with tribal families fanning out over the wilderness and settling around springs and oases (Dt 1:46). Numbers 15:1–21:20 relates the account of the 38 years of wilderness wandering. Much of this time was probably spent around Kadesh-barnea (Dt 1:46).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 15<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given (Nm 15:1-21). Also, the procedure to be followed when an Israelite committed a sin deliberately and defiantly was spelled out in terms of excommunication: there was no atonement for such an attitude (vv 22-31). A Sabbath violator was executed (vv 32-36), perhaps as an illustration of the foregoing legislation. Finally, to assist them in obeying God’s laws, the Israelites were instructed to tie blue tassels to their outer garments as reminders (vv 37-41).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 16<\/h5>\n<p>Korah challenged Aaron’s high priesthood, and Dathan, Abiram, and On challenged Moses’ leadership (vv 1-14). God, at Moses’ word, opened up the earth and swallowed the offenders (Nm 16:32; cf. Dt 9:6; Ps 106:16-18). Korah is regarded in the NT (Jude 1:11) as a classic example of a rebellious malcontent.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 26:11 states that Korah’s young children did not perish with him. Perhaps they became the ancestors of the “sons of Korah,” the sacred musicians of the temple who composed 12 Korahite psalms (Pss 42–49, 84–85, 87–88).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 17<\/h5>\n<p>God then instructed the leaders of each tribe to bring rods, 12 in all, to write the names of the tribes upon them (with Aaron’s name on Levi’s rod), and to deposit them in the tabernacle. The following day, Aaron’s rod had sprouted with blossoms and ripe almonds, thus vindicating Aaron’s special high-priestly status.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 18–19<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given. In 18:1-7, the full responsibility for the priestly service was given to the Aaronic priests—a very natural consequence of the preceding chapter. The Levites were to assist the Aaronic order (v 6). Since the tribe of Levi received no land inheritance, they were to be supported from the offerings of the people (vv 8-20).<\/p>\n<p>In 19:1-22 instructions concerning ceremonial impurity were given. When an Israelite became ceremonially unclean through contact with death (vv 11-16), God required that he be purified from his sin (vv 9, 17) by the sprinkling of specially prepared water upon him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 20<\/h5>\n<p>With Israel once again at Kadesh on the southern border of the wilderness of Zin in the first month of the 40th year of wandering, Miriam died and was buried (v 1). According to the encampment list in chapter 33, 18 encampments may have occurred for Israel since the nation had last been at this site (cf. 33:18-36).<\/p>\n<p>At this time the nation complained once again because there was little water (20:2). Moses, at God’s instruction, brought forth water from a rock (vv 8-11), but because of a gross infraction by Moses and Aaron on this occasion, God announced that they would not be permitted to lead Israel in the conquest of the land (vv 12, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The chapter closes with Edom refusing Israel passage across its territory (vv 14-21) and Aaron dying on Mt Hor on the border of Edom (vv 22-29) in the fifth month of the 40th year (33:38). Eleazar, Aaron’s son, assumed the office of high priest.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 21<\/h5>\n<p>After a quick victory over Arad (vv 1-3), Israel started south to encircle Edom. Becoming impatient with God and with Moses, the people expressed their disgust with God’s provision of manna. The Lord sent poisonous snakes to the camp, causing many to die. But at God’s command Moses fashioned a snake out of bronze and placed it atop a standard. All who looked to the bronze snake survived (vv 4-10). The bronze snake was preserved and later was destroyed by Hezekiah, the symbol having become by his time an idol (2 Kgs 18:4). Later still, Jesus drew an analogy between these wicked sinners looking to the bronze snake and being delivered and men looking to him by faith and being saved (Jn 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Leaving that fateful place, Israel journeyed into and up the Arabah, crossed the Wadi Zered in an eastern swing around Moab, finally crossing the Arnon into Amorite territory. Journeying north, they camped at Pisgah (Nm 21:10-20).<\/p>\n<p>At this point the conquest of the Transjordan begins. In quick succession Israel defeated Sihon of Heshbon (vv 21-31) and Og of Bashan (vv 33-35) and settled in the plains of Moab (22:1). This encampment was the scene for the remainder of the activities of Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua 1–3. In a real sense, one can say the wilderness wanderings were now over.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the place, then, to summarize the spiritual condition of Israel on the eve of the conquest of Canaan. Numbers makes it quite evident that the entire generation that left Egypt, with the exception of Joshua and Caleb, was to die in the wilderness because of its apostasy (cf. Am 5:25), unbelief, and general failure to keep covenant with God. None of the generation of male children born in the wilderness had been circumcised (Jos 5:2-9). Psalm 90 underscores Israel as the recipient of God’s wrath in the wilderness. It is in this pitiable spiritual condition that Israel arrived on the plains of Moab.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 22–24<\/h5>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab, frightened by Israel’s presence, joined with Midian to hire Balaam, the false prophet, to curse Israel. For gain, Balaam agreed (2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11), but God prevented him, causing him rather to bless Israel in his four oracular utterances (Nm 23:7-10, 18-24; 24:3-9, 15-19) and to predict the destruction of Moab, Edom, Amalek (24:20), the Kenites (24:21), and Asshur (24:24). With that, Balak and Balaam separated. Balaam, in collusion with Midian, agreed to counsel Israel to commit idolatry and immorality (31:16). And so, where Balak failed to turn the Lord against Israel, Balaam succeeded (ch 25).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 25<\/h5>\n<p>Israel sinned against God by idolatrous and immoral acts with the people of Moab (vv 1-3). In carrying out the command of God to destroy the reprobate Israelites, Phinehas killed Zimri and Cozbi, the latter being a daughter of one of the five kings of Midian (vv 4-14). This event provided the occasion for God to declare a holy war against Midian (vv 16-18; cf. ch 31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 26<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to take a roll of the men of the second generation who were capable of warring against Israel’s enemies. The total number came to 601,730 (v 51), a reduction of 1,820 men from the first count. With a smaller force than the first generation, Israel conquered Canaan, clearly indicating that Israel could have spared itself the years of wandering if only the nation had obeyed God 38 years before Kadesh. The Levites totaled 23,000 males a month old and upward (vv 57-62).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 27<\/h5>\n<p>At the request of the daughters of Zelophehad (cf. 26:33) that they be granted the right to inherit their father’s possessions since he had no sons, the Lord agreed that they could, using the occasion to give further laws of inheritance (vv 1-11).<\/p>\n<p>Reminded that he would soon die in Abarim, Moses requested that God appoint his successor. God selected Joshua, and Moses commissioned him (vv 12-23).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 28–30<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation regarding offerings for various occasions was given. God also instructed Moses to inform the people concerning vows. When a man made a vow, it was inviolable (30:2), but if a woman made a vow, the man (father, husband) responsible for her could nullify it if he felt that it was rash (vv 1-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 31<\/h5>\n<p>The account of the holy war declared against Midian in 25:16-18 is given. With Phinehas accompanying 12,000 warriors, Israel defeated Midian, killing Balaam along with the five kings and many male adults of Midian (31:1-8). The Midianite women and children were taken captive, but Moses commanded that all the male children and the nonvirgin women be killed (vv 9-18). One must not conclude that this war meant the end of Midian as such, for Midian later proved a formidable foe of Israel in the time of the judges (Jgs 6).<\/p>\n<p>After the battle, the warriors were instructed to purify themselves, their clothing, and the booty from the war before coming into the camp (Nm 31:19-24). Furthermore, they were instructed to divide the booty in half and to contribute one-fifth of one percent of their half to the high priest (“the Lord’s tribute”). The other half was divided among the people who had remained in camp, after the Levites received a two percent contribution (vv 25-31).<\/p>\n<p>Verses 32-47 give the tally of the booty after its division into two parts and the amount that was given from each part to Eleazar and the Levites. The tally is said by some to be too high to be authentic, but there is no evidence that disputes the recorded figures.<\/p>\n<p>In thanksgiving to God because no Israelite had been killed in the war (v 49) and to make atonement for themselves (v 50), the army officers brought a special offering of gold trinkets to Moses and Eleazar, which was placed in the tabernacle as a memorial (vv 48-54).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 32<\/h5>\n<p>At their request and on the condition that they aid the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan, Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh were allotted the Transjordan region. Moses earnestly besought the Lord to change his mind about not permitting him to enter the land of promise (Dt 3:23-27). But God would not let him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 33–34<\/h5>\n<p>At God’s command, Moses kept a written record of Israel’s itinerary from Egypt to the plains of Moab. Here is biblical evidence of the Mosaic authorship of Numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The boundaries of the Promised Land were now given. The southern boundary would run from the southern tip of the Dead Sea, south of Kadesh-barnea up to the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish), and on to the Mediterranean Sea (34:3-5). The western boundary would be the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea itself (v 6). The northern boundary, not realized until the times of David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:3-12; 1 Kgs 8:65), was to extend from the Mediterranean Sea east to Hamath, at the head of the Orontes River (Nm 34:7-9). The eastern boundary was to be practically on a vertical line, with the Jordan Valley running north to the northern boundary (vv 10-12). The nine and a half tribes were to divide this area among themselves (vv 13-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then selected the men who were to bear the responsibility of dividing the land of Canaan among the western tribes after the conquest (vv 16-29).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 35<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Israel to give 48 cities throughout the land on both sides of the Jordan to the Levites for a permanent possession (vv 1-8), since that tribe was not included in the land allotments to the other tribes. The number of cities each tribe was to give was to be determined by its size (v 8). Six of the Levitical cities, three on each side of the Jordan, were to be designated “cities of refuge” for the manslayer (v 6; cf. Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>Legislation concerning the manslayer follows (vv 9-34). If the slayer committed murder, the kinsman avenger had the right to fulfill his role as executioner (vv 16-21). If, however, the killing was unintentional, the manslayer was to flee to the nearest city of refuge for a trial. If found innocent of murder, he was assigned to remain within the city of refuge until the death of the high priest. If he left the city before then, the kinsman avenger was permitted to execute him (vv 22-34).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 36<\/h5>\n<p>Basing their question on the earlier law established in chapter 27, the leaders from Manasseh asked whether an heiress should be allowed to marry outside her tribe, with the accompanying transfer of property from one tribe to another that would ensue. God directed that an heiress would have to marry within her tribe (vv 1-12).<\/p>\n<p>The last verse of the book refers to all the laws given in the plains of Moab (26:1–36:12; cf. Lv 27:34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalTeaching\">Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Numbers God is revealed as the unchangingly faithful God of the covenant (Nm 23:19). This faithfulness to his covenant required that he both guide and care for his people and punish their sins against him. But no impediment was so great that God’s design to bring his people to the land of promise was thwarted (11:23).<\/p>\n<p>Both by his wrathful reaction to Israel’s sin and by the numerous priestly laws, God highlights his awesome holiness. The legislation expressly teaches that the person who approaches God must be clean. Even to look with unholy eyes upon the holiness of God meant death (4:20).<\/p>\n<p>His sovereignty over all of life is evident from the attention he displays over even the minutest aspects of life. The phrase “And the Lord said unto Moses” occurs over 50 times, and the words that follow in each case deal with all kinds of matters.<\/p>\n<p>As the God of the covenant, God’s “christological” character is also apparent. God’s blessing and faithfulness reflect the christological motif. Finally, Moses’ prophetic leadership (Acts 7:37-38) and intercessory ministry (e.g., Nm 11:2; 12:13; 14:19), in the Aaronic priesthood (e.g., ch 16), in the animal sacrifices (cf. 19:9; Heb 9:13), and in the symbols (the manna, the water, the bronze snake) foreshadow the future Christ.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s responses to God, the people depict all of human sinfulness and faithlessness. Israel’s wanderings illustrate the results of unbelief. The punishments of Israel prove the maxim of Numbers 32:23: “But if you fail to keep your word, then you will have sinned against the <span>Lord<\/span>, and you may be sure that your sin will find you out” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Numbers forcefully teaches that safety and blessing are to be found only in trust in the Lord. Only he is capable of bringing men and women to the place of rest (Heb 4:9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Deuteronomy, Book of; Exodus, Book of; Genesis, Book of; Leviticus, Book of; Moses; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NUMBERS, Book of Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, Numeri. The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4. Preview • Author • Background • Purpose • Content • Theological Teaching Author The question of the authorship o...","summary_en":"NUMBERS, Book of Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, Numeri. The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4. Preview • Author • Background • Purpose • Content • Theological Teaching Author The question of the authorship o...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32618,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rehob (Person)","title_en":"Rehob (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>REHOB (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. King of Zobah whose son, Hadadezer, was defeated by David at the Euphrates River (2 Sm 8:3, 12).<\/li>\n<li>2. One of the Levites who set his seal on Ezra’s covenant (Neh 10:11).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>REHOB (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. King of Zobah whose son, Hadadezer, was defeated by David at the Euphrates River (2 Sm 8:3, 12).<\/li>\n<li>2. One of the Levites who set his seal on Ezra’s covenant (Neh 10:11).<\/li>","summary_ro":"REHOB (Person) 1. King of Zobah whose son, Hadadezer, was defeated by David at the Euphrates River (2 Sm 8:3, 12). 2. One of the Levites who set his seal on Ezra’s covenant (Neh 10:11).","summary_en":"REHOB (Person) 1. King of Zobah whose son, Hadadezer, was defeated by David at the Euphrates River (2 Sm 8:3, 12). 2. One of the Levites who set his seal on Ezra’s covenant (Neh 10:11).","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36556,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Syrians Syria","title_en":"Syrians Syria","content_ro":"<h3>SYRIA, SYRIANS<\/h3>\n<p>Terms used in the Septuagint and in some English translations to render the names Aram, Arameans.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoryoftheArameans\">History of the Arameans<\/p>\n<p>According to the “table of nations” in Genesis 10:22-23, the Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem. Another genealogy in Genesis 22:20-21 makes Aram a descendant of Nahor. According to Amos 9:7, the Arameans (Syrians) came from Kir, which is linked with Elam in Isaiah 22:6. The exile of the Arameans to Kir (2 Kgs 16:9; Am 1:5) may suggest they were to go back to their original home. The precise origins of this group of people are, however, lost in antiquity. When they emerged clearly into history, they were settled around the central Euphrates from which they were spread out east, west, and north.<\/p>\n<p>The Arameans were traditionally thought to have been established in upper Mesopotamia in the first part of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gn 25:20; 28:1-7); the home of Bethuel was in Paddan-aram (25:20). The prophet Hosea recalls the tradition by noting that Jacob fled to “the field of Aram” (Hos 12:12) or “Aram-naharaim” (Aram of the two rivers), which was the northern part of Mesopotamia between the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers. In the creedal confession in Deuteronomy 26:5, the Israelite who brought his firstfruits confessed, “My father [probably Jacob] was a wandering Aramean.”<\/p>\n<p>Probably the best early evidence of an Aramean presence in this area comes from Tiglath-pileser I. In his annals of his fourth year (1112 <span>BC<\/span>), he speaks of a campaign among the “Akhlama, Arameans” in the Middle Euphrates area and the sacking of six Aramean villages in the Mt Bishri area.<\/p>\n<p>The Arameans of upper Mesopotamia became important in biblical history. They set up a number of separate Aramean states, two of which were especially important for the people of Israel—Aram-zobah in the days of David, and Aram-damascus from the days of Solomon onward.<\/p>\n<p>By about 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, the Aramean tribes had spread throughout Syria and had expanded into northern Transjordan, where they came into conflict with the Israelites. At his peak Hadadezer, king of Aram-zobah, embraced several vassals, such as Damascus, Maacah, and Tob. He was eventually defeated by King David (2 Sm 8:3-4; 10:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>Events in Israel and Judah had some bearing on Damascus. After the death of Solomon, when the formerly united kingdom became divided into Judah and Israel, tension arose between the two small states. War broke out between Baasha of Israel and Asa of Judah in the years 890–880 <span>BC<\/span>. Asa sought aid from Ben-hadad I of Damascus (1 Kgs 15:18). Lands in Transjordan changed hands several times. The successors of Omri of Israel—namely Ahab, Ahaziah, Jehoram, Jehu, Jehoahaz, and Jehoash—had many conflicts with Damascus. Ahab fought Ben-hadad and his 32 allies who besieged Samaria (20:1), but Israel defeated him. A second time Ben-hadad entered Israelite territory and reached Aphek (20:26), but he was again defeated and captured. As a consequence of his defeat and for the price of his release, he was obliged to make bazaars available in Damascus for Israelite trade. After three years of peace between Israel and Damascus, hostilities broke out again and resulted in a battle in the region of Ramoth-gilead in which Ahab was killed (22:29-37). Aram-damascus was eventually defeated by King Jehoash of Israel (2 Kgs 13:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SyriaaftertheCollapseoftheArameanKingdoms\">Syria after the Collapse of the Aramean Kingdoms<\/p>\n<p>After the collapse of Aram-damascus in 733–732 <span>BC<\/span>, the political character of the whole region changed. Over the centuries that followed and on into Christian times, the region passed under the control of several great powers and no independent Aramean state survived. When Assyria collapsed in 612–609 <span>BC<\/span>, the region came under Babylonian control, but only for a comparatively short period. With the rise of Cyrus the Persian, the Syrian region was quickly overrun by Persian armies. Palestine, Asia Minor, and Egypt were absorbed into the Persian Empire at the same time.<\/p>\n<p>The next significant political change that affected the region came with the appearance of Philip of Macedon in 360 <span>BC<\/span>. His son Alexander the Great (336–323 <span>BC<\/span>) consolidated Greek power throughout western Asia and as far as the borders of India. On his death in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, at the age of 33, the control of western Asia passed to Alexander’s generals. General Seleucus I (312–280 <span>BC<\/span>) controlled the southern half of Asia Minor, the region of Syria, Mesopotamia, and eastward to the borders of India. Syria thus fell under the influence of Hellenist rulers, the Seleucids, who founded a new capital at Antioch.<\/p>\n\n<p>Further west, Rome was rising to power and cast her eyes eastward. It was General Pompey who overcame Mithridates, the young king of Pontus, and moved to crush the remnants of the kingdom of the Seleucids. The western parts of Syria were formed into a Roman province in 64 <span>BC<\/span>. Pompey finally moved into Palestine, which came under Roman control in 63 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman province of Syria included Cilicia, a strip of territory in the southeastern corner of Asia Minor. The northern boundary reached to the Euphrates River. The boundary then swung south well to the east of Damascus and then turned west about halfway down the Dead Sea and continued west to the Mediterranean Sea. Syria was bound to the west by the Mediterranean up to the Gulf of Alexandretta, where it turned west. The province of Syria and Cilicia (Acts 15:23, 41; Gal 1:21) was governed by an imperial legate (<em>legatis<\/em>) who commanded a strong force of legionary troops. One such governor, Quirinius, governed Syria at the time of the census of Caesar Augustus; this census brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem for the birth of Jesus (Lk 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the following centuries the population of Damascus was Christianized, and Christianity spread throughout the Roman province of Syria, giving rise to the Old Syrian Church, which remains to this day. It has left a remarkable legacy of Christian literature written in Syriac (Aramaic). The old Aramaic language remained, though a modified alphabet was used to write it.<\/p>\n<p>It was the rise of Islam in the seventh century <span>AD<\/span> that brought about a considerable weakening of the Syrian church, although it has never been completely destroyed. Scattered communities of Aramaic-speaking people still survive in parts of Syria, and numerous remains of Christian churches have been brought to light as a result of modern archaeological work.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LanguageandCulture\">Language and Culture<\/p>\n<p>Aramaic was the language of the Arameans, of which numerous inscriptions have been discovered. The Aramaic script was adapted for use by the Israelites, and the language became the international language for diplomacy and administration all over the Near East. It was the <em>lingua franca<\/em> of the Persian period from Egypt to India and was widely spoken in Palestine in Jesus’ day. The words “<em>talitha cumi<\/em>” (Mk 5:41) and “<em>marana tha<\/em>” (1 Cor 16:22) are Aramaic.<\/p>\n<p>Excavations in many sites have provided a good idea of the Aramean architecture, sculpture, pottery, and other arts. The religion of the Arameans was polytheistic. The people adopted many foreign deities as well. The principal Aramean deity was the ancient west Semitic storm god Hadad. In the days of Ahaz of Judah, the Damascus cult was forced on the people of Jerusalem when an altar based on a Damascus model was placed in the temple (2 Kgs 16:10-13). Arameans exiled to Samaria by the Assyrian ruler Sargon brought foreign Aramean cults with them (17:24-34).<\/p>\n<p>Through the centuries that followed the disappearance of the Aramean states, the Aramaic language has survived. The Christian form of Aramaic, Syriac, has left behind a vast legacy of literature, histories, theologies, commentaries, treatises, and translations, which have been carefully preserved in ancient monastic libraries, particularly in northern Syria, northern Iraq, and southern Turkey.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Aramaic.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SYRIA, SYRIANS<\/h3>\n<p>Terms used in the Septuagint and in some English translations to render the names Aram, Arameans.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoryoftheArameans\">History of the Arameans<\/p>\n<p>According to the “table of nations” in Genesis 10:22-23, the Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem. Another genealogy in Genesis 22:20-21 makes Aram a descendant of Nahor. According to Amos 9:7, the Arameans (Syrians) came from Kir, which is linked with Elam in Isaiah 22:6. The exile of the Arameans to Kir (2 Kgs 16:9; Am 1:5) may suggest they were to go back to their original home. The precise origins of this group of people are, however, lost in antiquity. When they emerged clearly into history, they were settled around the central Euphrates from which they were spread out east, west, and north.<\/p>\n<p>The Arameans were traditionally thought to have been established in upper Mesopotamia in the first part of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Bethuel and Laban were known as Arameans (Gn 25:20; 28:1-7); the home of Bethuel was in Paddan-aram (25:20). The prophet Hosea recalls the tradition by noting that Jacob fled to “the field of Aram” (Hos 12:12) or “Aram-naharaim” (Aram of the two rivers), which was the northern part of Mesopotamia between the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers. In the creedal confession in Deuteronomy 26:5, the Israelite who brought his firstfruits confessed, “My father [probably Jacob] was a wandering Aramean.”<\/p>\n<p>Probably the best early evidence of an Aramean presence in this area comes from Tiglath-pileser I. In his annals of his fourth year (1112 <span>BC<\/span>), he speaks of a campaign among the “Akhlama, Arameans” in the Middle Euphrates area and the sacking of six Aramean villages in the Mt Bishri area.<\/p>\n<p>The Arameans of upper Mesopotamia became important in biblical history. They set up a number of separate Aramean states, two of which were especially important for the people of Israel—Aram-zobah in the days of David, and Aram-damascus from the days of Solomon onward.<\/p>\n<p>By about 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, the Aramean tribes had spread throughout Syria and had expanded into northern Transjordan, where they came into conflict with the Israelites. At his peak Hadadezer, king of Aram-zobah, embraced several vassals, such as Damascus, Maacah, and Tob. He was eventually defeated by King David (2 Sm 8:3-4; 10:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>Events in Israel and Judah had some bearing on Damascus. After the death of Solomon, when the formerly united kingdom became divided into Judah and Israel, tension arose between the two small states. War broke out between Baasha of Israel and Asa of Judah in the years 890–880 <span>BC<\/span>. Asa sought aid from Ben-hadad I of Damascus (1 Kgs 15:18). Lands in Transjordan changed hands several times. The successors of Omri of Israel—namely Ahab, Ahaziah, Jehoram, Jehu, Jehoahaz, and Jehoash—had many conflicts with Damascus. Ahab fought Ben-hadad and his 32 allies who besieged Samaria (20:1), but Israel defeated him. A second time Ben-hadad entered Israelite territory and reached Aphek (20:26), but he was again defeated and captured. As a consequence of his defeat and for the price of his release, he was obliged to make bazaars available in Damascus for Israelite trade. After three years of peace between Israel and Damascus, hostilities broke out again and resulted in a battle in the region of Ramoth-gilead in which Ahab was killed (22:29-37). Aram-damascus was eventually defeated by King Jehoash of Israel (2 Kgs 13:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SyriaaftertheCollapseoftheArameanKingdoms\">Syria after the Collapse of the Aramean Kingdoms<\/p>\n<p>After the collapse of Aram-damascus in 733–732 <span>BC<\/span>, the political character of the whole region changed. Over the centuries that followed and on into Christian times, the region passed under the control of several great powers and no independent Aramean state survived. When Assyria collapsed in 612–609 <span>BC<\/span>, the region came under Babylonian control, but only for a comparatively short period. With the rise of Cyrus the Persian, the Syrian region was quickly overrun by Persian armies. Palestine, Asia Minor, and Egypt were absorbed into the Persian Empire at the same time.<\/p>\n<p>The next significant political change that affected the region came with the appearance of Philip of Macedon in 360 <span>BC<\/span>. His son Alexander the Great (336–323 <span>BC<\/span>) consolidated Greek power throughout western Asia and as far as the borders of India. On his death in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, at the age of 33, the control of western Asia passed to Alexander’s generals. General Seleucus I (312–280 <span>BC<\/span>) controlled the southern half of Asia Minor, the region of Syria, Mesopotamia, and eastward to the borders of India. Syria thus fell under the influence of Hellenist rulers, the Seleucids, who founded a new capital at Antioch.<\/p>\n\n<p>Further west, Rome was rising to power and cast her eyes eastward. It was General Pompey who overcame Mithridates, the young king of Pontus, and moved to crush the remnants of the kingdom of the Seleucids. The western parts of Syria were formed into a Roman province in 64 <span>BC<\/span>. Pompey finally moved into Palestine, which came under Roman control in 63 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman province of Syria included Cilicia, a strip of territory in the southeastern corner of Asia Minor. The northern boundary reached to the Euphrates River. The boundary then swung south well to the east of Damascus and then turned west about halfway down the Dead Sea and continued west to the Mediterranean Sea. Syria was bound to the west by the Mediterranean up to the Gulf of Alexandretta, where it turned west. The province of Syria and Cilicia (Acts 15:23, 41; Gal 1:21) was governed by an imperial legate (<em>legatis<\/em>) who commanded a strong force of legionary troops. One such governor, Quirinius, governed Syria at the time of the census of Caesar Augustus; this census brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem for the birth of Jesus (Lk 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the following centuries the population of Damascus was Christianized, and Christianity spread throughout the Roman province of Syria, giving rise to the Old Syrian Church, which remains to this day. It has left a remarkable legacy of Christian literature written in Syriac (Aramaic). The old Aramaic language remained, though a modified alphabet was used to write it.<\/p>\n<p>It was the rise of Islam in the seventh century <span>AD<\/span> that brought about a considerable weakening of the Syrian church, although it has never been completely destroyed. Scattered communities of Aramaic-speaking people still survive in parts of Syria, and numerous remains of Christian churches have been brought to light as a result of modern archaeological work.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LanguageandCulture\">Language and Culture<\/p>\n<p>Aramaic was the language of the Arameans, of which numerous inscriptions have been discovered. The Aramaic script was adapted for use by the Israelites, and the language became the international language for diplomacy and administration all over the Near East. It was the <em>lingua franca<\/em> of the Persian period from Egypt to India and was widely spoken in Palestine in Jesus’ day. The words “<em>talitha cumi<\/em>” (Mk 5:41) and “<em>marana tha<\/em>” (1 Cor 16:22) are Aramaic.<\/p>\n<p>Excavations in many sites have provided a good idea of the Aramean architecture, sculpture, pottery, and other arts. The religion of the Arameans was polytheistic. The people adopted many foreign deities as well. The principal Aramean deity was the ancient west Semitic storm god Hadad. In the days of Ahaz of Judah, the Damascus cult was forced on the people of Jerusalem when an altar based on a Damascus model was placed in the temple (2 Kgs 16:10-13). Arameans exiled to Samaria by the Assyrian ruler Sargon brought foreign Aramean cults with them (17:24-34).<\/p>\n<p>Through the centuries that followed the disappearance of the Aramean states, the Aramaic language has survived. The Christian form of Aramaic, Syriac, has left behind a vast legacy of literature, histories, theologies, commentaries, treatises, and translations, which have been carefully preserved in ancient monastic libraries, particularly in northern Syria, northern Iraq, and southern Turkey.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Aramaic.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SYRIA, SYRIANS Terms used in the Septuagint and in some English translations to render the names Aram, Arameans. History of the Arameans According to the “table of nations” in Genesis 10:22-23, the Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem. Another genealogy in Genesis 22:20-21 makes Aram a descendant of Nahor. According to Amos 9:7, the Arameans (Syrians) came from Kir, which is linked with Elam in Isaiah 22:6. The exile of the Arameans to Kir (2 Kgs 16:9; Am 1:5) may suggest they w...","summary_en":"SYRIA, SYRIANS Terms used in the Septuagint and in some English translations to render the names Aram, Arameans. History of the Arameans According to the “table of nations” in Genesis 10:22-23, the Arameans were a Semitic group, descendants of Shem. Another genealogy in Genesis 22:20-21 makes Aram a descendant of Nahor. According to Amos 9:7, the Arameans (Syrians) came from Kir, which is linked with Elam in Isaiah 22:6. The exile of the Arameans to Kir (2 Kgs 16:9; Am 1:5) may suggest they w...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39499,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zobah","title_en":"Zobah","content_ro":"<h3>ZOBAH<\/h3>\n<p>Aramean nation suffering military defeat from Israel during the early kingdom period. King Saul defeated the kings of Zobah (1 Sm 14:47). Soon after David became king of Israel, he defeated Hadadezer the son of Rehob, king of Zobah (2 Sm 8:3-5, 12; 1 Chr 18:3-10; Ps 60 title). Later, the Ammonites hired 20,000 “Syrians of Zobah” for an anticipated attack by David’s forces. The coalition of Ammonites and hired mercenaries was defeated by soldiers led by Joab (2 Sm 10:6-14). When Hadadezer’s army counterattacked, they were again defeated decisively by David (2 Sm 10:15-19; 1 Chr 19:16-19).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ZOBAH<\/h3>\n<p>Aramean nation suffering military defeat from Israel during the early kingdom period. King Saul defeated the kings of Zobah (1 Sm 14:47). Soon after David became king of Israel, he defeated Hadadezer the son of Rehob, king of Zobah (2 Sm 8:3-5, 12; 1 Chr 18:3-10; Ps 60 title). Later, the Ammonites hired 20,000 “Syrians of Zobah” for an anticipated attack by David’s forces. The coalition of Ammonites and hired mercenaries was defeated by soldiers led by Joab (2 Sm 10:6-14). When Hadadezer’s army counterattacked, they were again defeated decisively by David (2 Sm 10:15-19; 1 Chr 19:16-19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ZOBAH Aramean nation suffering military defeat from Israel during the early kingdom period. King Saul defeated the kings of Zobah (1 Sm 14:47). Soon after David became king of Israel, he defeated Hadadezer the son of Rehob, king of Zobah (2 Sm 8:3-5, 12; 1 Chr 18:3-10; Ps 60 title). Later, the Ammonites hired 20,000 “Syrians of Zobah” for an anticipated attack by David’s forces. The coalition of Ammonites and hired mercenaries was defeated by soldiers led by Joab (2 Sm 10:6-14). When Hadadeze...","summary_en":"ZOBAH Aramean nation suffering military defeat from Israel during the early kingdom period. King Saul defeated the kings of Zobah (1 Sm 14:47). Soon after David became king of Israel, he defeated Hadadezer the son of Rehob, king of Zobah (2 Sm 8:3-5, 12; 1 Chr 18:3-10; Ps 60 title). Later, the Ammonites hired 20,000 “Syrians of Zobah” for an anticipated attack by David’s forces. The coalition of Ammonites and hired mercenaries was defeated by soldiers led by Joab (2 Sm 10:6-14). When Hadadeze...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40148,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles","title_en":"Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles","content_ro":"<h3>Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>The books of Chronicles, referred to as a single book in this article, have received considerable scholarly criticism about the nature of their content and about apparent discrepancies with material in Samuel and Kings. The differences can be classified as numerical, theological, and historical.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>As an example of numerical differences, 1 Chronicles 11:11 says that one of David’s “mighty men” killed 300 men with his spear at one time, but the parallel account in 2 Samuel 23:8 says he killed 800 at one time. Again, 1 Chronicles 18:3-4 says that after defeating King Hadadezer of Zobah, David took from him 1,000 chariots, 7,000 horsemen, and 20,000 foot soldiers; a parallel account in 2 Samuel 8:3-4 says that David took 1,700 horsemen and 20,000 foot soldiers. Although 2 Chronicles 22:2 says that Ahaziah was 42 years old when he began to reign, 2 Kings 8:26 says he was 22; and so on.<\/p>\n<p>Many numbers in Chronicles seem exceptionally high. In 1 Chronicles 21:5, Israel had just over a million men and Judah had 470,000. In another example of a remarkably high number, the temple’s vestibule is said to have been 120 cubits, or approximately 180 feet (54.8 meters), in height (2 Chr 3:4). In 2 Chronicles 13:3, Judah’s army had 400,000 men and Israel’s army 800,000. Some 500,000 of Israel’s army were slain (2 Chr 13:17). In 2 Chronicles 14:9, Zerah the Ethiopian had an army of a million men and 300 chariots.<\/p>\n<p>How should such problems with numbers in Chronicles be understood? First, some of the problems in the text as it now stands may have come about from faulty copying. Also, some excessively high numbers may have been used figuratively to indicate a very large army, or perhaps as estimates. Though not all questions have been answered, scholars have found credible solutions to some of the problems. In the meantime, such matters are seen by evangelical scholars as verifying the human side of the Scriptures without necessarily detracting from their divine origin.<\/p>\n<p>Chronicles also contains some different theological emphases from earlier materials. The best example can be seen by comparing 1 Chronicles 21:1 with 2 Samuel 24:1. In the Samuel account the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he incited David to harm them by taking a national census. The Chronicler’s account is that “Satan stood up against Israel, and incited David to number Israel.” In one account God moved David to take the census; in the other Satan was the prime mover.<\/p>\n<p>The authenticity of the Chronicler has also been questioned on historical grounds. Several incidents reported in Samuel-Kings are told in a different manner in Chronicles. In 2 Samuel 8:13 David is said to have slain 18,000 Edomites at the Valley of Salt, whereas the Chronicler reports that Abishai, David’s cousin, killed the Edomites (1 Chr 18:12). Again, according to 2 Samuel 21:19, Elhanan slew Goliath the Gittite, whereas the Chronicler says that Elhanan slew Lahmi, the brother of Goliath the Gittite (1 Chr 20:5; most OT scholars today believe that Chronicles preserves the true reading of the original text). A more difficult historical problem is seen by comparing 2 Chronicles 20:35-37 with 1 Kings 22:48-49. The Kings account says that the ships Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, built to bring gold from Ophir were wrecked at Ezion-geber, evidently before they ever left port. When Ahaziah, king of Israel, asked that his servants be allowed to go on the ships with Jehoshaphat’s servants, Jehoshaphat refused. The Chronicler’s version of what happened is different. There Jehoshaphat joined with the wicked Ahaziah in building ships at Ezion-geber to go to Tarshish, but a prophet prophesied that the Lord would destroy the ships because of the alliance with Ahaziah. Both accounts agree that Jehoshaphat built ships at Ezion-geber and that the ships were destroyed before they left port. On the basis of the present status of the texts, however, one cannot tell whether or not Jehoshaphat joined Ahaziah. Whatever happened, the ships were lost.<\/p>\n<p>In a comparison of Chronicles with Kings, a serious problem arises over the war between Asa of Judah and Baasha of Israel. In 2 Chronicles 16:1 one reads that in Asa’s 36th year of reign, Baasha challenged Judah by building a fortress at Ramah. But according to the chronology of 1 Kings 16, Baasha was not even alive in the 36th year of Asa’s reign. First Kings 16:6-8 says that Baasha died and his son Elah succeeded him as king in the 26th year of Asa’s reign.<\/p>\n<p>At one time scholars were quite skeptical about the authenticity of Chronicles. Now they tend to treat Chronicles with respect and appreciation. In some instances new archaeological evidence has tended to support the historicity of the Chronicler’s statement. In other instances reexamination of a discrepancy has shown it to be more apparent than real. If all the facts were known, other problems might also be cleared up to the satisfaction of impartial scholars.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>The books of Chronicles, referred to as a single book in this article, have received considerable scholarly criticism about the nature of their content and about apparent discrepancies with material in Samuel and Kings. The differences can be classified as numerical, theological, and historical.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>As an example of numerical differences, 1 Chronicles 11:11 says that one of David’s “mighty men” killed 300 men with his spear at one time, but the parallel account in 2 Samuel 23:8 says he killed 800 at one time. Again, 1 Chronicles 18:3-4 says that after defeating King Hadadezer of Zobah, David took from him 1,000 chariots, 7,000 horsemen, and 20,000 foot soldiers; a parallel account in 2 Samuel 8:3-4 says that David took 1,700 horsemen and 20,000 foot soldiers. Although 2 Chronicles 22:2 says that Ahaziah was 42 years old when he began to reign, 2 Kings 8:26 says he was 22; and so on.<\/p>\n<p>Many numbers in Chronicles seem exceptionally high. In 1 Chronicles 21:5, Israel had just over a million men and Judah had 470,000. In another example of a remarkably high number, the temple’s vestibule is said to have been 120 cubits, or approximately 180 feet (54.8 meters), in height (2 Chr 3:4). In 2 Chronicles 13:3, Judah’s army had 400,000 men and Israel’s army 800,000. Some 500,000 of Israel’s army were slain (2 Chr 13:17). In 2 Chronicles 14:9, Zerah the Ethiopian had an army of a million men and 300 chariots.<\/p>\n<p>How should such problems with numbers in Chronicles be understood? First, some of the problems in the text as it now stands may have come about from faulty copying. Also, some excessively high numbers may have been used figuratively to indicate a very large army, or perhaps as estimates. Though not all questions have been answered, scholars have found credible solutions to some of the problems. In the meantime, such matters are seen by evangelical scholars as verifying the human side of the Scriptures without necessarily detracting from their divine origin.<\/p>\n<p>Chronicles also contains some different theological emphases from earlier materials. The best example can be seen by comparing 1 Chronicles 21:1 with 2 Samuel 24:1. In the Samuel account the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he incited David to harm them by taking a national census. The Chronicler’s account is that “Satan stood up against Israel, and incited David to number Israel.” In one account God moved David to take the census; in the other Satan was the prime mover.<\/p>\n<p>The authenticity of the Chronicler has also been questioned on historical grounds. Several incidents reported in Samuel-Kings are told in a different manner in Chronicles. In 2 Samuel 8:13 David is said to have slain 18,000 Edomites at the Valley of Salt, whereas the Chronicler reports that Abishai, David’s cousin, killed the Edomites (1 Chr 18:12). Again, according to 2 Samuel 21:19, Elhanan slew Goliath the Gittite, whereas the Chronicler says that Elhanan slew Lahmi, the brother of Goliath the Gittite (1 Chr 20:5; most OT scholars today believe that Chronicles preserves the true reading of the original text). A more difficult historical problem is seen by comparing 2 Chronicles 20:35-37 with 1 Kings 22:48-49. The Kings account says that the ships Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, built to bring gold from Ophir were wrecked at Ezion-geber, evidently before they ever left port. When Ahaziah, king of Israel, asked that his servants be allowed to go on the ships with Jehoshaphat’s servants, Jehoshaphat refused. The Chronicler’s version of what happened is different. There Jehoshaphat joined with the wicked Ahaziah in building ships at Ezion-geber to go to Tarshish, but a prophet prophesied that the Lord would destroy the ships because of the alliance with Ahaziah. Both accounts agree that Jehoshaphat built ships at Ezion-geber and that the ships were destroyed before they left port. On the basis of the present status of the texts, however, one cannot tell whether or not Jehoshaphat joined Ahaziah. Whatever happened, the ships were lost.<\/p>\n<p>In a comparison of Chronicles with Kings, a serious problem arises over the war between Asa of Judah and Baasha of Israel. In 2 Chronicles 16:1 one reads that in Asa’s 36th year of reign, Baasha challenged Judah by building a fortress at Ramah. But according to the chronology of 1 Kings 16, Baasha was not even alive in the 36th year of Asa’s reign. First Kings 16:6-8 says that Baasha died and his son Elah succeeded him as king in the 26th year of Asa’s reign.<\/p>\n<p>At one time scholars were quite skeptical about the authenticity of Chronicles. Now they tend to treat Chronicles with respect and appreciation. In some instances new archaeological evidence has tended to support the historicity of the Chronicler’s statement. In other instances reexamination of a discrepancy has shown it to be more apparent than real. If all the facts were known, other problems might also be cleared up to the satisfaction of impartial scholars.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles The books of Chronicles, referred to as a single book in this article, have received considerable scholarly criticism about the nature of their content and about apparent discrepancies with material in Samuel and Kings. The differences can be classified as numerical, theological, and historical. As an example of numerical differences, 1 Chronicles 11:11 says that one of David’s “mighty men” killed 300 men with his spear at one time, but the paral...","summary_en":"Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles The books of Chronicles, referred to as a single book in this article, have received considerable scholarly criticism about the nature of their content and about apparent discrepancies with material in Samuel and Kings. The differences can be classified as numerical, theological, and historical. As an example of numerical differences, 1 Chronicles 11:11 says that one of David’s “mighty men” killed 300 men with his spear at one time, but the paral...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46613,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:3","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:3<\/strong> <em>Hadadezer<\/em> reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct <em>son of Rehob<\/em> and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • <em>Zobah<\/em> was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally <em>he<\/em>), <em>marched out to strengthen his control.<\/em> • <em>the Euphrates River:<\/em> Literally <em>the river;<\/em> 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp. 2 Sam 10:16.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:3<\/strong> <em>Hadadezer<\/em> reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct <em>son of Rehob<\/em> and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • <em>Zobah<\/em> was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally <em>he<\/em>), <em>marched out to strengthen his control.<\/em> • <em>the Euphrates River:<\/em> Literally <em>the river;<\/em> 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp. 2 Sam 10:16.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:3 Hadadezer reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct son of Rehob and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • Zobah was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally he), marched out to strengthen his control. • the Euphrates River: Literally the river; 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp....","summary_en":"8:3 Hadadezer reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct son of Rehob and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • Zobah was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally he), marched out to strengthen his control. • the Euphrates River: Literally the river; 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp....","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74239,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:3","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:3<\/strong> <em>Hadadezer<\/em> reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct <em>son of Rehob<\/em> and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • <em>Zobah<\/em> was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally <em>he<\/em>), <em>marched out to strengthen his control.<\/em> • <em>the Euphrates River:<\/em> Literally <em>the river;<\/em> 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp. 2 Sam 10:16.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:3<\/strong> <em>Hadadezer<\/em> reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct <em>son of Rehob<\/em> and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • <em>Zobah<\/em> was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally <em>he<\/em>), <em>marched out to strengthen his control.<\/em> • <em>the Euphrates River:<\/em> Literally <em>the river;<\/em> 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp. 2 Sam 10:16.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:3 Hadadezer reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct son of Rehob and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • Zobah was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally he), marched out to strengthen his control. • the Euphrates River: Literally the river; 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp....","summary_en":"8:3 Hadadezer reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct son of Rehob and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • Zobah was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally he), marched out to strengthen his control. • the Euphrates River: Literally the river; 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp....","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101865,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:3","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:3<\/strong> <em>Hadadezer<\/em> reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct <em>son of Rehob<\/em> and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • <em>Zobah<\/em> was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally <em>he<\/em>), <em>marched out to strengthen his control.<\/em> • <em>the Euphrates River:<\/em> Literally <em>the river;<\/em> 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp. 2 Sam 10:16.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:3<\/strong> <em>Hadadezer<\/em> reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct <em>son of Rehob<\/em> and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • <em>Zobah<\/em> was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally <em>he<\/em>), <em>marched out to strengthen his control.<\/em> • <em>the Euphrates River:<\/em> Literally <em>the river;<\/em> 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp. 2 Sam 10:16.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:3 Hadadezer reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct son of Rehob and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • Zobah was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally he), marched out to strengthen his control. • the Euphrates River: Literally the river; 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp....","summary_en":"8:3 Hadadezer reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct son of Rehob and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • Zobah was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally he), marched out to strengthen his control. • the Euphrates River: Literally the river; 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp....","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129491,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:3","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:3<\/strong> <em>Hadadezer<\/em> reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct <em>son of Rehob<\/em> and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • <em>Zobah<\/em> was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally <em>he<\/em>), <em>marched out to strengthen his control.<\/em> • <em>the Euphrates River:<\/em> Literally <em>the river;<\/em> 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp. 2 Sam 10:16.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:3<\/strong> <em>Hadadezer<\/em> reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct <em>son of Rehob<\/em> and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • <em>Zobah<\/em> was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally <em>he<\/em>), <em>marched out to strengthen his control.<\/em> • <em>the Euphrates River:<\/em> Literally <em>the river;<\/em> 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp. 2 Sam 10:16.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:3 Hadadezer reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct son of Rehob and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • Zobah was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally he), marched out to strengthen his control. • the Euphrates River: Literally the river; 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp....","summary_en":"8:3 Hadadezer reappears in 10:16 as David’s foe. He was either the direct son of Rehob and his successor or the reigning king of a dynasty established by a king named Rehob, whose kingdom was near the northern city of Dan (see Judg 18:28; cp. Num 13:21). • Zobah was north and east of David’s kingdom. • It is possible that David, not Hadadezer (literally he), marched out to strengthen his control. • the Euphrates River: Literally the river; 1 Chr 18:3 specifically identifies the Euphrates. Cp....","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":46614,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:4","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> David would have <em>crippled . . . horses<\/em> to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> David would have <em>crippled . . . horses<\/em> to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:4 David would have crippled . . . horses to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).","summary_en":"8:4 David would have crippled . . . horses to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74240,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:4","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> David would have <em>crippled . . . horses<\/em> to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> David would have <em>crippled . . . horses<\/em> to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:4 David would have crippled . . . horses to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).","summary_en":"8:4 David would have crippled . . . horses to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101866,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:4","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> David would have <em>crippled . . . horses<\/em> to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> David would have <em>crippled . . . horses<\/em> to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:4 David would have crippled . . . horses to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).","summary_en":"8:4 David would have crippled . . . horses to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129492,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:4","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> David would have <em>crippled . . . horses<\/em> to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> David would have <em>crippled . . . horses<\/em> to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:4 David would have crippled . . . horses to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).","summary_en":"8:4 David would have crippled . . . horses to prevent their reuse by the enemy and because kings in Israel were not to accumulate horses (Deut 17:16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":46615,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:5","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> Hadadezer’s neighbors, <em>Arameans from Damascus,<\/em> were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> Hadadezer’s neighbors, <em>Arameans from Damascus,<\/em> were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:5 Hadadezer’s neighbors, Arameans from Damascus, were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).","summary_en":"8:5 Hadadezer’s neighbors, Arameans from Damascus, were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74241,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:5","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> Hadadezer’s neighbors, <em>Arameans from Damascus,<\/em> were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> Hadadezer’s neighbors, <em>Arameans from Damascus,<\/em> were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:5 Hadadezer’s neighbors, Arameans from Damascus, were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).","summary_en":"8:5 Hadadezer’s neighbors, Arameans from Damascus, were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101867,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:5","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> Hadadezer’s neighbors, <em>Arameans from Damascus,<\/em> were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> Hadadezer’s neighbors, <em>Arameans from Damascus,<\/em> were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:5 Hadadezer’s neighbors, Arameans from Damascus, were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).","summary_en":"8:5 Hadadezer’s neighbors, Arameans from Damascus, were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129493,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:5","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> Hadadezer’s neighbors, <em>Arameans from Damascus,<\/em> were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> Hadadezer’s neighbors, <em>Arameans from Damascus,<\/em> were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:5 Hadadezer’s neighbors, Arameans from Damascus, were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).","summary_en":"8:5 Hadadezer’s neighbors, Arameans from Damascus, were of no help to him in repelling David. They would later be more successful against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:23-25) but less successful in their attack of Samaria during the days of King Ahab of Israel (1 Kgs 20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":33581,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Salvation","title_en":"Salvation","content_ro":"<h3>SALVATION<\/h3>\n<p>God’s way of providing people deliverance from sin and death. Scripture reveals God but it also reveals his plan to save the human race. In that sense, salvation is a major theme in both the OT and NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The concept of salvation is represented by various terms and situations in both Testaments. Among several Hebrew words that mean “deliver” or “save,” the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yasha‘<\/span> and derivatives are most frequently translated by English versions as “save” or “salvation.” Frequency in the English Bible depends upon the version considered. For example, in the OT “salvation” is found 74 times in the <span>nlt<\/span>, 80 times in the <span>niv<\/span>, 90 times in the <span>rsv<\/span>, 111 times in the <span>nasb<\/span>, and 119 times in the <span>kjv<\/span>. Salvation is not used as a technical term in the OT and is ascribed to both individuals and God. Leaders like Samson (Jgs 13:5) or David (2 Sm 8:6) are used of the Lord to bring deliverance to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s concept of salvation was rooted in the historical experience of the exodus. This momentous occasion was an opportunity to witness the salvation of the Lord (Ex 14:13) firsthand. Poets (Ps 106:8) and prophets (Is 43:3; Hos 13:4) later reiterated God’s salvation when recalling the exodus experience. Israel’s understanding of salvation was worked out in historical instances like Sennacherib’s attack on Jerusalem in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, when the Lord declared that he would save the city for his name’s sake (2 Kgs 19:34; cf. 18:30, 35). Israel’s opportunity to see God’s salvation through various leaders and situations corroborated this understanding of God as the God of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s response to God’s deliverance was primarily praise, as evidenced so often in the psalms (Pss 3:8; 9:14; 21:1) and earlier poetic passages (Ex 15:2; 1 Sm 2:1). In addition, they directed petitions and pleas for help to the Lord for his salvation—whether from enemies (Pss 35:3; 38:22), sickness (69:29), or battle (140:7; 144:10-11)—and in faith expected his deliverance (35:9; 65:5).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets emphasized the eschatological (end-time) aspect of salvation. God’s ability to save was revealed by his great works in the past, which thus promoted the anticipation of his work of deliverance in the future. This future hope was for the nation of Israel (Is 45:17) but anticipated universal deliverance (49:6). The prophets looked forward to deliverance and return from exile in Babylon (Is 49:25-26; Jer 46:27), yet they also spoke of an abiding future salvation (Is 45:17; 51:6-8). The messianic hope is indicated in passages that speak of an individual who will bring God’s salvation. Isaiah speaks of the Servant who brings salvation to the ends of the earth (49:6), while Jeremiah writes of deliverance by God’s righteous Branch (Jer 23:5-6). The mention of the king who brings salvation in Zechariah 9:9 reflects this messianic theme and is applied to Jesus Christ in Matthew 21:4-5.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In classical Greek the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> (“to save”) and noun <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">soteria<\/span> (“salvation”) are used for the concept of “rescue,” “deliverance” or “salvation,” and even “well-being” or “health.” The Septuagint most frequently uses <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> to render the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yasha‘<\/span> (“to save”), and the NT primarily employs <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> and its derivatives for the idea of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>These Greek terms are generally used theologically in the NT, but examples of nontheological usage occur. In Acts 27, these words refer to the threat and deliverance of the soldiers, sailors, and prisoners from shipwreck (vv 20, 31), as well as their well-being (v 34).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels “salvation” is clearly connected with the OT concept of salvation; it is applied to the coming of Christ in Zechariah’s prophecy (Lk 1:69, 71; cf. Pss 106:10; 132:17) and in Simeon’s hymn of praise (Lk 2:30). While <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">soteria<\/span> does not occur frequently in the Gospels, the concept of salvation is implied in Jesus’ statement about entrance into the kingdom of God (Mt 19:24-26) and his miracles of healing (Lk 17:19; 18:42).<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaches that salvation has its source in Jesus Christ (2 Tm 2:10; Heb 5:9), who is the “author” and mediator of salvation (Heb 2:10; 7:25). Salvation is God’s work (1 Thes 5:9) and is offered by his grace (Eph 2:8-9). The message of salvation is contained in the Scriptures (2 Tm 3:15) and is carried by those who proclaim the word of truth (Eph 1:13). The appropriate response is repentance (2 Cor 7:10) and faith (2 Tm 3:15; 1 Pt 1:9). This was the preaching of the early church as it proclaimed the Savior Jesus (Acts 4:12; 13:23-26; 16:30-31). Paul especially proclaimed the universality of God’s offer of salvation (Rom 1:16; Ti 2:11). His desire was for Jews to be saved (Rom 10:1), though he primarily preached the message of salvation to the Gentiles (11:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Within the Scriptures there are many other terms associated with the concept of salvation. The new birth speaks of being made alive in Christ (“born again,” Jn 3:3). Justification envisions one’s legal standing before God, while redemption speaks more of the means of salvation—the payment of a price to bring one back to God. Reconciliation speaks of a change in relationship and propitiation, which evokes the OT sacrificial system and points to the turning away of God’s wrath. These terms and others share some common ground with the biblical concept of salvation, but all point to the person and work of Jesus Christ the Savior.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Justification, Justified; Reconciliation; Redeemer, Redemption; Savior.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SALVATION<\/h3>\n<p>God’s way of providing people deliverance from sin and death. Scripture reveals God but it also reveals his plan to save the human race. In that sense, salvation is a major theme in both the OT and NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The concept of salvation is represented by various terms and situations in both Testaments. Among several Hebrew words that mean “deliver” or “save,” the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yasha‘<\/span> and derivatives are most frequently translated by English versions as “save” or “salvation.” Frequency in the English Bible depends upon the version considered. For example, in the OT “salvation” is found 74 times in the <span>nlt<\/span>, 80 times in the <span>niv<\/span>, 90 times in the <span>rsv<\/span>, 111 times in the <span>nasb<\/span>, and 119 times in the <span>kjv<\/span>. Salvation is not used as a technical term in the OT and is ascribed to both individuals and God. Leaders like Samson (Jgs 13:5) or David (2 Sm 8:6) are used of the Lord to bring deliverance to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s concept of salvation was rooted in the historical experience of the exodus. This momentous occasion was an opportunity to witness the salvation of the Lord (Ex 14:13) firsthand. Poets (Ps 106:8) and prophets (Is 43:3; Hos 13:4) later reiterated God’s salvation when recalling the exodus experience. Israel’s understanding of salvation was worked out in historical instances like Sennacherib’s attack on Jerusalem in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, when the Lord declared that he would save the city for his name’s sake (2 Kgs 19:34; cf. 18:30, 35). Israel’s opportunity to see God’s salvation through various leaders and situations corroborated this understanding of God as the God of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s response to God’s deliverance was primarily praise, as evidenced so often in the psalms (Pss 3:8; 9:14; 21:1) and earlier poetic passages (Ex 15:2; 1 Sm 2:1). In addition, they directed petitions and pleas for help to the Lord for his salvation—whether from enemies (Pss 35:3; 38:22), sickness (69:29), or battle (140:7; 144:10-11)—and in faith expected his deliverance (35:9; 65:5).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets emphasized the eschatological (end-time) aspect of salvation. God’s ability to save was revealed by his great works in the past, which thus promoted the anticipation of his work of deliverance in the future. This future hope was for the nation of Israel (Is 45:17) but anticipated universal deliverance (49:6). The prophets looked forward to deliverance and return from exile in Babylon (Is 49:25-26; Jer 46:27), yet they also spoke of an abiding future salvation (Is 45:17; 51:6-8). The messianic hope is indicated in passages that speak of an individual who will bring God’s salvation. Isaiah speaks of the Servant who brings salvation to the ends of the earth (49:6), while Jeremiah writes of deliverance by God’s righteous Branch (Jer 23:5-6). The mention of the king who brings salvation in Zechariah 9:9 reflects this messianic theme and is applied to Jesus Christ in Matthew 21:4-5.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In classical Greek the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> (“to save”) and noun <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">soteria<\/span> (“salvation”) are used for the concept of “rescue,” “deliverance” or “salvation,” and even “well-being” or “health.” The Septuagint most frequently uses <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> to render the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yasha‘<\/span> (“to save”), and the NT primarily employs <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> and its derivatives for the idea of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>These Greek terms are generally used theologically in the NT, but examples of nontheological usage occur. In Acts 27, these words refer to the threat and deliverance of the soldiers, sailors, and prisoners from shipwreck (vv 20, 31), as well as their well-being (v 34).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels “salvation” is clearly connected with the OT concept of salvation; it is applied to the coming of Christ in Zechariah’s prophecy (Lk 1:69, 71; cf. Pss 106:10; 132:17) and in Simeon’s hymn of praise (Lk 2:30). While <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">soteria<\/span> does not occur frequently in the Gospels, the concept of salvation is implied in Jesus’ statement about entrance into the kingdom of God (Mt 19:24-26) and his miracles of healing (Lk 17:19; 18:42).<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaches that salvation has its source in Jesus Christ (2 Tm 2:10; Heb 5:9), who is the “author” and mediator of salvation (Heb 2:10; 7:25). Salvation is God’s work (1 Thes 5:9) and is offered by his grace (Eph 2:8-9). The message of salvation is contained in the Scriptures (2 Tm 3:15) and is carried by those who proclaim the word of truth (Eph 1:13). The appropriate response is repentance (2 Cor 7:10) and faith (2 Tm 3:15; 1 Pt 1:9). This was the preaching of the early church as it proclaimed the Savior Jesus (Acts 4:12; 13:23-26; 16:30-31). Paul especially proclaimed the universality of God’s offer of salvation (Rom 1:16; Ti 2:11). His desire was for Jews to be saved (Rom 10:1), though he primarily preached the message of salvation to the Gentiles (11:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Within the Scriptures there are many other terms associated with the concept of salvation. The new birth speaks of being made alive in Christ (“born again,” Jn 3:3). Justification envisions one’s legal standing before God, while redemption speaks more of the means of salvation—the payment of a price to bring one back to God. Reconciliation speaks of a change in relationship and propitiation, which evokes the OT sacrificial system and points to the turning away of God’s wrath. These terms and others share some common ground with the biblical concept of salvation, but all point to the person and work of Jesus Christ the Savior.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Justification, Justified; Reconciliation; Redeemer, Redemption; Savior.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SALVATION God’s way of providing people deliverance from sin and death. Scripture reveals God but it also reveals his plan to save the human race. In that sense, salvation is a major theme in both the OT and NT. In the Old Testament The concept of salvation is represented by various terms and situations in both Testaments. Among several Hebrew words that mean “deliver” or “save,” the Hebrew verb yasha‘ and derivatives are most frequently translated by English versions as “save” or “salvation....","summary_en":"SALVATION God’s way of providing people deliverance from sin and death. Scripture reveals God but it also reveals his plan to save the human race. In that sense, salvation is a major theme in both the OT and NT. In the Old Testament The concept of salvation is represented by various terms and situations in both Testaments. Among several Hebrew words that mean “deliver” or “save,” the Hebrew verb yasha‘ and derivatives are most frequently translated by English versions as “save” or “salvation....","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36802,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Taxation Tax","title_en":"Taxation Tax","content_ro":"<h3>TAX, TAXATION<\/h3>\n<p>Amount of money or goods that was extracted by the powerful nations from those whom they subjected. It commonly consisted of gold, silver, animals, produce, or forced labor. Taxes were also levied on the people both by their ruler and by the priesthood to pay for the maintenance of the temple. The term “tribute” is first used in the <span>kjv<\/span> in Genesis 49:15 (<span>nlt<\/span> “forced labor”). In Numbers 31:28 the spoils of battle were divided up to include a tribute or levy for the priesthood. For the Hebrews the temple tribute was originally a voluntary offering to the Lord (Dt 16:10) but later became a prescribed tax (Mt 17:24).<\/p>\n<p>Even in 2500 <span>BC<\/span> in the city of Lagash, taxes were imposed on most facets of life, from the means of earning a livelihood, to marriage, divorce, and death. Like many ancient peoples, the Sumerians believed that the land belonged to the god and his representative the king, and that therefore a rent or levy was payable to the owner.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Joseph exacted a burdensome 20-percent tax in grain during the seven years of plenty, which alleviated the food shortages during the subsequent seven years of famine (Gn 41:25–42:5). The tax on the crops was facilitated because in Egypt the ownership of the land was vested in the ruler.<\/p>\n<p>Warrior kings, such as David, were able to maintain a healthy treasury without taxing their own people. The Canaanites and neighboring conquered peoples contributed great wealth to the treasury (2 Sm 8:6-14; 1 Chr 27:25-31), one list of which included silver, gold, bronze, 1,700 horsemen, and 20,000 foot soldiers. Forced labor was often required by David and his successors of aliens who remained within the boundaries of the Israelite kingdom (Jos 16:10; 17:13; Jgs 1:28).<\/p>\n<p>Israel was probably first taxed during Solomon’s reign. In this more stable period, income came from tribute but not from booty. To maintain the grandeur of the court and the extensive building program, Solomon divided Israel into 12 areas, each under an officer, each of whom provided food and support for the king and his household for one month per year (1 Kgs 4:7). Solomon also derived considerable income from levying custom duties on trading caravans that passed regularly through his kingdom. In addition to all of this, both foreigners and native Israelites were subject to forced labor for major building projects, especially for the temple (1 Kgs 5:13; 9:20-21; 2 Chr 8:7-8). Handles from ten-gallon (37.9-liter) jars have been excavated, bearing a Hebrew stamp “to the king,” indicating that they formed part of a levy (2 Chr 2:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jehoshaphat was equally successful in taxing the people at home (2 Chr 17:5) and maintaining the tribute from abroad, including silver and gold from the Philistines and 7,700 rams and 7,700 he-goats from the Arabs (2 Chr 17:11-12). As the power of the surrounding empires increased, Judah found itself forced to pay tribute. Sennacherib, king of Assyria, required 300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold, which necessitated the removal of the gold from the temple doors (2 Kgs 18:14-16). Approximately a century later, Pharaoh Neco required 100 talents of silver and a talent of gold from Judah (23:33), and shortly thereafter Nebuchadnezzar removed all the treasure from the temple and the royal palace, together with 10,000 captives, all the craftsmen, and 1,000 smiths, leaving few in Jerusalem except the poor (24:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>A definite, regular, organized tax system was instituted by the Persians, whose satraps, ruling each province, were required to make payment of fixed sums into the royal treasury (Est 10:1). Tax exemption was introduced by Artaxerxes I, who stated that levies should not be collected from priests, Levites, or any others occupied in any way with the service of the temple (Ezr 7:24). An additional tax was required for the maintenance of the governor’s household; it consisted of food, wine, and 40 shekels of silver (Neh 5:14-15). As governor, Nehemiah did not claim this allowance of food because he considered the taxes already burdensome, causing the mortgaging of fields, vineyards, and houses “for the king’s tax.” Simultaneously, a levy was imposed upon the Jews for the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem (4:6). Darius was politically astute enough to encourage the rebuilding of the temple and to allow the Jews to use some of the royal tax money for this purpose (Ezr 6:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Under the Seleucids, the Ptolemies, and subsequently the Romans, there was a change in the collection of taxes, whereby the office of tax collector was sold to the highest bidder, who in turn extracted the maximum payment from the people and built up his own wealth from the surplus generated. At times, the Jews were paying tithes for the maintenance of the temple, in addition to taxes of as much as one-third of the grain and half of the fruit grown. Excise, sales, and poll taxes were also collected.<\/p>\n<p>After the extortionate level of tax imposed by Pompey, Julius Caesar reduced the amount paid by the Jews and exempted them from all payment in the sabbatical year. The provinces were considered booty by the Romans and were plundered physically by the army and financially by the tax collectors. In imperial times there was greater regulation of the tax system. An income tax was imposed on produce from the field and from artisans and tradesmen, as well as a poll tax, port duties, sales taxes, an auction tax, and an estate duty.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the taxes paid to foreign powers, all Jews worldwide who were 20 years of age and older (Ex 30:11-16) were assessed a half-shekel per person annually as a tax to support the temple in Jerusalem (Mt 17:24), a tax that continued to be levied even after the destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70. Jesus was questioned on the validity of this tax (v 25) as well as the lawfulness of payment of taxes to Rome (Mt 22:17; Mk 12:14-15; Lk 20:22). Despite Jesus’ famous reply—“render to Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s” (Mt 22:21; Mk 12:17; Lk 20:25)—he was still accused before Pilate of forbidding the Jews to give taxes to Caesar (Lk 23:2). The early church also reinforced the legality of taxation as a legitimate responsibility required of all people (Rom 13:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking; Tax Collector.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TAX, TAXATION<\/h3>\n<p>Amount of money or goods that was extracted by the powerful nations from those whom they subjected. It commonly consisted of gold, silver, animals, produce, or forced labor. Taxes were also levied on the people both by their ruler and by the priesthood to pay for the maintenance of the temple. The term “tribute” is first used in the <span>kjv<\/span> in Genesis 49:15 (<span>nlt<\/span> “forced labor”). In Numbers 31:28 the spoils of battle were divided up to include a tribute or levy for the priesthood. For the Hebrews the temple tribute was originally a voluntary offering to the Lord (Dt 16:10) but later became a prescribed tax (Mt 17:24).<\/p>\n<p>Even in 2500 <span>BC<\/span> in the city of Lagash, taxes were imposed on most facets of life, from the means of earning a livelihood, to marriage, divorce, and death. Like many ancient peoples, the Sumerians believed that the land belonged to the god and his representative the king, and that therefore a rent or levy was payable to the owner.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Joseph exacted a burdensome 20-percent tax in grain during the seven years of plenty, which alleviated the food shortages during the subsequent seven years of famine (Gn 41:25–42:5). The tax on the crops was facilitated because in Egypt the ownership of the land was vested in the ruler.<\/p>\n<p>Warrior kings, such as David, were able to maintain a healthy treasury without taxing their own people. The Canaanites and neighboring conquered peoples contributed great wealth to the treasury (2 Sm 8:6-14; 1 Chr 27:25-31), one list of which included silver, gold, bronze, 1,700 horsemen, and 20,000 foot soldiers. Forced labor was often required by David and his successors of aliens who remained within the boundaries of the Israelite kingdom (Jos 16:10; 17:13; Jgs 1:28).<\/p>\n<p>Israel was probably first taxed during Solomon’s reign. In this more stable period, income came from tribute but not from booty. To maintain the grandeur of the court and the extensive building program, Solomon divided Israel into 12 areas, each under an officer, each of whom provided food and support for the king and his household for one month per year (1 Kgs 4:7). Solomon also derived considerable income from levying custom duties on trading caravans that passed regularly through his kingdom. In addition to all of this, both foreigners and native Israelites were subject to forced labor for major building projects, especially for the temple (1 Kgs 5:13; 9:20-21; 2 Chr 8:7-8). Handles from ten-gallon (37.9-liter) jars have been excavated, bearing a Hebrew stamp “to the king,” indicating that they formed part of a levy (2 Chr 2:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jehoshaphat was equally successful in taxing the people at home (2 Chr 17:5) and maintaining the tribute from abroad, including silver and gold from the Philistines and 7,700 rams and 7,700 he-goats from the Arabs (2 Chr 17:11-12). As the power of the surrounding empires increased, Judah found itself forced to pay tribute. Sennacherib, king of Assyria, required 300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold, which necessitated the removal of the gold from the temple doors (2 Kgs 18:14-16). Approximately a century later, Pharaoh Neco required 100 talents of silver and a talent of gold from Judah (23:33), and shortly thereafter Nebuchadnezzar removed all the treasure from the temple and the royal palace, together with 10,000 captives, all the craftsmen, and 1,000 smiths, leaving few in Jerusalem except the poor (24:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>A definite, regular, organized tax system was instituted by the Persians, whose satraps, ruling each province, were required to make payment of fixed sums into the royal treasury (Est 10:1). Tax exemption was introduced by Artaxerxes I, who stated that levies should not be collected from priests, Levites, or any others occupied in any way with the service of the temple (Ezr 7:24). An additional tax was required for the maintenance of the governor’s household; it consisted of food, wine, and 40 shekels of silver (Neh 5:14-15). As governor, Nehemiah did not claim this allowance of food because he considered the taxes already burdensome, causing the mortgaging of fields, vineyards, and houses “for the king’s tax.” Simultaneously, a levy was imposed upon the Jews for the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem (4:6). Darius was politically astute enough to encourage the rebuilding of the temple and to allow the Jews to use some of the royal tax money for this purpose (Ezr 6:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Under the Seleucids, the Ptolemies, and subsequently the Romans, there was a change in the collection of taxes, whereby the office of tax collector was sold to the highest bidder, who in turn extracted the maximum payment from the people and built up his own wealth from the surplus generated. At times, the Jews were paying tithes for the maintenance of the temple, in addition to taxes of as much as one-third of the grain and half of the fruit grown. Excise, sales, and poll taxes were also collected.<\/p>\n<p>After the extortionate level of tax imposed by Pompey, Julius Caesar reduced the amount paid by the Jews and exempted them from all payment in the sabbatical year. The provinces were considered booty by the Romans and were plundered physically by the army and financially by the tax collectors. In imperial times there was greater regulation of the tax system. An income tax was imposed on produce from the field and from artisans and tradesmen, as well as a poll tax, port duties, sales taxes, an auction tax, and an estate duty.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the taxes paid to foreign powers, all Jews worldwide who were 20 years of age and older (Ex 30:11-16) were assessed a half-shekel per person annually as a tax to support the temple in Jerusalem (Mt 17:24), a tax that continued to be levied even after the destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70. Jesus was questioned on the validity of this tax (v 25) as well as the lawfulness of payment of taxes to Rome (Mt 22:17; Mk 12:14-15; Lk 20:22). Despite Jesus’ famous reply—“render to Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s” (Mt 22:21; Mk 12:17; Lk 20:25)—he was still accused before Pilate of forbidding the Jews to give taxes to Caesar (Lk 23:2). The early church also reinforced the legality of taxation as a legitimate responsibility required of all people (Rom 13:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking; Tax Collector.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TAX, TAXATION Amount of money or goods that was extracted by the powerful nations from those whom they subjected. It commonly consisted of gold, silver, animals, produce, or forced labor. Taxes were also levied on the people both by their ruler and by the priesthood to pay for the maintenance of the temple. The term “tribute” is first used in the kjv in Genesis 49:15 (nlt “forced labor”). In Numbers 31:28 the spoils of battle were divided up to include a tribute or levy for the priesthood. Fo...","summary_en":"TAX, TAXATION Amount of money or goods that was extracted by the powerful nations from those whom they subjected. It commonly consisted of gold, silver, animals, produce, or forced labor. Taxes were also levied on the people both by their ruler and by the priesthood to pay for the maintenance of the temple. The term “tribute” is first used in the kjv in Genesis 49:15 (nlt “forced labor”). In Numbers 31:28 the spoils of battle were divided up to include a tribute or levy for the priesthood. Fo...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46616,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:6","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:6<\/strong> David established <em>army garrisons<\/em> in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> made David victorious:<\/em> Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:6<\/strong> David established <em>army garrisons<\/em> in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> made David victorious:<\/em> Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:6 David established army garrisons in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • the Lord made David victorious: Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.","summary_en":"8:6 David established army garrisons in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • the Lord made David victorious: Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74242,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:6","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:6<\/strong> David established <em>army garrisons<\/em> in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> made David victorious:<\/em> Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:6<\/strong> David established <em>army garrisons<\/em> in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> made David victorious:<\/em> Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:6 David established army garrisons in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • the Lord made David victorious: Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.","summary_en":"8:6 David established army garrisons in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • the Lord made David victorious: Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101868,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:6","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:6<\/strong> David established <em>army garrisons<\/em> in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> made David victorious:<\/em> Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:6<\/strong> David established <em>army garrisons<\/em> in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> made David victorious:<\/em> Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:6 David established army garrisons in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • the Lord made David victorious: Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.","summary_en":"8:6 David established army garrisons in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • the Lord made David victorious: Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129494,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:6","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:6<\/strong> David established <em>army garrisons<\/em> in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> made David victorious:<\/em> Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:6<\/strong> David established <em>army garrisons<\/em> in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> made David victorious:<\/em> Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:6 David established army garrisons in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • the Lord made David victorious: Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.","summary_en":"8:6 David established army garrisons in Aram but not in Moab (8:2), which suggests that Aram was a more formidable force and that David needed a military presence there to maintain control. • the Lord made David victorious: Cp. 8:14. God was the real source of David’s growth and power.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":46617,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:7","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:7<\/strong> <em>gold shields:<\/em> See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • <em>brought . . . to Jerusalem:<\/em> In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:7<\/strong> <em>gold shields:<\/em> See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • <em>brought . . . to Jerusalem:<\/em> In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:7 gold shields: See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • brought . . . to Jerusalem: In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.","summary_en":"8:7 gold shields: See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • brought . . . to Jerusalem: In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74243,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:7","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:7<\/strong> <em>gold shields:<\/em> See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • <em>brought . . . to Jerusalem:<\/em> In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:7<\/strong> <em>gold shields:<\/em> See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • <em>brought . . . to Jerusalem:<\/em> In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:7 gold shields: See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • brought . . . to Jerusalem: In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.","summary_en":"8:7 gold shields: See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • brought . . . to Jerusalem: In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101869,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:7","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:7<\/strong> <em>gold shields:<\/em> See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • <em>brought . . . to Jerusalem:<\/em> In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:7<\/strong> <em>gold shields:<\/em> See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • <em>brought . . . to Jerusalem:<\/em> In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:7 gold shields: See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • brought . . . to Jerusalem: In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.","summary_en":"8:7 gold shields: See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • brought . . . to Jerusalem: In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129495,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:7","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:7<\/strong> <em>gold shields:<\/em> See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • <em>brought . . . to Jerusalem:<\/em> In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:7<\/strong> <em>gold shields:<\/em> See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • <em>brought . . . to Jerusalem:<\/em> In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:7 gold shields: See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • brought . . . to Jerusalem: In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.","summary_en":"8:7 gold shields: See also 2 Kgs 11:10. • brought . . . to Jerusalem: In conformity with God’s stipulations for a good king (Deut 17:17), David dedicated these valuable items to God (see 2 Sam 8:11) rather than hoarding them for his own wealth and splendor.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":4380,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Berothai Berothah","title_en":"Berothai Berothah","content_ro":"<h3>BEROTHAH, BEROTHAI<\/h3>\n<p>City between Damascus and Hamath mentioned by the prophet Ezekiel as lying on the northern border of the restored Israel (Ez 47:16). Berothah is probably the same as Berothai, a city captured by David (2 Sm 8:8; called Cun in 1 Chr 18:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BEROTHAH, BEROTHAI<\/h3>\n<p>City between Damascus and Hamath mentioned by the prophet Ezekiel as lying on the northern border of the restored Israel (Ez 47:16). Berothah is probably the same as Berothai, a city captured by David (2 Sm 8:8; called Cun in 1 Chr 18:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BEROTHAH, BEROTHAI City between Damascus and Hamath mentioned by the prophet Ezekiel as lying on the northern border of the restored Israel (Ez 47:16). Berothah is probably the same as Berothai, a city captured by David (2 Sm 8:8; called Cun in 1 Chr 18:8).","summary_en":"BEROTHAH, BEROTHAI City between Damascus and Hamath mentioned by the prophet Ezekiel as lying on the northern border of the restored Israel (Ez 47:16). Berothah is probably the same as Berothai, a city captured by David (2 Sm 8:8; called Cun in 1 Chr 18:8).","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4391,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Betah*","title_en":"Betah*","content_ro":"<h3>BETAH*<\/h3>\n<p>Alternate name for Tibhath (1 Chr 18:8), a town in the city-kingdom of Aram-zobah, subjugated by King David, in 2 Samuel 8:8. <em>See<\/em> Tebah (Place).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BETAH*<\/h3>\n<p>Alternate name for Tibhath (1 Chr 18:8), a town in the city-kingdom of Aram-zobah, subjugated by King David, in 2 Samuel 8:8. <em>See<\/em> Tebah (Place).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BETAH* Alternate name for Tibhath (1 Chr 18:8), a town in the city-kingdom of Aram-zobah, subjugated by King David, in 2 Samuel 8:8. See Tebah (Place).","summary_en":"BETAH* Alternate name for Tibhath (1 Chr 18:8), a town in the city-kingdom of Aram-zobah, subjugated by King David, in 2 Samuel 8:8. See Tebah (Place).","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7543,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Coppersmith","title_en":"Coppersmith","content_ro":"<h3>COPPERSMITH<\/h3>\n<p>One who worked in copper and fashioned bronze and copper tools, implements, and ornaments (Ex 26:11, 37; 27:2-10; Jos 6:19, 24; 1 Sm 17:5-6; 2 Sm 8:8). Only in the NT (2 Tm 4:14) is the term “coppersmith” used; however, the occupation was important throughout Bible history.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COPPERSMITH<\/h3>\n<p>One who worked in copper and fashioned bronze and copper tools, implements, and ornaments (Ex 26:11, 37; 27:2-10; Jos 6:19, 24; 1 Sm 17:5-6; 2 Sm 8:8). Only in the NT (2 Tm 4:14) is the term “coppersmith” used; however, the occupation was important throughout Bible history.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COPPERSMITH One who worked in copper and fashioned bronze and copper tools, implements, and ornaments (Ex 26:11, 37; 27:2-10; Jos 6:19, 24; 1 Sm 17:5-6; 2 Sm 8:8). Only in the NT (2 Tm 4:14) is the term “coppersmith” used; however, the occupation was important throughout Bible history. See also Minerals and Metals.","summary_en":"COPPERSMITH One who worked in copper and fashioned bronze and copper tools, implements, and ornaments (Ex 26:11, 37; 27:2-10; Jos 6:19, 24; 1 Sm 17:5-6; 2 Sm 8:8). Only in the NT (2 Tm 4:14) is the term “coppersmith” used; however, the occupation was important throughout Bible history. See also Minerals and Metals.","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8273,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cun","title_en":"Cun","content_ro":"<h3>CUN<\/h3>\n<p>Syrian city belonging to Hadadezer, king of Zobah. David raided Cun, taking away large quantities of bronze (1 Chr 18:8). In a parallel account, Berothai may be the same place (2 Sm 8:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Berothah, Berothai.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CUN<\/h3>\n<p>Syrian city belonging to Hadadezer, king of Zobah. David raided Cun, taking away large quantities of bronze (1 Chr 18:8). In a parallel account, Berothai may be the same place (2 Sm 8:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Berothah, Berothai.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CUN Syrian city belonging to Hadadezer, king of Zobah. David raided Cun, taking away large quantities of bronze (1 Chr 18:8). In a parallel account, Berothai may be the same place (2 Sm 8:8). See also Berothah, Berothai.","summary_en":"CUN Syrian city belonging to Hadadezer, king of Zobah. David raided Cun, taking away large quantities of bronze (1 Chr 18:8). In a parallel account, Berothai may be the same place (2 Sm 8:8). See also Berothah, Berothai.","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36876,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tebah (Place)","title_en":"Tebah (Place)","content_ro":"<h3>TEBAH (P<span>lace<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>City of King Hadadezer from which David received a large quantity of bronze as booty (2 Sm 8:8; 1 Chr 18:8). Hadadezer was the king of Zobah, which is located in the region of Hamath in Syria, so the location of Tebah was likely in that region.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TEBAH (P<span>lace<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>City of King Hadadezer from which David received a large quantity of bronze as booty (2 Sm 8:8; 1 Chr 18:8). Hadadezer was the king of Zobah, which is located in the region of Hamath in Syria, so the location of Tebah was likely in that region.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TEBAH (Place) City of King Hadadezer from which David received a large quantity of bronze as booty (2 Sm 8:8; 1 Chr 18:8). Hadadezer was the king of Zobah, which is located in the region of Hamath in Syria, so the location of Tebah was likely in that region.","summary_en":"TEBAH (Place) City of King Hadadezer from which David received a large quantity of bronze as booty (2 Sm 8:8; 1 Chr 18:8). Hadadezer was the king of Zobah, which is located in the region of Hamath in Syria, so the location of Tebah was likely in that region.","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37290,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tibhath*","title_en":"Tibhath*","content_ro":"<h3>TIBHATH*<\/h3>\n<p>City of King Hadadezer (1 Chr 18:8, <span>nlt<\/span> “Tebah”) called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Betah<\/span> in the Hebrew of 2 Samuel 8:8. <em>See<\/em> Tebah (Place).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TIBHATH*<\/h3>\n<p>City of King Hadadezer (1 Chr 18:8, <span>nlt<\/span> “Tebah”) called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Betah<\/span> in the Hebrew of 2 Samuel 8:8. <em>See<\/em> Tebah (Place).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TIBHATH* City of King Hadadezer (1 Chr 18:8, nlt “Tebah”) called Betah in the Hebrew of 2 Samuel 8:8. See Tebah (Place).","summary_en":"TIBHATH* City of King Hadadezer (1 Chr 18:8, nlt “Tebah”) called Betah in the Hebrew of 2 Samuel 8:8. See Tebah (Place).","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":15125,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hamath","title_en":"Hamath","content_ro":"<h3>HAMATH<\/h3>\n<li>1. City and district located about 125 miles (201 kilometers) north of Damascus (Syria), on the Orontes River. The early residents apparently were of the Hamitic race from the descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:18), but later inhabitants were Semitic. It was to be the northern boundary of the nation of Israel, described as the “entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:7-8; Jos 13:5; Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Lebo Hamath<\/span>), but actually it was such only in the early monarchy and under Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>). The location is uncertain but was between the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains. Some scholars have thought of it as an actual place-name, Lebo-hamath, and have identified it with modern Lebweh on the Orontes. Others have located it elsewhere in Syria.<\/li>\n<p>Hamath was established during the Neolithic period and destroyed about 1750 <span>BC<\/span>, perhaps by the Hyksos. It was later rebuilt and conquered by Thutmose III (1502–1448 <span>BC<\/span>), and while Egypt controlled Syria, Hamath prospered. Several Hittite inscriptions have been discovered that disclose that Hamath had become the capital of a small Hittite kingdom prior to 900 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>When David fought Hadadezer, king of Zobah, and defeated him, then Toi, king of Hamath, sent his son to congratulate David (2 Sm 8:9-10). Since Solomon built store-cities in the region of Hamath (2 Chr 8:4), it has been suggested that Hamath had become a tributary kingdom to Israel. During the reign of Ahab of Israel, the Assyrian royal inscriptions state that Irhulini, king of Hamath, allied with Damascus, Israel, and the 12 kings of the coast to resist the advances of Shalmaneser III (860–825 <span>BC<\/span>). The league halted Shalmaneser, although he continued to harass Syria, and about 846 <span>BC<\/span> he conquered the Syrian league, when Hamath became subject to Assyria. In 730 <span>BC<\/span> Eni-Ilus, then king of Hamath, paid tribute to Tiglath-pileser III. About 720 <span>BC<\/span> Sargon II colonized Hamath with 4,300 Assyrians and moved many people from different areas of his kingdom, including Hamath, to Samaria (2 Kgs 17:24). Israelites also were apparently colonized in Hamath (Is 11:11). Other OT references to the Assyrian conquest of Hamath include 2 Kings 18:34, 19:13, Isaiah 10:9, 36:19, 37:13, and Amos 6:2. Later the city seems to have been subject to Damascus (Jer 49:23). Some of the prophets predicted that Israel would eventually extend its boundaries once again to Hamath (Ez 47:16-17; 48:1; Zec 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>During the Maccabean period, Jonathan Maccabeus and his army met the army of Demetrius at Hamath (1 Macc 12:25). According to Josephus, Antiochus Epiphanes changed its name to Epiphania (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 1.4.2), the name by which it was known to the Greeks and Romans.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hamath, Entrance of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Hamath-zobah is mentioned in 2 Chronicles 8:3 as a town conquered by Solomon. Some have suggested that it was the same city as the Hamath above, while others suggest that it was a different town in the district of Zobah.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hamath-zobah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HAMATH<\/h3>\n<li>1. City and district located about 125 miles (201 kilometers) north of Damascus (Syria), on the Orontes River. The early residents apparently were of the Hamitic race from the descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:18), but later inhabitants were Semitic. It was to be the northern boundary of the nation of Israel, described as the “entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:7-8; Jos 13:5; Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Lebo Hamath<\/span>), but actually it was such only in the early monarchy and under Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>). The location is uncertain but was between the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains. Some scholars have thought of it as an actual place-name, Lebo-hamath, and have identified it with modern Lebweh on the Orontes. Others have located it elsewhere in Syria.<\/li>\n<p>Hamath was established during the Neolithic period and destroyed about 1750 <span>BC<\/span>, perhaps by the Hyksos. It was later rebuilt and conquered by Thutmose III (1502–1448 <span>BC<\/span>), and while Egypt controlled Syria, Hamath prospered. Several Hittite inscriptions have been discovered that disclose that Hamath had become the capital of a small Hittite kingdom prior to 900 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>When David fought Hadadezer, king of Zobah, and defeated him, then Toi, king of Hamath, sent his son to congratulate David (2 Sm 8:9-10). Since Solomon built store-cities in the region of Hamath (2 Chr 8:4), it has been suggested that Hamath had become a tributary kingdom to Israel. During the reign of Ahab of Israel, the Assyrian royal inscriptions state that Irhulini, king of Hamath, allied with Damascus, Israel, and the 12 kings of the coast to resist the advances of Shalmaneser III (860–825 <span>BC<\/span>). The league halted Shalmaneser, although he continued to harass Syria, and about 846 <span>BC<\/span> he conquered the Syrian league, when Hamath became subject to Assyria. In 730 <span>BC<\/span> Eni-Ilus, then king of Hamath, paid tribute to Tiglath-pileser III. About 720 <span>BC<\/span> Sargon II colonized Hamath with 4,300 Assyrians and moved many people from different areas of his kingdom, including Hamath, to Samaria (2 Kgs 17:24). Israelites also were apparently colonized in Hamath (Is 11:11). Other OT references to the Assyrian conquest of Hamath include 2 Kings 18:34, 19:13, Isaiah 10:9, 36:19, 37:13, and Amos 6:2. Later the city seems to have been subject to Damascus (Jer 49:23). Some of the prophets predicted that Israel would eventually extend its boundaries once again to Hamath (Ez 47:16-17; 48:1; Zec 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>During the Maccabean period, Jonathan Maccabeus and his army met the army of Demetrius at Hamath (1 Macc 12:25). According to Josephus, Antiochus Epiphanes changed its name to Epiphania (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 1.4.2), the name by which it was known to the Greeks and Romans.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hamath, Entrance of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Hamath-zobah is mentioned in 2 Chronicles 8:3 as a town conquered by Solomon. Some have suggested that it was the same city as the Hamath above, while others suggest that it was a different town in the district of Zobah.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hamath-zobah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HAMATH 1. City and district located about 125 miles (201 kilometers) north of Damascus (Syria), on the Orontes River. The early residents apparently were of the Hamitic race from the descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:18), but later inhabitants were Semitic. It was to be the northern boundary of the nation of Israel, described as the “entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:7-8; Jos 13:5; Hebrew, Lebo Hamath), but actually it was such only in the early monarchy and under Jeroboam II (793–753 BC). The location i...","summary_en":"HAMATH 1. City and district located about 125 miles (201 kilometers) north of Damascus (Syria), on the Orontes River. The early residents apparently were of the Hamitic race from the descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:18), but later inhabitants were Semitic. It was to be the northern boundary of the nation of Israel, described as the “entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:7-8; Jos 13:5; Hebrew, Lebo Hamath), but actually it was such only in the early monarchy and under Jeroboam II (793–753 BC). The location i...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20509,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Joram","title_en":"Joram","content_ro":"<h3>JORAM<\/h3>\n<li>1. Toi’s son and king of Hamath. He was sent by Toi to offer congratulations to David when David won a victory over Hadadezer of Zobah (2 Sm 8:9-12). He is also called Hadoram in 1 Chronicles 18:10.<\/li>\n<li>2. Alternate name for Jehoram, king of Judah (853–841 <span>BC<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Jehoram #1.<\/li>\n<li>3. Alternate name for Jehoram, king of Israel (852–841 <span>BC<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Jehoram #2.<\/li>\n<li>4. Jeshaiah’s son from Levi’s tribe (1 Chr 26:25).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JORAM<\/h3>\n<li>1. Toi’s son and king of Hamath. He was sent by Toi to offer congratulations to David when David won a victory over Hadadezer of Zobah (2 Sm 8:9-12). He is also called Hadoram in 1 Chronicles 18:10.<\/li>\n<li>2. Alternate name for Jehoram, king of Judah (853–841 <span>BC<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Jehoram #1.<\/li>\n<li>3. Alternate name for Jehoram, king of Israel (852–841 <span>BC<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Jehoram #2.<\/li>\n<li>4. Jeshaiah’s son from Levi’s tribe (1 Chr 26:25).<\/li>","summary_ro":"JORAM 1. Toi’s son and king of Hamath. He was sent by Toi to offer congratulations to David when David won a victory over Hadadezer of Zobah (2 Sm 8:9-12). He is also called Hadoram in 1 Chronicles 18:10. 2. Alternate name for Jehoram, king of Judah (853–841 BC). See Jehoram #1. 3. Alternate name for Jehoram, king of Israel (852–841 BC). See Jehoram #2. 4. Jeshaiah’s son from Levi’s tribe (1 Chr 26:25).","summary_en":"JORAM 1. Toi’s son and king of Hamath. He was sent by Toi to offer congratulations to David when David won a victory over Hadadezer of Zobah (2 Sm 8:9-12). He is also called Hadoram in 1 Chronicles 18:10. 2. Alternate name for Jehoram, king of Judah (853–841 BC). See Jehoram #1. 3. Alternate name for Jehoram, king of Israel (852–841 BC). See Jehoram #2. 4. Jeshaiah’s son from Levi’s tribe (1 Chr 26:25).","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37518,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Toi","title_en":"Toi","content_ro":"<h3>TOI<\/h3>\n<p>King of Hamath at the time David defeated the armies of Hadadezer (2 Sm 8:9-10; alternately called Tou in 1 Chr 18:9-10). He sent his son Joram to congratulate and give gifts to David.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TOI<\/h3>\n<p>King of Hamath at the time David defeated the armies of Hadadezer (2 Sm 8:9-10; alternately called Tou in 1 Chr 18:9-10). He sent his son Joram to congratulate and give gifts to David.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TOI King of Hamath at the time David defeated the armies of Hadadezer (2 Sm 8:9-10; alternately called Tou in 1 Chr 18:9-10). He sent his son Joram to congratulate and give gifts to David.","summary_en":"TOI King of Hamath at the time David defeated the armies of Hadadezer (2 Sm 8:9-10; alternately called Tou in 1 Chr 18:9-10). He sent his son Joram to congratulate and give gifts to David.","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46618,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:9","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:9<\/strong> <em>Hamath<\/em> was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:9<\/strong> <em>Hamath<\/em> was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:9 Hamath was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.","summary_en":"8:9 Hamath was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74244,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:9","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:9<\/strong> <em>Hamath<\/em> was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:9<\/strong> <em>Hamath<\/em> was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:9 Hamath was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.","summary_en":"8:9 Hamath was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101870,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:9","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:9<\/strong> <em>Hamath<\/em> was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:9<\/strong> <em>Hamath<\/em> was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:9 Hamath was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.","summary_en":"8:9 Hamath was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129496,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:9","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:9<\/strong> <em>Hamath<\/em> was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:9<\/strong> <em>Hamath<\/em> was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:9 Hamath was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.","summary_en":"8:9 Hamath was northwest of Hadadezer’s Zobah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":18018,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"History of Israel","title_en":"History of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>ISRAEL, History of<\/h3>\n<p>An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n<p>• Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Exodus<\/p>\n<p>• Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n<p>• The Conquest<\/p>\n<p>• The Judges<\/p>\n<p>• The United Monarchy<\/p>\n<p>• The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Restoration<\/p>\n<p>• The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n<p>• The Roman Period<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PatriarchalAge\">Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n<p>The story of Israel begins with Abraham, whom God called first at Ur, and perhaps later at Haran (Acts 7:2-4), to leave Mesopotamia and go into a land to which God would direct the way. In calling Abraham, God made with him a covenant (Gn 12:1-3) that promised him a land, special divine favor (“I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse,” <span>nasb<\/span>), and the privilege of being a channel of blessing to the entire world (“In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed,” <span>nasb<\/span>). In Genesis 12:4-8 God confirmed this unconditional covenant, promising Abraham this new land forever, along with innumerable descendants. Subsequently, in Genesis 15:1-21, God again confirmed the covenant but added the significant prediction that the guarantee of holding Canaan in perpetuity did not mean occupation of the land in every generation. God also spelled out the limits of the Promised Land (from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates, some 500 to 600 miles or 804 to 965 kilometers in extent). A final confirmation of the covenant to Abraham appears in Genesis 17:6-8. It guaranteed the land of Canaan to Abraham’s posterity and added that kings (an anticipation of the Davidic dynasty) would arise in his line. The covenant was confirmed to Abraham’s son Isaac (Gn 26:3-5) and his grandson Jacob (ch 28).<\/p>\n<p>This period is known as the patriarchal age in Hebrew history. The patriarchs were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were called patriarchs because they were fathers, not only to their immediate families, but also to the extended family of Hebrews, over which they exercised a fatherly control. They served as political, legal, and spiritual heads of their migratory community, looking after their interests and leading them in worship. Periodically they built altars on which they offered sacrifices. That the patriarchal community was very large can be seen from Genesis 14:14, which says that Abraham had 318 armed men in his camp. If one assumes that most of the men were married and had one or more children each, the total extended family may have numbered in excess of 1,000.<\/p>\n<p>Additional developments in the life of Abraham and Jacob were particularly important for world history. Abraham, frustrated at not having an heir, accepted Sarah’s suggestion to obtain an heir by the slave girl Hagar. (This was also the custom of the land.) The son born was named Ishmael, progenitor of the Arabs. Thus Abraham is revered by Arabs and Muslims as well as by Jews and Christians. He is the father of the Jews through his son Isaac, child of promise. He holds a special place in Christianity as an example of Christ, through whom all Christians obtain their salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Jacob, a scheming scoundrel in his earlier years, wound up in exile in northern Mesopotamia for 20 years in the home of his uncle Laban. There he married Leah and Rachel and fathered the sons who became the progenitors of the 12 tribes of Israel. On his return to Palestine he met God along the banks of the Jabbok River (Gn 32), and God changed his name to Israel (“a prince of God,” <span>kjv<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>The patriarchal period in Canaan lasted for 215 years. One estimate places Abraham’s entry into Canaan at about 2085 <span>BC<\/span>, when he was 75 years of age. Jacob and his sons migrated to Egypt to escape a severe famine in Canaan in about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>. During much of the patriarchal period, Palestine experienced a decline in population and was occupied largely by nomadic or seminomadic tribes. It was relatively easy for the Hebrews to enter such a situation. After 1900 Palestine began to enjoy more settled conditions. Shortly thereafter, the Hebrews made the trek into Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SojourninEgypt\">Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n<p>If Jacob and his sons entered Egypt about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, it was the period of the Middle Kingdom. And by that time other migrants from Asia were coming in increasing numbers. The Hebrews settled in Goshen, in the eastern delta region, under the protecting care of Joseph, who held a position at the Egyptian court roughly equivalent to that of prime minister. As more and more Asiatic Hyksos came into Egypt, they began to take over the country—northern Egypt at least. During this same time the Hebrews became increasingly numerous. Some who hold to a different chronology believe the Hebrews were welcomed into Egypt during the days of Hyksos domination (after 1750 <span>BC<\/span>). At any rate, by about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> native Egyptian princes regained control of the country and expelled many of the Asiatics.<\/p>\n<p>In process of time there arose a king over Egypt who “knew not Joseph” (Ex 1:8, <span>kjv<\/span>). Very possibly this meant that a native Egyptian dynasty had arisen in Egypt and they were apprehensive over the fact that the growing numbers and wealth of the Hebrews might jeopardize their own supremacy. But Egyptian measures to subjugate the Hebrews and reduce their birthrate had a reverse effect (Ex 1:12). Finally, the Egyptians ordered the killing of all male Hebrew infants at birth. Among those who disobeyed were the parents of Moses, who set him afloat in a waterproof basket made of reeds. Found by a daughter of Pharaoh, he was brought up in the Egyptian court, was given a first-class education, and became a high official of the realm.<\/p>\n<p>At the age of 40, Moses identified himself with his own people. He killed an Egyptian in defense of a fellow Hebrew, and immediately fled to the land of Midian in the northeastern part of the Sinai Peninsula. He married and lived there for 40 years, becoming thoroughly familiar with the geography and the ways of the wilderness through which he would later lead the Hebrews. The Egyptians continued to oppress the Hebrew people severely until they cried urgently to God for deliverance. In response, God confronted Moses in the famous burning bush experience and called on him to return to Egypt and lead the people back into the land of Canaan (Ex 3–4). He was to have the help of his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheExodus\">The Exodus<\/p>\n<p>Understandably the pharaoh of Egypt was reluctant to permit the Hebrews to leave permanently. The value of this great labor force was incalculable. But finally, after suffering a series of ten plagues, lasting perhaps a year, the Egyptians were persuaded to let the Hebrews go (Ex 7–12).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues had a theological as well as a practical purpose. They discredited the gods of Egypt and exalted the most high God of heaven (Ex 12:12). The plagues clearly discredited specific gods of Egypt (e.g., the Nile was worshiped as Hapi, plague one; the frog, worshiped as Heqt, plague two; the bull, worshiped as Ptah, plague five; the sun, worshiped as Amon-Re\/Aton, plague nine). Taken together, they struck a direct blow at the Egyptian pantheon.<\/p>\n<p>Just before the last plague, which was the night in which the death angel invaded the homes of the Egyptians, the Israelites made the Passover sacrifice according to divine instructions. This involved killing a lamb for each household (unless the household was too small; in that event, households could combine). Anyone who was careless about applying the blood to the doorpost or who rejected this divine provision came under the judgment of God. After the death of the firstborn throughout the land, the Egyptians begged the Hebrews to leave. Their company numbered 600,000 men over 20 years of age, plus women and children, for a total of over 2,500,000. In addition they took their flocks and herds and personal belongings.<\/p>\n<p>The date they left Egypt is a matter of continuing debate. Traditionally a date of about 1446 <span>BC<\/span> is given for the exodus (cf. 1 Kgs 6:1, which places the exodus 480 years before construction of the temple started in 966 <span>BC<\/span>) and 1406 <span>BC<\/span> for the Conquest under Joshua, and there do not seem to be any compelling arguments for rejecting that position. But a great many scholars prefer 1275 <span>BC<\/span> for a variety of reasons.<\/p>\n<p>The early date of the exodus would place the later years of the wilderness wanderings and the subsequent conquest of Palestine during the reigns of Amenhotep III and IV (1412–1366), a time when the pharaohs allowed Egyptian control of Palestine to disintegrate. When the Egyptians did reassert their power, about 1300, they restricted their movements largely to the coastal area, and thus did not come in contact with the Hebrews who were living in the hill country of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WildernessWanderings\">Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness wanderings were an important interlude in the history of Israel. During those years, significant and basic institutions came into existence at God’s command. At Sinai, Moses delivered to Israel the law, the pattern of the tabernacle (which later became the model for the temple) and orders for its operation, as well as detailed instructions for the priesthood and sacrificial system of worship.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the wanderings was truly a remarkable time. The presence of God was evidenced by a pillar of cloud that hovered over the people by day and a pillar of fire by night. God provided food in the form of manna, periodically provided water by miraculous means, and made sure that clothes did not wear out. In spite of all that, the people murmured and complained continually.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God gave the law (Ex 19:2–24:18), and the people promptly made a commitment to keep it (24:3). Then God gave the pattern for the tabernacle and its furniture (chs 25–27, 30–31, 35–40) and established the priesthood (chs 28–29). While Moses was on the mountain receiving God’s revelation, the people grew restless and clamored for gods they could see. Even Aaron was carried away with the idolatrous wave and supervised the casting of a golden calf and building of an altar before it. The fact that they turned to Egyptian cattle worship so readily indicates that paganism must have made deep inroads among them while in captivity (chs 32–34). Moses’ intercessory response to God’s announcement that he would destroy Israel because of her idolatry led to a divine determination to execute judgment on only the worst offenders (32:9-14).<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently, God revealed the legal and priestly order (Lv 1:1–27:34). Among the divinely appointed institutions described or alluded to in Leviticus are several special days or feasts, including the Sabbath, Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, Firstfruits, Pentecost or Feast of Weeks, Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles, the Year of Sabbath, and the Year of Jubilee.<\/p>\n<p>After camping at Sinai for about a year, the Israelites got their orders to go forward (Nm 10:11-12). Miriam (Moses’ sister) and Aaron criticized Moses’ leadership and suffered divine punishment as a consequence (ch 12). When the people arrived at Kadesh-barnea, the gate to southern Palestine, they were frightened by the report of most of the spies who had been reconnoitering in Canaan and decided that they should not advance into Canaan. They called for a new leader to bring them back to Egypt. God declared that the entire generation would wander in the wilderness until the adults had died. Only Joshua and Caleb (the two spies in favor of invading immediately) would enter the Promised Land (14:26-30). Near the end of the period of wandering, Moses also lost the privilege of entering the land by an act of disobedience.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheConquest\">The Conquest<\/p>\n<p>The latter part of the book of Numbers describes how Moses led the Israelites to victory over the peoples living east of the Jordan River. Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh requested permission to settle there and reluctantly were allowed to do so on the condition that they would join the rest of the Israelites in conquering Canaan before settling down. Prior to victories in Transjordan, a new census of adult males was taken in order to determine the military capabilities of Israel and to provide a basis for equitable division of the land they were about to enter. The number of males above 20 years of age was 601,730 (Nm 26:51). The book of Deuteronomy consists primarily of a series of speeches delivered by Moses in a covenant renewal ceremony on the plains of Moab just before his death and the appointment of Joshua as leader.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua lost no time in moving forward. Spies sent across the Jordan to Jericho to reconnoiter reported a situation quite different from what the Hebrews had experienced at Kadesh-barnea a generation earlier. Now the people of Canaan were terrified because they had heard of the numerical strength and victories of the Hebrews. Apparently the day after the spies returned, Joshua moved the people to the edge of the Jordan and prepared to cross over. The waters parted for them here as the Red Sea had parted earlier.<\/p>\n<p>The narrative of conquest that appears in the book of Joshua is not a detailed battle account. It describes a thrust into the middle of Palestine around Jericho and Ai, a southerly drive to defeat the Amorite league, and a northern campaign against Hazor and other towns. The history of Joshua is extremely telescoped, for Joshua’s major military action must have required about six years. Joshua’s friend Caleb was 79 when the Conquest began and 85 after the last great battle with Jabin, king of Hazor (Jos 14:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>When the war was over, major strongholds (e.g., Jerusalem) still remained in enemy hands, but the land west of the Jordan was allocated to the nine and a half Hebrew tribes. The task of reducing enemy towns was left to the individual tribes in whose land they were located. The Joshua account was not so much a narrative of Israelite battle prowess as of God’s faithfulness and intervention on behalf of his people. For example, at Jericho they did not attack but merely followed divine orders and watched the defenses collapse; at Gibeon hailstones killed more Amorites than Israelite soldiers did (Jos 10:7-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheJudges\">The Judges<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died some 30 years after he had led the Hebrews into Canaan, and he was followed by a series of divinely appointed leaders who ruled sometimes over the whole of Israel as a loose confederacy and sometimes over one or more tribes. They were judges, civil functionaries, and military leaders all at the same time.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Judges pictures a series of recurring cycles: apostasy from God, punishment in the form of oppression by neighboring tribes, cries to God for relief, release from bondage under the leadership of a judge, and a period of rest from oppression.<\/p>\n<p>Establishment of the chronology of the judges is one of the thorniest problems of Scripture. Adding up all years of oppression and rest mentioned in the book gives a total of 410. The book of Acts gives a total of 450 years from the days of Joshua to Samuel (Acts 13:19). The difference in Acts may be accounted for by the addition of 40 years of Eli’s ministry (1 Sm 4:18). Allowing 410 years for the period of the judges, about 30 for the Conquest to the judges, and 40 for the wilderness wanderings, means 480 years from 1050 <span>BC<\/span>, the date for Saul’s kingship, and would give a date of about 1530 for the exodus. This is about 100 years more than even the early date for the exodus. The most probable explanation is that there is some overlap in oppressions and judgeships. For instance, the activities of Jephthah were centered on the eastern frontier, those of Samson in the Philistine plain to the southwest, and those of Deborah and Barak in the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnitedMonarchy\">The United Monarchy<\/p>\n<p>Because of the weakness of Israel resulting from political disunity and the ineptness and corruption of both Eli’s and Samuel’s sons, the people of Israel called for a king to rule over them. This demand was in reality a rejection of the divine plan of theocracy—the rule of God. God granted the Hebrews’ wish but warned them of the disadvantages of monarchy (1 Sm 8:9-21). The concept of kingship was not new to Israel. It had been hinted at in Genesis 49:10 and Numbers 24:17, and Moses had made some very clear statements about it in Deuteronomy 17:14-20.<\/p>\n<p>The first stage of Hebrew monarchy is commonly called the united monarchy because all Israel was ruled by a single king. This period lasted for 120 years—encompassing the 40-year reigns of Saul (Acts 13:21), David (2 Sm 5:5), and Solomon (1 Kgs 11:42).<\/p>\n<p>The people asked for a king, and God granted them one, but not one like those of the surrounding nations. The Hebrew king was to be a man who followed God’s dictates in his public and private life, who did not intrude into the affairs of the priesthood, and who did not fall into idolatry, but exerted all his influence to keep the people faithful to God. If he failed in any of these respects, he ran the risk of being deposed by God, of having his line brought to an end, or even of having the people fall into captivity to a foreign power. All this must be kept in mind when evaluating the reigns of Saul, David, Solomon, and the kings of the divided monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>Saul began well. He won a great victory over the Ammonites at Jabesh-gilead and showed considerable wisdom in administrative matters. But after about two years he intruded into the priest’s office to offer sacrifice, bringing the divine prediction that his kingdom would be taken from him (1 Sm 13:8-14). He would go on to enjoy great military victory and ability as a ruler until about the middle of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>After Saul’s disobedience to God’s command to totally destroy the Amalekites, the Lord repudiated Saul and instructed Samuel to anoint David privately as future king of Israel. David’s rise to prominence was spurred by his victory over Goliath and the accompanying defeat of the Philistines. Saul later made David commander of the army, and the young man soon earned a reputation greater than that of the king himself. Saul, who had become increasingly mentally disturbed after his relationship with God was broken, began to make attempts on David’s life, and for the last years of Saul’s reign David lived as a fugitive. Meanwhile, the Philistines got completely out of control and finally killed Saul and most of his sons in the great battle of Mt Gilboa, which gave the Philistines control over much of Palestine west of the Jordan (1 Sm 31:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Soon David became king in Judah with his capital in Hebron. A son of Saul, Ishbosheth, established himself at Mahanaim, east of the Jordan. For seven years the two tiny kingdoms existed side by side (2 Sm 2:2-11). But after the Israelite king and his army commander were assassinated, David became ruler of a united Hebrew kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the beginning of his reign (1010–970 <span>BC<\/span>) David completely defeated and subjugated the Philistines. Soon thereafter he captured Jerusalem, making it the capital of the united kingdom. During succeeding years, David built up an empire (2 Sm 8:10; 1 Chr 18–19), conquering Moab, Edom, Damascus, Zobah, and Ammon, so he controlled territory from the Gulf of Aqaba (a branch of the Red Sea) and the Sinai in the south almost to the Euphrates in the north. Moreover, he established good relations, if not an alliance, with Tyre. The establishment of David’s empire was possible because of a power vacuum in the Middle East. The Egyptians, Mycenaeans, Hittites, and Assyrians were either decadent or removed from the stage of history. The Phoenicians, a peaceful commercial people, were also free to expand their trade, and they were happy to sell cedar to David for his palace and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>Without doubt, David was Israel’s greatest king. Jerusalem came to be known as the city of David. When the king wanted to build the temple as God’s house, God replied that his son should do it instead. But God would in a very real sense build David’s house; he made a covenant with David, promising him that his house (dynasty, kingdom, throne) would be established forever (2 Sm 7). Christ, the infinite One who came from the line of David, alone was capable of fulfilling this divine promise (see Lk 1:31-33; Acts 2:29-36; 13:32-39; 15:14-17).<\/p>\n<p>Like other Oriental monarchs, David fell into the practice of keeping a harem. Scripture names 8 wives and 21 children and refers to other wives and concubines. Such a situation opened the door to family rivalries and questions about succession to the throne. Two sons, Absalom and Adonijah, made a try for the throne, but both efforts were squelched. Solomon, son of David’s favorite wife, Bathsheba, became the next king.<\/p>\n<p>Solomon (970–930 <span>BC<\/span>) was a man of peace and a builder of palaces, cities, fortifications, and the temple. He fortified cities all over his realm and outfitted cities for his chariot corps and cavalry units. With the help of the Phoenicians, he built a seaport and kept a fleet at Ezion-geber, near modern Eilat on the Gulf of Aqaba. He greatly enlarged Jerusalem by enclosing the temple area to the north of David’s city and the southwestern hill now known as Zion. His best-known project was the temple, which took seven years to build. Twice the size of the tabernacle, it was built on the same basic plan; it measured 90 feet (27.4 meters) long and 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide and had magnificent appointments. But he also constructed a palace complex that took 13 years to complete. This included an armory, a throne room, the king’s private residence, and a house for the daughter of pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Apparently much influenced by the spiritual testimony of David and desiring God’s blessing on his rule, Solomon made a great sacrifice to God at Gibeon near the beginning of his reign. God met him there and offered to grant whatever he might request. Solomon asked for understanding and wisdom to govern God’s people (1 Kgs 3:9). His God-given wisdom is apparent in many administrative decisions and official policies and building plans.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, Solomon did not show such wisdom in maintaining a harem of 700 wives and 300 concubines or in excessive expenditures that left the state in serious financial straits. He even erected places of worship for his foreign wives, thus subsidizing their idolatries and incurring the wrath of God. In fact, foreign wives and their idolatry proved to be his downfall; before Solomon died, God informed him that for this reason he would divide the kingdom at his death and give most of it to someone other than Solomon’s son. But for David’s sake, God would keep Judah and Jerusalem in the hands of the Davidic line (1 Kgs 11:9-13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDividedKingdom\">The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n<p>After the death of Solomon, the Near East was destined to become a very different place. Israel was no longer in a power vacuum. The Assyrian Empire rose in Mesopotamia, to be followed by the Neo-Babylonian and the Medo-Persian Empires in turn. Egypt was temporarily powerful in the south, but it would later come under control of Assyria and Medo-Persia. These empires exerted great pressure on Israel and dominated one or both of the two Hebrew kingdoms.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Solomon died, his son Rehoboam took the throne and was forced to deal with a rising tide of resentment over the high taxes and economic stagnation of Solomon’s last years. When Rehoboam refused to give relief, all the northern tribes broke away and formed the northern kingdom, Israel, under the leadership of Jeroboam. The southern kingdom, Judah, was left with only the territory of Judah and Benjamin. A total of 20 kings ruled in each of the separate kingdoms. While the north had several dynasties and the reigns of kings were generally short, in the south the dynasty of David continued to rule and the reigns were longer.<\/p>\n<h5>The Northern Kingdom<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom lasted from the division in 930 <span>BC<\/span> until its conquest by Assyria in 722. Jeroboam, fearing that he would lose the loyalty of the people if they continued to go to Jerusalem to worship, set up a new religion of his own. Instituting calf worship, he built shrines at Dan in the north and Bethel in the south. This idolatry drew the condemnation of God and fulfilled the prediction that Jeroboam’s line would be wiped out. All his successors are said to have followed in his idolatrous steps. Israel found itself at war during much of its history—with Judah, Syria, or Assyria. Jeroboam established his capital first at Shechem and later at Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>Four other kings of the north require special comment: Omri, Ahab, Jehu, and Jeroboam II. Omri (885–874 <span>BC<\/span>) must have been an impressive ruler. Generations later, Assyrians still spoke of Israel as the land of Omri. After he had established himself on the throne, he located the permanent capital of the kingdom at Samaria and began the palace complex there. Early in his reign he was successful in conquering Moab, and later he reestablished the good relations with Tyre that existed in the days of David and Solomon. Apparently he established a full alliance and cemented it with the marriage of his son Ahab to Jezebel, a princess of Tyre.<\/p>\n<p>Ahab (874–853 <span>BC<\/span>) was one of the most significant of Israel’s kings. He and his wife, Jezebel, promoted the vile idolatry of Baal worship with its religious prostitution, arousing the powerful opposition of the prophet Elijah. Ahab was a formidable military man, defeating the Syrians in major campaigns and participating in a coalition that fought the Assyrians to a virtual standstill. He also built extensively at Samaria, Hazor, Megiddo, and other towns, as excavations show.<\/p>\n<p>Jehu (841–814 <span>BC<\/span>) was God’s agent for punishing the house of Omri and destroying Baal worship in Israel. He did eradicate Baal worship and liquidated literally scores of relatives and court officials of Ahab. But he was so ruthless that he killed off the people who knew how to run the government; subsequently, it did not work well. Jehu also was forced to become a vassal to Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>Jeroboam II ruled during most of the first half of the eighth century (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) and brought the kingdom to its greatest extent and prosperity. He, with his contemporary Uzziah in the south, ruled most of the land David had once controlled. This was possible because the Assyrians were in a period of decline during most of the first half of the century.<\/p>\n<p>Prophets who were active during the history of the northern kingdom include the nonwriting prophets Elijah and Elisha and the writing prophets Jonah, Amos, and Hosea.<\/p>\n<h5>The Southern Kingdom<\/h5>\n<p>The history of the southern kingdom of Judah was quite different from that of the northern kingdom. The temple was there and so were large numbers of Levites, many of whom came south after the division of the kingdom to protest the idolatry of the north. In addition to this spiritual strength, there was greater political stability and unity, promoted by the fact that only two tribes—Judah and Benjamin—shared power, and all the kings were of the Davidic dynasty. Moreover, eight of the kings were good monarchs. There were also periodic religious revivals. God granted the southern kingdom about 100 more years of existence than the north. But Judah, too, fell into idolatry and went into captivity for her sins.<\/p>\n<p>Rehoboam, the first king in the south, is especially remembered because he refused to listen to wise counsel about fiscal matters and perpetrated the division of the kingdom. He is also remembered for his religious policies. After a good beginning, he allowed apostasy to get out of control and brought the judgment of God in the form of an invasion in his fifth year (926 <span>BC<\/span>) by Shishak I of Egypt, resulting in extensive plunder and payment of tribute. Thereafter, he launched an extensive program to fortify the realm. Shishak’s invasion did have the effect of producing a partial and temporary spiritual reform, but the general trend of Rehoboam’s reign was downward.<\/p>\n<p>Conditions during the reign of his son, Abijam, were worse, but Asa (910–869 <span>BC<\/span>) initiated a religious reform that was effective for most of his reign. When threatened by the northern kingdom during his latter years, however, Asa turned to Syria for help instead of to God, and he seems to have defied the prophets of God to his dying day.<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s son Jehoshaphat (872–848 <span>BC<\/span>) was apparently influenced by his father’s early religious devotion, and his reign was characterized by faithfulness, winning the favor of God. However, he seems to have made a full alliance with Ahab of Israel, which resulted in the marriage of his son Jehoram to Ahab’s daughter Athaliah. This alliance involved Jehoshaphat in almost ruinous joint ventures with Ahab, and later with two of his sons when they became kings of Israel. It also opened the door for the introduction of Baal worship into Judah when Jehoram came to the throne in the southern kingdom. For his sin Jehoram (853–841 <span>BC<\/span>) suffered internal revolt, invasion, and death from a horrible disease.<\/p>\n<p>After his death, his last remaining son, Ahaziah, ruled less than a year, following the wicked ways of his father. When Ahaziah died in battle, the queen mother, Athaliah, decided to seize the throne for herself and to secure her power by killing off all those in line to the throne. But she missed Ahaziah’s infant son Joash, who was kept hidden in the temple for six years.<\/p>\n<p>When Joash was seven, Jehoiada the high priest arranged his coronation and also the execution of the murderous and idolatrous Athaliah. During his early years when Joash was influenced by good counsel, he did well. But after the middle of his reign (835–796 <span>BC<\/span>), he began to listen to the princes who wanted to restore idolatry, and conditions deteriorated. Military reversals brought on economic decline and ultimately the king’s assassination.<\/p>\n<p>His son Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>) started well with victory over Edom and faithfulness to God. But he, too, fell into idolatry and was totally defeated by the northern kingdom, being held prisoner there. At that point his son Uzziah took over (c. 792 <span>BC<\/span>) and began a long and generally successful reign. During the several decades that followed, Assyria was in decline, and Uzziah and his contemporary in the north, Jeroboam II, were able to expand Hebrew holdings so that between them they controlled most of the territory Solomon had ruled.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah (792–740 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to restore the power of Judah rather quickly after his father’s defeat by Israel. Then he subjugated the Philistines in the southwest and the Ammonites across the Jordan; he strengthened his hold on the Edomites. All during his reign economic conditions improved. But at the height of his power Uzziah foolishly violated the high priest’s prerogatives and offered sacrifice in the temple. For this he was smitten with leprosy; his son Jotham was co-regent during the years 750–740 <span>BC<\/span>, going on to rule alone for about five more years. Meanwhile, Assyrian power became resurgent.<\/p>\n<p>By and large, Jotham merely carried on the policies of Uzziah. But the administration of his son Ahaz (735–715 <span>BC<\/span>) was very much affected by the Assyrian threat. Israel and Syria wanted him to join in war against Assyria, but he refused, being pro-Assyrian in sympathy. When Israel and Syria invaded Judah, King Ahaz sent tribute to Assyria and became her vassal in return for protection. This rash course of action was vainly opposed by Isaiah, who was prophet at court (c. 740–700 <span>BC<\/span>). Contemporaneously, the prophet Micah ministered to the common people of Judah. The pro-Assyrian policy of Ahaz was accompanied by a renewed sympathy for idolatry, and this brought the judgment of God in the form of invasion by Edomites and Philistines and trouble with Assyria. In fact, during this period, Assyria had annexed the northern kingdom (722 <span>BC<\/span>) and removed many of her people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>The next king of Judah, Hezekiah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>), was greatly sobered by the fall of Israel because of her sins, and he determined to launch a reform in his realm. He was anti-Assyrian too, but he did not dare to discontinue tribute payments and strike for independence until after Sennacherib came to the throne in Nineveh in 705 <span>BC<\/span>. At first Sennacherib was too preoccupied to attend to Judah, but finally in 701 he invaded. Despite tremendous initial success, he was stopped by a divinely sent plague (Is 36–39). Isaiah stood by the king to reassure and sustain him during this emergency.<\/p>\n<p>Hezekiah’s son Manasseh (697–642 <span>BC<\/span>) ruled longer than any other king of Israel or Judah. Unfortunately, he turned his back on his father’s example and caused the people to fall into gross idolatry (2 Kgs 21:9). Carried away captive by the Assyrians late in his reign, he repented of his evil and God restored him to his throne; thereafter, he led some reforms. But the land was too steeped in iniquity to be rescued. His son Amon (642–640 <span>BC<\/span>) reverted to the idolatry he knew in his youth.<\/p>\n<p>The situation was different with Josiah (640–609 <span>BC<\/span>), however. Throughout his reign he dedicated himself to reform. He sought to root out idolatry and to restore the temple and its worship. In 622 <span>BC<\/span> the Book of the Law was found during repair of the temple, and its demands—which had been forgotten—made a great impression on king and people alike. It is certain that Jeremiah and Zephaniah ministered during Josiah’s reign, as did Nahum and Habakkuk (in all probability).<\/p>\n<p>International conditions were now changing rapidly. Assyria was declining, and Nineveh fell to Babylon and the Medes in 612 <span>BC<\/span>. Three years later Pharaoh Neco of Egypt marched north to aid his Assyrian ally. When Josiah tried to stop him, he was killed in battle.<\/p>\n<p>From this point everything was downhill for Judah. None of the rest of the kings was devout, and political power and economic health rapidly declined. The people put one of Josiah’s sons, Jehoahaz, on the throne. He lasted three months. Pharaoh Neco replaced him with Jehoiakim (609–598 <span>BC<\/span>), another son of Josiah. In 605 Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon defeated Neco, invaded Judah, and took tribute and hostages from Jehoiakim, including Daniel and his friends (Dn 1:1). Jehoiakim revolted in 600 <span>BC<\/span>, but Nebuchadnezzar did not come to deal with him personally until 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He died before the Babylonians arrived, and his son Jehoiachin came to the throne in 598 <span>BC<\/span> to rule for only three months before the Babylonians carried him away into exile. Ezekiel was among the many captives taken on that occasion.<\/p>\n<p>The Babylonians then put Zedekiah, youngest son of Josiah, on the throne in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. When he rebelled, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusalem and took the city (587 <span>BC<\/span>), destroying it and the temple and carrying off large numbers of people. The judgment of God had finally fallen on the Jews for their idolatrous ways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRestoration\">The Restoration<\/p>\n<p>In judgment God remembered mercy. This is evident in individual lives, when faithful ones like Daniel, Esther, or Nehemiah rose to a position of importance in political life, or as numerous other persons became prosperous in the foreign environment. It is evident on the community level as God moved to protect Hebrew enclaves scattered abroad and to restore an organized society in Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Among the exiles, Judaism as a way of life separated from its own political system or cultic center and began to emerge. Jews finally turned their backs on idolatry. And without a temple, priesthood, king, or land, they turned to the divine Scriptures as their rallying point and the foundation of their community. During this period they developed the synagogue as a place for fellowship, prayer, and study.<\/p>\n<p>God’s restoration of an organized community to Palestine involved particularly the fortunes of his “anointed” Cyrus (Is 44:28; 45:1). Cyrus was a Persian prince who in 559 <span>BC<\/span> revolted against the dominant dynasty controlling the Median Empire. After consolidating his hold on the throne, he proceeded to conquer Asia Minor and the Chaldean or Neo-Babylonian Empire. As a humane man and a wise administrator, he permitted the captive peoples to return to their homes and rebuild their communities. Cyrus’s decree to the Jews appears in Ezra 1 and dates probably to 538 <span>BC<\/span>. A total of almost 50,000 went back to Judah as a result of this edict (Ezr 2:64-65).<\/p>\n<p>Under the stresses and strains of reestablishment, the people built their houses but got no further than laying the foundation of a new temple. Finally, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah stirred the people to build the house of God (Ezr 5:1). They began in the second year of Darius I, the Great (520 <span>BC<\/span>; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), and completed the work in his sixth year (515 <span>BC<\/span>; Ezr 6:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of Darius’s son Xerxes (486–465 <span>BC<\/span>), a plot was hatched to exterminate all the Jews in the Persian Empire, which at that time controlled the lands where Jews lived. Fortunately, Xerxes (Ahasuerus in the book of Esther), in his third year (483 <span>BC<\/span>; Est 1:3), went searching for a new queen and chose Esther, who managed to preserve her people.<\/p>\n<p>Xerxes’ son Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>) also figured significantly in Jewish history. In his seventh year (458 <span>BC<\/span>; Ezr 7:7), under the leadership of Ezra, a second contingent of Jews returned to Jerusalem. And in Artaxerxes’ 20th year (445 <span>BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1), Nehemiah went to Jerusalem to supervise the rebuilding of the walls of the city. Malachi probably wrote his prophecy to the Jews in Jerusalem during the latter part of Artaxerxes’ reign.<\/p>\n<p>After the fall of Samaria and the captivity of Judah, the Hebrews remaining in the land intermarried with various pagan groups in the area. Their offspring became the Samaritans, a religious and racial admixture. These people had moved into the vacuum left by the destruction of Judah, and naturally they looked with disfavor on an intrusion of Babylonian Jews into an area they had come to call their own. They did all they could to frustrate the efforts of Nehemiah to rebuild the walls. It took all the courage, tact, energy, and persuasiveness Ezra and Nehemiah could muster to prevent the returning Jews from intermarrying with racially mixed people of the land. Such intermarriage would have meant the ultimate absorption and destruction of the Jewish people.<\/p>\n<p>A Samaritan temple was later built on Mt Gerizim (probably during the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>), and it became the center of the Samaritan worship. The hostility between Samaritans and Jews continued on into the NT period (Jn 4) and exists to the present.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIntertestamentalPeriod\">The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n<p>Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire with lightning speed. When the people of Jerusalem threw open their gates in 332 <span>BC<\/span> and capitulated without a fight, Alexander treated them well. After his death in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, Palestine passed back and forth among his successors until Ptolemy I of Egypt managed to establish control in 301 <span>BC<\/span>. Thereafter the area remained in Egyptian hands until 198 <span>BC<\/span>. The Ptolemies were tolerant and granted the Jews considerable autonomy, allowing them to develop their unique culture undisturbed as long as they paid their taxes and remained submissive. Many Jews settled in Alexandria and gradually forgot their Hebrew in the Hellenistic environment. As a result, a translation of the OT into Greek (the Septuagint) was produced there. While the Ptolemies did not force Hellenism on the Jews of either Alexandria or Palestine, many were influenced by Hellenistic ideas.<\/p>\n<p>When Ptolemy V came to the throne as a minor in 203 <span>BC<\/span>, Antiochus III of Syria took advantage of the weakened Egypt and conquered Palestine (198 <span>BC<\/span>). Apparently the Jews hoped to gain something from the change and welcomed the Syrians. But their hope was ill-founded. Antiochus III suffered disastrous defeat at the hands of Rome at Magnesia in 190 <span>BC<\/span>. Syria not only lost much territory but also was forced to pay a huge indemnity. Thereafter, the Jews suffered under great financial burdens, along with other peoples of the empire. The next Syrian king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 <span>BC<\/span>), decided to launch an effort to achieve greater internal strength and unity within the empire by forcing, among other things, a greater acceptance of Greek culture and the cult of the divine ruler. Naturally this idolatrous requirement weighed heavily on the monotheistic Jews and incited revolution.<\/p>\n<p>But this does not completely explain the Maccabean revolt against Syria. In 168 <span>BC<\/span> armed conflict broke out between Jewish factions in Jerusalem. Antiochus IV chose to interpret this as open rebellion and sent an army against the city. His forces demolished part of the city wall and many houses. After this Antiochus decided to suppress Judaism completely, and he dedicated the temple to Zeus and sacrificed swine on the altar. Circumcision, Sabbath observance, and other religious festivals were no longer permitted, and public worship of heathen gods became compulsory.<\/p>\n<p>Some Jews capitulated to Antiochus’s orders or only resisted passively, but a few decided to resist openly. Chief among them were Mattathias and his five sons. After the early death of Mattathias, his son Judas Maccabeus led his forces to victory over the Syrians, regaining the right to restore Jewish worship. The rededication of the temple on December 25, 164 <span>BC<\/span>, inaugurated the Festival of Hanukkah (1 Macc 4:36-59). Subsequently, Jonathan and Simon (other sons of Mattathias) continued the struggle until independence was gained in 142 <span>BC<\/span>; this was possible in large part because they saw how to take advantage of the increasing weakness of Syrian rulers and the competition for the royal office.<\/p>\n<p>Simon ruled the Jewish state until his assassination in 134 <span>BC<\/span>, when his son John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>) took over. John Hyrcanus fought successfully in the east, north, and south, gaining land in Transjordan, capturing Shechem and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim, and subjugating the Idumeans in the south, forcing them to adopt Judaism. His son Aristobulus ruled for only about a year (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), but he added a portion of Galilee to the kingdom. When he died, his widow married his brother Alexander Janneus (103–76 <span>BC<\/span>). Janneus carried on almost incessant military action during his reign, and by the time of his death had almost recovered the kingdom of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>When Janneus died, Alexandra, widow of two kings, took the throne (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>) and her eldest son, Hyrcanus II, became high priest. Her reign was peaceful and prosperous, but when she died, her sons fell to squabbling. Their appeals to Pompey, who was campaigning in the eastern Mediterranean area, were responsible for Roman interference in the region and conquest of Palestine in 63 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRomanPeriod\">The Roman Period<\/p>\n<p>After the Romans took over Palestine, Hyrcanus II was confirmed as high priest and was also appointed as ethnarch or political ruler (63–40 <span>BC<\/span>). But Antipater, father of Herod the Great, was the real power behind the throne, and during many of those years Hyrcanus was virtually unable to function because of the confusion of the Roman civil wars. Antipater was loyal to Rome and saw that Roman policies were carried out; he won Julius Caesar’s favor toward Jews of both Palestine and in the Dispersion.<\/p>\n<p>With the support of Mark Antony, Herod managed to get himself appointed king of Judea by the Roman senate in 40 <span>BC<\/span>. But a Parthian invasion of Syria and Jewish hatred for the Romans made it possible for Antigonus II, last king of the Maccabean family, to rule for three years (40–37 <span>BC<\/span>). Finally, Herod ascended his throne in 37 and ruled until 4 <span>BC<\/span>. As an allied king, Herod proved to be an excellent ruler from the Roman point of view and earned the title of “Great.” He brought some order to regions east of the Jordan and made possible organization of the Roman province of Arabia. He also furthered the cultural plans of Augustus for development of a Greco-Roman civilization throughout the whole empire.<\/p>\n<p>Herod admired Greek culture and contributed to building projects in Rhodes, Antioch, Damascus, Athens, and elsewhere outside Palestine. Within Palestine he rebuilt Samaria and named it Sebaste in honor of Augustus (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Sebastos<\/span> is Greek for “Augustus”) and also constructed the great port of Caesarea. Probably about as large as Manhattan Island, it became the capital of Roman Palestine. Among his many other building projects, remodeling the temple in Jerusalem was the most famous. Begun in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, it was not completed until just a few years before its destruction in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The material splendor of Herod’s reign did not win the affection or support of the Jews, however. Nor did he achieve peace and harmony in his family, among whom there were periodic eruptions of treason, unfaithfulness, and murder. He worried about any threat to his rule and cracked down hard to destroy such threats, as is evident from his slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem after the birth of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, Herod controlled Idumea, Judea, Samaria, Galilee, Perea, and the area northeast of the Sea of Galilee. By his last will, his son Archelaus was to rule Idumea, Judea, and Samaria; Antipas, Galilee and Perea; and Philip, the region northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Archelaus was deposed in <span>AD<\/span> 6, and his territory became a Roman province (<span>AD<\/span> 6–41) to be ruled by direct appointees of Rome. The best-known of these was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36), who ordered the crucifixion of Jesus. Antipas was more successful and built a new capital at Tiberias, but he ran afoul of the emperor’s good pleasure in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and was deposed. Philip was the most effective of the three and ruled until his death in <span>AD<\/span> 34. Philip’s lands were later given to Herod Agrippa I in <span>AD<\/span> 37; the holdings of Antipas were then added in <span>AD<\/span> 39; and in 41 Agrippa also received Samaria, Judea, and Idumea.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44) was the heir of the Maccabees (through his grandmother Mariamne, first wife of Herod the Great), and for this reason had the support of patriotic Jews and of the Pharisees for his observance of divine ordinances. But when he built a new north wall for Jerusalem and dabbled in foreign affairs, he aroused the suspicions of the Romans; when he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44, they turned the kingdom into a Roman province.<\/p>\n<p>As is clear from the Gospels, several sects had arisen in Palestine by Roman times and were active during the first century. The Zealots opposed Roman rule and advocated armed rebellion. Herodians supported the Herodian family and Roman power. The Pharisees were fanatically devoted to the law and were supernaturalists in theological orientation. They were somewhat content to support Rome if given religious freedom, and they dominated the synagogues of the land. The Sadducees were antisupernaturalists, tended to collaborate with the ruling regime, and were dominant in the temple. Generally speaking, the literature of the intertestamental period and the popular mentality of the time tended to view the Messiah as a political deliverer who would free his people from foreign domination and set up a new independent kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Roman prefects ruled Palestine from <span>AD<\/span> 44–66. They had a knack for offending the religious scruples of the Jews and alienating them in other ways. With Felix (<span>AD<\/span> 52–60) there began a constant tension between Jews and Romans that led to the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70). While Paul was imprisoned in Caesarea (Acts 23:23–24:27) about <span>AD<\/span> 58–60, riots broke out there between Jews and Gentiles. Festus (<span>AD<\/span> 60–62; Acts 25) was an able administrator, but the situation was almost out of hand. After he died in office, there was virtual anarchy until his successor, Albinus, arrived (<span>AD<\/span> 62–64). Totally incompetent and dishonest, Albinus was recalled in 64 and replaced by Florus (<span>AD<\/span> 64–66). Florus was even worse, resorting to open robbery and bribery until there was no safety or justice in the land. Finally, the Jews could take no more.<\/p>\n<p>The spark that ignited the fires of rebellion was an anti-Semitic act by the Hellenistic population of Caesarea in <span>AD<\/span> 66. Soon riots spread to numerous cities, and Roman garrisons were massacred in several places. But the Jews were not united, and in Jerusalem armed bands of Jews fought with each other for mastery. Vespasian was chosen to command the Roman army of some 60,000 to deal with the insurrection. He had subjugated most of Palestine by the time he was elevated to the imperial chair in <span>AD<\/span> 69 (after the death of Nero), and he left his son Titus in charge of completing the operations. In August of <span>AD<\/span> 70 the walls of Jerusalem were breached, many of the people butchered, and the city and the temple leveled. Masada held out until <span>AD<\/span> 73. Palestine had been flattened by Roman might. Loss of life and property had been incalculable and indescribable.<\/p>\n<p>On two more occasions the Jews were destined to fight disastrously against the Romans. Under Trajan’s rule a rebellion of Jews broke out in Cyrenaica in <span>AD<\/span> 115 and spread rapidly to Cyprus, Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. In the beginning it was an outgrowth of agitation between the Jews and their Hellenistic neighbors, but it developed into a challenge to Roman authority. This was particularly true after the successes of Parthia on Rome’s eastern frontier when there seemed to be some hope of success in throwing off the Roman yoke. Wherever Jews got the upper hand, they perpetrated massacres, and the non-Semitic population retaliated in kind. Trajan ruthlessly suppressed the rebels and restored order everywhere except Egypt; his successor, Hadrian, was left to accomplish that.<\/p>\n<p>But Hadrian faced a new rebellion of his own, brought on by his law forbidding circumcision (which he considered to be inhumane) and his decision in <span>AD<\/span> 130 to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina and erect a temple to Jupiter on the site of the temple of Yahweh. The latter would not only profane the temple site but also would preclude any rebuilding of the Jewish temple.<\/p>\n<p>Leader of this second Jewish revolt was Simeon, prince of Israel, called Bar-Kochba (“Son of the Star”). Both sides fought with such great ferocity for over three years (<span>AD<\/span> 132–135) that the population of Judea was almost exterminated. Jerusalem was rebuilt as a Roman colony, and Jews were forbidden to enter on pain of death. Even as late as the fourth century they were permitted to enter only once a year, on the anniversary of the destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. After the Bar-Kochba revolt, Judaism retreated increasingly within the citadel of the written and oral law, thus separating itself from the Gentiles.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Conquest and Allotment of the Land; David; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; First Jewish Revolt; Jew; Judaism; Moses; Patriarchs, Period of the; Saul #2; Solomon; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ISRAEL, History of<\/h3>\n<p>An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n<p>• Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Exodus<\/p>\n<p>• Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n<p>• The Conquest<\/p>\n<p>• The Judges<\/p>\n<p>• The United Monarchy<\/p>\n<p>• The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Restoration<\/p>\n<p>• The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n<p>• The Roman Period<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PatriarchalAge\">Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n<p>The story of Israel begins with Abraham, whom God called first at Ur, and perhaps later at Haran (Acts 7:2-4), to leave Mesopotamia and go into a land to which God would direct the way. In calling Abraham, God made with him a covenant (Gn 12:1-3) that promised him a land, special divine favor (“I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse,” <span>nasb<\/span>), and the privilege of being a channel of blessing to the entire world (“In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed,” <span>nasb<\/span>). In Genesis 12:4-8 God confirmed this unconditional covenant, promising Abraham this new land forever, along with innumerable descendants. Subsequently, in Genesis 15:1-21, God again confirmed the covenant but added the significant prediction that the guarantee of holding Canaan in perpetuity did not mean occupation of the land in every generation. God also spelled out the limits of the Promised Land (from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates, some 500 to 600 miles or 804 to 965 kilometers in extent). A final confirmation of the covenant to Abraham appears in Genesis 17:6-8. It guaranteed the land of Canaan to Abraham’s posterity and added that kings (an anticipation of the Davidic dynasty) would arise in his line. The covenant was confirmed to Abraham’s son Isaac (Gn 26:3-5) and his grandson Jacob (ch 28).<\/p>\n<p>This period is known as the patriarchal age in Hebrew history. The patriarchs were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were called patriarchs because they were fathers, not only to their immediate families, but also to the extended family of Hebrews, over which they exercised a fatherly control. They served as political, legal, and spiritual heads of their migratory community, looking after their interests and leading them in worship. Periodically they built altars on which they offered sacrifices. That the patriarchal community was very large can be seen from Genesis 14:14, which says that Abraham had 318 armed men in his camp. If one assumes that most of the men were married and had one or more children each, the total extended family may have numbered in excess of 1,000.<\/p>\n<p>Additional developments in the life of Abraham and Jacob were particularly important for world history. Abraham, frustrated at not having an heir, accepted Sarah’s suggestion to obtain an heir by the slave girl Hagar. (This was also the custom of the land.) The son born was named Ishmael, progenitor of the Arabs. Thus Abraham is revered by Arabs and Muslims as well as by Jews and Christians. He is the father of the Jews through his son Isaac, child of promise. He holds a special place in Christianity as an example of Christ, through whom all Christians obtain their salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Jacob, a scheming scoundrel in his earlier years, wound up in exile in northern Mesopotamia for 20 years in the home of his uncle Laban. There he married Leah and Rachel and fathered the sons who became the progenitors of the 12 tribes of Israel. On his return to Palestine he met God along the banks of the Jabbok River (Gn 32), and God changed his name to Israel (“a prince of God,” <span>kjv<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>The patriarchal period in Canaan lasted for 215 years. One estimate places Abraham’s entry into Canaan at about 2085 <span>BC<\/span>, when he was 75 years of age. Jacob and his sons migrated to Egypt to escape a severe famine in Canaan in about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>. During much of the patriarchal period, Palestine experienced a decline in population and was occupied largely by nomadic or seminomadic tribes. It was relatively easy for the Hebrews to enter such a situation. After 1900 Palestine began to enjoy more settled conditions. Shortly thereafter, the Hebrews made the trek into Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SojourninEgypt\">Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n<p>If Jacob and his sons entered Egypt about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, it was the period of the Middle Kingdom. And by that time other migrants from Asia were coming in increasing numbers. The Hebrews settled in Goshen, in the eastern delta region, under the protecting care of Joseph, who held a position at the Egyptian court roughly equivalent to that of prime minister. As more and more Asiatic Hyksos came into Egypt, they began to take over the country—northern Egypt at least. During this same time the Hebrews became increasingly numerous. Some who hold to a different chronology believe the Hebrews were welcomed into Egypt during the days of Hyksos domination (after 1750 <span>BC<\/span>). At any rate, by about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> native Egyptian princes regained control of the country and expelled many of the Asiatics.<\/p>\n<p>In process of time there arose a king over Egypt who “knew not Joseph” (Ex 1:8, <span>kjv<\/span>). Very possibly this meant that a native Egyptian dynasty had arisen in Egypt and they were apprehensive over the fact that the growing numbers and wealth of the Hebrews might jeopardize their own supremacy. But Egyptian measures to subjugate the Hebrews and reduce their birthrate had a reverse effect (Ex 1:12). Finally, the Egyptians ordered the killing of all male Hebrew infants at birth. Among those who disobeyed were the parents of Moses, who set him afloat in a waterproof basket made of reeds. Found by a daughter of Pharaoh, he was brought up in the Egyptian court, was given a first-class education, and became a high official of the realm.<\/p>\n<p>At the age of 40, Moses identified himself with his own people. He killed an Egyptian in defense of a fellow Hebrew, and immediately fled to the land of Midian in the northeastern part of the Sinai Peninsula. He married and lived there for 40 years, becoming thoroughly familiar with the geography and the ways of the wilderness through which he would later lead the Hebrews. The Egyptians continued to oppress the Hebrew people severely until they cried urgently to God for deliverance. In response, God confronted Moses in the famous burning bush experience and called on him to return to Egypt and lead the people back into the land of Canaan (Ex 3–4). He was to have the help of his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheExodus\">The Exodus<\/p>\n<p>Understandably the pharaoh of Egypt was reluctant to permit the Hebrews to leave permanently. The value of this great labor force was incalculable. But finally, after suffering a series of ten plagues, lasting perhaps a year, the Egyptians were persuaded to let the Hebrews go (Ex 7–12).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues had a theological as well as a practical purpose. They discredited the gods of Egypt and exalted the most high God of heaven (Ex 12:12). The plagues clearly discredited specific gods of Egypt (e.g., the Nile was worshiped as Hapi, plague one; the frog, worshiped as Heqt, plague two; the bull, worshiped as Ptah, plague five; the sun, worshiped as Amon-Re\/Aton, plague nine). Taken together, they struck a direct blow at the Egyptian pantheon.<\/p>\n<p>Just before the last plague, which was the night in which the death angel invaded the homes of the Egyptians, the Israelites made the Passover sacrifice according to divine instructions. This involved killing a lamb for each household (unless the household was too small; in that event, households could combine). Anyone who was careless about applying the blood to the doorpost or who rejected this divine provision came under the judgment of God. After the death of the firstborn throughout the land, the Egyptians begged the Hebrews to leave. Their company numbered 600,000 men over 20 years of age, plus women and children, for a total of over 2,500,000. In addition they took their flocks and herds and personal belongings.<\/p>\n<p>The date they left Egypt is a matter of continuing debate. Traditionally a date of about 1446 <span>BC<\/span> is given for the exodus (cf. 1 Kgs 6:1, which places the exodus 480 years before construction of the temple started in 966 <span>BC<\/span>) and 1406 <span>BC<\/span> for the Conquest under Joshua, and there do not seem to be any compelling arguments for rejecting that position. But a great many scholars prefer 1275 <span>BC<\/span> for a variety of reasons.<\/p>\n<p>The early date of the exodus would place the later years of the wilderness wanderings and the subsequent conquest of Palestine during the reigns of Amenhotep III and IV (1412–1366), a time when the pharaohs allowed Egyptian control of Palestine to disintegrate. When the Egyptians did reassert their power, about 1300, they restricted their movements largely to the coastal area, and thus did not come in contact with the Hebrews who were living in the hill country of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WildernessWanderings\">Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness wanderings were an important interlude in the history of Israel. During those years, significant and basic institutions came into existence at God’s command. At Sinai, Moses delivered to Israel the law, the pattern of the tabernacle (which later became the model for the temple) and orders for its operation, as well as detailed instructions for the priesthood and sacrificial system of worship.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the wanderings was truly a remarkable time. The presence of God was evidenced by a pillar of cloud that hovered over the people by day and a pillar of fire by night. God provided food in the form of manna, periodically provided water by miraculous means, and made sure that clothes did not wear out. In spite of all that, the people murmured and complained continually.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God gave the law (Ex 19:2–24:18), and the people promptly made a commitment to keep it (24:3). Then God gave the pattern for the tabernacle and its furniture (chs 25–27, 30–31, 35–40) and established the priesthood (chs 28–29). While Moses was on the mountain receiving God’s revelation, the people grew restless and clamored for gods they could see. Even Aaron was carried away with the idolatrous wave and supervised the casting of a golden calf and building of an altar before it. The fact that they turned to Egyptian cattle worship so readily indicates that paganism must have made deep inroads among them while in captivity (chs 32–34). Moses’ intercessory response to God’s announcement that he would destroy Israel because of her idolatry led to a divine determination to execute judgment on only the worst offenders (32:9-14).<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently, God revealed the legal and priestly order (Lv 1:1–27:34). Among the divinely appointed institutions described or alluded to in Leviticus are several special days or feasts, including the Sabbath, Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, Firstfruits, Pentecost or Feast of Weeks, Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles, the Year of Sabbath, and the Year of Jubilee.<\/p>\n<p>After camping at Sinai for about a year, the Israelites got their orders to go forward (Nm 10:11-12). Miriam (Moses’ sister) and Aaron criticized Moses’ leadership and suffered divine punishment as a consequence (ch 12). When the people arrived at Kadesh-barnea, the gate to southern Palestine, they were frightened by the report of most of the spies who had been reconnoitering in Canaan and decided that they should not advance into Canaan. They called for a new leader to bring them back to Egypt. God declared that the entire generation would wander in the wilderness until the adults had died. Only Joshua and Caleb (the two spies in favor of invading immediately) would enter the Promised Land (14:26-30). Near the end of the period of wandering, Moses also lost the privilege of entering the land by an act of disobedience.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheConquest\">The Conquest<\/p>\n<p>The latter part of the book of Numbers describes how Moses led the Israelites to victory over the peoples living east of the Jordan River. Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh requested permission to settle there and reluctantly were allowed to do so on the condition that they would join the rest of the Israelites in conquering Canaan before settling down. Prior to victories in Transjordan, a new census of adult males was taken in order to determine the military capabilities of Israel and to provide a basis for equitable division of the land they were about to enter. The number of males above 20 years of age was 601,730 (Nm 26:51). The book of Deuteronomy consists primarily of a series of speeches delivered by Moses in a covenant renewal ceremony on the plains of Moab just before his death and the appointment of Joshua as leader.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua lost no time in moving forward. Spies sent across the Jordan to Jericho to reconnoiter reported a situation quite different from what the Hebrews had experienced at Kadesh-barnea a generation earlier. Now the people of Canaan were terrified because they had heard of the numerical strength and victories of the Hebrews. Apparently the day after the spies returned, Joshua moved the people to the edge of the Jordan and prepared to cross over. The waters parted for them here as the Red Sea had parted earlier.<\/p>\n<p>The narrative of conquest that appears in the book of Joshua is not a detailed battle account. It describes a thrust into the middle of Palestine around Jericho and Ai, a southerly drive to defeat the Amorite league, and a northern campaign against Hazor and other towns. The history of Joshua is extremely telescoped, for Joshua’s major military action must have required about six years. Joshua’s friend Caleb was 79 when the Conquest began and 85 after the last great battle with Jabin, king of Hazor (Jos 14:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>When the war was over, major strongholds (e.g., Jerusalem) still remained in enemy hands, but the land west of the Jordan was allocated to the nine and a half Hebrew tribes. The task of reducing enemy towns was left to the individual tribes in whose land they were located. The Joshua account was not so much a narrative of Israelite battle prowess as of God’s faithfulness and intervention on behalf of his people. For example, at Jericho they did not attack but merely followed divine orders and watched the defenses collapse; at Gibeon hailstones killed more Amorites than Israelite soldiers did (Jos 10:7-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheJudges\">The Judges<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died some 30 years after he had led the Hebrews into Canaan, and he was followed by a series of divinely appointed leaders who ruled sometimes over the whole of Israel as a loose confederacy and sometimes over one or more tribes. They were judges, civil functionaries, and military leaders all at the same time.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Judges pictures a series of recurring cycles: apostasy from God, punishment in the form of oppression by neighboring tribes, cries to God for relief, release from bondage under the leadership of a judge, and a period of rest from oppression.<\/p>\n<p>Establishment of the chronology of the judges is one of the thorniest problems of Scripture. Adding up all years of oppression and rest mentioned in the book gives a total of 410. The book of Acts gives a total of 450 years from the days of Joshua to Samuel (Acts 13:19). The difference in Acts may be accounted for by the addition of 40 years of Eli’s ministry (1 Sm 4:18). Allowing 410 years for the period of the judges, about 30 for the Conquest to the judges, and 40 for the wilderness wanderings, means 480 years from 1050 <span>BC<\/span>, the date for Saul’s kingship, and would give a date of about 1530 for the exodus. This is about 100 years more than even the early date for the exodus. The most probable explanation is that there is some overlap in oppressions and judgeships. For instance, the activities of Jephthah were centered on the eastern frontier, those of Samson in the Philistine plain to the southwest, and those of Deborah and Barak in the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnitedMonarchy\">The United Monarchy<\/p>\n<p>Because of the weakness of Israel resulting from political disunity and the ineptness and corruption of both Eli’s and Samuel’s sons, the people of Israel called for a king to rule over them. This demand was in reality a rejection of the divine plan of theocracy—the rule of God. God granted the Hebrews’ wish but warned them of the disadvantages of monarchy (1 Sm 8:9-21). The concept of kingship was not new to Israel. It had been hinted at in Genesis 49:10 and Numbers 24:17, and Moses had made some very clear statements about it in Deuteronomy 17:14-20.<\/p>\n<p>The first stage of Hebrew monarchy is commonly called the united monarchy because all Israel was ruled by a single king. This period lasted for 120 years—encompassing the 40-year reigns of Saul (Acts 13:21), David (2 Sm 5:5), and Solomon (1 Kgs 11:42).<\/p>\n<p>The people asked for a king, and God granted them one, but not one like those of the surrounding nations. The Hebrew king was to be a man who followed God’s dictates in his public and private life, who did not intrude into the affairs of the priesthood, and who did not fall into idolatry, but exerted all his influence to keep the people faithful to God. If he failed in any of these respects, he ran the risk of being deposed by God, of having his line brought to an end, or even of having the people fall into captivity to a foreign power. All this must be kept in mind when evaluating the reigns of Saul, David, Solomon, and the kings of the divided monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>Saul began well. He won a great victory over the Ammonites at Jabesh-gilead and showed considerable wisdom in administrative matters. But after about two years he intruded into the priest’s office to offer sacrifice, bringing the divine prediction that his kingdom would be taken from him (1 Sm 13:8-14). He would go on to enjoy great military victory and ability as a ruler until about the middle of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>After Saul’s disobedience to God’s command to totally destroy the Amalekites, the Lord repudiated Saul and instructed Samuel to anoint David privately as future king of Israel. David’s rise to prominence was spurred by his victory over Goliath and the accompanying defeat of the Philistines. Saul later made David commander of the army, and the young man soon earned a reputation greater than that of the king himself. Saul, who had become increasingly mentally disturbed after his relationship with God was broken, began to make attempts on David’s life, and for the last years of Saul’s reign David lived as a fugitive. Meanwhile, the Philistines got completely out of control and finally killed Saul and most of his sons in the great battle of Mt Gilboa, which gave the Philistines control over much of Palestine west of the Jordan (1 Sm 31:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Soon David became king in Judah with his capital in Hebron. A son of Saul, Ishbosheth, established himself at Mahanaim, east of the Jordan. For seven years the two tiny kingdoms existed side by side (2 Sm 2:2-11). But after the Israelite king and his army commander were assassinated, David became ruler of a united Hebrew kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the beginning of his reign (1010–970 <span>BC<\/span>) David completely defeated and subjugated the Philistines. Soon thereafter he captured Jerusalem, making it the capital of the united kingdom. During succeeding years, David built up an empire (2 Sm 8:10; 1 Chr 18–19), conquering Moab, Edom, Damascus, Zobah, and Ammon, so he controlled territory from the Gulf of Aqaba (a branch of the Red Sea) and the Sinai in the south almost to the Euphrates in the north. Moreover, he established good relations, if not an alliance, with Tyre. The establishment of David’s empire was possible because of a power vacuum in the Middle East. The Egyptians, Mycenaeans, Hittites, and Assyrians were either decadent or removed from the stage of history. The Phoenicians, a peaceful commercial people, were also free to expand their trade, and they were happy to sell cedar to David for his palace and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>Without doubt, David was Israel’s greatest king. Jerusalem came to be known as the city of David. When the king wanted to build the temple as God’s house, God replied that his son should do it instead. But God would in a very real sense build David’s house; he made a covenant with David, promising him that his house (dynasty, kingdom, throne) would be established forever (2 Sm 7). Christ, the infinite One who came from the line of David, alone was capable of fulfilling this divine promise (see Lk 1:31-33; Acts 2:29-36; 13:32-39; 15:14-17).<\/p>\n<p>Like other Oriental monarchs, David fell into the practice of keeping a harem. Scripture names 8 wives and 21 children and refers to other wives and concubines. Such a situation opened the door to family rivalries and questions about succession to the throne. Two sons, Absalom and Adonijah, made a try for the throne, but both efforts were squelched. Solomon, son of David’s favorite wife, Bathsheba, became the next king.<\/p>\n<p>Solomon (970–930 <span>BC<\/span>) was a man of peace and a builder of palaces, cities, fortifications, and the temple. He fortified cities all over his realm and outfitted cities for his chariot corps and cavalry units. With the help of the Phoenicians, he built a seaport and kept a fleet at Ezion-geber, near modern Eilat on the Gulf of Aqaba. He greatly enlarged Jerusalem by enclosing the temple area to the north of David’s city and the southwestern hill now known as Zion. His best-known project was the temple, which took seven years to build. Twice the size of the tabernacle, it was built on the same basic plan; it measured 90 feet (27.4 meters) long and 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide and had magnificent appointments. But he also constructed a palace complex that took 13 years to complete. This included an armory, a throne room, the king’s private residence, and a house for the daughter of pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Apparently much influenced by the spiritual testimony of David and desiring God’s blessing on his rule, Solomon made a great sacrifice to God at Gibeon near the beginning of his reign. God met him there and offered to grant whatever he might request. Solomon asked for understanding and wisdom to govern God’s people (1 Kgs 3:9). His God-given wisdom is apparent in many administrative decisions and official policies and building plans.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, Solomon did not show such wisdom in maintaining a harem of 700 wives and 300 concubines or in excessive expenditures that left the state in serious financial straits. He even erected places of worship for his foreign wives, thus subsidizing their idolatries and incurring the wrath of God. In fact, foreign wives and their idolatry proved to be his downfall; before Solomon died, God informed him that for this reason he would divide the kingdom at his death and give most of it to someone other than Solomon’s son. But for David’s sake, God would keep Judah and Jerusalem in the hands of the Davidic line (1 Kgs 11:9-13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDividedKingdom\">The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n<p>After the death of Solomon, the Near East was destined to become a very different place. Israel was no longer in a power vacuum. The Assyrian Empire rose in Mesopotamia, to be followed by the Neo-Babylonian and the Medo-Persian Empires in turn. Egypt was temporarily powerful in the south, but it would later come under control of Assyria and Medo-Persia. These empires exerted great pressure on Israel and dominated one or both of the two Hebrew kingdoms.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Solomon died, his son Rehoboam took the throne and was forced to deal with a rising tide of resentment over the high taxes and economic stagnation of Solomon’s last years. When Rehoboam refused to give relief, all the northern tribes broke away and formed the northern kingdom, Israel, under the leadership of Jeroboam. The southern kingdom, Judah, was left with only the territory of Judah and Benjamin. A total of 20 kings ruled in each of the separate kingdoms. While the north had several dynasties and the reigns of kings were generally short, in the south the dynasty of David continued to rule and the reigns were longer.<\/p>\n<h5>The Northern Kingdom<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom lasted from the division in 930 <span>BC<\/span> until its conquest by Assyria in 722. Jeroboam, fearing that he would lose the loyalty of the people if they continued to go to Jerusalem to worship, set up a new religion of his own. Instituting calf worship, he built shrines at Dan in the north and Bethel in the south. This idolatry drew the condemnation of God and fulfilled the prediction that Jeroboam’s line would be wiped out. All his successors are said to have followed in his idolatrous steps. Israel found itself at war during much of its history—with Judah, Syria, or Assyria. Jeroboam established his capital first at Shechem and later at Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>Four other kings of the north require special comment: Omri, Ahab, Jehu, and Jeroboam II. Omri (885–874 <span>BC<\/span>) must have been an impressive ruler. Generations later, Assyrians still spoke of Israel as the land of Omri. After he had established himself on the throne, he located the permanent capital of the kingdom at Samaria and began the palace complex there. Early in his reign he was successful in conquering Moab, and later he reestablished the good relations with Tyre that existed in the days of David and Solomon. Apparently he established a full alliance and cemented it with the marriage of his son Ahab to Jezebel, a princess of Tyre.<\/p>\n<p>Ahab (874–853 <span>BC<\/span>) was one of the most significant of Israel’s kings. He and his wife, Jezebel, promoted the vile idolatry of Baal worship with its religious prostitution, arousing the powerful opposition of the prophet Elijah. Ahab was a formidable military man, defeating the Syrians in major campaigns and participating in a coalition that fought the Assyrians to a virtual standstill. He also built extensively at Samaria, Hazor, Megiddo, and other towns, as excavations show.<\/p>\n<p>Jehu (841–814 <span>BC<\/span>) was God’s agent for punishing the house of Omri and destroying Baal worship in Israel. He did eradicate Baal worship and liquidated literally scores of relatives and court officials of Ahab. But he was so ruthless that he killed off the people who knew how to run the government; subsequently, it did not work well. Jehu also was forced to become a vassal to Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>Jeroboam II ruled during most of the first half of the eighth century (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) and brought the kingdom to its greatest extent and prosperity. He, with his contemporary Uzziah in the south, ruled most of the land David had once controlled. This was possible because the Assyrians were in a period of decline during most of the first half of the century.<\/p>\n<p>Prophets who were active during the history of the northern kingdom include the nonwriting prophets Elijah and Elisha and the writing prophets Jonah, Amos, and Hosea.<\/p>\n<h5>The Southern Kingdom<\/h5>\n<p>The history of the southern kingdom of Judah was quite different from that of the northern kingdom. The temple was there and so were large numbers of Levites, many of whom came south after the division of the kingdom to protest the idolatry of the north. In addition to this spiritual strength, there was greater political stability and unity, promoted by the fact that only two tribes—Judah and Benjamin—shared power, and all the kings were of the Davidic dynasty. Moreover, eight of the kings were good monarchs. There were also periodic religious revivals. God granted the southern kingdom about 100 more years of existence than the north. But Judah, too, fell into idolatry and went into captivity for her sins.<\/p>\n<p>Rehoboam, the first king in the south, is especially remembered because he refused to listen to wise counsel about fiscal matters and perpetrated the division of the kingdom. He is also remembered for his religious policies. After a good beginning, he allowed apostasy to get out of control and brought the judgment of God in the form of an invasion in his fifth year (926 <span>BC<\/span>) by Shishak I of Egypt, resulting in extensive plunder and payment of tribute. Thereafter, he launched an extensive program to fortify the realm. Shishak’s invasion did have the effect of producing a partial and temporary spiritual reform, but the general trend of Rehoboam’s reign was downward.<\/p>\n<p>Conditions during the reign of his son, Abijam, were worse, but Asa (910–869 <span>BC<\/span>) initiated a religious reform that was effective for most of his reign. When threatened by the northern kingdom during his latter years, however, Asa turned to Syria for help instead of to God, and he seems to have defied the prophets of God to his dying day.<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s son Jehoshaphat (872–848 <span>BC<\/span>) was apparently influenced by his father’s early religious devotion, and his reign was characterized by faithfulness, winning the favor of God. However, he seems to have made a full alliance with Ahab of Israel, which resulted in the marriage of his son Jehoram to Ahab’s daughter Athaliah. This alliance involved Jehoshaphat in almost ruinous joint ventures with Ahab, and later with two of his sons when they became kings of Israel. It also opened the door for the introduction of Baal worship into Judah when Jehoram came to the throne in the southern kingdom. For his sin Jehoram (853–841 <span>BC<\/span>) suffered internal revolt, invasion, and death from a horrible disease.<\/p>\n<p>After his death, his last remaining son, Ahaziah, ruled less than a year, following the wicked ways of his father. When Ahaziah died in battle, the queen mother, Athaliah, decided to seize the throne for herself and to secure her power by killing off all those in line to the throne. But she missed Ahaziah’s infant son Joash, who was kept hidden in the temple for six years.<\/p>\n<p>When Joash was seven, Jehoiada the high priest arranged his coronation and also the execution of the murderous and idolatrous Athaliah. During his early years when Joash was influenced by good counsel, he did well. But after the middle of his reign (835–796 <span>BC<\/span>), he began to listen to the princes who wanted to restore idolatry, and conditions deteriorated. Military reversals brought on economic decline and ultimately the king’s assassination.<\/p>\n<p>His son Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>) started well with victory over Edom and faithfulness to God. But he, too, fell into idolatry and was totally defeated by the northern kingdom, being held prisoner there. At that point his son Uzziah took over (c. 792 <span>BC<\/span>) and began a long and generally successful reign. During the several decades that followed, Assyria was in decline, and Uzziah and his contemporary in the north, Jeroboam II, were able to expand Hebrew holdings so that between them they controlled most of the territory Solomon had ruled.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah (792–740 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to restore the power of Judah rather quickly after his father’s defeat by Israel. Then he subjugated the Philistines in the southwest and the Ammonites across the Jordan; he strengthened his hold on the Edomites. All during his reign economic conditions improved. But at the height of his power Uzziah foolishly violated the high priest’s prerogatives and offered sacrifice in the temple. For this he was smitten with leprosy; his son Jotham was co-regent during the years 750–740 <span>BC<\/span>, going on to rule alone for about five more years. Meanwhile, Assyrian power became resurgent.<\/p>\n<p>By and large, Jotham merely carried on the policies of Uzziah. But the administration of his son Ahaz (735–715 <span>BC<\/span>) was very much affected by the Assyrian threat. Israel and Syria wanted him to join in war against Assyria, but he refused, being pro-Assyrian in sympathy. When Israel and Syria invaded Judah, King Ahaz sent tribute to Assyria and became her vassal in return for protection. This rash course of action was vainly opposed by Isaiah, who was prophet at court (c. 740–700 <span>BC<\/span>). Contemporaneously, the prophet Micah ministered to the common people of Judah. The pro-Assyrian policy of Ahaz was accompanied by a renewed sympathy for idolatry, and this brought the judgment of God in the form of invasion by Edomites and Philistines and trouble with Assyria. In fact, during this period, Assyria had annexed the northern kingdom (722 <span>BC<\/span>) and removed many of her people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>The next king of Judah, Hezekiah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>), was greatly sobered by the fall of Israel because of her sins, and he determined to launch a reform in his realm. He was anti-Assyrian too, but he did not dare to discontinue tribute payments and strike for independence until after Sennacherib came to the throne in Nineveh in 705 <span>BC<\/span>. At first Sennacherib was too preoccupied to attend to Judah, but finally in 701 he invaded. Despite tremendous initial success, he was stopped by a divinely sent plague (Is 36–39). Isaiah stood by the king to reassure and sustain him during this emergency.<\/p>\n<p>Hezekiah’s son Manasseh (697–642 <span>BC<\/span>) ruled longer than any other king of Israel or Judah. Unfortunately, he turned his back on his father’s example and caused the people to fall into gross idolatry (2 Kgs 21:9). Carried away captive by the Assyrians late in his reign, he repented of his evil and God restored him to his throne; thereafter, he led some reforms. But the land was too steeped in iniquity to be rescued. His son Amon (642–640 <span>BC<\/span>) reverted to the idolatry he knew in his youth.<\/p>\n<p>The situation was different with Josiah (640–609 <span>BC<\/span>), however. Throughout his reign he dedicated himself to reform. He sought to root out idolatry and to restore the temple and its worship. In 622 <span>BC<\/span> the Book of the Law was found during repair of the temple, and its demands—which had been forgotten—made a great impression on king and people alike. It is certain that Jeremiah and Zephaniah ministered during Josiah’s reign, as did Nahum and Habakkuk (in all probability).<\/p>\n<p>International conditions were now changing rapidly. Assyria was declining, and Nineveh fell to Babylon and the Medes in 612 <span>BC<\/span>. Three years later Pharaoh Neco of Egypt marched north to aid his Assyrian ally. When Josiah tried to stop him, he was killed in battle.<\/p>\n<p>From this point everything was downhill for Judah. None of the rest of the kings was devout, and political power and economic health rapidly declined. The people put one of Josiah’s sons, Jehoahaz, on the throne. He lasted three months. Pharaoh Neco replaced him with Jehoiakim (609–598 <span>BC<\/span>), another son of Josiah. In 605 Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon defeated Neco, invaded Judah, and took tribute and hostages from Jehoiakim, including Daniel and his friends (Dn 1:1). Jehoiakim revolted in 600 <span>BC<\/span>, but Nebuchadnezzar did not come to deal with him personally until 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He died before the Babylonians arrived, and his son Jehoiachin came to the throne in 598 <span>BC<\/span> to rule for only three months before the Babylonians carried him away into exile. Ezekiel was among the many captives taken on that occasion.<\/p>\n<p>The Babylonians then put Zedekiah, youngest son of Josiah, on the throne in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. When he rebelled, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusalem and took the city (587 <span>BC<\/span>), destroying it and the temple and carrying off large numbers of people. The judgment of God had finally fallen on the Jews for their idolatrous ways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRestoration\">The Restoration<\/p>\n<p>In judgment God remembered mercy. This is evident in individual lives, when faithful ones like Daniel, Esther, or Nehemiah rose to a position of importance in political life, or as numerous other persons became prosperous in the foreign environment. It is evident on the community level as God moved to protect Hebrew enclaves scattered abroad and to restore an organized society in Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Among the exiles, Judaism as a way of life separated from its own political system or cultic center and began to emerge. Jews finally turned their backs on idolatry. And without a temple, priesthood, king, or land, they turned to the divine Scriptures as their rallying point and the foundation of their community. During this period they developed the synagogue as a place for fellowship, prayer, and study.<\/p>\n<p>God’s restoration of an organized community to Palestine involved particularly the fortunes of his “anointed” Cyrus (Is 44:28; 45:1). Cyrus was a Persian prince who in 559 <span>BC<\/span> revolted against the dominant dynasty controlling the Median Empire. After consolidating his hold on the throne, he proceeded to conquer Asia Minor and the Chaldean or Neo-Babylonian Empire. As a humane man and a wise administrator, he permitted the captive peoples to return to their homes and rebuild their communities. Cyrus’s decree to the Jews appears in Ezra 1 and dates probably to 538 <span>BC<\/span>. A total of almost 50,000 went back to Judah as a result of this edict (Ezr 2:64-65).<\/p>\n<p>Under the stresses and strains of reestablishment, the people built their houses but got no further than laying the foundation of a new temple. Finally, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah stirred the people to build the house of God (Ezr 5:1). They began in the second year of Darius I, the Great (520 <span>BC<\/span>; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), and completed the work in his sixth year (515 <span>BC<\/span>; Ezr 6:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of Darius’s son Xerxes (486–465 <span>BC<\/span>), a plot was hatched to exterminate all the Jews in the Persian Empire, which at that time controlled the lands where Jews lived. Fortunately, Xerxes (Ahasuerus in the book of Esther), in his third year (483 <span>BC<\/span>; Est 1:3), went searching for a new queen and chose Esther, who managed to preserve her people.<\/p>\n<p>Xerxes’ son Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>) also figured significantly in Jewish history. In his seventh year (458 <span>BC<\/span>; Ezr 7:7), under the leadership of Ezra, a second contingent of Jews returned to Jerusalem. And in Artaxerxes’ 20th year (445 <span>BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1), Nehemiah went to Jerusalem to supervise the rebuilding of the walls of the city. Malachi probably wrote his prophecy to the Jews in Jerusalem during the latter part of Artaxerxes’ reign.<\/p>\n<p>After the fall of Samaria and the captivity of Judah, the Hebrews remaining in the land intermarried with various pagan groups in the area. Their offspring became the Samaritans, a religious and racial admixture. These people had moved into the vacuum left by the destruction of Judah, and naturally they looked with disfavor on an intrusion of Babylonian Jews into an area they had come to call their own. They did all they could to frustrate the efforts of Nehemiah to rebuild the walls. It took all the courage, tact, energy, and persuasiveness Ezra and Nehemiah could muster to prevent the returning Jews from intermarrying with racially mixed people of the land. Such intermarriage would have meant the ultimate absorption and destruction of the Jewish people.<\/p>\n<p>A Samaritan temple was later built on Mt Gerizim (probably during the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>), and it became the center of the Samaritan worship. The hostility between Samaritans and Jews continued on into the NT period (Jn 4) and exists to the present.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIntertestamentalPeriod\">The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n<p>Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire with lightning speed. When the people of Jerusalem threw open their gates in 332 <span>BC<\/span> and capitulated without a fight, Alexander treated them well. After his death in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, Palestine passed back and forth among his successors until Ptolemy I of Egypt managed to establish control in 301 <span>BC<\/span>. Thereafter the area remained in Egyptian hands until 198 <span>BC<\/span>. The Ptolemies were tolerant and granted the Jews considerable autonomy, allowing them to develop their unique culture undisturbed as long as they paid their taxes and remained submissive. Many Jews settled in Alexandria and gradually forgot their Hebrew in the Hellenistic environment. As a result, a translation of the OT into Greek (the Septuagint) was produced there. While the Ptolemies did not force Hellenism on the Jews of either Alexandria or Palestine, many were influenced by Hellenistic ideas.<\/p>\n<p>When Ptolemy V came to the throne as a minor in 203 <span>BC<\/span>, Antiochus III of Syria took advantage of the weakened Egypt and conquered Palestine (198 <span>BC<\/span>). Apparently the Jews hoped to gain something from the change and welcomed the Syrians. But their hope was ill-founded. Antiochus III suffered disastrous defeat at the hands of Rome at Magnesia in 190 <span>BC<\/span>. Syria not only lost much territory but also was forced to pay a huge indemnity. Thereafter, the Jews suffered under great financial burdens, along with other peoples of the empire. The next Syrian king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 <span>BC<\/span>), decided to launch an effort to achieve greater internal strength and unity within the empire by forcing, among other things, a greater acceptance of Greek culture and the cult of the divine ruler. Naturally this idolatrous requirement weighed heavily on the monotheistic Jews and incited revolution.<\/p>\n<p>But this does not completely explain the Maccabean revolt against Syria. In 168 <span>BC<\/span> armed conflict broke out between Jewish factions in Jerusalem. Antiochus IV chose to interpret this as open rebellion and sent an army against the city. His forces demolished part of the city wall and many houses. After this Antiochus decided to suppress Judaism completely, and he dedicated the temple to Zeus and sacrificed swine on the altar. Circumcision, Sabbath observance, and other religious festivals were no longer permitted, and public worship of heathen gods became compulsory.<\/p>\n<p>Some Jews capitulated to Antiochus’s orders or only resisted passively, but a few decided to resist openly. Chief among them were Mattathias and his five sons. After the early death of Mattathias, his son Judas Maccabeus led his forces to victory over the Syrians, regaining the right to restore Jewish worship. The rededication of the temple on December 25, 164 <span>BC<\/span>, inaugurated the Festival of Hanukkah (1 Macc 4:36-59). Subsequently, Jonathan and Simon (other sons of Mattathias) continued the struggle until independence was gained in 142 <span>BC<\/span>; this was possible in large part because they saw how to take advantage of the increasing weakness of Syrian rulers and the competition for the royal office.<\/p>\n<p>Simon ruled the Jewish state until his assassination in 134 <span>BC<\/span>, when his son John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>) took over. John Hyrcanus fought successfully in the east, north, and south, gaining land in Transjordan, capturing Shechem and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim, and subjugating the Idumeans in the south, forcing them to adopt Judaism. His son Aristobulus ruled for only about a year (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), but he added a portion of Galilee to the kingdom. When he died, his widow married his brother Alexander Janneus (103–76 <span>BC<\/span>). Janneus carried on almost incessant military action during his reign, and by the time of his death had almost recovered the kingdom of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>When Janneus died, Alexandra, widow of two kings, took the throne (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>) and her eldest son, Hyrcanus II, became high priest. Her reign was peaceful and prosperous, but when she died, her sons fell to squabbling. Their appeals to Pompey, who was campaigning in the eastern Mediterranean area, were responsible for Roman interference in the region and conquest of Palestine in 63 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRomanPeriod\">The Roman Period<\/p>\n<p>After the Romans took over Palestine, Hyrcanus II was confirmed as high priest and was also appointed as ethnarch or political ruler (63–40 <span>BC<\/span>). But Antipater, father of Herod the Great, was the real power behind the throne, and during many of those years Hyrcanus was virtually unable to function because of the confusion of the Roman civil wars. Antipater was loyal to Rome and saw that Roman policies were carried out; he won Julius Caesar’s favor toward Jews of both Palestine and in the Dispersion.<\/p>\n<p>With the support of Mark Antony, Herod managed to get himself appointed king of Judea by the Roman senate in 40 <span>BC<\/span>. But a Parthian invasion of Syria and Jewish hatred for the Romans made it possible for Antigonus II, last king of the Maccabean family, to rule for three years (40–37 <span>BC<\/span>). Finally, Herod ascended his throne in 37 and ruled until 4 <span>BC<\/span>. As an allied king, Herod proved to be an excellent ruler from the Roman point of view and earned the title of “Great.” He brought some order to regions east of the Jordan and made possible organization of the Roman province of Arabia. He also furthered the cultural plans of Augustus for development of a Greco-Roman civilization throughout the whole empire.<\/p>\n<p>Herod admired Greek culture and contributed to building projects in Rhodes, Antioch, Damascus, Athens, and elsewhere outside Palestine. Within Palestine he rebuilt Samaria and named it Sebaste in honor of Augustus (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Sebastos<\/span> is Greek for “Augustus”) and also constructed the great port of Caesarea. Probably about as large as Manhattan Island, it became the capital of Roman Palestine. Among his many other building projects, remodeling the temple in Jerusalem was the most famous. Begun in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, it was not completed until just a few years before its destruction in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The material splendor of Herod’s reign did not win the affection or support of the Jews, however. Nor did he achieve peace and harmony in his family, among whom there were periodic eruptions of treason, unfaithfulness, and murder. He worried about any threat to his rule and cracked down hard to destroy such threats, as is evident from his slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem after the birth of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, Herod controlled Idumea, Judea, Samaria, Galilee, Perea, and the area northeast of the Sea of Galilee. By his last will, his son Archelaus was to rule Idumea, Judea, and Samaria; Antipas, Galilee and Perea; and Philip, the region northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Archelaus was deposed in <span>AD<\/span> 6, and his territory became a Roman province (<span>AD<\/span> 6–41) to be ruled by direct appointees of Rome. The best-known of these was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36), who ordered the crucifixion of Jesus. Antipas was more successful and built a new capital at Tiberias, but he ran afoul of the emperor’s good pleasure in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and was deposed. Philip was the most effective of the three and ruled until his death in <span>AD<\/span> 34. Philip’s lands were later given to Herod Agrippa I in <span>AD<\/span> 37; the holdings of Antipas were then added in <span>AD<\/span> 39; and in 41 Agrippa also received Samaria, Judea, and Idumea.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44) was the heir of the Maccabees (through his grandmother Mariamne, first wife of Herod the Great), and for this reason had the support of patriotic Jews and of the Pharisees for his observance of divine ordinances. But when he built a new north wall for Jerusalem and dabbled in foreign affairs, he aroused the suspicions of the Romans; when he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44, they turned the kingdom into a Roman province.<\/p>\n<p>As is clear from the Gospels, several sects had arisen in Palestine by Roman times and were active during the first century. The Zealots opposed Roman rule and advocated armed rebellion. Herodians supported the Herodian family and Roman power. The Pharisees were fanatically devoted to the law and were supernaturalists in theological orientation. They were somewhat content to support Rome if given religious freedom, and they dominated the synagogues of the land. The Sadducees were antisupernaturalists, tended to collaborate with the ruling regime, and were dominant in the temple. Generally speaking, the literature of the intertestamental period and the popular mentality of the time tended to view the Messiah as a political deliverer who would free his people from foreign domination and set up a new independent kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Roman prefects ruled Palestine from <span>AD<\/span> 44–66. They had a knack for offending the religious scruples of the Jews and alienating them in other ways. With Felix (<span>AD<\/span> 52–60) there began a constant tension between Jews and Romans that led to the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70). While Paul was imprisoned in Caesarea (Acts 23:23–24:27) about <span>AD<\/span> 58–60, riots broke out there between Jews and Gentiles. Festus (<span>AD<\/span> 60–62; Acts 25) was an able administrator, but the situation was almost out of hand. After he died in office, there was virtual anarchy until his successor, Albinus, arrived (<span>AD<\/span> 62–64). Totally incompetent and dishonest, Albinus was recalled in 64 and replaced by Florus (<span>AD<\/span> 64–66). Florus was even worse, resorting to open robbery and bribery until there was no safety or justice in the land. Finally, the Jews could take no more.<\/p>\n<p>The spark that ignited the fires of rebellion was an anti-Semitic act by the Hellenistic population of Caesarea in <span>AD<\/span> 66. Soon riots spread to numerous cities, and Roman garrisons were massacred in several places. But the Jews were not united, and in Jerusalem armed bands of Jews fought with each other for mastery. Vespasian was chosen to command the Roman army of some 60,000 to deal with the insurrection. He had subjugated most of Palestine by the time he was elevated to the imperial chair in <span>AD<\/span> 69 (after the death of Nero), and he left his son Titus in charge of completing the operations. In August of <span>AD<\/span> 70 the walls of Jerusalem were breached, many of the people butchered, and the city and the temple leveled. Masada held out until <span>AD<\/span> 73. Palestine had been flattened by Roman might. Loss of life and property had been incalculable and indescribable.<\/p>\n<p>On two more occasions the Jews were destined to fight disastrously against the Romans. Under Trajan’s rule a rebellion of Jews broke out in Cyrenaica in <span>AD<\/span> 115 and spread rapidly to Cyprus, Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. In the beginning it was an outgrowth of agitation between the Jews and their Hellenistic neighbors, but it developed into a challenge to Roman authority. This was particularly true after the successes of Parthia on Rome’s eastern frontier when there seemed to be some hope of success in throwing off the Roman yoke. Wherever Jews got the upper hand, they perpetrated massacres, and the non-Semitic population retaliated in kind. Trajan ruthlessly suppressed the rebels and restored order everywhere except Egypt; his successor, Hadrian, was left to accomplish that.<\/p>\n<p>But Hadrian faced a new rebellion of his own, brought on by his law forbidding circumcision (which he considered to be inhumane) and his decision in <span>AD<\/span> 130 to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina and erect a temple to Jupiter on the site of the temple of Yahweh. The latter would not only profane the temple site but also would preclude any rebuilding of the Jewish temple.<\/p>\n<p>Leader of this second Jewish revolt was Simeon, prince of Israel, called Bar-Kochba (“Son of the Star”). Both sides fought with such great ferocity for over three years (<span>AD<\/span> 132–135) that the population of Judea was almost exterminated. Jerusalem was rebuilt as a Roman colony, and Jews were forbidden to enter on pain of death. Even as late as the fourth century they were permitted to enter only once a year, on the anniversary of the destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. After the Bar-Kochba revolt, Judaism retreated increasingly within the citadel of the written and oral law, thus separating itself from the Gentiles.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Conquest and Allotment of the Land; David; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; First Jewish Revolt; Jew; Judaism; Moses; Patriarchs, Period of the; Saul #2; Solomon; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ISRAEL, History of An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world. Preview • Patriarchal Age • Sojour...","summary_en":"ISRAEL, History of An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world. Preview • Patriarchal Age • Sojour...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46619,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:10","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:10<\/strong> <em>his son:<\/em> King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • <em>Joram:<\/em> The prefix <em>Jo-<\/em> is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; <em>Joram<\/em> means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:10<\/strong> <em>his son:<\/em> King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • <em>Joram:<\/em> The prefix <em>Jo-<\/em> is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; <em>Joram<\/em> means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:10 his son: King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • Joram: The prefix Jo- is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; Joram means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.","summary_en":"8:10 his son: King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • Joram: The prefix Jo- is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; Joram means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74245,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:10","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:10<\/strong> <em>his son:<\/em> King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • <em>Joram:<\/em> The prefix <em>Jo-<\/em> is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; <em>Joram<\/em> means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:10<\/strong> <em>his son:<\/em> King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • <em>Joram:<\/em> The prefix <em>Jo-<\/em> is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; <em>Joram<\/em> means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:10 his son: King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • Joram: The prefix Jo- is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; Joram means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.","summary_en":"8:10 his son: King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • Joram: The prefix Jo- is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; Joram means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101871,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:10","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:10<\/strong> <em>his son:<\/em> King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • <em>Joram:<\/em> The prefix <em>Jo-<\/em> is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; <em>Joram<\/em> means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:10<\/strong> <em>his son:<\/em> King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • <em>Joram:<\/em> The prefix <em>Jo-<\/em> is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; <em>Joram<\/em> means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:10 his son: King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • Joram: The prefix Jo- is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; Joram means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.","summary_en":"8:10 his son: King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • Joram: The prefix Jo- is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; Joram means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129497,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:10","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:10<\/strong> <em>his son:<\/em> King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • <em>Joram:<\/em> The prefix <em>Jo-<\/em> is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; <em>Joram<\/em> means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:10<\/strong> <em>his son:<\/em> King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • <em>Joram:<\/em> The prefix <em>Jo-<\/em> is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; <em>Joram<\/em> means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:10 his son: King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • Joram: The prefix Jo- is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; Joram means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.","summary_en":"8:10 his son: King Toi dispatched the crown prince rather than another entourage on this mission because he considered it vital to stay properly connected with David. • Joram: The prefix Jo- is an abbreviated form of Yahweh; Joram means “Yahweh is exalted.” In 1 Chr 18:10 the prince’s name is Hadoram, which means “Hadad [a Canaanite god] is exalted.” It is possible that Toi changed the prince’s name for diplomatic reasons, to make it more agreeable to David.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":40685,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Esau","title_en":"Esau","content_ro":"<h3>Esau<\/h3>\n<p>Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than the mild meat Jacob provided from the family flocks. One day Esau returned home very hungry from an unsuccessful hunt, and Jacob persuaded Esau to surrender his birthright in exchange for food (25:29-34). Esau had little regard for his birthright and was controlled by his carnal desires (see Heb 12:16). He also married two local women who were not Abraham’s descendants (Gen 26:34-35), which may have fed into Rebekah’s favoritism toward Jacob and her idea about stealing the blessing of Isaac that was intended for Esau (27:1-40). Esau’s anger on discovering his brother’s deception prompted Jacob to flee for Haran. The brothers were reunited twenty years later when Esau demonstrated gracious forgiveness (33:1-16).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was born with Jacob grasping his heel; this omen was interpreted to mean that Esau’s descendants would be subject to Jacob’s offspring. The subservient relationship between the Edomites and the Israelites began in David’s time (2 Sam 8:11-15; 1 Chr 18:11-13) and continued until the reign of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22; 2 Chr 21:8-10). Following a rebellion in 845 <span>BC<\/span>, the Edomites briefly gained their independence but were conquered again by Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>). They regained their freedom in 735 <span>BC<\/span> and then remained independent of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Esau represents the line of Abraham’s descendants who lacked the gift of faith and were rejected by God as recipients of his promised blessings (see Rom 9:6-24). Herod the Great was an Edomite.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 25:21-34; 26:34-35; 27:1-42; 28:6-9; 32:3-20; 33:1-16; 35:28-29; 36:1-43; Deut 2:1-8, 12, 22, 29; Josh 24:4; Mal 1:2-5; Rom 9:6-13; Heb 11:20; 12:16-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Esau<\/h3>\n<p>Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than the mild meat Jacob provided from the family flocks. One day Esau returned home very hungry from an unsuccessful hunt, and Jacob persuaded Esau to surrender his birthright in exchange for food (25:29-34). Esau had little regard for his birthright and was controlled by his carnal desires (see Heb 12:16). He also married two local women who were not Abraham’s descendants (Gen 26:34-35), which may have fed into Rebekah’s favoritism toward Jacob and her idea about stealing the blessing of Isaac that was intended for Esau (27:1-40). Esau’s anger on discovering his brother’s deception prompted Jacob to flee for Haran. The brothers were reunited twenty years later when Esau demonstrated gracious forgiveness (33:1-16).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was born with Jacob grasping his heel; this omen was interpreted to mean that Esau’s descendants would be subject to Jacob’s offspring. The subservient relationship between the Edomites and the Israelites began in David’s time (2 Sam 8:11-15; 1 Chr 18:11-13) and continued until the reign of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22; 2 Chr 21:8-10). Following a rebellion in 845 <span>BC<\/span>, the Edomites briefly gained their independence but were conquered again by Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>). They regained their freedom in 735 <span>BC<\/span> and then remained independent of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Esau represents the line of Abraham’s descendants who lacked the gift of faith and were rejected by God as recipients of his promised blessings (see Rom 9:6-24). Herod the Great was an Edomite.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 25:21-34; 26:34-35; 27:1-42; 28:6-9; 32:3-20; 33:1-16; 35:28-29; 36:1-43; Deut 2:1-8, 12, 22, 29; Josh 24:4; Mal 1:2-5; Rom 9:6-13; Heb 11:20; 12:16-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Esau Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25). Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than th...","summary_en":"Esau Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25). Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than th...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":41260,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Amalekites","title_en":"The Amalekites","content_ro":"<h3>The Amalekites<\/h3>\n<p>The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when they attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-16). In this encounter, the Amalekites were defeated by Joshua and the Israelite army. The Amalekites later rebuffed Israel’s disobedient attempt to enter the Promised Land (Num 14:39-45). As a result of their enmity, Moses instructed Israel to destroy them (Deut 25:17-19), but the Amalekites continued to inhabit the Negev (see Judg 3:12-14; 6:33; 1 Sam 14:47-48; 15:1-35). Those who survived remained Israel’s enemies (27:8; 30:1-20; 2 Sam 8:11-12; Ps 83:1-8). This remnant was finally destroyed during the reign of Hezekiah (1 Chr 4:42-43). In the book of Esther, Haman (a descendant of King Agag) embodied their animosity to the bitter end (Esth 3; see 1 Sam 15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 30:1-31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Amalekites<\/h3>\n<p>The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when they attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-16). In this encounter, the Amalekites were defeated by Joshua and the Israelite army. The Amalekites later rebuffed Israel’s disobedient attempt to enter the Promised Land (Num 14:39-45). As a result of their enmity, Moses instructed Israel to destroy them (Deut 25:17-19), but the Amalekites continued to inhabit the Negev (see Judg 3:12-14; 6:33; 1 Sam 14:47-48; 15:1-35). Those who survived remained Israel’s enemies (27:8; 30:1-20; 2 Sam 8:11-12; Ps 83:1-8). This remnant was finally destroyed during the reign of Hezekiah (1 Chr 4:42-43). In the book of Esther, Haman (a descendant of King Agag) embodied their animosity to the bitter end (Esth 3; see 1 Sam 15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 30:1-31<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Amalekites The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia. The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when ...","summary_en":"The Amalekites The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia. The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68311,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Esau","title_en":"Esau","content_ro":"<h3>Esau<\/h3>\n<p>Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than the mild meat Jacob provided from the family flocks. One day Esau returned home very hungry from an unsuccessful hunt, and Jacob persuaded Esau to surrender his birthright in exchange for food (25:29-34). Esau had little regard for his birthright and was controlled by his carnal desires (see Heb 12:16). He also married two local women who were not Abraham’s descendants (Gen 26:34-35), which may have fed into Rebekah’s favoritism toward Jacob and her idea about stealing the blessing of Isaac that was intended for Esau (27:1-40). Esau’s anger on discovering his brother’s deception prompted Jacob to flee for Haran. The brothers were reunited twenty years later when Esau demonstrated gracious forgiveness (33:1-16).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was born with Jacob grasping his heel; this omen was interpreted to mean that Esau’s descendants would be subject to Jacob’s offspring. The subservient relationship between the Edomites and the Israelites began in David’s time (2 Sam 8:11-15; 1 Chr 18:11-13) and continued until the reign of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22; 2 Chr 21:8-10). Following a rebellion in 845 <span>BC<\/span>, the Edomites briefly gained their independence but were conquered again by Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>). They regained their freedom in 735 <span>BC<\/span> and then remained independent of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Esau represents the line of Abraham’s descendants who lacked the gift of faith and were rejected by God as recipients of his promised blessings (see Rom 9:6-24). Herod the Great was an Edomite.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 25:21-34; 26:34-35; 27:1-42; 28:6-9; 32:3-20; 33:1-16; 35:28-29; 36:1-43; Deut 2:1-8, 12, 22, 29; Josh 24:4; Mal 1:2-5; Rom 9:6-13; Heb 11:20; 12:16-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Esau<\/h3>\n<p>Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than the mild meat Jacob provided from the family flocks. One day Esau returned home very hungry from an unsuccessful hunt, and Jacob persuaded Esau to surrender his birthright in exchange for food (25:29-34). Esau had little regard for his birthright and was controlled by his carnal desires (see Heb 12:16). He also married two local women who were not Abraham’s descendants (Gen 26:34-35), which may have fed into Rebekah’s favoritism toward Jacob and her idea about stealing the blessing of Isaac that was intended for Esau (27:1-40). Esau’s anger on discovering his brother’s deception prompted Jacob to flee for Haran. The brothers were reunited twenty years later when Esau demonstrated gracious forgiveness (33:1-16).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was born with Jacob grasping his heel; this omen was interpreted to mean that Esau’s descendants would be subject to Jacob’s offspring. The subservient relationship between the Edomites and the Israelites began in David’s time (2 Sam 8:11-15; 1 Chr 18:11-13) and continued until the reign of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22; 2 Chr 21:8-10). Following a rebellion in 845 <span>BC<\/span>, the Edomites briefly gained their independence but were conquered again by Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>). They regained their freedom in 735 <span>BC<\/span> and then remained independent of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Esau represents the line of Abraham’s descendants who lacked the gift of faith and were rejected by God as recipients of his promised blessings (see Rom 9:6-24). Herod the Great was an Edomite.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 25:21-34; 26:34-35; 27:1-42; 28:6-9; 32:3-20; 33:1-16; 35:28-29; 36:1-43; Deut 2:1-8, 12, 22, 29; Josh 24:4; Mal 1:2-5; Rom 9:6-13; Heb 11:20; 12:16-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Esau Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25). Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than th...","summary_en":"Esau Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25). Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than th...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68886,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Amalekites","title_en":"The Amalekites","content_ro":"<h3>The Amalekites<\/h3>\n<p>The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when they attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-16). In this encounter, the Amalekites were defeated by Joshua and the Israelite army. The Amalekites later rebuffed Israel’s disobedient attempt to enter the Promised Land (Num 14:39-45). As a result of their enmity, Moses instructed Israel to destroy them (Deut 25:17-19), but the Amalekites continued to inhabit the Negev (see Judg 3:12-14; 6:33; 1 Sam 14:47-48; 15:1-35). Those who survived remained Israel’s enemies (27:8; 30:1-20; 2 Sam 8:11-12; Ps 83:1-8). This remnant was finally destroyed during the reign of Hezekiah (1 Chr 4:42-43). In the book of Esther, Haman (a descendant of King Agag) embodied their animosity to the bitter end (Esth 3; see 1 Sam 15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 30:1-31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Amalekites<\/h3>\n<p>The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when they attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-16). In this encounter, the Amalekites were defeated by Joshua and the Israelite army. The Amalekites later rebuffed Israel’s disobedient attempt to enter the Promised Land (Num 14:39-45). As a result of their enmity, Moses instructed Israel to destroy them (Deut 25:17-19), but the Amalekites continued to inhabit the Negev (see Judg 3:12-14; 6:33; 1 Sam 14:47-48; 15:1-35). Those who survived remained Israel’s enemies (27:8; 30:1-20; 2 Sam 8:11-12; Ps 83:1-8). This remnant was finally destroyed during the reign of Hezekiah (1 Chr 4:42-43). In the book of Esther, Haman (a descendant of King Agag) embodied their animosity to the bitter end (Esth 3; see 1 Sam 15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 30:1-31<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Amalekites The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia. The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when ...","summary_en":"The Amalekites The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia. The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95937,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Esau","title_en":"Esau","content_ro":"<h3>Esau<\/h3>\n<p>Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than the mild meat Jacob provided from the family flocks. One day Esau returned home very hungry from an unsuccessful hunt, and Jacob persuaded Esau to surrender his birthright in exchange for food (25:29-34). Esau had little regard for his birthright and was controlled by his carnal desires (see Heb 12:16). He also married two local women who were not Abraham’s descendants (Gen 26:34-35), which may have fed into Rebekah’s favoritism toward Jacob and her idea about stealing the blessing of Isaac that was intended for Esau (27:1-40). Esau’s anger on discovering his brother’s deception prompted Jacob to flee for Haran. The brothers were reunited twenty years later when Esau demonstrated gracious forgiveness (33:1-16).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was born with Jacob grasping his heel; this omen was interpreted to mean that Esau’s descendants would be subject to Jacob’s offspring. The subservient relationship between the Edomites and the Israelites began in David’s time (2 Sam 8:11-15; 1 Chr 18:11-13) and continued until the reign of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22; 2 Chr 21:8-10). Following a rebellion in 845 <span>BC<\/span>, the Edomites briefly gained their independence but were conquered again by Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>). They regained their freedom in 735 <span>BC<\/span> and then remained independent of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Esau represents the line of Abraham’s descendants who lacked the gift of faith and were rejected by God as recipients of his promised blessings (see Rom 9:6-24). Herod the Great was an Edomite.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 25:21-34; 26:34-35; 27:1-42; 28:6-9; 32:3-20; 33:1-16; 35:28-29; 36:1-43; Deut 2:1-8, 12, 22, 29; Josh 24:4; Mal 1:2-5; Rom 9:6-13; Heb 11:20; 12:16-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Esau<\/h3>\n<p>Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than the mild meat Jacob provided from the family flocks. One day Esau returned home very hungry from an unsuccessful hunt, and Jacob persuaded Esau to surrender his birthright in exchange for food (25:29-34). Esau had little regard for his birthright and was controlled by his carnal desires (see Heb 12:16). He also married two local women who were not Abraham’s descendants (Gen 26:34-35), which may have fed into Rebekah’s favoritism toward Jacob and her idea about stealing the blessing of Isaac that was intended for Esau (27:1-40). Esau’s anger on discovering his brother’s deception prompted Jacob to flee for Haran. The brothers were reunited twenty years later when Esau demonstrated gracious forgiveness (33:1-16).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was born with Jacob grasping his heel; this omen was interpreted to mean that Esau’s descendants would be subject to Jacob’s offspring. The subservient relationship between the Edomites and the Israelites began in David’s time (2 Sam 8:11-15; 1 Chr 18:11-13) and continued until the reign of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22; 2 Chr 21:8-10). Following a rebellion in 845 <span>BC<\/span>, the Edomites briefly gained their independence but were conquered again by Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>). They regained their freedom in 735 <span>BC<\/span> and then remained independent of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Esau represents the line of Abraham’s descendants who lacked the gift of faith and were rejected by God as recipients of his promised blessings (see Rom 9:6-24). Herod the Great was an Edomite.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 25:21-34; 26:34-35; 27:1-42; 28:6-9; 32:3-20; 33:1-16; 35:28-29; 36:1-43; Deut 2:1-8, 12, 22, 29; Josh 24:4; Mal 1:2-5; Rom 9:6-13; Heb 11:20; 12:16-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Esau Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25). Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than th...","summary_en":"Esau Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25). Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than th...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96512,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Amalekites","title_en":"The Amalekites","content_ro":"<h3>The Amalekites<\/h3>\n<p>The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when they attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-16). In this encounter, the Amalekites were defeated by Joshua and the Israelite army. The Amalekites later rebuffed Israel’s disobedient attempt to enter the Promised Land (Num 14:39-45). As a result of their enmity, Moses instructed Israel to destroy them (Deut 25:17-19), but the Amalekites continued to inhabit the Negev (see Judg 3:12-14; 6:33; 1 Sam 14:47-48; 15:1-35). Those who survived remained Israel’s enemies (27:8; 30:1-20; 2 Sam 8:11-12; Ps 83:1-8). This remnant was finally destroyed during the reign of Hezekiah (1 Chr 4:42-43). In the book of Esther, Haman (a descendant of King Agag) embodied their animosity to the bitter end (Esth 3; see 1 Sam 15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 30:1-31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Amalekites<\/h3>\n<p>The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when they attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-16). In this encounter, the Amalekites were defeated by Joshua and the Israelite army. The Amalekites later rebuffed Israel’s disobedient attempt to enter the Promised Land (Num 14:39-45). As a result of their enmity, Moses instructed Israel to destroy them (Deut 25:17-19), but the Amalekites continued to inhabit the Negev (see Judg 3:12-14; 6:33; 1 Sam 14:47-48; 15:1-35). Those who survived remained Israel’s enemies (27:8; 30:1-20; 2 Sam 8:11-12; Ps 83:1-8). This remnant was finally destroyed during the reign of Hezekiah (1 Chr 4:42-43). In the book of Esther, Haman (a descendant of King Agag) embodied their animosity to the bitter end (Esth 3; see 1 Sam 15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 30:1-31<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Amalekites The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia. The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when ...","summary_en":"The Amalekites The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia. The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123563,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Esau","title_en":"Esau","content_ro":"<h3>Esau<\/h3>\n<p>Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than the mild meat Jacob provided from the family flocks. One day Esau returned home very hungry from an unsuccessful hunt, and Jacob persuaded Esau to surrender his birthright in exchange for food (25:29-34). Esau had little regard for his birthright and was controlled by his carnal desires (see Heb 12:16). He also married two local women who were not Abraham’s descendants (Gen 26:34-35), which may have fed into Rebekah’s favoritism toward Jacob and her idea about stealing the blessing of Isaac that was intended for Esau (27:1-40). Esau’s anger on discovering his brother’s deception prompted Jacob to flee for Haran. The brothers were reunited twenty years later when Esau demonstrated gracious forgiveness (33:1-16).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was born with Jacob grasping his heel; this omen was interpreted to mean that Esau’s descendants would be subject to Jacob’s offspring. The subservient relationship between the Edomites and the Israelites began in David’s time (2 Sam 8:11-15; 1 Chr 18:11-13) and continued until the reign of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22; 2 Chr 21:8-10). Following a rebellion in 845 <span>BC<\/span>, the Edomites briefly gained their independence but were conquered again by Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>). They regained their freedom in 735 <span>BC<\/span> and then remained independent of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Esau represents the line of Abraham’s descendants who lacked the gift of faith and were rejected by God as recipients of his promised blessings (see Rom 9:6-24). Herod the Great was an Edomite.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 25:21-34; 26:34-35; 27:1-42; 28:6-9; 32:3-20; 33:1-16; 35:28-29; 36:1-43; Deut 2:1-8, 12, 22, 29; Josh 24:4; Mal 1:2-5; Rom 9:6-13; Heb 11:20; 12:16-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Esau<\/h3>\n<p>Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than the mild meat Jacob provided from the family flocks. One day Esau returned home very hungry from an unsuccessful hunt, and Jacob persuaded Esau to surrender his birthright in exchange for food (25:29-34). Esau had little regard for his birthright and was controlled by his carnal desires (see Heb 12:16). He also married two local women who were not Abraham’s descendants (Gen 26:34-35), which may have fed into Rebekah’s favoritism toward Jacob and her idea about stealing the blessing of Isaac that was intended for Esau (27:1-40). Esau’s anger on discovering his brother’s deception prompted Jacob to flee for Haran. The brothers were reunited twenty years later when Esau demonstrated gracious forgiveness (33:1-16).<\/p>\n<p>Esau was born with Jacob grasping his heel; this omen was interpreted to mean that Esau’s descendants would be subject to Jacob’s offspring. The subservient relationship between the Edomites and the Israelites began in David’s time (2 Sam 8:11-15; 1 Chr 18:11-13) and continued until the reign of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22; 2 Chr 21:8-10). Following a rebellion in 845 <span>BC<\/span>, the Edomites briefly gained their independence but were conquered again by Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>). They regained their freedom in 735 <span>BC<\/span> and then remained independent of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Esau represents the line of Abraham’s descendants who lacked the gift of faith and were rejected by God as recipients of his promised blessings (see Rom 9:6-24). Herod the Great was an Edomite.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 25:21-34; 26:34-35; 27:1-42; 28:6-9; 32:3-20; 33:1-16; 35:28-29; 36:1-43; Deut 2:1-8, 12, 22, 29; Josh 24:4; Mal 1:2-5; Rom 9:6-13; Heb 11:20; 12:16-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Esau Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25). Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than th...","summary_en":"Esau Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, was Jacob’s older twin brother (Gen 25:24-26), so named because his body was hairy at birth. His descendants were called Edomites (“Edom” meaning “red”) on account of his reddish color at birth (25:25), the red lentil stew he received from Jacob (25:30), and the reddish color of the land in which he settled (see study note on Gen 25:25). Esau was a proficient hunter who brought tasty wild meat to his father. Isaac enjoyed its strong flavor more than th...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124138,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Amalekites","title_en":"The Amalekites","content_ro":"<h3>The Amalekites<\/h3>\n<p>The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when they attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-16). In this encounter, the Amalekites were defeated by Joshua and the Israelite army. The Amalekites later rebuffed Israel’s disobedient attempt to enter the Promised Land (Num 14:39-45). As a result of their enmity, Moses instructed Israel to destroy them (Deut 25:17-19), but the Amalekites continued to inhabit the Negev (see Judg 3:12-14; 6:33; 1 Sam 14:47-48; 15:1-35). Those who survived remained Israel’s enemies (27:8; 30:1-20; 2 Sam 8:11-12; Ps 83:1-8). This remnant was finally destroyed during the reign of Hezekiah (1 Chr 4:42-43). In the book of Esther, Haman (a descendant of King Agag) embodied their animosity to the bitter end (Esth 3; see 1 Sam 15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 30:1-31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Amalekites<\/h3>\n<p>The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when they attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-16). In this encounter, the Amalekites were defeated by Joshua and the Israelite army. The Amalekites later rebuffed Israel’s disobedient attempt to enter the Promised Land (Num 14:39-45). As a result of their enmity, Moses instructed Israel to destroy them (Deut 25:17-19), but the Amalekites continued to inhabit the Negev (see Judg 3:12-14; 6:33; 1 Sam 14:47-48; 15:1-35). Those who survived remained Israel’s enemies (27:8; 30:1-20; 2 Sam 8:11-12; Ps 83:1-8). This remnant was finally destroyed during the reign of Hezekiah (1 Chr 4:42-43). In the book of Esther, Haman (a descendant of King Agag) embodied their animosity to the bitter end (Esth 3; see 1 Sam 15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 30:1-31<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Amalekites The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia. The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when ...","summary_en":"The Amalekites The Amalekites were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). They were nomadic herdsmen; their territory in the Negev ranged from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly into Arabia. The Amalekites were staunch enemies of Israel. Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai when ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":1361,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ammonites Ammon","title_en":"Ammonites Ammon","content_ro":"<h3>AMMON, AMMONITES<\/h3>\n<p>A Semitic people who occupied a fertile area northeast of Moab in Transjordan between the Arnon and Jabbok Rivers and extending eastward to the Syrian Desert. The chief city was Rabbah (Rabbath-ammon), modern Amman, capital of Jordan.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites traced their ancestry to the younger daughter of Lot (Gn 19:38). Their name in Hebrew originally meant “son of my paternal clan,” preserving the remembrance of an actual clan and personal name, and suggesting a kinship between the Ammonites and Israelites. The name occurred frequently in the ancient Near East from the middle of the second millennium on. One form was found in Assyrian inscriptions; other forms are seen in Ugaritic texts of the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>, in the Mari texts, in the Amarna tablets, and in the Alalakh tablets.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites originated in the southern Transjordan region about the beginning of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Though these people were of mixed ancestry, the languages they spoke were closely related to Hebrew. Ammonite was written in the old Canaanite-Phoenician script, which could probably be read and understood by Israelites. Ammonites intermarried with Hebrews (1 Kgs 14:21, 31; 2 Chr 12:13), and their personal names reflected early Arabic influences.<\/p>\n<p>In language, ethnic background, and physical characteristics the Ammonites were difficult to distinguish from Amorites and were probably closely related. Both may have entered the land at about the same time, for when Joshua led the Israelites into Canaan, both the Ammonite kingdom and the Amorite kingdom of Heshbon were already well established.<\/p>\n<p>The OT states that the territory of Ammon was once occupied by a race of giants called Rephaim or Zamzummim, about whom almost nothing is known (Dt 2:20-21; “Zuzim,” Gn 14:5). The Genesis Apocryphon found among the Dead Sea Scrolls mentions them as one of the people defeated by the alliance of four kings (Gn 14:1, 5). The expedition of Chedorlaomer, king of Elam (Gn 14), broke the power of those giants and probably made the occupation of the land by Esau, Ammon, and Moab much easier. King Og was “of the remnant of the Rephaim” known to the Ammonites (Dt 3:11). His bed was evidently an object of veneration because of its unusual size.<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites arrived at Kadesh, they encountered the well-organized kingdom of Edom but were refused permission to pass through Edomite territory (Nm 20:14-21). They journeyed northward to Ammonite country, which was then occupied by the Amorite king Sihon. He also refused them permission to pass through his land, but the Israelites defeated him in battle and occupied his country (Nm 21:21-24). They were instructed by God through Moses not to try to occupy Ammonite territory, as it had already been given to the descendants of Lot (Dt 2:19, 37).<\/p>\n<p>Continuing northward, the Israelites defeated King Og of Bashan (Dt 3:1-11), then went down to the Jordan Valley, where they camped on the plains of Moab. There Balak, king of Moab, hired a soothsayer, Balaam, to pronounce a curse on the Israelites, but Balaam pronounced a blessing each time instead (Nm 22–24). For supporting the Moabites in their actions, the Ammonites were excluded from the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation (Dt 23:3; Neh 13:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelite tribes of Gad and Reuben and the half-tribe of Manasseh were attracted to the fertile Transjordan region that had belonged to the Amorites and Bashan and decided to settle there on the Ammonite frontier (Nm 32; Dt 3:16; Jos 13:8-32). Subsequently they built an altar at the Jordan River, which the other tribes at first interpreted as an act of rebellion in that they appeared to be establishing a rival place of worship (Jos 22:10-34).<\/p>\n<p>Before the Israelite conquest of Canaan, the Ammonites evidently had not attained the same level of political organization and settled life as the neighboring Moabites and Edomites. Even as late as the seventh century <span>BC<\/span> the nation was essentially nomadic. Shortly after Israel settled in Canaan, the Ammonites allied with the Moabites and Amalekites when King Eglon of Moab tried to regain former Moabite territory at the north end of the Dead Sea (Jgs 3:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>By the end of the 12th century <span>BC<\/span> the Israelites, then securely established in the land of Canaan, angered God by their worship of the deities of the Syrians, Sidonians, Moabites, Ammonites, and Philistines (Jgs 10:6). The Ammonites, in their first recorded political expansion, launched an attack against Israel and were able to establish themselves in Gilead (Jgs 10:7-8). They then crossed the Jordan and attacked the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Ephraim (Jgs 10:9). In desperation the elders of Gilead turned for help to Jephthah, a social outcast but an able military leader (Jgs 11:1-11). He defeated the Ammonites so decisively that it was unnecessary for him to wage further campaigns against Ammonite settlements west of the Jordan (Jgs 11:12-33).<\/p>\n<p>Near the end of the 11th century an Ammonite king named Nahash came to power, determined to reestablish Ammonite dominion over Israelite settlements in Transjordan. He launched an aggressive military campaign around 1020 <span>BC<\/span> that took him as far north as Jabesh-gilead. The inhabitants of the town were willing to surrender to him but delayed their surrender to appeal for help from Saul, the recently consecrated Israelite king. Saul quickly organized an army and decisively defeated the Ammonites (1 Sm 11:1-11). The victory ensured freedom from Ammonite domination in the Jordan Valley for several centuries, although later in his reign Saul was forced to fight further battles with the enemies of Israel, including Ammonites (1 Sm 14:47-48).<\/p>\n<p>When David became king, he took silver and gold from the Ammonites, Philistines, and Amalekites, either as spoils or as tribute (2 Sm 8:11-12; 1 Chr 18:11). Soon thereafter, David sent Joab at the head of a strong army to devastate the Ammonite countryside and besiege the capital city of Rabbah (2 Sm 11:1; 1 Chr 20:2). The siege lasted many months, but Joab weakened the city and David then completed its capture (2 Sm 12:26-29). In a ceremony of capitulation the Ammonite king’s massive golden crown was placed on David’s head (2 Sm 12:30; 1 Chr 20:1). The conquered city was plundered, and its inhabitants were enslaved. Other Ammonite cities were taken, and the nation was added to the growing number of vassal states of Israel (2 Sm 12:31; 1 Chr 20:3). David appointed a governor over the Ammonites from the Ammonite royal family. Shobi, another son of Nahash (and therefore Hanun’s brother), became ruler of the Ammonites and aided David during his flight from Absalom’s rebellion (2 Sm 17:27). One of David’s best warriors was an Ammonite (2 Sm 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Ammonite relations with Israel remained generally peaceful during the reign of Solomon, David’s successor, with the Ammonites undoubtedly sharing in the prosperity and wealth of that period. After the death of Solomon, the kingdom split apart under Rehoboam and was further weakened by a campaign of Shishak, king of Egypt, that swept through Palestine and also through Ammonite territory. Taking advantage of the situation, the Ammonites declared their independence from Israel and Judah. The Ammonites joined the Moabites and Meunites to make war against King Jehoshaphat of Judah (reigning 871–848 <span>BC<\/span>). In fear, Jehoshaphat sought help from God in prayer (2 Chr 20:1-12). The Ammonites and their allies began fighting among themselves and destroyed each other, leaving behind great spoils for Jehoshaphat and his people—which took three days to be carried away (2 Chr 20:22-25). Eventually the Ammonites recovered, so that by the end of the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, Ammon had again become completely independent and was the dominant state of south Transjordan. Ammonite independence was short, however, for in 599 <span>BC<\/span>, according to the Babylonian Chronicle, Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar led his troops into Syria and began raiding southern Palestine. In 593 <span>BC<\/span>, the Ammonites met in Jerusalem with King Zedekiah of Judah and representatives from Edom, Moab, Tyre, and Sidon in a conspiracy to rebel against Babylon (Jer 27:1-3). The prophet Jeremiah warned them that God would cause their plan to fail (Jer 27:4-22). Nebuchadnezzar sent an army to crush the rebellion and attacked Jerusalem, which he destroyed after a lengthy and bitter siege (586 <span>BC<\/span>), deporting many Jews to Babylonia. Ammon was not immediately invaded, however, and many Judeans sought refuge there (Jer 40:11), including a man named Ishmael (Jer 40:13-16). Ishmael plotted with Baalis, king of Ammon, to assassinate Gedaliah, whom Nebuchadnezzar had appointed governor over Judea, now reduced to a province of Babylonia. After carrying out the assassination, Ishmael escaped to Ammon (Jer 41:1-15). Nebuchadnezzar then sent troops that sacked Rabbah and took captive many of the Ammonites. Though the city was not destroyed, the destruction of the countryside was thorough. In the third century <span>BC<\/span>, Arab invaders poured in and destroyed the remaining organized political structure, thus marking the end of Ammon as a semi-independent state.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AMMON, AMMONITES<\/h3>\n<p>A Semitic people who occupied a fertile area northeast of Moab in Transjordan between the Arnon and Jabbok Rivers and extending eastward to the Syrian Desert. The chief city was Rabbah (Rabbath-ammon), modern Amman, capital of Jordan.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites traced their ancestry to the younger daughter of Lot (Gn 19:38). Their name in Hebrew originally meant “son of my paternal clan,” preserving the remembrance of an actual clan and personal name, and suggesting a kinship between the Ammonites and Israelites. The name occurred frequently in the ancient Near East from the middle of the second millennium on. One form was found in Assyrian inscriptions; other forms are seen in Ugaritic texts of the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>, in the Mari texts, in the Amarna tablets, and in the Alalakh tablets.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonites originated in the southern Transjordan region about the beginning of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Though these people were of mixed ancestry, the languages they spoke were closely related to Hebrew. Ammonite was written in the old Canaanite-Phoenician script, which could probably be read and understood by Israelites. Ammonites intermarried with Hebrews (1 Kgs 14:21, 31; 2 Chr 12:13), and their personal names reflected early Arabic influences.<\/p>\n<p>In language, ethnic background, and physical characteristics the Ammonites were difficult to distinguish from Amorites and were probably closely related. Both may have entered the land at about the same time, for when Joshua led the Israelites into Canaan, both the Ammonite kingdom and the Amorite kingdom of Heshbon were already well established.<\/p>\n<p>The OT states that the territory of Ammon was once occupied by a race of giants called Rephaim or Zamzummim, about whom almost nothing is known (Dt 2:20-21; “Zuzim,” Gn 14:5). The Genesis Apocryphon found among the Dead Sea Scrolls mentions them as one of the people defeated by the alliance of four kings (Gn 14:1, 5). The expedition of Chedorlaomer, king of Elam (Gn 14), broke the power of those giants and probably made the occupation of the land by Esau, Ammon, and Moab much easier. King Og was “of the remnant of the Rephaim” known to the Ammonites (Dt 3:11). His bed was evidently an object of veneration because of its unusual size.<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites arrived at Kadesh, they encountered the well-organized kingdom of Edom but were refused permission to pass through Edomite territory (Nm 20:14-21). They journeyed northward to Ammonite country, which was then occupied by the Amorite king Sihon. He also refused them permission to pass through his land, but the Israelites defeated him in battle and occupied his country (Nm 21:21-24). They were instructed by God through Moses not to try to occupy Ammonite territory, as it had already been given to the descendants of Lot (Dt 2:19, 37).<\/p>\n<p>Continuing northward, the Israelites defeated King Og of Bashan (Dt 3:1-11), then went down to the Jordan Valley, where they camped on the plains of Moab. There Balak, king of Moab, hired a soothsayer, Balaam, to pronounce a curse on the Israelites, but Balaam pronounced a blessing each time instead (Nm 22–24). For supporting the Moabites in their actions, the Ammonites were excluded from the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation (Dt 23:3; Neh 13:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelite tribes of Gad and Reuben and the half-tribe of Manasseh were attracted to the fertile Transjordan region that had belonged to the Amorites and Bashan and decided to settle there on the Ammonite frontier (Nm 32; Dt 3:16; Jos 13:8-32). Subsequently they built an altar at the Jordan River, which the other tribes at first interpreted as an act of rebellion in that they appeared to be establishing a rival place of worship (Jos 22:10-34).<\/p>\n<p>Before the Israelite conquest of Canaan, the Ammonites evidently had not attained the same level of political organization and settled life as the neighboring Moabites and Edomites. Even as late as the seventh century <span>BC<\/span> the nation was essentially nomadic. Shortly after Israel settled in Canaan, the Ammonites allied with the Moabites and Amalekites when King Eglon of Moab tried to regain former Moabite territory at the north end of the Dead Sea (Jgs 3:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>By the end of the 12th century <span>BC<\/span> the Israelites, then securely established in the land of Canaan, angered God by their worship of the deities of the Syrians, Sidonians, Moabites, Ammonites, and Philistines (Jgs 10:6). The Ammonites, in their first recorded political expansion, launched an attack against Israel and were able to establish themselves in Gilead (Jgs 10:7-8). They then crossed the Jordan and attacked the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Ephraim (Jgs 10:9). In desperation the elders of Gilead turned for help to Jephthah, a social outcast but an able military leader (Jgs 11:1-11). He defeated the Ammonites so decisively that it was unnecessary for him to wage further campaigns against Ammonite settlements west of the Jordan (Jgs 11:12-33).<\/p>\n<p>Near the end of the 11th century an Ammonite king named Nahash came to power, determined to reestablish Ammonite dominion over Israelite settlements in Transjordan. He launched an aggressive military campaign around 1020 <span>BC<\/span> that took him as far north as Jabesh-gilead. The inhabitants of the town were willing to surrender to him but delayed their surrender to appeal for help from Saul, the recently consecrated Israelite king. Saul quickly organized an army and decisively defeated the Ammonites (1 Sm 11:1-11). The victory ensured freedom from Ammonite domination in the Jordan Valley for several centuries, although later in his reign Saul was forced to fight further battles with the enemies of Israel, including Ammonites (1 Sm 14:47-48).<\/p>\n<p>When David became king, he took silver and gold from the Ammonites, Philistines, and Amalekites, either as spoils or as tribute (2 Sm 8:11-12; 1 Chr 18:11). Soon thereafter, David sent Joab at the head of a strong army to devastate the Ammonite countryside and besiege the capital city of Rabbah (2 Sm 11:1; 1 Chr 20:2). The siege lasted many months, but Joab weakened the city and David then completed its capture (2 Sm 12:26-29). In a ceremony of capitulation the Ammonite king’s massive golden crown was placed on David’s head (2 Sm 12:30; 1 Chr 20:1). The conquered city was plundered, and its inhabitants were enslaved. Other Ammonite cities were taken, and the nation was added to the growing number of vassal states of Israel (2 Sm 12:31; 1 Chr 20:3). David appointed a governor over the Ammonites from the Ammonite royal family. Shobi, another son of Nahash (and therefore Hanun’s brother), became ruler of the Ammonites and aided David during his flight from Absalom’s rebellion (2 Sm 17:27). One of David’s best warriors was an Ammonite (2 Sm 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Ammonite relations with Israel remained generally peaceful during the reign of Solomon, David’s successor, with the Ammonites undoubtedly sharing in the prosperity and wealth of that period. After the death of Solomon, the kingdom split apart under Rehoboam and was further weakened by a campaign of Shishak, king of Egypt, that swept through Palestine and also through Ammonite territory. Taking advantage of the situation, the Ammonites declared their independence from Israel and Judah. The Ammonites joined the Moabites and Meunites to make war against King Jehoshaphat of Judah (reigning 871–848 <span>BC<\/span>). In fear, Jehoshaphat sought help from God in prayer (2 Chr 20:1-12). The Ammonites and their allies began fighting among themselves and destroyed each other, leaving behind great spoils for Jehoshaphat and his people—which took three days to be carried away (2 Chr 20:22-25). Eventually the Ammonites recovered, so that by the end of the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, Ammon had again become completely independent and was the dominant state of south Transjordan. Ammonite independence was short, however, for in 599 <span>BC<\/span>, according to the Babylonian Chronicle, Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar led his troops into Syria and began raiding southern Palestine. In 593 <span>BC<\/span>, the Ammonites met in Jerusalem with King Zedekiah of Judah and representatives from Edom, Moab, Tyre, and Sidon in a conspiracy to rebel against Babylon (Jer 27:1-3). The prophet Jeremiah warned them that God would cause their plan to fail (Jer 27:4-22). Nebuchadnezzar sent an army to crush the rebellion and attacked Jerusalem, which he destroyed after a lengthy and bitter siege (586 <span>BC<\/span>), deporting many Jews to Babylonia. Ammon was not immediately invaded, however, and many Judeans sought refuge there (Jer 40:11), including a man named Ishmael (Jer 40:13-16). Ishmael plotted with Baalis, king of Ammon, to assassinate Gedaliah, whom Nebuchadnezzar had appointed governor over Judea, now reduced to a province of Babylonia. After carrying out the assassination, Ishmael escaped to Ammon (Jer 41:1-15). Nebuchadnezzar then sent troops that sacked Rabbah and took captive many of the Ammonites. Though the city was not destroyed, the destruction of the countryside was thorough. In the third century <span>BC<\/span>, Arab invaders poured in and destroyed the remaining organized political structure, thus marking the end of Ammon as a semi-independent state.<\/p>","summary_ro":"AMMON, AMMONITES A Semitic people who occupied a fertile area northeast of Moab in Transjordan between the Arnon and Jabbok Rivers and extending eastward to the Syrian Desert. The chief city was Rabbah (Rabbath-ammon), modern Amman, capital of Jordan. The Ammonites traced their ancestry to the younger daughter of Lot (Gn 19:38). Their name in Hebrew originally meant “son of my paternal clan,” preserving the remembrance of an actual clan and personal name, and suggesting a kinship between the ...","summary_en":"AMMON, AMMONITES A Semitic people who occupied a fertile area northeast of Moab in Transjordan between the Arnon and Jabbok Rivers and extending eastward to the Syrian Desert. The chief city was Rabbah (Rabbath-ammon), modern Amman, capital of Jordan. The Ammonites traced their ancestry to the younger daughter of Lot (Gn 19:38). Their name in Hebrew originally meant “son of my paternal clan,” preserving the remembrance of an actual clan and personal name, and suggesting a kinship between the ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11052,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Esau","title_en":"Esau","content_ro":"<h3>ESAU<\/h3>\n<p>Isaac’s son, and the older twin brother of Jacob (Gn 25:24-26), who was given this name because of the hair on his body at birth. The reddish color of the baby, together with the color appearing in the episode of the lentil soup (v 30), led to the use of the term Edom, or “red.” The Edomites claimed to be descended from Esau, and naming their land Seir may have been an attempt to retain an association with the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sair<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “hairy.”<\/p>\n<p>A proficient hunter, Esau brought tasty wild meat to his father, who enjoyed its stronger flavor much more than that of the mild meat provided from the family flocks by Jacob. On a certain day Esau returned home from an unsuccessful hunting expedition; he was very hungry. Esau was persuaded by Jacob to surrender his birthright in return for food (Gn 25:29-34).<\/p>\n<p>Archaeological information from Nuzi shows that giving up the birthright to another member of the family was not unknown. Esau’s marriage to two local women who were not descendants of Abraham made life extremely difficult for his parents (Gn 26:34-35). This may have been the reason why his mother, Rebekah, decided to coach Jacob to obtain the patriarchal blessing that normally belonged to his elder brother Esau (ch 27). Esau’s anger on discovering the deception of his brother prompted Jacob to leave for Haran, though 20 years later, through the generous forgiveness of Esau, the brothers were reunited (33:4-16).<\/p>\n<p>At birth Jacob had come into the world grasping the heel of Esau, an omen that was interpreted to show that the Edomite descendants of Esau would be subject to the offspring of Jacob. The subservient relationship between the Edomites and the Israelites in the time of David (2 Sm 8:11-15; 1 Chr 18:13) continued until the time of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22; 2 Chr 21:8-10). Following a rebellion in 845 <span>BC<\/span>, the Edomites gained their independence for a while but were reconquered by Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>). Regaining their freedom in 735 <span>BC<\/span>, they subsequently remained independent of Judah. <em>See<\/em> Edom, Edomites.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ESAU<\/h3>\n<p>Isaac’s son, and the older twin brother of Jacob (Gn 25:24-26), who was given this name because of the hair on his body at birth. The reddish color of the baby, together with the color appearing in the episode of the lentil soup (v 30), led to the use of the term Edom, or “red.” The Edomites claimed to be descended from Esau, and naming their land Seir may have been an attempt to retain an association with the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sair<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “hairy.”<\/p>\n<p>A proficient hunter, Esau brought tasty wild meat to his father, who enjoyed its stronger flavor much more than that of the mild meat provided from the family flocks by Jacob. On a certain day Esau returned home from an unsuccessful hunting expedition; he was very hungry. Esau was persuaded by Jacob to surrender his birthright in return for food (Gn 25:29-34).<\/p>\n<p>Archaeological information from Nuzi shows that giving up the birthright to another member of the family was not unknown. Esau’s marriage to two local women who were not descendants of Abraham made life extremely difficult for his parents (Gn 26:34-35). This may have been the reason why his mother, Rebekah, decided to coach Jacob to obtain the patriarchal blessing that normally belonged to his elder brother Esau (ch 27). Esau’s anger on discovering the deception of his brother prompted Jacob to leave for Haran, though 20 years later, through the generous forgiveness of Esau, the brothers were reunited (33:4-16).<\/p>\n<p>At birth Jacob had come into the world grasping the heel of Esau, an omen that was interpreted to show that the Edomite descendants of Esau would be subject to the offspring of Jacob. The subservient relationship between the Edomites and the Israelites in the time of David (2 Sm 8:11-15; 1 Chr 18:13) continued until the time of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22; 2 Chr 21:8-10). Following a rebellion in 845 <span>BC<\/span>, the Edomites gained their independence for a while but were reconquered by Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>). Regaining their freedom in 735 <span>BC<\/span>, they subsequently remained independent of Judah. <em>See<\/em> Edom, Edomites.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ESAU Isaac’s son, and the older twin brother of Jacob (Gn 25:24-26), who was given this name because of the hair on his body at birth. The reddish color of the baby, together with the color appearing in the episode of the lentil soup (v 30), led to the use of the term Edom, or “red.” The Edomites claimed to be descended from Esau, and naming their land Seir may have been an attempt to retain an association with the word sair, meaning “hairy.” A proficient hunter, Esau brought tasty wild meat ...","summary_en":"ESAU Isaac’s son, and the older twin brother of Jacob (Gn 25:24-26), who was given this name because of the hair on his body at birth. The reddish color of the baby, together with the color appearing in the episode of the lentil soup (v 30), led to the use of the term Edom, or “red.” The Edomites claimed to be descended from Esau, and naming their land Seir may have been an attempt to retain an association with the word sair, meaning “hairy.” A proficient hunter, Esau brought tasty wild meat ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13865,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gilead (Place)","title_en":"Gilead (Place)","content_ro":"<h3>GILEAD (P<span>lace<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Region east of the Jordan River. Generally used to designate the territory occupied by all the Transjordanian Israelite tribes (Jgs 20:1; 2 Kgs 10:33; Jer 50:19; Zec 10:10). Specifically, Gilead is the area of the Transjordan lying between the Yarmuk and Arnon Rivers and divided by the Jabbok River.<\/li>\n<p>The so-called Dome of Gilead is an extension of the central hill country of Judah, rising to heights of more than 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above the Jordan Valley. The valleys and hills were well watered by numerous rivers and tributaries, making flatter portions of the countryside well suited for agriculture, especially olive trees, grapevines, and grains (cf. Jer 8:22; 46:11; Hos 2:8). The densely forested and rugged hills were sometimes compared to those of Lebanon (Jer 22:6; Zec 10:10) and made the land a refuge for those in flight, since the terrain prohibited ready pursuit by enemies (cf. Gn 31:21; 1 Sm 13:7).<\/p>\n<p>Originally the region of Gilead was allotted to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh (Nm 32). The period of the judges saw Israelite security there assailed by the Midianites and Amalekites, only to be checked by the military exploits of Gideon (Jgs 6–7). Half a century later, Jephthah was recalled from his banishment to rescue Gilead from oppressive Ammonite rule (chs 10–11). During the united monarchy, Saul delivered Jabesh-gilead from Ammonite dominance (1 Sm 11:1-11; 31:8-13; 2 Sm 2:1-7). Abner installed Ish-bosheth as a rival to David in Gilead (2 Sm 2:8-9). David conquered the Ammonites controlling Gilead as he extended the borders of Israel (8:11-12; 10:1-19). He fled there for refuge in the face of Absalom’s rebellion (chs 15–17) and was finally restored to the throne when Absalom was slain in the forest of Ephraim (chs 18–19). Gilead remained a battleground during the divided monarchy, as first the Israelites warred with the Syrians (Arameans; 1 Kgs 20:23-43; 22:1-4, 29-40; 2 Kgs 13:22; Am 1:3) and then with the Assyrians, who wrested the territory from Pekah in 733 <span>BC<\/span> and deported the Israelite population, thus severing Gilead’s tie to the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 15:27-31).<\/p>\n<li>2. A city condemned for its evil (Hos 6:8), possibly an abbreviated name for Jabesh-gilead or Ramoth-gilead. This may be the same Gilead that was identified with Mizpah #5. (cf. Jgs 10:17-18).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>GILEAD (P<span>lace<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Region east of the Jordan River. Generally used to designate the territory occupied by all the Transjordanian Israelite tribes (Jgs 20:1; 2 Kgs 10:33; Jer 50:19; Zec 10:10). Specifically, Gilead is the area of the Transjordan lying between the Yarmuk and Arnon Rivers and divided by the Jabbok River.<\/li>\n<p>The so-called Dome of Gilead is an extension of the central hill country of Judah, rising to heights of more than 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above the Jordan Valley. The valleys and hills were well watered by numerous rivers and tributaries, making flatter portions of the countryside well suited for agriculture, especially olive trees, grapevines, and grains (cf. Jer 8:22; 46:11; Hos 2:8). The densely forested and rugged hills were sometimes compared to those of Lebanon (Jer 22:6; Zec 10:10) and made the land a refuge for those in flight, since the terrain prohibited ready pursuit by enemies (cf. Gn 31:21; 1 Sm 13:7).<\/p>\n<p>Originally the region of Gilead was allotted to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh (Nm 32). The period of the judges saw Israelite security there assailed by the Midianites and Amalekites, only to be checked by the military exploits of Gideon (Jgs 6–7). Half a century later, Jephthah was recalled from his banishment to rescue Gilead from oppressive Ammonite rule (chs 10–11). During the united monarchy, Saul delivered Jabesh-gilead from Ammonite dominance (1 Sm 11:1-11; 31:8-13; 2 Sm 2:1-7). Abner installed Ish-bosheth as a rival to David in Gilead (2 Sm 2:8-9). David conquered the Ammonites controlling Gilead as he extended the borders of Israel (8:11-12; 10:1-19). He fled there for refuge in the face of Absalom’s rebellion (chs 15–17) and was finally restored to the throne when Absalom was slain in the forest of Ephraim (chs 18–19). Gilead remained a battleground during the divided monarchy, as first the Israelites warred with the Syrians (Arameans; 1 Kgs 20:23-43; 22:1-4, 29-40; 2 Kgs 13:22; Am 1:3) and then with the Assyrians, who wrested the territory from Pekah in 733 <span>BC<\/span> and deported the Israelite population, thus severing Gilead’s tie to the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 15:27-31).<\/p>\n<li>2. A city condemned for its evil (Hos 6:8), possibly an abbreviated name for Jabesh-gilead or Ramoth-gilead. This may be the same Gilead that was identified with Mizpah #5. (cf. Jgs 10:17-18).<\/li>","summary_ro":"GILEAD (Place) 1. Region east of the Jordan River. Generally used to designate the territory occupied by all the Transjordanian Israelite tribes (Jgs 20:1; 2 Kgs 10:33; Jer 50:19; Zec 10:10). Specifically, Gilead is the area of the Transjordan lying between the Yarmuk and Arnon Rivers and divided by the Jabbok River. The so-called Dome of Gilead is an extension of the central hill country of Judah, rising to heights of more than 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above the Jordan Valley. The valleys a...","summary_en":"GILEAD (Place) 1. Region east of the Jordan River. Generally used to designate the territory occupied by all the Transjordanian Israelite tribes (Jgs 20:1; 2 Kgs 10:33; Jer 50:19; Zec 10:10). Specifically, Gilead is the area of the Transjordan lying between the Yarmuk and Arnon Rivers and divided by the Jabbok River. The so-called Dome of Gilead is an extension of the central hill country of Judah, rising to heights of more than 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above the Jordan Valley. The valleys a...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46620,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:11","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:11-12<\/strong> Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were <em>dedicated . . . to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:11-12<\/strong> Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were <em>dedicated . . . to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:11-12 Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were dedicated . . . to the Lord.","summary_en":"8:11-12 Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were dedicated . . . to the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74246,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:11","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:11-12<\/strong> Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were <em>dedicated . . . to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:11-12<\/strong> Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were <em>dedicated . . . to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:11-12 Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were dedicated . . . to the Lord.","summary_en":"8:11-12 Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were dedicated . . . to the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101872,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:11","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:11-12<\/strong> Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were <em>dedicated . . . to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:11-12<\/strong> Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were <em>dedicated . . . to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:11-12 Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were dedicated . . . to the Lord.","summary_en":"8:11-12 Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were dedicated . . . to the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129498,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:11","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:11-12<\/strong> Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were <em>dedicated . . . to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:11-12<\/strong> Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were <em>dedicated . . . to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:11-12 Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were dedicated . . . to the Lord.","summary_en":"8:11-12 Captured war booty and diplomatic exchanges went into God’s treasury rather than the king’s treasury. Voluntary gifts (8:11a) and plunder exacted from defeated foes (8:11b-12) also were dedicated . . . to the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":1217,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Amalekites Amalek","title_en":"Amalekites Amalek","content_ro":"<h3>AMALEK, AMALEKITES<\/h3>\n<p>Amalek was the son of Eliphaz (Esau’s son) by his concubine, Timna (Gn 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). Descendants of this tribal chief of Edom were known as Amalekites. They settled in the Negev Desert and became allies of the Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, Ishmaelites, and Midianites. The Amalekites were notable enemies of Israel. Amalek inherited the fraternal feud that had begun with his grandfather Esau’s antagonism toward Jacob. Since Jacob was one of the progenitors of Israel, the conflict between Amalek and Israel had both a theological and political basis.<\/p>\n<p>The territory of the nomadic Amalekites in the Negev ranged at times from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly over into Arabia. In the Negev they blocked the path of the Israelites during the exodus (Ex 17:8-16).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai. Moses stood on top of a hill and held up the rod of God until Israel won the battle, then built an altar and named it “The Lord Is My Banner” (Ex 17:1, 8-16). The Amalekites attacked stragglers during Israel’s desert wanderings (Dt 25:17-18). After reaching the boundary of the Promised Land but rejecting Caleb and Joshua’s report of it, the unbelieving and disheartened Israelites attacked the Amalekites and were defeated (Nm 14:39-45).<\/p>\n<p>When Balaam was summoned by King Balak of Moab to curse Israel, he turned his curse upon Moab and in his last oracle predicted the end of Amalek’s tribe (Nm 24:20). Moses, in his farewell speech, reminded the children of Israel that they had been harassed by Amalek’s descendants and should blot out all remembrance of the name Amalek (Dt 25:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the judges Amalekites continued to occupy their traditional area and became associated with the Kenites (1 Sm 15:5-6), descendants of Moses’ father-in-law, who settled in the Negev south of Arad (Jgs 1:16). The Amalekites, still associated with other nomadic tribes (Moabites, Ammonites, Midianites), were rallied by Eglon, king of Moab, to defeat Israel and seize Jericho (Jgs 3:12-14). The Song of Deborah cites Amalek as one of a coalition of tribes against Israel (Jgs 5:14, <span>kjv<\/span>). The name is omitted in a number of modern translations, and in others translated as “into the valley” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However, Amalekite harassment is referred to in other passages of the time of Deborah and Barak (Jgs 6:3, 33; 7:12). Gideon defeated the coalition (Jgs 7:12-25), but there is no evidence that the Amalekites were driven out of the Negev.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Samuel, Saul sent his armies out against the Amalekites (14:47-48) and received a command from God to destroy them and all their possessions (15:1-3). He did attack their city (15:4-7) but did not kill their king, Agag (15:8). Saul distributed the choicest Amalekite livestock to his men (15:9), for which the Lord condemned him and sent Samuel to tell him that his kingship was ended because of his sin (15:10-31). Samuel then slaughtered Agag (15:32-35). A remnant of Amalekites must have escaped, since they appeared again as David’s foes while he was still a young warrior (27:8). He rescued his two wives carried off by Amalekites and killed most of the raiding party (30:1-20). The Amalekites were Israel’s sworn enemies throughout King David’s reign (2 Sm 1:1). They are listed among the enemies of Israel (2 Sm 8:12; 1 Chr 18:11; Ps 83:7). Destruction of the few surviving Amalekites came several hundred years after David during the reign of Hezekiah of the southern kingdom of Judah (1 Chr 4:41-43).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AMALEK, AMALEKITES<\/h3>\n<p>Amalek was the son of Eliphaz (Esau’s son) by his concubine, Timna (Gn 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). Descendants of this tribal chief of Edom were known as Amalekites. They settled in the Negev Desert and became allies of the Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, Ishmaelites, and Midianites. The Amalekites were notable enemies of Israel. Amalek inherited the fraternal feud that had begun with his grandfather Esau’s antagonism toward Jacob. Since Jacob was one of the progenitors of Israel, the conflict between Amalek and Israel had both a theological and political basis.<\/p>\n<p>The territory of the nomadic Amalekites in the Negev ranged at times from south of Beersheba to the southeast as far as Elath and Ezion-geber. They undoubtedly raided westward into the coastal plain, eastward into the Arabah wastelands, and possibly over into Arabia. In the Negev they blocked the path of the Israelites during the exodus (Ex 17:8-16).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s first encounter with the warriors of Amalek came at Rephidim near Sinai. Moses stood on top of a hill and held up the rod of God until Israel won the battle, then built an altar and named it “The Lord Is My Banner” (Ex 17:1, 8-16). The Amalekites attacked stragglers during Israel’s desert wanderings (Dt 25:17-18). After reaching the boundary of the Promised Land but rejecting Caleb and Joshua’s report of it, the unbelieving and disheartened Israelites attacked the Amalekites and were defeated (Nm 14:39-45).<\/p>\n<p>When Balaam was summoned by King Balak of Moab to curse Israel, he turned his curse upon Moab and in his last oracle predicted the end of Amalek’s tribe (Nm 24:20). Moses, in his farewell speech, reminded the children of Israel that they had been harassed by Amalek’s descendants and should blot out all remembrance of the name Amalek (Dt 25:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the judges Amalekites continued to occupy their traditional area and became associated with the Kenites (1 Sm 15:5-6), descendants of Moses’ father-in-law, who settled in the Negev south of Arad (Jgs 1:16). The Amalekites, still associated with other nomadic tribes (Moabites, Ammonites, Midianites), were rallied by Eglon, king of Moab, to defeat Israel and seize Jericho (Jgs 3:12-14). The Song of Deborah cites Amalek as one of a coalition of tribes against Israel (Jgs 5:14, <span>kjv<\/span>). The name is omitted in a number of modern translations, and in others translated as “into the valley” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However, Amalekite harassment is referred to in other passages of the time of Deborah and Barak (Jgs 6:3, 33; 7:12). Gideon defeated the coalition (Jgs 7:12-25), but there is no evidence that the Amalekites were driven out of the Negev.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Samuel, Saul sent his armies out against the Amalekites (14:47-48) and received a command from God to destroy them and all their possessions (15:1-3). He did attack their city (15:4-7) but did not kill their king, Agag (15:8). Saul distributed the choicest Amalekite livestock to his men (15:9), for which the Lord condemned him and sent Samuel to tell him that his kingship was ended because of his sin (15:10-31). Samuel then slaughtered Agag (15:32-35). A remnant of Amalekites must have escaped, since they appeared again as David’s foes while he was still a young warrior (27:8). He rescued his two wives carried off by Amalekites and killed most of the raiding party (30:1-20). The Amalekites were Israel’s sworn enemies throughout King David’s reign (2 Sm 1:1). They are listed among the enemies of Israel (2 Sm 8:12; 1 Chr 18:11; Ps 83:7). Destruction of the few surviving Amalekites came several hundred years after David during the reign of Hezekiah of the southern kingdom of Judah (1 Chr 4:41-43).<\/p>","summary_ro":"AMALEK, AMALEKITES Amalek was the son of Eliphaz (Esau’s son) by his concubine, Timna (Gn 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). Descendants of this tribal chief of Edom were known as Amalekites. They settled in the Negev Desert and became allies of the Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, Ishmaelites, and Midianites. The Amalekites were notable enemies of Israel. Amalek inherited the fraternal feud that had begun with his grandfather Esau’s antagonism toward Jacob. Since Jacob was one of the progenitors of Israel, t...","summary_en":"AMALEK, AMALEKITES Amalek was the son of Eliphaz (Esau’s son) by his concubine, Timna (Gn 36:12; 1 Chr 1:36). Descendants of this tribal chief of Edom were known as Amalekites. They settled in the Negev Desert and became allies of the Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, Ishmaelites, and Midianites. The Amalekites were notable enemies of Israel. Amalek inherited the fraternal feud that had begun with his grandfather Esau’s antagonism toward Jacob. Since Jacob was one of the progenitors of Israel, t...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":10101,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Edomites Edom","title_en":"Edomites Edom","content_ro":"<h3>EDOM, EDOMITES<\/h3>\n<p>Land and its inhabitants found on the high plateau to the south and southeast of the Dead Sea. The biblical term Edom, meaning “red,” denotes either the name of the land or the name of Esau, in remembrance of the red pottage or stew for which he exchanged his birthright (Gn 25:30; 36:1, 8, 19). The country of Edom was also known as Seir (Gn 32:3; 36:30; Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The northern boundary of Edom was the Wadi Zered, the “Brook of the Willows” (Is 15:7). In ancient geological times the area was thrust up to a considerable height, and dark-red sandstone cliffs were exposed along the western side where the land falls steeply into the Arabah, the southern extension of the deep depression in which the Dead Sea and the Jordan Valley lie. The Edom Plateau rises to over 5,000 feet (1,523.9 meters), reaching over 5,600 feet (1,706.8 meters) in places. The area divides into two unequal parts. The region of Punon forms something of a valley between the smaller northern part and the longer southern part. The northern section is not quite so high, though in a limited area near Radhadiyeh it reaches 5,300 feet (1,615.4 meters). The southern section is longer and generally higher, being over 5,000 feet (1,523.9 meters) throughout the central ridge and touching 5,687 feet (1,733.3 meters) at one point. To the east, the escarpment does not fall below 4,000 feet (1,219.1 meters), except in the north. The desert lies beyond and limits expansion eastward. To the west, the land falls away rather steeply into the Arabah. The extent of Edom to the west varied from time to time. It was comparatively easy to gain access to the Negev of southern Judah in this area, and Edomite encroachments were made from time to time. The southern frontier was marked by an extensive limestone scarp at the southern edge of the plateau. This ran eastward from Ain Gharandal in the Arabah. Beyond this barrier to the south lay rocky, uninhabitable desert, through which merchants must have journeyed to the port at Ezion-geber for trade.<\/p>\n<p>The land of Edom was, on the whole, inhospitable, though there were areas where farming could be undertaken, particularly to the northeast. Here herds of animals could be grazed. Edom’s wealth, however, came largely from the caravan trade that came up from the south and brought goods from India and South Arabia to the Mediterranean coast and Egypt. The important King’s Highway (Nm 21:22) passed through Edom on its way north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>Biblically, the name Edom does not appear in the genealogy in Genesis 10. It first appears in the story of Esau in Genesis 25:30. Esau was called Edom from the red color of the pottage for which he sold his birthright to his brother, Jacob. In Genesis 36 there is reference to an Edomite kingdom at a time well before the appearance of an Israelite kingdom, though it is possible that the “chiefs” of Edom were tribal chieftains or non-dynastic leaders like the Israelite judges.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest nonbiblical references come from Egypt and seem to confirm this. Amarna Letter 288 (early 14th century <span>BC<\/span>) refers to the “lands of Seir,” and the crossing of the Shashu tribes of Edom into Egypt is mentioned by Seti II (1214–1208 <span>BC<\/span>) and Ramses III (1198–1166 <span>BC<\/span>). There are no Egyptian references to towns or rulers, only to tribal Bedouin from Seir-Edom. There is some evidence that Ramses II was in Transjordan about 1280–1270 <span>BC<\/span>, but there is no clear evidence that there was a centralized government before the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Rather, the land was occupied mainly by seminomadic people. From then on, permanent settlements began to appear, a fact that has relevance for the date of the exodus. The Song of Moses in Exodus 15 refers to the “chiefs of Edom.” By the time of the exodus, there appears to have been a kingdom of Edom (Nm 20:14, 18, 20-23; 33:37; 34:3). The Israelites skirted Edom on their journey to the Promised Land (Jgs 5:4; 11:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the rise of the Israelite monarchy, Saul fought successfully against Edom (1 Sm 14:47). Doeg the Edomite was the chief of Saul’s herdsmen (21:7; 22:9, 18-22). At the beginning of the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>, David defeated Edom in the Valley of Salt and killed many Edomites (2 Sm 8:13; 1 Chr 18:12). Thereafter, David placed garrisons in Edom, and the Edomites became his subjects (2 Sm 8:14). It is not clear whether David saw in these people a military threat or whether he was interested in the supply of copper from their land and the potential wealth that would flow from the caravan traffic passing through Edom. David’s successes resulted in the flight of a certain Hadad, who was “of the royal house of Edom” to Egypt (1 Kgs 11:14-17), where he married a member of the Egyptian royal family (vv 18-20). On David’s death, Hadad returned to Edom, where he became king. It would seem that a monarchical form of government had developed by David’s time. Solomon continued to exert influence in Edom. He had access to the port of Ezion-geber (9:26).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical records provide no information about Edom from the end of Solomon’s reign until the days of Jehoshaphat of Judah (872–848 <span>BC<\/span>). Jehoshaphat was able to occupy the port of Ezion-geber, although his ships were wrecked there, possibly by the Edomites (1 Kgs 22:48; 2 Chr 20:36-37). Israel combined with Judah and Edom in an unsuccessful campaign against King Mesha of Moab (2 Kgs 3:4-27). Edom was able to throw off Judah’s authority under King Jehoram (853–841 <span>BC<\/span>) and set up a king of its own (8:20-22). It remained independent until the days of King Amaziah of Judah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>), who conquered Edom as far south as Sela, defeating a large army of the Edomites in the Valley of Salt (2 Kgs 14:7; 2 Chr 25:11-13). This gave Judah control of the copper mines in the Punon area. King Uzziah of Judah (792–740 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to push his control south to Elath (near Ezion-geber; 2 Kgs 14:22; 2 Chr 26:1-2). Before the end of the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, in the days of Ahaz (735–715 <span>BC<\/span>), Edom defeated Judah and recovered Elath (2 Kgs 16:6). Thereafter, Judah lost control over Edom.<\/p>\n<p>During the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, the Assyrians began to move into Transjordan. About 800 <span>BC<\/span> Adad-nirari III (810–782 <span>BC<\/span>) claimed to have conquered several of these western states and to have imposed the payment of tribute. Then Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) received tribute from Qaus-malaku of Edom. Sargon II (722–705 <span>BC<\/span>) spoke of an unnamed ruler of Edom who was involved in the rebellion of Ashdod in 713 <span>BC<\/span>. Sennacherib (705–681 <span>BC<\/span>) spoke of a certain Aiarammu, who brought gifts from Edom. Esarhaddon (681–669 <span>BC<\/span>) referred to Qaus-gabri, king of Edom, who came to Nineveh with 22 vassals to swear allegiance. Under Ashurbanipal (669–627 <span>BC<\/span>), Edom appears on Assyrian records. Thereafter, Assyria itself was defeated by the Babylonians. Under the Babylonians, Edom seems to have remained a subservient vassal, although in 594 it joined other small nations in discussing rebellion (Jer 27). When Nebuchadnezzar attacked these, however, Moab and Edom were not involved. In the overthrow of Jerusalem in 586, Edom remained neutral and even allowed some refugees from Judah to shelter there for a time (40:11). The prophet Obadiah castigated Edom for not assisting Judah at the time of the Babylonian invasion (Ob 1:11). Instead, they raided Judah, handed over captives to Babylon, and possessed lands in the Negev area to the south (Ez 35).<\/p>\n<p>A long history of enmity existed between Judah and Edom, and several prophets spoke unfavorably about Edom (Is 11:14; 34:5-17; Ez 32:29; Jl 3:19; Am 1:11-12; Mal 1:2-4). In the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, Edom entered a period of decline. Several cities were abandoned. At the same time Edomite colonies west of the Arabah in the southern hill country of Judah emerged, and by Roman times there was a province of Idumea, which was the descendant of the Persian province of Edom, with its administrative center at Lachish. In the old Edomite homeland, Arab groups began to move in. Finally, ancient Edom became the home of the Nabateans.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EDOM, EDOMITES<\/h3>\n<p>Land and its inhabitants found on the high plateau to the south and southeast of the Dead Sea. The biblical term Edom, meaning “red,” denotes either the name of the land or the name of Esau, in remembrance of the red pottage or stew for which he exchanged his birthright (Gn 25:30; 36:1, 8, 19). The country of Edom was also known as Seir (Gn 32:3; 36:30; Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The northern boundary of Edom was the Wadi Zered, the “Brook of the Willows” (Is 15:7). In ancient geological times the area was thrust up to a considerable height, and dark-red sandstone cliffs were exposed along the western side where the land falls steeply into the Arabah, the southern extension of the deep depression in which the Dead Sea and the Jordan Valley lie. The Edom Plateau rises to over 5,000 feet (1,523.9 meters), reaching over 5,600 feet (1,706.8 meters) in places. The area divides into two unequal parts. The region of Punon forms something of a valley between the smaller northern part and the longer southern part. The northern section is not quite so high, though in a limited area near Radhadiyeh it reaches 5,300 feet (1,615.4 meters). The southern section is longer and generally higher, being over 5,000 feet (1,523.9 meters) throughout the central ridge and touching 5,687 feet (1,733.3 meters) at one point. To the east, the escarpment does not fall below 4,000 feet (1,219.1 meters), except in the north. The desert lies beyond and limits expansion eastward. To the west, the land falls away rather steeply into the Arabah. The extent of Edom to the west varied from time to time. It was comparatively easy to gain access to the Negev of southern Judah in this area, and Edomite encroachments were made from time to time. The southern frontier was marked by an extensive limestone scarp at the southern edge of the plateau. This ran eastward from Ain Gharandal in the Arabah. Beyond this barrier to the south lay rocky, uninhabitable desert, through which merchants must have journeyed to the port at Ezion-geber for trade.<\/p>\n<p>The land of Edom was, on the whole, inhospitable, though there were areas where farming could be undertaken, particularly to the northeast. Here herds of animals could be grazed. Edom’s wealth, however, came largely from the caravan trade that came up from the south and brought goods from India and South Arabia to the Mediterranean coast and Egypt. The important King’s Highway (Nm 21:22) passed through Edom on its way north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>Biblically, the name Edom does not appear in the genealogy in Genesis 10. It first appears in the story of Esau in Genesis 25:30. Esau was called Edom from the red color of the pottage for which he sold his birthright to his brother, Jacob. In Genesis 36 there is reference to an Edomite kingdom at a time well before the appearance of an Israelite kingdom, though it is possible that the “chiefs” of Edom were tribal chieftains or non-dynastic leaders like the Israelite judges.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest nonbiblical references come from Egypt and seem to confirm this. Amarna Letter 288 (early 14th century <span>BC<\/span>) refers to the “lands of Seir,” and the crossing of the Shashu tribes of Edom into Egypt is mentioned by Seti II (1214–1208 <span>BC<\/span>) and Ramses III (1198–1166 <span>BC<\/span>). There are no Egyptian references to towns or rulers, only to tribal Bedouin from Seir-Edom. There is some evidence that Ramses II was in Transjordan about 1280–1270 <span>BC<\/span>, but there is no clear evidence that there was a centralized government before the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Rather, the land was occupied mainly by seminomadic people. From then on, permanent settlements began to appear, a fact that has relevance for the date of the exodus. The Song of Moses in Exodus 15 refers to the “chiefs of Edom.” By the time of the exodus, there appears to have been a kingdom of Edom (Nm 20:14, 18, 20-23; 33:37; 34:3). The Israelites skirted Edom on their journey to the Promised Land (Jgs 5:4; 11:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the rise of the Israelite monarchy, Saul fought successfully against Edom (1 Sm 14:47). Doeg the Edomite was the chief of Saul’s herdsmen (21:7; 22:9, 18-22). At the beginning of the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>, David defeated Edom in the Valley of Salt and killed many Edomites (2 Sm 8:13; 1 Chr 18:12). Thereafter, David placed garrisons in Edom, and the Edomites became his subjects (2 Sm 8:14). It is not clear whether David saw in these people a military threat or whether he was interested in the supply of copper from their land and the potential wealth that would flow from the caravan traffic passing through Edom. David’s successes resulted in the flight of a certain Hadad, who was “of the royal house of Edom” to Egypt (1 Kgs 11:14-17), where he married a member of the Egyptian royal family (vv 18-20). On David’s death, Hadad returned to Edom, where he became king. It would seem that a monarchical form of government had developed by David’s time. Solomon continued to exert influence in Edom. He had access to the port of Ezion-geber (9:26).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical records provide no information about Edom from the end of Solomon’s reign until the days of Jehoshaphat of Judah (872–848 <span>BC<\/span>). Jehoshaphat was able to occupy the port of Ezion-geber, although his ships were wrecked there, possibly by the Edomites (1 Kgs 22:48; 2 Chr 20:36-37). Israel combined with Judah and Edom in an unsuccessful campaign against King Mesha of Moab (2 Kgs 3:4-27). Edom was able to throw off Judah’s authority under King Jehoram (853–841 <span>BC<\/span>) and set up a king of its own (8:20-22). It remained independent until the days of King Amaziah of Judah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>), who conquered Edom as far south as Sela, defeating a large army of the Edomites in the Valley of Salt (2 Kgs 14:7; 2 Chr 25:11-13). This gave Judah control of the copper mines in the Punon area. King Uzziah of Judah (792–740 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to push his control south to Elath (near Ezion-geber; 2 Kgs 14:22; 2 Chr 26:1-2). Before the end of the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, in the days of Ahaz (735–715 <span>BC<\/span>), Edom defeated Judah and recovered Elath (2 Kgs 16:6). Thereafter, Judah lost control over Edom.<\/p>\n<p>During the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, the Assyrians began to move into Transjordan. About 800 <span>BC<\/span> Adad-nirari III (810–782 <span>BC<\/span>) claimed to have conquered several of these western states and to have imposed the payment of tribute. Then Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) received tribute from Qaus-malaku of Edom. Sargon II (722–705 <span>BC<\/span>) spoke of an unnamed ruler of Edom who was involved in the rebellion of Ashdod in 713 <span>BC<\/span>. Sennacherib (705–681 <span>BC<\/span>) spoke of a certain Aiarammu, who brought gifts from Edom. Esarhaddon (681–669 <span>BC<\/span>) referred to Qaus-gabri, king of Edom, who came to Nineveh with 22 vassals to swear allegiance. Under Ashurbanipal (669–627 <span>BC<\/span>), Edom appears on Assyrian records. Thereafter, Assyria itself was defeated by the Babylonians. Under the Babylonians, Edom seems to have remained a subservient vassal, although in 594 it joined other small nations in discussing rebellion (Jer 27). When Nebuchadnezzar attacked these, however, Moab and Edom were not involved. In the overthrow of Jerusalem in 586, Edom remained neutral and even allowed some refugees from Judah to shelter there for a time (40:11). The prophet Obadiah castigated Edom for not assisting Judah at the time of the Babylonian invasion (Ob 1:11). Instead, they raided Judah, handed over captives to Babylon, and possessed lands in the Negev area to the south (Ez 35).<\/p>\n<p>A long history of enmity existed between Judah and Edom, and several prophets spoke unfavorably about Edom (Is 11:14; 34:5-17; Ez 32:29; Jl 3:19; Am 1:11-12; Mal 1:2-4). In the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, Edom entered a period of decline. Several cities were abandoned. At the same time Edomite colonies west of the Arabah in the southern hill country of Judah emerged, and by Roman times there was a province of Idumea, which was the descendant of the Persian province of Edom, with its administrative center at Lachish. In the old Edomite homeland, Arab groups began to move in. Finally, ancient Edom became the home of the Nabateans.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EDOM, EDOMITES Land and its inhabitants found on the high plateau to the south and southeast of the Dead Sea. The biblical term Edom, meaning “red,” denotes either the name of the land or the name of Esau, in remembrance of the red pottage or stew for which he exchanged his birthright (Gn 25:30; 36:1, 8, 19). The country of Edom was also known as Seir (Gn 32:3; 36:30; Nm 24:18). Geography The northern boundary of Edom was the Wadi Zered, the “Brook of the Willows” (Is 15:7). In ancient geolog...","summary_en":"EDOM, EDOMITES Land and its inhabitants found on the high plateau to the south and southeast of the Dead Sea. The biblical term Edom, meaning “red,” denotes either the name of the land or the name of Esau, in remembrance of the red pottage or stew for which he exchanged his birthright (Gn 25:30; 36:1, 8, 19). The country of Edom was also known as Seir (Gn 32:3; 36:30; Nm 24:18). Geography The northern boundary of Edom was the Wadi Zered, the “Brook of the Willows” (Is 15:7). In ancient geolog...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25788,"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},{"id":27780,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Numbers","title_en":"Book of Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>NUMBERS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, <em>Numeri.<\/em> The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The question of the authorship of Numbers is part of the larger question of the authorship of the Pentateuch. Until the appearance of the higher-critical documentary theories of the 19th century, the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was almost universally held by both Jews and Christians alike. This time-honored tradition is supported by the Pentateuch itself (e.g., Ex 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Nm 33:2; Dt 31:9, 24), the rest of the OT (e.g., Jos 23:6; Jgs 3:4; Mal 4:4), as well as Jesus’ teaching (e.g., Jn 5:46-47), and the rest of the NT (e.g., Acts 28:23; Rom 10:19; 1 Cor 9:9). Although discrepancies in the Pentateuch were widely and openly acknowledged, nevertheless Moses, the 15th-century <span>BC<\/span> lawgiver, was affirmed as the primary author of the Pentateuchal literature.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<h5>Sinai Peninsula<\/h5>\n<p>The historical background of Numbers begins primarily in the geographical region of the Sinai Peninsula of the mid-second millennium <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai Peninsula is in the shape of an inverted triangle with the base on the north. It is approximately 240 miles (386.2 kilometers) long from north to south and 175 miles (281.6 kilometers) wide at the northern base, with an area of approximately 22,000 square miles (56,980 square kilometers). It is bounded on the north by the Mediterranean Sea and the southern border of Canaan, on the west by the Bitter Lakes and the Gulf of Suez, and on the east by the Arabah and the Gulf of Aqaba. Beginning in the north at the Mediterranean coast and moving south, for about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the soil is sandy. South of this coastal plain is a high plateau (Et-Tih) of gravel and limestone (about 2,500 feet, or 762 meters, above sea level), stretching south into the peninsula for approximately 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). Rising above the plateau at this point is a granite mountain formation with peaks up to 8,000 feet (2,438.4 meters) above sea level. In this mountainous region at the apex of the peninsular triangle, Jebel Musa (7,363 feet, or 2,244.2 meters, high), the traditional site where Israel camped before Mt Sinai and Moses received the law, rises above the plain.<\/p>\n<p>The peninsula itself is comprised of five wilderness areas. In the north and immediately east of the land of Goshen is the approximately 40-mile- or 64.4-kilometer-wide wilderness of Shur, which runs past the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) to the region of Kadesh-barnea and northeast to Beersheba. East of this region is the wilderness of Zin, extending east from the wilderness of Shur to the southern tip of the Dead Sea. Kadesh-barnea is located on its southern border (Nm 20:1; 33:36). South of the wilderness of Shur is the wilderness of Etham, and east of this wilderness in the east-central region of Sinai is the great wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19). Kadesh-barnea is on the northern border of this territory (Nm 13:26). In this area the Israelites spent 38 of their 40 years of wandering. Southwest of the wilderness of Paran, on the western slopes of the peninsula, not far from the granite mountains standing in the southern apex of the triangle, is the wilderness of Sin.<\/p>\n<p>While the region is generally desolate and barren, it is not impassable or incapable of sustaining travelers. Wells and springs dot both the western and eastern borders at reasonable distances from each other. The water table is fairly close to ground level, making the digging of wells possible (Nm 20:17; 21:16-18). The limestone rocks are also capable of holding great amounts of water (20:11). Vegetation is sparse except around the more permanent streams where vegetation and date palms flourish. The rainy season in winter is approximately 20 days. Quail (11:31-32) are known to migrate across the peninsula to Europe in the spring.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Peoples Israel Confronted<\/h5>\n<h6>Amalekites and Canaanites (14:25, 43-45; 24:20)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amalekites were descendants of Amalek, son of Eliphaz and grandson of Esau (Gn 36:12, 16). They were generally a nomadic people. In the Sinai Peninsula they were the first to war against Israel at Rephidim (cf. Nm 24:20), perhaps the Wadi Refayid in southwest Sinai (Ex 17:8-16), before Israel reached Horeb. A year later, the Amalekites settled in the hills and valleys north of Kadesh-barnea. In league with the Canaanites, the inhabitants of Palestine, they blocked the effort of Israel to invade the land of promise from the south (Nm 14:45). Israel’s will to wage war appears to have been completely broken for years to come.<\/p>\n<h6>Edomites (20:14-21; 21:4, 10-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Edom, or Seir (24:18), is the territory south of the Dead Sea occupied by Esau’s descendants. Stretching from its northern border at the Wadi Zered (21:12), which flowed into the Dead Sea at its southern tip, 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) south to the Gulf of Aqaba, it occupied both sides of the Arabah, with Kadesh-barnea again standing on the edge of its western border (20:16), giving it a land area of approximately 4,000 square miles (10,360 square kilometers). It is a rugged mountain region with peaks rising to 3,500 feet (1,066.8 meters). The “king’s highway,” an ancient trade route from Damascus through the Transjordan to the Gulf of Aqaba, passed through its territory and major cities, Bozrah and Leman. While Edom was not fertile, it did have cultivable areas (20:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>During Israel’s march to the Transjordan region, Edom refused to let Israel journey directly east from Kadesh through its territory but forced Israel to move southeast into and up the Arabah (21:4, 11). In spite of this hostility to God’s people, Israel was forbidden to attack (Dt 2:2-8) or to hate the Edomites (23:7), and so Edom was spared from destruction during the conquest of the land. The area was later conquered by David (2 Sm 8:13-14) according to Balaam’s prophecy (Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<h6>Arad (21:1-3)<\/h6>\n<p>Arad was a south Canaanite settlement in the Negev. Its king, after fighting against Israel and taking some captives, was later defeated at Hormah.<\/p>\n<h6>Moabites (21:11-15; 22:1–24:25)<\/h6>\n<p>Moab, occupied by the descendants of Lot (Gn 19:37), is the territory east of the Dead Sea lying primarily between the Wadi Arnon (Nm 21:13) and the Wadi Zered with a land area of approximately 1,400 square miles (3,626 square kilometers).<\/p>\n<p>In the late middle Bronze Age, the Moabites had overflowed their main plateau and had extended well to the north of the Arnon all the way to the northern end of the Dead Sea (21:20). At the time of the events recorded in Numbers, however, the Amorites occupied the area from Arnon all the way north to the Wadi Jabbok (vv 13, 21-24), having earlier taken this land from Moab (vv 26-30). The Moabite kingdom was highly organized, with agriculture and livestock, splendid buildings, distinctive pottery, and strong fortifications around her borders. Its god was Chemosh (v 29).<\/p>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab during the period of the conquest, in league with Midian, hired Balaam to curse Israel (chs 22–24). When this failed, the two heathen powers sought to neutralize Israel by luring the people of God into the worship of Chemosh and into idolatry (25:1-2). In the war that ensued, Israel defeated Midian (31:1-18), but by God’s express command (Dt 2:9-13) spared Moab. But as Balaam had prophesied earlier (Nm 24:17), David in the 11th century warred against and defeated Moab (2 Sm 8:2, 13-14).<\/p>\n<h6>Amorites (21:21-35)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amorites, the people who had occupied northern Moabite territory (Nm 21:25-30), were descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:16) who had scattered throughout the hill country on both sides of the Jordan River. Heshbon was their capital city. Both Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan were Amorite kings (Dt 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As for Bashan (Nm 21:33-35; cf. Dt 1:4; 3:1-12), it is the fertile grazing region (Nm 32:1-5) east of the Sea of Kinnereth (Galilee), whose northern border extended to Mt Hermon and whose southern border, while normally the river Yarmuk, in the Mosaic age was the Wadi Jabbok (Jos 12:4-5). Its land area covered approximately 5,000 square miles (12,950 square kilometers). Its major cities were Ashtaroth, Edrei, and Golan. After the conquest of the land, this territory fell to the half-tribe of Manasseh, with Gad occupying southern Gilead, and Reuben the region south to the Wadi Arnon.<\/p>\n<h6>Midianites (25:16-18; 31:1-54)<\/h6>\n<p>The Midianites, descendants of Abraham through the concubine Keturah (Gn 25:2), were desert dwellers in Transjordan from Moab to the region south of Edom. The elders of Moab and Midian cooperated in hiring Balaam to curse Israel (Nm 22:4-7). Later, when that effort proved fruitless, the Midianites, again with Moab, led Israel into idolatry and immorality (25:1-6, 14-15). Cozbi, the Midianite woman who was executed for her wickedness (25:8), was the daughter of Zur, one of the five Midianite kings confederate with the Amorite king Sihon (Jos 13:21) who were later killed in Israel’s holy war against Midian (Nm 31:8). This war with Midian apparently broke the back of any remaining Amorite resistance, for Joshua 13:15-23 clearly intimates that as a result the tribe of Reuben occupied this territory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Numbers serves a twofold purpose. First, as a historical book, it contains the account of Israel’s fortunes from Mt Sinai to the plains of Moab on the eve of the conquest of Canaan—that almost-40-year period spent in the wilderness of Sinai and in Transjordan (1447–1407 <span>BC<\/span>). While recounting Israel’s many failures and God’s many faithful acts, it depicts Moses, Israel’s leader, in all of his greatness and in all of his weakness. The two army rolls (chs 2 and 26) introduce the “acts” of the main drama of its history: the first in preparation for entering the land, which failed due to Israel’s unbelief; the second, after the death of the entire generation that left Egypt, in preparation for the successful invasion of Canaan under Joshua’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Second, in line with Paul’s general belief that “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope” (Rom 15:4, <span>rsv<\/span>), and in keeping with his specific teaching that “these things [that befell Israel in the wilderness] happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor 10:11, <span>rsv<\/span>), Numbers serves a doctrinal, typical, and hortatory purpose (cf. v 12). Historical events are divinely invested with spiritual truths, thereby becoming object lessons for the Christian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to register (Nm 1:18) the men able to go to war (vv 2-3). The total number of soldiers in Israel was 603,550 (v 46). The Levites were not numbered in this roll (vv 47-54), since they were to be set apart for special service pertaining to the tabernacle.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 2<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses concerning the arrangement of the tribes while encamped and on the march. With the tabernacle in the center of the camp, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, totaling 186,400 (v 9), were to camp on the east; Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, totaling 151,450 (v 16), were to camp on the south; Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, totaling 108,100 (v 24), were to camp on the west; and Dan, Asher, and Naphtali, totaling 157,600 (v 31), were to camp on the north.<\/p>\n<p>On the march, Judah’s east group (v 9) was to set out first, followed by Reuben’s south group (v 16). The Levites with the tabernacle were to follow (v 17). Then Ephraim’s west group (v 24) was to follow the Levites, with Dan’s north group (v 31) bringing up the rear. This means that the Levites were flanked by two groups, before and behind.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 3<\/h5>\n<p>Aaron, the great-grandson of Levi through Kohath (Ex 6:16-20), and his descendants were designated to serve as priests at the tabernacle (Nm 3:2-3). The remaining descendants of Levi, from the families of Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, were to serve the Aaronic line at the tabernacle (vv 5-10). The Gershonites were responsible for the tabernacle coverings, hangings, and screens (vv 25-26); the Kohathites were responsible for the “furniture” in the tabernacle (v 31); and the Merarites were responsible for the frames, bars, and foundations for the tabernacle (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed Moses to number the three Levitical families. Gershon’s descendants, totaling 7,500 (v 22), were to camp on the west, between the western group of tribes and the tabernacle. Kohath’s descendants, totaling 8,600 (v 28), were to camp on the south, between the southern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Merari’s descendants, totaling 6,200 (v 34), were to camp on the north, between the northern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Moses and the Aaronic family were to camp on the east, between the eastern group of tribes and the tabernacle (v 38). Both in camp and on the march, then, the tabernacle was in the midst of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The census of Israel’s firstborn males disclosed 273 more male babies than Levites (vv 40-46), and since the Levites were a ransom for Israelite males on a one-to-one basis, the 273 additional male children had to be ransomed by atonement money (vv 46-51).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 4<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Moses that only Levites between the ages of 30 and 50 were to serve at the tabernacle. A census disclosed that there were 2,750 Kohathites (v 36), 2,630 Gershonites (v 40), and 3,200 Merarites (v 44), making a total of 8,580 (v 48) who were eligible to serve the Aaronic priests.<\/p>\n<p>God further ordered the Aaronic priests, when the tabernacle was being dismantled for the march, to cover all the tabernacle “furniture” before the Kohathites even looked at them (v 20) lest the Kohathites, either looking at or touching them (v 15), should die (vv 15, 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 5<\/h5>\n<p>For ceremonial purposes, God demanded that lepers, those with a bodily discharge, and those who had touched the dead, must be put outside the camp until they were purified (vv 1-4). Furthermore, God instructed those making restitution for a wrongdoing, if the wronged person was no longer alive, to give the restitution price to a priest (vv 5-10).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, if a woman was suspected by her husband of infidelity but there was no evidence of such, the woman was to undergo a trial by water ordeal to relieve the man of his suspicions. The priest was to give her holy water with dust from the floor of the tabernacle in it to drink. If she was guilty, the water by divine direction would cause her pain, make her abdomen swell, and her thigh waste away (vv 11-31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 6<\/h5>\n<p>Laws pertaining to the Nazirite were given next. A Nazirite was a person who determined to take a vow to separate himself wholly to the Lord. To dramatize this separation, the Nazirite was to drink no intoxicating beverage, let the hair grow long, and touch no dead body (vv 3-6). Should he defile himself, he was to follow prescribed rules for ceremonial cleansing (vv 9-12). When his vow had run its course, he was to follow prescribed rules for terminating his vow (vv 13-21). Finally, God instructed the Aaronic priesthood concerning the blessing they were to pronounce upon the Israelite worshiper (vv 22-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 7<\/h5>\n<p>The leaders in Israel brought six wagons and twelve oxen for use in the transfer of the tabernacle (7:3). Moses gave two wagons and four oxen to the Gershonites (v 7), and four wagons and eight oxen to the Merarites (v 8). (The Kohathites were to carry the “furniture” of the tabernacle on their shoulders, v 9.) For twelve consecutive days, to consecrate the altar after it was anointed (vv 10, 88), the tribal leaders, in the order of march (cf. ch 2), brought similar offerings. God demonstrated his pleasure with this gesture by speaking to Moses from the mercy seat (v 89).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 8<\/h5>\n<p>God granted the prerogative to light the seven-branched lampstand to the Aaronic priests (vv 1-4). Following divine instructions, Moses and Aaron consecrated the Levites to the service of the tabernacle by means of a purification ceremony (vv 5-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 9:1–10:10<\/h5>\n<p>For the benefit of the worshiper who was ceremonially unclean or away on a journey at the time of the Passover, God granted permission to observe the Passover a month later (vv 6-12; see also ch 27).<\/p>\n<p>God gave final instructions to the people before their departure from Sinai. They were to prepare for marching when they saw the cloud ascending from the tabernacle, and they were to stop at the place where the cloud settled down (9:15-23). The people were to assemble at the tabernacle if two silver trumpets were blown; only the leaders were to come if one was blown; and at the blast of a military alarm, the several groups of tribes were to prepare for an immediate march (10:1-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 10:11–14:45<\/h5>\n<p>The next section recounts the march from Sinai to Kadesh-barnea, a period of time approximately one and a half to two months in length (cf. 10:11; 13:20). Almost immediately the people began to complain as they passed through the terrible wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19), angering the Lord at Taberah (Nm 11:1-3) and at Kibroth-hattaavah (Nm 11:4-35; Pss 78:26-31; 106:13-15). Miriam and Aaron challenged Moses’ sole right to speak for God to the people, which resulted in temporary leprosy as punishment for Miriam (doubtless the leader in the provocation). Through Moses’ intercession, the two were forgiven (Nm 12). Out of this event, however, came the remarkable description of Moses’ relationship to God as a unique means of revelation (vv 6-8).<\/p>\n<p>From Paran (Kadesh-barnea) Moses dispatched the spies to survey the land (ch 13). Deuteronomy 1:22 suggests that the plan to spy out the land originated with the people, with Moses (at God’s behest) acquiescing. At the end of 40 days, they returned. Only Caleb and Joshua urged the people to advance to the conquest; the other 10 spies spoke of foes too formidable for them to defeat. The people, greatly discouraged, attempted to stone Caleb and Joshua (Nm 14:10), and were prevented from doing so only by the sudden appearance of the glory cloud at the tabernacle. God swore in his wrath (Nm 14:21; cf. Heb 3:7–4:10) that, with the exception of Caleb and Joshua, none of that generation would enter the land of promise (Nm 14:21-35). He then struck down the 10 unbelieving spies (v 37). Presumptuously, and in spite of God’s express command to the contrary (Dt 1:42), Israel attempted to advance on the land, leaving Moses and the ark of the covenant in the camp. They were challenged by the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Israel remained in this general area with tribal families fanning out over the wilderness and settling around springs and oases (Dt 1:46). Numbers 15:1–21:20 relates the account of the 38 years of wilderness wandering. Much of this time was probably spent around Kadesh-barnea (Dt 1:46).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 15<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given (Nm 15:1-21). Also, the procedure to be followed when an Israelite committed a sin deliberately and defiantly was spelled out in terms of excommunication: there was no atonement for such an attitude (vv 22-31). A Sabbath violator was executed (vv 32-36), perhaps as an illustration of the foregoing legislation. Finally, to assist them in obeying God’s laws, the Israelites were instructed to tie blue tassels to their outer garments as reminders (vv 37-41).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 16<\/h5>\n<p>Korah challenged Aaron’s high priesthood, and Dathan, Abiram, and On challenged Moses’ leadership (vv 1-14). God, at Moses’ word, opened up the earth and swallowed the offenders (Nm 16:32; cf. Dt 9:6; Ps 106:16-18). Korah is regarded in the NT (Jude 1:11) as a classic example of a rebellious malcontent.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 26:11 states that Korah’s young children did not perish with him. Perhaps they became the ancestors of the “sons of Korah,” the sacred musicians of the temple who composed 12 Korahite psalms (Pss 42–49, 84–85, 87–88).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 17<\/h5>\n<p>God then instructed the leaders of each tribe to bring rods, 12 in all, to write the names of the tribes upon them (with Aaron’s name on Levi’s rod), and to deposit them in the tabernacle. The following day, Aaron’s rod had sprouted with blossoms and ripe almonds, thus vindicating Aaron’s special high-priestly status.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 18–19<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given. In 18:1-7, the full responsibility for the priestly service was given to the Aaronic priests—a very natural consequence of the preceding chapter. The Levites were to assist the Aaronic order (v 6). Since the tribe of Levi received no land inheritance, they were to be supported from the offerings of the people (vv 8-20).<\/p>\n<p>In 19:1-22 instructions concerning ceremonial impurity were given. When an Israelite became ceremonially unclean through contact with death (vv 11-16), God required that he be purified from his sin (vv 9, 17) by the sprinkling of specially prepared water upon him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 20<\/h5>\n<p>With Israel once again at Kadesh on the southern border of the wilderness of Zin in the first month of the 40th year of wandering, Miriam died and was buried (v 1). According to the encampment list in chapter 33, 18 encampments may have occurred for Israel since the nation had last been at this site (cf. 33:18-36).<\/p>\n<p>At this time the nation complained once again because there was little water (20:2). Moses, at God’s instruction, brought forth water from a rock (vv 8-11), but because of a gross infraction by Moses and Aaron on this occasion, God announced that they would not be permitted to lead Israel in the conquest of the land (vv 12, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The chapter closes with Edom refusing Israel passage across its territory (vv 14-21) and Aaron dying on Mt Hor on the border of Edom (vv 22-29) in the fifth month of the 40th year (33:38). Eleazar, Aaron’s son, assumed the office of high priest.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 21<\/h5>\n<p>After a quick victory over Arad (vv 1-3), Israel started south to encircle Edom. Becoming impatient with God and with Moses, the people expressed their disgust with God’s provision of manna. The Lord sent poisonous snakes to the camp, causing many to die. But at God’s command Moses fashioned a snake out of bronze and placed it atop a standard. All who looked to the bronze snake survived (vv 4-10). The bronze snake was preserved and later was destroyed by Hezekiah, the symbol having become by his time an idol (2 Kgs 18:4). Later still, Jesus drew an analogy between these wicked sinners looking to the bronze snake and being delivered and men looking to him by faith and being saved (Jn 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Leaving that fateful place, Israel journeyed into and up the Arabah, crossed the Wadi Zered in an eastern swing around Moab, finally crossing the Arnon into Amorite territory. Journeying north, they camped at Pisgah (Nm 21:10-20).<\/p>\n<p>At this point the conquest of the Transjordan begins. In quick succession Israel defeated Sihon of Heshbon (vv 21-31) and Og of Bashan (vv 33-35) and settled in the plains of Moab (22:1). This encampment was the scene for the remainder of the activities of Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua 1–3. In a real sense, one can say the wilderness wanderings were now over.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the place, then, to summarize the spiritual condition of Israel on the eve of the conquest of Canaan. Numbers makes it quite evident that the entire generation that left Egypt, with the exception of Joshua and Caleb, was to die in the wilderness because of its apostasy (cf. Am 5:25), unbelief, and general failure to keep covenant with God. None of the generation of male children born in the wilderness had been circumcised (Jos 5:2-9). Psalm 90 underscores Israel as the recipient of God’s wrath in the wilderness. It is in this pitiable spiritual condition that Israel arrived on the plains of Moab.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 22–24<\/h5>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab, frightened by Israel’s presence, joined with Midian to hire Balaam, the false prophet, to curse Israel. For gain, Balaam agreed (2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11), but God prevented him, causing him rather to bless Israel in his four oracular utterances (Nm 23:7-10, 18-24; 24:3-9, 15-19) and to predict the destruction of Moab, Edom, Amalek (24:20), the Kenites (24:21), and Asshur (24:24). With that, Balak and Balaam separated. Balaam, in collusion with Midian, agreed to counsel Israel to commit idolatry and immorality (31:16). And so, where Balak failed to turn the Lord against Israel, Balaam succeeded (ch 25).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 25<\/h5>\n<p>Israel sinned against God by idolatrous and immoral acts with the people of Moab (vv 1-3). In carrying out the command of God to destroy the reprobate Israelites, Phinehas killed Zimri and Cozbi, the latter being a daughter of one of the five kings of Midian (vv 4-14). This event provided the occasion for God to declare a holy war against Midian (vv 16-18; cf. ch 31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 26<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to take a roll of the men of the second generation who were capable of warring against Israel’s enemies. The total number came to 601,730 (v 51), a reduction of 1,820 men from the first count. With a smaller force than the first generation, Israel conquered Canaan, clearly indicating that Israel could have spared itself the years of wandering if only the nation had obeyed God 38 years before Kadesh. The Levites totaled 23,000 males a month old and upward (vv 57-62).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 27<\/h5>\n<p>At the request of the daughters of Zelophehad (cf. 26:33) that they be granted the right to inherit their father’s possessions since he had no sons, the Lord agreed that they could, using the occasion to give further laws of inheritance (vv 1-11).<\/p>\n<p>Reminded that he would soon die in Abarim, Moses requested that God appoint his successor. God selected Joshua, and Moses commissioned him (vv 12-23).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 28–30<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation regarding offerings for various occasions was given. God also instructed Moses to inform the people concerning vows. When a man made a vow, it was inviolable (30:2), but if a woman made a vow, the man (father, husband) responsible for her could nullify it if he felt that it was rash (vv 1-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 31<\/h5>\n<p>The account of the holy war declared against Midian in 25:16-18 is given. With Phinehas accompanying 12,000 warriors, Israel defeated Midian, killing Balaam along with the five kings and many male adults of Midian (31:1-8). The Midianite women and children were taken captive, but Moses commanded that all the male children and the nonvirgin women be killed (vv 9-18). One must not conclude that this war meant the end of Midian as such, for Midian later proved a formidable foe of Israel in the time of the judges (Jgs 6).<\/p>\n<p>After the battle, the warriors were instructed to purify themselves, their clothing, and the booty from the war before coming into the camp (Nm 31:19-24). Furthermore, they were instructed to divide the booty in half and to contribute one-fifth of one percent of their half to the high priest (“the Lord’s tribute”). The other half was divided among the people who had remained in camp, after the Levites received a two percent contribution (vv 25-31).<\/p>\n<p>Verses 32-47 give the tally of the booty after its division into two parts and the amount that was given from each part to Eleazar and the Levites. The tally is said by some to be too high to be authentic, but there is no evidence that disputes the recorded figures.<\/p>\n<p>In thanksgiving to God because no Israelite had been killed in the war (v 49) and to make atonement for themselves (v 50), the army officers brought a special offering of gold trinkets to Moses and Eleazar, which was placed in the tabernacle as a memorial (vv 48-54).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 32<\/h5>\n<p>At their request and on the condition that they aid the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan, Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh were allotted the Transjordan region. Moses earnestly besought the Lord to change his mind about not permitting him to enter the land of promise (Dt 3:23-27). But God would not let him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 33–34<\/h5>\n<p>At God’s command, Moses kept a written record of Israel’s itinerary from Egypt to the plains of Moab. Here is biblical evidence of the Mosaic authorship of Numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The boundaries of the Promised Land were now given. The southern boundary would run from the southern tip of the Dead Sea, south of Kadesh-barnea up to the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish), and on to the Mediterranean Sea (34:3-5). The western boundary would be the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea itself (v 6). The northern boundary, not realized until the times of David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:3-12; 1 Kgs 8:65), was to extend from the Mediterranean Sea east to Hamath, at the head of the Orontes River (Nm 34:7-9). The eastern boundary was to be practically on a vertical line, with the Jordan Valley running north to the northern boundary (vv 10-12). The nine and a half tribes were to divide this area among themselves (vv 13-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then selected the men who were to bear the responsibility of dividing the land of Canaan among the western tribes after the conquest (vv 16-29).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 35<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Israel to give 48 cities throughout the land on both sides of the Jordan to the Levites for a permanent possession (vv 1-8), since that tribe was not included in the land allotments to the other tribes. The number of cities each tribe was to give was to be determined by its size (v 8). Six of the Levitical cities, three on each side of the Jordan, were to be designated “cities of refuge” for the manslayer (v 6; cf. Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>Legislation concerning the manslayer follows (vv 9-34). If the slayer committed murder, the kinsman avenger had the right to fulfill his role as executioner (vv 16-21). If, however, the killing was unintentional, the manslayer was to flee to the nearest city of refuge for a trial. If found innocent of murder, he was assigned to remain within the city of refuge until the death of the high priest. If he left the city before then, the kinsman avenger was permitted to execute him (vv 22-34).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 36<\/h5>\n<p>Basing their question on the earlier law established in chapter 27, the leaders from Manasseh asked whether an heiress should be allowed to marry outside her tribe, with the accompanying transfer of property from one tribe to another that would ensue. God directed that an heiress would have to marry within her tribe (vv 1-12).<\/p>\n<p>The last verse of the book refers to all the laws given in the plains of Moab (26:1–36:12; cf. Lv 27:34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalTeaching\">Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Numbers God is revealed as the unchangingly faithful God of the covenant (Nm 23:19). This faithfulness to his covenant required that he both guide and care for his people and punish their sins against him. But no impediment was so great that God’s design to bring his people to the land of promise was thwarted (11:23).<\/p>\n<p>Both by his wrathful reaction to Israel’s sin and by the numerous priestly laws, God highlights his awesome holiness. The legislation expressly teaches that the person who approaches God must be clean. Even to look with unholy eyes upon the holiness of God meant death (4:20).<\/p>\n<p>His sovereignty over all of life is evident from the attention he displays over even the minutest aspects of life. The phrase “And the Lord said unto Moses” occurs over 50 times, and the words that follow in each case deal with all kinds of matters.<\/p>\n<p>As the God of the covenant, God’s “christological” character is also apparent. God’s blessing and faithfulness reflect the christological motif. Finally, Moses’ prophetic leadership (Acts 7:37-38) and intercessory ministry (e.g., Nm 11:2; 12:13; 14:19), in the Aaronic priesthood (e.g., ch 16), in the animal sacrifices (cf. 19:9; Heb 9:13), and in the symbols (the manna, the water, the bronze snake) foreshadow the future Christ.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s responses to God, the people depict all of human sinfulness and faithlessness. Israel’s wanderings illustrate the results of unbelief. The punishments of Israel prove the maxim of Numbers 32:23: “But if you fail to keep your word, then you will have sinned against the <span>Lord<\/span>, and you may be sure that your sin will find you out” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Numbers forcefully teaches that safety and blessing are to be found only in trust in the Lord. Only he is capable of bringing men and women to the place of rest (Heb 4:9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Deuteronomy, Book of; Exodus, Book of; Genesis, Book of; Leviticus, Book of; Moses; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NUMBERS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, <em>Numeri.<\/em> The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The question of the authorship of Numbers is part of the larger question of the authorship of the Pentateuch. Until the appearance of the higher-critical documentary theories of the 19th century, the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was almost universally held by both Jews and Christians alike. This time-honored tradition is supported by the Pentateuch itself (e.g., Ex 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Nm 33:2; Dt 31:9, 24), the rest of the OT (e.g., Jos 23:6; Jgs 3:4; Mal 4:4), as well as Jesus’ teaching (e.g., Jn 5:46-47), and the rest of the NT (e.g., Acts 28:23; Rom 10:19; 1 Cor 9:9). Although discrepancies in the Pentateuch were widely and openly acknowledged, nevertheless Moses, the 15th-century <span>BC<\/span> lawgiver, was affirmed as the primary author of the Pentateuchal literature.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<h5>Sinai Peninsula<\/h5>\n<p>The historical background of Numbers begins primarily in the geographical region of the Sinai Peninsula of the mid-second millennium <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai Peninsula is in the shape of an inverted triangle with the base on the north. It is approximately 240 miles (386.2 kilometers) long from north to south and 175 miles (281.6 kilometers) wide at the northern base, with an area of approximately 22,000 square miles (56,980 square kilometers). It is bounded on the north by the Mediterranean Sea and the southern border of Canaan, on the west by the Bitter Lakes and the Gulf of Suez, and on the east by the Arabah and the Gulf of Aqaba. Beginning in the north at the Mediterranean coast and moving south, for about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the soil is sandy. South of this coastal plain is a high plateau (Et-Tih) of gravel and limestone (about 2,500 feet, or 762 meters, above sea level), stretching south into the peninsula for approximately 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). Rising above the plateau at this point is a granite mountain formation with peaks up to 8,000 feet (2,438.4 meters) above sea level. In this mountainous region at the apex of the peninsular triangle, Jebel Musa (7,363 feet, or 2,244.2 meters, high), the traditional site where Israel camped before Mt Sinai and Moses received the law, rises above the plain.<\/p>\n<p>The peninsula itself is comprised of five wilderness areas. In the north and immediately east of the land of Goshen is the approximately 40-mile- or 64.4-kilometer-wide wilderness of Shur, which runs past the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) to the region of Kadesh-barnea and northeast to Beersheba. East of this region is the wilderness of Zin, extending east from the wilderness of Shur to the southern tip of the Dead Sea. Kadesh-barnea is located on its southern border (Nm 20:1; 33:36). South of the wilderness of Shur is the wilderness of Etham, and east of this wilderness in the east-central region of Sinai is the great wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19). Kadesh-barnea is on the northern border of this territory (Nm 13:26). In this area the Israelites spent 38 of their 40 years of wandering. Southwest of the wilderness of Paran, on the western slopes of the peninsula, not far from the granite mountains standing in the southern apex of the triangle, is the wilderness of Sin.<\/p>\n<p>While the region is generally desolate and barren, it is not impassable or incapable of sustaining travelers. Wells and springs dot both the western and eastern borders at reasonable distances from each other. The water table is fairly close to ground level, making the digging of wells possible (Nm 20:17; 21:16-18). The limestone rocks are also capable of holding great amounts of water (20:11). Vegetation is sparse except around the more permanent streams where vegetation and date palms flourish. The rainy season in winter is approximately 20 days. Quail (11:31-32) are known to migrate across the peninsula to Europe in the spring.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Peoples Israel Confronted<\/h5>\n<h6>Amalekites and Canaanites (14:25, 43-45; 24:20)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amalekites were descendants of Amalek, son of Eliphaz and grandson of Esau (Gn 36:12, 16). They were generally a nomadic people. In the Sinai Peninsula they were the first to war against Israel at Rephidim (cf. Nm 24:20), perhaps the Wadi Refayid in southwest Sinai (Ex 17:8-16), before Israel reached Horeb. A year later, the Amalekites settled in the hills and valleys north of Kadesh-barnea. In league with the Canaanites, the inhabitants of Palestine, they blocked the effort of Israel to invade the land of promise from the south (Nm 14:45). Israel’s will to wage war appears to have been completely broken for years to come.<\/p>\n<h6>Edomites (20:14-21; 21:4, 10-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Edom, or Seir (24:18), is the territory south of the Dead Sea occupied by Esau’s descendants. Stretching from its northern border at the Wadi Zered (21:12), which flowed into the Dead Sea at its southern tip, 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) south to the Gulf of Aqaba, it occupied both sides of the Arabah, with Kadesh-barnea again standing on the edge of its western border (20:16), giving it a land area of approximately 4,000 square miles (10,360 square kilometers). It is a rugged mountain region with peaks rising to 3,500 feet (1,066.8 meters). The “king’s highway,” an ancient trade route from Damascus through the Transjordan to the Gulf of Aqaba, passed through its territory and major cities, Bozrah and Leman. While Edom was not fertile, it did have cultivable areas (20:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>During Israel’s march to the Transjordan region, Edom refused to let Israel journey directly east from Kadesh through its territory but forced Israel to move southeast into and up the Arabah (21:4, 11). In spite of this hostility to God’s people, Israel was forbidden to attack (Dt 2:2-8) or to hate the Edomites (23:7), and so Edom was spared from destruction during the conquest of the land. The area was later conquered by David (2 Sm 8:13-14) according to Balaam’s prophecy (Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<h6>Arad (21:1-3)<\/h6>\n<p>Arad was a south Canaanite settlement in the Negev. Its king, after fighting against Israel and taking some captives, was later defeated at Hormah.<\/p>\n<h6>Moabites (21:11-15; 22:1–24:25)<\/h6>\n<p>Moab, occupied by the descendants of Lot (Gn 19:37), is the territory east of the Dead Sea lying primarily between the Wadi Arnon (Nm 21:13) and the Wadi Zered with a land area of approximately 1,400 square miles (3,626 square kilometers).<\/p>\n<p>In the late middle Bronze Age, the Moabites had overflowed their main plateau and had extended well to the north of the Arnon all the way to the northern end of the Dead Sea (21:20). At the time of the events recorded in Numbers, however, the Amorites occupied the area from Arnon all the way north to the Wadi Jabbok (vv 13, 21-24), having earlier taken this land from Moab (vv 26-30). The Moabite kingdom was highly organized, with agriculture and livestock, splendid buildings, distinctive pottery, and strong fortifications around her borders. Its god was Chemosh (v 29).<\/p>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab during the period of the conquest, in league with Midian, hired Balaam to curse Israel (chs 22–24). When this failed, the two heathen powers sought to neutralize Israel by luring the people of God into the worship of Chemosh and into idolatry (25:1-2). In the war that ensued, Israel defeated Midian (31:1-18), but by God’s express command (Dt 2:9-13) spared Moab. But as Balaam had prophesied earlier (Nm 24:17), David in the 11th century warred against and defeated Moab (2 Sm 8:2, 13-14).<\/p>\n<h6>Amorites (21:21-35)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amorites, the people who had occupied northern Moabite territory (Nm 21:25-30), were descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:16) who had scattered throughout the hill country on both sides of the Jordan River. Heshbon was their capital city. Both Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan were Amorite kings (Dt 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As for Bashan (Nm 21:33-35; cf. Dt 1:4; 3:1-12), it is the fertile grazing region (Nm 32:1-5) east of the Sea of Kinnereth (Galilee), whose northern border extended to Mt Hermon and whose southern border, while normally the river Yarmuk, in the Mosaic age was the Wadi Jabbok (Jos 12:4-5). Its land area covered approximately 5,000 square miles (12,950 square kilometers). Its major cities were Ashtaroth, Edrei, and Golan. After the conquest of the land, this territory fell to the half-tribe of Manasseh, with Gad occupying southern Gilead, and Reuben the region south to the Wadi Arnon.<\/p>\n<h6>Midianites (25:16-18; 31:1-54)<\/h6>\n<p>The Midianites, descendants of Abraham through the concubine Keturah (Gn 25:2), were desert dwellers in Transjordan from Moab to the region south of Edom. The elders of Moab and Midian cooperated in hiring Balaam to curse Israel (Nm 22:4-7). Later, when that effort proved fruitless, the Midianites, again with Moab, led Israel into idolatry and immorality (25:1-6, 14-15). Cozbi, the Midianite woman who was executed for her wickedness (25:8), was the daughter of Zur, one of the five Midianite kings confederate with the Amorite king Sihon (Jos 13:21) who were later killed in Israel’s holy war against Midian (Nm 31:8). This war with Midian apparently broke the back of any remaining Amorite resistance, for Joshua 13:15-23 clearly intimates that as a result the tribe of Reuben occupied this territory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Numbers serves a twofold purpose. First, as a historical book, it contains the account of Israel’s fortunes from Mt Sinai to the plains of Moab on the eve of the conquest of Canaan—that almost-40-year period spent in the wilderness of Sinai and in Transjordan (1447–1407 <span>BC<\/span>). While recounting Israel’s many failures and God’s many faithful acts, it depicts Moses, Israel’s leader, in all of his greatness and in all of his weakness. The two army rolls (chs 2 and 26) introduce the “acts” of the main drama of its history: the first in preparation for entering the land, which failed due to Israel’s unbelief; the second, after the death of the entire generation that left Egypt, in preparation for the successful invasion of Canaan under Joshua’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Second, in line with Paul’s general belief that “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope” (Rom 15:4, <span>rsv<\/span>), and in keeping with his specific teaching that “these things [that befell Israel in the wilderness] happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor 10:11, <span>rsv<\/span>), Numbers serves a doctrinal, typical, and hortatory purpose (cf. v 12). Historical events are divinely invested with spiritual truths, thereby becoming object lessons for the Christian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to register (Nm 1:18) the men able to go to war (vv 2-3). The total number of soldiers in Israel was 603,550 (v 46). The Levites were not numbered in this roll (vv 47-54), since they were to be set apart for special service pertaining to the tabernacle.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 2<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses concerning the arrangement of the tribes while encamped and on the march. With the tabernacle in the center of the camp, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, totaling 186,400 (v 9), were to camp on the east; Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, totaling 151,450 (v 16), were to camp on the south; Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, totaling 108,100 (v 24), were to camp on the west; and Dan, Asher, and Naphtali, totaling 157,600 (v 31), were to camp on the north.<\/p>\n<p>On the march, Judah’s east group (v 9) was to set out first, followed by Reuben’s south group (v 16). The Levites with the tabernacle were to follow (v 17). Then Ephraim’s west group (v 24) was to follow the Levites, with Dan’s north group (v 31) bringing up the rear. This means that the Levites were flanked by two groups, before and behind.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 3<\/h5>\n<p>Aaron, the great-grandson of Levi through Kohath (Ex 6:16-20), and his descendants were designated to serve as priests at the tabernacle (Nm 3:2-3). The remaining descendants of Levi, from the families of Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, were to serve the Aaronic line at the tabernacle (vv 5-10). The Gershonites were responsible for the tabernacle coverings, hangings, and screens (vv 25-26); the Kohathites were responsible for the “furniture” in the tabernacle (v 31); and the Merarites were responsible for the frames, bars, and foundations for the tabernacle (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed Moses to number the three Levitical families. Gershon’s descendants, totaling 7,500 (v 22), were to camp on the west, between the western group of tribes and the tabernacle. Kohath’s descendants, totaling 8,600 (v 28), were to camp on the south, between the southern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Merari’s descendants, totaling 6,200 (v 34), were to camp on the north, between the northern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Moses and the Aaronic family were to camp on the east, between the eastern group of tribes and the tabernacle (v 38). Both in camp and on the march, then, the tabernacle was in the midst of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The census of Israel’s firstborn males disclosed 273 more male babies than Levites (vv 40-46), and since the Levites were a ransom for Israelite males on a one-to-one basis, the 273 additional male children had to be ransomed by atonement money (vv 46-51).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 4<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Moses that only Levites between the ages of 30 and 50 were to serve at the tabernacle. A census disclosed that there were 2,750 Kohathites (v 36), 2,630 Gershonites (v 40), and 3,200 Merarites (v 44), making a total of 8,580 (v 48) who were eligible to serve the Aaronic priests.<\/p>\n<p>God further ordered the Aaronic priests, when the tabernacle was being dismantled for the march, to cover all the tabernacle “furniture” before the Kohathites even looked at them (v 20) lest the Kohathites, either looking at or touching them (v 15), should die (vv 15, 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 5<\/h5>\n<p>For ceremonial purposes, God demanded that lepers, those with a bodily discharge, and those who had touched the dead, must be put outside the camp until they were purified (vv 1-4). Furthermore, God instructed those making restitution for a wrongdoing, if the wronged person was no longer alive, to give the restitution price to a priest (vv 5-10).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, if a woman was suspected by her husband of infidelity but there was no evidence of such, the woman was to undergo a trial by water ordeal to relieve the man of his suspicions. The priest was to give her holy water with dust from the floor of the tabernacle in it to drink. If she was guilty, the water by divine direction would cause her pain, make her abdomen swell, and her thigh waste away (vv 11-31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 6<\/h5>\n<p>Laws pertaining to the Nazirite were given next. A Nazirite was a person who determined to take a vow to separate himself wholly to the Lord. To dramatize this separation, the Nazirite was to drink no intoxicating beverage, let the hair grow long, and touch no dead body (vv 3-6). Should he defile himself, he was to follow prescribed rules for ceremonial cleansing (vv 9-12). When his vow had run its course, he was to follow prescribed rules for terminating his vow (vv 13-21). Finally, God instructed the Aaronic priesthood concerning the blessing they were to pronounce upon the Israelite worshiper (vv 22-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 7<\/h5>\n<p>The leaders in Israel brought six wagons and twelve oxen for use in the transfer of the tabernacle (7:3). Moses gave two wagons and four oxen to the Gershonites (v 7), and four wagons and eight oxen to the Merarites (v 8). (The Kohathites were to carry the “furniture” of the tabernacle on their shoulders, v 9.) For twelve consecutive days, to consecrate the altar after it was anointed (vv 10, 88), the tribal leaders, in the order of march (cf. ch 2), brought similar offerings. God demonstrated his pleasure with this gesture by speaking to Moses from the mercy seat (v 89).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 8<\/h5>\n<p>God granted the prerogative to light the seven-branched lampstand to the Aaronic priests (vv 1-4). Following divine instructions, Moses and Aaron consecrated the Levites to the service of the tabernacle by means of a purification ceremony (vv 5-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 9:1–10:10<\/h5>\n<p>For the benefit of the worshiper who was ceremonially unclean or away on a journey at the time of the Passover, God granted permission to observe the Passover a month later (vv 6-12; see also ch 27).<\/p>\n<p>God gave final instructions to the people before their departure from Sinai. They were to prepare for marching when they saw the cloud ascending from the tabernacle, and they were to stop at the place where the cloud settled down (9:15-23). The people were to assemble at the tabernacle if two silver trumpets were blown; only the leaders were to come if one was blown; and at the blast of a military alarm, the several groups of tribes were to prepare for an immediate march (10:1-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 10:11–14:45<\/h5>\n<p>The next section recounts the march from Sinai to Kadesh-barnea, a period of time approximately one and a half to two months in length (cf. 10:11; 13:20). Almost immediately the people began to complain as they passed through the terrible wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19), angering the Lord at Taberah (Nm 11:1-3) and at Kibroth-hattaavah (Nm 11:4-35; Pss 78:26-31; 106:13-15). Miriam and Aaron challenged Moses’ sole right to speak for God to the people, which resulted in temporary leprosy as punishment for Miriam (doubtless the leader in the provocation). Through Moses’ intercession, the two were forgiven (Nm 12). Out of this event, however, came the remarkable description of Moses’ relationship to God as a unique means of revelation (vv 6-8).<\/p>\n<p>From Paran (Kadesh-barnea) Moses dispatched the spies to survey the land (ch 13). Deuteronomy 1:22 suggests that the plan to spy out the land originated with the people, with Moses (at God’s behest) acquiescing. At the end of 40 days, they returned. Only Caleb and Joshua urged the people to advance to the conquest; the other 10 spies spoke of foes too formidable for them to defeat. The people, greatly discouraged, attempted to stone Caleb and Joshua (Nm 14:10), and were prevented from doing so only by the sudden appearance of the glory cloud at the tabernacle. God swore in his wrath (Nm 14:21; cf. Heb 3:7–4:10) that, with the exception of Caleb and Joshua, none of that generation would enter the land of promise (Nm 14:21-35). He then struck down the 10 unbelieving spies (v 37). Presumptuously, and in spite of God’s express command to the contrary (Dt 1:42), Israel attempted to advance on the land, leaving Moses and the ark of the covenant in the camp. They were challenged by the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Israel remained in this general area with tribal families fanning out over the wilderness and settling around springs and oases (Dt 1:46). Numbers 15:1–21:20 relates the account of the 38 years of wilderness wandering. Much of this time was probably spent around Kadesh-barnea (Dt 1:46).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 15<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given (Nm 15:1-21). Also, the procedure to be followed when an Israelite committed a sin deliberately and defiantly was spelled out in terms of excommunication: there was no atonement for such an attitude (vv 22-31). A Sabbath violator was executed (vv 32-36), perhaps as an illustration of the foregoing legislation. Finally, to assist them in obeying God’s laws, the Israelites were instructed to tie blue tassels to their outer garments as reminders (vv 37-41).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 16<\/h5>\n<p>Korah challenged Aaron’s high priesthood, and Dathan, Abiram, and On challenged Moses’ leadership (vv 1-14). God, at Moses’ word, opened up the earth and swallowed the offenders (Nm 16:32; cf. Dt 9:6; Ps 106:16-18). Korah is regarded in the NT (Jude 1:11) as a classic example of a rebellious malcontent.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 26:11 states that Korah’s young children did not perish with him. Perhaps they became the ancestors of the “sons of Korah,” the sacred musicians of the temple who composed 12 Korahite psalms (Pss 42–49, 84–85, 87–88).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 17<\/h5>\n<p>God then instructed the leaders of each tribe to bring rods, 12 in all, to write the names of the tribes upon them (with Aaron’s name on Levi’s rod), and to deposit them in the tabernacle. The following day, Aaron’s rod had sprouted with blossoms and ripe almonds, thus vindicating Aaron’s special high-priestly status.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 18–19<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given. In 18:1-7, the full responsibility for the priestly service was given to the Aaronic priests—a very natural consequence of the preceding chapter. The Levites were to assist the Aaronic order (v 6). Since the tribe of Levi received no land inheritance, they were to be supported from the offerings of the people (vv 8-20).<\/p>\n<p>In 19:1-22 instructions concerning ceremonial impurity were given. When an Israelite became ceremonially unclean through contact with death (vv 11-16), God required that he be purified from his sin (vv 9, 17) by the sprinkling of specially prepared water upon him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 20<\/h5>\n<p>With Israel once again at Kadesh on the southern border of the wilderness of Zin in the first month of the 40th year of wandering, Miriam died and was buried (v 1). According to the encampment list in chapter 33, 18 encampments may have occurred for Israel since the nation had last been at this site (cf. 33:18-36).<\/p>\n<p>At this time the nation complained once again because there was little water (20:2). Moses, at God’s instruction, brought forth water from a rock (vv 8-11), but because of a gross infraction by Moses and Aaron on this occasion, God announced that they would not be permitted to lead Israel in the conquest of the land (vv 12, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The chapter closes with Edom refusing Israel passage across its territory (vv 14-21) and Aaron dying on Mt Hor on the border of Edom (vv 22-29) in the fifth month of the 40th year (33:38). Eleazar, Aaron’s son, assumed the office of high priest.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 21<\/h5>\n<p>After a quick victory over Arad (vv 1-3), Israel started south to encircle Edom. Becoming impatient with God and with Moses, the people expressed their disgust with God’s provision of manna. The Lord sent poisonous snakes to the camp, causing many to die. But at God’s command Moses fashioned a snake out of bronze and placed it atop a standard. All who looked to the bronze snake survived (vv 4-10). The bronze snake was preserved and later was destroyed by Hezekiah, the symbol having become by his time an idol (2 Kgs 18:4). Later still, Jesus drew an analogy between these wicked sinners looking to the bronze snake and being delivered and men looking to him by faith and being saved (Jn 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Leaving that fateful place, Israel journeyed into and up the Arabah, crossed the Wadi Zered in an eastern swing around Moab, finally crossing the Arnon into Amorite territory. Journeying north, they camped at Pisgah (Nm 21:10-20).<\/p>\n<p>At this point the conquest of the Transjordan begins. In quick succession Israel defeated Sihon of Heshbon (vv 21-31) and Og of Bashan (vv 33-35) and settled in the plains of Moab (22:1). This encampment was the scene for the remainder of the activities of Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua 1–3. In a real sense, one can say the wilderness wanderings were now over.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the place, then, to summarize the spiritual condition of Israel on the eve of the conquest of Canaan. Numbers makes it quite evident that the entire generation that left Egypt, with the exception of Joshua and Caleb, was to die in the wilderness because of its apostasy (cf. Am 5:25), unbelief, and general failure to keep covenant with God. None of the generation of male children born in the wilderness had been circumcised (Jos 5:2-9). Psalm 90 underscores Israel as the recipient of God’s wrath in the wilderness. It is in this pitiable spiritual condition that Israel arrived on the plains of Moab.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 22–24<\/h5>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab, frightened by Israel’s presence, joined with Midian to hire Balaam, the false prophet, to curse Israel. For gain, Balaam agreed (2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11), but God prevented him, causing him rather to bless Israel in his four oracular utterances (Nm 23:7-10, 18-24; 24:3-9, 15-19) and to predict the destruction of Moab, Edom, Amalek (24:20), the Kenites (24:21), and Asshur (24:24). With that, Balak and Balaam separated. Balaam, in collusion with Midian, agreed to counsel Israel to commit idolatry and immorality (31:16). And so, where Balak failed to turn the Lord against Israel, Balaam succeeded (ch 25).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 25<\/h5>\n<p>Israel sinned against God by idolatrous and immoral acts with the people of Moab (vv 1-3). In carrying out the command of God to destroy the reprobate Israelites, Phinehas killed Zimri and Cozbi, the latter being a daughter of one of the five kings of Midian (vv 4-14). This event provided the occasion for God to declare a holy war against Midian (vv 16-18; cf. ch 31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 26<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to take a roll of the men of the second generation who were capable of warring against Israel’s enemies. The total number came to 601,730 (v 51), a reduction of 1,820 men from the first count. With a smaller force than the first generation, Israel conquered Canaan, clearly indicating that Israel could have spared itself the years of wandering if only the nation had obeyed God 38 years before Kadesh. The Levites totaled 23,000 males a month old and upward (vv 57-62).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 27<\/h5>\n<p>At the request of the daughters of Zelophehad (cf. 26:33) that they be granted the right to inherit their father’s possessions since he had no sons, the Lord agreed that they could, using the occasion to give further laws of inheritance (vv 1-11).<\/p>\n<p>Reminded that he would soon die in Abarim, Moses requested that God appoint his successor. God selected Joshua, and Moses commissioned him (vv 12-23).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 28–30<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation regarding offerings for various occasions was given. God also instructed Moses to inform the people concerning vows. When a man made a vow, it was inviolable (30:2), but if a woman made a vow, the man (father, husband) responsible for her could nullify it if he felt that it was rash (vv 1-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 31<\/h5>\n<p>The account of the holy war declared against Midian in 25:16-18 is given. With Phinehas accompanying 12,000 warriors, Israel defeated Midian, killing Balaam along with the five kings and many male adults of Midian (31:1-8). The Midianite women and children were taken captive, but Moses commanded that all the male children and the nonvirgin women be killed (vv 9-18). One must not conclude that this war meant the end of Midian as such, for Midian later proved a formidable foe of Israel in the time of the judges (Jgs 6).<\/p>\n<p>After the battle, the warriors were instructed to purify themselves, their clothing, and the booty from the war before coming into the camp (Nm 31:19-24). Furthermore, they were instructed to divide the booty in half and to contribute one-fifth of one percent of their half to the high priest (“the Lord’s tribute”). The other half was divided among the people who had remained in camp, after the Levites received a two percent contribution (vv 25-31).<\/p>\n<p>Verses 32-47 give the tally of the booty after its division into two parts and the amount that was given from each part to Eleazar and the Levites. The tally is said by some to be too high to be authentic, but there is no evidence that disputes the recorded figures.<\/p>\n<p>In thanksgiving to God because no Israelite had been killed in the war (v 49) and to make atonement for themselves (v 50), the army officers brought a special offering of gold trinkets to Moses and Eleazar, which was placed in the tabernacle as a memorial (vv 48-54).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 32<\/h5>\n<p>At their request and on the condition that they aid the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan, Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh were allotted the Transjordan region. Moses earnestly besought the Lord to change his mind about not permitting him to enter the land of promise (Dt 3:23-27). But God would not let him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 33–34<\/h5>\n<p>At God’s command, Moses kept a written record of Israel’s itinerary from Egypt to the plains of Moab. Here is biblical evidence of the Mosaic authorship of Numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The boundaries of the Promised Land were now given. The southern boundary would run from the southern tip of the Dead Sea, south of Kadesh-barnea up to the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish), and on to the Mediterranean Sea (34:3-5). The western boundary would be the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea itself (v 6). The northern boundary, not realized until the times of David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:3-12; 1 Kgs 8:65), was to extend from the Mediterranean Sea east to Hamath, at the head of the Orontes River (Nm 34:7-9). The eastern boundary was to be practically on a vertical line, with the Jordan Valley running north to the northern boundary (vv 10-12). The nine and a half tribes were to divide this area among themselves (vv 13-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then selected the men who were to bear the responsibility of dividing the land of Canaan among the western tribes after the conquest (vv 16-29).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 35<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Israel to give 48 cities throughout the land on both sides of the Jordan to the Levites for a permanent possession (vv 1-8), since that tribe was not included in the land allotments to the other tribes. The number of cities each tribe was to give was to be determined by its size (v 8). Six of the Levitical cities, three on each side of the Jordan, were to be designated “cities of refuge” for the manslayer (v 6; cf. Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>Legislation concerning the manslayer follows (vv 9-34). If the slayer committed murder, the kinsman avenger had the right to fulfill his role as executioner (vv 16-21). If, however, the killing was unintentional, the manslayer was to flee to the nearest city of refuge for a trial. If found innocent of murder, he was assigned to remain within the city of refuge until the death of the high priest. If he left the city before then, the kinsman avenger was permitted to execute him (vv 22-34).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 36<\/h5>\n<p>Basing their question on the earlier law established in chapter 27, the leaders from Manasseh asked whether an heiress should be allowed to marry outside her tribe, with the accompanying transfer of property from one tribe to another that would ensue. God directed that an heiress would have to marry within her tribe (vv 1-12).<\/p>\n<p>The last verse of the book refers to all the laws given in the plains of Moab (26:1–36:12; cf. Lv 27:34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalTeaching\">Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Numbers God is revealed as the unchangingly faithful God of the covenant (Nm 23:19). This faithfulness to his covenant required that he both guide and care for his people and punish their sins against him. But no impediment was so great that God’s design to bring his people to the land of promise was thwarted (11:23).<\/p>\n<p>Both by his wrathful reaction to Israel’s sin and by the numerous priestly laws, God highlights his awesome holiness. The legislation expressly teaches that the person who approaches God must be clean. Even to look with unholy eyes upon the holiness of God meant death (4:20).<\/p>\n<p>His sovereignty over all of life is evident from the attention he displays over even the minutest aspects of life. The phrase “And the Lord said unto Moses” occurs over 50 times, and the words that follow in each case deal with all kinds of matters.<\/p>\n<p>As the God of the covenant, God’s “christological” character is also apparent. God’s blessing and faithfulness reflect the christological motif. Finally, Moses’ prophetic leadership (Acts 7:37-38) and intercessory ministry (e.g., Nm 11:2; 12:13; 14:19), in the Aaronic priesthood (e.g., ch 16), in the animal sacrifices (cf. 19:9; Heb 9:13), and in the symbols (the manna, the water, the bronze snake) foreshadow the future Christ.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s responses to God, the people depict all of human sinfulness and faithlessness. Israel’s wanderings illustrate the results of unbelief. The punishments of Israel prove the maxim of Numbers 32:23: “But if you fail to keep your word, then you will have sinned against the <span>Lord<\/span>, and you may be sure that your sin will find you out” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Numbers forcefully teaches that safety and blessing are to be found only in trust in the Lord. Only he is capable of bringing men and women to the place of rest (Heb 4:9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Deuteronomy, Book of; Exodus, Book of; Genesis, Book of; Leviticus, Book of; Moses; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NUMBERS, Book of Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, Numeri. The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4. Preview • Author • Background • Purpose • Content • Theological Teaching Author The question of the authorship o...","summary_en":"NUMBERS, Book of Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, Numeri. The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4. Preview • Author • Background • Purpose • Content • Theological Teaching Author The question of the authorship o...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33575,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Valley of Salt","title_en":"Valley of Salt","content_ro":"<h3>SALT, Valley of<\/h3>\n<p>Valley in the southern vicinity of the Dead Sea. The Valley of Salt was the scene of two major military campaigns recorded in the OT. Initially, it was where David made a name for himself by routing the Edomite army (2 Sm 8:13). Abishai, one of David’s mighty men, was credited with killing 18,000 Edomites there (1 Chr 18:12). Later, King Amaziah of Judah defeated the Edomite army in this valley and captured Sela, an Edomite stronghold in the nearby hill country (2 Kgs 14:7; 2 Chr 25:11).<\/p>\n<p>The location of the Valley of Salt is not altogether certain. Some identify it with Wadi el-Milh (meaning “salt”) east of Beersheba in Judah. A more probable suggestion is with es-Sebkha, a lifeless saline plain south of the Dead Sea positioned in the Arabah, leading to the hill country of Edom.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SALT, Valley of<\/h3>\n<p>Valley in the southern vicinity of the Dead Sea. The Valley of Salt was the scene of two major military campaigns recorded in the OT. Initially, it was where David made a name for himself by routing the Edomite army (2 Sm 8:13). Abishai, one of David’s mighty men, was credited with killing 18,000 Edomites there (1 Chr 18:12). Later, King Amaziah of Judah defeated the Edomite army in this valley and captured Sela, an Edomite stronghold in the nearby hill country (2 Kgs 14:7; 2 Chr 25:11).<\/p>\n<p>The location of the Valley of Salt is not altogether certain. Some identify it with Wadi el-Milh (meaning “salt”) east of Beersheba in Judah. A more probable suggestion is with es-Sebkha, a lifeless saline plain south of the Dead Sea positioned in the Arabah, leading to the hill country of Edom.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SALT, Valley of Valley in the southern vicinity of the Dead Sea. The Valley of Salt was the scene of two major military campaigns recorded in the OT. Initially, it was where David made a name for himself by routing the Edomite army (2 Sm 8:13). Abishai, one of David’s mighty men, was credited with killing 18,000 Edomites there (1 Chr 18:12). Later, King Amaziah of Judah defeated the Edomite army in this valley and captured Sela, an Edomite stronghold in the nearby hill country (2 Kgs 14:7; 2 ...","summary_en":"SALT, Valley of Valley in the southern vicinity of the Dead Sea. The Valley of Salt was the scene of two major military campaigns recorded in the OT. Initially, it was where David made a name for himself by routing the Edomite army (2 Sm 8:13). Abishai, one of David’s mighty men, was credited with killing 18,000 Edomites there (1 Chr 18:12). Later, King Amaziah of Judah defeated the Edomite army in this valley and captured Sela, an Edomite stronghold in the nearby hill country (2 Kgs 14:7; 2 ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40158,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles","title_en":"Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles","content_ro":"<h3>Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>The books of Chronicles, referred to as a single book in this article, have received considerable scholarly criticism about the nature of their content and about apparent discrepancies with material in Samuel and Kings. The differences can be classified as numerical, theological, and historical.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>As an example of numerical differences, 1 Chronicles 11:11 says that one of David’s “mighty men” killed 300 men with his spear at one time, but the parallel account in 2 Samuel 23:8 says he killed 800 at one time. Again, 1 Chronicles 18:3-4 says that after defeating King Hadadezer of Zobah, David took from him 1,000 chariots, 7,000 horsemen, and 20,000 foot soldiers; a parallel account in 2 Samuel 8:3-4 says that David took 1,700 horsemen and 20,000 foot soldiers. Although 2 Chronicles 22:2 says that Ahaziah was 42 years old when he began to reign, 2 Kings 8:26 says he was 22; and so on.<\/p>\n<p>Many numbers in Chronicles seem exceptionally high. In 1 Chronicles 21:5, Israel had just over a million men and Judah had 470,000. In another example of a remarkably high number, the temple’s vestibule is said to have been 120 cubits, or approximately 180 feet (54.8 meters), in height (2 Chr 3:4). In 2 Chronicles 13:3, Judah’s army had 400,000 men and Israel’s army 800,000. Some 500,000 of Israel’s army were slain (2 Chr 13:17). In 2 Chronicles 14:9, Zerah the Ethiopian had an army of a million men and 300 chariots.<\/p>\n<p>How should such problems with numbers in Chronicles be understood? First, some of the problems in the text as it now stands may have come about from faulty copying. Also, some excessively high numbers may have been used figuratively to indicate a very large army, or perhaps as estimates. Though not all questions have been answered, scholars have found credible solutions to some of the problems. In the meantime, such matters are seen by evangelical scholars as verifying the human side of the Scriptures without necessarily detracting from their divine origin.<\/p>\n<p>Chronicles also contains some different theological emphases from earlier materials. The best example can be seen by comparing 1 Chronicles 21:1 with 2 Samuel 24:1. In the Samuel account the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he incited David to harm them by taking a national census. The Chronicler’s account is that “Satan stood up against Israel, and incited David to number Israel.” In one account God moved David to take the census; in the other Satan was the prime mover.<\/p>\n<p>The authenticity of the Chronicler has also been questioned on historical grounds. Several incidents reported in Samuel-Kings are told in a different manner in Chronicles. In 2 Samuel 8:13 David is said to have slain 18,000 Edomites at the Valley of Salt, whereas the Chronicler reports that Abishai, David’s cousin, killed the Edomites (1 Chr 18:12). Again, according to 2 Samuel 21:19, Elhanan slew Goliath the Gittite, whereas the Chronicler says that Elhanan slew Lahmi, the brother of Goliath the Gittite (1 Chr 20:5; most OT scholars today believe that Chronicles preserves the true reading of the original text). A more difficult historical problem is seen by comparing 2 Chronicles 20:35-37 with 1 Kings 22:48-49. The Kings account says that the ships Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, built to bring gold from Ophir were wrecked at Ezion-geber, evidently before they ever left port. When Ahaziah, king of Israel, asked that his servants be allowed to go on the ships with Jehoshaphat’s servants, Jehoshaphat refused. The Chronicler’s version of what happened is different. There Jehoshaphat joined with the wicked Ahaziah in building ships at Ezion-geber to go to Tarshish, but a prophet prophesied that the Lord would destroy the ships because of the alliance with Ahaziah. Both accounts agree that Jehoshaphat built ships at Ezion-geber and that the ships were destroyed before they left port. On the basis of the present status of the texts, however, one cannot tell whether or not Jehoshaphat joined Ahaziah. Whatever happened, the ships were lost.<\/p>\n<p>In a comparison of Chronicles with Kings, a serious problem arises over the war between Asa of Judah and Baasha of Israel. In 2 Chronicles 16:1 one reads that in Asa’s 36th year of reign, Baasha challenged Judah by building a fortress at Ramah. But according to the chronology of 1 Kings 16, Baasha was not even alive in the 36th year of Asa’s reign. First Kings 16:6-8 says that Baasha died and his son Elah succeeded him as king in the 26th year of Asa’s reign.<\/p>\n<p>At one time scholars were quite skeptical about the authenticity of Chronicles. Now they tend to treat Chronicles with respect and appreciation. In some instances new archaeological evidence has tended to support the historicity of the Chronicler’s statement. In other instances reexamination of a discrepancy has shown it to be more apparent than real. If all the facts were known, other problems might also be cleared up to the satisfaction of impartial scholars.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>The books of Chronicles, referred to as a single book in this article, have received considerable scholarly criticism about the nature of their content and about apparent discrepancies with material in Samuel and Kings. The differences can be classified as numerical, theological, and historical.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>As an example of numerical differences, 1 Chronicles 11:11 says that one of David’s “mighty men” killed 300 men with his spear at one time, but the parallel account in 2 Samuel 23:8 says he killed 800 at one time. Again, 1 Chronicles 18:3-4 says that after defeating King Hadadezer of Zobah, David took from him 1,000 chariots, 7,000 horsemen, and 20,000 foot soldiers; a parallel account in 2 Samuel 8:3-4 says that David took 1,700 horsemen and 20,000 foot soldiers. Although 2 Chronicles 22:2 says that Ahaziah was 42 years old when he began to reign, 2 Kings 8:26 says he was 22; and so on.<\/p>\n<p>Many numbers in Chronicles seem exceptionally high. In 1 Chronicles 21:5, Israel had just over a million men and Judah had 470,000. In another example of a remarkably high number, the temple’s vestibule is said to have been 120 cubits, or approximately 180 feet (54.8 meters), in height (2 Chr 3:4). In 2 Chronicles 13:3, Judah’s army had 400,000 men and Israel’s army 800,000. Some 500,000 of Israel’s army were slain (2 Chr 13:17). In 2 Chronicles 14:9, Zerah the Ethiopian had an army of a million men and 300 chariots.<\/p>\n<p>How should such problems with numbers in Chronicles be understood? First, some of the problems in the text as it now stands may have come about from faulty copying. Also, some excessively high numbers may have been used figuratively to indicate a very large army, or perhaps as estimates. Though not all questions have been answered, scholars have found credible solutions to some of the problems. In the meantime, such matters are seen by evangelical scholars as verifying the human side of the Scriptures without necessarily detracting from their divine origin.<\/p>\n<p>Chronicles also contains some different theological emphases from earlier materials. The best example can be seen by comparing 1 Chronicles 21:1 with 2 Samuel 24:1. In the Samuel account the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he incited David to harm them by taking a national census. The Chronicler’s account is that “Satan stood up against Israel, and incited David to number Israel.” In one account God moved David to take the census; in the other Satan was the prime mover.<\/p>\n<p>The authenticity of the Chronicler has also been questioned on historical grounds. Several incidents reported in Samuel-Kings are told in a different manner in Chronicles. In 2 Samuel 8:13 David is said to have slain 18,000 Edomites at the Valley of Salt, whereas the Chronicler reports that Abishai, David’s cousin, killed the Edomites (1 Chr 18:12). Again, according to 2 Samuel 21:19, Elhanan slew Goliath the Gittite, whereas the Chronicler says that Elhanan slew Lahmi, the brother of Goliath the Gittite (1 Chr 20:5; most OT scholars today believe that Chronicles preserves the true reading of the original text). A more difficult historical problem is seen by comparing 2 Chronicles 20:35-37 with 1 Kings 22:48-49. The Kings account says that the ships Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, built to bring gold from Ophir were wrecked at Ezion-geber, evidently before they ever left port. When Ahaziah, king of Israel, asked that his servants be allowed to go on the ships with Jehoshaphat’s servants, Jehoshaphat refused. The Chronicler’s version of what happened is different. There Jehoshaphat joined with the wicked Ahaziah in building ships at Ezion-geber to go to Tarshish, but a prophet prophesied that the Lord would destroy the ships because of the alliance with Ahaziah. Both accounts agree that Jehoshaphat built ships at Ezion-geber and that the ships were destroyed before they left port. On the basis of the present status of the texts, however, one cannot tell whether or not Jehoshaphat joined Ahaziah. Whatever happened, the ships were lost.<\/p>\n<p>In a comparison of Chronicles with Kings, a serious problem arises over the war between Asa of Judah and Baasha of Israel. In 2 Chronicles 16:1 one reads that in Asa’s 36th year of reign, Baasha challenged Judah by building a fortress at Ramah. But according to the chronology of 1 Kings 16, Baasha was not even alive in the 36th year of Asa’s reign. First Kings 16:6-8 says that Baasha died and his son Elah succeeded him as king in the 26th year of Asa’s reign.<\/p>\n<p>At one time scholars were quite skeptical about the authenticity of Chronicles. Now they tend to treat Chronicles with respect and appreciation. In some instances new archaeological evidence has tended to support the historicity of the Chronicler’s statement. In other instances reexamination of a discrepancy has shown it to be more apparent than real. If all the facts were known, other problems might also be cleared up to the satisfaction of impartial scholars.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles The books of Chronicles, referred to as a single book in this article, have received considerable scholarly criticism about the nature of their content and about apparent discrepancies with material in Samuel and Kings. The differences can be classified as numerical, theological, and historical. As an example of numerical differences, 1 Chronicles 11:11 says that one of David’s “mighty men” killed 300 men with his spear at one time, but the paral...","summary_en":"Questioning the Authenticity of the Chronicles The books of Chronicles, referred to as a single book in this article, have received considerable scholarly criticism about the nature of their content and about apparent discrepancies with material in Samuel and Kings. The differences can be classified as numerical, theological, and historical. As an example of numerical differences, 1 Chronicles 11:11 says that one of David’s “mighty men” killed 300 men with his spear at one time, but the paral...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46621,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:13","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:13-14<\/strong> These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (<em>18,000<\/em> casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they <em>became David’s subjects<\/em>); (3) place <em>army garrisons<\/em> in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • <em>Edomites:<\/em> This name is very similar to <em>Arameans<\/em> in old Hebrew script. <em>Edomites<\/em> is more likely, however, because <em>the Valley of Salt<\/em> (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:13-14<\/strong> These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (<em>18,000<\/em> casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they <em>became David’s subjects<\/em>); (3) place <em>army garrisons<\/em> in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • <em>Edomites:<\/em> This name is very similar to <em>Arameans<\/em> in old Hebrew script. <em>Edomites<\/em> is more likely, however, because <em>the Valley of Salt<\/em> (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:13-14 These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (18,000 casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they became David’s subjects); (3) place army garrisons in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • Edomites: This name is very similar to Arameans in old Hebrew script. Edomites is more likely, however, because the Valley of Salt (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.","summary_en":"8:13-14 These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (18,000 casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they became David’s subjects); (3) place army garrisons in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • Edomites: This name is very similar to Arameans in old Hebrew script. Edomites is more likely, however, because the Valley of Salt (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74247,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:13","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:13-14<\/strong> These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (<em>18,000<\/em> casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they <em>became David’s subjects<\/em>); (3) place <em>army garrisons<\/em> in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • <em>Edomites:<\/em> This name is very similar to <em>Arameans<\/em> in old Hebrew script. <em>Edomites<\/em> is more likely, however, because <em>the Valley of Salt<\/em> (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:13-14<\/strong> These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (<em>18,000<\/em> casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they <em>became David’s subjects<\/em>); (3) place <em>army garrisons<\/em> in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • <em>Edomites:<\/em> This name is very similar to <em>Arameans<\/em> in old Hebrew script. <em>Edomites<\/em> is more likely, however, because <em>the Valley of Salt<\/em> (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:13-14 These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (18,000 casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they became David’s subjects); (3) place army garrisons in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • Edomites: This name is very similar to Arameans in old Hebrew script. Edomites is more likely, however, because the Valley of Salt (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.","summary_en":"8:13-14 These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (18,000 casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they became David’s subjects); (3) place army garrisons in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • Edomites: This name is very similar to Arameans in old Hebrew script. Edomites is more likely, however, because the Valley of Salt (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101873,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:13","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:13-14<\/strong> These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (<em>18,000<\/em> casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they <em>became David’s subjects<\/em>); (3) place <em>army garrisons<\/em> in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • <em>Edomites:<\/em> This name is very similar to <em>Arameans<\/em> in old Hebrew script. <em>Edomites<\/em> is more likely, however, because <em>the Valley of Salt<\/em> (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:13-14<\/strong> These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (<em>18,000<\/em> casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they <em>became David’s subjects<\/em>); (3) place <em>army garrisons<\/em> in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • <em>Edomites:<\/em> This name is very similar to <em>Arameans<\/em> in old Hebrew script. <em>Edomites<\/em> is more likely, however, because <em>the Valley of Salt<\/em> (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:13-14 These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (18,000 casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they became David’s subjects); (3) place army garrisons in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • Edomites: This name is very similar to Arameans in old Hebrew script. Edomites is more likely, however, because the Valley of Salt (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.","summary_en":"8:13-14 These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (18,000 casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they became David’s subjects); (3) place army garrisons in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • Edomites: This name is very similar to Arameans in old Hebrew script. Edomites is more likely, however, because the Valley of Salt (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129499,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:13","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:13-14<\/strong> These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (<em>18,000<\/em> casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they <em>became David’s subjects<\/em>); (3) place <em>army garrisons<\/em> in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • <em>Edomites:<\/em> This name is very similar to <em>Arameans<\/em> in old Hebrew script. <em>Edomites<\/em> is more likely, however, because <em>the Valley of Salt<\/em> (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:13-14<\/strong> These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (<em>18,000<\/em> casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they <em>became David’s subjects<\/em>); (3) place <em>army garrisons<\/em> in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • <em>Edomites:<\/em> This name is very similar to <em>Arameans<\/em> in old Hebrew script. <em>Edomites<\/em> is more likely, however, because <em>the Valley of Salt<\/em> (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:13-14 These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (18,000 casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they became David’s subjects); (3) place army garrisons in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • Edomites: This name is very similar to Arameans in old Hebrew script. Edomites is more likely, however, because the Valley of Salt (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.","summary_en":"8:13-14 These two verses highlight three of David’s war policies: (1) inflict heavy damage on the enemy (18,000 casualties); (2) reduce them to vassalage (they became David’s subjects); (3) place army garrisons in the conquered territory to maintain control over them. • Edomites: This name is very similar to Arameans in old Hebrew script. Edomites is more likely, however, because the Valley of Salt (the Dead Sea area) was adjacent to Edomite, not Aramean, territory.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":10103,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Edomites Edom","title_en":"Edomites Edom","content_ro":"<h3>EDOM, EDOMITES<\/h3>\n<p>Land and its inhabitants found on the high plateau to the south and southeast of the Dead Sea. The biblical term Edom, meaning “red,” denotes either the name of the land or the name of Esau, in remembrance of the red pottage or stew for which he exchanged his birthright (Gn 25:30; 36:1, 8, 19). The country of Edom was also known as Seir (Gn 32:3; 36:30; Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The northern boundary of Edom was the Wadi Zered, the “Brook of the Willows” (Is 15:7). In ancient geological times the area was thrust up to a considerable height, and dark-red sandstone cliffs were exposed along the western side where the land falls steeply into the Arabah, the southern extension of the deep depression in which the Dead Sea and the Jordan Valley lie. The Edom Plateau rises to over 5,000 feet (1,523.9 meters), reaching over 5,600 feet (1,706.8 meters) in places. The area divides into two unequal parts. The region of Punon forms something of a valley between the smaller northern part and the longer southern part. The northern section is not quite so high, though in a limited area near Radhadiyeh it reaches 5,300 feet (1,615.4 meters). The southern section is longer and generally higher, being over 5,000 feet (1,523.9 meters) throughout the central ridge and touching 5,687 feet (1,733.3 meters) at one point. To the east, the escarpment does not fall below 4,000 feet (1,219.1 meters), except in the north. The desert lies beyond and limits expansion eastward. To the west, the land falls away rather steeply into the Arabah. The extent of Edom to the west varied from time to time. It was comparatively easy to gain access to the Negev of southern Judah in this area, and Edomite encroachments were made from time to time. The southern frontier was marked by an extensive limestone scarp at the southern edge of the plateau. This ran eastward from Ain Gharandal in the Arabah. Beyond this barrier to the south lay rocky, uninhabitable desert, through which merchants must have journeyed to the port at Ezion-geber for trade.<\/p>\n<p>The land of Edom was, on the whole, inhospitable, though there were areas where farming could be undertaken, particularly to the northeast. Here herds of animals could be grazed. Edom’s wealth, however, came largely from the caravan trade that came up from the south and brought goods from India and South Arabia to the Mediterranean coast and Egypt. The important King’s Highway (Nm 21:22) passed through Edom on its way north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>Biblically, the name Edom does not appear in the genealogy in Genesis 10. It first appears in the story of Esau in Genesis 25:30. Esau was called Edom from the red color of the pottage for which he sold his birthright to his brother, Jacob. In Genesis 36 there is reference to an Edomite kingdom at a time well before the appearance of an Israelite kingdom, though it is possible that the “chiefs” of Edom were tribal chieftains or non-dynastic leaders like the Israelite judges.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest nonbiblical references come from Egypt and seem to confirm this. Amarna Letter 288 (early 14th century <span>BC<\/span>) refers to the “lands of Seir,” and the crossing of the Shashu tribes of Edom into Egypt is mentioned by Seti II (1214–1208 <span>BC<\/span>) and Ramses III (1198–1166 <span>BC<\/span>). There are no Egyptian references to towns or rulers, only to tribal Bedouin from Seir-Edom. There is some evidence that Ramses II was in Transjordan about 1280–1270 <span>BC<\/span>, but there is no clear evidence that there was a centralized government before the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Rather, the land was occupied mainly by seminomadic people. From then on, permanent settlements began to appear, a fact that has relevance for the date of the exodus. The Song of Moses in Exodus 15 refers to the “chiefs of Edom.” By the time of the exodus, there appears to have been a kingdom of Edom (Nm 20:14, 18, 20-23; 33:37; 34:3). The Israelites skirted Edom on their journey to the Promised Land (Jgs 5:4; 11:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the rise of the Israelite monarchy, Saul fought successfully against Edom (1 Sm 14:47). Doeg the Edomite was the chief of Saul’s herdsmen (21:7; 22:9, 18-22). At the beginning of the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>, David defeated Edom in the Valley of Salt and killed many Edomites (2 Sm 8:13; 1 Chr 18:12). Thereafter, David placed garrisons in Edom, and the Edomites became his subjects (2 Sm 8:14). It is not clear whether David saw in these people a military threat or whether he was interested in the supply of copper from their land and the potential wealth that would flow from the caravan traffic passing through Edom. David’s successes resulted in the flight of a certain Hadad, who was “of the royal house of Edom” to Egypt (1 Kgs 11:14-17), where he married a member of the Egyptian royal family (vv 18-20). On David’s death, Hadad returned to Edom, where he became king. It would seem that a monarchical form of government had developed by David’s time. Solomon continued to exert influence in Edom. He had access to the port of Ezion-geber (9:26).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical records provide no information about Edom from the end of Solomon’s reign until the days of Jehoshaphat of Judah (872–848 <span>BC<\/span>). Jehoshaphat was able to occupy the port of Ezion-geber, although his ships were wrecked there, possibly by the Edomites (1 Kgs 22:48; 2 Chr 20:36-37). Israel combined with Judah and Edom in an unsuccessful campaign against King Mesha of Moab (2 Kgs 3:4-27). Edom was able to throw off Judah’s authority under King Jehoram (853–841 <span>BC<\/span>) and set up a king of its own (8:20-22). It remained independent until the days of King Amaziah of Judah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>), who conquered Edom as far south as Sela, defeating a large army of the Edomites in the Valley of Salt (2 Kgs 14:7; 2 Chr 25:11-13). This gave Judah control of the copper mines in the Punon area. King Uzziah of Judah (792–740 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to push his control south to Elath (near Ezion-geber; 2 Kgs 14:22; 2 Chr 26:1-2). Before the end of the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, in the days of Ahaz (735–715 <span>BC<\/span>), Edom defeated Judah and recovered Elath (2 Kgs 16:6). Thereafter, Judah lost control over Edom.<\/p>\n<p>During the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, the Assyrians began to move into Transjordan. About 800 <span>BC<\/span> Adad-nirari III (810–782 <span>BC<\/span>) claimed to have conquered several of these western states and to have imposed the payment of tribute. Then Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) received tribute from Qaus-malaku of Edom. Sargon II (722–705 <span>BC<\/span>) spoke of an unnamed ruler of Edom who was involved in the rebellion of Ashdod in 713 <span>BC<\/span>. Sennacherib (705–681 <span>BC<\/span>) spoke of a certain Aiarammu, who brought gifts from Edom. Esarhaddon (681–669 <span>BC<\/span>) referred to Qaus-gabri, king of Edom, who came to Nineveh with 22 vassals to swear allegiance. Under Ashurbanipal (669–627 <span>BC<\/span>), Edom appears on Assyrian records. Thereafter, Assyria itself was defeated by the Babylonians. Under the Babylonians, Edom seems to have remained a subservient vassal, although in 594 it joined other small nations in discussing rebellion (Jer 27). When Nebuchadnezzar attacked these, however, Moab and Edom were not involved. In the overthrow of Jerusalem in 586, Edom remained neutral and even allowed some refugees from Judah to shelter there for a time (40:11). The prophet Obadiah castigated Edom for not assisting Judah at the time of the Babylonian invasion (Ob 1:11). Instead, they raided Judah, handed over captives to Babylon, and possessed lands in the Negev area to the south (Ez 35).<\/p>\n<p>A long history of enmity existed between Judah and Edom, and several prophets spoke unfavorably about Edom (Is 11:14; 34:5-17; Ez 32:29; Jl 3:19; Am 1:11-12; Mal 1:2-4). In the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, Edom entered a period of decline. Several cities were abandoned. At the same time Edomite colonies west of the Arabah in the southern hill country of Judah emerged, and by Roman times there was a province of Idumea, which was the descendant of the Persian province of Edom, with its administrative center at Lachish. In the old Edomite homeland, Arab groups began to move in. Finally, ancient Edom became the home of the Nabateans.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EDOM, EDOMITES<\/h3>\n<p>Land and its inhabitants found on the high plateau to the south and southeast of the Dead Sea. The biblical term Edom, meaning “red,” denotes either the name of the land or the name of Esau, in remembrance of the red pottage or stew for which he exchanged his birthright (Gn 25:30; 36:1, 8, 19). The country of Edom was also known as Seir (Gn 32:3; 36:30; Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The northern boundary of Edom was the Wadi Zered, the “Brook of the Willows” (Is 15:7). In ancient geological times the area was thrust up to a considerable height, and dark-red sandstone cliffs were exposed along the western side where the land falls steeply into the Arabah, the southern extension of the deep depression in which the Dead Sea and the Jordan Valley lie. The Edom Plateau rises to over 5,000 feet (1,523.9 meters), reaching over 5,600 feet (1,706.8 meters) in places. The area divides into two unequal parts. The region of Punon forms something of a valley between the smaller northern part and the longer southern part. The northern section is not quite so high, though in a limited area near Radhadiyeh it reaches 5,300 feet (1,615.4 meters). The southern section is longer and generally higher, being over 5,000 feet (1,523.9 meters) throughout the central ridge and touching 5,687 feet (1,733.3 meters) at one point. To the east, the escarpment does not fall below 4,000 feet (1,219.1 meters), except in the north. The desert lies beyond and limits expansion eastward. To the west, the land falls away rather steeply into the Arabah. The extent of Edom to the west varied from time to time. It was comparatively easy to gain access to the Negev of southern Judah in this area, and Edomite encroachments were made from time to time. The southern frontier was marked by an extensive limestone scarp at the southern edge of the plateau. This ran eastward from Ain Gharandal in the Arabah. Beyond this barrier to the south lay rocky, uninhabitable desert, through which merchants must have journeyed to the port at Ezion-geber for trade.<\/p>\n<p>The land of Edom was, on the whole, inhospitable, though there were areas where farming could be undertaken, particularly to the northeast. Here herds of animals could be grazed. Edom’s wealth, however, came largely from the caravan trade that came up from the south and brought goods from India and South Arabia to the Mediterranean coast and Egypt. The important King’s Highway (Nm 21:22) passed through Edom on its way north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>Biblically, the name Edom does not appear in the genealogy in Genesis 10. It first appears in the story of Esau in Genesis 25:30. Esau was called Edom from the red color of the pottage for which he sold his birthright to his brother, Jacob. In Genesis 36 there is reference to an Edomite kingdom at a time well before the appearance of an Israelite kingdom, though it is possible that the “chiefs” of Edom were tribal chieftains or non-dynastic leaders like the Israelite judges.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest nonbiblical references come from Egypt and seem to confirm this. Amarna Letter 288 (early 14th century <span>BC<\/span>) refers to the “lands of Seir,” and the crossing of the Shashu tribes of Edom into Egypt is mentioned by Seti II (1214–1208 <span>BC<\/span>) and Ramses III (1198–1166 <span>BC<\/span>). There are no Egyptian references to towns or rulers, only to tribal Bedouin from Seir-Edom. There is some evidence that Ramses II was in Transjordan about 1280–1270 <span>BC<\/span>, but there is no clear evidence that there was a centralized government before the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Rather, the land was occupied mainly by seminomadic people. From then on, permanent settlements began to appear, a fact that has relevance for the date of the exodus. The Song of Moses in Exodus 15 refers to the “chiefs of Edom.” By the time of the exodus, there appears to have been a kingdom of Edom (Nm 20:14, 18, 20-23; 33:37; 34:3). The Israelites skirted Edom on their journey to the Promised Land (Jgs 5:4; 11:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the rise of the Israelite monarchy, Saul fought successfully against Edom (1 Sm 14:47). Doeg the Edomite was the chief of Saul’s herdsmen (21:7; 22:9, 18-22). At the beginning of the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>, David defeated Edom in the Valley of Salt and killed many Edomites (2 Sm 8:13; 1 Chr 18:12). Thereafter, David placed garrisons in Edom, and the Edomites became his subjects (2 Sm 8:14). It is not clear whether David saw in these people a military threat or whether he was interested in the supply of copper from their land and the potential wealth that would flow from the caravan traffic passing through Edom. David’s successes resulted in the flight of a certain Hadad, who was “of the royal house of Edom” to Egypt (1 Kgs 11:14-17), where he married a member of the Egyptian royal family (vv 18-20). On David’s death, Hadad returned to Edom, where he became king. It would seem that a monarchical form of government had developed by David’s time. Solomon continued to exert influence in Edom. He had access to the port of Ezion-geber (9:26).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical records provide no information about Edom from the end of Solomon’s reign until the days of Jehoshaphat of Judah (872–848 <span>BC<\/span>). Jehoshaphat was able to occupy the port of Ezion-geber, although his ships were wrecked there, possibly by the Edomites (1 Kgs 22:48; 2 Chr 20:36-37). Israel combined with Judah and Edom in an unsuccessful campaign against King Mesha of Moab (2 Kgs 3:4-27). Edom was able to throw off Judah’s authority under King Jehoram (853–841 <span>BC<\/span>) and set up a king of its own (8:20-22). It remained independent until the days of King Amaziah of Judah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>), who conquered Edom as far south as Sela, defeating a large army of the Edomites in the Valley of Salt (2 Kgs 14:7; 2 Chr 25:11-13). This gave Judah control of the copper mines in the Punon area. King Uzziah of Judah (792–740 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to push his control south to Elath (near Ezion-geber; 2 Kgs 14:22; 2 Chr 26:1-2). Before the end of the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, in the days of Ahaz (735–715 <span>BC<\/span>), Edom defeated Judah and recovered Elath (2 Kgs 16:6). Thereafter, Judah lost control over Edom.<\/p>\n<p>During the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, the Assyrians began to move into Transjordan. About 800 <span>BC<\/span> Adad-nirari III (810–782 <span>BC<\/span>) claimed to have conquered several of these western states and to have imposed the payment of tribute. Then Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) received tribute from Qaus-malaku of Edom. Sargon II (722–705 <span>BC<\/span>) spoke of an unnamed ruler of Edom who was involved in the rebellion of Ashdod in 713 <span>BC<\/span>. Sennacherib (705–681 <span>BC<\/span>) spoke of a certain Aiarammu, who brought gifts from Edom. Esarhaddon (681–669 <span>BC<\/span>) referred to Qaus-gabri, king of Edom, who came to Nineveh with 22 vassals to swear allegiance. Under Ashurbanipal (669–627 <span>BC<\/span>), Edom appears on Assyrian records. Thereafter, Assyria itself was defeated by the Babylonians. Under the Babylonians, Edom seems to have remained a subservient vassal, although in 594 it joined other small nations in discussing rebellion (Jer 27). When Nebuchadnezzar attacked these, however, Moab and Edom were not involved. In the overthrow of Jerusalem in 586, Edom remained neutral and even allowed some refugees from Judah to shelter there for a time (40:11). The prophet Obadiah castigated Edom for not assisting Judah at the time of the Babylonian invasion (Ob 1:11). Instead, they raided Judah, handed over captives to Babylon, and possessed lands in the Negev area to the south (Ez 35).<\/p>\n<p>A long history of enmity existed between Judah and Edom, and several prophets spoke unfavorably about Edom (Is 11:14; 34:5-17; Ez 32:29; Jl 3:19; Am 1:11-12; Mal 1:2-4). In the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, Edom entered a period of decline. Several cities were abandoned. At the same time Edomite colonies west of the Arabah in the southern hill country of Judah emerged, and by Roman times there was a province of Idumea, which was the descendant of the Persian province of Edom, with its administrative center at Lachish. In the old Edomite homeland, Arab groups began to move in. Finally, ancient Edom became the home of the Nabateans.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EDOM, EDOMITES Land and its inhabitants found on the high plateau to the south and southeast of the Dead Sea. The biblical term Edom, meaning “red,” denotes either the name of the land or the name of Esau, in remembrance of the red pottage or stew for which he exchanged his birthright (Gn 25:30; 36:1, 8, 19). The country of Edom was also known as Seir (Gn 32:3; 36:30; Nm 24:18). Geography The northern boundary of Edom was the Wadi Zered, the “Brook of the Willows” (Is 15:7). In ancient geolog...","summary_en":"EDOM, EDOMITES Land and its inhabitants found on the high plateau to the south and southeast of the Dead Sea. The biblical term Edom, meaning “red,” denotes either the name of the land or the name of Esau, in remembrance of the red pottage or stew for which he exchanged his birthright (Gn 25:30; 36:1, 8, 19). The country of Edom was also known as Seir (Gn 32:3; 36:30; Nm 24:18). Geography The northern boundary of Edom was the Wadi Zered, the “Brook of the Willows” (Is 15:7). In ancient geolog...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10269,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Elath","title_en":"Elath","content_ro":"<h3>ELATH<\/h3>\n<p>Edomite city (also spelled Eloth) at the head of the Gulf of Aqaba (Dt 2:8; 1 Kgs 9:26), on the eastern border of the wilderness of Paran (Gn 14:6, where it is alternately called El-paran). It probably owed its named (which means “grove of trees”) to the many palm trees in the area and may have been located in a grove of sacred trees. Elath was strategically located along a primary trade route running from southern Arabia and Egypt to Phoenicia, making it a valuable city to possess.<\/p>\n<p>Elath was taken by Kedorlaomer from the Horites (Gn 14:5-6). Later it was regarded as the southern limit of the territory of Edom (Dt 2:8). David probably captured it when he conquered Edom (2 Sm 8:14). During the reign of Joram, Jehoshaphat’s son, revolt restored it to the Edomites (2 Kgs 8:20-22). A few years later it was recaptured and rebuilt by Judah’s King Uzziah (2 Kgs 14:22). It remained under Judah’s rule until the time of Ahaz, when it was taken by Rezin of Syria and occupied by Syrians (2 Kgs 16:6). From about 753 <span>BC<\/span> onward, it remained an Edomite city until it was abandoned sometime between the sixth and fourth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. Then the Nabateans, who controlled the area, built a city a little farther east of the original site and renamed it Aila.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> El-paran.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ELATH<\/h3>\n<p>Edomite city (also spelled Eloth) at the head of the Gulf of Aqaba (Dt 2:8; 1 Kgs 9:26), on the eastern border of the wilderness of Paran (Gn 14:6, where it is alternately called El-paran). It probably owed its named (which means “grove of trees”) to the many palm trees in the area and may have been located in a grove of sacred trees. Elath was strategically located along a primary trade route running from southern Arabia and Egypt to Phoenicia, making it a valuable city to possess.<\/p>\n<p>Elath was taken by Kedorlaomer from the Horites (Gn 14:5-6). Later it was regarded as the southern limit of the territory of Edom (Dt 2:8). David probably captured it when he conquered Edom (2 Sm 8:14). During the reign of Joram, Jehoshaphat’s son, revolt restored it to the Edomites (2 Kgs 8:20-22). A few years later it was recaptured and rebuilt by Judah’s King Uzziah (2 Kgs 14:22). It remained under Judah’s rule until the time of Ahaz, when it was taken by Rezin of Syria and occupied by Syrians (2 Kgs 16:6). From about 753 <span>BC<\/span> onward, it remained an Edomite city until it was abandoned sometime between the sixth and fourth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. Then the Nabateans, who controlled the area, built a city a little farther east of the original site and renamed it Aila.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> El-paran.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ELATH Edomite city (also spelled Eloth) at the head of the Gulf of Aqaba (Dt 2:8; 1 Kgs 9:26), on the eastern border of the wilderness of Paran (Gn 14:6, where it is alternately called El-paran). It probably owed its named (which means “grove of trees”) to the many palm trees in the area and may have been located in a grove of sacred trees. Elath was strategically located along a primary trade route running from southern Arabia and Egypt to Phoenicia, making it a valuable city to possess. Ela...","summary_en":"ELATH Edomite city (also spelled Eloth) at the head of the Gulf of Aqaba (Dt 2:8; 1 Kgs 9:26), on the eastern border of the wilderness of Paran (Gn 14:6, where it is alternately called El-paran). It probably owed its named (which means “grove of trees”) to the many palm trees in the area and may have been located in a grove of sacred trees. Elath was strategically located along a primary trade route running from southern Arabia and Egypt to Phoenicia, making it a valuable city to possess. Ela...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":46622,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:15","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:15-18<\/strong> David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (<em>Joab<\/em>); (2) a court historian (<em>Jehoshaphat<\/em>); (3) priests (<em>Zadok<\/em> and <em>Ahimelech<\/em>); (4) a scribe or court secretary (<em>Seraiah<\/em>); and (5) a security officer (<em>Benaiah,<\/em> who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:15-18<\/strong> David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (<em>Joab<\/em>); (2) a court historian (<em>Jehoshaphat<\/em>); (3) priests (<em>Zadok<\/em> and <em>Ahimelech<\/em>); (4) a scribe or court secretary (<em>Seraiah<\/em>); and (5) a security officer (<em>Benaiah,<\/em> who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:15-18 David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (Joab); (2) a court historian (Jehoshaphat); (3) priests (Zadok and Ahimelech); (4) a scribe or court secretary (Seraiah); and (5) a security officer (Benaiah, who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).","summary_en":"8:15-18 David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (Joab); (2) a court historian (Jehoshaphat); (3) priests (Zadok and Ahimelech); (4) a scribe or court secretary (Seraiah); and (5) a security officer (Benaiah, who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74248,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:15","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:15-18<\/strong> David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (<em>Joab<\/em>); (2) a court historian (<em>Jehoshaphat<\/em>); (3) priests (<em>Zadok<\/em> and <em>Ahimelech<\/em>); (4) a scribe or court secretary (<em>Seraiah<\/em>); and (5) a security officer (<em>Benaiah,<\/em> who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:15-18<\/strong> David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (<em>Joab<\/em>); (2) a court historian (<em>Jehoshaphat<\/em>); (3) priests (<em>Zadok<\/em> and <em>Ahimelech<\/em>); (4) a scribe or court secretary (<em>Seraiah<\/em>); and (5) a security officer (<em>Benaiah,<\/em> who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:15-18 David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (Joab); (2) a court historian (Jehoshaphat); (3) priests (Zadok and Ahimelech); (4) a scribe or court secretary (Seraiah); and (5) a security officer (Benaiah, who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).","summary_en":"8:15-18 David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (Joab); (2) a court historian (Jehoshaphat); (3) priests (Zadok and Ahimelech); (4) a scribe or court secretary (Seraiah); and (5) a security officer (Benaiah, who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101874,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:15","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:15-18<\/strong> David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (<em>Joab<\/em>); (2) a court historian (<em>Jehoshaphat<\/em>); (3) priests (<em>Zadok<\/em> and <em>Ahimelech<\/em>); (4) a scribe or court secretary (<em>Seraiah<\/em>); and (5) a security officer (<em>Benaiah,<\/em> who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:15-18<\/strong> David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (<em>Joab<\/em>); (2) a court historian (<em>Jehoshaphat<\/em>); (3) priests (<em>Zadok<\/em> and <em>Ahimelech<\/em>); (4) a scribe or court secretary (<em>Seraiah<\/em>); and (5) a security officer (<em>Benaiah,<\/em> who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:15-18 David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (Joab); (2) a court historian (Jehoshaphat); (3) priests (Zadok and Ahimelech); (4) a scribe or court secretary (Seraiah); and (5) a security officer (Benaiah, who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).","summary_en":"8:15-18 David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (Joab); (2) a court historian (Jehoshaphat); (3) priests (Zadok and Ahimelech); (4) a scribe or court secretary (Seraiah); and (5) a security officer (Benaiah, who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129500,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:15","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:15-18<\/strong> David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (<em>Joab<\/em>); (2) a court historian (<em>Jehoshaphat<\/em>); (3) priests (<em>Zadok<\/em> and <em>Ahimelech<\/em>); (4) a scribe or court secretary (<em>Seraiah<\/em>); and (5) a security officer (<em>Benaiah,<\/em> who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:15-18<\/strong> David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (<em>Joab<\/em>); (2) a court historian (<em>Jehoshaphat<\/em>); (3) priests (<em>Zadok<\/em> and <em>Ahimelech<\/em>); (4) a scribe or court secretary (<em>Seraiah<\/em>); and (5) a security officer (<em>Benaiah,<\/em> who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:15-18 David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (Joab); (2) a court historian (Jehoshaphat); (3) priests (Zadok and Ahimelech); (4) a scribe or court secretary (Seraiah); and (5) a security officer (Benaiah, who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).","summary_en":"8:15-18 David’s bureaucracy included (1) military officials (Joab); (2) a court historian (Jehoshaphat); (3) priests (Zadok and Ahimelech); (4) a scribe or court secretary (Seraiah); and (5) a security officer (Benaiah, who became a commander under Solomon; see also 1 Kgs 2:25-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":41420,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joab","title_en":"Joab","content_ro":"<h3>Joab<\/h3>\n<p>Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the northern army of Israel under Abner’s impressive command (2 Sam 2:12-32).<\/p>\n<p>Joab often acted to promote what he perceived were David’s interests. For example, he colluded with David in the death of Uriah the Hittite to cover up the king’s adultery with Bathsheba (11:1-27). He persuaded David to allow Absalom’s return to court (14:1-33), and he tried to talk David out of taking a census that provoked God’s anger (24:1-9; 1 Chr 21:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Though he was very loyal to David, Joab sometimes acted in his own interest, and sometimes he disregarded the king’s orders. When Abner killed Joab’s brother Asahel (2 Sam 2:23), Joab killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (3:12-19). Later, Joab killed his own cousin Amasa (20:8-10), who commanded Absalom’s army (17:25), after David had appointed Amasa commander in Joab’s place (19:13; 20:4). Joab also killed Absalom against David’s direct order (18:5, 10-17). He then rebuked David for grieving Absalom’s death rather than congratulating the army (19:5-7). Joab was ruthless, and he regained the most powerful position in David’s army (20:23; 24:2; 1 Kgs 1:19).<\/p>\n<p>Joab sealed his fate by supporting Adonijah’s bid for David’s throne (1 Kgs 1:5-7). David’s deathbed instructions to Solomon included having Joab killed because of his murders of Abner and Amasa. When Solomon became king, he sent Benaiah to kill Joab even as Joab clung to the horns of the altar (1 Kgs 2:28-34). Joab met the same fate that he dealt to others throughout his life, and his executioner replaced him as commander of Israel’s army (1 Kgs 2:35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 2:13-32; 3:22-39; 8:16; 10:7-14; 11:1-25; 12:26-28; 14:1-33; 17:25; 18:2–19:13; 20:7-23; 24:2-9; 1 Kgs 1:7, 19; 2:28-35; 11:15-16; 1 Chr 2:16; 11:6-8; 18:15; 19:8-15; 20:1; 21:2-6; 26:28; 27:24, 34; Ps 60:1-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joab<\/h3>\n<p>Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the northern army of Israel under Abner’s impressive command (2 Sam 2:12-32).<\/p>\n<p>Joab often acted to promote what he perceived were David’s interests. For example, he colluded with David in the death of Uriah the Hittite to cover up the king’s adultery with Bathsheba (11:1-27). He persuaded David to allow Absalom’s return to court (14:1-33), and he tried to talk David out of taking a census that provoked God’s anger (24:1-9; 1 Chr 21:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Though he was very loyal to David, Joab sometimes acted in his own interest, and sometimes he disregarded the king’s orders. When Abner killed Joab’s brother Asahel (2 Sam 2:23), Joab killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (3:12-19). Later, Joab killed his own cousin Amasa (20:8-10), who commanded Absalom’s army (17:25), after David had appointed Amasa commander in Joab’s place (19:13; 20:4). Joab also killed Absalom against David’s direct order (18:5, 10-17). He then rebuked David for grieving Absalom’s death rather than congratulating the army (19:5-7). Joab was ruthless, and he regained the most powerful position in David’s army (20:23; 24:2; 1 Kgs 1:19).<\/p>\n<p>Joab sealed his fate by supporting Adonijah’s bid for David’s throne (1 Kgs 1:5-7). David’s deathbed instructions to Solomon included having Joab killed because of his murders of Abner and Amasa. When Solomon became king, he sent Benaiah to kill Joab even as Joab clung to the horns of the altar (1 Kgs 2:28-34). Joab met the same fate that he dealt to others throughout his life, and his executioner replaced him as commander of Israel’s army (1 Kgs 2:35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 2:13-32; 3:22-39; 8:16; 10:7-14; 11:1-25; 12:26-28; 14:1-33; 17:25; 18:2–19:13; 20:7-23; 24:2-9; 1 Kgs 1:7, 19; 2:28-35; 11:15-16; 1 Chr 2:16; 11:6-8; 18:15; 19:8-15; 20:1; 21:2-6; 26:28; 27:24, 34; Ps 60:1-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joab Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the no...","summary_en":"Joab Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the no...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69046,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joab","title_en":"Joab","content_ro":"<h3>Joab<\/h3>\n<p>Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the northern army of Israel under Abner’s impressive command (2 Sam 2:12-32).<\/p>\n<p>Joab often acted to promote what he perceived were David’s interests. For example, he colluded with David in the death of Uriah the Hittite to cover up the king’s adultery with Bathsheba (11:1-27). He persuaded David to allow Absalom’s return to court (14:1-33), and he tried to talk David out of taking a census that provoked God’s anger (24:1-9; 1 Chr 21:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Though he was very loyal to David, Joab sometimes acted in his own interest, and sometimes he disregarded the king’s orders. When Abner killed Joab’s brother Asahel (2 Sam 2:23), Joab killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (3:12-19). Later, Joab killed his own cousin Amasa (20:8-10), who commanded Absalom’s army (17:25), after David had appointed Amasa commander in Joab’s place (19:13; 20:4). Joab also killed Absalom against David’s direct order (18:5, 10-17). He then rebuked David for grieving Absalom’s death rather than congratulating the army (19:5-7). Joab was ruthless, and he regained the most powerful position in David’s army (20:23; 24:2; 1 Kgs 1:19).<\/p>\n<p>Joab sealed his fate by supporting Adonijah’s bid for David’s throne (1 Kgs 1:5-7). David’s deathbed instructions to Solomon included having Joab killed because of his murders of Abner and Amasa. When Solomon became king, he sent Benaiah to kill Joab even as Joab clung to the horns of the altar (1 Kgs 2:28-34). Joab met the same fate that he dealt to others throughout his life, and his executioner replaced him as commander of Israel’s army (1 Kgs 2:35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 2:13-32; 3:22-39; 8:16; 10:7-14; 11:1-25; 12:26-28; 14:1-33; 17:25; 18:2–19:13; 20:7-23; 24:2-9; 1 Kgs 1:7, 19; 2:28-35; 11:15-16; 1 Chr 2:16; 11:6-8; 18:15; 19:8-15; 20:1; 21:2-6; 26:28; 27:24, 34; Ps 60:1-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joab<\/h3>\n<p>Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the northern army of Israel under Abner’s impressive command (2 Sam 2:12-32).<\/p>\n<p>Joab often acted to promote what he perceived were David’s interests. For example, he colluded with David in the death of Uriah the Hittite to cover up the king’s adultery with Bathsheba (11:1-27). He persuaded David to allow Absalom’s return to court (14:1-33), and he tried to talk David out of taking a census that provoked God’s anger (24:1-9; 1 Chr 21:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Though he was very loyal to David, Joab sometimes acted in his own interest, and sometimes he disregarded the king’s orders. When Abner killed Joab’s brother Asahel (2 Sam 2:23), Joab killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (3:12-19). Later, Joab killed his own cousin Amasa (20:8-10), who commanded Absalom’s army (17:25), after David had appointed Amasa commander in Joab’s place (19:13; 20:4). Joab also killed Absalom against David’s direct order (18:5, 10-17). He then rebuked David for grieving Absalom’s death rather than congratulating the army (19:5-7). Joab was ruthless, and he regained the most powerful position in David’s army (20:23; 24:2; 1 Kgs 1:19).<\/p>\n<p>Joab sealed his fate by supporting Adonijah’s bid for David’s throne (1 Kgs 1:5-7). David’s deathbed instructions to Solomon included having Joab killed because of his murders of Abner and Amasa. When Solomon became king, he sent Benaiah to kill Joab even as Joab clung to the horns of the altar (1 Kgs 2:28-34). Joab met the same fate that he dealt to others throughout his life, and his executioner replaced him as commander of Israel’s army (1 Kgs 2:35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 2:13-32; 3:22-39; 8:16; 10:7-14; 11:1-25; 12:26-28; 14:1-33; 17:25; 18:2–19:13; 20:7-23; 24:2-9; 1 Kgs 1:7, 19; 2:28-35; 11:15-16; 1 Chr 2:16; 11:6-8; 18:15; 19:8-15; 20:1; 21:2-6; 26:28; 27:24, 34; Ps 60:1-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joab Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the no...","summary_en":"Joab Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the no...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96672,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joab","title_en":"Joab","content_ro":"<h3>Joab<\/h3>\n<p>Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the northern army of Israel under Abner’s impressive command (2 Sam 2:12-32).<\/p>\n<p>Joab often acted to promote what he perceived were David’s interests. For example, he colluded with David in the death of Uriah the Hittite to cover up the king’s adultery with Bathsheba (11:1-27). He persuaded David to allow Absalom’s return to court (14:1-33), and he tried to talk David out of taking a census that provoked God’s anger (24:1-9; 1 Chr 21:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Though he was very loyal to David, Joab sometimes acted in his own interest, and sometimes he disregarded the king’s orders. When Abner killed Joab’s brother Asahel (2 Sam 2:23), Joab killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (3:12-19). Later, Joab killed his own cousin Amasa (20:8-10), who commanded Absalom’s army (17:25), after David had appointed Amasa commander in Joab’s place (19:13; 20:4). Joab also killed Absalom against David’s direct order (18:5, 10-17). He then rebuked David for grieving Absalom’s death rather than congratulating the army (19:5-7). Joab was ruthless, and he regained the most powerful position in David’s army (20:23; 24:2; 1 Kgs 1:19).<\/p>\n<p>Joab sealed his fate by supporting Adonijah’s bid for David’s throne (1 Kgs 1:5-7). David’s deathbed instructions to Solomon included having Joab killed because of his murders of Abner and Amasa. When Solomon became king, he sent Benaiah to kill Joab even as Joab clung to the horns of the altar (1 Kgs 2:28-34). Joab met the same fate that he dealt to others throughout his life, and his executioner replaced him as commander of Israel’s army (1 Kgs 2:35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 2:13-32; 3:22-39; 8:16; 10:7-14; 11:1-25; 12:26-28; 14:1-33; 17:25; 18:2–19:13; 20:7-23; 24:2-9; 1 Kgs 1:7, 19; 2:28-35; 11:15-16; 1 Chr 2:16; 11:6-8; 18:15; 19:8-15; 20:1; 21:2-6; 26:28; 27:24, 34; Ps 60:1-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joab<\/h3>\n<p>Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the northern army of Israel under Abner’s impressive command (2 Sam 2:12-32).<\/p>\n<p>Joab often acted to promote what he perceived were David’s interests. For example, he colluded with David in the death of Uriah the Hittite to cover up the king’s adultery with Bathsheba (11:1-27). He persuaded David to allow Absalom’s return to court (14:1-33), and he tried to talk David out of taking a census that provoked God’s anger (24:1-9; 1 Chr 21:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Though he was very loyal to David, Joab sometimes acted in his own interest, and sometimes he disregarded the king’s orders. When Abner killed Joab’s brother Asahel (2 Sam 2:23), Joab killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (3:12-19). Later, Joab killed his own cousin Amasa (20:8-10), who commanded Absalom’s army (17:25), after David had appointed Amasa commander in Joab’s place (19:13; 20:4). Joab also killed Absalom against David’s direct order (18:5, 10-17). He then rebuked David for grieving Absalom’s death rather than congratulating the army (19:5-7). Joab was ruthless, and he regained the most powerful position in David’s army (20:23; 24:2; 1 Kgs 1:19).<\/p>\n<p>Joab sealed his fate by supporting Adonijah’s bid for David’s throne (1 Kgs 1:5-7). David’s deathbed instructions to Solomon included having Joab killed because of his murders of Abner and Amasa. When Solomon became king, he sent Benaiah to kill Joab even as Joab clung to the horns of the altar (1 Kgs 2:28-34). Joab met the same fate that he dealt to others throughout his life, and his executioner replaced him as commander of Israel’s army (1 Kgs 2:35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 2:13-32; 3:22-39; 8:16; 10:7-14; 11:1-25; 12:26-28; 14:1-33; 17:25; 18:2–19:13; 20:7-23; 24:2-9; 1 Kgs 1:7, 19; 2:28-35; 11:15-16; 1 Chr 2:16; 11:6-8; 18:15; 19:8-15; 20:1; 21:2-6; 26:28; 27:24, 34; Ps 60:1-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joab Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the no...","summary_en":"Joab Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the no...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124298,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joab","title_en":"Joab","content_ro":"<h3>Joab<\/h3>\n<p>Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the northern army of Israel under Abner’s impressive command (2 Sam 2:12-32).<\/p>\n<p>Joab often acted to promote what he perceived were David’s interests. For example, he colluded with David in the death of Uriah the Hittite to cover up the king’s adultery with Bathsheba (11:1-27). He persuaded David to allow Absalom’s return to court (14:1-33), and he tried to talk David out of taking a census that provoked God’s anger (24:1-9; 1 Chr 21:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Though he was very loyal to David, Joab sometimes acted in his own interest, and sometimes he disregarded the king’s orders. When Abner killed Joab’s brother Asahel (2 Sam 2:23), Joab killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (3:12-19). Later, Joab killed his own cousin Amasa (20:8-10), who commanded Absalom’s army (17:25), after David had appointed Amasa commander in Joab’s place (19:13; 20:4). Joab also killed Absalom against David’s direct order (18:5, 10-17). He then rebuked David for grieving Absalom’s death rather than congratulating the army (19:5-7). Joab was ruthless, and he regained the most powerful position in David’s army (20:23; 24:2; 1 Kgs 1:19).<\/p>\n<p>Joab sealed his fate by supporting Adonijah’s bid for David’s throne (1 Kgs 1:5-7). David’s deathbed instructions to Solomon included having Joab killed because of his murders of Abner and Amasa. When Solomon became king, he sent Benaiah to kill Joab even as Joab clung to the horns of the altar (1 Kgs 2:28-34). Joab met the same fate that he dealt to others throughout his life, and his executioner replaced him as commander of Israel’s army (1 Kgs 2:35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 2:13-32; 3:22-39; 8:16; 10:7-14; 11:1-25; 12:26-28; 14:1-33; 17:25; 18:2–19:13; 20:7-23; 24:2-9; 1 Kgs 1:7, 19; 2:28-35; 11:15-16; 1 Chr 2:16; 11:6-8; 18:15; 19:8-15; 20:1; 21:2-6; 26:28; 27:24, 34; Ps 60:1-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joab<\/h3>\n<p>Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the northern army of Israel under Abner’s impressive command (2 Sam 2:12-32).<\/p>\n<p>Joab often acted to promote what he perceived were David’s interests. For example, he colluded with David in the death of Uriah the Hittite to cover up the king’s adultery with Bathsheba (11:1-27). He persuaded David to allow Absalom’s return to court (14:1-33), and he tried to talk David out of taking a census that provoked God’s anger (24:1-9; 1 Chr 21:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Though he was very loyal to David, Joab sometimes acted in his own interest, and sometimes he disregarded the king’s orders. When Abner killed Joab’s brother Asahel (2 Sam 2:23), Joab killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (3:12-19). Later, Joab killed his own cousin Amasa (20:8-10), who commanded Absalom’s army (17:25), after David had appointed Amasa commander in Joab’s place (19:13; 20:4). Joab also killed Absalom against David’s direct order (18:5, 10-17). He then rebuked David for grieving Absalom’s death rather than congratulating the army (19:5-7). Joab was ruthless, and he regained the most powerful position in David’s army (20:23; 24:2; 1 Kgs 1:19).<\/p>\n<p>Joab sealed his fate by supporting Adonijah’s bid for David’s throne (1 Kgs 1:5-7). David’s deathbed instructions to Solomon included having Joab killed because of his murders of Abner and Amasa. When Solomon became king, he sent Benaiah to kill Joab even as Joab clung to the horns of the altar (1 Kgs 2:28-34). Joab met the same fate that he dealt to others throughout his life, and his executioner replaced him as commander of Israel’s army (1 Kgs 2:35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 2:13-32; 3:22-39; 8:16; 10:7-14; 11:1-25; 12:26-28; 14:1-33; 17:25; 18:2–19:13; 20:7-23; 24:2-9; 1 Kgs 1:7, 19; 2:28-35; 11:15-16; 1 Chr 2:16; 11:6-8; 18:15; 19:8-15; 20:1; 21:2-6; 26:28; 27:24, 34; Ps 60:1-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joab Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the no...","summary_en":"Joab Joab was David’s nephew, the son of David’s sister Zeruiah (1 Chr 2:13-16); his brothers were Abishai and Asahel. Joab became commander of David’s armies because of his bravery and military skill (2 Sam 2:18; 8:16; 11:1; 1 Chr 18:15). As the first to attack the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, he was awarded the commander’s position (1 Chr 11:4-9). Joab also suppressed a rebellion among the Arameans and Ammonites (2 Sam 10:1-19; 1 Chr 19:8-15) and won many key battles for David against the no...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":898,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ahilud","title_en":"Ahilud","content_ro":"<h3>AHILUD<\/h3>\n<p>Father of the court historian Jehoshaphat. Jehoshaphat served under both David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:16; 20:24; 1 Kgs 4:3; 1 Chr 18:15). Probably Ahilud was also the father of Baana, one of Solomon’s tax officials (1 Kgs 4:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AHILUD<\/h3>\n<p>Father of the court historian Jehoshaphat. Jehoshaphat served under both David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:16; 20:24; 1 Kgs 4:3; 1 Chr 18:15). Probably Ahilud was also the father of Baana, one of Solomon’s tax officials (1 Kgs 4:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"AHILUD Father of the court historian Jehoshaphat. Jehoshaphat served under both David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:16; 20:24; 1 Kgs 4:3; 1 Chr 18:15). Probably Ahilud was also the father of Baana, one of Solomon’s tax officials (1 Kgs 4:12).","summary_en":"AHILUD Father of the court historian Jehoshaphat. Jehoshaphat served under both David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:16; 20:24; 1 Kgs 4:3; 1 Chr 18:15). Probably Ahilud was also the father of Baana, one of Solomon’s tax officials (1 Kgs 4:12).","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14278,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Names of God","title_en":"Names of God","content_ro":"<h3>GOD, Names of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s self-identifications expressing various aspects of his being.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Biblical Idea of Name<\/p>\n<p>• The Names of God in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Names of God in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblicalIdeaofName\">The Biblical Idea of Name<\/p>\n<p>In the Scriptures the name and person of God are inseparably related. This is in keeping with the biblical conception of what a name signifies.<\/p>\n<p>In the Hebrew language, the term for “name” most probably meant “sign” or “distinctive mark.” In the Greek language, “name” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">onoma<\/span><em>)<\/em> is derived from a verb that means “to know.” A name, therefore, indicates that by which a person or object is to be known. But the idea of name is not to be taken in the sense of a label or an arbitrary means of identifying or specifying a person, place, or object. “Name” in biblical usage correctly describes the person, place, or object and indicates the essential character of that to which the name is given. Adam named the animals according to their nature (Gn 2:19-20); Noah means “one who brings relief and comfort” (5:29); Jesus means “savior” (Mt 1:21). When a person was given a new position or a radical change took place in his life, a new name was given to indicate that new aspect—for example, Abraham (“father of many,” Gn 17:5), and Israel (“one who strives with God” or “God strives,” 32:28). The name of a person or people expressed what the person or people thought the proper description or statement of character was.<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the names of God, there are considerable differences, and these are most clearly seen when biblical scholars and theologians confront the question of whether the names of God are ascriptions given by God concerning himself or they are ascriptions given to God by people who observed his acts and reflected on his character as discerned through a study of divine deeds. Here are some examples of various kinds of divine names:<\/p>\n<p>1. Proper names: El, Yahweh, Adonai, Theos (God), Kurios (Lord).<\/p>\n<li>2. Personal names: Father, Abba, Son, Jesus, Holy Spirit.<\/li>\n<li>3. Titles: Creator, Messiah\/Christ, Paraclete\/Comforter.<\/li>\n<li>4. Essential names: Light, Love, Spirit.<\/li>\n<li>5. Descriptive names: Rock, Ba’al, Master, Rabboni, Shepherd.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNamesofGodintheOldTestament\">The Names of God in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<h5>El and Related Names<\/h5>\n<p>The name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> is found over 200 times in the Hebrew Bible. It is best translated as “God.” The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’el<\/span> has a number of possible meanings. The root is thought by some to be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’ul<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to be first” or “to be strong.” Others suggest the root is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to precede” and suggests “leader” or “commander.” It can also mean “to be afraid.” Thus God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> as the strong one, is to be feared. Still others suggest the preposition <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’el<\/span> (“to, toward”) as the root; the idea then is of “one giving self to others” or of “one to whom others go for help.” Some scholars suggest that the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alim<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bind,” should be considered as a root also—that is, “the strong one binds and holds firm control.” Common to these four suggested root meanings is the idea of strength, power, and of supreme excellence and greatness.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> in the OT is used particularly in the earlier books, where it describes God’s exercising dynamic power as distinguished from authority. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> speaks of God as the great doer and producer. He is the One who exercises such power that whatever is made, done, kept, or destroyed is his doing (cf. Ex 15). <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> is also used to express the idea that God is not to be identified as part of creation but as the One who is above, behind, and beyond creation (Ps 19:1).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is also commonly used as the name of God, occurring over 2,500 times in the OT. There are differences of opinion concerning the exact origin and meaning of this plural name. Some have suggested that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is the plural form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span><em>,<\/em> but it seems more likely that it is a plural of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Eloah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which appears in the poetical writings. Some critical writers have suggested that this plural form is borrowed from pagan polytheistic sources, but no such plural form is found among pagans as the name of a deity. Others have suggested that the plural form is used to indicate the triune nature of God, and support for this has been seen in the use of a singular verb with this plural noun. The biblical doctrine of the Trinity, as it is developed throughout the Scriptures, does not appear to be based on the use of this plural form of God’s name, even though the two positions are not contradictory.<\/p>\n<p>The plural form, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>,<\/em> is best understood as expressing intensity. God makes himself known by this name as the Lord of intense and extensive glory and richness as he exercises his preeminence and power in the created cosmos. Hence, when the Scripture speaks of creation, it states, “In the beginning <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> created the heavens and the earth” (Gn 1:1). This name is repeated 35 times in Genesis 1 and 2 in connection with God’s power as revealed in Creation. In the book of Deuteronomy the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is used repeatedly to stress the majestic power of God that was shown in Israel’s release from bondage in Egypt, preservation in the wilderness, and preparation for entrance into the Promised Land. In this context, God <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>)<\/em> is also recognized as the Lawgiver who will powerfully execute judgment on covenant breakers. The psalmists also used this named repeatedly as they acknowledged and praised God the majestic ruler who had demonstrated his omnipotence in many dimensions of life (see Ps 68, in which <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> appears 26 times.)<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to the use of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> when God spoke to Abraham and said he would be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> to the patriarch and his seed; that is, God would be in a covenant relationship to them (Gn 17:1-8). Included in this relationship is the idea that God is ever ready to use his power on behalf of those who are in covenant with him. Thus, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Elohim<\/span> also expresses the concept of God’s faithfulness in regard to the covenant and the promises and blessings involved in it.<\/p>\n<p>The name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span> occurs mainly in the poetical writings, no fewer than 41 times in Job. Isaiah used it to express the incomparable character of God (Is 44:8). In like manner David asked, “Who is God [<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span>], but the <span>Lord<\/span>?” (2 Sm 22:32). Moses was the first to use the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span> in his song (Dt 32:15-17), referring to Israel’s God in the context of the “no-gods,” which had been chosen in place of the Rock of salvation and the incomparable One. This name was probably used to stress the fact that God is the only true and living One, the One to be adored and worshiped; he is to be revered with a holy fear.<\/p>\n<p>Another closely related name is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span><em>,<\/em> found in Ezra and Daniel. Some think <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span> is a Chaldee or Aramaic form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Eloah<\/span><em>.<\/em> Its root is said to be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to fear” or “to be perplexed.” God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span> is the God to be feared and worshiped accordingly. In view of this meaning, it can be understood why, in the time of Israel’s exile and immediately after their return, this name was commonly used.<\/p>\n<p>Three other names of God include the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span><em>:<\/em><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Elyon<\/span> is the name used to designate the God of Melchizedek (Gn 14:18-22) as God Most High. In Psalms 57:2 and 78:56 the Hebrew reads <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim ‘Elyon<\/span><em>.<\/em> It is believed that the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “go up, be elevated, to be exalted.” There are a number of instances where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> is used alone, but the context indicates that it is then used as a synonym for God (e.g., Nm 24:16; Ps 83:18; Is 14:14). The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘elyon<\/span> is used quite frequently as an adjective; it is then translated as “high, highest, upper, uppermost.” The basic ascription given to God when this name is employed is to One who is above all things as the maker, possessor, and ruler. He is incomparable in every way; he is subject to no one and no thing; he is the Exalted One.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> is used in the longer form seven times in the Scriptures (Gn 17:1; 28:3; 35:11; 43:14; 48:3; Ex 6:3; Ez 10:5). In the shorter form <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span><em>),<\/em> it appears more frequently: in Job 30 times; in Psalms 19:1 and 68:14; once in Ruth (1:21), Isaiah (13:6), Ezekiel (1:24), and Joel (1:15). In these passages the combined ideas of God as the all-powerful, all-sufficient, transcendent, sovereign ruler and disposer are present. This meaning is generally accepted, but there are differences as to the exact meaning of the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span><em>.<\/em> Some have begun with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shad<\/span> as the first concept to be considered; its meaning is “breast, pap, or teat,” and it is considered a “precious metaphor” of the God who nourishes, supplies, and satisfies. The root of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shad<\/span> <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadah<\/span><em>),<\/em> in Semitic usage, is to moisten. This meaning is not the preferred one in the context of which <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> appears; nor is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shed<\/span> (demon), which some scholars have sought to use because it appears in Deuteronomy 32:17 and Psalm 106:37 speaking of Israel’s idolatry. In addition to the fact that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shed<\/span> is spelled differently, the connection between the concept of demon and God as all-powerful is difficult to establish. More acceptable is the suggestion that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is a composite term of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sha<\/span> (“the one who”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dai<\/span> (“is sufficient”). The later Greek versions have adopted this meaning. The most preferred explanation is that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadad<\/span> (“to overpower, to deal violently, or to devastate”). A clear connection between <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadad<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is said to be found in Isaiah 13:6 and Joel 1:15. God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> is presented as the all-powerful One, totally self-sufficient, absolute ruler, and the One who can and does make final disposition. The Septuagint has adapted this meaning; it translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Pantokrator<\/span><em>,<\/em> the “All-Ruler” or “Sovereign One.”<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Olam<\/span> is used to refer to God as the everlasting or eternal One, a clear instance where the name of God and an attribute of God are combined. The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> has a wide range of uses. It is usually defined in lexicons as meaning “long duration, antiquity, and indefinite futurity.” It is used to speak of God’s existence, of God’s covenant and promises, and of the Messiah’s reign. Speaking to God, the psalmist said, “You are from <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> (everlasting) to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> (everlasting)” (Ps 90:2), and the prophet Isaiah spoke of God as the everlasting Creator (Is 40:28) and as everlasting strength (26:4), and Jeremiah spoke of God as everlasting King (Jer 10:10). God’s everlastingness or eternity speaks of his infinity in relation to time. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Olam<\/span><em>,<\/em> as ascribed to God, should not be thought of as duration prolonged indefinitely backward and forward. Rather, the word speaks to God’s transcending all temporal limits; in addition, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> refers to the quality of God that differs essentially from time. The Scriptures speak of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Olam<\/span> in contexts where the believer’s assurance of well-being, security, and hope are presented as prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Gibbor<\/span> is a name that speaks of God’s power and might. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Gibbor<\/span> alone is used in reference to mighty and heroic men. The two terms together always refer to God, and in some instances <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Haggadol<\/span> (“the greatest”) is added (Dt 10:17; Jer 32:18) to emphasize the greatness and awesome majesty of God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Gibbor<\/span> is also used to describe the Messiah in Isaiah 9:6 (cf. Ps 45:4).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Ro’i<\/span> is used once to describe God as the seeing One. Hagar described the Lord this way when she was found in the wilderness (Gn 16:13). Psalm 139:1-2 expresses this concept of God as the all-seeing One from whose eye nothing is hidden (cf. Ps 33:18).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is a distinctly proper name of God. It is never used to refer to any pagan gods; neither is it used in regard to men. It appears 6,823 times in the OT, occurring first in Genesis 2:4, where it is joined with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is used 164 times in Genesis, and it appears 1,800 times in Exodus through Joshua. It never appears in a declined form in the Hebrew language, and it never occurs in the plural form or with suffixes. It is abbreviated as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yah<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahu<\/span> (cf. Ex 15:2; Ps 68:4; Is 12:2; etc.).<\/p>\n<p>The exact meaning of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is difficult to determine. Some have sought the root in the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hayah<\/span> (“to be”) or in an ancient form of that same verb, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hawah<\/span><em>.<\/em> There is no agreement as to whether the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qal<\/span> or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hiphil<\/span> form of the verb should be considered as the root. Those who opt for the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hiphil<\/span> form read <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> to mean “cause to be”; thus Exodus 3:14 would read, “I will cause to be what has come to be.” Others look to the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qal<\/span> form and then translate the name as “I Am” or “I Shall Be.” Still others are inclined to disassociate the name from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hayah<\/span> and regard it as an original and independent term, expressing the uniqueness of Israel’s gracious God.<\/p>\n\n<p>Translators of the OT have not agreed upon the correct translation of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> Since it is translated into the Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “Lord,” many have rendered <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as “<span>Lord<\/span>.” But <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is best rendered “Lord,” appears with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> in various instances. The <span>kjv<\/span>, for example, translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as “God,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> as “Lord.” Some modern translators have chosen to use <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> (see <span>jb<\/span> and <span>njb<\/span>). The name Jehovah, as used in the <span>asv<\/span> (1901), has been judged unacceptable. This name arose due to the Jewish practice of not pronouncing <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> because of Leviticus 24:16, “He that blasphemes the name of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> shall surely be put to death.” This warning against a vain or blasphemous use of the name was taken in an absolute sense, especially after Israel’s deportation (cf. Am 6:10). Hence, when reading the OT the Jews substituted either <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> for <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> From this, the practice of adding the vowels of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> to YHWH (JeHoWaH) became established.<\/p>\n<p>The interpretation of Exodus 6:2-3 has caused much debate. “And God said to Moses, ‘I am <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">El Shaddai<\/span><em>,<\/em> but by my name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> I did not make myself known to them.’ ” This passage has been understood to mean that the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> was not known or used prior to the time of Moses. But that is not what the passage states; rather, it speaks of the patriarchs not knowing God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> They knew him as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> in actual revelatory historical deeds. They had not come to know God according to his unique character, that is, as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> In other words, God had always been <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> he is saying to Moses that the descendants of the patriarchs would come to know the full, rich meaning of the name by the way God dealt with them.<\/p>\n<p>This name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> reveals God’s nature in the highest and fullest sense possible. It includes, or presupposes, the meaning of the other names. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> particularly stresses the absolute faithfulness of God. God had promised the patriarchs that he would be their God, that he would be with them and deliver and bless them, keep them, and give them a land as a place of service and inheritance. Moses is told by God that Israel is about to behold and experience the unchangeableness of God as he steadfastly and wondrously remembers his word and executes it to the fullest degree. God would prove to be a faithful, redeeming, upholding, restoring God. In working out this redemption, God would demonstrate that he is all that his name implies: merciful, gracious, patient, full of loving-kindness, truthful, faithful, forgiving, just, and righteous (Ex 34:5-6). Truly, Jacob had received an insight into the meaning of the name when he exclaimed, “I wait for thy salvation, O <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span>” (Gn 49:18).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> then, is the name par excellence of Israel’s God. As <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> he is a faithful covenant God who, having given his word of love and life, keeps that word by bestowing love and life abundantly on his own.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the richness of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> it can be understood why there were stringent rules regarding its proper use (Lv 24:11, 16). It also explains why thankful, rejoicing, worshiping Israelites used the abbreviated form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> in song when they sang Hallelujah: “Praise Yah” (Pss 104:35; 106:1; 149:1; 150:1).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is used in a number of phrases that are considered names of or ascriptions of God. The most common of these compound names is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> (“hosts”). The word “hosts” is used frequently in the Pentateuch to refer to the armies of Israel (cf. Nm 10:14-28). This is because the word is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">saba<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to wage” war. It also means “to serve” in some contexts; for example, Numbers 8:24 clearly has reference to the service performed in the tabernacle. The noun <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> first occurs in Genesis 2:1, where it refers to the many components of the earth and heaven. Some would limit the reference in these contexts to the stars. Still others would suggest that the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> refers to the angels, appealing to Psalm 33:6 for confirmation.<\/p>\n<p>The compound name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> first appears in 1 Samuel 1:3. In view of the frequent use of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> in 1—2 Samuel to refer to armies (1 Sm 12:9; 14:50; 17:55; 2 Sm 2:8; 8:16; 10:16), it is thought that the compound name refers to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as the God of armies, that is, God has his armies to serve him. These are considered to be armies of angels who are ministering servants to God. It has been correctly pointed out that the compound name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> is used most frequently by the prophets (Jeremiah, 88 times; Zechariah, 55 times; Malachi, 25 times; Haggai, 14 times) at times when God’s people had either suffered defeat at the hands of enemy armies or were threatened by defeat. Therefore, the compound name was used to remind them that their covenant God had great hosts to fight and work for him on behalf of his people. Thus, though Israel’s armies failed, their covenant God was sufficient for every possible circumstance. And it was to this <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> that Israel’s commanders were to give allegiance (Jos 5:14-15), and in whose name Israel was blessed (2 Sm 6:18).<\/p>\n<p>Several other compound names occur infrequently:<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Nissi<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nissi<\/span><em>,<\/em> “my banner”) is the name that Moses called on when he built an altar celebrating Israel’s God-given victory over the Amalekites (Ex 17:15). Isaiah uses the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nissi<\/span> when speaking of the coming Messiah who is to be the conqueror (Is 11:10).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Rapha<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">rapha’<\/span><em>,<\/em> “healer”) appears in Exodus 15:26, when Israel is assured that God, their healer, will prevent the diseases of Egypt from affecting Israel. Although the name is only used once, God was often called upon and praised as the healing One (e.g., Ps 103:3; Is 30:26; Jer 6:14).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Rohi<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ro‘i<\/span><em>,<\/em> “my shepherd”) appears in Psalm 23:1. The concept of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as shepherd is explicated in Ezekiel 34. “I myself will be the Shepherd of my sheep” (v 15). Jesus demonstrated this concept’s full meaning when as a shepherd he gave his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Jireh<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yir’eh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to see ahead or to provide”) appears in Genesis 22:14. Abraham gave this name to the place where God provided a substitute for his son Isaac, whom Abraham was to offer as a sacrifice to God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Shalom<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> “peace”) is the name Gideon gave to the altar he built when the angel of the Lord came to give him orders to fight the Midianites (Jgs 6:24).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> appears with a few forms of the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tsadaq<\/span><em>,<\/em> “righteousness.” <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is spoken of as our righteousness in Jeremiah 23:6; the thought evidently is that David’s Righteous Branch (the Messiah) will attribute God’s righteousness to those who are incorporated in the new covenant. This concept is expressed in the Pentateuch a number of times when it is said that God has provided a way for living righteously; that is, God provides a way of sanctification (cf. Lv 20:8; 22:9).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> as a name for God appears about 360 times in the OT, though it is not uniformly used. It is first found in Genesis 15:2 and 8, when Abram requests more definite information concerning a son and the Promised Land. It appears only 14 times after that in the Pentateuch. It appears repeatedly in the Psalms (over 50 times), and certain of the prophets use it frequently (Isaiah, 47 times; Jeremiah, 29 times; Ezekiel, over 150 times; and Amos, 27 times).<\/p>\n<p>The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adan<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “master, ruler, owner, lord,” is thought to be the root of the noun <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adon<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is frequently used of men. For example, in Genesis and 1—2 Samuel the term is used often for men who own slaves or are in positions of authority. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> is correctly described as the name of personal communication between the believer and God. In such communication the worshiper acknowledged God’s intense majesty and greatness and also the sense of belonging to this God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> coming from human lips, expressed honor for God and humble submission on the part of the believing person. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> thus, is the name that expresses faith, assurance, security, ready service, and thanksgiving (Pss 16:2; 57:9-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Old Testament Name Combinations<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT the names of God appear in various combinations. For example <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-Yahweh-’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-’Adonai<\/span> are very common. These combinations were an effort to express the fullness of God’s being and character as these had been revealed. Names of God in combination with “Israel” occur also as, for example, with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span>-God-Israel (Jgs 5:3; Is 17:6). God is also invoked in relation to Israel without the mention of one of his names—for example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Qedosh Yisrael<\/span> (“Holy One of Israel,” Is 43:14) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Abir Yisrael<\/span> (“Mighty One of Israel,” Gn 49:24; Ps 132:2; Is 49:26). By means of these phrases, the covenantal relationship between God and his people was expressed and God’s unchanging character was positively acknowledged.<\/p>\n<h5>Old Testament Personal Names<\/h5>\n<p>The personal names of God are Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and variations of these.<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Abh<\/span> (“father”) appears more frequently in Genesis than in any other book, and in the Pentateuch more than in any other division of the OT. But it is not used there of God but rather of one who has generated children (i.e., the male parent), the progenitor—head, chief, and ruler of the family group or clan. It is used often in the sense of the responsible one through whom God has spoken, with whom God has dealt, and through whom he has given a rich heritage to the children and descendants of the patriarchs.<\/p>\n<p>In the poetical books, God is referred to as Father but is not directly named as such. Job is asked, “Has the rain a father?” (Jb 38:28). The reference is to God as the maker, source, and controller of rain. In Psalm 68:5 God in his holy dwelling place is the “Father of the fatherless”; the parallel phrase, “protector of widows,” indicates the sense. Psalm 89:26 says that David will cry to God, “Thou art my Father,” and the parallels use the terms “God” and “Rock of my salvation.” The idea here is of God as Creator and Savior who raised up, delivered, and protected David. In Psalm 103:13, “Father” is used analogously, “As a father pities his children.”<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah uses the term “Father” in relation to God four times. Three times it refers to the One who has made, saved, formed, kept, and directed Israel (Is 63:16; 64:8). Isaiah says the promised child is to be named Everlasting Father (9:6). Used in this sense, the term establishes the Son’s equality with the Father in stature, function, ability, and responsibility. Jeremiah also refers to God as Father in Jeremiah 3:4, 19, meaning the origin, keeper, and friend of his people Israel. Malachi 1:6 and 2:10 speak of God as the parent who deserves honor from his children and as the origin and ruler of all people.<\/p>\n<p>The term “son” is one of the most-used terms in the OT; it commonly occurs in the sense of offspring and descendant. It also appears in the sense of follower or successor. There are a few indirect references to the second person of the Trinity.<\/p>\n<p>The messianic Psalm 2 has such a reference: “You are my son” (v 7). It is stated in the context of the king speaking to one who rules and is to rule with and under the sovereign. The immediate reference may be to the theocratic king; however, the reference is revealed in the NT to be the second person of the Trinity (Acts 13:33). Thus, the term “son” is applied to the promised Messiah who is set forth as the divine sovereign ruler and judge of the nations. The Son is perceived to be equal with the Father in deity and function. Not all biblical scholars accept this interpretation, but support is found in such NT passages as Hebrews 1:8 which quotes Psalm 45:6. As stated above, Isaiah speaks of the son to be given (Is 9:6), the One born of the virgin (7:14), who is Immanuel, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.<\/p>\n<p>The name “Holy Spirit” occurs only a few times in the OT. The Spirit is referred to frequently by terms and phrases such as “the Spirit of God” (Gn 1:2), “the Spirit of the Lord God” (Is 61:1), “the Spirit of the Lord” (Ez 37:1), “the Spirit” (Nm 11:17; 27:18), “my Spirit” (Gn 6:3), and “your Spirit” (Ps 51:11). Though the character of the Spirit is not developed as clearly in the OT as in the NT, it can be safely stated that the relationship posited between God and the Spirit is such that there is no doubt that the OT teaches the deity of the Spirit. The character and function of the Spirit is referred to especially in relation to the work of creation (Gn 1:2; Ps 33:6; etc.) and the equipping of servants for the service of God—for example, craftsmanship (Ex 35:31), leadership (Nm 11:17; 27:18), and prophecy (1 Sm 10:6; 2 Sm 23:2; 2 Chr 15:1; Ez 11:5).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNamesofGodintheNewTestament\">The Names of God in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>Proper Names of God<\/h5>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> is the NT equivalent of the OT names <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span>and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>;<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> appears in the NT as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Hupsistos<\/span><em>,<\/em> the Highest (Mk 5:7; Lk 1:32, 76). <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Pantokrator<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘El Shaddai<\/span>) appears with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> (2 Cor 6:18; Rv 16:7). This name was used not only to express God’s transcendency, power, sovereignty, and lordship, but also to express that God is one who has a close relationship with his people. This fact is established by the very frequent use of personal pronouns with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span><em>.<\/em> The name <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> appears over 1,000 times in the NT.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> “Lord,” is used to express the OT names <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Adonai<\/span> in the Septuagint, and the NT follows it. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span> means “power,” so the meaning is not the same as with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> yet the NT does give <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span> the full weight of meaning that the OT gave to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> especially when used of Jesus Christ (cf. Acts 2:36; Phil 2:9-11; etc.)<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Despotes<\/span> is used five times of God or Jesus in the NT (Lk 2:29; Acts 4:24; 2 Pt 2:11; Jude 1:4; Rv 6:10). It expresses the idea of authority. The idea of brutality conveyed by the modern concept “despot” is absent from the NT usage even when applied to men, where its central thought is ownership (2 Tm 2:21).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Names of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the baptismal formula, which is part of the Great Commission (Mt 28:19-20), the three personal names of God appear: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These names carry the OT meaning, but since the relationship of the three Persons is explicated, the NT meaning of the names is enriched.<\/p>\n<p>“Jesus” is the personal name of the Son, the second person of the triune Godhead. It means “savior” (Mt 1:21). The root of this name “to save” gave rise to names such as Joshua, Hoshea, and Hosea. The basic meaning of the OT root is “to bring into a safe, wide-open place.” Joshua, bringing Israel into Canaan, personally did what his name meant. The NT explanation (“save from sin”) is not contrary to the OT meaning. To be saved from sin is to be restored to fellowship with God and to enter into the paradise of the heavenly kingdom.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; God, Being and Attributes of; Holy Spirit; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah; Names, Significance of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOD, Names of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s self-identifications expressing various aspects of his being.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Biblical Idea of Name<\/p>\n<p>• The Names of God in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Names of God in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblicalIdeaofName\">The Biblical Idea of Name<\/p>\n<p>In the Scriptures the name and person of God are inseparably related. This is in keeping with the biblical conception of what a name signifies.<\/p>\n<p>In the Hebrew language, the term for “name” most probably meant “sign” or “distinctive mark.” In the Greek language, “name” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">onoma<\/span><em>)<\/em> is derived from a verb that means “to know.” A name, therefore, indicates that by which a person or object is to be known. But the idea of name is not to be taken in the sense of a label or an arbitrary means of identifying or specifying a person, place, or object. “Name” in biblical usage correctly describes the person, place, or object and indicates the essential character of that to which the name is given. Adam named the animals according to their nature (Gn 2:19-20); Noah means “one who brings relief and comfort” (5:29); Jesus means “savior” (Mt 1:21). When a person was given a new position or a radical change took place in his life, a new name was given to indicate that new aspect—for example, Abraham (“father of many,” Gn 17:5), and Israel (“one who strives with God” or “God strives,” 32:28). The name of a person or people expressed what the person or people thought the proper description or statement of character was.<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the names of God, there are considerable differences, and these are most clearly seen when biblical scholars and theologians confront the question of whether the names of God are ascriptions given by God concerning himself or they are ascriptions given to God by people who observed his acts and reflected on his character as discerned through a study of divine deeds. Here are some examples of various kinds of divine names:<\/p>\n<p>1. Proper names: El, Yahweh, Adonai, Theos (God), Kurios (Lord).<\/p>\n<li>2. Personal names: Father, Abba, Son, Jesus, Holy Spirit.<\/li>\n<li>3. Titles: Creator, Messiah\/Christ, Paraclete\/Comforter.<\/li>\n<li>4. Essential names: Light, Love, Spirit.<\/li>\n<li>5. Descriptive names: Rock, Ba’al, Master, Rabboni, Shepherd.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNamesofGodintheOldTestament\">The Names of God in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<h5>El and Related Names<\/h5>\n<p>The name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> is found over 200 times in the Hebrew Bible. It is best translated as “God.” The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’el<\/span> has a number of possible meanings. The root is thought by some to be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’ul<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to be first” or “to be strong.” Others suggest the root is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to precede” and suggests “leader” or “commander.” It can also mean “to be afraid.” Thus God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> as the strong one, is to be feared. Still others suggest the preposition <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’el<\/span> (“to, toward”) as the root; the idea then is of “one giving self to others” or of “one to whom others go for help.” Some scholars suggest that the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alim<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bind,” should be considered as a root also—that is, “the strong one binds and holds firm control.” Common to these four suggested root meanings is the idea of strength, power, and of supreme excellence and greatness.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> in the OT is used particularly in the earlier books, where it describes God’s exercising dynamic power as distinguished from authority. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> speaks of God as the great doer and producer. He is the One who exercises such power that whatever is made, done, kept, or destroyed is his doing (cf. Ex 15). <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> is also used to express the idea that God is not to be identified as part of creation but as the One who is above, behind, and beyond creation (Ps 19:1).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is also commonly used as the name of God, occurring over 2,500 times in the OT. There are differences of opinion concerning the exact origin and meaning of this plural name. Some have suggested that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is the plural form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span><em>,<\/em> but it seems more likely that it is a plural of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Eloah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which appears in the poetical writings. Some critical writers have suggested that this plural form is borrowed from pagan polytheistic sources, but no such plural form is found among pagans as the name of a deity. Others have suggested that the plural form is used to indicate the triune nature of God, and support for this has been seen in the use of a singular verb with this plural noun. The biblical doctrine of the Trinity, as it is developed throughout the Scriptures, does not appear to be based on the use of this plural form of God’s name, even though the two positions are not contradictory.<\/p>\n<p>The plural form, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>,<\/em> is best understood as expressing intensity. God makes himself known by this name as the Lord of intense and extensive glory and richness as he exercises his preeminence and power in the created cosmos. Hence, when the Scripture speaks of creation, it states, “In the beginning <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> created the heavens and the earth” (Gn 1:1). This name is repeated 35 times in Genesis 1 and 2 in connection with God’s power as revealed in Creation. In the book of Deuteronomy the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is used repeatedly to stress the majestic power of God that was shown in Israel’s release from bondage in Egypt, preservation in the wilderness, and preparation for entrance into the Promised Land. In this context, God <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>)<\/em> is also recognized as the Lawgiver who will powerfully execute judgment on covenant breakers. The psalmists also used this named repeatedly as they acknowledged and praised God the majestic ruler who had demonstrated his omnipotence in many dimensions of life (see Ps 68, in which <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> appears 26 times.)<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to the use of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> when God spoke to Abraham and said he would be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> to the patriarch and his seed; that is, God would be in a covenant relationship to them (Gn 17:1-8). Included in this relationship is the idea that God is ever ready to use his power on behalf of those who are in covenant with him. Thus, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Elohim<\/span> also expresses the concept of God’s faithfulness in regard to the covenant and the promises and blessings involved in it.<\/p>\n<p>The name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span> occurs mainly in the poetical writings, no fewer than 41 times in Job. Isaiah used it to express the incomparable character of God (Is 44:8). In like manner David asked, “Who is God [<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span>], but the <span>Lord<\/span>?” (2 Sm 22:32). Moses was the first to use the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span> in his song (Dt 32:15-17), referring to Israel’s God in the context of the “no-gods,” which had been chosen in place of the Rock of salvation and the incomparable One. This name was probably used to stress the fact that God is the only true and living One, the One to be adored and worshiped; he is to be revered with a holy fear.<\/p>\n<p>Another closely related name is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span><em>,<\/em> found in Ezra and Daniel. Some think <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span> is a Chaldee or Aramaic form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Eloah<\/span><em>.<\/em> Its root is said to be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to fear” or “to be perplexed.” God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span> is the God to be feared and worshiped accordingly. In view of this meaning, it can be understood why, in the time of Israel’s exile and immediately after their return, this name was commonly used.<\/p>\n<p>Three other names of God include the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span><em>:<\/em><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Elyon<\/span> is the name used to designate the God of Melchizedek (Gn 14:18-22) as God Most High. In Psalms 57:2 and 78:56 the Hebrew reads <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim ‘Elyon<\/span><em>.<\/em> It is believed that the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “go up, be elevated, to be exalted.” There are a number of instances where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> is used alone, but the context indicates that it is then used as a synonym for God (e.g., Nm 24:16; Ps 83:18; Is 14:14). The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘elyon<\/span> is used quite frequently as an adjective; it is then translated as “high, highest, upper, uppermost.” The basic ascription given to God when this name is employed is to One who is above all things as the maker, possessor, and ruler. He is incomparable in every way; he is subject to no one and no thing; he is the Exalted One.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> is used in the longer form seven times in the Scriptures (Gn 17:1; 28:3; 35:11; 43:14; 48:3; Ex 6:3; Ez 10:5). In the shorter form <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span><em>),<\/em> it appears more frequently: in Job 30 times; in Psalms 19:1 and 68:14; once in Ruth (1:21), Isaiah (13:6), Ezekiel (1:24), and Joel (1:15). In these passages the combined ideas of God as the all-powerful, all-sufficient, transcendent, sovereign ruler and disposer are present. This meaning is generally accepted, but there are differences as to the exact meaning of the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span><em>.<\/em> Some have begun with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shad<\/span> as the first concept to be considered; its meaning is “breast, pap, or teat,” and it is considered a “precious metaphor” of the God who nourishes, supplies, and satisfies. The root of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shad<\/span> <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadah<\/span><em>),<\/em> in Semitic usage, is to moisten. This meaning is not the preferred one in the context of which <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> appears; nor is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shed<\/span> (demon), which some scholars have sought to use because it appears in Deuteronomy 32:17 and Psalm 106:37 speaking of Israel’s idolatry. In addition to the fact that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shed<\/span> is spelled differently, the connection between the concept of demon and God as all-powerful is difficult to establish. More acceptable is the suggestion that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is a composite term of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sha<\/span> (“the one who”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dai<\/span> (“is sufficient”). The later Greek versions have adopted this meaning. The most preferred explanation is that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadad<\/span> (“to overpower, to deal violently, or to devastate”). A clear connection between <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadad<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is said to be found in Isaiah 13:6 and Joel 1:15. God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> is presented as the all-powerful One, totally self-sufficient, absolute ruler, and the One who can and does make final disposition. The Septuagint has adapted this meaning; it translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Pantokrator<\/span><em>,<\/em> the “All-Ruler” or “Sovereign One.”<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Olam<\/span> is used to refer to God as the everlasting or eternal One, a clear instance where the name of God and an attribute of God are combined. The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> has a wide range of uses. It is usually defined in lexicons as meaning “long duration, antiquity, and indefinite futurity.” It is used to speak of God’s existence, of God’s covenant and promises, and of the Messiah’s reign. Speaking to God, the psalmist said, “You are from <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> (everlasting) to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> (everlasting)” (Ps 90:2), and the prophet Isaiah spoke of God as the everlasting Creator (Is 40:28) and as everlasting strength (26:4), and Jeremiah spoke of God as everlasting King (Jer 10:10). God’s everlastingness or eternity speaks of his infinity in relation to time. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Olam<\/span><em>,<\/em> as ascribed to God, should not be thought of as duration prolonged indefinitely backward and forward. Rather, the word speaks to God’s transcending all temporal limits; in addition, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> refers to the quality of God that differs essentially from time. The Scriptures speak of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Olam<\/span> in contexts where the believer’s assurance of well-being, security, and hope are presented as prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Gibbor<\/span> is a name that speaks of God’s power and might. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Gibbor<\/span> alone is used in reference to mighty and heroic men. The two terms together always refer to God, and in some instances <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Haggadol<\/span> (“the greatest”) is added (Dt 10:17; Jer 32:18) to emphasize the greatness and awesome majesty of God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Gibbor<\/span> is also used to describe the Messiah in Isaiah 9:6 (cf. Ps 45:4).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Ro’i<\/span> is used once to describe God as the seeing One. Hagar described the Lord this way when she was found in the wilderness (Gn 16:13). Psalm 139:1-2 expresses this concept of God as the all-seeing One from whose eye nothing is hidden (cf. Ps 33:18).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is a distinctly proper name of God. It is never used to refer to any pagan gods; neither is it used in regard to men. It appears 6,823 times in the OT, occurring first in Genesis 2:4, where it is joined with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is used 164 times in Genesis, and it appears 1,800 times in Exodus through Joshua. It never appears in a declined form in the Hebrew language, and it never occurs in the plural form or with suffixes. It is abbreviated as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yah<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahu<\/span> (cf. Ex 15:2; Ps 68:4; Is 12:2; etc.).<\/p>\n<p>The exact meaning of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is difficult to determine. Some have sought the root in the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hayah<\/span> (“to be”) or in an ancient form of that same verb, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hawah<\/span><em>.<\/em> There is no agreement as to whether the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qal<\/span> or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hiphil<\/span> form of the verb should be considered as the root. Those who opt for the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hiphil<\/span> form read <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> to mean “cause to be”; thus Exodus 3:14 would read, “I will cause to be what has come to be.” Others look to the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qal<\/span> form and then translate the name as “I Am” or “I Shall Be.” Still others are inclined to disassociate the name from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hayah<\/span> and regard it as an original and independent term, expressing the uniqueness of Israel’s gracious God.<\/p>\n\n<p>Translators of the OT have not agreed upon the correct translation of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> Since it is translated into the Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “Lord,” many have rendered <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as “<span>Lord<\/span>.” But <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is best rendered “Lord,” appears with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> in various instances. The <span>kjv<\/span>, for example, translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as “God,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> as “Lord.” Some modern translators have chosen to use <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> (see <span>jb<\/span> and <span>njb<\/span>). The name Jehovah, as used in the <span>asv<\/span> (1901), has been judged unacceptable. This name arose due to the Jewish practice of not pronouncing <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> because of Leviticus 24:16, “He that blasphemes the name of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> shall surely be put to death.” This warning against a vain or blasphemous use of the name was taken in an absolute sense, especially after Israel’s deportation (cf. Am 6:10). Hence, when reading the OT the Jews substituted either <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> for <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> From this, the practice of adding the vowels of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> to YHWH (JeHoWaH) became established.<\/p>\n<p>The interpretation of Exodus 6:2-3 has caused much debate. “And God said to Moses, ‘I am <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">El Shaddai<\/span><em>,<\/em> but by my name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> I did not make myself known to them.’ ” This passage has been understood to mean that the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> was not known or used prior to the time of Moses. But that is not what the passage states; rather, it speaks of the patriarchs not knowing God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> They knew him as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> in actual revelatory historical deeds. They had not come to know God according to his unique character, that is, as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> In other words, God had always been <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> he is saying to Moses that the descendants of the patriarchs would come to know the full, rich meaning of the name by the way God dealt with them.<\/p>\n<p>This name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> reveals God’s nature in the highest and fullest sense possible. It includes, or presupposes, the meaning of the other names. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> particularly stresses the absolute faithfulness of God. God had promised the patriarchs that he would be their God, that he would be with them and deliver and bless them, keep them, and give them a land as a place of service and inheritance. Moses is told by God that Israel is about to behold and experience the unchangeableness of God as he steadfastly and wondrously remembers his word and executes it to the fullest degree. God would prove to be a faithful, redeeming, upholding, restoring God. In working out this redemption, God would demonstrate that he is all that his name implies: merciful, gracious, patient, full of loving-kindness, truthful, faithful, forgiving, just, and righteous (Ex 34:5-6). Truly, Jacob had received an insight into the meaning of the name when he exclaimed, “I wait for thy salvation, O <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span>” (Gn 49:18).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> then, is the name par excellence of Israel’s God. As <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> he is a faithful covenant God who, having given his word of love and life, keeps that word by bestowing love and life abundantly on his own.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the richness of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> it can be understood why there were stringent rules regarding its proper use (Lv 24:11, 16). It also explains why thankful, rejoicing, worshiping Israelites used the abbreviated form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> in song when they sang Hallelujah: “Praise Yah” (Pss 104:35; 106:1; 149:1; 150:1).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is used in a number of phrases that are considered names of or ascriptions of God. The most common of these compound names is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> (“hosts”). The word “hosts” is used frequently in the Pentateuch to refer to the armies of Israel (cf. Nm 10:14-28). This is because the word is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">saba<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to wage” war. It also means “to serve” in some contexts; for example, Numbers 8:24 clearly has reference to the service performed in the tabernacle. The noun <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> first occurs in Genesis 2:1, where it refers to the many components of the earth and heaven. Some would limit the reference in these contexts to the stars. Still others would suggest that the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> refers to the angels, appealing to Psalm 33:6 for confirmation.<\/p>\n<p>The compound name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> first appears in 1 Samuel 1:3. In view of the frequent use of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> in 1—2 Samuel to refer to armies (1 Sm 12:9; 14:50; 17:55; 2 Sm 2:8; 8:16; 10:16), it is thought that the compound name refers to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as the God of armies, that is, God has his armies to serve him. These are considered to be armies of angels who are ministering servants to God. It has been correctly pointed out that the compound name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> is used most frequently by the prophets (Jeremiah, 88 times; Zechariah, 55 times; Malachi, 25 times; Haggai, 14 times) at times when God’s people had either suffered defeat at the hands of enemy armies or were threatened by defeat. Therefore, the compound name was used to remind them that their covenant God had great hosts to fight and work for him on behalf of his people. Thus, though Israel’s armies failed, their covenant God was sufficient for every possible circumstance. And it was to this <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> that Israel’s commanders were to give allegiance (Jos 5:14-15), and in whose name Israel was blessed (2 Sm 6:18).<\/p>\n<p>Several other compound names occur infrequently:<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Nissi<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nissi<\/span><em>,<\/em> “my banner”) is the name that Moses called on when he built an altar celebrating Israel’s God-given victory over the Amalekites (Ex 17:15). Isaiah uses the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nissi<\/span> when speaking of the coming Messiah who is to be the conqueror (Is 11:10).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Rapha<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">rapha’<\/span><em>,<\/em> “healer”) appears in Exodus 15:26, when Israel is assured that God, their healer, will prevent the diseases of Egypt from affecting Israel. Although the name is only used once, God was often called upon and praised as the healing One (e.g., Ps 103:3; Is 30:26; Jer 6:14).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Rohi<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ro‘i<\/span><em>,<\/em> “my shepherd”) appears in Psalm 23:1. The concept of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as shepherd is explicated in Ezekiel 34. “I myself will be the Shepherd of my sheep” (v 15). Jesus demonstrated this concept’s full meaning when as a shepherd he gave his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Jireh<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yir’eh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to see ahead or to provide”) appears in Genesis 22:14. Abraham gave this name to the place where God provided a substitute for his son Isaac, whom Abraham was to offer as a sacrifice to God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Shalom<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> “peace”) is the name Gideon gave to the altar he built when the angel of the Lord came to give him orders to fight the Midianites (Jgs 6:24).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> appears with a few forms of the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tsadaq<\/span><em>,<\/em> “righteousness.” <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is spoken of as our righteousness in Jeremiah 23:6; the thought evidently is that David’s Righteous Branch (the Messiah) will attribute God’s righteousness to those who are incorporated in the new covenant. This concept is expressed in the Pentateuch a number of times when it is said that God has provided a way for living righteously; that is, God provides a way of sanctification (cf. Lv 20:8; 22:9).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> as a name for God appears about 360 times in the OT, though it is not uniformly used. It is first found in Genesis 15:2 and 8, when Abram requests more definite information concerning a son and the Promised Land. It appears only 14 times after that in the Pentateuch. It appears repeatedly in the Psalms (over 50 times), and certain of the prophets use it frequently (Isaiah, 47 times; Jeremiah, 29 times; Ezekiel, over 150 times; and Amos, 27 times).<\/p>\n<p>The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adan<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “master, ruler, owner, lord,” is thought to be the root of the noun <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adon<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is frequently used of men. For example, in Genesis and 1—2 Samuel the term is used often for men who own slaves or are in positions of authority. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> is correctly described as the name of personal communication between the believer and God. In such communication the worshiper acknowledged God’s intense majesty and greatness and also the sense of belonging to this God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> coming from human lips, expressed honor for God and humble submission on the part of the believing person. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> thus, is the name that expresses faith, assurance, security, ready service, and thanksgiving (Pss 16:2; 57:9-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Old Testament Name Combinations<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT the names of God appear in various combinations. For example <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-Yahweh-’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-’Adonai<\/span> are very common. These combinations were an effort to express the fullness of God’s being and character as these had been revealed. Names of God in combination with “Israel” occur also as, for example, with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span>-God-Israel (Jgs 5:3; Is 17:6). God is also invoked in relation to Israel without the mention of one of his names—for example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Qedosh Yisrael<\/span> (“Holy One of Israel,” Is 43:14) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Abir Yisrael<\/span> (“Mighty One of Israel,” Gn 49:24; Ps 132:2; Is 49:26). By means of these phrases, the covenantal relationship between God and his people was expressed and God’s unchanging character was positively acknowledged.<\/p>\n<h5>Old Testament Personal Names<\/h5>\n<p>The personal names of God are Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and variations of these.<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Abh<\/span> (“father”) appears more frequently in Genesis than in any other book, and in the Pentateuch more than in any other division of the OT. But it is not used there of God but rather of one who has generated children (i.e., the male parent), the progenitor—head, chief, and ruler of the family group or clan. It is used often in the sense of the responsible one through whom God has spoken, with whom God has dealt, and through whom he has given a rich heritage to the children and descendants of the patriarchs.<\/p>\n<p>In the poetical books, God is referred to as Father but is not directly named as such. Job is asked, “Has the rain a father?” (Jb 38:28). The reference is to God as the maker, source, and controller of rain. In Psalm 68:5 God in his holy dwelling place is the “Father of the fatherless”; the parallel phrase, “protector of widows,” indicates the sense. Psalm 89:26 says that David will cry to God, “Thou art my Father,” and the parallels use the terms “God” and “Rock of my salvation.” The idea here is of God as Creator and Savior who raised up, delivered, and protected David. In Psalm 103:13, “Father” is used analogously, “As a father pities his children.”<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah uses the term “Father” in relation to God four times. Three times it refers to the One who has made, saved, formed, kept, and directed Israel (Is 63:16; 64:8). Isaiah says the promised child is to be named Everlasting Father (9:6). Used in this sense, the term establishes the Son’s equality with the Father in stature, function, ability, and responsibility. Jeremiah also refers to God as Father in Jeremiah 3:4, 19, meaning the origin, keeper, and friend of his people Israel. Malachi 1:6 and 2:10 speak of God as the parent who deserves honor from his children and as the origin and ruler of all people.<\/p>\n<p>The term “son” is one of the most-used terms in the OT; it commonly occurs in the sense of offspring and descendant. It also appears in the sense of follower or successor. There are a few indirect references to the second person of the Trinity.<\/p>\n<p>The messianic Psalm 2 has such a reference: “You are my son” (v 7). It is stated in the context of the king speaking to one who rules and is to rule with and under the sovereign. The immediate reference may be to the theocratic king; however, the reference is revealed in the NT to be the second person of the Trinity (Acts 13:33). Thus, the term “son” is applied to the promised Messiah who is set forth as the divine sovereign ruler and judge of the nations. The Son is perceived to be equal with the Father in deity and function. Not all biblical scholars accept this interpretation, but support is found in such NT passages as Hebrews 1:8 which quotes Psalm 45:6. As stated above, Isaiah speaks of the son to be given (Is 9:6), the One born of the virgin (7:14), who is Immanuel, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.<\/p>\n<p>The name “Holy Spirit” occurs only a few times in the OT. The Spirit is referred to frequently by terms and phrases such as “the Spirit of God” (Gn 1:2), “the Spirit of the Lord God” (Is 61:1), “the Spirit of the Lord” (Ez 37:1), “the Spirit” (Nm 11:17; 27:18), “my Spirit” (Gn 6:3), and “your Spirit” (Ps 51:11). Though the character of the Spirit is not developed as clearly in the OT as in the NT, it can be safely stated that the relationship posited between God and the Spirit is such that there is no doubt that the OT teaches the deity of the Spirit. The character and function of the Spirit is referred to especially in relation to the work of creation (Gn 1:2; Ps 33:6; etc.) and the equipping of servants for the service of God—for example, craftsmanship (Ex 35:31), leadership (Nm 11:17; 27:18), and prophecy (1 Sm 10:6; 2 Sm 23:2; 2 Chr 15:1; Ez 11:5).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNamesofGodintheNewTestament\">The Names of God in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>Proper Names of God<\/h5>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> is the NT equivalent of the OT names <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span>and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>;<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> appears in the NT as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Hupsistos<\/span><em>,<\/em> the Highest (Mk 5:7; Lk 1:32, 76). <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Pantokrator<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘El Shaddai<\/span>) appears with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> (2 Cor 6:18; Rv 16:7). This name was used not only to express God’s transcendency, power, sovereignty, and lordship, but also to express that God is one who has a close relationship with his people. This fact is established by the very frequent use of personal pronouns with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span><em>.<\/em> The name <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> appears over 1,000 times in the NT.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> “Lord,” is used to express the OT names <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Adonai<\/span> in the Septuagint, and the NT follows it. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span> means “power,” so the meaning is not the same as with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> yet the NT does give <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span> the full weight of meaning that the OT gave to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> especially when used of Jesus Christ (cf. Acts 2:36; Phil 2:9-11; etc.)<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Despotes<\/span> is used five times of God or Jesus in the NT (Lk 2:29; Acts 4:24; 2 Pt 2:11; Jude 1:4; Rv 6:10). It expresses the idea of authority. The idea of brutality conveyed by the modern concept “despot” is absent from the NT usage even when applied to men, where its central thought is ownership (2 Tm 2:21).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Names of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the baptismal formula, which is part of the Great Commission (Mt 28:19-20), the three personal names of God appear: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These names carry the OT meaning, but since the relationship of the three Persons is explicated, the NT meaning of the names is enriched.<\/p>\n<p>“Jesus” is the personal name of the Son, the second person of the triune Godhead. It means “savior” (Mt 1:21). The root of this name “to save” gave rise to names such as Joshua, Hoshea, and Hosea. The basic meaning of the OT root is “to bring into a safe, wide-open place.” Joshua, bringing Israel into Canaan, personally did what his name meant. The NT explanation (“save from sin”) is not contrary to the OT meaning. To be saved from sin is to be restored to fellowship with God and to enter into the paradise of the heavenly kingdom.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; God, Being and Attributes of; Holy Spirit; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah; Names, Significance of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOD, Names of God’s self-identifications expressing various aspects of his being. Preview • The Biblical Idea of Name • The Names of God in the Old Testament • The Names of God in the New Testament The Biblical Idea of Name In the Scriptures the name and person of God are inseparably related. This is in keeping with the biblical conception of what a name signifies. In the Hebrew language, the term for “name” most probably meant “sign” or “distinctive mark.” In the Greek language, “name” (onom...","summary_en":"GOD, Names of God’s self-identifications expressing various aspects of his being. Preview • The Biblical Idea of Name • The Names of God in the Old Testament • The Names of God in the New Testament The Biblical Idea of Name In the Scriptures the name and person of God are inseparably related. This is in keeping with the biblical conception of what a name signifies. In the Hebrew language, the term for “name” most probably meant “sign” or “distinctive mark.” In the Greek language, “name” (onom...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":18820,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jehoshaphat (Person)","title_en":"Jehoshaphat (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JEHOSHAPHAT (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. The fourth king of Judah (872–848 <span>BC<\/span>), son and successor of Asa (910–869 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/li>\n<p>Jehoshaphat was 35 years of age when he began his reign; he ruled 25 years, during which time he maintained the stability of the Davidic dynasty (1 Kgs 22:41-42). He was contemporary with King Ahab of Israel (874–853 <span>BC<\/span>), since his first year on the throne corresponds with the fourth year of the reign of Ahab (v 41). He was also contemporary with Ahaziah (853– 852 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Ahab, and his brother Jehoram (852–841 <span>BC<\/span>), who succeeded Ahaziah when he died childless (2 Kgs 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Jehoshaphat is held in high esteem by the Chronicler, along with Hezekiah and Josiah. His successful rule was due to his religious policy. He continued the religious reformation initiated by his father; therefore, the Lord firmly established the kingdom under his control. Everyone in Judah brought tribute to Jehoshaphat, so that he had great riches and honor (2 Chr 17:1-5). The Chronicler praised Jehoshaphat’s courageous heart, evidenced in his removing the high places and the Asherim from Judah (v 6). Jehoshaphat is also reported to have closed all the temples of prostitution (1 Kgs 22:46).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical record informs us that Jehoshaphat reversed his father’s foreign policy. During his reign, Asa warred against Baasha of Israel (908–886 <span>BC<\/span>), who exterminated the house of Jeroboam I (930–909 <span>BC<\/span>) and usurped the throne for himself, keeping it for nearly a quarter of a century. The two kingdoms engaged in warfare over the boundaries between the kingdoms. Jehoshaphat, however, discontinued this war and made peace with the king of Israel (1 Kgs 22:2). To confirm this state of peace, he made an alliance with Ahab and married his son and successor, Jehoram, to Ahab’s daughter Athaliah (2 Kgs 8:18; 2 Chr 18:1-2). In accordance with this alliance Jehoshaphat fought on the side of Ahab in his battle against Aram, which took place at Ramoth-gilead (1 Kgs 22; 2 Chr 18). He also was an ally of Jehoram, the younger son of Ahab, against Mesha the king of Moab (2 Kgs 3:4-27).<\/p>\n<p>In his domestic reforms Jehoshaphat sent Ben-hail, Obadiah, Zechariah, Nethanel, and Micaiah to teach the law in the cities of Judah (2 Chr 17:7-9). He is also reported to have organized the use of tribute paid to Judah. The surrounding nations, observing the strength of Jehoshaphat and recognizing the presence of the Lord with him, not only refrained from attacking Judah but even brought tribute to him. He used this tribute to fortify the cities of Judah (vv 10-13). Jehoshaphat also reorganized the army and made arrangements for the defense of the kingdom. He had a standing army in the capital as well as garrisons in the fortified cities. It is evident that the organization centered about the tribal association of Judah and Benjamin (vv 14-19).<\/p>\n<p>A prophet by the name of Jehu rebuked Jehoshaphat for his alliances with Ahab (2 Chr 19:1-3). Evidently, Jehoshaphat took this rebuke to heart and ruled Judah wisely. He swept most of the Asherim from the land and determined in his mind to seek God. He is reported to have gone regularly among the people from Beersheba to Mt Ephraim to convert them to the Lord. He appointed judges in each of the fortified cities of Judah and admonished them to judge as the Lord’s representatives. He also appointed Levites, priests, and family heads to handle cases pertaining to the worship of the Lord and to make decisions in disputes arising among citizens (vv 4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the fortified cities in Judah, Jehoshaphat placed military forces in the cities of Ephraim that his father, Asa, had taken (2 Chr 17:1-2). Though his alliances with Phoenicia and Israel were not approved by the prophets and proved dangerous in the long run, they still brought relative peace and temporary prosperity to his realm. He was held in high esteem by the neighboring Philistines and the Arabs (vv 10-13), and it is also evident that Edom submitted to him. He won victory over the Moabites, Ammonites, and Meunites at En-gedi (20:1-30). Wishing to emulate Solomon, he constructed ships at Ezion-geber to go to Tarshish, but this did not prove a successful venture (vv 35-37).<\/p>\n<p>Jehoshaphat died when he was about 60 years of age and was buried with his fathers in the city of David. His son Jehoram became king in his place (2 Chr 21:1). His name is listed in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Son of Ahilud who held the position of “recorder” (the Hebrew word may imply an official historian or a spokesman for the king) in the days of David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:16; 20:24; 1 Kgs 4:3; 1 Chr 18:15).<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of Paruah and one of Solomon’s 12 administrative officials who requisitioned food from the people for the king’s household. Each of them arranged provisions for one month of the year. Jehoshaphat was the officer assigned for the tribe of Issachar (1 Kgs 4:7, 17).<\/li>\n<li>4. Son of Nimshi and the father of Jehu, who exterminated the dynasty of Omri and became king of Samaria around 842–815 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 9:2, 14).<\/li>\n<li>5. KJV spelling of Joshaphat in 1 Chronicles 15:24, a priest during David’s reign. <em>See<\/em> #2 (above).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JEHOSHAPHAT (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. The fourth king of Judah (872–848 <span>BC<\/span>), son and successor of Asa (910–869 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/li>\n<p>Jehoshaphat was 35 years of age when he began his reign; he ruled 25 years, during which time he maintained the stability of the Davidic dynasty (1 Kgs 22:41-42). He was contemporary with King Ahab of Israel (874–853 <span>BC<\/span>), since his first year on the throne corresponds with the fourth year of the reign of Ahab (v 41). He was also contemporary with Ahaziah (853– 852 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Ahab, and his brother Jehoram (852–841 <span>BC<\/span>), who succeeded Ahaziah when he died childless (2 Kgs 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Jehoshaphat is held in high esteem by the Chronicler, along with Hezekiah and Josiah. His successful rule was due to his religious policy. He continued the religious reformation initiated by his father; therefore, the Lord firmly established the kingdom under his control. Everyone in Judah brought tribute to Jehoshaphat, so that he had great riches and honor (2 Chr 17:1-5). The Chronicler praised Jehoshaphat’s courageous heart, evidenced in his removing the high places and the Asherim from Judah (v 6). Jehoshaphat is also reported to have closed all the temples of prostitution (1 Kgs 22:46).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical record informs us that Jehoshaphat reversed his father’s foreign policy. During his reign, Asa warred against Baasha of Israel (908–886 <span>BC<\/span>), who exterminated the house of Jeroboam I (930–909 <span>BC<\/span>) and usurped the throne for himself, keeping it for nearly a quarter of a century. The two kingdoms engaged in warfare over the boundaries between the kingdoms. Jehoshaphat, however, discontinued this war and made peace with the king of Israel (1 Kgs 22:2). To confirm this state of peace, he made an alliance with Ahab and married his son and successor, Jehoram, to Ahab’s daughter Athaliah (2 Kgs 8:18; 2 Chr 18:1-2). In accordance with this alliance Jehoshaphat fought on the side of Ahab in his battle against Aram, which took place at Ramoth-gilead (1 Kgs 22; 2 Chr 18). He also was an ally of Jehoram, the younger son of Ahab, against Mesha the king of Moab (2 Kgs 3:4-27).<\/p>\n<p>In his domestic reforms Jehoshaphat sent Ben-hail, Obadiah, Zechariah, Nethanel, and Micaiah to teach the law in the cities of Judah (2 Chr 17:7-9). He is also reported to have organized the use of tribute paid to Judah. The surrounding nations, observing the strength of Jehoshaphat and recognizing the presence of the Lord with him, not only refrained from attacking Judah but even brought tribute to him. He used this tribute to fortify the cities of Judah (vv 10-13). Jehoshaphat also reorganized the army and made arrangements for the defense of the kingdom. He had a standing army in the capital as well as garrisons in the fortified cities. It is evident that the organization centered about the tribal association of Judah and Benjamin (vv 14-19).<\/p>\n<p>A prophet by the name of Jehu rebuked Jehoshaphat for his alliances with Ahab (2 Chr 19:1-3). Evidently, Jehoshaphat took this rebuke to heart and ruled Judah wisely. He swept most of the Asherim from the land and determined in his mind to seek God. He is reported to have gone regularly among the people from Beersheba to Mt Ephraim to convert them to the Lord. He appointed judges in each of the fortified cities of Judah and admonished them to judge as the Lord’s representatives. He also appointed Levites, priests, and family heads to handle cases pertaining to the worship of the Lord and to make decisions in disputes arising among citizens (vv 4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the fortified cities in Judah, Jehoshaphat placed military forces in the cities of Ephraim that his father, Asa, had taken (2 Chr 17:1-2). Though his alliances with Phoenicia and Israel were not approved by the prophets and proved dangerous in the long run, they still brought relative peace and temporary prosperity to his realm. He was held in high esteem by the neighboring Philistines and the Arabs (vv 10-13), and it is also evident that Edom submitted to him. He won victory over the Moabites, Ammonites, and Meunites at En-gedi (20:1-30). Wishing to emulate Solomon, he constructed ships at Ezion-geber to go to Tarshish, but this did not prove a successful venture (vv 35-37).<\/p>\n<p>Jehoshaphat died when he was about 60 years of age and was buried with his fathers in the city of David. His son Jehoram became king in his place (2 Chr 21:1). His name is listed in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Son of Ahilud who held the position of “recorder” (the Hebrew word may imply an official historian or a spokesman for the king) in the days of David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:16; 20:24; 1 Kgs 4:3; 1 Chr 18:15).<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of Paruah and one of Solomon’s 12 administrative officials who requisitioned food from the people for the king’s household. Each of them arranged provisions for one month of the year. Jehoshaphat was the officer assigned for the tribe of Issachar (1 Kgs 4:7, 17).<\/li>\n<li>4. Son of Nimshi and the father of Jehu, who exterminated the dynasty of Omri and became king of Samaria around 842–815 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 9:2, 14).<\/li>\n<li>5. KJV spelling of Joshaphat in 1 Chronicles 15:24, a priest during David’s reign. <em>See<\/em> #2 (above).<\/li>","summary_ro":"JEHOSHAPHAT (Person) 1. The fourth king of Judah (872–848 BC), son and successor of Asa (910–869 BC). Jehoshaphat was 35 years of age when he began his reign; he ruled 25 years, during which time he maintained the stability of the Davidic dynasty (1 Kgs 22:41-42). He was contemporary with King Ahab of Israel (874–853 BC), since his first year on the throne corresponds with the fourth year of the reign of Ahab (v 41). He was also contemporary with Ahaziah (853– 852 BC), son of Ahab, and his br...","summary_en":"JEHOSHAPHAT (Person) 1. The fourth king of Judah (872–848 BC), son and successor of Asa (910–869 BC). Jehoshaphat was 35 years of age when he began his reign; he ruled 25 years, during which time he maintained the stability of the Davidic dynasty (1 Kgs 22:41-42). He was contemporary with King Ahab of Israel (874–853 BC), since his first year on the throne corresponds with the fourth year of the reign of Ahab (v 41). He was also contemporary with Ahaziah (853– 852 BC), son of Ahab, and his br...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19889,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Joab","title_en":"Joab","content_ro":"<h3>JOAB<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Zeruiah, the half sister of David (1 Chr 2:16), who, along with his brothers Abishai and Asahel, was well known for his military valor in Judah (2 Sm 2:18; cf. 1 Sm 26:6). According to 2 Samuel, Joab rose to prominence and distinguished himself at the battle of Gibeon when Saul’s troops under Abner were vanquished (2 Sm 2:8-32). Because Abner had slain Joab’s brother Asahel (v 23), Joab later killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (vv 12-19). Possibly Joab sensed that Abner would be his rival. Nevertheless, David praised the slain commander as a prince and a great man (vv 31-39) and set a curse on the house of Joab for his insubordination (vv 26-29, 39). This incident illumines Joab’s sometimes unscrupulous and ruthless behavior.<\/li>\n<p>Joab spearheaded David’s siege of the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, and when David consolidated his reign there, Joab became the commander of the king’s army (2 Sm 8:16; 11:1; cf. 1 Chr 11:6-8; 18:15). He suppressed a rebellion among the Syrians and Ammonites (2 Sm 10:7-14; 1 Chr 19:8-15). At Rabbah he not only conquered the city (2 Sm 11–12) but arranged for the death of Uriah the Hittite so that David could take Uriah’s wife, Bathsheba.<\/p>\n<p>Joab’s loyalties to David and shrewd control of the army are seen during Absalom’s rebellion (2 Sm 15). Joab suppressed the conspiracy (ch 18), but ignoring a direct order from David not to kill his son (18:5), brutally killed him anyway (vv 10-17). When David mourned, Joab rebuked the king, urging that a crisis with the army was imminent (19:5-7). This insubordination led David to replace Joab with Amasa as commander (v 13), but later, at Gibeon, Joab also killed him dishonorably (20:8-10). Joab’s influence in the army must have been great, since he regained his former role as military commander (2 Sm 20:23, 24:2; 1 Kgs 1:19).<\/p>\n<p>At the end of David’s reign, Joab supported the conspiracy of Adonijah and Abiathar against the throne (1 Kgs 1:7). David’s distrust of him led the king to warn Solomon specifically about Joab’s repeated treacheries (2:5-9). Solomon had to resolve the problem of an untrustworthy army. Therefore, upon his father’s death, Solomon pursued the conspirators Adonijah (v 23), Abiathar (v 26), and Joab (v 28). Solomon’s officer Benaiah found Joab at the altar seeking refuge and killed him there (vv 28-35), thus cleansing Solomon’s reign from the wrongdoing of Joab.<\/p>\n<li>2. KJV translation (“Ataroth, the house of Joab”) of Atroth-beth-joab in 1 Chronicles 2:54. <em>See<\/em> Atroth-beth-joab.<\/li>\n<li>3. Judahite, Seraiah’s son from the house of Kenaz and forefather of the residents of the valley of craftsmen (1 Chr 4:14).<\/li>\n<li>4. Forefather of a clan of Jews who returned to Palestine with Zerubbabel following the exile (Ezr 2:6; Neh 7:11).<\/li>\n<li>5. Forefather of a family of which 219 members returned with Ezra to Palestine following the exile (Ezr 8:9). He is perhaps identifiable with #4 above.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JOAB<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Zeruiah, the half sister of David (1 Chr 2:16), who, along with his brothers Abishai and Asahel, was well known for his military valor in Judah (2 Sm 2:18; cf. 1 Sm 26:6). According to 2 Samuel, Joab rose to prominence and distinguished himself at the battle of Gibeon when Saul’s troops under Abner were vanquished (2 Sm 2:8-32). Because Abner had slain Joab’s brother Asahel (v 23), Joab later killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (vv 12-19). Possibly Joab sensed that Abner would be his rival. Nevertheless, David praised the slain commander as a prince and a great man (vv 31-39) and set a curse on the house of Joab for his insubordination (vv 26-29, 39). This incident illumines Joab’s sometimes unscrupulous and ruthless behavior.<\/li>\n<p>Joab spearheaded David’s siege of the Jebusite city of Jerusalem, and when David consolidated his reign there, Joab became the commander of the king’s army (2 Sm 8:16; 11:1; cf. 1 Chr 11:6-8; 18:15). He suppressed a rebellion among the Syrians and Ammonites (2 Sm 10:7-14; 1 Chr 19:8-15). At Rabbah he not only conquered the city (2 Sm 11–12) but arranged for the death of Uriah the Hittite so that David could take Uriah’s wife, Bathsheba.<\/p>\n<p>Joab’s loyalties to David and shrewd control of the army are seen during Absalom’s rebellion (2 Sm 15). Joab suppressed the conspiracy (ch 18), but ignoring a direct order from David not to kill his son (18:5), brutally killed him anyway (vv 10-17). When David mourned, Joab rebuked the king, urging that a crisis with the army was imminent (19:5-7). This insubordination led David to replace Joab with Amasa as commander (v 13), but later, at Gibeon, Joab also killed him dishonorably (20:8-10). Joab’s influence in the army must have been great, since he regained his former role as military commander (2 Sm 20:23, 24:2; 1 Kgs 1:19).<\/p>\n<p>At the end of David’s reign, Joab supported the conspiracy of Adonijah and Abiathar against the throne (1 Kgs 1:7). David’s distrust of him led the king to warn Solomon specifically about Joab’s repeated treacheries (2:5-9). Solomon had to resolve the problem of an untrustworthy army. Therefore, upon his father’s death, Solomon pursued the conspirators Adonijah (v 23), Abiathar (v 26), and Joab (v 28). Solomon’s officer Benaiah found Joab at the altar seeking refuge and killed him there (vv 28-35), thus cleansing Solomon’s reign from the wrongdoing of Joab.<\/p>\n<li>2. KJV translation (“Ataroth, the house of Joab”) of Atroth-beth-joab in 1 Chronicles 2:54. <em>See<\/em> Atroth-beth-joab.<\/li>\n<li>3. Judahite, Seraiah’s son from the house of Kenaz and forefather of the residents of the valley of craftsmen (1 Chr 4:14).<\/li>\n<li>4. Forefather of a clan of Jews who returned to Palestine with Zerubbabel following the exile (Ezr 2:6; Neh 7:11).<\/li>\n<li>5. Forefather of a family of which 219 members returned with Ezra to Palestine following the exile (Ezr 8:9). He is perhaps identifiable with #4 above.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JOAB 1. Son of Zeruiah, the half sister of David (1 Chr 2:16), who, along with his brothers Abishai and Asahel, was well known for his military valor in Judah (2 Sm 2:18; cf. 1 Sm 26:6). According to 2 Samuel, Joab rose to prominence and distinguished himself at the battle of Gibeon when Saul’s troops under Abner were vanquished (2 Sm 2:8-32). Because Abner had slain Joab’s brother Asahel (v 23), Joab later killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (vv 12-19). Po...","summary_en":"JOAB 1. Son of Zeruiah, the half sister of David (1 Chr 2:16), who, along with his brothers Abishai and Asahel, was well known for his military valor in Judah (2 Sm 2:18; cf. 1 Sm 26:6). According to 2 Samuel, Joab rose to prominence and distinguished himself at the battle of Gibeon when Saul’s troops under Abner were vanquished (2 Sm 2:8-32). Because Abner had slain Joab’s brother Asahel (v 23), Joab later killed Abner in revenge (3:26-30), despite Abner’s new loyalty to David (vv 12-19). Po...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27720,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Numerology*, Numbers","title_en":"and Numerology*, Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern.<\/p>\n<p>Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mystical, pre-Christian Jewish groups, and later carried to extremes by the Kabbalists.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>• Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>• Numerology<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionofNumbers\">Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew, and indeed any other Semitic language, has a simple but adequate system of numeration. The number one is an adjective. After that, the numerals are nouns, in parallel masculine and feminine forms, although the masculine is used with the feminine noun and vice versa. Ordinal numbers (first, second, third, etc.) exist alongside cardinal numbers (one, two, three), but as in most languages, the second set can be used instead of the first (“day two” instead of “second day”). From ten to nineteen, there is one composite form built like English “thirteen” (“three-ten”), but “twenty” is literally “tens” (the plural of “ten”). Thirty, forty, and so on are literally “threes,” “fours” (the plural of the words “three” and “four,” respectively) and so on, up to a hundred, which is a new word. There are also separate words for “thousand” and for “ten thousand,” as in Greek, Chinese, and many other languages. Larger numbers must be expressed by multiples of these (“ten thousand times ten thousand” and “thousands of thousands”), suggesting that large figures, rarely needed for small populations and tiny kingdoms, were expressed approximately. Hebrew has not only a singular and plural but also a dual form to express two of anything (two hundred, two thousand). Fractions (a half, a third, a tenth, etc.) could be expressed, and multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction were used. Indeed, instances of all four operations can be found in the Bible. The Hebrew mathematical system was basically part of the larger western Asian mathematical system, of which we know a great deal from Mesopotamia and Egypt. These countries, however, used a more highly developed mathematical system than Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaysofWritingNumerals\">Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, numbers are always written out in words, as on the famous Moabite Stone and the Siloam Inscription. But every nation in the ancient world could also express numbers by using figures or ciphers of various kinds (like our 1, 2, 3, . . .). Because of this danger of error, in later days numbers were normally written out in full, in words, where confusion, although still possible, was not nearly so likely. An additional way of writing numbers, known both to the Hebrews and the Greeks, was the use of consecutive letters of the alphabet instead of consecutive numerals (as if we used A for 1, B for 2, etc.). This system, in wide use by NT times, is the usual system in modern Hebrew and has the advantage that numerical combinations can be pronounced by inserting arbitrary vowels, thus making artificial words. For example, if the number of the beast (Rv 13:18), 666, is expressed in alphabetical letters, it can spell out the consonants of “Nero Caesar,” although other names are possible, especially if the variant reading 616 is used.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofLargeNumbers\">Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Even allowing for all these possibilities, there remain certain problems connected with large numbers, particularly in the OT. The most obvious is that of the ten long-lived patriarchs, whose ages are recorded in Genesis 5. Different figures (varying by whole centuries) are recorded for their ages in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan text, and the earliest Greek translation (known as the Septuagint), but all figures are very large. Some interpret these figures literally and point out that there is a steady reduction from the ages attained by these patriarchs to the more modest 120 years allotted to man in Noah’s time (Gn 6:3) and the 70 years accepted later as the human life span (Ps 90:10). This would correspond to the progressive spiritual deterioration of mankind after the fall, from the perfect state of Adam to the present condition. Whatever the explanation of the figures, there is no doubt that this is the theological intent of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The large number of Israelites who left Egypt is also problematic. If there were actually 600,000 fighting men (Nm 1:46), this would correspond to a whole nation of some 2 million or more. Possibly the word translated “thousand” means “clan units”; it would clearly be a much smaller total body, whatever its exact size. Of course, God could have maintained any number of people in the desert. The evidence of archaeology as to the population of Canaan both before and after the Israelite onslaught seems to support a lower number. The same principle might explain the large numbers given for the fighting men of the various Israelite tribes, and the huge totals for Israel and Judah’s military strength given at later times in the historical books of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>To the ordinary Bible reader, perhaps one of the biggest problems is the different numbers recorded in Chronicles and Kings, when the same incidents are being described. Manuscript errors, or confusion of numbers written by signs or single letters of the alphabet, may account for numerous individual inconsistencies, but not for wholesale differences, particularly as the figures in Chronicles are consistently much larger. These very large round numbers may have symbolic significance and may not be intended to be taken in their literal sense at all. Indeed, since the Jews had before them the book of Kings and the book of Chronicles at the same time, they can hardly have taken both sets of numbers literally themselves.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CountingbyGenerations\">Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>One of the problems of the OT is that of the dating of events. Even with an exact number system, there is no absolute fixed point from which to reckon. Later Jews and Christians counted from the presumed date of the Creation. Not until after the time of David and Solomon are both internal reference between the comparative dates of kings of Judah and Israel and external reference to monarchs outside Israel used. This open-endedness accounts for the vague period of “forty years” used so often in the OT (e.g., the book of Judges) for any long but indeterminate period of time, almost certainly corresponding to a generation (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dor<\/span>). Counting by generations is specific in some places in the Bible and may be implicit in others. For instance, Abraham’s descendants are to return to Canaan “in the fourth generation” (Gn 15:16), and the genealogy of Christ is neatly constructed on a pattern of three groups of fourteen generations (Mt 1:17), rather than on periods of years. Wherever people use and recite genealogies, such counting by generations is natural. But Abraham’s descendants are said to have returned to Canaan approximately four centuries later (Gal 3:17), and therefore the word “generation” sometimes stands for 100 years. The Hebrew word for “generation” may mean 120 years (Gn 6:3). Usually, the ancient Hebrews used vague phrases like “in those days” or “after those days” or “the days are coming,” which expressed past, present, and future without any specific mention of number. In other words, the Bible writers were more concerned with theology than with mathematics.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApproximateUseofNumbers\">Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, Israel’s 40 years in the desert is a good example of the approximate use of numbers (Nm 14:33). In the NT, Jesus was in the wilderness 40 days during the temptation (Mt 4:2), and there were 40 days between his resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3). Moses was 40 years old at his call (Acts 7:23), apparently lived 40 years in Midian (Ex 7:7), and spent 40 years leading Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (Dt 34:7), for he is said to be 120 years old at his death. However, two generations of 40 years is the normal maximum for a healthy man (Ps 90:10), and even this is often shortened to 70 years by the rigors of life. Seventy is also used at times in this approximate sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolicUseofNumbers\">Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, seven symbolizes completeness or perfection. On the seventh day God rested from his labors and creation is finished (Gn 2:2). Pharaoh in his dream saw seven cattle coming from the Nile (41:2). Samson’s sacred Nazirite locks were braided in seven plaits (Jgs 16:13). Seven devils left Mary of Magdala, signifying the totality of her previous possession by Satan (Lk 8:2); “seven other devils” will enter the purified but vacant life of a person (Mt 12:45). However, on the positive side, there were the seven spirits of God (Rv 3:1). In the seventh year the Hebrew slave was to be freed (Ex 21:2), having completed his time of captivity and service. Every seventh year was a sabbatical year (Lv 25:4). Seven times seven reiterates the sense of completeness. In the Year of Jubilee (at the completion of 7 x 7 years = the 50th year), all land is freed and returns to the original owners (Lv 25:10). Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks, is seven times seven days after Passover. “Seventy,” which is literally “sevens” in Hebrew, strengthens the concept of perfection. There are 70 elders (Ex 24:1) in Israel. Israel was exiled to Babylon for 70 years (Jer 25:12) to complete its punishment. “Seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) reiterates this still further. The Lord was not giving Peter a mathematical number of times that he should forgive another person, but rather was insisting on limitless forgiveness for a brother’s sin.<\/p>\n<p>“Three” may well share in this meaning of completion or perfection, although not so forcibly (2 Kgs 13:18). Many things happen “on the third day” (Hos 6:2). Jonah spent three days in the stomach of the fish (Mt 12:40), and the Lord rose again on the third day (1 Cor 15:4). David was offered a choice of divine punishments—three years, three months, three days (2 Sm 24:13). For the Christian, “three” takes on a far deeper significance as the number of Persons of the Trinity. The three Persons are clearly expressed, for instance, in the Great Commission (Mt 28:19) and in the Pauline benediction (2 Cor 13:13). Many echoes of this threefold expression are in the NT, and many anticipations of it in the OT, of which the thrice-repeated “Holy” in Isaiah 6:3 is the most famous.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars see four as another symbol of completeness (four winds of heaven, Dn 7:2; four horsemen, Rv 6:1-7; four living creatures around the throne of God, Rv 4:6). Five is certainly used in an indefinite sense as a small number (Is 19:18; 30:17). Nor do eight or nine seem to have any special significance, although, like other numbers, they may be used in a factual sense to describe any of God’s activities (nine plagues on Egypt, Ex 7–10). “Ten” does have significance because of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17), but not any special symbolism earlier in the Bible. If anything, “ten” is elsewhere used in a vague way. Laban changes Jacob’s wages ten times (Gn 31:7); Daniel and his friends are ten times better than all other students (Dn 1:20); ten times over, the Jewish settlers will be warned of impending enemy attacks (Neh 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>Eleven appears to have no special biblical significance, but 12 certainly has. The clearest proof of this is the existence of the 12 tribes in Israel. In Revelation 7:4-8, where it is mathematically important that the number of tribes be limited to 12, the tribe of Dan is altogether omitted—probably on account of Dan’s sin of idolatry (Jgs 18:14-20). Ishmael’s descendants were also divided into 12 clans (Gn 17:20), so that the number 12 was apparently significant outside Israel as well. In the NT Christ chose 12 apostles (Mt 10:1-4). The link with the number of tribes is made specific when Christ tells the apostles that they will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes (Mt 19:28). However, it is interesting that, after the election and appointment of Matthias (Acts 1:26), the Christian church apparently made no subsequent efforts to maintain the number of apostles. Like “seven times seven,” “twelve times twelve” increases the force of the number. When this is further multiplied by a thousand, the figure becomes the 144,000 redeemed (Rv 7:4), who were sealed “out of all the tribes of Israel.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExactStatistics\">Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>As distinct from the metaphorical use of numbers to denote completion, immensity, and the like, numbers in Hebrew were often used to give exact tallies or measurements. Such usage is known to us only from clay tablets and ostraca (broken pieces of potsherd engraved in ink, used as rough notebooks). However, ascertaining exactly what the text was in its earliest form and what that text means is difficult.<\/p>\n<p>An example is the number of the sons of Jeconiah among the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh. They were struck down by the Lord because of their failure to rejoice with the others when God’s ark returned to Israel from the Philistine country (1 Sm 6:19). The Greek text (LXX) reads “seventy”; the later Hebrew manuscripts add “fifty thousand.” But, as Beth-shemesh itself was only a small frontier town, and the “sons of Jeconiah” was presumably only one clan among several, the smaller number is obviously the original, and the large addition due to some later manuscript confusion.<\/p>\n<p>A good rule in trying to decide whether a number is statistical or impressionistic is to determine whether it is a small number, or an unusual number for which there is no obvious theological explanation. When the men of Ai killed some 36 Israelites at the first assault on the city (Jos 7:5), the smallness of the number is evidence that this is a vividly remembered factual detail. Similarly, in the case of the number of Abraham’s 318 men (Gn 14:14) or the catch of 153 fish after the resurrection (Jn 21:11), the numbers, though large, are not round numbers but unusual combinations, and are obviously meant in a literal or statistical sense. Irrelevant details like this have a habit of remaining in the memory, and are the best guarantee of the trustworthiness of the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Numerology\">Numerology<\/p>\n<p>Numerology may be said to be an extended application of the metaphorical significance of numbers (7, 40, etc.) already discussed. In the Bible, this systematization of numbers always goes with a strong sense of the sovereignty of God, his control over human history, and a belief in his ongoing purpose and its triumphant conclusion.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the first clear instance of numerology in the Bible is 1 Kings 6:1, where Solomon began to build the temple 480 years after the exodus, a period 5 times 10 times 12, or 4 times 120, the ideal life span of man in early days (Gn 6:3). First Chronicles 6:3-8 gives 12 generations of men (presumably 40 years each) to cover the same period, so “twelve generations” is probably the real basis for the computation, rather than any exact year-by-year tally. A tally would have been impossible in the days of the judges and unlikely before the monarchy. David was the first to establish an official scribe or recorder to keep daily annals in Israel (2 Sm 8:16-17), as was common in the great kingdoms from far earlier times. Such Israelite annals are later mentioned as sources of the books of the kings (2 Kgs 14:18). The number 480 is probably a rough approximation rather than exact and denotes the end of one of God’s epochs.<\/p>\n<p>When Jeremiah prophesies an exile of 70 years for Judah (Jer 25:11; 29:10), it is not only a historical prediction that was literally fulfilled but also a symbol of completeness; Judah’s punishment is complete (cf. Is 40:2). Isaiah (Is 23:15) had made a similar prophecy of a 70-year punishment for Tyre, and Ezekiel (Ez 29:11-13) prophesied a 40-year “exile” for Egypt. When these 70 years are regarded as sabbatical years, where the land must lie untilled to compensate for the 7 times 70 years of sin before, then true numerology begins (2 Chr 36:21). Here numerology is used only as an explanation of past and present, but it can also be used to explain the future, especially in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel (Dn 9:2) refers to the literal 70 years of the exile as foretold by Jeremiah. In Daniel 9:24, this has been extended to 70 weeks of years (490 years) applied to the distant future. Daniel 9:25 sees 69 of these (483 years) as elapsing before Messiah appears. Presumably, the last week of the 70 is therefore thought of as the time of his activity. However this may be interpreted in terms of actual dates, it must be harmonized with 9:26, where the Messiah is “cut off” after 62 weeks of years (434 years). The difficulty lies in establishing the starting point for this long period. This is an example of an elaborate numerology, embracing centuries of history, all ultimately based on the 70 years of Jeremiah. According to biblical principles, this can have both an “immediate” fulfillment in the return from exile, and a “prophetic” fulfillment in the far distant future in connection with the coming of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The other major example of extended numerology in Daniel is in connection with the “time, times, and half a time” (7:25). This must stand for three and a half “times,” that is, half of seven “times.” Thus, it refers either to three and a half years (half a “week” of years) or three and a half “weeks” of years (cf. “seven times” in 4:16, where “seven years” is clearly meant). Whatever may be its ultimate prophetic fulfillment in Christ, the “initial” or “partial” fulfillment is the roughly three and a half years of bitter persecution of God’s people by Antiochus Epiphanes (167–164 <span>BC<\/span>). This figure of three and a half years reappears in Revelation 11:2 (“forty-two months”), and 12:14 (“a time, and times, and half a time”), to describe the period of Rome’s persecution of the Christian church. The figure had possibly become a symbol of any bitter but limited persecution. The “two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings” of Daniel 8:14 may mean 1,150 days, which is approximately the same length of time.<\/p>\n<p>The three and a half years of Daniel 7:25 reappear in Revelation 11 in the form of “forty-two months,” the time when the heathen will trample down Jerusalem (Rv 11:2). The 1,290 days of Daniel 12:11 reappear here (in the slightly different form of 1,260 days) as the time that God’s two witnesses will prophesy (Rv 11:3). The 42 months reappear in Revelation 13:5 as the period that the wild beast will be allowed to blaspheme. While the “thousand years” of 20:6 is not derived from Daniel at all, the metaphorical use of “thousand” is familiar to the OT. The closest direct parallel is in Deuteronomy 7:9, where God’s covenant will be kept with a “thousand generations” to come.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern.<\/p>\n<p>Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mystical, pre-Christian Jewish groups, and later carried to extremes by the Kabbalists.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>• Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>• Numerology<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionofNumbers\">Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew, and indeed any other Semitic language, has a simple but adequate system of numeration. The number one is an adjective. After that, the numerals are nouns, in parallel masculine and feminine forms, although the masculine is used with the feminine noun and vice versa. Ordinal numbers (first, second, third, etc.) exist alongside cardinal numbers (one, two, three), but as in most languages, the second set can be used instead of the first (“day two” instead of “second day”). From ten to nineteen, there is one composite form built like English “thirteen” (“three-ten”), but “twenty” is literally “tens” (the plural of “ten”). Thirty, forty, and so on are literally “threes,” “fours” (the plural of the words “three” and “four,” respectively) and so on, up to a hundred, which is a new word. There are also separate words for “thousand” and for “ten thousand,” as in Greek, Chinese, and many other languages. Larger numbers must be expressed by multiples of these (“ten thousand times ten thousand” and “thousands of thousands”), suggesting that large figures, rarely needed for small populations and tiny kingdoms, were expressed approximately. Hebrew has not only a singular and plural but also a dual form to express two of anything (two hundred, two thousand). Fractions (a half, a third, a tenth, etc.) could be expressed, and multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction were used. Indeed, instances of all four operations can be found in the Bible. The Hebrew mathematical system was basically part of the larger western Asian mathematical system, of which we know a great deal from Mesopotamia and Egypt. These countries, however, used a more highly developed mathematical system than Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaysofWritingNumerals\">Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, numbers are always written out in words, as on the famous Moabite Stone and the Siloam Inscription. But every nation in the ancient world could also express numbers by using figures or ciphers of various kinds (like our 1, 2, 3, . . .). Because of this danger of error, in later days numbers were normally written out in full, in words, where confusion, although still possible, was not nearly so likely. An additional way of writing numbers, known both to the Hebrews and the Greeks, was the use of consecutive letters of the alphabet instead of consecutive numerals (as if we used A for 1, B for 2, etc.). This system, in wide use by NT times, is the usual system in modern Hebrew and has the advantage that numerical combinations can be pronounced by inserting arbitrary vowels, thus making artificial words. For example, if the number of the beast (Rv 13:18), 666, is expressed in alphabetical letters, it can spell out the consonants of “Nero Caesar,” although other names are possible, especially if the variant reading 616 is used.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofLargeNumbers\">Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Even allowing for all these possibilities, there remain certain problems connected with large numbers, particularly in the OT. The most obvious is that of the ten long-lived patriarchs, whose ages are recorded in Genesis 5. Different figures (varying by whole centuries) are recorded for their ages in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan text, and the earliest Greek translation (known as the Septuagint), but all figures are very large. Some interpret these figures literally and point out that there is a steady reduction from the ages attained by these patriarchs to the more modest 120 years allotted to man in Noah’s time (Gn 6:3) and the 70 years accepted later as the human life span (Ps 90:10). This would correspond to the progressive spiritual deterioration of mankind after the fall, from the perfect state of Adam to the present condition. Whatever the explanation of the figures, there is no doubt that this is the theological intent of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The large number of Israelites who left Egypt is also problematic. If there were actually 600,000 fighting men (Nm 1:46), this would correspond to a whole nation of some 2 million or more. Possibly the word translated “thousand” means “clan units”; it would clearly be a much smaller total body, whatever its exact size. Of course, God could have maintained any number of people in the desert. The evidence of archaeology as to the population of Canaan both before and after the Israelite onslaught seems to support a lower number. The same principle might explain the large numbers given for the fighting men of the various Israelite tribes, and the huge totals for Israel and Judah’s military strength given at later times in the historical books of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>To the ordinary Bible reader, perhaps one of the biggest problems is the different numbers recorded in Chronicles and Kings, when the same incidents are being described. Manuscript errors, or confusion of numbers written by signs or single letters of the alphabet, may account for numerous individual inconsistencies, but not for wholesale differences, particularly as the figures in Chronicles are consistently much larger. These very large round numbers may have symbolic significance and may not be intended to be taken in their literal sense at all. Indeed, since the Jews had before them the book of Kings and the book of Chronicles at the same time, they can hardly have taken both sets of numbers literally themselves.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CountingbyGenerations\">Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>One of the problems of the OT is that of the dating of events. Even with an exact number system, there is no absolute fixed point from which to reckon. Later Jews and Christians counted from the presumed date of the Creation. Not until after the time of David and Solomon are both internal reference between the comparative dates of kings of Judah and Israel and external reference to monarchs outside Israel used. This open-endedness accounts for the vague period of “forty years” used so often in the OT (e.g., the book of Judges) for any long but indeterminate period of time, almost certainly corresponding to a generation (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dor<\/span>). Counting by generations is specific in some places in the Bible and may be implicit in others. For instance, Abraham’s descendants are to return to Canaan “in the fourth generation” (Gn 15:16), and the genealogy of Christ is neatly constructed on a pattern of three groups of fourteen generations (Mt 1:17), rather than on periods of years. Wherever people use and recite genealogies, such counting by generations is natural. But Abraham’s descendants are said to have returned to Canaan approximately four centuries later (Gal 3:17), and therefore the word “generation” sometimes stands for 100 years. The Hebrew word for “generation” may mean 120 years (Gn 6:3). Usually, the ancient Hebrews used vague phrases like “in those days” or “after those days” or “the days are coming,” which expressed past, present, and future without any specific mention of number. In other words, the Bible writers were more concerned with theology than with mathematics.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApproximateUseofNumbers\">Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, Israel’s 40 years in the desert is a good example of the approximate use of numbers (Nm 14:33). In the NT, Jesus was in the wilderness 40 days during the temptation (Mt 4:2), and there were 40 days between his resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3). Moses was 40 years old at his call (Acts 7:23), apparently lived 40 years in Midian (Ex 7:7), and spent 40 years leading Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (Dt 34:7), for he is said to be 120 years old at his death. However, two generations of 40 years is the normal maximum for a healthy man (Ps 90:10), and even this is often shortened to 70 years by the rigors of life. Seventy is also used at times in this approximate sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolicUseofNumbers\">Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, seven symbolizes completeness or perfection. On the seventh day God rested from his labors and creation is finished (Gn 2:2). Pharaoh in his dream saw seven cattle coming from the Nile (41:2). Samson’s sacred Nazirite locks were braided in seven plaits (Jgs 16:13). Seven devils left Mary of Magdala, signifying the totality of her previous possession by Satan (Lk 8:2); “seven other devils” will enter the purified but vacant life of a person (Mt 12:45). However, on the positive side, there were the seven spirits of God (Rv 3:1). In the seventh year the Hebrew slave was to be freed (Ex 21:2), having completed his time of captivity and service. Every seventh year was a sabbatical year (Lv 25:4). Seven times seven reiterates the sense of completeness. In the Year of Jubilee (at the completion of 7 x 7 years = the 50th year), all land is freed and returns to the original owners (Lv 25:10). Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks, is seven times seven days after Passover. “Seventy,” which is literally “sevens” in Hebrew, strengthens the concept of perfection. There are 70 elders (Ex 24:1) in Israel. Israel was exiled to Babylon for 70 years (Jer 25:12) to complete its punishment. “Seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) reiterates this still further. The Lord was not giving Peter a mathematical number of times that he should forgive another person, but rather was insisting on limitless forgiveness for a brother’s sin.<\/p>\n<p>“Three” may well share in this meaning of completion or perfection, although not so forcibly (2 Kgs 13:18). Many things happen “on the third day” (Hos 6:2). Jonah spent three days in the stomach of the fish (Mt 12:40), and the Lord rose again on the third day (1 Cor 15:4). David was offered a choice of divine punishments—three years, three months, three days (2 Sm 24:13). For the Christian, “three” takes on a far deeper significance as the number of Persons of the Trinity. The three Persons are clearly expressed, for instance, in the Great Commission (Mt 28:19) and in the Pauline benediction (2 Cor 13:13). Many echoes of this threefold expression are in the NT, and many anticipations of it in the OT, of which the thrice-repeated “Holy” in Isaiah 6:3 is the most famous.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars see four as another symbol of completeness (four winds of heaven, Dn 7:2; four horsemen, Rv 6:1-7; four living creatures around the throne of God, Rv 4:6). Five is certainly used in an indefinite sense as a small number (Is 19:18; 30:17). Nor do eight or nine seem to have any special significance, although, like other numbers, they may be used in a factual sense to describe any of God’s activities (nine plagues on Egypt, Ex 7–10). “Ten” does have significance because of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17), but not any special symbolism earlier in the Bible. If anything, “ten” is elsewhere used in a vague way. Laban changes Jacob’s wages ten times (Gn 31:7); Daniel and his friends are ten times better than all other students (Dn 1:20); ten times over, the Jewish settlers will be warned of impending enemy attacks (Neh 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>Eleven appears to have no special biblical significance, but 12 certainly has. The clearest proof of this is the existence of the 12 tribes in Israel. In Revelation 7:4-8, where it is mathematically important that the number of tribes be limited to 12, the tribe of Dan is altogether omitted—probably on account of Dan’s sin of idolatry (Jgs 18:14-20). Ishmael’s descendants were also divided into 12 clans (Gn 17:20), so that the number 12 was apparently significant outside Israel as well. In the NT Christ chose 12 apostles (Mt 10:1-4). The link with the number of tribes is made specific when Christ tells the apostles that they will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes (Mt 19:28). However, it is interesting that, after the election and appointment of Matthias (Acts 1:26), the Christian church apparently made no subsequent efforts to maintain the number of apostles. Like “seven times seven,” “twelve times twelve” increases the force of the number. When this is further multiplied by a thousand, the figure becomes the 144,000 redeemed (Rv 7:4), who were sealed “out of all the tribes of Israel.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExactStatistics\">Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>As distinct from the metaphorical use of numbers to denote completion, immensity, and the like, numbers in Hebrew were often used to give exact tallies or measurements. Such usage is known to us only from clay tablets and ostraca (broken pieces of potsherd engraved in ink, used as rough notebooks). However, ascertaining exactly what the text was in its earliest form and what that text means is difficult.<\/p>\n<p>An example is the number of the sons of Jeconiah among the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh. They were struck down by the Lord because of their failure to rejoice with the others when God’s ark returned to Israel from the Philistine country (1 Sm 6:19). The Greek text (LXX) reads “seventy”; the later Hebrew manuscripts add “fifty thousand.” But, as Beth-shemesh itself was only a small frontier town, and the “sons of Jeconiah” was presumably only one clan among several, the smaller number is obviously the original, and the large addition due to some later manuscript confusion.<\/p>\n<p>A good rule in trying to decide whether a number is statistical or impressionistic is to determine whether it is a small number, or an unusual number for which there is no obvious theological explanation. When the men of Ai killed some 36 Israelites at the first assault on the city (Jos 7:5), the smallness of the number is evidence that this is a vividly remembered factual detail. Similarly, in the case of the number of Abraham’s 318 men (Gn 14:14) or the catch of 153 fish after the resurrection (Jn 21:11), the numbers, though large, are not round numbers but unusual combinations, and are obviously meant in a literal or statistical sense. Irrelevant details like this have a habit of remaining in the memory, and are the best guarantee of the trustworthiness of the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Numerology\">Numerology<\/p>\n<p>Numerology may be said to be an extended application of the metaphorical significance of numbers (7, 40, etc.) already discussed. In the Bible, this systematization of numbers always goes with a strong sense of the sovereignty of God, his control over human history, and a belief in his ongoing purpose and its triumphant conclusion.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the first clear instance of numerology in the Bible is 1 Kings 6:1, where Solomon began to build the temple 480 years after the exodus, a period 5 times 10 times 12, or 4 times 120, the ideal life span of man in early days (Gn 6:3). First Chronicles 6:3-8 gives 12 generations of men (presumably 40 years each) to cover the same period, so “twelve generations” is probably the real basis for the computation, rather than any exact year-by-year tally. A tally would have been impossible in the days of the judges and unlikely before the monarchy. David was the first to establish an official scribe or recorder to keep daily annals in Israel (2 Sm 8:16-17), as was common in the great kingdoms from far earlier times. Such Israelite annals are later mentioned as sources of the books of the kings (2 Kgs 14:18). The number 480 is probably a rough approximation rather than exact and denotes the end of one of God’s epochs.<\/p>\n<p>When Jeremiah prophesies an exile of 70 years for Judah (Jer 25:11; 29:10), it is not only a historical prediction that was literally fulfilled but also a symbol of completeness; Judah’s punishment is complete (cf. Is 40:2). Isaiah (Is 23:15) had made a similar prophecy of a 70-year punishment for Tyre, and Ezekiel (Ez 29:11-13) prophesied a 40-year “exile” for Egypt. When these 70 years are regarded as sabbatical years, where the land must lie untilled to compensate for the 7 times 70 years of sin before, then true numerology begins (2 Chr 36:21). Here numerology is used only as an explanation of past and present, but it can also be used to explain the future, especially in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel (Dn 9:2) refers to the literal 70 years of the exile as foretold by Jeremiah. In Daniel 9:24, this has been extended to 70 weeks of years (490 years) applied to the distant future. Daniel 9:25 sees 69 of these (483 years) as elapsing before Messiah appears. Presumably, the last week of the 70 is therefore thought of as the time of his activity. However this may be interpreted in terms of actual dates, it must be harmonized with 9:26, where the Messiah is “cut off” after 62 weeks of years (434 years). The difficulty lies in establishing the starting point for this long period. This is an example of an elaborate numerology, embracing centuries of history, all ultimately based on the 70 years of Jeremiah. According to biblical principles, this can have both an “immediate” fulfillment in the return from exile, and a “prophetic” fulfillment in the far distant future in connection with the coming of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The other major example of extended numerology in Daniel is in connection with the “time, times, and half a time” (7:25). This must stand for three and a half “times,” that is, half of seven “times.” Thus, it refers either to three and a half years (half a “week” of years) or three and a half “weeks” of years (cf. “seven times” in 4:16, where “seven years” is clearly meant). Whatever may be its ultimate prophetic fulfillment in Christ, the “initial” or “partial” fulfillment is the roughly three and a half years of bitter persecution of God’s people by Antiochus Epiphanes (167–164 <span>BC<\/span>). This figure of three and a half years reappears in Revelation 11:2 (“forty-two months”), and 12:14 (“a time, and times, and half a time”), to describe the period of Rome’s persecution of the Christian church. The figure had possibly become a symbol of any bitter but limited persecution. The “two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings” of Daniel 8:14 may mean 1,150 days, which is approximately the same length of time.<\/p>\n<p>The three and a half years of Daniel 7:25 reappear in Revelation 11 in the form of “forty-two months,” the time when the heathen will trample down Jerusalem (Rv 11:2). The 1,290 days of Daniel 12:11 reappear here (in the slightly different form of 1,260 days) as the time that God’s two witnesses will prophesy (Rv 11:3). The 42 months reappear in Revelation 13:5 as the period that the wild beast will be allowed to blaspheme. While the “thousand years” of 20:6 is not derived from Daniel at all, the metaphorical use of “thousand” is familiar to the OT. The closest direct parallel is in Deuteronomy 7:9, where God’s covenant will be kept with a “thousand generations” to come.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY* Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern. Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mys...","summary_en":"NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY* Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern. Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mys...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32532,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Recorder","title_en":"Recorder","content_ro":"<h3>RECORDER<\/h3>\n<p>The title of a high public official from David’s reign until the end of the Israelite monarchy. Though precise duties are never specified in the OT, the recorder probably kept the official log or ledger and advised the king from the information available to him. A recorder is mentioned with other leading officers in 2 Samuel 8:16, 20:24, and 1 Kings 4:3. The recorder spoke for Hezekiah in his dealings with Rabshekah (2 Kgs 18:18), and during Josiah’s reign, supervised temple repairs (2 Chr 34:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RECORDER<\/h3>\n<p>The title of a high public official from David’s reign until the end of the Israelite monarchy. Though precise duties are never specified in the OT, the recorder probably kept the official log or ledger and advised the king from the information available to him. A recorder is mentioned with other leading officers in 2 Samuel 8:16, 20:24, and 1 Kings 4:3. The recorder spoke for Hezekiah in his dealings with Rabshekah (2 Kgs 18:18), and during Josiah’s reign, supervised temple repairs (2 Chr 34:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"RECORDER The title of a high public official from David’s reign until the end of the Israelite monarchy. Though precise duties are never specified in the OT, the recorder probably kept the official log or ledger and advised the king from the information available to him. A recorder is mentioned with other leading officers in 2 Samuel 8:16, 20:24, and 1 Kings 4:3. The recorder spoke for Hezekiah in his dealings with Rabshekah (2 Kgs 18:18), and during Josiah’s reign, supervised temple repairs ...","summary_en":"RECORDER The title of a high public official from David’s reign until the end of the Israelite monarchy. Though precise duties are never specified in the OT, the recorder probably kept the official log or ledger and advised the king from the information available to him. A recorder is mentioned with other leading officers in 2 Samuel 8:16, 20:24, and 1 Kings 4:3. The recorder spoke for Hezekiah in his dealings with Rabshekah (2 Kgs 18:18), and during Josiah’s reign, supervised temple repairs ...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34093,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Scribe","title_en":"Scribe","content_ro":"<h3>SCRIBE<\/h3>\n<p>Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPreexilicTimes\">Scribes in Preexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion of the term “scribe” and has no particular religious connotation. Scribes were employed to keep accounts or transcribe legal information (Jer 32:12), military data (2 Chr 26:11), other public documents (Jgs 8:14; Is 50:1), or personal correspondence (Jer 36:18). These secretaries were essential to royal administrations, and there is frequent mention of a chief scribe who functioned as a court recorder (1 Kgs 4:3; 2 Chr 24:11), adviser (2 Sm 8:16-17; 2 Kgs 18:18; 22:12; 1 Chr 27:32; Is 36:3), and financial overseer (2 Kgs 22:3-4). Secretaries or scribes were associated with the priesthood as well, serving as recorders for temple affairs (1 Chr 24:6; 2 Chr 34:13-15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPostexilicTimes\">Scribes in Postexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>With the restoration of Judaism under Ezra and Nehemiah, the term “scribe” begins to be associated more narrowly with those who gathered together, studied, and interpreted the Torah (Jewish law). They became, in essence, a separate profession of teachers (although unpaid), able to preserve accurately the law of Moses and interpret it to meet conditions in postexilic times. In this initial period, Ezra himself appears as the ideal “scribe who studied and taught the commands and laws of the <span>Lord<\/span> to Israel” (Ezr 7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). In Ecclesiasticus, the scribe is portrayed as one who, because of his diligent study of the Law, the Prophets, and Writings (Ecclus 38:24ff; 39:1), is able to penetrate the hidden meanings of texts (39:2-3) and thus is able to serve as judge and counsel for the affairs of the people and state (38:33; 39:4-8). Because of his invaluable place in a society governed by the Torah, the scribe is worthy of praise and veneration throughout succeeding generations (39:9). By the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the scribes were a fairly distinct class in Jewish society. They appear as such during the Maccabean wars, acting as a negotiating body with the rival Syrians (1 Macc 7:12). It is also significant that, from this time forward, the history of the scribe in Jewish life is closely linked with the rise of the Pharisees. Although there were apparently some scribes affiliated with the rival Sadducean party, the party of the Pharisees, with its absolute devotion to the law (including the oral law), became the primary religiopolitical affiliation for the scribes (see the close connection in the NT: Mt 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; Mk 7:5; Lk 6:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TrainingandStatus\">Training and Status<\/p>\n<p>The training of scribes initially occurred within priestly family-based guilds that guaranteed the regulation and perpetuation of this position (1 Chr 2:55). Later, scribal training in the law became open to members of all classes, with the eventual result, by Jesus’ time, of scribes from nonpriestly families being far more numerous and influential. Training in the law began at an early age under the personal supervision of a teacher (rabbi), who gave instructions in all matters pertaining to the law and its interpretation for present needs. Because the written law of Moses could not possibly speak directly to conditions in postexilic times, the oral interpretation and application of the written law to meet such current needs was a significant contribution by the scribes. Such oral law promulgated by them was regarded as equal to the written law and equally binding for those desiring to please God (see Mk 7:6-13). This important function, lying at the heart of Jewish life, accounts for the participation of the scribes in the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, in order to make legal decisions in keeping with the law, obviously needed the presence of those most knowledgeable about the minutest details of the Torah and the principles governing its application to new circumstances. The scribes, consequently, were the only members outside the aristocratic high priests and elders to be represented in this Jewish supreme court (Mt 26:57; Mk 14:43, 53; Lk 22:66; Acts 23:9). Being the authoritative instructors of the law both within the temple (Lk 2:46) and within the various synagogues of Judea and Galilee (5:17), as well as prominent members of the Sanhedrin, the scribes were greatly respected within the Jewish community. They wore special robes (Mk 12:38) with memorial fringes at the bottom and phylacteries, or “prayer boxes,” hanging from the arms (Mt 23:5). Such attire made their presence obvious and occasioned the rising or bowing of the common people when they passed (Mk 12:38). They were addressed with respect as “rabbi” or “master” (Mt 23:7) and were given the place of honor at worship as well as at social affairs (Mt 23:2; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46). Indeed, the high regard the Jews held for their scribes is testified by the fact that such teachers of the law were buried alongside the tombs of the patriarchs and prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheScribesinJesusDay\">The Scribes in Jesus’ Day<\/p>\n<p>The scribes appear predominantly in the ministry of Jesus as those concerned with the circumspectness of legal observance. Luke refers to the scribes as “lawyers,” thereby describing their chief function as interpreters of the Jewish law in a way that communicated to his gentile audience. It is often found, therefore, that the scribes were critical members of Jesus’ audience, accusing him of violating the law on numerous occasions: in forgiving sins (Mt 9:1-3; Lk 5:17-26), in breaking their notion of Sabbath observance through work (Lk 6:1-2) and healing (vv 6-11), in not following their accepted ceremonial washings (Mk 7:2-5), and in ignoring their practice of fasting (Lk 5:33-39). Not surprisingly, they especially disapproved of Jesus’ practice of mingling with the unclean and outcasts of Jewish society (Mk 2:16-17; Lk 15:1-2). In a similar light, they are not unfrequently found presenting questions concerning the law for the purpose of tricking Jesus (Mk 7:5; 12:28, 35; Lk 11:53; Jn 8:3-4). In a similar fashion, they demanded that Jesus make his identity clear (Mt 12:38) and reveal the source of his authority to perform miracles (Mk 3:22; Lk 20:1-4). Although there is evidence that a minority of the scribes accepted Jesus (Mt 8:19; 13:52; Mk 12:32; Jn 3:1-2), their primary attitude toward Jesus was one of hostility. As previously suggested, this was partly due to Jesus’ differing expression of fidelity to the Mosaic law and his openness toward the outcasts. It was also partly due to the rising popularity of Jesus among the people, which posed a threat to their own authority (Mt 7:29) and to the safety of the city (Mt 21:15; Mk 11:18). Certainly, another major contributing factor of their opposition to Jesus was his exposure of their hypocrisy and corruption. In his rebukes of the scribes and the Pharisees, Jesus openly accused them of catering to public approval (Mt 23:5-7; Mk 12:38-39; Lk 11:43). While appearing to be outwardly correct and holy, they were inwardly corrupt (Mt 23:25-28; Lk 11:39-41). Jesus also attacked the principle of oral law taught by the scribes, which they demanded that the people follow. Jesus charged that the oral law was a “heavy burden” that the scribes themselves did not even bother to follow (Mt 23:2-4, 13-22; Lk 11:46). While emphasizing the minor points of the law, the scribes were also guilty of ignoring the weightier concerns of justice, mercy, and faith (Mt 23:23-24; Mk 12:40; Lk 11:42). Contrary to being the descendants of the prophets, as the scribes held themselves to be, the scribes (Jesus claimed) would have killed the prophets if they had lived in their day (Mt 23:29-36; Lk 20:9-19).<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising to find, therefore, the scribes anxious to get rid of Jesus (Mk 14:1; Lk 11:53). His more flexible interpretation of the law posed a clear threat to their position and authority within the community. The scribes joined forces with their normal opponents (the high priesthood) to engineer Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43). When Jesus appeared before them and the rest of the Sanhedrin, they worked with the other leaders to construct a case against him worthy of death (Mt 26:57-66). When taking Jesus before Herod, they stood by and shouted their accusations with the others (Lk 23:10). Finally, they participated with other members of the Sanhedrin in mocking Jesus on the cross, demanding that Jesus save himself by coming down from the cross (Mt 27:41-43). Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the scribes continued with the other elements of the Sanhedrin to oppose the early Christian church, and they brought about Stephen’s martyrdom (Acts 6:12-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Pharisees; Writer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SCRIBE<\/h3>\n<p>Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPreexilicTimes\">Scribes in Preexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion of the term “scribe” and has no particular religious connotation. Scribes were employed to keep accounts or transcribe legal information (Jer 32:12), military data (2 Chr 26:11), other public documents (Jgs 8:14; Is 50:1), or personal correspondence (Jer 36:18). These secretaries were essential to royal administrations, and there is frequent mention of a chief scribe who functioned as a court recorder (1 Kgs 4:3; 2 Chr 24:11), adviser (2 Sm 8:16-17; 2 Kgs 18:18; 22:12; 1 Chr 27:32; Is 36:3), and financial overseer (2 Kgs 22:3-4). Secretaries or scribes were associated with the priesthood as well, serving as recorders for temple affairs (1 Chr 24:6; 2 Chr 34:13-15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPostexilicTimes\">Scribes in Postexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>With the restoration of Judaism under Ezra and Nehemiah, the term “scribe” begins to be associated more narrowly with those who gathered together, studied, and interpreted the Torah (Jewish law). They became, in essence, a separate profession of teachers (although unpaid), able to preserve accurately the law of Moses and interpret it to meet conditions in postexilic times. In this initial period, Ezra himself appears as the ideal “scribe who studied and taught the commands and laws of the <span>Lord<\/span> to Israel” (Ezr 7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). In Ecclesiasticus, the scribe is portrayed as one who, because of his diligent study of the Law, the Prophets, and Writings (Ecclus 38:24ff; 39:1), is able to penetrate the hidden meanings of texts (39:2-3) and thus is able to serve as judge and counsel for the affairs of the people and state (38:33; 39:4-8). Because of his invaluable place in a society governed by the Torah, the scribe is worthy of praise and veneration throughout succeeding generations (39:9). By the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the scribes were a fairly distinct class in Jewish society. They appear as such during the Maccabean wars, acting as a negotiating body with the rival Syrians (1 Macc 7:12). It is also significant that, from this time forward, the history of the scribe in Jewish life is closely linked with the rise of the Pharisees. Although there were apparently some scribes affiliated with the rival Sadducean party, the party of the Pharisees, with its absolute devotion to the law (including the oral law), became the primary religiopolitical affiliation for the scribes (see the close connection in the NT: Mt 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; Mk 7:5; Lk 6:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TrainingandStatus\">Training and Status<\/p>\n<p>The training of scribes initially occurred within priestly family-based guilds that guaranteed the regulation and perpetuation of this position (1 Chr 2:55). Later, scribal training in the law became open to members of all classes, with the eventual result, by Jesus’ time, of scribes from nonpriestly families being far more numerous and influential. Training in the law began at an early age under the personal supervision of a teacher (rabbi), who gave instructions in all matters pertaining to the law and its interpretation for present needs. Because the written law of Moses could not possibly speak directly to conditions in postexilic times, the oral interpretation and application of the written law to meet such current needs was a significant contribution by the scribes. Such oral law promulgated by them was regarded as equal to the written law and equally binding for those desiring to please God (see Mk 7:6-13). This important function, lying at the heart of Jewish life, accounts for the participation of the scribes in the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, in order to make legal decisions in keeping with the law, obviously needed the presence of those most knowledgeable about the minutest details of the Torah and the principles governing its application to new circumstances. The scribes, consequently, were the only members outside the aristocratic high priests and elders to be represented in this Jewish supreme court (Mt 26:57; Mk 14:43, 53; Lk 22:66; Acts 23:9). Being the authoritative instructors of the law both within the temple (Lk 2:46) and within the various synagogues of Judea and Galilee (5:17), as well as prominent members of the Sanhedrin, the scribes were greatly respected within the Jewish community. They wore special robes (Mk 12:38) with memorial fringes at the bottom and phylacteries, or “prayer boxes,” hanging from the arms (Mt 23:5). Such attire made their presence obvious and occasioned the rising or bowing of the common people when they passed (Mk 12:38). They were addressed with respect as “rabbi” or “master” (Mt 23:7) and were given the place of honor at worship as well as at social affairs (Mt 23:2; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46). Indeed, the high regard the Jews held for their scribes is testified by the fact that such teachers of the law were buried alongside the tombs of the patriarchs and prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheScribesinJesusDay\">The Scribes in Jesus’ Day<\/p>\n<p>The scribes appear predominantly in the ministry of Jesus as those concerned with the circumspectness of legal observance. Luke refers to the scribes as “lawyers,” thereby describing their chief function as interpreters of the Jewish law in a way that communicated to his gentile audience. It is often found, therefore, that the scribes were critical members of Jesus’ audience, accusing him of violating the law on numerous occasions: in forgiving sins (Mt 9:1-3; Lk 5:17-26), in breaking their notion of Sabbath observance through work (Lk 6:1-2) and healing (vv 6-11), in not following their accepted ceremonial washings (Mk 7:2-5), and in ignoring their practice of fasting (Lk 5:33-39). Not surprisingly, they especially disapproved of Jesus’ practice of mingling with the unclean and outcasts of Jewish society (Mk 2:16-17; Lk 15:1-2). In a similar light, they are not unfrequently found presenting questions concerning the law for the purpose of tricking Jesus (Mk 7:5; 12:28, 35; Lk 11:53; Jn 8:3-4). In a similar fashion, they demanded that Jesus make his identity clear (Mt 12:38) and reveal the source of his authority to perform miracles (Mk 3:22; Lk 20:1-4). Although there is evidence that a minority of the scribes accepted Jesus (Mt 8:19; 13:52; Mk 12:32; Jn 3:1-2), their primary attitude toward Jesus was one of hostility. As previously suggested, this was partly due to Jesus’ differing expression of fidelity to the Mosaic law and his openness toward the outcasts. It was also partly due to the rising popularity of Jesus among the people, which posed a threat to their own authority (Mt 7:29) and to the safety of the city (Mt 21:15; Mk 11:18). Certainly, another major contributing factor of their opposition to Jesus was his exposure of their hypocrisy and corruption. In his rebukes of the scribes and the Pharisees, Jesus openly accused them of catering to public approval (Mt 23:5-7; Mk 12:38-39; Lk 11:43). While appearing to be outwardly correct and holy, they were inwardly corrupt (Mt 23:25-28; Lk 11:39-41). Jesus also attacked the principle of oral law taught by the scribes, which they demanded that the people follow. Jesus charged that the oral law was a “heavy burden” that the scribes themselves did not even bother to follow (Mt 23:2-4, 13-22; Lk 11:46). While emphasizing the minor points of the law, the scribes were also guilty of ignoring the weightier concerns of justice, mercy, and faith (Mt 23:23-24; Mk 12:40; Lk 11:42). Contrary to being the descendants of the prophets, as the scribes held themselves to be, the scribes (Jesus claimed) would have killed the prophets if they had lived in their day (Mt 23:29-36; Lk 20:9-19).<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising to find, therefore, the scribes anxious to get rid of Jesus (Mk 14:1; Lk 11:53). His more flexible interpretation of the law posed a clear threat to their position and authority within the community. The scribes joined forces with their normal opponents (the high priesthood) to engineer Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43). When Jesus appeared before them and the rest of the Sanhedrin, they worked with the other leaders to construct a case against him worthy of death (Mt 26:57-66). When taking Jesus before Herod, they stood by and shouted their accusations with the others (Lk 23:10). Finally, they participated with other members of the Sanhedrin in mocking Jesus on the cross, demanding that Jesus save himself by coming down from the cross (Mt 27:41-43). Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the scribes continued with the other elements of the Sanhedrin to oppose the early Christian church, and they brought about Stephen’s martyrdom (Acts 6:12-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Pharisees; Writer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SCRIBE Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus. Scribes in Preexilic Times The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion...","summary_en":"SCRIBE Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus. Scribes in Preexilic Times The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39284,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zeruiah","title_en":"Zeruiah","content_ro":"<h3>ZERUIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Nahash’s daughter and the sister of Abigail (2 Sm 17:25). Zeruiah eventually bore three sons: Joab, Abishai, and Asahel, all of whom were David’s friends during his reign (2 Sm 2:18; 3:39; 8:16; 18:2).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ZERUIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Nahash’s daughter and the sister of Abigail (2 Sm 17:25). Zeruiah eventually bore three sons: Joab, Abishai, and Asahel, all of whom were David’s friends during his reign (2 Sm 2:18; 3:39; 8:16; 18:2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ZERUIAH Nahash’s daughter and the sister of Abigail (2 Sm 17:25). Zeruiah eventually bore three sons: Joab, Abishai, and Asahel, all of whom were David’s friends during his reign (2 Sm 2:18; 3:39; 8:16; 18:2).","summary_en":"ZERUIAH Nahash’s daughter and the sister of Abigail (2 Sm 17:25). Zeruiah eventually bore three sons: Joab, Abishai, and Asahel, all of whom were David’s friends during his reign (2 Sm 2:18; 3:39; 8:16; 18:2).","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":41375,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Zadok","title_en":"Zadok","content_ro":"<h3>Zadok<\/h3>\n<p>Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli. Zadok and Abiathar were priests of Israel under King David (2 Sam 8:17; 20:25).<\/p>\n<p>When Absalom revolted against King David, both Zadok and Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by taking the Ark to him, fully prepared to share in his exile (15:24-29). Instead, David sent them to Jerusalem as his spies.<\/p>\n<p>Later, when David’s son Adonijah tried to seize the aged David’s throne with the support of Joab and Abiathar, Zadok wisely refrained from supporting him (1 Kgs 1:5-10). Abiathar was banished (1 Kgs 2:26-27), fulfilling the prophecy that Eli’s family would be removed from the priesthood (1 Sam 2:27-36). In this same prophecy, God said, “I will raise up a faithful priest who will serve me and do what I desire. I will establish his family, and they will be priests to my anointed kings forever” (1 Sam 2:35).<\/p>\n<p>The loyal Zadok fulfilled this prophecy and became the sole high priest under Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35). Zadok’s descendants served as Israel’s priests throughout the monarchy and beyond. Azariah, chief priest during Hezekiah’s reign, was of Zadok’s line (2 Chr 31:10). During the Exile, Ezekiel’s eschatological vision of the new Temple refers to Zadok’s priestly line (Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11). When the Jews later came under Seleucid domination in the early 100s <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood, by then regarded as a political appointment, was taken away from Zadok’s descendants. As a result of Ezekiel’s prophecies, Jewish groups such as those responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls continued to await the restoration of Zadok’s line to the high priesthood. The New Testament teaches that the office of the high priest now rests on Jesus Christ (Heb 9:11; 10:12-25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 8:17; 15:23-37; 1 Kgs 1:5-53; 2:35; 1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53; Ezra 7:2; Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Zadok<\/h3>\n<p>Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli. Zadok and Abiathar were priests of Israel under King David (2 Sam 8:17; 20:25).<\/p>\n<p>When Absalom revolted against King David, both Zadok and Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by taking the Ark to him, fully prepared to share in his exile (15:24-29). Instead, David sent them to Jerusalem as his spies.<\/p>\n<p>Later, when David’s son Adonijah tried to seize the aged David’s throne with the support of Joab and Abiathar, Zadok wisely refrained from supporting him (1 Kgs 1:5-10). Abiathar was banished (1 Kgs 2:26-27), fulfilling the prophecy that Eli’s family would be removed from the priesthood (1 Sam 2:27-36). In this same prophecy, God said, “I will raise up a faithful priest who will serve me and do what I desire. I will establish his family, and they will be priests to my anointed kings forever” (1 Sam 2:35).<\/p>\n<p>The loyal Zadok fulfilled this prophecy and became the sole high priest under Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35). Zadok’s descendants served as Israel’s priests throughout the monarchy and beyond. Azariah, chief priest during Hezekiah’s reign, was of Zadok’s line (2 Chr 31:10). During the Exile, Ezekiel’s eschatological vision of the new Temple refers to Zadok’s priestly line (Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11). When the Jews later came under Seleucid domination in the early 100s <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood, by then regarded as a political appointment, was taken away from Zadok’s descendants. As a result of Ezekiel’s prophecies, Jewish groups such as those responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls continued to await the restoration of Zadok’s line to the high priesthood. The New Testament teaches that the office of the high priest now rests on Jesus Christ (Heb 9:11; 10:12-25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 8:17; 15:23-37; 1 Kgs 1:5-53; 2:35; 1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53; Ezra 7:2; Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Zadok Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli....","summary_en":"Zadok Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli....","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42193,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Sadducees","title_en":"The Sadducees","content_ro":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","summary_en":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69001,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Zadok","title_en":"Zadok","content_ro":"<h3>Zadok<\/h3>\n<p>Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli. Zadok and Abiathar were priests of Israel under King David (2 Sam 8:17; 20:25).<\/p>\n<p>When Absalom revolted against King David, both Zadok and Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by taking the Ark to him, fully prepared to share in his exile (15:24-29). Instead, David sent them to Jerusalem as his spies.<\/p>\n<p>Later, when David’s son Adonijah tried to seize the aged David’s throne with the support of Joab and Abiathar, Zadok wisely refrained from supporting him (1 Kgs 1:5-10). Abiathar was banished (1 Kgs 2:26-27), fulfilling the prophecy that Eli’s family would be removed from the priesthood (1 Sam 2:27-36). In this same prophecy, God said, “I will raise up a faithful priest who will serve me and do what I desire. I will establish his family, and they will be priests to my anointed kings forever” (1 Sam 2:35).<\/p>\n<p>The loyal Zadok fulfilled this prophecy and became the sole high priest under Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35). Zadok’s descendants served as Israel’s priests throughout the monarchy and beyond. Azariah, chief priest during Hezekiah’s reign, was of Zadok’s line (2 Chr 31:10). During the Exile, Ezekiel’s eschatological vision of the new Temple refers to Zadok’s priestly line (Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11). When the Jews later came under Seleucid domination in the early 100s <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood, by then regarded as a political appointment, was taken away from Zadok’s descendants. As a result of Ezekiel’s prophecies, Jewish groups such as those responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls continued to await the restoration of Zadok’s line to the high priesthood. The New Testament teaches that the office of the high priest now rests on Jesus Christ (Heb 9:11; 10:12-25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 8:17; 15:23-37; 1 Kgs 1:5-53; 2:35; 1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53; Ezra 7:2; Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Zadok<\/h3>\n<p>Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli. Zadok and Abiathar were priests of Israel under King David (2 Sam 8:17; 20:25).<\/p>\n<p>When Absalom revolted against King David, both Zadok and Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by taking the Ark to him, fully prepared to share in his exile (15:24-29). Instead, David sent them to Jerusalem as his spies.<\/p>\n<p>Later, when David’s son Adonijah tried to seize the aged David’s throne with the support of Joab and Abiathar, Zadok wisely refrained from supporting him (1 Kgs 1:5-10). Abiathar was banished (1 Kgs 2:26-27), fulfilling the prophecy that Eli’s family would be removed from the priesthood (1 Sam 2:27-36). In this same prophecy, God said, “I will raise up a faithful priest who will serve me and do what I desire. I will establish his family, and they will be priests to my anointed kings forever” (1 Sam 2:35).<\/p>\n<p>The loyal Zadok fulfilled this prophecy and became the sole high priest under Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35). Zadok’s descendants served as Israel’s priests throughout the monarchy and beyond. Azariah, chief priest during Hezekiah’s reign, was of Zadok’s line (2 Chr 31:10). During the Exile, Ezekiel’s eschatological vision of the new Temple refers to Zadok’s priestly line (Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11). When the Jews later came under Seleucid domination in the early 100s <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood, by then regarded as a political appointment, was taken away from Zadok’s descendants. As a result of Ezekiel’s prophecies, Jewish groups such as those responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls continued to await the restoration of Zadok’s line to the high priesthood. The New Testament teaches that the office of the high priest now rests on Jesus Christ (Heb 9:11; 10:12-25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 8:17; 15:23-37; 1 Kgs 1:5-53; 2:35; 1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53; Ezra 7:2; Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Zadok Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli....","summary_en":"Zadok Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli....","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69819,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Sadducees","title_en":"The Sadducees","content_ro":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","summary_en":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96627,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Zadok","title_en":"Zadok","content_ro":"<h3>Zadok<\/h3>\n<p>Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli. Zadok and Abiathar were priests of Israel under King David (2 Sam 8:17; 20:25).<\/p>\n<p>When Absalom revolted against King David, both Zadok and Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by taking the Ark to him, fully prepared to share in his exile (15:24-29). Instead, David sent them to Jerusalem as his spies.<\/p>\n<p>Later, when David’s son Adonijah tried to seize the aged David’s throne with the support of Joab and Abiathar, Zadok wisely refrained from supporting him (1 Kgs 1:5-10). Abiathar was banished (1 Kgs 2:26-27), fulfilling the prophecy that Eli’s family would be removed from the priesthood (1 Sam 2:27-36). In this same prophecy, God said, “I will raise up a faithful priest who will serve me and do what I desire. I will establish his family, and they will be priests to my anointed kings forever” (1 Sam 2:35).<\/p>\n<p>The loyal Zadok fulfilled this prophecy and became the sole high priest under Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35). Zadok’s descendants served as Israel’s priests throughout the monarchy and beyond. Azariah, chief priest during Hezekiah’s reign, was of Zadok’s line (2 Chr 31:10). During the Exile, Ezekiel’s eschatological vision of the new Temple refers to Zadok’s priestly line (Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11). When the Jews later came under Seleucid domination in the early 100s <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood, by then regarded as a political appointment, was taken away from Zadok’s descendants. As a result of Ezekiel’s prophecies, Jewish groups such as those responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls continued to await the restoration of Zadok’s line to the high priesthood. The New Testament teaches that the office of the high priest now rests on Jesus Christ (Heb 9:11; 10:12-25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 8:17; 15:23-37; 1 Kgs 1:5-53; 2:35; 1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53; Ezra 7:2; Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Zadok<\/h3>\n<p>Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli. Zadok and Abiathar were priests of Israel under King David (2 Sam 8:17; 20:25).<\/p>\n<p>When Absalom revolted against King David, both Zadok and Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by taking the Ark to him, fully prepared to share in his exile (15:24-29). Instead, David sent them to Jerusalem as his spies.<\/p>\n<p>Later, when David’s son Adonijah tried to seize the aged David’s throne with the support of Joab and Abiathar, Zadok wisely refrained from supporting him (1 Kgs 1:5-10). Abiathar was banished (1 Kgs 2:26-27), fulfilling the prophecy that Eli’s family would be removed from the priesthood (1 Sam 2:27-36). In this same prophecy, God said, “I will raise up a faithful priest who will serve me and do what I desire. I will establish his family, and they will be priests to my anointed kings forever” (1 Sam 2:35).<\/p>\n<p>The loyal Zadok fulfilled this prophecy and became the sole high priest under Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35). Zadok’s descendants served as Israel’s priests throughout the monarchy and beyond. Azariah, chief priest during Hezekiah’s reign, was of Zadok’s line (2 Chr 31:10). During the Exile, Ezekiel’s eschatological vision of the new Temple refers to Zadok’s priestly line (Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11). When the Jews later came under Seleucid domination in the early 100s <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood, by then regarded as a political appointment, was taken away from Zadok’s descendants. As a result of Ezekiel’s prophecies, Jewish groups such as those responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls continued to await the restoration of Zadok’s line to the high priesthood. The New Testament teaches that the office of the high priest now rests on Jesus Christ (Heb 9:11; 10:12-25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 8:17; 15:23-37; 1 Kgs 1:5-53; 2:35; 1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53; Ezra 7:2; Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Zadok Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli....","summary_en":"Zadok Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli....","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97445,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Sadducees","title_en":"The Sadducees","content_ro":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","summary_en":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124253,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Zadok","title_en":"Zadok","content_ro":"<h3>Zadok<\/h3>\n<p>Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli. Zadok and Abiathar were priests of Israel under King David (2 Sam 8:17; 20:25).<\/p>\n<p>When Absalom revolted against King David, both Zadok and Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by taking the Ark to him, fully prepared to share in his exile (15:24-29). Instead, David sent them to Jerusalem as his spies.<\/p>\n<p>Later, when David’s son Adonijah tried to seize the aged David’s throne with the support of Joab and Abiathar, Zadok wisely refrained from supporting him (1 Kgs 1:5-10). Abiathar was banished (1 Kgs 2:26-27), fulfilling the prophecy that Eli’s family would be removed from the priesthood (1 Sam 2:27-36). In this same prophecy, God said, “I will raise up a faithful priest who will serve me and do what I desire. I will establish his family, and they will be priests to my anointed kings forever” (1 Sam 2:35).<\/p>\n<p>The loyal Zadok fulfilled this prophecy and became the sole high priest under Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35). Zadok’s descendants served as Israel’s priests throughout the monarchy and beyond. Azariah, chief priest during Hezekiah’s reign, was of Zadok’s line (2 Chr 31:10). During the Exile, Ezekiel’s eschatological vision of the new Temple refers to Zadok’s priestly line (Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11). When the Jews later came under Seleucid domination in the early 100s <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood, by then regarded as a political appointment, was taken away from Zadok’s descendants. As a result of Ezekiel’s prophecies, Jewish groups such as those responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls continued to await the restoration of Zadok’s line to the high priesthood. The New Testament teaches that the office of the high priest now rests on Jesus Christ (Heb 9:11; 10:12-25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 8:17; 15:23-37; 1 Kgs 1:5-53; 2:35; 1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53; Ezra 7:2; Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Zadok<\/h3>\n<p>Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli. Zadok and Abiathar were priests of Israel under King David (2 Sam 8:17; 20:25).<\/p>\n<p>When Absalom revolted against King David, both Zadok and Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by taking the Ark to him, fully prepared to share in his exile (15:24-29). Instead, David sent them to Jerusalem as his spies.<\/p>\n<p>Later, when David’s son Adonijah tried to seize the aged David’s throne with the support of Joab and Abiathar, Zadok wisely refrained from supporting him (1 Kgs 1:5-10). Abiathar was banished (1 Kgs 2:26-27), fulfilling the prophecy that Eli’s family would be removed from the priesthood (1 Sam 2:27-36). In this same prophecy, God said, “I will raise up a faithful priest who will serve me and do what I desire. I will establish his family, and they will be priests to my anointed kings forever” (1 Sam 2:35).<\/p>\n<p>The loyal Zadok fulfilled this prophecy and became the sole high priest under Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35). Zadok’s descendants served as Israel’s priests throughout the monarchy and beyond. Azariah, chief priest during Hezekiah’s reign, was of Zadok’s line (2 Chr 31:10). During the Exile, Ezekiel’s eschatological vision of the new Temple refers to Zadok’s priestly line (Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11). When the Jews later came under Seleucid domination in the early 100s <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood, by then regarded as a political appointment, was taken away from Zadok’s descendants. As a result of Ezekiel’s prophecies, Jewish groups such as those responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls continued to await the restoration of Zadok’s line to the high priesthood. The New Testament teaches that the office of the high priest now rests on Jesus Christ (Heb 9:11; 10:12-25).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 8:17; 15:23-37; 1 Kgs 1:5-53; 2:35; 1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53; Ezra 7:2; Ezek 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Zadok Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli....","summary_en":"Zadok Zadok was an important transitional figure in the history of Israel’s priesthood. Since he seemingly appears out of nowhere in the narrative of 2 Samuel (8:17), some scholars suggest that he was not really born into a priestly family. However, there is no reason to doubt the biblical record that he was Aaron’s descendant (1 Chr 6:1-15, 50-53). Zadok’s family line is traced back to Eleazar, Aaron’s son (1 Chr 6:4-8; 24:3; Ezra 7:2-5). Zadok served alongside Abiathar, a descendant of Eli....","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125071,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Sadducees","title_en":"The Sadducees","content_ro":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","summary_en":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Abiathar","title_en":"Abiathar","content_ro":"<h3>ABIATHAR<\/h3>\n<p>One of two high priests during the reign of King David. The other high priest was Zadok, who evidently was appointed by David after his conquest of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Only Abiathar escaped when the priestly families at Nob were massacred at the instigation of King Saul. The priests of Nob had given food and Goliath’s sword to David during his escape from the wrath of Saul, thus earning Saul’s hatred (1 Sm 21–22). When Abiathar joined David he brought the ephod, which David then used in determining the will of God (1 Sm 23:6, 9-11; 30:7-8). Abiathar was one of the first persons from Saul’s administration to support David. His support was formidable because he represented the priesthood of the old tribal league of the line of Eli.<\/p>\n<p>During the last days of David’s kingship, his sons struggled for the throne. The two major rivals were Adonijah and Solomon. Abiathar the high priest supported Adonijah’s claim to the throne, probably because Adonijah was David’s oldest living heir and because David’s general Joab, one of the strongest men in the kingdom, supported Adonijah (1 Kgs 1:5-7). Zadok supported Solomon, who actually succeeded David on the throne. Having fallen out of favor with the new king, Abiathar was banished to his estate in Anathoth (1 Kgs 2:26-27), a village about four miles (6.4 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. <\/p>\n<p>The relationship of Abiathar to Ahimelech is confusing. Ahimelech could have been the name of both Abiathar’s father (1 Sm 22:20; 23:6) and son (2 Sm 8:17; 1 Chr 18:16; 24:6). If each of the references was to the same Ahimelech, then the names were reversed in the later passages. In the NT, Abiathar is mentioned as the high priest when David came to Nob needing food and weapons (Mk 2:26). The OT account says that Ahimelech was the priest at that time (1 Sm 21:1-2). The apparent discrepancy may have resulted from a copyist’s error or from the fact that Abiathar as high priest was more prominent than Ahimelech.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ABIATHAR<\/h3>\n<p>One of two high priests during the reign of King David. The other high priest was Zadok, who evidently was appointed by David after his conquest of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Only Abiathar escaped when the priestly families at Nob were massacred at the instigation of King Saul. The priests of Nob had given food and Goliath’s sword to David during his escape from the wrath of Saul, thus earning Saul’s hatred (1 Sm 21–22). When Abiathar joined David he brought the ephod, which David then used in determining the will of God (1 Sm 23:6, 9-11; 30:7-8). Abiathar was one of the first persons from Saul’s administration to support David. His support was formidable because he represented the priesthood of the old tribal league of the line of Eli.<\/p>\n<p>During the last days of David’s kingship, his sons struggled for the throne. The two major rivals were Adonijah and Solomon. Abiathar the high priest supported Adonijah’s claim to the throne, probably because Adonijah was David’s oldest living heir and because David’s general Joab, one of the strongest men in the kingdom, supported Adonijah (1 Kgs 1:5-7). Zadok supported Solomon, who actually succeeded David on the throne. Having fallen out of favor with the new king, Abiathar was banished to his estate in Anathoth (1 Kgs 2:26-27), a village about four miles (6.4 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. <\/p>\n<p>The relationship of Abiathar to Ahimelech is confusing. Ahimelech could have been the name of both Abiathar’s father (1 Sm 22:20; 23:6) and son (2 Sm 8:17; 1 Chr 18:16; 24:6). If each of the references was to the same Ahimelech, then the names were reversed in the later passages. In the NT, Abiathar is mentioned as the high priest when David came to Nob needing food and weapons (Mk 2:26). The OT account says that Ahimelech was the priest at that time (1 Sm 21:1-2). The apparent discrepancy may have resulted from a copyist’s error or from the fact that Abiathar as high priest was more prominent than Ahimelech.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ABIATHAR One of two high priests during the reign of King David. The other high priest was Zadok, who evidently was appointed by David after his conquest of Jerusalem. Only Abiathar escaped when the priestly families at Nob were massacred at the instigation of King Saul. The priests of Nob had given food and Goliath’s sword to David during his escape from the wrath of Saul, thus earning Saul’s hatred (1 Sm 21–22). When Abiathar joined David he brought the ephod, which David then used in deter...","summary_en":"ABIATHAR One of two high priests during the reign of King David. The other high priest was Zadok, who evidently was appointed by David after his conquest of Jerusalem. Only Abiathar escaped when the priestly families at Nob were massacred at the instigation of King Saul. The priests of Nob had given food and Goliath’s sword to David during his escape from the wrath of Saul, thus earning Saul’s hatred (1 Sm 21–22). When Abiathar joined David he brought the ephod, which David then used in deter...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":919,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ahimelech","title_en":"Ahimelech","content_ro":"<h3>AHIMELECH<\/h3>\n<li>1. A priest at Nob who aided David in his flight from Saul (1 Sm 21:1-9). When he was asked for food, all he could provide was the holy bread in the tabernacle (Jesus referred to this incident in Mt 12:1-8). Doeg the Edomite subsequently reported this action to Saul, who ordered Ahimelech put to death. Saul’s guards were unwilling to execute a priest, but the informer Doeg had no such inhibitions. He killed Ahimelech and 84 other priests, plus their families and livestock (1 Sm 22:9-19). Only Abiathar, Ahimelech’s son, escaped and fled to David’s protection (22:20-23). Psalm 52 was written by David as an indictment of Doeg’s treachery.<\/li>\n<li>2. Hittite who joined David’s guerrilla force during his flight from Saul (1 Sm 26:6).<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of Abiathar and grandson of #1 above. This Ahimelech aided his father in the priesthood under King David (2 Sm 8:17; 1 Chr 24:3, 5, 31; cf. 1 Chr 18:16, where some versions have Abimelech instead).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>AHIMELECH<\/h3>\n<li>1. A priest at Nob who aided David in his flight from Saul (1 Sm 21:1-9). When he was asked for food, all he could provide was the holy bread in the tabernacle (Jesus referred to this incident in Mt 12:1-8). Doeg the Edomite subsequently reported this action to Saul, who ordered Ahimelech put to death. Saul’s guards were unwilling to execute a priest, but the informer Doeg had no such inhibitions. He killed Ahimelech and 84 other priests, plus their families and livestock (1 Sm 22:9-19). Only Abiathar, Ahimelech’s son, escaped and fled to David’s protection (22:20-23). Psalm 52 was written by David as an indictment of Doeg’s treachery.<\/li>\n<li>2. Hittite who joined David’s guerrilla force during his flight from Saul (1 Sm 26:6).<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of Abiathar and grandson of #1 above. This Ahimelech aided his father in the priesthood under King David (2 Sm 8:17; 1 Chr 24:3, 5, 31; cf. 1 Chr 18:16, where some versions have Abimelech instead).<\/li>","summary_ro":"AHIMELECH 1. A priest at Nob who aided David in his flight from Saul (1 Sm 21:1-9). When he was asked for food, all he could provide was the holy bread in the tabernacle (Jesus referred to this incident in Mt 12:1-8). Doeg the Edomite subsequently reported this action to Saul, who ordered Ahimelech put to death. Saul’s guards were unwilling to execute a priest, but the informer Doeg had no such inhibitions. He killed Ahimelech and 84 other priests, plus their families and livestock (1 Sm 22:9...","summary_en":"AHIMELECH 1. A priest at Nob who aided David in his flight from Saul (1 Sm 21:1-9). When he was asked for food, all he could provide was the holy bread in the tabernacle (Jesus referred to this incident in Mt 12:1-8). Doeg the Edomite subsequently reported this action to Saul, who ordered Ahimelech put to death. Saul’s guards were unwilling to execute a priest, but the informer Doeg had no such inhibitions. He killed Ahimelech and 84 other priests, plus their families and livestock (1 Sm 22:9...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":956,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ahitub","title_en":"Ahitub","content_ro":"<h3>AHITUB<\/h3>\n<li>1. Member of the priestly line of Aaron’s youngest son, Ithamar. Ahitub was a descendant of Eli through Eli’s son Phinehas and father of Ahijah and Ahimelech, who were priests during Saul’s reign (1 Sm 14:3; 22:9-12, 20).<\/li>\n<li>2. Member of the priestly line of Aaron’s third son, Eleazar. Ahitub was Meraioth’s grandson, Amariah’s son, and father of Zadok (1 Chr 6:4-7). Zadok was a chief priest during David’s reign (2 Sm 8:17).<\/li>\n<li>3. Possibly the same as #2 above (the scribes sometimes mistakenly copied names twice), but more likely another member of the priestly line of Eleazar, seven generations after #2 (1 Chr 6:11-12). This Ahitub’s father was also named Amariah and his son or grandson Zadok (1 Chr 9:11; Neh 11:11), but his grandfather was Azariah. Ahitub is listed as an ancestor of Ezra (Ezr 7:2; 1 Esd 8:2; 2 Esd 1:1).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>AHITUB<\/h3>\n<li>1. Member of the priestly line of Aaron’s youngest son, Ithamar. Ahitub was a descendant of Eli through Eli’s son Phinehas and father of Ahijah and Ahimelech, who were priests during Saul’s reign (1 Sm 14:3; 22:9-12, 20).<\/li>\n<li>2. Member of the priestly line of Aaron’s third son, Eleazar. Ahitub was Meraioth’s grandson, Amariah’s son, and father of Zadok (1 Chr 6:4-7). Zadok was a chief priest during David’s reign (2 Sm 8:17).<\/li>\n<li>3. Possibly the same as #2 above (the scribes sometimes mistakenly copied names twice), but more likely another member of the priestly line of Eleazar, seven generations after #2 (1 Chr 6:11-12). This Ahitub’s father was also named Amariah and his son or grandson Zadok (1 Chr 9:11; Neh 11:11), but his grandfather was Azariah. Ahitub is listed as an ancestor of Ezra (Ezr 7:2; 1 Esd 8:2; 2 Esd 1:1).<\/li>","summary_ro":"AHITUB 1. Member of the priestly line of Aaron’s youngest son, Ithamar. Ahitub was a descendant of Eli through Eli’s son Phinehas and father of Ahijah and Ahimelech, who were priests during Saul’s reign (1 Sm 14:3; 22:9-12, 20). 2. Member of the priestly line of Aaron’s third son, Eleazar. Ahitub was Meraioth’s grandson, Amariah’s son, and father of Zadok (1 Chr 6:4-7). Zadok was a chief priest during David’s reign (2 Sm 8:17). 3. Possibly the same as #2 above (the scribes sometimes mistakenl...","summary_en":"AHITUB 1. Member of the priestly line of Aaron’s youngest son, Ithamar. Ahitub was a descendant of Eli through Eli’s son Phinehas and father of Ahijah and Ahimelech, who were priests during Saul’s reign (1 Sm 14:3; 22:9-12, 20). 2. Member of the priestly line of Aaron’s third son, Eleazar. Ahitub was Meraioth’s grandson, Amariah’s son, and father of Zadok (1 Chr 6:4-7). Zadok was a chief priest during David’s reign (2 Sm 8:17). 3. Possibly the same as #2 above (the scribes sometimes mistakenl...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33486,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sadducees","title_en":"Sadducees","content_ro":"<h3>SADDUCEES<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheirHistory\">Their History<\/p>\n<p>A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">saddik<\/span>). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from <em>i<\/em> to <em>u<\/em> in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Saddouk<\/span> in Greek), a priest in the days of David (2 Sm 8:17; 15:24-29) who anointed Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-39) and in his reign became chief priest (2:35). He is said to have descended from Eleazar, the son of Aaron (1 Chr 6:3-8), and Zadokite priests seem to have been responsible for priestly duties in the temple until the exile. In the blueprints for the restoration of the worship of the temple (Ez 40–48), it is the Zadokite priesthood that is again given charge to minister as “Levitical priests” (44:15-16; 48:11-12). After the exile, we read of Joshua (Jeshua) the son of Jehozadak as high priest (Hg 1:1), and his lineage was traced back to Zadok (1 Chr 6:8-15). The significance of the Zadokite priesthood continues to be stressed in writings of the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, but it is by no means clear that the Sadducees made a stand for the Zadokite priesthood. It may be added that the double <em>d<\/em> in the word is not readily explained by this view of Sadducean origins.<\/p>\n<p>Third, a late rabbinic tradition is that the Sadducees took their name from another Zadok who lived in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. There is little to commend this view.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the British NT scholar T. W. Manson suggested that their name is to be connected with the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sundikoi<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “members of the council,” thus designating the Sadducees as councillors under the Hasmonean rulers.<\/p>\n<p>The first historical knowledge of the Sadducees is in the time of Jonathan Maccabeus, who led the Jewish struggle against the Seleucids from 160 to 143 <span>BC<\/span>. Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9) said that they were a party at this time, and that when John Hyrcanus was head of the Jewish state (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>) there was strife between the Pharisees and the Sadducees (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6). It is possible that the Sadducees stood in some sense for the Zadokite priesthood or for the claim that the Jerusalem priesthood of their day was Zadokite in origin, but this is far from clear. Josephus says that the Sadducees had the rich on their side, while the Pharisees had a following among the common people. In the days of Salome Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), the Pharisees were in the ascendancy, but when Judea became a Roman province and Roman governors began to put one high priest down and raise another up, it appears that most of the high priests were from high-born Sadducean families. While they could temporize with the Romans, these Sadducean families had power and influence in the land. As hostilities developed between the Jews and their Roman overlords, the influence of the Sadducees declined. After the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees fade from history.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel narrative they first appeared, together with Pharisees, at John’s baptism. He addressed them as “sons of snakes” and challenged them to show repentance in their lives (Mt 3:7-10). Later, the Sadducees came along with some Pharisees to “test” Jesus, asking him to show them a sign from heaven (16:1). Jesus told his disciples to beware of the Sadducees (vv 6, 11-12).<\/p>\n<p>A great difference begins to emerge between Pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew 22:23-33 (cf. Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-38). The Sadducees, who, like others, wanted to embarrass Jesus with their questions, came with a trick question that showed their doubts concerning the resurrection of the dead. The Sadducees were described in this context as those who say there is no resurrection after death. They cited the case of a woman who had seven brothers as her husbands in succession. “Whose wife will she be in the resurrection?” they asked, implying that because of such a problem, the resurrection could not be a reality. Jesus answered by speaking of the error of their view caused by their ignorance of the Scriptures and of God’s power.<\/p>\n<p>In the early days of the church in Jerusalem, the priests and the captain of the temple police and the Sadducees became annoyed because the disciples were proclaiming the resurrection from the dead (Acts 4:1-2). The Sadducees seem to have led the opposition to the apostles and their preaching. Later the high priest and Sadducees determined to arrest the apostles and put them in the prison (5:17). The only other reference to them in the NT is in Acts 23:6-8, in the record of Paul’s trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin. On that occasion, Paul deliberately spoke about his belief in the resurrection so as to cause a division between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, who did not believe in resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>Thus from these NT passages one realizes something of the basic tenets of the Sadducees, of their prominence among the high priestly families, and of the differences between Pharisees and Sadducees.<\/p>\n<p>Josephus, the Jewish historian who wrote in the closing years of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, adds to the information in the NT about this party. He said that the Sadducees, in contrast to the Pharisees and Essenes, gave no place to the overruling providence of God but emphasized that all that happens to us is the result of the good or evil that we do (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9; <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). Josephus, in a way comparable to the NT, spoke of the Sadducees’ rejection of “the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in Hades” (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). “Souls die with the bodies” was what they said (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). Early Christian writers—Hippolytus, Origen, and Jerome—said that the Sadducees accepted only the Pentateuch and not the other OT books. It would seem, however, that they were not opposed to other OT books as a whole (though it is doubtful whether they accepted books such as Daniel, with its clear statement of the resurrection of the dead), but rather that they opposed the legal regulations introduced by the Pharisees and were saying that only the OT law should be considered mandatory. In this, as in their stand against belief in angels and in life after death, they appear to have regarded the Pharisees as innovators and themselves as conservatives.<\/p>\n<p>The other main source of knowledge about the Sadducees is the Mishnah, the collection of the teaching of the rabbis, put down in writing in the second century <span>AD<\/span>. The Sadducees opposed many of the detailed regulations that the Pharisees sought to impose on the people (<em>Parah<\/em> 3.3,7). It also indicates that they had a greater tendency to compromise with the ways of the Gentiles than other Jewish parties (<em>Niddah<\/em> 4.2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Essenes; Judaism; Pharisees.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SADDUCEES<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheirHistory\">Their History<\/p>\n<p>A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">saddik<\/span>). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from <em>i<\/em> to <em>u<\/em> in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Saddouk<\/span> in Greek), a priest in the days of David (2 Sm 8:17; 15:24-29) who anointed Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-39) and in his reign became chief priest (2:35). He is said to have descended from Eleazar, the son of Aaron (1 Chr 6:3-8), and Zadokite priests seem to have been responsible for priestly duties in the temple until the exile. In the blueprints for the restoration of the worship of the temple (Ez 40–48), it is the Zadokite priesthood that is again given charge to minister as “Levitical priests” (44:15-16; 48:11-12). After the exile, we read of Joshua (Jeshua) the son of Jehozadak as high priest (Hg 1:1), and his lineage was traced back to Zadok (1 Chr 6:8-15). The significance of the Zadokite priesthood continues to be stressed in writings of the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, but it is by no means clear that the Sadducees made a stand for the Zadokite priesthood. It may be added that the double <em>d<\/em> in the word is not readily explained by this view of Sadducean origins.<\/p>\n<p>Third, a late rabbinic tradition is that the Sadducees took their name from another Zadok who lived in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. There is little to commend this view.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the British NT scholar T. W. Manson suggested that their name is to be connected with the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sundikoi<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “members of the council,” thus designating the Sadducees as councillors under the Hasmonean rulers.<\/p>\n<p>The first historical knowledge of the Sadducees is in the time of Jonathan Maccabeus, who led the Jewish struggle against the Seleucids from 160 to 143 <span>BC<\/span>. Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9) said that they were a party at this time, and that when John Hyrcanus was head of the Jewish state (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>) there was strife between the Pharisees and the Sadducees (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6). It is possible that the Sadducees stood in some sense for the Zadokite priesthood or for the claim that the Jerusalem priesthood of their day was Zadokite in origin, but this is far from clear. Josephus says that the Sadducees had the rich on their side, while the Pharisees had a following among the common people. In the days of Salome Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), the Pharisees were in the ascendancy, but when Judea became a Roman province and Roman governors began to put one high priest down and raise another up, it appears that most of the high priests were from high-born Sadducean families. While they could temporize with the Romans, these Sadducean families had power and influence in the land. As hostilities developed between the Jews and their Roman overlords, the influence of the Sadducees declined. After the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees fade from history.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel narrative they first appeared, together with Pharisees, at John’s baptism. He addressed them as “sons of snakes” and challenged them to show repentance in their lives (Mt 3:7-10). Later, the Sadducees came along with some Pharisees to “test” Jesus, asking him to show them a sign from heaven (16:1). Jesus told his disciples to beware of the Sadducees (vv 6, 11-12).<\/p>\n<p>A great difference begins to emerge between Pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew 22:23-33 (cf. Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-38). The Sadducees, who, like others, wanted to embarrass Jesus with their questions, came with a trick question that showed their doubts concerning the resurrection of the dead. The Sadducees were described in this context as those who say there is no resurrection after death. They cited the case of a woman who had seven brothers as her husbands in succession. “Whose wife will she be in the resurrection?” they asked, implying that because of such a problem, the resurrection could not be a reality. Jesus answered by speaking of the error of their view caused by their ignorance of the Scriptures and of God’s power.<\/p>\n<p>In the early days of the church in Jerusalem, the priests and the captain of the temple police and the Sadducees became annoyed because the disciples were proclaiming the resurrection from the dead (Acts 4:1-2). The Sadducees seem to have led the opposition to the apostles and their preaching. Later the high priest and Sadducees determined to arrest the apostles and put them in the prison (5:17). The only other reference to them in the NT is in Acts 23:6-8, in the record of Paul’s trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin. On that occasion, Paul deliberately spoke about his belief in the resurrection so as to cause a division between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, who did not believe in resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>Thus from these NT passages one realizes something of the basic tenets of the Sadducees, of their prominence among the high priestly families, and of the differences between Pharisees and Sadducees.<\/p>\n<p>Josephus, the Jewish historian who wrote in the closing years of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, adds to the information in the NT about this party. He said that the Sadducees, in contrast to the Pharisees and Essenes, gave no place to the overruling providence of God but emphasized that all that happens to us is the result of the good or evil that we do (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9; <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). Josephus, in a way comparable to the NT, spoke of the Sadducees’ rejection of “the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in Hades” (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). “Souls die with the bodies” was what they said (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). Early Christian writers—Hippolytus, Origen, and Jerome—said that the Sadducees accepted only the Pentateuch and not the other OT books. It would seem, however, that they were not opposed to other OT books as a whole (though it is doubtful whether they accepted books such as Daniel, with its clear statement of the resurrection of the dead), but rather that they opposed the legal regulations introduced by the Pharisees and were saying that only the OT law should be considered mandatory. In this, as in their stand against belief in angels and in life after death, they appear to have regarded the Pharisees as innovators and themselves as conservatives.<\/p>\n<p>The other main source of knowledge about the Sadducees is the Mishnah, the collection of the teaching of the rabbis, put down in writing in the second century <span>AD<\/span>. The Sadducees opposed many of the detailed regulations that the Pharisees sought to impose on the people (<em>Parah<\/em> 3.3,7). It also indicates that they had a greater tendency to compromise with the ways of the Gentiles than other Jewish parties (<em>Niddah<\/em> 4.2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Essenes; Judaism; Pharisees.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SADDUCEES Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT. Their History A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (saddik). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from i to u in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written...","summary_en":"SADDUCEES Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT. Their History A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (saddik). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from i to u in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34356,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Seraiah","title_en":"Seraiah","content_ro":"<h3>SERAIAH<\/h3>\n<li> 1. Royal secretary of King David (2 Sm 8:17); alternately called Sheva in 2 Samuel 20:25, Shisha in 1 Kings 4:3, and Shavsha in 1 Chronicles 18:16.<\/li>\n<li> 2. Chief priest in Jerusalem at the time of its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. He was taken by Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard, to Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah, where he was put to death (2 Kgs 25:18; Jer 52:24). First Chronicles 6:14 records Seraiah as the son of Azariah, the father of Jehozadak and a descendant of Levi through Aaron’s line.<\/li>\n<li> 3. Son of Tanhumeth the Netophathite and one of the captains of the Judean forces who sought clemency from Nebuchadnezzar under Gedaliah (2 Kgs 25:23; Jer 40:8).<\/li>\n<li> 4. Judahite, the son of Kenaz, the brother of Othniel and Joab’s father (1 Chr 4:13-14).<\/li>\n<li> 5. Simeonite, the son of Asiel and Joshibiah’s father (1 Chr 4:35).<\/li>\n<li> 6. One of the men who returned with Zerubbabel to Judah following the exile (Ezr 2:2); called Azariah in Nehemiah 7:7. <em>See<\/em> Azariah #23.<\/li>\n<li> 7. Father of Ezra the scribe. Ezra returned to Jerusalem during the reign of King Artaxerxes I of Persia (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>; Ezr 7:1). He is perhaps identical with #2 above, in which case Jehozadak would be Ezra’s brother.<\/li>\n<li> 8. One of the priests who set his seal on the covenant of Ezra (Neh 10:2).<\/li>\n<li> 9. Son of Hilkiah and a priest living in Jerusalem during the postexilic era (Neh 11:11); called Azariah in 1 Chronicles 9:11. <em>See<\/em> Azariah #10.<\/li>\n<li>10. One of the leaders of the priests who returned with Zerubbabel and Jeshua to Judah after the exile (Neh 12:1). His house in the next generation was headed by Meraiah. He is perhaps identical with #6 above.<\/li>\n<li>11. Son of Azriel who, with Jerahmeel and Shelemiah, was ordered by King Jehoiakim of Judah (609–598 <span>BC<\/span>) to capture Baruch and Jeremiah (Jer 36:26).<\/li>\n<li>12. Son of Neriah and the official who accompanied King Zedekiah of Judah (597–586 <span>BC<\/span>) to Babylon. Seraiah was to relay Jeremiah’s message against Babylon (Jer 51:59-61).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>SERAIAH<\/h3>\n<li> 1. Royal secretary of King David (2 Sm 8:17); alternately called Sheva in 2 Samuel 20:25, Shisha in 1 Kings 4:3, and Shavsha in 1 Chronicles 18:16.<\/li>\n<li> 2. Chief priest in Jerusalem at the time of its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. He was taken by Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard, to Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah, where he was put to death (2 Kgs 25:18; Jer 52:24). First Chronicles 6:14 records Seraiah as the son of Azariah, the father of Jehozadak and a descendant of Levi through Aaron’s line.<\/li>\n<li> 3. Son of Tanhumeth the Netophathite and one of the captains of the Judean forces who sought clemency from Nebuchadnezzar under Gedaliah (2 Kgs 25:23; Jer 40:8).<\/li>\n<li> 4. Judahite, the son of Kenaz, the brother of Othniel and Joab’s father (1 Chr 4:13-14).<\/li>\n<li> 5. Simeonite, the son of Asiel and Joshibiah’s father (1 Chr 4:35).<\/li>\n<li> 6. One of the men who returned with Zerubbabel to Judah following the exile (Ezr 2:2); called Azariah in Nehemiah 7:7. <em>See<\/em> Azariah #23.<\/li>\n<li> 7. Father of Ezra the scribe. Ezra returned to Jerusalem during the reign of King Artaxerxes I of Persia (464–424 <span>BC<\/span>; Ezr 7:1). He is perhaps identical with #2 above, in which case Jehozadak would be Ezra’s brother.<\/li>\n<li> 8. One of the priests who set his seal on the covenant of Ezra (Neh 10:2).<\/li>\n<li> 9. Son of Hilkiah and a priest living in Jerusalem during the postexilic era (Neh 11:11); called Azariah in 1 Chronicles 9:11. <em>See<\/em> Azariah #10.<\/li>\n<li>10. One of the leaders of the priests who returned with Zerubbabel and Jeshua to Judah after the exile (Neh 12:1). His house in the next generation was headed by Meraiah. He is perhaps identical with #6 above.<\/li>\n<li>11. Son of Azriel who, with Jerahmeel and Shelemiah, was ordered by King Jehoiakim of Judah (609–598 <span>BC<\/span>) to capture Baruch and Jeremiah (Jer 36:26).<\/li>\n<li>12. Son of Neriah and the official who accompanied King Zedekiah of Judah (597–586 <span>BC<\/span>) to Babylon. Seraiah was to relay Jeremiah’s message against Babylon (Jer 51:59-61).<\/li>","summary_ro":"SERAIAH 1. Royal secretary of King David (2 Sm 8:17); alternately called Sheva in 2 Samuel 20:25, Shisha in 1 Kings 4:3, and Shavsha in 1 Chronicles 18:16. 2. Chief priest in Jerusalem at the time of its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 BC. He was taken by Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard, to Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah, where he was put to death (2 Kgs 25:18; Jer 52:24). First Chronicles 6:14 records Seraiah as the son of Azariah, the father of Jehozadak and a descendant of Levi throu...","summary_en":"SERAIAH 1. Royal secretary of King David (2 Sm 8:17); alternately called Sheva in 2 Samuel 20:25, Shisha in 1 Kings 4:3, and Shavsha in 1 Chronicles 18:16. 2. Chief priest in Jerusalem at the time of its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 BC. He was taken by Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard, to Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah, where he was put to death (2 Kgs 25:18; Jer 52:24). First Chronicles 6:14 records Seraiah as the son of Azariah, the father of Jehozadak and a descendant of Levi throu...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38869,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zadok","title_en":"Zadok","content_ro":"<h3>ZADOK<\/h3>\n<p>Common OT name meaning “righteous one.”<\/p>\n<p>1. David’s priest, probably the most famous and influential of Israel’s high priests apart from Aaron. He first appeared at the time of Absalom’s revolt, when he and his fellow priest Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by coming to him with the ark, fully prepared to share his exile (2 Sm 15:24-29). David refused their offer and sent them back to Jerusalem to act in his interests.<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Samuel 8:17, Zadok is listed as the son of Ahitub, who is noted in 1 Samuel 14:3 as the grandson of Eli. In the genealogies of Chronicles, Zadok’s descent through Ahitub is traced back to Eleazar, the eldest son of Aaron (1 Chr 6:1-8, 50-53; Ezr 7:2-5), but with no reference to Eli. A slight problem emerges in that Zadok replaces the banished Abiathar, a descendant of Eli. This is regarded as the fulfillment of an earlier prophecy that the tenure of the high priestly office by Eli’s family would be broken in favor of a different branch of Aaron’s family (1 Sm 2:30-36; 1 Kgs 2:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In both summaries of David’s court officials (2 Sm 8:17; 20:25), Zadok is listed as one of David’s two principal priests, an office held throughout the latter part of David’s reign. When David was near death, a power struggle over the throne was precipitated by Adonijah, David’s oldest surviving son. With the support of Joab, the commander of the army, and the priest Abiathar, David’s long-standing friend, Adonijah declared himself king (1 Kgs 1:5-10). Nathan the prophet promptly intervened with Bathsheba as Solomon’s advocate. Zadok and Benaiah, the captain of the mercenary troops, supported Solomon. Adonijah’s cause was hopeless once David had indicated his approval of Nathan’s plans. Consequently, the discredited Abiathar was banished (2:26-27), leaving the loyal Zadok as Solomon’s chief priest (2:35; 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the centuries that followed, the descendants of Zadok preserved this dominance, and as Jerusalem’s prestige increased, so did their status. Azariah, the chief priest in Hezekiah’s reign, was a Zadokite (2 Chr 31:10). Ezekiel restricted the main priestly functions to the “sons of Zadok,” demoting the Levites generally to the rank of “temple caretakers” because of their apostasy during the monarchy (Ez 44:10-16). When the Jews came under Seleucid domination in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood, regarded as a political appointment, was taken away from the Zadokites. Conservative elements, however, like the Qumran covenanters, continued to look for its restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> David; Israel, History of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Father-in-law of Uzziah and grandfather of Jotham, kings of Judah (2 Kgs 15:32-33; 2 Chr 27:1).<\/li>\n<li>3. Descendant of Zadok, David’s priest (1 Chr 6:12; 9:11; Neh 11:11).<\/li>\n<li>4. Young man of exceptional courage, the leader of a contingent that joined David at Hebron against Saul (1 Chr 12:28).<\/li>\n<li>5. Son of Baana, who helped to repair the wall of Jerusalem in Nehemiah’s time (Neh 3:4).<\/li>\n<li>6. Son of Immer, who also shared in Nehemiah’s rebuilding operations (Neh 3:29).<\/li>\n<li>7. Signatory to Nehemiah’s covenant (Neh 10:21) and perhaps identifiable with #5 or #6 above.<\/li>\n<li>8. One of three treasurers appointed by Nehemiah during his second term of office, called the scribe (Neh 13:13).<\/li>\n<li>9. Ancestor of Christ (Mt 1:14). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>ZADOK<\/h3>\n<p>Common OT name meaning “righteous one.”<\/p>\n<p>1. David’s priest, probably the most famous and influential of Israel’s high priests apart from Aaron. He first appeared at the time of Absalom’s revolt, when he and his fellow priest Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by coming to him with the ark, fully prepared to share his exile (2 Sm 15:24-29). David refused their offer and sent them back to Jerusalem to act in his interests.<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Samuel 8:17, Zadok is listed as the son of Ahitub, who is noted in 1 Samuel 14:3 as the grandson of Eli. In the genealogies of Chronicles, Zadok’s descent through Ahitub is traced back to Eleazar, the eldest son of Aaron (1 Chr 6:1-8, 50-53; Ezr 7:2-5), but with no reference to Eli. A slight problem emerges in that Zadok replaces the banished Abiathar, a descendant of Eli. This is regarded as the fulfillment of an earlier prophecy that the tenure of the high priestly office by Eli’s family would be broken in favor of a different branch of Aaron’s family (1 Sm 2:30-36; 1 Kgs 2:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In both summaries of David’s court officials (2 Sm 8:17; 20:25), Zadok is listed as one of David’s two principal priests, an office held throughout the latter part of David’s reign. When David was near death, a power struggle over the throne was precipitated by Adonijah, David’s oldest surviving son. With the support of Joab, the commander of the army, and the priest Abiathar, David’s long-standing friend, Adonijah declared himself king (1 Kgs 1:5-10). Nathan the prophet promptly intervened with Bathsheba as Solomon’s advocate. Zadok and Benaiah, the captain of the mercenary troops, supported Solomon. Adonijah’s cause was hopeless once David had indicated his approval of Nathan’s plans. Consequently, the discredited Abiathar was banished (2:26-27), leaving the loyal Zadok as Solomon’s chief priest (2:35; 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the centuries that followed, the descendants of Zadok preserved this dominance, and as Jerusalem’s prestige increased, so did their status. Azariah, the chief priest in Hezekiah’s reign, was a Zadokite (2 Chr 31:10). Ezekiel restricted the main priestly functions to the “sons of Zadok,” demoting the Levites generally to the rank of “temple caretakers” because of their apostasy during the monarchy (Ez 44:10-16). When the Jews came under Seleucid domination in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood, regarded as a political appointment, was taken away from the Zadokites. Conservative elements, however, like the Qumran covenanters, continued to look for its restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> David; Israel, History of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Father-in-law of Uzziah and grandfather of Jotham, kings of Judah (2 Kgs 15:32-33; 2 Chr 27:1).<\/li>\n<li>3. Descendant of Zadok, David’s priest (1 Chr 6:12; 9:11; Neh 11:11).<\/li>\n<li>4. Young man of exceptional courage, the leader of a contingent that joined David at Hebron against Saul (1 Chr 12:28).<\/li>\n<li>5. Son of Baana, who helped to repair the wall of Jerusalem in Nehemiah’s time (Neh 3:4).<\/li>\n<li>6. Son of Immer, who also shared in Nehemiah’s rebuilding operations (Neh 3:29).<\/li>\n<li>7. Signatory to Nehemiah’s covenant (Neh 10:21) and perhaps identifiable with #5 or #6 above.<\/li>\n<li>8. One of three treasurers appointed by Nehemiah during his second term of office, called the scribe (Neh 13:13).<\/li>\n<li>9. Ancestor of Christ (Mt 1:14). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","summary_ro":"ZADOK Common OT name meaning “righteous one.” 1. David’s priest, probably the most famous and influential of Israel’s high priests apart from Aaron. He first appeared at the time of Absalom’s revolt, when he and his fellow priest Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by coming to him with the ark, fully prepared to share his exile (2 Sm 15:24-29). David refused their offer and sent them back to Jerusalem to act in his interests. In 2 Samuel 8:17, Zadok is listed as the son of Ahitub, who is ...","summary_en":"ZADOK Common OT name meaning “righteous one.” 1. David’s priest, probably the most famous and influential of Israel’s high priests apart from Aaron. He first appeared at the time of Absalom’s revolt, when he and his fellow priest Abiathar showed their loyalty to David by coming to him with the ark, fully prepared to share his exile (2 Sm 15:24-29). David refused their offer and sent them back to Jerusalem to act in his interests. In 2 Samuel 8:17, Zadok is listed as the son of Ahitub, who is ...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":4239,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Benaiah","title_en":"Benaiah","content_ro":"<h3>BENAIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Popular name meaning “the Lord has built,” used primarily by Levites.<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jehoiada the priest, from the south Judean town of Kabzeel. Benaiah was engaged in military service, and his loyalty gained for him the rank of commander in chief of the army during the reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35; 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>Before David became king, Benaiah distinguished himself in a number of daring military and protective feats to become one of the mighty men (2 Sm 23:20-22) during David’s flight from King Saul. He attained command of “the thirty” (1 Chr 27:6), a group second only to “the three” of highest valor (2 Sm 23:23). He later had a high place in the armed forces when Joab was commander in chief and was placed over King David’s elite troops, the Cherethites and Pelethites (8:18). He was also made third commander by David, with 24,000 men under him, and with annual responsibility for priestly service in the temple during the third month of the year (1 Chr 27:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Benaiah stayed loyal to David during the rebellion of Absalom (2 Sm 20:23; see 15:18) as well as during the attempt by Adonijah to seize David’s throne (1 Kgs 1:8), and therefore had the privilege of assisting in Solomon’s coronation at Gihon (vv 32-40). As army commander and chief bodyguard to Solomon he was responsible for executing Adonijah (2:25), Joab (v 34), and Shimei (v 46) by orders of the new king.<\/p>\n<li>2. Warrior from the town of Pirathon who was among David’s mighty men known as “the thirty” (2 Sm 23:30; 1 Chr 11:31). Benaiah commanded the 11th division of the army in the rotation system established by David (1 Chr 27:14).<\/li>\n<li>3. Prince in Simeon’s tribe who participated in the conquest of Gedor during Hezekiah’s reign (1 Chr 4:36).<\/li>\n<li> 4. Levitical musician who played the harp when King David brought the ark to Jerusalem (1 Chr 15:18, 20; 16:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Afterward, he was appointed to minister daily before the ark under the direction of Asaph (16:5).<\/li>\n<li> 5. Priestly musician who blew the trumpet before the ark when King David brought it to Jerusalem (1 Chr 15:24). Afterward he was appointed to play regularly before the ark (16:6).<\/li>\n<li> 6. Father of Jehoiada, King David’s counselor after the death of Ahithophel (1 Chr 27:34; see also 2 Sm 17:1-14).<\/li>\n<li> 7. Levite Asaph’s descendant and grandfather of Jahaziel (2 Chr 20:14). Jahaziel delivered an encouraging prophecy to King Jehoshaphat of Judah before his battle against the Moabites and Ammonites (vv 1-29).<\/li>\n<li> 8. Levite appointed by King Hezekiah to help oversee the tithes and contributions brought to the temple (2 Chr 31:13).<\/li>\n<li> 9. Parosh’s son (or descendant), who obeyed Ezra’s exhortation to divorce his pagan wife after the Babylonian exile (Ezr 10:25).<\/li>\n<li>10. Pahath-moab’s son (or descendant), who also obeyed Ezra’s exhortation to divorce his pagan wife after the exile (Ezr 10:30).<\/li>\n<li>11. Bani’s son (or descendant), another who divorced his pagan wife after the exile (Ezr 10:35).<\/li>\n<li>12. Nebo’s son (or descendant), who also divorced his pagan wife after the exile (Ezr 10:43).<\/li>\n<li>13. Pelatiah’s father (Ez 11:1, 13). Pelatiah was a prince of the people of Israel during the time of the prophet Ezekiel.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>BENAIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Popular name meaning “the Lord has built,” used primarily by Levites.<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jehoiada the priest, from the south Judean town of Kabzeel. Benaiah was engaged in military service, and his loyalty gained for him the rank of commander in chief of the army during the reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35; 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>Before David became king, Benaiah distinguished himself in a number of daring military and protective feats to become one of the mighty men (2 Sm 23:20-22) during David’s flight from King Saul. He attained command of “the thirty” (1 Chr 27:6), a group second only to “the three” of highest valor (2 Sm 23:23). He later had a high place in the armed forces when Joab was commander in chief and was placed over King David’s elite troops, the Cherethites and Pelethites (8:18). He was also made third commander by David, with 24,000 men under him, and with annual responsibility for priestly service in the temple during the third month of the year (1 Chr 27:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Benaiah stayed loyal to David during the rebellion of Absalom (2 Sm 20:23; see 15:18) as well as during the attempt by Adonijah to seize David’s throne (1 Kgs 1:8), and therefore had the privilege of assisting in Solomon’s coronation at Gihon (vv 32-40). As army commander and chief bodyguard to Solomon he was responsible for executing Adonijah (2:25), Joab (v 34), and Shimei (v 46) by orders of the new king.<\/p>\n<li>2. Warrior from the town of Pirathon who was among David’s mighty men known as “the thirty” (2 Sm 23:30; 1 Chr 11:31). Benaiah commanded the 11th division of the army in the rotation system established by David (1 Chr 27:14).<\/li>\n<li>3. Prince in Simeon’s tribe who participated in the conquest of Gedor during Hezekiah’s reign (1 Chr 4:36).<\/li>\n<li> 4. Levitical musician who played the harp when King David brought the ark to Jerusalem (1 Chr 15:18, 20; 16:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Afterward, he was appointed to minister daily before the ark under the direction of Asaph (16:5).<\/li>\n<li> 5. Priestly musician who blew the trumpet before the ark when King David brought it to Jerusalem (1 Chr 15:24). Afterward he was appointed to play regularly before the ark (16:6).<\/li>\n<li> 6. Father of Jehoiada, King David’s counselor after the death of Ahithophel (1 Chr 27:34; see also 2 Sm 17:1-14).<\/li>\n<li> 7. Levite Asaph’s descendant and grandfather of Jahaziel (2 Chr 20:14). Jahaziel delivered an encouraging prophecy to King Jehoshaphat of Judah before his battle against the Moabites and Ammonites (vv 1-29).<\/li>\n<li> 8. Levite appointed by King Hezekiah to help oversee the tithes and contributions brought to the temple (2 Chr 31:13).<\/li>\n<li> 9. Parosh’s son (or descendant), who obeyed Ezra’s exhortation to divorce his pagan wife after the Babylonian exile (Ezr 10:25).<\/li>\n<li>10. Pahath-moab’s son (or descendant), who also obeyed Ezra’s exhortation to divorce his pagan wife after the exile (Ezr 10:30).<\/li>\n<li>11. Bani’s son (or descendant), another who divorced his pagan wife after the exile (Ezr 10:35).<\/li>\n<li>12. Nebo’s son (or descendant), who also divorced his pagan wife after the exile (Ezr 10:43).<\/li>\n<li>13. Pelatiah’s father (Ez 11:1, 13). Pelatiah was a prince of the people of Israel during the time of the prophet Ezekiel.<\/li>","summary_ro":"BENAIAH Popular name meaning “the Lord has built,” used primarily by Levites. 1. Son of Jehoiada the priest, from the south Judean town of Kabzeel. Benaiah was engaged in military service, and his loyalty gained for him the rank of commander in chief of the army during the reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35; 4:4). Before David became king, Benaiah distinguished himself in a number of daring military and protective feats to become one of the mighty men (2 Sm 23:20-22) during David’s flight from King...","summary_en":"BENAIAH Popular name meaning “the Lord has built,” used primarily by Levites. 1. Son of Jehoiada the priest, from the south Judean town of Kabzeel. Benaiah was engaged in military service, and his loyalty gained for him the rank of commander in chief of the army during the reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 2:35; 4:4). Before David became king, Benaiah distinguished himself in a number of daring military and protective feats to become one of the mighty men (2 Sm 23:20-22) during David’s flight from King...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21622,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kerethites","title_en":"Kerethites","content_ro":"<h3>KERETHITES<\/h3>\n<p>Members of a tribal group that lived in southern Judah near Hebron (1 Sm 30:14), mentioned along with the Pelethites (2 Sm 8:18). The Kerethites were associated with the Philistines, according to Ezekiel 25:15-17 (cf. Zep 2:5). They were judged with “the rest of the seacoast” for the Philistines’ offense against Israel. Since the Philistines most likely originated in the islands of the Mediterranean, including Crete, the word Kerethite probably means Cretan. “Pelethite” is probably an alternate spelling of Philistine.<\/p>\n<p>Because of the Kerethites’ Philistine connections, what is known about the Philistines may shed light on them. Archaeological evidence from Cretan murals and Egyptian tomb paintings and temple reliefs shows Philistines wearing plumed headdresses. Similarities between Philistine, Cretan, and Greek pottery designs also suggest a strong link among these Mediterranean peoples.<\/p>\n<p>Kerethites and Pelethites were hired by David as mercenaries, forming an elite corps of foreign soldiers faithful to him through all his troubles (2 Sm 15:18; 20:7, 23; 1 Kgs 1:38). Later kings may have continued to use them as soldiers, as suggested by the mention of “Carites” (Kerethites?) in 2 Kings 11:4, 19.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KERETHITES<\/h3>\n<p>Members of a tribal group that lived in southern Judah near Hebron (1 Sm 30:14), mentioned along with the Pelethites (2 Sm 8:18). The Kerethites were associated with the Philistines, according to Ezekiel 25:15-17 (cf. Zep 2:5). They were judged with “the rest of the seacoast” for the Philistines’ offense against Israel. Since the Philistines most likely originated in the islands of the Mediterranean, including Crete, the word Kerethite probably means Cretan. “Pelethite” is probably an alternate spelling of Philistine.<\/p>\n<p>Because of the Kerethites’ Philistine connections, what is known about the Philistines may shed light on them. Archaeological evidence from Cretan murals and Egyptian tomb paintings and temple reliefs shows Philistines wearing plumed headdresses. Similarities between Philistine, Cretan, and Greek pottery designs also suggest a strong link among these Mediterranean peoples.<\/p>\n<p>Kerethites and Pelethites were hired by David as mercenaries, forming an elite corps of foreign soldiers faithful to him through all his troubles (2 Sm 15:18; 20:7, 23; 1 Kgs 1:38). Later kings may have continued to use them as soldiers, as suggested by the mention of “Carites” (Kerethites?) in 2 Kings 11:4, 19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KERETHITES Members of a tribal group that lived in southern Judah near Hebron (1 Sm 30:14), mentioned along with the Pelethites (2 Sm 8:18). The Kerethites were associated with the Philistines, according to Ezekiel 25:15-17 (cf. Zep 2:5). They were judged with “the rest of the seacoast” for the Philistines’ offense against Israel. Since the Philistines most likely originated in the islands of the Mediterranean, including Crete, the word Kerethite probably means Cretan. “Pelethite” is probably...","summary_en":"KERETHITES Members of a tribal group that lived in southern Judah near Hebron (1 Sm 30:14), mentioned along with the Pelethites (2 Sm 8:18). The Kerethites were associated with the Philistines, according to Ezekiel 25:15-17 (cf. Zep 2:5). They were judged with “the rest of the seacoast” for the Philistines’ offense against Israel. Since the Philistines most likely originated in the islands of the Mediterranean, including Crete, the word Kerethite probably means Cretan. “Pelethite” is probably...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28737,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Palace","title_en":"Palace","content_ro":"<h3>PALACE<\/h3>\n<p>Residence for royalty. Excavations suggest that any city that enjoyed royal patronage would boast of a building that could be described as a palace. Royal cities had a second surrounding wall that shut off the royal palace and its outbuildings, forming the acropolis of the city. Jerusalem had the equivalent in the City of David, which formerly was the Citadel of Zion (2 Sm 5:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s references to palaces in Palestine are vague—for example, David’s palace (2 Sm 11:2, 9), the palace of Tirzah (1 Kgs 16:18) and Ahab’s palace in Jezreel (21:1). Even the references to Solomon’s palace in Jerusalem are quite imprecise. In 1 Kings 7:1-12 the construction of public and private buildings close to the temple went on for 13 years. Only the choicest of materials were used. But from the details supplied, it is quite impossible to reproduce plans of the House of the Forest of Lebanon, the Porch of Pillars, the Porch of the Throne, the palace for Solomon’s Egyptian wife, or the royal palace. What the situation of these buildings was in relation to one another is matter only for conjecture. Round about the whole complex was a great court of hewn stones and cedar beams.<\/p>\n<p>Forced labor was universal in the ancient Near East. Samuel’s warning that a king would introduce the system into Israel (1 Sm 8:12-17) was fulfilled, and it came to full development under Solomon when he undertook his massive building program, including his palace. Solomon raised his workforce from all over Israel. The system incited Jeroboam to revolt (1 Kgs 12:4, 16). King Asa used it (15:22), and it continued on into Jeremiah’s time (Jer 22:13). Nehemiah’s builders were volunteers (see Neh 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>Prominent among Solomon’s royal buildings was the temple. Apparently, it stood in the middle of a courtyard called the inner court (1 Kgs 6:36), by contrast with the great court (7:12), which included both the temple and the palace. The palace itself had an inner court too (v 8), the northern wall of which was common to the inner court of the temple. Hence it was but a step from the king’s domain to the Lord’s domain.<\/p>\n<p>The king’s enthronement took place in the palace, in the Porch of the Throne (1 Kgs 1:46; 2 Kgs 11:19). When he took his seat on the throne, it marked his assumption of power (1 Kgs 16:11; 2 Kgs 13:13). Solomon’s throne in his palace became the symbol of royal power, although his throne was still called the throne of David (1 Kgs 2:24, 45; Is 9:7). Solomon’s palace throne is described as one of the wonders of the world (1 Kgs 10:18-20). It was around this throne that the high officials came to do him homage (1:47).<\/p>\n<p>The king’s daughters lived in the palace until their marriage under the care of women (2 Sm 13:7). They wore a distinctive dress (vv 18-19). The king’s sons were reared in the palace by nurses (2 Kgs 11:2) and tutored under leading men of the city (10:1, 6-7), until they were able to perform certain duties at the court (2 Sm 8:18; 1 Chr 18:17). Then they led an independent life and were provided for by the king (2 Chr 21:3). Amnon evidently lived outside the palace (2 Sm 13:5), and Absalom had his own house (13:20; 14:24), lands, and livestock (13:23; 14:30). Palace or court officials surrounded the royal family (1 Kgs 10:4-5). Whatever their office, they were called the king’s “servants.” There were those “who saw the king’s face,” meaning they were admitted to the king’s presence (2 Sm 14:24, 28, 32), or stood before the king (1 Sm 16:21-22; Jer 52:12). It was a signal mark of favor to be admitted to the royal table (2 Sm 9:7, 13).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PALACE<\/h3>\n<p>Residence for royalty. Excavations suggest that any city that enjoyed royal patronage would boast of a building that could be described as a palace. Royal cities had a second surrounding wall that shut off the royal palace and its outbuildings, forming the acropolis of the city. Jerusalem had the equivalent in the City of David, which formerly was the Citadel of Zion (2 Sm 5:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s references to palaces in Palestine are vague—for example, David’s palace (2 Sm 11:2, 9), the palace of Tirzah (1 Kgs 16:18) and Ahab’s palace in Jezreel (21:1). Even the references to Solomon’s palace in Jerusalem are quite imprecise. In 1 Kings 7:1-12 the construction of public and private buildings close to the temple went on for 13 years. Only the choicest of materials were used. But from the details supplied, it is quite impossible to reproduce plans of the House of the Forest of Lebanon, the Porch of Pillars, the Porch of the Throne, the palace for Solomon’s Egyptian wife, or the royal palace. What the situation of these buildings was in relation to one another is matter only for conjecture. Round about the whole complex was a great court of hewn stones and cedar beams.<\/p>\n<p>Forced labor was universal in the ancient Near East. Samuel’s warning that a king would introduce the system into Israel (1 Sm 8:12-17) was fulfilled, and it came to full development under Solomon when he undertook his massive building program, including his palace. Solomon raised his workforce from all over Israel. The system incited Jeroboam to revolt (1 Kgs 12:4, 16). King Asa used it (15:22), and it continued on into Jeremiah’s time (Jer 22:13). Nehemiah’s builders were volunteers (see Neh 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>Prominent among Solomon’s royal buildings was the temple. Apparently, it stood in the middle of a courtyard called the inner court (1 Kgs 6:36), by contrast with the great court (7:12), which included both the temple and the palace. The palace itself had an inner court too (v 8), the northern wall of which was common to the inner court of the temple. Hence it was but a step from the king’s domain to the Lord’s domain.<\/p>\n<p>The king’s enthronement took place in the palace, in the Porch of the Throne (1 Kgs 1:46; 2 Kgs 11:19). When he took his seat on the throne, it marked his assumption of power (1 Kgs 16:11; 2 Kgs 13:13). Solomon’s throne in his palace became the symbol of royal power, although his throne was still called the throne of David (1 Kgs 2:24, 45; Is 9:7). Solomon’s palace throne is described as one of the wonders of the world (1 Kgs 10:18-20). It was around this throne that the high officials came to do him homage (1:47).<\/p>\n<p>The king’s daughters lived in the palace until their marriage under the care of women (2 Sm 13:7). They wore a distinctive dress (vv 18-19). The king’s sons were reared in the palace by nurses (2 Kgs 11:2) and tutored under leading men of the city (10:1, 6-7), until they were able to perform certain duties at the court (2 Sm 8:18; 1 Chr 18:17). Then they led an independent life and were provided for by the king (2 Chr 21:3). Amnon evidently lived outside the palace (2 Sm 13:5), and Absalom had his own house (13:20; 14:24), lands, and livestock (13:23; 14:30). Palace or court officials surrounded the royal family (1 Kgs 10:4-5). Whatever their office, they were called the king’s “servants.” There were those “who saw the king’s face,” meaning they were admitted to the king’s presence (2 Sm 14:24, 28, 32), or stood before the king (1 Sm 16:21-22; Jer 52:12). It was a signal mark of favor to be admitted to the royal table (2 Sm 9:7, 13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"PALACE Residence for royalty. Excavations suggest that any city that enjoyed royal patronage would boast of a building that could be described as a palace. Royal cities had a second surrounding wall that shut off the royal palace and its outbuildings, forming the acropolis of the city. Jerusalem had the equivalent in the City of David, which formerly was the Citadel of Zion (2 Sm 5:7-9). The OT’s references to palaces in Palestine are vague—for example, David’s palace (2 Sm 11:2, 9), the pala...","summary_en":"PALACE Residence for royalty. Excavations suggest that any city that enjoyed royal patronage would boast of a building that could be described as a palace. Royal cities had a second surrounding wall that shut off the royal palace and its outbuildings, forming the acropolis of the city. Jerusalem had the equivalent in the City of David, which formerly was the Citadel of Zion (2 Sm 5:7-9). The OT’s references to palaces in Palestine are vague—for example, David’s palace (2 Sm 11:2, 9), the pala...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38182,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Warfare","title_en":"Warfare","content_ro":"<h3>WARFARE<\/h3>\n<p>The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MethodsofWarfare\">Methods of Warfare<\/p>\n<h5>Standard Combat<\/h5>\n<p>Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of firepower at decisive points. When the Assyrians coordinated their infantry, cavalry, and chariot corps into a powerful battle machine, smaller neighboring nations were more and more compelled to retreat behind their fortifications. They could not hope to engage the massive Assyrian army in standard combat in open terrain. No period is richer in illustrated monuments than Iron Age II; the Assyrian war reliefs present detailed illustrations of their conquests and the size of fortified cities. The few scenes depicting standard combat in open terrain show chariots charging from all directions and engaging the enemy at all stages of a battle. Other formations carry out mopping-up operations, finishing off pockets of enemy resistance remaining after the chariot charge.<\/p>\n<p>The factor of terrain was always very important. In standard combat on open terrain it became conventional to place the best troops on the right side of the line. A Greek commander, Epaminodas (d. 362 <span>BC<\/span>), introduced the variant of a slanting attack by a strengthened left wing, taking the Spartan army completely by surprise. Philip of Macedon and his son Alexander continued to surprise their enemies with variations on a plan of attack based on the phalanx.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Battle in Open Terrain: The Duel<\/h5>\n<p>During certain periods in the ancient Near East, the duel presented an alternative to standard combat. The duel was a contest between two champions who represented the contending forces. The two armies would agree in advance to abide by the outcome of the fight. The duel was meant to avoid the heavy casualties of full-scale warfare. The earliest detailed written account of this unique form of warfare occurs in the Tale of Sinuhe. A chamberlain in the royal court of the 12th dynasty, Sinuhe voluntarily went into exile and traveled to northern Palestine and Syria, where he lived among Semitic tribes. There he was challenged to a duel by a local champion, whom he defeated and whose goods he then plundered.<\/p>\n<p>Although the duel was common among other armies in subsequent periods, it was evidently unknown to Israel before the encounter between David and Goliath (1 Sm 17). The Philistine army had penetrated Judah as far as Socoh and were arrayed on one hill. Drawn up against them on an opposite hill was the army of Saul. The valley of Elah separated the two camps. The Israelites were challenged daily by the Philistine champion, Goliath, who proposed that the battle be decided through combat between two warriors. David accepted his proposal, but when he killed Goliath, the Philistines fled, unwilling to honor the terms of the prior agreement. The Israelite army then entered the contest, pursuing the Philistines and inflicting heavy casualties.<\/p>\n<h5>Assaults on Fortified Cities<\/h5>\n<p>Most cities in the ancient Near East were located at sites that could be defended against attack and that possessed economic advantages. An assault on a fortified city presented opposite problems for attacker and defender. The actions of one were a direct response to the actions of the other. Systems of defense were intended to thwart methods of attack, which in turn were designed to penetrate systems of defense.<\/p>\n<p>There were five possible ways of conquering a fortified city: penetration from above the fortifications; direct penetration through the fortifications; penetration from below the fortifications; siege; and penetration by ruse. On many occasions, a combination of two or more methods was necessary to breach the defensive network.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical narrative of the conquest of Shechem by Abimelech (Jgs 9) gives an account of an assault on a fortified city in the period of the judges (Iron Age I). When the people of Shechem and their allies rebelled against Abimelech, he retaliated by attacking the city, advancing his army of mercenaries by night and launching an assault from ambush positions at dawn (9:32-35). The men of Shechem engaged in open battle outside the city gates but were forced to retreat behind the security of the city walls. The next day Abimelech directed his assault against the city itself. Dividing his forces into three groups, he assumed direct command of one, which he committed to an attack on the city gates at the decisive moment of battle (vv 43-44). The gate was breached and the main walls seized, but the city’s surviving defenders fled to an inner citadel, the temple of Baal-berith.<\/p>\n<p>Many reliefs depict groups of soldiers defending an inner citadel after a city’s wall was breached. Archaeological excavations at Shechem confirm that its temple, like those in other Canaanite cities, was built in the form of a fortified tower, supported by stout bastions near the entrance. The tower of Shechem was thus strongly fortified and occupied only a small area, enabling its defenders to concentrate their firepower on Abimelech’s troops. Since it could not be taken by storm, Abimelech ordered his soldiers to use their battle-axes to cut brushwood, which was piled against the stronghold and set on fire (Jgs 9:48-49). All of the defenders within the tower died.<\/p>\n<p>An assault on an inner citadel was always a hazardous undertaking for an attacking army, as shown in the sequel to the capture of Shechem’s tower. Abimelech turned his attention next to the city of Thebez and followed the same plan of assault that had proved successful at Shechem. But as he was preparing to burn the door of the tower to which the defenders had fled, his skull was crushed by a piece of millstone dropped on him by a woman (Jgs 9:50-53). The incident was remembered and became proverbial for the danger of approaching too closely the walls of a fortified tower (2 Sm 11:19-21).<\/p>\n<h5>Communications and Intelligence<\/h5>\n<p>From the patriarchal period (middle Bronze period), we have detailed written information on the use of communications systems in wartime. The documents from Mari on the Euphrates provide evidence for a well-developed communications system based on signaling. Signals were flashed by torches or firebrands at night in accordance with a prearranged code. The system was widely used in Mesopotamia and elsewhere to call for immediate help when a city was under attack.<\/p>\n<p>In the late Bronze period horsemen were sometimes employed for isolated communication functions. Intelligence services played a role in planning and executing military operations. The importance of intelligence and the use of spies or scouts is stressed in the biblical accounts of the conquest of the land of Canaan. Before entering the land, Moses sent men on an espionage mission. He instructed them to gather information on the topography of the land, to observe the relative strength of its inhabitants, to determine whether the land was fertile, to survey the cities and see if they were fortified, and to report on the character of the land—whether it was capable of sustaining a large population (Nm 13:17-20).<\/p>\n<p>Tactical intelligence was very important. Joshua dispatched spies to Jericho and to Ai before beginning military operations against them (Jos 2:1; 7:2). The reports he received about the offensive spirit and strength of the Canaanites enabled him to formulate an attack plan. In the period of the judges the conquest of Bethel (Jgs 1:22-26) was due directly to intelligence gathered by a reconnaissance patrol. The tribes of Joseph sent out scouts to keep the city under observation. It was strongly fortified and seemed impregnable. The scouts captured a man who emerged from the city—presumably not through the main gate, which was shut tight, but through a concealed postern or tunnel. In exchange for his own life and the safety of his family, he disclosed the location of the passage leading beneath the walls. The city was penetrated through the tunnel and captured.<\/p>\n<h5>Attack and Penetration: The Breach<\/h5>\n<p>Direct penetration through the fortifications of an ancient city meant breaching the gate or the main walls by using hammers, axes, pikes, spears, swords, or a battering ram. Illustrated monuments and written documents indicate that early in the middle Bronze period fortified cities were being attacked with battering rams. The earliest known illustration of a ram appears in a siege scene in the wall paintings from Beni Hasan (20th century <span>BC<\/span>). The ram pictured is a relatively simple device, consisting of a hutlike structure with a slightly pointed roof, which could be moved near a fortress with the help of two parallel crossbars. The structure provided cover for two or three soldiers who operated by hand a very long pole with a sharp tip, presumably of metal.<\/p>\n<p>The Mari documents provide information for the period 200 years later. They mention the effectiveness of battering rams constructed largely of wood. Although very heavy, the siege weapon could be moved over long distances. One document speaks of the use of a wagon drawn by draft animals and of a boat to transport a battering ram to the site of a besieged city.<\/p>\n<p>Moving a battering ram into position always exposed the demolition unit to heavy fire from defenders on the walls above them. Its heaviness made it cumbersome to move. Moreover, the ground adjacent to the walls was usually rough, rocky, and steep. When the chosen point of penetration was a section of the wall, an assault force had to construct an earthen ramp, occasionally strengthened on the top surface and sides with wooden planks or stones. The ramp provided a track along which the battering ram could be moved from the foot of the slope to the outer wall. Once moved into operational position, the ram had to be braked to prevent it from rolling back. The building of such a ramp was evidently necessary in Joab’s campaign against the fortified city of Abel in Beth-maacah (2 Sm 20:15). The biblical account indicates that some sort of battering ram was in use in Israel under King David during the early monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest Assyrian reliefs show that protection of the penetration units was a major consideration. High, mobile assault towers constructed of wood operated in tandem with a battering ram. Such towers, moved into position near a breach operation and manned by archers, provided covering fire directed against the defenders on the wall. Siege towers neutralized the defenders’ advantage in firepower and drew fire away from the crew engaged in breaching the walls.<\/p>\n<p>The details of the Assyrian reliefs make it possible to visualize clearly the fate of Jerusalem, as announced to the prophet Ezekiel (Ez 4:1-3; 21:22). The gate was the focal point of attack because it was the weakest point in the wall. Moreover, the path leading up to the gate made construction of a special ramp unnecessary. In the demolition of a gate, swords were sometimes used to pry the doors loose and to tear down hinges. Wooden doors unprotected by metal were often set on fire.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram continued to be used as an engine for breaching walls in the Hellenistic-Roman period. In 63 <span>BC<\/span> the Roman commander Pompey brought up battering rams from Tyre against the defenders of Jerusalem, and with them penetrated the fortified wall that enclosed the temple. The siege machine shown on Trajan’s column had a beam with an iron head shaped like a ram. It was moved up to a wall in a frame protected by a wooden roof covered with clay or hides. A variation equipped for boring into a wall was used by Titus when besieging Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram was not the only device used to effect a breach in a wall. Troops trained as sappers would tear down a section of the wall by using sharp-headed levers (pikes, swords, spears) or even sledgehammers (cf. Ez 26:8-9). In Ashurnasirpal’s army such men were issued full-length coats of mail to cover their whole bodies. Under later Assyrian kings, they were protected by both round and rectangular shields, which they carried on their backs when engaged in demolition. Later, Ashurbanipal relied exclusively on such sappers for direct penetration of a fortified city. He designed for their protection a huge shield, the curved head of which could be propped against the wall, screening the sapper from missiles while he worked beneath it.<\/p>\n<h5>Scaling the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A battle scene depicted on limestone in the tomb of Anta at Dashashe in Upper Egypt (24th century <span>BC<\/span>) provides the earliest known representation of siege activities. It shows the Egyptians raising a scaling ladder against the walls of a fortified city. By the time of Sargon, the thickness of walls was increased considerably, which permitted construction of much higher walls, more resistant to scaling. Such solid, massive walls also tended to blunt the effectiveness of a battering ram. Sargon, and especially his successor Ashurbanipal, responded by constructing longer scaling ladders, some of which could reach a height of from 25 to 30 feet (7.6 to 9.1 meters), judging from the number of rungs.<\/p>\n<h5>Penetration beneath the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A tunneling operation could be started beyond the range of any weapons at the disposal of the defenders. Once underground, the penetration unit was shielded from enemy fire. The tunneling could be accomplished under cover of night, so that the element of surprise could be exploited to the maximum. It was, however, a lengthy process requiring considerable technical skill. Moreover, if the operation was detected by the defenders before its completion, they could destroy the penetration unit as it emerged from the tunnel. Attempts to penetrate fortified cities by tunneling beneath the walls was a characteristic feature of warfare in Iron Age II. That is confirmed by reliefs, written documents, and archaeological excavation of sites dating to this period, where the remains of attack tunnels have been discovered.<\/p>\n<h5>Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Particularly when a walled city was situated on a high hill, an extended siege provided an alternate method of conquering it. By encircling the city and preventing aid or supplies from reaching its defenders, the attacking army could starve the inhabitants out. That procedure minimized the element of risk for the attacking army. Its success depended upon their capacity to prevent outside assistance from reaching the city and the defenders from leaving it. An army would generally resort to siege when a city’s fortifications were too powerful for direct penetration. The siege of Samaria by the Assyrians lasted for three years (2 Kgs 18:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>The peculiar conditions of siege produced the catapult, a major innovation of Greek artillery and a logical improvement on the bow and the sling. Designed originally as a strengthened bow mounted on a stand and used to fire arrows only, it was introduced around 400 <span>BC<\/span> by Demetrius I. He may have borrowed the idea from the Phoenicians at Carthage.<\/p>\n<p>In the course of time the instrument was improved. The perfect weapon, called the torsion catapult, derived its power from many tightly twisted strands of elastic material, frequently supplied by women’s hair, which could be tightened with a windlass and then released suddenly. Firing arrows, large stones, or fire-baskets with an effective range of 200 yards (182.9 meters), a catapult could clear a wall of its defenders while a battering ram breached it or a boarding party attacked from a mobile tower.<\/p>\n<p>For those in a besieged city, the critical problems were food and water supplies. The horror of famine is stressed in the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by the Syrian Ben-hadad in the days of the prophet Elisha. On that occasion women were reduced to eating their children (2 Kgs 6:26-29). A besieging army would do everything in its power to aggravate such conditions. In one of the siege reliefs of Ashurnasirpal II, a defender has lowered a bucket from the wall to draw water from a stream below; an Assyrian soldier is shown cutting the rope with his dagger.<\/p>\n<h5>Ruses and Stratagems<\/h5>\n<p>Various ruses and stratagems could draw the defenders out of a city or infiltrate troops into the city. If a small force could enter a city by a cunning stratagem, it could overpower the guards and open the city gates to an attacking army. A city’s fortifications were of little value once an enemy had entered the city. Moreover, penetrating a city’s defenses at any one point frequently caused the entire defense system to collapse. The story of the Trojan horse is probably the most celebrated account of a stratagem circumventing the defense of a strongly fortified ancient city.<\/p>\n<p>In the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by Ben-hadad, a sudden lifting of the Syrian siege led Joram, the king of Israel, to suspect a ruse. He refused to believe the report of four lepers that the Syrians had gone, leaving behind large food supplies (2 Kgs 7:12). That was the same kind of tactic that Joshua had employed at Ai (Jos 8:3-8).<\/p>\n<p>On other occasions, powerful armies sought to break down resistance by psychological warfare, as in the unsuccessful attempt by Sennacherib to capture Jerusalem in the time of Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18–19). The dialogue between the Assyrian general and Hezekiah’s delegates reveals that the Assyrian was trying to shake the confidence of the city’s defenders.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a type of ruse used to trap and destroy an enemy at a moment when he was least able to counter a sudden, unexpected blow. Its effectiveness depended almost entirely on the element of surprise. By taking advantage of good intelligence, knowledge of the terrain, and the cover of night, a small force could stage a devastating ambush against vastly superior numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a standard method of combat during the period of the conquest of Canaan. The fall of Ai, for example, was due directly to the tactical success of an ambush (Jos 8:1-23). Under cover of night, Joshua was able to move a large force to a concealed position behind the city. He then led the remainder of the Israelite army to the edge of a valley north of the fortified city, giving the appearance of a planned assault on the city. The diversion, as calculated, drew the main force of Ai away from the city to engage Israel on the plain of Arabah. When the Israelites fell back, appearing to be badly beaten, the remaining defenders of the city were summoned to pursue Joshua’s fleeing army. With the city left undefended, the main Israelite strike force rose from its ambush position, poured into the city, and set it on fire. Too late, the men of Ai saw the smoke from their burning city and realized the stratagem. Joshua’s army turned to counterattack their pursuers, who found themselves trapped between two bodies of Israelite forces. Assaulted from both front and rear, the king of Ai’s army was annihilated, victim of an effectively laid ambush.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FortificationsandDefense\">Fortifications and Defense<\/p>\n<p>The earliest known fortifications in the world, dated by some to about 7000 <span>BC<\/span>, were discovered in 1954 at Jericho. They were impressive in conception and construction. The core of the defense system was a wall, part of which, bordering the western edge of the ancient city, was still standing to a height of 21 feet (6.4 meters). Further excavation uncovered a large moat that had been carved out of solid rock at the base of the wall, 27 feet (8.2 meters) wide and 9 feet (2.7 meters) deep. How that feat was accomplished when the only tools assumed to have been available were made of stone is a complete mystery. A third component of Jericho’s defense system was a huge stone circular tower 30 feet (9.1 meters) high, once evidently attached to the inner side of the western part of the wall. The exact purpose of the tower has not yet been determined, but Neolithic Jericho provides the earliest evidence of a fortified city supported by a wall, tower, and moat.<\/p>\n<p>By the middle Bronze period, there were four components in a standard defense system: a moat, an advance (outer) wall, the main (inner) wall, and a well-fortified gate structure. The moat, advance wall, and subsidiary fortifications protecting the steep slope and lower portion of the main wall were intended to prevent breaching by a battering ram.<\/p>\n<h5>City Walls<\/h5>\n<p>Erection of a simple wall could halt a hostile advance only temporarily, since walls could be scaled or breached. Walls therefore provided a firing platform so defenders could repel attacks. The wall system consisted of three principal components: the wall itself, constituting the barrier; an upper structure, which provided the firing platform and cover for the defenders; and a series of obstacles and traps erected in front of the wall to keep archers at a distance and to prevent operation of a battering ram.<\/p>\n<p>The battlement—a parapet built along the outer top edge of the wall—provided the defenders with a measure of security, freedom for mobility, and openings through which fire could be directed. From a distance the square notches looked like a row of teeth with gaps between them. The teeth, called merlons, provided a protective barrier against hostile missiles. The gaps, called embrasures or crenels, supplied openings through which the defenders could discharge their weapons. Special towers protruded from the outer face of the wall, spaced at a distance no greater than the double range of a bow. Such towers enabled the defenders to fire at troops who managed to reach the walls. One way of protecting the main wall was to construct an outer or advance wall that could be breached or climbed only under heavy fire from defending units on the battlements of the main wall. Another method was to dig a wide, deep moat around the base of the main wall. A moat kept the enemy from using a battering ram unless they could bridge the moat or fill it up at certain points, under concentrated fire from the defenders.<\/p>\n<p>Casemate fortifications, introduced in the middle Bronze period, were developed from double walls built of dressed stones. The space between the walls was divided into chambers, or casemates, used for storage or dwellings. The Hittite casemate system, introduced into Palestine at least as early as the time of Saul, was widely adopted in Syria and Palestine. A fine example has been discovered at Gibeah, where Saul’s citadel was located, dating to the end of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>. The overall thickness of the double walls, including the casemates, reaches 15 feet (4.6 meters). The same type of construction has been found in excavations of three Solomonic cities—Hazor, Gezer, and Megiddo (cf. 1 Kgs 9:15)—where the casemate walls have an overall thickness of 18 feet (5.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>Although the divided kingdoms of Judah and Israel were not noted for technical advancements in offensive warfare, a number of their kings worked at improving fortifications and means of defense. Uzziah was especially remembered for his accomplishments in defensive warfare. Along with other measures, “he produced machines mounted on the walls of Jerusalem, designed by brilliant men to shoot arrows and hurl stones from the towers and the corners of the wall” (2 Chr 26:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those “machines” were special protective structures built to facilitate the task of the archers and to permit huge stones to be dropped on the heads of assaulting troops.<\/p>\n<h5>Gate<\/h5>\n<p>It was inevitable that the gate would be the focus of action in any assault on a fortified city. City gates were therefore designed to expose an attacking army to the greatest risk while providing maximum security to the defenders. The road approaching a city on a hill would wind up the slope, climbing obliquely to the left or the right. Such roads were usually laid out to reach the gate from the right, so an attacker would have to expose the right side of his body to the defenders on the wall. Since he carried his shield in his left hand, that made him more vulnerable.<\/p>\n<p>To prevent the heavy wooden doors of the gate from being set on fire, they were usually plated with metal. A gate wide enough for chariots required double doors, making the line at the center where the two doors met the weakest point in the barrier. Double doors were therefore fitted with huge bolts and fortified with a heavy beam running across the back of both door panels and held in place by sockets set in the doorposts.<\/p>\n<p>Another component in the defense complex at a gate consisted of towers erected on either side of the gate and protruding from the outer face of the wall. Enemy soldiers trying to smash the doors with axes or set them on fire with torches were thus exposed to heavy flanking fire from defensive units on the towers. From a roof over the gate having a balcony, concentrated firepower could be poured down on attackers’ heads. The addition of such auxiliary structures transformed a gate into a small fortress.<\/p>\n<h5>Inner Citadel<\/h5>\n<p>A major weakness of a city’s walls and gate was the magnitude of the circumference. An average-size city might have a perimeter of half a mile (.8 kilometer); a larger city, a perimeter of over a mile (1.6 kilometers). Yet the entire wall had to be defended against breaching, scaling, or tunneling. An attacking army would use diversionary tactics to keep defenders dispersed along the entire perimeter but concentrate their primary assault at one point in the wall. Once the wall was breached, perimeter fortifications served no further defensive purpose. Therefore, internal walls were often added to subdivide a city into several sections, each capable of independent defense. Also, on the highest point of land within the city a citadel would be constructed as a self-contained defensive unit.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest examples of such fortifications, called migdols, are found in the late Bronze Age. They were originally small citadels built to guard important military targets such as sources of water, strategic routes, cultivated farmlands, or frontiers. A migdol of that type was discovered in Israel, not far from Ashdod, in 1960. It was square in plan, with rectangular bastions, and was two stories high, just like structures depicted in Egyptian reliefs from the same period. The same design was used to fortify temples inside of cities. Such fortified temples served as places of refuge and as a city’s final defense once its walls had been breached (cf. Jgs 9:45-51).<\/p>\n<p>In a later period an inner citadel could embrace a complex consisting of the fortified palace of the governor, dwellings of his chief ministers, and sometimes the temple. Such citadels resembled fortified cities, possessing a main wall, a gateway, an outer wall, and occasionally a moat. Being small in area and heavily fortified, citadels could be defended in a final effort by the governor and remaining inhabitants. Presumably Zimri could have held out against Omri’s army for an extended period in the citadel of Tirzah, had he not committed suicide by setting it on fire (1 Kgs 16:17-18).<\/p>\n<h5>Water Supply under Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Unless provision was made to keep a city’s inhabitants supplied with food and water during a protracted siege, no defense system could be effective. Several Judean kings made efforts to solve the food-storage problem. Rehoboam, for example, fortified a number of cities located on the western, eastern, and southern borders of his kingdom and made them centers for the storage of food, oil, and wine (2 Chr 11:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Storage of food was easier than storage of water. Cisterns built to collect rainwater were a partial answer, but cisterns often ran dry, particularly in times of drought. Cities were sometimes built on the banks of a stream or river, using the stream as part of the city’s defense system. But for a city built on a hill, the source of water might be a spring located at the foot of the slope and outside the city walls. Sometimes the mouth of the spring could be blocked and its location concealed from the enemy while still allowing access by the inhabitants. At Megiddo a vertical shaft 100 feet (274.3 meters) deep was connected by a horizontal tunnel about 200 feet (548.6 meters) long to the water supply at the western end of the city, beyond the fortifications. The work was undertaken in the time of either Solomon or Ahab.<\/p>\n<p>The most celebrated measures to guarantee a supply of fresh water in a time of siege were those taken by Hezekiah at Jerusalem. That engineering achievement is recalled in all the summaries of his reign, both in the Bible and in the “Praise of Famous Men” in the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus (2 Kgs 20:20; 2 Chr 32:30; Ecclus 48:17). The prodigious feat commemorated in those references was the sealing of the spring of Gihon and the cutting of an 1,800-foot (548.6-meter) channel through solid rock in order to bring water into a reservoir in the city. How it was accomplished was reported by Hezekiah himself in the famous Siloam inscription. Two crews, working with hammers, wedges, and pickaxes, began at opposite ends. The crew that began at the spring was able to take advantage of the older tunnel (cf. Is 22:11). They turned due south, in the direction of the city. The other crew, starting from the reservoir, began in a northeasterly direction. They then turned southeast until they reached the north-south line followed by the crew tunneling from the spring, when they turned due north to meet them. The two crews almost passed each other, being about five feet (1.5 meters) apart, but a shout from one was heard through a crevice in the rock by the other. Both parties turned sharply right, and the tunnel was completed. Hezekiah’s precautionary step, taken before Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah, helps to explain why the Assyrians were unable to subdue Jerusalem by the siege tactics that had earlier subdued Samaria in the time of Sargon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewMilitaryOrganization\">Hebrew Military Organization<\/p>\n<h5>Tribal Army<\/h5>\n<p>In their exodus from Egypt the Israelites were organized by tribes and divisions. That systematic arrangement for their trek through the wilderness provided a precedent for military organization. After the sojourn at Mt Sinai, the 12 tribes were divided into divisions or army corps, and certain grades in military rank began to appear. The “officers of the army” (Nm 31:14) had command over units of 1,000 or 100 men, which suggests that the tribal army was divided into decimal units. At a later period there is reference to units of 1,000 (the division), 100 (the company), 50 (the platoon), and 10 (the section). Except for the Levites, who were assigned as a tribe to the care of the tabernacle (Nm 2:33), men from 20 years of age who were physically able to fight were assigned to a unit in the tribal army. Certain individuals, however, were exempted from military service (cf. Dt 20:5-9; 24:5; Jgs 7:3).<\/p>\n<p>Until after the conquest of Canaan, the tribal army was essentially a militia recruited in an emergency. Internal organization of the militia was the responsibility of the tribe; each clan and family sent their quota of warriors when summoned to battle by tribal leaders. Because the clan formed the basic unit, recruits were under the command of their own leaders. David’s brothers, for example, served in a division composed of the fighting men from their clan under the command of a captain (1 Sm 17:18; 18:13). When the emergency passed, the militia was disbanded and the soldiers returned to their home districts.<\/p>\n<p>Because the land was divided among the tribes, no tribal or clan leader before Saul commanded the entire tribal confederation (cf. 1 Sm 11:1-11). In fact, tribal jealousies and rivalries threatened national solidarity and jeopardized united action even in a critical period. On some occasions, however, the severity of a crisis caused the armies of the various tribes to unite in common action. The multitribal armies were divided into companies of 1,000, 100, and 50, and still further into families under appointed officers. There is evidence of organization into units according to weaponry (1 Chr 12:24-38). Benjamin’s tribe specialized in the bow and sling. The tribes of Gad, Judah, and Naphtali were expert with the spear and shield.<\/p>\n<p>Provisioning the tribal army was the responsibility of each tribe (Jgs 20:9-10). One out of every ten soldiers was appointed to secure food for the others, either from wealthy landowners (cf. 1 Sm 25) or from the natural resources of the land. In that early stage of military organization, a soldier’s pay generally consisted only of supplies and a portion of the spoils of battle (cf. 30:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Professional Army<\/h5>\n<p>Not until the time of the united monarchy did Israel have a regular army. Transition from a people’s militia to a professional army took place under Saul, whose reign changed the tribal confederacy into a monarchy (1 Sm 13:2). Philistine harassment of Israel encouraged establishment of a strong standing army. The army, however, was not large; it consisted of 3,000 men organized in three formations of 1,000 each (1 Sm 13:2; 24:2). Pay for those career soldiers was sometimes in the form of a land grant (8:14) as well as a share of booty. In the organization of Saul’s army, Abner, Jonathan, and David were given particular responsibilities. Abner was named commander of the army (17:55) and was probably also given direct command of one of the divisions. David’s band of valorous men, “the thirty,” provided the leadership core for his own military organization when he became king.<\/p>\n<p>David continued the practice of maintaining a professional army. But he also developed a national militia of 12 regiments, each being called up for duty for one month of the year under professional officers (1 Chr 27:1-15). Each regiment, recruited across tribal lines, consisted of 24,000 soldiers. David’s innovation provided him with a large reserve force that could be mustered for war in times of emergency. The reserves, and presumably the professional army as well, were organized into units of 1,000, 100, 50, and 10. Joab, a specialist in siege warfare (2 Sm 20:15), commanded the professional army, and Amasa was over the citizens’ militia. David, however, remained commander-in-chief of the military organization.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelite group in King David’s professional army was an outgrowth of the small band of fighting men who had served with him during the period of conflict with Saul. That veteran group consisted of David’s family and clansmen, and others who felt themselves oppressed by the central authority under Saul (1 Sm 22:1-2). It ranged in size between 400 and 600 men (1 Sm 22:2; 23:13; 27:2). The presence of mercenaries in David’s army is clearly recorded. Uriah the Hittite and Ittai of Gath are conspicuous examples, along with many career soldiers of Philistine origin, such as the Cherethites and the Pelethites under Benaiah (2 Sm 8:18; 15:19-22; 23:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>The Davidic dynasty maintained a permanent mercenary army until 701 <span>BC<\/span>, after which it was considered too costly. The oppressive cost of maintaining a professional army, financed by burdensome taxes and forced labor, was in fact a major factor contributing to the disruption of the monarchy after Solomon’s death (cf. 1 Kgs 10:26-29; 12:4-19). After Sennacherib’s invasion in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, the southern kingdom of Judah depended entirely on a citizens’ militia for its defense. It is commonly held that the northern kingdom of Israel did not employ a professional army, but it is evident that King Ahab used at least some mercenary soldiers in his defense against Ben-hadad of Syria (1 Kgs 20:15-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Armor and Weapons.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WARFARE<\/h3>\n<p>The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MethodsofWarfare\">Methods of Warfare<\/p>\n<h5>Standard Combat<\/h5>\n<p>Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of firepower at decisive points. When the Assyrians coordinated their infantry, cavalry, and chariot corps into a powerful battle machine, smaller neighboring nations were more and more compelled to retreat behind their fortifications. They could not hope to engage the massive Assyrian army in standard combat in open terrain. No period is richer in illustrated monuments than Iron Age II; the Assyrian war reliefs present detailed illustrations of their conquests and the size of fortified cities. The few scenes depicting standard combat in open terrain show chariots charging from all directions and engaging the enemy at all stages of a battle. Other formations carry out mopping-up operations, finishing off pockets of enemy resistance remaining after the chariot charge.<\/p>\n<p>The factor of terrain was always very important. In standard combat on open terrain it became conventional to place the best troops on the right side of the line. A Greek commander, Epaminodas (d. 362 <span>BC<\/span>), introduced the variant of a slanting attack by a strengthened left wing, taking the Spartan army completely by surprise. Philip of Macedon and his son Alexander continued to surprise their enemies with variations on a plan of attack based on the phalanx.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Battle in Open Terrain: The Duel<\/h5>\n<p>During certain periods in the ancient Near East, the duel presented an alternative to standard combat. The duel was a contest between two champions who represented the contending forces. The two armies would agree in advance to abide by the outcome of the fight. The duel was meant to avoid the heavy casualties of full-scale warfare. The earliest detailed written account of this unique form of warfare occurs in the Tale of Sinuhe. A chamberlain in the royal court of the 12th dynasty, Sinuhe voluntarily went into exile and traveled to northern Palestine and Syria, where he lived among Semitic tribes. There he was challenged to a duel by a local champion, whom he defeated and whose goods he then plundered.<\/p>\n<p>Although the duel was common among other armies in subsequent periods, it was evidently unknown to Israel before the encounter between David and Goliath (1 Sm 17). The Philistine army had penetrated Judah as far as Socoh and were arrayed on one hill. Drawn up against them on an opposite hill was the army of Saul. The valley of Elah separated the two camps. The Israelites were challenged daily by the Philistine champion, Goliath, who proposed that the battle be decided through combat between two warriors. David accepted his proposal, but when he killed Goliath, the Philistines fled, unwilling to honor the terms of the prior agreement. The Israelite army then entered the contest, pursuing the Philistines and inflicting heavy casualties.<\/p>\n<h5>Assaults on Fortified Cities<\/h5>\n<p>Most cities in the ancient Near East were located at sites that could be defended against attack and that possessed economic advantages. An assault on a fortified city presented opposite problems for attacker and defender. The actions of one were a direct response to the actions of the other. Systems of defense were intended to thwart methods of attack, which in turn were designed to penetrate systems of defense.<\/p>\n<p>There were five possible ways of conquering a fortified city: penetration from above the fortifications; direct penetration through the fortifications; penetration from below the fortifications; siege; and penetration by ruse. On many occasions, a combination of two or more methods was necessary to breach the defensive network.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical narrative of the conquest of Shechem by Abimelech (Jgs 9) gives an account of an assault on a fortified city in the period of the judges (Iron Age I). When the people of Shechem and their allies rebelled against Abimelech, he retaliated by attacking the city, advancing his army of mercenaries by night and launching an assault from ambush positions at dawn (9:32-35). The men of Shechem engaged in open battle outside the city gates but were forced to retreat behind the security of the city walls. The next day Abimelech directed his assault against the city itself. Dividing his forces into three groups, he assumed direct command of one, which he committed to an attack on the city gates at the decisive moment of battle (vv 43-44). The gate was breached and the main walls seized, but the city’s surviving defenders fled to an inner citadel, the temple of Baal-berith.<\/p>\n<p>Many reliefs depict groups of soldiers defending an inner citadel after a city’s wall was breached. Archaeological excavations at Shechem confirm that its temple, like those in other Canaanite cities, was built in the form of a fortified tower, supported by stout bastions near the entrance. The tower of Shechem was thus strongly fortified and occupied only a small area, enabling its defenders to concentrate their firepower on Abimelech’s troops. Since it could not be taken by storm, Abimelech ordered his soldiers to use their battle-axes to cut brushwood, which was piled against the stronghold and set on fire (Jgs 9:48-49). All of the defenders within the tower died.<\/p>\n<p>An assault on an inner citadel was always a hazardous undertaking for an attacking army, as shown in the sequel to the capture of Shechem’s tower. Abimelech turned his attention next to the city of Thebez and followed the same plan of assault that had proved successful at Shechem. But as he was preparing to burn the door of the tower to which the defenders had fled, his skull was crushed by a piece of millstone dropped on him by a woman (Jgs 9:50-53). The incident was remembered and became proverbial for the danger of approaching too closely the walls of a fortified tower (2 Sm 11:19-21).<\/p>\n<h5>Communications and Intelligence<\/h5>\n<p>From the patriarchal period (middle Bronze period), we have detailed written information on the use of communications systems in wartime. The documents from Mari on the Euphrates provide evidence for a well-developed communications system based on signaling. Signals were flashed by torches or firebrands at night in accordance with a prearranged code. The system was widely used in Mesopotamia and elsewhere to call for immediate help when a city was under attack.<\/p>\n<p>In the late Bronze period horsemen were sometimes employed for isolated communication functions. Intelligence services played a role in planning and executing military operations. The importance of intelligence and the use of spies or scouts is stressed in the biblical accounts of the conquest of the land of Canaan. Before entering the land, Moses sent men on an espionage mission. He instructed them to gather information on the topography of the land, to observe the relative strength of its inhabitants, to determine whether the land was fertile, to survey the cities and see if they were fortified, and to report on the character of the land—whether it was capable of sustaining a large population (Nm 13:17-20).<\/p>\n<p>Tactical intelligence was very important. Joshua dispatched spies to Jericho and to Ai before beginning military operations against them (Jos 2:1; 7:2). The reports he received about the offensive spirit and strength of the Canaanites enabled him to formulate an attack plan. In the period of the judges the conquest of Bethel (Jgs 1:22-26) was due directly to intelligence gathered by a reconnaissance patrol. The tribes of Joseph sent out scouts to keep the city under observation. It was strongly fortified and seemed impregnable. The scouts captured a man who emerged from the city—presumably not through the main gate, which was shut tight, but through a concealed postern or tunnel. In exchange for his own life and the safety of his family, he disclosed the location of the passage leading beneath the walls. The city was penetrated through the tunnel and captured.<\/p>\n<h5>Attack and Penetration: The Breach<\/h5>\n<p>Direct penetration through the fortifications of an ancient city meant breaching the gate or the main walls by using hammers, axes, pikes, spears, swords, or a battering ram. Illustrated monuments and written documents indicate that early in the middle Bronze period fortified cities were being attacked with battering rams. The earliest known illustration of a ram appears in a siege scene in the wall paintings from Beni Hasan (20th century <span>BC<\/span>). The ram pictured is a relatively simple device, consisting of a hutlike structure with a slightly pointed roof, which could be moved near a fortress with the help of two parallel crossbars. The structure provided cover for two or three soldiers who operated by hand a very long pole with a sharp tip, presumably of metal.<\/p>\n<p>The Mari documents provide information for the period 200 years later. They mention the effectiveness of battering rams constructed largely of wood. Although very heavy, the siege weapon could be moved over long distances. One document speaks of the use of a wagon drawn by draft animals and of a boat to transport a battering ram to the site of a besieged city.<\/p>\n<p>Moving a battering ram into position always exposed the demolition unit to heavy fire from defenders on the walls above them. Its heaviness made it cumbersome to move. Moreover, the ground adjacent to the walls was usually rough, rocky, and steep. When the chosen point of penetration was a section of the wall, an assault force had to construct an earthen ramp, occasionally strengthened on the top surface and sides with wooden planks or stones. The ramp provided a track along which the battering ram could be moved from the foot of the slope to the outer wall. Once moved into operational position, the ram had to be braked to prevent it from rolling back. The building of such a ramp was evidently necessary in Joab’s campaign against the fortified city of Abel in Beth-maacah (2 Sm 20:15). The biblical account indicates that some sort of battering ram was in use in Israel under King David during the early monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest Assyrian reliefs show that protection of the penetration units was a major consideration. High, mobile assault towers constructed of wood operated in tandem with a battering ram. Such towers, moved into position near a breach operation and manned by archers, provided covering fire directed against the defenders on the wall. Siege towers neutralized the defenders’ advantage in firepower and drew fire away from the crew engaged in breaching the walls.<\/p>\n<p>The details of the Assyrian reliefs make it possible to visualize clearly the fate of Jerusalem, as announced to the prophet Ezekiel (Ez 4:1-3; 21:22). The gate was the focal point of attack because it was the weakest point in the wall. Moreover, the path leading up to the gate made construction of a special ramp unnecessary. In the demolition of a gate, swords were sometimes used to pry the doors loose and to tear down hinges. Wooden doors unprotected by metal were often set on fire.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram continued to be used as an engine for breaching walls in the Hellenistic-Roman period. In 63 <span>BC<\/span> the Roman commander Pompey brought up battering rams from Tyre against the defenders of Jerusalem, and with them penetrated the fortified wall that enclosed the temple. The siege machine shown on Trajan’s column had a beam with an iron head shaped like a ram. It was moved up to a wall in a frame protected by a wooden roof covered with clay or hides. A variation equipped for boring into a wall was used by Titus when besieging Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram was not the only device used to effect a breach in a wall. Troops trained as sappers would tear down a section of the wall by using sharp-headed levers (pikes, swords, spears) or even sledgehammers (cf. Ez 26:8-9). In Ashurnasirpal’s army such men were issued full-length coats of mail to cover their whole bodies. Under later Assyrian kings, they were protected by both round and rectangular shields, which they carried on their backs when engaged in demolition. Later, Ashurbanipal relied exclusively on such sappers for direct penetration of a fortified city. He designed for their protection a huge shield, the curved head of which could be propped against the wall, screening the sapper from missiles while he worked beneath it.<\/p>\n<h5>Scaling the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A battle scene depicted on limestone in the tomb of Anta at Dashashe in Upper Egypt (24th century <span>BC<\/span>) provides the earliest known representation of siege activities. It shows the Egyptians raising a scaling ladder against the walls of a fortified city. By the time of Sargon, the thickness of walls was increased considerably, which permitted construction of much higher walls, more resistant to scaling. Such solid, massive walls also tended to blunt the effectiveness of a battering ram. Sargon, and especially his successor Ashurbanipal, responded by constructing longer scaling ladders, some of which could reach a height of from 25 to 30 feet (7.6 to 9.1 meters), judging from the number of rungs.<\/p>\n<h5>Penetration beneath the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A tunneling operation could be started beyond the range of any weapons at the disposal of the defenders. Once underground, the penetration unit was shielded from enemy fire. The tunneling could be accomplished under cover of night, so that the element of surprise could be exploited to the maximum. It was, however, a lengthy process requiring considerable technical skill. Moreover, if the operation was detected by the defenders before its completion, they could destroy the penetration unit as it emerged from the tunnel. Attempts to penetrate fortified cities by tunneling beneath the walls was a characteristic feature of warfare in Iron Age II. That is confirmed by reliefs, written documents, and archaeological excavation of sites dating to this period, where the remains of attack tunnels have been discovered.<\/p>\n<h5>Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Particularly when a walled city was situated on a high hill, an extended siege provided an alternate method of conquering it. By encircling the city and preventing aid or supplies from reaching its defenders, the attacking army could starve the inhabitants out. That procedure minimized the element of risk for the attacking army. Its success depended upon their capacity to prevent outside assistance from reaching the city and the defenders from leaving it. An army would generally resort to siege when a city’s fortifications were too powerful for direct penetration. The siege of Samaria by the Assyrians lasted for three years (2 Kgs 18:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>The peculiar conditions of siege produced the catapult, a major innovation of Greek artillery and a logical improvement on the bow and the sling. Designed originally as a strengthened bow mounted on a stand and used to fire arrows only, it was introduced around 400 <span>BC<\/span> by Demetrius I. He may have borrowed the idea from the Phoenicians at Carthage.<\/p>\n<p>In the course of time the instrument was improved. The perfect weapon, called the torsion catapult, derived its power from many tightly twisted strands of elastic material, frequently supplied by women’s hair, which could be tightened with a windlass and then released suddenly. Firing arrows, large stones, or fire-baskets with an effective range of 200 yards (182.9 meters), a catapult could clear a wall of its defenders while a battering ram breached it or a boarding party attacked from a mobile tower.<\/p>\n<p>For those in a besieged city, the critical problems were food and water supplies. The horror of famine is stressed in the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by the Syrian Ben-hadad in the days of the prophet Elisha. On that occasion women were reduced to eating their children (2 Kgs 6:26-29). A besieging army would do everything in its power to aggravate such conditions. In one of the siege reliefs of Ashurnasirpal II, a defender has lowered a bucket from the wall to draw water from a stream below; an Assyrian soldier is shown cutting the rope with his dagger.<\/p>\n<h5>Ruses and Stratagems<\/h5>\n<p>Various ruses and stratagems could draw the defenders out of a city or infiltrate troops into the city. If a small force could enter a city by a cunning stratagem, it could overpower the guards and open the city gates to an attacking army. A city’s fortifications were of little value once an enemy had entered the city. Moreover, penetrating a city’s defenses at any one point frequently caused the entire defense system to collapse. The story of the Trojan horse is probably the most celebrated account of a stratagem circumventing the defense of a strongly fortified ancient city.<\/p>\n<p>In the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by Ben-hadad, a sudden lifting of the Syrian siege led Joram, the king of Israel, to suspect a ruse. He refused to believe the report of four lepers that the Syrians had gone, leaving behind large food supplies (2 Kgs 7:12). That was the same kind of tactic that Joshua had employed at Ai (Jos 8:3-8).<\/p>\n<p>On other occasions, powerful armies sought to break down resistance by psychological warfare, as in the unsuccessful attempt by Sennacherib to capture Jerusalem in the time of Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18–19). The dialogue between the Assyrian general and Hezekiah’s delegates reveals that the Assyrian was trying to shake the confidence of the city’s defenders.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a type of ruse used to trap and destroy an enemy at a moment when he was least able to counter a sudden, unexpected blow. Its effectiveness depended almost entirely on the element of surprise. By taking advantage of good intelligence, knowledge of the terrain, and the cover of night, a small force could stage a devastating ambush against vastly superior numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a standard method of combat during the period of the conquest of Canaan. The fall of Ai, for example, was due directly to the tactical success of an ambush (Jos 8:1-23). Under cover of night, Joshua was able to move a large force to a concealed position behind the city. He then led the remainder of the Israelite army to the edge of a valley north of the fortified city, giving the appearance of a planned assault on the city. The diversion, as calculated, drew the main force of Ai away from the city to engage Israel on the plain of Arabah. When the Israelites fell back, appearing to be badly beaten, the remaining defenders of the city were summoned to pursue Joshua’s fleeing army. With the city left undefended, the main Israelite strike force rose from its ambush position, poured into the city, and set it on fire. Too late, the men of Ai saw the smoke from their burning city and realized the stratagem. Joshua’s army turned to counterattack their pursuers, who found themselves trapped between two bodies of Israelite forces. Assaulted from both front and rear, the king of Ai’s army was annihilated, victim of an effectively laid ambush.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FortificationsandDefense\">Fortifications and Defense<\/p>\n<p>The earliest known fortifications in the world, dated by some to about 7000 <span>BC<\/span>, were discovered in 1954 at Jericho. They were impressive in conception and construction. The core of the defense system was a wall, part of which, bordering the western edge of the ancient city, was still standing to a height of 21 feet (6.4 meters). Further excavation uncovered a large moat that had been carved out of solid rock at the base of the wall, 27 feet (8.2 meters) wide and 9 feet (2.7 meters) deep. How that feat was accomplished when the only tools assumed to have been available were made of stone is a complete mystery. A third component of Jericho’s defense system was a huge stone circular tower 30 feet (9.1 meters) high, once evidently attached to the inner side of the western part of the wall. The exact purpose of the tower has not yet been determined, but Neolithic Jericho provides the earliest evidence of a fortified city supported by a wall, tower, and moat.<\/p>\n<p>By the middle Bronze period, there were four components in a standard defense system: a moat, an advance (outer) wall, the main (inner) wall, and a well-fortified gate structure. The moat, advance wall, and subsidiary fortifications protecting the steep slope and lower portion of the main wall were intended to prevent breaching by a battering ram.<\/p>\n<h5>City Walls<\/h5>\n<p>Erection of a simple wall could halt a hostile advance only temporarily, since walls could be scaled or breached. Walls therefore provided a firing platform so defenders could repel attacks. The wall system consisted of three principal components: the wall itself, constituting the barrier; an upper structure, which provided the firing platform and cover for the defenders; and a series of obstacles and traps erected in front of the wall to keep archers at a distance and to prevent operation of a battering ram.<\/p>\n<p>The battlement—a parapet built along the outer top edge of the wall—provided the defenders with a measure of security, freedom for mobility, and openings through which fire could be directed. From a distance the square notches looked like a row of teeth with gaps between them. The teeth, called merlons, provided a protective barrier against hostile missiles. The gaps, called embrasures or crenels, supplied openings through which the defenders could discharge their weapons. Special towers protruded from the outer face of the wall, spaced at a distance no greater than the double range of a bow. Such towers enabled the defenders to fire at troops who managed to reach the walls. One way of protecting the main wall was to construct an outer or advance wall that could be breached or climbed only under heavy fire from defending units on the battlements of the main wall. Another method was to dig a wide, deep moat around the base of the main wall. A moat kept the enemy from using a battering ram unless they could bridge the moat or fill it up at certain points, under concentrated fire from the defenders.<\/p>\n<p>Casemate fortifications, introduced in the middle Bronze period, were developed from double walls built of dressed stones. The space between the walls was divided into chambers, or casemates, used for storage or dwellings. The Hittite casemate system, introduced into Palestine at least as early as the time of Saul, was widely adopted in Syria and Palestine. A fine example has been discovered at Gibeah, where Saul’s citadel was located, dating to the end of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>. The overall thickness of the double walls, including the casemates, reaches 15 feet (4.6 meters). The same type of construction has been found in excavations of three Solomonic cities—Hazor, Gezer, and Megiddo (cf. 1 Kgs 9:15)—where the casemate walls have an overall thickness of 18 feet (5.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>Although the divided kingdoms of Judah and Israel were not noted for technical advancements in offensive warfare, a number of their kings worked at improving fortifications and means of defense. Uzziah was especially remembered for his accomplishments in defensive warfare. Along with other measures, “he produced machines mounted on the walls of Jerusalem, designed by brilliant men to shoot arrows and hurl stones from the towers and the corners of the wall” (2 Chr 26:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those “machines” were special protective structures built to facilitate the task of the archers and to permit huge stones to be dropped on the heads of assaulting troops.<\/p>\n<h5>Gate<\/h5>\n<p>It was inevitable that the gate would be the focus of action in any assault on a fortified city. City gates were therefore designed to expose an attacking army to the greatest risk while providing maximum security to the defenders. The road approaching a city on a hill would wind up the slope, climbing obliquely to the left or the right. Such roads were usually laid out to reach the gate from the right, so an attacker would have to expose the right side of his body to the defenders on the wall. Since he carried his shield in his left hand, that made him more vulnerable.<\/p>\n<p>To prevent the heavy wooden doors of the gate from being set on fire, they were usually plated with metal. A gate wide enough for chariots required double doors, making the line at the center where the two doors met the weakest point in the barrier. Double doors were therefore fitted with huge bolts and fortified with a heavy beam running across the back of both door panels and held in place by sockets set in the doorposts.<\/p>\n<p>Another component in the defense complex at a gate consisted of towers erected on either side of the gate and protruding from the outer face of the wall. Enemy soldiers trying to smash the doors with axes or set them on fire with torches were thus exposed to heavy flanking fire from defensive units on the towers. From a roof over the gate having a balcony, concentrated firepower could be poured down on attackers’ heads. The addition of such auxiliary structures transformed a gate into a small fortress.<\/p>\n<h5>Inner Citadel<\/h5>\n<p>A major weakness of a city’s walls and gate was the magnitude of the circumference. An average-size city might have a perimeter of half a mile (.8 kilometer); a larger city, a perimeter of over a mile (1.6 kilometers). Yet the entire wall had to be defended against breaching, scaling, or tunneling. An attacking army would use diversionary tactics to keep defenders dispersed along the entire perimeter but concentrate their primary assault at one point in the wall. Once the wall was breached, perimeter fortifications served no further defensive purpose. Therefore, internal walls were often added to subdivide a city into several sections, each capable of independent defense. Also, on the highest point of land within the city a citadel would be constructed as a self-contained defensive unit.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest examples of such fortifications, called migdols, are found in the late Bronze Age. They were originally small citadels built to guard important military targets such as sources of water, strategic routes, cultivated farmlands, or frontiers. A migdol of that type was discovered in Israel, not far from Ashdod, in 1960. It was square in plan, with rectangular bastions, and was two stories high, just like structures depicted in Egyptian reliefs from the same period. The same design was used to fortify temples inside of cities. Such fortified temples served as places of refuge and as a city’s final defense once its walls had been breached (cf. Jgs 9:45-51).<\/p>\n<p>In a later period an inner citadel could embrace a complex consisting of the fortified palace of the governor, dwellings of his chief ministers, and sometimes the temple. Such citadels resembled fortified cities, possessing a main wall, a gateway, an outer wall, and occasionally a moat. Being small in area and heavily fortified, citadels could be defended in a final effort by the governor and remaining inhabitants. Presumably Zimri could have held out against Omri’s army for an extended period in the citadel of Tirzah, had he not committed suicide by setting it on fire (1 Kgs 16:17-18).<\/p>\n<h5>Water Supply under Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Unless provision was made to keep a city’s inhabitants supplied with food and water during a protracted siege, no defense system could be effective. Several Judean kings made efforts to solve the food-storage problem. Rehoboam, for example, fortified a number of cities located on the western, eastern, and southern borders of his kingdom and made them centers for the storage of food, oil, and wine (2 Chr 11:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Storage of food was easier than storage of water. Cisterns built to collect rainwater were a partial answer, but cisterns often ran dry, particularly in times of drought. Cities were sometimes built on the banks of a stream or river, using the stream as part of the city’s defense system. But for a city built on a hill, the source of water might be a spring located at the foot of the slope and outside the city walls. Sometimes the mouth of the spring could be blocked and its location concealed from the enemy while still allowing access by the inhabitants. At Megiddo a vertical shaft 100 feet (274.3 meters) deep was connected by a horizontal tunnel about 200 feet (548.6 meters) long to the water supply at the western end of the city, beyond the fortifications. The work was undertaken in the time of either Solomon or Ahab.<\/p>\n<p>The most celebrated measures to guarantee a supply of fresh water in a time of siege were those taken by Hezekiah at Jerusalem. That engineering achievement is recalled in all the summaries of his reign, both in the Bible and in the “Praise of Famous Men” in the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus (2 Kgs 20:20; 2 Chr 32:30; Ecclus 48:17). The prodigious feat commemorated in those references was the sealing of the spring of Gihon and the cutting of an 1,800-foot (548.6-meter) channel through solid rock in order to bring water into a reservoir in the city. How it was accomplished was reported by Hezekiah himself in the famous Siloam inscription. Two crews, working with hammers, wedges, and pickaxes, began at opposite ends. The crew that began at the spring was able to take advantage of the older tunnel (cf. Is 22:11). They turned due south, in the direction of the city. The other crew, starting from the reservoir, began in a northeasterly direction. They then turned southeast until they reached the north-south line followed by the crew tunneling from the spring, when they turned due north to meet them. The two crews almost passed each other, being about five feet (1.5 meters) apart, but a shout from one was heard through a crevice in the rock by the other. Both parties turned sharply right, and the tunnel was completed. Hezekiah’s precautionary step, taken before Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah, helps to explain why the Assyrians were unable to subdue Jerusalem by the siege tactics that had earlier subdued Samaria in the time of Sargon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewMilitaryOrganization\">Hebrew Military Organization<\/p>\n<h5>Tribal Army<\/h5>\n<p>In their exodus from Egypt the Israelites were organized by tribes and divisions. That systematic arrangement for their trek through the wilderness provided a precedent for military organization. After the sojourn at Mt Sinai, the 12 tribes were divided into divisions or army corps, and certain grades in military rank began to appear. The “officers of the army” (Nm 31:14) had command over units of 1,000 or 100 men, which suggests that the tribal army was divided into decimal units. At a later period there is reference to units of 1,000 (the division), 100 (the company), 50 (the platoon), and 10 (the section). Except for the Levites, who were assigned as a tribe to the care of the tabernacle (Nm 2:33), men from 20 years of age who were physically able to fight were assigned to a unit in the tribal army. Certain individuals, however, were exempted from military service (cf. Dt 20:5-9; 24:5; Jgs 7:3).<\/p>\n<p>Until after the conquest of Canaan, the tribal army was essentially a militia recruited in an emergency. Internal organization of the militia was the responsibility of the tribe; each clan and family sent their quota of warriors when summoned to battle by tribal leaders. Because the clan formed the basic unit, recruits were under the command of their own leaders. David’s brothers, for example, served in a division composed of the fighting men from their clan under the command of a captain (1 Sm 17:18; 18:13). When the emergency passed, the militia was disbanded and the soldiers returned to their home districts.<\/p>\n<p>Because the land was divided among the tribes, no tribal or clan leader before Saul commanded the entire tribal confederation (cf. 1 Sm 11:1-11). In fact, tribal jealousies and rivalries threatened national solidarity and jeopardized united action even in a critical period. On some occasions, however, the severity of a crisis caused the armies of the various tribes to unite in common action. The multitribal armies were divided into companies of 1,000, 100, and 50, and still further into families under appointed officers. There is evidence of organization into units according to weaponry (1 Chr 12:24-38). Benjamin’s tribe specialized in the bow and sling. The tribes of Gad, Judah, and Naphtali were expert with the spear and shield.<\/p>\n<p>Provisioning the tribal army was the responsibility of each tribe (Jgs 20:9-10). One out of every ten soldiers was appointed to secure food for the others, either from wealthy landowners (cf. 1 Sm 25) or from the natural resources of the land. In that early stage of military organization, a soldier’s pay generally consisted only of supplies and a portion of the spoils of battle (cf. 30:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Professional Army<\/h5>\n<p>Not until the time of the united monarchy did Israel have a regular army. Transition from a people’s militia to a professional army took place under Saul, whose reign changed the tribal confederacy into a monarchy (1 Sm 13:2). Philistine harassment of Israel encouraged establishment of a strong standing army. The army, however, was not large; it consisted of 3,000 men organized in three formations of 1,000 each (1 Sm 13:2; 24:2). Pay for those career soldiers was sometimes in the form of a land grant (8:14) as well as a share of booty. In the organization of Saul’s army, Abner, Jonathan, and David were given particular responsibilities. Abner was named commander of the army (17:55) and was probably also given direct command of one of the divisions. David’s band of valorous men, “the thirty,” provided the leadership core for his own military organization when he became king.<\/p>\n<p>David continued the practice of maintaining a professional army. But he also developed a national militia of 12 regiments, each being called up for duty for one month of the year under professional officers (1 Chr 27:1-15). Each regiment, recruited across tribal lines, consisted of 24,000 soldiers. David’s innovation provided him with a large reserve force that could be mustered for war in times of emergency. The reserves, and presumably the professional army as well, were organized into units of 1,000, 100, 50, and 10. Joab, a specialist in siege warfare (2 Sm 20:15), commanded the professional army, and Amasa was over the citizens’ militia. David, however, remained commander-in-chief of the military organization.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelite group in King David’s professional army was an outgrowth of the small band of fighting men who had served with him during the period of conflict with Saul. That veteran group consisted of David’s family and clansmen, and others who felt themselves oppressed by the central authority under Saul (1 Sm 22:1-2). It ranged in size between 400 and 600 men (1 Sm 22:2; 23:13; 27:2). The presence of mercenaries in David’s army is clearly recorded. Uriah the Hittite and Ittai of Gath are conspicuous examples, along with many career soldiers of Philistine origin, such as the Cherethites and the Pelethites under Benaiah (2 Sm 8:18; 15:19-22; 23:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>The Davidic dynasty maintained a permanent mercenary army until 701 <span>BC<\/span>, after which it was considered too costly. The oppressive cost of maintaining a professional army, financed by burdensome taxes and forced labor, was in fact a major factor contributing to the disruption of the monarchy after Solomon’s death (cf. 1 Kgs 10:26-29; 12:4-19). After Sennacherib’s invasion in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, the southern kingdom of Judah depended entirely on a citizens’ militia for its defense. It is commonly held that the northern kingdom of Israel did not employ a professional army, but it is evident that King Ahab used at least some mercenary soldiers in his defense against Ben-hadad of Syria (1 Kgs 20:15-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Armor and Weapons.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WARFARE The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense. Methods of Warfare Standard Combat Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium BC and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of ...","summary_en":"WARFARE The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense. Methods of Warfare Standard Combat Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium BC and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of ...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46623,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:18","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:18<\/strong> <em>the king’s bodyguard:<\/em> Hebrew <em>the Kerethites and Pelethites.<\/em> Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • <em>David’s sons served as priestly leaders:<\/em> David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal court (see also study note on 2 Sam 20:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:18<\/strong> <em>the king’s bodyguard:<\/em> Hebrew <em>the Kerethites and Pelethites.<\/em> Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • <em>David’s sons served as priestly leaders:<\/em> David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal court (see also study note on 2 Sam 20:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:18 the king’s bodyguard: Hebrew the Kerethites and Pelethites. Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • David’s sons served as priestly leaders: David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal...","summary_en":"8:18 the king’s bodyguard: Hebrew the Kerethites and Pelethites. Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • David’s sons served as priestly leaders: David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":74249,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:18","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:18<\/strong> <em>the king’s bodyguard:<\/em> Hebrew <em>the Kerethites and Pelethites.<\/em> Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • <em>David’s sons served as priestly leaders:<\/em> David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal court (see also study note on 2 Sam 20:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:18<\/strong> <em>the king’s bodyguard:<\/em> Hebrew <em>the Kerethites and Pelethites.<\/em> Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • <em>David’s sons served as priestly leaders:<\/em> David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal court (see also study note on 2 Sam 20:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:18 the king’s bodyguard: Hebrew the Kerethites and Pelethites. Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • David’s sons served as priestly leaders: David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal...","summary_en":"8:18 the king’s bodyguard: Hebrew the Kerethites and Pelethites. Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • David’s sons served as priestly leaders: David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101875,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:18","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:18<\/strong> <em>the king’s bodyguard:<\/em> Hebrew <em>the Kerethites and Pelethites.<\/em> Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • <em>David’s sons served as priestly leaders:<\/em> David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal court (see also study note on 2 Sam 20:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:18<\/strong> <em>the king’s bodyguard:<\/em> Hebrew <em>the Kerethites and Pelethites.<\/em> Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • <em>David’s sons served as priestly leaders:<\/em> David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal court (see also study note on 2 Sam 20:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:18 the king’s bodyguard: Hebrew the Kerethites and Pelethites. Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • David’s sons served as priestly leaders: David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal...","summary_en":"8:18 the king’s bodyguard: Hebrew the Kerethites and Pelethites. Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • David’s sons served as priestly leaders: David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":129501,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: 2 Samuel 8:18","title_en":"Study Note: 2 Samuel 8:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:18<\/strong> <em>the king’s bodyguard:<\/em> Hebrew <em>the Kerethites and Pelethites.<\/em> Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • <em>David’s sons served as priestly leaders:<\/em> David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal court (see also study note on 2 Sam 20:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:18<\/strong> <em>the king’s bodyguard:<\/em> Hebrew <em>the Kerethites and Pelethites.<\/em> Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • <em>David’s sons served as priestly leaders:<\/em> David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal court (see also study note on 2 Sam 20:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:18 the king’s bodyguard: Hebrew the Kerethites and Pelethites. Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • David’s sons served as priestly leaders: David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal...","summary_en":"8:18 the king’s bodyguard: Hebrew the Kerethites and Pelethites. Both peoples were probably foreigners, especially the Kerethites, who might have come from the island of Crete (see also 1 Sam 30:14; Ezek 25:16). These groups might have been Philistine mercenaries. • David’s sons served as priestly leaders: David was from Judah and was not a Levite. Alongside the traditional priesthood, David might have inaugurated a religious class specifically tied to his dynasty, probably to serve the royal...","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.
2 Samuel 8
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse
Muzică de relaxareSelectează o piesă
0:00
Redare audio
0 piese
🍪 Folosim cookie-uri
Folosim cookie-uri esențiale pentru funcționarea platformei și cookie-uri de analiză pentru a îmbunătăți experiența ta.
Află mai multe
✝️
Logosasistentul Biserica Online
✝️
Bine ai venit! 👋
Sunt Logos, prietenul tău spiritual. Începe conversația — te ascult cu drag! ✨