📖 Biblia online

Citește Biblia

Biblia audio Planuri audio structurate — ascultă Biblia zilnică

Deuteronom 12

¹ Iată legile şi poruncile pe cari să le păziţi şi să le împliniţi, cât veţi trăi, în ţara pe care v-o dă în stăpânire Domnul, Dumnezeul părinţilor voştri.

² Să nimiciţi toate locurile în cari slujesc dumnezeilor lor neamurile pe cari le veţi izgoni, fie pe munţi înalţi, fie pe dealuri, şi subt orice copac verde.

³ Să le surpaţi altarele, să le sfărâmaţi stâlpii idoleşti, să le ardeţi în foc copacii închinaţi idolilor lor, să dărâmaţi chipurile cioplite ale dumnezeilor lor, şi să faceţi să le piară numele din locurile acelea.

⁴ Voi să nu faceţi aşa faţă de Domnul, Dumnezeul vostru!

⁵ Ci să -L căutaţi la locaşul Lui, şi să mergeţi la locul pe care-l va alege Domnul Dumnezeul vostru, din toate seminţiile voastre, ca să-Şi aşeze acolo Numele Lui.

⁶ Acolo să vă aduceţi arderile voastre de tot, jertfele voastre, zeciuielile voastre, cele dintâi roade, darurile aduse ca împlinire a unei juruinţe, darurile de bună voie, şi întâii-născuţi din cirezile şi turmele voastre.

⁷ Acolo să mâncaţi înaintea Domnului, Dumnezeului vostru, şi să vă bucuraţi, împreună cu familiile voastre, de toate bunurile cu cari vă va fi binecuvântat Domnul, Dumnezeul vostru.

⁸ Să nu faceţi dar cum facem noi acum aici, unde fiecare face ce-i place,

⁹ fiindcă n-aţi ajuns încă în locul de odihnă şi în moştenirea pe care v-o dă Domnul, Dumnezeul vostru.

¹⁰ Dar veţi trece Iordanul, şi veţi locui în ţara pe care v-o va da în stăpânire Domnul, Dumnezeul vostru. El vă va da odihnă, dupăce vă va izbăvi de toţi vrăjmaşii voştri cari vă înconjoară, şi veţi locui fără frică.

¹¹ Atunci va fi un loc, pe care-l va alege Domnul, Dumnezeul vostru, ca să facă să locuiască Numele Lui acolo. Acolo să aduceţi tot ce vă poruncesc, arderile voastre de tot, jertfele, zeciuielile, cele dintâi roade, şi darurile alese pe cari le veţi face Domnului pentru împlinirea juruinţelor voastre.

¹² Acolo să vă bucuraţi înaintea Domnului, Dumnezeului vostru, voi, fiii voştri şi fiicele voastre, robii şi roabele voastre, şi Levitul care va fi în locurile voastre, căci el n-are nici parte de moşie, nici moştenire cu voi.

¹³ Vezi să n-aduci arderile tale de tot în toate locurile pe cari le vei vedea;

¹⁴ ci să-ţi aduci arderile de tot în locul pe care-l va alege Domnul în una din seminţiile tale, şi acolo să faci tot ce-ţi poruncesc eu.

¹⁵ Totuş, când vei dori, vei putea să junghii vite şi să mănânci carne în toate cetăţile tale, cât îţi va fi dat prin binecuvântarea Domnului, Dumnezeului tău; cel ce va fi necurat şi cel ce va fi curat vor putea să mănânce din ea, cum se mănâncă din căprioară şi din cerb.

¹⁶ Numai sângele să nu-l mâncaţi, ci să-l vărsaţi pe pământ ca apa.

¹⁷ Nu vei putea să mănânci în cetăţile tale zeciuiala din grâul tău, din mustul tău şi din untdelemnul tău, nici întâii născuţi din cirezile şi turmele tale, nici vreunul din darurile aduse de tine pentru împlinirea unei juruinţe, nici darurile tale de bună voie, nici cele dintâi roade ale tale.

¹⁸ Ci pe acestea să le mănânci înaintea Domnului, Dumnezeului tău, în locul pe care-l va alege Domnul, Dumnezeul tău, tu, fiul tău şi fiica ta, robul şi roaba ta, şi Levitul care va fi în cetăţile tale; şi să te bucuri înaintea Domnului, Dumnezeului tău, de toate bunurile pe cari le vei avea.

¹⁹ Cât vei trăi în ţara ta, vezi să nu cumva să părăseşti pe Levit.

²⁰ Când Domnul, Dumnezeul tău, îţi va lărgi hotarele, cum ţi-a făgăduit, şi dorinţa să mănânci carne te va face să zici: ,,Aş vrea să mănânc carne!`` vei putea să mănânci după dorinţa ta.

²¹ Dacă locul pe care-l va alege Domnul, Dumnezeul tău, ca să-Şi aşeze acolo Numele, este departe de tine, vei putea să tai vite din cireadă şi din turmă, cum ţi-am poruncit, şi vei putea să mănânci din ele în cetăţile tale, după dorinţa ta.

²² Să mănânci din ele cum se mănâncă din căprioară şi cerb; cel ce va fi necurat şi cel ce va fi curat vor mânca şi ei amândoi.

²³ Numai, vezi să nu cumva să mănânci sângele, căci sângele este viaţa (sufletul); şi să nu mănânci sufletul împreună cu carnea.

²⁴ Să nu-l mănânci, ci să-l verşi pe pământ ca apa.

²⁵ Să nu-l mănânci, ca să fii fericit, tu şi copiii tăi după tine, făcând ce este plăcut înaintea Domnului.

²⁶ Dar lucrurile pe cari vei voi să le închini Domnului şi darurile pe cari le vei aduce pentru împlinirea unei juruinţe, să te duci să le aduci în locul pe care-l va alege Domnul.

²⁷ Să-ţi aduci arderile de tot, carnea şi sângele, pe altarul Domnului, Dumnezeului tău: în celelalte jertfe ale tale, sângele să fie vărsat pe altarul Domnului, Dumnezeului tău, iar carnea s-o mănânci.

²⁸ Păzeşte şi ascultă toate aceste lucruri pe cari ţi le poruncesc, ca să fii fericit, tu şi copiii tăi după tine, pe vecie, făcând ce este bine şi ce este plăcut înaintea Domnului, Dumnezeului tău.

²⁹ După ce Domnul, Dumnezeul tău, va nimici toate neamurile pe cari le vei izgoni dinaintea ta, dupăce le vei izgoni şi te vei aşeza în ţara lor,

³⁰ vezi să nu te laşi prins în cursă, călcând pe urmele lor, dupăce vor fi nimicite dinaintea ta. Fereşte-te să nu cercetezi despre dumnezeii lor şi să zici: ,,Cum slujeau neamurile acestea dumnezeilor lor? Şi eu vreau să fac la fel.``

³¹ Tu să nu faci aşa faţă de Domnul, Dumnezeul tău; căci ele slujeau dumnezeilor lor, făcând toate urâciunile pe cari le urăşte Domnul, şi ele chiar îşi ardeau în foc fiii şi fiicele lor în cinstea dumnezeilor lor.

³² Voi să păziţi şi să împliniţi toate lucrurile pe cari vi le poruncesc eu; să n-adăugaţi nimic la ele, şi să nu scoateţi nimic din ele.

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":7878,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant","title_en":"Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\nArrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\nAt a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n• Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\nThe essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\nIn the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\nHuman Covenants<\/p>\nA variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\nTo appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\nAn individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\nCovenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\nCovenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\nDivine-Human Covenants<\/p>\nThe same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\nThe concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\nBeginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\nAdam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\nThe fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\nThe first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\nThe covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\nThe covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\nThe first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nFormal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\nYet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\nGod’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\nThe covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\nAnother dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\nThus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\nThe Sinai Covenant<\/p>\nThe covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\nIn order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\nThe basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\nGod’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\nThe covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\nThe second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\nThe covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\nThe most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\nMany aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\nThe Covenant with David<\/p>\nThe covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\nChristians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\nThe New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nAlthough David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\nHosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\nThe new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\nThus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\nConclusion<\/p>\nCovenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\nArrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\nAt a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n• Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\nThe essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\nIn the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\nHuman Covenants<\/p>\nA variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\nTo appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\nAn individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\nCovenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\nCovenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\nDivine-Human Covenants<\/p>\nThe same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\nThe concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\nBeginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\nAdam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\nThe fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\nThe first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\nThe covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\nThe covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\nThe first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nFormal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\nYet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\nGod’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\nThe covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\nAnother dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\nThus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\nThe Sinai Covenant<\/p>\nThe covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\nIn order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\nThe basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\nGod’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\nThe covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\nThe second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\nThe covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\nThe most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\nMany aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\nThe Covenant with David<\/p>\nThe covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\nChristians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\nThe New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nAlthough David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\nHosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\nThe new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\nThus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\nConclusion<\/p>\nCovenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","summary_en":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9446,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Deuteronomy","title_en":"Book of Deuteronomy","content_ro":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\nFifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\nPreview<\/p>\n• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n• Historical Setting<\/p>\n• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nDate and Authorship<\/p>\nTwo basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\nAs early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\nMany modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\nIn recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\nThe book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\nThe fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\nHistorical Setting<\/p>\nMoses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\nIn that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\nNumbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\nThe book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\nSignificance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\nDeuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\nJesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\nThe primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\nDeuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\nTo designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\nThe NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\nMoses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\nMoses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\nInstructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\nThe Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\nMoses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\nThe circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\nMoses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\nLove is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The Lord<\/span> is our God, the Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\nExclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\nThe Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\nMoses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\nThe Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\nThe God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\nMoses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\nThe Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\nIn the first century AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\nIn Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\nIn worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\nCanaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\nMoses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\nIn human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\nIn domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\nIn Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\nMoses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\nWhen the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\nThe “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\nAfter some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\nThe book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\nFifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\nPreview<\/p>\n• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n• Historical Setting<\/p>\n• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nDate and Authorship<\/p>\nTwo basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\nAs early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\nMany modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\nIn recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\nThe book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\nThe fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\nHistorical Setting<\/p>\nMoses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\nIn that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\nNumbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\nThe book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\nSignificance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\nDeuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\nJesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\nThe primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\nDeuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\nTo designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\nThe NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\nMoses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\nMoses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\nInstructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\nThe Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\nMoses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\nThe circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\nMoses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\nLove is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The Lord<\/span> is our God, the Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\nExclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\nThe Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\nMoses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\nThe Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\nThe God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\nMoses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\nThe Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\nIn the first century AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\nIn Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\nIn worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\nCanaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\nMoses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\nIn human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\nIn domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\nIn Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\nMoses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\nWhen the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\nThe “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\nAfter some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\nThe book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","summary_en":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10442,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Papyri*, Elephantine","title_en":"Papyri*, Elephantine","content_ro":"<h3>ELEPHANTINE PAPYRI*<\/h3>\nAramaic documents from the fifth century BC<\/span> discovered at Elephantine, an island in the Nile River. At the time of the documents’ writing, Elephantine was a Persian military outpost, manned in part by a group of Jewish mercenaries with their families. The documents, numbering over 100, belong primarily to three archives—two familial and one communal. The archives contained many complete scrolls that were still tied and sealed at the time of their discovery, along with numerous broken papyri and fragments.<\/p>\nThe manuscripts are of considerable archaeological importance. Several centuries older than most of the Dead Sea Scrolls, they portray the social, political, and religious life of a Jewish community outside Palestine. Several points of contact are made with the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.<\/p>\nSince most of the documents are legal texts, they are an important link in the history of law in the ancient Near East. The texts also provide valuable information about the Aramaic spoken in the period and illustrate the daily life of a Persian frontier military colony.<\/p>\n\nAncient Elephantine<\/p>\nElephantine was located on the southern tip of a small island in the Nile River a few kilometers north of the first cataract, opposite its twin city, ancient Syene (modern Aswan). The Bible probably includes the twin cities of Elephantine and Syene in two occurrences of the phrase “from Migdol to Syene” (Ez 29:10; 30:6), that is, from Egypt’s northern border to its southern border. The city’s name was an Aramaic version of an Egyptian name meaning “city of ivories” and was translated into Greek as Elephantine.<\/em> Because of its strategic importance on Egypt’s southern boundary with Nubia, it was probably fortified as early as the third dynasty (27th century BC<\/span>) and figured repeatedly in Egypt’s military history.<\/p>\nElephantine was also a major commercial center. Since the first cataract was just upstream from Elephantine\/ Syene, the twin towns were the terminal ports for deep water navigation. Both towns had wharves and were fortified with garrisons to protect the trade in ivory, animal skins, spices, minerals, slaves, and food. Also a religious center, Elephantine was the temple city of Khnum, the Egyptian god of the cataract region, who presided over the flood cycles of the Nile.<\/p>\nDiscovery of the Papyri<\/p>\nElephantine came into archaeological prominence with the discoveries of the papyri. The discoveries were made in three stages. The first group to be published (in 1906) had been gathered by purchases from antiquities dealers and was housed in the Cairo Museum. That first publication stimulated German and French excavations at Elephantine in the hope of discovering more papyri. The Berlin Museum was rewarded for its efforts with a second group of papyri, published in 1911. Ironically, a group of papyri discovered in the late 19th century was the last to be studied and published. American scholar C. E. Wilbour purchased papyri in 1893 from some Arab women at Aswan. In storage until Wilbour’s daughter bequeathed them to the Brooklyn Museum, they were finally published in 1953. Since 1912, other excavations have been mounted by the pontifical Biblical Institute of Rome and the Egyptian government, but no further papyri were found.<\/p>\nJewish Colony<\/p>\nAt the time the papyri were written, the Jews were already well established in Elephantine. The legal documents among the excavated papyri give a clear picture of life in the military colony at Elephantine. In addition to the Jewish mercenaries (“men of the regiment”), Jewish civilians (“men of the town”) were also present. The soldiers were organized into military units, which also appear to have had socioeconomic functions. Though subject to military discipline, the soldiers enjoyed considerable personal freedom. They led normal family lives, engaged in all types of commerce, and bequeathed their properties to their children. Marriage at Elephantine required the consent of the bride as well as the father, and could be dissolved by either party through a public declaration that he or she “hates” the other.<\/p>\nThe Elephantine Jews worshiped in their own temple, which was dedicated to the Hebrew God, whom they called Yahu (a variation on Yahweh). Political and religious leaders at Elephantine were in correspondence with officials in Jerusalem and Samaria.<\/p>\nThere is no conclusive evidence regarding when the Jewish presence at Elephantine began. Jews could have entered Egypt on any of several occasions from the eighth to the early sixth centuries BC<\/span>. One document from Elephantine claims that the Jewish temple there was built during a period of native Egyptian rule before the Persian conquest under Cambyses (reigned 529–522 BC<\/span>). That would give a date for the construction of the Elephantine temple by the mid-sixth century at the latest.<\/p>\nElephantine Judaism<\/p>\nIn spite of the law of a single sanctuary (Dt 12:1-11), and in spite of the recent reforms of kings Hezekiah and Josiah in the seventh and eighth centuries BC<\/span> that centralized worship in Jerusalem, the Elephantine Jews seem to have felt no wrong in having a temple in Egypt. Neither the German, French, Italian, nor Egyptian excavations located the Jewish temple, but the documents record that the temple was oriented toward Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe Elephantine Jews may have recognized Jerusalem’s primacy in religious affairs. When the temple at Elephantine was destroyed by priests of the Khnum temple in 410 BC<\/span>, an appeal was sent to Johanan the high priest (cf. Neh 12:22; 13:28) and Bagoas the governor of Judah, seeking their permission and influence for its restoration. The appeal produced no response, perhaps because of the Jerusalem leadership’s disapproval of the temple in Egypt. A second appeal, sent three years later to Bagoas, governor of Judah, and to Delaiah and Shelemiah, sons of Sanballat, governor of Samaria, produced an oral reply, recorded in a memorandum. The reply ordered the temple’s rebuilding and the resumption of meal and incense offerings. Permission to reinstitute the burnt offering, however, was not given, perhaps as a concession to Egyptian or Persian religious convictions. A deed for a piece of property, dated 402 BC<\/span>, mentions the temple of Yahu, implying that it was in fact rebuilt.<\/p>\nThe Elephantine Jews probably brought with them to Egypt the popular religion that was so strongly denounced by the prophets before the destruction of the Jerusalem temple. God was central in their faith, but they also worshiped other gods, even if only in a subsidiary fashion. Evidence of departure from orthodox worship of God comes from a list of offerings that mentions two Aramean deities, Eshembethel and Anathbethel. Oaths at Elephantine were sworn almost exclusively in the name of Yahu, but they were also sworn occasionally in the names of an Egyptian goddess, Sati, and another Aramean deity, Herembethel. Salutations in letters invoked the blessings of a variety of deities. Moreover, intermarriage with surrounding peoples, forbidden in the OT because it would lead to religious apostasy (Ex 34:11-16; Dt 7:1-5), had become a common practice at Elephantine. It was a contemporary problem in Israel as well under Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezr 9:1–10:44; Neh 13:23-28). Children of mixed marriages in Elephantine often had Egyptian names.<\/p>\nNevertheless, the archives also show that the Elephantine Jews continued to observe the Jewish feasts. An order from King Darius II in 419 BC<\/span> commanded the Jews at Elephantine to observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The text, broken immediately before this reference, presumably also contained instructions to observe the Passover. Four ostraca (potsherds) also refer to the Sabbath but provide few clues regarding Sabbath observance at Elephantine.<\/p>\nLanguage of the Papyri<\/p>\nExcept for slight differences, the Aramaic of the Elephantine papyri is the same as biblical Aramaic. Both are a part of a dialect known as Imperial Aramaic, the international and commercial language of the Persian Empire. The personal names continued to be Hebrew, but there is no direct evidence that Hebrew was used by the community. Aramaic was the daily language, and there is no suggestion of controversy over whether or not Hebrew should be used in Jewish homes, as was the case with Nehemiah in Jerusalem (Neh 13:23-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ELEPHANTINE PAPYRI*<\/h3>\nAramaic documents from the fifth century BC<\/span> discovered at Elephantine, an island in the Nile River. At the time of the documents’ writing, Elephantine was a Persian military outpost, manned in part by a group of Jewish mercenaries with their families. The documents, numbering over 100, belong primarily to three archives—two familial and one communal. The archives contained many complete scrolls that were still tied and sealed at the time of their discovery, along with numerous broken papyri and fragments.<\/p>\nThe manuscripts are of considerable archaeological importance. Several centuries older than most of the Dead Sea Scrolls, they portray the social, political, and religious life of a Jewish community outside Palestine. Several points of contact are made with the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.<\/p>\nSince most of the documents are legal texts, they are an important link in the history of law in the ancient Near East. The texts also provide valuable information about the Aramaic spoken in the period and illustrate the daily life of a Persian frontier military colony.<\/p>\n\nAncient Elephantine<\/p>\nElephantine was located on the southern tip of a small island in the Nile River a few kilometers north of the first cataract, opposite its twin city, ancient Syene (modern Aswan). The Bible probably includes the twin cities of Elephantine and Syene in two occurrences of the phrase “from Migdol to Syene” (Ez 29:10; 30:6), that is, from Egypt’s northern border to its southern border. The city’s name was an Aramaic version of an Egyptian name meaning “city of ivories” and was translated into Greek as Elephantine.<\/em> Because of its strategic importance on Egypt’s southern boundary with Nubia, it was probably fortified as early as the third dynasty (27th century BC<\/span>) and figured repeatedly in Egypt’s military history.<\/p>\nElephantine was also a major commercial center. Since the first cataract was just upstream from Elephantine\/ Syene, the twin towns were the terminal ports for deep water navigation. Both towns had wharves and were fortified with garrisons to protect the trade in ivory, animal skins, spices, minerals, slaves, and food. Also a religious center, Elephantine was the temple city of Khnum, the Egyptian god of the cataract region, who presided over the flood cycles of the Nile.<\/p>\nDiscovery of the Papyri<\/p>\nElephantine came into archaeological prominence with the discoveries of the papyri. The discoveries were made in three stages. The first group to be published (in 1906) had been gathered by purchases from antiquities dealers and was housed in the Cairo Museum. That first publication stimulated German and French excavations at Elephantine in the hope of discovering more papyri. The Berlin Museum was rewarded for its efforts with a second group of papyri, published in 1911. Ironically, a group of papyri discovered in the late 19th century was the last to be studied and published. American scholar C. E. Wilbour purchased papyri in 1893 from some Arab women at Aswan. In storage until Wilbour’s daughter bequeathed them to the Brooklyn Museum, they were finally published in 1953. Since 1912, other excavations have been mounted by the pontifical Biblical Institute of Rome and the Egyptian government, but no further papyri were found.<\/p>\nJewish Colony<\/p>\nAt the time the papyri were written, the Jews were already well established in Elephantine. The legal documents among the excavated papyri give a clear picture of life in the military colony at Elephantine. In addition to the Jewish mercenaries (“men of the regiment”), Jewish civilians (“men of the town”) were also present. The soldiers were organized into military units, which also appear to have had socioeconomic functions. Though subject to military discipline, the soldiers enjoyed considerable personal freedom. They led normal family lives, engaged in all types of commerce, and bequeathed their properties to their children. Marriage at Elephantine required the consent of the bride as well as the father, and could be dissolved by either party through a public declaration that he or she “hates” the other.<\/p>\nThe Elephantine Jews worshiped in their own temple, which was dedicated to the Hebrew God, whom they called Yahu (a variation on Yahweh). Political and religious leaders at Elephantine were in correspondence with officials in Jerusalem and Samaria.<\/p>\nThere is no conclusive evidence regarding when the Jewish presence at Elephantine began. Jews could have entered Egypt on any of several occasions from the eighth to the early sixth centuries BC<\/span>. One document from Elephantine claims that the Jewish temple there was built during a period of native Egyptian rule before the Persian conquest under Cambyses (reigned 529–522 BC<\/span>). That would give a date for the construction of the Elephantine temple by the mid-sixth century at the latest.<\/p>\nElephantine Judaism<\/p>\nIn spite of the law of a single sanctuary (Dt 12:1-11), and in spite of the recent reforms of kings Hezekiah and Josiah in the seventh and eighth centuries BC<\/span> that centralized worship in Jerusalem, the Elephantine Jews seem to have felt no wrong in having a temple in Egypt. Neither the German, French, Italian, nor Egyptian excavations located the Jewish temple, but the documents record that the temple was oriented toward Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe Elephantine Jews may have recognized Jerusalem’s primacy in religious affairs. When the temple at Elephantine was destroyed by priests of the Khnum temple in 410 BC<\/span>, an appeal was sent to Johanan the high priest (cf. Neh 12:22; 13:28) and Bagoas the governor of Judah, seeking their permission and influence for its restoration. The appeal produced no response, perhaps because of the Jerusalem leadership’s disapproval of the temple in Egypt. A second appeal, sent three years later to Bagoas, governor of Judah, and to Delaiah and Shelemiah, sons of Sanballat, governor of Samaria, produced an oral reply, recorded in a memorandum. The reply ordered the temple’s rebuilding and the resumption of meal and incense offerings. Permission to reinstitute the burnt offering, however, was not given, perhaps as a concession to Egyptian or Persian religious convictions. A deed for a piece of property, dated 402 BC<\/span>, mentions the temple of Yahu, implying that it was in fact rebuilt.<\/p>\nThe Elephantine Jews probably brought with them to Egypt the popular religion that was so strongly denounced by the prophets before the destruction of the Jerusalem temple. God was central in their faith, but they also worshiped other gods, even if only in a subsidiary fashion. Evidence of departure from orthodox worship of God comes from a list of offerings that mentions two Aramean deities, Eshembethel and Anathbethel. Oaths at Elephantine were sworn almost exclusively in the name of Yahu, but they were also sworn occasionally in the names of an Egyptian goddess, Sati, and another Aramean deity, Herembethel. Salutations in letters invoked the blessings of a variety of deities. Moreover, intermarriage with surrounding peoples, forbidden in the OT because it would lead to religious apostasy (Ex 34:11-16; Dt 7:1-5), had become a common practice at Elephantine. It was a contemporary problem in Israel as well under Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezr 9:1–10:44; Neh 13:23-28). Children of mixed marriages in Elephantine often had Egyptian names.<\/p>\nNevertheless, the archives also show that the Elephantine Jews continued to observe the Jewish feasts. An order from King Darius II in 419 BC<\/span> commanded the Jews at Elephantine to observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The text, broken immediately before this reference, presumably also contained instructions to observe the Passover. Four ostraca (potsherds) also refer to the Sabbath but provide few clues regarding Sabbath observance at Elephantine.<\/p>\nLanguage of the Papyri<\/p>\nExcept for slight differences, the Aramaic of the Elephantine papyri is the same as biblical Aramaic. Both are a part of a dialect known as Imperial Aramaic, the international and commercial language of the Persian Empire. The personal names continued to be Hebrew, but there is no direct evidence that Hebrew was used by the community. Aramaic was the daily language, and there is no suggestion of controversy over whether or not Hebrew should be used in Jewish homes, as was the case with Nehemiah in Jerusalem (Neh 13:23-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ELEPHANTINE PAPYRI* Aramaic documents from the fifth century BC discovered at Elephantine, an island in the Nile River. At the time of the documents’ writing, Elephantine was a Persian military outpost, manned in part by a group of Jewish mercenaries with their families. The documents, numbering over 100, belong primarily to three archives—two familial and one communal. The archives contained many complete scrolls that were still tied and sealed at the time of their discovery, along with nume...","summary_en":"ELEPHANTINE PAPYRI* Aramaic documents from the fifth century BC discovered at Elephantine, an island in the Nile River. At the time of the documents’ writing, Elephantine was a Persian military outpost, manned in part by a group of Jewish mercenaries with their families. The documents, numbering over 100, belong primarily to three archives—two familial and one communal. The archives contained many complete scrolls that were still tied and sealed at the time of their discovery, along with nume...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21991,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Books of First and Second Kings","title_en":"Books of First and Second Kings","content_ro":"<h3>KINGS, Books of First and Second<\/h3>\nBooks continuing the history of the covenant people as recorded in Joshua, Judges, and the books of Samuel. The record in Kings begins with the events at the end of David’s reign (1 Kgs 1–2). It continues through the reign of Solomon (chs 3–11); the histories of the divided kingdoms (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17); and the history of the surviving kingdom in the south, through its fall in 586 BC<\/span> and the subsequent kindness shown Jehoiachin by Evil-merodach, king of Babylon, around 561 BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 18–25).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Authorship and Date<\/p>\n• Sources<\/p>\n• Theology and Purpose<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthorship and Date<\/p>\nKings was originally regarded as one book in the Hebrew canon; the division into two books of approximately equal length appeared first in the Septuagint and finally entered the Hebrew Bible in the 15th century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe book itself is anonymous, and information about its author can only be deduced by examining the concerns and perspectives of the work. The Babylonian Talmud (Baba Bathra<\/em> 15a) attributes Kings to Jeremiah. Although this identification could have arisen from the tendency of later Jewish tradition to assign biblical books to prophetic authors, the theory of origin in prophetic circles fits the evidence quite well. Substantial portions are given to the lives of the prophets; 16 of 47 chapters are devoted to the lives of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17—2 Kgs 10), and there is considerable interest in other prophetic figures such as Ahijah (1 Kgs 11:29-39; 14:1-16), an unnamed man of God (13:1-10), and Micaiah (22:13-28). Possible dependence on Isaiah (2 Kgs 18–20; cf. Is 36–39) and Jeremiah (2 Kgs 24–25; cf. Jer 52) also suggest prophetic origin. The author-compiler also shows intense concern with the efficacy of the prophetic word, frequently calling attention to the fulfillment of words spoken earlier by the prophets.<\/p>\nOne might initially think that such a history would be unlikely for a prophet, but the evidence is to the contrary. The prophets were the guardians of the covenant relationship and are known to have produced accounts used as sources by other biblical historians. The following are among such sources: the acts of Samuel the seer, the acts of Nathan the prophet, the acts of Gad the seer (1 Chr 29:29); the acts of Nathan the prophet, the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, the visions of Iddo the seer (2 Chr 9:29); the chronicles of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer (12:15); the annotations of the prophet Iddo (13:22); and the acts of Uzziah by Isaiah the prophet (26:22). Add to this the fact that Kings is positioned in the Hebrew canon in the Former Prophets (Joshua to 2 Kings), and a consistent picture of prophetic origin emerges.<\/p>\nThe date of the final part of the book must be after the last events recorded. Evil-merodach’s kindness toward Jehoiachin (c. 561 BC<\/span>) is the terminus of the book and therefore fixes the earliest date. Since the work shows no knowledge of the restoration period, a date before 539 BC<\/span> is probable. The author’s selection of his data to answer the burning theological questions of the exilic community also suggests a date between 561 and 539 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nSources<\/p>\nThe compiler of Kings specifically names three of the sources that he used in his work, and biblical scholars have suggested the presence of a number of other sources that may have been cited. Of course, the sources not mentioned specifically by the compiler are only the speculations of those who have studied his work and can have only varying degrees of probability. The sources both specified and alleged are as follows.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Acts of Solomon<\/h5>\nAs 1 Kings 11:41 says, “The rest of the events in Solomon’s reign, including his wisdom, are recorded in The Book of the Acts of Solomon”<\/em> (nlt<\/span>). Presumably additional materials of a biographical nature were included, specifically accounts similar to the judgment between the two mothers (3:16-28) or the visit of the queen of Sheba (10:1-10). There has been debate as to whether these materials were official court records or nonofficial documents. Some scholars have attempted to isolate further materials within this section by identifying descriptions of the buildings as from temple archives (chs 6–7) and lists of administrators as from administrative documents (chs 4–5), but this must remain speculative.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the History of the Kings of Israel<\/h5>\nThis source is mentioned 17 times in Kings, usually in the closing formulas at the end of the account of the reign of a northern king. Some idea of the nature of these chronicles can be derived from looking at the type of information to which the compiler refers his readers (see 1 Kgs 14:19; 16:27; 22:39; 2 Kgs 13:12; 14:28). These passages suggest that this source was the official annals covering the reigns of the kings.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the History of the Kings of Judah<\/h5>\nThis source is mentioned in 15 passages, and as with the kings of Israel, is found in the concluding formulas to the accounts of the reigns. This source was to be consulted for additional details on individuals’ reigns (for example, see 1 Kgs 15:23; 22:45; 2 Kgs 20:20; 21:17). These sources for the histories of the two kingdoms were probably similar to the annals known from the surrounding cultures, particularly from the reigns of Assyrian kings. They were likely official court histories kept in Samaria and Jerusalem.<\/p>\nIn addition to these explicitly mentioned sources, scholars have suggested the compiler drew on other sources that he does not name.<\/p>\n<h5>Davidic Court History<\/h5>\nSecond Samuel 9–20 is often identified as a unit of material in the composition of the books of Samuel; it is variously called “the court history” or “the succession narrative.” Because of similar vocabulary and outlook, 1 Kings 1–2 are often associated with this material from Samuel. The statement of 1 Kings 2:46, “so the kingdom was now firmly in Solomon’s grip,” is taken to be the end of this record.<\/p>\n<h5>Sources for the House of Ahab<\/h5>\nThe reigns of individual kings are ordinarily given only brief notices; for example, the father of Ahab, Omri, is given eight verses, even though when judged by political and economic significance, he was among the greatest of the northern kings (1 Kgs 16:21-28). However, beginning with the reign of Ahab, the record becomes quite expansive, and extensive coverage is given the dynasty of Ahab through the coup by Jehu (1 Kgs 16—2 Kgs 12). The use of the stereotyped formulas for the reigns is suspended in this material, and the existence of other literature used by the compiler is probable. This material is commonly subdivided into further sources for the lives of Elijah and Elisha and the reign of Ahab.<\/p>\nThe Elijah section covers material in the following chapters: 1 Kings 17–19, including the feeding by the ravens, the incidents with the widow of Zarephath, the drought, the fire on Carmel, and the revelation of God at Sinai; 1 Kings 21, the affair of Naboth’s vineyard; and 2 Kings 1, the death of Ahaziah’s messengers. The reign of Ahab, which gets so much attention in Kings, is primarily a backdrop for the accounts concerning Elijah.<\/p>\nThe Elisha material found in 2 Kings 2–13 may have had an independent literary development from that of the Elijah accounts. It includes the following: chapter 2 (Elisha’s succession to the prophetic office, the purification of a spring, the death of mocking children); chapter 3 (on the campaign against Moab); chapter 4 (the widow’s oil, the Shunammite woman); chapter 5 (Naaman’s leprosy); chapter 6 (the Aramean attempt to capture Elisha); chapter 7 (the famine in Samaria); chapter 8 (the Shunammite’s property, the coup of Hazael); chapter 9 (the anointing of Jehu); and chapter 13 (the death of Elisha). No other portion of the OT takes the sheer delight in the miraculous that is seen in the Elisha narratives.<\/p>\nIn 1 Kings 16 to 2 Kings 13 there are additional incidents not directly related to the biographies of Elijah and Elisha; accounts such as the military campaigns of 1 Kings 20:1-34 and further details of Jehu’s coup (2 Kgs 9:11–10:36) are often attributed to a third source containing accounts of the dynasty of Ahab and his successors. In all three of these possible sources the orientation is toward affairs in the northern kingdom.<\/p>\n<h5>Isaiah Source<\/h5>\nThe account of the reign of Hezekiah contains a section (2 Kgs 18:13–20:19) that is nearly a verbatim citation of material also found in Isaiah (Is 36:1–39:8). The section records the invasion of Sennacherib, the mission of the Rabshakeh, Hezekiah’s prayer, Isaiah’s prophecy, Hezekiah’s illness, the regression of the sun, and the envoys from Merodach-baladan. The material must be regarded as based on the book of Isaiah or some other source used in both Isaiah and Kings.<\/p>\n<h5>A Prophetic Source<\/h5>\nBecause Kings shows great interest in the prophets and their ministries, various scholars have suggested that yet another source was used by the compiler; this would be an independent literary unit containing accounts of the prophets. This source would have contained the records for the material on Ahijah (1 Kgs 11:29-39; 14:1-16), unnamed prophets (ch 12; 20:35-43), Micaiah (22:13-28), and other references.<\/p>\nApart from the sources explicitly mentioned and inferences about their character, the remainder of the sources suggested have only varying degrees of probability. Considerable scholarly effort has gone into identifying and characterizing such sources, but it remains speculative. When considering the sources the compiler may have used, one important caution must be kept in mind. Even if such sources did exist, one cannot have confidence in a reconstruction of the compositional history. Which sources had already been integrated into a larger composition before they were used by the compiler of Kings? We cannot be certain that the life situation out of which these other sources grew has been correctly identified, nor can we know that even the compiler himself was aware of the past history of his sources. Biblical scholarship has expended considerable energy in trying to delineate the past history of the book of Kings, but it has often been at the neglect of the unity of perspective that is the product of the final compiler(s) in whose hands the book received its canonical form.<\/p>\nWhat is important to understanding the book is not the perspective of its various sources (of which the compiler himself may have been unaware), but the perspective of the book as a whole on the history of the kingdoms. It is the outline that the compiler has imposed on the sources that establishes the teaching of the book; his sources are used in accord with his own purposes, a fact that makes the purposes for which the sources had been prepared largely irrelevant to the teaching of the book in its present form. Exploring possible sources, worthwhile in itself, must not eclipse the message of the book as a whole. This is not to imply that the books of Kings are simply a compilation of unaltered sources. The writer(s) undoubtedly exercised a measure of selectivity and literary skill in composing the historical narrative.<\/p>\nOne compositional technique of the compiler is quite prominent in the histories of the divided kingdoms: this is the use of formulaic introductions and conclusions to the various reigns. The formulas for both kingdoms are quite similar, differing only in minor details. For the kings of Judah, the full introductory formula is as follows: (1) year of accession synchronized with the regnal year of the northern king; (2) age of the king at his accession; (3) length of his reign; (4) name of his mother; (5) judgment on the character of the reign. The account of a Judean king’s reign is concluded as follows: (1) a reference to the chronicles of the kings of Judah for further information; (2) a statement regarding the death of the king, including the place of burial; (3) successor: “And his son reigned in his stead” (rsv<\/span>). The full formula for a Judean king can be seen, for example, in the reign of Rehoboam (1 Kgs 14:21-22, 29-31).<\/p>\nThe formulas differ slightly for the kings of Israel; the introduction is as follows: (1) year of succession synchronized with the regnal year of the southern king; (2) length of his reign; (3) location of the royal residence; (4) condemnation for idolatry; (5) name of the king’s father. The account of an Israelite king’s reign ends as follows: (1) a reference to the chronicles of the kings of Israel for further information; (2) a statement regarding his death; (3) a statement of the succession of his son, unless a usurper follows. The full formula for an Israelite king can be seen, for example, in the reign of Baasha (1 Kgs 15:33-34; 16:5-6).<\/p>\nThere is some variation in the use of these patterns, but on the whole, they are consistently followed and provide the basic framework for the history of the divided kingdom. The synchronisms of the reigns provide data for constructing the chronology of the period. The variations in the formulas may reflect the characteristics of the sources the compiler was using or may reflect his own interests. The name of the mother of a Judean king is recorded, but not of an Israelite king, perhaps reflecting concern with a more exact and fuller record of the Davidic succession. The royal residence is presumed to be Jerusalem for the southern kings (though it may be mentioned) but is recorded for the northern kings since it moved several times, from Shechem to Penuel to Tirzah to Samaria. The mention of the king’s father for a northern ruler also reflects the frequent change in dynasties there, as opposed to the dynastic stability of Judah, which is reinforced by mentioning the burial of almost all its kings in the city of David.<\/p>\nTheology and Purpose<\/p>\nThe books of Kings record the history of the covenant people from the end of the reign of David (961 BC<\/span>) through the fall of the southern kingdom (586 BC<\/span>). Yet it is not history written in accord with modern expectations for history textbooks. Rather than concentrating on economic, political, and military themes as they shaped the history of the period, the compiler of Kings is motivated by theological concerns.<\/p>\nEvaluation of the theology and purpose of the books of Kings is made easier by the fact that there is a parallel history for much of Kings found in the books of Chronicles. By comparing the two accounts, especially where the later Chronicler adds or deletes material found in Kings, the interests of both histories are thrown into clearer relief.<\/p>\nThe books of Kings were composed during the exile, likely between 560 and 539 BC<\/span>. Jerusalem had been turned into rubble, and there was no longer a throne of David. Those two pillars of the popular theology—the inviolability of the temple and the throne of David (Jer 7:4; 13:13-14; 22:1-9; see 1 Kgs 8:16, 29)—had tumbled. If Israel’s faith was to survive, the burning questions that had to be answered were “How did it all happen? Can’t God keep his promises to David and to Zion? Have the promises failed?” The writer of Kings aims to deal with the bewilderment of the chosen people in response to the disasters of 722 BC<\/span> (fall of Samaria) and 586 BC<\/span> (fall of Jerusalem). Kings, like the book of Job, is a theodicy, a justification of the ways of God to men.<\/p>\nIn order to answer the question “How did it happen?” the compiler adopts the procedure of recounting the history of the covenant people in light of standards propounded in the Law. For this reason Kings could be called Pentateuchal history, or even more pointedly, Deuteronomic history, for standards propounded only in the book of Deuteronomy in the Pentateuch are used by the compiler to measure the kingdoms. Among the prominent themes selected from Deuteronomy and applied to the kingdoms are the centralization of worship, the institution of the monarchy, the efficacy of the prophetic word, and the outworking of the covenant curses on disobedience.<\/p>\n<h5>Centralization of Worship<\/h5>\nThe primary concern of the writer is the purity of the worship of the Lord. His major criterion for measuring this purity is the attitude of the kings toward centralization of worship in the Jerusalem temple as opposed to the worship of the Lord elsewhere and the continuation of Canaanite cults mingled with Yahwism at the high places. Centralization of worship at the central shrine is called for in Deuteronomy 12. Perhaps “centralization of worship” is a misnomer, for worship was always centered around the tabernacle in the periods prior to the temple; the change that is envisaged in Deuteronomy is not the centralizing of worship but rather the fact that the shrine would no longer be mobile but stationary. For the kings of the northern kingdom, this criterion becomes virtually a stereotyped formula that “he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord and walked in the way of Jeroboam son of Nebat, who sinned and made all Israel sin along with him” (see 1 Kgs 14:16; 15:30; 16:31; 2 Kgs 3:3; 10:31; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:22). The compiler of Kings sees the rival altars with the golden calves at Dan and Bethel as the great sin of which the northern kings never repented (1 Kgs 12:25–13:34). Rejecting the primacy of Jerusalem, these altars became the rod with which to measure the northern kings. All the kings of Israel are condemned by this standard (except for Shallum, who reigned but a month, and Hoshea, the last of the northern kings)—even Zimri, the murderer of Elah, who ruled only one week before committing suicide in the flames of his own palace (16:9-20). For the kings of Judah, a different standard is used: what their attitude was to the high places where heterodox worship was allowed to flourish in the environs of Jerusalem. Only Hezekiah and Josiah receive the compiler’s unqualified endorsement for following the ways of David (2 Kgs 18:3; 22:2). Six others are commended for their zeal in suppressing idolatry, though they did not remove the high places (Asa, 1 Kgs 15:9-15; Jehoshaphat, 22:43; Jehoash, 2 Kgs 12:2-3; Amaziah, 14:3-4; Azariah, 15:3-4; Jotham, 15:34-35). The remainder of the Judean kings are condemned for their participation in the high places and their desecration of the temple itself. This one theme is the preeminent motif in the book.<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Monarchy<\/h5>\nA second prominent interest for the compiler was to trace the history of the monarchy. Deuteronomy 17:14-20 provides for the day when Israel would ask for a king and charges that king with the basic religious responsibility for the people. This provision for a king, again a feature found only in Deuteronomy, becomes the basis for the compiler’s intense interest in the history of the monarchy, and particularly the religious fidelity of the kings. David becomes the model of the ideal king, the one by whom the others are measured, the one whose sons “continue long in his kingdom in the midst of Israel” (17:20; see also 1 Kgs 15:11; 2 Kgs 18:3; 22:2 for following in the ways of David, and 1 Kgs 14:8; 15:3-5; 2 Kgs 14:3; 16:2 for the reverse). The compiler wanted to show that God had been faithful to David even though David’s sons were not faithful. While both kingdoms had about the same number of kings, the northern kingdom is marked by repeated dynastic changes and regicide through its 200 years, while the dynasty of David is maintained as a lamp in the south through 350 years (1 Kgs 11:13, 32, 36; 15:4-5; 2 Kgs 8:19; 19:34; 20:6). It is the disaster that had befallen the house of David, and the consequent doubts about the promises of God, that prompted the compiler to write.<\/p>\n<h5>Efficacy of the Prophetic Word<\/h5>\nAnother reason why Kings can be called Deuteronomic history is its concern with the efficacy of the prophetic word. There are three passages in the Pentateuch that deal with the institution of the prophetic order: Numbers 12:1-8; Deuteronomy 13:1-5; and Deuteronomy 18:14-22. It is only in Deuteronomy 18 that the test of a true prophet is given: that what he has spoken comes about, that his words are fulfilled. Notice the number of instances where the writer calls attention to the fulfillment of the words of the prophets: 2 Samuel 7:13 in 1 Kings 8:20; 1 Kings 11:29-36 in 12:15; 1 Kings 13:1-3 in 2 Kings 23:16-18; 1 Kings 14:6-12 in 14:17-18 and 15:29; 1 Kings 16:1-4 in 16:7, 11-12; Joshua 6:26 in 1 Kings 16:34; 1 Kings 22:17 in 22:35-38; 1 Kings 21:21-29 in 2 Kings 9:7-10, 30-37 and 10:10-11, 30; 2 Kings 1:6 in 1:17; 2 Kings 21:10-15 in 24:2; 2 Kings 22:15-20 in 23:30. The writer is concerned to show that the words of the prophets were efficacious, powerful words. His concern with the prophetic order is also seen in the material devoted to Elijah and Elisha and to other prophetic figures.<\/p>\n<h5>Fulfillment of the Curses<\/h5>\nAnother aspect of the compiler’s interest in Deuteronomy is seen in his concern to trace the fulfillment of the covenant curses on disobedience. God’s covenant with Israel would issue in curses or blessings depending on the obedience of the people; the compiler of Kings sees the curses inflicted on the two kingdoms because of their failure to meet the demands of the covenant. He takes care to show that most of the curses of Deuteronomy 28:15-68 had some historical realization in the life of the people. Moses had warned that disobedience would “bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, as the eagle swoops down” (Dt 28:49, nasb<\/span>), and the Assyrians came to Samaria and the Babylonians to Jerusalem (28:52). The siege of Samaria lasted from 724 to 722 BC<\/span>, and the siege of Jerusalem from 588 to 586 BC<\/span>. The dire conditions of the siege would drive the people to devouring their own children; women would feed on their afterbirths. It happened to Israel in the siege of Ben-hadad (2 Kgs 6:24-30). Just as the Lord had delighted to prosper and multiply his people, so he would not refrain from destroying them and scattering them among the peoples of the earth (Dt 28:63-67).<\/p>\nIn these and other ways the writer of Kings set out to write the history of Israel and Judah to solve a theological dilemma. How was one to reconcile the exile with God’s promises to the nation and David? His answer is twofold: (1) the problem was not with God but with the people’s disobedience—God remains just; (2) the end of the state does not equal the end of the people or the house of David. Here the ending of the book is instructive: Evil-merodach releases Jehoiachin from prison, elevates him above the other kings, and provides his rations (2 Kgs 25:27-30). Even during the exile, though cut down to almost nothing, the house of David still enjoys the favor and blessing of God. God has not abandoned his promises; the people should keep hope.<\/p>\nOther themes in Kings also show the theological motivations underlying the compiler’s selection and arrangement of the data, particularly his use of Deuteronomy as a framework for examining the history of the people. Compare the laws governing the observance of Passover in Exodus 12:1-20 and Deuteronomy 16:1-8: whereas the Passover is centered in the family in Exodus, it is celebrated at the sanctuary in Deuteronomy. The writer of Kings is careful to show that the Passover during the reign of Josiah was celebrated in accordance with the requirements of Deuteronomy (2 Kgs 23:21-23). A passage in Deuteronomy is explicitly cited with reference to Amaziah’s keeping the law (Dt 24:16 in 2 Kgs 14:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Contrast with Chronicles<\/h5>\nThe interests of Kings are further highlighted when compared with the parallel accounts in Chronicles. While the writer of Kings worked in the aftermath of the destruction of Jerusalem and had to answer the “how?” and “why?” questions, the Chronicler is part of the restoration community. Here the burning theological questions were not “how?” and “why?” but rather “What continuity do we have with David? Is God still interested in us?” The need is not to account for the exile but rather to relate the postexilic and the preexilic. The building of the second temple and the ordering of worship there show up in increased detail in Chronicles in any matter pertaining to the former temple. Chronicles is a history of Judah and of the Davidic line, reflecting the fact that it alone survives after the exile. Interesting, too, are the things omitted from the account by the Chronicler. Since he is not building a case for an indictment, as was done in Samuel and Kings, he is free to omit references to David’s sin with Bathsheba (2 Sm 11) or to Solomon’s difficulties in gaining the throne (1 Kgs 1–2). Since in his day the northern kingdom had not survived, the Chronicler did not go into detail about the sins of Jeroboam (chs 13–14). Chronicles is interested more in the affairs of the temple and does not show the marked interest in prophetic matters found in Kings, so that the lives of Elijah and Elisha are omitted (1 Kgs 16—2 Kgs 10). Nor does the Chronicler recite the sins that led to the demise of the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 17:1–18:12). In all these examples one can see the interplay of the historical moment and theological concerns of the people and the compilers. Each compiler has selected and arranged the data in accordance with the concerns and needs of the community in which he was a member; comparing the two accounts throws the interests of each into sharp relief.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n\nThe books of Kings fall into three parts: (1) the reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 1–11); (2) the history of the divided kingdom (1 Kgs 12–2 Kgs 17); (3) the history of the surviving kingdom in Judah (2 Kgs 18–25).<\/p>\n<h5>The Reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 1–11)<\/h5>\nThe record begins with an account of the court intrigue surrounding Solomon’s accession to the throne, set against the backdrop of the abortive coup by Adonijah (ch 1). The dying David charges Solomon to obey the commandments of God (2:1-4) and also to take vengeance on his enemies (vv 5-9). After David’s death Solomon orders the deaths of Adonijah, Joab, and Shimei, and the banishment of Abiathar, the priest who had supported Adonijah in his bid for the throne (vv 13-46). Enemies eliminated, the kingdom was firmly established by Solomon (v 46).<\/p>\nThe remainder of Solomon’s reign is divided into two parts: Solomon the good, who follows in the ways of his father, David (chs 3–10); and Solomon the bad, whose heart is led astray (ch 11). While sacrificing at Gibeon, Solomon asks God to give him the gift of wisdom to rule—wisdom promptly demonstrated in the quarrel of two prostitutes about a child (ch 3). An account is given of the administrative organization of the kingdom and the incomparable wisdom of Solomon (ch 4). The compiler of Kings gives extensive coverage to the preparations (ch 5), building (chs 6–7), and dedication (ch 8) of the temple. God appeared to Solomon a second time, reminding him to keep his commandments as David had done (9:1-9). Details are given of the king’s building and commercial activities (vv 10-27). The account of the visit by the queen of Sheba is followed with elaboration of Solomon’s splendor (ch 10). But Solomon did not keep God’s commands; seduced to pagan worship by his foreign wives, he was not fully devoted to the Lord as David had been (11:4), and God determined to take away the northern tribes from the rule of his son (vv 11-13). As punishment from the hand of God, Solomon faced rebellion among conquered peoples (vv 14-25) and within Israel in the person of Jeroboam (vv 26-40).<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Divided Kingdom (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17)<\/h5>\n\nThe united monarchy dissolved after the death of Solomon. The northern kingdom (Israel) would exist for about two centuries, would be ruled by 20 kings from nine different dynasties, and would show a history of internal weakness riddled with regicide and usurpation. In contrast, the southern kingdom would last for three and a half centuries and would be ruled by 19 kings of Davidic descent (apart from a short period under the dynastic interloper Athaliah).<\/p>\nThere had been a long history of independent action and even warfare between the northern and southern tribes prior to David and Solomon, so it is no surprise that the division would take place along the lines that it did. The immediate cause, however, was the unwise severity with which Rehoboam replied to the representatives of the northern tribes while negotiating for the kingship. Jeroboam, the popular hero of the earlier insurrection against Solomon, became king in the north. He immediately erected the rival sanctuaries at Dan and Bethel (1 Kgs 12); these rival altars became the measure by which the kings of Israel were condemned for following in the sins of Jeroboam.<\/p>\nFor two generations there would be warfare between Israel and Judah over the border areas in Benjamin claimed by both sides. Fifty years of sporadic fighting on their mutual frontier, interlaced with invasions from the Arameans in the north or the Egyptians in the south, would consume the reigns of Jeroboam, Nadab, Baasha, Elah, and Zimri in Israel and of Rehoboam, Abijam, and Asa in Judah (1 Kgs 13:1–16:20).<\/p>\nThe accession of Omri in Israel introduced a ruling house that would last for a total of four generations and end the dynastic instability of the northern kingdom. Though Kings gives Omri a scant eight verses (1 Kgs 16:21-28), he was among the greatest of the northern kings, forging alliances with the Phoenicians and Judah; for over a century, the Assyrians would call Israel “the house of Omri.”<\/p>\nThe reigns of Omri’s successors, Ahab, Ahaziah, and Jehoram, are treated at disproportionate length, taking almost a third of the total book, 16 of 47 chapters (1 Kgs 17—2 Kgs 10). This is due to the fact that the compiler of Kings incorporated extensive coverage of the lives of Elijah and Elisha, weaving a contrast between good and evil by paralleling the dynasty of Omri with these prophets. Ahab and Jezebel were used as foils for the account of Elijah, so that Ahab became a paradigm of the evil king (e.g., 2 Kgs 21:3).<\/p>\nBecause of this preoccupation with the dynasty of Omri and the lives of Elijah and Elisha, the equivalent period in Judah is not given as extensive coverage. During this period, the northern kingdom appears to have exercised some hegemony over Judah, as attested by the marriage of an Omride (Athaliah, 2 Kgs 8:18, 26) to Jehoram of Judah and the subservient role of Jehoshaphat to Ahab at the battle of Ramoth-gilead (1 Kgs 22). Judah’s fortunes declined in this period when Edom revolted against Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22), costing Judah control over the port at Ezion-geber and consequent economic losses.<\/p>\nIn 842 BC<\/span> Jehu, after being anointed king by a prophet (2 Kgs 9:1-13), led a coup ending the house of Omri and also killing Ahaziah of Judah (vv 14-29). Jehu’s purge also brought the death of Jezebel, Ahab’s family, members of the family of Ahaziah, and the ministers of Baal (9:30–10:36). The consequences were severe politically: the murder of the Phoenician princess Jezebel and the king of Judah cost Israel its allies to the north and south.<\/p>\nJehu’s dynasty had the longest succession of any in Israel, including Jehoahaz, Jehoash, Jeroboam II, and Zechariah, a period spanning 90 years. Jehu’s murder of Ahaziah of Judah set the stage for the one threat to the continuity of the Davidic dynasty. Queen Athaliah, herself an Omride, seized the throne and attempted a purge of Davidic pretenders. She ruled for six years, until the faithful priest Jehoiada staged a countercoup to place the child Joash on the throne of David (ch 11).<\/p>\nIsrael endured a half century of weakness as a result of Jehu’s coup, during which the Arameans had a free hand, reducing the forces of Jehu’s son Jehoahaz to a small army and bodyguard (2 Kgs 13:1-7).<\/p>\nThe reemergence of Assyria early in the ninth century BC<\/span> gave relief to Israel and Judah. Assyrian armies conquered the Arameans; with that threat removed, Israel and Judah enjoyed a dramatic resurgence. Jehoash of Israel, grandson of Jehu, reconquered cities lost to the Arameans (2 Kgs 13:25); Elisha died during his reign (v 20). In the south Amaziah reconquered the Edomites (14:7). Amaziah and Jehoash renewed the warfare between the kingdoms, with the north again victorious (vv 8-14).<\/p>\nUnder Jeroboam II, Israel enjoyed a period of prosperity when the borders of the kingdom reached the same extent as they had under Solomon (2 Kgs 14:23-28). Uzziah (Azariah), his contemporary in Judah, also fortified Jerusalem and undertook a program of offensive operations extending Judah’s sway to the south (14:21-22; 15:1-7).<\/p>\nYet this resurgence was but a brilliant sunset in the history of the two kingdoms. After the death of Jeroboam II, the history is one of successive disasters, culminating in the fall of Israel and the subjugation of Judah to the might of Assyria. The next 30 years in Israel would see four dynasties, three represented by only one king, and repeated regicides as the northern kingdom hastened to its demise. A period of civil war and anarchy would see five kings in just over ten years (2 Kgs 15). Heavy tribute was paid to Tiglath-pileser III in both the north and south (15:19-20; 16:7-10). Israel and the Arameans forged a coalition to throw back the Assyrians and sought to press Ahaz of Judah into the fight; Ahaz appealed to Tiglath-pileser III for help. The coalition was destroyed, and Israel and Judah became vassals. Hoshea defected as soon as he felt safe, looking to Egypt for help, but it was suicide for the northern kingdom. Shalmaneser V retaliated, and the political history of the state of Israel came to an end (17:1-23). The area was resettled with other displaced populations (vv 24-41).<\/p>\nIsrael had faced the Arameans and survived, only to fall to Assyria. And now, similarly, Judah would outlast Assyria, only to fall to Babylon.<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Surviving Kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 18–25)<\/h5>\nAhaz’s appeal for Assyrian aid cost him his liberty, and Judah became a vassal of the Assyrian Empire. Illegitimate worship flourished under his rule (2 Kgs 16:1-19). Ahaz was succeeded by the first of the outstanding reform kings of Judah: Hezekiah. Much of the account of his reign is given to his rebellion against Sennacherib of Assyria: the rebellion, the Assyrian envoys and threats, Isaiah’s assurances of deliverance, and the destruction of the Assyrian armies (18:9–19:37). Hezekiah’s illness was averted after a sign and oracle from Isaiah (20:1-11). As part of what appears to be negotiations toward an anti-Assyrian alliance, Hezekiah also entertained envoys from Babylon, a decision that the prophet announced would be costly (vv 12-21).<\/p>\nHezekiah was followed by Manasseh, who ruled longer than any other king of Judah (a total of 55 years). His reign was marked by great apostasy—apostasy so severe that the compiler of Kings regarded his reign as sufficient reason for the exile that was unavoidable (2 Kgs 21:1-18; cf. 23:26; 24:3-4; Jer 15:1-4). Manasseh was followed by his son Amon, a carbon copy of his father, who ruled only two years before he was deposed by the people (2 Kings 21:19-26).<\/p>\nThe second great reform king of Judah, Josiah, followed. In his reign the Book of the Law was found while the temple was being refurbished; he led the people in a renewal of the covenant and suppressed illegitimate worship (2 Kgs 22:1–23:14). The Assyrian Empire was in rapid decline, so Josiah extended his borders to the north, destroying the altar at Bethel and the high places throughout Samaria (23:15-20). A great Passover celebration was convened in Jerusalem, and further measures were taken to rectify worship (vv 21-25). Josiah tried to block Pharaoh Neco’s foray to assist Assyria, and he lost his life at Megiddo (vv 26-30).<\/p>\nJosiah was the only king of Judah to have three of his sons succeed him. At his death the people put Jehoahaz on the throne, but Neco removed him three months later and took him to Egypt in chains (2 Kgs 23:31-33), replacing him with another son of Josiah, Eliakim, whose name was changed to Jehoiakim (vv 34-37). During his reign, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judah, and Jehoiakim became his vassal. Late in his life Jehoiakim rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar. Jehoiakim died, leaving his son Jehoiachin to face retaliation from Babylon (24:1-10). Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem; when the city fell, Jehoiachin, the queen mother, the army, and the leaders of the land were carried away captive. Nebuchadnezzar put Mattaniah (uncle of Jehoiachin and third son of Josiah) on the throne, changing his name to Zedekiah (vv 11-17). Nine years later Zedekiah, too, would rebel against Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar besieged the city for two years and, when it fell, utterly destroyed it. Zedekiah’s sons were killed before his eyes, and then his own eyes were put out, and he was taken to Babylon (24:18–25:21). Nebuchadnezzar appointed Gedaliah to rule as governor from nearby Mizpah; he was assassinated, and the conspirators fled to Egypt (25:22-26).<\/p>\nThe book concludes by showing that God had not forgotten his promise to David, mentioning that in captivity Jehoiachin enjoyed favor from the hand of Evil-merodach, successor of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kgs 25:27-30).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronicles, Books of First and Second.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGS, Books of First and Second<\/h3>\nBooks continuing the history of the covenant people as recorded in Joshua, Judges, and the books of Samuel. The record in Kings begins with the events at the end of David’s reign (1 Kgs 1–2). It continues through the reign of Solomon (chs 3–11); the histories of the divided kingdoms (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17); and the history of the surviving kingdom in the south, through its fall in 586 BC<\/span> and the subsequent kindness shown Jehoiachin by Evil-merodach, king of Babylon, around 561 BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 18–25).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Authorship and Date<\/p>\n• Sources<\/p>\n• Theology and Purpose<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthorship and Date<\/p>\nKings was originally regarded as one book in the Hebrew canon; the division into two books of approximately equal length appeared first in the Septuagint and finally entered the Hebrew Bible in the 15th century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nThe book itself is anonymous, and information about its author can only be deduced by examining the concerns and perspectives of the work. The Babylonian Talmud (Baba Bathra<\/em> 15a) attributes Kings to Jeremiah. Although this identification could have arisen from the tendency of later Jewish tradition to assign biblical books to prophetic authors, the theory of origin in prophetic circles fits the evidence quite well. Substantial portions are given to the lives of the prophets; 16 of 47 chapters are devoted to the lives of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17—2 Kgs 10), and there is considerable interest in other prophetic figures such as Ahijah (1 Kgs 11:29-39; 14:1-16), an unnamed man of God (13:1-10), and Micaiah (22:13-28). Possible dependence on Isaiah (2 Kgs 18–20; cf. Is 36–39) and Jeremiah (2 Kgs 24–25; cf. Jer 52) also suggest prophetic origin. The author-compiler also shows intense concern with the efficacy of the prophetic word, frequently calling attention to the fulfillment of words spoken earlier by the prophets.<\/p>\nOne might initially think that such a history would be unlikely for a prophet, but the evidence is to the contrary. The prophets were the guardians of the covenant relationship and are known to have produced accounts used as sources by other biblical historians. The following are among such sources: the acts of Samuel the seer, the acts of Nathan the prophet, the acts of Gad the seer (1 Chr 29:29); the acts of Nathan the prophet, the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, the visions of Iddo the seer (2 Chr 9:29); the chronicles of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer (12:15); the annotations of the prophet Iddo (13:22); and the acts of Uzziah by Isaiah the prophet (26:22). Add to this the fact that Kings is positioned in the Hebrew canon in the Former Prophets (Joshua to 2 Kings), and a consistent picture of prophetic origin emerges.<\/p>\nThe date of the final part of the book must be after the last events recorded. Evil-merodach’s kindness toward Jehoiachin (c. 561 BC<\/span>) is the terminus of the book and therefore fixes the earliest date. Since the work shows no knowledge of the restoration period, a date before 539 BC<\/span> is probable. The author’s selection of his data to answer the burning theological questions of the exilic community also suggests a date between 561 and 539 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nSources<\/p>\nThe compiler of Kings specifically names three of the sources that he used in his work, and biblical scholars have suggested the presence of a number of other sources that may have been cited. Of course, the sources not mentioned specifically by the compiler are only the speculations of those who have studied his work and can have only varying degrees of probability. The sources both specified and alleged are as follows.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Acts of Solomon<\/h5>\nAs 1 Kings 11:41 says, “The rest of the events in Solomon’s reign, including his wisdom, are recorded in The Book of the Acts of Solomon”<\/em> (nlt<\/span>). Presumably additional materials of a biographical nature were included, specifically accounts similar to the judgment between the two mothers (3:16-28) or the visit of the queen of Sheba (10:1-10). There has been debate as to whether these materials were official court records or nonofficial documents. Some scholars have attempted to isolate further materials within this section by identifying descriptions of the buildings as from temple archives (chs 6–7) and lists of administrators as from administrative documents (chs 4–5), but this must remain speculative.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the History of the Kings of Israel<\/h5>\nThis source is mentioned 17 times in Kings, usually in the closing formulas at the end of the account of the reign of a northern king. Some idea of the nature of these chronicles can be derived from looking at the type of information to which the compiler refers his readers (see 1 Kgs 14:19; 16:27; 22:39; 2 Kgs 13:12; 14:28). These passages suggest that this source was the official annals covering the reigns of the kings.<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the History of the Kings of Judah<\/h5>\nThis source is mentioned in 15 passages, and as with the kings of Israel, is found in the concluding formulas to the accounts of the reigns. This source was to be consulted for additional details on individuals’ reigns (for example, see 1 Kgs 15:23; 22:45; 2 Kgs 20:20; 21:17). These sources for the histories of the two kingdoms were probably similar to the annals known from the surrounding cultures, particularly from the reigns of Assyrian kings. They were likely official court histories kept in Samaria and Jerusalem.<\/p>\nIn addition to these explicitly mentioned sources, scholars have suggested the compiler drew on other sources that he does not name.<\/p>\n<h5>Davidic Court History<\/h5>\nSecond Samuel 9–20 is often identified as a unit of material in the composition of the books of Samuel; it is variously called “the court history” or “the succession narrative.” Because of similar vocabulary and outlook, 1 Kings 1–2 are often associated with this material from Samuel. The statement of 1 Kings 2:46, “so the kingdom was now firmly in Solomon’s grip,” is taken to be the end of this record.<\/p>\n<h5>Sources for the House of Ahab<\/h5>\nThe reigns of individual kings are ordinarily given only brief notices; for example, the father of Ahab, Omri, is given eight verses, even though when judged by political and economic significance, he was among the greatest of the northern kings (1 Kgs 16:21-28). However, beginning with the reign of Ahab, the record becomes quite expansive, and extensive coverage is given the dynasty of Ahab through the coup by Jehu (1 Kgs 16—2 Kgs 12). The use of the stereotyped formulas for the reigns is suspended in this material, and the existence of other literature used by the compiler is probable. This material is commonly subdivided into further sources for the lives of Elijah and Elisha and the reign of Ahab.<\/p>\nThe Elijah section covers material in the following chapters: 1 Kings 17–19, including the feeding by the ravens, the incidents with the widow of Zarephath, the drought, the fire on Carmel, and the revelation of God at Sinai; 1 Kings 21, the affair of Naboth’s vineyard; and 2 Kings 1, the death of Ahaziah’s messengers. The reign of Ahab, which gets so much attention in Kings, is primarily a backdrop for the accounts concerning Elijah.<\/p>\nThe Elisha material found in 2 Kings 2–13 may have had an independent literary development from that of the Elijah accounts. It includes the following: chapter 2 (Elisha’s succession to the prophetic office, the purification of a spring, the death of mocking children); chapter 3 (on the campaign against Moab); chapter 4 (the widow’s oil, the Shunammite woman); chapter 5 (Naaman’s leprosy); chapter 6 (the Aramean attempt to capture Elisha); chapter 7 (the famine in Samaria); chapter 8 (the Shunammite’s property, the coup of Hazael); chapter 9 (the anointing of Jehu); and chapter 13 (the death of Elisha). No other portion of the OT takes the sheer delight in the miraculous that is seen in the Elisha narratives.<\/p>\nIn 1 Kings 16 to 2 Kings 13 there are additional incidents not directly related to the biographies of Elijah and Elisha; accounts such as the military campaigns of 1 Kings 20:1-34 and further details of Jehu’s coup (2 Kgs 9:11–10:36) are often attributed to a third source containing accounts of the dynasty of Ahab and his successors. In all three of these possible sources the orientation is toward affairs in the northern kingdom.<\/p>\n<h5>Isaiah Source<\/h5>\nThe account of the reign of Hezekiah contains a section (2 Kgs 18:13–20:19) that is nearly a verbatim citation of material also found in Isaiah (Is 36:1–39:8). The section records the invasion of Sennacherib, the mission of the Rabshakeh, Hezekiah’s prayer, Isaiah’s prophecy, Hezekiah’s illness, the regression of the sun, and the envoys from Merodach-baladan. The material must be regarded as based on the book of Isaiah or some other source used in both Isaiah and Kings.<\/p>\n<h5>A Prophetic Source<\/h5>\nBecause Kings shows great interest in the prophets and their ministries, various scholars have suggested that yet another source was used by the compiler; this would be an independent literary unit containing accounts of the prophets. This source would have contained the records for the material on Ahijah (1 Kgs 11:29-39; 14:1-16), unnamed prophets (ch 12; 20:35-43), Micaiah (22:13-28), and other references.<\/p>\nApart from the sources explicitly mentioned and inferences about their character, the remainder of the sources suggested have only varying degrees of probability. Considerable scholarly effort has gone into identifying and characterizing such sources, but it remains speculative. When considering the sources the compiler may have used, one important caution must be kept in mind. Even if such sources did exist, one cannot have confidence in a reconstruction of the compositional history. Which sources had already been integrated into a larger composition before they were used by the compiler of Kings? We cannot be certain that the life situation out of which these other sources grew has been correctly identified, nor can we know that even the compiler himself was aware of the past history of his sources. Biblical scholarship has expended considerable energy in trying to delineate the past history of the book of Kings, but it has often been at the neglect of the unity of perspective that is the product of the final compiler(s) in whose hands the book received its canonical form.<\/p>\nWhat is important to understanding the book is not the perspective of its various sources (of which the compiler himself may have been unaware), but the perspective of the book as a whole on the history of the kingdoms. It is the outline that the compiler has imposed on the sources that establishes the teaching of the book; his sources are used in accord with his own purposes, a fact that makes the purposes for which the sources had been prepared largely irrelevant to the teaching of the book in its present form. Exploring possible sources, worthwhile in itself, must not eclipse the message of the book as a whole. This is not to imply that the books of Kings are simply a compilation of unaltered sources. The writer(s) undoubtedly exercised a measure of selectivity and literary skill in composing the historical narrative.<\/p>\nOne compositional technique of the compiler is quite prominent in the histories of the divided kingdoms: this is the use of formulaic introductions and conclusions to the various reigns. The formulas for both kingdoms are quite similar, differing only in minor details. For the kings of Judah, the full introductory formula is as follows: (1) year of accession synchronized with the regnal year of the northern king; (2) age of the king at his accession; (3) length of his reign; (4) name of his mother; (5) judgment on the character of the reign. The account of a Judean king’s reign is concluded as follows: (1) a reference to the chronicles of the kings of Judah for further information; (2) a statement regarding the death of the king, including the place of burial; (3) successor: “And his son reigned in his stead” (rsv<\/span>). The full formula for a Judean king can be seen, for example, in the reign of Rehoboam (1 Kgs 14:21-22, 29-31).<\/p>\nThe formulas differ slightly for the kings of Israel; the introduction is as follows: (1) year of succession synchronized with the regnal year of the southern king; (2) length of his reign; (3) location of the royal residence; (4) condemnation for idolatry; (5) name of the king’s father. The account of an Israelite king’s reign ends as follows: (1) a reference to the chronicles of the kings of Israel for further information; (2) a statement regarding his death; (3) a statement of the succession of his son, unless a usurper follows. The full formula for an Israelite king can be seen, for example, in the reign of Baasha (1 Kgs 15:33-34; 16:5-6).<\/p>\nThere is some variation in the use of these patterns, but on the whole, they are consistently followed and provide the basic framework for the history of the divided kingdom. The synchronisms of the reigns provide data for constructing the chronology of the period. The variations in the formulas may reflect the characteristics of the sources the compiler was using or may reflect his own interests. The name of the mother of a Judean king is recorded, but not of an Israelite king, perhaps reflecting concern with a more exact and fuller record of the Davidic succession. The royal residence is presumed to be Jerusalem for the southern kings (though it may be mentioned) but is recorded for the northern kings since it moved several times, from Shechem to Penuel to Tirzah to Samaria. The mention of the king’s father for a northern ruler also reflects the frequent change in dynasties there, as opposed to the dynastic stability of Judah, which is reinforced by mentioning the burial of almost all its kings in the city of David.<\/p>\nTheology and Purpose<\/p>\nThe books of Kings record the history of the covenant people from the end of the reign of David (961 BC<\/span>) through the fall of the southern kingdom (586 BC<\/span>). Yet it is not history written in accord with modern expectations for history textbooks. Rather than concentrating on economic, political, and military themes as they shaped the history of the period, the compiler of Kings is motivated by theological concerns.<\/p>\nEvaluation of the theology and purpose of the books of Kings is made easier by the fact that there is a parallel history for much of Kings found in the books of Chronicles. By comparing the two accounts, especially where the later Chronicler adds or deletes material found in Kings, the interests of both histories are thrown into clearer relief.<\/p>\nThe books of Kings were composed during the exile, likely between 560 and 539 BC<\/span>. Jerusalem had been turned into rubble, and there was no longer a throne of David. Those two pillars of the popular theology—the inviolability of the temple and the throne of David (Jer 7:4; 13:13-14; 22:1-9; see 1 Kgs 8:16, 29)—had tumbled. If Israel’s faith was to survive, the burning questions that had to be answered were “How did it all happen? Can’t God keep his promises to David and to Zion? Have the promises failed?” The writer of Kings aims to deal with the bewilderment of the chosen people in response to the disasters of 722 BC<\/span> (fall of Samaria) and 586 BC<\/span> (fall of Jerusalem). Kings, like the book of Job, is a theodicy, a justification of the ways of God to men.<\/p>\nIn order to answer the question “How did it happen?” the compiler adopts the procedure of recounting the history of the covenant people in light of standards propounded in the Law. For this reason Kings could be called Pentateuchal history, or even more pointedly, Deuteronomic history, for standards propounded only in the book of Deuteronomy in the Pentateuch are used by the compiler to measure the kingdoms. Among the prominent themes selected from Deuteronomy and applied to the kingdoms are the centralization of worship, the institution of the monarchy, the efficacy of the prophetic word, and the outworking of the covenant curses on disobedience.<\/p>\n<h5>Centralization of Worship<\/h5>\nThe primary concern of the writer is the purity of the worship of the Lord. His major criterion for measuring this purity is the attitude of the kings toward centralization of worship in the Jerusalem temple as opposed to the worship of the Lord elsewhere and the continuation of Canaanite cults mingled with Yahwism at the high places. Centralization of worship at the central shrine is called for in Deuteronomy 12. Perhaps “centralization of worship” is a misnomer, for worship was always centered around the tabernacle in the periods prior to the temple; the change that is envisaged in Deuteronomy is not the centralizing of worship but rather the fact that the shrine would no longer be mobile but stationary. For the kings of the northern kingdom, this criterion becomes virtually a stereotyped formula that “he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord and walked in the way of Jeroboam son of Nebat, who sinned and made all Israel sin along with him” (see 1 Kgs 14:16; 15:30; 16:31; 2 Kgs 3:3; 10:31; 13:2, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:22). The compiler of Kings sees the rival altars with the golden calves at Dan and Bethel as the great sin of which the northern kings never repented (1 Kgs 12:25–13:34). Rejecting the primacy of Jerusalem, these altars became the rod with which to measure the northern kings. All the kings of Israel are condemned by this standard (except for Shallum, who reigned but a month, and Hoshea, the last of the northern kings)—even Zimri, the murderer of Elah, who ruled only one week before committing suicide in the flames of his own palace (16:9-20). For the kings of Judah, a different standard is used: what their attitude was to the high places where heterodox worship was allowed to flourish in the environs of Jerusalem. Only Hezekiah and Josiah receive the compiler’s unqualified endorsement for following the ways of David (2 Kgs 18:3; 22:2). Six others are commended for their zeal in suppressing idolatry, though they did not remove the high places (Asa, 1 Kgs 15:9-15; Jehoshaphat, 22:43; Jehoash, 2 Kgs 12:2-3; Amaziah, 14:3-4; Azariah, 15:3-4; Jotham, 15:34-35). The remainder of the Judean kings are condemned for their participation in the high places and their desecration of the temple itself. This one theme is the preeminent motif in the book.<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Monarchy<\/h5>\nA second prominent interest for the compiler was to trace the history of the monarchy. Deuteronomy 17:14-20 provides for the day when Israel would ask for a king and charges that king with the basic religious responsibility for the people. This provision for a king, again a feature found only in Deuteronomy, becomes the basis for the compiler’s intense interest in the history of the monarchy, and particularly the religious fidelity of the kings. David becomes the model of the ideal king, the one by whom the others are measured, the one whose sons “continue long in his kingdom in the midst of Israel” (17:20; see also 1 Kgs 15:11; 2 Kgs 18:3; 22:2 for following in the ways of David, and 1 Kgs 14:8; 15:3-5; 2 Kgs 14:3; 16:2 for the reverse). The compiler wanted to show that God had been faithful to David even though David’s sons were not faithful. While both kingdoms had about the same number of kings, the northern kingdom is marked by repeated dynastic changes and regicide through its 200 years, while the dynasty of David is maintained as a lamp in the south through 350 years (1 Kgs 11:13, 32, 36; 15:4-5; 2 Kgs 8:19; 19:34; 20:6). It is the disaster that had befallen the house of David, and the consequent doubts about the promises of God, that prompted the compiler to write.<\/p>\n<h5>Efficacy of the Prophetic Word<\/h5>\nAnother reason why Kings can be called Deuteronomic history is its concern with the efficacy of the prophetic word. There are three passages in the Pentateuch that deal with the institution of the prophetic order: Numbers 12:1-8; Deuteronomy 13:1-5; and Deuteronomy 18:14-22. It is only in Deuteronomy 18 that the test of a true prophet is given: that what he has spoken comes about, that his words are fulfilled. Notice the number of instances where the writer calls attention to the fulfillment of the words of the prophets: 2 Samuel 7:13 in 1 Kings 8:20; 1 Kings 11:29-36 in 12:15; 1 Kings 13:1-3 in 2 Kings 23:16-18; 1 Kings 14:6-12 in 14:17-18 and 15:29; 1 Kings 16:1-4 in 16:7, 11-12; Joshua 6:26 in 1 Kings 16:34; 1 Kings 22:17 in 22:35-38; 1 Kings 21:21-29 in 2 Kings 9:7-10, 30-37 and 10:10-11, 30; 2 Kings 1:6 in 1:17; 2 Kings 21:10-15 in 24:2; 2 Kings 22:15-20 in 23:30. The writer is concerned to show that the words of the prophets were efficacious, powerful words. His concern with the prophetic order is also seen in the material devoted to Elijah and Elisha and to other prophetic figures.<\/p>\n<h5>Fulfillment of the Curses<\/h5>\nAnother aspect of the compiler’s interest in Deuteronomy is seen in his concern to trace the fulfillment of the covenant curses on disobedience. God’s covenant with Israel would issue in curses or blessings depending on the obedience of the people; the compiler of Kings sees the curses inflicted on the two kingdoms because of their failure to meet the demands of the covenant. He takes care to show that most of the curses of Deuteronomy 28:15-68 had some historical realization in the life of the people. Moses had warned that disobedience would “bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, as the eagle swoops down” (Dt 28:49, nasb<\/span>), and the Assyrians came to Samaria and the Babylonians to Jerusalem (28:52). The siege of Samaria lasted from 724 to 722 BC<\/span>, and the siege of Jerusalem from 588 to 586 BC<\/span>. The dire conditions of the siege would drive the people to devouring their own children; women would feed on their afterbirths. It happened to Israel in the siege of Ben-hadad (2 Kgs 6:24-30). Just as the Lord had delighted to prosper and multiply his people, so he would not refrain from destroying them and scattering them among the peoples of the earth (Dt 28:63-67).<\/p>\nIn these and other ways the writer of Kings set out to write the history of Israel and Judah to solve a theological dilemma. How was one to reconcile the exile with God’s promises to the nation and David? His answer is twofold: (1) the problem was not with God but with the people’s disobedience—God remains just; (2) the end of the state does not equal the end of the people or the house of David. Here the ending of the book is instructive: Evil-merodach releases Jehoiachin from prison, elevates him above the other kings, and provides his rations (2 Kgs 25:27-30). Even during the exile, though cut down to almost nothing, the house of David still enjoys the favor and blessing of God. God has not abandoned his promises; the people should keep hope.<\/p>\nOther themes in Kings also show the theological motivations underlying the compiler’s selection and arrangement of the data, particularly his use of Deuteronomy as a framework for examining the history of the people. Compare the laws governing the observance of Passover in Exodus 12:1-20 and Deuteronomy 16:1-8: whereas the Passover is centered in the family in Exodus, it is celebrated at the sanctuary in Deuteronomy. The writer of Kings is careful to show that the Passover during the reign of Josiah was celebrated in accordance with the requirements of Deuteronomy (2 Kgs 23:21-23). A passage in Deuteronomy is explicitly cited with reference to Amaziah’s keeping the law (Dt 24:16 in 2 Kgs 14:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Contrast with Chronicles<\/h5>\nThe interests of Kings are further highlighted when compared with the parallel accounts in Chronicles. While the writer of Kings worked in the aftermath of the destruction of Jerusalem and had to answer the “how?” and “why?” questions, the Chronicler is part of the restoration community. Here the burning theological questions were not “how?” and “why?” but rather “What continuity do we have with David? Is God still interested in us?” The need is not to account for the exile but rather to relate the postexilic and the preexilic. The building of the second temple and the ordering of worship there show up in increased detail in Chronicles in any matter pertaining to the former temple. Chronicles is a history of Judah and of the Davidic line, reflecting the fact that it alone survives after the exile. Interesting, too, are the things omitted from the account by the Chronicler. Since he is not building a case for an indictment, as was done in Samuel and Kings, he is free to omit references to David’s sin with Bathsheba (2 Sm 11) or to Solomon’s difficulties in gaining the throne (1 Kgs 1–2). Since in his day the northern kingdom had not survived, the Chronicler did not go into detail about the sins of Jeroboam (chs 13–14). Chronicles is interested more in the affairs of the temple and does not show the marked interest in prophetic matters found in Kings, so that the lives of Elijah and Elisha are omitted (1 Kgs 16—2 Kgs 10). Nor does the Chronicler recite the sins that led to the demise of the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 17:1–18:12). In all these examples one can see the interplay of the historical moment and theological concerns of the people and the compilers. Each compiler has selected and arranged the data in accordance with the concerns and needs of the community in which he was a member; comparing the two accounts throws the interests of each into sharp relief.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n\nThe books of Kings fall into three parts: (1) the reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 1–11); (2) the history of the divided kingdom (1 Kgs 12–2 Kgs 17); (3) the history of the surviving kingdom in Judah (2 Kgs 18–25).<\/p>\n<h5>The Reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 1–11)<\/h5>\nThe record begins with an account of the court intrigue surrounding Solomon’s accession to the throne, set against the backdrop of the abortive coup by Adonijah (ch 1). The dying David charges Solomon to obey the commandments of God (2:1-4) and also to take vengeance on his enemies (vv 5-9). After David’s death Solomon orders the deaths of Adonijah, Joab, and Shimei, and the banishment of Abiathar, the priest who had supported Adonijah in his bid for the throne (vv 13-46). Enemies eliminated, the kingdom was firmly established by Solomon (v 46).<\/p>\nThe remainder of Solomon’s reign is divided into two parts: Solomon the good, who follows in the ways of his father, David (chs 3–10); and Solomon the bad, whose heart is led astray (ch 11). While sacrificing at Gibeon, Solomon asks God to give him the gift of wisdom to rule—wisdom promptly demonstrated in the quarrel of two prostitutes about a child (ch 3). An account is given of the administrative organization of the kingdom and the incomparable wisdom of Solomon (ch 4). The compiler of Kings gives extensive coverage to the preparations (ch 5), building (chs 6–7), and dedication (ch 8) of the temple. God appeared to Solomon a second time, reminding him to keep his commandments as David had done (9:1-9). Details are given of the king’s building and commercial activities (vv 10-27). The account of the visit by the queen of Sheba is followed with elaboration of Solomon’s splendor (ch 10). But Solomon did not keep God’s commands; seduced to pagan worship by his foreign wives, he was not fully devoted to the Lord as David had been (11:4), and God determined to take away the northern tribes from the rule of his son (vv 11-13). As punishment from the hand of God, Solomon faced rebellion among conquered peoples (vv 14-25) and within Israel in the person of Jeroboam (vv 26-40).<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Divided Kingdom (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17)<\/h5>\n\nThe united monarchy dissolved after the death of Solomon. The northern kingdom (Israel) would exist for about two centuries, would be ruled by 20 kings from nine different dynasties, and would show a history of internal weakness riddled with regicide and usurpation. In contrast, the southern kingdom would last for three and a half centuries and would be ruled by 19 kings of Davidic descent (apart from a short period under the dynastic interloper Athaliah).<\/p>\nThere had been a long history of independent action and even warfare between the northern and southern tribes prior to David and Solomon, so it is no surprise that the division would take place along the lines that it did. The immediate cause, however, was the unwise severity with which Rehoboam replied to the representatives of the northern tribes while negotiating for the kingship. Jeroboam, the popular hero of the earlier insurrection against Solomon, became king in the north. He immediately erected the rival sanctuaries at Dan and Bethel (1 Kgs 12); these rival altars became the measure by which the kings of Israel were condemned for following in the sins of Jeroboam.<\/p>\nFor two generations there would be warfare between Israel and Judah over the border areas in Benjamin claimed by both sides. Fifty years of sporadic fighting on their mutual frontier, interlaced with invasions from the Arameans in the north or the Egyptians in the south, would consume the reigns of Jeroboam, Nadab, Baasha, Elah, and Zimri in Israel and of Rehoboam, Abijam, and Asa in Judah (1 Kgs 13:1–16:20).<\/p>\nThe accession of Omri in Israel introduced a ruling house that would last for a total of four generations and end the dynastic instability of the northern kingdom. Though Kings gives Omri a scant eight verses (1 Kgs 16:21-28), he was among the greatest of the northern kings, forging alliances with the Phoenicians and Judah; for over a century, the Assyrians would call Israel “the house of Omri.”<\/p>\nThe reigns of Omri’s successors, Ahab, Ahaziah, and Jehoram, are treated at disproportionate length, taking almost a third of the total book, 16 of 47 chapters (1 Kgs 17—2 Kgs 10). This is due to the fact that the compiler of Kings incorporated extensive coverage of the lives of Elijah and Elisha, weaving a contrast between good and evil by paralleling the dynasty of Omri with these prophets. Ahab and Jezebel were used as foils for the account of Elijah, so that Ahab became a paradigm of the evil king (e.g., 2 Kgs 21:3).<\/p>\nBecause of this preoccupation with the dynasty of Omri and the lives of Elijah and Elisha, the equivalent period in Judah is not given as extensive coverage. During this period, the northern kingdom appears to have exercised some hegemony over Judah, as attested by the marriage of an Omride (Athaliah, 2 Kgs 8:18, 26) to Jehoram of Judah and the subservient role of Jehoshaphat to Ahab at the battle of Ramoth-gilead (1 Kgs 22). Judah’s fortunes declined in this period when Edom revolted against Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:20-22), costing Judah control over the port at Ezion-geber and consequent economic losses.<\/p>\nIn 842 BC<\/span> Jehu, after being anointed king by a prophet (2 Kgs 9:1-13), led a coup ending the house of Omri and also killing Ahaziah of Judah (vv 14-29). Jehu’s purge also brought the death of Jezebel, Ahab’s family, members of the family of Ahaziah, and the ministers of Baal (9:30–10:36). The consequences were severe politically: the murder of the Phoenician princess Jezebel and the king of Judah cost Israel its allies to the north and south.<\/p>\nJehu’s dynasty had the longest succession of any in Israel, including Jehoahaz, Jehoash, Jeroboam II, and Zechariah, a period spanning 90 years. Jehu’s murder of Ahaziah of Judah set the stage for the one threat to the continuity of the Davidic dynasty. Queen Athaliah, herself an Omride, seized the throne and attempted a purge of Davidic pretenders. She ruled for six years, until the faithful priest Jehoiada staged a countercoup to place the child Joash on the throne of David (ch 11).<\/p>\nIsrael endured a half century of weakness as a result of Jehu’s coup, during which the Arameans had a free hand, reducing the forces of Jehu’s son Jehoahaz to a small army and bodyguard (2 Kgs 13:1-7).<\/p>\nThe reemergence of Assyria early in the ninth century BC<\/span> gave relief to Israel and Judah. Assyrian armies conquered the Arameans; with that threat removed, Israel and Judah enjoyed a dramatic resurgence. Jehoash of Israel, grandson of Jehu, reconquered cities lost to the Arameans (2 Kgs 13:25); Elisha died during his reign (v 20). In the south Amaziah reconquered the Edomites (14:7). Amaziah and Jehoash renewed the warfare between the kingdoms, with the north again victorious (vv 8-14).<\/p>\nUnder Jeroboam II, Israel enjoyed a period of prosperity when the borders of the kingdom reached the same extent as they had under Solomon (2 Kgs 14:23-28). Uzziah (Azariah), his contemporary in Judah, also fortified Jerusalem and undertook a program of offensive operations extending Judah’s sway to the south (14:21-22; 15:1-7).<\/p>\nYet this resurgence was but a brilliant sunset in the history of the two kingdoms. After the death of Jeroboam II, the history is one of successive disasters, culminating in the fall of Israel and the subjugation of Judah to the might of Assyria. The next 30 years in Israel would see four dynasties, three represented by only one king, and repeated regicides as the northern kingdom hastened to its demise. A period of civil war and anarchy would see five kings in just over ten years (2 Kgs 15). Heavy tribute was paid to Tiglath-pileser III in both the north and south (15:19-20; 16:7-10). Israel and the Arameans forged a coalition to throw back the Assyrians and sought to press Ahaz of Judah into the fight; Ahaz appealed to Tiglath-pileser III for help. The coalition was destroyed, and Israel and Judah became vassals. Hoshea defected as soon as he felt safe, looking to Egypt for help, but it was suicide for the northern kingdom. Shalmaneser V retaliated, and the political history of the state of Israel came to an end (17:1-23). The area was resettled with other displaced populations (vv 24-41).<\/p>\nIsrael had faced the Arameans and survived, only to fall to Assyria. And now, similarly, Judah would outlast Assyria, only to fall to Babylon.<\/p>\n<h5>History of the Surviving Kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 18–25)<\/h5>\nAhaz’s appeal for Assyrian aid cost him his liberty, and Judah became a vassal of the Assyrian Empire. Illegitimate worship flourished under his rule (2 Kgs 16:1-19). Ahaz was succeeded by the first of the outstanding reform kings of Judah: Hezekiah. Much of the account of his reign is given to his rebellion against Sennacherib of Assyria: the rebellion, the Assyrian envoys and threats, Isaiah’s assurances of deliverance, and the destruction of the Assyrian armies (18:9–19:37). Hezekiah’s illness was averted after a sign and oracle from Isaiah (20:1-11). As part of what appears to be negotiations toward an anti-Assyrian alliance, Hezekiah also entertained envoys from Babylon, a decision that the prophet announced would be costly (vv 12-21).<\/p>\nHezekiah was followed by Manasseh, who ruled longer than any other king of Judah (a total of 55 years). His reign was marked by great apostasy—apostasy so severe that the compiler of Kings regarded his reign as sufficient reason for the exile that was unavoidable (2 Kgs 21:1-18; cf. 23:26; 24:3-4; Jer 15:1-4). Manasseh was followed by his son Amon, a carbon copy of his father, who ruled only two years before he was deposed by the people (2 Kings 21:19-26).<\/p>\nThe second great reform king of Judah, Josiah, followed. In his reign the Book of the Law was found while the temple was being refurbished; he led the people in a renewal of the covenant and suppressed illegitimate worship (2 Kgs 22:1–23:14). The Assyrian Empire was in rapid decline, so Josiah extended his borders to the north, destroying the altar at Bethel and the high places throughout Samaria (23:15-20). A great Passover celebration was convened in Jerusalem, and further measures were taken to rectify worship (vv 21-25). Josiah tried to block Pharaoh Neco’s foray to assist Assyria, and he lost his life at Megiddo (vv 26-30).<\/p>\nJosiah was the only king of Judah to have three of his sons succeed him. At his death the people put Jehoahaz on the throne, but Neco removed him three months later and took him to Egypt in chains (2 Kgs 23:31-33), replacing him with another son of Josiah, Eliakim, whose name was changed to Jehoiakim (vv 34-37). During his reign, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judah, and Jehoiakim became his vassal. Late in his life Jehoiakim rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar. Jehoiakim died, leaving his son Jehoiachin to face retaliation from Babylon (24:1-10). Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem; when the city fell, Jehoiachin, the queen mother, the army, and the leaders of the land were carried away captive. Nebuchadnezzar put Mattaniah (uncle of Jehoiachin and third son of Josiah) on the throne, changing his name to Zedekiah (vv 11-17). Nine years later Zedekiah, too, would rebel against Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar besieged the city for two years and, when it fell, utterly destroyed it. Zedekiah’s sons were killed before his eyes, and then his own eyes were put out, and he was taken to Babylon (24:18–25:21). Nebuchadnezzar appointed Gedaliah to rule as governor from nearby Mizpah; he was assassinated, and the conspirators fled to Egypt (25:22-26).<\/p>\nThe book concludes by showing that God had not forgotten his promise to David, mentioning that in captivity Jehoiachin enjoyed favor from the hand of Evil-merodach, successor of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kgs 25:27-30).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Chronicles, Books of First and Second.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGS, Books of First and Second Books continuing the history of the covenant people as recorded in Joshua, Judges, and the books of Samuel. The record in Kings begins with the events at the end of David’s reign (1 Kgs 1–2). It continues through the reign of Solomon (chs 3–11); the histories of the divided kingdoms (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17); and the history of the surviving kingdom in the south, through its fall in 586 BC and the subsequent kindness shown Jehoiachin by Evil-merodach, king of Babylo...","summary_en":"KINGS, Books of First and Second Books continuing the history of the covenant people as recorded in Joshua, Judges, and the books of Samuel. The record in Kings begins with the events at the end of David’s reign (1 Kgs 1–2). It continues through the reign of Solomon (chs 3–11); the histories of the divided kingdoms (1 Kgs 12—2 Kgs 17); and the history of the surviving kingdom in the south, through its fall in 586 BC and the subsequent kindness shown Jehoiachin by Evil-merodach, king of Babylo...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45002,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:1","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:1","content_ro":"12:1–26:15<\/strong> After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.<\/p>","content_en":"12:1–26:15<\/strong> After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:1–26:15 After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.","summary_en":"12:1–26:15 After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72628,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:1","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:1","content_ro":"12:1–26:15<\/strong> After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.<\/p>","content_en":"12:1–26:15<\/strong> After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:1–26:15 After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.","summary_en":"12:1–26:15 After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100254,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:1","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:1","content_ro":"12:1–26:15<\/strong> After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.<\/p>","content_en":"12:1–26:15<\/strong> After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:1–26:15 After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.","summary_en":"12:1–26:15 After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127880,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:1","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:1","content_ro":"12:1–26:15<\/strong> After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.<\/p>","content_en":"12:1–26:15<\/strong> After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:1–26:15 After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.","summary_en":"12:1–26:15 After Moses laid out the principles of the covenant (5:1–11:32), he moved to the application of these principles in everyday life. Passages in this section expand on the Ten Commandments and cover some of the contingencies that inevitably arise in the complexity of human relationships.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":7086,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Color","title_en":"Color","content_ro":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","summary_en":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37418,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tithing Tithe","title_en":"Tithing Tithe","content_ro":"<h3>TITHE, TITHING<\/h3>\nWords deriving from Old English for “tenth” and representing a charge upon produce or labor levied for the maintenance of religious activities. The custom is very ancient (Abraham paid a tithe of the spoils of war to Melchizedek; see Gn 14:20) and widely practiced, being known in Athens, Arabia, Rome, Carthage, Egypt, Syria, Babylon, and China.<\/p>\nAccording to Deuteronomy (Dt 12:2-7, 17-19; 14:22-29), the centralization of worship meant that the tithe was taken annually at the sanctuary and shared by priests and Levites. Corn, wine, oil, and flocks were tithed. Every third year, the Levites, foreigners, orphans, and widows were given the whole tithe in charity (Dt 26:12). According to Numbers 18:21-32, every tithe in Israel was given to the Levites in return for their priestly service.<\/p>\n The prophet Malachi (Mal 3:8-10), who scathingly declared the withholding of tithes to be “robbing God,” promised full barns and vats, opened windows of heaven, outpoured blessing and deliverance from locusts, in return for faithful tithing. In the early tithe feasts, thanksgiving for God’s gifts would seem appropriate (cf. Gn 28:22), though not emphasized. Maintenance of the service of God remained the chief purpose of tithing, along with a wide charity.<\/p>\nApart from recalling Melchizedek’s tithe (Heb 7), tithing is mentioned in the NT critically. According to Matthew 23:23 and Luke 11:42, Jesus spoke of those who meticulously paid tithes on three small garden herbs while neglecting three “weightier matters of the law,” namely, justice, mercy, and faith. For him, this was an example of the lack of moral proportion, the lack of a right sense of priorities, that marked Pharisaism. The explicit rule, precisely observed, is so much easier and self-satisfying than the moral sensitivity that should govern all relations with others and with God. According to Luke 18:12, the Pharisee, congratulating himself in prayer for his superior virtues, mentions his tithing of all income among his claims to divine favor. Christ sternly devalued the pride-filled performance, compared with that of the humble penitent.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TITHE, TITHING<\/h3>\nWords deriving from Old English for “tenth” and representing a charge upon produce or labor levied for the maintenance of religious activities. The custom is very ancient (Abraham paid a tithe of the spoils of war to Melchizedek; see Gn 14:20) and widely practiced, being known in Athens, Arabia, Rome, Carthage, Egypt, Syria, Babylon, and China.<\/p>\nAccording to Deuteronomy (Dt 12:2-7, 17-19; 14:22-29), the centralization of worship meant that the tithe was taken annually at the sanctuary and shared by priests and Levites. Corn, wine, oil, and flocks were tithed. Every third year, the Levites, foreigners, orphans, and widows were given the whole tithe in charity (Dt 26:12). According to Numbers 18:21-32, every tithe in Israel was given to the Levites in return for their priestly service.<\/p>\n The prophet Malachi (Mal 3:8-10), who scathingly declared the withholding of tithes to be “robbing God,” promised full barns and vats, opened windows of heaven, outpoured blessing and deliverance from locusts, in return for faithful tithing. In the early tithe feasts, thanksgiving for God’s gifts would seem appropriate (cf. Gn 28:22), though not emphasized. Maintenance of the service of God remained the chief purpose of tithing, along with a wide charity.<\/p>\nApart from recalling Melchizedek’s tithe (Heb 7), tithing is mentioned in the NT critically. According to Matthew 23:23 and Luke 11:42, Jesus spoke of those who meticulously paid tithes on three small garden herbs while neglecting three “weightier matters of the law,” namely, justice, mercy, and faith. For him, this was an example of the lack of moral proportion, the lack of a right sense of priorities, that marked Pharisaism. The explicit rule, precisely observed, is so much easier and self-satisfying than the moral sensitivity that should govern all relations with others and with God. According to Luke 18:12, the Pharisee, congratulating himself in prayer for his superior virtues, mentions his tithing of all income among his claims to divine favor. Christ sternly devalued the pride-filled performance, compared with that of the humble penitent.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TITHE, TITHING Words deriving from Old English for “tenth” and representing a charge upon produce or labor levied for the maintenance of religious activities. The custom is very ancient (Abraham paid a tithe of the spoils of war to Melchizedek; see Gn 14:20) and widely practiced, being known in Athens, Arabia, Rome, Carthage, Egypt, Syria, Babylon, and China. According to Deuteronomy (Dt 12:2-7, 17-19; 14:22-29), the centralization of worship meant that the tithe was taken annually at the san...","summary_en":"TITHE, TITHING Words deriving from Old English for “tenth” and representing a charge upon produce or labor levied for the maintenance of religious activities. The custom is very ancient (Abraham paid a tithe of the spoils of war to Melchizedek; see Gn 14:20) and widely practiced, being known in Athens, Arabia, Rome, Carthage, Egypt, Syria, Babylon, and China. According to Deuteronomy (Dt 12:2-7, 17-19; 14:22-29), the centralization of worship meant that the tithe was taken annually at the san...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45003,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:2","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:2","content_ro":"12:2<\/strong> green tree:<\/em> The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).<\/p>","content_en":"12:2<\/strong> green tree:<\/em> The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:2 green tree: The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).","summary_en":"12:2 green tree: The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72629,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:2","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:2","content_ro":"12:2<\/strong> green tree:<\/em> The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).<\/p>","content_en":"12:2<\/strong> green tree:<\/em> The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:2 green tree: The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).","summary_en":"12:2 green tree: The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100255,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:2","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:2","content_ro":"12:2<\/strong> green tree:<\/em> The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).<\/p>","content_en":"12:2<\/strong> green tree:<\/em> The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:2 green tree: The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).","summary_en":"12:2 green tree: The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127881,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:2","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:2","content_ro":"12:2<\/strong> green tree:<\/em> The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).<\/p>","content_en":"12:2<\/strong> green tree:<\/em> The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:2 green tree: The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).","summary_en":"12:2 green tree: The Canaanites selected groves of trees for worship sites because their lush foliage demonstrated fertility. Sometimes trees were stylized in the form of wooden poles driven into the ground and dedicated to the worship of the mother goddess, Asherah (see 7:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":14856,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Grove*","title_en":"Grove*","content_ro":"<h3>GROVE*<\/h3>\nMistaken kjv<\/span> translation of a Hebrew word that was the name of a Canaanite goddess, Asherah. Often sacred trees were designated as symbols of that fertility goddess; sometimes wooden poles were erected. God commanded the Israelites to destroy those symbols (called “Asherim,” “Asheroth”) by cutting them down (Ex 34:13) and burning them (Dt 12:3). Because the poles were wooden, archaeologists have been unable to find any clear remains. In an early sanctuary at Ai, however, a large piece of carbonized wood was discovered lying between incense burners. It may have been a tree trunk from which the branches had been trimmed. Some researchers suggest it was an Asherah pole.<\/p>\nGod strictly forbade the Israelites to worship Asherah or to erect sacred symbols in her honor. From time to time Israel disobeyed God and engaged in false worship. One account of the downfall of the northern kingdom attributes its failure to the existence of groves and the worship of the pagan goddess and her male counterpart, Baal (2 Kgs 17:7-18). Jezebel, a priestess of the Tyrian Baal, promoted the spread of such idolatry. The “grove” of Genesis 21:33 (kjv<\/span>) was actually a tamarisk tree.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Gods and Goddesses; High Place; Idols, Idolatry.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GROVE*<\/h3>\nMistaken kjv<\/span> translation of a Hebrew word that was the name of a Canaanite goddess, Asherah. Often sacred trees were designated as symbols of that fertility goddess; sometimes wooden poles were erected. God commanded the Israelites to destroy those symbols (called “Asherim,” “Asheroth”) by cutting them down (Ex 34:13) and burning them (Dt 12:3). Because the poles were wooden, archaeologists have been unable to find any clear remains. In an early sanctuary at Ai, however, a large piece of carbonized wood was discovered lying between incense burners. It may have been a tree trunk from which the branches had been trimmed. Some researchers suggest it was an Asherah pole.<\/p>\nGod strictly forbade the Israelites to worship Asherah or to erect sacred symbols in her honor. From time to time Israel disobeyed God and engaged in false worship. One account of the downfall of the northern kingdom attributes its failure to the existence of groves and the worship of the pagan goddess and her male counterpart, Baal (2 Kgs 17:7-18). Jezebel, a priestess of the Tyrian Baal, promoted the spread of such idolatry. The “grove” of Genesis 21:33 (kjv<\/span>) was actually a tamarisk tree.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Gods and Goddesses; High Place; Idols, Idolatry.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GROVE* Mistaken kjv translation of a Hebrew word that was the name of a Canaanite goddess, Asherah. Often sacred trees were designated as symbols of that fertility goddess; sometimes wooden poles were erected. God commanded the Israelites to destroy those symbols (called “Asherim,” “Asheroth”) by cutting them down (Ex 34:13) and burning them (Dt 12:3). Because the poles were wooden, archaeologists have been unable to find any clear remains. In an early sanctuary at Ai, however, a large piece ...","summary_en":"GROVE* Mistaken kjv translation of a Hebrew word that was the name of a Canaanite goddess, Asherah. Often sacred trees were designated as symbols of that fertility goddess; sometimes wooden poles were erected. God commanded the Israelites to destroy those symbols (called “Asherim,” “Asheroth”) by cutting them down (Ex 34:13) and burning them (Dt 12:3). Because the poles were wooden, archaeologists have been unable to find any clear remains. In an early sanctuary at Ai, however, a large piece ...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16390,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"High Place","title_en":"High Place","content_ro":"<h3>HIGH PLACE<\/h3>\nPhrase commonly translated from the Hebrew bamah, which apparently derived from a word originally meaning “the back (or ridge) of an animal.” Thus it came to refer to a height or hill or a stone burial cairn. Usually it was an elevated worship center, such as the ones referred to in Numbers 33:51-52, 1 Samuel 9:13-14, 2 Kings 12:3, 2 Chronicles 21:11, and Ezekiel 36:1-2. But sometimes (as in 2 Kgs 23:8) it was a bamah<\/span> of the gate, a sanctuary with no special reference to height, located at the city gate as in Dan and Beersheba. It might even have been placed in a declivity (Jer 7:31).<\/p>\nThat a bamah<\/span> might simply be a burial place with commemorative stelae or memorial stones is clear from such a passage as Ezekiel 43:7. An illustration of such a bamah<\/span> is the so-called Gezer high place. This Bronze Age center with its 10 huge pillars is now interpreted as a mortuary shrine instead of a sanctuary in the strict sense of the term.<\/p>\nA second word translated “high place” is ramah<\/span> (elevation), from the Hebrew meaning “to be high.” Ezekiel used this term to refer to illicit worship centers (16:24-25, 31-39) that evidently had no necessary connection with height.<\/p>\nOne of the best-known and best-preserved of all high places in the vicinity of Palestine is the great high place at Petra, discovered by George L. Robinson in 1900. Located on a ridge west of the Khazneh, or treasury, it consists of a large rectangular court and adjacent altars. The court is about 47 feet (14.3 meters) long and 21 feet (6.4 meters) wide and is cut into the rock platform to a depth of 18 inches (45.7 centimeters). West of the court stand a square and a round altar, each hewn from the solid rock. South of the court is a pool measuring about eight and a half by nine and a half feet (2.6 by 2.9 meters) and cut four feet (1.2 meters) into the rock. South of the pool stand two sacred obelisks or pillars, also cut out of the solid rock. This whole complex is reached from a lower terrace by two flights of stairs. At this center the ancient Nabatean inhabitants of Petra evidently engaged in feasts and sacrifices to honor their gods. Though the worship center in its present form does not date before the first century BC<\/span>, it preserves an ancient tradition of Transjordan and illustrates the pagan and Israelite high places of OT times.<\/p>\nThe pagan high place was usually located on a physical height, where one could feel closer to the god. Its first essential was an altar, which might be a heap of earth, unhewn stones, or a unit cut out of the solid rock. Second, there was a stone pillar (Dt 12:3) or obelisk (<\/em>matsebah<\/span>)<\/em> representing the male deity and having phallic associations; third, a tree or pole (<\/em>asherah<\/span>)<\/em> representing the female deity (a fertility goddess); and fourth, a laver for ceremonial washings. A sanctuary with an image of the deity also required a building of some sort to protect it (2 Kgs 17:29).<\/p>\nAt these pagan high places sacrifices of animals and sometimes of human beings took place, and religious prostitution or homosexual acts were common. It is natural that such practices should develop in a context of sympathetic magic, where promiscuity and breeding among human beings was supposed to influence animals and crops.<\/p>\nThe Hebrews had legitimate high places between the time of the destruction of the tabernacle at Shiloh and construction of the temple, though there was little similarity to pagan accoutrements or practices, apart from the presence of an altar and the offering of sacrifices. At one high place the people ate a sacrificial meal before Samuel anointed Saul king (1 Sm 9:12–10:1). The tabernacle was located at the high place of Gibeon during the reign of David (1 Chr 16:39; 21:29). Solomon offered sacrifices at several high places (1 Kgs 3:2-3), and at the high place of Gibeon he met God and was granted the gift of wisdom for his administration (vv 4-15). Once Solomon’s temple was completed, high places were eliminated and were off-limits for the Hebrews.<\/p>\nWhen the Hebrews entered Canaan, they encountered pagan peoples who had long worshiped at high places. God commanded the Israelites to destroy those sanctuaries (Nm 33:51-52) to avoid contamination by them, but the warning went largely unheeded. At the height of the Hebrew kingdom, after Solomon had completed the temple, he built high places for the god Chemosh of Moab, Molech of Ammon, and other gods of his pagan wives. For this sin God determined to split the Hebrew kingdom (1 Kgs 11:7-11).<\/p>\nAfter the division of the kingdom, Jeroboam established high places at Dan and Bethel, and Ahab and others proliferated their construction. Judgment was prophesied (1 Kgs 13:2-3; 2 Kgs 17:7-18), and ultimately the kingdom of Israel went into captivity to Assyria for her idolatry.<\/p>\nRehoboam, the first king of the southern kingdom, spread high places all over his domain (1 Kgs 14:23-24). Though King Asa launched a revival of true religion, he did not remove the high places (15:12-14). Jehoshaphat also initiated revival, but again the high places remained (22:43). On the other hand, his son Jehoram and his wife, Athaliah, encouraged their construction (2 Chr 21:11). Joash, during his revival, did not eliminate the high places (2 Kgs 12:3), nor did the good king Uzziah in similar efforts (15:3-4). Ahaz made no pretense of faithfulness to God, and actively encouraged the idolatry of the pagan sanctuaries (16:3-4). Finally, Hezekiah launched a campaign against the high places (2 Chr 31:1), but his policies were reversed during the reign of his wicked son Manasseh (2 Kgs 21:2-9). Josiah led the last Judean revival and again attacked the high places (23:5, 8).<\/p>\nThe prophets Isaiah (Is 15:2; 16:12), Jeremiah (Jer 48:35), Ezekiel (Ez 6:3), Hosea (Hos 10:8), and Amos (Am 7:9) roundly condemned these centers of idolatry. See<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Gods and Goddesses; Grove; Idols, Idolatry.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HIGH PLACE<\/h3>\nPhrase commonly translated from the Hebrew bamah, which apparently derived from a word originally meaning “the back (or ridge) of an animal.” Thus it came to refer to a height or hill or a stone burial cairn. Usually it was an elevated worship center, such as the ones referred to in Numbers 33:51-52, 1 Samuel 9:13-14, 2 Kings 12:3, 2 Chronicles 21:11, and Ezekiel 36:1-2. But sometimes (as in 2 Kgs 23:8) it was a bamah<\/span> of the gate, a sanctuary with no special reference to height, located at the city gate as in Dan and Beersheba. It might even have been placed in a declivity (Jer 7:31).<\/p>\nThat a bamah<\/span> might simply be a burial place with commemorative stelae or memorial stones is clear from such a passage as Ezekiel 43:7. An illustration of such a bamah<\/span> is the so-called Gezer high place. This Bronze Age center with its 10 huge pillars is now interpreted as a mortuary shrine instead of a sanctuary in the strict sense of the term.<\/p>\nA second word translated “high place” is ramah<\/span> (elevation), from the Hebrew meaning “to be high.” Ezekiel used this term to refer to illicit worship centers (16:24-25, 31-39) that evidently had no necessary connection with height.<\/p>\nOne of the best-known and best-preserved of all high places in the vicinity of Palestine is the great high place at Petra, discovered by George L. Robinson in 1900. Located on a ridge west of the Khazneh, or treasury, it consists of a large rectangular court and adjacent altars. The court is about 47 feet (14.3 meters) long and 21 feet (6.4 meters) wide and is cut into the rock platform to a depth of 18 inches (45.7 centimeters). West of the court stand a square and a round altar, each hewn from the solid rock. South of the court is a pool measuring about eight and a half by nine and a half feet (2.6 by 2.9 meters) and cut four feet (1.2 meters) into the rock. South of the pool stand two sacred obelisks or pillars, also cut out of the solid rock. This whole complex is reached from a lower terrace by two flights of stairs. At this center the ancient Nabatean inhabitants of Petra evidently engaged in feasts and sacrifices to honor their gods. Though the worship center in its present form does not date before the first century BC<\/span>, it preserves an ancient tradition of Transjordan and illustrates the pagan and Israelite high places of OT times.<\/p>\nThe pagan high place was usually located on a physical height, where one could feel closer to the god. Its first essential was an altar, which might be a heap of earth, unhewn stones, or a unit cut out of the solid rock. Second, there was a stone pillar (Dt 12:3) or obelisk (<\/em>matsebah<\/span>)<\/em> representing the male deity and having phallic associations; third, a tree or pole (<\/em>asherah<\/span>)<\/em> representing the female deity (a fertility goddess); and fourth, a laver for ceremonial washings. A sanctuary with an image of the deity also required a building of some sort to protect it (2 Kgs 17:29).<\/p>\nAt these pagan high places sacrifices of animals and sometimes of human beings took place, and religious prostitution or homosexual acts were common. It is natural that such practices should develop in a context of sympathetic magic, where promiscuity and breeding among human beings was supposed to influence animals and crops.<\/p>\nThe Hebrews had legitimate high places between the time of the destruction of the tabernacle at Shiloh and construction of the temple, though there was little similarity to pagan accoutrements or practices, apart from the presence of an altar and the offering of sacrifices. At one high place the people ate a sacrificial meal before Samuel anointed Saul king (1 Sm 9:12–10:1). The tabernacle was located at the high place of Gibeon during the reign of David (1 Chr 16:39; 21:29). Solomon offered sacrifices at several high places (1 Kgs 3:2-3), and at the high place of Gibeon he met God and was granted the gift of wisdom for his administration (vv 4-15). Once Solomon’s temple was completed, high places were eliminated and were off-limits for the Hebrews.<\/p>\nWhen the Hebrews entered Canaan, they encountered pagan peoples who had long worshiped at high places. God commanded the Israelites to destroy those sanctuaries (Nm 33:51-52) to avoid contamination by them, but the warning went largely unheeded. At the height of the Hebrew kingdom, after Solomon had completed the temple, he built high places for the god Chemosh of Moab, Molech of Ammon, and other gods of his pagan wives. For this sin God determined to split the Hebrew kingdom (1 Kgs 11:7-11).<\/p>\nAfter the division of the kingdom, Jeroboam established high places at Dan and Bethel, and Ahab and others proliferated their construction. Judgment was prophesied (1 Kgs 13:2-3; 2 Kgs 17:7-18), and ultimately the kingdom of Israel went into captivity to Assyria for her idolatry.<\/p>\nRehoboam, the first king of the southern kingdom, spread high places all over his domain (1 Kgs 14:23-24). Though King Asa launched a revival of true religion, he did not remove the high places (15:12-14). Jehoshaphat also initiated revival, but again the high places remained (22:43). On the other hand, his son Jehoram and his wife, Athaliah, encouraged their construction (2 Chr 21:11). Joash, during his revival, did not eliminate the high places (2 Kgs 12:3), nor did the good king Uzziah in similar efforts (15:3-4). Ahaz made no pretense of faithfulness to God, and actively encouraged the idolatry of the pagan sanctuaries (16:3-4). Finally, Hezekiah launched a campaign against the high places (2 Chr 31:1), but his policies were reversed during the reign of his wicked son Manasseh (2 Kgs 21:2-9). Josiah led the last Judean revival and again attacked the high places (23:5, 8).<\/p>\nThe prophets Isaiah (Is 15:2; 16:12), Jeremiah (Jer 48:35), Ezekiel (Ez 6:3), Hosea (Hos 10:8), and Amos (Am 7:9) roundly condemned these centers of idolatry. See<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Gods and Goddesses; Grove; Idols, Idolatry.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HIGH PLACE Phrase commonly translated from the Hebrew bamah, which apparently derived from a word originally meaning “the back (or ridge) of an animal.” Thus it came to refer to a height or hill or a stone burial cairn. Usually it was an elevated worship center, such as the ones referred to in Numbers 33:51-52, 1 Samuel 9:13-14, 2 Kings 12:3, 2 Chronicles 21:11, and Ezekiel 36:1-2. But sometimes (as in 2 Kgs 23:8) it was a bamah of the gate, a sanctuary with no special reference to height, lo...","summary_en":"HIGH PLACE Phrase commonly translated from the Hebrew bamah, which apparently derived from a word originally meaning “the back (or ridge) of an animal.” Thus it came to refer to a height or hill or a stone burial cairn. Usually it was an elevated worship center, such as the ones referred to in Numbers 33:51-52, 1 Samuel 9:13-14, 2 Kings 12:3, 2 Chronicles 21:11, and Ezekiel 36:1-2. But sometimes (as in 2 Kgs 23:8) it was a bamah of the gate, a sanctuary with no special reference to height, lo...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45004,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:3","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:3","content_ro":"12:3<\/strong> sacred pillars:<\/em> See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles:<\/em> The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names:<\/em> With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).<\/p>","content_en":"12:3<\/strong> sacred pillars:<\/em> See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles:<\/em> The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names:<\/em> With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:3 sacred pillars: See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles: The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names: With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).","summary_en":"12:3 sacred pillars: See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles: The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names: With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72630,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:3","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:3","content_ro":"12:3<\/strong> sacred pillars:<\/em> See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles:<\/em> The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names:<\/em> With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).<\/p>","content_en":"12:3<\/strong> sacred pillars:<\/em> See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles:<\/em> The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names:<\/em> With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:3 sacred pillars: See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles: The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names: With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).","summary_en":"12:3 sacred pillars: See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles: The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names: With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100256,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:3","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:3","content_ro":"12:3<\/strong> sacred pillars:<\/em> See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles:<\/em> The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names:<\/em> With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).<\/p>","content_en":"12:3<\/strong> sacred pillars:<\/em> See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles:<\/em> The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names:<\/em> With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:3 sacred pillars: See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles: The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names: With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).","summary_en":"12:3 sacred pillars: See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles: The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names: With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127882,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:3","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:3","content_ro":"12:3<\/strong> sacred pillars:<\/em> See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles:<\/em> The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names:<\/em> With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).<\/p>","content_en":"12:3<\/strong> sacred pillars:<\/em> See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles:<\/em> The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names:<\/em> With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:3 sacred pillars: See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles: The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names: With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).","summary_en":"12:3 sacred pillars: See study note on 7:5. • Asherah poles: The feminine counterpart to the sacred pillar was a wooden pole dedicated to the mother goddess, Asherah. • erase the names: With the destruction of all idols and every vestige of pagan worship, the names of these deities would be forgotten. Future generations would know nothing of them (see also study note on 7:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":33883,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sanctuary","title_en":"Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>SANCTUARY<\/h3>\nTranslation of two Hebrew words, kodesh<\/span> and midkosh<\/span>,<\/em> both of which are derived from the verb “to be clean” and\/or “to be holy.” It appears approximately 60 times in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers where the building, moving, and initial use of the tabernacle is reported. Places of revelation, sacrifice, and worship are referred to in Deuteronomy but not by the term “sanctuary.” The term appears over 60 times in Ezekiel, Daniel, and postexilic writings because of the importance the sanctuary had in the life of Israel during and after the exile.<\/p>\n“Sanctuary” refers to the place where God appeared and\/or dwelt, as indicated by the presence of the ark. God’s Word was kept there and issued forth from it. There God’s people gathered for sacrifice, for hearing the covenant word, for worship and prayer, and for the celebration of the major feasts.<\/p>\nThe patriarchs had places of worship (Gn 26:24-25; 28:16-22) but no actual sanctuary. The first reference to sanctuary (Ex 15:17) speaks of it as a symbol of God’s dwelling among his people and ruling over them from within it. The tabernacle, moved from place to place, was the central sanctuary until the time when Solomon built the temple in Jerusalem. It must be emphatically stressed that God’s people were to have one central sanctuary (Dt 12:4-7; 16:5-8).<\/p>\nThe NT refers to the OT sanctuary as a type of a foreshadowing of God’s eternal dwelling with and among his people (Heb 8:5-6; 9:1-14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SANCTUARY<\/h3>\nTranslation of two Hebrew words, kodesh<\/span> and midkosh<\/span>,<\/em> both of which are derived from the verb “to be clean” and\/or “to be holy.” It appears approximately 60 times in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers where the building, moving, and initial use of the tabernacle is reported. Places of revelation, sacrifice, and worship are referred to in Deuteronomy but not by the term “sanctuary.” The term appears over 60 times in Ezekiel, Daniel, and postexilic writings because of the importance the sanctuary had in the life of Israel during and after the exile.<\/p>\n“Sanctuary” refers to the place where God appeared and\/or dwelt, as indicated by the presence of the ark. God’s Word was kept there and issued forth from it. There God’s people gathered for sacrifice, for hearing the covenant word, for worship and prayer, and for the celebration of the major feasts.<\/p>\nThe patriarchs had places of worship (Gn 26:24-25; 28:16-22) but no actual sanctuary. The first reference to sanctuary (Ex 15:17) speaks of it as a symbol of God’s dwelling among his people and ruling over them from within it. The tabernacle, moved from place to place, was the central sanctuary until the time when Solomon built the temple in Jerusalem. It must be emphatically stressed that God’s people were to have one central sanctuary (Dt 12:4-7; 16:5-8).<\/p>\nThe NT refers to the OT sanctuary as a type of a foreshadowing of God’s eternal dwelling with and among his people (Heb 8:5-6; 9:1-14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SANCTUARY Translation of two Hebrew words, kodesh and midkosh, both of which are derived from the verb “to be clean” and\/or “to be holy.” It appears approximately 60 times in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers where the building, moving, and initial use of the tabernacle is reported. Places of revelation, sacrifice, and worship are referred to in Deuteronomy but not by the term “sanctuary.” The term appears over 60 times in Ezekiel, Daniel, and postexilic writings because of the importance the sa...","summary_en":"SANCTUARY Translation of two Hebrew words, kodesh and midkosh, both of which are derived from the verb “to be clean” and\/or “to be holy.” It appears approximately 60 times in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers where the building, moving, and initial use of the tabernacle is reported. Places of revelation, sacrifice, and worship are referred to in Deuteronomy but not by the term “sanctuary.” The term appears over 60 times in Ezekiel, Daniel, and postexilic writings because of the importance the sa...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60796,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\nGod wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nGod is transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\nGod made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\nGod would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\nGod wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nGod is transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\nGod made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\nGod would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61671,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Success","title_en":"True Success","content_ro":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\nGod requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\nBeginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\nSome of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\nWhile the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\nGod requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\nBeginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\nSome of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\nWhile the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","summary_en":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88422,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\nGod wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nGod is transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\nGod made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\nGod would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\nGod wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nGod is transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\nGod made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\nGod would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89297,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Success","title_en":"True Success","content_ro":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\nGod requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\nBeginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\nSome of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\nWhile the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\nGod requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\nBeginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\nSome of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\nWhile the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","summary_en":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116048,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\nGod wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nGod is transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\nGod made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\nGod would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\nGod wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nGod is transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\nGod made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\nGod would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116923,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Success","title_en":"True Success","content_ro":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\nGod requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\nBeginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\nSome of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\nWhile the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\nGod requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\nBeginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\nSome of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\nWhile the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","summary_en":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143674,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\nGod wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nGod is transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\nGod made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\nGod would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\nGod wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nGod is transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\nGod made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\nGod would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144549,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Success","title_en":"True Success","content_ro":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\nGod requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\nBeginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\nSome of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\nWhile the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\nGod requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\nBeginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\nSome of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\nWhile the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","summary_en":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":22794,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Concept of Law","title_en":"Biblical Concept of Law","content_ro":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\nGod’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Historical Context<\/p>\n• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\nHistorical Context<\/p>\nWhen man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\nYet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\nThe father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\nHowever, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\nLaw in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is Torah<\/span>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\nSynonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\nThese words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\nHow could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\nIsraelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\nIsrael’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\nOld Testament Laws<\/p>\nThe legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\nThe commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\nThe commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\nThe purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\nGod’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\nThe tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\nBy means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\nThe priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\nThe holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\nThe laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\nThe holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\nBoth promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\nThe Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\nPurposes of the Law<\/p>\nThe law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\nThe law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\nThe purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\nMaturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\nGod’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Historical Context<\/p>\n• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\nHistorical Context<\/p>\nWhen man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\nYet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\nThe father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\nHowever, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\nLaw in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is Torah<\/span>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\nSynonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\nThese words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\nHow could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\nIsraelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\nIsrael’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\nOld Testament Laws<\/p>\nThe legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\nThe commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\nThe commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\nThe purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\nGod’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\nThe tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\nBy means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\nThe priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\nThe holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\nThe laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\nThe holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\nBoth promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\nThe Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\nPurposes of the Law<\/p>\nThe law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\nThe law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\nThe purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\nMaturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","summary_en":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38734,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Worship","title_en":"Worship","content_ro":"<h3>WORSHIP<\/h3>\nExpression of reverence and adoration of God.<\/p>\nWorship in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC<\/span>) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted more than three centuries until its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. When the Jews returned from exile, they built a new temple, which was later renovated and enlarged by Herod the Great. Though all the temple buildings were destroyed by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70, the foundations remained. Jews still pray by the Western Wall (called the Wailing Wall).<\/p>\nIf the form of worship changed with times and situations, its heart and center did not. God revealed himself to Abraham, promising that his children would inherit the land of Canaan. Abraham demonstrated his faith through prayer and sacrifice. Throughout the biblical period listening to God’s Word, prayer, and sacrifice constituted the essence of worship. The promises to Abraham were constantly recalled as the basis of Israel’s existence as a nation and its right to the land of Canaan.<\/p>\nFrom time to time every family visited the temple in Jerusalem. Eight days after a baby boy was born, he was circumcised to mark his membership in Israel. Then, a month or two later, the baby’s mother went to the temple to offer sacrifice (Lv 12; cf. Lk 2:22-24).<\/p>\nAnimals were sacrificed in the lambing and calving season. The first lamb or calf born to every ewe or cow was presented in sacrifice (Ex 22:30). Similarly, at the beginning of the harvest season, a basket of the first fruits was offered, and at the end, a tenth of all the harvest, the tithe, was given to the priests as God’s representatives (Nm 18:21-32). Deuteronomy 26:5-15 gives a typical prayer for use on such occasions.<\/p>\nSometimes a person would decide to offer a sacrifice for more personal reasons. In a crisis, vows could be made and sealed with a sacrifice (Gn 28:18-22; 1 Sm 1:10-11). Then when the prayer was answered, a second sacrifice was customarily offered (Gn 35:3, 14; 1 Sm 1:24-25). Serious sin or serious sickness were also occasions for sacrifice (Lv 4–5, 13–15).<\/p>\nThe worshiper brought the animal into the temple court. Standing before the priest, he placed one hand on its head, thereby identifying himself with the animal, and confessed his sin or explained the reason for offering the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and cut it up for the priest to burn on the great bronze altar. Some sacrifices (burnt offerings) involved the whole animal being burnt on the altar. In others, some of the meat was set aside for the priests, while the rest was shared by the worshiper and his family. But in every case the worshiper killed the animal from his own flock with his own hands. These sacrifices expressed in a vivid and tangible way the cost of sin and the worshiper’s responsibility. As the worshiper killed the animal, he recalled that sin would have caused his own death, had God not provided an escape through animal sacrifice.<\/p>\nThree times a year all adult men went to the temple to celebrate the national festivals (Ex 23:17; Dt 16:16): Passover (held in April), the Feast of Weeks (held in May), and the Feast of Booths (in October). When possible, the whole family accompanied the men. But if they lived a long way from Jerusalem, they would go up for only one of the festivals (1 Sm 1:3; Lk 2:41).<\/p>\nThese festivals were tremendous occasions. Hundreds of thousands of people converged on Jerusalem. They would stay with relatives or camp in tents outside the city. The temple courts would be thronged with worshipers. The temple choirs sang psalms appropriate for the festival, while the priests and Levites offered hundreds (at Passover, thousands) of animals in sacrifice. Groups of worshipers carried away with emotion would break forth into dancing. Those of more sober temperament were content to join in the singing or simply pray quietly.<\/p>\nThe major festivals were joyful occasions, for they celebrated the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. At Passover each family ate roasted lamb and bitter herbs to reenact the last meal their forefathers ate before leaving Egypt (Ex 12). At the Feast of Booths, they built shelters of branches and lived in them for a week, as a reminder that the Israelites camped in tents during the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness (Lv 23:39-43). These great festivals served as reminders of how God had delivered them from slavery in Egypt and had given them the land of Canaan as he had promised to Abraham.<\/p>\nEach of these three festivals lasted a week, but there was one day in the year that was totally different, the Day of Atonement, when everyone fasted and mourned for their sins. On this day the high priest confessed the nation’s sins as he pressed his hand on the head of a goat. Then the goat was led away into the wilderness, symbolizing the removal of sin from the people (Lv 16).<\/p>\nSometime after the destruction of the first temple, synagogues developed for public worship. The services were more like modern church worship, consisting exclusively of prayer, Bible reading, and preaching. There were no sacrifices made in the synagogues. When the second temple was destroyed in AD<\/span> 70, synagogues became the only places where Jews could worship in public. Then there were no more sacrifices at all. The NT pictures this as fitting, for Jesus was the true Lamb of God (Jn 1:29); because of his death, there is no need for further animal sacrifice (Heb 10:11-12).<\/p>\nWorship in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe Jews had become far too dependent on a physical place, the temple, for their worship. When Jesus arrived on the scene, he proclaimed that he himself was the temple of God; in resurrection, he would provide the spiritual dwelling where God the Spirit and people, in spirit, could have spiritual communion (see Mt 12:6; Jn 2:19-22). In other words, worship would no longer be in a place but in a person—through Jesus Christ and his Spirit the worshipers could come directly to God (see Jn 14:6; Heb 10:19-20).<\/p>\nThis shift in worship—from physical to spiritual—is the theme of John 4, a chapter that recounts Jesus’ visit to the Samaritans. After Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman, she acknowledged that he must be a prophet, and then she launched into a discussion concerning the religious debate between the Jews and the Samaritans over which place of worship was the right one—Jerusalem or Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans had set up a place for worship on Mt Gerizim in accordance with Deuteronomy 11:26-29 and 27:1-8, while the Jews had followed David and Solomon in making Jerusalem the center of Jewish worship. The Scriptures affirmed Jerusalem as the true center for worship (Dt 12:5; 2 Chr 6:6; 7:12; Ps 78:67-68). But Jesus told her that a new age had come in which the issue no longer concerned a physical site. God the Father would no longer be worshiped in either place. A new age had come in which the true worshipers (Jew, Samaritan, or Gentile) must worship the Father in spirit and in truth.<\/p>\n“In spirit” corresponds to Jerusalem, and “in truth” corresponds to the Samaritans’ unknowledgeable ideas of worship, God, etc. Formerly, God was worshiped in Jerusalem, but now the true Jerusalem would be in a person’s spirit. Indeed, the church is called “the habitation of God in spirit” (Eph 2:22). True worship required a people to contact God, the Spirit, in their spirit, as well as a people who knew the truth. New Testament worship must be in spirit and in truth. Since “God is Spirit,” he must be worshiped in spirit. Human beings possess a human spirit, the nature of which corresponds to God’s nature, which is spirit. Therefore, people can have fellowship with God and worship God in the same sphere that God exists in.<\/p>\nIn a sense, John 4 anticipates Revelation 21 and 22, where God provides the rivers of the water of life to all the believers and where the Lamb and God are the temple in the New Jerusalem. The believers receive life from God and they worship in God. There is a profound, even mystical connection between drinking of the Spirit and worshiping God in the Spirit (see 1 Cor 12:13). This is also described in Ezekiel 47, which pictures the river flowing from God’s temple as a symbol of God’s never-ending supply. In John 4, Jesus provides the living waters to all who receive the gift of God, and he directs people to a new temple, a spiritual one, where God is worshiped in spirit.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORSHIP<\/h3>\nExpression of reverence and adoration of God.<\/p>\nWorship in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC<\/span>) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted more than three centuries until its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. When the Jews returned from exile, they built a new temple, which was later renovated and enlarged by Herod the Great. Though all the temple buildings were destroyed by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70, the foundations remained. Jews still pray by the Western Wall (called the Wailing Wall).<\/p>\nIf the form of worship changed with times and situations, its heart and center did not. God revealed himself to Abraham, promising that his children would inherit the land of Canaan. Abraham demonstrated his faith through prayer and sacrifice. Throughout the biblical period listening to God’s Word, prayer, and sacrifice constituted the essence of worship. The promises to Abraham were constantly recalled as the basis of Israel’s existence as a nation and its right to the land of Canaan.<\/p>\nFrom time to time every family visited the temple in Jerusalem. Eight days after a baby boy was born, he was circumcised to mark his membership in Israel. Then, a month or two later, the baby’s mother went to the temple to offer sacrifice (Lv 12; cf. Lk 2:22-24).<\/p>\nAnimals were sacrificed in the lambing and calving season. The first lamb or calf born to every ewe or cow was presented in sacrifice (Ex 22:30). Similarly, at the beginning of the harvest season, a basket of the first fruits was offered, and at the end, a tenth of all the harvest, the tithe, was given to the priests as God’s representatives (Nm 18:21-32). Deuteronomy 26:5-15 gives a typical prayer for use on such occasions.<\/p>\nSometimes a person would decide to offer a sacrifice for more personal reasons. In a crisis, vows could be made and sealed with a sacrifice (Gn 28:18-22; 1 Sm 1:10-11). Then when the prayer was answered, a second sacrifice was customarily offered (Gn 35:3, 14; 1 Sm 1:24-25). Serious sin or serious sickness were also occasions for sacrifice (Lv 4–5, 13–15).<\/p>\nThe worshiper brought the animal into the temple court. Standing before the priest, he placed one hand on its head, thereby identifying himself with the animal, and confessed his sin or explained the reason for offering the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and cut it up for the priest to burn on the great bronze altar. Some sacrifices (burnt offerings) involved the whole animal being burnt on the altar. In others, some of the meat was set aside for the priests, while the rest was shared by the worshiper and his family. But in every case the worshiper killed the animal from his own flock with his own hands. These sacrifices expressed in a vivid and tangible way the cost of sin and the worshiper’s responsibility. As the worshiper killed the animal, he recalled that sin would have caused his own death, had God not provided an escape through animal sacrifice.<\/p>\nThree times a year all adult men went to the temple to celebrate the national festivals (Ex 23:17; Dt 16:16): Passover (held in April), the Feast of Weeks (held in May), and the Feast of Booths (in October). When possible, the whole family accompanied the men. But if they lived a long way from Jerusalem, they would go up for only one of the festivals (1 Sm 1:3; Lk 2:41).<\/p>\nThese festivals were tremendous occasions. Hundreds of thousands of people converged on Jerusalem. They would stay with relatives or camp in tents outside the city. The temple courts would be thronged with worshipers. The temple choirs sang psalms appropriate for the festival, while the priests and Levites offered hundreds (at Passover, thousands) of animals in sacrifice. Groups of worshipers carried away with emotion would break forth into dancing. Those of more sober temperament were content to join in the singing or simply pray quietly.<\/p>\nThe major festivals were joyful occasions, for they celebrated the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. At Passover each family ate roasted lamb and bitter herbs to reenact the last meal their forefathers ate before leaving Egypt (Ex 12). At the Feast of Booths, they built shelters of branches and lived in them for a week, as a reminder that the Israelites camped in tents during the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness (Lv 23:39-43). These great festivals served as reminders of how God had delivered them from slavery in Egypt and had given them the land of Canaan as he had promised to Abraham.<\/p>\nEach of these three festivals lasted a week, but there was one day in the year that was totally different, the Day of Atonement, when everyone fasted and mourned for their sins. On this day the high priest confessed the nation’s sins as he pressed his hand on the head of a goat. Then the goat was led away into the wilderness, symbolizing the removal of sin from the people (Lv 16).<\/p>\nSometime after the destruction of the first temple, synagogues developed for public worship. The services were more like modern church worship, consisting exclusively of prayer, Bible reading, and preaching. There were no sacrifices made in the synagogues. When the second temple was destroyed in AD<\/span> 70, synagogues became the only places where Jews could worship in public. Then there were no more sacrifices at all. The NT pictures this as fitting, for Jesus was the true Lamb of God (Jn 1:29); because of his death, there is no need for further animal sacrifice (Heb 10:11-12).<\/p>\nWorship in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe Jews had become far too dependent on a physical place, the temple, for their worship. When Jesus arrived on the scene, he proclaimed that he himself was the temple of God; in resurrection, he would provide the spiritual dwelling where God the Spirit and people, in spirit, could have spiritual communion (see Mt 12:6; Jn 2:19-22). In other words, worship would no longer be in a place but in a person—through Jesus Christ and his Spirit the worshipers could come directly to God (see Jn 14:6; Heb 10:19-20).<\/p>\nThis shift in worship—from physical to spiritual—is the theme of John 4, a chapter that recounts Jesus’ visit to the Samaritans. After Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman, she acknowledged that he must be a prophet, and then she launched into a discussion concerning the religious debate between the Jews and the Samaritans over which place of worship was the right one—Jerusalem or Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans had set up a place for worship on Mt Gerizim in accordance with Deuteronomy 11:26-29 and 27:1-8, while the Jews had followed David and Solomon in making Jerusalem the center of Jewish worship. The Scriptures affirmed Jerusalem as the true center for worship (Dt 12:5; 2 Chr 6:6; 7:12; Ps 78:67-68). But Jesus told her that a new age had come in which the issue no longer concerned a physical site. God the Father would no longer be worshiped in either place. A new age had come in which the true worshipers (Jew, Samaritan, or Gentile) must worship the Father in spirit and in truth.<\/p>\n“In spirit” corresponds to Jerusalem, and “in truth” corresponds to the Samaritans’ unknowledgeable ideas of worship, God, etc. Formerly, God was worshiped in Jerusalem, but now the true Jerusalem would be in a person’s spirit. Indeed, the church is called “the habitation of God in spirit” (Eph 2:22). True worship required a people to contact God, the Spirit, in their spirit, as well as a people who knew the truth. New Testament worship must be in spirit and in truth. Since “God is Spirit,” he must be worshiped in spirit. Human beings possess a human spirit, the nature of which corresponds to God’s nature, which is spirit. Therefore, people can have fellowship with God and worship God in the same sphere that God exists in.<\/p>\nIn a sense, John 4 anticipates Revelation 21 and 22, where God provides the rivers of the water of life to all the believers and where the Lamb and God are the temple in the New Jerusalem. The believers receive life from God and they worship in God. There is a profound, even mystical connection between drinking of the Spirit and worshiping God in the Spirit (see 1 Cor 12:13). This is also described in Ezekiel 47, which pictures the river flowing from God’s temple as a symbol of God’s never-ending supply. In John 4, Jesus provides the living waters to all who receive the gift of God, and he directs people to a new temple, a spiritual one, where God is worshiped in spirit.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORSHIP Expression of reverence and adoration of God. Worship in the Old Testament The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted ...","summary_en":"WORSHIP Expression of reverence and adoration of God. Worship in the Old Testament The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted ...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39389,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zion","title_en":"Zion","content_ro":"<h3>ZION<\/h3>\nThe Jebusite fortress in Jerusalem conquered by David. Thereafter, Zion was used by biblical writers to identify other areas of Jerusalem and was used as a designation of the entire city. Zion was also used to describe, spiritually speaking, the eternal city of God.<\/p>\n\nGeographical Sites<\/p>\n<h5>The Jebusite Fortress<\/h5>\nThe first occurrence of the word “Zion” is in the narrative of David’s conquest of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-10; 1 Chr 11:4-9). David captured the “fortress of Zion,” which was thereafter known as the “city of David.” The “fortress of Zion” may refer to the entire walled perimeter of the approximately 11-acre (4.5-hectare) site on the southeastern ridge (the Ophel Ridge), or to a smaller fortified area within that site.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temple Mount<\/h5>\nChanges in the perimeter of the city by incorporating more territory within the walls extend the term Zion. When Solomon built the temple and his palace and extended the walls north of the Ophel Ridge to encompass the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite (2 Sm 24:16-18; 1 Chr 21:15-18, 28), the name Zion was applied to these areas as well. The transfer of the ark “from the city of David which is Zion” (1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Chr 5:2) to the temple hill brought both an extension and a reduction of the territory embraced by the term “Zion.” The whole city could still be called Zion, but from this point on, there would be a close identification between Zion and the temple hill. The temple precincts became the primary Zion; references to Zion in the poetic books and the preaching of the prophets are primarily to the temple area as the dwelling place of God.<\/p>\n<h5>The Entire City<\/h5>\nThe word “Zion” can be used as a designation of the entire city or its population without any particular reference to the temple area. This use is clearest in poetic passages where Zion is the parallel term to Jerusalem (Pss 51:18; 76:2; 102:21; 135:21; 147:12; Is 2:3; 30:19; 33:20; 37:32; 40:9; 41:27; 62:1; Jer 26:18; 51:35; Am 1:2; Zep 3:14) or to the villages of Judah (Pss 69:35; 97:8; Is 40:9).<\/p>\nTheological Motifs<\/p>\n<h5>In the Old Testament<\/h5>\nMany theological motifs attach to the Zion theme as it develops in redemptive history. The dominant motif of Zion as the dwelling place of God, the place where God is in the midst of his people, is conjoined to the larger theme of Immanuel, “God in our midst.” Just as the pillar of fire and cloud stood above the tabernacle during the wilderness wandering, so once Israel had attained the place of God’s choosing (Dt 12:5-14), he would dwell there. When Jerusalem became David’s capital and Solomon had completed the temple, the glory cloud filled the temple (1 Kgs 8:10; 2 Chr 5:13-14) and Jerusalem became the dwelling place of God (Pss 74:2; 76:2; 135:21; Is 8:18; Jl 3:17-21). The Lord loved and chose Zion (Pss 78:68; 132:13). His glorious presence was there, and from there he would speak (50:1-2). His fire was in Zion, his furnace in Jerusalem (Is 31:8-9). There he was enthroned above the cherubim (Pss 9:11; 99:1-2) and ruled over his people and the nations (Is 24:23). His chosen king ruled from that holy hill (Pss 2:6; 48:1).<\/p>\nThough the size of the site of ancient Jerusalem is not particularly impressive and ordinarily would not be considered a large hill, for the psalmist Zion is God’s holy hill (Ps 99:9). The prophets describe it as “chief among the mountains, raised above the hills” (Is 2:2; Mi 4:1). The Canaanite god Baal was thought to dwell on a great mountain to the north, Mt Zaphon, so the psalmist describes Zion as “beautiful in its loftiness, like the utmost heights of Mt Zaphon” (Ps 48:1-2). God’s sanctuary is “like the high mountains” (Ps 78:68; Ez 40:2).<\/p>\nAn adequate water supply has been a problem for Jerusalem throughout its history. During the OT period, the city’s water came from one small spring. But in the eyes of the poets and prophets, Zion is gladdened by a great river that brings life wherever it flows (Ps 46:4; Ez 47:1-12; Jl 3:18; Zec 13:1; 14:8; see Rv 22:1-2). The threatening waters of chaos cannot shake the city of God (Ps 46:1-3).<\/p>\nBecause Zion is the city of God, it is the object of pilgrims, Jew and Gentile alike, who thirst to be in the presence of God in Zion’s temple (Pss 42:1-2; 63:1). The pilgrim psalms give vivid expression to their longing (84; 122; 125–128). All humanity will come to God in Zion (65:1-4). The Gentiles will make annual pilgrimages bringing gifts (Ps 76; Is 18:7; Zep 3:9-10); even former enemies will be regarded as native-born citizens of Zion (Ps 87; Is 60:14; Zec 14:21). The nations will stream into Jerusalem to inaugurate an era of peace (Is 2:1-5; Mi 4:1-8). Year after year the festivals of Israel will be celebrated in Zion by Gentiles (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\nThe NT further develops the emphasis on both the heavenly and the eschatological Zion. For example, the author of Hebrews said that the OT saints looked “forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God . . . longing for a better country—a heavenly one” (Heb 11:10, 16, niv<\/span>), but none of them received the promises because God had planned something even better (vv 39-40). The church now enjoys what believers of the old covenant could never know: unlimited access to the presence of God in that Holy City, “Mount Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God” (12:22; see vv 18-24). Earthly Zion is but a shadow of the heavenly reality. The present city of Jerusalem is likened to a slave woman, but the heavenly Jerusalem is free and the mother of both Jew and Gentile (Gal 4:21-27; see Is 49:14-23; 54:1). The NT also looks forward to the eschatological expectation of the re-creation of heaven and earth and the revelation of the new Jerusalem (Rv 21:2). It is a city on a great high mountain (Rv 21:10; see Pss 48:1-2; 78:68; Is 2:2; Ez 40:2; Mi 4:1), and a river of life flows within (Rv 22:1-2).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jerusalem; Jerusalem, New.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ZION<\/h3>\nThe Jebusite fortress in Jerusalem conquered by David. Thereafter, Zion was used by biblical writers to identify other areas of Jerusalem and was used as a designation of the entire city. Zion was also used to describe, spiritually speaking, the eternal city of God.<\/p>\n\nGeographical Sites<\/p>\n<h5>The Jebusite Fortress<\/h5>\nThe first occurrence of the word “Zion” is in the narrative of David’s conquest of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-10; 1 Chr 11:4-9). David captured the “fortress of Zion,” which was thereafter known as the “city of David.” The “fortress of Zion” may refer to the entire walled perimeter of the approximately 11-acre (4.5-hectare) site on the southeastern ridge (the Ophel Ridge), or to a smaller fortified area within that site.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temple Mount<\/h5>\nChanges in the perimeter of the city by incorporating more territory within the walls extend the term Zion. When Solomon built the temple and his palace and extended the walls north of the Ophel Ridge to encompass the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite (2 Sm 24:16-18; 1 Chr 21:15-18, 28), the name Zion was applied to these areas as well. The transfer of the ark “from the city of David which is Zion” (1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Chr 5:2) to the temple hill brought both an extension and a reduction of the territory embraced by the term “Zion.” The whole city could still be called Zion, but from this point on, there would be a close identification between Zion and the temple hill. The temple precincts became the primary Zion; references to Zion in the poetic books and the preaching of the prophets are primarily to the temple area as the dwelling place of God.<\/p>\n<h5>The Entire City<\/h5>\nThe word “Zion” can be used as a designation of the entire city or its population without any particular reference to the temple area. This use is clearest in poetic passages where Zion is the parallel term to Jerusalem (Pss 51:18; 76:2; 102:21; 135:21; 147:12; Is 2:3; 30:19; 33:20; 37:32; 40:9; 41:27; 62:1; Jer 26:18; 51:35; Am 1:2; Zep 3:14) or to the villages of Judah (Pss 69:35; 97:8; Is 40:9).<\/p>\nTheological Motifs<\/p>\n<h5>In the Old Testament<\/h5>\nMany theological motifs attach to the Zion theme as it develops in redemptive history. The dominant motif of Zion as the dwelling place of God, the place where God is in the midst of his people, is conjoined to the larger theme of Immanuel, “God in our midst.” Just as the pillar of fire and cloud stood above the tabernacle during the wilderness wandering, so once Israel had attained the place of God’s choosing (Dt 12:5-14), he would dwell there. When Jerusalem became David’s capital and Solomon had completed the temple, the glory cloud filled the temple (1 Kgs 8:10; 2 Chr 5:13-14) and Jerusalem became the dwelling place of God (Pss 74:2; 76:2; 135:21; Is 8:18; Jl 3:17-21). The Lord loved and chose Zion (Pss 78:68; 132:13). His glorious presence was there, and from there he would speak (50:1-2). His fire was in Zion, his furnace in Jerusalem (Is 31:8-9). There he was enthroned above the cherubim (Pss 9:11; 99:1-2) and ruled over his people and the nations (Is 24:23). His chosen king ruled from that holy hill (Pss 2:6; 48:1).<\/p>\nThough the size of the site of ancient Jerusalem is not particularly impressive and ordinarily would not be considered a large hill, for the psalmist Zion is God’s holy hill (Ps 99:9). The prophets describe it as “chief among the mountains, raised above the hills” (Is 2:2; Mi 4:1). The Canaanite god Baal was thought to dwell on a great mountain to the north, Mt Zaphon, so the psalmist describes Zion as “beautiful in its loftiness, like the utmost heights of Mt Zaphon” (Ps 48:1-2). God’s sanctuary is “like the high mountains” (Ps 78:68; Ez 40:2).<\/p>\nAn adequate water supply has been a problem for Jerusalem throughout its history. During the OT period, the city’s water came from one small spring. But in the eyes of the poets and prophets, Zion is gladdened by a great river that brings life wherever it flows (Ps 46:4; Ez 47:1-12; Jl 3:18; Zec 13:1; 14:8; see Rv 22:1-2). The threatening waters of chaos cannot shake the city of God (Ps 46:1-3).<\/p>\nBecause Zion is the city of God, it is the object of pilgrims, Jew and Gentile alike, who thirst to be in the presence of God in Zion’s temple (Pss 42:1-2; 63:1). The pilgrim psalms give vivid expression to their longing (84; 122; 125–128). All humanity will come to God in Zion (65:1-4). The Gentiles will make annual pilgrimages bringing gifts (Ps 76; Is 18:7; Zep 3:9-10); even former enemies will be regarded as native-born citizens of Zion (Ps 87; Is 60:14; Zec 14:21). The nations will stream into Jerusalem to inaugurate an era of peace (Is 2:1-5; Mi 4:1-8). Year after year the festivals of Israel will be celebrated in Zion by Gentiles (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\nThe NT further develops the emphasis on both the heavenly and the eschatological Zion. For example, the author of Hebrews said that the OT saints looked “forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God . . . longing for a better country—a heavenly one” (Heb 11:10, 16, niv<\/span>), but none of them received the promises because God had planned something even better (vv 39-40). The church now enjoys what believers of the old covenant could never know: unlimited access to the presence of God in that Holy City, “Mount Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God” (12:22; see vv 18-24). Earthly Zion is but a shadow of the heavenly reality. The present city of Jerusalem is likened to a slave woman, but the heavenly Jerusalem is free and the mother of both Jew and Gentile (Gal 4:21-27; see Is 49:14-23; 54:1). The NT also looks forward to the eschatological expectation of the re-creation of heaven and earth and the revelation of the new Jerusalem (Rv 21:2). It is a city on a great high mountain (Rv 21:10; see Pss 48:1-2; 78:68; Is 2:2; Ez 40:2; Mi 4:1), and a river of life flows within (Rv 22:1-2).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jerusalem; Jerusalem, New.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ZION The Jebusite fortress in Jerusalem conquered by David. Thereafter, Zion was used by biblical writers to identify other areas of Jerusalem and was used as a designation of the entire city. Zion was also used to describe, spiritually speaking, the eternal city of God. Geographical Sites The Jebusite Fortress The first occurrence of the word “Zion” is in the narrative of David’s conquest of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-10; 1 Chr 11:4-9). David captured the “fortress of Zion,” which was thereafter kn...","summary_en":"ZION The Jebusite fortress in Jerusalem conquered by David. Thereafter, Zion was used by biblical writers to identify other areas of Jerusalem and was used as a designation of the entire city. Zion was also used to describe, spiritually speaking, the eternal city of God. Geographical Sites The Jebusite Fortress The first occurrence of the word “Zion” is in the narrative of David’s conquest of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-10; 1 Chr 11:4-9). David captured the “fortress of Zion,” which was thereafter kn...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45005,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:5","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:5","content_ro":"12:5<\/strong> his name will be honored:<\/em> The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name<\/em> there (see Exod 3:13-14).<\/p>","content_en":"12:5<\/strong> his name will be honored:<\/em> The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name<\/em> there (see Exod 3:13-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:5 his name will be honored: The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name there (see Exod 3:13-14).","summary_en":"12:5 his name will be honored: The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name there (see Exod 3:13-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72631,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:5","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:5","content_ro":"12:5<\/strong> his name will be honored:<\/em> The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name<\/em> there (see Exod 3:13-14).<\/p>","content_en":"12:5<\/strong> his name will be honored:<\/em> The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name<\/em> there (see Exod 3:13-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:5 his name will be honored: The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name there (see Exod 3:13-14).","summary_en":"12:5 his name will be honored: The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name there (see Exod 3:13-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100257,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:5","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:5","content_ro":"12:5<\/strong> his name will be honored:<\/em> The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name<\/em> there (see Exod 3:13-14).<\/p>","content_en":"12:5<\/strong> his name will be honored:<\/em> The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name<\/em> there (see Exod 3:13-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:5 his name will be honored: The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name there (see Exod 3:13-14).","summary_en":"12:5 his name will be honored: The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name there (see Exod 3:13-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127883,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:5","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:5","content_ro":"12:5<\/strong> his name will be honored:<\/em> The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name<\/em> there (see Exod 3:13-14).<\/p>","content_en":"12:5<\/strong> his name will be honored:<\/em> The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name<\/em> there (see Exod 3:13-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:5 his name will be honored: The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name there (see Exod 3:13-14).","summary_en":"12:5 his name will be honored: The name of the Lord represents the Lord himself. God lived among his people in a designated location by placing his name there (see Exod 3:13-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61853,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Seeking the Lord","title_en":"Seeking the Lord","content_ro":"<h3>Seeking the Lord<\/h3>\nAs Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were settled in the Promised Land, they were to build a more permanent sanctuary.<\/p>\nDuring the period of the judges, the people of Israel often sought the gods of the surrounding nations rather than the one true God. The establishment of the monarchy brought the hope that the entire nation would be unified in the worship of God. However, the first king, Saul, lost the kingdom and his life in part because he sought a medium rather than the Lord (1 Chr 10:13-14). Many of the kings throughout Israel’s history would follow Saul’s example of disobedience and would lead the nation into pagan religious practices.<\/p>\nDavid, by contrast, was a man after the Lord’s own heart (1 Sam 13:14). As king, one of David’s chief concerns was to restore the prominence of the Ark of the Covenant, which the Israelites had neglected in the days of Saul (1 Chr 13:3). David failed in his first attempt to bring the Ark to Jerusalem because he and the Levites did not seek the Lord’s counsel regarding its transport (13:1-14; 15:13). David later brought the Ark to Jerusalem successfully (15:1–16:1).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary and worship in Jerusalem provided a crucial component in seeking the Lord. Once the Ark was situated in the tent prepared for it in Jerusalem, David established a new role for Levites as ministers of music (16:4-6). And David consistently exhorted the leaders to “seek the Lord<\/span>” in building the Temple (22:19; cp. 28:8-10). Solomon’s first act to consolidate the kingdom was to gather all the leaders together at the altar at Gibeon in order to seek the Lord (2 Chr 1:1-6). The Lord met Solomon there to grant him both wisdom and wealth like that of no other king. Later, Solomon completed the Temple and dedicated it as a place for seeking the Lord (2 Chr 6).<\/p>\nIsaiah the prophet urged those waiting for the fulfillment of God’s promises to seek God: “Seek the Lord<\/span> while you can find him. Call on him now while he is near” (Isa 55:6). God’s covenant and promise are certain (Isa 55:3), and they are reserved for those who seek the Lord.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n1 Chr 10:13-14; 13:3; 16:11-13; 22:19; 28:8-10; 2 Chr 6:19-40; 7:14; Pss 27:4-8; 105:4-6; Isa 55:6-7; Jer 29:13-14; Matt 6:31-33; Rom 2:7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Seeking the Lord<\/h3>\nAs Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were settled in the Promised Land, they were to build a more permanent sanctuary.<\/p>\nDuring the period of the judges, the people of Israel often sought the gods of the surrounding nations rather than the one true God. The establishment of the monarchy brought the hope that the entire nation would be unified in the worship of God. However, the first king, Saul, lost the kingdom and his life in part because he sought a medium rather than the Lord (1 Chr 10:13-14). Many of the kings throughout Israel’s history would follow Saul’s example of disobedience and would lead the nation into pagan religious practices.<\/p>\nDavid, by contrast, was a man after the Lord’s own heart (1 Sam 13:14). As king, one of David’s chief concerns was to restore the prominence of the Ark of the Covenant, which the Israelites had neglected in the days of Saul (1 Chr 13:3). David failed in his first attempt to bring the Ark to Jerusalem because he and the Levites did not seek the Lord’s counsel regarding its transport (13:1-14; 15:13). David later brought the Ark to Jerusalem successfully (15:1–16:1).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary and worship in Jerusalem provided a crucial component in seeking the Lord. Once the Ark was situated in the tent prepared for it in Jerusalem, David established a new role for Levites as ministers of music (16:4-6). And David consistently exhorted the leaders to “seek the Lord<\/span>” in building the Temple (22:19; cp. 28:8-10). Solomon’s first act to consolidate the kingdom was to gather all the leaders together at the altar at Gibeon in order to seek the Lord (2 Chr 1:1-6). The Lord met Solomon there to grant him both wisdom and wealth like that of no other king. Later, Solomon completed the Temple and dedicated it as a place for seeking the Lord (2 Chr 6).<\/p>\nIsaiah the prophet urged those waiting for the fulfillment of God’s promises to seek God: “Seek the Lord<\/span> while you can find him. Call on him now while he is near” (Isa 55:6). God’s covenant and promise are certain (Isa 55:3), and they are reserved for those who seek the Lord.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n1 Chr 10:13-14; 13:3; 16:11-13; 22:19; 28:8-10; 2 Chr 6:19-40; 7:14; Pss 27:4-8; 105:4-6; Isa 55:6-7; Jer 29:13-14; Matt 6:31-33; Rom 2:7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Seeking the Lord As Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were set...","summary_en":"Seeking the Lord As Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were set...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64667,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\nThe Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\nThe Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89479,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Seeking the Lord","title_en":"Seeking the Lord","content_ro":"<h3>Seeking the Lord<\/h3>\nAs Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were settled in the Promised Land, they were to build a more permanent sanctuary.<\/p>\nDuring the period of the judges, the people of Israel often sought the gods of the surrounding nations rather than the one true God. The establishment of the monarchy brought the hope that the entire nation would be unified in the worship of God. However, the first king, Saul, lost the kingdom and his life in part because he sought a medium rather than the Lord (1 Chr 10:13-14). Many of the kings throughout Israel’s history would follow Saul’s example of disobedience and would lead the nation into pagan religious practices.<\/p>\nDavid, by contrast, was a man after the Lord’s own heart (1 Sam 13:14). As king, one of David’s chief concerns was to restore the prominence of the Ark of the Covenant, which the Israelites had neglected in the days of Saul (1 Chr 13:3). David failed in his first attempt to bring the Ark to Jerusalem because he and the Levites did not seek the Lord’s counsel regarding its transport (13:1-14; 15:13). David later brought the Ark to Jerusalem successfully (15:1–16:1).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary and worship in Jerusalem provided a crucial component in seeking the Lord. Once the Ark was situated in the tent prepared for it in Jerusalem, David established a new role for Levites as ministers of music (16:4-6). And David consistently exhorted the leaders to “seek the Lord<\/span>” in building the Temple (22:19; cp. 28:8-10). Solomon’s first act to consolidate the kingdom was to gather all the leaders together at the altar at Gibeon in order to seek the Lord (2 Chr 1:1-6). The Lord met Solomon there to grant him both wisdom and wealth like that of no other king. Later, Solomon completed the Temple and dedicated it as a place for seeking the Lord (2 Chr 6).<\/p>\nIsaiah the prophet urged those waiting for the fulfillment of God’s promises to seek God: “Seek the Lord<\/span> while you can find him. Call on him now while he is near” (Isa 55:6). God’s covenant and promise are certain (Isa 55:3), and they are reserved for those who seek the Lord.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n1 Chr 10:13-14; 13:3; 16:11-13; 22:19; 28:8-10; 2 Chr 6:19-40; 7:14; Pss 27:4-8; 105:4-6; Isa 55:6-7; Jer 29:13-14; Matt 6:31-33; Rom 2:7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Seeking the Lord<\/h3>\nAs Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were settled in the Promised Land, they were to build a more permanent sanctuary.<\/p>\nDuring the period of the judges, the people of Israel often sought the gods of the surrounding nations rather than the one true God. The establishment of the monarchy brought the hope that the entire nation would be unified in the worship of God. However, the first king, Saul, lost the kingdom and his life in part because he sought a medium rather than the Lord (1 Chr 10:13-14). Many of the kings throughout Israel’s history would follow Saul’s example of disobedience and would lead the nation into pagan religious practices.<\/p>\nDavid, by contrast, was a man after the Lord’s own heart (1 Sam 13:14). As king, one of David’s chief concerns was to restore the prominence of the Ark of the Covenant, which the Israelites had neglected in the days of Saul (1 Chr 13:3). David failed in his first attempt to bring the Ark to Jerusalem because he and the Levites did not seek the Lord’s counsel regarding its transport (13:1-14; 15:13). David later brought the Ark to Jerusalem successfully (15:1–16:1).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary and worship in Jerusalem provided a crucial component in seeking the Lord. Once the Ark was situated in the tent prepared for it in Jerusalem, David established a new role for Levites as ministers of music (16:4-6). And David consistently exhorted the leaders to “seek the Lord<\/span>” in building the Temple (22:19; cp. 28:8-10). Solomon’s first act to consolidate the kingdom was to gather all the leaders together at the altar at Gibeon in order to seek the Lord (2 Chr 1:1-6). The Lord met Solomon there to grant him both wisdom and wealth like that of no other king. Later, Solomon completed the Temple and dedicated it as a place for seeking the Lord (2 Chr 6).<\/p>\nIsaiah the prophet urged those waiting for the fulfillment of God’s promises to seek God: “Seek the Lord<\/span> while you can find him. Call on him now while he is near” (Isa 55:6). God’s covenant and promise are certain (Isa 55:3), and they are reserved for those who seek the Lord.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n1 Chr 10:13-14; 13:3; 16:11-13; 22:19; 28:8-10; 2 Chr 6:19-40; 7:14; Pss 27:4-8; 105:4-6; Isa 55:6-7; Jer 29:13-14; Matt 6:31-33; Rom 2:7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Seeking the Lord As Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were set...","summary_en":"Seeking the Lord As Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were set...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92293,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\nThe Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\nThe Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117105,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Seeking the Lord","title_en":"Seeking the Lord","content_ro":"<h3>Seeking the Lord<\/h3>\nAs Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were settled in the Promised Land, they were to build a more permanent sanctuary.<\/p>\nDuring the period of the judges, the people of Israel often sought the gods of the surrounding nations rather than the one true God. The establishment of the monarchy brought the hope that the entire nation would be unified in the worship of God. However, the first king, Saul, lost the kingdom and his life in part because he sought a medium rather than the Lord (1 Chr 10:13-14). Many of the kings throughout Israel’s history would follow Saul’s example of disobedience and would lead the nation into pagan religious practices.<\/p>\nDavid, by contrast, was a man after the Lord’s own heart (1 Sam 13:14). As king, one of David’s chief concerns was to restore the prominence of the Ark of the Covenant, which the Israelites had neglected in the days of Saul (1 Chr 13:3). David failed in his first attempt to bring the Ark to Jerusalem because he and the Levites did not seek the Lord’s counsel regarding its transport (13:1-14; 15:13). David later brought the Ark to Jerusalem successfully (15:1–16:1).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary and worship in Jerusalem provided a crucial component in seeking the Lord. Once the Ark was situated in the tent prepared for it in Jerusalem, David established a new role for Levites as ministers of music (16:4-6). And David consistently exhorted the leaders to “seek the Lord<\/span>” in building the Temple (22:19; cp. 28:8-10). Solomon’s first act to consolidate the kingdom was to gather all the leaders together at the altar at Gibeon in order to seek the Lord (2 Chr 1:1-6). The Lord met Solomon there to grant him both wisdom and wealth like that of no other king. Later, Solomon completed the Temple and dedicated it as a place for seeking the Lord (2 Chr 6).<\/p>\nIsaiah the prophet urged those waiting for the fulfillment of God’s promises to seek God: “Seek the Lord<\/span> while you can find him. Call on him now while he is near” (Isa 55:6). God’s covenant and promise are certain (Isa 55:3), and they are reserved for those who seek the Lord.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n1 Chr 10:13-14; 13:3; 16:11-13; 22:19; 28:8-10; 2 Chr 6:19-40; 7:14; Pss 27:4-8; 105:4-6; Isa 55:6-7; Jer 29:13-14; Matt 6:31-33; Rom 2:7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Seeking the Lord<\/h3>\nAs Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were settled in the Promised Land, they were to build a more permanent sanctuary.<\/p>\nDuring the period of the judges, the people of Israel often sought the gods of the surrounding nations rather than the one true God. The establishment of the monarchy brought the hope that the entire nation would be unified in the worship of God. However, the first king, Saul, lost the kingdom and his life in part because he sought a medium rather than the Lord (1 Chr 10:13-14). Many of the kings throughout Israel’s history would follow Saul’s example of disobedience and would lead the nation into pagan religious practices.<\/p>\nDavid, by contrast, was a man after the Lord’s own heart (1 Sam 13:14). As king, one of David’s chief concerns was to restore the prominence of the Ark of the Covenant, which the Israelites had neglected in the days of Saul (1 Chr 13:3). David failed in his first attempt to bring the Ark to Jerusalem because he and the Levites did not seek the Lord’s counsel regarding its transport (13:1-14; 15:13). David later brought the Ark to Jerusalem successfully (15:1–16:1).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary and worship in Jerusalem provided a crucial component in seeking the Lord. Once the Ark was situated in the tent prepared for it in Jerusalem, David established a new role for Levites as ministers of music (16:4-6). And David consistently exhorted the leaders to “seek the Lord<\/span>” in building the Temple (22:19; cp. 28:8-10). Solomon’s first act to consolidate the kingdom was to gather all the leaders together at the altar at Gibeon in order to seek the Lord (2 Chr 1:1-6). The Lord met Solomon there to grant him both wisdom and wealth like that of no other king. Later, Solomon completed the Temple and dedicated it as a place for seeking the Lord (2 Chr 6).<\/p>\nIsaiah the prophet urged those waiting for the fulfillment of God’s promises to seek God: “Seek the Lord<\/span> while you can find him. Call on him now while he is near” (Isa 55:6). God’s covenant and promise are certain (Isa 55:3), and they are reserved for those who seek the Lord.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n1 Chr 10:13-14; 13:3; 16:11-13; 22:19; 28:8-10; 2 Chr 6:19-40; 7:14; Pss 27:4-8; 105:4-6; Isa 55:6-7; Jer 29:13-14; Matt 6:31-33; Rom 2:7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Seeking the Lord As Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were set...","summary_en":"Seeking the Lord As Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were set...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119919,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\nThe Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\nThe Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144731,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Seeking the Lord","title_en":"Seeking the Lord","content_ro":"<h3>Seeking the Lord<\/h3>\nAs Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were settled in the Promised Land, they were to build a more permanent sanctuary.<\/p>\nDuring the period of the judges, the people of Israel often sought the gods of the surrounding nations rather than the one true God. The establishment of the monarchy brought the hope that the entire nation would be unified in the worship of God. However, the first king, Saul, lost the kingdom and his life in part because he sought a medium rather than the Lord (1 Chr 10:13-14). Many of the kings throughout Israel’s history would follow Saul’s example of disobedience and would lead the nation into pagan religious practices.<\/p>\nDavid, by contrast, was a man after the Lord’s own heart (1 Sam 13:14). As king, one of David’s chief concerns was to restore the prominence of the Ark of the Covenant, which the Israelites had neglected in the days of Saul (1 Chr 13:3). David failed in his first attempt to bring the Ark to Jerusalem because he and the Levites did not seek the Lord’s counsel regarding its transport (13:1-14; 15:13). David later brought the Ark to Jerusalem successfully (15:1–16:1).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary and worship in Jerusalem provided a crucial component in seeking the Lord. Once the Ark was situated in the tent prepared for it in Jerusalem, David established a new role for Levites as ministers of music (16:4-6). And David consistently exhorted the leaders to “seek the Lord<\/span>” in building the Temple (22:19; cp. 28:8-10). Solomon’s first act to consolidate the kingdom was to gather all the leaders together at the altar at Gibeon in order to seek the Lord (2 Chr 1:1-6). The Lord met Solomon there to grant him both wisdom and wealth like that of no other king. Later, Solomon completed the Temple and dedicated it as a place for seeking the Lord (2 Chr 6).<\/p>\nIsaiah the prophet urged those waiting for the fulfillment of God’s promises to seek God: “Seek the Lord<\/span> while you can find him. Call on him now while he is near” (Isa 55:6). God’s covenant and promise are certain (Isa 55:3), and they are reserved for those who seek the Lord.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n1 Chr 10:13-14; 13:3; 16:11-13; 22:19; 28:8-10; 2 Chr 6:19-40; 7:14; Pss 27:4-8; 105:4-6; Isa 55:6-7; Jer 29:13-14; Matt 6:31-33; Rom 2:7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Seeking the Lord<\/h3>\nAs Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were settled in the Promised Land, they were to build a more permanent sanctuary.<\/p>\nDuring the period of the judges, the people of Israel often sought the gods of the surrounding nations rather than the one true God. The establishment of the monarchy brought the hope that the entire nation would be unified in the worship of God. However, the first king, Saul, lost the kingdom and his life in part because he sought a medium rather than the Lord (1 Chr 10:13-14). Many of the kings throughout Israel’s history would follow Saul’s example of disobedience and would lead the nation into pagan religious practices.<\/p>\nDavid, by contrast, was a man after the Lord’s own heart (1 Sam 13:14). As king, one of David’s chief concerns was to restore the prominence of the Ark of the Covenant, which the Israelites had neglected in the days of Saul (1 Chr 13:3). David failed in his first attempt to bring the Ark to Jerusalem because he and the Levites did not seek the Lord’s counsel regarding its transport (13:1-14; 15:13). David later brought the Ark to Jerusalem successfully (15:1–16:1).<\/p>\nThe sanctuary and worship in Jerusalem provided a crucial component in seeking the Lord. Once the Ark was situated in the tent prepared for it in Jerusalem, David established a new role for Levites as ministers of music (16:4-6). And David consistently exhorted the leaders to “seek the Lord<\/span>” in building the Temple (22:19; cp. 28:8-10). Solomon’s first act to consolidate the kingdom was to gather all the leaders together at the altar at Gibeon in order to seek the Lord (2 Chr 1:1-6). The Lord met Solomon there to grant him both wisdom and wealth like that of no other king. Later, Solomon completed the Temple and dedicated it as a place for seeking the Lord (2 Chr 6).<\/p>\nIsaiah the prophet urged those waiting for the fulfillment of God’s promises to seek God: “Seek the Lord<\/span> while you can find him. Call on him now while he is near” (Isa 55:6). God’s covenant and promise are certain (Isa 55:3), and they are reserved for those who seek the Lord.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n1 Chr 10:13-14; 13:3; 16:11-13; 22:19; 28:8-10; 2 Chr 6:19-40; 7:14; Pss 27:4-8; 105:4-6; Isa 55:6-7; Jer 29:13-14; Matt 6:31-33; Rom 2:7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Seeking the Lord As Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were set...","summary_en":"Seeking the Lord As Israel was on the verge of entering the Promised Land, Moses instructed the people to “seek the Lord . . . at the place of worship he himself will choose from among all the tribes” (Deut 12:5). The Israelites were to rid the land of pagan worship practices and establish the centrality of the worship of God. In the wilderness, they constructed the Tabernacle as the place where God would manifest his presence and where the people would come to worship him. Once they were set...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147545,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\nThe Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\nThe Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":12815,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Freewill Offering","title_en":"Freewill Offering","content_ro":"<h3>FREEWILL OFFERING<\/h3>\nVoluntary peace offering (Lv 7:16; Dt 12:6). See<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FREEWILL OFFERING<\/h3>\nVoluntary peace offering (Lv 7:16; Dt 12:6). See<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FREEWILL OFFERING Voluntary peace offering (Lv 7:16; Dt 12:6). See Offerings and Sacrifices.","summary_en":"FREEWILL OFFERING Voluntary peace offering (Lv 7:16; Dt 12:6). See Offerings and Sacrifices.","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28304,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45006,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:6","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:6","content_ro":"12:6<\/strong> All of the offerings<\/em> listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).<\/p>","content_en":"12:6<\/strong> All of the offerings<\/em> listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:6 All of the offerings listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).","summary_en":"12:6 All of the offerings listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72632,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:6","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:6","content_ro":"12:6<\/strong> All of the offerings<\/em> listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).<\/p>","content_en":"12:6<\/strong> All of the offerings<\/em> listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:6 All of the offerings listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).","summary_en":"12:6 All of the offerings listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100258,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:6","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:6","content_ro":"12:6<\/strong> All of the offerings<\/em> listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).<\/p>","content_en":"12:6<\/strong> All of the offerings<\/em> listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:6 All of the offerings listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).","summary_en":"12:6 All of the offerings listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127884,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:6","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:6","content_ro":"12:6<\/strong> All of the offerings<\/em> listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).<\/p>","content_en":"12:6<\/strong> All of the offerings<\/em> listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:6 All of the offerings listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).","summary_en":"12:6 All of the offerings listed here are expressions of thanksgiving, fellowship, and loyalty to the Lord. In covenant relationships, the vassal offered tribute to the great king as a sign of submission and a promise of dependability (see study note on 1:31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":45007,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:8","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:8","content_ro":"12:8<\/strong> doing as you please:<\/em> Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).<\/p>","content_en":"12:8<\/strong> doing as you please:<\/em> Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:8 doing as you please: Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).","summary_en":"12:8 doing as you please: Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72633,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:8","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:8","content_ro":"12:8<\/strong> doing as you please:<\/em> Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).<\/p>","content_en":"12:8<\/strong> doing as you please:<\/em> Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:8 doing as you please: Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).","summary_en":"12:8 doing as you please: Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100259,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:8","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:8","content_ro":"12:8<\/strong> doing as you please:<\/em> Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).<\/p>","content_en":"12:8<\/strong> doing as you please:<\/em> Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:8 doing as you please: Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).","summary_en":"12:8 doing as you please: Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127885,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:8","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:8","content_ro":"12:8<\/strong> doing as you please:<\/em> Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).<\/p>","content_en":"12:8<\/strong> doing as you please:<\/em> Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:8 doing as you please: Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).","summary_en":"12:8 doing as you please: Until the Exodus, the Israelites probably worshiped at multiple shrines in Egypt. With the construction of the Tabernacle, worship was centralized and remained so with the later building of the Temple. In the future, the community would be required to assemble on stated occasions to worship the Lord collectively at the central sanctuary, although local worship by individuals, families, and even villages would continue (see Exod 20:24-26; 1 Sam 9:11-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":36587,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tabernacle","title_en":"Tabernacle","content_ro":"<h3>TABERNACLE<\/h3>\nPlace of worship during the earliest years of the history of Israel.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Names for the Tabernacle<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• The Tabernacle and Its Furniture<\/p>\n• The Tabernacle Proper<\/p>\n• The Outer Court and Its Furnishings<\/p>\n• The Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nThe tabernacle was the precursor of the temple during most of the period between the formation of Israel at Sinai and its final establishment in the Promised Land in the early period of the monarchy. A portable sanctuary in keeping with the demand for easy mobility, it was the symbol of God’s presence with his people and, therefore, of his availability, as well as a place where his will was communicated. At an early period it was anticipated that, when peace and security had been secured, a permanent national shrine would be established (Dt 12:10-11). This was not realized until the time of Solomon, when the temple was erected (2 Sm 7:10-13; 1 Kgs 5:1-5). Historical events, as well as the similarities in construction and underlying theology, illustrate the close connection between the tabernacle and temple.<\/p>\n\nNames for the Tabernacle<\/p>\nSeveral words and descriptive phrases are used:<\/p>\n1. “Sacred residence,” “sanctuary,“ or “holy place” (Ex 25:8; Lv 10:17-18) derive from the verb “to be holy.”<\/p>\n<li>2. “The tent” occurs 19 times and is also found in expressions such as “the tent of the testimony” (Nm 9:15), “the tent of the Lord” (1 Kgs 2:28-30), “the house of the tent” (1 Chr 9:23), and “the tent of meeting” (e.g., Ex 33:7). The last name appears approximately 130 times. The word involves the concept of meeting by appointment and designates the tabernacle as the place where God met with Moses and his people to make known his will.<\/li>\n<li>3. “Dwelling place” is the literal meaning of “tabernacle.” In Exodus 25:9 the word indicates the whole tabernacle (including the outer court), but in Exodus 26:1 it refers to the tabernacle proper (that included the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies). A variant of this is “the tabernacle of the testimony” (Ex 38:21; nlt<\/span> “Tabernacle of the Covenant”), which, with other expressions like “the tent of the testimony,” stresses the presence of the two tablets of the law.<\/li>\n<li>4. “The house of the Lord<\/span>” (Ex 23:19).<\/li>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe three-part construction of the tabernacle, composed of a general area and two restricted areas, was not unique. In other developed religions that included an organized priesthood there were three main levels of approach: one for all members of the community; one for the priests generally; and one for the chief religious leaders, which was an inner sanctuary, conceived as the dwelling place of the deity. Excavations of heathen sanctuaries in Palestine and Syria in the pre-Israelite period have revealed this type of divided sanctuary.<\/p>\nThere is also widespread evidence of the use of portable, often complex, prefabricated structures during the second millennium BC<\/span>, usually as either staterooms for kings and other high dignitaries, or as sanctuaries. Rulers of settled communities used these structures when traveling to other areas within their kingdoms (e.g., Egypt and, to a lesser extent, Canaan). Also, nomadic or seminomadic peoples, such as the Midianites, used portable sanctuaries. In pre-Mosaic Egypt, craftsmen used techniques similar to those used in the construction of the tabernacle.<\/p>\nThe Tabernacle and Its Furniture<\/p>\nThe book of Exodus (Ex 25–40) describes the tabernacle and its furnishings in detail. The materials used included items ranging from precious to common materials. Three metals are mentioned in descending order of importance: gold, copper, and silver. Gold alone was employed in the principal sanctuary furnishings. The total amount of metals used was approximately one ton (.9 metric ton) of gold, three of copper, and four of silver (38:24-31). The relatively large amount of silver came from an offering (30:11-16), which augmented the silver and gold already given by the Egyptians (12:35).<\/p>\nSignificantly, in God’s building specifications, the starting point was the furniture of the inner sanctuary (the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies). In the actual construction, this furniture was made after the tabernacle itself, presumably so that it could be immediately and adequately housed (Ex 25:9–27:19; cf. 36:8–37:28).<\/p>\nThe first item listed was the ark, the only furniture in the Holy of Holies. It was a wooden box sheathed in gold, approximately three and three-quarters feet (1.1 meters) long, with a width and height of two and a quarter feet (.7 meter). The supreme symbol of the covenant relationship between God and Israel, it was often called “the ark of the covenant of the Lord<\/span>” (Dt 10:8). Unlike contemporary arks in some neighboring countries, it contained no representation of the deity, only the Ten Commandments (Ex 25:16), a jar of manna (16:33), and Aaron’s rod (Nm 17:10)—all symbolic of various aspects of God’s provision (see Heb 9:4).<\/p>\nThe ark was transported by two poles that passed through rings attached to each lower corner (Ex 25:13-15). These poles, left in place, projected underneath the veil into the Holy Place, serving as a reminder of the presence of the unseen ark.<\/p>\nResting upon the ark was the mercy seat (nlt<\/span> “atonement cover”), a rectangular slab of solid gold, to which were attached two cherubim. The inward-looking cherubim and the mercy seat formed a throne for the invisible God (Ex 25:22), who is frequently described as enthroned above or upon the cherubim (Pss 80:1; 99:1). The noun “mercy seat” comes from a verb meaning “to make atonement.” The mercy seat was sprinkled with blood at the climax of the annual Day of Atonement (Lv 16:14). The fact that the ark was placed under<\/em> the mercy seat (Ex 25:21) signifies that the law was under God’s protection and explains the references to the ark as his footstool (e.g., Ps 132:7). Like the cherubim in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24), those in the Holy of Holies probably had a similar protective function. In the ancient world, symbolic winged creatures like the cherubim were frequently placed as guardians of thrones and important buildings.<\/p>\nLike the ark, the portable table of the bread of the Presence (Ex 25:30) was made of acacia wood overlaid with gold. It was marginally smaller, with a length of three feet (.9 meter), a width of one and a half feet (.5 meter) and a height of two and a quarter feet (.7 meter). The various auxiliary vessels and implements are detailed (v 29); presumably the dishes would be used for carrying the bread. On each Sabbath day, 12 loaves, symbolizing God’s provision for the 12 tribes of Israel, were placed in two rows on the table (Lv 24:5-9). The table was located in the Holy Place, on the north side.<\/p>\nOn the south side was the seven-branched golden lampstand (Ex 25:31-39; 37:17-24; 40:24). It was the most impressive item of furniture in the Holy Place; like the cherubim and the mercy seat, it was made of pure gold. Six golden branches, three on either side, extended from a central shaft, and the whole lampstand was ornamented with almond flowers. From the biblical evidence, it is not clear whether the lampstand gave continuous illumination (Ex 27:20; Lv 24:2) or night light only (1 Sm 3:3 in most versions). Leviticus 24:4 strongly supports the former, and the reference in 1 Samuel probably reflects the laxity that had crept in during the period of the judges. In Scripture, the golden lampstand symbolizes the continuing witness of the covenant community (Zec 4:1-7; Rv 2:1). The precise attention to the smallest detail is well illustrated in the listing of the supplementary items, all made of pure gold, required for the servicing of the lamps. Without this precise attention, the light would soon grow dim, and the sanctuary itself be defiled by carbon deposits (Ex 25:38). Moreover, only the best-quality olive oil was used, thus ensuring the brightest possible light (27:20).<\/p>\nThe altar of incense (Ex 30:1-10) may have been deliberately played down to give greater prominence to the sacrificial altar in the outer court, which is frequently referred to as “the<\/em> altar.” In order to distinguish the altar of incense from the bronze altar of sacrifice, the former was called “the golden altar” (40:5). The altar of incense was located in the Holy Place, immediately opposite the ark in the Holy of Holies but just outside the veil, between the table of the bread of the Presence and the lampstand. Made of acacia wood overlaid with gold, it was 18 inches (45.7 centimeters) square and 3 feet (.9 meter) high, with horns and a golden molding around the four sides. Like the ark, it was made readily portable by the provision of rings and carrying poles. The altar was used for the offering of incense every morning and evening and for anointing the horns for the yearly atonement (30:7-10). The incense from a special recipe was forbidden for secular use. Originally, incense indicated something that ascended from a sacrifice, a pleasing aroma to God. Incense acknowledged God in worship (Mal 1:11) and at an early date signified the prayers of the godly (Ps 141:2). It also concealed God from human eyes (Lv 16:13).<\/p>\nThe Tabernacle Proper<\/p>\nThe tabernacle was fundamentally a tent structure supported on a rigid framework. As with most of the other items, a triplication of detail underlines the importance of the tabernacle proper. The specifications are given in Exodus 26, the construction in Exodus 36:8-38, and the final erection in Exodus 40:16-19. The overall dimensions were approximately 45 feet (13.7 meters) long, 15 feet (4.6 meters) wide, and 15 feet high.<\/p>\nThe basic framework was a series of upright supports, each 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and 2½ feet (.7 meters) wide, and each standing on two silver bases (Ex 26:15-25). Scholars used to think these supports or frames were solid planks of acacia wood, but most modern scholars accept that each comprised two upright sides connected by horizontal pieces like a ladder. Such sections would be considerably stronger, would keep their shape better, and would allow a view of the beautiful inner layer of curtains from within the sanctuary. On the south and north sides were 20 such frames, with 6 more at the western end. In addition, on the western side were two corner pieces to which all the walls were attached by clasps (vv 23-25). A series of bars, which passed through gold rings attached to each upright frame, provided further security and alignment (vv 26-29). There were five such bars on each of the three sides. The central one on both the south and the north sides extended the entire length; the other four probably extended halfway, so that each frame was effectively secured by three bars. All the wooden sections were sheathed in gold.<\/p>\nOver this framework several layers of coverings formed the top, sides, and back of the tabernacle. The first layer of ten linen curtains was dyed blue, purple, and scarlet, and embroidered with cherubim (Ex 26:1-6; 36:8-13). Each measured 42 feet by 6 feet (12.8 meters by 1.8 meters). Pairs joined along their length formed five sets of curtains. The two large curtains were themselves attached with 50 golden clasps that passed through a similar number of loops in each. Probably the curtains were stretched over the structure like a tablecloth.<\/p>\nEleven curtains or tarpaulins of goat hair, each 45 feet by 6 feet (13.7 meters by 1.8 meters), formed the next layer. These were divided into two sets by joining together five and six curtains respectively, and were linked using a similar method as the under curtain, except that bronze clasps instead of gold were used. The extra length of the goat-hair tarpaulins provided an overlap to protect the under curtain, and the larger tarpaulin overlapped at both the front and the rear of the tabernacle (Ex 26:7-9, 12-13). Two further layers ensured complete weatherproofing, one of ram’s skins dyed red and one of goatskins.<\/p>\nA veil made of the same material as the under curtaining divided the sanctuary and hung under the golden clasps that joined the two curtains, supported by four pillars of acacia wood plated with gold and resting in silver bases. The cherubim on both the veil and the curtains were symbolic guardians of the sanctuary. The positioning of the veil made the Holy of Holies a perfect cube of 15 feet (4.6 meters). The layers of overlapping material and the attention given to the joints emphasizes the darkness of the innermost shrine. God was surrounded by darkness, carefully isolated from any unauthorized sight (Ps 97:2). The Holy Place occupied an area 30 feet by 15 feet (9.1 meters by 4.6 meters), exactly twice the area of the Holy of Holies. A screen made from the same fabric as the main curtain stood between the Holy Place and the outer court and hung from golden hooks on five posts of acacia wood, overlaid with gold and resting on bronze sockets. There is no mention of embroidered seraphim on this section, which formed the tabernacle’s eastern wall.<\/p>\nThe tabernacle, while probably having a somewhat squat appearance suggestive of strength, could be easily dismantled, transported, and reassembled. By the standards of that age, it was a fit dwelling place for God, constructed by the best human skills and the highest quality materials.<\/p>\nThe Outer Court and Its Furnishings<\/p>\nThe court of the tabernacle was a rectangle 150 feet (45.7 meters) long on the north and south sides and 75 feet (22.9 meters) wide on the east and west (Ex 27:9-18; 38:9-19). The tabernacle itself was at the western end. Curtains of fine-twined linen 7½ feet (2.3 meters) high screened the entire tabernacle area. In the eastern section, there was a central entrance, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide. An embroidered curtain of the same height screened this doorway, which was probably recessed to facilitate entrance on either side. Silver rods supported all the curtains. These rods passed through silver hooks attached to the silver-plated posts that rested on bronze bases (38:17).<\/p>\nThe altar of burnt offering (Ex 27:1-8; 38:1-7), at the eastern end of the court adjacent to the entrance (40:29), was a reminder that there could be no approach to God except by the place of sacrifice. Seven feet (2.1 meters) square and four and a half feet (1.4 meters) high, it was small in comparison to the gigantic altar in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 4:1). Basically, it was a hollow wooden framework overlaid with bronze, light enough to be carried on bronze-plated poles that passed through bronze rings at each corner. The grating (Ex 27:4-5) was probably inside the altar at the middle, although some scholars believe that it extended around the lower, outer sides of the altar, to provide draft and to allow the sacrificial blood to flow to the base of the altar. The horns, possibly symbolizing the sacrificial victims, could be used to tether the animals about to be sacrificed. In Israel, a person could claim sanctuary by clinging to the horns of the altar (e.g., 1 Kgs 1:50), with the possible symbolism that he was offering himself as a sacrifice to God and so claiming his protection. The lower part of the altar may have been partly filled with earth to absorb the blood (Ex 20:24). All the accessories were bronze: ash buckets, shovels for removing the ashes and filling the base with earth, basins for the blood, carcass hooks, and fire pans (27:3).<\/p>\nNo specifications concerning the size of the laver (nlt<\/span> “washbasin”) have survived (Ex 30:17-20; 38:8). It was made from the mirrors of the women who served at the entrance to the court. The laver stood between the altar of sacrifice and the tabernacle. Failure to wash at the laver prior to ministering was punishable by death—a solemn reminder of the need for cleanliness and obedience before undertaking any task for God. The bronze pedestal may have been merely a support for the laver, but possibly it incorporated a lower basin in which the priests could wash their feet.<\/p>\nThe Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle<\/p>\nThe God-given specifications required skills beyond the capabilities of Moses and Aaron. Prominent in the construction were Bezalel and Oholiab (Ex 30:1-11), with a large supporting group of experts, who must have learned their craftsmanship in Egypt. In a remarkable community effort, the Israelites gave so generously that the flow of gifts had to be stopped (35:20-24; 36:4-7). In addition, many gave of their special skills (35:25-29).<\/p>\nWhen all the items had been completed and placed in position (Ex 40:1-33), every piece except the mercy seat and the cherubim was anointed with special oil (30:22-33; 40:9-11) and symbolically consecrated for its particular function. The climax came when the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle (40:34). He came to be present among his people, and thereafter the cloud by day and fire by night provided reassurance concerning his presence and guidance. Yet there could be no laxity in approaching him, and even Moses was excluded from the Holy of Holies. The tabernacle was erected exactly one year after the deliverance from Egypt and a mere nine months after the Sinai revelation.<\/p>\nThereafter, when Israel camped, the Levites surrounded the tabernacle on three sides (Nm 1:53), with the families of Moses and Aaron occupying the remaining eastern side (Nm 3:14-38). This prevented any unauthorized intrusion into the sacred area. When the tabernacle was moved, the dismantlement was carefully regulated (4:5-15). The Kohathites were responsible for transporting the more sacred items, using the carrying poles; the Gershonites dealt with all the soft furnishings, the altar of sacrifice, and its accessories; and the Merarites carried the hard furnishings, such as the frames, bars, and bases. Even on the march, the tabernacle remained central, with six tribes preceding and the remaining six following (Nm 2).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TABERNACLE<\/h3>\nPlace of worship during the earliest years of the history of Israel.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Names for the Tabernacle<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• The Tabernacle and Its Furniture<\/p>\n• The Tabernacle Proper<\/p>\n• The Outer Court and Its Furnishings<\/p>\n• The Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nThe tabernacle was the precursor of the temple during most of the period between the formation of Israel at Sinai and its final establishment in the Promised Land in the early period of the monarchy. A portable sanctuary in keeping with the demand for easy mobility, it was the symbol of God’s presence with his people and, therefore, of his availability, as well as a place where his will was communicated. At an early period it was anticipated that, when peace and security had been secured, a permanent national shrine would be established (Dt 12:10-11). This was not realized until the time of Solomon, when the temple was erected (2 Sm 7:10-13; 1 Kgs 5:1-5). Historical events, as well as the similarities in construction and underlying theology, illustrate the close connection between the tabernacle and temple.<\/p>\n\nNames for the Tabernacle<\/p>\nSeveral words and descriptive phrases are used:<\/p>\n1. “Sacred residence,” “sanctuary,“ or “holy place” (Ex 25:8; Lv 10:17-18) derive from the verb “to be holy.”<\/p>\n<li>2. “The tent” occurs 19 times and is also found in expressions such as “the tent of the testimony” (Nm 9:15), “the tent of the Lord” (1 Kgs 2:28-30), “the house of the tent” (1 Chr 9:23), and “the tent of meeting” (e.g., Ex 33:7). The last name appears approximately 130 times. The word involves the concept of meeting by appointment and designates the tabernacle as the place where God met with Moses and his people to make known his will.<\/li>\n<li>3. “Dwelling place” is the literal meaning of “tabernacle.” In Exodus 25:9 the word indicates the whole tabernacle (including the outer court), but in Exodus 26:1 it refers to the tabernacle proper (that included the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies). A variant of this is “the tabernacle of the testimony” (Ex 38:21; nlt<\/span> “Tabernacle of the Covenant”), which, with other expressions like “the tent of the testimony,” stresses the presence of the two tablets of the law.<\/li>\n<li>4. “The house of the Lord<\/span>” (Ex 23:19).<\/li>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe three-part construction of the tabernacle, composed of a general area and two restricted areas, was not unique. In other developed religions that included an organized priesthood there were three main levels of approach: one for all members of the community; one for the priests generally; and one for the chief religious leaders, which was an inner sanctuary, conceived as the dwelling place of the deity. Excavations of heathen sanctuaries in Palestine and Syria in the pre-Israelite period have revealed this type of divided sanctuary.<\/p>\nThere is also widespread evidence of the use of portable, often complex, prefabricated structures during the second millennium BC<\/span>, usually as either staterooms for kings and other high dignitaries, or as sanctuaries. Rulers of settled communities used these structures when traveling to other areas within their kingdoms (e.g., Egypt and, to a lesser extent, Canaan). Also, nomadic or seminomadic peoples, such as the Midianites, used portable sanctuaries. In pre-Mosaic Egypt, craftsmen used techniques similar to those used in the construction of the tabernacle.<\/p>\nThe Tabernacle and Its Furniture<\/p>\nThe book of Exodus (Ex 25–40) describes the tabernacle and its furnishings in detail. The materials used included items ranging from precious to common materials. Three metals are mentioned in descending order of importance: gold, copper, and silver. Gold alone was employed in the principal sanctuary furnishings. The total amount of metals used was approximately one ton (.9 metric ton) of gold, three of copper, and four of silver (38:24-31). The relatively large amount of silver came from an offering (30:11-16), which augmented the silver and gold already given by the Egyptians (12:35).<\/p>\nSignificantly, in God’s building specifications, the starting point was the furniture of the inner sanctuary (the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies). In the actual construction, this furniture was made after the tabernacle itself, presumably so that it could be immediately and adequately housed (Ex 25:9–27:19; cf. 36:8–37:28).<\/p>\nThe first item listed was the ark, the only furniture in the Holy of Holies. It was a wooden box sheathed in gold, approximately three and three-quarters feet (1.1 meters) long, with a width and height of two and a quarter feet (.7 meter). The supreme symbol of the covenant relationship between God and Israel, it was often called “the ark of the covenant of the Lord<\/span>” (Dt 10:8). Unlike contemporary arks in some neighboring countries, it contained no representation of the deity, only the Ten Commandments (Ex 25:16), a jar of manna (16:33), and Aaron’s rod (Nm 17:10)—all symbolic of various aspects of God’s provision (see Heb 9:4).<\/p>\nThe ark was transported by two poles that passed through rings attached to each lower corner (Ex 25:13-15). These poles, left in place, projected underneath the veil into the Holy Place, serving as a reminder of the presence of the unseen ark.<\/p>\nResting upon the ark was the mercy seat (nlt<\/span> “atonement cover”), a rectangular slab of solid gold, to which were attached two cherubim. The inward-looking cherubim and the mercy seat formed a throne for the invisible God (Ex 25:22), who is frequently described as enthroned above or upon the cherubim (Pss 80:1; 99:1). The noun “mercy seat” comes from a verb meaning “to make atonement.” The mercy seat was sprinkled with blood at the climax of the annual Day of Atonement (Lv 16:14). The fact that the ark was placed under<\/em> the mercy seat (Ex 25:21) signifies that the law was under God’s protection and explains the references to the ark as his footstool (e.g., Ps 132:7). Like the cherubim in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24), those in the Holy of Holies probably had a similar protective function. In the ancient world, symbolic winged creatures like the cherubim were frequently placed as guardians of thrones and important buildings.<\/p>\nLike the ark, the portable table of the bread of the Presence (Ex 25:30) was made of acacia wood overlaid with gold. It was marginally smaller, with a length of three feet (.9 meter), a width of one and a half feet (.5 meter) and a height of two and a quarter feet (.7 meter). The various auxiliary vessels and implements are detailed (v 29); presumably the dishes would be used for carrying the bread. On each Sabbath day, 12 loaves, symbolizing God’s provision for the 12 tribes of Israel, were placed in two rows on the table (Lv 24:5-9). The table was located in the Holy Place, on the north side.<\/p>\nOn the south side was the seven-branched golden lampstand (Ex 25:31-39; 37:17-24; 40:24). It was the most impressive item of furniture in the Holy Place; like the cherubim and the mercy seat, it was made of pure gold. Six golden branches, three on either side, extended from a central shaft, and the whole lampstand was ornamented with almond flowers. From the biblical evidence, it is not clear whether the lampstand gave continuous illumination (Ex 27:20; Lv 24:2) or night light only (1 Sm 3:3 in most versions). Leviticus 24:4 strongly supports the former, and the reference in 1 Samuel probably reflects the laxity that had crept in during the period of the judges. In Scripture, the golden lampstand symbolizes the continuing witness of the covenant community (Zec 4:1-7; Rv 2:1). The precise attention to the smallest detail is well illustrated in the listing of the supplementary items, all made of pure gold, required for the servicing of the lamps. Without this precise attention, the light would soon grow dim, and the sanctuary itself be defiled by carbon deposits (Ex 25:38). Moreover, only the best-quality olive oil was used, thus ensuring the brightest possible light (27:20).<\/p>\nThe altar of incense (Ex 30:1-10) may have been deliberately played down to give greater prominence to the sacrificial altar in the outer court, which is frequently referred to as “the<\/em> altar.” In order to distinguish the altar of incense from the bronze altar of sacrifice, the former was called “the golden altar” (40:5). The altar of incense was located in the Holy Place, immediately opposite the ark in the Holy of Holies but just outside the veil, between the table of the bread of the Presence and the lampstand. Made of acacia wood overlaid with gold, it was 18 inches (45.7 centimeters) square and 3 feet (.9 meter) high, with horns and a golden molding around the four sides. Like the ark, it was made readily portable by the provision of rings and carrying poles. The altar was used for the offering of incense every morning and evening and for anointing the horns for the yearly atonement (30:7-10). The incense from a special recipe was forbidden for secular use. Originally, incense indicated something that ascended from a sacrifice, a pleasing aroma to God. Incense acknowledged God in worship (Mal 1:11) and at an early date signified the prayers of the godly (Ps 141:2). It also concealed God from human eyes (Lv 16:13).<\/p>\nThe Tabernacle Proper<\/p>\nThe tabernacle was fundamentally a tent structure supported on a rigid framework. As with most of the other items, a triplication of detail underlines the importance of the tabernacle proper. The specifications are given in Exodus 26, the construction in Exodus 36:8-38, and the final erection in Exodus 40:16-19. The overall dimensions were approximately 45 feet (13.7 meters) long, 15 feet (4.6 meters) wide, and 15 feet high.<\/p>\nThe basic framework was a series of upright supports, each 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and 2½ feet (.7 meters) wide, and each standing on two silver bases (Ex 26:15-25). Scholars used to think these supports or frames were solid planks of acacia wood, but most modern scholars accept that each comprised two upright sides connected by horizontal pieces like a ladder. Such sections would be considerably stronger, would keep their shape better, and would allow a view of the beautiful inner layer of curtains from within the sanctuary. On the south and north sides were 20 such frames, with 6 more at the western end. In addition, on the western side were two corner pieces to which all the walls were attached by clasps (vv 23-25). A series of bars, which passed through gold rings attached to each upright frame, provided further security and alignment (vv 26-29). There were five such bars on each of the three sides. The central one on both the south and the north sides extended the entire length; the other four probably extended halfway, so that each frame was effectively secured by three bars. All the wooden sections were sheathed in gold.<\/p>\nOver this framework several layers of coverings formed the top, sides, and back of the tabernacle. The first layer of ten linen curtains was dyed blue, purple, and scarlet, and embroidered with cherubim (Ex 26:1-6; 36:8-13). Each measured 42 feet by 6 feet (12.8 meters by 1.8 meters). Pairs joined along their length formed five sets of curtains. The two large curtains were themselves attached with 50 golden clasps that passed through a similar number of loops in each. Probably the curtains were stretched over the structure like a tablecloth.<\/p>\nEleven curtains or tarpaulins of goat hair, each 45 feet by 6 feet (13.7 meters by 1.8 meters), formed the next layer. These were divided into two sets by joining together five and six curtains respectively, and were linked using a similar method as the under curtain, except that bronze clasps instead of gold were used. The extra length of the goat-hair tarpaulins provided an overlap to protect the under curtain, and the larger tarpaulin overlapped at both the front and the rear of the tabernacle (Ex 26:7-9, 12-13). Two further layers ensured complete weatherproofing, one of ram’s skins dyed red and one of goatskins.<\/p>\nA veil made of the same material as the under curtaining divided the sanctuary and hung under the golden clasps that joined the two curtains, supported by four pillars of acacia wood plated with gold and resting in silver bases. The cherubim on both the veil and the curtains were symbolic guardians of the sanctuary. The positioning of the veil made the Holy of Holies a perfect cube of 15 feet (4.6 meters). The layers of overlapping material and the attention given to the joints emphasizes the darkness of the innermost shrine. God was surrounded by darkness, carefully isolated from any unauthorized sight (Ps 97:2). The Holy Place occupied an area 30 feet by 15 feet (9.1 meters by 4.6 meters), exactly twice the area of the Holy of Holies. A screen made from the same fabric as the main curtain stood between the Holy Place and the outer court and hung from golden hooks on five posts of acacia wood, overlaid with gold and resting on bronze sockets. There is no mention of embroidered seraphim on this section, which formed the tabernacle’s eastern wall.<\/p>\nThe tabernacle, while probably having a somewhat squat appearance suggestive of strength, could be easily dismantled, transported, and reassembled. By the standards of that age, it was a fit dwelling place for God, constructed by the best human skills and the highest quality materials.<\/p>\nThe Outer Court and Its Furnishings<\/p>\nThe court of the tabernacle was a rectangle 150 feet (45.7 meters) long on the north and south sides and 75 feet (22.9 meters) wide on the east and west (Ex 27:9-18; 38:9-19). The tabernacle itself was at the western end. Curtains of fine-twined linen 7½ feet (2.3 meters) high screened the entire tabernacle area. In the eastern section, there was a central entrance, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide. An embroidered curtain of the same height screened this doorway, which was probably recessed to facilitate entrance on either side. Silver rods supported all the curtains. These rods passed through silver hooks attached to the silver-plated posts that rested on bronze bases (38:17).<\/p>\nThe altar of burnt offering (Ex 27:1-8; 38:1-7), at the eastern end of the court adjacent to the entrance (40:29), was a reminder that there could be no approach to God except by the place of sacrifice. Seven feet (2.1 meters) square and four and a half feet (1.4 meters) high, it was small in comparison to the gigantic altar in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 4:1). Basically, it was a hollow wooden framework overlaid with bronze, light enough to be carried on bronze-plated poles that passed through bronze rings at each corner. The grating (Ex 27:4-5) was probably inside the altar at the middle, although some scholars believe that it extended around the lower, outer sides of the altar, to provide draft and to allow the sacrificial blood to flow to the base of the altar. The horns, possibly symbolizing the sacrificial victims, could be used to tether the animals about to be sacrificed. In Israel, a person could claim sanctuary by clinging to the horns of the altar (e.g., 1 Kgs 1:50), with the possible symbolism that he was offering himself as a sacrifice to God and so claiming his protection. The lower part of the altar may have been partly filled with earth to absorb the blood (Ex 20:24). All the accessories were bronze: ash buckets, shovels for removing the ashes and filling the base with earth, basins for the blood, carcass hooks, and fire pans (27:3).<\/p>\nNo specifications concerning the size of the laver (nlt<\/span> “washbasin”) have survived (Ex 30:17-20; 38:8). It was made from the mirrors of the women who served at the entrance to the court. The laver stood between the altar of sacrifice and the tabernacle. Failure to wash at the laver prior to ministering was punishable by death—a solemn reminder of the need for cleanliness and obedience before undertaking any task for God. The bronze pedestal may have been merely a support for the laver, but possibly it incorporated a lower basin in which the priests could wash their feet.<\/p>\nThe Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle<\/p>\nThe God-given specifications required skills beyond the capabilities of Moses and Aaron. Prominent in the construction were Bezalel and Oholiab (Ex 30:1-11), with a large supporting group of experts, who must have learned their craftsmanship in Egypt. In a remarkable community effort, the Israelites gave so generously that the flow of gifts had to be stopped (35:20-24; 36:4-7). In addition, many gave of their special skills (35:25-29).<\/p>\nWhen all the items had been completed and placed in position (Ex 40:1-33), every piece except the mercy seat and the cherubim was anointed with special oil (30:22-33; 40:9-11) and symbolically consecrated for its particular function. The climax came when the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle (40:34). He came to be present among his people, and thereafter the cloud by day and fire by night provided reassurance concerning his presence and guidance. Yet there could be no laxity in approaching him, and even Moses was excluded from the Holy of Holies. The tabernacle was erected exactly one year after the deliverance from Egypt and a mere nine months after the Sinai revelation.<\/p>\nThereafter, when Israel camped, the Levites surrounded the tabernacle on three sides (Nm 1:53), with the families of Moses and Aaron occupying the remaining eastern side (Nm 3:14-38). This prevented any unauthorized intrusion into the sacred area. When the tabernacle was moved, the dismantlement was carefully regulated (4:5-15). The Kohathites were responsible for transporting the more sacred items, using the carrying poles; the Gershonites dealt with all the soft furnishings, the altar of sacrifice, and its accessories; and the Merarites carried the hard furnishings, such as the frames, bars, and bases. Even on the march, the tabernacle remained central, with six tribes preceding and the remaining six following (Nm 2).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TABERNACLE Place of worship during the earliest years of the history of Israel. Preview • Introduction • Names for the Tabernacle • Background • The Tabernacle and Its Furniture • The Tabernacle Proper • The Outer Court and Its Furnishings • The Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle Introduction The tabernacle was the precursor of the temple during most of the period between the formation of Israel at Sinai and its final establishment in the Promised Land in the early period of the ...","summary_en":"TABERNACLE Place of worship during the earliest years of the history of Israel. Preview • Introduction • Names for the Tabernacle • Background • The Tabernacle and Its Furniture • The Tabernacle Proper • The Outer Court and Its Furnishings • The Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle Introduction The tabernacle was the precursor of the temple during most of the period between the formation of Israel at Sinai and its final establishment in the Promised Land in the early period of the ...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":61105,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Vows to God","title_en":"Vows to God","content_ro":"<h3>Vows to God<\/h3>\nThe essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8).<\/p>\nGuidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their requests. Then they would pay or fulfill their vows to God, often by giving offerings (e.g., Lev 7:16; 22:23; Deut 12:11).<\/p>\nHowever, vows could be abused. The law itself warns against this (Deut 23:21-23), as do the wisdom teachings (e.g., Prov 7:10-14; 20:25) and the books of the prophets (see, e.g., Jer 44:25). Saul was prone both to make foolish vows (1 Sam 14:24-28) and to not keep the vows he made (19:6). Impulsive vows might go unfulfilled and never paid, arousing God’s anger. Not making a vow is better than backing out of one (Eccl 5:3-5). Jesus counsels us not to make vows, but simply to keep our word (Matt 5:33-37; cp. Jas 5:12).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 28:20-22; Num 21:2-3; 30:1-16; Deut 23:18-23; Judg 11:30-40; 1 Sam 1:11, 24-28; 14:24-45; Ps 76:11; Prov 20:25; Eccl 5:3-5; Mal 1:14; Matt 5:33-37; Acts 18:18; 21:23-24; Jas 5:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Vows to God<\/h3>\nThe essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8).<\/p>\nGuidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their requests. Then they would pay or fulfill their vows to God, often by giving offerings (e.g., Lev 7:16; 22:23; Deut 12:11).<\/p>\nHowever, vows could be abused. The law itself warns against this (Deut 23:21-23), as do the wisdom teachings (e.g., Prov 7:10-14; 20:25) and the books of the prophets (see, e.g., Jer 44:25). Saul was prone both to make foolish vows (1 Sam 14:24-28) and to not keep the vows he made (19:6). Impulsive vows might go unfulfilled and never paid, arousing God’s anger. Not making a vow is better than backing out of one (Eccl 5:3-5). Jesus counsels us not to make vows, but simply to keep our word (Matt 5:33-37; cp. Jas 5:12).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 28:20-22; Num 21:2-3; 30:1-16; Deut 23:18-23; Judg 11:30-40; 1 Sam 1:11, 24-28; 14:24-45; Ps 76:11; Prov 20:25; Eccl 5:3-5; Mal 1:14; Matt 5:33-37; Acts 18:18; 21:23-24; Jas 5:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Vows to God The essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8). Guidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their reque...","summary_en":"Vows to God The essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8). Guidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their reque...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88731,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Vows to God","title_en":"Vows to God","content_ro":"<h3>Vows to God<\/h3>\nThe essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8).<\/p>\nGuidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their requests. Then they would pay or fulfill their vows to God, often by giving offerings (e.g., Lev 7:16; 22:23; Deut 12:11).<\/p>\nHowever, vows could be abused. The law itself warns against this (Deut 23:21-23), as do the wisdom teachings (e.g., Prov 7:10-14; 20:25) and the books of the prophets (see, e.g., Jer 44:25). Saul was prone both to make foolish vows (1 Sam 14:24-28) and to not keep the vows he made (19:6). Impulsive vows might go unfulfilled and never paid, arousing God’s anger. Not making a vow is better than backing out of one (Eccl 5:3-5). Jesus counsels us not to make vows, but simply to keep our word (Matt 5:33-37; cp. Jas 5:12).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 28:20-22; Num 21:2-3; 30:1-16; Deut 23:18-23; Judg 11:30-40; 1 Sam 1:11, 24-28; 14:24-45; Ps 76:11; Prov 20:25; Eccl 5:3-5; Mal 1:14; Matt 5:33-37; Acts 18:18; 21:23-24; Jas 5:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Vows to God<\/h3>\nThe essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8).<\/p>\nGuidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their requests. Then they would pay or fulfill their vows to God, often by giving offerings (e.g., Lev 7:16; 22:23; Deut 12:11).<\/p>\nHowever, vows could be abused. The law itself warns against this (Deut 23:21-23), as do the wisdom teachings (e.g., Prov 7:10-14; 20:25) and the books of the prophets (see, e.g., Jer 44:25). Saul was prone both to make foolish vows (1 Sam 14:24-28) and to not keep the vows he made (19:6). Impulsive vows might go unfulfilled and never paid, arousing God’s anger. Not making a vow is better than backing out of one (Eccl 5:3-5). Jesus counsels us not to make vows, but simply to keep our word (Matt 5:33-37; cp. Jas 5:12).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 28:20-22; Num 21:2-3; 30:1-16; Deut 23:18-23; Judg 11:30-40; 1 Sam 1:11, 24-28; 14:24-45; Ps 76:11; Prov 20:25; Eccl 5:3-5; Mal 1:14; Matt 5:33-37; Acts 18:18; 21:23-24; Jas 5:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Vows to God The essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8). Guidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their reque...","summary_en":"Vows to God The essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8). Guidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their reque...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116357,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Vows to God","title_en":"Vows to God","content_ro":"<h3>Vows to God<\/h3>\nThe essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8).<\/p>\nGuidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their requests. Then they would pay or fulfill their vows to God, often by giving offerings (e.g., Lev 7:16; 22:23; Deut 12:11).<\/p>\nHowever, vows could be abused. The law itself warns against this (Deut 23:21-23), as do the wisdom teachings (e.g., Prov 7:10-14; 20:25) and the books of the prophets (see, e.g., Jer 44:25). Saul was prone both to make foolish vows (1 Sam 14:24-28) and to not keep the vows he made (19:6). Impulsive vows might go unfulfilled and never paid, arousing God’s anger. Not making a vow is better than backing out of one (Eccl 5:3-5). Jesus counsels us not to make vows, but simply to keep our word (Matt 5:33-37; cp. Jas 5:12).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 28:20-22; Num 21:2-3; 30:1-16; Deut 23:18-23; Judg 11:30-40; 1 Sam 1:11, 24-28; 14:24-45; Ps 76:11; Prov 20:25; Eccl 5:3-5; Mal 1:14; Matt 5:33-37; Acts 18:18; 21:23-24; Jas 5:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Vows to God<\/h3>\nThe essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8).<\/p>\nGuidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their requests. Then they would pay or fulfill their vows to God, often by giving offerings (e.g., Lev 7:16; 22:23; Deut 12:11).<\/p>\nHowever, vows could be abused. The law itself warns against this (Deut 23:21-23), as do the wisdom teachings (e.g., Prov 7:10-14; 20:25) and the books of the prophets (see, e.g., Jer 44:25). Saul was prone both to make foolish vows (1 Sam 14:24-28) and to not keep the vows he made (19:6). Impulsive vows might go unfulfilled and never paid, arousing God’s anger. Not making a vow is better than backing out of one (Eccl 5:3-5). Jesus counsels us not to make vows, but simply to keep our word (Matt 5:33-37; cp. Jas 5:12).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 28:20-22; Num 21:2-3; 30:1-16; Deut 23:18-23; Judg 11:30-40; 1 Sam 1:11, 24-28; 14:24-45; Ps 76:11; Prov 20:25; Eccl 5:3-5; Mal 1:14; Matt 5:33-37; Acts 18:18; 21:23-24; Jas 5:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Vows to God The essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8). Guidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their reque...","summary_en":"Vows to God The essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8). Guidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their reque...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143983,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Vows to God","title_en":"Vows to God","content_ro":"<h3>Vows to God<\/h3>\nThe essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8).<\/p>\nGuidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their requests. Then they would pay or fulfill their vows to God, often by giving offerings (e.g., Lev 7:16; 22:23; Deut 12:11).<\/p>\nHowever, vows could be abused. The law itself warns against this (Deut 23:21-23), as do the wisdom teachings (e.g., Prov 7:10-14; 20:25) and the books of the prophets (see, e.g., Jer 44:25). Saul was prone both to make foolish vows (1 Sam 14:24-28) and to not keep the vows he made (19:6). Impulsive vows might go unfulfilled and never paid, arousing God’s anger. Not making a vow is better than backing out of one (Eccl 5:3-5). Jesus counsels us not to make vows, but simply to keep our word (Matt 5:33-37; cp. Jas 5:12).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 28:20-22; Num 21:2-3; 30:1-16; Deut 23:18-23; Judg 11:30-40; 1 Sam 1:11, 24-28; 14:24-45; Ps 76:11; Prov 20:25; Eccl 5:3-5; Mal 1:14; Matt 5:33-37; Acts 18:18; 21:23-24; Jas 5:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Vows to God<\/h3>\nThe essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8).<\/p>\nGuidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their requests. Then they would pay or fulfill their vows to God, often by giving offerings (e.g., Lev 7:16; 22:23; Deut 12:11).<\/p>\nHowever, vows could be abused. The law itself warns against this (Deut 23:21-23), as do the wisdom teachings (e.g., Prov 7:10-14; 20:25) and the books of the prophets (see, e.g., Jer 44:25). Saul was prone both to make foolish vows (1 Sam 14:24-28) and to not keep the vows he made (19:6). Impulsive vows might go unfulfilled and never paid, arousing God’s anger. Not making a vow is better than backing out of one (Eccl 5:3-5). Jesus counsels us not to make vows, but simply to keep our word (Matt 5:33-37; cp. Jas 5:12).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 28:20-22; Num 21:2-3; 30:1-16; Deut 23:18-23; Judg 11:30-40; 1 Sam 1:11, 24-28; 14:24-45; Ps 76:11; Prov 20:25; Eccl 5:3-5; Mal 1:14; Matt 5:33-37; Acts 18:18; 21:23-24; Jas 5:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Vows to God The essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8). Guidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their reque...","summary_en":"Vows to God The essence of a vow to God is, “If God will do X, then I will dedicate Y” to God or his sanctuary. Examples include Jacob’s tithing (Gen 28:20-22), the Israelites’ dealing with the Canaanite spoils of war (Num 21:2), Hannah’s dedicating her son as a lifelong servant of the Lord (1 Sam 1:11), and Absalom’s sacrificing to God at Hebron (2 Sam 15:8). Guidelines for vows are frequently mentioned in the sacrificial laws. Israelites made vows conditional upon God’s granting their reque...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":28303,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45008,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:12","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:12","content_ro":"12:12<\/strong> The Levites,<\/em> descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).<\/p>","content_en":"12:12<\/strong> The Levites,<\/em> descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:12 The Levites, descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).","summary_en":"12:12 The Levites, descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72634,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:12","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:12","content_ro":"12:12<\/strong> The Levites,<\/em> descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).<\/p>","content_en":"12:12<\/strong> The Levites,<\/em> descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:12 The Levites, descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).","summary_en":"12:12 The Levites, descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100260,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:12","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:12","content_ro":"12:12<\/strong> The Levites,<\/em> descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).<\/p>","content_en":"12:12<\/strong> The Levites,<\/em> descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:12 The Levites, descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).","summary_en":"12:12 The Levites, descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127886,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:12","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:12","content_ro":"12:12<\/strong> The Levites,<\/em> descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).<\/p>","content_en":"12:12<\/strong> The Levites,<\/em> descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:12 The Levites, descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).","summary_en":"12:12 The Levites, descendants of Jacob’s son Levi, were set apart to serve the Lord full time in Israel’s religious life (Num 18:1-7). The primary task of the Levites was to assist the priests in their various responsibilities. Because the priests and the Levites could not engage in secular pursuits, they depended on the generosity of Israel’s other tribes for their livelihood (Num 18:21-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":1815,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Animals","title_en":"Animals","content_ro":"<h3>ANIMALS<\/h3>\nIn biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals as object lessons.<\/p>\nThe biblical approach to classification of animals is somewhat different from the system of classification used by biologists today. The present system of classification, which traces back to Carolus Linnaeus (an 18th-century Swedish botanist), is based on structure, both internal and external. The biblical basis of classification is habitat. Thus Genesis 1 speaks of aquatic organisms (v 20); aerial organisms (v 21); animals that crawl on the ground (v 24); cattle or domesticated animals (animals that live in association with humans) (v 24); and wild animals (v 24). The same system of classification is followed in Leviticus 11 and throughout Scripture.<\/p>\nBecause of the divergence between systems of classification, the various animals of the Bible will be listed here in alphabetical order—including reptiles, fish, and even invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms, and sponges. Birds are discussed in a separate article.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Adder<\/p>\n• Ant<\/p>\n• Antelope<\/p>\n• Ape<\/p>\n• Asp<\/p>\n• Ass<\/p>\n• Badger<\/p>\n• Bat<\/p>\n• Bear<\/p>\n• Bee<\/p>\n• Behemoth<\/p>\n• Camel<\/p>\n• Caterpillar<\/p>\n• Cattle<\/p>\n• Chameleon<\/p>\n• Coral<\/p>\n• Cricket<\/p>\n• Crocodile<\/p>\n• Deer<\/p>\n• Dog<\/p>\n• Donkey<\/p>\n• Dragon<\/p>\n• Fish<\/p>\n• Flea<\/p>\n• Fly<\/p>\n• Fox<\/p>\n• Frog<\/p>\n• Gazelle<\/p>\n• Gecko<\/p>\n• Gnat<\/p>\n• Goat<\/p>\n• Grasshopper<\/p>\n• Hare<\/p>\n• Hippopotamus<\/p>\n• Horse<\/p>\n• Hyena<\/p>\n• Jackal<\/p>\n• Leech<\/p>\n• Leopard<\/p>\n• Leviathan<\/p>\n• Lion<\/p>\n• Lizard<\/p>\n• Locust<\/p>\n• Mole<\/p>\n• Moth<\/p>\n• Mouse<\/p>\n• Mule<\/p>\n• Pig<\/p>\n• Porcupine<\/p>\n• Scorpion<\/p>\n• Sheep<\/p>\n• Snail<\/p>\n• Snake<\/p>\n• Spider<\/p>\n• Sponge<\/p>\n• Unicorn<\/p>\n• Wasp<\/p>\n• Whale<\/p>\n• Wild Ox<\/p>\n• Wolf<\/p>\n• Worm<\/p>\n\nAdder<\/p>\nOne of the 20 poisonous snakes found in Israel and surrounding countries, also referred to as cockatrice and viper. True vipers (genus Cerastes, Echis colorata,<\/em> and Vipera palestina<\/em>) also exist there, poisonous snakes with curved fangs that spring into position when the snake strikes. The horned viper (Cerastes hasselquistii)<\/em> may attack horses. It is 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 centimeters) long and often lies in ambush in the sand with only its eyes and the hornlike protrusions on its head visible.<\/p>\nBoth Jesus and John the Baptist referred to the viper several times (Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33). The reference in Acts 28:3 is probably to a small viper (Vipera aspis)<\/em> that strikes rapidly and is very pugnacious. It is found in southern Europe and hisses each time it inhales and exhales. The poison of vipers attacks the respiratory system and disintegrates red blood cells.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\nAnt<\/p>\nMentioned only twice in the Bible, both times in the book of Proverbs. For many years Solomon was charged with a biological error when he referred to the ant as providing her meat in the summer and gathering her food in the harvest (Prv 6:8). Critics of the Bible were quick to point out that, so far as was then known, ants do not store up food. They assumed that Solomon had probably kicked open an ant hill and mistaken the pupal cases (pods in which immature ants grow to maturity) for grain or had observed ants carrying bits of grain, leaves, and other matter to their nests.<\/p>\nAt least three species of grain-storing ants are now known—two occur in Israel and the other in Mediterranean countries. The particular species referred to by Solomon (Prv 6:6-8; 30:24-25) is probably the harvester ant (Messor semirufus).<\/em> Its granaries are flat chambers connected by galleries irregularly scattered over an area about six feet (1.8 meters) in diameter and about a foot (.3 meter) deep in the ground. Seeds are collected from the ground or picked from plants. The head, or radicle, which is the softest part of the kernel, is bitten off to prevent germination, and the chaff and empty capsules are discarded on kitchen middens (refuse piles) outside the nest. Individual granaries may be 5 inches (12.7 centimeters) in diameter and a half inch (1.2 centimeters) high. Some nests are known to be 40 feet (12 meters) in diameter and 6 to 7 feet (approx. 2 meters) deep with several entrances.<\/p>\nAntelope<\/p>\nSeveral antelope-like creatures are referred to in the Scriptures. One seems to be the white oryx (Oryx leucoryx),<\/em> referred to in Deuteronomy 14:5 (kjv<\/span> “wild ox”; rsv<\/span> “antelope”) and Isaiah 51:20 (kjv<\/span> “wild bull”; RSV <\/span>“antelope”). The oryx was probably the antelope, commonly used for food because its long horns made it relatively easy to catch.<\/p>\nAnother antelope mentioned in the Bible is the addax (Addax nasomaculatus),<\/em> probably the “pygarg” of Deuteronomy 14:5 (kjv<\/span>). It is a native of North Africa with grayish white hinder parts, a white patch on the forehead, and twisted and ringed horns. The word “pygarg” comes from a Greek word meaning “white rump.” The addax is about the size of a donkey. Its body is closely covered with short hair. It has a short mane on the underside of its neck that makes the head look somewhat like that of a goat. The hooves are broad and flat, and the tail resembles that of a donkey. It is common in Africa and in Arabia, where Arabs hunt it with falcons and dogs.<\/p>\nAntelopes are very graceful and run with their heads held high. Both sexes have long, permanent, hollow horns. With the oryx the horns go straight back; addax horns are twisted and ringed. Antelope are alert, wary, and keen sighted. They are usually found in herds of from two to a dozen. If injured or brought to bay, an antelope attacks with its head lowered so that the sharp horns point forward. Antelopes feed on grasses and shrubs, drinking from streams and water holes. When water is scarce, they eat melons and succulent bulbs. Both addax and oryx were ceremonially clean in Jewish law.<\/p>\nApe<\/p>\nPrimate not native to Palestine. The two references to apes in the OT (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) refer to their importation by King Solomon with other treasures on board the ships of his mercantile fleet. There is some question concerning the origin of those primates. Some believe that the mention of “ivory” in the same verses suggests they came from East Africa and that they were indeed apes, that is, tailless primates. Others, believing they came from India or Ceylon, suggest that they were actually monkeys. There the baboon (genus Papeio), a large monkey, was considered sacred to the god Thoth. Males of that genus were kept in temples, and the more docile females were often kept as house pets. Such baboons frequently had some of their teeth removed or ground down to lessen the danger of their biting. A number of mummified baboons have been found in Egypt, indicating the high regard in which they were held.<\/p>\nAsp<\/p>\nPoisonous snake. Most biblical references to the asp (Dt 32:33) seem to be to the Egyptian cobra (Naja haje),<\/em> which conceals itself in holes, walls, and rocks and has the ability to expand its neck by raising its anterior ribs so as to enlarge the front of its breast into the shape of a flat disc. Its potent poison can cause death in 30 minutes. It attains a length of about 80 inches (2 meters). The fangs are permanently erect, not movable as in the vipers (the common poisonous snakes of North America; only the coral snake in America has permanently erect fangs). Cobra poison attacks the nervous system, causing muscular paralysis. The Egyptians looked upon it as a sacred creature; they regarded it as a protector since it fed on the rodents that ate their crops. The “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:6; Dt 8:15, both rsv<\/span>) may have been cobras; “fiery” probably refers to the burning fever caused by their venom. Isaiah 14:29 and 30:6 (“flying serpent”) may refer to the hood of the cobra.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\nAss<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Donkey (below).<\/p>\nBadger<\/p>\nSmall hoofed mammal. What the kjv<\/span> calls a “coney,” modern translations name “rock badger” (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7; Ps 104:18; Prv 30:26). The rock badger spoken of in the Bible is probably the Syrian rock hyrax (Hyrax syriaca),<\/em> the only species of hyrax found outside Africa. This small ungulate (having hooflike toenails) lives among rocks from the Dead Sea valley to Mt Hermon. It is strictly a herbivorous (plant-eating) animal about the size of a rabbit. It resembles a guinea pig more than a rabbit, having quite inconspicuous ears and a very small tail. It has broad nails with four toes on its forelegs and three on its hind legs, the toes being connected with skin almost like a web. Pads acting as sucking discs under its feet enable it to keep its footing on slippery rocks. With its yellow and brown fur, it is sometimes called the bear rat because of its resemblance to a tailless rat. It is also equipped with black whiskers that may be seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long.<\/p>\nThese rock badgers, or hyraxes, live together in colonies of from 6 to 50 animals, often sunning themselves on rocks. They are difficult to catch. Guards are posted, and if approaching danger is sighted, the whole group will scurry for cover, warned by the sharp whistles of the guards. Thus they are commended for taking refuge in the rocks (Ps 104:18) and are called wise for making “their houses in the rocks” (Prv 30:24, 26, kjv<\/span>). The badger is not a ruminant (does not chew its cud), but the motion of its jaws may suggest that it chews its cud. That is probably why it was included with other cud-chewing animals in the Jewish food laws (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7). It was forbidden to the Jews as food because it did not have cloven hooves. Some Arabs eat and even prize its meat.<\/p>\nBat<\/p>\nFlying mammals according to modern classification. They have hair and provide milk for their young. The Bible classifies them with other aerial creatures. Bats take shelter in caves, crevices, tree cavities, buildings, and also in exposed places on trees. In colder areas they hibernate or migrate. The normal resting position for a bat is hanging head downward. Bats “swim” through the air rather than fly because they move with their legs as well as with their wings.<\/p>\nThe bat’s thumb is free and terminates in a single hook claw used for climbing and hanging. The hind feet have five toes, all pointing the same way. The large chest accommodates the powerful muscles needed for flying. Because they orient themselves by echo location, the sense of hearing is very well developed.<\/p>\nMost bats are insect eaters, seizing insects in flight. Many insectivorous bats also eat some fruit. Other bats feed exclusively, usually in groups, on fruit and green vegetation. Fruit-eating bats generally live in the tropics where fruit is constantly ripening, although some have been found in the Holy Land. These bats tend to be larger than the insectivores, having a wingspread of up to five feet (1.5 meters).<\/p>\nA third group includes flower-eating bats that feed on pollen and nectar. These small bats with long pointed heads and long tongues are found only in tropical and semitropical regions. Three species of vampire bats, which do not occur in the Holy Land, eat blood by making a small incision and lapping it up. Carnivorous (meat-eating) bats prey on birds, lizards, and frogs. Fish-eating bats catch fish at or near the water surface.<\/p>\nEight varieties of bats are known in the Holy Land. One of them, the little brown bat (genus Myotis<\/em>), is worldwide in its distribution. It is insectivorous and probably has the widest distribution of any nonhuman terrestrial mammal. Brown bats are mostly cave dwellers. The females form maternity colonies that may number in the tens of thousands.<\/p>\nTwo species of mouse-tailed bats (genus Rhinopoma<\/em>) are found in the Holy Land. Their tails are nearly as long as the head and body combined. They are colonial, roosting in caves, rock clefts, wells, pyramids, palaces, and houses. Like the brown bat, they are insectivorous. The slit-faced or hollow-faced bats (genus Nycteris<\/em>) are also found in the Holy Land. They are insectivorous and roost in groups from 6 to 20.<\/p>\nThe bats found in the Holy Land vary in size from that of a mouse to the size of a rat; the largest species measures more than 20 inches (51 centimeters) across the wings. The bat was unclean to the Jews (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\nBear<\/p>\nLarge, heavy, big-headed mammal with short, powerful limbs, a short tail, and small eyes and ears. Bears have a “plantigrade” walk: they walk on both the sole and heel as humans do. The Palestinian bear is a Syrian version of the brown bear (Ursus arctos syriacus).<\/em> It can grow to a height of 6 feet (1.8 meters) and may weigh as much as 500 pounds (227 kilograms).<\/p>\nBears have an excellent sense of smell but less developed senses of sight and hearing. They are omnivorous (eating any kind of food); they subsist largely on vegetation, fruits, insects, and fish.<\/p>\nBears are usually peaceful and inoffensive, but if they think they must defend themselves (Lam 3:10) or their young (2 Sm 17:8; Prv 17:12; Hos 13:8), they may be formidable and dangerous adversaries. David boasted of his role as a bear killer (1 Sm 17:34-37). Since a blow from a bear’s paw can be fatal, David’s courage and strength as a young shepherd in running after a bear and wrenching one of his father’s sheep from its jaws were noteworthy.<\/p>\nSome biblical passages seem to imply that bears attacked for no apparent reason (e.g., Prv 28:15; Am 5:19). At other times they were God’s instruments of punishment, as in the story of Elisha and the two she-bears (2 Kgs 2:24). The bear and the lion, often mentioned together in the Bible (1 Sm 17:37), were the two largest and strongest beasts of prey in the Holy Land. Thus they symbolized both strength and terror (Am 5:19).<\/p>\nIn biblical times bears seem to have roamed all over Palestine. Today they are found only in the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains, and even there they are rare.<\/p>\nBee<\/p>\nOne of two domesticated insects (Apis mellifica),<\/em> the other being the silkworm. Bees gather nectar from flowers, transferring pollen from one flower to another in the process. It is believed that they convey the location of sources of nectar to other bees through a bee “dance,” which may indicate both distance and direction. Bees are sensitive to four colors: blue-green, yellow-green, blue-violet, and ultra-violet (invisible to humans).<\/p>\nThe wild bees of the Holy Land are especially noted for their ferocity in attack. Only the female “worker” bees sting people and animals, the virulence of their venom increasing in warm weather. A number of biblical passages allude to the irritable, vindictive nature of bees and to the painful stings they inflict (Dt 1:44; Ps 118:12; Is 7:18).<\/p>\nOne reference calls attention to the fact that in semidesert regions a dead animal’s carcass, stripped to the bone by jackals or vultures and dried in the sun, can provide wild bees an excellent place to start a new colony (Jgs 14:5-9).<\/p>\nThe Egyptians considered the bee sacred. In ancient Greece candles were made from beeswax. In the Holy Land, beekeeping was probably not practiced until the Hellenistic period (second century BC<\/span>), although Ezekiel 27:17 suggests that it may have been practiced earlier. If domestic honey was not available to the Hebrews, wild honey certainly was, and travelers would be on the lookout for caches of honey in rocky clefts and other likely places. The Philistines and the Hittites practiced beekeeping in their cities.<\/p>\nThe Bible contains many references to bees and bee products. A bee swarm was a valuable asset, though the price of honey itself was low. Honey was sometimes eaten with the honeycomb (Sg 5:1). Honey also had uses other than food, e.g., in embalming.<\/p>\nThe land of Israel was described as a land flowing with milk and honey. Honey was a major source of sweetening in the ancient Near East—hence, its importance (cf. Jgs 14:8-9). Actually the Hebrew word for “honey” may include not only bee honey but also the sweet syrup extracted from such fruits as figs, dates, and grapes. Thus “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Ex 3:8, rsv<\/span>) does not necessarily stand for a land of bees but for a land rich in sweetness.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Honey.<\/p>\nBehemoth<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Hippopotamus (below).<\/p>\nCamel<\/p>\nLarge beast of burden. Unintelligent, ill-natured, and quarrelsome, the camel (Camelus dromedarius)<\/em> is nevertheless a blessing to people living in the desert and on its borders because it is especially adapted to that habitat. It has been called the ship of the desert. Having thick elastic pads of fibrous tissue on its feet, it can walk on hot desert sands. It can go without water for long periods and can subsist on vegetation growing on the saline soils. The camel’s nostrils are pinched together and can be closed at will to prevent penetration of sand during violent sandstorms.<\/p>\nCamels are used for transporting both goods and people. A person riding a camel can cover from 60 to 75 miles (96.5 to 121 kilometers) in a day. A camel can carry a load weighing 600 pounds (272 kilograms) or more. Camels were used heavily in the spice trade (Gn 37:25) and traveled regularly in camel trains between Arabia, Egypt, and Assyria. They were also ridden in time of war (Jgs 6:5). A camel can even be hitched to a plow in areas where the land is cultivated.<\/p>\nThe hair shed by camels during the early spring is preserved and used in weaving cloth and making tents. As much as 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) of hair can be obtained from one camel. A rough cloak of camel’s hair, as worn by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4), is still worn by Bedouins today. A camel’s hair garment was also the sign of the prophetic office (Zec 13:4).<\/p>\nTwo varieties of camel occur within the one-humped species, the slow burden-bearing camel referred to in Genesis 37:25 and the fast dromedary of 1 Samuel 30:17. The dromedary can stand seven feet (2.1 meters) tall and measure as much as nine feet (2.7 meters) from the muzzle to the tip of the tail. With its three-chambered stomach, which can hold from 15 to 30 quarts (14.2 to 28.4 liters) of liquid, it can go for as long as 5 days during the summer or 25 days in winter without drinking. The camel’s hump is a reserve store of fat, making it possible for the animal to subsist on very little food during a desert journey.<\/p>\nAnother species of camel, the Bactrian camel (Camelus bactrianus),<\/em> is also resident in the Holy Land. It has two humps. It is heavier, bigger, and has longer hair than the one-humped camel and is slower than the swift dromedary. Isaiah 21:7 may refer to the Bactrian camel; both kinds of camel are referred to in Esther 8:10 (kjv<\/span>). Camels ranked in importance with sheep, cattle, and asses in OT times. A third of the 66 biblical references to the camel lists it with other animals.<\/p>\nCamels are ruminants (cud-chewing mammals) but do not have cloven hooves. Thus, they were included in the list of unclean beasts, forbidden by the Israelites as food (Lv 11:4; Dt 14:7). They are eaten by Arabs, however, who also drink their milk (cf. Gn 32:15).<\/p>\nAbraham had camels in Egypt (Gn 12:16). At first Job had 3,000 camels (Jb 1:3) and after his recovery, 6,000 (Jb 42:12). Although wide use of camels does not seem to have begun until shortly before 1000 BC<\/span> (Jgs 6:5), Sumerian texts from the Old Babylonian period list camels and indicate that they had been domesticated. Camel bones and figurines have been found at various eastern archaeological sites dating from well before 1200 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nCaterpillar<\/p>\nLarval stage of insects characterized by complete metamorphosis. Such insects pass through four stages: egg, larva or caterpillar, pupa, and adult. Bees, flies, moths, and butterflies all pass through a larval or caterpillar stage.<\/p>\nThe word “caterpillar” occurs three times in the nlt<\/span> (1 Kgs 8:37; 2 Chr 6:28; Ps 78:46). In the book of Joel that same Hebrew word is translated “locust” (1:4; 2:25, nlt<\/span>). The locust and grasshopper to which the Hebrew word refers have an incomplete type of metamorphosis with only three stages: egg, nymph, and adult. The nymph is a miniature adult in which the wings are not fully developed, though their outline may be present. There are several nymph stages known as instars. The reference is to one of the last instars, in which the wing structures are still folded together and enclosed in a sac but are nevertheless clearly recognizable. That form of the insect is about an inch (2.5 centimeters) long.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\nCattle<\/p>\nDomestic animals of the bovine species (Bos primigenius).<\/em> The OT often emphasized the beauty of cattle. Egypt was rich in cattle, especially in the Nile River delta area (Goshen), where the Hebrews settled under Joseph.<\/p>\nSome scholars believe that milk rather than meat was the foremost consideration in the domestication of cattle and that in early civilizations meat supplies came chiefly from wild game. Cattle also supplied strong hides that supplanted wood in the manufacture of shields. Their dung was a source of fuel when wood was scarce (Ez 4:15). They were used as beasts of burden and for plowing. Development of wheeled transportation was associated more closely with cattle than with any other animal.<\/p>\nThe biblical term “cattle” often refers to all domesticated animals or livestock (Gn 1:24; 2:20; 7:23; 47:6, 16-17; Ex 9:3-7; Nm 3:41, 45). Occasionally, the term was used to refer to all large domestic animals (Nm 31:9; 32:26), although sometimes the word as used in the kjv<\/span> refers only to sheep and goats (Gn 30:32, 39, 43; 31:8, 10; Is 7:25; 43:23).<\/p>\nProbably several kinds of cattle were domesticated in the Holy Land. Small, short-legged, black or brown shorthorn cattle were found in the southern part of Judah; that type submitted easily to the yoke and was prominent in agricultural operations. Along the coast a larger variety was found, and the wild districts east of the Jordan River were populated with a breed of huge black cattle.<\/p>\nCattle breeding was widely practiced by the patriarchs (cf. Gn 32:15; Jb 21:10). Strict laws in Mesopotamia, as well as in Israel, penalized the owner of a bull that gored a man or other cattle (Ex 21:28-36). Bulls were sometimes employed figuratively as pictures of strength or violence (Dt 33:17; Pss 22:12; 68:30; Is 10:13). For breeding purposes one bull is normally adequate for about 30 cows, but many more were kept since bulls were widely used in Israel for sacrifices. They might be used as a general sacrifice (Lv 22:23; Nm 23:1) or for special sacrifices (Jgs 6:25; 1 Sm 1:24). Particular sacrifices were offered at the consecration of priests (Ex 29:1), consecration of an altar (Nm 7), purification of the Levites (Nm 8), sin offerings (Lv 16), day of the new moon (Nm 28:11-14), Passover (Nm 28:19), Feast of Weeks (Nm 28:27), Feast of Trumpets (Nm 29:1-2), Day of Atonement (Nm 29:7-9), and the Feast of Tabernacles (Nm 29:12-38). The Feast of Tabernacles required the largest number of bulls for burnt offerings of all the annual feasts, with a total of 71 being slaughtered during the course of eight days.<\/p>\nCalves were sometimes referred to as “sons of the herd” in the original Hebrew (Gn 18:8; 1 Sm 6:7; 14:32). The calf, a symbol of peacefulness (Is 11:6), was also used figuratively to refer to the weak (Ps 68:30). A calf’s head decorated the back of Solomon’s throne (1 Kgs 10:19). Calves were sometimes fattened in stalls to keep them from running off weight in the field (Am 6:4; Mal 4:2; Lk 15:23) or were kept around the house; the witch of Endor kept a calf in her house that she killed and served to Saul and his men (1 Sm 28:24-25). Calves supplied veal (Gn 18:7), considered a delicacy by the wealthy; Amos referred to stall-fattened calves in a denunciation of luxurious and careless living (Am 6:4). Calves also supplied meat for all Saul’s armies at the great slaughter of the Philistines (1 Sm 14:32). The “fatted calf” served roasted or boiled was gourmet fare, suitable for the finest banquet (Gn 18:7; Mt 22:4; Lk 15:23).<\/p>\nCattle were subject to the law of firstlings (Ex 13:12). They were a mark of wealth (Gn 13:2) and were considered proper booty of war (Jos 8:2). Aaron, the first high priest, made a golden calf as a rival to the ark of the covenant (Ex 32; Dt 9:16, 21). Even though he represented the calf as an image of the invisible God, it was especially offensive because the calf was a fertility symbol related to Egyptian and Canaanite practices. Two calves were later made by Jeroboam I of Israel (930–909 BC<\/span>) for his shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:28-33). Hosea’s prophetic denunciations of calf worship were directed at those shrines (Hos 8:5-6; 13:2).<\/p>\nAn ox is an adult castrated bull. A steer is a young ox. Oxen were used to do work (Nm 7:3; Dt 22:10; 25:4), though for moving heavy objects, cows were typically favored over bulls because of their more docile nature. Oxen were also used as pack animals (1 Chr 12:40, although they did not have the endurance of the ass, camel, or mule. They usually fed on grass (Nm 22:4; Ps 106:20), but they also ate straw (Is 11:7) and salted fodder (Is 30:24) and could be kept in a stable (Lk 13:15). Oxen could not be offered as sacrifices because they had been castrated (Lv 22:24). They could be used for food but were rarely eaten. Possession of an ox and an ass was regarded as the bare minimum for existence in the ancient Palestinian agriculture economy (Jb 24:3; cf. Ex 20:17).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Agriculture; Food and Food Preparation; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\nChameleon<\/p>\nLizard characterized by its ability to change color according to its surroundings (Chameleon vulgaris).<\/em> To the Israelites the chameleon was ritually unclean (Lv 11:30). The Hebrew word for chameleon is derived from a word meaning “to pant.” A lizard’s lungs are very large, and in ancient times lizards were believed to live on air. A chameleon’s eyes move independently of each other; so at times one eye may be turned upward and the other downward. Chameleons live in trees and bushes, clinging to branches with their long tails.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\nCoral<\/p>\nCalcareous (lime-containing) skeletons of relatively simple marine organisms (Corallium rubrum).<\/em> Red coral from the Mediterranean and Red Seas is widely used for jewelry and for medicinal purposes. While the animal is alive, the coral is green in color and shrublike in appearance, looking rather like an underwater plant since the coral animals are immobil. When the coral is removed from the water, it becomes hard and red in color.<\/p>\nIn ancient times coral was sometimes used as money, along with precious stones, pearls, and gold. Some believe the biblical reference in Lamentations 4:7 (rsv<\/span>) is to pearls rather than to coral, but it is probable that the references in Job 28:18 and Ezekiel 27:16 are to the red coral (see nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nCricket<\/p>\nInsect of the order Orthptera related to grasshoppers and locusts. According to Leviticus 11:22, the cricket was edible. The reference may be to one of the growth stages of the locust.<\/p>\nThe kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word as “beetle.” Beetles are insects with chewing mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the fore pair being hard and sheathlike and the hind pair being membranous and folded under the fore pair. Some beetles are carnivorous, others are chiefly herbivorous. Some are aquatic, some produce a secretion that blisters the skin, some damage fabrics, some damage crops, and some feed on other insects that are harmful to humans. In ancient Egypt the beetle, or sacred scarab, was a symbol of the sun god Ra. Scarab seals and amulets were extremely popular in Egypt.<\/p>\nCrocodile<\/p>\nLargest of all existing reptiles (Crocodilus vulgaris),<\/em> attaining a length of well over 20 feet (6 meters). Crocodiles are characterized by large lizardlike bodies supported by short legs. The head terminates in a flattened snout armed with strong conical teeth, each of which is implanted in a distinct socket. New teeth growing from beneath continually replace those in use. The toes are webbed. The back and tail are protected by quadrangular horny shields of varying sizes arranged in regular rows and in contact with one another at the edges. The eyes are covered with movable lids that can be closed when the animal enters the water.<\/p>\nThe crocodile spends most of its time in the water where it feeds mainly on fish but also on aquatic birds and even small animals that come down to the water’s edge to drink. It is surprisingly fast and agile on dry land, even though its legs are so short that its belly and tail drag across the earth leaving a distinct path.<\/p>\nUntil the beginning of the 20th century, the crocodile was found in the marshes and small coastal rivers of western Palestine. A first-century Roman writer, Pliny, referred to a place in the Holy Land called Crocodeilopolis (“crocodile city”) to the south of Mt Carmel, and visitors to the Holy Land as late as the 19th century reported seeing crocodiles in that general region.<\/p>\nThe description of “Leviathan” in Job 41 seems to be based on the crocodile (thus the translation of the nlt<\/span>). The “dragon” of Ezekiel 29:3, used figuratively of the Egyptian pharaoh, may be a reference to the crocodile.<\/p>\nDeer<\/p>\nLarge ruminant (cud-chewing) animals. Only the males have antlers (branching horns). Deer antlers grow annually and are solid, in contrast to those of the antelope and the gazelle. Fully developed antlers are devoid of any covering of skin or horn and, for all practical purposes, may be regarded as a mass of dead bone carried for a certain time by the living animal.<\/p>\nThe end of the deer’s muzzle is naked in all species. The stomach is divided into a series of compartments, some of which are used to store partly chewed food. The food is later regurgitated, rechewed, and finally swallowed into a section of the stomach where true digestion takes place.<\/p>\nThree species of deer were known in Palestine: the red deer (Cervus elaphus),<\/em> the Persian fallow deer (Dama mesopotamica),<\/em> and the roe deer (Capreolus capreolus).<\/em> All are now extinct there. The last deer were hunted in the Holy Land in 1914. The red deer referred to in the Bible as “hart” (male), “stag” (male), or “hind” (female) stood about four feet (1.2 meters) high at the shoulder. It was gregarious (living in herds or flocks), each group remaining in a definite territory. Red deer grazed and browsed during the morning and late afternoon (Lam 1:6). The sexes remained in separate herds. The red deer was known for its leaping (Is 35:6) and sure-footedness in the mountains (Ps 18:33; Sg 2:8-9, 17; 8:14; Hb 3:19).<\/p>\nThe antlers of the Persian fallow deer (1 Kgs 4:23) were large, flattened, and palmated (shaped like an open palm with fingers extended), and its coat was a yellowbrown. It traveled in small groups, feeding mainly on grass in the morning and evening.<\/p>\nThe roe deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23) was a small, graceful animal, dark reddish brown in summer and yellowish gray in winter. Its antlers were about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and had three points. The roe deer preferred sparsely wooded valleys and the lower slopes of mountains, grazing in open grasslands. It usually associated in family groups made up of the doe and her offspring. They were shy, yet very curious. The roe deer barked like a dog when disturbed, and they were excellent swimmers.<\/p>\nThere is some question as to whether the roe deer is actually referred to in such passages as 1 Kings 4:23; references may be to the fallow deer, although that animal does not seem to have lived in the southern part of Palestine around the Sinai Desert because of its need for ample amounts of food and water. Fallow deer were found in northern Palestine.<\/p>\nThe hart (the male red deer) was listed among the clean beasts that Jewish law permitted as food (Dt 12:15, 22; 14:5), but deer were not listed among the animals appropriate for sacrifice. The hind (female red deer) normally gave birth to one calf at a time, though twins were born with some degree of regularity (Jb 39:1; Ps 29:9, kjv<\/span>; Jer 14:5). The gestation period was about 40 weeks. When it was about to give birth, the hind looked for a secure hiding place, preferably in the dense undergrowth of the forest where it could find natural protection for the tiny calf. During the first few days after birth, the mother never went far from her young. The fawn was able to stand on its own legs a few hours after birth. The solicitous care by the hind for her calf during the first days of its life is hinted at in a touching way in Jeremiah 14:4-5, where only a severe drought is said to drive the hind from her calf. Job 39:1-4 describes the calving of the hinds. The hind illustrated grace and charm (Gn 49:21; Prv 5:19), and its dark, gentle eyes and graceful limbs were used to describe the beauty of a woman (Prv 5:18-19).<\/p>\nDog<\/p>\nProbably the earliest domesticated animal (Canis familiaris),<\/em> used very early in hunting. The modern dog is believed to have come from the Indian wolf (Canis lupus pallipes).<\/em> The dogs of biblical times probably looked like a modern German shepherd, with short pointed ears, a pointed nose, and a long tail.<\/p>\nThe dog was generally looked down upon in biblical times (Prv 26:11; 2 Pt 2:22). The biblical writers did not share modern sentiments about dogs being man’s best friends. The dog was pictured as a scavenger, haunting streets and dumps (Ex 22:31; 1 Kgs 22:38; Mt 15:26; Lk 16:21). Human corpses could become the spoil of dogs (2 Kgs 9:35-36). In general, dogs served the same function as vultures and other birds of prey. Most of the 41 references in the Scriptures to dogs show strong disfavor. Dogs were considered cowardly, filthy creatures.<\/p>\nDogs used in hunting occur in paintings in Egyptian tombs, and there is a reference to dogs herding sheep in Job 30:1. One good quality of dogs highly esteemed by the Israelites was watchfulness (Is 56:10). In general, however, in biblical times “dog” was a term of contempt (1 Sm 17:43; 2 Sm 16:9) and was used of overly submissive persons (2 Sm 9:8; 2 Kgs 8:13) and of evil persons (Is 56:10-11; Mt 7:6; Phil 3:2; Rv 22:15).<\/p>\nDogs, like pigs, were voracious and omnivorous (eating any kind of food). In response to a Gentile woman’s request that he heal her daughter, Jesus used the metaphor of throwing household food scraps to dogs (Mt 15:22-28; Mk 7:25-30). At the time of Jesus, the word “dog” was a standard Jewish term of contempt for Gentiles who, like dogs, were considered unclean, although the diminutive form of the word, used by Jesus, softened this considerably. Seeing her faith, Jesus granted the woman’s request, giving a non-Jew some of “the children’s bread.”<\/p>\nDonkey<\/p>\nBeast of burden. The donkey of the Holy Land (Equus asinus)<\/em> was quite different from the European donkey of today, which is usually a small, stubborn animal. In biblical times the donkey was a beautiful, stately, friendly animal. Its color was usually reddish brown. Three wild races have been described, all from Africa. The race from northwest Africa is extinct; the one from northeast Africa, if not extinct, is close to extinction; the Somalian race, which survives, did not play an important part in domestication. The northeast African race, the Nubian donkey, was evidently domesticated in the Nile River region in early historic times. The donkey was used as a mount from the time of domestication on. It is first mentioned in the Bible among the animals that Abraham acquired in Egypt (Gn 12:16). The donkey was primarily a beast of burden, driven but not bridled. From the time of the Middle Kingdom on (c. 2040 BC<\/span>), it was used for riding in Egypt, but only the Jews and Nubians rode donkeys regularly. The donkey was also used for threshing grain and for pulling the plow. In Arab countries today peasants plow with a donkey and a cow or camel hitched together. In Israel the law forbade plowing with a donkey and an ox hitched together (Dt 22:10). Until the time of Solomon (960 BC<\/span>), horses were not used in Palestine. From that time on, the horse was ridden by warriors; the donkey was used by those who were traveling peaceably.<\/p>\nThe donkey was held in high regard by the Jews and was considered an economic asset. An individual had to have a donkey for minimum existence (Jb 24:3), and wealth was frequently counted by the number of donkeys one possessed (Gn 12:16; 24:35). The donkey was considered an acceptable gift (Gn 32:13-15). It was allowed to rest on the Sabbath (Dt 5:14). Women in biblical times often used the donkey as a riding animal (Jos 15:18; 1 Sm 25:23; 2 Kgs 4:24); often a special driver would help a woman guide the animal, running along at its side. If a married couple possessed only one donkey, the husband usually walked alongside while the wife rode (Ex 4:20).<\/p>\nThe people of Israel returning from Babylon had ten times as many donkeys as horses and camels (Ezr 2:66-67; Neh 7:68-69). Job’s wealth was indicated by the fact that he had 500 she-donkeys before catastrophe hit him (Jb 1:3); after his recovery he had 1,000 donkeys (Jb 42:12). Joseph’s brothers used donkeys to transport the grain they purchased in Egypt (Gn 42:26; 43:24). Abigail transported food on donkeys to David and his troops during their conflict with Saul (1 Sm 25:18). David assigned one of the 12 managers of his royal estates to look after his donkeys exclusively (1 Chr 27:30).<\/p>\nThe onager, or Syrian wild donkey (Equus hemionus hemihippus)<\/em>, is an intermediate between the true horse and the true donkey. Its ears are longer than those of a horse but shorter than those of a donkey. The front hooves are narrow; there are chestnuts (callouslike spots on the inside of the knees) on the front legs only, and the tail is short haired for a long distance from its root so that it appears to be tufted.<\/p>\nThe Sumerians (ancient Mesopotamians) were able to domesticate the onager, which was eventually replaced by the horse. It was used to draw chariots in Ur; a number of onagers were buried with their vehicles in a royal grave that dates from about 2500 BC<\/span>. Later the wild onager was a favorite hunter’s prize for Babylonian and Assyrian kings.<\/p>\nThe onager was very common in the steppe lands near Israel, where it was described as a freedom-loving desert animal (Jb 24:5; 39:5-8; Ps 104:11; Is 32:14; Jer 2:24; Hos 8:9). Ishmael was described as “free and untamed as a wild donkey” (Gn 16:12, nlt<\/span>)—that is, one who could not adjust to domestic life. Drought seems to have been responsible for the population decline of the onager in biblical times (Jer 14:6). The modern onager (Equus hemionus onager)<\/em> is slightly larger than the Syrian wild donkey that is extinct.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nDragon<\/p>\nAny one of a number of monstrous land and sea creatures. In biblical usage, “dragon” does not refer to the huge, fire-breathing, winged reptile of European folklore. The translators of the kjv<\/span> used the term to translate two Hebrew words that are usually rendered more precisely in modern translations. One word referred to desert animals; most scholars agree with the niv<\/span> that “jackals” is its proper meaning (Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; Jer 9:11; Mal 1:3). See<\/em> Jackal (below).<\/p>\nThe other Hebrew word translated “dragon” is harder to define. It was frequently used in reference to serpents (so translated in the rsv<\/span>: Ex 7:9-12; Dt 32:33; Ps 91:13). In other rsv<\/span> passages it is translated “sea monster” (Gn 1:21; Jb 7:12; Ps 148:7). The exact identity of such sea monsters is not known. Several rsv<\/span> passages retain the English “dragon.” In two of them (Ps 74:13; Is 27:1), the context indicates that sea monsters are meant. In three others (Is 51:9; Ez 29:3; 32:2) “dragon” seems to refer to the crocodile, a figurative reference to the Egyptian pharaoh at the time of the exodus. Jeremiah 51:34 (translated “monster” in the rsv<\/span>) may also refer to a voracious creature such as a crocodile. See<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\nBabylonian myths described monsters and dragons in primordial conflict with the god Marduk; they represented the principle of evil. In its figurative usages in Scripture, “dragon” has a similar significance, especially in the prophetic books. In the book of Revelation it is a symbol of Satan, the archenemy of God and his people (Rv 12:3-17; 13:2, 4, 11; 16:13; 20:2).<\/p>\nFish<\/p>\nAquatic animals frequently mentioned in the Bible without names or descriptions that enable us to identify the particular species. Since time immemorial, fish have constituted one of the staple foods of humanity, and they still serve as the chief source of protein in many parts of the world. The trade in fish was highly developed in biblical times. For example, one of the gates in Jerusalem was called the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3; Zep 1:10). The law in Leviticus 11:9-12 permitted the Jews to eat fish, but only those having both fins and scales. Scaleless fish such as catfish were forbidden, even though they had fins.<\/p>\nEgyptian paintings depict various methods of fishing, and the Philistines fished in the Mediterranean Sea. Since the people of Israel were not a seafaring nation, it is safe to assume that most of their fish came from freshwater lakes and rivers, especially the Sea of Galilee. Some 36 species of fish have been identified in that lake, including varieties of perch, carp, barbel, “sardine,” and catfish.<\/p>\nThe method of fishing characteristic of NT times was the dragnet. After a boat had put out into the deep (Lk 5:4), a large net would be thrown out from it and then dragged toward shore by the rowers in the boat, possibly with the help of a crew in another boat. The catch was sorted out on shore (Mt 13:47-48). Fishing was usually carried out at night when the coolness of the water brought fish closer to the surface and when they could not see the approaching nets.<\/p>\nThe Jews also fished by hook and line (Mt 17:27), a few by spear (Jb 41:7), and some by the throw net (Ez 47:10). Habakkuk refers to hook-and-line fishing, netting, and seining (1:15).<\/p>\nVery early in the history of the Christian church the fish became a symbol for Christ and the faith. It was scratched on the walls of Roman catacombs and may be seen today decorating walls, altars, pews, and vestments. The symbol came into use because the Greek word for “fish” (<\/em>ichthus<\/span>)<\/em> is composed of the first letter of each word in the Greek phrase “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.” See<\/em> Whale (below).<\/p>\nFlea<\/p>\nTiny, irritating insect (1 Sm 24:14; 26:20, nlt<\/span>). Many species of fleas occur in Palestine, the most common being Pulex irritans.<\/em> About a thousand species are known around the world. Fleas are wingless parasites that have sharp jaws and suck out blood from the bodies of humans and animals. The body is wedge shaped, enabling the flea to burrow into folds of skin and hide there. The eggs, laid by the female in dust heaps in the corners of rooms, hatch into small, white larvae that pupate (a nonfeeding stage) in a cocoon. Soon adult fleas appear that immediately attach themselves to the body of a host. The female requires blood for the development of her eggs.<\/p>\nA flea bite is painful and causes some swelling and itching. Fleas are attracted by warmth. With favorable moisture and temperature, adult fleas can live a year or longer without food, but they are voracious feeders. The most dangerous fleas are those of the rat that transmit the organism responsible for bubonic plague. There were 41 recorded epidemics of bubonic plague before the Christian era.<\/p>\nFly<\/p>\nInsects of the order Diptera, which have one pair of wings. Many winged insects of other orders, however, are also called flies, such as the dragonfly or butterfly.<\/p>\nAs in almost all parts of the world, flies are abundant in Palestine. One of the most numerous is the common housefly (Musca domestica),<\/em> found chiefly around dung heaps and garbage. The female lays her eggs, out of which emerge white maggots that feed on refuse. After a few days the maggot develops into a cocoon out of which emerges the adult housefly. In the summer the whole cycle lasts about 12 days, so that a fly can breed about 20 generations a year.<\/p>\nAnother fly common to Palestine is the botfly (family Oestridae). It causes much discomfort among livestock by irritating them and spreading diseases. Tabanid flies (family Tabanidae), including the horsefly (genus Tabanus<\/em>) and related species, are also found in Palestine. Both the botfly and horsefly are known as gadflies because of the persistent distress they inflict. Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar is spoken of as a gadfly in view of his invasion of Egypt (Jer 46:20).<\/p>\nThe fourth plague in Egypt just before the exodus featured “swarms of flies” (Ex 8:21-31, nlt<\/span>; cf. Pss 78:45; 105:31). Those swarms may have been made up of any or all the flies mentioned above. The maggots mentioned in Job 25:6 and Isaiah 14:11 and the worms in Exodus 16:24 and Job 7:5 and 17:14 were probably fly larvae.<\/p>\nA proverb quoted in Ecclesiastes 10:1 probably refers to the housefly, which would be attracted to an open, perfumed ointment bottle. Once inside it would drown and eventually decay, causing the ointment to spoil and stink. The fly is also referred to in Isaiah 7:18 where it symbolizes Egypt. Isaiah may have had in mind a horsefly (Tabanus arenivagus)<\/em> that attacks both humans and animals.<\/p>\nPhilistine inhabitants of the city of Ekron worshiped a god named Baal-zebul, meaning “Lord of the high places.” The Hebrews mockingly spoke of Baal-zebub, meaning “Lord of the flies” (2 Kgs 1:2). The NT form is Beelzebub (e.g., Mt 10:25; 12:24, 27).<\/p>\nFox<\/p>\nSmall, doglike carnivore with a bushy tail that is about half its body length. The red fox of the Holy Land (Vulpes palaetinae)<\/em> is similar to the North American red fox; it is smaller than a wolf and is normally a nocturnal solitary animal. The omnivorous fox eats almost any kind of food—fruits, plants, mice, beetles, and birds—but seldom touches carrion. It loves the sweet juice of grapes, but it also burrows underground tunnels that can destroy the vines (Sg 2:15). The fox is intelligent and known for its slyness (Lk 13:32). It has considerable endurance and can run at speeds up to 30 miles (48 kilometers) per hour. The Jews rebuilding Jerusalem’s wall were taunted by the wisecrack that even a fox jumping on their wall would knock it over (Neh 4:3).<\/p>\nThe Egyptian fox (Vulpes niloticus)<\/em> is found in the central and southern parts of the Holy Land. It is somewhat smaller than the common red fox. Its back is rust colored and its belly light. The Syrian fox (Vulpes flavescens)<\/em> that lives in the northern part of the Holy Land is shiny gold in color.<\/p>\nSome OT references such as Psalm 63:10 and Lamentations 5:18 are translated “fox” in the kjv<\/span> but probably refer to jackals. Jackals, not foxes, hunt in packs and tend to act as scavengers.<\/p>\nFrog<\/p>\nAmphibian (genus Rana<\/em>), living part of its life in the water and part on land.<\/p>\nFrogs and toads are covered with soft, hairless skin and lack a tail in the adult stage. The hind legs are much longer and more powerfully developed than the forelegs so that the animals are able to jump large distances. It has been suggested that the frog referred to in Scripture is an edible one, Rana ridibunda,<\/em> one of the aquatic frogs found in Egypt and in the stagnant waters of the Holy Land.<\/p>\nThe female frog lays her eggs in the water; after about a week the eggs hatch into tadpoles. Gradually through metamorphosis the tail is lost and limbs are acquired. Frogs must maintain a moist skin since they take oxygen through the skin as well as through their lungs; thus they must always remain close to water. They feed on insects and worms.<\/p>\nFrogs are found throughout the Palestinian lowlands, where their croaking is heard in the spring and on summer evenings. The Israelites seem to have associated frogs primarily with sliminess and foulness. They fell into the category of creeping or swarming creatures, which in general were ritually unclean (Lv 11:29-31). Since the frog was not specifically listed, however, rabbis did not consider it one of the animals that defiled human beings through contact.<\/p>\nIn Revelation 16:13 certain foul spirits are said to look like frogs. The ancient Egyptians made the frog a symbol of life and birth and an image of Heqet, the patron goddess of birth. She is depicted with a frog’s head giving life to the newborn. Thus that deity was discredited when the power of God afflicted Egypt in the second of the ten plagues on the Egyptians with the very animal that was her symbol (Ex 8:1-14; Pss 78:45; 105:30). The frog in question may have been the spotted frog of Egypt (Rana punctata,<\/em> or Rana ridibunda).<\/em><\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\nGazelle<\/p>\nSmall, dainty, graceful antelope with hollow recurved horns on both sexes. Two varieties exist in the Holy Land, the dorcas gazelle (Gazella dorcas),<\/em> which is pale fawn in color and up to 22 inches (56 centimeters) tall, and the Arabian gazelle (Gazella arabica),<\/em> which is a dark smoky color and up to 25 inches (63.5 centimeters) tall.<\/p>\nGazelles are still quite common throughout the desert and steppe areas of the Holy Land, especially in the Negev Desert. Herds usually consist of from 5 to 10 animals, but some varieties assemble in large migratory herds in the fall to relocate to lower elevations and new feeding grounds. Gazelles are herbivorous (plant eating). They are very shy and post guards to warn the herd of approaching danger.<\/p>\nIn biblical times the gazelle was probably the game animal most hunted by the Jews (Prv 6:5; Is 13:14). Pharaoh Tutankhamen hunted gazelles and ostriches. The gazelle is said to have graced Solomon’s table (1 Kgs 4:23). Gazelles were not easy to catch because of their great speed (2 Sm 2:18; 1 Chr 12:8; Prv 6:5); they surpass the deer in swiftness. They were trapped in various ways—encircled with nets, driven into enclosures with pitfalls, or forced into narrow valleys and shot with arrows. The Bedouin hunt gazelle with falcons and dogs; the falcon annoys the gazelle, striking it on the head and injuring it so that the dogs can overtake it.<\/p>\nThe gazelle is referred to in Song of Songs 2:9, 17; 4:5; 7:3; 8:14, where it is an image of feminine beauty.<\/p>\nGecko<\/p>\nReptile of the family Gekkonidae, referred to in Leviticus 11:30. In Jewish food law it was a ritually unclean lizard. There are seven species of geckos in the Holy Land (including Hemidactylus turcicus<\/em> and Ptyodactylus hasselquistii,<\/em> all insectivorous—insect eating). The gecko makes a low mourning sound by vibrating its tongue rapidly against the roof of its mouth. In legend the gecko was said to cause leprosy by crawling across a person’s body.<\/p>\nAnother name for the gecko is the wall lizard, so named because it can walk upside down on ceilings with the aid of the suction discs on its toes—but it often plops down into the middle of the home. Since it was considered unclean, such an intrusion would have been a disgusting nuisance to Jewish households (Lv 11:31-38).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\nGnat<\/p>\nAny very small fly, in common and biblical usage. According to the nlt<\/span>, the third plague in Egypt before the exodus consisted of gnats (Ex 8:16-18; Ps 105:31). The kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word there as “lice,” but the breeding pattern described in Exodus 8—insects rising from the dust—seems to fit gnats better than lice. Since “gnat” is a general term, the small flies of that plague may have included several small species such as mosquitos, harvester gnats, midges, or sand flies.<\/p>\nThe sand fly inflicts a far more painful bite than the mosquito. Further, it does not betray itself by a buzzing noise in flight and is so small that it penetrates most mosquito netting.<\/p>\nGnats were drawn to wine while it was fermenting. The Pharisees in particular would strain their wine to avoid consuming unclean insects (Mt 23:24).<\/p>\nGoat<\/p>\nCloven-hooved mammals (genus Capra<\/em>) with large eyes and big, floppy ears that constantly twitch. Both males and females have backward arching horns. The Palestinian goat is a ruminant (cud-chewing animal) of lighter build than the sheep.<\/p>\nThe goat was probably the earliest ruminant to be domesticated. Its wild ancestor seems to have been the Gezoar goat (Capra aegagrus).<\/em> Wild goats are believed to have been domesticated very early in Palestine. The goat of Bible times was probably the Syrian or Mamber variety (Capra hircus mambrica).<\/em> Domesticated goats may have as many as four kids in a litter, whereas wild goats bear only one or two.<\/p>\nThe Palestinian goat was commonly black. Speckled and spotted goats were a rarity, and for that reason Jacob’s request for those goats in Genesis 30:32 appeared very modest. There may also have been red goats (cf. 1 Sm 16:12; 19:13, where goat’s hair was used to imitate David’s hair, which was “ruddy” or auburn).<\/p>\nAlmost every part of the goat was used by the Israelites. The whole goat was used for sacrifice. Its flesh served as meat (Lv 7:23; Dt 14:4), and it was the principal source of milk (Prv 27:27). Goats were sheared in the late spring, and the goat hair was used for weaving tent cloth and for various domestic purposes (Ex 36:14; 1 Sm 19:13, 16). The tabernacle at Mt Sinai was made of goat’s hair blankets (Ex 26:7).<\/p>\nAdult male goats were generally not eaten because of their strong flavor and toughness and also because they were necessary to insure the flock’s increase. Young kids, however, were usually the chief meat for a feast and were offered to visitors as a symbol of hospitality. Goat milk is richer than the milk of cows and sheep and evidently had broader uses. A good goat gives three quarts of milk a day, from which a rich butter and buttermilk can be made. The average Hebrew family could have lived almost entirely on a single goat’s production.<\/p>\nGoatskin was tanned as leather, and the whole hide was turned into a skin bottle by sewing shut leg and neck apertures (Gn 21:14; Jos 9:4). Goatskin had many uses, including the construction of Hebrew musical instruments. The nebal, a large harp, was made with goatskin for its base sound. Drums had goatskin coverings.<\/p>\nGoats were herded with sheep in biblical times, but each group remained separate following its own bell-laden leader. Jesus was evidently referring to their common herding in his description of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\nBecause of their wool, sheep are valued more than goats. However, where pasture and water are scarce and thorny shrubs dominate over grass, sheep are difficult to keep and goats become important. They can live under conditions that suit neither cows nor sheep, producing large quantities of milk. The goat does not supply fat as the sheep does, and since its hair is coarse its wool is rather scarce. Goat-hair cloth called cilicium was used to make tents.<\/p>\nGoats have voracious appetites. They also were responsible for much damage done to the land of Palestine, breaking down terraces, destroying forests, and bringing about soil erosion by eating off all cover.<\/p>\nThe goat was recognized as a form of wealth, subject to the law of firstlings (Nm 18:17). It had to be eight days old before it could be offered as a sacrifice. A year-old male goat was one of the animals offered at the Passover (28:22), and two goats were offered on the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:7-10). The goat was also used for other specific sacrifices.<\/p>\nThe ibex, a type of wild goat (Capra ibex nubiana),<\/em> still lives in small numbers on the cliffs close to the Dead Sea. That it was known in ancient times is evident from rock carvings. It is distinguished from the true wild goat by having a more compact rump and horns that are slender and curved back. Its slender legs and sharp cloven hooves enable it to cling to narrow rock ledges, to jump between them, and to climb steep cliffs.<\/p>\nUsually the ibex is found in rugged mountain country among rocky crags and meadows just below the snow line (Ps 104:18). In Job 39:1 they are referred to as “mountain goats.” They frequently gather in herds of 5 to 20. They graze and browse, being active in the afternoon and sometimes feeding through the night. The large horn of the ibex was at one period made into the shofar that was blown in the second Jerusalem temple to announce the new year and the jubilee year.<\/p>\nThe goat was often used in a figurative and symbolic sense by the writers of the Bible: in Song of Songs 4:1 and 6:5 for the bride’s black hair; in Matthew 25:31-46 for the wicked; and in Ezekiel 34:17 and Daniel 8:5-8 for various human leaders.<\/p>\nGrasshopper<\/p>\nLarge insects of the Orthoptera order. They have chewing or biting mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the front pair of which is narrow and somewhat thickened and the hind pair membranous and used for flying. When not in use the flight wings are folded beneath the protective front wings like a fan against the body. By rubbing their wings together, male grasshoppers produce sounds that both males and females can detect. Grasshoppers pass through a partial metamorphosis; the egg hatches into a juvenile nymph that looks like an adult except for its smaller size and undeveloped wings. After several months the nymph becomes a winged adult.<\/p>\nThe terms “grasshopper” and “locust” are often used interchangeably. Actually the locust is a kind of grasshopper. Also confusing is the fact that other insects such as cicadas are sometimes called locusts. The difference between grasshoppers and locusts depends more on behavior than appearance. Grasshoppers are individual insects that lead solitary lives and do not migrate. The same insects when migrating in a swarm are called migratory grasshoppers or locusts. Elimination of their food supply by drought, flood, or fire may lead to migration. Climatic factors such as a warm dry winter also stimulate migrations.<\/p>\nGrasshoppers and locusts have been a staple food in the Middle East and also among the Indians of the American Southwest. To the Israelites the grasshopper was considered ritually clean and could be eaten (Lv 11:22).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\nHare<\/p>\nAnimal of the genus and species Lepus europaeus judaeus, Lepus capensis,<\/em> and Lepus arabicus.<\/em> It is found in open country, often near or on cultivated lands, and in woods, usually deciduous rather than evergreen. It is an herbivorous rodent and is different from the rabbit, which is not found in Palestine. Although it is not a true ruminant according to modern classification (because it does not have a four-chambered stomach), the hare does rechew its food. It has a process of partial regurgitation of material too hard for the cells in the stomach to absorb initially; thus, the hare actually chews food previously swallowed.<\/p>\nNear Eastern hares have very long ears and large hind feet; their feet are well furred. They are similar to American jackrabbits, which are true hares. Hares do not dig or occupy burrows the way rabbits do. Hares are mainly nocturnal and spend their inactive hours hiding in vegetation. They eat grasses and herbaceous matter as well as twigs and young bark of woody plants. Hares breed with great rapidity—the young attaining sexual maturity at six months after birth.<\/p>\nThe hare was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:6; Dt 14:7), evidently because although it appeared to chew its cud, it did not have cloven hooves. Consumption of hares has also been forbidden among the Arabs, Chinese, and Lapps, but the hare was widely hunted by other people in ancient and modern times. Its great speed, prolific breeding, timidity, and caution have saved it from extermination by its many enemies.<\/p>\nHippopotamus<\/p>\nLarge beast of problematic interpretation. Some early interpreters thought it referred to the elephant, others to the wild ox, the mammoth, or any large animal. It was called “behemoth” by the kjv<\/span> translators. Today it is generally agreed that the reference is to the hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius),<\/em> a large, thick-skinned, amphibious mammal, an ungulate (having hooflike toenails) with a large head, a bulky, hairless body, and short legs.<\/p>\nThe description in Job 40:15-24 fits closely the modern hippopotamus (see nlt<\/span>), except for the depiction of the tail. At present the hippopotamus is found only in the rivers of Africa, but there is fossil evidence that it has existed in the Holy Land, perhaps in the swamps of northern Galilee and the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\nThe hippopotamus has highly developed sense organs, placed in such a way that it can see, hear, and smell almost without being seen; its eyes, ears, and nostrils can reach above water while the rest of the animal lies submerged. It has a large mouth, large tusks, and a short, heavy throat. The strong legs are so short that the belly almost reaches the ground when the animal is on the land. The hippopotamus lives on plants and herbs growing in rivers, but if food is scarce there, it forages on land, usually at night. In spite of its heavy body it is surprisingly agile on land.<\/p>\nHorse<\/p>\nPrzewalski’s horse (Equus przewalskii,<\/em> an eastern race that roamed about Mongolia until modern firearms destroyed most of them after World War I) and the tarpan (a western race of southern Russia that became extinct in the Ukraine in 1851). The domesticated horse (Equus caballus)<\/em> seems to have been derived from the tarpan. The original site of domestication is believed to have been Turkestan, a region north of Afghanistan and India, now in Russia. The horse differs from the donkey in that it has shorter ears, a longer mane with a forelock, a long hairy tail, and a soft, sensitive muzzle.<\/p>\nHorses were used in war not only for riding but also for pulling the heavy, springless war chariots. Two kinds of horses were needed for these different purposes, and the Hebrews distinguished between chariot horses and cavalry horses.<\/p>\n\nThe Lord warned the early Israelites against unnecessarily amassing military strength in the form of horses and thereby following the oppressive tactics of the powerful Egyptians (Dt 17:14-16), but the demands of war caused both David and Solomon to import horses from Egypt into their kingdoms and to breed them. Solomon greatly increased the number of horses in the Jewish kingdom and maintained large stables at various cities (1 Kgs 10:26) such as the regional defense centers of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer (1 Kgs 9:15-19). Ahab’s horses are mentioned in 1 Kings 18:5, and records of Shalmaneser III state that Ahab furnished 2,000 chariots to a coalition against Assyria.<\/p>\nIn early Israel, the horse was opposed as a symbol of pagan luxury and of dependence on physical power for defense (Dt 17:16; 1 Sm 8:11; Ps 20:7; Is 31:1). Horse trading, mentioned as early as Genesis 47:17, was carried on by Solomon between Egypt and the Syro-Hittite principalities (1 Kgs 10:28-29). Most biblical references to horses refer to their use in war, but horses were also used for transportation. Riding seems to have been less popular than the use of chariots. Cavalry units were not introduced until the 12th century BC<\/span> by the Medes. Joseph rode in Pharaoh’s second horse-drawn chariot (Gn 41:43), and Absalom made a display by riding a horse-drawn chariot (2 Sm 15:1). Naaman traveled by horse and chariot (2 Kgs 5:9). Later, horses were so common in Jerusalem that the royal palace had a special horse gate (2 Chr 23:15), and a gate of the city itself was known as the Horse Gate (Neh 3:28; Jer 31:40). Mordecai rode a royal horse of King Xerxes as a sign of honor (Est 6:8-11). Horses are often spoken of figuratively (Ps 32:9; “mare,” Sg 1:9; “stallions,” Jer 5:8; 12:5), especially in the context of judgment (Hb 3:8; Zec 1:8; 6:1-8; Rv 6:2-8; 9:17; 19:11-16).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Warfare; Travel.<\/p>\nHyena<\/p>\nStocky carnivore (Hyaena hyaena)<\/em> with coarse hair, an erect mane, and long hairs along the neck and back. Hyenas live in holes among rocks and banks. They are mainly nocturnal but are ordinarily neither noisy nor aggressive. Their cry, however, is a disagreeable, unearthly sound. Hyenas usually feed on carrion, crushing bones with their powerful jaws. If the carrion supply is inadequate, they will kill sheep, goats, or other small animals. When threatened, hyenas growl and erect their mane, but they rarely fight. They are massively built with forelegs longer than the hind legs.<\/p>\nKnown as scavengers in Africa, hyenas eat domestic refuse in the villages. In Palestine the striped hyena is a common predator, preferring rocky territory and even rock tombs. Since hyenas were notorious for raiding the graves of the dead, all Israelites who could afford it arranged for burial in tombs protected by massive stone doors. Absalom, King David’s son who was killed by Joab in the wild, was buried under a huge pile of stones to protect his corpse from molestation by hyenas (2 Sm 18:17).<\/p>\nJackal<\/p>\nCarnivore (Canis aureus)<\/em> smaller than the true wolf and with a shorter tail. It is similar to the fox but has a broader head, shorter ears, and longer legs. The fox is solitary; the jackal tends to be gregarious. Its tail can be drooping or erect, compared with the long horizontal tail of the fox. Jackals usually prowl at night, either singly, in pairs, or in packs through open savannah country. They eat small mammals, poultry, fruit, vegetables, and carrion. They spend their days in thickets and clumps of vegetation. Often they obtain scraps from kills by larger carnivores. Jackals can run at speeds of about 33 miles (53 kilometers) per hour.<\/p>\nThe jackal can reach a height of about 20 inches (51 centimeters), roughly the size of a German shepherd dog. Its back is pale yellow with dark, almost black, flanks. Its lips are black and its ears white on the inside. The howl of the jackal sounds like the crying of a child or the heartrending wail of the bereaved (Mi 1:8; cf. Jb 30:29). To other jackals the howl is merely an invitation calling the pack together for its nocturnal hunting.<\/p>\nOT references are chiefly to jackals prowling around ruined cities and wilderness areas (Neh 2:13; Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; Jer 9:11; 14:6; 49:33; 51:37; Lam 4:3; 5:18; Mal 1:3). Many such references are translated “dragon” in the kjv<\/span>, but “jackal” is more appropriate.<\/p>\nLeech<\/p>\nSegmented worm (class Hirundinea) up to five inches (12.7 centimeters) long with a flat body equipped with suction pads at each end. The mouth, located at the bottom of the front suction pad, has three teeth that the leech uses to pierce the skin of its host. The leech feeds on blood, and its glands secrete an anticoagulant to prevent the blood from clotting. The ordinary medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis) is abundant in springs and ponds from the Negev Desert to Galilee. It adheres to the bodies of human beings and animals that submerge themselves in water, injects its anticoagulant, and sucks their blood.<\/p>\nThe reference in Proverbs 30:15 is uncertain (see nlt<\/span>) but may be to the parasitic and greedy nature of the horse leech (genus Haemopis<\/em>). The small horse leech enters its host’s mouth and nostrils from water while the animal is drinking. A leech weighing one-half ounce (14.2 grams) has been known to gorge itself with two and a half ounces (71 grams) of concentrated blood and then to exist for 15 months with no more to eat.<\/p>\nLeopard<\/p>\nCalled Panthera pardus tulliana,<\/em> it is the most widespread of all the large wildcats. In rocky areas it lives in caves, but in forested regions it lives in thick vegetation. In OT times many lived in the vicinity of Mt Hermon (Sg 4:8).<\/p>\nThe leopard is somewhat smaller than the tiger, measuring up to 5 feet (1.5 meters) in length with a tail of about 30 inches (.8 meter). Its body is better proportioned than that of the tiger. The leopard takes its victim by surprise from a silent ambush, often concealing itself near villages or watering places and waiting for its prey, remaining in one spot for long spans of time. The leopard is swift on the ground (Hb 1:8), agile in trees, and very graceful in its movements. Its color is yellowish speckled with black spots (Jer 13:23). Daniel and John saw visions in which leopards were symbols of world powers (Dn 7:6; Rv 13:2).<\/p>\nThe leopard is a wary and cunning animal, formidable and ferocious (Jer 5:6; Hos 13:7; cf. Is 11:6). The leopard is dangerous not only to domestic animals but also to humans. With its natural camouflage it can hide on the forest floor, blending into the changing light and shadows. The Israelites were terrified of the leopard because it constantly ravaged their sheep and goats. Several biblical place names suggest that they were known for the leopards in their vicinity: Nimrah, Beth-nimrah, and Nimrim, a district northeast of the Dead Sea. It has survived in the Holy Land into the present century; a few leopards still exist in remote areas near Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\nLeviathan<\/p>\nSea monster mentioned several times in the Bible (Pss 74:14; 104:26; Is 27:1, nlt<\/span>). It may refer to any of the larger marine animals such as large jellyfish, whales, or sharks, or to a large reptile like the crocodile. Some scholars think “Leviathan” may refer to animals now extinct, such as ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs (marine reptiles similar to dinosaurs). The scriptural term might also refer to certain dinosaurs that spent part of their lives half-submerged in shallow lakes and oceans. Other scholars believe that most of the references are to the crocodile.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\nLion<\/p>\nLarge, tawny-colored carnivore (Panthera leo)<\/em> that preys chiefly on hoofed mammals and charges by a series of leaps and bounds. Within historic times the lion ranged in Africa, Europe, and the Holy Land. In ancient times the territories of the African and Persian lions met in the Middle East. The lion of the Holy Land was the Asiatic or Persian lion (Panthera leo persica).<\/em><\/p>\nThe males have heavy manes that stop at the shoulders but cover much of the chest. The Persian lion cannot climb and is mainly nocturnal, returning to its lair or a thicket by day (Jer 4:7; 25:38; Na 2:11-12). This lion is about 5 feet (1.5 meters) long with a tasseled tail 30 inches (.8 meter) or so long; its shoulders may reach a height of 35 inches (.9 meter). It is one of the smallest of the lion breeds.<\/p>\nLions are usually found in pairs, though sometimes in larger numbers. A small group is known as a pride. They generally prefer open country but in Palestine evidently prowled the subtropical vegetation of the Jordan River valley. Lions, which usually hunt at dusk, kill smaller animals by a blow of the paw, larger ones by a bite in the throat. A lion does not remain in the same place for more than a few days. The animal is in its prime at about seven years of age, when it weighs from 400 to 600 pounds (181.6 to 272.4 kilograms).<\/p>\nThe lion does not characteristically attack humans, though like other great cats it may become a man-eater (1 Kgs 13:24-28; 20:36; 2 Kgs 17:25-26; Ps 57:4; Dn 6:7-27). Ordinarily, it attacks only out of great hunger or in self-defense. A very young lion that attacks humans can become dangerous if it develops a taste for human flesh. A very old lion, expelled from the pride because it can no longer keep up in the pursuit of antelope or gazelles, may choose humans as a relatively slow-moving prey.<\/p>\nA lion generally roars only on a full stomach—that is, after it has consumed its prey (Ps 22:13; Ez 22:25; Am 3:4). Nevertheless, its roaring arouses fear (Am 3:8; 1 Pt 5:8). The lion is a bold (2 Sm 17:10; Prv 28:1), destructive animal (Ps 7:2; Jer 2:30; Hos 5:14; Mi 5:8), and the enemy of flocks (Am 3:12).<\/p>\nLions were common in biblical times in all parts of the Holy Land. Hebrew has at least seven words for lion and young lion. The lion is referred to about 130 times in the OT—more than any other wild animal. Lions were evidently much less common in NT times. After gradually declining, they became extinct in Palestine shortly after AD<\/span> 1300. The lion was present in Mesopotamia, however, until the end of the 19th century.<\/p>\nLions played an important part in the political and religious symbolism of the Near East (1 Kgs 10:19-20). In Assyria and Babylonia the lion was regarded as a royal beast (Dn 7:4). Oriental monarchs maintained artificial lion pits as places of execution (Ez 19:1-9; Dn 6:7-16). Animals for these were captured in camouflaged nets or pits. To the Jews, the lion was the mightiest of beasts (Prv 30:29-31). Thus, it symbolized leadership (Gn 49:9-10; Nm 24:9) and hence eventually became a title for Christ (Rv 5:5). It was also the ensign of Judah’s tribe and was used by King Solomon in the decoration of his house and the temple.<\/p>\nLizard<\/p>\nReptiles of the suborder Lacertilia. Their skin is covered with scales. The lizard is a useful creature because it captures harmful insects and worms. Like other reptiles, it lays eggs with shells softer than those of a bird and with no clear division between the yolk and the white. Lizards are “cold-blooded” organisms without a temperature-maintenance mechanism; hence, they become inactive in cold weather.<\/p>\nLizards can survive in barren parched countryside. In the Near East they are encountered in great numbers in the Arabian Desert, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Judean wilderness. There may be as many as 44 different species of lizards in the Holy Land.<\/p>\nThe Dabb lizard (genus Uromastyx<\/em>), which attains a length of about 24 inches (61 centimeters), is found in the Negev Desert. It is omnivorous, an unusual trait since most lizards are insectivorous. It has a hard, rough skin, green with brown spots; a short, rounded head; and a powerful tail encircled with a row of strong spines that it uses as a weapon of defense.<\/p>\nLizards are listed as ceremonially unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:29-31). The fact that lizards crawl on their bellies made them unclean. Contact with a lizard’s carcass defiled a law-abiding Jew (Lv 11:32-36). The nlt<\/span> translates the “lizards” of Leviticus 11 as “great lizard,” “gecko,” “monitor lizard,” “sand lizard,” and “chameleon.” The monitor lizard is a large lizard that lives in the deserts of southern Palestine, Sinai, and Egypt. It is up to 55 inches (1.4 meters) long with a long snout and sharp teeth. Other translators and commentators render the original Hebrew in a wide variety of ways, including “tortoise,” “ferret,” “lizard,” “snail,” “mole,” and even “water hen.” The fact that most of the original Hebrew words occur only once in Scripture makes it very difficult to be certain about their appropriate translation.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Gecko (above).<\/p>\nLocust<\/p>\nAn insect of the family Acridiidae.<\/em> It is referred to by at least 12 different names in Scripture. The various Hebrew words may refer to different stages of its development from larva to adult or to the type of damage that it causes. Locusts are characterized by swarming and mass migration. In modern times they have caused extensive and disastrous destruction to vegetation. Grasshoppers do not swarm or migrate en masse, differentiating them from the true locusts.<\/p>\nThe OT mentions several different species of locusts. Leviticus 11:22 seems to refer to the slant-faced (bald) locust and also to the katydid, or long-horned grasshopper. The reference in Deuteronomy 28:42 may be to the mole cricket. In Joel 1:4 and 2:25 and in Nahum 3:16-17, successive stages of the insect’s development are described. The cutting locust (kjv<\/span> “palmerworm”) of Joel is probably the first instar (stage of development), the swarming locusts (kjv<\/span> “locust”) are middle stages, and the hopping locusts (kjv<\/span> “cankerworm”) later instars but not yet fully matured insects. In the adult stage, called destroying locusts (kjv<\/span> “caterpillar”), the color of the locust is reddish brown, which turns to yellow with a brownish network on the wings.<\/p>\nOnly three of the hundreds of varieties of locusts found in Bible lands are capable of multiplying into great swarms, and only the desert locust (Schistocerca gergaria)<\/em> can be considered widespread in all the Bible lands. The desert locust is native to the Sudan (Africa). It is a little over two inches (5 centimeters) long and has a wingspread of some five inches (12.7 centimeters). It shows two phases, a solitary phase and a gregarious phase, with a possible third phase known as transiens. There are differences in the immature and adult forms of the phases in color and physiology.<\/p>\nThe quantity and distribution of rains are important factors in the extent of swarming. Moist soil is needed for depositing the eggs and permitting them to develop. Each female deposits from one to six egg pods, containing 28 to 146 eggs each. The larvae emerge in 15 to 43 days.<\/p>\nIn the gregarious phase (from the second stage of metamorphosis onward), the locust is driven by a strong wandering instinct. Masses of them form a random procession of overflowing locust bodies that ignore any obstruction. They swarm over everything (Jl 2:4-9). The only regulator of their activities is temperature; they are immobilized by high or low temperatures. Taking to wing they may move 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) from their native home. They fly in compact formations large enough to blot out the light of the sun. Their movement seems to be controlled by hormones, but the direction is influenced by the wind. The swarms consume almost every plant in their path, sparing only the carob, sycamore, castor tree, and oleander bush.<\/p>\nA locust plague was one of the most severe evils to come upon the ancient world (Dt 28:38). Joel 2:1-11 describes a locust plague in graphic terms, using it as a symbol of God’s destroying judgment. Special days of prayer, fasting, and trumpet blowing were prescribed to remove locust plagues (1 Kgs 8:37-38; 2 Chr 6:28-29; Jl 2:12-17). Locusts symbolized powerful and merciless enemies that completely destroyed the earnings of human toil (Jgs 6:5; Is 33:4; Jer 46:23; 51:27; Na 3:15).<\/p>\nBedouins eat locusts raw, roasted, or boiled, preserving them by drying and threading. They are also crushed and ground, and the grist used in cooking or eaten with bread, sometimes mixed with honey and dates. Such was the diet of John the Baptist (Mk 1:6). The Greeks ground locusts in stone mortars to make flour of them.<\/p>\nThe ancients considered the two large hind legs, or jumping legs, as separate limbs and had a special name for them. Hence locusts were described as having four legs, a reference to the four smaller walking legs. “Going on all fours” thus referred to creeping or walking as opposed to jumping and did not mean that the unclean insects had only four legs in all. Because of its two hind jumping legs, the locust was exempted from the prohibition against unclean insects (Lv 11:20-23).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\nMole<\/p>\nRodent (Spalax ehrenbergi)<\/em> from six to nine inches (15 to 23 centimeters) long, which burrows in any area where the soil is suitable for digging; it should be called a mole rat. Common in the Holy Land, large numbers are found in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:20 refers to the mole, as does Leviticus 11:29-30 (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe mole rat has no tail and is molelike in appearance, but neither true moles nor shrews have ever been found in the Holy Land. The mole rat’s teeth are strong and protruding like those of a squirrel. The neck is short and thick with a plump body shaped like a sausage. The short legs have broad paws with claws adapted for burrowing. The fur is soft, thick, and ashen gray. Its ears and almost sightless eyes, which are no larger than poppyseeds, are hidden in the fur. Folklore taught that touching a mole rat would result in blindness.<\/p>\nIn the wet winter season the mole rat builds breeding mounds resembling those of pocket gophers. It builds less complex resting mounds in the summer, although both have rather elaborate tunnel systems. The mole rat feeds on roots, bulbs, tubers, and various other subterranean plant parts, often doing extensive damage to agriculture.<\/p>\nMoth<\/p>\nInsect of the genus Tineola<\/em> that lays its eggs on wool or furs, its larvae feeding on those materials. The destructive qualities of moths are referred to in several biblical passages (Jb 13:28; Ps 39:11; Is 50:9; Hos 5:12; Mt 6:19-20; Lk 12:33; Jas 5:2). In Isaiah 51:8 “worm” (nlt<\/span>) refers specifically to the larva of the clothes moth. The moth symbolizes disintegration, decay, and weakening. It is only the larvae that do the damage. The adult is quite harmless and feeds mainly on the nectar of flowers. It is easily crushed (Jb 4:19). The clothes moth reproduces in May or June. It enters human dwellings in the evening. A week after the eggs are laid the larvae appear and immediately begin their work of destruction, eating anything within reach made of animal fibers.<\/p>\nThe moth’s destructive activity is done in secret without any sound and without any dramatic appearance, such as a swarm that blots out the sun. In an age when wealth was counted more in possessions than in money, and when among those possessions wool clothing was highly valued, moths could literally cause economic disaster; hence the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:19-20).<\/p>\nThere are hundreds of species of moths other than the clothes moth in the Holy Land; they are harmless to leaves, flowers, fruit, trees, and seeds. As with the clothes moth, the larvae inflict the damage.<\/p>\nMouse<\/p>\nRodent of the family Muridae, especially genus Mus.<\/em> The mouse was regarded as unclean because, being short legged, it was considered one of the creeping creatures (Lv 11:29). Mice known as commensals live in dwellings and tend to have longer tails and to be darker in color than wild mice, which are active chiefly at night. Mice are good climbers and even good swimmers. Wild mice eat many kinds of vegetation, including seeds, fleshy roots, leaves, and stems. At times they store food.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew word for “mouse” (Lv 11:29; 1 Sm 6:4-5; Is 66:17) is probably a general term for various rats and mice. The root meaning of the Hebrew word “mouse” is “destruction of corn,” a reference to the damage mice do to field crops. At least 23 varieties of mouselike rodents are known in the Holy Land. They cause food spoilage, damage household articles, and transport the host fleas that spread typhus, spotted fever, and bubonic plague. Plague bacteria may have caused the tumors or swellings among the Philistines (1 Sm 6:5). Isaiah 66:17 refers to a pre-exilic Canaanite cultic practice in which mice were eaten; the reference may actually be to the hamster. A number of rodents are eaten by Arabs of the Near East; the gerbil is considered a special delicacy. See<\/em> Mole (above).<\/p>\nMule<\/p>\nHybrid offspring of a male ass and a female horse (Equus asinus mulus),<\/em> ordinarily sterile. The offspring of a female donkey and a stallion (male horse) is known as a hinny and is of little value because of its inferior size.<\/p>\nBecause crossbreeding was forbidden in the law (Lv 19:19), the Israelites procured mules from the Gentiles, perhaps from the Phoenicians, since Tyre (a Phoenician seaport in what is now southern Lebanon) imported horses and mules (Ez 27:14). Mules did not appear in Israel until David’s reign (2 Sm 13:29), possibly because of the rarity of horses among the Hebrews. Mules were used chiefly by members of the royal court and by other nobles. King David rode on a mule, and Solomon rode to his inaugaration on King David’s mule (1 Kgs 1:33). Absalom met his death riding on a mule (2 Sm 18:9). Mules were less common than horses, camels, and asses in the postexilic community (Ezr 2:66). In antiquity Asia Minor was especially noted for breeding fine mules.<\/p>\nMules have long enjoyed a reputation for obstinacy, but that trait is not mentioned in the Bible. The mule is prized for riding and for carrying heavy burdens, especially in warm mountainous regions. They are sure-footed and thrive best in hot, dry climates. The mule has the frugality, endurance, and steady gait of an ass along with the size, strength, swiftness, and courage of a horse. Mules are almost never sick. They live longer than horses. They can carry a load of up to 300 pounds (136 kilograms) as far as 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) a day.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nPig<\/p>\nMost properly, newborn swine. “Swine” is technically the better name for the species, but it is rarely used in common speech today. The domestic pigs of the Middle East derived from the wild pig (Sus scrofa).<\/em> The pig is the most prolific and abundant supplier of meat and fat for food. A thick layer of fat just under the skin is especially pronounced in domestic breeds. Pigs cannot be driven, so they are of value only to the settled farmer. The Hebrews were originally a nomadic people; therefore, they had little use for an animal closely associated with settled life. An Egyptian prince of about 1500 BC<\/span>, however, is recorded as owning a herd of 1,500 swine.<\/p>\nThe pig is clumsily built, yet lively and able to move with agility and speed. The most conspicuous characteristic of the pig is a truncated, mobile snout terminating in a disc-shaped surface on which the nostrils are located. Most pigs have large tusks in both jaws which grow continuously in life. The tusks of the upper jaw are unique in that they curve upward instead of pointing downward as in most animals. The excrement of a pig has an almost unbearable odor, which clings not only to the pig itself but also to swineherds, who can be identified a long way off.<\/p>\nPigs were never raised in the Holy Land by Jews. The great herd into which Jesus drove the unclean spirits was encountered in the land of the Gadarenes, a non-Jewish area east of the Jordan. The Gadarene demons took refuge in a herd of pigs feeding on a bluff overlooking the Sea of Galilee (Mt 8:28-32).<\/p>\nWild pigs were found in the Holy Land as in many countries today. Psalm 80:13 refers to the destructiveness of a wild boar (the male, or hog) attacking growing crops. A party of wild boars can destroy an entire vineyard or a field of crops in a single night. They devour, trample, and ravage everything within reach.<\/p>\nBoar hunts were common in ancient Mesopotamia. Wild boars do not attack unless molested, but they are dangerous when aroused. They travel in bands of from 6 to 50 and are most active in the evening and early morning hours. The body is covered with stiff bristles and usually some finer hair, but the body covering is often quite scanty. Wild pigs are mainly vegetarian, feeding on roots, nuts, grains, and plant stems. Wild boars were particularly abundant in the mountainous regions of Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, in the Jordan River valley, and in wooded sections such as Mt Tabor.<\/p>\nStrict Jews would not even mention swine by name but would always substitute the term “the abomination.” Israelites considered themselves polluted if they were even touched by a swine’s bristle. To the Jews, the pig symbolized filth and ugliness. Pigs will eat fecal material, vermin, rodents, carrion, and the like (2 Pt 2:22). Proverbs 11:22 refers to the incongruity of a golden ring in the nose of an animal showing such characteristics. A similar metaphor occurs in Jesus’ statement about casting pearls before swine (Mt 7:6). The prodigal son’s degeneration was shown by his being forced in his poverty to feed pigs and eat their food (Lk 15:15-16).<\/p>\nEating the flesh of pigs was forbidden to the Jews (Lv 11:7; Dt 14:8). The Canaanites in the Holy Land killed and ate pigs freely. In intertestamental times Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), a Syrian king whose territories included Israel, used the pig to “Hellenize” the Jews. He first tested their loyalty to the Jewish faith by requiring the consumption of pork, considered a delicacy by the Greeks (2 Macc 6:18). The act of desecration that drove the Jews to rebellion, however, was the sprinkling of pig blood on the temple altar in a sacrifice to Zeus (1 Macc 1:47).<\/p>\nPigs were frequently used in pagan worship (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17), which may account for their being forbidden to the Jews as food. Evidence in the Holy Land shows that pigs were sacrificed long before Hellenistic times. Pig bones were found in a grotto below the rock-cut place of sacrifice at Gezer. A similar underground chamber with vessels containing piglet bones at Tirzah dates to the middle Bronze Age (about 2000 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nAlabaster fragments of a statuette of a pig ready to be sacrificed have been unearthed. Swine were sacrificed to Aphrodite (Venus) in Greece and Asia Minor. In addition, pigs were sacrificed in connection with oaths and treaties; in the Iliad,<\/em> Agamemnon sacrificed a boar to Zeus and Helios. So it is not surprising that among the Jews the pig became a symbol of filthiness and paganism.<\/p>\nIt is possible that eating pork was forbidden primarily because the pig may carry many worm parasites such as trichina, though that is also true of some “clean” animals. Another reason for forbidding their consumption may have been that pigs eat carrion. Some people are allergic to pork in hot weather—another suggested reason behind the Jewish taboo. The same taboo exists among the Muslims and existed in certain social strata in Egypt.<\/p>\nPorcupine<\/p>\nRodent, Hystrix cristata,<\/em> which lives in forested areas, rocky hills, ravines, and valleys. The porcupine is still found in the Holy Land today. It has long quills that can be raised to give the appearance of a crest. It is almost entirely nocturnal. It burrows by day into a natural cavity or crevice. The Old World porcupine rarely climbed trees, although the New World porcupine frequently does. A porcupine may weigh as much as 60 pounds (27.2 kilograms). It eats fruit, bark, roots, and other vegetation, and carrion as well. Although its flesh is edible, the porcupine was not classed among the clean animals for the Israelites. The reference in Isaiah 34:11 (rsv<\/span>) is probably to the porcupine, as is Isaiah 14:23 in the nlt<\/span>. See<\/em> Hedgehog.<\/p>\nScorpion<\/p>\nArthropod of the same group as spiders (arachnids). A dozen species of scorpions (order Scorpionida) are found in the Holy Land, but 90 percent of the scorpions are yellow scorpions, usually three to five inches (7.6 to 12.7 centimeters) long. The rock scorpion, also common to the Holy Land, is as thick as a man’s finger and from five to seven inches (12.7 to 17.8 centimeters) in length. Scorpions are slow, nocturnal invertebrates that rest beneath stones by day and prey on insects and other arachnids by night. At the end of its long tail the scorpion carries a poisonous sting that is fatal to most prey and extremely painful to humans (Rv 9:3, 5, 10; cf. 1 Kgs 12:11, 14). Scorpions symbolize Ezekiel’s evil countrymen (Ez 2:6) and the demonic forces of Satan (Lk 10:19). The scorpion is referred to as frequenting the Sinai Desert (Dt 8:15).<\/p>\nA scorpion has from six to eight eyes. It has eight legs like a spider and two lobsterlike claws with which it catches and holds its prey. It feeds particularly on locusts and beetles. In many species the female scorpion eats the male after mating. Scorpions lay eggs that hatch very shortly after laying. Scorpions prefer warmer climates, and because of their desire for warmth, enter houses, especially at night, hiding in beds, blankets, footwear, and clothing.<\/p>\nSheep<\/p>\nDomestic animal, Ovis orientalis,<\/em> referred to directly or by some term such as ewe, lamb, ram, or by some fact concerning them over 700 times in Scripture.<\/p>\nSheep represented the chief wealth and total livelihood of pastoral peoples, providing food to eat, milk to drink, wool for the making of cloth, and hides and bones for other uses. In addition, the sheep was a medium of exchange and a sacrificial animal. The number of sheep raised in ancient times was prodigious. Mesha, king of Moab, paid a tribute annually of 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams (2 Kgs 3:4). The Israelites took 250,000 sheep from the Hagrites (1 Chr 5:21).<\/p>\nSheep shearing was often done for festivals (2 Sm 13:23). The sheep was held down on its side and its legs were tied together; then it lay docilely while its wool was clipped (Is 53:7). Sheep reserved for burnt offerings were not shorn; nothing could be held back from a sacrifice to the Lord.<\/p>\nWool had to be processed before it could be used for clothing. First it was washed, sometimes while still on the sheep, then carded and perhaps weighed for the market. The spinning of wool was regarded as a woman’s work (Prv 31:19), but weaving the spun thread into cloth on a loom was primarily a man’s occupation.<\/p>\nThe Bible reports that Abel kept sheep (Gn 4:2). The first sheep to be domesticated was probably the argali (Ovis ammon),<\/em> a variety of the urial (Ovis vignei),<\/em> a mountainous species still existing in Turkestan and Mongolia. Five breeds had reached Mesopotamia by 2000 BC<\/span>; all were of the urial stock.<\/p>\nThe sheep known in Israel was the broad-tailed sheep (Ovis orientalis vignei<\/em> or laticaudata),<\/em> of which the tail weighs from 10 to 15 pounds (4.5 to 6.8 kilograms) and has always been considered a delicacy. Thus the Lord asked for this choice part as a sacrifice (Ex 29:22-25).<\/p>\nOnly the ram of the broad-tailed sheep has horns, but in other varieties of sheep in the Holy Land the ewe also has horns. The horns, two to three inches (5 to 8 centimeters) in diameter, can be potent weapons. Rams’ horns could be used as trumpets (Jos 6:4) or as oil containers (1 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\nAlthough the sheep is very similar to the goat, it is differentiated by a lower forehead, its angulated spiral horns marked with transverse wrinkles and curved slightly outward, its covering of wool, and its lack of a “goatee.” Most sheep are white (Ps 147:16; Is 1:18; Dn 7:9; Rv 1:14).<\/p>\nThe flesh of sheep was a luxury in the biblical culture. King Solomon required a daily provision of 100 sheep for his table (1 Kgs 4:23), but the common people ate lamb or mutton only on festive occasions. A young ram was usually chosen because the ewes were more important to the future prospects of the herd. The meat was boiled in large caldrons. The milk of the sheep is extremely rich; in biblical times it was usually allowed to curdle before drinking. Possibly some Israelites kept lambs in their houses as pets (2 Sm 12:3-4).<\/p>\nTo protect the flock at night against predatory attacks, the shepherd tried to provide a fold. In meadows near villages, folds were built and watchmen were hired to relieve the shepherds. The shepherds of the nativity story were out in the field (Lk 2:8); they had no fold but probably had set up a tent for shelter, consisting simply of goat-hair blankets spread across sapling supports. The scarcity of springs in the Holy Land made the watering of the flock a crucial problem for the shepherd (Gn 13:8-11).<\/p>\nWild mountain sheep, varieties of Ovis orientalis,<\/em> are known in the Mediterranean area (Dt 14:5). The Deuteronomy passage (kjv<\/span> “chamois”) might also refer to Ovis traelaphus,<\/em> a sheep about five feet high (1.5 meters) with long, curved horns. Another possibility is the Barbary sheep that lives in small flocks in rugged mountain areas in Barbary, Egypt, and Mt Sinai. The true chamois is unknown in Palestine.<\/p>\nThe sheep is also used figuratively in Scripture. The ram represented great strength and fittingly symbolized Medo-Persia in Daniel’s vision (Dn 8:3). It is the nature of sheep to be gentle and submissive (Is 53:7; Jer 11:19), defenseless (Mi 5:8; Mt 10:16), and in constant need of guidance and care (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36). Such qualities are regarded as desirable in the lives of believers in Christ; hence the many figurative references to sheep in the NT and to Jesus as shepherd (Mk 6:34; Jn 10:1-30; Rom 8:35-37; Heb 13:20-21; 1 Pt 2:25). The resurrected Christ told the apostle Peter to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep” (Jn 21:15-17).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\nSnail<\/p>\nInvertebrate gastropods (mollusks). Land snails are very numerous in the Near East. Some freshwater forms serve as hosts for the schistosome worm, the fluke parasite causing the dread disease bilharzia (schistosomiasis).<\/p>\nPurple dyes of all shades were highly valued in the ancient world. A royal purple dye was obtained from secretions of a sea snail (Murex trunculus<\/em> and Murex brandaris).<\/em> Evidently, that process was developed by Phoenicians, Egyptians, and Assyrians as early as 1500 BC<\/span>. The “purple” fishermen had their own guild during the time of the Roman Empire. The snails were harvested during the fall and winter seasons; in the spring, when egg laying took place, little dye was available. The snails tended to remain concealed in the summer. They inhabited the waters off Crete and Phoenicia. Tyrian purple, produced in the Phoenician city of Tyre, the center of the purple-dye industry, was obtained by a double dyeing. Large deposits of murex shells from dyeing operations have been found along the Mediterranean shoreline. The Israelites had to import purple goods (Ez 27:16). Lydia was a “seller of purple” or of cloth so dyed (Acts 16:14). Purple was a sign of distinction, royalty, and wealth (cf. Ex 25:4; 28:5-6, 15; Nm 15:38; 2 Chr 2:7; Est 8:15; Prv 31:22; Sg 3:10; Ez 27:7; Dn 5:7).<\/p>\nExodus 30:34-35 refers to “onycha,” which was an important ingredient of incense. Onycha is the horny, clawlike operculum (the plate that closes off the opening of its shell when a snail is retracted) of a Near Eastern member of the molluskan family Strombidae. The operculum is sometimes used for offense or locomotion as well as for defense. When burned, the operculum gives off a sharp, strong scent, and when mixed with more fragrant but less powerful substances is even more potent. The name “onycha” is derived from a Greek word (onyx)<\/em> for a fingernail or a claw.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>\nSnake<\/p>\nVarious species of snake, suborder Ophidia (Serpentes). In the Bible nine Hebrew words and four Greek ones refer to snakes. The most common Hebrew word is onomatopoeic—that is, it is an imitation of a snake hissing or of the sound it produces as it scrapes its scales along the ground (cf. Jer 46:22). Many types of snakes lay eggs (Is 59:5), although some retain the eggs in the body until ready to hatch.<\/p>\nSnakes are among the most widespread reptiles and are found on all continents except Antarctica; they decrease in numbers and species toward the poles but increase as one approaches the equator. Thirty-three species of snakes are known in Palestine and neighboring countries, 20 of which are poisonous. Two dangerous characteristics of the snake noted by biblical writers are its inconspicuous way of moving and the ease with which it hides itself.<\/p>\nMany snakes are able to swallow animals several times their own diameter because of their unusually flexible jaw mechanism. They lack not only legs but also movable eyelids. Snakes periodically shed their skins. The tongue is actually a hearing apparatus sensitive to airborne vibrations and probably to heat waves.<\/p>\nThe venom of poisonous species is a clear, thin secretion, transmitted to the victim’s bloodstream by means of fangs. Two types of venom are known: that of the vipers, which affects respiration and disintegrates red blood cells, and that of the cobras, which paralyzes the nervous system.<\/p>\nThe “asp” referred to in the Bible is probably the cobra; the “adder” is the viper. The “cockatrice” (kjv<\/span>) is probably the adder. Serpents were associated with worship in Canaanite religion and symbolized evil deities among many other peoples. Steles (upright stones bearing inscriptions) have been unearthed at several sites in the Holy Land and Syria depicting a god or worshiper with a snake winding about the legs or body. Because the Israelites were burning incense in pagan worship of Moses’ bronze serpent (Nm 21:8-9), King Hezekiah destroyed it in his religious reform (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\nAlthough snakes have been an object of veneration in some religions, in the Judeo-Christian tradition snakes represent evil and, more specifically, the devil. That association began in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:1-15) and is also found in the book of Revelation (12:9; 20:2-3).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Adder (above); Asp (above).<\/p>\nSpider<\/p>\nAnimal of the order Araneida. Between 600 and 700 different species inhabit the Holy Land. Spiders are different from insects in that, like scorpions, they have four pairs of legs instead of three. Spiders are equipped with poison glands—the effectiveness varying from species to species. A few can kill only insects, but others can also kill birds and mice.<\/p>\nMost spiders have a pair of spinnerets attached to silk glands on the underside of the abdomen; from them a web is extruded. In the Bible the spider’s web is referred to as a symbol of frailty and insecurity (Jb 8:14; Is 59:5-6).<\/p>\nSponge<\/p>\nSimple marine animals, phylum Porifera. The term “sponge” also refers to those animals’ skeletal remains. The sponge has a porous body composed of tubules and cells.<\/p>\nSponge fishing was well known in the Mediterranean area in ancient times. It was practiced particularly along the Anatolian and Syrian coasts. Sponges were harvested by divers. The use of sponges in absorbing liquids is referred to in the Bible (Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36).<\/p>\nUnicorn<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Wild Ox (below).<\/p>\nWasp<\/p>\nInsects of the family Vespidae. Hornets are social wasps that build large aerial apartment houses in which 1,000 or more individuals may live. In the Bible the hornet is used as a metaphor for God’s use of military forces (Ex 23:28; Dt 7:20; Jos 24:12).<\/p>\nWhale<\/p>\nLargest of all living creatures, including those that have become extinct. Whales are air-breathing mammals of the order Cetacea.<\/p>\nTwo varieties of whales visit the shores of the Holy Land at times. The finback whale (Balaenoptera physalus)<\/em> weighs about 200 tons (181 metric tons) and lives mainly in the Arctic region but sometimes passes through the Straits of Gibraltar to reach the eastern Mediterranean Sea. It feeds on small marine organisms that it strains through its whale bone; it does not have teeth. The finback whale’s esophagus is narrow.<\/p>\nThe sperm whale (Physeter catodon),<\/em> about 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, has a curiously shaped head that looks like a battering ram. The teeth in the lower jaw of the male sperm whale are about seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long. It feeds on big fish, even on sharks. It has a large throat opening.<\/p>\nWhales are referred to in Genesis 1:21 and Job 7:12 (kjv<\/span> only). The “great fish” of Jonah 2:1 need not have been a whale but could have been a large shark, such as the whale shark (Rhineodon),<\/em> which grows 70 feet (21.3 meters) long and lacks the terrible teeth of other sharks. Whatever the actual marine organism, Jonah’s deliverance was miraculous. The Greek word for “whale” is sometimes used as a general term for “sea monster” or huge fish and may be used in that sense in Matthew 12:40.<\/p>\nWild Ox<\/p>\nLarge, fierce, fleet, intractable animal (Bos primigenius).<\/em> It had a long, lean rump with a straight back and a long, narrow head. The animal described in Job 39:9-12 is clearly the wild ox. The two horns (Dt 33:17), its outstanding characteristic, were straight and as long as the head (Nm 23:22; 24:8; Ps 22:21). Kings often symbolized their dominion by wearing a helmet with two wild ox horns (cf. Pss 92:10; 132:17-18). The horns were often used as drinking vessels by the Israelites; some were large enough to hold four gallons (15 liters).<\/p>\nHunting the wild ox was a favorite sport of Assyrian kings. Tiglath-pileser I hunted it in the Lebanon Mountains about 1100 BC<\/span> (cf. Ps 29:6). At one time the animal referred to in Job 39:9-12 was thought to be the oryx or antelope because of the similarity between the Hebrew word in Job and the Arabian name for oryx. The translators of the kjv<\/span> called the wild ox a “unicorn” because of representations found on Babylonian mosaics and Egyptian drawings. Those representations showed it in strict profile, showing only one horn—hence, “unicorn.” Jerome’s Vulgate, a Latin Bible translation (fourth century AD<\/span>) and Martin Luther’s German version translated it similarly.<\/p>\nWolf<\/p>\nLarge doglike mammal (Canis lupus)<\/em> that travels in bands of up to 30 animals. From the nose to the rump, the wolf measures about 3 feet (.9 meter); its drooping tail is about 18 inches (.5 meter) long. It looks much like a skinny German shepherd dog. The grayish yellow pelt is coarse and short haired.<\/p>\nWolves hunt singly or in relays, usually at night (Jer 5:6). Wolves have acute hearing and sight but rely chiefly on scent and usually catch their prey in a swift, open chase. The wolf has a reputation for boldness, fierceness, and voracity (Gn 49:27; Hb 1:8). It commonly kills more than it can eat or drag away and thus is known for its greediness.<\/p>\nThe wolf is a restless animal, always on the move; hunger drives it from one place to another in constant search of new hunting grounds. During spring and fall, wolves usually roam singly or in pairs, whereas in summer they may travel in family groups. In winter, several such groups may join to form a large pack. Wolves are intelligent, social creatures, faithful to their own kind. They mate for life. Individually, the wolf is a rather timid animal; it would much rather avoid human beings. But collectively wolves can be among the most dangerous animals alive.<\/p>\nIn Egypt, Rome, and Greece the wolf was considered sacred. Wolves were well known in the Holy Land and are still found there and also in many places in Asia Minor. Shepherds continually battled with wolves that plundered their flocks (Jn 10:12).<\/p>\nThe Bible refers to wolves in a literal sense in only three places (Is 11:6; 65:25; Jn 10:12), all other references being figurative. Usually the wolf is a symbol of enemies or the wicked (e.g., Ez 22:27; Zep 3:3; Acts 20:29). Both the wolf’s courage and its cruelty were probably in the mind of the patriarch Jacob when he predicted the fate of Benjamin’s tribe (Gn 49:27).<\/p>\nWorm<\/p>\nActually insect larvae in most biblical references, usually maggots, the larvae of flies (see Fly, above). For example, maggots are evidently referred to in accounts of worms feeding on spoiled manna (Ex 16:19-20), corpses (Jb 21:26; Is 14:11), or open wounds (Jb 7:5). Mark 9:48 refers to a maggot that eats dead flesh. In Acts 12:23 a fatal, worm-induced abdominal disease of King Herod is mentioned. In other cases, the reference is to the larvae of other insects (Is 51:8). In Deuteronomy 28:39 and Jonah 4:7 the vine weevil (Cochylis ambiguella)<\/em> is probably referred to; it destroys vines by boring into their stems. Comparing a man to a worm is a metaphor for abasement (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANIMALS<\/h3>\nIn biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals as object lessons.<\/p>\nThe biblical approach to classification of animals is somewhat different from the system of classification used by biologists today. The present system of classification, which traces back to Carolus Linnaeus (an 18th-century Swedish botanist), is based on structure, both internal and external. The biblical basis of classification is habitat. Thus Genesis 1 speaks of aquatic organisms (v 20); aerial organisms (v 21); animals that crawl on the ground (v 24); cattle or domesticated animals (animals that live in association with humans) (v 24); and wild animals (v 24). The same system of classification is followed in Leviticus 11 and throughout Scripture.<\/p>\nBecause of the divergence between systems of classification, the various animals of the Bible will be listed here in alphabetical order—including reptiles, fish, and even invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms, and sponges. Birds are discussed in a separate article.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Adder<\/p>\n• Ant<\/p>\n• Antelope<\/p>\n• Ape<\/p>\n• Asp<\/p>\n• Ass<\/p>\n• Badger<\/p>\n• Bat<\/p>\n• Bear<\/p>\n• Bee<\/p>\n• Behemoth<\/p>\n• Camel<\/p>\n• Caterpillar<\/p>\n• Cattle<\/p>\n• Chameleon<\/p>\n• Coral<\/p>\n• Cricket<\/p>\n• Crocodile<\/p>\n• Deer<\/p>\n• Dog<\/p>\n• Donkey<\/p>\n• Dragon<\/p>\n• Fish<\/p>\n• Flea<\/p>\n• Fly<\/p>\n• Fox<\/p>\n• Frog<\/p>\n• Gazelle<\/p>\n• Gecko<\/p>\n• Gnat<\/p>\n• Goat<\/p>\n• Grasshopper<\/p>\n• Hare<\/p>\n• Hippopotamus<\/p>\n• Horse<\/p>\n• Hyena<\/p>\n• Jackal<\/p>\n• Leech<\/p>\n• Leopard<\/p>\n• Leviathan<\/p>\n• Lion<\/p>\n• Lizard<\/p>\n• Locust<\/p>\n• Mole<\/p>\n• Moth<\/p>\n• Mouse<\/p>\n• Mule<\/p>\n• Pig<\/p>\n• Porcupine<\/p>\n• Scorpion<\/p>\n• Sheep<\/p>\n• Snail<\/p>\n• Snake<\/p>\n• Spider<\/p>\n• Sponge<\/p>\n• Unicorn<\/p>\n• Wasp<\/p>\n• Whale<\/p>\n• Wild Ox<\/p>\n• Wolf<\/p>\n• Worm<\/p>\n\nAdder<\/p>\nOne of the 20 poisonous snakes found in Israel and surrounding countries, also referred to as cockatrice and viper. True vipers (genus Cerastes, Echis colorata,<\/em> and Vipera palestina<\/em>) also exist there, poisonous snakes with curved fangs that spring into position when the snake strikes. The horned viper (Cerastes hasselquistii)<\/em> may attack horses. It is 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 centimeters) long and often lies in ambush in the sand with only its eyes and the hornlike protrusions on its head visible.<\/p>\nBoth Jesus and John the Baptist referred to the viper several times (Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33). The reference in Acts 28:3 is probably to a small viper (Vipera aspis)<\/em> that strikes rapidly and is very pugnacious. It is found in southern Europe and hisses each time it inhales and exhales. The poison of vipers attacks the respiratory system and disintegrates red blood cells.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\nAnt<\/p>\nMentioned only twice in the Bible, both times in the book of Proverbs. For many years Solomon was charged with a biological error when he referred to the ant as providing her meat in the summer and gathering her food in the harvest (Prv 6:8). Critics of the Bible were quick to point out that, so far as was then known, ants do not store up food. They assumed that Solomon had probably kicked open an ant hill and mistaken the pupal cases (pods in which immature ants grow to maturity) for grain or had observed ants carrying bits of grain, leaves, and other matter to their nests.<\/p>\nAt least three species of grain-storing ants are now known—two occur in Israel and the other in Mediterranean countries. The particular species referred to by Solomon (Prv 6:6-8; 30:24-25) is probably the harvester ant (Messor semirufus).<\/em> Its granaries are flat chambers connected by galleries irregularly scattered over an area about six feet (1.8 meters) in diameter and about a foot (.3 meter) deep in the ground. Seeds are collected from the ground or picked from plants. The head, or radicle, which is the softest part of the kernel, is bitten off to prevent germination, and the chaff and empty capsules are discarded on kitchen middens (refuse piles) outside the nest. Individual granaries may be 5 inches (12.7 centimeters) in diameter and a half inch (1.2 centimeters) high. Some nests are known to be 40 feet (12 meters) in diameter and 6 to 7 feet (approx. 2 meters) deep with several entrances.<\/p>\nAntelope<\/p>\nSeveral antelope-like creatures are referred to in the Scriptures. One seems to be the white oryx (Oryx leucoryx),<\/em> referred to in Deuteronomy 14:5 (kjv<\/span> “wild ox”; rsv<\/span> “antelope”) and Isaiah 51:20 (kjv<\/span> “wild bull”; RSV <\/span>“antelope”). The oryx was probably the antelope, commonly used for food because its long horns made it relatively easy to catch.<\/p>\nAnother antelope mentioned in the Bible is the addax (Addax nasomaculatus),<\/em> probably the “pygarg” of Deuteronomy 14:5 (kjv<\/span>). It is a native of North Africa with grayish white hinder parts, a white patch on the forehead, and twisted and ringed horns. The word “pygarg” comes from a Greek word meaning “white rump.” The addax is about the size of a donkey. Its body is closely covered with short hair. It has a short mane on the underside of its neck that makes the head look somewhat like that of a goat. The hooves are broad and flat, and the tail resembles that of a donkey. It is common in Africa and in Arabia, where Arabs hunt it with falcons and dogs.<\/p>\nAntelopes are very graceful and run with their heads held high. Both sexes have long, permanent, hollow horns. With the oryx the horns go straight back; addax horns are twisted and ringed. Antelope are alert, wary, and keen sighted. They are usually found in herds of from two to a dozen. If injured or brought to bay, an antelope attacks with its head lowered so that the sharp horns point forward. Antelopes feed on grasses and shrubs, drinking from streams and water holes. When water is scarce, they eat melons and succulent bulbs. Both addax and oryx were ceremonially clean in Jewish law.<\/p>\nApe<\/p>\nPrimate not native to Palestine. The two references to apes in the OT (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) refer to their importation by King Solomon with other treasures on board the ships of his mercantile fleet. There is some question concerning the origin of those primates. Some believe that the mention of “ivory” in the same verses suggests they came from East Africa and that they were indeed apes, that is, tailless primates. Others, believing they came from India or Ceylon, suggest that they were actually monkeys. There the baboon (genus Papeio), a large monkey, was considered sacred to the god Thoth. Males of that genus were kept in temples, and the more docile females were often kept as house pets. Such baboons frequently had some of their teeth removed or ground down to lessen the danger of their biting. A number of mummified baboons have been found in Egypt, indicating the high regard in which they were held.<\/p>\nAsp<\/p>\nPoisonous snake. Most biblical references to the asp (Dt 32:33) seem to be to the Egyptian cobra (Naja haje),<\/em> which conceals itself in holes, walls, and rocks and has the ability to expand its neck by raising its anterior ribs so as to enlarge the front of its breast into the shape of a flat disc. Its potent poison can cause death in 30 minutes. It attains a length of about 80 inches (2 meters). The fangs are permanently erect, not movable as in the vipers (the common poisonous snakes of North America; only the coral snake in America has permanently erect fangs). Cobra poison attacks the nervous system, causing muscular paralysis. The Egyptians looked upon it as a sacred creature; they regarded it as a protector since it fed on the rodents that ate their crops. The “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:6; Dt 8:15, both rsv<\/span>) may have been cobras; “fiery” probably refers to the burning fever caused by their venom. Isaiah 14:29 and 30:6 (“flying serpent”) may refer to the hood of the cobra.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\nAss<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Donkey (below).<\/p>\nBadger<\/p>\nSmall hoofed mammal. What the kjv<\/span> calls a “coney,” modern translations name “rock badger” (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7; Ps 104:18; Prv 30:26). The rock badger spoken of in the Bible is probably the Syrian rock hyrax (Hyrax syriaca),<\/em> the only species of hyrax found outside Africa. This small ungulate (having hooflike toenails) lives among rocks from the Dead Sea valley to Mt Hermon. It is strictly a herbivorous (plant-eating) animal about the size of a rabbit. It resembles a guinea pig more than a rabbit, having quite inconspicuous ears and a very small tail. It has broad nails with four toes on its forelegs and three on its hind legs, the toes being connected with skin almost like a web. Pads acting as sucking discs under its feet enable it to keep its footing on slippery rocks. With its yellow and brown fur, it is sometimes called the bear rat because of its resemblance to a tailless rat. It is also equipped with black whiskers that may be seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long.<\/p>\nThese rock badgers, or hyraxes, live together in colonies of from 6 to 50 animals, often sunning themselves on rocks. They are difficult to catch. Guards are posted, and if approaching danger is sighted, the whole group will scurry for cover, warned by the sharp whistles of the guards. Thus they are commended for taking refuge in the rocks (Ps 104:18) and are called wise for making “their houses in the rocks” (Prv 30:24, 26, kjv<\/span>). The badger is not a ruminant (does not chew its cud), but the motion of its jaws may suggest that it chews its cud. That is probably why it was included with other cud-chewing animals in the Jewish food laws (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7). It was forbidden to the Jews as food because it did not have cloven hooves. Some Arabs eat and even prize its meat.<\/p>\nBat<\/p>\nFlying mammals according to modern classification. They have hair and provide milk for their young. The Bible classifies them with other aerial creatures. Bats take shelter in caves, crevices, tree cavities, buildings, and also in exposed places on trees. In colder areas they hibernate or migrate. The normal resting position for a bat is hanging head downward. Bats “swim” through the air rather than fly because they move with their legs as well as with their wings.<\/p>\nThe bat’s thumb is free and terminates in a single hook claw used for climbing and hanging. The hind feet have five toes, all pointing the same way. The large chest accommodates the powerful muscles needed for flying. Because they orient themselves by echo location, the sense of hearing is very well developed.<\/p>\nMost bats are insect eaters, seizing insects in flight. Many insectivorous bats also eat some fruit. Other bats feed exclusively, usually in groups, on fruit and green vegetation. Fruit-eating bats generally live in the tropics where fruit is constantly ripening, although some have been found in the Holy Land. These bats tend to be larger than the insectivores, having a wingspread of up to five feet (1.5 meters).<\/p>\nA third group includes flower-eating bats that feed on pollen and nectar. These small bats with long pointed heads and long tongues are found only in tropical and semitropical regions. Three species of vampire bats, which do not occur in the Holy Land, eat blood by making a small incision and lapping it up. Carnivorous (meat-eating) bats prey on birds, lizards, and frogs. Fish-eating bats catch fish at or near the water surface.<\/p>\nEight varieties of bats are known in the Holy Land. One of them, the little brown bat (genus Myotis<\/em>), is worldwide in its distribution. It is insectivorous and probably has the widest distribution of any nonhuman terrestrial mammal. Brown bats are mostly cave dwellers. The females form maternity colonies that may number in the tens of thousands.<\/p>\nTwo species of mouse-tailed bats (genus Rhinopoma<\/em>) are found in the Holy Land. Their tails are nearly as long as the head and body combined. They are colonial, roosting in caves, rock clefts, wells, pyramids, palaces, and houses. Like the brown bat, they are insectivorous. The slit-faced or hollow-faced bats (genus Nycteris<\/em>) are also found in the Holy Land. They are insectivorous and roost in groups from 6 to 20.<\/p>\nThe bats found in the Holy Land vary in size from that of a mouse to the size of a rat; the largest species measures more than 20 inches (51 centimeters) across the wings. The bat was unclean to the Jews (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\nBear<\/p>\nLarge, heavy, big-headed mammal with short, powerful limbs, a short tail, and small eyes and ears. Bears have a “plantigrade” walk: they walk on both the sole and heel as humans do. The Palestinian bear is a Syrian version of the brown bear (Ursus arctos syriacus).<\/em> It can grow to a height of 6 feet (1.8 meters) and may weigh as much as 500 pounds (227 kilograms).<\/p>\nBears have an excellent sense of smell but less developed senses of sight and hearing. They are omnivorous (eating any kind of food); they subsist largely on vegetation, fruits, insects, and fish.<\/p>\nBears are usually peaceful and inoffensive, but if they think they must defend themselves (Lam 3:10) or their young (2 Sm 17:8; Prv 17:12; Hos 13:8), they may be formidable and dangerous adversaries. David boasted of his role as a bear killer (1 Sm 17:34-37). Since a blow from a bear’s paw can be fatal, David’s courage and strength as a young shepherd in running after a bear and wrenching one of his father’s sheep from its jaws were noteworthy.<\/p>\nSome biblical passages seem to imply that bears attacked for no apparent reason (e.g., Prv 28:15; Am 5:19). At other times they were God’s instruments of punishment, as in the story of Elisha and the two she-bears (2 Kgs 2:24). The bear and the lion, often mentioned together in the Bible (1 Sm 17:37), were the two largest and strongest beasts of prey in the Holy Land. Thus they symbolized both strength and terror (Am 5:19).<\/p>\nIn biblical times bears seem to have roamed all over Palestine. Today they are found only in the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains, and even there they are rare.<\/p>\nBee<\/p>\nOne of two domesticated insects (Apis mellifica),<\/em> the other being the silkworm. Bees gather nectar from flowers, transferring pollen from one flower to another in the process. It is believed that they convey the location of sources of nectar to other bees through a bee “dance,” which may indicate both distance and direction. Bees are sensitive to four colors: blue-green, yellow-green, blue-violet, and ultra-violet (invisible to humans).<\/p>\nThe wild bees of the Holy Land are especially noted for their ferocity in attack. Only the female “worker” bees sting people and animals, the virulence of their venom increasing in warm weather. A number of biblical passages allude to the irritable, vindictive nature of bees and to the painful stings they inflict (Dt 1:44; Ps 118:12; Is 7:18).<\/p>\nOne reference calls attention to the fact that in semidesert regions a dead animal’s carcass, stripped to the bone by jackals or vultures and dried in the sun, can provide wild bees an excellent place to start a new colony (Jgs 14:5-9).<\/p>\nThe Egyptians considered the bee sacred. In ancient Greece candles were made from beeswax. In the Holy Land, beekeeping was probably not practiced until the Hellenistic period (second century BC<\/span>), although Ezekiel 27:17 suggests that it may have been practiced earlier. If domestic honey was not available to the Hebrews, wild honey certainly was, and travelers would be on the lookout for caches of honey in rocky clefts and other likely places. The Philistines and the Hittites practiced beekeeping in their cities.<\/p>\nThe Bible contains many references to bees and bee products. A bee swarm was a valuable asset, though the price of honey itself was low. Honey was sometimes eaten with the honeycomb (Sg 5:1). Honey also had uses other than food, e.g., in embalming.<\/p>\nThe land of Israel was described as a land flowing with milk and honey. Honey was a major source of sweetening in the ancient Near East—hence, its importance (cf. Jgs 14:8-9). Actually the Hebrew word for “honey” may include not only bee honey but also the sweet syrup extracted from such fruits as figs, dates, and grapes. Thus “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Ex 3:8, rsv<\/span>) does not necessarily stand for a land of bees but for a land rich in sweetness.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Honey.<\/p>\nBehemoth<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Hippopotamus (below).<\/p>\nCamel<\/p>\nLarge beast of burden. Unintelligent, ill-natured, and quarrelsome, the camel (Camelus dromedarius)<\/em> is nevertheless a blessing to people living in the desert and on its borders because it is especially adapted to that habitat. It has been called the ship of the desert. Having thick elastic pads of fibrous tissue on its feet, it can walk on hot desert sands. It can go without water for long periods and can subsist on vegetation growing on the saline soils. The camel’s nostrils are pinched together and can be closed at will to prevent penetration of sand during violent sandstorms.<\/p>\nCamels are used for transporting both goods and people. A person riding a camel can cover from 60 to 75 miles (96.5 to 121 kilometers) in a day. A camel can carry a load weighing 600 pounds (272 kilograms) or more. Camels were used heavily in the spice trade (Gn 37:25) and traveled regularly in camel trains between Arabia, Egypt, and Assyria. They were also ridden in time of war (Jgs 6:5). A camel can even be hitched to a plow in areas where the land is cultivated.<\/p>\nThe hair shed by camels during the early spring is preserved and used in weaving cloth and making tents. As much as 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) of hair can be obtained from one camel. A rough cloak of camel’s hair, as worn by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4), is still worn by Bedouins today. A camel’s hair garment was also the sign of the prophetic office (Zec 13:4).<\/p>\nTwo varieties of camel occur within the one-humped species, the slow burden-bearing camel referred to in Genesis 37:25 and the fast dromedary of 1 Samuel 30:17. The dromedary can stand seven feet (2.1 meters) tall and measure as much as nine feet (2.7 meters) from the muzzle to the tip of the tail. With its three-chambered stomach, which can hold from 15 to 30 quarts (14.2 to 28.4 liters) of liquid, it can go for as long as 5 days during the summer or 25 days in winter without drinking. The camel’s hump is a reserve store of fat, making it possible for the animal to subsist on very little food during a desert journey.<\/p>\nAnother species of camel, the Bactrian camel (Camelus bactrianus),<\/em> is also resident in the Holy Land. It has two humps. It is heavier, bigger, and has longer hair than the one-humped camel and is slower than the swift dromedary. Isaiah 21:7 may refer to the Bactrian camel; both kinds of camel are referred to in Esther 8:10 (kjv<\/span>). Camels ranked in importance with sheep, cattle, and asses in OT times. A third of the 66 biblical references to the camel lists it with other animals.<\/p>\nCamels are ruminants (cud-chewing mammals) but do not have cloven hooves. Thus, they were included in the list of unclean beasts, forbidden by the Israelites as food (Lv 11:4; Dt 14:7). They are eaten by Arabs, however, who also drink their milk (cf. Gn 32:15).<\/p>\nAbraham had camels in Egypt (Gn 12:16). At first Job had 3,000 camels (Jb 1:3) and after his recovery, 6,000 (Jb 42:12). Although wide use of camels does not seem to have begun until shortly before 1000 BC<\/span> (Jgs 6:5), Sumerian texts from the Old Babylonian period list camels and indicate that they had been domesticated. Camel bones and figurines have been found at various eastern archaeological sites dating from well before 1200 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nCaterpillar<\/p>\nLarval stage of insects characterized by complete metamorphosis. Such insects pass through four stages: egg, larva or caterpillar, pupa, and adult. Bees, flies, moths, and butterflies all pass through a larval or caterpillar stage.<\/p>\nThe word “caterpillar” occurs three times in the nlt<\/span> (1 Kgs 8:37; 2 Chr 6:28; Ps 78:46). In the book of Joel that same Hebrew word is translated “locust” (1:4; 2:25, nlt<\/span>). The locust and grasshopper to which the Hebrew word refers have an incomplete type of metamorphosis with only three stages: egg, nymph, and adult. The nymph is a miniature adult in which the wings are not fully developed, though their outline may be present. There are several nymph stages known as instars. The reference is to one of the last instars, in which the wing structures are still folded together and enclosed in a sac but are nevertheless clearly recognizable. That form of the insect is about an inch (2.5 centimeters) long.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\nCattle<\/p>\nDomestic animals of the bovine species (Bos primigenius).<\/em> The OT often emphasized the beauty of cattle. Egypt was rich in cattle, especially in the Nile River delta area (Goshen), where the Hebrews settled under Joseph.<\/p>\nSome scholars believe that milk rather than meat was the foremost consideration in the domestication of cattle and that in early civilizations meat supplies came chiefly from wild game. Cattle also supplied strong hides that supplanted wood in the manufacture of shields. Their dung was a source of fuel when wood was scarce (Ez 4:15). They were used as beasts of burden and for plowing. Development of wheeled transportation was associated more closely with cattle than with any other animal.<\/p>\nThe biblical term “cattle” often refers to all domesticated animals or livestock (Gn 1:24; 2:20; 7:23; 47:6, 16-17; Ex 9:3-7; Nm 3:41, 45). Occasionally, the term was used to refer to all large domestic animals (Nm 31:9; 32:26), although sometimes the word as used in the kjv<\/span> refers only to sheep and goats (Gn 30:32, 39, 43; 31:8, 10; Is 7:25; 43:23).<\/p>\nProbably several kinds of cattle were domesticated in the Holy Land. Small, short-legged, black or brown shorthorn cattle were found in the southern part of Judah; that type submitted easily to the yoke and was prominent in agricultural operations. Along the coast a larger variety was found, and the wild districts east of the Jordan River were populated with a breed of huge black cattle.<\/p>\nCattle breeding was widely practiced by the patriarchs (cf. Gn 32:15; Jb 21:10). Strict laws in Mesopotamia, as well as in Israel, penalized the owner of a bull that gored a man or other cattle (Ex 21:28-36). Bulls were sometimes employed figuratively as pictures of strength or violence (Dt 33:17; Pss 22:12; 68:30; Is 10:13). For breeding purposes one bull is normally adequate for about 30 cows, but many more were kept since bulls were widely used in Israel for sacrifices. They might be used as a general sacrifice (Lv 22:23; Nm 23:1) or for special sacrifices (Jgs 6:25; 1 Sm 1:24). Particular sacrifices were offered at the consecration of priests (Ex 29:1), consecration of an altar (Nm 7), purification of the Levites (Nm 8), sin offerings (Lv 16), day of the new moon (Nm 28:11-14), Passover (Nm 28:19), Feast of Weeks (Nm 28:27), Feast of Trumpets (Nm 29:1-2), Day of Atonement (Nm 29:7-9), and the Feast of Tabernacles (Nm 29:12-38). The Feast of Tabernacles required the largest number of bulls for burnt offerings of all the annual feasts, with a total of 71 being slaughtered during the course of eight days.<\/p>\nCalves were sometimes referred to as “sons of the herd” in the original Hebrew (Gn 18:8; 1 Sm 6:7; 14:32). The calf, a symbol of peacefulness (Is 11:6), was also used figuratively to refer to the weak (Ps 68:30). A calf’s head decorated the back of Solomon’s throne (1 Kgs 10:19). Calves were sometimes fattened in stalls to keep them from running off weight in the field (Am 6:4; Mal 4:2; Lk 15:23) or were kept around the house; the witch of Endor kept a calf in her house that she killed and served to Saul and his men (1 Sm 28:24-25). Calves supplied veal (Gn 18:7), considered a delicacy by the wealthy; Amos referred to stall-fattened calves in a denunciation of luxurious and careless living (Am 6:4). Calves also supplied meat for all Saul’s armies at the great slaughter of the Philistines (1 Sm 14:32). The “fatted calf” served roasted or boiled was gourmet fare, suitable for the finest banquet (Gn 18:7; Mt 22:4; Lk 15:23).<\/p>\nCattle were subject to the law of firstlings (Ex 13:12). They were a mark of wealth (Gn 13:2) and were considered proper booty of war (Jos 8:2). Aaron, the first high priest, made a golden calf as a rival to the ark of the covenant (Ex 32; Dt 9:16, 21). Even though he represented the calf as an image of the invisible God, it was especially offensive because the calf was a fertility symbol related to Egyptian and Canaanite practices. Two calves were later made by Jeroboam I of Israel (930–909 BC<\/span>) for his shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:28-33). Hosea’s prophetic denunciations of calf worship were directed at those shrines (Hos 8:5-6; 13:2).<\/p>\nAn ox is an adult castrated bull. A steer is a young ox. Oxen were used to do work (Nm 7:3; Dt 22:10; 25:4), though for moving heavy objects, cows were typically favored over bulls because of their more docile nature. Oxen were also used as pack animals (1 Chr 12:40, although they did not have the endurance of the ass, camel, or mule. They usually fed on grass (Nm 22:4; Ps 106:20), but they also ate straw (Is 11:7) and salted fodder (Is 30:24) and could be kept in a stable (Lk 13:15). Oxen could not be offered as sacrifices because they had been castrated (Lv 22:24). They could be used for food but were rarely eaten. Possession of an ox and an ass was regarded as the bare minimum for existence in the ancient Palestinian agriculture economy (Jb 24:3; cf. Ex 20:17).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Agriculture; Food and Food Preparation; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\nChameleon<\/p>\nLizard characterized by its ability to change color according to its surroundings (Chameleon vulgaris).<\/em> To the Israelites the chameleon was ritually unclean (Lv 11:30). The Hebrew word for chameleon is derived from a word meaning “to pant.” A lizard’s lungs are very large, and in ancient times lizards were believed to live on air. A chameleon’s eyes move independently of each other; so at times one eye may be turned upward and the other downward. Chameleons live in trees and bushes, clinging to branches with their long tails.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\nCoral<\/p>\nCalcareous (lime-containing) skeletons of relatively simple marine organisms (Corallium rubrum).<\/em> Red coral from the Mediterranean and Red Seas is widely used for jewelry and for medicinal purposes. While the animal is alive, the coral is green in color and shrublike in appearance, looking rather like an underwater plant since the coral animals are immobil. When the coral is removed from the water, it becomes hard and red in color.<\/p>\nIn ancient times coral was sometimes used as money, along with precious stones, pearls, and gold. Some believe the biblical reference in Lamentations 4:7 (rsv<\/span>) is to pearls rather than to coral, but it is probable that the references in Job 28:18 and Ezekiel 27:16 are to the red coral (see nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nCricket<\/p>\nInsect of the order Orthptera related to grasshoppers and locusts. According to Leviticus 11:22, the cricket was edible. The reference may be to one of the growth stages of the locust.<\/p>\nThe kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word as “beetle.” Beetles are insects with chewing mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the fore pair being hard and sheathlike and the hind pair being membranous and folded under the fore pair. Some beetles are carnivorous, others are chiefly herbivorous. Some are aquatic, some produce a secretion that blisters the skin, some damage fabrics, some damage crops, and some feed on other insects that are harmful to humans. In ancient Egypt the beetle, or sacred scarab, was a symbol of the sun god Ra. Scarab seals and amulets were extremely popular in Egypt.<\/p>\nCrocodile<\/p>\nLargest of all existing reptiles (Crocodilus vulgaris),<\/em> attaining a length of well over 20 feet (6 meters). Crocodiles are characterized by large lizardlike bodies supported by short legs. The head terminates in a flattened snout armed with strong conical teeth, each of which is implanted in a distinct socket. New teeth growing from beneath continually replace those in use. The toes are webbed. The back and tail are protected by quadrangular horny shields of varying sizes arranged in regular rows and in contact with one another at the edges. The eyes are covered with movable lids that can be closed when the animal enters the water.<\/p>\nThe crocodile spends most of its time in the water where it feeds mainly on fish but also on aquatic birds and even small animals that come down to the water’s edge to drink. It is surprisingly fast and agile on dry land, even though its legs are so short that its belly and tail drag across the earth leaving a distinct path.<\/p>\nUntil the beginning of the 20th century, the crocodile was found in the marshes and small coastal rivers of western Palestine. A first-century Roman writer, Pliny, referred to a place in the Holy Land called Crocodeilopolis (“crocodile city”) to the south of Mt Carmel, and visitors to the Holy Land as late as the 19th century reported seeing crocodiles in that general region.<\/p>\nThe description of “Leviathan” in Job 41 seems to be based on the crocodile (thus the translation of the nlt<\/span>). The “dragon” of Ezekiel 29:3, used figuratively of the Egyptian pharaoh, may be a reference to the crocodile.<\/p>\nDeer<\/p>\nLarge ruminant (cud-chewing) animals. Only the males have antlers (branching horns). Deer antlers grow annually and are solid, in contrast to those of the antelope and the gazelle. Fully developed antlers are devoid of any covering of skin or horn and, for all practical purposes, may be regarded as a mass of dead bone carried for a certain time by the living animal.<\/p>\nThe end of the deer’s muzzle is naked in all species. The stomach is divided into a series of compartments, some of which are used to store partly chewed food. The food is later regurgitated, rechewed, and finally swallowed into a section of the stomach where true digestion takes place.<\/p>\nThree species of deer were known in Palestine: the red deer (Cervus elaphus),<\/em> the Persian fallow deer (Dama mesopotamica),<\/em> and the roe deer (Capreolus capreolus).<\/em> All are now extinct there. The last deer were hunted in the Holy Land in 1914. The red deer referred to in the Bible as “hart” (male), “stag” (male), or “hind” (female) stood about four feet (1.2 meters) high at the shoulder. It was gregarious (living in herds or flocks), each group remaining in a definite territory. Red deer grazed and browsed during the morning and late afternoon (Lam 1:6). The sexes remained in separate herds. The red deer was known for its leaping (Is 35:6) and sure-footedness in the mountains (Ps 18:33; Sg 2:8-9, 17; 8:14; Hb 3:19).<\/p>\nThe antlers of the Persian fallow deer (1 Kgs 4:23) were large, flattened, and palmated (shaped like an open palm with fingers extended), and its coat was a yellowbrown. It traveled in small groups, feeding mainly on grass in the morning and evening.<\/p>\nThe roe deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23) was a small, graceful animal, dark reddish brown in summer and yellowish gray in winter. Its antlers were about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and had three points. The roe deer preferred sparsely wooded valleys and the lower slopes of mountains, grazing in open grasslands. It usually associated in family groups made up of the doe and her offspring. They were shy, yet very curious. The roe deer barked like a dog when disturbed, and they were excellent swimmers.<\/p>\nThere is some question as to whether the roe deer is actually referred to in such passages as 1 Kings 4:23; references may be to the fallow deer, although that animal does not seem to have lived in the southern part of Palestine around the Sinai Desert because of its need for ample amounts of food and water. Fallow deer were found in northern Palestine.<\/p>\nThe hart (the male red deer) was listed among the clean beasts that Jewish law permitted as food (Dt 12:15, 22; 14:5), but deer were not listed among the animals appropriate for sacrifice. The hind (female red deer) normally gave birth to one calf at a time, though twins were born with some degree of regularity (Jb 39:1; Ps 29:9, kjv<\/span>; Jer 14:5). The gestation period was about 40 weeks. When it was about to give birth, the hind looked for a secure hiding place, preferably in the dense undergrowth of the forest where it could find natural protection for the tiny calf. During the first few days after birth, the mother never went far from her young. The fawn was able to stand on its own legs a few hours after birth. The solicitous care by the hind for her calf during the first days of its life is hinted at in a touching way in Jeremiah 14:4-5, where only a severe drought is said to drive the hind from her calf. Job 39:1-4 describes the calving of the hinds. The hind illustrated grace and charm (Gn 49:21; Prv 5:19), and its dark, gentle eyes and graceful limbs were used to describe the beauty of a woman (Prv 5:18-19).<\/p>\nDog<\/p>\nProbably the earliest domesticated animal (Canis familiaris),<\/em> used very early in hunting. The modern dog is believed to have come from the Indian wolf (Canis lupus pallipes).<\/em> The dogs of biblical times probably looked like a modern German shepherd, with short pointed ears, a pointed nose, and a long tail.<\/p>\nThe dog was generally looked down upon in biblical times (Prv 26:11; 2 Pt 2:22). The biblical writers did not share modern sentiments about dogs being man’s best friends. The dog was pictured as a scavenger, haunting streets and dumps (Ex 22:31; 1 Kgs 22:38; Mt 15:26; Lk 16:21). Human corpses could become the spoil of dogs (2 Kgs 9:35-36). In general, dogs served the same function as vultures and other birds of prey. Most of the 41 references in the Scriptures to dogs show strong disfavor. Dogs were considered cowardly, filthy creatures.<\/p>\nDogs used in hunting occur in paintings in Egyptian tombs, and there is a reference to dogs herding sheep in Job 30:1. One good quality of dogs highly esteemed by the Israelites was watchfulness (Is 56:10). In general, however, in biblical times “dog” was a term of contempt (1 Sm 17:43; 2 Sm 16:9) and was used of overly submissive persons (2 Sm 9:8; 2 Kgs 8:13) and of evil persons (Is 56:10-11; Mt 7:6; Phil 3:2; Rv 22:15).<\/p>\nDogs, like pigs, were voracious and omnivorous (eating any kind of food). In response to a Gentile woman’s request that he heal her daughter, Jesus used the metaphor of throwing household food scraps to dogs (Mt 15:22-28; Mk 7:25-30). At the time of Jesus, the word “dog” was a standard Jewish term of contempt for Gentiles who, like dogs, were considered unclean, although the diminutive form of the word, used by Jesus, softened this considerably. Seeing her faith, Jesus granted the woman’s request, giving a non-Jew some of “the children’s bread.”<\/p>\nDonkey<\/p>\nBeast of burden. The donkey of the Holy Land (Equus asinus)<\/em> was quite different from the European donkey of today, which is usually a small, stubborn animal. In biblical times the donkey was a beautiful, stately, friendly animal. Its color was usually reddish brown. Three wild races have been described, all from Africa. The race from northwest Africa is extinct; the one from northeast Africa, if not extinct, is close to extinction; the Somalian race, which survives, did not play an important part in domestication. The northeast African race, the Nubian donkey, was evidently domesticated in the Nile River region in early historic times. The donkey was used as a mount from the time of domestication on. It is first mentioned in the Bible among the animals that Abraham acquired in Egypt (Gn 12:16). The donkey was primarily a beast of burden, driven but not bridled. From the time of the Middle Kingdom on (c. 2040 BC<\/span>), it was used for riding in Egypt, but only the Jews and Nubians rode donkeys regularly. The donkey was also used for threshing grain and for pulling the plow. In Arab countries today peasants plow with a donkey and a cow or camel hitched together. In Israel the law forbade plowing with a donkey and an ox hitched together (Dt 22:10). Until the time of Solomon (960 BC<\/span>), horses were not used in Palestine. From that time on, the horse was ridden by warriors; the donkey was used by those who were traveling peaceably.<\/p>\nThe donkey was held in high regard by the Jews and was considered an economic asset. An individual had to have a donkey for minimum existence (Jb 24:3), and wealth was frequently counted by the number of donkeys one possessed (Gn 12:16; 24:35). The donkey was considered an acceptable gift (Gn 32:13-15). It was allowed to rest on the Sabbath (Dt 5:14). Women in biblical times often used the donkey as a riding animal (Jos 15:18; 1 Sm 25:23; 2 Kgs 4:24); often a special driver would help a woman guide the animal, running along at its side. If a married couple possessed only one donkey, the husband usually walked alongside while the wife rode (Ex 4:20).<\/p>\nThe people of Israel returning from Babylon had ten times as many donkeys as horses and camels (Ezr 2:66-67; Neh 7:68-69). Job’s wealth was indicated by the fact that he had 500 she-donkeys before catastrophe hit him (Jb 1:3); after his recovery he had 1,000 donkeys (Jb 42:12). Joseph’s brothers used donkeys to transport the grain they purchased in Egypt (Gn 42:26; 43:24). Abigail transported food on donkeys to David and his troops during their conflict with Saul (1 Sm 25:18). David assigned one of the 12 managers of his royal estates to look after his donkeys exclusively (1 Chr 27:30).<\/p>\nThe onager, or Syrian wild donkey (Equus hemionus hemihippus)<\/em>, is an intermediate between the true horse and the true donkey. Its ears are longer than those of a horse but shorter than those of a donkey. The front hooves are narrow; there are chestnuts (callouslike spots on the inside of the knees) on the front legs only, and the tail is short haired for a long distance from its root so that it appears to be tufted.<\/p>\nThe Sumerians (ancient Mesopotamians) were able to domesticate the onager, which was eventually replaced by the horse. It was used to draw chariots in Ur; a number of onagers were buried with their vehicles in a royal grave that dates from about 2500 BC<\/span>. Later the wild onager was a favorite hunter’s prize for Babylonian and Assyrian kings.<\/p>\nThe onager was very common in the steppe lands near Israel, where it was described as a freedom-loving desert animal (Jb 24:5; 39:5-8; Ps 104:11; Is 32:14; Jer 2:24; Hos 8:9). Ishmael was described as “free and untamed as a wild donkey” (Gn 16:12, nlt<\/span>)—that is, one who could not adjust to domestic life. Drought seems to have been responsible for the population decline of the onager in biblical times (Jer 14:6). The modern onager (Equus hemionus onager)<\/em> is slightly larger than the Syrian wild donkey that is extinct.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nDragon<\/p>\nAny one of a number of monstrous land and sea creatures. In biblical usage, “dragon” does not refer to the huge, fire-breathing, winged reptile of European folklore. The translators of the kjv<\/span> used the term to translate two Hebrew words that are usually rendered more precisely in modern translations. One word referred to desert animals; most scholars agree with the niv<\/span> that “jackals” is its proper meaning (Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; Jer 9:11; Mal 1:3). See<\/em> Jackal (below).<\/p>\nThe other Hebrew word translated “dragon” is harder to define. It was frequently used in reference to serpents (so translated in the rsv<\/span>: Ex 7:9-12; Dt 32:33; Ps 91:13). In other rsv<\/span> passages it is translated “sea monster” (Gn 1:21; Jb 7:12; Ps 148:7). The exact identity of such sea monsters is not known. Several rsv<\/span> passages retain the English “dragon.” In two of them (Ps 74:13; Is 27:1), the context indicates that sea monsters are meant. In three others (Is 51:9; Ez 29:3; 32:2) “dragon” seems to refer to the crocodile, a figurative reference to the Egyptian pharaoh at the time of the exodus. Jeremiah 51:34 (translated “monster” in the rsv<\/span>) may also refer to a voracious creature such as a crocodile. See<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\nBabylonian myths described monsters and dragons in primordial conflict with the god Marduk; they represented the principle of evil. In its figurative usages in Scripture, “dragon” has a similar significance, especially in the prophetic books. In the book of Revelation it is a symbol of Satan, the archenemy of God and his people (Rv 12:3-17; 13:2, 4, 11; 16:13; 20:2).<\/p>\nFish<\/p>\nAquatic animals frequently mentioned in the Bible without names or descriptions that enable us to identify the particular species. Since time immemorial, fish have constituted one of the staple foods of humanity, and they still serve as the chief source of protein in many parts of the world. The trade in fish was highly developed in biblical times. For example, one of the gates in Jerusalem was called the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3; Zep 1:10). The law in Leviticus 11:9-12 permitted the Jews to eat fish, but only those having both fins and scales. Scaleless fish such as catfish were forbidden, even though they had fins.<\/p>\nEgyptian paintings depict various methods of fishing, and the Philistines fished in the Mediterranean Sea. Since the people of Israel were not a seafaring nation, it is safe to assume that most of their fish came from freshwater lakes and rivers, especially the Sea of Galilee. Some 36 species of fish have been identified in that lake, including varieties of perch, carp, barbel, “sardine,” and catfish.<\/p>\nThe method of fishing characteristic of NT times was the dragnet. After a boat had put out into the deep (Lk 5:4), a large net would be thrown out from it and then dragged toward shore by the rowers in the boat, possibly with the help of a crew in another boat. The catch was sorted out on shore (Mt 13:47-48). Fishing was usually carried out at night when the coolness of the water brought fish closer to the surface and when they could not see the approaching nets.<\/p>\nThe Jews also fished by hook and line (Mt 17:27), a few by spear (Jb 41:7), and some by the throw net (Ez 47:10). Habakkuk refers to hook-and-line fishing, netting, and seining (1:15).<\/p>\nVery early in the history of the Christian church the fish became a symbol for Christ and the faith. It was scratched on the walls of Roman catacombs and may be seen today decorating walls, altars, pews, and vestments. The symbol came into use because the Greek word for “fish” (<\/em>ichthus<\/span>)<\/em> is composed of the first letter of each word in the Greek phrase “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.” See<\/em> Whale (below).<\/p>\nFlea<\/p>\nTiny, irritating insect (1 Sm 24:14; 26:20, nlt<\/span>). Many species of fleas occur in Palestine, the most common being Pulex irritans.<\/em> About a thousand species are known around the world. Fleas are wingless parasites that have sharp jaws and suck out blood from the bodies of humans and animals. The body is wedge shaped, enabling the flea to burrow into folds of skin and hide there. The eggs, laid by the female in dust heaps in the corners of rooms, hatch into small, white larvae that pupate (a nonfeeding stage) in a cocoon. Soon adult fleas appear that immediately attach themselves to the body of a host. The female requires blood for the development of her eggs.<\/p>\nA flea bite is painful and causes some swelling and itching. Fleas are attracted by warmth. With favorable moisture and temperature, adult fleas can live a year or longer without food, but they are voracious feeders. The most dangerous fleas are those of the rat that transmit the organism responsible for bubonic plague. There were 41 recorded epidemics of bubonic plague before the Christian era.<\/p>\nFly<\/p>\nInsects of the order Diptera, which have one pair of wings. Many winged insects of other orders, however, are also called flies, such as the dragonfly or butterfly.<\/p>\nAs in almost all parts of the world, flies are abundant in Palestine. One of the most numerous is the common housefly (Musca domestica),<\/em> found chiefly around dung heaps and garbage. The female lays her eggs, out of which emerge white maggots that feed on refuse. After a few days the maggot develops into a cocoon out of which emerges the adult housefly. In the summer the whole cycle lasts about 12 days, so that a fly can breed about 20 generations a year.<\/p>\nAnother fly common to Palestine is the botfly (family Oestridae). It causes much discomfort among livestock by irritating them and spreading diseases. Tabanid flies (family Tabanidae), including the horsefly (genus Tabanus<\/em>) and related species, are also found in Palestine. Both the botfly and horsefly are known as gadflies because of the persistent distress they inflict. Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar is spoken of as a gadfly in view of his invasion of Egypt (Jer 46:20).<\/p>\nThe fourth plague in Egypt just before the exodus featured “swarms of flies” (Ex 8:21-31, nlt<\/span>; cf. Pss 78:45; 105:31). Those swarms may have been made up of any or all the flies mentioned above. The maggots mentioned in Job 25:6 and Isaiah 14:11 and the worms in Exodus 16:24 and Job 7:5 and 17:14 were probably fly larvae.<\/p>\nA proverb quoted in Ecclesiastes 10:1 probably refers to the housefly, which would be attracted to an open, perfumed ointment bottle. Once inside it would drown and eventually decay, causing the ointment to spoil and stink. The fly is also referred to in Isaiah 7:18 where it symbolizes Egypt. Isaiah may have had in mind a horsefly (Tabanus arenivagus)<\/em> that attacks both humans and animals.<\/p>\nPhilistine inhabitants of the city of Ekron worshiped a god named Baal-zebul, meaning “Lord of the high places.” The Hebrews mockingly spoke of Baal-zebub, meaning “Lord of the flies” (2 Kgs 1:2). The NT form is Beelzebub (e.g., Mt 10:25; 12:24, 27).<\/p>\nFox<\/p>\nSmall, doglike carnivore with a bushy tail that is about half its body length. The red fox of the Holy Land (Vulpes palaetinae)<\/em> is similar to the North American red fox; it is smaller than a wolf and is normally a nocturnal solitary animal. The omnivorous fox eats almost any kind of food—fruits, plants, mice, beetles, and birds—but seldom touches carrion. It loves the sweet juice of grapes, but it also burrows underground tunnels that can destroy the vines (Sg 2:15). The fox is intelligent and known for its slyness (Lk 13:32). It has considerable endurance and can run at speeds up to 30 miles (48 kilometers) per hour. The Jews rebuilding Jerusalem’s wall were taunted by the wisecrack that even a fox jumping on their wall would knock it over (Neh 4:3).<\/p>\nThe Egyptian fox (Vulpes niloticus)<\/em> is found in the central and southern parts of the Holy Land. It is somewhat smaller than the common red fox. Its back is rust colored and its belly light. The Syrian fox (Vulpes flavescens)<\/em> that lives in the northern part of the Holy Land is shiny gold in color.<\/p>\nSome OT references such as Psalm 63:10 and Lamentations 5:18 are translated “fox” in the kjv<\/span> but probably refer to jackals. Jackals, not foxes, hunt in packs and tend to act as scavengers.<\/p>\nFrog<\/p>\nAmphibian (genus Rana<\/em>), living part of its life in the water and part on land.<\/p>\nFrogs and toads are covered with soft, hairless skin and lack a tail in the adult stage. The hind legs are much longer and more powerfully developed than the forelegs so that the animals are able to jump large distances. It has been suggested that the frog referred to in Scripture is an edible one, Rana ridibunda,<\/em> one of the aquatic frogs found in Egypt and in the stagnant waters of the Holy Land.<\/p>\nThe female frog lays her eggs in the water; after about a week the eggs hatch into tadpoles. Gradually through metamorphosis the tail is lost and limbs are acquired. Frogs must maintain a moist skin since they take oxygen through the skin as well as through their lungs; thus they must always remain close to water. They feed on insects and worms.<\/p>\nFrogs are found throughout the Palestinian lowlands, where their croaking is heard in the spring and on summer evenings. The Israelites seem to have associated frogs primarily with sliminess and foulness. They fell into the category of creeping or swarming creatures, which in general were ritually unclean (Lv 11:29-31). Since the frog was not specifically listed, however, rabbis did not consider it one of the animals that defiled human beings through contact.<\/p>\nIn Revelation 16:13 certain foul spirits are said to look like frogs. The ancient Egyptians made the frog a symbol of life and birth and an image of Heqet, the patron goddess of birth. She is depicted with a frog’s head giving life to the newborn. Thus that deity was discredited when the power of God afflicted Egypt in the second of the ten plagues on the Egyptians with the very animal that was her symbol (Ex 8:1-14; Pss 78:45; 105:30). The frog in question may have been the spotted frog of Egypt (Rana punctata,<\/em> or Rana ridibunda).<\/em><\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\nGazelle<\/p>\nSmall, dainty, graceful antelope with hollow recurved horns on both sexes. Two varieties exist in the Holy Land, the dorcas gazelle (Gazella dorcas),<\/em> which is pale fawn in color and up to 22 inches (56 centimeters) tall, and the Arabian gazelle (Gazella arabica),<\/em> which is a dark smoky color and up to 25 inches (63.5 centimeters) tall.<\/p>\nGazelles are still quite common throughout the desert and steppe areas of the Holy Land, especially in the Negev Desert. Herds usually consist of from 5 to 10 animals, but some varieties assemble in large migratory herds in the fall to relocate to lower elevations and new feeding grounds. Gazelles are herbivorous (plant eating). They are very shy and post guards to warn the herd of approaching danger.<\/p>\nIn biblical times the gazelle was probably the game animal most hunted by the Jews (Prv 6:5; Is 13:14). Pharaoh Tutankhamen hunted gazelles and ostriches. The gazelle is said to have graced Solomon’s table (1 Kgs 4:23). Gazelles were not easy to catch because of their great speed (2 Sm 2:18; 1 Chr 12:8; Prv 6:5); they surpass the deer in swiftness. They were trapped in various ways—encircled with nets, driven into enclosures with pitfalls, or forced into narrow valleys and shot with arrows. The Bedouin hunt gazelle with falcons and dogs; the falcon annoys the gazelle, striking it on the head and injuring it so that the dogs can overtake it.<\/p>\nThe gazelle is referred to in Song of Songs 2:9, 17; 4:5; 7:3; 8:14, where it is an image of feminine beauty.<\/p>\nGecko<\/p>\nReptile of the family Gekkonidae, referred to in Leviticus 11:30. In Jewish food law it was a ritually unclean lizard. There are seven species of geckos in the Holy Land (including Hemidactylus turcicus<\/em> and Ptyodactylus hasselquistii,<\/em> all insectivorous—insect eating). The gecko makes a low mourning sound by vibrating its tongue rapidly against the roof of its mouth. In legend the gecko was said to cause leprosy by crawling across a person’s body.<\/p>\nAnother name for the gecko is the wall lizard, so named because it can walk upside down on ceilings with the aid of the suction discs on its toes—but it often plops down into the middle of the home. Since it was considered unclean, such an intrusion would have been a disgusting nuisance to Jewish households (Lv 11:31-38).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\nGnat<\/p>\nAny very small fly, in common and biblical usage. According to the nlt<\/span>, the third plague in Egypt before the exodus consisted of gnats (Ex 8:16-18; Ps 105:31). The kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word there as “lice,” but the breeding pattern described in Exodus 8—insects rising from the dust—seems to fit gnats better than lice. Since “gnat” is a general term, the small flies of that plague may have included several small species such as mosquitos, harvester gnats, midges, or sand flies.<\/p>\nThe sand fly inflicts a far more painful bite than the mosquito. Further, it does not betray itself by a buzzing noise in flight and is so small that it penetrates most mosquito netting.<\/p>\nGnats were drawn to wine while it was fermenting. The Pharisees in particular would strain their wine to avoid consuming unclean insects (Mt 23:24).<\/p>\nGoat<\/p>\nCloven-hooved mammals (genus Capra<\/em>) with large eyes and big, floppy ears that constantly twitch. Both males and females have backward arching horns. The Palestinian goat is a ruminant (cud-chewing animal) of lighter build than the sheep.<\/p>\nThe goat was probably the earliest ruminant to be domesticated. Its wild ancestor seems to have been the Gezoar goat (Capra aegagrus).<\/em> Wild goats are believed to have been domesticated very early in Palestine. The goat of Bible times was probably the Syrian or Mamber variety (Capra hircus mambrica).<\/em> Domesticated goats may have as many as four kids in a litter, whereas wild goats bear only one or two.<\/p>\nThe Palestinian goat was commonly black. Speckled and spotted goats were a rarity, and for that reason Jacob’s request for those goats in Genesis 30:32 appeared very modest. There may also have been red goats (cf. 1 Sm 16:12; 19:13, where goat’s hair was used to imitate David’s hair, which was “ruddy” or auburn).<\/p>\nAlmost every part of the goat was used by the Israelites. The whole goat was used for sacrifice. Its flesh served as meat (Lv 7:23; Dt 14:4), and it was the principal source of milk (Prv 27:27). Goats were sheared in the late spring, and the goat hair was used for weaving tent cloth and for various domestic purposes (Ex 36:14; 1 Sm 19:13, 16). The tabernacle at Mt Sinai was made of goat’s hair blankets (Ex 26:7).<\/p>\nAdult male goats were generally not eaten because of their strong flavor and toughness and also because they were necessary to insure the flock’s increase. Young kids, however, were usually the chief meat for a feast and were offered to visitors as a symbol of hospitality. Goat milk is richer than the milk of cows and sheep and evidently had broader uses. A good goat gives three quarts of milk a day, from which a rich butter and buttermilk can be made. The average Hebrew family could have lived almost entirely on a single goat’s production.<\/p>\nGoatskin was tanned as leather, and the whole hide was turned into a skin bottle by sewing shut leg and neck apertures (Gn 21:14; Jos 9:4). Goatskin had many uses, including the construction of Hebrew musical instruments. The nebal, a large harp, was made with goatskin for its base sound. Drums had goatskin coverings.<\/p>\nGoats were herded with sheep in biblical times, but each group remained separate following its own bell-laden leader. Jesus was evidently referring to their common herding in his description of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\nBecause of their wool, sheep are valued more than goats. However, where pasture and water are scarce and thorny shrubs dominate over grass, sheep are difficult to keep and goats become important. They can live under conditions that suit neither cows nor sheep, producing large quantities of milk. The goat does not supply fat as the sheep does, and since its hair is coarse its wool is rather scarce. Goat-hair cloth called cilicium was used to make tents.<\/p>\nGoats have voracious appetites. They also were responsible for much damage done to the land of Palestine, breaking down terraces, destroying forests, and bringing about soil erosion by eating off all cover.<\/p>\nThe goat was recognized as a form of wealth, subject to the law of firstlings (Nm 18:17). It had to be eight days old before it could be offered as a sacrifice. A year-old male goat was one of the animals offered at the Passover (28:22), and two goats were offered on the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:7-10). The goat was also used for other specific sacrifices.<\/p>\nThe ibex, a type of wild goat (Capra ibex nubiana),<\/em> still lives in small numbers on the cliffs close to the Dead Sea. That it was known in ancient times is evident from rock carvings. It is distinguished from the true wild goat by having a more compact rump and horns that are slender and curved back. Its slender legs and sharp cloven hooves enable it to cling to narrow rock ledges, to jump between them, and to climb steep cliffs.<\/p>\nUsually the ibex is found in rugged mountain country among rocky crags and meadows just below the snow line (Ps 104:18). In Job 39:1 they are referred to as “mountain goats.” They frequently gather in herds of 5 to 20. They graze and browse, being active in the afternoon and sometimes feeding through the night. The large horn of the ibex was at one period made into the shofar that was blown in the second Jerusalem temple to announce the new year and the jubilee year.<\/p>\nThe goat was often used in a figurative and symbolic sense by the writers of the Bible: in Song of Songs 4:1 and 6:5 for the bride’s black hair; in Matthew 25:31-46 for the wicked; and in Ezekiel 34:17 and Daniel 8:5-8 for various human leaders.<\/p>\nGrasshopper<\/p>\nLarge insects of the Orthoptera order. They have chewing or biting mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the front pair of which is narrow and somewhat thickened and the hind pair membranous and used for flying. When not in use the flight wings are folded beneath the protective front wings like a fan against the body. By rubbing their wings together, male grasshoppers produce sounds that both males and females can detect. Grasshoppers pass through a partial metamorphosis; the egg hatches into a juvenile nymph that looks like an adult except for its smaller size and undeveloped wings. After several months the nymph becomes a winged adult.<\/p>\nThe terms “grasshopper” and “locust” are often used interchangeably. Actually the locust is a kind of grasshopper. Also confusing is the fact that other insects such as cicadas are sometimes called locusts. The difference between grasshoppers and locusts depends more on behavior than appearance. Grasshoppers are individual insects that lead solitary lives and do not migrate. The same insects when migrating in a swarm are called migratory grasshoppers or locusts. Elimination of their food supply by drought, flood, or fire may lead to migration. Climatic factors such as a warm dry winter also stimulate migrations.<\/p>\nGrasshoppers and locusts have been a staple food in the Middle East and also among the Indians of the American Southwest. To the Israelites the grasshopper was considered ritually clean and could be eaten (Lv 11:22).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\nHare<\/p>\nAnimal of the genus and species Lepus europaeus judaeus, Lepus capensis,<\/em> and Lepus arabicus.<\/em> It is found in open country, often near or on cultivated lands, and in woods, usually deciduous rather than evergreen. It is an herbivorous rodent and is different from the rabbit, which is not found in Palestine. Although it is not a true ruminant according to modern classification (because it does not have a four-chambered stomach), the hare does rechew its food. It has a process of partial regurgitation of material too hard for the cells in the stomach to absorb initially; thus, the hare actually chews food previously swallowed.<\/p>\nNear Eastern hares have very long ears and large hind feet; their feet are well furred. They are similar to American jackrabbits, which are true hares. Hares do not dig or occupy burrows the way rabbits do. Hares are mainly nocturnal and spend their inactive hours hiding in vegetation. They eat grasses and herbaceous matter as well as twigs and young bark of woody plants. Hares breed with great rapidity—the young attaining sexual maturity at six months after birth.<\/p>\nThe hare was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:6; Dt 14:7), evidently because although it appeared to chew its cud, it did not have cloven hooves. Consumption of hares has also been forbidden among the Arabs, Chinese, and Lapps, but the hare was widely hunted by other people in ancient and modern times. Its great speed, prolific breeding, timidity, and caution have saved it from extermination by its many enemies.<\/p>\nHippopotamus<\/p>\nLarge beast of problematic interpretation. Some early interpreters thought it referred to the elephant, others to the wild ox, the mammoth, or any large animal. It was called “behemoth” by the kjv<\/span> translators. Today it is generally agreed that the reference is to the hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius),<\/em> a large, thick-skinned, amphibious mammal, an ungulate (having hooflike toenails) with a large head, a bulky, hairless body, and short legs.<\/p>\nThe description in Job 40:15-24 fits closely the modern hippopotamus (see nlt<\/span>), except for the depiction of the tail. At present the hippopotamus is found only in the rivers of Africa, but there is fossil evidence that it has existed in the Holy Land, perhaps in the swamps of northern Galilee and the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\nThe hippopotamus has highly developed sense organs, placed in such a way that it can see, hear, and smell almost without being seen; its eyes, ears, and nostrils can reach above water while the rest of the animal lies submerged. It has a large mouth, large tusks, and a short, heavy throat. The strong legs are so short that the belly almost reaches the ground when the animal is on the land. The hippopotamus lives on plants and herbs growing in rivers, but if food is scarce there, it forages on land, usually at night. In spite of its heavy body it is surprisingly agile on land.<\/p>\nHorse<\/p>\nPrzewalski’s horse (Equus przewalskii,<\/em> an eastern race that roamed about Mongolia until modern firearms destroyed most of them after World War I) and the tarpan (a western race of southern Russia that became extinct in the Ukraine in 1851). The domesticated horse (Equus caballus)<\/em> seems to have been derived from the tarpan. The original site of domestication is believed to have been Turkestan, a region north of Afghanistan and India, now in Russia. The horse differs from the donkey in that it has shorter ears, a longer mane with a forelock, a long hairy tail, and a soft, sensitive muzzle.<\/p>\nHorses were used in war not only for riding but also for pulling the heavy, springless war chariots. Two kinds of horses were needed for these different purposes, and the Hebrews distinguished between chariot horses and cavalry horses.<\/p>\n\nThe Lord warned the early Israelites against unnecessarily amassing military strength in the form of horses and thereby following the oppressive tactics of the powerful Egyptians (Dt 17:14-16), but the demands of war caused both David and Solomon to import horses from Egypt into their kingdoms and to breed them. Solomon greatly increased the number of horses in the Jewish kingdom and maintained large stables at various cities (1 Kgs 10:26) such as the regional defense centers of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer (1 Kgs 9:15-19). Ahab’s horses are mentioned in 1 Kings 18:5, and records of Shalmaneser III state that Ahab furnished 2,000 chariots to a coalition against Assyria.<\/p>\nIn early Israel, the horse was opposed as a symbol of pagan luxury and of dependence on physical power for defense (Dt 17:16; 1 Sm 8:11; Ps 20:7; Is 31:1). Horse trading, mentioned as early as Genesis 47:17, was carried on by Solomon between Egypt and the Syro-Hittite principalities (1 Kgs 10:28-29). Most biblical references to horses refer to their use in war, but horses were also used for transportation. Riding seems to have been less popular than the use of chariots. Cavalry units were not introduced until the 12th century BC<\/span> by the Medes. Joseph rode in Pharaoh’s second horse-drawn chariot (Gn 41:43), and Absalom made a display by riding a horse-drawn chariot (2 Sm 15:1). Naaman traveled by horse and chariot (2 Kgs 5:9). Later, horses were so common in Jerusalem that the royal palace had a special horse gate (2 Chr 23:15), and a gate of the city itself was known as the Horse Gate (Neh 3:28; Jer 31:40). Mordecai rode a royal horse of King Xerxes as a sign of honor (Est 6:8-11). Horses are often spoken of figuratively (Ps 32:9; “mare,” Sg 1:9; “stallions,” Jer 5:8; 12:5), especially in the context of judgment (Hb 3:8; Zec 1:8; 6:1-8; Rv 6:2-8; 9:17; 19:11-16).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Warfare; Travel.<\/p>\nHyena<\/p>\nStocky carnivore (Hyaena hyaena)<\/em> with coarse hair, an erect mane, and long hairs along the neck and back. Hyenas live in holes among rocks and banks. They are mainly nocturnal but are ordinarily neither noisy nor aggressive. Their cry, however, is a disagreeable, unearthly sound. Hyenas usually feed on carrion, crushing bones with their powerful jaws. If the carrion supply is inadequate, they will kill sheep, goats, or other small animals. When threatened, hyenas growl and erect their mane, but they rarely fight. They are massively built with forelegs longer than the hind legs.<\/p>\nKnown as scavengers in Africa, hyenas eat domestic refuse in the villages. In Palestine the striped hyena is a common predator, preferring rocky territory and even rock tombs. Since hyenas were notorious for raiding the graves of the dead, all Israelites who could afford it arranged for burial in tombs protected by massive stone doors. Absalom, King David’s son who was killed by Joab in the wild, was buried under a huge pile of stones to protect his corpse from molestation by hyenas (2 Sm 18:17).<\/p>\nJackal<\/p>\nCarnivore (Canis aureus)<\/em> smaller than the true wolf and with a shorter tail. It is similar to the fox but has a broader head, shorter ears, and longer legs. The fox is solitary; the jackal tends to be gregarious. Its tail can be drooping or erect, compared with the long horizontal tail of the fox. Jackals usually prowl at night, either singly, in pairs, or in packs through open savannah country. They eat small mammals, poultry, fruit, vegetables, and carrion. They spend their days in thickets and clumps of vegetation. Often they obtain scraps from kills by larger carnivores. Jackals can run at speeds of about 33 miles (53 kilometers) per hour.<\/p>\nThe jackal can reach a height of about 20 inches (51 centimeters), roughly the size of a German shepherd dog. Its back is pale yellow with dark, almost black, flanks. Its lips are black and its ears white on the inside. The howl of the jackal sounds like the crying of a child or the heartrending wail of the bereaved (Mi 1:8; cf. Jb 30:29). To other jackals the howl is merely an invitation calling the pack together for its nocturnal hunting.<\/p>\nOT references are chiefly to jackals prowling around ruined cities and wilderness areas (Neh 2:13; Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; Jer 9:11; 14:6; 49:33; 51:37; Lam 4:3; 5:18; Mal 1:3). Many such references are translated “dragon” in the kjv<\/span>, but “jackal” is more appropriate.<\/p>\nLeech<\/p>\nSegmented worm (class Hirundinea) up to five inches (12.7 centimeters) long with a flat body equipped with suction pads at each end. The mouth, located at the bottom of the front suction pad, has three teeth that the leech uses to pierce the skin of its host. The leech feeds on blood, and its glands secrete an anticoagulant to prevent the blood from clotting. The ordinary medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis) is abundant in springs and ponds from the Negev Desert to Galilee. It adheres to the bodies of human beings and animals that submerge themselves in water, injects its anticoagulant, and sucks their blood.<\/p>\nThe reference in Proverbs 30:15 is uncertain (see nlt<\/span>) but may be to the parasitic and greedy nature of the horse leech (genus Haemopis<\/em>). The small horse leech enters its host’s mouth and nostrils from water while the animal is drinking. A leech weighing one-half ounce (14.2 grams) has been known to gorge itself with two and a half ounces (71 grams) of concentrated blood and then to exist for 15 months with no more to eat.<\/p>\nLeopard<\/p>\nCalled Panthera pardus tulliana,<\/em> it is the most widespread of all the large wildcats. In rocky areas it lives in caves, but in forested regions it lives in thick vegetation. In OT times many lived in the vicinity of Mt Hermon (Sg 4:8).<\/p>\nThe leopard is somewhat smaller than the tiger, measuring up to 5 feet (1.5 meters) in length with a tail of about 30 inches (.8 meter). Its body is better proportioned than that of the tiger. The leopard takes its victim by surprise from a silent ambush, often concealing itself near villages or watering places and waiting for its prey, remaining in one spot for long spans of time. The leopard is swift on the ground (Hb 1:8), agile in trees, and very graceful in its movements. Its color is yellowish speckled with black spots (Jer 13:23). Daniel and John saw visions in which leopards were symbols of world powers (Dn 7:6; Rv 13:2).<\/p>\nThe leopard is a wary and cunning animal, formidable and ferocious (Jer 5:6; Hos 13:7; cf. Is 11:6). The leopard is dangerous not only to domestic animals but also to humans. With its natural camouflage it can hide on the forest floor, blending into the changing light and shadows. The Israelites were terrified of the leopard because it constantly ravaged their sheep and goats. Several biblical place names suggest that they were known for the leopards in their vicinity: Nimrah, Beth-nimrah, and Nimrim, a district northeast of the Dead Sea. It has survived in the Holy Land into the present century; a few leopards still exist in remote areas near Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\nLeviathan<\/p>\nSea monster mentioned several times in the Bible (Pss 74:14; 104:26; Is 27:1, nlt<\/span>). It may refer to any of the larger marine animals such as large jellyfish, whales, or sharks, or to a large reptile like the crocodile. Some scholars think “Leviathan” may refer to animals now extinct, such as ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs (marine reptiles similar to dinosaurs). The scriptural term might also refer to certain dinosaurs that spent part of their lives half-submerged in shallow lakes and oceans. Other scholars believe that most of the references are to the crocodile.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\nLion<\/p>\nLarge, tawny-colored carnivore (Panthera leo)<\/em> that preys chiefly on hoofed mammals and charges by a series of leaps and bounds. Within historic times the lion ranged in Africa, Europe, and the Holy Land. In ancient times the territories of the African and Persian lions met in the Middle East. The lion of the Holy Land was the Asiatic or Persian lion (Panthera leo persica).<\/em><\/p>\nThe males have heavy manes that stop at the shoulders but cover much of the chest. The Persian lion cannot climb and is mainly nocturnal, returning to its lair or a thicket by day (Jer 4:7; 25:38; Na 2:11-12). This lion is about 5 feet (1.5 meters) long with a tasseled tail 30 inches (.8 meter) or so long; its shoulders may reach a height of 35 inches (.9 meter). It is one of the smallest of the lion breeds.<\/p>\nLions are usually found in pairs, though sometimes in larger numbers. A small group is known as a pride. They generally prefer open country but in Palestine evidently prowled the subtropical vegetation of the Jordan River valley. Lions, which usually hunt at dusk, kill smaller animals by a blow of the paw, larger ones by a bite in the throat. A lion does not remain in the same place for more than a few days. The animal is in its prime at about seven years of age, when it weighs from 400 to 600 pounds (181.6 to 272.4 kilograms).<\/p>\nThe lion does not characteristically attack humans, though like other great cats it may become a man-eater (1 Kgs 13:24-28; 20:36; 2 Kgs 17:25-26; Ps 57:4; Dn 6:7-27). Ordinarily, it attacks only out of great hunger or in self-defense. A very young lion that attacks humans can become dangerous if it develops a taste for human flesh. A very old lion, expelled from the pride because it can no longer keep up in the pursuit of antelope or gazelles, may choose humans as a relatively slow-moving prey.<\/p>\nA lion generally roars only on a full stomach—that is, after it has consumed its prey (Ps 22:13; Ez 22:25; Am 3:4). Nevertheless, its roaring arouses fear (Am 3:8; 1 Pt 5:8). The lion is a bold (2 Sm 17:10; Prv 28:1), destructive animal (Ps 7:2; Jer 2:30; Hos 5:14; Mi 5:8), and the enemy of flocks (Am 3:12).<\/p>\nLions were common in biblical times in all parts of the Holy Land. Hebrew has at least seven words for lion and young lion. The lion is referred to about 130 times in the OT—more than any other wild animal. Lions were evidently much less common in NT times. After gradually declining, they became extinct in Palestine shortly after AD<\/span> 1300. The lion was present in Mesopotamia, however, until the end of the 19th century.<\/p>\nLions played an important part in the political and religious symbolism of the Near East (1 Kgs 10:19-20). In Assyria and Babylonia the lion was regarded as a royal beast (Dn 7:4). Oriental monarchs maintained artificial lion pits as places of execution (Ez 19:1-9; Dn 6:7-16). Animals for these were captured in camouflaged nets or pits. To the Jews, the lion was the mightiest of beasts (Prv 30:29-31). Thus, it symbolized leadership (Gn 49:9-10; Nm 24:9) and hence eventually became a title for Christ (Rv 5:5). It was also the ensign of Judah’s tribe and was used by King Solomon in the decoration of his house and the temple.<\/p>\nLizard<\/p>\nReptiles of the suborder Lacertilia. Their skin is covered with scales. The lizard is a useful creature because it captures harmful insects and worms. Like other reptiles, it lays eggs with shells softer than those of a bird and with no clear division between the yolk and the white. Lizards are “cold-blooded” organisms without a temperature-maintenance mechanism; hence, they become inactive in cold weather.<\/p>\nLizards can survive in barren parched countryside. In the Near East they are encountered in great numbers in the Arabian Desert, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Judean wilderness. There may be as many as 44 different species of lizards in the Holy Land.<\/p>\nThe Dabb lizard (genus Uromastyx<\/em>), which attains a length of about 24 inches (61 centimeters), is found in the Negev Desert. It is omnivorous, an unusual trait since most lizards are insectivorous. It has a hard, rough skin, green with brown spots; a short, rounded head; and a powerful tail encircled with a row of strong spines that it uses as a weapon of defense.<\/p>\nLizards are listed as ceremonially unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:29-31). The fact that lizards crawl on their bellies made them unclean. Contact with a lizard’s carcass defiled a law-abiding Jew (Lv 11:32-36). The nlt<\/span> translates the “lizards” of Leviticus 11 as “great lizard,” “gecko,” “monitor lizard,” “sand lizard,” and “chameleon.” The monitor lizard is a large lizard that lives in the deserts of southern Palestine, Sinai, and Egypt. It is up to 55 inches (1.4 meters) long with a long snout and sharp teeth. Other translators and commentators render the original Hebrew in a wide variety of ways, including “tortoise,” “ferret,” “lizard,” “snail,” “mole,” and even “water hen.” The fact that most of the original Hebrew words occur only once in Scripture makes it very difficult to be certain about their appropriate translation.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Gecko (above).<\/p>\nLocust<\/p>\nAn insect of the family Acridiidae.<\/em> It is referred to by at least 12 different names in Scripture. The various Hebrew words may refer to different stages of its development from larva to adult or to the type of damage that it causes. Locusts are characterized by swarming and mass migration. In modern times they have caused extensive and disastrous destruction to vegetation. Grasshoppers do not swarm or migrate en masse, differentiating them from the true locusts.<\/p>\nThe OT mentions several different species of locusts. Leviticus 11:22 seems to refer to the slant-faced (bald) locust and also to the katydid, or long-horned grasshopper. The reference in Deuteronomy 28:42 may be to the mole cricket. In Joel 1:4 and 2:25 and in Nahum 3:16-17, successive stages of the insect’s development are described. The cutting locust (kjv<\/span> “palmerworm”) of Joel is probably the first instar (stage of development), the swarming locusts (kjv<\/span> “locust”) are middle stages, and the hopping locusts (kjv<\/span> “cankerworm”) later instars but not yet fully matured insects. In the adult stage, called destroying locusts (kjv<\/span> “caterpillar”), the color of the locust is reddish brown, which turns to yellow with a brownish network on the wings.<\/p>\nOnly three of the hundreds of varieties of locusts found in Bible lands are capable of multiplying into great swarms, and only the desert locust (Schistocerca gergaria)<\/em> can be considered widespread in all the Bible lands. The desert locust is native to the Sudan (Africa). It is a little over two inches (5 centimeters) long and has a wingspread of some five inches (12.7 centimeters). It shows two phases, a solitary phase and a gregarious phase, with a possible third phase known as transiens. There are differences in the immature and adult forms of the phases in color and physiology.<\/p>\nThe quantity and distribution of rains are important factors in the extent of swarming. Moist soil is needed for depositing the eggs and permitting them to develop. Each female deposits from one to six egg pods, containing 28 to 146 eggs each. The larvae emerge in 15 to 43 days.<\/p>\nIn the gregarious phase (from the second stage of metamorphosis onward), the locust is driven by a strong wandering instinct. Masses of them form a random procession of overflowing locust bodies that ignore any obstruction. They swarm over everything (Jl 2:4-9). The only regulator of their activities is temperature; they are immobilized by high or low temperatures. Taking to wing they may move 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) from their native home. They fly in compact formations large enough to blot out the light of the sun. Their movement seems to be controlled by hormones, but the direction is influenced by the wind. The swarms consume almost every plant in their path, sparing only the carob, sycamore, castor tree, and oleander bush.<\/p>\nA locust plague was one of the most severe evils to come upon the ancient world (Dt 28:38). Joel 2:1-11 describes a locust plague in graphic terms, using it as a symbol of God’s destroying judgment. Special days of prayer, fasting, and trumpet blowing were prescribed to remove locust plagues (1 Kgs 8:37-38; 2 Chr 6:28-29; Jl 2:12-17). Locusts symbolized powerful and merciless enemies that completely destroyed the earnings of human toil (Jgs 6:5; Is 33:4; Jer 46:23; 51:27; Na 3:15).<\/p>\nBedouins eat locusts raw, roasted, or boiled, preserving them by drying and threading. They are also crushed and ground, and the grist used in cooking or eaten with bread, sometimes mixed with honey and dates. Such was the diet of John the Baptist (Mk 1:6). The Greeks ground locusts in stone mortars to make flour of them.<\/p>\nThe ancients considered the two large hind legs, or jumping legs, as separate limbs and had a special name for them. Hence locusts were described as having four legs, a reference to the four smaller walking legs. “Going on all fours” thus referred to creeping or walking as opposed to jumping and did not mean that the unclean insects had only four legs in all. Because of its two hind jumping legs, the locust was exempted from the prohibition against unclean insects (Lv 11:20-23).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\nMole<\/p>\nRodent (Spalax ehrenbergi)<\/em> from six to nine inches (15 to 23 centimeters) long, which burrows in any area where the soil is suitable for digging; it should be called a mole rat. Common in the Holy Land, large numbers are found in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:20 refers to the mole, as does Leviticus 11:29-30 (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe mole rat has no tail and is molelike in appearance, but neither true moles nor shrews have ever been found in the Holy Land. The mole rat’s teeth are strong and protruding like those of a squirrel. The neck is short and thick with a plump body shaped like a sausage. The short legs have broad paws with claws adapted for burrowing. The fur is soft, thick, and ashen gray. Its ears and almost sightless eyes, which are no larger than poppyseeds, are hidden in the fur. Folklore taught that touching a mole rat would result in blindness.<\/p>\nIn the wet winter season the mole rat builds breeding mounds resembling those of pocket gophers. It builds less complex resting mounds in the summer, although both have rather elaborate tunnel systems. The mole rat feeds on roots, bulbs, tubers, and various other subterranean plant parts, often doing extensive damage to agriculture.<\/p>\nMoth<\/p>\nInsect of the genus Tineola<\/em> that lays its eggs on wool or furs, its larvae feeding on those materials. The destructive qualities of moths are referred to in several biblical passages (Jb 13:28; Ps 39:11; Is 50:9; Hos 5:12; Mt 6:19-20; Lk 12:33; Jas 5:2). In Isaiah 51:8 “worm” (nlt<\/span>) refers specifically to the larva of the clothes moth. The moth symbolizes disintegration, decay, and weakening. It is only the larvae that do the damage. The adult is quite harmless and feeds mainly on the nectar of flowers. It is easily crushed (Jb 4:19). The clothes moth reproduces in May or June. It enters human dwellings in the evening. A week after the eggs are laid the larvae appear and immediately begin their work of destruction, eating anything within reach made of animal fibers.<\/p>\nThe moth’s destructive activity is done in secret without any sound and without any dramatic appearance, such as a swarm that blots out the sun. In an age when wealth was counted more in possessions than in money, and when among those possessions wool clothing was highly valued, moths could literally cause economic disaster; hence the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:19-20).<\/p>\nThere are hundreds of species of moths other than the clothes moth in the Holy Land; they are harmless to leaves, flowers, fruit, trees, and seeds. As with the clothes moth, the larvae inflict the damage.<\/p>\nMouse<\/p>\nRodent of the family Muridae, especially genus Mus.<\/em> The mouse was regarded as unclean because, being short legged, it was considered one of the creeping creatures (Lv 11:29). Mice known as commensals live in dwellings and tend to have longer tails and to be darker in color than wild mice, which are active chiefly at night. Mice are good climbers and even good swimmers. Wild mice eat many kinds of vegetation, including seeds, fleshy roots, leaves, and stems. At times they store food.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew word for “mouse” (Lv 11:29; 1 Sm 6:4-5; Is 66:17) is probably a general term for various rats and mice. The root meaning of the Hebrew word “mouse” is “destruction of corn,” a reference to the damage mice do to field crops. At least 23 varieties of mouselike rodents are known in the Holy Land. They cause food spoilage, damage household articles, and transport the host fleas that spread typhus, spotted fever, and bubonic plague. Plague bacteria may have caused the tumors or swellings among the Philistines (1 Sm 6:5). Isaiah 66:17 refers to a pre-exilic Canaanite cultic practice in which mice were eaten; the reference may actually be to the hamster. A number of rodents are eaten by Arabs of the Near East; the gerbil is considered a special delicacy. See<\/em> Mole (above).<\/p>\nMule<\/p>\nHybrid offspring of a male ass and a female horse (Equus asinus mulus),<\/em> ordinarily sterile. The offspring of a female donkey and a stallion (male horse) is known as a hinny and is of little value because of its inferior size.<\/p>\nBecause crossbreeding was forbidden in the law (Lv 19:19), the Israelites procured mules from the Gentiles, perhaps from the Phoenicians, since Tyre (a Phoenician seaport in what is now southern Lebanon) imported horses and mules (Ez 27:14). Mules did not appear in Israel until David’s reign (2 Sm 13:29), possibly because of the rarity of horses among the Hebrews. Mules were used chiefly by members of the royal court and by other nobles. King David rode on a mule, and Solomon rode to his inaugaration on King David’s mule (1 Kgs 1:33). Absalom met his death riding on a mule (2 Sm 18:9). Mules were less common than horses, camels, and asses in the postexilic community (Ezr 2:66). In antiquity Asia Minor was especially noted for breeding fine mules.<\/p>\nMules have long enjoyed a reputation for obstinacy, but that trait is not mentioned in the Bible. The mule is prized for riding and for carrying heavy burdens, especially in warm mountainous regions. They are sure-footed and thrive best in hot, dry climates. The mule has the frugality, endurance, and steady gait of an ass along with the size, strength, swiftness, and courage of a horse. Mules are almost never sick. They live longer than horses. They can carry a load of up to 300 pounds (136 kilograms) as far as 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) a day.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nPig<\/p>\nMost properly, newborn swine. “Swine” is technically the better name for the species, but it is rarely used in common speech today. The domestic pigs of the Middle East derived from the wild pig (Sus scrofa).<\/em> The pig is the most prolific and abundant supplier of meat and fat for food. A thick layer of fat just under the skin is especially pronounced in domestic breeds. Pigs cannot be driven, so they are of value only to the settled farmer. The Hebrews were originally a nomadic people; therefore, they had little use for an animal closely associated with settled life. An Egyptian prince of about 1500 BC<\/span>, however, is recorded as owning a herd of 1,500 swine.<\/p>\nThe pig is clumsily built, yet lively and able to move with agility and speed. The most conspicuous characteristic of the pig is a truncated, mobile snout terminating in a disc-shaped surface on which the nostrils are located. Most pigs have large tusks in both jaws which grow continuously in life. The tusks of the upper jaw are unique in that they curve upward instead of pointing downward as in most animals. The excrement of a pig has an almost unbearable odor, which clings not only to the pig itself but also to swineherds, who can be identified a long way off.<\/p>\nPigs were never raised in the Holy Land by Jews. The great herd into which Jesus drove the unclean spirits was encountered in the land of the Gadarenes, a non-Jewish area east of the Jordan. The Gadarene demons took refuge in a herd of pigs feeding on a bluff overlooking the Sea of Galilee (Mt 8:28-32).<\/p>\nWild pigs were found in the Holy Land as in many countries today. Psalm 80:13 refers to the destructiveness of a wild boar (the male, or hog) attacking growing crops. A party of wild boars can destroy an entire vineyard or a field of crops in a single night. They devour, trample, and ravage everything within reach.<\/p>\nBoar hunts were common in ancient Mesopotamia. Wild boars do not attack unless molested, but they are dangerous when aroused. They travel in bands of from 6 to 50 and are most active in the evening and early morning hours. The body is covered with stiff bristles and usually some finer hair, but the body covering is often quite scanty. Wild pigs are mainly vegetarian, feeding on roots, nuts, grains, and plant stems. Wild boars were particularly abundant in the mountainous regions of Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, in the Jordan River valley, and in wooded sections such as Mt Tabor.<\/p>\nStrict Jews would not even mention swine by name but would always substitute the term “the abomination.” Israelites considered themselves polluted if they were even touched by a swine’s bristle. To the Jews, the pig symbolized filth and ugliness. Pigs will eat fecal material, vermin, rodents, carrion, and the like (2 Pt 2:22). Proverbs 11:22 refers to the incongruity of a golden ring in the nose of an animal showing such characteristics. A similar metaphor occurs in Jesus’ statement about casting pearls before swine (Mt 7:6). The prodigal son’s degeneration was shown by his being forced in his poverty to feed pigs and eat their food (Lk 15:15-16).<\/p>\nEating the flesh of pigs was forbidden to the Jews (Lv 11:7; Dt 14:8). The Canaanites in the Holy Land killed and ate pigs freely. In intertestamental times Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), a Syrian king whose territories included Israel, used the pig to “Hellenize” the Jews. He first tested their loyalty to the Jewish faith by requiring the consumption of pork, considered a delicacy by the Greeks (2 Macc 6:18). The act of desecration that drove the Jews to rebellion, however, was the sprinkling of pig blood on the temple altar in a sacrifice to Zeus (1 Macc 1:47).<\/p>\nPigs were frequently used in pagan worship (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17), which may account for their being forbidden to the Jews as food. Evidence in the Holy Land shows that pigs were sacrificed long before Hellenistic times. Pig bones were found in a grotto below the rock-cut place of sacrifice at Gezer. A similar underground chamber with vessels containing piglet bones at Tirzah dates to the middle Bronze Age (about 2000 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nAlabaster fragments of a statuette of a pig ready to be sacrificed have been unearthed. Swine were sacrificed to Aphrodite (Venus) in Greece and Asia Minor. In addition, pigs were sacrificed in connection with oaths and treaties; in the Iliad,<\/em> Agamemnon sacrificed a boar to Zeus and Helios. So it is not surprising that among the Jews the pig became a symbol of filthiness and paganism.<\/p>\nIt is possible that eating pork was forbidden primarily because the pig may carry many worm parasites such as trichina, though that is also true of some “clean” animals. Another reason for forbidding their consumption may have been that pigs eat carrion. Some people are allergic to pork in hot weather—another suggested reason behind the Jewish taboo. The same taboo exists among the Muslims and existed in certain social strata in Egypt.<\/p>\nPorcupine<\/p>\nRodent, Hystrix cristata,<\/em> which lives in forested areas, rocky hills, ravines, and valleys. The porcupine is still found in the Holy Land today. It has long quills that can be raised to give the appearance of a crest. It is almost entirely nocturnal. It burrows by day into a natural cavity or crevice. The Old World porcupine rarely climbed trees, although the New World porcupine frequently does. A porcupine may weigh as much as 60 pounds (27.2 kilograms). It eats fruit, bark, roots, and other vegetation, and carrion as well. Although its flesh is edible, the porcupine was not classed among the clean animals for the Israelites. The reference in Isaiah 34:11 (rsv<\/span>) is probably to the porcupine, as is Isaiah 14:23 in the nlt<\/span>. See<\/em> Hedgehog.<\/p>\nScorpion<\/p>\nArthropod of the same group as spiders (arachnids). A dozen species of scorpions (order Scorpionida) are found in the Holy Land, but 90 percent of the scorpions are yellow scorpions, usually three to five inches (7.6 to 12.7 centimeters) long. The rock scorpion, also common to the Holy Land, is as thick as a man’s finger and from five to seven inches (12.7 to 17.8 centimeters) in length. Scorpions are slow, nocturnal invertebrates that rest beneath stones by day and prey on insects and other arachnids by night. At the end of its long tail the scorpion carries a poisonous sting that is fatal to most prey and extremely painful to humans (Rv 9:3, 5, 10; cf. 1 Kgs 12:11, 14). Scorpions symbolize Ezekiel’s evil countrymen (Ez 2:6) and the demonic forces of Satan (Lk 10:19). The scorpion is referred to as frequenting the Sinai Desert (Dt 8:15).<\/p>\nA scorpion has from six to eight eyes. It has eight legs like a spider and two lobsterlike claws with which it catches and holds its prey. It feeds particularly on locusts and beetles. In many species the female scorpion eats the male after mating. Scorpions lay eggs that hatch very shortly after laying. Scorpions prefer warmer climates, and because of their desire for warmth, enter houses, especially at night, hiding in beds, blankets, footwear, and clothing.<\/p>\nSheep<\/p>\nDomestic animal, Ovis orientalis,<\/em> referred to directly or by some term such as ewe, lamb, ram, or by some fact concerning them over 700 times in Scripture.<\/p>\nSheep represented the chief wealth and total livelihood of pastoral peoples, providing food to eat, milk to drink, wool for the making of cloth, and hides and bones for other uses. In addition, the sheep was a medium of exchange and a sacrificial animal. The number of sheep raised in ancient times was prodigious. Mesha, king of Moab, paid a tribute annually of 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams (2 Kgs 3:4). The Israelites took 250,000 sheep from the Hagrites (1 Chr 5:21).<\/p>\nSheep shearing was often done for festivals (2 Sm 13:23). The sheep was held down on its side and its legs were tied together; then it lay docilely while its wool was clipped (Is 53:7). Sheep reserved for burnt offerings were not shorn; nothing could be held back from a sacrifice to the Lord.<\/p>\nWool had to be processed before it could be used for clothing. First it was washed, sometimes while still on the sheep, then carded and perhaps weighed for the market. The spinning of wool was regarded as a woman’s work (Prv 31:19), but weaving the spun thread into cloth on a loom was primarily a man’s occupation.<\/p>\nThe Bible reports that Abel kept sheep (Gn 4:2). The first sheep to be domesticated was probably the argali (Ovis ammon),<\/em> a variety of the urial (Ovis vignei),<\/em> a mountainous species still existing in Turkestan and Mongolia. Five breeds had reached Mesopotamia by 2000 BC<\/span>; all were of the urial stock.<\/p>\nThe sheep known in Israel was the broad-tailed sheep (Ovis orientalis vignei<\/em> or laticaudata),<\/em> of which the tail weighs from 10 to 15 pounds (4.5 to 6.8 kilograms) and has always been considered a delicacy. Thus the Lord asked for this choice part as a sacrifice (Ex 29:22-25).<\/p>\nOnly the ram of the broad-tailed sheep has horns, but in other varieties of sheep in the Holy Land the ewe also has horns. The horns, two to three inches (5 to 8 centimeters) in diameter, can be potent weapons. Rams’ horns could be used as trumpets (Jos 6:4) or as oil containers (1 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\nAlthough the sheep is very similar to the goat, it is differentiated by a lower forehead, its angulated spiral horns marked with transverse wrinkles and curved slightly outward, its covering of wool, and its lack of a “goatee.” Most sheep are white (Ps 147:16; Is 1:18; Dn 7:9; Rv 1:14).<\/p>\nThe flesh of sheep was a luxury in the biblical culture. King Solomon required a daily provision of 100 sheep for his table (1 Kgs 4:23), but the common people ate lamb or mutton only on festive occasions. A young ram was usually chosen because the ewes were more important to the future prospects of the herd. The meat was boiled in large caldrons. The milk of the sheep is extremely rich; in biblical times it was usually allowed to curdle before drinking. Possibly some Israelites kept lambs in their houses as pets (2 Sm 12:3-4).<\/p>\nTo protect the flock at night against predatory attacks, the shepherd tried to provide a fold. In meadows near villages, folds were built and watchmen were hired to relieve the shepherds. The shepherds of the nativity story were out in the field (Lk 2:8); they had no fold but probably had set up a tent for shelter, consisting simply of goat-hair blankets spread across sapling supports. The scarcity of springs in the Holy Land made the watering of the flock a crucial problem for the shepherd (Gn 13:8-11).<\/p>\nWild mountain sheep, varieties of Ovis orientalis,<\/em> are known in the Mediterranean area (Dt 14:5). The Deuteronomy passage (kjv<\/span> “chamois”) might also refer to Ovis traelaphus,<\/em> a sheep about five feet high (1.5 meters) with long, curved horns. Another possibility is the Barbary sheep that lives in small flocks in rugged mountain areas in Barbary, Egypt, and Mt Sinai. The true chamois is unknown in Palestine.<\/p>\nThe sheep is also used figuratively in Scripture. The ram represented great strength and fittingly symbolized Medo-Persia in Daniel’s vision (Dn 8:3). It is the nature of sheep to be gentle and submissive (Is 53:7; Jer 11:19), defenseless (Mi 5:8; Mt 10:16), and in constant need of guidance and care (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36). Such qualities are regarded as desirable in the lives of believers in Christ; hence the many figurative references to sheep in the NT and to Jesus as shepherd (Mk 6:34; Jn 10:1-30; Rom 8:35-37; Heb 13:20-21; 1 Pt 2:25). The resurrected Christ told the apostle Peter to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep” (Jn 21:15-17).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\nSnail<\/p>\nInvertebrate gastropods (mollusks). Land snails are very numerous in the Near East. Some freshwater forms serve as hosts for the schistosome worm, the fluke parasite causing the dread disease bilharzia (schistosomiasis).<\/p>\nPurple dyes of all shades were highly valued in the ancient world. A royal purple dye was obtained from secretions of a sea snail (Murex trunculus<\/em> and Murex brandaris).<\/em> Evidently, that process was developed by Phoenicians, Egyptians, and Assyrians as early as 1500 BC<\/span>. The “purple” fishermen had their own guild during the time of the Roman Empire. The snails were harvested during the fall and winter seasons; in the spring, when egg laying took place, little dye was available. The snails tended to remain concealed in the summer. They inhabited the waters off Crete and Phoenicia. Tyrian purple, produced in the Phoenician city of Tyre, the center of the purple-dye industry, was obtained by a double dyeing. Large deposits of murex shells from dyeing operations have been found along the Mediterranean shoreline. The Israelites had to import purple goods (Ez 27:16). Lydia was a “seller of purple” or of cloth so dyed (Acts 16:14). Purple was a sign of distinction, royalty, and wealth (cf. Ex 25:4; 28:5-6, 15; Nm 15:38; 2 Chr 2:7; Est 8:15; Prv 31:22; Sg 3:10; Ez 27:7; Dn 5:7).<\/p>\nExodus 30:34-35 refers to “onycha,” which was an important ingredient of incense. Onycha is the horny, clawlike operculum (the plate that closes off the opening of its shell when a snail is retracted) of a Near Eastern member of the molluskan family Strombidae. The operculum is sometimes used for offense or locomotion as well as for defense. When burned, the operculum gives off a sharp, strong scent, and when mixed with more fragrant but less powerful substances is even more potent. The name “onycha” is derived from a Greek word (onyx)<\/em> for a fingernail or a claw.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>\nSnake<\/p>\nVarious species of snake, suborder Ophidia (Serpentes). In the Bible nine Hebrew words and four Greek ones refer to snakes. The most common Hebrew word is onomatopoeic—that is, it is an imitation of a snake hissing or of the sound it produces as it scrapes its scales along the ground (cf. Jer 46:22). Many types of snakes lay eggs (Is 59:5), although some retain the eggs in the body until ready to hatch.<\/p>\nSnakes are among the most widespread reptiles and are found on all continents except Antarctica; they decrease in numbers and species toward the poles but increase as one approaches the equator. Thirty-three species of snakes are known in Palestine and neighboring countries, 20 of which are poisonous. Two dangerous characteristics of the snake noted by biblical writers are its inconspicuous way of moving and the ease with which it hides itself.<\/p>\nMany snakes are able to swallow animals several times their own diameter because of their unusually flexible jaw mechanism. They lack not only legs but also movable eyelids. Snakes periodically shed their skins. The tongue is actually a hearing apparatus sensitive to airborne vibrations and probably to heat waves.<\/p>\nThe venom of poisonous species is a clear, thin secretion, transmitted to the victim’s bloodstream by means of fangs. Two types of venom are known: that of the vipers, which affects respiration and disintegrates red blood cells, and that of the cobras, which paralyzes the nervous system.<\/p>\nThe “asp” referred to in the Bible is probably the cobra; the “adder” is the viper. The “cockatrice” (kjv<\/span>) is probably the adder. Serpents were associated with worship in Canaanite religion and symbolized evil deities among many other peoples. Steles (upright stones bearing inscriptions) have been unearthed at several sites in the Holy Land and Syria depicting a god or worshiper with a snake winding about the legs or body. Because the Israelites were burning incense in pagan worship of Moses’ bronze serpent (Nm 21:8-9), King Hezekiah destroyed it in his religious reform (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\nAlthough snakes have been an object of veneration in some religions, in the Judeo-Christian tradition snakes represent evil and, more specifically, the devil. That association began in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:1-15) and is also found in the book of Revelation (12:9; 20:2-3).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Adder (above); Asp (above).<\/p>\nSpider<\/p>\nAnimal of the order Araneida. Between 600 and 700 different species inhabit the Holy Land. Spiders are different from insects in that, like scorpions, they have four pairs of legs instead of three. Spiders are equipped with poison glands—the effectiveness varying from species to species. A few can kill only insects, but others can also kill birds and mice.<\/p>\nMost spiders have a pair of spinnerets attached to silk glands on the underside of the abdomen; from them a web is extruded. In the Bible the spider’s web is referred to as a symbol of frailty and insecurity (Jb 8:14; Is 59:5-6).<\/p>\nSponge<\/p>\nSimple marine animals, phylum Porifera. The term “sponge” also refers to those animals’ skeletal remains. The sponge has a porous body composed of tubules and cells.<\/p>\nSponge fishing was well known in the Mediterranean area in ancient times. It was practiced particularly along the Anatolian and Syrian coasts. Sponges were harvested by divers. The use of sponges in absorbing liquids is referred to in the Bible (Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36).<\/p>\nUnicorn<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Wild Ox (below).<\/p>\nWasp<\/p>\nInsects of the family Vespidae. Hornets are social wasps that build large aerial apartment houses in which 1,000 or more individuals may live. In the Bible the hornet is used as a metaphor for God’s use of military forces (Ex 23:28; Dt 7:20; Jos 24:12).<\/p>\nWhale<\/p>\nLargest of all living creatures, including those that have become extinct. Whales are air-breathing mammals of the order Cetacea.<\/p>\nTwo varieties of whales visit the shores of the Holy Land at times. The finback whale (Balaenoptera physalus)<\/em> weighs about 200 tons (181 metric tons) and lives mainly in the Arctic region but sometimes passes through the Straits of Gibraltar to reach the eastern Mediterranean Sea. It feeds on small marine organisms that it strains through its whale bone; it does not have teeth. The finback whale’s esophagus is narrow.<\/p>\nThe sperm whale (Physeter catodon),<\/em> about 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, has a curiously shaped head that looks like a battering ram. The teeth in the lower jaw of the male sperm whale are about seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long. It feeds on big fish, even on sharks. It has a large throat opening.<\/p>\nWhales are referred to in Genesis 1:21 and Job 7:12 (kjv<\/span> only). The “great fish” of Jonah 2:1 need not have been a whale but could have been a large shark, such as the whale shark (Rhineodon),<\/em> which grows 70 feet (21.3 meters) long and lacks the terrible teeth of other sharks. Whatever the actual marine organism, Jonah’s deliverance was miraculous. The Greek word for “whale” is sometimes used as a general term for “sea monster” or huge fish and may be used in that sense in Matthew 12:40.<\/p>\nWild Ox<\/p>\nLarge, fierce, fleet, intractable animal (Bos primigenius).<\/em> It had a long, lean rump with a straight back and a long, narrow head. The animal described in Job 39:9-12 is clearly the wild ox. The two horns (Dt 33:17), its outstanding characteristic, were straight and as long as the head (Nm 23:22; 24:8; Ps 22:21). Kings often symbolized their dominion by wearing a helmet with two wild ox horns (cf. Pss 92:10; 132:17-18). The horns were often used as drinking vessels by the Israelites; some were large enough to hold four gallons (15 liters).<\/p>\nHunting the wild ox was a favorite sport of Assyrian kings. Tiglath-pileser I hunted it in the Lebanon Mountains about 1100 BC<\/span> (cf. Ps 29:6). At one time the animal referred to in Job 39:9-12 was thought to be the oryx or antelope because of the similarity between the Hebrew word in Job and the Arabian name for oryx. The translators of the kjv<\/span> called the wild ox a “unicorn” because of representations found on Babylonian mosaics and Egyptian drawings. Those representations showed it in strict profile, showing only one horn—hence, “unicorn.” Jerome’s Vulgate, a Latin Bible translation (fourth century AD<\/span>) and Martin Luther’s German version translated it similarly.<\/p>\nWolf<\/p>\nLarge doglike mammal (Canis lupus)<\/em> that travels in bands of up to 30 animals. From the nose to the rump, the wolf measures about 3 feet (.9 meter); its drooping tail is about 18 inches (.5 meter) long. It looks much like a skinny German shepherd dog. The grayish yellow pelt is coarse and short haired.<\/p>\nWolves hunt singly or in relays, usually at night (Jer 5:6). Wolves have acute hearing and sight but rely chiefly on scent and usually catch their prey in a swift, open chase. The wolf has a reputation for boldness, fierceness, and voracity (Gn 49:27; Hb 1:8). It commonly kills more than it can eat or drag away and thus is known for its greediness.<\/p>\nThe wolf is a restless animal, always on the move; hunger drives it from one place to another in constant search of new hunting grounds. During spring and fall, wolves usually roam singly or in pairs, whereas in summer they may travel in family groups. In winter, several such groups may join to form a large pack. Wolves are intelligent, social creatures, faithful to their own kind. They mate for life. Individually, the wolf is a rather timid animal; it would much rather avoid human beings. But collectively wolves can be among the most dangerous animals alive.<\/p>\nIn Egypt, Rome, and Greece the wolf was considered sacred. Wolves were well known in the Holy Land and are still found there and also in many places in Asia Minor. Shepherds continually battled with wolves that plundered their flocks (Jn 10:12).<\/p>\nThe Bible refers to wolves in a literal sense in only three places (Is 11:6; 65:25; Jn 10:12), all other references being figurative. Usually the wolf is a symbol of enemies or the wicked (e.g., Ez 22:27; Zep 3:3; Acts 20:29). Both the wolf’s courage and its cruelty were probably in the mind of the patriarch Jacob when he predicted the fate of Benjamin’s tribe (Gn 49:27).<\/p>\nWorm<\/p>\nActually insect larvae in most biblical references, usually maggots, the larvae of flies (see Fly, above). For example, maggots are evidently referred to in accounts of worms feeding on spoiled manna (Ex 16:19-20), corpses (Jb 21:26; Is 14:11), or open wounds (Jb 7:5). Mark 9:48 refers to a maggot that eats dead flesh. In Acts 12:23 a fatal, worm-induced abdominal disease of King Herod is mentioned. In other cases, the reference is to the larvae of other insects (Is 51:8). In Deuteronomy 28:39 and Jonah 4:7 the vine weevil (Cochylis ambiguella)<\/em> is probably referred to; it destroys vines by boring into their stems. Comparing a man to a worm is a metaphor for abasement (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANIMALS In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals ...","summary_en":"ANIMALS In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45009,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:15","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:15","content_ro":"12:15<\/strong> butcher your animals . . . whenever you want:<\/em> This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean:<\/em> The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.<\/p>","content_en":"12:15<\/strong> butcher your animals . . . whenever you want:<\/em> This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean:<\/em> The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:15 butcher your animals . . . whenever you want: This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean: The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.","summary_en":"12:15 butcher your animals . . . whenever you want: This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean: The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72635,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:15","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:15","content_ro":"12:15<\/strong> butcher your animals . . . whenever you want:<\/em> This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean:<\/em> The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.<\/p>","content_en":"12:15<\/strong> butcher your animals . . . whenever you want:<\/em> This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean:<\/em> The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:15 butcher your animals . . . whenever you want: This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean: The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.","summary_en":"12:15 butcher your animals . . . whenever you want: This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean: The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100261,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:15","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:15","content_ro":"12:15<\/strong> butcher your animals . . . whenever you want:<\/em> This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean:<\/em> The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.<\/p>","content_en":"12:15<\/strong> butcher your animals . . . whenever you want:<\/em> This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean:<\/em> The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:15 butcher your animals . . . whenever you want: This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean: The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.","summary_en":"12:15 butcher your animals . . . whenever you want: This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean: The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127887,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:15","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:15","content_ro":"12:15<\/strong> butcher your animals . . . whenever you want:<\/em> This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean:<\/em> The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.<\/p>","content_en":"12:15<\/strong> butcher your animals . . . whenever you want:<\/em> This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean:<\/em> The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:15 butcher your animals . . . whenever you want: This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean: The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.","summary_en":"12:15 butcher your animals . . . whenever you want: This instruction refers to animals for eating, not for a ritual sacrifice. • ceremonially clean or unclean: The slaughter of animals for food could take place without the slayer undergoing the purification rituals necessary when sacrificial animals were slain.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":6863,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Regulations concerning Cleanness and Uncleanness","title_en":"and Uncleanness, Regulations concerning, Cleanness","content_ro":"<h3>CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning<\/h3>\nAspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\nThe OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and personal lines—God’s personal nature being expressed in his giving of the law to Moses. The personal and uniquely consistent character of Israel’s Lord made him morally a completely different being from the many gods of pagan cultures. Unlike the Lord, the Baals of the Canaanites were capricious and vicious; nobody expected them to be ethically consistent. Israel’s Lord, on the other hand, could be trusted to keep his word (a verbal communication through his chosen prophets). Nobody, not even the high priest or the king, was above the law, which expressed not only God’s character but also his sovereign will for the individual and the nation. His moral consistency carried over into his miraculous interventions into history to protect his people, to judge them and their enemies, and to redeem humanity itself.<\/p>\nCleanness as defined in the book of Leviticus, therefore, was always conditioned by the presence of the personal God who gave the law. As the people sought to approach the Lord, they necessarily did so on his terms and therefore within the framework of the cultic ceremonies he had prescribed. Details of the Levitical ceremonies were designed to illustrate the moral implications of the sinner’s approach to God and God’s provision for his people to become morally clean in his sight.<\/p>\nThe meaning of the Levitical system was stated clearly in the psalmist’s words: “Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord<\/span>? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully” (Ps 24:3-4, rsv<\/span>). One’s state of cleanness depends not only on external actions but also on an internal relationship with God. As a result, the sinner’s inability to satisfy the moral demands of a holy God leads to his or her complete dependence on God and on God’s provision for satisfying his own demands. That provision was detailed in the law.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Early History<\/p>\n• Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n• Purification Rites<\/p>\n• New Testament Perspective<\/p>\nEarly History<\/p>\n<h5>Gentile Religious Background<\/h5>\nThe gentile conscience was no doubt a strong influence on the development of ethnic notions of clean and unclean. The subjective sense of sin’s uncleanness is universally encountered in one form or another in the literature of every great religion, whatever explanation is given for it. Many religions have rites of purification based on water and washings. The Hebrews’ ritual avoidance of certain objects, some because of their holiness and others because of their unholiness, finds an analogy in the taboos of many primitive religions, including some of those with which the early Hebrews came into contact.<\/p>\nThe similarities between the Hebrew and other ancient religions are easily established by superficial comparison. It would be surprising if there were none. Those differences that give biblical religion its distinctive character, however, must be accounted for.<\/p>\nLevitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<h5>Ceremonial and Moral Law<\/h5>\nThe relationship between the external ceremonial details of the Mosaic law and the internally directed moral requirements of such parts of it as the Ten Commandments is one of the fundamental issues of OT theology. It is possible to demonstrate that, throughout the OT, uncleanness and sin are virtually synonymous. In many passages sin is described as uncleanness (e.g., Lv 16:16, 30; the ordeal of the bitter water in Nm 5:11-28; Zec 13:1).<\/p>\nThe relationship between ceremonial and moral cleanness can be illustrated from passages mentioning clean hands on the one hand (2 Sm 22:21; Jb 17:9; 22:30) and a clean heart on the other (Pss 24:4; 51:10; 73:13; Prv 20:9). The prophet Isaiah felt convicted of “unclean lips” when he was in God’s presence; a purifying coal, perhaps representing forgiveness and atonement, cleansed him (Is 6:5-7). In many passages cleanness represents innocence before God (Jb 11:4; 33:9; Ps 51:7-10; Prv 20:9), and uncleanness is said to come from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 64:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Causes of Uncleanness<\/h5>\nFrom the Mosaic law a number of causes of uncleanness can be derived.<\/p>\n1. Some foods were not to be eaten. Various laws concerning animals make a “distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten” (Lv 11:47, rsv<\/span>). Permitted food was what was acceptable to God (see also Dt 14:3-21; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<li>2. Diseases, especially leprosy, produced an unclean state (Lv 13–14). The story of Naaman refers to leprous defilement (2 Kgs 5:1-14). The Gospels refer often to lepers (e.g., Mt 8:1-4; 10:8; 11:5; Lk 4:27). Many swellings, sores, and rashes were included under that heading, including Hansen’s disease (modern leprosy). The defilement of disease included all things touched by a diseased person (Lv 14:33-57).<\/li>\n<li>3. Bodily discharges were unclean, and contact with them defiled a person for various periods of time. Emission of semen produced uncleanness until the evening, whether in intercourse (Lv 15:16-18) or inadvertently during the night (Dt 23:10). An unnatural discharge, since it usually indicated disease, made a person unclean for seven days after it had ceased (Lv 15:1-15). Menstruation also produced uncleanness lasting seven days after it ceased (Lv 15:19-24; 2 Sm 11:4). Sexual intercourse during that time made both partners unclean (Lv 15:19-24; 20:18). Contact with the spittle of an unclean person produced uncleanness for a day (15:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Dead bodies, or even parts of them such as bone, caused uncleanness (Nm 19:16). Persons who touched a dead body were unclean for a month, and only after that period could they celebrate their own Passover if they had missed it (9:6-11). The high priest could not even bury his own parents because of his special ritual responsibilities (Lv 21:10-11; cf. Nm 6:6-7; Hg 2:13; Mt 23:27).<\/li>\n<li>5. Idolatry was the greatest source of spiritual defilement. The entire nation of Israel was defiled because of it (Ps 106:38; Is 30:22; Ez 36:25), as were the Gentiles (Jer 43:12). Consequently, contact with Gentiles was thought to produce defilement. The gospel’s universal appeal confronted that conviction (e.g., Jn 4:9; Acts 10:28; cf. Gal 2:11-14). Closely related to the defilement of idolatry was the defilement caused by unclean spirits (Zec 13:2; cf. Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23-27).<\/li>\n<h5>Laws about Objects<\/h5>\nCertain laws illustrate the principle that uncleanness was transmitted much like a contagion. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched, as did dead insects and certain crawling things (Lv 11:29-38). It is interesting that dry grain, running springwater, and water in a cistern were expressly excluded from that law of contamination; perhaps otherwise, starvation would have resulted, dead insects and mice being found in grain and water every day in an agricultural community. Unclean pottery had to be broken, but wooden vessels merely required washing (Lv 15:12). Even uncovered pots in a house where a person had died became unclean (Nm 19:15); everyone who entered the house was unclean.<\/p>\nBecause of their idolatrous associations, the possessions of pagans were unclean; therefore, booty taken in war had to be cleansed by fire or washing (Nm 31:21-24). Clothing of wool, linen, or leather could contract unclean “leprosy” from diseased persons and had to be tested. If the leprous spots (greenish or reddish patches) spread after a test period, the garments had to be burned (Lv 13:47-59; 14:33-53).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Places<\/h5>\nThe land and people of Israel were holy; they could be defiled by the uncleanness of economic oppression or idolatry (Jos 22:17-19; Jer 13:27). Jerusalem was a holy city, but it could be defiled by the sins of its people (Ez 22:2-4; Lam 1:8) or by the blood of its slaughtered inhabitants (Lam 4:15).<\/p>\nThe temple could be defiled by unclean persons. It was necessary for Hezekiah to cleanse the temple after Ahaz’s idolatrous worship (2 Chr 29:15-19); Nehemiah had to cleanse the rooms in which Tobiah had been living (Neh 13:9). One of the functions of the Day of Atonement was removal of impurities transferred to the temple by the sins of the Israelites during the past year (Lv 16:16-19; 31-33).<\/p>\nAn unclean place received the pieces of a leprous house after its demolition (Lv 14:45). The valley of Hinnom became Jerusalem’s garbage dump in later years, giving rise to the visions of “Gehenna” as a place of eternal punishment in NT eschatology. Since the Israelite camp was a holy place, care was taken to bury human excrement outside its boundaries (Dt 23:12-14). The value of that simple expedient in preventing disease during military excursions can hardly be exaggerated, since plagues were a great scourge of ancient armies.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Food<\/h5>\nCertain kinds of animals were unclean and thus could not be eaten (Lv 11; Dt 14:3-21). Animals that died of old age, disease, or injury, or had been wounded by predators, were unclean. Animals that did not both chew the cud and have a cloven hoof were unclean, a definition that included pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits among others. Israelites could eat only those fish that had both fins and scales. Birds of prey and scavengers were unclean. All winged insects were unclean except hopping insects (locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets). A large classification of “crawling things” was prohibited, including worms, lizards, snakes, weasels, and mice. In addition to all those was the ancient prohibition against eating blood (Gn 9:4; Lv 17:14-15; Dt 12:16-23; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\nPurification Rites<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Lapse of Time<\/h5>\nSecondary contamination could often be canceled simply by waiting until the evening (Lv 11:24) or for 7, 14, 40, or 80 days. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched for 7 days (Nm 19:11), as did menstruation (Lv 15:19). When a child was born, the mother’s unclean condition lasted 7 days for a boy and 14 days for a girl. An additional 33 days for a male child and 66 days for a female were required before the mother could touch any sacred thing.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Water<\/h5>\nContact with unclean things, such as bodily discharges, often required washing of hands and clothing, usually accompanied by the lapse of a day (Lv 15:5-11).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Ceremonial Substances<\/h5>\nCeremonial substances used in purification rites included the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water (Nm 19:1-10), and (in cases of leprosy) cedarwood, scarlet cloth, hyssop, and blood (Lv 14:2-9). When the altar was used in a purification ceremony, only blood was suitable, since the altar was the place of sacrifice for sin (Lv 16:18-19; Ez 43:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Sacrifice<\/h5>\nSacrifice was the ultimate source of both ritual and moral purification. All bodily discharges except sexual ones were purified by offerings of doves and pigeons (Lv 15:14-15, 29-30). Childbirth required a lamb and a bird (12:6). Poor people could offer birds in place of an animal (Lv 12:8; 14:21-32; Lk 2:24).<\/p>\nIn sacrifice, blood was symbolic of a life given and therefore a death experienced; the uncleanness of disease or sin was thought of as being transferred to the victim, thus removing the uncleanness (Lv 14:7). Sacrificial death, therefore, always had a substitutionary element. Only blood sacrifice could provide the moral cleansing necessary for sin itself; such sacrifice was therefore the basis of all cleansing, including that of disease.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Fire<\/h5>\nSome contamination could be removed only by fire, such as contamination of metal pots (Nm 31:22-23). Incest was punishable not only by death but also by burning the bodies (Lv 20:14). Idolatry had to be put away by total destruction of the objects and by burning (Ex 32:20). Cities consecrated to pagan deities were to be burned.<\/p>\nNew Testament Perspective<\/p>\nThe NT did not reject the OT concept of clean and unclean, but rather reinterpreted it in a new context. It stressed in particular the moral sense of the concept as well as the identification of uncleanness with sin.<\/p>\nThe Gospels were written in the context of OT law and its Pharisaic and Sadducean accretions. Jesus obeyed the law but was often at odds with the practical casuistry (system) that had grown up around it. Jesus taught that true defilement came from the sinner’s heart and not from outside contamination (Mk 7:14-23; Lk 11:39-41). A central element in his teaching was his attack on the ceremonial externalism of the Pharisees. Thus it has been said that Jesus “internalized” the law. It would be more correct to say that he forced attention to the law’s demands on people’s inner lives.<\/p>\nThe intrinsic wickedness of demons is underscored by the use of the term “unclean spirit” throughout the Gospels. In fact, the word “unclean” itself always appears in the Gospels in the context of spirit, a detail that illustrates the NT shift of emphasis from ritual uncleanness to sin and its guilt.<\/p>\nAn important episode in the life of the early church came in Acts 10, when God taught the apostle Peter that Gentiles were not unclean in themselves and that Peter was obliged to receive them. The result was Cornelius’s conversion.<\/p>\nJesus’ assertion that uncleanness originates in the heart bore fruit in the apostle Paul’s doctrine of Christian freedom. Paul, a Pharisee who could say of himself that he had never broken an external law, came to see that nothing is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14-20). Throughout his epistles, cleanness is the result of obedience of the heart flowing from regeneration; it is based on the cleansing power of the Atonement (see Rom 6:19; 1 Thes 2:3-4, where uncleanness is strictly moral).<\/p>\nChrist’s atonement was the final cleansing agent for sin and its moral results (Heb 9:14, 22; 1 Jn 1:7), doing in reality what the blood of bulls and goats only typified. Thus those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb (Rv 7:14) are seen as wearing clean white robes (15:6; 19:8-14). His blood, symbolizing the life given and the death died by the Son at the behest of the Father, satisfies the attributes of personal justice of the triune God. Because the personal character of a righteous Father was vindicated, the personal forgiveness of sinners is morally possible. God can be in history only what he is eternally: he is both just and the justifier of believers in Christ (Rom 3:24-26).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Baptism; Circumcision; Uncircumcision; Offerings and Sacrifices; Law, Biblical Concept of; Dietary Laws.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning<\/h3>\nAspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\nThe OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and personal lines—God’s personal nature being expressed in his giving of the law to Moses. The personal and uniquely consistent character of Israel’s Lord made him morally a completely different being from the many gods of pagan cultures. Unlike the Lord, the Baals of the Canaanites were capricious and vicious; nobody expected them to be ethically consistent. Israel’s Lord, on the other hand, could be trusted to keep his word (a verbal communication through his chosen prophets). Nobody, not even the high priest or the king, was above the law, which expressed not only God’s character but also his sovereign will for the individual and the nation. His moral consistency carried over into his miraculous interventions into history to protect his people, to judge them and their enemies, and to redeem humanity itself.<\/p>\nCleanness as defined in the book of Leviticus, therefore, was always conditioned by the presence of the personal God who gave the law. As the people sought to approach the Lord, they necessarily did so on his terms and therefore within the framework of the cultic ceremonies he had prescribed. Details of the Levitical ceremonies were designed to illustrate the moral implications of the sinner’s approach to God and God’s provision for his people to become morally clean in his sight.<\/p>\nThe meaning of the Levitical system was stated clearly in the psalmist’s words: “Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord<\/span>? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully” (Ps 24:3-4, rsv<\/span>). One’s state of cleanness depends not only on external actions but also on an internal relationship with God. As a result, the sinner’s inability to satisfy the moral demands of a holy God leads to his or her complete dependence on God and on God’s provision for satisfying his own demands. That provision was detailed in the law.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Early History<\/p>\n• Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n• Purification Rites<\/p>\n• New Testament Perspective<\/p>\nEarly History<\/p>\n<h5>Gentile Religious Background<\/h5>\nThe gentile conscience was no doubt a strong influence on the development of ethnic notions of clean and unclean. The subjective sense of sin’s uncleanness is universally encountered in one form or another in the literature of every great religion, whatever explanation is given for it. Many religions have rites of purification based on water and washings. The Hebrews’ ritual avoidance of certain objects, some because of their holiness and others because of their unholiness, finds an analogy in the taboos of many primitive religions, including some of those with which the early Hebrews came into contact.<\/p>\nThe similarities between the Hebrew and other ancient religions are easily established by superficial comparison. It would be surprising if there were none. Those differences that give biblical religion its distinctive character, however, must be accounted for.<\/p>\nLevitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<h5>Ceremonial and Moral Law<\/h5>\nThe relationship between the external ceremonial details of the Mosaic law and the internally directed moral requirements of such parts of it as the Ten Commandments is one of the fundamental issues of OT theology. It is possible to demonstrate that, throughout the OT, uncleanness and sin are virtually synonymous. In many passages sin is described as uncleanness (e.g., Lv 16:16, 30; the ordeal of the bitter water in Nm 5:11-28; Zec 13:1).<\/p>\nThe relationship between ceremonial and moral cleanness can be illustrated from passages mentioning clean hands on the one hand (2 Sm 22:21; Jb 17:9; 22:30) and a clean heart on the other (Pss 24:4; 51:10; 73:13; Prv 20:9). The prophet Isaiah felt convicted of “unclean lips” when he was in God’s presence; a purifying coal, perhaps representing forgiveness and atonement, cleansed him (Is 6:5-7). In many passages cleanness represents innocence before God (Jb 11:4; 33:9; Ps 51:7-10; Prv 20:9), and uncleanness is said to come from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 64:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Causes of Uncleanness<\/h5>\nFrom the Mosaic law a number of causes of uncleanness can be derived.<\/p>\n1. Some foods were not to be eaten. Various laws concerning animals make a “distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten” (Lv 11:47, rsv<\/span>). Permitted food was what was acceptable to God (see also Dt 14:3-21; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<li>2. Diseases, especially leprosy, produced an unclean state (Lv 13–14). The story of Naaman refers to leprous defilement (2 Kgs 5:1-14). The Gospels refer often to lepers (e.g., Mt 8:1-4; 10:8; 11:5; Lk 4:27). Many swellings, sores, and rashes were included under that heading, including Hansen’s disease (modern leprosy). The defilement of disease included all things touched by a diseased person (Lv 14:33-57).<\/li>\n<li>3. Bodily discharges were unclean, and contact with them defiled a person for various periods of time. Emission of semen produced uncleanness until the evening, whether in intercourse (Lv 15:16-18) or inadvertently during the night (Dt 23:10). An unnatural discharge, since it usually indicated disease, made a person unclean for seven days after it had ceased (Lv 15:1-15). Menstruation also produced uncleanness lasting seven days after it ceased (Lv 15:19-24; 2 Sm 11:4). Sexual intercourse during that time made both partners unclean (Lv 15:19-24; 20:18). Contact with the spittle of an unclean person produced uncleanness for a day (15:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Dead bodies, or even parts of them such as bone, caused uncleanness (Nm 19:16). Persons who touched a dead body were unclean for a month, and only after that period could they celebrate their own Passover if they had missed it (9:6-11). The high priest could not even bury his own parents because of his special ritual responsibilities (Lv 21:10-11; cf. Nm 6:6-7; Hg 2:13; Mt 23:27).<\/li>\n<li>5. Idolatry was the greatest source of spiritual defilement. The entire nation of Israel was defiled because of it (Ps 106:38; Is 30:22; Ez 36:25), as were the Gentiles (Jer 43:12). Consequently, contact with Gentiles was thought to produce defilement. The gospel’s universal appeal confronted that conviction (e.g., Jn 4:9; Acts 10:28; cf. Gal 2:11-14). Closely related to the defilement of idolatry was the defilement caused by unclean spirits (Zec 13:2; cf. Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23-27).<\/li>\n<h5>Laws about Objects<\/h5>\nCertain laws illustrate the principle that uncleanness was transmitted much like a contagion. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched, as did dead insects and certain crawling things (Lv 11:29-38). It is interesting that dry grain, running springwater, and water in a cistern were expressly excluded from that law of contamination; perhaps otherwise, starvation would have resulted, dead insects and mice being found in grain and water every day in an agricultural community. Unclean pottery had to be broken, but wooden vessels merely required washing (Lv 15:12). Even uncovered pots in a house where a person had died became unclean (Nm 19:15); everyone who entered the house was unclean.<\/p>\nBecause of their idolatrous associations, the possessions of pagans were unclean; therefore, booty taken in war had to be cleansed by fire or washing (Nm 31:21-24). Clothing of wool, linen, or leather could contract unclean “leprosy” from diseased persons and had to be tested. If the leprous spots (greenish or reddish patches) spread after a test period, the garments had to be burned (Lv 13:47-59; 14:33-53).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Places<\/h5>\nThe land and people of Israel were holy; they could be defiled by the uncleanness of economic oppression or idolatry (Jos 22:17-19; Jer 13:27). Jerusalem was a holy city, but it could be defiled by the sins of its people (Ez 22:2-4; Lam 1:8) or by the blood of its slaughtered inhabitants (Lam 4:15).<\/p>\nThe temple could be defiled by unclean persons. It was necessary for Hezekiah to cleanse the temple after Ahaz’s idolatrous worship (2 Chr 29:15-19); Nehemiah had to cleanse the rooms in which Tobiah had been living (Neh 13:9). One of the functions of the Day of Atonement was removal of impurities transferred to the temple by the sins of the Israelites during the past year (Lv 16:16-19; 31-33).<\/p>\nAn unclean place received the pieces of a leprous house after its demolition (Lv 14:45). The valley of Hinnom became Jerusalem’s garbage dump in later years, giving rise to the visions of “Gehenna” as a place of eternal punishment in NT eschatology. Since the Israelite camp was a holy place, care was taken to bury human excrement outside its boundaries (Dt 23:12-14). The value of that simple expedient in preventing disease during military excursions can hardly be exaggerated, since plagues were a great scourge of ancient armies.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Food<\/h5>\nCertain kinds of animals were unclean and thus could not be eaten (Lv 11; Dt 14:3-21). Animals that died of old age, disease, or injury, or had been wounded by predators, were unclean. Animals that did not both chew the cud and have a cloven hoof were unclean, a definition that included pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits among others. Israelites could eat only those fish that had both fins and scales. Birds of prey and scavengers were unclean. All winged insects were unclean except hopping insects (locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets). A large classification of “crawling things” was prohibited, including worms, lizards, snakes, weasels, and mice. In addition to all those was the ancient prohibition against eating blood (Gn 9:4; Lv 17:14-15; Dt 12:16-23; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\nPurification Rites<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Lapse of Time<\/h5>\nSecondary contamination could often be canceled simply by waiting until the evening (Lv 11:24) or for 7, 14, 40, or 80 days. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched for 7 days (Nm 19:11), as did menstruation (Lv 15:19). When a child was born, the mother’s unclean condition lasted 7 days for a boy and 14 days for a girl. An additional 33 days for a male child and 66 days for a female were required before the mother could touch any sacred thing.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Water<\/h5>\nContact with unclean things, such as bodily discharges, often required washing of hands and clothing, usually accompanied by the lapse of a day (Lv 15:5-11).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Ceremonial Substances<\/h5>\nCeremonial substances used in purification rites included the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water (Nm 19:1-10), and (in cases of leprosy) cedarwood, scarlet cloth, hyssop, and blood (Lv 14:2-9). When the altar was used in a purification ceremony, only blood was suitable, since the altar was the place of sacrifice for sin (Lv 16:18-19; Ez 43:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Sacrifice<\/h5>\nSacrifice was the ultimate source of both ritual and moral purification. All bodily discharges except sexual ones were purified by offerings of doves and pigeons (Lv 15:14-15, 29-30). Childbirth required a lamb and a bird (12:6). Poor people could offer birds in place of an animal (Lv 12:8; 14:21-32; Lk 2:24).<\/p>\nIn sacrifice, blood was symbolic of a life given and therefore a death experienced; the uncleanness of disease or sin was thought of as being transferred to the victim, thus removing the uncleanness (Lv 14:7). Sacrificial death, therefore, always had a substitutionary element. Only blood sacrifice could provide the moral cleansing necessary for sin itself; such sacrifice was therefore the basis of all cleansing, including that of disease.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Fire<\/h5>\nSome contamination could be removed only by fire, such as contamination of metal pots (Nm 31:22-23). Incest was punishable not only by death but also by burning the bodies (Lv 20:14). Idolatry had to be put away by total destruction of the objects and by burning (Ex 32:20). Cities consecrated to pagan deities were to be burned.<\/p>\nNew Testament Perspective<\/p>\nThe NT did not reject the OT concept of clean and unclean, but rather reinterpreted it in a new context. It stressed in particular the moral sense of the concept as well as the identification of uncleanness with sin.<\/p>\nThe Gospels were written in the context of OT law and its Pharisaic and Sadducean accretions. Jesus obeyed the law but was often at odds with the practical casuistry (system) that had grown up around it. Jesus taught that true defilement came from the sinner’s heart and not from outside contamination (Mk 7:14-23; Lk 11:39-41). A central element in his teaching was his attack on the ceremonial externalism of the Pharisees. Thus it has been said that Jesus “internalized” the law. It would be more correct to say that he forced attention to the law’s demands on people’s inner lives.<\/p>\nThe intrinsic wickedness of demons is underscored by the use of the term “unclean spirit” throughout the Gospels. In fact, the word “unclean” itself always appears in the Gospels in the context of spirit, a detail that illustrates the NT shift of emphasis from ritual uncleanness to sin and its guilt.<\/p>\nAn important episode in the life of the early church came in Acts 10, when God taught the apostle Peter that Gentiles were not unclean in themselves and that Peter was obliged to receive them. The result was Cornelius’s conversion.<\/p>\nJesus’ assertion that uncleanness originates in the heart bore fruit in the apostle Paul’s doctrine of Christian freedom. Paul, a Pharisee who could say of himself that he had never broken an external law, came to see that nothing is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14-20). Throughout his epistles, cleanness is the result of obedience of the heart flowing from regeneration; it is based on the cleansing power of the Atonement (see Rom 6:19; 1 Thes 2:3-4, where uncleanness is strictly moral).<\/p>\nChrist’s atonement was the final cleansing agent for sin and its moral results (Heb 9:14, 22; 1 Jn 1:7), doing in reality what the blood of bulls and goats only typified. Thus those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb (Rv 7:14) are seen as wearing clean white robes (15:6; 19:8-14). His blood, symbolizing the life given and the death died by the Son at the behest of the Father, satisfies the attributes of personal justice of the triune God. Because the personal character of a righteous Father was vindicated, the personal forgiveness of sinners is morally possible. God can be in history only what he is eternally: he is both just and the justifier of believers in Christ (Rom 3:24-26).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Baptism; Circumcision; Uncircumcision; Offerings and Sacrifices; Law, Biblical Concept of; Dietary Laws.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people. The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and persona...","summary_en":"CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people. The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and persona...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9599,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Laws*, Dietary","title_en":"Laws*, Dietary","content_ro":"<h3>DIETARY LAWS*<\/h3>\nRegulations of food preparation and consumption provided by God for his people in OT times. The dietary laws formed part of broader regulations on “cleanness” that were designed to maintain Israel’s status as a holy people.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Holiness and Dietary Law<\/p>\n• Before Moses<\/p>\n• The Mosaic Law<\/p>\n• After Moses<\/p>\n• Symbolism<\/p>\n• Reactions from the Church<\/p>\nHoliness and Dietary Law<\/p>\nBiblical laws concerning diet and cleanness were based on the idea of holiness. The underlying meaning of the Hebrew word for “holiness” is difficult to ascertain but most probably was “to cut,” or “to be separate,” or “to set apart.” The Lord told Israel, “You shall be holy to me; for I the Lord<\/span> am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be mine” (Lv 20:26, rsv<\/span>). God is the supreme example of holiness; he is the one uniquely separate in his character and being (Is 6:3). But God wanted his covenant people to be holy, too. One of the ways that God made the Israelites different from the other peoples of the world was by giving them dietary laws: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy” (Lv 11:44, niv<\/span>). Keeping the dietary laws did not automatically make the people “holy” (i.e., separated to God); rather, it was one of the ways OT believers could show their gratitude to God for his deliverance.<\/p>\nBefore Moses<\/p>\nFrom the Creation, God approved all varieties of fruit and vegetables as legitimate, clean food (Gn 1:29). After the fall of humanity, God distinguished between clean and unclean animals. At the time of Noah, God directed that additional specimens of clean animals be taken aboard the ark (7:2; 8:20). After the Flood, God prohibited the eating of blood because blood represented life (9:4). To commemorate the patriarch Jacob’s wrestling with the Angel of the Lord, Jacob’s descendants refrained from eating a certain hip muscle (32:32), though that was not a command from God.<\/p>\nThe Mosaic Law<\/p>\nThe primary revelation of the Lord’s dietary standards for Israel was given through Moses. Dietary laws are found among the ceremonial regulations received at Mt Sinai (Lv 11). Moses repeated many of those laws 39 years later, shortly before the people entered the Promised Land (Dt 14:3-21). The dietary laws concerned only animal products, except for the prohibition of wine to certain people (Lv 10:9; Nm 6:3-4; cf. Jgs 13:14; Jer 35:6).<\/p>\nFive categories of living things were regulated for food. To be edible an animal had to have cloven (divided) hooves and had to chew its cud. According to Leviticus, that requirement ruled out camels, horses, rabbits, and pigs (Lv 11:2-8). Sea life had to have fins and scales (vv 9-12). Birds were edible if they were not predatory (vv 13-19); Moses went on to list 20 species specifically prohibited because they were birds of prey or scavengers. Winged insects were forbidden (vv 22-23) except for certain types of locusts and grasshoppers (food commonly eaten by desert nomads). Finally, “the animals that move about on the ground,” including reptiles and rodents (vv 29-31, niv<\/span>), were ruled out.<\/p>\nFurther prohibitions were made about food that otherwise would have been considered clean. For example, nothing found already dead (Dt 14:21) or that had been torn by beasts (Lv 17:15) was to be eaten. Food could become defiled by contact with some other thing that was unclean, like a dead mouse that happened to fall into a food container (11:32-34). A young goat was not to be boiled in its mother’s milk (Ex 23:19; 34:26; Dt 14:21). When clean animals were slaughtered, their blood was to be drained out (Lv 17:14). All pieces of fat (3:16; 7:23), especially a sheep’s fat tail (Ex 29:22; Lv 3:9), were restricted for use in sacrifices to the Lord. Through Moses the Lord reiterated the prohibition against eating blood (Lv 17:10; 19:26; Dt 12:16; 15:23).<\/p>\nSeveral reasons, stated in or inferred from Scripture, account for the dietary laws and apply to the Bible’s cleanness regulations in general. Some seem to be natural reasons; others may be symbolic or relational.<\/p>\n<h5>Hygiene<\/h5>\nSome dietary laws, such as those against eating vermin or decomposing flesh, circumvented obvious health hazards and were given for the people’s protection. But hygiene alone cannot account for all the regulations; in fact, some foods that might have been acceptable from a hygienic viewpoint, such as rabbit or clams, were excluded.<\/p>\n<h5>Aversion<\/h5>\nWorms and snakes are generally considered loathsome, whatever their actual food value. Such animals were not kosher<\/em> (proper).<\/p>\n<h5>Relationship to Pagan Practice<\/h5>\nBoiling a young goat in its mother’s milk has now been documented as a pagan rite among Moses’ contemporaries, the Canaanites. God’s people were not to imitate the practices of the peoples around them (Dt 18:9).<\/p>\nAfter Moses<\/p>\nThe dietary laws given at Mt Sinai continued to be recognized throughout Israel’s history. Before the birth of Samson, the child’s mother was warned, “Now see to it that you drink no wine or other fermented drink and that you do not eat anything unclean” (Jgs 13:4, niv<\/span>). During the Philistine wars of the next century (c. 1041 BC<\/span>), King Saul’s soldiers sinned by disregarding requirements about the proper draining of blood from animals (1 Sm 14:32-34).<\/p>\nLater, when the Israelites were exiled in heathen lands, they were faced with situations in which the selection of food and its preparation could render it unclean (Ez 4:12-14). Daniel’s refusal to be defiled by pagan delicacies at Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylonian court (605 BC<\/span>) illustrated his loyalty to God (Dn 1:8).<\/p>\nFrom the prophet Isaiah’s day (740 BC<\/span>) onward, the most abhorrent food to the Israelites was the meat of swine (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17). In the Maccabean period the “abomination of desolation,” which the Jewish hero Judas Maccabeus and his followers resisted to the death, included sacrifices of pigs on the temple altar in Jerusalem by the pagan ruler Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Macc 1:54, 62-63; 2 Macc 6:5; 7:1).<\/p>\nSymbolism<\/p>\nCertain food products were ruled out because of something they symbolized. God said not to eat blood: “Be sure that you do not eat the blood; for the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh” (Dt 12:23, rsv<\/span>). Blood had a ritual function. It was used to make atonement on God’s altar and therefore was not to be eaten (Lv 17:11-12). The NT writers recognized the sacrificial blood of the OT as a “type” or foreshadowing of the blood of Jesus Christ shed on the cross as a sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:1, 4, 12; 1 Pt 1:18-19). A symbolic regard for maternal life may explain why one who came upon a bird’s nest was allowed to take the eggs or the young but had to leave the mother bird unharmed (Dt 22:6-7). The need to preserve a fragile desert ecosystem may also have been a factor.<\/p>\nReactions from the Church<\/p>\nAt first the early church, with its Jewish background, found it difficult to break away from Hebrew dietary traditions. The apostle Peter was given a vision, repeated three times, about no longer calling either non-Jewish food or the non-Jews who ate it “unclean” (Acts 10:9-16; 11:1-10). Later, a council at Jerusalem officially decided not to retain Moses’ ceremonialism in the church, except that gentile Christians should abstain “from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood” (Acts 15:20, niv<\/span>) in order not to offend Jewish Christians. That was an application of the NT teaching of consideration for those with sensitive consciences. “Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. . . . But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin” (Rom 14:20, 23, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nJewish dietary laws also have relevance to Christians because of certain OT promises. God promised, first to Abraham and, by reiteration or allusion, throughout the OT, that the Gentiles would be included in his covenant. By preserving the health of the Hebrew people, God was ensuring their continuation as a nation. According to the NT, the salvation of both Jews and Gentiles was achieved by Christ, a Jew. The nation through which Christ came was protected in order that God’s promise could be fulfilled. Thus, the dietary laws need not be seen as burdensome restrictions of the law; they were part of God’s way of working out his redemptive plan.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Leviticus, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DIETARY LAWS*<\/h3>\nRegulations of food preparation and consumption provided by God for his people in OT times. The dietary laws formed part of broader regulations on “cleanness” that were designed to maintain Israel’s status as a holy people.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Holiness and Dietary Law<\/p>\n• Before Moses<\/p>\n• The Mosaic Law<\/p>\n• After Moses<\/p>\n• Symbolism<\/p>\n• Reactions from the Church<\/p>\nHoliness and Dietary Law<\/p>\nBiblical laws concerning diet and cleanness were based on the idea of holiness. The underlying meaning of the Hebrew word for “holiness” is difficult to ascertain but most probably was “to cut,” or “to be separate,” or “to set apart.” The Lord told Israel, “You shall be holy to me; for I the Lord<\/span> am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be mine” (Lv 20:26, rsv<\/span>). God is the supreme example of holiness; he is the one uniquely separate in his character and being (Is 6:3). But God wanted his covenant people to be holy, too. One of the ways that God made the Israelites different from the other peoples of the world was by giving them dietary laws: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy” (Lv 11:44, niv<\/span>). Keeping the dietary laws did not automatically make the people “holy” (i.e., separated to God); rather, it was one of the ways OT believers could show their gratitude to God for his deliverance.<\/p>\nBefore Moses<\/p>\nFrom the Creation, God approved all varieties of fruit and vegetables as legitimate, clean food (Gn 1:29). After the fall of humanity, God distinguished between clean and unclean animals. At the time of Noah, God directed that additional specimens of clean animals be taken aboard the ark (7:2; 8:20). After the Flood, God prohibited the eating of blood because blood represented life (9:4). To commemorate the patriarch Jacob’s wrestling with the Angel of the Lord, Jacob’s descendants refrained from eating a certain hip muscle (32:32), though that was not a command from God.<\/p>\nThe Mosaic Law<\/p>\nThe primary revelation of the Lord’s dietary standards for Israel was given through Moses. Dietary laws are found among the ceremonial regulations received at Mt Sinai (Lv 11). Moses repeated many of those laws 39 years later, shortly before the people entered the Promised Land (Dt 14:3-21). The dietary laws concerned only animal products, except for the prohibition of wine to certain people (Lv 10:9; Nm 6:3-4; cf. Jgs 13:14; Jer 35:6).<\/p>\nFive categories of living things were regulated for food. To be edible an animal had to have cloven (divided) hooves and had to chew its cud. According to Leviticus, that requirement ruled out camels, horses, rabbits, and pigs (Lv 11:2-8). Sea life had to have fins and scales (vv 9-12). Birds were edible if they were not predatory (vv 13-19); Moses went on to list 20 species specifically prohibited because they were birds of prey or scavengers. Winged insects were forbidden (vv 22-23) except for certain types of locusts and grasshoppers (food commonly eaten by desert nomads). Finally, “the animals that move about on the ground,” including reptiles and rodents (vv 29-31, niv<\/span>), were ruled out.<\/p>\nFurther prohibitions were made about food that otherwise would have been considered clean. For example, nothing found already dead (Dt 14:21) or that had been torn by beasts (Lv 17:15) was to be eaten. Food could become defiled by contact with some other thing that was unclean, like a dead mouse that happened to fall into a food container (11:32-34). A young goat was not to be boiled in its mother’s milk (Ex 23:19; 34:26; Dt 14:21). When clean animals were slaughtered, their blood was to be drained out (Lv 17:14). All pieces of fat (3:16; 7:23), especially a sheep’s fat tail (Ex 29:22; Lv 3:9), were restricted for use in sacrifices to the Lord. Through Moses the Lord reiterated the prohibition against eating blood (Lv 17:10; 19:26; Dt 12:16; 15:23).<\/p>\nSeveral reasons, stated in or inferred from Scripture, account for the dietary laws and apply to the Bible’s cleanness regulations in general. Some seem to be natural reasons; others may be symbolic or relational.<\/p>\n<h5>Hygiene<\/h5>\nSome dietary laws, such as those against eating vermin or decomposing flesh, circumvented obvious health hazards and were given for the people’s protection. But hygiene alone cannot account for all the regulations; in fact, some foods that might have been acceptable from a hygienic viewpoint, such as rabbit or clams, were excluded.<\/p>\n<h5>Aversion<\/h5>\nWorms and snakes are generally considered loathsome, whatever their actual food value. Such animals were not kosher<\/em> (proper).<\/p>\n<h5>Relationship to Pagan Practice<\/h5>\nBoiling a young goat in its mother’s milk has now been documented as a pagan rite among Moses’ contemporaries, the Canaanites. God’s people were not to imitate the practices of the peoples around them (Dt 18:9).<\/p>\nAfter Moses<\/p>\nThe dietary laws given at Mt Sinai continued to be recognized throughout Israel’s history. Before the birth of Samson, the child’s mother was warned, “Now see to it that you drink no wine or other fermented drink and that you do not eat anything unclean” (Jgs 13:4, niv<\/span>). During the Philistine wars of the next century (c. 1041 BC<\/span>), King Saul’s soldiers sinned by disregarding requirements about the proper draining of blood from animals (1 Sm 14:32-34).<\/p>\nLater, when the Israelites were exiled in heathen lands, they were faced with situations in which the selection of food and its preparation could render it unclean (Ez 4:12-14). Daniel’s refusal to be defiled by pagan delicacies at Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylonian court (605 BC<\/span>) illustrated his loyalty to God (Dn 1:8).<\/p>\nFrom the prophet Isaiah’s day (740 BC<\/span>) onward, the most abhorrent food to the Israelites was the meat of swine (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17). In the Maccabean period the “abomination of desolation,” which the Jewish hero Judas Maccabeus and his followers resisted to the death, included sacrifices of pigs on the temple altar in Jerusalem by the pagan ruler Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Macc 1:54, 62-63; 2 Macc 6:5; 7:1).<\/p>\nSymbolism<\/p>\nCertain food products were ruled out because of something they symbolized. God said not to eat blood: “Be sure that you do not eat the blood; for the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh” (Dt 12:23, rsv<\/span>). Blood had a ritual function. It was used to make atonement on God’s altar and therefore was not to be eaten (Lv 17:11-12). The NT writers recognized the sacrificial blood of the OT as a “type” or foreshadowing of the blood of Jesus Christ shed on the cross as a sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:1, 4, 12; 1 Pt 1:18-19). A symbolic regard for maternal life may explain why one who came upon a bird’s nest was allowed to take the eggs or the young but had to leave the mother bird unharmed (Dt 22:6-7). The need to preserve a fragile desert ecosystem may also have been a factor.<\/p>\nReactions from the Church<\/p>\nAt first the early church, with its Jewish background, found it difficult to break away from Hebrew dietary traditions. The apostle Peter was given a vision, repeated three times, about no longer calling either non-Jewish food or the non-Jews who ate it “unclean” (Acts 10:9-16; 11:1-10). Later, a council at Jerusalem officially decided not to retain Moses’ ceremonialism in the church, except that gentile Christians should abstain “from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood” (Acts 15:20, niv<\/span>) in order not to offend Jewish Christians. That was an application of the NT teaching of consideration for those with sensitive consciences. “Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. . . . But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin” (Rom 14:20, 23, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nJewish dietary laws also have relevance to Christians because of certain OT promises. God promised, first to Abraham and, by reiteration or allusion, throughout the OT, that the Gentiles would be included in his covenant. By preserving the health of the Hebrew people, God was ensuring their continuation as a nation. According to the NT, the salvation of both Jews and Gentiles was achieved by Christ, a Jew. The nation through which Christ came was protected in order that God’s promise could be fulfilled. Thus, the dietary laws need not be seen as burdensome restrictions of the law; they were part of God’s way of working out his redemptive plan.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Leviticus, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DIETARY LAWS* Regulations of food preparation and consumption provided by God for his people in OT times. The dietary laws formed part of broader regulations on “cleanness” that were designed to maintain Israel’s status as a holy people. Preview • Holiness and Dietary Law • Before Moses • The Mosaic Law • After Moses • Symbolism • Reactions from the Church Holiness and Dietary Law Biblical laws concerning diet and cleanness were based on the idea of holiness. The underlying meaning of the Heb...","summary_en":"DIETARY LAWS* Regulations of food preparation and consumption provided by God for his people in OT times. The dietary laws formed part of broader regulations on “cleanness” that were designed to maintain Israel’s status as a holy people. Preview • Holiness and Dietary Law • Before Moses • The Mosaic Law • After Moses • Symbolism • Reactions from the Church Holiness and Dietary Law Biblical laws concerning diet and cleanness were based on the idea of holiness. The underlying meaning of the Heb...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28308,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45010,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:16","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:16","content_ro":"12:16<\/strong> The prohibition against consuming blood<\/em> pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.<\/p>","content_en":"12:16<\/strong> The prohibition against consuming blood<\/em> pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:16 The prohibition against consuming blood pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.","summary_en":"12:16 The prohibition against consuming blood pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72636,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:16","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:16","content_ro":"12:16<\/strong> The prohibition against consuming blood<\/em> pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.<\/p>","content_en":"12:16<\/strong> The prohibition against consuming blood<\/em> pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:16 The prohibition against consuming blood pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.","summary_en":"12:16 The prohibition against consuming blood pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100262,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:16","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:16","content_ro":"12:16<\/strong> The prohibition against consuming blood<\/em> pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.<\/p>","content_en":"12:16<\/strong> The prohibition against consuming blood<\/em> pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:16 The prohibition against consuming blood pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.","summary_en":"12:16 The prohibition against consuming blood pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127888,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:16","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:16","content_ro":"12:16<\/strong> The prohibition against consuming blood<\/em> pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.<\/p>","content_en":"12:16<\/strong> The prohibition against consuming blood<\/em> pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:16 The prohibition against consuming blood pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.","summary_en":"12:16 The prohibition against consuming blood pertained both to sacrificial animals and to those slain for meat. Because it represented life, blood was sacred and was to be rendered only to God. This principle is inherent in creation and preceded the law (Gen 4:10-11; 9:4-6; Lev 17:11). See also study note on Lev 7:26-27.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":28223,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28381,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Oil","title_en":"Oil","content_ro":"<h3>OIL<\/h3>\nSubstance most commonly produced from the olive berry, although the word could also apply to oil of myrrh (Est 2:12). Oil was used primarily in cooking, but additionally as a cosmetic for anointing the body, for medicinal purposes, as a source of light, for anointing kings and priests, and in religious offerings.<\/p>\nThe growth of olive trees was widespread, and the Israelites took advantage of this major crop to establish a thriving trade in oil with Tyre and Egypt. Like precious metals and animals, oil became an established medium of exchange. Solomon used it as part of the payment to Hiram for construction expenses connected with the temple (1 Kgs 5:11; Ez 27:17).<\/p>\nBecause oil was essential for everyday life, it was an effective and acceptable medium of barter. Oil was used in the preparation of most food (1 Kgs 17:12-16). The common cake or patty of grain, which formed the basis of the noon meal, would be cooked on a griddle with a little oil.<\/p>\nAs a cosmetic, oil was used for anointing the body after a bath (Ru 3:3; 2 Sm 12:20). It was frequently used on festive occasions, and at Egyptian banquets the heads of both the guests and the female entertainers were anointed. In the NT, the anointing of the sick is mentioned (Jas 5:14). Olive oil could also be taken internally as a medicine for the relief of gastric disorders. It had a soothing effect and was also used as a mild laxative. It was applied externally as an ointment for bruises, burns, cuts, and abrasions (Is 1:6; Mk 6:13; Lk 10:34).<\/p>\nAs soon as the sun set, the only source of light was the oil lamp. Often the small portable one could be placed easily on a shelf, but in large homes, palaces, synagogues, or temples, the lamp could rest on a tall metal base like a standard lamp. The wick of flax (Is 42:3) or hemp was placed in the oil that gave out a flame until it was extinguished or the supply of fuel ran out. Torches were used in the streets both to light the way and for additional security. They added immeasurably to the festive atmosphere of evening processions. Torches were an essential part of the wedding procession, and normally those carrying the torches brought a quantity of oil in a container in case there was a delay and their supply was exhausted. This scene is vividly portrayed in Jesus’ parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-13).<\/p>\nIn other ceremonial events, oil had a special meaning when used for the anointing of kings (1 Sm 10:1; 1 Kgs 1:39) and priests (Ex 29:7). It was symbolic of the office and of the recognition of God’s blessing on the officeholder.<\/p>\nQuantities of oil were used in the temple. It was donated as part of the firstfruit offering (Ex 22:29) and was also subject to tithing (Dt 12:17). Oil was frequently used for the ceremonial aspect of temple life or as part of the offering. The grain offering was mixed with oil (Lv 8:26; Nm 7:19), and the oil in the lamp that burned in the sanctuary constantly needed replenishing (Lv 24:2). The daily sacrifice required the use of oil (Ex 29:40), although the sin offering (Lv 5:11) and the jealousy offering (Nm 5:15) specifically did not use oil.<\/p>\nA pestle and mortar, or a stone press, pressed oil from the olives (Ex 27:20). Where the latter was used, the pulp initially produced by the press was often trodden out or subjected to further extensive pressing. Stone presses were set up to process the quantities of berries available at the Mt of Olives. The word for “oil press” was gatt-semen,<\/em> hence the name Gethsemane.<\/p>\nOil was symbolically associated with joy, festivity, ceremony, honor, light, and health (both spiritual and physical), while its absence spelled sorrow (Jl 1:10) and the withdrawal of all that is good in life.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Anoint; Food and Food Preparation; Medicine and Medical Practice; Ointment; Plants (Olive, Olive Tree).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OIL<\/h3>\nSubstance most commonly produced from the olive berry, although the word could also apply to oil of myrrh (Est 2:12). Oil was used primarily in cooking, but additionally as a cosmetic for anointing the body, for medicinal purposes, as a source of light, for anointing kings and priests, and in religious offerings.<\/p>\nThe growth of olive trees was widespread, and the Israelites took advantage of this major crop to establish a thriving trade in oil with Tyre and Egypt. Like precious metals and animals, oil became an established medium of exchange. Solomon used it as part of the payment to Hiram for construction expenses connected with the temple (1 Kgs 5:11; Ez 27:17).<\/p>\nBecause oil was essential for everyday life, it was an effective and acceptable medium of barter. Oil was used in the preparation of most food (1 Kgs 17:12-16). The common cake or patty of grain, which formed the basis of the noon meal, would be cooked on a griddle with a little oil.<\/p>\nAs a cosmetic, oil was used for anointing the body after a bath (Ru 3:3; 2 Sm 12:20). It was frequently used on festive occasions, and at Egyptian banquets the heads of both the guests and the female entertainers were anointed. In the NT, the anointing of the sick is mentioned (Jas 5:14). Olive oil could also be taken internally as a medicine for the relief of gastric disorders. It had a soothing effect and was also used as a mild laxative. It was applied externally as an ointment for bruises, burns, cuts, and abrasions (Is 1:6; Mk 6:13; Lk 10:34).<\/p>\nAs soon as the sun set, the only source of light was the oil lamp. Often the small portable one could be placed easily on a shelf, but in large homes, palaces, synagogues, or temples, the lamp could rest on a tall metal base like a standard lamp. The wick of flax (Is 42:3) or hemp was placed in the oil that gave out a flame until it was extinguished or the supply of fuel ran out. Torches were used in the streets both to light the way and for additional security. They added immeasurably to the festive atmosphere of evening processions. Torches were an essential part of the wedding procession, and normally those carrying the torches brought a quantity of oil in a container in case there was a delay and their supply was exhausted. This scene is vividly portrayed in Jesus’ parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-13).<\/p>\nIn other ceremonial events, oil had a special meaning when used for the anointing of kings (1 Sm 10:1; 1 Kgs 1:39) and priests (Ex 29:7). It was symbolic of the office and of the recognition of God’s blessing on the officeholder.<\/p>\nQuantities of oil were used in the temple. It was donated as part of the firstfruit offering (Ex 22:29) and was also subject to tithing (Dt 12:17). Oil was frequently used for the ceremonial aspect of temple life or as part of the offering. The grain offering was mixed with oil (Lv 8:26; Nm 7:19), and the oil in the lamp that burned in the sanctuary constantly needed replenishing (Lv 24:2). The daily sacrifice required the use of oil (Ex 29:40), although the sin offering (Lv 5:11) and the jealousy offering (Nm 5:15) specifically did not use oil.<\/p>\nA pestle and mortar, or a stone press, pressed oil from the olives (Ex 27:20). Where the latter was used, the pulp initially produced by the press was often trodden out or subjected to further extensive pressing. Stone presses were set up to process the quantities of berries available at the Mt of Olives. The word for “oil press” was gatt-semen,<\/em> hence the name Gethsemane.<\/p>\nOil was symbolically associated with joy, festivity, ceremony, honor, light, and health (both spiritual and physical), while its absence spelled sorrow (Jl 1:10) and the withdrawal of all that is good in life.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Anoint; Food and Food Preparation; Medicine and Medical Practice; Ointment; Plants (Olive, Olive Tree).<\/p>","summary_ro":"OIL Substance most commonly produced from the olive berry, although the word could also apply to oil of myrrh (Est 2:12). Oil was used primarily in cooking, but additionally as a cosmetic for anointing the body, for medicinal purposes, as a source of light, for anointing kings and priests, and in religious offerings. The growth of olive trees was widespread, and the Israelites took advantage of this major crop to establish a thriving trade in oil with Tyre and Egypt. Like precious metals and ...","summary_en":"OIL Substance most commonly produced from the olive berry, although the word could also apply to oil of myrrh (Est 2:12). Oil was used primarily in cooking, but additionally as a cosmetic for anointing the body, for medicinal purposes, as a source of light, for anointing kings and priests, and in religious offerings. The growth of olive trees was widespread, and the Israelites took advantage of this major crop to establish a thriving trade in oil with Tyre and Egypt. Like precious metals and ...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":45011,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:18","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:18","content_ro":"12:18<\/strong> The place he will choose<\/em> was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"12:18<\/strong> The place he will choose<\/em> was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:18 The place he will choose was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.","summary_en":"12:18 The place he will choose was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72637,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:18","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:18","content_ro":"12:18<\/strong> The place he will choose<\/em> was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"12:18<\/strong> The place he will choose<\/em> was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:18 The place he will choose was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.","summary_en":"12:18 The place he will choose was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100263,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:18","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:18","content_ro":"12:18<\/strong> The place he will choose<\/em> was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"12:18<\/strong> The place he will choose<\/em> was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:18 The place he will choose was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.","summary_en":"12:18 The place he will choose was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127889,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:18","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:18","content_ro":"12:18<\/strong> The place he will choose<\/em> was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"12:18<\/strong> The place he will choose<\/em> was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:18 The place he will choose was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.","summary_en":"12:18 The place he will choose was the central sanctuary—first the Tabernacle and then the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":45012,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:21","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:21","content_ro":"12:21<\/strong> you may butcher:<\/em> Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship<\/em> if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).<\/p>","content_en":"12:21<\/strong> you may butcher:<\/em> Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship<\/em> if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:21 you may butcher: Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).","summary_en":"12:21 you may butcher: Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72638,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:21","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:21","content_ro":"12:21<\/strong> you may butcher:<\/em> Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship<\/em> if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).<\/p>","content_en":"12:21<\/strong> you may butcher:<\/em> Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship<\/em> if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:21 you may butcher: Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).","summary_en":"12:21 you may butcher: Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100264,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:21","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:21","content_ro":"12:21<\/strong> you may butcher:<\/em> Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship<\/em> if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).<\/p>","content_en":"12:21<\/strong> you may butcher:<\/em> Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship<\/em> if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:21 you may butcher: Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).","summary_en":"12:21 you may butcher: Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127890,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:21","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:21","content_ro":"12:21<\/strong> you may butcher:<\/em> Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship<\/em> if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).<\/p>","content_en":"12:21<\/strong> you may butcher:<\/em> Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship<\/em> if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:21 you may butcher: Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).","summary_en":"12:21 you may butcher: Because an animal’s blood was considered sacred (see Gen 9:4-6), even meat intended for human consumption was to be slaughtered at the central designated place of worship if that was at all practical (cp. Lev 17:8-9); if not, the animal could be sacrificed locally, but the blood still had to be disposed of in a ritually appropriate manner (Deut 12:23-25; cp. Lev 17:10-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":5249,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Blood","title_en":"Blood","content_ro":"<h3>BLOOD<\/h3>\nFluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt<\/span>). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv<\/span>). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, rsv<\/span>; see also 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12). After betraying Jesus, Judas recognized that he had “sinned in betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4, rsv<\/span>). In such passages “blood” has reference to life lived at the human level, natural life as opposed to spiritual or divine life.<\/p>\nThe term “blood” is also used in the sense of shedding blood, that is, in killing or murder. Psalm 9:12 speaks of one “who avenges blood.” Genesis 37:26 refers to the brothers who concealed Joseph’s blood, that is, his murder. To be “burdened with the blood of another” (Prv 28:17, rsv<\/span>) means to be guilty of murder. At the crucifixion Pilate said, “I am innocent of the blood of this man” (Mt 27:24-25). Thus, the idea of violent death is regularly connected with blood.<\/p>\nThe logic of such expressions becomes particularly clear when one sees how closely life is associated with blood. Three passages specifically tie the two together. “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Gn 9:4, rsv<\/span>). “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lv 17:11, rsv<\/span>). “The only restriction is never to eat the blood, for the blood is the life” (Dt 12:23, tlb<\/span>). Because God is the author of all life, any shedding of blood (any killing) is a serious matter. A certain sanctity associated with blood forms the basis for prohibitions against eating it. (Compare what the apostles said in Acts 15:20.) Blood stands for the “life principle” that is from God.<\/p>\nBecause of its association with life, blood takes on a special significance in the sacrificial motif. On the Day of Atonement (Lv 16), the blood of a bull and of a goat was sprinkled upon the altar as a “covering” of the people’s sin. Life was poured out in death. Animal life was given up on behalf of the life of the people. Judgment and atonement were carried out through a transfer of the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. Transference is depicted also by the scapegoat in the same ceremony (Lv 16:20-22). In the first Passover (Ex 12:1-13), the blood bore the same meaning. Animal blood posted on each door was a sign that a death had already taken place, so the angel of death passed over.<\/p>\nFurther, because life is connected with blood, blood becomes the supreme offering to God. In the ratification of the covenant (Ex 24), Moses poured half the sacrificial blood on the altar; after reading the covenant to the people and receiving their affirmative response, he sprinkled the rest of the blood on them and said, “This blood confirms the covenant the Lord<\/span> has made with you in giving you these laws” (Ex 24:8, nlt<\/span>). Sprinkling blood on both the altar and the people bound God and the Israelites together in covenant relationship. In the sacrifices of Israel, blood stood for death and depending on the context, might also stand for judgment, sacrifice, substitution, or redemption. Life with God was made possible by blood.<\/p>\nIn the NT, apart from medical references (e.g., Mt 9:20) and references to murder (e.g., Acts 22:20), the primary reference is to the blood of Christ, an allusion to the OT motifs. The synoptic Gospels show that at the Last Supper Jesus spoke of his blood with reference to a new covenant (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20). The language surrounding those sayings reveals the sacrificial motif; Jesus was speaking of his death and its redemptive significance. The fourth Gospel expresses the same theology in different terms and in a different context: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you cannot have eternal life within you” (Jn 6:53, nlt<\/span>). The believer is said to participate by faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord (see also 1 Cor 10:16).<\/p>\nThe apostle Paul’s letters likewise associate blood with Christ’s death, so much so that the word becomes—like the term “cross”—synonymous with the death of Christ in its saving significance: making peace “by means of his blood on the cross” (Col 1:20, nlt<\/span>); and in a passage on reconciliation: “though you once were far away from God, now you have been brought near to him because of the blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13, nlt<\/span>). “Blood” and “cross” both stand for the death of Jesus in reconciling Jew and Gentile to God and in the creation of a new humanity. Paul evidently had in mind the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement when he said that God purposed that Christ be an atoning sacrifice by his blood (Rom 3:25). His vocabulary (from Lv 16) focused on the most important sacrifice of Jewish tradition.<\/p>\nPeter made reference to the blood of the covenant (Ex 24) when he described Christian exiles as having been sprinkled with the blood of Christ (1 Pt 1:2). He reminded his readers that they had been redeemed by that blood (v 19). In calling Christ the “spotless lamb of God,” he may have had in mind either the servant of Isaiah 53 or the Passover lamb, both of which had redemptive significance in his readers’ minds. Finally, to the writer of Hebrews the whole OT system of sacrifices found its ultimate fulfillment in the blood of Christ, that is, in his sacrificial death (Heb 9:7-28; 13:11-12).<\/p>\nThus, NT references to the blood of Christ point to the culminating and comprehensive redemption achieved by God in the death of his Son (Heb 10:20). Both justice and justification were thus achieved (Rom 3:26). The blood of Christ is therefore called the “once for all” means of redemption (Heb 9:26). See<\/em> Atonement; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLOOD<\/h3>\nFluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt<\/span>). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv<\/span>). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, rsv<\/span>; see also 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12). After betraying Jesus, Judas recognized that he had “sinned in betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4, rsv<\/span>). In such passages “blood” has reference to life lived at the human level, natural life as opposed to spiritual or divine life.<\/p>\nThe term “blood” is also used in the sense of shedding blood, that is, in killing or murder. Psalm 9:12 speaks of one “who avenges blood.” Genesis 37:26 refers to the brothers who concealed Joseph’s blood, that is, his murder. To be “burdened with the blood of another” (Prv 28:17, rsv<\/span>) means to be guilty of murder. At the crucifixion Pilate said, “I am innocent of the blood of this man” (Mt 27:24-25). Thus, the idea of violent death is regularly connected with blood.<\/p>\nThe logic of such expressions becomes particularly clear when one sees how closely life is associated with blood. Three passages specifically tie the two together. “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Gn 9:4, rsv<\/span>). “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lv 17:11, rsv<\/span>). “The only restriction is never to eat the blood, for the blood is the life” (Dt 12:23, tlb<\/span>). Because God is the author of all life, any shedding of blood (any killing) is a serious matter. A certain sanctity associated with blood forms the basis for prohibitions against eating it. (Compare what the apostles said in Acts 15:20.) Blood stands for the “life principle” that is from God.<\/p>\nBecause of its association with life, blood takes on a special significance in the sacrificial motif. On the Day of Atonement (Lv 16), the blood of a bull and of a goat was sprinkled upon the altar as a “covering” of the people’s sin. Life was poured out in death. Animal life was given up on behalf of the life of the people. Judgment and atonement were carried out through a transfer of the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. Transference is depicted also by the scapegoat in the same ceremony (Lv 16:20-22). In the first Passover (Ex 12:1-13), the blood bore the same meaning. Animal blood posted on each door was a sign that a death had already taken place, so the angel of death passed over.<\/p>\nFurther, because life is connected with blood, blood becomes the supreme offering to God. In the ratification of the covenant (Ex 24), Moses poured half the sacrificial blood on the altar; after reading the covenant to the people and receiving their affirmative response, he sprinkled the rest of the blood on them and said, “This blood confirms the covenant the Lord<\/span> has made with you in giving you these laws” (Ex 24:8, nlt<\/span>). Sprinkling blood on both the altar and the people bound God and the Israelites together in covenant relationship. In the sacrifices of Israel, blood stood for death and depending on the context, might also stand for judgment, sacrifice, substitution, or redemption. Life with God was made possible by blood.<\/p>\nIn the NT, apart from medical references (e.g., Mt 9:20) and references to murder (e.g., Acts 22:20), the primary reference is to the blood of Christ, an allusion to the OT motifs. The synoptic Gospels show that at the Last Supper Jesus spoke of his blood with reference to a new covenant (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20). The language surrounding those sayings reveals the sacrificial motif; Jesus was speaking of his death and its redemptive significance. The fourth Gospel expresses the same theology in different terms and in a different context: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you cannot have eternal life within you” (Jn 6:53, nlt<\/span>). The believer is said to participate by faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord (see also 1 Cor 10:16).<\/p>\nThe apostle Paul’s letters likewise associate blood with Christ’s death, so much so that the word becomes—like the term “cross”—synonymous with the death of Christ in its saving significance: making peace “by means of his blood on the cross” (Col 1:20, nlt<\/span>); and in a passage on reconciliation: “though you once were far away from God, now you have been brought near to him because of the blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13, nlt<\/span>). “Blood” and “cross” both stand for the death of Jesus in reconciling Jew and Gentile to God and in the creation of a new humanity. Paul evidently had in mind the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement when he said that God purposed that Christ be an atoning sacrifice by his blood (Rom 3:25). His vocabulary (from Lv 16) focused on the most important sacrifice of Jewish tradition.<\/p>\nPeter made reference to the blood of the covenant (Ex 24) when he described Christian exiles as having been sprinkled with the blood of Christ (1 Pt 1:2). He reminded his readers that they had been redeemed by that blood (v 19). In calling Christ the “spotless lamb of God,” he may have had in mind either the servant of Isaiah 53 or the Passover lamb, both of which had redemptive significance in his readers’ minds. Finally, to the writer of Hebrews the whole OT system of sacrifices found its ultimate fulfillment in the blood of Christ, that is, in his sacrificial death (Heb 9:7-28; 13:11-12).<\/p>\nThus, NT references to the blood of Christ point to the culminating and comprehensive redemption achieved by God in the death of his Son (Heb 10:20). Both justice and justification were thus achieved (Rom 3:26). The blood of Christ is therefore called the “once for all” means of redemption (Heb 9:26). See<\/em> Atonement; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLOOD Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not reve...","summary_en":"BLOOD Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not reve...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9611,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Laws*, Dietary","title_en":"Laws*, Dietary","content_ro":"<h3>DIETARY LAWS*<\/h3>\nRegulations of food preparation and consumption provided by God for his people in OT times. The dietary laws formed part of broader regulations on “cleanness” that were designed to maintain Israel’s status as a holy people.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Holiness and Dietary Law<\/p>\n• Before Moses<\/p>\n• The Mosaic Law<\/p>\n• After Moses<\/p>\n• Symbolism<\/p>\n• Reactions from the Church<\/p>\nHoliness and Dietary Law<\/p>\nBiblical laws concerning diet and cleanness were based on the idea of holiness. The underlying meaning of the Hebrew word for “holiness” is difficult to ascertain but most probably was “to cut,” or “to be separate,” or “to set apart.” The Lord told Israel, “You shall be holy to me; for I the Lord<\/span> am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be mine” (Lv 20:26, rsv<\/span>). God is the supreme example of holiness; he is the one uniquely separate in his character and being (Is 6:3). But God wanted his covenant people to be holy, too. One of the ways that God made the Israelites different from the other peoples of the world was by giving them dietary laws: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy” (Lv 11:44, niv<\/span>). Keeping the dietary laws did not automatically make the people “holy” (i.e., separated to God); rather, it was one of the ways OT believers could show their gratitude to God for his deliverance.<\/p>\nBefore Moses<\/p>\nFrom the Creation, God approved all varieties of fruit and vegetables as legitimate, clean food (Gn 1:29). After the fall of humanity, God distinguished between clean and unclean animals. At the time of Noah, God directed that additional specimens of clean animals be taken aboard the ark (7:2; 8:20). After the Flood, God prohibited the eating of blood because blood represented life (9:4). To commemorate the patriarch Jacob’s wrestling with the Angel of the Lord, Jacob’s descendants refrained from eating a certain hip muscle (32:32), though that was not a command from God.<\/p>\nThe Mosaic Law<\/p>\nThe primary revelation of the Lord’s dietary standards for Israel was given through Moses. Dietary laws are found among the ceremonial regulations received at Mt Sinai (Lv 11). Moses repeated many of those laws 39 years later, shortly before the people entered the Promised Land (Dt 14:3-21). The dietary laws concerned only animal products, except for the prohibition of wine to certain people (Lv 10:9; Nm 6:3-4; cf. Jgs 13:14; Jer 35:6).<\/p>\nFive categories of living things were regulated for food. To be edible an animal had to have cloven (divided) hooves and had to chew its cud. According to Leviticus, that requirement ruled out camels, horses, rabbits, and pigs (Lv 11:2-8). Sea life had to have fins and scales (vv 9-12). Birds were edible if they were not predatory (vv 13-19); Moses went on to list 20 species specifically prohibited because they were birds of prey or scavengers. Winged insects were forbidden (vv 22-23) except for certain types of locusts and grasshoppers (food commonly eaten by desert nomads). Finally, “the animals that move about on the ground,” including reptiles and rodents (vv 29-31, niv<\/span>), were ruled out.<\/p>\nFurther prohibitions were made about food that otherwise would have been considered clean. For example, nothing found already dead (Dt 14:21) or that had been torn by beasts (Lv 17:15) was to be eaten. Food could become defiled by contact with some other thing that was unclean, like a dead mouse that happened to fall into a food container (11:32-34). A young goat was not to be boiled in its mother’s milk (Ex 23:19; 34:26; Dt 14:21). When clean animals were slaughtered, their blood was to be drained out (Lv 17:14). All pieces of fat (3:16; 7:23), especially a sheep’s fat tail (Ex 29:22; Lv 3:9), were restricted for use in sacrifices to the Lord. Through Moses the Lord reiterated the prohibition against eating blood (Lv 17:10; 19:26; Dt 12:16; 15:23).<\/p>\nSeveral reasons, stated in or inferred from Scripture, account for the dietary laws and apply to the Bible’s cleanness regulations in general. Some seem to be natural reasons; others may be symbolic or relational.<\/p>\n<h5>Hygiene<\/h5>\nSome dietary laws, such as those against eating vermin or decomposing flesh, circumvented obvious health hazards and were given for the people’s protection. But hygiene alone cannot account for all the regulations; in fact, some foods that might have been acceptable from a hygienic viewpoint, such as rabbit or clams, were excluded.<\/p>\n<h5>Aversion<\/h5>\nWorms and snakes are generally considered loathsome, whatever their actual food value. Such animals were not kosher<\/em> (proper).<\/p>\n<h5>Relationship to Pagan Practice<\/h5>\nBoiling a young goat in its mother’s milk has now been documented as a pagan rite among Moses’ contemporaries, the Canaanites. God’s people were not to imitate the practices of the peoples around them (Dt 18:9).<\/p>\nAfter Moses<\/p>\nThe dietary laws given at Mt Sinai continued to be recognized throughout Israel’s history. Before the birth of Samson, the child’s mother was warned, “Now see to it that you drink no wine or other fermented drink and that you do not eat anything unclean” (Jgs 13:4, niv<\/span>). During the Philistine wars of the next century (c. 1041 BC<\/span>), King Saul’s soldiers sinned by disregarding requirements about the proper draining of blood from animals (1 Sm 14:32-34).<\/p>\nLater, when the Israelites were exiled in heathen lands, they were faced with situations in which the selection of food and its preparation could render it unclean (Ez 4:12-14). Daniel’s refusal to be defiled by pagan delicacies at Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylonian court (605 BC<\/span>) illustrated his loyalty to God (Dn 1:8).<\/p>\nFrom the prophet Isaiah’s day (740 BC<\/span>) onward, the most abhorrent food to the Israelites was the meat of swine (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17). In the Maccabean period the “abomination of desolation,” which the Jewish hero Judas Maccabeus and his followers resisted to the death, included sacrifices of pigs on the temple altar in Jerusalem by the pagan ruler Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Macc 1:54, 62-63; 2 Macc 6:5; 7:1).<\/p>\nSymbolism<\/p>\nCertain food products were ruled out because of something they symbolized. God said not to eat blood: “Be sure that you do not eat the blood; for the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh” (Dt 12:23, rsv<\/span>). Blood had a ritual function. It was used to make atonement on God’s altar and therefore was not to be eaten (Lv 17:11-12). The NT writers recognized the sacrificial blood of the OT as a “type” or foreshadowing of the blood of Jesus Christ shed on the cross as a sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:1, 4, 12; 1 Pt 1:18-19). A symbolic regard for maternal life may explain why one who came upon a bird’s nest was allowed to take the eggs or the young but had to leave the mother bird unharmed (Dt 22:6-7). The need to preserve a fragile desert ecosystem may also have been a factor.<\/p>\nReactions from the Church<\/p>\nAt first the early church, with its Jewish background, found it difficult to break away from Hebrew dietary traditions. The apostle Peter was given a vision, repeated three times, about no longer calling either non-Jewish food or the non-Jews who ate it “unclean” (Acts 10:9-16; 11:1-10). Later, a council at Jerusalem officially decided not to retain Moses’ ceremonialism in the church, except that gentile Christians should abstain “from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood” (Acts 15:20, niv<\/span>) in order not to offend Jewish Christians. That was an application of the NT teaching of consideration for those with sensitive consciences. “Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. . . . But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin” (Rom 14:20, 23, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nJewish dietary laws also have relevance to Christians because of certain OT promises. God promised, first to Abraham and, by reiteration or allusion, throughout the OT, that the Gentiles would be included in his covenant. By preserving the health of the Hebrew people, God was ensuring their continuation as a nation. According to the NT, the salvation of both Jews and Gentiles was achieved by Christ, a Jew. The nation through which Christ came was protected in order that God’s promise could be fulfilled. Thus, the dietary laws need not be seen as burdensome restrictions of the law; they were part of God’s way of working out his redemptive plan.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Leviticus, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DIETARY LAWS*<\/h3>\nRegulations of food preparation and consumption provided by God for his people in OT times. The dietary laws formed part of broader regulations on “cleanness” that were designed to maintain Israel’s status as a holy people.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Holiness and Dietary Law<\/p>\n• Before Moses<\/p>\n• The Mosaic Law<\/p>\n• After Moses<\/p>\n• Symbolism<\/p>\n• Reactions from the Church<\/p>\nHoliness and Dietary Law<\/p>\nBiblical laws concerning diet and cleanness were based on the idea of holiness. The underlying meaning of the Hebrew word for “holiness” is difficult to ascertain but most probably was “to cut,” or “to be separate,” or “to set apart.” The Lord told Israel, “You shall be holy to me; for I the Lord<\/span> am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be mine” (Lv 20:26, rsv<\/span>). God is the supreme example of holiness; he is the one uniquely separate in his character and being (Is 6:3). But God wanted his covenant people to be holy, too. One of the ways that God made the Israelites different from the other peoples of the world was by giving them dietary laws: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy” (Lv 11:44, niv<\/span>). Keeping the dietary laws did not automatically make the people “holy” (i.e., separated to God); rather, it was one of the ways OT believers could show their gratitude to God for his deliverance.<\/p>\nBefore Moses<\/p>\nFrom the Creation, God approved all varieties of fruit and vegetables as legitimate, clean food (Gn 1:29). After the fall of humanity, God distinguished between clean and unclean animals. At the time of Noah, God directed that additional specimens of clean animals be taken aboard the ark (7:2; 8:20). After the Flood, God prohibited the eating of blood because blood represented life (9:4). To commemorate the patriarch Jacob’s wrestling with the Angel of the Lord, Jacob’s descendants refrained from eating a certain hip muscle (32:32), though that was not a command from God.<\/p>\nThe Mosaic Law<\/p>\nThe primary revelation of the Lord’s dietary standards for Israel was given through Moses. Dietary laws are found among the ceremonial regulations received at Mt Sinai (Lv 11). Moses repeated many of those laws 39 years later, shortly before the people entered the Promised Land (Dt 14:3-21). The dietary laws concerned only animal products, except for the prohibition of wine to certain people (Lv 10:9; Nm 6:3-4; cf. Jgs 13:14; Jer 35:6).<\/p>\nFive categories of living things were regulated for food. To be edible an animal had to have cloven (divided) hooves and had to chew its cud. According to Leviticus, that requirement ruled out camels, horses, rabbits, and pigs (Lv 11:2-8). Sea life had to have fins and scales (vv 9-12). Birds were edible if they were not predatory (vv 13-19); Moses went on to list 20 species specifically prohibited because they were birds of prey or scavengers. Winged insects were forbidden (vv 22-23) except for certain types of locusts and grasshoppers (food commonly eaten by desert nomads). Finally, “the animals that move about on the ground,” including reptiles and rodents (vv 29-31, niv<\/span>), were ruled out.<\/p>\nFurther prohibitions were made about food that otherwise would have been considered clean. For example, nothing found already dead (Dt 14:21) or that had been torn by beasts (Lv 17:15) was to be eaten. Food could become defiled by contact with some other thing that was unclean, like a dead mouse that happened to fall into a food container (11:32-34). A young goat was not to be boiled in its mother’s milk (Ex 23:19; 34:26; Dt 14:21). When clean animals were slaughtered, their blood was to be drained out (Lv 17:14). All pieces of fat (3:16; 7:23), especially a sheep’s fat tail (Ex 29:22; Lv 3:9), were restricted for use in sacrifices to the Lord. Through Moses the Lord reiterated the prohibition against eating blood (Lv 17:10; 19:26; Dt 12:16; 15:23).<\/p>\nSeveral reasons, stated in or inferred from Scripture, account for the dietary laws and apply to the Bible’s cleanness regulations in general. Some seem to be natural reasons; others may be symbolic or relational.<\/p>\n<h5>Hygiene<\/h5>\nSome dietary laws, such as those against eating vermin or decomposing flesh, circumvented obvious health hazards and were given for the people’s protection. But hygiene alone cannot account for all the regulations; in fact, some foods that might have been acceptable from a hygienic viewpoint, such as rabbit or clams, were excluded.<\/p>\n<h5>Aversion<\/h5>\nWorms and snakes are generally considered loathsome, whatever their actual food value. Such animals were not kosher<\/em> (proper).<\/p>\n<h5>Relationship to Pagan Practice<\/h5>\nBoiling a young goat in its mother’s milk has now been documented as a pagan rite among Moses’ contemporaries, the Canaanites. God’s people were not to imitate the practices of the peoples around them (Dt 18:9).<\/p>\nAfter Moses<\/p>\nThe dietary laws given at Mt Sinai continued to be recognized throughout Israel’s history. Before the birth of Samson, the child’s mother was warned, “Now see to it that you drink no wine or other fermented drink and that you do not eat anything unclean” (Jgs 13:4, niv<\/span>). During the Philistine wars of the next century (c. 1041 BC<\/span>), King Saul’s soldiers sinned by disregarding requirements about the proper draining of blood from animals (1 Sm 14:32-34).<\/p>\nLater, when the Israelites were exiled in heathen lands, they were faced with situations in which the selection of food and its preparation could render it unclean (Ez 4:12-14). Daniel’s refusal to be defiled by pagan delicacies at Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylonian court (605 BC<\/span>) illustrated his loyalty to God (Dn 1:8).<\/p>\nFrom the prophet Isaiah’s day (740 BC<\/span>) onward, the most abhorrent food to the Israelites was the meat of swine (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17). In the Maccabean period the “abomination of desolation,” which the Jewish hero Judas Maccabeus and his followers resisted to the death, included sacrifices of pigs on the temple altar in Jerusalem by the pagan ruler Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Macc 1:54, 62-63; 2 Macc 6:5; 7:1).<\/p>\nSymbolism<\/p>\nCertain food products were ruled out because of something they symbolized. God said not to eat blood: “Be sure that you do not eat the blood; for the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh” (Dt 12:23, rsv<\/span>). Blood had a ritual function. It was used to make atonement on God’s altar and therefore was not to be eaten (Lv 17:11-12). The NT writers recognized the sacrificial blood of the OT as a “type” or foreshadowing of the blood of Jesus Christ shed on the cross as a sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:1, 4, 12; 1 Pt 1:18-19). A symbolic regard for maternal life may explain why one who came upon a bird’s nest was allowed to take the eggs or the young but had to leave the mother bird unharmed (Dt 22:6-7). The need to preserve a fragile desert ecosystem may also have been a factor.<\/p>\nReactions from the Church<\/p>\nAt first the early church, with its Jewish background, found it difficult to break away from Hebrew dietary traditions. The apostle Peter was given a vision, repeated three times, about no longer calling either non-Jewish food or the non-Jews who ate it “unclean” (Acts 10:9-16; 11:1-10). Later, a council at Jerusalem officially decided not to retain Moses’ ceremonialism in the church, except that gentile Christians should abstain “from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood” (Acts 15:20, niv<\/span>) in order not to offend Jewish Christians. That was an application of the NT teaching of consideration for those with sensitive consciences. “Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. . . . But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin” (Rom 14:20, 23, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nJewish dietary laws also have relevance to Christians because of certain OT promises. God promised, first to Abraham and, by reiteration or allusion, throughout the OT, that the Gentiles would be included in his covenant. By preserving the health of the Hebrew people, God was ensuring their continuation as a nation. According to the NT, the salvation of both Jews and Gentiles was achieved by Christ, a Jew. The nation through which Christ came was protected in order that God’s promise could be fulfilled. Thus, the dietary laws need not be seen as burdensome restrictions of the law; they were part of God’s way of working out his redemptive plan.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Leviticus, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DIETARY LAWS* Regulations of food preparation and consumption provided by God for his people in OT times. The dietary laws formed part of broader regulations on “cleanness” that were designed to maintain Israel’s status as a holy people. Preview • Holiness and Dietary Law • Before Moses • The Mosaic Law • After Moses • Symbolism • Reactions from the Church Holiness and Dietary Law Biblical laws concerning diet and cleanness were based on the idea of holiness. The underlying meaning of the Heb...","summary_en":"DIETARY LAWS* Regulations of food preparation and consumption provided by God for his people in OT times. The dietary laws formed part of broader regulations on “cleanness” that were designed to maintain Israel’s status as a holy people. Preview • Holiness and Dietary Law • Before Moses • The Mosaic Law • After Moses • Symbolism • Reactions from the Church Holiness and Dietary Law Biblical laws concerning diet and cleanness were based on the idea of holiness. The underlying meaning of the Heb...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45013,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:23","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:23","content_ro":"12:23<\/strong> the blood is the life:<\/em> In this figure of speech, the means (blood<\/em>) is equated with the effect (life<\/em>). Since life<\/em> is sacred, its vehicle, the blood<\/em>,<\/em> is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).<\/p>","content_en":"12:23<\/strong> the blood is the life:<\/em> In this figure of speech, the means (blood<\/em>) is equated with the effect (life<\/em>). Since life<\/em> is sacred, its vehicle, the blood<\/em>,<\/em> is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:23 the blood is the life: In this figure of speech, the means (blood) is equated with the effect (life). Since life is sacred, its vehicle, the blood, is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).","summary_en":"12:23 the blood is the life: In this figure of speech, the means (blood) is equated with the effect (life). Since life is sacred, its vehicle, the blood, is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72639,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:23","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:23","content_ro":"12:23<\/strong> the blood is the life:<\/em> In this figure of speech, the means (blood<\/em>) is equated with the effect (life<\/em>). Since life<\/em> is sacred, its vehicle, the blood<\/em>,<\/em> is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).<\/p>","content_en":"12:23<\/strong> the blood is the life:<\/em> In this figure of speech, the means (blood<\/em>) is equated with the effect (life<\/em>). Since life<\/em> is sacred, its vehicle, the blood<\/em>,<\/em> is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:23 the blood is the life: In this figure of speech, the means (blood) is equated with the effect (life). Since life is sacred, its vehicle, the blood, is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).","summary_en":"12:23 the blood is the life: In this figure of speech, the means (blood) is equated with the effect (life). Since life is sacred, its vehicle, the blood, is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100265,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:23","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:23","content_ro":"12:23<\/strong> the blood is the life:<\/em> In this figure of speech, the means (blood<\/em>) is equated with the effect (life<\/em>). Since life<\/em> is sacred, its vehicle, the blood<\/em>,<\/em> is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).<\/p>","content_en":"12:23<\/strong> the blood is the life:<\/em> In this figure of speech, the means (blood<\/em>) is equated with the effect (life<\/em>). Since life<\/em> is sacred, its vehicle, the blood<\/em>,<\/em> is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:23 the blood is the life: In this figure of speech, the means (blood) is equated with the effect (life). Since life is sacred, its vehicle, the blood, is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).","summary_en":"12:23 the blood is the life: In this figure of speech, the means (blood) is equated with the effect (life). Since life is sacred, its vehicle, the blood, is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127891,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:23","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:23","content_ro":"12:23<\/strong> the blood is the life:<\/em> In this figure of speech, the means (blood<\/em>) is equated with the effect (life<\/em>). Since life<\/em> is sacred, its vehicle, the blood<\/em>,<\/em> is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).<\/p>","content_en":"12:23<\/strong> the blood is the life:<\/em> In this figure of speech, the means (blood<\/em>) is equated with the effect (life<\/em>). Since life<\/em> is sacred, its vehicle, the blood<\/em>,<\/em> is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:23 the blood is the life: In this figure of speech, the means (blood) is equated with the effect (life). Since life is sacred, its vehicle, the blood, is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).","summary_en":"12:23 the blood is the life: In this figure of speech, the means (blood) is equated with the effect (life). Since life is sacred, its vehicle, the blood, is also sacred (see also Lev 17:11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":45014,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:27","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:27","content_ro":"12:27<\/strong> you may eat the meat:<\/em> The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).<\/p>","content_en":"12:27<\/strong> you may eat the meat:<\/em> The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:27 you may eat the meat: The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).","summary_en":"12:27 you may eat the meat: The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72640,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:27","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:27","content_ro":"12:27<\/strong> you may eat the meat:<\/em> The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).<\/p>","content_en":"12:27<\/strong> you may eat the meat:<\/em> The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:27 you may eat the meat: The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).","summary_en":"12:27 you may eat the meat: The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100266,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:27","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:27","content_ro":"12:27<\/strong> you may eat the meat:<\/em> The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).<\/p>","content_en":"12:27<\/strong> you may eat the meat:<\/em> The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:27 you may eat the meat: The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).","summary_en":"12:27 you may eat the meat: The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127892,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:27","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:27","content_ro":"12:27<\/strong> you may eat the meat:<\/em> The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).<\/p>","content_en":"12:27<\/strong> you may eat the meat:<\/em> The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:27 you may eat the meat: The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).","summary_en":"12:27 you may eat the meat: The exception was meat sacrificed in burnt offerings, which was to be given to the Lord and wholly consumed in the fire (see Lev 1:3-17 and study note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":15066,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hairstyles and Beards","title_en":"Hairstyles and Beards","content_ro":"<h3>HAIRSTYLES AND BEARDS<\/h3>\nIn Palestine and throughout the Near East, women’s hairstyles were long. In NT times a woman who cut her hair might be mistaken for a pagan priestess and thus be disgraced (see 1 Cor 11:15). The apostle Peter warned Christian women against preoccupation with elaborate styles of hair (1 Pt 3:3). When a woman married, it was customary to change her hairstyle slightly, in favor of a more mature appearance. Curling tongs and hair oils were used by some married women.<\/p>\nDark hair is mentioned frequently in the Bible, although gray hair represented maturity and was respected. Some persons preferred to make use of popular black and red hair dyes. According to tradition, Herod the Great dyed his graying hair with henna.<\/p>\nBeard and hair trimming was performed in a specialized manner in Jewish culture. An Israelite man was instructed not to cut the hair on his temples or trim the corners of his beard (Lv 19:27). This was done to maintain a contrast in every way between the Israelites and the members of idolatrous cults in Canaan and elsewhere (Dt 12:29-30). Beards distinguished Hebrews from Egyptians, who were clean-shaven, although they sometimes wore false beards on ceremonial occasions. Shaving or cutting off the beard of enemy captives was considered the gravest humiliation that the victor could impose. A shaved head, however, was also a recognized symbol of purification at the termination of a vow (Lv 14:8-9; Acts 18:18). Shaving a beard was the usual sign of mourning (Is 15:2). It could also symbolize the approach of doom (Is 7:20; Jer 41:5; 48:37).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HAIRSTYLES AND BEARDS<\/h3>\nIn Palestine and throughout the Near East, women’s hairstyles were long. In NT times a woman who cut her hair might be mistaken for a pagan priestess and thus be disgraced (see 1 Cor 11:15). The apostle Peter warned Christian women against preoccupation with elaborate styles of hair (1 Pt 3:3). When a woman married, it was customary to change her hairstyle slightly, in favor of a more mature appearance. Curling tongs and hair oils were used by some married women.<\/p>\nDark hair is mentioned frequently in the Bible, although gray hair represented maturity and was respected. Some persons preferred to make use of popular black and red hair dyes. According to tradition, Herod the Great dyed his graying hair with henna.<\/p>\nBeard and hair trimming was performed in a specialized manner in Jewish culture. An Israelite man was instructed not to cut the hair on his temples or trim the corners of his beard (Lv 19:27). This was done to maintain a contrast in every way between the Israelites and the members of idolatrous cults in Canaan and elsewhere (Dt 12:29-30). Beards distinguished Hebrews from Egyptians, who were clean-shaven, although they sometimes wore false beards on ceremonial occasions. Shaving or cutting off the beard of enemy captives was considered the gravest humiliation that the victor could impose. A shaved head, however, was also a recognized symbol of purification at the termination of a vow (Lv 14:8-9; Acts 18:18). Shaving a beard was the usual sign of mourning (Is 15:2). It could also symbolize the approach of doom (Is 7:20; Jer 41:5; 48:37).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HAIRSTYLES AND BEARDS In Palestine and throughout the Near East, women’s hairstyles were long. In NT times a woman who cut her hair might be mistaken for a pagan priestess and thus be disgraced (see 1 Cor 11:15). The apostle Peter warned Christian women against preoccupation with elaborate styles of hair (1 Pt 3:3). When a woman married, it was customary to change her hairstyle slightly, in favor of a more mature appearance. Curling tongs and hair oils were used by some married women. Dark ha...","summary_en":"HAIRSTYLES AND BEARDS In Palestine and throughout the Near East, women’s hairstyles were long. In NT times a woman who cut her hair might be mistaken for a pagan priestess and thus be disgraced (see 1 Cor 11:15). The apostle Peter warned Christian women against preoccupation with elaborate styles of hair (1 Pt 3:3). When a woman married, it was customary to change her hairstyle slightly, in favor of a more mature appearance. Curling tongs and hair oils were used by some married women. Dark ha...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27052,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nations","title_en":"Nations","content_ro":"<h3>NATIONS<\/h3>\nGroups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews.<\/p>\nOrigins<\/p>\nThe book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and language (vv 5, 20, 31). The story of the tower (ziggurat) of Babel, whose peak was to reach to heaven (ch 11), explains that ethnic groups were separated by language barriers and scattered geographically so that they might not collaborate on presumptuous ventures.<\/p>\nPaul, in his sermon in Athens, assumes that the various nations had a common origin, just as the writer of Genesis did, and accepts as part of the design of God the fact that nations should be separated by geographical boundaries (Acts 17:26). The prophet Zephaniah looked forward to the day when God would reverse this state of affairs and cause all the nations to speak one language (Zep 3:9). The writer of Revelation, in his vision of the new heaven and the new earth, saw these natural boundaries abolished. The nations freely intermingle in the new Jerusalem (Rv 21:22-26).<\/p>\nThe distinction between “Israel” and “the nations” is not clear-cut. “Israel” evolved from various ethnic groups, and several of “the nations” traced their origins to prominent figures in the Israelite community. Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, lived in Ur of the Chaldees in the delta region of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. With his father he migrated north to Haran, and finally southwest to the land of Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:9). Deuteronomy 26:5 (“a wandering Aramean was my father”) suggests Abraham’s residence was in the district of Mesopotamia known as Aram-naharaim. When Abraham entered into covenant with God, God gave him the token of the covenant relationship: circumcision. Foreigners purchased as slaves were circumcised, thus including them in the covenant community. When Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt into the wilderness, a mixed multitude also went up with them (Ex 12:38), which suggests again that people not biologically related nevertheless identified themselves with the people of Israel.<\/p>\nThe nation of Israel did not include all of those physically descended from Abraham. The first son of Abraham, Ishmael, had an Egyptian mother and is the ancestor of the Ishmaelites, bedouins who roamed the southern wilderness region (Gn 16). Of the twin sons born to Isaac and Rebekah, Esau, the firstborn, is the father of the Edomites living in the southeast, traditional enemies of Israel (Gn 25:23; Nm 20:21).<\/p>\nGod and the Nations<\/p>\nScripture presents negative and positive attitudes toward the nations. The nations inhabiting the territory between the Tigris-Euphrates valley and the Nile River were wicked nations. Therefore, God took away their land and gave it to the descendants of Abraham (Gn 15:16-20). Incestuous relationships, adultery, homosexuality, and sexual relationships between men and animals characterized the nations and incurred God’s displeasure (Lv 18). The nations indulged in the practice of spiritism, augury, witchcraft, and necromancy, so the Hebrews were instructed to avoid such activities (19:26; 20:6). The nations worshiped many gods and included in their worship the practice of human sacrifice, often the sacrifice of children—a ritual that God abhors (Lv 20:1-5; 2 Kgs 17:29-34). The prophet Isaiah spoke scathingly of the craftsman who, taking a branch of a tree, used part of it to kindle a fire and fashioned from the remainder a graven image that he then worshiped (Is 44:12-20). The Baalim and Ashteroth, fertility gods of the Canaanites, were a constant source of temptation to the people of Israel. The message repeated throughout Scripture is that for these reasons God would drive out the nations and give their territory to Israel (Ex 34:24; Dt 12:29-31). The prophetic oracles against the nations reinforced this negative attitude (Jer 46–51; Am 1:3–2:3).<\/p>\nHowever, the Scripture also reflects a more positive attitude toward the nations. As revealed in the book of Psalms, God is not only concerned about Israel; his eyes keep watch over the nations, and all the earth praises and worships him (Ps 66:1-8). The psalmist prays that God’s saving power may be known among all the nations. He affirms that God righteously judges the peoples and guides the nations. All the ends of the earth should fear him (67:7). The prophet Isaiah declares that the Jerusalem temple is to be a house of prayer for all peoples and that God welcomes the foreigner who comes with sacrifices and offering worship (Is 56:6-8). Isaiah’s vision of hope for the latter days pictures people of all nations pouring into Jerusalem to worship the Lord and learn his ways. Instead of nation warring against nation, all will live in peace, ruled by God (2:2-4).<\/p>\nThe Nations in the New Testament<\/p>\nAccording to the Gospels, Jesus ministered not only to the Jews but also to the Gentile nations in accordance with ancient prophecy (Mt 4:15-16). Jesus taught in Galilee, a predominantly non-Jewish area, traveled to Tyre and Sidon (Mk 7:24) and through the Decapolis (v 31). He ministered to a Roman centurion (Lk 7:1-10), the widow of Nain (vv 11-17), and a Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:26). People from Idumea came to observe his miracles (3:8).<\/p>\nThe teaching of Jesus was also wide in scope. The narrative of the great judgment (Mt 25:31-46) depicts all nations gathered before the Son of Man, and Jesus commissions the apostles to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19).<\/p>\nAlthough the book of Acts does not overlook the nations’ role in the death of Jesus (Acts 4:27) and their role in opposing the ministry of Paul (26:17), it nevertheless clearly indicates that the church fulfilled its commission to present the gospel to non-Jewish peoples. Peter proclaims the message about Jesus to the household of Cornelius, a Roman soldier of the Italian Cohort (ch 10). Although the early church resisted the fact that non-Jewish peoples might freely receive the gift of the Spirit, they eventually welcomed this conclusion (11:1-8; 15:1-29). Paul traveled through Cyprus, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy, founding or visiting churches that were predominantly Gentile. The book of Acts ends dramatically with Paul preaching the gospel in the city of Rome, the heart of the Roman Empire.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NATIONS<\/h3>\nGroups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews.<\/p>\nOrigins<\/p>\nThe book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and language (vv 5, 20, 31). The story of the tower (ziggurat) of Babel, whose peak was to reach to heaven (ch 11), explains that ethnic groups were separated by language barriers and scattered geographically so that they might not collaborate on presumptuous ventures.<\/p>\nPaul, in his sermon in Athens, assumes that the various nations had a common origin, just as the writer of Genesis did, and accepts as part of the design of God the fact that nations should be separated by geographical boundaries (Acts 17:26). The prophet Zephaniah looked forward to the day when God would reverse this state of affairs and cause all the nations to speak one language (Zep 3:9). The writer of Revelation, in his vision of the new heaven and the new earth, saw these natural boundaries abolished. The nations freely intermingle in the new Jerusalem (Rv 21:22-26).<\/p>\nThe distinction between “Israel” and “the nations” is not clear-cut. “Israel” evolved from various ethnic groups, and several of “the nations” traced their origins to prominent figures in the Israelite community. Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, lived in Ur of the Chaldees in the delta region of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. With his father he migrated north to Haran, and finally southwest to the land of Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:9). Deuteronomy 26:5 (“a wandering Aramean was my father”) suggests Abraham’s residence was in the district of Mesopotamia known as Aram-naharaim. When Abraham entered into covenant with God, God gave him the token of the covenant relationship: circumcision. Foreigners purchased as slaves were circumcised, thus including them in the covenant community. When Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt into the wilderness, a mixed multitude also went up with them (Ex 12:38), which suggests again that people not biologically related nevertheless identified themselves with the people of Israel.<\/p>\nThe nation of Israel did not include all of those physically descended from Abraham. The first son of Abraham, Ishmael, had an Egyptian mother and is the ancestor of the Ishmaelites, bedouins who roamed the southern wilderness region (Gn 16). Of the twin sons born to Isaac and Rebekah, Esau, the firstborn, is the father of the Edomites living in the southeast, traditional enemies of Israel (Gn 25:23; Nm 20:21).<\/p>\nGod and the Nations<\/p>\nScripture presents negative and positive attitudes toward the nations. The nations inhabiting the territory between the Tigris-Euphrates valley and the Nile River were wicked nations. Therefore, God took away their land and gave it to the descendants of Abraham (Gn 15:16-20). Incestuous relationships, adultery, homosexuality, and sexual relationships between men and animals characterized the nations and incurred God’s displeasure (Lv 18). The nations indulged in the practice of spiritism, augury, witchcraft, and necromancy, so the Hebrews were instructed to avoid such activities (19:26; 20:6). The nations worshiped many gods and included in their worship the practice of human sacrifice, often the sacrifice of children—a ritual that God abhors (Lv 20:1-5; 2 Kgs 17:29-34). The prophet Isaiah spoke scathingly of the craftsman who, taking a branch of a tree, used part of it to kindle a fire and fashioned from the remainder a graven image that he then worshiped (Is 44:12-20). The Baalim and Ashteroth, fertility gods of the Canaanites, were a constant source of temptation to the people of Israel. The message repeated throughout Scripture is that for these reasons God would drive out the nations and give their territory to Israel (Ex 34:24; Dt 12:29-31). The prophetic oracles against the nations reinforced this negative attitude (Jer 46–51; Am 1:3–2:3).<\/p>\nHowever, the Scripture also reflects a more positive attitude toward the nations. As revealed in the book of Psalms, God is not only concerned about Israel; his eyes keep watch over the nations, and all the earth praises and worships him (Ps 66:1-8). The psalmist prays that God’s saving power may be known among all the nations. He affirms that God righteously judges the peoples and guides the nations. All the ends of the earth should fear him (67:7). The prophet Isaiah declares that the Jerusalem temple is to be a house of prayer for all peoples and that God welcomes the foreigner who comes with sacrifices and offering worship (Is 56:6-8). Isaiah’s vision of hope for the latter days pictures people of all nations pouring into Jerusalem to worship the Lord and learn his ways. Instead of nation warring against nation, all will live in peace, ruled by God (2:2-4).<\/p>\nThe Nations in the New Testament<\/p>\nAccording to the Gospels, Jesus ministered not only to the Jews but also to the Gentile nations in accordance with ancient prophecy (Mt 4:15-16). Jesus taught in Galilee, a predominantly non-Jewish area, traveled to Tyre and Sidon (Mk 7:24) and through the Decapolis (v 31). He ministered to a Roman centurion (Lk 7:1-10), the widow of Nain (vv 11-17), and a Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:26). People from Idumea came to observe his miracles (3:8).<\/p>\nThe teaching of Jesus was also wide in scope. The narrative of the great judgment (Mt 25:31-46) depicts all nations gathered before the Son of Man, and Jesus commissions the apostles to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19).<\/p>\nAlthough the book of Acts does not overlook the nations’ role in the death of Jesus (Acts 4:27) and their role in opposing the ministry of Paul (26:17), it nevertheless clearly indicates that the church fulfilled its commission to present the gospel to non-Jewish peoples. Peter proclaims the message about Jesus to the household of Cornelius, a Roman soldier of the Italian Cohort (ch 10). Although the early church resisted the fact that non-Jewish peoples might freely receive the gift of the Spirit, they eventually welcomed this conclusion (11:1-8; 15:1-29). Paul traveled through Cyprus, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy, founding or visiting churches that were predominantly Gentile. The book of Acts ends dramatically with Paul preaching the gospel in the city of Rome, the heart of the Roman Empire.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NATIONS Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews. Origins The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and languag...","summary_en":"NATIONS Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews. Origins The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and languag...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"30":[{"id":20674,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\nFirst of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author and Date<\/p>\n• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n• Purpose<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\n\nAuthor and Date<\/p>\nAccording to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 BC<\/span> and 1045 BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\nProblems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\nThe morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\nVarious explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\nPurpose<\/p>\nThe role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\nWith the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\nThe first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\nThe account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\nThe Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\nThe consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\nThe victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\nVictory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\nJoshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\nThe rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\nThe Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\nThe king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\nThe five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\nThe Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\nJoshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\nThe listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\nBecause of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\nJoshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\nEleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\nThe boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\nThese two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\nThough they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\nThe Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\nThe conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\nAccording to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\nThe Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\nWith the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\nJoshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\nThe response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\nPhinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\nThe last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\nJoshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\nThe address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\nThe goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\nThe book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\nFirst of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author and Date<\/p>\n• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n• Purpose<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\n\nAuthor and Date<\/p>\nAccording to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 BC<\/span> and 1045 BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\nProblems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\nThe morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\nVarious explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\nPurpose<\/p>\nThe role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\nWith the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\nThe first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\nThe account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\nThe Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\nThe consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\nThe victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\nVictory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\nJoshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\nThe rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\nThe Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\nThe king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\nThe five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\nThe Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\nJoshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\nThe listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\nBecause of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\nJoshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\nEleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\nThe boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\nThese two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\nThough they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\nThe Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\nThe conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\nAccording to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\nThe Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\nWith the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\nJoshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\nThe response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\nPhinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\nThe last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\nJoshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\nThe address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\nThe goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\nThe book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":45015,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:31","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:31","content_ro":"12:31<\/strong> burn their sons and daughters:<\/em> Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).<\/p>","content_en":"12:31<\/strong> burn their sons and daughters:<\/em> Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:31 burn their sons and daughters: Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).","summary_en":"12:31 burn their sons and daughters: Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":72641,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:31","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:31","content_ro":"12:31<\/strong> burn their sons and daughters:<\/em> Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).<\/p>","content_en":"12:31<\/strong> burn their sons and daughters:<\/em> Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:31 burn their sons and daughters: Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).","summary_en":"12:31 burn their sons and daughters: Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100267,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:31","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:31","content_ro":"12:31<\/strong> burn their sons and daughters:<\/em> Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).<\/p>","content_en":"12:31<\/strong> burn their sons and daughters:<\/em> Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:31 burn their sons and daughters: Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).","summary_en":"12:31 burn their sons and daughters: Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127893,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Deuteronomul 12:31","title_en":"Study Note: Deuteronomul 12:31","content_ro":"12:31<\/strong> burn their sons and daughters:<\/em> Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).<\/p>","content_en":"12:31<\/strong> burn their sons and daughters:<\/em> Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"12:31 burn their sons and daughters: Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).","summary_en":"12:31 burn their sons and daughters: Human sacrifice was one of the most abhorrent practices of ancient pagan religions. The Ammonites believed that their god Molech required such sacrifice from his worshipers (Lev 18:21; 20:2; 2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 32:35).","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"}}

Deuteronom 12

Citește Biblia

Deuteronom 12

Niciun rezultat

Redare audio

Bine ai venit! 👋