Citește Biblia

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":37802,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tyre","title_en":"Tyre","content_ro":"<h3>TYRE<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 <span>BC<\/span>. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyptian citation from the same period. Tyre first appears in the Bible in the list of cities that comprised Asher’s inheritance (Jos 19:29). At that time, it was described as a “strong city” and was evidently never conquered by the Israelites (2 Sm 24:7). Tyre was most significant as a mercantile center, with maritime contacts throughout the Mediterranean region and overland traffic with Mesopotamia and Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>During David’s and Solomon’s monarchies, Tyre was a strong commercial ally of Israel. Both David and Solomon contracted with Hiram of Tyre for timber, building materials, and skilled laborers, for which they provided Tyre with agriculture produce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 5:1-11; 1 Chr 14:1; 2 Chr 2:3-16). After the division of the kingdom, Tyre evidently maintained friendly relations with Israel for some time. Ahab’s wife, Jezebel, was the daughter of “Ethbaal, king of the Sidonians,” a king who is known elsewhere as Ithobal of Tyre (1 Kgs 16:31; cf. Menander). At some point, however, the pressure of Assyrian and Babylonian aggression dissolved the alliance, so that by the time of Samaria’s fall, Tyre and Israel were no longer aligned and shortly thereafter became enemies.<\/p>\n<p>During the later kingdom period, Tyre was the focus for some of the strongest prophetic denunciations recorded in Scripture (Is 23:1-18; Jer 25:22; 27:1-11; Ez 26:1-19; Jl 3:4-8; Am 1:9-10). Tyre’s condemnation was justified for several reasons. Because of its commercial significance, Tyre was the focal point of Assyrian and Egyptian rivalries. Tyre managed, however, to play these rivals against each other while building its wealth and exploiting its neighbors. Additionally, the city of Tyre was not only a city of unscrupulous merchants but also a center of religious idolatry and sexual immorality. Foremost among Tyre’s sins was pride induced by its great wealth and strategic location. Ezekiel’s prophecy against Tyre offers a detailed picture of the city, its commercial empire, its sin, and its eventual demise (Ez 26:1-28; 29:18-20). The final destruction of Tyre did not come for almost 1,900 years (<span>AD<\/span> 1291), though it was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for 13 years (587–574 <span>BC<\/span>), and conquered by Alexander the Great in 332 <span>BC<\/span> after a seven-month siege, during which he built a causeway out to the island. Ezekiel’s description of Tyre’s arrogance can be compared to that of Satan’s, with Tyre’s words “I am a God, I sit in the seat of God” (<span>kjv<\/span>) being the expression that led to the fall of both Satan and Tyre (Ez 28:2).<\/p>\n<p>Despite Alexander’s destruction of the city, Tyre had regained prominence by the NT period, being equal to or greater than Jerusalem in terms of population and commercial power. Jesus visited the region surrounding Tyre during his early ministry, healing the Syrophoenician woman’s daughter (Mt 15:21-28; Mk 7:24-31). Jesus also compared the Galilean towns that had rejected him to Tyre and Sidon, suggesting that the Galileans would bear greater responsibility for their rejection because of the number of miracles he had performed among them (Lk 10:13-14).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TYRE<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 <span>BC<\/span>. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyptian citation from the same period. Tyre first appears in the Bible in the list of cities that comprised Asher’s inheritance (Jos 19:29). At that time, it was described as a “strong city” and was evidently never conquered by the Israelites (2 Sm 24:7). Tyre was most significant as a mercantile center, with maritime contacts throughout the Mediterranean region and overland traffic with Mesopotamia and Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>During David’s and Solomon’s monarchies, Tyre was a strong commercial ally of Israel. Both David and Solomon contracted with Hiram of Tyre for timber, building materials, and skilled laborers, for which they provided Tyre with agriculture produce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 5:1-11; 1 Chr 14:1; 2 Chr 2:3-16). After the division of the kingdom, Tyre evidently maintained friendly relations with Israel for some time. Ahab’s wife, Jezebel, was the daughter of “Ethbaal, king of the Sidonians,” a king who is known elsewhere as Ithobal of Tyre (1 Kgs 16:31; cf. Menander). At some point, however, the pressure of Assyrian and Babylonian aggression dissolved the alliance, so that by the time of Samaria’s fall, Tyre and Israel were no longer aligned and shortly thereafter became enemies.<\/p>\n<p>During the later kingdom period, Tyre was the focus for some of the strongest prophetic denunciations recorded in Scripture (Is 23:1-18; Jer 25:22; 27:1-11; Ez 26:1-19; Jl 3:4-8; Am 1:9-10). Tyre’s condemnation was justified for several reasons. Because of its commercial significance, Tyre was the focal point of Assyrian and Egyptian rivalries. Tyre managed, however, to play these rivals against each other while building its wealth and exploiting its neighbors. Additionally, the city of Tyre was not only a city of unscrupulous merchants but also a center of religious idolatry and sexual immorality. Foremost among Tyre’s sins was pride induced by its great wealth and strategic location. Ezekiel’s prophecy against Tyre offers a detailed picture of the city, its commercial empire, its sin, and its eventual demise (Ez 26:1-28; 29:18-20). The final destruction of Tyre did not come for almost 1,900 years (<span>AD<\/span> 1291), though it was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for 13 years (587–574 <span>BC<\/span>), and conquered by Alexander the Great in 332 <span>BC<\/span> after a seven-month siege, during which he built a causeway out to the island. Ezekiel’s description of Tyre’s arrogance can be compared to that of Satan’s, with Tyre’s words “I am a God, I sit in the seat of God” (<span>kjv<\/span>) being the expression that led to the fall of both Satan and Tyre (Ez 28:2).<\/p>\n<p>Despite Alexander’s destruction of the city, Tyre had regained prominence by the NT period, being equal to or greater than Jerusalem in terms of population and commercial power. Jesus visited the region surrounding Tyre during his early ministry, healing the Syrophoenician woman’s daughter (Mt 15:21-28; Mk 7:24-31). Jesus also compared the Galilean towns that had rejected him to Tyre and Sidon, suggesting that the Galileans would bear greater responsibility for their rejection because of the number of miracles he had performed among them (Lk 10:13-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TYRE Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 BC. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyp...","summary_en":"TYRE Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 BC. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyp...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":53171,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:1–28:19<\/strong> The message against <em>Tyre<\/em><em>,<\/em> Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would <em>come to a horrible end<\/em> and <em>exist no more<\/em> (27:36).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:1–28:19<\/strong> The message against <em>Tyre<\/em><em>,<\/em> Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would <em>come to a horrible end<\/em> and <em>exist no more<\/em> (27:36).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:1–28:19 The message against Tyre, Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would come to a horrible end and exist no more (27:36).","summary_en":"26:1–28:19 The message against Tyre, Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would come to a horrible end and exist no more (27:36).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":53172,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:1<\/strong> <em>February 3,<\/em> 585 <span>BC<\/span> was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:1<\/strong> <em>February 3,<\/em> 585 <span>BC<\/span> was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:1 February 3, 585 BC was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.","summary_en":"26:1 February 3, 585 BC was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80797,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:1–28:19<\/strong> The message against <em>Tyre<\/em><em>,<\/em> Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would <em>come to a horrible end<\/em> and <em>exist no more<\/em> (27:36).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:1–28:19<\/strong> The message against <em>Tyre<\/em><em>,<\/em> Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would <em>come to a horrible end<\/em> and <em>exist no more<\/em> (27:36).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:1–28:19 The message against Tyre, Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would come to a horrible end and exist no more (27:36).","summary_en":"26:1–28:19 The message against Tyre, Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would come to a horrible end and exist no more (27:36).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80798,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:1<\/strong> <em>February 3,<\/em> 585 <span>BC<\/span> was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:1<\/strong> <em>February 3,<\/em> 585 <span>BC<\/span> was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:1 February 3, 585 BC was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.","summary_en":"26:1 February 3, 585 BC was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108423,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:1–28:19<\/strong> The message against <em>Tyre<\/em><em>,<\/em> Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would <em>come to a horrible end<\/em> and <em>exist no more<\/em> (27:36).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:1–28:19<\/strong> The message against <em>Tyre<\/em><em>,<\/em> Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would <em>come to a horrible end<\/em> and <em>exist no more<\/em> (27:36).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:1–28:19 The message against Tyre, Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would come to a horrible end and exist no more (27:36).","summary_en":"26:1–28:19 The message against Tyre, Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would come to a horrible end and exist no more (27:36).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108424,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:1<\/strong> <em>February 3,<\/em> 585 <span>BC<\/span> was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:1<\/strong> <em>February 3,<\/em> 585 <span>BC<\/span> was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:1 February 3, 585 BC was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.","summary_en":"26:1 February 3, 585 BC was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136049,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:1–28:19<\/strong> The message against <em>Tyre<\/em><em>,<\/em> Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would <em>come to a horrible end<\/em> and <em>exist no more<\/em> (27:36).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:1–28:19<\/strong> The message against <em>Tyre<\/em><em>,<\/em> Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would <em>come to a horrible end<\/em> and <em>exist no more<\/em> (27:36).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:1–28:19 The message against Tyre, Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would come to a horrible end and exist no more (27:36).","summary_en":"26:1–28:19 The message against Tyre, Israel’s northwestern neighbor, is much more substantial than the short oracles preceding it. It takes the form of three nearly parallel panels (26:2-21; 27:1-36; and 28:1-19), each presenting a variation on the same message—that Tyre would come to a horrible end and exist no more (27:36).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136050,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:1<\/strong> <em>February 3,<\/em> 585 <span>BC<\/span> was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:1<\/strong> <em>February 3,<\/em> 585 <span>BC<\/span> was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:1 February 3, 585 BC was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.","summary_en":"26:1 February 3, 585 BC was about seven months after the fall of Jerusalem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":11678,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ezekiel","title_en":"Book of Ezekiel","content_ro":"<h3>EZEKIEL, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the temple to his fellow exiles. Settled at Tel-abib, on the canal of Kebar, the thousands of deportees eked out a meager existence. They hoped for a speedy return to Judah and a change for the better in the international situation. Their hope was enflamed by the spirited preaching of false prophets, likened to jackals among the ruins (13:4). They piously said, “The Lord declares . . . ,” but they were actually self-commissioned (v 6). They deceived the people with a message of peace at a time when God’s judgment was about to be poured out on his people (v 10). They had led the people to distrust prophecy to such an extent that a proverb circulated among the people that “the days grow long, and every vision comes to nought” (12:22). Much time had passed since visions of God’s judgment had been given to the people, and nothing could be interpreted as a fulfillment of those visions. Ezekiel was called to serve his community by symbolic acts, visions, and verbal messages in order to convince the people that God’s judgment was imminent (v 23).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandBackground\">Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of the prophet Ezekiel can be understood best against the backdrop of his time. If, as the church father Origen believed, the vague reference “in the thirtieth year” (1:1) marks the prophet’s age at the time of his first vision, Ezekiel was born during the rule of King Josiah of Judah (c. 640–609 <span>BC<\/span>). Josiah was the grandson of King Manasseh, whose sacrilegious acts had brought God’s judgment on the kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 21:10-15).<\/p>\n<p>Though Judah’s political situation was perilous, Josiah led the nation in a radical reformation that began with the finding of the “Book of the Law” (2 Kgs 22) in the year that Ezekiel was born (c. 621 <span>BC<\/span>). Idolatry was done away with and the people turned back to God, but God’s judgment on Judah was unchangeable (23:26-27). Josiah erred in trying to make Judah a kingdom with which other states had to reckon. He was threatened when the Egyptian pharaoh Neco passed through Judah on his way to aid the weakened Assyrian kingdom. Josiah marched to meet the Egyptian forces, but his troops were unable to stand against the Egyptians, and he died in battle (v 29). Egypt took control of Judah, and Pharaoh Neco placed Jehoiakim in power over Jerusalem. Egyptian control did not last long, however, for in 605 <span>BC<\/span> Egypt and Assyria were defeated by Babylonia’s king Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish. The Babylonians then pushed south to Jerusalem, and the first deportation of Judean leaders (among them the prophet Daniel) took place.<\/p>\n<p>Jehoiakim was permitted to continue ruling over Judah as a vassal king of Nebuchadnezzar. But his dealings with Egypt brought the emperor’s wrath down upon him. Before the Babylonians could address the Judean situation, Jehoiakim died and his son Jehoiachin was crowned. When the Babylonian forces arrived at the gates of Jerusalem, Jehoiachin and thousands of the aristocracy were taken to Babylon (2 Kgs 24:10-17). Among those deportees was Ezekiel, then about 25 years old.<\/p>\n<p>Although the book says otherwise, many scholars think that Ezekiel lived and taught in Judah for the duration of the siege and the fall of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>). They conclude this from Ezekiel’s familiarity with idolatry in the temple and his vivid descriptions of Jerusalem’s last days (Ez 8:11). Others believe that Ezekiel ministered both to the exiled community and to the Judeans living in Judah. Neither interpretation does full justice to the claims of the book itself. Ezekiel was exiled in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He was called to bring God’s word to the deportees at Tel-abib; he was granted a vision of the horrible practices in the temple court; and he was familiar with Jerusalem and Judah from having lived there and from reports on affairs in Jerusalem coming to the exiles through messengers. Jeremiah, Ezekiel’s contemporary, was prophesying in Jerusalem, but there is no evidence that Jeremiah and Ezekiel knew of each other’s ministry. If Ezekiel had brought God’s word to Jerusalem during the siege, some reference to Jeremiah might appear in his writings. If Jeremiah was supported by Ezekiel’s ministry in Jerusalem, he probably would have included a positive word for his colleague in his book. The book of Ezekiel plainly says that Ezekiel lived and preached in exile (see 1:1-3; 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The prophecy of Ezekiel is easily outlined by subject matter and chronology. The chronology of the period permits a division before and after 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Jerusalem). Chapters 1–24 cover the pre-586 ministry of Ezekiel, whereas chapters 33–48 represent his post-586 ministry. Chapters 25–32 (oracles against the foreign nations) function as a transition between the book’s two major divisions.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s outline according to subject matter divides into four parts: Ezekiel’s call (1:1–3:21); prophecies of judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27); oracles against the nations (25:1–32:32); and proclamation of hope (33:1–48:35).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Call (1:1–3:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The prophet’s call in one sense was similar to that of Isaiah and Jeremiah. Isaiah received his mission in a vision of God’s glory in the temple (Is 6). Jeremiah was called unexpectedly in his youth, and received signs that solemnly set forth the nature of his mission (Jer 1:11-15). The call of Ezekiel combined those two elements. Revelation of God’s glory to the prophet at the same time revealed the nature of the prophet’s mission. Ezekiel’s call contained a full description of God’s glory. Isaiah briefly stated that he saw the Lord enthroned in the temple, and he concentrated on the seraphim representing and magnifying God’s glory. Ezekiel elaborated on the revelation of the Lord’s glory as well as on the ministering angels who went before the Lord as part of his royal entourage. The vision of God’s glory, though difficult to understand, is the key to the book of Ezekiel.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel, as a priest, was concerned about the future of the temple. That sacred place had been ordained by God as his home among his people. The glory, presence, and holiness of God were symbolized in the temple (see 1 Kgs 8:10-11). In exile Ezekiel could not serve his people as a priest, for they were far from Jerusalem, the city God had chosen. Against all expectations the Lord revealed himself to Ezekiel in the land of Babylon. In calling Ezekiel to a prophetic ministry, God assured his servant that he had not forsaken his people, even though they had been banished from the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet’s vision began with a storm. As a large cloud approached from the north, Ezekiel saw a brightness surrounding the cloud, four creatures, and four wheels. The combination of creatures and wheels suggests that the Lord appeared in a chariot. God’s chariot is a familiar OT representation of his coming in judgment (see Is 66:15-16). The wheels within wheels and the position of the four living creatures may signify God’s total control over the whole earth, so he could move his “chariot of judgment” in any direction. It is also possible that the living creatures with their four faces, and the wheels full of eyes, may be separate symbols showing that God sees all that happens and thereby knows the plight of the exiles. In the vision the prophet’s attention was drawn to a throne above the heads of the creatures. On the throne was “the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1:28). In his vision of God’s coming in judgment, Ezekiel received his call to the prophetic ministry: “Son of man, I send you to the people of Israel, to a nation of rebels who have rebelled against me” (2:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). During a dark hour of Israel’s history, Ezekiel had to prophesy, rebuke his fellow exiles (3:11), and be responsible as a watchman over the house of Israel (3:17; cf. 33:1-9). Symbolic of his mission was a scroll filled with lamentations and woe (2:9-10), which when eaten became sweet as honey (3:1-3). Difficult as the mission was, God’s presence and the certain fulfillment of the prophecies sweetened Ezekiel’s task. Such encouragement was intended to take away any fear of the rebellious Israelites (2:6-7). Instead of being elated with his mission, however, Ezekiel became despondent.<\/p>\n<p>A week later, the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel to remind him of his important role as a watchman (3:16-17). Ezekiel became responsible for Israel as a nation, not just for individuals. His witness to Israel had the express aim of national repentance (vv 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was confined to his house by God (3:24-25). The house ministry was to be carried on only with those Israelites who sought God’s will, for the Lord had abandoned those who continued in their apostasy. The prophetic word would not help the apostates (v 26). The principle of Ezekiel’s ministry is found in 3:27: “Whenever I give you a message, I will loosen your tongue and let you speak. Then you will say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span> says!’ Some of them will listen, but some will ignore you, for they are rebels” (<span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 11:15; 13:43).<\/p>\n<h5>Prophecies of Judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolism figures prominently in Ezekiel’s writing. His priestly background and preparation probably suited him to receive and communicate God’s word in symbolic acts and speech. Chapters 4 and 5 contain four symbolic acts: (1) Jerusalem’s siege is portrayed on a brick (Ez 4:1-3); (2) Israel’s iniquity is represented by Ezekiel’s lying on his sides (vv 4-8); (3) Jerusalem’s grief and horror in the last days of the siege are represented by Ezekiel’s food and drink (vv 9-17); (4) Jerusalem’s fate is represented by the prophet’s hair being cut off (5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s instructions were further illuminated by God’s explanation of Israel’s apostasy (5:6-7) and his judgment on Israel (vv 8-12). The judgment will last until the Israelites admit that in covenant faithfulness their Lord has inflicted righteous judgment on them (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>God would direct his judgment first against the people and the city of Jerusalem. Next in line were the mountains of Israel (ch 6) and the land (ch 7). God’s wrath included the cities and cultic sites in the hill country of Judah, leaving no protection for the people (6:3-6). Abominations that were practiced throughout the land caused God’s judgment to fall on the land as well as on the people (7:2-3, 10-11, 23). But because God is righteous, he judged the people according to their ways of life, desiring that they would once more acknowledge him as their God (7:27).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet then (chs 8–11) focused on the abominations practiced in Jerusalem, particularly idolatry in the temple courts, which caused the judgment announced in chapters 1–7. An idol had been erected in the inner court (8:3-5). By the wall of the court, elders of the city were paying homage to the idols that surrounded the court (vv 11-12). Closer to the temple, women were weeping for the god Tammuz (v 14), and men were worshiping the sun (v 16). In preparation for the ultimate judgment on the land, the prophet placed a mark on the foreheads of the few faithful Israelites so that they would survive (9:4-6). Then (ch 10), the glory of God, which had filled the temple from the time of Solomon, gradually left: “Then the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> went up from the city and stopped above the mountain to the east” (11:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people, now without divine protection, were being handed over to the Babylonians (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>The message of doom for Jerusalem contains four elements of hope: restoration of the people (11:17), restoration of the land (v 17), purification of the people (v 18), and renewed fellowship between God and his people (vv 19-20). The prophet develops those four themes in chapters 33–48.<\/p>\n<p>The visions of chapters 10 and 11 made clear that when God removed his presence from Jerusalem, the exile was approaching. Those who were already in Babylon were unwilling to believe that such an extensive devastation of Jerusalem would happen or that the people would all be exiled and the land become desolate.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel acted out the certainty of God’s word of judgment by packing his bags and showing the baggage to his fellow exiles. First, he placed the bags in the courtyard outside his modest home. Next, he went out by making a hole through the wall. Finally, the prophet walked about the settlement with his bags in full view. Skeptical observers did not understand Ezekiel and probably thought he was crazy. The believers who saw him understood. His strange actions dramatized how the king’s aides would do all they could to help King Zedekiah escape just before the fall of Jerusalem. Second Kings 25 tells how the king and his soldiers left Jerusalem for the wilderness, to be overtaken by the Babylonians at Jericho and brought before Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah. As a captive, Zedekiah witnessed the murder of his sons; then his eyes were put out, and he was sent into exile with the other Judeans (cf. Ez 12:13). The prophet’s explanation concluded with a word of comfort. Because of his covenant with Abraham, God promised not to destroy the people completely. A remnant who overcame the sword, famine, and pestilence would live to tell the story of God’s judgment (vv 15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel further illustrated the nation’s plight by eating as though full of fear, depicting the great trauma that all of Judah’s inhabitants would soon undergo.<\/p>\n<p>Both symbolic acts, packing his belongings and eating, emphasized the truthfulness of God’s word. The people needed to face the nature of their God: He is magnificent, and when he speaks, his words are powerful and come to pass. Thus, the devastation of the land and the people’s exile were a fulfillment of God’s word through the prophets. The judgment was meant to produce a recognition of the Lord, repentance, and a return to God. Some in Judah doubted the efficacy of God’s prophecies, saying, “Time passes, making a liar of every prophet” (12:22). Others thought God’s word would come true in the distant future (v 27). The prevailing attitude of distrust in God’s word had been stimulated by the popular preaching of false prophets (ch 13). Never commissioned by the Lord, they deceived God’s people by lying and misdirecting them with messages of peace (vv 8-10). Wickedness, lying, and deceit were encouraged among the people by such false prophets (v 22). The magnitude of their sin and their great responsibility for Judah’s fall would be matched by the Lord’s heavy judgment. Yet God would save his people from such evil and will prepare a righteous nation with whom to maintain his covenant (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>The certainty of the judgment has been connected with the truthfulness of God’s word. Ezekiel’s difficult task of affirming the doom of Jerusalem to stubborn hearers was intensified by the people’s idolatry. Their whole way of life denied the existence of God. They practiced idolatry in their worship, and they had set up idols in their hearts (14:3). Before the covenant with God could be restored, they had to be purified from their idolatry. Even so, repentance would not guarantee immunity from judgment. Sword, famine, wild beasts, and plagues would ravage the population (v 21). After the execution of his judgment, God would take back those survivors who had turned to him for mercy. God would surely accomplish all that he intended for his people’s good (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 15–17 Ezekiel uses three parables to set forth the apostasy, present uselessness, and judgment of Israel. Jerusalem and Judah are compared to a piece of charred wood, an adulterous woman, and a vine.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 15 reviews Jerusalem’s case. Jerusalem is compared to a piece of wood, both ends of which have been charred with fire, so that the wood is of no value. As the whole piece of wood is burned instead of being saved, so Jerusalem would undergo complete devastation (15:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 16 presents God’s case against Jerusalem from a different perspective, stressing his care for Jerusalem in the past. The beginnings of her history are compared to the birth of a female child, left abandoned by her mother (16:3-5). God adopted the child and washed and clothed her (vv 6-7). He made a covenant with her (v 8), making her his own possession. He generously gave her all the fine things of life (vv 9-13). In the height of her development, Jerusalem’s fame spread to the nations (v 14). Her self-reliance made her a spiritual prostitute as she took up the religious practices and way of life of the nations (vv 15-34). The cities of Sodom (Gn 19) and Samaria (2 Kgs 17:6), known for their immorality, are called Jerusalem’s sisters (Ez 16:46). They had been judged by God, but the corruption of those cities was little compared to the lewdness of Jerusalem (vv 48-51). Thus, Jerusalem also would surely fall and become desolate. Yet Ezekiel anticipates the judgment’s final outcome; Jerusalem will be restored to covenantal blessing (vv 62-63) after her repentance.<\/p>\n<p>The third parable (ch 17) focuses on God’s sovereignty over political developments. Assyria was no longer a power to be reckoned with. Babylon and Egypt both exercised dominion, although the balance of power was veering in favor of Babylon. Their extension of power is likened to an eagle. Nebuchadnezzar, pictured as “a great eagle with broad wings full of many-colored feathers,” took control over the affairs of Judah by removing Jehoiachin, “the highest branch of a cedar tree,” from office and by exiling him with young leaders of the Judean state (17:3-4). Ezekiel was among them. Nebuchadnezzar let the Judeans control their own affairs under Zedekiah but expected them to be subject to Babylon and not to any other power. But Judah (likened to a vine) tried to ally itself with Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt, “another great eagle with broad wings and full plumage” (v 7), against Nebuchadnezzar. Zedekiah’s folly in turning to Egypt would cause Nebuchadnezzar to pull up the vine by its roots and make it wither (vv 9-10). In explaining the parable, God told the exiles that Judah’s fall was a result of its unfaithfulness to King Nebuchadnezzar, to whom Judah owed allegiance by covenant (vv 13-18). Judah’s unfaithfulness thus extended to all of its relationships: religious, cultural, and political. After the exile, God promised, he would restore his people to their land under a Messiah, “a tender shoot” (v 22). The messianic rule is signified by the young twig, which when planted in the land will become a magnificent cedar, giving shade and protection to the birds. Chapter 17 is an inspiring affirmation of the sovereignty of God in human affairs (“All the trees will know that it is I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, who cuts down the tall tree and helps the short tree to grow tall. It is I who makes the green tree wither and gives new life to the dead tree”—17:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 18–22 contain Ezekiel’s oracles to Judah, its leaders, and the exiles. First, he enunciates God’s standard of righteousness: “The person who sins will be the one who dies” (18:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people are charging God with injustice, for they believe themselves to be under God’s judgment for the sins of their ancestors (vv 25-29). Although the Ten Commandments do say that God may punish “the sins of their parents to the third and the fourth generations” (Ex 20:5, <span>nlt<\/span>), the prophet vindicates God’s justice, telling the people that they are not being punished merely for their ancestors’ sin. Each person must be directly accountable to God; the sinner will die in wickedness, and the righteous will live by righteousness. A life of faithfulness to God’s moral and civil law will be rewarded (Ez 18:5-9). Even if one’s father was a sinner, the father’s sin is not transferable (vv 14-18). God is ready to forgive any sinner who repents (v 27). The prophet’s vindication of God’s justice becomes a call to repentance. The sinners in Judah and in exile were thus warned of the consequences of their evil, and were exhorted to return to their God and his standard of right and wrong (vv 31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 19 contains two parables in the form of a lamentation. The first portrays a lioness and her two cubs. The lioness is Hamutal, the wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31), who bore two sons: Jehoahaz and Zedekiah. Jehoahaz is referred to in Ezekiel 19:3-4 as a cub who grew up and was taken to Egypt (by Pharaoh Neco in 608 <span>BC<\/span>; see 2 Kgs 23:31-34). Zedekiah succeeded to the throne ten years later. In the lamentation the prophet imaginatively represents Zedekiah as a young cub who is ultimately taken to Babylon as a rebellious ruler (Ez 19:7-9). The second parable changes the imagery to a vine, representing Israel (v 10). In its early days God blessed Israel with strong rulers, but now the vine was wilting as Zedekiah irresponsibly led Judah to its last days. Ezekiel’s lamentation stresses the lack of a good candidate for the throne and the lack of life in the vine (vv 13-14).<\/p>\n<p>In chapter 20 the prophet concludes God’s argument against his people. He reviews the history of Israel’s past, starting with God’s self-revelation in Egypt (20:5-6). He took to himself a stubborn nation, tied to idolatry (v 8) and prone to apostasy (vv 13, 21). Israel wanted to be one of the great nations (v 32) instead of a sanctified people (v 12). As a result of its spiritual hardness, Israel is dispersed to live among the nations (v 35). Yet God had a solemn covenant with Israel, made by oath to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. On the basis of that covenant, God will reach out with compassion to those who repent of their sinful ways (vv 37-44). In Israel’s judgment and restoration the nations will see the holiness of God, which does not tolerate unfaithfulness in Israel (v 41).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s prophecies alternate between God’s judgment on Israel’s sin and his restoration of Israel, spanning the bridge between Israel’s past and future. In view of the people’s doubts of the coming judgment on Jerusalem, he stresses the necessity of judgment and the need for repentance. Still, the future restoration of a remnant is touched upon here and there as the counterpart of his message of judgment. After announcing the fall of Jerusalem, the prophet shifts from a message of judgment to one of hope.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet returns to the proclamation of judgment in four oracles (20:45–21:32). He speaks against the Negev Desert area (20:45-49), Jerusalem and the land of Israel (21:2-17, 20-27), and against the Ammonites (vv 28-32). God permitted the sword of Nebuchadnezzar to be his instrument of judgment upon the Judeans (v 19). He would see to the judgment on the Ammonites. The Judeans would recover their previous glory, but the memory of the Ammonites would perish (vv 27, 32). The oracle against the Ammonites anticipates a larger treatise on Israel’s other neighbors: Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt (chs 25–29).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 22–24 contain a renewed series of indictments against Jerusalem. Jerusalem’s religious and civil leadership (the prophets, priests, and princes) are corrupt, and the people have followed their example (22:25-30). The parable of the two sisters, Oholah and Oholibah, is a variation of the parable of adulterous Jerusalem (ch 23; cf. ch 16). It differs in that the comparison drawn between Jerusalem, soon to be exiled, and Samaria, already in exile, is more explicit in the parable of Oholah and Oholibah. In chapter 16 Jerusalem was charged with greater sins than Sodom and Samaria, but was promised restoration. Only the adulterous nature of the two sisters and God’s judgment on them is emphasized in chapter 23, with no word of restoration. This parable is a fitting introduction to that of the boiling pot (ch 24), in which Jerusalem is compared to a rusty pot boiling with water. The Jerusalemites, likened to pieces of meat in the boiling pot, will die in the city. The parable was pronounced on the starting day of Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem. Thus, the exiles were divinely forewarned of God’s intent to destroy the temple (24:21) and were prepared for messengers bringing the bad news of Jerusalem’s fall.<\/p>\n<p>Those oracles and parables conclude the first division of the book. Ezekiel has stated God’s case against the rebellious house of Judah in many ways. His metaphors have likened Judah to a burnt piece of wood, to an uprooted vine, to a baby who grew up to be an adulteress, and to Oholibah, the adulterous woman. He has countered arguments against the fulfillment of God’s word and against the justice of God. He has reassured the exiles that God will not leave the righteous and that the future of Israel begins with a righteous remnant. The pendulum of Ezekiel’s writing has swung from judgment to restoration, while the clock was bringing Judah closer to the hour of its fall.<\/p>\n<h5>Oracles against the Nations (25:1–32:32)<\/h5>\n<p>Ammon, Moab, and Edom were Israel’s neighbors to the east. Because they were ethnically related to Israel, they were not attacked by the Israelites on their march to the Promised Land. Ammon and Moab were descendants of Lot, Abraham’s nephew, and the Edomites descended from Esau, the brother of Jacob. Although God forbade war with them, relations between Israel and its eastern neighbors were always tense. Israel had been overrun by the Ammonites for a time, and Israel was never successful in controlling the Edomites’ competitive trade relations. Those neighboring nations joined the Babylonian attack against Jerusalem and rejoiced when Jerusalem fell and the temple was devastated (Ez 25:3-12). They were ready to take over and loot Judah’s cities, and to instigate trouble in a time when Jerusalem was distressed. Therefore, says Ezekiel, God’s judgment will also extend to Ammon, Moab, and Edom (vv 4-14).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines had been Israel’s enemy to the southwest. During the period of the judges and the united monarchy, the Philistines had controlled much of Israel’s territory. King David successfully limited the Philistine threat by confining them to their own territory. But in Ezekiel’s day they were still considered Israel’s “everlasting” enemy (25:15), possibly intensified by Philistine support of the Babylonian invasion of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>The city of Tyre had received reports of the overthrow of Jerusalem and was ready to exploit the opportunity for its own advantage (26:2). Tyre’s trade position was unrivaled; its ships crossed the seas to exchange goods with many distant lands (Ez 27). But Tyre would soon be broken by the Babylonians, its wealth dried up with the destruction of the fleet and the murder of its sailors (27:26).<\/p>\n<p>The prince of Tyre is singled out in chapter 28, but verse 12 refers to the “king” of Tyre. Interpreters disagree whether they are one person or two. Those who distinguish between the two understand the prince of Tyre to be the ruler of that city, but they consider the “king” of Tyre to represent Satan (28:13-15). The Garden of Eden with all its splendor is an appropriate setting for the original glory of an angelic Satan before his fall. But there is no reason within the context to distinguish between the prince and the king of Tyre. Each is said to have exalted himself, and both took authority over men as if they were gods and enjoyed all the splendor and royalty that belong to God. And both prince and king fall from their high position. The passage is a magnificent example of Ezekiel’s literary ability. He draws a glorious picture of the Garden of Eden, reworking the same theme as he depicts the glory and fall of the king of Tyre. Ezekiel presents him as a cherub, in accordance with the local belief that the king was divine. He wore the finest clothing, with nine kinds of precious stones (v 13). Though God had elevated him to the royal throne (vv 13-14), the king’s heart turned to materialism and to religious and judicial corruption (vv 16-18). In a sense the king (prince) represents the people of Tyre. They were all guilty of corruption, injustice, and violence. If God judged his covenant people for their perversion of justice and for their sins, his judgment would surely come also on the city of Tyre (vv 18-19). When the Babylonians marched on Tyre, they laboriously built a jetty from the mainland to the city. At the same time Tyrian ships loaded with goods and treasures sailed out across the Mediterranean, so that when Nebuchadnezzar’s troops finally breached the walls, little loot could be taken (29:18).<\/p>\n<p>The city of Sidon also cheered Jerusalem’s destruction. Sidon was a port city in Phoenicia, to the north of Tyre. By pestilence and war, the inhabitants of Sidon would learn the justice of Israel’s God.<\/p>\n<p>Six nations (Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, and Sidon) scorned Israel at the fall of Jerusalem. Because God had invested his holiness in the temple of Jerusalem and in his people, the temple’s destruction and the people’s exile signified to the nations that Israel’s God was impotent. They did not realize that the reason for Israel’s fate was God’s intolerance of his people’s sin. God’s holiness required the punishment of sin, and it also required vindication for his name (28:22-23). God was still concerned for his people, that Israel might know he had removed the scorn of their neighbors (v 24). In the restoration of Israel the Lord would further manifest his holiness before the nations. Israel would receive back the land, vineyards, and houses, and would enjoy the bounty of the Lord in peace (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>Egypt had convinced the people of Israel and Judah that with its help the Assyrians and the Babylonians could not stand their ground in Palestine. In 722 <span>BC<\/span> the Assyrian troops took the northern capital of Samaria, and in 586 the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem, while Egypt remained passive. The Egyptians had desired control over Palestine for economic reasons, but not at the expense of their own welfare. Egypt, too, would lose its leadership under God’s judgment (29:9-16). Reduced to dependence on foreign powers, Egypt would no longer be a stumbling block for Israel. First, Babylonia was permitted to break Egypt’s power (23:1–32:21); later, the Persians, Greeks, and Romans would incorporate Egypt as a province. The fall of Egypt coincided with the fall of several great and small kingdoms: Assyria (32:22-23), Elam (vv 24-25), Meshech and Tubal (vv 26-28), Edom (v 29), and Sidon (v 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Proclamation of Hope (33:1–48:35)<\/h5>\n<p>After the visions of God’s judgment on the surrounding nations, Ezekiel returns to the future hope of Israel. In the first major section of his book he dealt with the reasons for Judah’s exile and the destruction of the temple, alluding often to the future of Israel. But the prophet’s organization of his material included, between prophecies of Israel’s judgment and restoration, the oracles of God’s judgment on Israel’s neighbors who had encouraged and rejoiced in its fall. Throughout its history Israel had allowed foreign nations to influence its religion, culture, and form of government. The reduction of their powers meant Israel, restored to the Promised Land, would be more free for faithfulness to God. Before taking up the theme of the restoration, Ezekiel reviews the emphases of chapters 1–24: (1) He was called to be a watchman over Israel (33:1-9; cf. 1:1–3:21). (2) Israel had sinned against the Lord and had to receive a righteous judgment (33:10). (3) Jerusalem was to be taken by the Babylonians (v 21). (4) Israel’s repentance is necessary for restoration (vv 11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Thus far, his ministry had not met with success. The exiles who had heard his messages were full of appreciation for Ezekiel’s rhetorical and literary abilities (33:32). They readily accepted Ezekiel as a watchman who warned the people of the impending catastrophe at Jerusalem, and they may have admitted that their sin was the reason for God’s judgment on Israel and Jerusalem. But they were slow in applying the prophetic word to their own lives. God was ready to forgive their sins if they repented, acknowledged him, and demonstrated their renewed spirit by practicing the law of God (v 32). Now that the news of Jerusalem had been reported to the exiles (v 21), the necessity for the people to act responsibly was even more urgent. The Lord had demonstrated that Ezekiel was a true prophet (v 33).<\/p>\n<p>The success of Ezekiel’s ministry was not measured in numbers. He faithfully declared the word of God in word, sign, and parable. The exiles had followed the false hopes proclaimed by false “shepherds” who had fattened themselves at the expense of the flock (34:2-3). They did not take care of those in need (v 4), and they allowed the flock to be scattered (vv 5-6). God promised his people that he would be the faithful shepherd, bring the sheep together, feed them, and care for them (34:11-15; cf. Ps 23). God would also distinguish between the sheep and the goats, to find out whose hearts were right with him, so that the true sheep could be restored to God’s flock (Ez 34:20-22). God’s promise included the restoration of the land and the restoration of the divinely appointed Davidic dynasty (v 24). The renewed fellowship between the Lord and Israel under the messianic ruler would be sealed with a new covenant, the “covenant of peace.” That covenant assured the people of God’s blessing on their labor, bringing them abundant harvests (vv 26-27). The people would not be forced to fight against nature in their pursuits (vv 25-28). They would not have to struggle against other peoples who might try to share in their blessings by force (vv 27-29). The prophetic vision telescoped the events of the restoration of Israel after the exile, the coming of Jesus the Messiah (cf. Jn 10), and the full restoration of the sin-cursed world.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 34 is the key to the messages of restoration. The emphases include the outworking of the frequently repeated verse “They will truly be my people, and I will be their God” (11:20; cf. 34:30; 36:28). The most significant aspects of the restoration theme include: (1) God’s gracious restoration of his people to covenant blessing (36:20-36; 37:23-26; 39:25); (2) God’s restoration of the nation of Israel to the land (36:1-15, 24; 37:14-23; 39:27); (3) God’s new covenant, giving his Spirit to his people (36:25-27; 37:14; 39:29), and his blessing on his people (36:8-12, 29-38; 39:9-10, 26), assuring them of victory over their enemies (35:1-15; 36:36; 37:28; 38:1–39:24); (4) God’s appointment of a Davidic king, the Messiah, over his people (37:24-25); and (5) God’s temple restored among his people (37:26-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The People of God<\/h6>\n<p>The rejection of the exiles did not last forever. Based on the Abrahamic covenant, the Lord promised to bless the faithful remnant and to make of them a new people. The imagery of a valley of dry bones is particularly fitting. The dry bones represent God’s people without hope (37:11). Ezekiel proclaims to them the good news that God will renew and restore them (v 12). The Lord’s purpose for his people is that all the nations may honor his holy name through his people (39:7, 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The Land<\/h6>\n<p>The promise also extends to the land, originally given to Abraham and his descendants. The Abrahamic covenant included a messianic element, for through the family of Abraham living in the Promised Land all nations would receive God’s blessing (Gn 12:3). In a vision Ezekiel saw the boundaries and described the division of the land (Ez 47–48). The royal city of Jerusalem is the central symbol of God’s presence among his people; its name will be “The Lord is there” (48:8-35).<\/p>\n<h6>The New Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Abrahamic covenant is renewed, a gracious covenant that expresses the restored relationship. “Covenant of peace” fittingly describes its nature and benefits. The restless people of God are promised rest from their searching, their enemies, and their toil. The change in relationship is further emphasized by God’s sending of his Spirit, who will add a new dimension to the lifestyle of his people. Obedience to God will no longer be constrained, for God’s Spirit helps his people to do his will. A new heart, controlled by the Spirit of God, is given to the Lord’s people (36:26-27). The presence of the Spirit also signifies a new life for the people (37:14; see Jn 3:8, 16; Acts 2:38; Rom 8:2-4, 15).<\/p>\n<h6>The Messiah<\/h6>\n<p>The OT hope of a messianic king is crystallized in Ezekiel’s message. His rule will be everlasting (Ez 37:25), over all God’s people who have new hearts (vv 15-25).<\/p>\n<h6>The Temple<\/h6>\n<p>As a priest, Ezekiel remained keenly interested in the temple, priesthood, sacrificial regulations, and festivals. A large section of the prophecy’s last division describes the temple’s revived worship (40:1–46:24). His vision of the glory of God, so important in the messages of God’s judgment on Jerusalem (chs 1, 10–11), now assures the remnant that God did not forsake his people (43:2-5). He will dwell among them, for the temple is a symbol of God’s presence (37:27). Some interpreters believe that the temple, with its ritual as described in Ezekiel 40–46, will be restored in the messianic era before the last judgment. Others believe the promises about the temple provide a positive symbolic answer to Ezekiel’s greatest concern: whether God will return to be with his people (48:35; see Jn 2:21; Rv 21:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are various interpretations of chapters 34–48. As a watchman to Israel, Ezekiel had a message for the exiled Jewish community. Thus the prophecy’s fulfillment must have begun with the decree of Cyrus I (538 <span>BC<\/span>) permitting the Jews to return to their land (Ezr 1:1-3). Two rival schools of interpretation exist on how the prophecy is fulfilled beyond Israel’s restoration to the land. Those who interpret Israel as simply the nation view the modern return of Jewish people to the land of Israel as a continuation of God’s prophetic promise. They believe that God’s plan for Israel is being fulfilled along with, and in addition to, his plan for the Christian church. The fulfillment of those prophecies will be inaugurated by the coming of the messianic king, who will give earthly peace to the Jewish people. The temple worship (Ez 40–48) will be restored in some way during the period of the messianic kingdom. The church will enjoy a small share in all the events centered on the Jews. The promises of Ezekiel’s vision are thus limited to the nation of Israel and must be fulfilled before the coming of a new heaven and earth.<\/p>\n<p>Other interpreters believe that Ezekiel wrote for the benefit of spiritual descendants of Abraham who believe, as Abraham did, in God’s promises (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:11-13; Gal 3:6-9, 29). All who have faith like Abraham, whether Jews or Gentiles, are regarded as Abraham’s offspring (Gal 3:28-29). Ezekiel’s message thus would include all of God’s gracious work among Christian Gentiles, who have become the recipients of God’s promises and benefits. It is possible, on the basis of 1 Peter 1:10-11, to interpret Ezekiel’s language as a prophetic expression of how God’s grace would come to all those who become reconciled to God through faith in the gospel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Ezekiel (Person); Prophecy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EZEKIEL, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the temple to his fellow exiles. Settled at Tel-abib, on the canal of Kebar, the thousands of deportees eked out a meager existence. They hoped for a speedy return to Judah and a change for the better in the international situation. Their hope was enflamed by the spirited preaching of false prophets, likened to jackals among the ruins (13:4). They piously said, “The Lord declares . . . ,” but they were actually self-commissioned (v 6). They deceived the people with a message of peace at a time when God’s judgment was about to be poured out on his people (v 10). They had led the people to distrust prophecy to such an extent that a proverb circulated among the people that “the days grow long, and every vision comes to nought” (12:22). Much time had passed since visions of God’s judgment had been given to the people, and nothing could be interpreted as a fulfillment of those visions. Ezekiel was called to serve his community by symbolic acts, visions, and verbal messages in order to convince the people that God’s judgment was imminent (v 23).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandBackground\">Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of the prophet Ezekiel can be understood best against the backdrop of his time. If, as the church father Origen believed, the vague reference “in the thirtieth year” (1:1) marks the prophet’s age at the time of his first vision, Ezekiel was born during the rule of King Josiah of Judah (c. 640–609 <span>BC<\/span>). Josiah was the grandson of King Manasseh, whose sacrilegious acts had brought God’s judgment on the kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 21:10-15).<\/p>\n<p>Though Judah’s political situation was perilous, Josiah led the nation in a radical reformation that began with the finding of the “Book of the Law” (2 Kgs 22) in the year that Ezekiel was born (c. 621 <span>BC<\/span>). Idolatry was done away with and the people turned back to God, but God’s judgment on Judah was unchangeable (23:26-27). Josiah erred in trying to make Judah a kingdom with which other states had to reckon. He was threatened when the Egyptian pharaoh Neco passed through Judah on his way to aid the weakened Assyrian kingdom. Josiah marched to meet the Egyptian forces, but his troops were unable to stand against the Egyptians, and he died in battle (v 29). Egypt took control of Judah, and Pharaoh Neco placed Jehoiakim in power over Jerusalem. Egyptian control did not last long, however, for in 605 <span>BC<\/span> Egypt and Assyria were defeated by Babylonia’s king Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish. The Babylonians then pushed south to Jerusalem, and the first deportation of Judean leaders (among them the prophet Daniel) took place.<\/p>\n<p>Jehoiakim was permitted to continue ruling over Judah as a vassal king of Nebuchadnezzar. But his dealings with Egypt brought the emperor’s wrath down upon him. Before the Babylonians could address the Judean situation, Jehoiakim died and his son Jehoiachin was crowned. When the Babylonian forces arrived at the gates of Jerusalem, Jehoiachin and thousands of the aristocracy were taken to Babylon (2 Kgs 24:10-17). Among those deportees was Ezekiel, then about 25 years old.<\/p>\n<p>Although the book says otherwise, many scholars think that Ezekiel lived and taught in Judah for the duration of the siege and the fall of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>). They conclude this from Ezekiel’s familiarity with idolatry in the temple and his vivid descriptions of Jerusalem’s last days (Ez 8:11). Others believe that Ezekiel ministered both to the exiled community and to the Judeans living in Judah. Neither interpretation does full justice to the claims of the book itself. Ezekiel was exiled in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He was called to bring God’s word to the deportees at Tel-abib; he was granted a vision of the horrible practices in the temple court; and he was familiar with Jerusalem and Judah from having lived there and from reports on affairs in Jerusalem coming to the exiles through messengers. Jeremiah, Ezekiel’s contemporary, was prophesying in Jerusalem, but there is no evidence that Jeremiah and Ezekiel knew of each other’s ministry. If Ezekiel had brought God’s word to Jerusalem during the siege, some reference to Jeremiah might appear in his writings. If Jeremiah was supported by Ezekiel’s ministry in Jerusalem, he probably would have included a positive word for his colleague in his book. The book of Ezekiel plainly says that Ezekiel lived and preached in exile (see 1:1-3; 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The prophecy of Ezekiel is easily outlined by subject matter and chronology. The chronology of the period permits a division before and after 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Jerusalem). Chapters 1–24 cover the pre-586 ministry of Ezekiel, whereas chapters 33–48 represent his post-586 ministry. Chapters 25–32 (oracles against the foreign nations) function as a transition between the book’s two major divisions.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s outline according to subject matter divides into four parts: Ezekiel’s call (1:1–3:21); prophecies of judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27); oracles against the nations (25:1–32:32); and proclamation of hope (33:1–48:35).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Call (1:1–3:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The prophet’s call in one sense was similar to that of Isaiah and Jeremiah. Isaiah received his mission in a vision of God’s glory in the temple (Is 6). Jeremiah was called unexpectedly in his youth, and received signs that solemnly set forth the nature of his mission (Jer 1:11-15). The call of Ezekiel combined those two elements. Revelation of God’s glory to the prophet at the same time revealed the nature of the prophet’s mission. Ezekiel’s call contained a full description of God’s glory. Isaiah briefly stated that he saw the Lord enthroned in the temple, and he concentrated on the seraphim representing and magnifying God’s glory. Ezekiel elaborated on the revelation of the Lord’s glory as well as on the ministering angels who went before the Lord as part of his royal entourage. The vision of God’s glory, though difficult to understand, is the key to the book of Ezekiel.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel, as a priest, was concerned about the future of the temple. That sacred place had been ordained by God as his home among his people. The glory, presence, and holiness of God were symbolized in the temple (see 1 Kgs 8:10-11). In exile Ezekiel could not serve his people as a priest, for they were far from Jerusalem, the city God had chosen. Against all expectations the Lord revealed himself to Ezekiel in the land of Babylon. In calling Ezekiel to a prophetic ministry, God assured his servant that he had not forsaken his people, even though they had been banished from the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet’s vision began with a storm. As a large cloud approached from the north, Ezekiel saw a brightness surrounding the cloud, four creatures, and four wheels. The combination of creatures and wheels suggests that the Lord appeared in a chariot. God’s chariot is a familiar OT representation of his coming in judgment (see Is 66:15-16). The wheels within wheels and the position of the four living creatures may signify God’s total control over the whole earth, so he could move his “chariot of judgment” in any direction. It is also possible that the living creatures with their four faces, and the wheels full of eyes, may be separate symbols showing that God sees all that happens and thereby knows the plight of the exiles. In the vision the prophet’s attention was drawn to a throne above the heads of the creatures. On the throne was “the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1:28). In his vision of God’s coming in judgment, Ezekiel received his call to the prophetic ministry: “Son of man, I send you to the people of Israel, to a nation of rebels who have rebelled against me” (2:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). During a dark hour of Israel’s history, Ezekiel had to prophesy, rebuke his fellow exiles (3:11), and be responsible as a watchman over the house of Israel (3:17; cf. 33:1-9). Symbolic of his mission was a scroll filled with lamentations and woe (2:9-10), which when eaten became sweet as honey (3:1-3). Difficult as the mission was, God’s presence and the certain fulfillment of the prophecies sweetened Ezekiel’s task. Such encouragement was intended to take away any fear of the rebellious Israelites (2:6-7). Instead of being elated with his mission, however, Ezekiel became despondent.<\/p>\n<p>A week later, the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel to remind him of his important role as a watchman (3:16-17). Ezekiel became responsible for Israel as a nation, not just for individuals. His witness to Israel had the express aim of national repentance (vv 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was confined to his house by God (3:24-25). The house ministry was to be carried on only with those Israelites who sought God’s will, for the Lord had abandoned those who continued in their apostasy. The prophetic word would not help the apostates (v 26). The principle of Ezekiel’s ministry is found in 3:27: “Whenever I give you a message, I will loosen your tongue and let you speak. Then you will say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span> says!’ Some of them will listen, but some will ignore you, for they are rebels” (<span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 11:15; 13:43).<\/p>\n<h5>Prophecies of Judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolism figures prominently in Ezekiel’s writing. His priestly background and preparation probably suited him to receive and communicate God’s word in symbolic acts and speech. Chapters 4 and 5 contain four symbolic acts: (1) Jerusalem’s siege is portrayed on a brick (Ez 4:1-3); (2) Israel’s iniquity is represented by Ezekiel’s lying on his sides (vv 4-8); (3) Jerusalem’s grief and horror in the last days of the siege are represented by Ezekiel’s food and drink (vv 9-17); (4) Jerusalem’s fate is represented by the prophet’s hair being cut off (5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s instructions were further illuminated by God’s explanation of Israel’s apostasy (5:6-7) and his judgment on Israel (vv 8-12). The judgment will last until the Israelites admit that in covenant faithfulness their Lord has inflicted righteous judgment on them (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>God would direct his judgment first against the people and the city of Jerusalem. Next in line were the mountains of Israel (ch 6) and the land (ch 7). God’s wrath included the cities and cultic sites in the hill country of Judah, leaving no protection for the people (6:3-6). Abominations that were practiced throughout the land caused God’s judgment to fall on the land as well as on the people (7:2-3, 10-11, 23). But because God is righteous, he judged the people according to their ways of life, desiring that they would once more acknowledge him as their God (7:27).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet then (chs 8–11) focused on the abominations practiced in Jerusalem, particularly idolatry in the temple courts, which caused the judgment announced in chapters 1–7. An idol had been erected in the inner court (8:3-5). By the wall of the court, elders of the city were paying homage to the idols that surrounded the court (vv 11-12). Closer to the temple, women were weeping for the god Tammuz (v 14), and men were worshiping the sun (v 16). In preparation for the ultimate judgment on the land, the prophet placed a mark on the foreheads of the few faithful Israelites so that they would survive (9:4-6). Then (ch 10), the glory of God, which had filled the temple from the time of Solomon, gradually left: “Then the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> went up from the city and stopped above the mountain to the east” (11:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people, now without divine protection, were being handed over to the Babylonians (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>The message of doom for Jerusalem contains four elements of hope: restoration of the people (11:17), restoration of the land (v 17), purification of the people (v 18), and renewed fellowship between God and his people (vv 19-20). The prophet develops those four themes in chapters 33–48.<\/p>\n<p>The visions of chapters 10 and 11 made clear that when God removed his presence from Jerusalem, the exile was approaching. Those who were already in Babylon were unwilling to believe that such an extensive devastation of Jerusalem would happen or that the people would all be exiled and the land become desolate.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel acted out the certainty of God’s word of judgment by packing his bags and showing the baggage to his fellow exiles. First, he placed the bags in the courtyard outside his modest home. Next, he went out by making a hole through the wall. Finally, the prophet walked about the settlement with his bags in full view. Skeptical observers did not understand Ezekiel and probably thought he was crazy. The believers who saw him understood. His strange actions dramatized how the king’s aides would do all they could to help King Zedekiah escape just before the fall of Jerusalem. Second Kings 25 tells how the king and his soldiers left Jerusalem for the wilderness, to be overtaken by the Babylonians at Jericho and brought before Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah. As a captive, Zedekiah witnessed the murder of his sons; then his eyes were put out, and he was sent into exile with the other Judeans (cf. Ez 12:13). The prophet’s explanation concluded with a word of comfort. Because of his covenant with Abraham, God promised not to destroy the people completely. A remnant who overcame the sword, famine, and pestilence would live to tell the story of God’s judgment (vv 15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel further illustrated the nation’s plight by eating as though full of fear, depicting the great trauma that all of Judah’s inhabitants would soon undergo.<\/p>\n<p>Both symbolic acts, packing his belongings and eating, emphasized the truthfulness of God’s word. The people needed to face the nature of their God: He is magnificent, and when he speaks, his words are powerful and come to pass. Thus, the devastation of the land and the people’s exile were a fulfillment of God’s word through the prophets. The judgment was meant to produce a recognition of the Lord, repentance, and a return to God. Some in Judah doubted the efficacy of God’s prophecies, saying, “Time passes, making a liar of every prophet” (12:22). Others thought God’s word would come true in the distant future (v 27). The prevailing attitude of distrust in God’s word had been stimulated by the popular preaching of false prophets (ch 13). Never commissioned by the Lord, they deceived God’s people by lying and misdirecting them with messages of peace (vv 8-10). Wickedness, lying, and deceit were encouraged among the people by such false prophets (v 22). The magnitude of their sin and their great responsibility for Judah’s fall would be matched by the Lord’s heavy judgment. Yet God would save his people from such evil and will prepare a righteous nation with whom to maintain his covenant (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>The certainty of the judgment has been connected with the truthfulness of God’s word. Ezekiel’s difficult task of affirming the doom of Jerusalem to stubborn hearers was intensified by the people’s idolatry. Their whole way of life denied the existence of God. They practiced idolatry in their worship, and they had set up idols in their hearts (14:3). Before the covenant with God could be restored, they had to be purified from their idolatry. Even so, repentance would not guarantee immunity from judgment. Sword, famine, wild beasts, and plagues would ravage the population (v 21). After the execution of his judgment, God would take back those survivors who had turned to him for mercy. God would surely accomplish all that he intended for his people’s good (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 15–17 Ezekiel uses three parables to set forth the apostasy, present uselessness, and judgment of Israel. Jerusalem and Judah are compared to a piece of charred wood, an adulterous woman, and a vine.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 15 reviews Jerusalem’s case. Jerusalem is compared to a piece of wood, both ends of which have been charred with fire, so that the wood is of no value. As the whole piece of wood is burned instead of being saved, so Jerusalem would undergo complete devastation (15:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 16 presents God’s case against Jerusalem from a different perspective, stressing his care for Jerusalem in the past. The beginnings of her history are compared to the birth of a female child, left abandoned by her mother (16:3-5). God adopted the child and washed and clothed her (vv 6-7). He made a covenant with her (v 8), making her his own possession. He generously gave her all the fine things of life (vv 9-13). In the height of her development, Jerusalem’s fame spread to the nations (v 14). Her self-reliance made her a spiritual prostitute as she took up the religious practices and way of life of the nations (vv 15-34). The cities of Sodom (Gn 19) and Samaria (2 Kgs 17:6), known for their immorality, are called Jerusalem’s sisters (Ez 16:46). They had been judged by God, but the corruption of those cities was little compared to the lewdness of Jerusalem (vv 48-51). Thus, Jerusalem also would surely fall and become desolate. Yet Ezekiel anticipates the judgment’s final outcome; Jerusalem will be restored to covenantal blessing (vv 62-63) after her repentance.<\/p>\n<p>The third parable (ch 17) focuses on God’s sovereignty over political developments. Assyria was no longer a power to be reckoned with. Babylon and Egypt both exercised dominion, although the balance of power was veering in favor of Babylon. Their extension of power is likened to an eagle. Nebuchadnezzar, pictured as “a great eagle with broad wings full of many-colored feathers,” took control over the affairs of Judah by removing Jehoiachin, “the highest branch of a cedar tree,” from office and by exiling him with young leaders of the Judean state (17:3-4). Ezekiel was among them. Nebuchadnezzar let the Judeans control their own affairs under Zedekiah but expected them to be subject to Babylon and not to any other power. But Judah (likened to a vine) tried to ally itself with Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt, “another great eagle with broad wings and full plumage” (v 7), against Nebuchadnezzar. Zedekiah’s folly in turning to Egypt would cause Nebuchadnezzar to pull up the vine by its roots and make it wither (vv 9-10). In explaining the parable, God told the exiles that Judah’s fall was a result of its unfaithfulness to King Nebuchadnezzar, to whom Judah owed allegiance by covenant (vv 13-18). Judah’s unfaithfulness thus extended to all of its relationships: religious, cultural, and political. After the exile, God promised, he would restore his people to their land under a Messiah, “a tender shoot” (v 22). The messianic rule is signified by the young twig, which when planted in the land will become a magnificent cedar, giving shade and protection to the birds. Chapter 17 is an inspiring affirmation of the sovereignty of God in human affairs (“All the trees will know that it is I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, who cuts down the tall tree and helps the short tree to grow tall. It is I who makes the green tree wither and gives new life to the dead tree”—17:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 18–22 contain Ezekiel’s oracles to Judah, its leaders, and the exiles. First, he enunciates God’s standard of righteousness: “The person who sins will be the one who dies” (18:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people are charging God with injustice, for they believe themselves to be under God’s judgment for the sins of their ancestors (vv 25-29). Although the Ten Commandments do say that God may punish “the sins of their parents to the third and the fourth generations” (Ex 20:5, <span>nlt<\/span>), the prophet vindicates God’s justice, telling the people that they are not being punished merely for their ancestors’ sin. Each person must be directly accountable to God; the sinner will die in wickedness, and the righteous will live by righteousness. A life of faithfulness to God’s moral and civil law will be rewarded (Ez 18:5-9). Even if one’s father was a sinner, the father’s sin is not transferable (vv 14-18). God is ready to forgive any sinner who repents (v 27). The prophet’s vindication of God’s justice becomes a call to repentance. The sinners in Judah and in exile were thus warned of the consequences of their evil, and were exhorted to return to their God and his standard of right and wrong (vv 31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 19 contains two parables in the form of a lamentation. The first portrays a lioness and her two cubs. The lioness is Hamutal, the wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31), who bore two sons: Jehoahaz and Zedekiah. Jehoahaz is referred to in Ezekiel 19:3-4 as a cub who grew up and was taken to Egypt (by Pharaoh Neco in 608 <span>BC<\/span>; see 2 Kgs 23:31-34). Zedekiah succeeded to the throne ten years later. In the lamentation the prophet imaginatively represents Zedekiah as a young cub who is ultimately taken to Babylon as a rebellious ruler (Ez 19:7-9). The second parable changes the imagery to a vine, representing Israel (v 10). In its early days God blessed Israel with strong rulers, but now the vine was wilting as Zedekiah irresponsibly led Judah to its last days. Ezekiel’s lamentation stresses the lack of a good candidate for the throne and the lack of life in the vine (vv 13-14).<\/p>\n<p>In chapter 20 the prophet concludes God’s argument against his people. He reviews the history of Israel’s past, starting with God’s self-revelation in Egypt (20:5-6). He took to himself a stubborn nation, tied to idolatry (v 8) and prone to apostasy (vv 13, 21). Israel wanted to be one of the great nations (v 32) instead of a sanctified people (v 12). As a result of its spiritual hardness, Israel is dispersed to live among the nations (v 35). Yet God had a solemn covenant with Israel, made by oath to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. On the basis of that covenant, God will reach out with compassion to those who repent of their sinful ways (vv 37-44). In Israel’s judgment and restoration the nations will see the holiness of God, which does not tolerate unfaithfulness in Israel (v 41).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s prophecies alternate between God’s judgment on Israel’s sin and his restoration of Israel, spanning the bridge between Israel’s past and future. In view of the people’s doubts of the coming judgment on Jerusalem, he stresses the necessity of judgment and the need for repentance. Still, the future restoration of a remnant is touched upon here and there as the counterpart of his message of judgment. After announcing the fall of Jerusalem, the prophet shifts from a message of judgment to one of hope.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet returns to the proclamation of judgment in four oracles (20:45–21:32). He speaks against the Negev Desert area (20:45-49), Jerusalem and the land of Israel (21:2-17, 20-27), and against the Ammonites (vv 28-32). God permitted the sword of Nebuchadnezzar to be his instrument of judgment upon the Judeans (v 19). He would see to the judgment on the Ammonites. The Judeans would recover their previous glory, but the memory of the Ammonites would perish (vv 27, 32). The oracle against the Ammonites anticipates a larger treatise on Israel’s other neighbors: Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt (chs 25–29).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 22–24 contain a renewed series of indictments against Jerusalem. Jerusalem’s religious and civil leadership (the prophets, priests, and princes) are corrupt, and the people have followed their example (22:25-30). The parable of the two sisters, Oholah and Oholibah, is a variation of the parable of adulterous Jerusalem (ch 23; cf. ch 16). It differs in that the comparison drawn between Jerusalem, soon to be exiled, and Samaria, already in exile, is more explicit in the parable of Oholah and Oholibah. In chapter 16 Jerusalem was charged with greater sins than Sodom and Samaria, but was promised restoration. Only the adulterous nature of the two sisters and God’s judgment on them is emphasized in chapter 23, with no word of restoration. This parable is a fitting introduction to that of the boiling pot (ch 24), in which Jerusalem is compared to a rusty pot boiling with water. The Jerusalemites, likened to pieces of meat in the boiling pot, will die in the city. The parable was pronounced on the starting day of Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem. Thus, the exiles were divinely forewarned of God’s intent to destroy the temple (24:21) and were prepared for messengers bringing the bad news of Jerusalem’s fall.<\/p>\n<p>Those oracles and parables conclude the first division of the book. Ezekiel has stated God’s case against the rebellious house of Judah in many ways. His metaphors have likened Judah to a burnt piece of wood, to an uprooted vine, to a baby who grew up to be an adulteress, and to Oholibah, the adulterous woman. He has countered arguments against the fulfillment of God’s word and against the justice of God. He has reassured the exiles that God will not leave the righteous and that the future of Israel begins with a righteous remnant. The pendulum of Ezekiel’s writing has swung from judgment to restoration, while the clock was bringing Judah closer to the hour of its fall.<\/p>\n<h5>Oracles against the Nations (25:1–32:32)<\/h5>\n<p>Ammon, Moab, and Edom were Israel’s neighbors to the east. Because they were ethnically related to Israel, they were not attacked by the Israelites on their march to the Promised Land. Ammon and Moab were descendants of Lot, Abraham’s nephew, and the Edomites descended from Esau, the brother of Jacob. Although God forbade war with them, relations between Israel and its eastern neighbors were always tense. Israel had been overrun by the Ammonites for a time, and Israel was never successful in controlling the Edomites’ competitive trade relations. Those neighboring nations joined the Babylonian attack against Jerusalem and rejoiced when Jerusalem fell and the temple was devastated (Ez 25:3-12). They were ready to take over and loot Judah’s cities, and to instigate trouble in a time when Jerusalem was distressed. Therefore, says Ezekiel, God’s judgment will also extend to Ammon, Moab, and Edom (vv 4-14).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines had been Israel’s enemy to the southwest. During the period of the judges and the united monarchy, the Philistines had controlled much of Israel’s territory. King David successfully limited the Philistine threat by confining them to their own territory. But in Ezekiel’s day they were still considered Israel’s “everlasting” enemy (25:15), possibly intensified by Philistine support of the Babylonian invasion of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>The city of Tyre had received reports of the overthrow of Jerusalem and was ready to exploit the opportunity for its own advantage (26:2). Tyre’s trade position was unrivaled; its ships crossed the seas to exchange goods with many distant lands (Ez 27). But Tyre would soon be broken by the Babylonians, its wealth dried up with the destruction of the fleet and the murder of its sailors (27:26).<\/p>\n<p>The prince of Tyre is singled out in chapter 28, but verse 12 refers to the “king” of Tyre. Interpreters disagree whether they are one person or two. Those who distinguish between the two understand the prince of Tyre to be the ruler of that city, but they consider the “king” of Tyre to represent Satan (28:13-15). The Garden of Eden with all its splendor is an appropriate setting for the original glory of an angelic Satan before his fall. But there is no reason within the context to distinguish between the prince and the king of Tyre. Each is said to have exalted himself, and both took authority over men as if they were gods and enjoyed all the splendor and royalty that belong to God. And both prince and king fall from their high position. The passage is a magnificent example of Ezekiel’s literary ability. He draws a glorious picture of the Garden of Eden, reworking the same theme as he depicts the glory and fall of the king of Tyre. Ezekiel presents him as a cherub, in accordance with the local belief that the king was divine. He wore the finest clothing, with nine kinds of precious stones (v 13). Though God had elevated him to the royal throne (vv 13-14), the king’s heart turned to materialism and to religious and judicial corruption (vv 16-18). In a sense the king (prince) represents the people of Tyre. They were all guilty of corruption, injustice, and violence. If God judged his covenant people for their perversion of justice and for their sins, his judgment would surely come also on the city of Tyre (vv 18-19). When the Babylonians marched on Tyre, they laboriously built a jetty from the mainland to the city. At the same time Tyrian ships loaded with goods and treasures sailed out across the Mediterranean, so that when Nebuchadnezzar’s troops finally breached the walls, little loot could be taken (29:18).<\/p>\n<p>The city of Sidon also cheered Jerusalem’s destruction. Sidon was a port city in Phoenicia, to the north of Tyre. By pestilence and war, the inhabitants of Sidon would learn the justice of Israel’s God.<\/p>\n<p>Six nations (Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, and Sidon) scorned Israel at the fall of Jerusalem. Because God had invested his holiness in the temple of Jerusalem and in his people, the temple’s destruction and the people’s exile signified to the nations that Israel’s God was impotent. They did not realize that the reason for Israel’s fate was God’s intolerance of his people’s sin. God’s holiness required the punishment of sin, and it also required vindication for his name (28:22-23). God was still concerned for his people, that Israel might know he had removed the scorn of their neighbors (v 24). In the restoration of Israel the Lord would further manifest his holiness before the nations. Israel would receive back the land, vineyards, and houses, and would enjoy the bounty of the Lord in peace (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>Egypt had convinced the people of Israel and Judah that with its help the Assyrians and the Babylonians could not stand their ground in Palestine. In 722 <span>BC<\/span> the Assyrian troops took the northern capital of Samaria, and in 586 the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem, while Egypt remained passive. The Egyptians had desired control over Palestine for economic reasons, but not at the expense of their own welfare. Egypt, too, would lose its leadership under God’s judgment (29:9-16). Reduced to dependence on foreign powers, Egypt would no longer be a stumbling block for Israel. First, Babylonia was permitted to break Egypt’s power (23:1–32:21); later, the Persians, Greeks, and Romans would incorporate Egypt as a province. The fall of Egypt coincided with the fall of several great and small kingdoms: Assyria (32:22-23), Elam (vv 24-25), Meshech and Tubal (vv 26-28), Edom (v 29), and Sidon (v 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Proclamation of Hope (33:1–48:35)<\/h5>\n<p>After the visions of God’s judgment on the surrounding nations, Ezekiel returns to the future hope of Israel. In the first major section of his book he dealt with the reasons for Judah’s exile and the destruction of the temple, alluding often to the future of Israel. But the prophet’s organization of his material included, between prophecies of Israel’s judgment and restoration, the oracles of God’s judgment on Israel’s neighbors who had encouraged and rejoiced in its fall. Throughout its history Israel had allowed foreign nations to influence its religion, culture, and form of government. The reduction of their powers meant Israel, restored to the Promised Land, would be more free for faithfulness to God. Before taking up the theme of the restoration, Ezekiel reviews the emphases of chapters 1–24: (1) He was called to be a watchman over Israel (33:1-9; cf. 1:1–3:21). (2) Israel had sinned against the Lord and had to receive a righteous judgment (33:10). (3) Jerusalem was to be taken by the Babylonians (v 21). (4) Israel’s repentance is necessary for restoration (vv 11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Thus far, his ministry had not met with success. The exiles who had heard his messages were full of appreciation for Ezekiel’s rhetorical and literary abilities (33:32). They readily accepted Ezekiel as a watchman who warned the people of the impending catastrophe at Jerusalem, and they may have admitted that their sin was the reason for God’s judgment on Israel and Jerusalem. But they were slow in applying the prophetic word to their own lives. God was ready to forgive their sins if they repented, acknowledged him, and demonstrated their renewed spirit by practicing the law of God (v 32). Now that the news of Jerusalem had been reported to the exiles (v 21), the necessity for the people to act responsibly was even more urgent. The Lord had demonstrated that Ezekiel was a true prophet (v 33).<\/p>\n<p>The success of Ezekiel’s ministry was not measured in numbers. He faithfully declared the word of God in word, sign, and parable. The exiles had followed the false hopes proclaimed by false “shepherds” who had fattened themselves at the expense of the flock (34:2-3). They did not take care of those in need (v 4), and they allowed the flock to be scattered (vv 5-6). God promised his people that he would be the faithful shepherd, bring the sheep together, feed them, and care for them (34:11-15; cf. Ps 23). God would also distinguish between the sheep and the goats, to find out whose hearts were right with him, so that the true sheep could be restored to God’s flock (Ez 34:20-22). God’s promise included the restoration of the land and the restoration of the divinely appointed Davidic dynasty (v 24). The renewed fellowship between the Lord and Israel under the messianic ruler would be sealed with a new covenant, the “covenant of peace.” That covenant assured the people of God’s blessing on their labor, bringing them abundant harvests (vv 26-27). The people would not be forced to fight against nature in their pursuits (vv 25-28). They would not have to struggle against other peoples who might try to share in their blessings by force (vv 27-29). The prophetic vision telescoped the events of the restoration of Israel after the exile, the coming of Jesus the Messiah (cf. Jn 10), and the full restoration of the sin-cursed world.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 34 is the key to the messages of restoration. The emphases include the outworking of the frequently repeated verse “They will truly be my people, and I will be their God” (11:20; cf. 34:30; 36:28). The most significant aspects of the restoration theme include: (1) God’s gracious restoration of his people to covenant blessing (36:20-36; 37:23-26; 39:25); (2) God’s restoration of the nation of Israel to the land (36:1-15, 24; 37:14-23; 39:27); (3) God’s new covenant, giving his Spirit to his people (36:25-27; 37:14; 39:29), and his blessing on his people (36:8-12, 29-38; 39:9-10, 26), assuring them of victory over their enemies (35:1-15; 36:36; 37:28; 38:1–39:24); (4) God’s appointment of a Davidic king, the Messiah, over his people (37:24-25); and (5) God’s temple restored among his people (37:26-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The People of God<\/h6>\n<p>The rejection of the exiles did not last forever. Based on the Abrahamic covenant, the Lord promised to bless the faithful remnant and to make of them a new people. The imagery of a valley of dry bones is particularly fitting. The dry bones represent God’s people without hope (37:11). Ezekiel proclaims to them the good news that God will renew and restore them (v 12). The Lord’s purpose for his people is that all the nations may honor his holy name through his people (39:7, 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The Land<\/h6>\n<p>The promise also extends to the land, originally given to Abraham and his descendants. The Abrahamic covenant included a messianic element, for through the family of Abraham living in the Promised Land all nations would receive God’s blessing (Gn 12:3). In a vision Ezekiel saw the boundaries and described the division of the land (Ez 47–48). The royal city of Jerusalem is the central symbol of God’s presence among his people; its name will be “The Lord is there” (48:8-35).<\/p>\n<h6>The New Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Abrahamic covenant is renewed, a gracious covenant that expresses the restored relationship. “Covenant of peace” fittingly describes its nature and benefits. The restless people of God are promised rest from their searching, their enemies, and their toil. The change in relationship is further emphasized by God’s sending of his Spirit, who will add a new dimension to the lifestyle of his people. Obedience to God will no longer be constrained, for God’s Spirit helps his people to do his will. A new heart, controlled by the Spirit of God, is given to the Lord’s people (36:26-27). The presence of the Spirit also signifies a new life for the people (37:14; see Jn 3:8, 16; Acts 2:38; Rom 8:2-4, 15).<\/p>\n<h6>The Messiah<\/h6>\n<p>The OT hope of a messianic king is crystallized in Ezekiel’s message. His rule will be everlasting (Ez 37:25), over all God’s people who have new hearts (vv 15-25).<\/p>\n<h6>The Temple<\/h6>\n<p>As a priest, Ezekiel remained keenly interested in the temple, priesthood, sacrificial regulations, and festivals. A large section of the prophecy’s last division describes the temple’s revived worship (40:1–46:24). His vision of the glory of God, so important in the messages of God’s judgment on Jerusalem (chs 1, 10–11), now assures the remnant that God did not forsake his people (43:2-5). He will dwell among them, for the temple is a symbol of God’s presence (37:27). Some interpreters believe that the temple, with its ritual as described in Ezekiel 40–46, will be restored in the messianic era before the last judgment. Others believe the promises about the temple provide a positive symbolic answer to Ezekiel’s greatest concern: whether God will return to be with his people (48:35; see Jn 2:21; Rv 21:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are various interpretations of chapters 34–48. As a watchman to Israel, Ezekiel had a message for the exiled Jewish community. Thus the prophecy’s fulfillment must have begun with the decree of Cyrus I (538 <span>BC<\/span>) permitting the Jews to return to their land (Ezr 1:1-3). Two rival schools of interpretation exist on how the prophecy is fulfilled beyond Israel’s restoration to the land. Those who interpret Israel as simply the nation view the modern return of Jewish people to the land of Israel as a continuation of God’s prophetic promise. They believe that God’s plan for Israel is being fulfilled along with, and in addition to, his plan for the Christian church. The fulfillment of those prophecies will be inaugurated by the coming of the messianic king, who will give earthly peace to the Jewish people. The temple worship (Ez 40–48) will be restored in some way during the period of the messianic kingdom. The church will enjoy a small share in all the events centered on the Jews. The promises of Ezekiel’s vision are thus limited to the nation of Israel and must be fulfilled before the coming of a new heaven and earth.<\/p>\n<p>Other interpreters believe that Ezekiel wrote for the benefit of spiritual descendants of Abraham who believe, as Abraham did, in God’s promises (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:11-13; Gal 3:6-9, 29). All who have faith like Abraham, whether Jews or Gentiles, are regarded as Abraham’s offspring (Gal 3:28-29). Ezekiel’s message thus would include all of God’s gracious work among Christian Gentiles, who have become the recipients of God’s promises and benefits. It is possible, on the basis of 1 Peter 1:10-11, to interpret Ezekiel’s language as a prophetic expression of how God’s grace would come to all those who become reconciled to God through faith in the gospel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Ezekiel (Person); Prophecy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EZEKIEL, Book of Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile. Preview • Author • Date and Background • Content Author Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the ...","summary_en":"EZEKIEL, Book of Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile. Preview • Author • Date and Background • Content Author Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30353,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Phoenicians Phoenicia","title_en":"Phoenicians Phoenicia","content_ro":"<h3>PHOENICIA, PHOENICIANs<\/h3>\n<p>Group of city-states (and their residents) that occupied a strip of the Syrian coastal plain at the foot of the Lebanon Mountains. “Phoenicia” was also spelled “Phenice” or “Phenicia.” At one time these states extended from Carmel in the south to Arvad in the north, a distance of less than 200 miles (321.8 kilometers). Nowhere is the Phoenician plain more than four miles (6.4 kilometers) wide. In these fertile plains rose independent city-states, so Phoenicia was neither a political nor a geographical unity.<\/p>\n<p>Bereft of good natural ports, the Phoenicians were forced to build their own. Fortunately, they had abundant supplies of magnificent cedar on the western slopes of the Lebanon Mountains, which they dominated. Thus they had good ship timber and an important source of revenue in a wood-starved region of the world. Offshore grew some of the finest dye-producing creatures (sea snails) of the Mediterranean, making possible quality textiles and dyestuffs. These two sources of income were supplemented by superior industrial production in metal and glassware and the transport of the goods of other peoples in Phoenician ships. With the passage of time, Phoenician colonies grew up along their trade routes. Prominent among them was Carthage.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• History<\/p>\n<p>• Cultural and Historical Significance<\/p>\n<p>• Religion<\/p>\n<p>• Phoenicia and the Bible<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>Though peoples of Mediterranean stock occupied Lebanon by about 4000 <span>BC<\/span>, there was no significant political or cultural development in the area until after 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, when the Canaanites arrived. Canaanite (Hamitic) culture and ethnic stock were diluted by an Amorite (Semitic) invasion of Phoenicia, Syria, and Palestine about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>. Subsequently, Semites became dominant in the area.<\/p>\n<p>Long before the Semites arrived, Egyptians established commercial contacts with Phoenicia. During the Old Kingdom (c. 2700–2200 <span>BC<\/span>), Egyptians seem virtually to have controlled Byblos, about 25 miles (40.2 kilometers) north of Beirut. It was the main port through which Phoenician timber moved to Egypt and Egyptian papyrus and influences entered Phoenicia.<\/p>\n<p>Though Egyptian influence slipped during Egypt’s first intermediate period (2200–2050 <span>BC<\/span>), it was fully restored during the Middle Kingdom. In fact, some scholars like to speak of much of Phoenicia falling within an Egyptian Middle Empire at this time (2050–1800 <span>BC<\/span>), but others think that Egypt’s control was only economic. Subsequently, the Hyksos dominated the whole eastern end of the Mediterranean.<\/p>\n<p>During the Egyptian empire period (c. 1580–1100 <span>BC<\/span>), the Egyptians at first effectively controlled the cities of Phoenicia, even stationing garrisons in them. But during the latter part of the period, Egyptians and Hittites fought for the mastery of Phoenicia. By 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, both the Egyptian and the Hittite empires had come to an end and Phoenicia entered a period of independence.<\/p>\n<p>During the next two centuries, Tyre built up her power and established a hegemony over the other Phoenician cities. Of special significance in this rise to power were the efforts of Hiram I. At the same time, the Hebrew united monarchy was building, and the two powers reached out to each other in ventures of mutual advantage.<\/p>\n<p>Conditions changed in the ninth century. In 868 <span>BC<\/span> Ashurnasirpal of Assyria forced the Phoenician states to pay tribute, and their freedom was lost again. But under the Assyrians, the Phoenicians prospered and planted numerous colonies in the west. By the end of the eighth century, Isaiah could wax eloquent about the prosperity of Tyre (Is 23:3-8).<\/p>\n<p>But as time wore on, the Phoenicians grew restless under increasing Assyrian restriction of liberties. About 678 <span>BC<\/span> Sidon led a revolt against Esar-haddon of Assyria, which turned out to be a total failure. The furious Assyrians killed or captured most of the inhabitants and leveled the city of Sidon, thus intimidating all the Phoenicians. But Assyrian power subsequently diminished, and Tyre became independent about 625 <span>BC<\/span>. Her greatness largely remained, and Ezekiel penned a remarkable description of her attainments (Ez 27).<\/p>\n<p>After Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon destroyed Jerusalem in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, he turned his attention to Phoenicia, easily conquering the rebuilt Sidon but requiring 13 years to subjugate Tyre. At that time he took only the mainland city of Tyre, however. The island city was safe because Nebuchadnezzar had no fleet. The greatness of Tyre was gone; the mainland city was never rebuilt.<\/p>\n<p>When Cyrus the Great conquered the Babylonian Empire in 539 <span>BC<\/span>, the Phoenicians were absorbed peacefully. But about two centuries later, they participated in a rebellion against the Persians. When the Persian army stood before Sidon in 352 <span>BC<\/span> and the inhabitants faced the destruction of their homes and the prospect of being sold into slavery, they set fire to their homes and perished with them. It is said that 40,000 died in the flames. The other Phoenician cities had no heart to continue the rebellion.<\/p>\n<p>When Alexander the Great came through Phoenicia in 332 <span>BC<\/span>, most of the cities welcomed release from Persian rule and opened their gates to him. Tyre did not, however, and was totally destroyed after a seven-month siege. When the city was rebuilt, it was populated with immigrants from Asia Minor and had little ethnic connection with the earlier period. Phoenician maritime supremacy was forever broken.<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently, Phoenicia came under the control of the Ptolemies (286 <span>BC<\/span>), the Seleucids (198 <span>BC<\/span>), and the Romans (64 <span>BC<\/span>). During the Roman period, Phoenicia was part of the province of Syria and enjoyed new prosperity during the Pax Romana (the Roman peace) of the first two centuries of the Christian era. By that time, it was largely Hellenized and its former Semitic character was gone.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CulturalandHistoricalSignificance\">Cultural and Historical Significance<\/p>\n<p>As the finest mariners of the ancient world, the Phoenicians dominated the Mediterranean during the first half of the first millennium <span>BC<\/span>, as well as the Aegean Sea for much of that time. As intrepid seafarers, they not only shipped products but also transmitted ideas and processes and engaged in much cultural cross-fertilization.<\/p>\n<p>Though there is no evidence that the Phoenicians invented the alphabet, they disseminated it so widely that it became known as the Phoenician alphabet. Especially important was their transmission of it to the Greeks (at least by 750 <span>BC<\/span>), who then added vowels and passed it on to the Western world.<\/p>\n<p>The Phoenicians also planted colonies in numerous places in the western Mediterranean, notably during the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>. Most powerful of these colonies was Carthage, which at its height controlled the western part of north Africa, much of Spain, and numerous Mediterranean islands, and which almost brought Rome to her knees during the third century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the Phoenicians developed advanced techniques in metalworking; some scholars think the Egyptians and possibly even Aegean peoples derived some of their processes from the Phoenicians. Though they may not have invented glass-making, as many ancient authors claim, they certainly contributed much to its development and the spread of its knowledge in the ancient world. The Phoenicians exported quantities of purple dye or dyed cloth and their famous cedars. Cedars of Lebanon found their way not only to Palestine but also to Egypt, Mesopotamia, and faraway Iran.<\/p>\n<p>Of all Phoenician exports, the one most severely censured in Scripture was Baal worship, which found its way into the kingdom of Israel through the marriage of Jezebel to Ahab, and into the kingdom of Judah through the marriage of their daughter Athaliah to Jehoram.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Religion\">Religion<\/p>\n<p>Less is known about Phoenician religion than that of most other peoples of antiquity. This is primarily because the Phoenicians’ own literature has not been preserved. One cannot be sure that information from ancient Ugarit in nearby Syria correctly reflects religious practices and beliefs of the Phoenician cities. Nor should it be assumed that the religion of Phoenicia’s colonies was transported without modification from the mother country. Unfortunately, what the OT says about Canaanite religion does not differentiate the beliefs or practices of individual Phoenician cities. The following information has been gleaned almost exclusively from Phoenician sources.<\/p>\n<p>Several general names appeared in Phoenician religion. El was both the Semitic word for god and the name of a specific god who was head of the pantheon. Baal simply means “lord,” but it also applies to the son of El. Baalat means “lady,” but it often designated a specific deity as the Baalat of Gebal or Byblos. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span> meant a “king” or “ruler,” but it might form part of a name of a deity such as Melqart (“ruler of the city”), chief god of Tyre.<\/p>\n<p>As in the Greek city-states, Phoenician cities had patron deities that were not necessarily the head of the pantheon. On the female side, there was really only one deity worshiped in all the cities, the mother and fertility goddess Ashtart or Astarte (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Ashtoreth<\/span>), the Babylonian Ishtar. She was regarded as the genetrix of the gods and man as well as of plants. Promiscuity characterized her conduct, and religious prostitution was carried on in her name.<\/p>\n<p>Baalat Gebal, who symbolized fertility and thus corresponded to Astarte, was the preeminent deity of Byblos, but Adonis was also very important. As the young god who died and was resurrected, he was linked to the annual death and rebirth of vegetation.<\/p>\n<p>Astarte was also predominant in the pantheon of Sidon, as is demonstrated by numerous inscriptions, temples built in her honor, and the fact that kings and queens called themselves her priests. The male deity most involved in Sidonian life was Eshmun, thought to correspond to Adonis in function. By the Greeks, he was identified as Asklepios, god of healing.<\/p>\n<p>The chief god of Tyre was Melqart, the baal or lord of Tyre. Since an annual feast of resurrection was celebrated in his honor, he was equated with Eshmun of Sidon and Adonis of Byblos. The Greeks identified Melqart with Heracles or Hercules. When Tyre came to dominate the other Phoenician cities, Melqart rose to a place of prominence in their pantheons. Melqart would have been the Baal introduced to Israel in the days of Ahab, who married Jezebel of Tyre. The main female deity of Tyre was Astarte. Hiram built temples to both Melqart and Astarte at Tyre, and Solomon brought the worship of Astarte (Ashtoreth) to Jerusalem in his day (1 Kgs 11:5). Her shrine remained to plague the Jews until the reform of Josiah late in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 23:13).<\/p>\n<p>The places for worship of Baal were either high places in the hills (consisting of an altar and a stone pillar representing the Baal, and a tree or pole representing Astarte) or stone enclosures with an altar, a stone pillar, and a tree. Sometimes they were covered temple buildings. Sacrifices consisted of animals and vegetables, and in times of great disaster, of human beings. Great religious festivals were held in observance of the god’s connection with the rhythm of the seasons. When he and nature died, there were mourning, funeral rites, and perhaps self-torture. The spring festival, which celebrated his resurrection and new life in nature and which sought the fertility of nature, commonly was accompanied by sacramental prostitution. The idolatry, human sacrifice, and sexual promiscuity connected with Baal worship brought upon it God’s special condemnation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhoeniciaandtheBible\">Phoenicia and the Bible<\/p>\n<p>Phoenicia first became involved in biblical history shortly after 1000 <span>BC<\/span>, when David obtained from Hiram I of Tyre some of the much-coveted cedars of Lebanon for construction of his palace. Solomon also bought cedar from Hiram for his palace and the temple. He hired Phoenician craftsmen for building the temple, for constructing fortifications at strategic centers, and for creating a major port facility at Ezion-geber on the Gulf of Aqaba, an arm of the Red Sea. Phoenician architectural design was employed in various Hebrew building projects in Solomon’s day, and Phoenician shipbuilding expertise made possible Solomon’s merchant marine. Phoenician sailors manned the ships after they were launched (see 1 Kgs 9:10-28).<\/p>\n<p>During the first half of the ninth century <span>BC<\/span>, Phoenician impact on Israel was largely religious. It was then that Jezebel, a princess from Tyre, married Ahab and introduced Baal worship to the northern kingdom. More than a century later, Phoenicia was the subject of prophetic condemnation. Isaiah (before 700 <span>BC<\/span>, see Is 23) and Ezekiel (about 600 <span>BC<\/span>, see Ez 26:2-19; 28:1-23) hurled predictions of suffering and destruction at both Tyre and Sidon.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the apostle Paul spent a week at Tyre with a group of Christians on his return to Jerusalem at the end of his third missionary journey (Acts 21:2-7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PHOENICIA, PHOENICIANs<\/h3>\n<p>Group of city-states (and their residents) that occupied a strip of the Syrian coastal plain at the foot of the Lebanon Mountains. “Phoenicia” was also spelled “Phenice” or “Phenicia.” At one time these states extended from Carmel in the south to Arvad in the north, a distance of less than 200 miles (321.8 kilometers). Nowhere is the Phoenician plain more than four miles (6.4 kilometers) wide. In these fertile plains rose independent city-states, so Phoenicia was neither a political nor a geographical unity.<\/p>\n<p>Bereft of good natural ports, the Phoenicians were forced to build their own. Fortunately, they had abundant supplies of magnificent cedar on the western slopes of the Lebanon Mountains, which they dominated. Thus they had good ship timber and an important source of revenue in a wood-starved region of the world. Offshore grew some of the finest dye-producing creatures (sea snails) of the Mediterranean, making possible quality textiles and dyestuffs. These two sources of income were supplemented by superior industrial production in metal and glassware and the transport of the goods of other peoples in Phoenician ships. With the passage of time, Phoenician colonies grew up along their trade routes. Prominent among them was Carthage.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• History<\/p>\n<p>• Cultural and Historical Significance<\/p>\n<p>• Religion<\/p>\n<p>• Phoenicia and the Bible<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>Though peoples of Mediterranean stock occupied Lebanon by about 4000 <span>BC<\/span>, there was no significant political or cultural development in the area until after 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, when the Canaanites arrived. Canaanite (Hamitic) culture and ethnic stock were diluted by an Amorite (Semitic) invasion of Phoenicia, Syria, and Palestine about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>. Subsequently, Semites became dominant in the area.<\/p>\n<p>Long before the Semites arrived, Egyptians established commercial contacts with Phoenicia. During the Old Kingdom (c. 2700–2200 <span>BC<\/span>), Egyptians seem virtually to have controlled Byblos, about 25 miles (40.2 kilometers) north of Beirut. It was the main port through which Phoenician timber moved to Egypt and Egyptian papyrus and influences entered Phoenicia.<\/p>\n<p>Though Egyptian influence slipped during Egypt’s first intermediate period (2200–2050 <span>BC<\/span>), it was fully restored during the Middle Kingdom. In fact, some scholars like to speak of much of Phoenicia falling within an Egyptian Middle Empire at this time (2050–1800 <span>BC<\/span>), but others think that Egypt’s control was only economic. Subsequently, the Hyksos dominated the whole eastern end of the Mediterranean.<\/p>\n<p>During the Egyptian empire period (c. 1580–1100 <span>BC<\/span>), the Egyptians at first effectively controlled the cities of Phoenicia, even stationing garrisons in them. But during the latter part of the period, Egyptians and Hittites fought for the mastery of Phoenicia. By 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, both the Egyptian and the Hittite empires had come to an end and Phoenicia entered a period of independence.<\/p>\n<p>During the next two centuries, Tyre built up her power and established a hegemony over the other Phoenician cities. Of special significance in this rise to power were the efforts of Hiram I. At the same time, the Hebrew united monarchy was building, and the two powers reached out to each other in ventures of mutual advantage.<\/p>\n<p>Conditions changed in the ninth century. In 868 <span>BC<\/span> Ashurnasirpal of Assyria forced the Phoenician states to pay tribute, and their freedom was lost again. But under the Assyrians, the Phoenicians prospered and planted numerous colonies in the west. By the end of the eighth century, Isaiah could wax eloquent about the prosperity of Tyre (Is 23:3-8).<\/p>\n<p>But as time wore on, the Phoenicians grew restless under increasing Assyrian restriction of liberties. About 678 <span>BC<\/span> Sidon led a revolt against Esar-haddon of Assyria, which turned out to be a total failure. The furious Assyrians killed or captured most of the inhabitants and leveled the city of Sidon, thus intimidating all the Phoenicians. But Assyrian power subsequently diminished, and Tyre became independent about 625 <span>BC<\/span>. Her greatness largely remained, and Ezekiel penned a remarkable description of her attainments (Ez 27).<\/p>\n<p>After Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon destroyed Jerusalem in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, he turned his attention to Phoenicia, easily conquering the rebuilt Sidon but requiring 13 years to subjugate Tyre. At that time he took only the mainland city of Tyre, however. The island city was safe because Nebuchadnezzar had no fleet. The greatness of Tyre was gone; the mainland city was never rebuilt.<\/p>\n<p>When Cyrus the Great conquered the Babylonian Empire in 539 <span>BC<\/span>, the Phoenicians were absorbed peacefully. But about two centuries later, they participated in a rebellion against the Persians. When the Persian army stood before Sidon in 352 <span>BC<\/span> and the inhabitants faced the destruction of their homes and the prospect of being sold into slavery, they set fire to their homes and perished with them. It is said that 40,000 died in the flames. The other Phoenician cities had no heart to continue the rebellion.<\/p>\n<p>When Alexander the Great came through Phoenicia in 332 <span>BC<\/span>, most of the cities welcomed release from Persian rule and opened their gates to him. Tyre did not, however, and was totally destroyed after a seven-month siege. When the city was rebuilt, it was populated with immigrants from Asia Minor and had little ethnic connection with the earlier period. Phoenician maritime supremacy was forever broken.<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently, Phoenicia came under the control of the Ptolemies (286 <span>BC<\/span>), the Seleucids (198 <span>BC<\/span>), and the Romans (64 <span>BC<\/span>). During the Roman period, Phoenicia was part of the province of Syria and enjoyed new prosperity during the Pax Romana (the Roman peace) of the first two centuries of the Christian era. By that time, it was largely Hellenized and its former Semitic character was gone.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CulturalandHistoricalSignificance\">Cultural and Historical Significance<\/p>\n<p>As the finest mariners of the ancient world, the Phoenicians dominated the Mediterranean during the first half of the first millennium <span>BC<\/span>, as well as the Aegean Sea for much of that time. As intrepid seafarers, they not only shipped products but also transmitted ideas and processes and engaged in much cultural cross-fertilization.<\/p>\n<p>Though there is no evidence that the Phoenicians invented the alphabet, they disseminated it so widely that it became known as the Phoenician alphabet. Especially important was their transmission of it to the Greeks (at least by 750 <span>BC<\/span>), who then added vowels and passed it on to the Western world.<\/p>\n<p>The Phoenicians also planted colonies in numerous places in the western Mediterranean, notably during the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>. Most powerful of these colonies was Carthage, which at its height controlled the western part of north Africa, much of Spain, and numerous Mediterranean islands, and which almost brought Rome to her knees during the third century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the Phoenicians developed advanced techniques in metalworking; some scholars think the Egyptians and possibly even Aegean peoples derived some of their processes from the Phoenicians. Though they may not have invented glass-making, as many ancient authors claim, they certainly contributed much to its development and the spread of its knowledge in the ancient world. The Phoenicians exported quantities of purple dye or dyed cloth and their famous cedars. Cedars of Lebanon found their way not only to Palestine but also to Egypt, Mesopotamia, and faraway Iran.<\/p>\n<p>Of all Phoenician exports, the one most severely censured in Scripture was Baal worship, which found its way into the kingdom of Israel through the marriage of Jezebel to Ahab, and into the kingdom of Judah through the marriage of their daughter Athaliah to Jehoram.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Religion\">Religion<\/p>\n<p>Less is known about Phoenician religion than that of most other peoples of antiquity. This is primarily because the Phoenicians’ own literature has not been preserved. One cannot be sure that information from ancient Ugarit in nearby Syria correctly reflects religious practices and beliefs of the Phoenician cities. Nor should it be assumed that the religion of Phoenicia’s colonies was transported without modification from the mother country. Unfortunately, what the OT says about Canaanite religion does not differentiate the beliefs or practices of individual Phoenician cities. The following information has been gleaned almost exclusively from Phoenician sources.<\/p>\n<p>Several general names appeared in Phoenician religion. El was both the Semitic word for god and the name of a specific god who was head of the pantheon. Baal simply means “lord,” but it also applies to the son of El. Baalat means “lady,” but it often designated a specific deity as the Baalat of Gebal or Byblos. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span> meant a “king” or “ruler,” but it might form part of a name of a deity such as Melqart (“ruler of the city”), chief god of Tyre.<\/p>\n<p>As in the Greek city-states, Phoenician cities had patron deities that were not necessarily the head of the pantheon. On the female side, there was really only one deity worshiped in all the cities, the mother and fertility goddess Ashtart or Astarte (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Ashtoreth<\/span>), the Babylonian Ishtar. She was regarded as the genetrix of the gods and man as well as of plants. Promiscuity characterized her conduct, and religious prostitution was carried on in her name.<\/p>\n<p>Baalat Gebal, who symbolized fertility and thus corresponded to Astarte, was the preeminent deity of Byblos, but Adonis was also very important. As the young god who died and was resurrected, he was linked to the annual death and rebirth of vegetation.<\/p>\n<p>Astarte was also predominant in the pantheon of Sidon, as is demonstrated by numerous inscriptions, temples built in her honor, and the fact that kings and queens called themselves her priests. The male deity most involved in Sidonian life was Eshmun, thought to correspond to Adonis in function. By the Greeks, he was identified as Asklepios, god of healing.<\/p>\n<p>The chief god of Tyre was Melqart, the baal or lord of Tyre. Since an annual feast of resurrection was celebrated in his honor, he was equated with Eshmun of Sidon and Adonis of Byblos. The Greeks identified Melqart with Heracles or Hercules. When Tyre came to dominate the other Phoenician cities, Melqart rose to a place of prominence in their pantheons. Melqart would have been the Baal introduced to Israel in the days of Ahab, who married Jezebel of Tyre. The main female deity of Tyre was Astarte. Hiram built temples to both Melqart and Astarte at Tyre, and Solomon brought the worship of Astarte (Ashtoreth) to Jerusalem in his day (1 Kgs 11:5). Her shrine remained to plague the Jews until the reform of Josiah late in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 23:13).<\/p>\n<p>The places for worship of Baal were either high places in the hills (consisting of an altar and a stone pillar representing the Baal, and a tree or pole representing Astarte) or stone enclosures with an altar, a stone pillar, and a tree. Sometimes they were covered temple buildings. Sacrifices consisted of animals and vegetables, and in times of great disaster, of human beings. Great religious festivals were held in observance of the god’s connection with the rhythm of the seasons. When he and nature died, there were mourning, funeral rites, and perhaps self-torture. The spring festival, which celebrated his resurrection and new life in nature and which sought the fertility of nature, commonly was accompanied by sacramental prostitution. The idolatry, human sacrifice, and sexual promiscuity connected with Baal worship brought upon it God’s special condemnation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhoeniciaandtheBible\">Phoenicia and the Bible<\/p>\n<p>Phoenicia first became involved in biblical history shortly after 1000 <span>BC<\/span>, when David obtained from Hiram I of Tyre some of the much-coveted cedars of Lebanon for construction of his palace. Solomon also bought cedar from Hiram for his palace and the temple. He hired Phoenician craftsmen for building the temple, for constructing fortifications at strategic centers, and for creating a major port facility at Ezion-geber on the Gulf of Aqaba, an arm of the Red Sea. Phoenician architectural design was employed in various Hebrew building projects in Solomon’s day, and Phoenician shipbuilding expertise made possible Solomon’s merchant marine. Phoenician sailors manned the ships after they were launched (see 1 Kgs 9:10-28).<\/p>\n<p>During the first half of the ninth century <span>BC<\/span>, Phoenician impact on Israel was largely religious. It was then that Jezebel, a princess from Tyre, married Ahab and introduced Baal worship to the northern kingdom. More than a century later, Phoenicia was the subject of prophetic condemnation. Isaiah (before 700 <span>BC<\/span>, see Is 23) and Ezekiel (about 600 <span>BC<\/span>, see Ez 26:2-19; 28:1-23) hurled predictions of suffering and destruction at both Tyre and Sidon.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the apostle Paul spent a week at Tyre with a group of Christians on his return to Jerusalem at the end of his third missionary journey (Acts 21:2-7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PHOENICIA, PHOENICIANs Group of city-states (and their residents) that occupied a strip of the Syrian coastal plain at the foot of the Lebanon Mountains. “Phoenicia” was also spelled “Phenice” or “Phenicia.” At one time these states extended from Carmel in the south to Arvad in the north, a distance of less than 200 miles (321.8 kilometers). Nowhere is the Phoenician plain more than four miles (6.4 kilometers) wide. In these fertile plains rose independent city-states, so Phoenicia was neithe...","summary_en":"PHOENICIA, PHOENICIANs Group of city-states (and their residents) that occupied a strip of the Syrian coastal plain at the foot of the Lebanon Mountains. “Phoenicia” was also spelled “Phenice” or “Phenicia.” At one time these states extended from Carmel in the south to Arvad in the north, a distance of less than 200 miles (321.8 kilometers). Nowhere is the Phoenician plain more than four miles (6.4 kilometers) wide. In these fertile plains rose independent city-states, so Phoenicia was neithe...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":53173,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> Like its neighbors, Tyre <em>rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem<\/em><em>,<\/em> which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new <em>trade routes<\/em> and markets for Tyre.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> Like its neighbors, Tyre <em>rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem<\/em><em>,<\/em> which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new <em>trade routes<\/em> and markets for Tyre.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:2 Like its neighbors, Tyre rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem, which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new trade routes and markets for Tyre.","summary_en":"26:2 Like its neighbors, Tyre rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem, which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new trade routes and markets for Tyre.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80799,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> Like its neighbors, Tyre <em>rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem<\/em><em>,<\/em> which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new <em>trade routes<\/em> and markets for Tyre.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> Like its neighbors, Tyre <em>rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem<\/em><em>,<\/em> which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new <em>trade routes<\/em> and markets for Tyre.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:2 Like its neighbors, Tyre rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem, which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new trade routes and markets for Tyre.","summary_en":"26:2 Like its neighbors, Tyre rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem, which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new trade routes and markets for Tyre.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108425,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> Like its neighbors, Tyre <em>rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem<\/em><em>,<\/em> which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new <em>trade routes<\/em> and markets for Tyre.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> Like its neighbors, Tyre <em>rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem<\/em><em>,<\/em> which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new <em>trade routes<\/em> and markets for Tyre.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:2 Like its neighbors, Tyre rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem, which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new trade routes and markets for Tyre.","summary_en":"26:2 Like its neighbors, Tyre rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem, which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new trade routes and markets for Tyre.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136051,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> Like its neighbors, Tyre <em>rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem<\/em><em>,<\/em> which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new <em>trade routes<\/em> and markets for Tyre.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> Like its neighbors, Tyre <em>rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem<\/em><em>,<\/em> which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new <em>trade routes<\/em> and markets for Tyre.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:2 Like its neighbors, Tyre rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem, which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new trade routes and markets for Tyre.","summary_en":"26:2 Like its neighbors, Tyre rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem, which eliminated a rival trading center and potentially opened up new trade routes and markets for Tyre.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":53174,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:3-6<\/strong> The <em>many nations<\/em> with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • <em>waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline:<\/em> This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:3-6<\/strong> The <em>many nations<\/em> with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • <em>waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline:<\/em> This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:3-6 The many nations with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline: This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.","summary_en":"26:3-6 The many nations with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline: This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80800,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:3-6<\/strong> The <em>many nations<\/em> with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • <em>waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline:<\/em> This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:3-6<\/strong> The <em>many nations<\/em> with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • <em>waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline:<\/em> This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:3-6 The many nations with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline: This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.","summary_en":"26:3-6 The many nations with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline: This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108426,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:3-6<\/strong> The <em>many nations<\/em> with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • <em>waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline:<\/em> This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:3-6<\/strong> The <em>many nations<\/em> with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • <em>waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline:<\/em> This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:3-6 The many nations with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline: This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.","summary_en":"26:3-6 The many nations with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline: This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136052,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:3-6<\/strong> The <em>many nations<\/em> with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • <em>waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline:<\/em> This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:3-6<\/strong> The <em>many nations<\/em> with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • <em>waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline:<\/em> This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:3-6 The many nations with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline: This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.","summary_en":"26:3-6 The many nations with which Tyre wanted to trade would instead come against her equipped for war, and like Jerusalem, she would become plunder for their armies. • waves of the sea crashing against your shoreline: This is a particularly apt metaphor for an assault on Tyre, which lay on a small coastal island.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":41990,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nebuchadnezzar II","title_en":"Nebuchadnezzar II","content_ro":"<h3>Nebuchadnezzar II<\/h3>\n<p>King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 <span>BC<\/span>. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 <span>BC<\/span>). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments.<\/p>\n<p>In 626 <span>BC<\/span>, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 <span>BC<\/span>, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Assyrians at Haran in 609 <span>BC<\/span>. By the time of this battle, Nabopolassar’s son Nebuchadnezzar played a leading role in the army. In 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar defeated the remnant of the Assyrian army at Carchemish; this victory also pushed the Egyptians back within their borders. In the same year, Nabopolassar died and his son became king.<\/p>\n<p>Following his victory at Carchemish in 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Syria and surrounding areas, including Judah. In that year, Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem for the first time (2 Kgs 24:1; 1:1-2). He took away a number of the Temple vessels and some of the leading young citizens of Judah, including Daniel and his three friends. Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem again in 597 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:10-17). He later besieged Jerusalem in 588 <span>BC<\/span> and destroyed the city and Temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, exiling most of the remaining people (2 Kgs 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>A detailed and interesting personal description of Nebuchadnezzar is found in Daniel. He brought Daniel and his friends to Babylon in order to educate them in the ways of Babylonia, but God used Daniel to teach Nebuchadnezzar about himself. After being humbled for his great pride (Dan 4:28-33), Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the Lord’s sovereignty and power (4:34-37), though he probably never worshiped the true God exclusively.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 24:1–25:30; 2 Chr 36:6-21; Jer 21:1-10; 22:24-27; 24:1; 25:1-14; 27:4-8; 28:14; 29:1-23; 32:1-5, 26-31; 34:1-3; 37:1; 39:1-14; 43:10-13; 46:2, 13-26; 49:28-33; 50:17; 51:34; 52:4-16, 28-30; Ezek 26:7; 29:18-20; 30:10-11; Dan 1:1–4:37<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nebuchadnezzar II<\/h3>\n<p>King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 <span>BC<\/span>. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 <span>BC<\/span>). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments.<\/p>\n<p>In 626 <span>BC<\/span>, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 <span>BC<\/span>, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Assyrians at Haran in 609 <span>BC<\/span>. By the time of this battle, Nabopolassar’s son Nebuchadnezzar played a leading role in the army. In 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar defeated the remnant of the Assyrian army at Carchemish; this victory also pushed the Egyptians back within their borders. In the same year, Nabopolassar died and his son became king.<\/p>\n<p>Following his victory at Carchemish in 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Syria and surrounding areas, including Judah. In that year, Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem for the first time (2 Kgs 24:1; 1:1-2). He took away a number of the Temple vessels and some of the leading young citizens of Judah, including Daniel and his three friends. Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem again in 597 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:10-17). He later besieged Jerusalem in 588 <span>BC<\/span> and destroyed the city and Temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, exiling most of the remaining people (2 Kgs 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>A detailed and interesting personal description of Nebuchadnezzar is found in Daniel. He brought Daniel and his friends to Babylon in order to educate them in the ways of Babylonia, but God used Daniel to teach Nebuchadnezzar about himself. After being humbled for his great pride (Dan 4:28-33), Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the Lord’s sovereignty and power (4:34-37), though he probably never worshiped the true God exclusively.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 24:1–25:30; 2 Chr 36:6-21; Jer 21:1-10; 22:24-27; 24:1; 25:1-14; 27:4-8; 28:14; 29:1-23; 32:1-5, 26-31; 34:1-3; 37:1; 39:1-14; 43:10-13; 46:2, 13-26; 49:28-33; 50:17; 51:34; 52:4-16, 28-30; Ezek 26:7; 29:18-20; 30:10-11; Dan 1:1–4:37<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nebuchadnezzar II King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 BC. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 BC). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments. In 626 BC, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 BC, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Ass...","summary_en":"Nebuchadnezzar II King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 BC. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 BC). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments. In 626 BC, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 BC, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Ass...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69616,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nebuchadnezzar II","title_en":"Nebuchadnezzar II","content_ro":"<h3>Nebuchadnezzar II<\/h3>\n<p>King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 <span>BC<\/span>. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 <span>BC<\/span>). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments.<\/p>\n<p>In 626 <span>BC<\/span>, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 <span>BC<\/span>, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Assyrians at Haran in 609 <span>BC<\/span>. By the time of this battle, Nabopolassar’s son Nebuchadnezzar played a leading role in the army. In 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar defeated the remnant of the Assyrian army at Carchemish; this victory also pushed the Egyptians back within their borders. In the same year, Nabopolassar died and his son became king.<\/p>\n<p>Following his victory at Carchemish in 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Syria and surrounding areas, including Judah. In that year, Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem for the first time (2 Kgs 24:1; 1:1-2). He took away a number of the Temple vessels and some of the leading young citizens of Judah, including Daniel and his three friends. Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem again in 597 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:10-17). He later besieged Jerusalem in 588 <span>BC<\/span> and destroyed the city and Temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, exiling most of the remaining people (2 Kgs 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>A detailed and interesting personal description of Nebuchadnezzar is found in Daniel. He brought Daniel and his friends to Babylon in order to educate them in the ways of Babylonia, but God used Daniel to teach Nebuchadnezzar about himself. After being humbled for his great pride (Dan 4:28-33), Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the Lord’s sovereignty and power (4:34-37), though he probably never worshiped the true God exclusively.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 24:1–25:30; 2 Chr 36:6-21; Jer 21:1-10; 22:24-27; 24:1; 25:1-14; 27:4-8; 28:14; 29:1-23; 32:1-5, 26-31; 34:1-3; 37:1; 39:1-14; 43:10-13; 46:2, 13-26; 49:28-33; 50:17; 51:34; 52:4-16, 28-30; Ezek 26:7; 29:18-20; 30:10-11; Dan 1:1–4:37<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nebuchadnezzar II<\/h3>\n<p>King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 <span>BC<\/span>. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 <span>BC<\/span>). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments.<\/p>\n<p>In 626 <span>BC<\/span>, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 <span>BC<\/span>, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Assyrians at Haran in 609 <span>BC<\/span>. By the time of this battle, Nabopolassar’s son Nebuchadnezzar played a leading role in the army. In 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar defeated the remnant of the Assyrian army at Carchemish; this victory also pushed the Egyptians back within their borders. In the same year, Nabopolassar died and his son became king.<\/p>\n<p>Following his victory at Carchemish in 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Syria and surrounding areas, including Judah. In that year, Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem for the first time (2 Kgs 24:1; 1:1-2). He took away a number of the Temple vessels and some of the leading young citizens of Judah, including Daniel and his three friends. Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem again in 597 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:10-17). He later besieged Jerusalem in 588 <span>BC<\/span> and destroyed the city and Temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, exiling most of the remaining people (2 Kgs 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>A detailed and interesting personal description of Nebuchadnezzar is found in Daniel. He brought Daniel and his friends to Babylon in order to educate them in the ways of Babylonia, but God used Daniel to teach Nebuchadnezzar about himself. After being humbled for his great pride (Dan 4:28-33), Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the Lord’s sovereignty and power (4:34-37), though he probably never worshiped the true God exclusively.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 24:1–25:30; 2 Chr 36:6-21; Jer 21:1-10; 22:24-27; 24:1; 25:1-14; 27:4-8; 28:14; 29:1-23; 32:1-5, 26-31; 34:1-3; 37:1; 39:1-14; 43:10-13; 46:2, 13-26; 49:28-33; 50:17; 51:34; 52:4-16, 28-30; Ezek 26:7; 29:18-20; 30:10-11; Dan 1:1–4:37<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nebuchadnezzar II King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 BC. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 BC). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments. In 626 BC, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 BC, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Ass...","summary_en":"Nebuchadnezzar II King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 BC. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 BC). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments. In 626 BC, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 BC, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Ass...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97242,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nebuchadnezzar II","title_en":"Nebuchadnezzar II","content_ro":"<h3>Nebuchadnezzar II<\/h3>\n<p>King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 <span>BC<\/span>. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 <span>BC<\/span>). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments.<\/p>\n<p>In 626 <span>BC<\/span>, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 <span>BC<\/span>, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Assyrians at Haran in 609 <span>BC<\/span>. By the time of this battle, Nabopolassar’s son Nebuchadnezzar played a leading role in the army. In 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar defeated the remnant of the Assyrian army at Carchemish; this victory also pushed the Egyptians back within their borders. In the same year, Nabopolassar died and his son became king.<\/p>\n<p>Following his victory at Carchemish in 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Syria and surrounding areas, including Judah. In that year, Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem for the first time (2 Kgs 24:1; 1:1-2). He took away a number of the Temple vessels and some of the leading young citizens of Judah, including Daniel and his three friends. Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem again in 597 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:10-17). He later besieged Jerusalem in 588 <span>BC<\/span> and destroyed the city and Temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, exiling most of the remaining people (2 Kgs 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>A detailed and interesting personal description of Nebuchadnezzar is found in Daniel. He brought Daniel and his friends to Babylon in order to educate them in the ways of Babylonia, but God used Daniel to teach Nebuchadnezzar about himself. After being humbled for his great pride (Dan 4:28-33), Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the Lord’s sovereignty and power (4:34-37), though he probably never worshiped the true God exclusively.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 24:1–25:30; 2 Chr 36:6-21; Jer 21:1-10; 22:24-27; 24:1; 25:1-14; 27:4-8; 28:14; 29:1-23; 32:1-5, 26-31; 34:1-3; 37:1; 39:1-14; 43:10-13; 46:2, 13-26; 49:28-33; 50:17; 51:34; 52:4-16, 28-30; Ezek 26:7; 29:18-20; 30:10-11; Dan 1:1–4:37<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nebuchadnezzar II<\/h3>\n<p>King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 <span>BC<\/span>. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 <span>BC<\/span>). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments.<\/p>\n<p>In 626 <span>BC<\/span>, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 <span>BC<\/span>, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Assyrians at Haran in 609 <span>BC<\/span>. By the time of this battle, Nabopolassar’s son Nebuchadnezzar played a leading role in the army. In 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar defeated the remnant of the Assyrian army at Carchemish; this victory also pushed the Egyptians back within their borders. In the same year, Nabopolassar died and his son became king.<\/p>\n<p>Following his victory at Carchemish in 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Syria and surrounding areas, including Judah. In that year, Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem for the first time (2 Kgs 24:1; 1:1-2). He took away a number of the Temple vessels and some of the leading young citizens of Judah, including Daniel and his three friends. Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem again in 597 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:10-17). He later besieged Jerusalem in 588 <span>BC<\/span> and destroyed the city and Temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, exiling most of the remaining people (2 Kgs 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>A detailed and interesting personal description of Nebuchadnezzar is found in Daniel. He brought Daniel and his friends to Babylon in order to educate them in the ways of Babylonia, but God used Daniel to teach Nebuchadnezzar about himself. After being humbled for his great pride (Dan 4:28-33), Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the Lord’s sovereignty and power (4:34-37), though he probably never worshiped the true God exclusively.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 24:1–25:30; 2 Chr 36:6-21; Jer 21:1-10; 22:24-27; 24:1; 25:1-14; 27:4-8; 28:14; 29:1-23; 32:1-5, 26-31; 34:1-3; 37:1; 39:1-14; 43:10-13; 46:2, 13-26; 49:28-33; 50:17; 51:34; 52:4-16, 28-30; Ezek 26:7; 29:18-20; 30:10-11; Dan 1:1–4:37<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nebuchadnezzar II King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 BC. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 BC). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments. In 626 BC, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 BC, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Ass...","summary_en":"Nebuchadnezzar II King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 BC. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 BC). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments. In 626 BC, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 BC, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Ass...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124868,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nebuchadnezzar II","title_en":"Nebuchadnezzar II","content_ro":"<h3>Nebuchadnezzar II<\/h3>\n<p>King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 <span>BC<\/span>. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 <span>BC<\/span>). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments.<\/p>\n<p>In 626 <span>BC<\/span>, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 <span>BC<\/span>, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Assyrians at Haran in 609 <span>BC<\/span>. By the time of this battle, Nabopolassar’s son Nebuchadnezzar played a leading role in the army. In 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar defeated the remnant of the Assyrian army at Carchemish; this victory also pushed the Egyptians back within their borders. In the same year, Nabopolassar died and his son became king.<\/p>\n<p>Following his victory at Carchemish in 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Syria and surrounding areas, including Judah. In that year, Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem for the first time (2 Kgs 24:1; 1:1-2). He took away a number of the Temple vessels and some of the leading young citizens of Judah, including Daniel and his three friends. Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem again in 597 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:10-17). He later besieged Jerusalem in 588 <span>BC<\/span> and destroyed the city and Temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, exiling most of the remaining people (2 Kgs 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>A detailed and interesting personal description of Nebuchadnezzar is found in Daniel. He brought Daniel and his friends to Babylon in order to educate them in the ways of Babylonia, but God used Daniel to teach Nebuchadnezzar about himself. After being humbled for his great pride (Dan 4:28-33), Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the Lord’s sovereignty and power (4:34-37), though he probably never worshiped the true God exclusively.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 24:1–25:30; 2 Chr 36:6-21; Jer 21:1-10; 22:24-27; 24:1; 25:1-14; 27:4-8; 28:14; 29:1-23; 32:1-5, 26-31; 34:1-3; 37:1; 39:1-14; 43:10-13; 46:2, 13-26; 49:28-33; 50:17; 51:34; 52:4-16, 28-30; Ezek 26:7; 29:18-20; 30:10-11; Dan 1:1–4:37<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nebuchadnezzar II<\/h3>\n<p>King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 <span>BC<\/span>. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 <span>BC<\/span>). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments.<\/p>\n<p>In 626 <span>BC<\/span>, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 <span>BC<\/span>, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Assyrians at Haran in 609 <span>BC<\/span>. By the time of this battle, Nabopolassar’s son Nebuchadnezzar played a leading role in the army. In 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar defeated the remnant of the Assyrian army at Carchemish; this victory also pushed the Egyptians back within their borders. In the same year, Nabopolassar died and his son became king.<\/p>\n<p>Following his victory at Carchemish in 605 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Syria and surrounding areas, including Judah. In that year, Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem for the first time (2 Kgs 24:1; 1:1-2). He took away a number of the Temple vessels and some of the leading young citizens of Judah, including Daniel and his three friends. Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem again in 597 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:10-17). He later besieged Jerusalem in 588 <span>BC<\/span> and destroyed the city and Temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, exiling most of the remaining people (2 Kgs 25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>A detailed and interesting personal description of Nebuchadnezzar is found in Daniel. He brought Daniel and his friends to Babylon in order to educate them in the ways of Babylonia, but God used Daniel to teach Nebuchadnezzar about himself. After being humbled for his great pride (Dan 4:28-33), Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the Lord’s sovereignty and power (4:34-37), though he probably never worshiped the true God exclusively.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 24:1–25:30; 2 Chr 36:6-21; Jer 21:1-10; 22:24-27; 24:1; 25:1-14; 27:4-8; 28:14; 29:1-23; 32:1-5, 26-31; 34:1-3; 37:1; 39:1-14; 43:10-13; 46:2, 13-26; 49:28-33; 50:17; 51:34; 52:4-16, 28-30; Ezek 26:7; 29:18-20; 30:10-11; Dan 1:1–4:37<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nebuchadnezzar II King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 BC. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 BC). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments. In 626 BC, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 BC, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Ass...","summary_en":"Nebuchadnezzar II King Nebuchadnezzar II reigned over Babylon from 605 to 562 BC. He secured and extended the empire of his father, Nabopolassar (626–605 BC). Beyond the scriptural record, many ancient Babylonian documents report Nebuchadnezzar’s accomplishments. In 626 BC, Babylon, like Judah, was under the domination of Assyria, but in that year Nabopolassar began a revolt that would change the world. In 612 BC, the Babylonians captured Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, and again defeated the Ass...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21734,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"King","title_en":"King","content_ro":"<h3>KING<\/h3>\n<p>The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span> (king) occurs more than 2,000 times in the Hebrew OT. It may refer to God (Ps 95:3) or to human rulers. Generally it designates one invested with ultimate authority and power over his subjects. In the OT, the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span> designates the ruler of a tribe (“the kings of Midian,” Nm 31:8), a city (Jericho, Ai; cf. Jos 12:9-24, where 31 kings of city-states conquered by the Israelites are listed), a nation (Israel, Judah, Ammon, Moab, Aram), or an international power (such as Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, or Persia). Other words may also refer to royalty. The Philistines introduced the title <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">seren<\/span> (lord) into Hebrew vocabulary. The five Philistine cities were ruled by five lords. Another word for an Israelite king is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nagid<\/span> (ruler). Both Saul and David were anointed as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nagid<\/span> over Israel (1 Sm 10:1; 16:13). In the NT and the Septuagint, the Greek version of the OT, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileus<\/span> has a meaning similar to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span><em>.<\/em> The NT <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileus<\/span> refers to secular rulers living in the first century, kings of Israel, rulers of the past, and the divine King, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “King of kings,” attributed to Jesus (1 Tm 6:15), is a Hebrew expression meaning supreme or greatest king. For example, in Ezekiel’s prediction of the fall of Tyre, Nebuchadnezzar is named the “king of kings” (Ez 26:7). The great rulers of Assyria and Babylon introduced this title. Before their time, rulers were called either “king” or “great king,” as in 2 Kings 18:28: “Hear the word of the great king, the king of Assyria” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Later rulers had their titles adjusted to keep up with the expanse of their empires.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"KingshipinIsrael\">Kingship in Israel<\/p>\n<p>God chose Abraham as the father of nations; through him and his descendants the messianic rule would be established on earth. In his promises to Abraham, God repeatedly assured him that he would become the father of a mighty nation, to whom God would give the land of Canaan, and that kings would arise from his descendants (Gn 17:6). Abraham showed his acceptance of the rule of God over his family by obeying God’s command to be circumcised, which set the clan of Abraham apart for the service of God (vv 10-14). The ultimate purpose of God’s relation with Abraham and his descendants was that God would be King over Israel and that his people would show their acceptance of his rule by their faithful obedience to him (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of the covenant was God’s expectation of loyalty to his rule. Abraham and his descendants were to exercise their God-given “rule” over the nations by living in fellowship with the great King. Thus the Lord reestablished his dominion over mankind. Through Abraham and his descendants, he would raise up a “royal nation” to whom the full privileges of rule over his creation would be restored.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord also made a covenant with Israel. This covenant was a sovereign administration of grace and promise by which the Lord consecrated the people unto himself by the sanctions of divine law and by his very presence. The nation, witnessing God’s care for them, had to learn that by their obedience to God’s expectations the theocratic kingdom might become a reality on earth. In the Sinaitic covenant the theocracy (the rule of God) was established. Israel was entrusted with the commandments, so that they might show themselves to be a theocratic nation, as God revealed to Moses: “Now if you will obey me and keep my covenant, you will be my own special treasure from among all the nations of the earth; for all the earth belongs to me. And you will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:5-6, <span>nlt<\/span>). They were God’s elect for the sake of the nations; through Israel’s priestly obedience and intercession, the whole earth might know the Creator-Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>The qualities of God’s kingship were power, glory, fidelity, wisdom, concern, service, delegation of power to man, blessing and protection, just rule, judgment, vindication, and deliverance. Israel’s kingship was to be no different from God’s. Their varied and sometimes complex laws taught Israel to distinguish between what was holy and common, clean and unclean, the ways of God and the ways of the nations. The ways of God enhanced love, fidelity, justice, peace, harmony, service, concern for others, wise living, defense of the needy, and judgment of the guilty. The ways of the kingdoms of the world all too often promoted selfishness, anarchy, despotism, and disregard for justice.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord also instituted an organizational structure designed to promote his theocratic purposes. In the wilderness Moses and the chosen leaders of Israel (Ex 18:19-26; Nm 11:24-25; cf. Dt 1:15-18) were God’s instruments for upholding his kingship in Israel. Upon Moses’ death, Joshua took over the theocratic rule. The Lord was with him as he had been with Moses, and all Israel recognized the continuity of God’s rule in Joshua’s leadership (Dt 34:9; Jos 3:7; 4:14). Like Moses had before his death, Joshua charged the leadership and Israel to persevere in the gracious covenant relationship (Jos 23–24). However, Israel perished because of its greed, immorality, strife, and idolatry. During the period of the judges, each one did what was right in his own eyes (Jgs 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). There was no king in the land in those days. The judges were military leaders whom the Lord raised up to deliver his people from their foreign oppressors. But God remained King, regardless of the fact that Israel lived as if he were not. The period of the judges demonstrated that apostate Israel, disobedient to their King, was unsuccessful in dealing with the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The theocratic leadership was restored to Israel by the ministry of Samuel. He was born into a Levitical family and served the Lord at the Shiloh tabernacle. He was called to be a prophet—an office which had not been filled since Moses’ death (1 Sm 3:20-21). He was recognized as a judge in Israel (7:15). In Samuel the offices of priest, prophet, and king were combined. He is never called king, as his lifestyle was that of a prophet rather than that of a ruler. The carefully calculated request of the people for a king was a rejection of Samuel’s ministry. The people were not satisfied with the spiritual, charismatic leadership of Samuel. In their search for a more dynamic leader they found in the kings of the surrounding nations attractive elements: power, manifestation of glory, and stability. Thus far the tribes had experienced several civil wars that endangered the unity of Israel. It was thought that a king would remedy all of the social and political problems. Though God had foreseen the days of the monarchy in the law (Dt 17:14-20), the people were motivated to introduce the kingship for secular rather than religious reasons: “Give us a king like all the other nations have” (1 Sm 8:5); “We want to be like the nations around us. Our king will govern us and lead us into battle” (v 20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Samuel never accepted the idea of kingship; it was foreign to the theocratic ideal.<\/p>\n<p>The crucial difference between kingship in Israel and kingship in neighboring lands lay in the fact that God endowed the king of Israel with his Spirit to establish his rule on earth. God ruled for his people, and his people benefited was from his rule; he was their provider, protector, and divine warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Samuel was instrumental in anointing Saul (a sad example of kingship) and David (a good example of kingly rule under God). Saul’s kingship revealed a despotic, uncaring attitude and self-aggrandizement. He was intent on establishing his dynasty, while not caring sufficiently for the people of God. Therefore, the Lord rejected his kingship (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>David’s kingship, in contrast to Saul’s, was in line with God’s because it reflected the glory of Yahweh’s kingship. David’s life and rule are taken up in the two books of Samuel as a commentary on the pros and cons of kingship. Positively, David was a man after God’s heart, who sought the will of God, repented of his sin, and sought the glory of God. Negatively, David failed in his personal and family life to uphold the high standards of God’s law. Yet God was pleased to choose David’s dynasty as the lineage through which Jesus Christ would come. The prophet Nathan assured David that his dynasty would last: “Your dynasty and your kingdom will continue for all time before me, and your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sm 7:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). But God did not promise that it would be immune from prosecution or banishment.<\/p>\n<p>The outstanding qualities of the kingship of David and his son Solomon reflect the true theocratic intention: concern for the Lord, for a heart of wisdom and integrity, and for the well-being of God’s people. Concern for the Lord found expression in the preparation for and actual building of the temple (cf. Ps 132). Concern for integrity and wisdom is clearly evident, especially in David’s response to Nathan’s rebuke (2 Sm 12) and in Solomon’s request to have a heart of wisdom (1 Kgs 3). Concern for the people comes to expression in their securing the borders against enemies, achieving national unification, and bringing opportunity for economic growth. The era of David and Solomon represented a true reflection of God’s kingship on earth.<\/p>\n<p>The accounts in Kings and Chronicles unfold the subsequent history of kingship in Israel and Judah. The good kings followed the examples provided by David and Solomon in securing Jerusalem against foreign invaders, in supplying for the needs of the temple, in having God’s people instructed in the word of God, and in modeling their rule after the law of Moses. A good Davidic king loved the Lord, the temple, the law, and God’s people. He served them as a good shepherd. Evil kings were those who rejected this model of kingship in favor of the pagan models. So Omri and Ahab introduced the Phoenician culture with its Baalism, utterly disregarding the heritage of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The Davidic king was treated as a member of God’s household, being a “son” of the great King (cf. 2 Sm 7:14-16; Ps 2:6-7). The Davidic king was to be loyal to the great King, Yahweh. He, like Moses and Joshua, received his orders directly from the Lord; but unlike with Moses, the word of the Lord was mediated through the prophets. He, like Moses and Joshua, was expected to serve his God and his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessiah-King\">The Messiah-King<\/p>\n<p>The descendants of David failed to maintain and expand the theocracy. By the eighth and seventh centuries <span>BC<\/span>, it was apparent that even the greatest kings were dwarfed by the stature of David and Solomon. The prophets (Is 9:2-7; 11:1-9; Jer 33:14-16; Ez 34:22-31; Mi 5:2-5) spoke of another king, the Messiah, a descendant of David who would rule permanently and by whose rule the reign of God would extend to the ends of the earth. He would put down all opposition to God’s rule, remove all enemies, and bring in an era of universal peace and righteousness. The Messiah-King would reveal the perfections of divine rule, as the Spirit of God would be upon him. His kingship would be marked by service to the people of God, so that they would be a well-cared-for flock; he would serve them as their shepherd.<\/p>\n<p>In the coming of Jesus the messianic kingdom is more clearly revealed. He is the King of whom the angels said, “The Savior—yes, the Messiah, the Lord—has been born tonight in Bethlehem, the city of David!” (Lk 2:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). These magnificent words show continuity with the prophetic word. Jesus is the Savior, whose role includes deliverance from sin but also deliverance from all causes of adversity, evil, and the effects of the curse. His mission pertains to both forgiveness and to the establishment of peace on earth (1:77-79). In this light we must look at Jesus’ ministry of healing, feeding, opposing the forces of evil, suffering, and teaching as the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth. He is the King who serves, fights against the demonic powers, and overcomes. The resurrection marks his victory, and he is crowned with glory by being seated at the right hand of the Father (Acts 2:33-36; cf. 1 Cor 15:25). In being the Savior he is none other than Christ the Lord. The early apostolic preaching proclaimed that Jesus is the Messiah of God and the Lord. The lordship of Jesus is corollary to his being the Messiah. To those who call on him, he is the Savior-Messiah-Lord (Rom 10:9-15), but to those who reject him, he is the divine warrior, before whom all knees will bow and who will bring in the era of the Father’s judgment (cf. Rv 1:12-16; 19:11-21).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught his disciples that at his coming in glory he would be seated on his throne and all mankind would pay him obeisance. The enemies of God will be cast out from his presence, and the people of God will fully inherit the kingdom (Mt 25:31-46). In accordance with Jesus’ teaching, the members of his body, the church, are expected to work out the theocratic ideal in their lives, that by their works and faith they may glorify the Father and show that they are his (Jn 17:20-26; cf. Mt 25:33-40). This is the biblical manner of witness that Israel failed to give and that the church is privileged to give; as Paul wrote to Timothy:<\/p>\n<p>I command you before God, who gives life to all, and before Christ Jesus, . . . that you obey his commands with all purity. Then no one can find fault with you from now until our Lord Jesus Christ returns. For at the right time Christ will be revealed from heaven by the blessed and only almighty God, the King of kings and Lord of lords. He alone can never die, and he lives in light so brilliant that no human can approach him. No one has ever seen him, nor ever will. To him be honor and power forever. Amen. (1 Tm 6:13-16, <span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Then Paul gives several instructions as to how the people of God must demonstrate their allegiance to Jesus. Throughout the book of Revelation, Jesus is viewed as King over the church (Rv 4:2, 9-11; 5:1, 9-13). At his return his kingship will be established. At this time, the enemies of the cross will see the one whom they have rejected and will bow before the messianic King (1 Cor 15:25-28). “After that the end will come, when he [Jesus] will turn the Kingdom over to God the Father, having put down all enemies of every kind” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KING<\/h3>\n<p>The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span> (king) occurs more than 2,000 times in the Hebrew OT. It may refer to God (Ps 95:3) or to human rulers. Generally it designates one invested with ultimate authority and power over his subjects. In the OT, the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span> designates the ruler of a tribe (“the kings of Midian,” Nm 31:8), a city (Jericho, Ai; cf. Jos 12:9-24, where 31 kings of city-states conquered by the Israelites are listed), a nation (Israel, Judah, Ammon, Moab, Aram), or an international power (such as Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, or Persia). Other words may also refer to royalty. The Philistines introduced the title <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">seren<\/span> (lord) into Hebrew vocabulary. The five Philistine cities were ruled by five lords. Another word for an Israelite king is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nagid<\/span> (ruler). Both Saul and David were anointed as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nagid<\/span> over Israel (1 Sm 10:1; 16:13). In the NT and the Septuagint, the Greek version of the OT, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileus<\/span> has a meaning similar to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">melek<\/span><em>.<\/em> The NT <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileus<\/span> refers to secular rulers living in the first century, kings of Israel, rulers of the past, and the divine King, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “King of kings,” attributed to Jesus (1 Tm 6:15), is a Hebrew expression meaning supreme or greatest king. For example, in Ezekiel’s prediction of the fall of Tyre, Nebuchadnezzar is named the “king of kings” (Ez 26:7). The great rulers of Assyria and Babylon introduced this title. Before their time, rulers were called either “king” or “great king,” as in 2 Kings 18:28: “Hear the word of the great king, the king of Assyria” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Later rulers had their titles adjusted to keep up with the expanse of their empires.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"KingshipinIsrael\">Kingship in Israel<\/p>\n<p>God chose Abraham as the father of nations; through him and his descendants the messianic rule would be established on earth. In his promises to Abraham, God repeatedly assured him that he would become the father of a mighty nation, to whom God would give the land of Canaan, and that kings would arise from his descendants (Gn 17:6). Abraham showed his acceptance of the rule of God over his family by obeying God’s command to be circumcised, which set the clan of Abraham apart for the service of God (vv 10-14). The ultimate purpose of God’s relation with Abraham and his descendants was that God would be King over Israel and that his people would show their acceptance of his rule by their faithful obedience to him (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of the covenant was God’s expectation of loyalty to his rule. Abraham and his descendants were to exercise their God-given “rule” over the nations by living in fellowship with the great King. Thus the Lord reestablished his dominion over mankind. Through Abraham and his descendants, he would raise up a “royal nation” to whom the full privileges of rule over his creation would be restored.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord also made a covenant with Israel. This covenant was a sovereign administration of grace and promise by which the Lord consecrated the people unto himself by the sanctions of divine law and by his very presence. The nation, witnessing God’s care for them, had to learn that by their obedience to God’s expectations the theocratic kingdom might become a reality on earth. In the Sinaitic covenant the theocracy (the rule of God) was established. Israel was entrusted with the commandments, so that they might show themselves to be a theocratic nation, as God revealed to Moses: “Now if you will obey me and keep my covenant, you will be my own special treasure from among all the nations of the earth; for all the earth belongs to me. And you will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:5-6, <span>nlt<\/span>). They were God’s elect for the sake of the nations; through Israel’s priestly obedience and intercession, the whole earth might know the Creator-Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>The qualities of God’s kingship were power, glory, fidelity, wisdom, concern, service, delegation of power to man, blessing and protection, just rule, judgment, vindication, and deliverance. Israel’s kingship was to be no different from God’s. Their varied and sometimes complex laws taught Israel to distinguish between what was holy and common, clean and unclean, the ways of God and the ways of the nations. The ways of God enhanced love, fidelity, justice, peace, harmony, service, concern for others, wise living, defense of the needy, and judgment of the guilty. The ways of the kingdoms of the world all too often promoted selfishness, anarchy, despotism, and disregard for justice.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord also instituted an organizational structure designed to promote his theocratic purposes. In the wilderness Moses and the chosen leaders of Israel (Ex 18:19-26; Nm 11:24-25; cf. Dt 1:15-18) were God’s instruments for upholding his kingship in Israel. Upon Moses’ death, Joshua took over the theocratic rule. The Lord was with him as he had been with Moses, and all Israel recognized the continuity of God’s rule in Joshua’s leadership (Dt 34:9; Jos 3:7; 4:14). Like Moses had before his death, Joshua charged the leadership and Israel to persevere in the gracious covenant relationship (Jos 23–24). However, Israel perished because of its greed, immorality, strife, and idolatry. During the period of the judges, each one did what was right in his own eyes (Jgs 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). There was no king in the land in those days. The judges were military leaders whom the Lord raised up to deliver his people from their foreign oppressors. But God remained King, regardless of the fact that Israel lived as if he were not. The period of the judges demonstrated that apostate Israel, disobedient to their King, was unsuccessful in dealing with the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The theocratic leadership was restored to Israel by the ministry of Samuel. He was born into a Levitical family and served the Lord at the Shiloh tabernacle. He was called to be a prophet—an office which had not been filled since Moses’ death (1 Sm 3:20-21). He was recognized as a judge in Israel (7:15). In Samuel the offices of priest, prophet, and king were combined. He is never called king, as his lifestyle was that of a prophet rather than that of a ruler. The carefully calculated request of the people for a king was a rejection of Samuel’s ministry. The people were not satisfied with the spiritual, charismatic leadership of Samuel. In their search for a more dynamic leader they found in the kings of the surrounding nations attractive elements: power, manifestation of glory, and stability. Thus far the tribes had experienced several civil wars that endangered the unity of Israel. It was thought that a king would remedy all of the social and political problems. Though God had foreseen the days of the monarchy in the law (Dt 17:14-20), the people were motivated to introduce the kingship for secular rather than religious reasons: “Give us a king like all the other nations have” (1 Sm 8:5); “We want to be like the nations around us. Our king will govern us and lead us into battle” (v 20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Samuel never accepted the idea of kingship; it was foreign to the theocratic ideal.<\/p>\n<p>The crucial difference between kingship in Israel and kingship in neighboring lands lay in the fact that God endowed the king of Israel with his Spirit to establish his rule on earth. God ruled for his people, and his people benefited was from his rule; he was their provider, protector, and divine warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Samuel was instrumental in anointing Saul (a sad example of kingship) and David (a good example of kingly rule under God). Saul’s kingship revealed a despotic, uncaring attitude and self-aggrandizement. He was intent on establishing his dynasty, while not caring sufficiently for the people of God. Therefore, the Lord rejected his kingship (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>David’s kingship, in contrast to Saul’s, was in line with God’s because it reflected the glory of Yahweh’s kingship. David’s life and rule are taken up in the two books of Samuel as a commentary on the pros and cons of kingship. Positively, David was a man after God’s heart, who sought the will of God, repented of his sin, and sought the glory of God. Negatively, David failed in his personal and family life to uphold the high standards of God’s law. Yet God was pleased to choose David’s dynasty as the lineage through which Jesus Christ would come. The prophet Nathan assured David that his dynasty would last: “Your dynasty and your kingdom will continue for all time before me, and your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sm 7:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). But God did not promise that it would be immune from prosecution or banishment.<\/p>\n<p>The outstanding qualities of the kingship of David and his son Solomon reflect the true theocratic intention: concern for the Lord, for a heart of wisdom and integrity, and for the well-being of God’s people. Concern for the Lord found expression in the preparation for and actual building of the temple (cf. Ps 132). Concern for integrity and wisdom is clearly evident, especially in David’s response to Nathan’s rebuke (2 Sm 12) and in Solomon’s request to have a heart of wisdom (1 Kgs 3). Concern for the people comes to expression in their securing the borders against enemies, achieving national unification, and bringing opportunity for economic growth. The era of David and Solomon represented a true reflection of God’s kingship on earth.<\/p>\n<p>The accounts in Kings and Chronicles unfold the subsequent history of kingship in Israel and Judah. The good kings followed the examples provided by David and Solomon in securing Jerusalem against foreign invaders, in supplying for the needs of the temple, in having God’s people instructed in the word of God, and in modeling their rule after the law of Moses. A good Davidic king loved the Lord, the temple, the law, and God’s people. He served them as a good shepherd. Evil kings were those who rejected this model of kingship in favor of the pagan models. So Omri and Ahab introduced the Phoenician culture with its Baalism, utterly disregarding the heritage of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The Davidic king was treated as a member of God’s household, being a “son” of the great King (cf. 2 Sm 7:14-16; Ps 2:6-7). The Davidic king was to be loyal to the great King, Yahweh. He, like Moses and Joshua, received his orders directly from the Lord; but unlike with Moses, the word of the Lord was mediated through the prophets. He, like Moses and Joshua, was expected to serve his God and his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessiah-King\">The Messiah-King<\/p>\n<p>The descendants of David failed to maintain and expand the theocracy. By the eighth and seventh centuries <span>BC<\/span>, it was apparent that even the greatest kings were dwarfed by the stature of David and Solomon. The prophets (Is 9:2-7; 11:1-9; Jer 33:14-16; Ez 34:22-31; Mi 5:2-5) spoke of another king, the Messiah, a descendant of David who would rule permanently and by whose rule the reign of God would extend to the ends of the earth. He would put down all opposition to God’s rule, remove all enemies, and bring in an era of universal peace and righteousness. The Messiah-King would reveal the perfections of divine rule, as the Spirit of God would be upon him. His kingship would be marked by service to the people of God, so that they would be a well-cared-for flock; he would serve them as their shepherd.<\/p>\n<p>In the coming of Jesus the messianic kingdom is more clearly revealed. He is the King of whom the angels said, “The Savior—yes, the Messiah, the Lord—has been born tonight in Bethlehem, the city of David!” (Lk 2:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). These magnificent words show continuity with the prophetic word. Jesus is the Savior, whose role includes deliverance from sin but also deliverance from all causes of adversity, evil, and the effects of the curse. His mission pertains to both forgiveness and to the establishment of peace on earth (1:77-79). In this light we must look at Jesus’ ministry of healing, feeding, opposing the forces of evil, suffering, and teaching as the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth. He is the King who serves, fights against the demonic powers, and overcomes. The resurrection marks his victory, and he is crowned with glory by being seated at the right hand of the Father (Acts 2:33-36; cf. 1 Cor 15:25). In being the Savior he is none other than Christ the Lord. The early apostolic preaching proclaimed that Jesus is the Messiah of God and the Lord. The lordship of Jesus is corollary to his being the Messiah. To those who call on him, he is the Savior-Messiah-Lord (Rom 10:9-15), but to those who reject him, he is the divine warrior, before whom all knees will bow and who will bring in the era of the Father’s judgment (cf. Rv 1:12-16; 19:11-21).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught his disciples that at his coming in glory he would be seated on his throne and all mankind would pay him obeisance. The enemies of God will be cast out from his presence, and the people of God will fully inherit the kingdom (Mt 25:31-46). In accordance with Jesus’ teaching, the members of his body, the church, are expected to work out the theocratic ideal in their lives, that by their works and faith they may glorify the Father and show that they are his (Jn 17:20-26; cf. Mt 25:33-40). This is the biblical manner of witness that Israel failed to give and that the church is privileged to give; as Paul wrote to Timothy:<\/p>\n<p>I command you before God, who gives life to all, and before Christ Jesus, . . . that you obey his commands with all purity. Then no one can find fault with you from now until our Lord Jesus Christ returns. For at the right time Christ will be revealed from heaven by the blessed and only almighty God, the King of kings and Lord of lords. He alone can never die, and he lives in light so brilliant that no human can approach him. No one has ever seen him, nor ever will. To him be honor and power forever. Amen. (1 Tm 6:13-16, <span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Then Paul gives several instructions as to how the people of God must demonstrate their allegiance to Jesus. Throughout the book of Revelation, Jesus is viewed as King over the church (Rv 4:2, 9-11; 5:1, 9-13). At his return his kingship will be established. At this time, the enemies of the cross will see the one whom they have rejected and will bow before the messianic King (1 Cor 15:25-28). “After that the end will come, when he [Jesus] will turn the Kingdom over to God the Father, having put down all enemies of every kind” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KING The word melek (king) occurs more than 2,000 times in the Hebrew OT. It may refer to God (Ps 95:3) or to human rulers. Generally it designates one invested with ultimate authority and power over his subjects. In the OT, the word melek designates the ruler of a tribe (“the kings of Midian,” Nm 31:8), a city (Jericho, Ai; cf. Jos 12:9-24, where 31 kings of city-states conquered by the Israelites are listed), a nation (Israel, Judah, Ammon, Moab, Aram), or an international power (such as Eg...","summary_en":"KING The word melek (king) occurs more than 2,000 times in the Hebrew OT. It may refer to God (Ps 95:3) or to human rulers. Generally it designates one invested with ultimate authority and power over his subjects. In the OT, the word melek designates the ruler of a tribe (“the kings of Midian,” Nm 31:8), a city (Jericho, Ai; cf. Jos 12:9-24, where 31 kings of city-states conquered by the Israelites are listed), a nation (Israel, Judah, Ammon, Moab, Aram), or an international power (such as Eg...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":53175,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:7-11<\/strong> Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:7-11<\/strong> Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:7-11 Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.","summary_en":"26:7-11 Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80801,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:7-11<\/strong> Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:7-11<\/strong> Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:7-11 Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.","summary_en":"26:7-11 Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108427,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:7-11<\/strong> Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:7-11<\/strong> Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:7-11 Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.","summary_en":"26:7-11 Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136053,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:7-11<\/strong> Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:7-11<\/strong> Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:7-11 Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.","summary_en":"26:7-11 Tyre’s projected destruction is described in great detail, conveying certainty as to the conflict’s outcome.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":38145,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Warfare","title_en":"Warfare","content_ro":"<h3>WARFARE<\/h3>\n<p>The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MethodsofWarfare\">Methods of Warfare<\/p>\n<h5>Standard Combat<\/h5>\n<p>Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of firepower at decisive points. When the Assyrians coordinated their infantry, cavalry, and chariot corps into a powerful battle machine, smaller neighboring nations were more and more compelled to retreat behind their fortifications. They could not hope to engage the massive Assyrian army in standard combat in open terrain. No period is richer in illustrated monuments than Iron Age II; the Assyrian war reliefs present detailed illustrations of their conquests and the size of fortified cities. The few scenes depicting standard combat in open terrain show chariots charging from all directions and engaging the enemy at all stages of a battle. Other formations carry out mopping-up operations, finishing off pockets of enemy resistance remaining after the chariot charge.<\/p>\n<p>The factor of terrain was always very important. In standard combat on open terrain it became conventional to place the best troops on the right side of the line. A Greek commander, Epaminodas (d. 362 <span>BC<\/span>), introduced the variant of a slanting attack by a strengthened left wing, taking the Spartan army completely by surprise. Philip of Macedon and his son Alexander continued to surprise their enemies with variations on a plan of attack based on the phalanx.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Battle in Open Terrain: The Duel<\/h5>\n<p>During certain periods in the ancient Near East, the duel presented an alternative to standard combat. The duel was a contest between two champions who represented the contending forces. The two armies would agree in advance to abide by the outcome of the fight. The duel was meant to avoid the heavy casualties of full-scale warfare. The earliest detailed written account of this unique form of warfare occurs in the Tale of Sinuhe. A chamberlain in the royal court of the 12th dynasty, Sinuhe voluntarily went into exile and traveled to northern Palestine and Syria, where he lived among Semitic tribes. There he was challenged to a duel by a local champion, whom he defeated and whose goods he then plundered.<\/p>\n<p>Although the duel was common among other armies in subsequent periods, it was evidently unknown to Israel before the encounter between David and Goliath (1 Sm 17). The Philistine army had penetrated Judah as far as Socoh and were arrayed on one hill. Drawn up against them on an opposite hill was the army of Saul. The valley of Elah separated the two camps. The Israelites were challenged daily by the Philistine champion, Goliath, who proposed that the battle be decided through combat between two warriors. David accepted his proposal, but when he killed Goliath, the Philistines fled, unwilling to honor the terms of the prior agreement. The Israelite army then entered the contest, pursuing the Philistines and inflicting heavy casualties.<\/p>\n<h5>Assaults on Fortified Cities<\/h5>\n<p>Most cities in the ancient Near East were located at sites that could be defended against attack and that possessed economic advantages. An assault on a fortified city presented opposite problems for attacker and defender. The actions of one were a direct response to the actions of the other. Systems of defense were intended to thwart methods of attack, which in turn were designed to penetrate systems of defense.<\/p>\n<p>There were five possible ways of conquering a fortified city: penetration from above the fortifications; direct penetration through the fortifications; penetration from below the fortifications; siege; and penetration by ruse. On many occasions, a combination of two or more methods was necessary to breach the defensive network.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical narrative of the conquest of Shechem by Abimelech (Jgs 9) gives an account of an assault on a fortified city in the period of the judges (Iron Age I). When the people of Shechem and their allies rebelled against Abimelech, he retaliated by attacking the city, advancing his army of mercenaries by night and launching an assault from ambush positions at dawn (9:32-35). The men of Shechem engaged in open battle outside the city gates but were forced to retreat behind the security of the city walls. The next day Abimelech directed his assault against the city itself. Dividing his forces into three groups, he assumed direct command of one, which he committed to an attack on the city gates at the decisive moment of battle (vv 43-44). The gate was breached and the main walls seized, but the city’s surviving defenders fled to an inner citadel, the temple of Baal-berith.<\/p>\n<p>Many reliefs depict groups of soldiers defending an inner citadel after a city’s wall was breached. Archaeological excavations at Shechem confirm that its temple, like those in other Canaanite cities, was built in the form of a fortified tower, supported by stout bastions near the entrance. The tower of Shechem was thus strongly fortified and occupied only a small area, enabling its defenders to concentrate their firepower on Abimelech’s troops. Since it could not be taken by storm, Abimelech ordered his soldiers to use their battle-axes to cut brushwood, which was piled against the stronghold and set on fire (Jgs 9:48-49). All of the defenders within the tower died.<\/p>\n<p>An assault on an inner citadel was always a hazardous undertaking for an attacking army, as shown in the sequel to the capture of Shechem’s tower. Abimelech turned his attention next to the city of Thebez and followed the same plan of assault that had proved successful at Shechem. But as he was preparing to burn the door of the tower to which the defenders had fled, his skull was crushed by a piece of millstone dropped on him by a woman (Jgs 9:50-53). The incident was remembered and became proverbial for the danger of approaching too closely the walls of a fortified tower (2 Sm 11:19-21).<\/p>\n<h5>Communications and Intelligence<\/h5>\n<p>From the patriarchal period (middle Bronze period), we have detailed written information on the use of communications systems in wartime. The documents from Mari on the Euphrates provide evidence for a well-developed communications system based on signaling. Signals were flashed by torches or firebrands at night in accordance with a prearranged code. The system was widely used in Mesopotamia and elsewhere to call for immediate help when a city was under attack.<\/p>\n<p>In the late Bronze period horsemen were sometimes employed for isolated communication functions. Intelligence services played a role in planning and executing military operations. The importance of intelligence and the use of spies or scouts is stressed in the biblical accounts of the conquest of the land of Canaan. Before entering the land, Moses sent men on an espionage mission. He instructed them to gather information on the topography of the land, to observe the relative strength of its inhabitants, to determine whether the land was fertile, to survey the cities and see if they were fortified, and to report on the character of the land—whether it was capable of sustaining a large population (Nm 13:17-20).<\/p>\n<p>Tactical intelligence was very important. Joshua dispatched spies to Jericho and to Ai before beginning military operations against them (Jos 2:1; 7:2). The reports he received about the offensive spirit and strength of the Canaanites enabled him to formulate an attack plan. In the period of the judges the conquest of Bethel (Jgs 1:22-26) was due directly to intelligence gathered by a reconnaissance patrol. The tribes of Joseph sent out scouts to keep the city under observation. It was strongly fortified and seemed impregnable. The scouts captured a man who emerged from the city—presumably not through the main gate, which was shut tight, but through a concealed postern or tunnel. In exchange for his own life and the safety of his family, he disclosed the location of the passage leading beneath the walls. The city was penetrated through the tunnel and captured.<\/p>\n<h5>Attack and Penetration: The Breach<\/h5>\n<p>Direct penetration through the fortifications of an ancient city meant breaching the gate or the main walls by using hammers, axes, pikes, spears, swords, or a battering ram. Illustrated monuments and written documents indicate that early in the middle Bronze period fortified cities were being attacked with battering rams. The earliest known illustration of a ram appears in a siege scene in the wall paintings from Beni Hasan (20th century <span>BC<\/span>). The ram pictured is a relatively simple device, consisting of a hutlike structure with a slightly pointed roof, which could be moved near a fortress with the help of two parallel crossbars. The structure provided cover for two or three soldiers who operated by hand a very long pole with a sharp tip, presumably of metal.<\/p>\n<p>The Mari documents provide information for the period 200 years later. They mention the effectiveness of battering rams constructed largely of wood. Although very heavy, the siege weapon could be moved over long distances. One document speaks of the use of a wagon drawn by draft animals and of a boat to transport a battering ram to the site of a besieged city.<\/p>\n<p>Moving a battering ram into position always exposed the demolition unit to heavy fire from defenders on the walls above them. Its heaviness made it cumbersome to move. Moreover, the ground adjacent to the walls was usually rough, rocky, and steep. When the chosen point of penetration was a section of the wall, an assault force had to construct an earthen ramp, occasionally strengthened on the top surface and sides with wooden planks or stones. The ramp provided a track along which the battering ram could be moved from the foot of the slope to the outer wall. Once moved into operational position, the ram had to be braked to prevent it from rolling back. The building of such a ramp was evidently necessary in Joab’s campaign against the fortified city of Abel in Beth-maacah (2 Sm 20:15). The biblical account indicates that some sort of battering ram was in use in Israel under King David during the early monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest Assyrian reliefs show that protection of the penetration units was a major consideration. High, mobile assault towers constructed of wood operated in tandem with a battering ram. Such towers, moved into position near a breach operation and manned by archers, provided covering fire directed against the defenders on the wall. Siege towers neutralized the defenders’ advantage in firepower and drew fire away from the crew engaged in breaching the walls.<\/p>\n<p>The details of the Assyrian reliefs make it possible to visualize clearly the fate of Jerusalem, as announced to the prophet Ezekiel (Ez 4:1-3; 21:22). The gate was the focal point of attack because it was the weakest point in the wall. Moreover, the path leading up to the gate made construction of a special ramp unnecessary. In the demolition of a gate, swords were sometimes used to pry the doors loose and to tear down hinges. Wooden doors unprotected by metal were often set on fire.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram continued to be used as an engine for breaching walls in the Hellenistic-Roman period. In 63 <span>BC<\/span> the Roman commander Pompey brought up battering rams from Tyre against the defenders of Jerusalem, and with them penetrated the fortified wall that enclosed the temple. The siege machine shown on Trajan’s column had a beam with an iron head shaped like a ram. It was moved up to a wall in a frame protected by a wooden roof covered with clay or hides. A variation equipped for boring into a wall was used by Titus when besieging Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram was not the only device used to effect a breach in a wall. Troops trained as sappers would tear down a section of the wall by using sharp-headed levers (pikes, swords, spears) or even sledgehammers (cf. Ez 26:8-9). In Ashurnasirpal’s army such men were issued full-length coats of mail to cover their whole bodies. Under later Assyrian kings, they were protected by both round and rectangular shields, which they carried on their backs when engaged in demolition. Later, Ashurbanipal relied exclusively on such sappers for direct penetration of a fortified city. He designed for their protection a huge shield, the curved head of which could be propped against the wall, screening the sapper from missiles while he worked beneath it.<\/p>\n<h5>Scaling the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A battle scene depicted on limestone in the tomb of Anta at Dashashe in Upper Egypt (24th century <span>BC<\/span>) provides the earliest known representation of siege activities. It shows the Egyptians raising a scaling ladder against the walls of a fortified city. By the time of Sargon, the thickness of walls was increased considerably, which permitted construction of much higher walls, more resistant to scaling. Such solid, massive walls also tended to blunt the effectiveness of a battering ram. Sargon, and especially his successor Ashurbanipal, responded by constructing longer scaling ladders, some of which could reach a height of from 25 to 30 feet (7.6 to 9.1 meters), judging from the number of rungs.<\/p>\n<h5>Penetration beneath the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A tunneling operation could be started beyond the range of any weapons at the disposal of the defenders. Once underground, the penetration unit was shielded from enemy fire. The tunneling could be accomplished under cover of night, so that the element of surprise could be exploited to the maximum. It was, however, a lengthy process requiring considerable technical skill. Moreover, if the operation was detected by the defenders before its completion, they could destroy the penetration unit as it emerged from the tunnel. Attempts to penetrate fortified cities by tunneling beneath the walls was a characteristic feature of warfare in Iron Age II. That is confirmed by reliefs, written documents, and archaeological excavation of sites dating to this period, where the remains of attack tunnels have been discovered.<\/p>\n<h5>Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Particularly when a walled city was situated on a high hill, an extended siege provided an alternate method of conquering it. By encircling the city and preventing aid or supplies from reaching its defenders, the attacking army could starve the inhabitants out. That procedure minimized the element of risk for the attacking army. Its success depended upon their capacity to prevent outside assistance from reaching the city and the defenders from leaving it. An army would generally resort to siege when a city’s fortifications were too powerful for direct penetration. The siege of Samaria by the Assyrians lasted for three years (2 Kgs 18:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>The peculiar conditions of siege produced the catapult, a major innovation of Greek artillery and a logical improvement on the bow and the sling. Designed originally as a strengthened bow mounted on a stand and used to fire arrows only, it was introduced around 400 <span>BC<\/span> by Demetrius I. He may have borrowed the idea from the Phoenicians at Carthage.<\/p>\n<p>In the course of time the instrument was improved. The perfect weapon, called the torsion catapult, derived its power from many tightly twisted strands of elastic material, frequently supplied by women’s hair, which could be tightened with a windlass and then released suddenly. Firing arrows, large stones, or fire-baskets with an effective range of 200 yards (182.9 meters), a catapult could clear a wall of its defenders while a battering ram breached it or a boarding party attacked from a mobile tower.<\/p>\n<p>For those in a besieged city, the critical problems were food and water supplies. The horror of famine is stressed in the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by the Syrian Ben-hadad in the days of the prophet Elisha. On that occasion women were reduced to eating their children (2 Kgs 6:26-29). A besieging army would do everything in its power to aggravate such conditions. In one of the siege reliefs of Ashurnasirpal II, a defender has lowered a bucket from the wall to draw water from a stream below; an Assyrian soldier is shown cutting the rope with his dagger.<\/p>\n<h5>Ruses and Stratagems<\/h5>\n<p>Various ruses and stratagems could draw the defenders out of a city or infiltrate troops into the city. If a small force could enter a city by a cunning stratagem, it could overpower the guards and open the city gates to an attacking army. A city’s fortifications were of little value once an enemy had entered the city. Moreover, penetrating a city’s defenses at any one point frequently caused the entire defense system to collapse. The story of the Trojan horse is probably the most celebrated account of a stratagem circumventing the defense of a strongly fortified ancient city.<\/p>\n<p>In the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by Ben-hadad, a sudden lifting of the Syrian siege led Joram, the king of Israel, to suspect a ruse. He refused to believe the report of four lepers that the Syrians had gone, leaving behind large food supplies (2 Kgs 7:12). That was the same kind of tactic that Joshua had employed at Ai (Jos 8:3-8).<\/p>\n<p>On other occasions, powerful armies sought to break down resistance by psychological warfare, as in the unsuccessful attempt by Sennacherib to capture Jerusalem in the time of Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18–19). The dialogue between the Assyrian general and Hezekiah’s delegates reveals that the Assyrian was trying to shake the confidence of the city’s defenders.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a type of ruse used to trap and destroy an enemy at a moment when he was least able to counter a sudden, unexpected blow. Its effectiveness depended almost entirely on the element of surprise. By taking advantage of good intelligence, knowledge of the terrain, and the cover of night, a small force could stage a devastating ambush against vastly superior numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a standard method of combat during the period of the conquest of Canaan. The fall of Ai, for example, was due directly to the tactical success of an ambush (Jos 8:1-23). Under cover of night, Joshua was able to move a large force to a concealed position behind the city. He then led the remainder of the Israelite army to the edge of a valley north of the fortified city, giving the appearance of a planned assault on the city. The diversion, as calculated, drew the main force of Ai away from the city to engage Israel on the plain of Arabah. When the Israelites fell back, appearing to be badly beaten, the remaining defenders of the city were summoned to pursue Joshua’s fleeing army. With the city left undefended, the main Israelite strike force rose from its ambush position, poured into the city, and set it on fire. Too late, the men of Ai saw the smoke from their burning city and realized the stratagem. Joshua’s army turned to counterattack their pursuers, who found themselves trapped between two bodies of Israelite forces. Assaulted from both front and rear, the king of Ai’s army was annihilated, victim of an effectively laid ambush.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FortificationsandDefense\">Fortifications and Defense<\/p>\n<p>The earliest known fortifications in the world, dated by some to about 7000 <span>BC<\/span>, were discovered in 1954 at Jericho. They were impressive in conception and construction. The core of the defense system was a wall, part of which, bordering the western edge of the ancient city, was still standing to a height of 21 feet (6.4 meters). Further excavation uncovered a large moat that had been carved out of solid rock at the base of the wall, 27 feet (8.2 meters) wide and 9 feet (2.7 meters) deep. How that feat was accomplished when the only tools assumed to have been available were made of stone is a complete mystery. A third component of Jericho’s defense system was a huge stone circular tower 30 feet (9.1 meters) high, once evidently attached to the inner side of the western part of the wall. The exact purpose of the tower has not yet been determined, but Neolithic Jericho provides the earliest evidence of a fortified city supported by a wall, tower, and moat.<\/p>\n<p>By the middle Bronze period, there were four components in a standard defense system: a moat, an advance (outer) wall, the main (inner) wall, and a well-fortified gate structure. The moat, advance wall, and subsidiary fortifications protecting the steep slope and lower portion of the main wall were intended to prevent breaching by a battering ram.<\/p>\n<h5>City Walls<\/h5>\n<p>Erection of a simple wall could halt a hostile advance only temporarily, since walls could be scaled or breached. Walls therefore provided a firing platform so defenders could repel attacks. The wall system consisted of three principal components: the wall itself, constituting the barrier; an upper structure, which provided the firing platform and cover for the defenders; and a series of obstacles and traps erected in front of the wall to keep archers at a distance and to prevent operation of a battering ram.<\/p>\n<p>The battlement—a parapet built along the outer top edge of the wall—provided the defenders with a measure of security, freedom for mobility, and openings through which fire could be directed. From a distance the square notches looked like a row of teeth with gaps between them. The teeth, called merlons, provided a protective barrier against hostile missiles. The gaps, called embrasures or crenels, supplied openings through which the defenders could discharge their weapons. Special towers protruded from the outer face of the wall, spaced at a distance no greater than the double range of a bow. Such towers enabled the defenders to fire at troops who managed to reach the walls. One way of protecting the main wall was to construct an outer or advance wall that could be breached or climbed only under heavy fire from defending units on the battlements of the main wall. Another method was to dig a wide, deep moat around the base of the main wall. A moat kept the enemy from using a battering ram unless they could bridge the moat or fill it up at certain points, under concentrated fire from the defenders.<\/p>\n<p>Casemate fortifications, introduced in the middle Bronze period, were developed from double walls built of dressed stones. The space between the walls was divided into chambers, or casemates, used for storage or dwellings. The Hittite casemate system, introduced into Palestine at least as early as the time of Saul, was widely adopted in Syria and Palestine. A fine example has been discovered at Gibeah, where Saul’s citadel was located, dating to the end of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>. The overall thickness of the double walls, including the casemates, reaches 15 feet (4.6 meters). The same type of construction has been found in excavations of three Solomonic cities—Hazor, Gezer, and Megiddo (cf. 1 Kgs 9:15)—where the casemate walls have an overall thickness of 18 feet (5.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>Although the divided kingdoms of Judah and Israel were not noted for technical advancements in offensive warfare, a number of their kings worked at improving fortifications and means of defense. Uzziah was especially remembered for his accomplishments in defensive warfare. Along with other measures, “he produced machines mounted on the walls of Jerusalem, designed by brilliant men to shoot arrows and hurl stones from the towers and the corners of the wall” (2 Chr 26:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those “machines” were special protective structures built to facilitate the task of the archers and to permit huge stones to be dropped on the heads of assaulting troops.<\/p>\n<h5>Gate<\/h5>\n<p>It was inevitable that the gate would be the focus of action in any assault on a fortified city. City gates were therefore designed to expose an attacking army to the greatest risk while providing maximum security to the defenders. The road approaching a city on a hill would wind up the slope, climbing obliquely to the left or the right. Such roads were usually laid out to reach the gate from the right, so an attacker would have to expose the right side of his body to the defenders on the wall. Since he carried his shield in his left hand, that made him more vulnerable.<\/p>\n<p>To prevent the heavy wooden doors of the gate from being set on fire, they were usually plated with metal. A gate wide enough for chariots required double doors, making the line at the center where the two doors met the weakest point in the barrier. Double doors were therefore fitted with huge bolts and fortified with a heavy beam running across the back of both door panels and held in place by sockets set in the doorposts.<\/p>\n<p>Another component in the defense complex at a gate consisted of towers erected on either side of the gate and protruding from the outer face of the wall. Enemy soldiers trying to smash the doors with axes or set them on fire with torches were thus exposed to heavy flanking fire from defensive units on the towers. From a roof over the gate having a balcony, concentrated firepower could be poured down on attackers’ heads. The addition of such auxiliary structures transformed a gate into a small fortress.<\/p>\n<h5>Inner Citadel<\/h5>\n<p>A major weakness of a city’s walls and gate was the magnitude of the circumference. An average-size city might have a perimeter of half a mile (.8 kilometer); a larger city, a perimeter of over a mile (1.6 kilometers). Yet the entire wall had to be defended against breaching, scaling, or tunneling. An attacking army would use diversionary tactics to keep defenders dispersed along the entire perimeter but concentrate their primary assault at one point in the wall. Once the wall was breached, perimeter fortifications served no further defensive purpose. Therefore, internal walls were often added to subdivide a city into several sections, each capable of independent defense. Also, on the highest point of land within the city a citadel would be constructed as a self-contained defensive unit.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest examples of such fortifications, called migdols, are found in the late Bronze Age. They were originally small citadels built to guard important military targets such as sources of water, strategic routes, cultivated farmlands, or frontiers. A migdol of that type was discovered in Israel, not far from Ashdod, in 1960. It was square in plan, with rectangular bastions, and was two stories high, just like structures depicted in Egyptian reliefs from the same period. The same design was used to fortify temples inside of cities. Such fortified temples served as places of refuge and as a city’s final defense once its walls had been breached (cf. Jgs 9:45-51).<\/p>\n<p>In a later period an inner citadel could embrace a complex consisting of the fortified palace of the governor, dwellings of his chief ministers, and sometimes the temple. Such citadels resembled fortified cities, possessing a main wall, a gateway, an outer wall, and occasionally a moat. Being small in area and heavily fortified, citadels could be defended in a final effort by the governor and remaining inhabitants. Presumably Zimri could have held out against Omri’s army for an extended period in the citadel of Tirzah, had he not committed suicide by setting it on fire (1 Kgs 16:17-18).<\/p>\n<h5>Water Supply under Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Unless provision was made to keep a city’s inhabitants supplied with food and water during a protracted siege, no defense system could be effective. Several Judean kings made efforts to solve the food-storage problem. Rehoboam, for example, fortified a number of cities located on the western, eastern, and southern borders of his kingdom and made them centers for the storage of food, oil, and wine (2 Chr 11:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Storage of food was easier than storage of water. Cisterns built to collect rainwater were a partial answer, but cisterns often ran dry, particularly in times of drought. Cities were sometimes built on the banks of a stream or river, using the stream as part of the city’s defense system. But for a city built on a hill, the source of water might be a spring located at the foot of the slope and outside the city walls. Sometimes the mouth of the spring could be blocked and its location concealed from the enemy while still allowing access by the inhabitants. At Megiddo a vertical shaft 100 feet (274.3 meters) deep was connected by a horizontal tunnel about 200 feet (548.6 meters) long to the water supply at the western end of the city, beyond the fortifications. The work was undertaken in the time of either Solomon or Ahab.<\/p>\n<p>The most celebrated measures to guarantee a supply of fresh water in a time of siege were those taken by Hezekiah at Jerusalem. That engineering achievement is recalled in all the summaries of his reign, both in the Bible and in the “Praise of Famous Men” in the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus (2 Kgs 20:20; 2 Chr 32:30; Ecclus 48:17). The prodigious feat commemorated in those references was the sealing of the spring of Gihon and the cutting of an 1,800-foot (548.6-meter) channel through solid rock in order to bring water into a reservoir in the city. How it was accomplished was reported by Hezekiah himself in the famous Siloam inscription. Two crews, working with hammers, wedges, and pickaxes, began at opposite ends. The crew that began at the spring was able to take advantage of the older tunnel (cf. Is 22:11). They turned due south, in the direction of the city. The other crew, starting from the reservoir, began in a northeasterly direction. They then turned southeast until they reached the north-south line followed by the crew tunneling from the spring, when they turned due north to meet them. The two crews almost passed each other, being about five feet (1.5 meters) apart, but a shout from one was heard through a crevice in the rock by the other. Both parties turned sharply right, and the tunnel was completed. Hezekiah’s precautionary step, taken before Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah, helps to explain why the Assyrians were unable to subdue Jerusalem by the siege tactics that had earlier subdued Samaria in the time of Sargon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewMilitaryOrganization\">Hebrew Military Organization<\/p>\n<h5>Tribal Army<\/h5>\n<p>In their exodus from Egypt the Israelites were organized by tribes and divisions. That systematic arrangement for their trek through the wilderness provided a precedent for military organization. After the sojourn at Mt Sinai, the 12 tribes were divided into divisions or army corps, and certain grades in military rank began to appear. The “officers of the army” (Nm 31:14) had command over units of 1,000 or 100 men, which suggests that the tribal army was divided into decimal units. At a later period there is reference to units of 1,000 (the division), 100 (the company), 50 (the platoon), and 10 (the section). Except for the Levites, who were assigned as a tribe to the care of the tabernacle (Nm 2:33), men from 20 years of age who were physically able to fight were assigned to a unit in the tribal army. Certain individuals, however, were exempted from military service (cf. Dt 20:5-9; 24:5; Jgs 7:3).<\/p>\n<p>Until after the conquest of Canaan, the tribal army was essentially a militia recruited in an emergency. Internal organization of the militia was the responsibility of the tribe; each clan and family sent their quota of warriors when summoned to battle by tribal leaders. Because the clan formed the basic unit, recruits were under the command of their own leaders. David’s brothers, for example, served in a division composed of the fighting men from their clan under the command of a captain (1 Sm 17:18; 18:13). When the emergency passed, the militia was disbanded and the soldiers returned to their home districts.<\/p>\n<p>Because the land was divided among the tribes, no tribal or clan leader before Saul commanded the entire tribal confederation (cf. 1 Sm 11:1-11). In fact, tribal jealousies and rivalries threatened national solidarity and jeopardized united action even in a critical period. On some occasions, however, the severity of a crisis caused the armies of the various tribes to unite in common action. The multitribal armies were divided into companies of 1,000, 100, and 50, and still further into families under appointed officers. There is evidence of organization into units according to weaponry (1 Chr 12:24-38). Benjamin’s tribe specialized in the bow and sling. The tribes of Gad, Judah, and Naphtali were expert with the spear and shield.<\/p>\n<p>Provisioning the tribal army was the responsibility of each tribe (Jgs 20:9-10). One out of every ten soldiers was appointed to secure food for the others, either from wealthy landowners (cf. 1 Sm 25) or from the natural resources of the land. In that early stage of military organization, a soldier’s pay generally consisted only of supplies and a portion of the spoils of battle (cf. 30:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Professional Army<\/h5>\n<p>Not until the time of the united monarchy did Israel have a regular army. Transition from a people’s militia to a professional army took place under Saul, whose reign changed the tribal confederacy into a monarchy (1 Sm 13:2). Philistine harassment of Israel encouraged establishment of a strong standing army. The army, however, was not large; it consisted of 3,000 men organized in three formations of 1,000 each (1 Sm 13:2; 24:2). Pay for those career soldiers was sometimes in the form of a land grant (8:14) as well as a share of booty. In the organization of Saul’s army, Abner, Jonathan, and David were given particular responsibilities. Abner was named commander of the army (17:55) and was probably also given direct command of one of the divisions. David’s band of valorous men, “the thirty,” provided the leadership core for his own military organization when he became king.<\/p>\n<p>David continued the practice of maintaining a professional army. But he also developed a national militia of 12 regiments, each being called up for duty for one month of the year under professional officers (1 Chr 27:1-15). Each regiment, recruited across tribal lines, consisted of 24,000 soldiers. David’s innovation provided him with a large reserve force that could be mustered for war in times of emergency. The reserves, and presumably the professional army as well, were organized into units of 1,000, 100, 50, and 10. Joab, a specialist in siege warfare (2 Sm 20:15), commanded the professional army, and Amasa was over the citizens’ militia. David, however, remained commander-in-chief of the military organization.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelite group in King David’s professional army was an outgrowth of the small band of fighting men who had served with him during the period of conflict with Saul. That veteran group consisted of David’s family and clansmen, and others who felt themselves oppressed by the central authority under Saul (1 Sm 22:1-2). It ranged in size between 400 and 600 men (1 Sm 22:2; 23:13; 27:2). The presence of mercenaries in David’s army is clearly recorded. Uriah the Hittite and Ittai of Gath are conspicuous examples, along with many career soldiers of Philistine origin, such as the Cherethites and the Pelethites under Benaiah (2 Sm 8:18; 15:19-22; 23:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>The Davidic dynasty maintained a permanent mercenary army until 701 <span>BC<\/span>, after which it was considered too costly. The oppressive cost of maintaining a professional army, financed by burdensome taxes and forced labor, was in fact a major factor contributing to the disruption of the monarchy after Solomon’s death (cf. 1 Kgs 10:26-29; 12:4-19). After Sennacherib’s invasion in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, the southern kingdom of Judah depended entirely on a citizens’ militia for its defense. It is commonly held that the northern kingdom of Israel did not employ a professional army, but it is evident that King Ahab used at least some mercenary soldiers in his defense against Ben-hadad of Syria (1 Kgs 20:15-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Armor and Weapons.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WARFARE<\/h3>\n<p>The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MethodsofWarfare\">Methods of Warfare<\/p>\n<h5>Standard Combat<\/h5>\n<p>Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of firepower at decisive points. When the Assyrians coordinated their infantry, cavalry, and chariot corps into a powerful battle machine, smaller neighboring nations were more and more compelled to retreat behind their fortifications. They could not hope to engage the massive Assyrian army in standard combat in open terrain. No period is richer in illustrated monuments than Iron Age II; the Assyrian war reliefs present detailed illustrations of their conquests and the size of fortified cities. The few scenes depicting standard combat in open terrain show chariots charging from all directions and engaging the enemy at all stages of a battle. Other formations carry out mopping-up operations, finishing off pockets of enemy resistance remaining after the chariot charge.<\/p>\n<p>The factor of terrain was always very important. In standard combat on open terrain it became conventional to place the best troops on the right side of the line. A Greek commander, Epaminodas (d. 362 <span>BC<\/span>), introduced the variant of a slanting attack by a strengthened left wing, taking the Spartan army completely by surprise. Philip of Macedon and his son Alexander continued to surprise their enemies with variations on a plan of attack based on the phalanx.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Battle in Open Terrain: The Duel<\/h5>\n<p>During certain periods in the ancient Near East, the duel presented an alternative to standard combat. The duel was a contest between two champions who represented the contending forces. The two armies would agree in advance to abide by the outcome of the fight. The duel was meant to avoid the heavy casualties of full-scale warfare. The earliest detailed written account of this unique form of warfare occurs in the Tale of Sinuhe. A chamberlain in the royal court of the 12th dynasty, Sinuhe voluntarily went into exile and traveled to northern Palestine and Syria, where he lived among Semitic tribes. There he was challenged to a duel by a local champion, whom he defeated and whose goods he then plundered.<\/p>\n<p>Although the duel was common among other armies in subsequent periods, it was evidently unknown to Israel before the encounter between David and Goliath (1 Sm 17). The Philistine army had penetrated Judah as far as Socoh and were arrayed on one hill. Drawn up against them on an opposite hill was the army of Saul. The valley of Elah separated the two camps. The Israelites were challenged daily by the Philistine champion, Goliath, who proposed that the battle be decided through combat between two warriors. David accepted his proposal, but when he killed Goliath, the Philistines fled, unwilling to honor the terms of the prior agreement. The Israelite army then entered the contest, pursuing the Philistines and inflicting heavy casualties.<\/p>\n<h5>Assaults on Fortified Cities<\/h5>\n<p>Most cities in the ancient Near East were located at sites that could be defended against attack and that possessed economic advantages. An assault on a fortified city presented opposite problems for attacker and defender. The actions of one were a direct response to the actions of the other. Systems of defense were intended to thwart methods of attack, which in turn were designed to penetrate systems of defense.<\/p>\n<p>There were five possible ways of conquering a fortified city: penetration from above the fortifications; direct penetration through the fortifications; penetration from below the fortifications; siege; and penetration by ruse. On many occasions, a combination of two or more methods was necessary to breach the defensive network.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical narrative of the conquest of Shechem by Abimelech (Jgs 9) gives an account of an assault on a fortified city in the period of the judges (Iron Age I). When the people of Shechem and their allies rebelled against Abimelech, he retaliated by attacking the city, advancing his army of mercenaries by night and launching an assault from ambush positions at dawn (9:32-35). The men of Shechem engaged in open battle outside the city gates but were forced to retreat behind the security of the city walls. The next day Abimelech directed his assault against the city itself. Dividing his forces into three groups, he assumed direct command of one, which he committed to an attack on the city gates at the decisive moment of battle (vv 43-44). The gate was breached and the main walls seized, but the city’s surviving defenders fled to an inner citadel, the temple of Baal-berith.<\/p>\n<p>Many reliefs depict groups of soldiers defending an inner citadel after a city’s wall was breached. Archaeological excavations at Shechem confirm that its temple, like those in other Canaanite cities, was built in the form of a fortified tower, supported by stout bastions near the entrance. The tower of Shechem was thus strongly fortified and occupied only a small area, enabling its defenders to concentrate their firepower on Abimelech’s troops. Since it could not be taken by storm, Abimelech ordered his soldiers to use their battle-axes to cut brushwood, which was piled against the stronghold and set on fire (Jgs 9:48-49). All of the defenders within the tower died.<\/p>\n<p>An assault on an inner citadel was always a hazardous undertaking for an attacking army, as shown in the sequel to the capture of Shechem’s tower. Abimelech turned his attention next to the city of Thebez and followed the same plan of assault that had proved successful at Shechem. But as he was preparing to burn the door of the tower to which the defenders had fled, his skull was crushed by a piece of millstone dropped on him by a woman (Jgs 9:50-53). The incident was remembered and became proverbial for the danger of approaching too closely the walls of a fortified tower (2 Sm 11:19-21).<\/p>\n<h5>Communications and Intelligence<\/h5>\n<p>From the patriarchal period (middle Bronze period), we have detailed written information on the use of communications systems in wartime. The documents from Mari on the Euphrates provide evidence for a well-developed communications system based on signaling. Signals were flashed by torches or firebrands at night in accordance with a prearranged code. The system was widely used in Mesopotamia and elsewhere to call for immediate help when a city was under attack.<\/p>\n<p>In the late Bronze period horsemen were sometimes employed for isolated communication functions. Intelligence services played a role in planning and executing military operations. The importance of intelligence and the use of spies or scouts is stressed in the biblical accounts of the conquest of the land of Canaan. Before entering the land, Moses sent men on an espionage mission. He instructed them to gather information on the topography of the land, to observe the relative strength of its inhabitants, to determine whether the land was fertile, to survey the cities and see if they were fortified, and to report on the character of the land—whether it was capable of sustaining a large population (Nm 13:17-20).<\/p>\n<p>Tactical intelligence was very important. Joshua dispatched spies to Jericho and to Ai before beginning military operations against them (Jos 2:1; 7:2). The reports he received about the offensive spirit and strength of the Canaanites enabled him to formulate an attack plan. In the period of the judges the conquest of Bethel (Jgs 1:22-26) was due directly to intelligence gathered by a reconnaissance patrol. The tribes of Joseph sent out scouts to keep the city under observation. It was strongly fortified and seemed impregnable. The scouts captured a man who emerged from the city—presumably not through the main gate, which was shut tight, but through a concealed postern or tunnel. In exchange for his own life and the safety of his family, he disclosed the location of the passage leading beneath the walls. The city was penetrated through the tunnel and captured.<\/p>\n<h5>Attack and Penetration: The Breach<\/h5>\n<p>Direct penetration through the fortifications of an ancient city meant breaching the gate or the main walls by using hammers, axes, pikes, spears, swords, or a battering ram. Illustrated monuments and written documents indicate that early in the middle Bronze period fortified cities were being attacked with battering rams. The earliest known illustration of a ram appears in a siege scene in the wall paintings from Beni Hasan (20th century <span>BC<\/span>). The ram pictured is a relatively simple device, consisting of a hutlike structure with a slightly pointed roof, which could be moved near a fortress with the help of two parallel crossbars. The structure provided cover for two or three soldiers who operated by hand a very long pole with a sharp tip, presumably of metal.<\/p>\n<p>The Mari documents provide information for the period 200 years later. They mention the effectiveness of battering rams constructed largely of wood. Although very heavy, the siege weapon could be moved over long distances. One document speaks of the use of a wagon drawn by draft animals and of a boat to transport a battering ram to the site of a besieged city.<\/p>\n<p>Moving a battering ram into position always exposed the demolition unit to heavy fire from defenders on the walls above them. Its heaviness made it cumbersome to move. Moreover, the ground adjacent to the walls was usually rough, rocky, and steep. When the chosen point of penetration was a section of the wall, an assault force had to construct an earthen ramp, occasionally strengthened on the top surface and sides with wooden planks or stones. The ramp provided a track along which the battering ram could be moved from the foot of the slope to the outer wall. Once moved into operational position, the ram had to be braked to prevent it from rolling back. The building of such a ramp was evidently necessary in Joab’s campaign against the fortified city of Abel in Beth-maacah (2 Sm 20:15). The biblical account indicates that some sort of battering ram was in use in Israel under King David during the early monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest Assyrian reliefs show that protection of the penetration units was a major consideration. High, mobile assault towers constructed of wood operated in tandem with a battering ram. Such towers, moved into position near a breach operation and manned by archers, provided covering fire directed against the defenders on the wall. Siege towers neutralized the defenders’ advantage in firepower and drew fire away from the crew engaged in breaching the walls.<\/p>\n<p>The details of the Assyrian reliefs make it possible to visualize clearly the fate of Jerusalem, as announced to the prophet Ezekiel (Ez 4:1-3; 21:22). The gate was the focal point of attack because it was the weakest point in the wall. Moreover, the path leading up to the gate made construction of a special ramp unnecessary. In the demolition of a gate, swords were sometimes used to pry the doors loose and to tear down hinges. Wooden doors unprotected by metal were often set on fire.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram continued to be used as an engine for breaching walls in the Hellenistic-Roman period. In 63 <span>BC<\/span> the Roman commander Pompey brought up battering rams from Tyre against the defenders of Jerusalem, and with them penetrated the fortified wall that enclosed the temple. The siege machine shown on Trajan’s column had a beam with an iron head shaped like a ram. It was moved up to a wall in a frame protected by a wooden roof covered with clay or hides. A variation equipped for boring into a wall was used by Titus when besieging Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The battering ram was not the only device used to effect a breach in a wall. Troops trained as sappers would tear down a section of the wall by using sharp-headed levers (pikes, swords, spears) or even sledgehammers (cf. Ez 26:8-9). In Ashurnasirpal’s army such men were issued full-length coats of mail to cover their whole bodies. Under later Assyrian kings, they were protected by both round and rectangular shields, which they carried on their backs when engaged in demolition. Later, Ashurbanipal relied exclusively on such sappers for direct penetration of a fortified city. He designed for their protection a huge shield, the curved head of which could be propped against the wall, screening the sapper from missiles while he worked beneath it.<\/p>\n<h5>Scaling the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A battle scene depicted on limestone in the tomb of Anta at Dashashe in Upper Egypt (24th century <span>BC<\/span>) provides the earliest known representation of siege activities. It shows the Egyptians raising a scaling ladder against the walls of a fortified city. By the time of Sargon, the thickness of walls was increased considerably, which permitted construction of much higher walls, more resistant to scaling. Such solid, massive walls also tended to blunt the effectiveness of a battering ram. Sargon, and especially his successor Ashurbanipal, responded by constructing longer scaling ladders, some of which could reach a height of from 25 to 30 feet (7.6 to 9.1 meters), judging from the number of rungs.<\/p>\n<h5>Penetration beneath the Walls<\/h5>\n<p>A tunneling operation could be started beyond the range of any weapons at the disposal of the defenders. Once underground, the penetration unit was shielded from enemy fire. The tunneling could be accomplished under cover of night, so that the element of surprise could be exploited to the maximum. It was, however, a lengthy process requiring considerable technical skill. Moreover, if the operation was detected by the defenders before its completion, they could destroy the penetration unit as it emerged from the tunnel. Attempts to penetrate fortified cities by tunneling beneath the walls was a characteristic feature of warfare in Iron Age II. That is confirmed by reliefs, written documents, and archaeological excavation of sites dating to this period, where the remains of attack tunnels have been discovered.<\/p>\n<h5>Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Particularly when a walled city was situated on a high hill, an extended siege provided an alternate method of conquering it. By encircling the city and preventing aid or supplies from reaching its defenders, the attacking army could starve the inhabitants out. That procedure minimized the element of risk for the attacking army. Its success depended upon their capacity to prevent outside assistance from reaching the city and the defenders from leaving it. An army would generally resort to siege when a city’s fortifications were too powerful for direct penetration. The siege of Samaria by the Assyrians lasted for three years (2 Kgs 18:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>The peculiar conditions of siege produced the catapult, a major innovation of Greek artillery and a logical improvement on the bow and the sling. Designed originally as a strengthened bow mounted on a stand and used to fire arrows only, it was introduced around 400 <span>BC<\/span> by Demetrius I. He may have borrowed the idea from the Phoenicians at Carthage.<\/p>\n<p>In the course of time the instrument was improved. The perfect weapon, called the torsion catapult, derived its power from many tightly twisted strands of elastic material, frequently supplied by women’s hair, which could be tightened with a windlass and then released suddenly. Firing arrows, large stones, or fire-baskets with an effective range of 200 yards (182.9 meters), a catapult could clear a wall of its defenders while a battering ram breached it or a boarding party attacked from a mobile tower.<\/p>\n<p>For those in a besieged city, the critical problems were food and water supplies. The horror of famine is stressed in the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by the Syrian Ben-hadad in the days of the prophet Elisha. On that occasion women were reduced to eating their children (2 Kgs 6:26-29). A besieging army would do everything in its power to aggravate such conditions. In one of the siege reliefs of Ashurnasirpal II, a defender has lowered a bucket from the wall to draw water from a stream below; an Assyrian soldier is shown cutting the rope with his dagger.<\/p>\n<h5>Ruses and Stratagems<\/h5>\n<p>Various ruses and stratagems could draw the defenders out of a city or infiltrate troops into the city. If a small force could enter a city by a cunning stratagem, it could overpower the guards and open the city gates to an attacking army. A city’s fortifications were of little value once an enemy had entered the city. Moreover, penetrating a city’s defenses at any one point frequently caused the entire defense system to collapse. The story of the Trojan horse is probably the most celebrated account of a stratagem circumventing the defense of a strongly fortified ancient city.<\/p>\n<p>In the biblical account of the siege of Samaria by Ben-hadad, a sudden lifting of the Syrian siege led Joram, the king of Israel, to suspect a ruse. He refused to believe the report of four lepers that the Syrians had gone, leaving behind large food supplies (2 Kgs 7:12). That was the same kind of tactic that Joshua had employed at Ai (Jos 8:3-8).<\/p>\n<p>On other occasions, powerful armies sought to break down resistance by psychological warfare, as in the unsuccessful attempt by Sennacherib to capture Jerusalem in the time of Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18–19). The dialogue between the Assyrian general and Hezekiah’s delegates reveals that the Assyrian was trying to shake the confidence of the city’s defenders.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a type of ruse used to trap and destroy an enemy at a moment when he was least able to counter a sudden, unexpected blow. Its effectiveness depended almost entirely on the element of surprise. By taking advantage of good intelligence, knowledge of the terrain, and the cover of night, a small force could stage a devastating ambush against vastly superior numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The ambush was a standard method of combat during the period of the conquest of Canaan. The fall of Ai, for example, was due directly to the tactical success of an ambush (Jos 8:1-23). Under cover of night, Joshua was able to move a large force to a concealed position behind the city. He then led the remainder of the Israelite army to the edge of a valley north of the fortified city, giving the appearance of a planned assault on the city. The diversion, as calculated, drew the main force of Ai away from the city to engage Israel on the plain of Arabah. When the Israelites fell back, appearing to be badly beaten, the remaining defenders of the city were summoned to pursue Joshua’s fleeing army. With the city left undefended, the main Israelite strike force rose from its ambush position, poured into the city, and set it on fire. Too late, the men of Ai saw the smoke from their burning city and realized the stratagem. Joshua’s army turned to counterattack their pursuers, who found themselves trapped between two bodies of Israelite forces. Assaulted from both front and rear, the king of Ai’s army was annihilated, victim of an effectively laid ambush.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FortificationsandDefense\">Fortifications and Defense<\/p>\n<p>The earliest known fortifications in the world, dated by some to about 7000 <span>BC<\/span>, were discovered in 1954 at Jericho. They were impressive in conception and construction. The core of the defense system was a wall, part of which, bordering the western edge of the ancient city, was still standing to a height of 21 feet (6.4 meters). Further excavation uncovered a large moat that had been carved out of solid rock at the base of the wall, 27 feet (8.2 meters) wide and 9 feet (2.7 meters) deep. How that feat was accomplished when the only tools assumed to have been available were made of stone is a complete mystery. A third component of Jericho’s defense system was a huge stone circular tower 30 feet (9.1 meters) high, once evidently attached to the inner side of the western part of the wall. The exact purpose of the tower has not yet been determined, but Neolithic Jericho provides the earliest evidence of a fortified city supported by a wall, tower, and moat.<\/p>\n<p>By the middle Bronze period, there were four components in a standard defense system: a moat, an advance (outer) wall, the main (inner) wall, and a well-fortified gate structure. The moat, advance wall, and subsidiary fortifications protecting the steep slope and lower portion of the main wall were intended to prevent breaching by a battering ram.<\/p>\n<h5>City Walls<\/h5>\n<p>Erection of a simple wall could halt a hostile advance only temporarily, since walls could be scaled or breached. Walls therefore provided a firing platform so defenders could repel attacks. The wall system consisted of three principal components: the wall itself, constituting the barrier; an upper structure, which provided the firing platform and cover for the defenders; and a series of obstacles and traps erected in front of the wall to keep archers at a distance and to prevent operation of a battering ram.<\/p>\n<p>The battlement—a parapet built along the outer top edge of the wall—provided the defenders with a measure of security, freedom for mobility, and openings through which fire could be directed. From a distance the square notches looked like a row of teeth with gaps between them. The teeth, called merlons, provided a protective barrier against hostile missiles. The gaps, called embrasures or crenels, supplied openings through which the defenders could discharge their weapons. Special towers protruded from the outer face of the wall, spaced at a distance no greater than the double range of a bow. Such towers enabled the defenders to fire at troops who managed to reach the walls. One way of protecting the main wall was to construct an outer or advance wall that could be breached or climbed only under heavy fire from defending units on the battlements of the main wall. Another method was to dig a wide, deep moat around the base of the main wall. A moat kept the enemy from using a battering ram unless they could bridge the moat or fill it up at certain points, under concentrated fire from the defenders.<\/p>\n<p>Casemate fortifications, introduced in the middle Bronze period, were developed from double walls built of dressed stones. The space between the walls was divided into chambers, or casemates, used for storage or dwellings. The Hittite casemate system, introduced into Palestine at least as early as the time of Saul, was widely adopted in Syria and Palestine. A fine example has been discovered at Gibeah, where Saul’s citadel was located, dating to the end of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>. The overall thickness of the double walls, including the casemates, reaches 15 feet (4.6 meters). The same type of construction has been found in excavations of three Solomonic cities—Hazor, Gezer, and Megiddo (cf. 1 Kgs 9:15)—where the casemate walls have an overall thickness of 18 feet (5.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>Although the divided kingdoms of Judah and Israel were not noted for technical advancements in offensive warfare, a number of their kings worked at improving fortifications and means of defense. Uzziah was especially remembered for his accomplishments in defensive warfare. Along with other measures, “he produced machines mounted on the walls of Jerusalem, designed by brilliant men to shoot arrows and hurl stones from the towers and the corners of the wall” (2 Chr 26:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those “machines” were special protective structures built to facilitate the task of the archers and to permit huge stones to be dropped on the heads of assaulting troops.<\/p>\n<h5>Gate<\/h5>\n<p>It was inevitable that the gate would be the focus of action in any assault on a fortified city. City gates were therefore designed to expose an attacking army to the greatest risk while providing maximum security to the defenders. The road approaching a city on a hill would wind up the slope, climbing obliquely to the left or the right. Such roads were usually laid out to reach the gate from the right, so an attacker would have to expose the right side of his body to the defenders on the wall. Since he carried his shield in his left hand, that made him more vulnerable.<\/p>\n<p>To prevent the heavy wooden doors of the gate from being set on fire, they were usually plated with metal. A gate wide enough for chariots required double doors, making the line at the center where the two doors met the weakest point in the barrier. Double doors were therefore fitted with huge bolts and fortified with a heavy beam running across the back of both door panels and held in place by sockets set in the doorposts.<\/p>\n<p>Another component in the defense complex at a gate consisted of towers erected on either side of the gate and protruding from the outer face of the wall. Enemy soldiers trying to smash the doors with axes or set them on fire with torches were thus exposed to heavy flanking fire from defensive units on the towers. From a roof over the gate having a balcony, concentrated firepower could be poured down on attackers’ heads. The addition of such auxiliary structures transformed a gate into a small fortress.<\/p>\n<h5>Inner Citadel<\/h5>\n<p>A major weakness of a city’s walls and gate was the magnitude of the circumference. An average-size city might have a perimeter of half a mile (.8 kilometer); a larger city, a perimeter of over a mile (1.6 kilometers). Yet the entire wall had to be defended against breaching, scaling, or tunneling. An attacking army would use diversionary tactics to keep defenders dispersed along the entire perimeter but concentrate their primary assault at one point in the wall. Once the wall was breached, perimeter fortifications served no further defensive purpose. Therefore, internal walls were often added to subdivide a city into several sections, each capable of independent defense. Also, on the highest point of land within the city a citadel would be constructed as a self-contained defensive unit.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest examples of such fortifications, called migdols, are found in the late Bronze Age. They were originally small citadels built to guard important military targets such as sources of water, strategic routes, cultivated farmlands, or frontiers. A migdol of that type was discovered in Israel, not far from Ashdod, in 1960. It was square in plan, with rectangular bastions, and was two stories high, just like structures depicted in Egyptian reliefs from the same period. The same design was used to fortify temples inside of cities. Such fortified temples served as places of refuge and as a city’s final defense once its walls had been breached (cf. Jgs 9:45-51).<\/p>\n<p>In a later period an inner citadel could embrace a complex consisting of the fortified palace of the governor, dwellings of his chief ministers, and sometimes the temple. Such citadels resembled fortified cities, possessing a main wall, a gateway, an outer wall, and occasionally a moat. Being small in area and heavily fortified, citadels could be defended in a final effort by the governor and remaining inhabitants. Presumably Zimri could have held out against Omri’s army for an extended period in the citadel of Tirzah, had he not committed suicide by setting it on fire (1 Kgs 16:17-18).<\/p>\n<h5>Water Supply under Siege<\/h5>\n<p>Unless provision was made to keep a city’s inhabitants supplied with food and water during a protracted siege, no defense system could be effective. Several Judean kings made efforts to solve the food-storage problem. Rehoboam, for example, fortified a number of cities located on the western, eastern, and southern borders of his kingdom and made them centers for the storage of food, oil, and wine (2 Chr 11:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Storage of food was easier than storage of water. Cisterns built to collect rainwater were a partial answer, but cisterns often ran dry, particularly in times of drought. Cities were sometimes built on the banks of a stream or river, using the stream as part of the city’s defense system. But for a city built on a hill, the source of water might be a spring located at the foot of the slope and outside the city walls. Sometimes the mouth of the spring could be blocked and its location concealed from the enemy while still allowing access by the inhabitants. At Megiddo a vertical shaft 100 feet (274.3 meters) deep was connected by a horizontal tunnel about 200 feet (548.6 meters) long to the water supply at the western end of the city, beyond the fortifications. The work was undertaken in the time of either Solomon or Ahab.<\/p>\n<p>The most celebrated measures to guarantee a supply of fresh water in a time of siege were those taken by Hezekiah at Jerusalem. That engineering achievement is recalled in all the summaries of his reign, both in the Bible and in the “Praise of Famous Men” in the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus (2 Kgs 20:20; 2 Chr 32:30; Ecclus 48:17). The prodigious feat commemorated in those references was the sealing of the spring of Gihon and the cutting of an 1,800-foot (548.6-meter) channel through solid rock in order to bring water into a reservoir in the city. How it was accomplished was reported by Hezekiah himself in the famous Siloam inscription. Two crews, working with hammers, wedges, and pickaxes, began at opposite ends. The crew that began at the spring was able to take advantage of the older tunnel (cf. Is 22:11). They turned due south, in the direction of the city. The other crew, starting from the reservoir, began in a northeasterly direction. They then turned southeast until they reached the north-south line followed by the crew tunneling from the spring, when they turned due north to meet them. The two crews almost passed each other, being about five feet (1.5 meters) apart, but a shout from one was heard through a crevice in the rock by the other. Both parties turned sharply right, and the tunnel was completed. Hezekiah’s precautionary step, taken before Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah, helps to explain why the Assyrians were unable to subdue Jerusalem by the siege tactics that had earlier subdued Samaria in the time of Sargon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewMilitaryOrganization\">Hebrew Military Organization<\/p>\n<h5>Tribal Army<\/h5>\n<p>In their exodus from Egypt the Israelites were organized by tribes and divisions. That systematic arrangement for their trek through the wilderness provided a precedent for military organization. After the sojourn at Mt Sinai, the 12 tribes were divided into divisions or army corps, and certain grades in military rank began to appear. The “officers of the army” (Nm 31:14) had command over units of 1,000 or 100 men, which suggests that the tribal army was divided into decimal units. At a later period there is reference to units of 1,000 (the division), 100 (the company), 50 (the platoon), and 10 (the section). Except for the Levites, who were assigned as a tribe to the care of the tabernacle (Nm 2:33), men from 20 years of age who were physically able to fight were assigned to a unit in the tribal army. Certain individuals, however, were exempted from military service (cf. Dt 20:5-9; 24:5; Jgs 7:3).<\/p>\n<p>Until after the conquest of Canaan, the tribal army was essentially a militia recruited in an emergency. Internal organization of the militia was the responsibility of the tribe; each clan and family sent their quota of warriors when summoned to battle by tribal leaders. Because the clan formed the basic unit, recruits were under the command of their own leaders. David’s brothers, for example, served in a division composed of the fighting men from their clan under the command of a captain (1 Sm 17:18; 18:13). When the emergency passed, the militia was disbanded and the soldiers returned to their home districts.<\/p>\n<p>Because the land was divided among the tribes, no tribal or clan leader before Saul commanded the entire tribal confederation (cf. 1 Sm 11:1-11). In fact, tribal jealousies and rivalries threatened national solidarity and jeopardized united action even in a critical period. On some occasions, however, the severity of a crisis caused the armies of the various tribes to unite in common action. The multitribal armies were divided into companies of 1,000, 100, and 50, and still further into families under appointed officers. There is evidence of organization into units according to weaponry (1 Chr 12:24-38). Benjamin’s tribe specialized in the bow and sling. The tribes of Gad, Judah, and Naphtali were expert with the spear and shield.<\/p>\n<p>Provisioning the tribal army was the responsibility of each tribe (Jgs 20:9-10). One out of every ten soldiers was appointed to secure food for the others, either from wealthy landowners (cf. 1 Sm 25) or from the natural resources of the land. In that early stage of military organization, a soldier’s pay generally consisted only of supplies and a portion of the spoils of battle (cf. 30:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Professional Army<\/h5>\n<p>Not until the time of the united monarchy did Israel have a regular army. Transition from a people’s militia to a professional army took place under Saul, whose reign changed the tribal confederacy into a monarchy (1 Sm 13:2). Philistine harassment of Israel encouraged establishment of a strong standing army. The army, however, was not large; it consisted of 3,000 men organized in three formations of 1,000 each (1 Sm 13:2; 24:2). Pay for those career soldiers was sometimes in the form of a land grant (8:14) as well as a share of booty. In the organization of Saul’s army, Abner, Jonathan, and David were given particular responsibilities. Abner was named commander of the army (17:55) and was probably also given direct command of one of the divisions. David’s band of valorous men, “the thirty,” provided the leadership core for his own military organization when he became king.<\/p>\n<p>David continued the practice of maintaining a professional army. But he also developed a national militia of 12 regiments, each being called up for duty for one month of the year under professional officers (1 Chr 27:1-15). Each regiment, recruited across tribal lines, consisted of 24,000 soldiers. David’s innovation provided him with a large reserve force that could be mustered for war in times of emergency. The reserves, and presumably the professional army as well, were organized into units of 1,000, 100, 50, and 10. Joab, a specialist in siege warfare (2 Sm 20:15), commanded the professional army, and Amasa was over the citizens’ militia. David, however, remained commander-in-chief of the military organization.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelite group in King David’s professional army was an outgrowth of the small band of fighting men who had served with him during the period of conflict with Saul. That veteran group consisted of David’s family and clansmen, and others who felt themselves oppressed by the central authority under Saul (1 Sm 22:1-2). It ranged in size between 400 and 600 men (1 Sm 22:2; 23:13; 27:2). The presence of mercenaries in David’s army is clearly recorded. Uriah the Hittite and Ittai of Gath are conspicuous examples, along with many career soldiers of Philistine origin, such as the Cherethites and the Pelethites under Benaiah (2 Sm 8:18; 15:19-22; 23:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>The Davidic dynasty maintained a permanent mercenary army until 701 <span>BC<\/span>, after which it was considered too costly. The oppressive cost of maintaining a professional army, financed by burdensome taxes and forced labor, was in fact a major factor contributing to the disruption of the monarchy after Solomon’s death (cf. 1 Kgs 10:26-29; 12:4-19). After Sennacherib’s invasion in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, the southern kingdom of Judah depended entirely on a citizens’ militia for its defense. It is commonly held that the northern kingdom of Israel did not employ a professional army, but it is evident that King Ahab used at least some mercenary soldiers in his defense against Ben-hadad of Syria (1 Kgs 20:15-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Armor and Weapons.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WARFARE The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense. Methods of Warfare Standard Combat Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium BC and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of ...","summary_en":"WARFARE The means by which one nation seeks to impose its will upon another by force. An index to the importance of warfare in antiquity is provided by the amount of technical skill directed to perfecting devices for destruction and defense. Methods of Warfare Standard Combat Cavalry units were introduced at the close of the second millennium BC and the beginning of the first. The cavalry charge provided a shock force to the great armies, and the cavalry’s mobility permitted concentration of ...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":2603,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Architecture","title_en":"Architecture","content_ro":"<h3>ARCHITECTURE<\/h3>\n<p>Science, art, or profession of designing and constructing buildings, bridges, etc. Architecture is the practice of combining construction and art in order to produce “beauty with purpose.” The architect’s synthesis of creative imagination and technical skill produces structures of interest, unity, power, and convenience. When we look at a building, monument, or tomb, we are examining its art as well as its structure.<\/p>\n<p>Special types of architecture are mentioned in Scripture, including houses, structures in particular cities, and, of course, the temples. All were influenced by the empires that dominated Israel at the time. It is therefore important to examine the architecture of empires associated with Bible history to understand the architecture of Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Sumerian Architecture<\/p>\n<p>• Egyptian Architecture<\/p>\n<p>• Assyrian and Hittite Architecture<\/p>\n<p>• Greek Architecture<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Architecture<\/p>\n<p>• Palestinian Architecture<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SumerianArchitecture\">Sumerian Architecture<\/p>\n<p>Architecture was first developed by the Sumerians, a people of non-Semitic origin. They may have settled on the island of Bahrain in the Persian Gulf a thousand years before moving northward to the mainland. From the beginning of their culture the Sumerians regarded architecture as an important artistic endeavor. It found its fullest expression in the building of temples. The Sumerian ziggurat, or staged tower, became Mesopotamia’s most distinctive contribution to architecture, both secular and sacred. The ziggurat has often been likened to a medieval European cathedral, the highest point of which might appear to be reaching upward to God as an expression of human religious aspirations. That, however, was not the concept the Sumerians held in building their shrines. For them, the ziggurat, standing on its mound or platform, represented a concentration of natural, life-giving forces. The god had already come down to his house, and it was the worshiper’s duty to commune with him there.<\/p>\n<p>By 2000 <span>BC<\/span> a Mesopotamian temple area commonly housed the ziggurat, several storehouses, shrines, workshops, and living quarters for priests. The ziggurat usually consisted of three stages: the inner walls of sun-dried mud brick, the outer walls of baked brick set in bitumen. The upper levels were reached by flights of stairs or ramps, and sometimes a small shrine to a local deity topped off the uppermost stage. In addition to devising decorated walls and columns, Sumerian architects discovered how to employ arches, domes, and vaults to give the impression of grandeur and space.<\/p>\n<p>Sumerian domestic architecture was quite mixed in style. Most city houses were two-story dwellings built on three sides of a square, with the opening facing away from the narrow streets. Homes of the wealthy might contain 20 rooms; some included servants’ quarters. Indoor bathroom facilities were connected by means of drainpipes to an underground cesspool. Many houses had a family burial vault in the basement. There seems little doubt that the Akkadians, Hittites, Egyptians, and Greeks all benefited in various ways from the architectural innovations of Sumer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EgyptianArchitecture\">Egyptian Architecture<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians achieved the most lasting architectural forms ever attempted by any civilization, and much of their architecture has been preserved. Such forms included temples, tombs, and pyramids. Huge stones to build those structures had to be brought from distant quarries. The Egyptians made use of slave labor and built their structures in honor of their rulers.<\/p>\n<p>The outstanding examples of Egyptian architecture are the pyramids, virtually all of which were constructed in the Old Kingdom period (c. 2700–2200 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sumerian principle of the recessed niche was employed to accommodate the enormous stresses of stone masonry. Without that technique it would have been impossible to construct such a huge edifice as the Great Pyramid, the estimated weight of which is almost six million tons (5,448,000 metric tons). The Great Pyramid is one of the most perfectly oriented buildings on earth, being just a few seconds of one degree short of true north-south orientation. Many of the huge blocks of stone were cut and fitted together so accurately that it is impossible to insert the edge of a sheet of paper between them. The pyramids were meant to serve as tombs for the remains of the persons who ordered them constructed, but the structures themselves have become monuments to human creativity.<\/p>\n<p>The major architectural style of the Egyptians was “post and lintel,” with horizontal crosspieces resting on columns. As a result, buildings of any size became a forest of columns. Wall surfaces were covered with carvings, paintings, and hieroglyphics. Temples were planned on a long axis with almost perfect symmetry. The structures seem designed for imperial pageants and other ceremonies staged to impress the people with the power and authority of their rulers.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AssyrianandHittiteArchitecture\">Assyrian and Hittite Architecture<\/p>\n<p>The Assyrians followed the Sumerian pattern of temple construction but enlarged the ziggurats and added more stories. The great ziggurat at Borsippa was an outstanding example of seven-story temple construction. The foundation was about 272 feet (83 meters) square, and the building stood about 160 feet (49 meters) high. Each story was set back from the level beneath it in a terraced effect and painted with a different color of wash. Each story was intended to represent one of the planets. In accordance with later Sumerian practice the uppermost level had a small shrine built on its roof, where the god Nebo was thought to have taken up his residence. Many believe that the Tower of Babel, which God destroyed, was a ziggurat tower (Gn 11).<\/p>\n<p>Assyrian royal palaces of the eighth and seventh centuries <span>BC<\/span> were large and elegant, decorated with enormous bas-reliefs depicting the king busily occupied with a variety of activities. Assyrian art was at its height in that period, and meticulous attention to detail brought a virile character to Assyrian architecture. Large stone sculptures of protective animals were stationed at entrances to public buildings. Similar statues were a feature of Hittite architecture in Anatolia, the eastern part of Asia Minor.<\/p>\n<p>Hittite buildings excavated at Boghazkôy and elsewhere easily matched those of the Assyrians in extent and grandeur. Towering columns, long halls, and expansive rooms were typical of Hittite palace construction in the Bronze Age.<\/p>\n<p>Hittite temple design followed what was common in Babylonia, with several buildings grouped around an open court. One difference was that the main sanctuary was approached through a series of entrances or porches extending beyond the length of adjacent buildings. The design enabled small windows to be placed at the top of the projection in order to give additional light in the sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GreekArchitecture\">Greek Architecture<\/p>\n\n<p>Architecture rose to great achievements in the Greek world. Many factors combined to produce architectural beauty that has lasted for centuries. Those factors included the climate, setting, government, and people. Perhaps the most important factor was the people, who seemed free to imagine and develop designs and structures that have continued to excite our imaginations to this day.<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks strove to attain beauty in their architecture. This worthy motive found its highest expression in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. In the time of Pericles (461–429 <span>BC<\/span>) the Parthenon and Propylea on the Acropolis were remodeled from earlier originals, and the Erechtheum was also built there. Subsequent temples in Athens included that of Hephaestus, which was a less graceful version of the Parthenon, and the shrine of Ares. Phidias, the sculptor who designed the Parthenon, was also responsible, with his students, for much of the fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> statuary. Although the Sumerians had been the first to execute rather stereotyped freestanding stone statues, they had done so largely with theological considerations in mind. For the Sumerian sculptors, the statue had represented an individual standing before a god, ready to be judged. For the Greeks, however, the objective of good statuary was the most realistic and accurate reproduction of human anatomy possible, and like the Assyrians’, their sculptors studied anatomy. Eventually the Greeks became the world’s most proficient sculptors.<\/p>\n<p>Many Greek buildings featured appropriate combinations of structure and setting. For example, theaters were built on hills so that the structure could have tiers of seats and still have a beautiful background. Marble was used extensively. Buildings were placed so that shadows added to their beauty. All that structural beauty was seen by the apostle Paul when he visited the city of Athens, but “he was deeply troubled by all the idols he saw everywhere in the city” (Acts 17:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many of the most beautiful buildings, such as the Parthenon, were built in honor of pagan Greek gods. In response, Paul preached his famous sermon on the Areopagus (Mars Hill), a hill that overlooked the temples of Athens.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanArchitecture\">Roman Architecture<\/p>\n<p>The Romans were great builders who left their mark on the architecture of the world. Several factors influenced Roman architectural styles. First was the fact that the Romans took over earlier empires and earlier forms of architecture. Some Egyptian influence was seen, but the Greek eye for beauty and use of marble was more important. Another factor was the Roman discovery of cement made from volcanic earth which, when mixed with lime, formed a mortar of great cohesion. Cement enabled the Romans to build masonry arches without supporting columns. The effect was a sense of pomp and majesty. The use of cement also allowed the Romans to build structures of more than one story, such as the Colosseum.<\/p>\n<p>Roman architects used central squares or public forums in the center of their cities. Around these were built public buildings, temples, shops, and porticoes. The central square contained arches and monuments commemorating victorious emperors. The Roman concept of municipal planning was copied throughout the Roman Empire, including Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The shortage of water in a number of countries over which the Romans ruled compelled them to devise means of transporting it overland. This led to the development of the aqueduct. Roman architects were faced with the problem of maintaining a sufficient degree of slope to enable water to flow by gravity. Cemented channels supported by stone arches provided much of the solution to the problem. The architectural design of aqueduct systems remained the same throughout the imperial period. Foundation piers were spanned by round arches. A stone channel was built on top of the archway, lined with cement, and frequently covered by a curved roof.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestinianArchitecture\">Palestinian Architecture<\/p>\n<p>For a generation the Israelites had been tent dwellers, living only semisedentary lives at best, without need of permanent structures of any kind. When the time came for them to settle down, they were handicapped by their lack of construction skills. Archaeological excavation at such sites as Shiloh, Bethel, and Debir have uncovered Israelite attempts to rebuild on earlier Canaanite foundations. Their standard of workmanship was noticeably inferior to that of the Canaanite builders, as exhibited especially in Canaanite royal cities. Until the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, Israelite buildings tended to be small and narrow, partly because the architects had not devised any means of roofing a dwelling other than by laying beams across its width and placing a flat covering on top. The first vaulted arch in Palestine was built in the Persian period, but it was so innovative that the conservative Judeans refused to adopt it as an architectural style. Only in the Roman period did the arch and vault gain acceptance, due largely to the influence of Herod the Great.<\/p>\n<h5>Old Testament Architecture<\/h5>\n<h6>Cities<\/h6>\n<p>In the OT era, cities were built on hills or mounds and surrounded with a wall for protection. Generally houses were placed in a random fashion with winding paths or alleys connecting them. People unable to afford city life lived in villages that surrounded the city. They would work the nearby fields and in time of danger flee to the city for protection.<\/p>\n<p>Most essential to any city was an adequate water supply. For that reason cities were built on or near underground springs. Some cities used plastered cisterns and catch basins to collect rainwater to supplement the regular water supply. Underground springs were protected by stepped tunnels for access when the city was besieged.<\/p>\n<h6>Fortifications<\/h6>\n<p>During much of OT times the Israelites used the techniques of the middle Bronze Age to defend their cities. The central feature was a wall made of stone or brick, 25 to 30 feet (7.6 to 9.1 meters) high. The wall was sometimes made with an artificial slope and a ditch at the bottom to fortify it against enemy battering rams.<\/p>\n<p>During the Israelite monarchy, casemate walls were also built. These consisted of two parallel walls connected by a series of cross walls. The resulting rooms were then filled with dirt to give added protection against enemy battering rams (Ez 26:9). Sometimes walls 20 feet (6 meters) thick were built with overhangs so attackers could be subdued. The apostle Paul was let down off the wall of Damascus in a basket from a room in such a wall (Acts 9:25; 2 Cor 11:33).<\/p>\n<h6>Gates<\/h6>\n<p>Most city walls had two gates. One of these was for camel caravans, chariots, and larger vehicles; the other, on the opposite side of the city, was used for pedestrians, donkeys, and small animals. Many gates consisted of double doors (Is 45:1; Neh 6:1) made of wood and overlaid with bronze plating (Is 45:2). The doors were secured with horizontal bars of wood, bronze (1 Kgs 4:13), or iron (Ps 107:16) that fit into openings in the gateposts (Jgs 16:3).<\/p>\n<p>The location of the gates was important to the defense of the city. Often the road leading to the gate was laid out so that attackers, who carried their shields in their left hands, would have to face the wall of the city and its defenders on their right side. Sometimes the gate was part of a large tower (2 Chr 26:9). Occasionally, steps were constructed on the inside of the tower, so that sentinels could reach the top to stand watch (2 Kgs 9:17). At other times the gate was so positioned that it turned 90 degrees between the portals, in order to prevent enemy archers from making a straight shot through the gate.<\/p>\n<h6>Houses<\/h6>\n<p>An above-average Israelite house consisted of several rooms facing an open courtyard (2 Sm 17:18). The largest room was for the family, another was for the family’s cattle, and another was used as a general storeroom. Sometimes the walls were made of stones, with the joints filled with mud. Sometimes the inside walls were plastered with mud, although more prosperous homes had cypress or cedarwood. Floors were made of clay or polished plaster stones. The flat roofs were supported by beams and made watertight with wood or brushwood. An outside stairway gave access to the roof, and some people built roof chambers that in effect made a two-story house (1 Kgs 17:19). The flat roofs of houses provided additional sleeping and recreational space for crowded households. The Mosaic law required these roofs to be surrounded by a protective parapet to prevent people falling to their deaths (Dt 22:8).<\/p>\n<h6>Solomon’s Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Probably the most important piece of Israelite architecture was King Solomon’s temple. The building was located on the site where Abraham was supposed to have offered his son Isaac (Gn 22). It took seven and a half years to build and was notable for its beauty as well as its purpose. The plan of the temple was similar to that of the tabernacle, except that the dimensions were doubled and the height was tripled. The walls were made of stone overlaid with gold (1 Kgs 6:22), with gold also covering the ceilings and floor. The partition between the Holy of Holies and the Holy Place was made of gold-covered cedarwood. The entrance to the Holy of Holies consisted of a double door made of carved olive wood overlaid with gold. The doorway stood open but was veiled. Outside the temple were two courts, an inner court for the priests and an outer court for the people.<\/p>\n<p>Lack of constructional expertise in Israel compelled Solomon to hire Phoenician workmen. The result was a typically Phoenician structure, the ground plan of which closely resembled that of an eighth-century <span>BC<\/span> Canaanite chapel excavated at Tell Tainat in Syria. Columns and porticoes were doubtless a feature of the temple of Solomon, though the precise function of the freestanding pillars named Jachin and Boaz is still far from certain. Carefully dressed masonry seems to have appeared in Israel initially in Solomon’s time; excellent specimens of hewn and squared stone have been recovered from Samaria. The Samaritan site, along with Megiddo, has also furnished interesting examples of a decorated pilaster capital that derived its design from Canaanite artistic representations.<\/p>\n<p>When Babylon overthrew Jerusalem and leveled the city in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the temple was plundered of its wealth and burned to the ground. After Israel returned from captivity, the temple was rebuilt, with the foundation being laid in 525 <span>BC<\/span>. However, that second temple was far less magnificent than Solomon’s and was in great need of repair by the time of King Herod of Judea (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Although OT tradition gives considerable prominence to the Solomonic temple and lauds its grandeur, the building was actually an adjunct to the royal palace, serving as a chapel. Only in the postexilic period was the temple freed from royal associations to become an independent shrine where people could observe the prescribed rituals. Both pre- and postexilic temples were quite small and narrow in their dimensions, their width being limited by the length of the wooden beams available for roofing purposes. The only way such a building could be enlarged was in the usual Near Eastern manner of attaching additional rooms to the exterior.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Architecture<\/h5>\n<p>The architecture of NT times consisted of Greek and Roman structures, since those rulers had most recently dominated Israel. The Greek cities were architectural models, containing planned streets, arches, theaters, public baths, temples, and a central marketplace called the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agora<\/span><em>.<\/em> Jewish homes, however, continued to remain small, with flat roofs over rooms facing a courtyard.<\/p>\n<p>During Roman domination Herod the Great (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) built some remarkable structures, including aqueducts, cisterns, dungeons, palaces, and whole cities (e.g., Caesarea). His greatest work was the rebuilding of the temple, a remarkable structure that took 83 years to complete. It lasted in its completed state only six years before it was destroyed by Titus in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s temple managed to blend the old with the new. Though it appeared to embody the latest Hellenistic architectural fashions in its colonnades, marble columns, and facades, it was still firmly rooted in the traditions of Phoenicia. The Herodian structure was an enlargement, and to some extent a rebuilding, of the sixth-century <span>BC<\/span> temple. A series of courts and porticoes surrounded the reconstructed shrine, which was given an illusion of grandeur by means of an enlarged entrance. In the middle of that porch stood an enormous doorway that gave access to the much smaller inner door of the shrine itself. Unfortunately, nothing of the building itself survived the destruction of <span>AD<\/span> 70, leaving us almost completely dependent upon Josephus’s account. <em>See<\/em> City; Homes and Dwellings; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ARCHITECTURE<\/h3>\n<p>Science, art, or profession of designing and constructing buildings, bridges, etc. Architecture is the practice of combining construction and art in order to produce “beauty with purpose.” The architect’s synthesis of creative imagination and technical skill produces structures of interest, unity, power, and convenience. When we look at a building, monument, or tomb, we are examining its art as well as its structure.<\/p>\n<p>Special types of architecture are mentioned in Scripture, including houses, structures in particular cities, and, of course, the temples. All were influenced by the empires that dominated Israel at the time. It is therefore important to examine the architecture of empires associated with Bible history to understand the architecture of Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Sumerian Architecture<\/p>\n<p>• Egyptian Architecture<\/p>\n<p>• Assyrian and Hittite Architecture<\/p>\n<p>• Greek Architecture<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Architecture<\/p>\n<p>• Palestinian Architecture<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SumerianArchitecture\">Sumerian Architecture<\/p>\n<p>Architecture was first developed by the Sumerians, a people of non-Semitic origin. They may have settled on the island of Bahrain in the Persian Gulf a thousand years before moving northward to the mainland. From the beginning of their culture the Sumerians regarded architecture as an important artistic endeavor. It found its fullest expression in the building of temples. The Sumerian ziggurat, or staged tower, became Mesopotamia’s most distinctive contribution to architecture, both secular and sacred. The ziggurat has often been likened to a medieval European cathedral, the highest point of which might appear to be reaching upward to God as an expression of human religious aspirations. That, however, was not the concept the Sumerians held in building their shrines. For them, the ziggurat, standing on its mound or platform, represented a concentration of natural, life-giving forces. The god had already come down to his house, and it was the worshiper’s duty to commune with him there.<\/p>\n<p>By 2000 <span>BC<\/span> a Mesopotamian temple area commonly housed the ziggurat, several storehouses, shrines, workshops, and living quarters for priests. The ziggurat usually consisted of three stages: the inner walls of sun-dried mud brick, the outer walls of baked brick set in bitumen. The upper levels were reached by flights of stairs or ramps, and sometimes a small shrine to a local deity topped off the uppermost stage. In addition to devising decorated walls and columns, Sumerian architects discovered how to employ arches, domes, and vaults to give the impression of grandeur and space.<\/p>\n<p>Sumerian domestic architecture was quite mixed in style. Most city houses were two-story dwellings built on three sides of a square, with the opening facing away from the narrow streets. Homes of the wealthy might contain 20 rooms; some included servants’ quarters. Indoor bathroom facilities were connected by means of drainpipes to an underground cesspool. Many houses had a family burial vault in the basement. There seems little doubt that the Akkadians, Hittites, Egyptians, and Greeks all benefited in various ways from the architectural innovations of Sumer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EgyptianArchitecture\">Egyptian Architecture<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians achieved the most lasting architectural forms ever attempted by any civilization, and much of their architecture has been preserved. Such forms included temples, tombs, and pyramids. Huge stones to build those structures had to be brought from distant quarries. The Egyptians made use of slave labor and built their structures in honor of their rulers.<\/p>\n<p>The outstanding examples of Egyptian architecture are the pyramids, virtually all of which were constructed in the Old Kingdom period (c. 2700–2200 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sumerian principle of the recessed niche was employed to accommodate the enormous stresses of stone masonry. Without that technique it would have been impossible to construct such a huge edifice as the Great Pyramid, the estimated weight of which is almost six million tons (5,448,000 metric tons). The Great Pyramid is one of the most perfectly oriented buildings on earth, being just a few seconds of one degree short of true north-south orientation. Many of the huge blocks of stone were cut and fitted together so accurately that it is impossible to insert the edge of a sheet of paper between them. The pyramids were meant to serve as tombs for the remains of the persons who ordered them constructed, but the structures themselves have become monuments to human creativity.<\/p>\n<p>The major architectural style of the Egyptians was “post and lintel,” with horizontal crosspieces resting on columns. As a result, buildings of any size became a forest of columns. Wall surfaces were covered with carvings, paintings, and hieroglyphics. Temples were planned on a long axis with almost perfect symmetry. The structures seem designed for imperial pageants and other ceremonies staged to impress the people with the power and authority of their rulers.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AssyrianandHittiteArchitecture\">Assyrian and Hittite Architecture<\/p>\n<p>The Assyrians followed the Sumerian pattern of temple construction but enlarged the ziggurats and added more stories. The great ziggurat at Borsippa was an outstanding example of seven-story temple construction. The foundation was about 272 feet (83 meters) square, and the building stood about 160 feet (49 meters) high. Each story was set back from the level beneath it in a terraced effect and painted with a different color of wash. Each story was intended to represent one of the planets. In accordance with later Sumerian practice the uppermost level had a small shrine built on its roof, where the god Nebo was thought to have taken up his residence. Many believe that the Tower of Babel, which God destroyed, was a ziggurat tower (Gn 11).<\/p>\n<p>Assyrian royal palaces of the eighth and seventh centuries <span>BC<\/span> were large and elegant, decorated with enormous bas-reliefs depicting the king busily occupied with a variety of activities. Assyrian art was at its height in that period, and meticulous attention to detail brought a virile character to Assyrian architecture. Large stone sculptures of protective animals were stationed at entrances to public buildings. Similar statues were a feature of Hittite architecture in Anatolia, the eastern part of Asia Minor.<\/p>\n<p>Hittite buildings excavated at Boghazkôy and elsewhere easily matched those of the Assyrians in extent and grandeur. Towering columns, long halls, and expansive rooms were typical of Hittite palace construction in the Bronze Age.<\/p>\n<p>Hittite temple design followed what was common in Babylonia, with several buildings grouped around an open court. One difference was that the main sanctuary was approached through a series of entrances or porches extending beyond the length of adjacent buildings. The design enabled small windows to be placed at the top of the projection in order to give additional light in the sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GreekArchitecture\">Greek Architecture<\/p>\n\n<p>Architecture rose to great achievements in the Greek world. Many factors combined to produce architectural beauty that has lasted for centuries. Those factors included the climate, setting, government, and people. Perhaps the most important factor was the people, who seemed free to imagine and develop designs and structures that have continued to excite our imaginations to this day.<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks strove to attain beauty in their architecture. This worthy motive found its highest expression in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. In the time of Pericles (461–429 <span>BC<\/span>) the Parthenon and Propylea on the Acropolis were remodeled from earlier originals, and the Erechtheum was also built there. Subsequent temples in Athens included that of Hephaestus, which was a less graceful version of the Parthenon, and the shrine of Ares. Phidias, the sculptor who designed the Parthenon, was also responsible, with his students, for much of the fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> statuary. Although the Sumerians had been the first to execute rather stereotyped freestanding stone statues, they had done so largely with theological considerations in mind. For the Sumerian sculptors, the statue had represented an individual standing before a god, ready to be judged. For the Greeks, however, the objective of good statuary was the most realistic and accurate reproduction of human anatomy possible, and like the Assyrians’, their sculptors studied anatomy. Eventually the Greeks became the world’s most proficient sculptors.<\/p>\n<p>Many Greek buildings featured appropriate combinations of structure and setting. For example, theaters were built on hills so that the structure could have tiers of seats and still have a beautiful background. Marble was used extensively. Buildings were placed so that shadows added to their beauty. All that structural beauty was seen by the apostle Paul when he visited the city of Athens, but “he was deeply troubled by all the idols he saw everywhere in the city” (Acts 17:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many of the most beautiful buildings, such as the Parthenon, were built in honor of pagan Greek gods. In response, Paul preached his famous sermon on the Areopagus (Mars Hill), a hill that overlooked the temples of Athens.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanArchitecture\">Roman Architecture<\/p>\n<p>The Romans were great builders who left their mark on the architecture of the world. Several factors influenced Roman architectural styles. First was the fact that the Romans took over earlier empires and earlier forms of architecture. Some Egyptian influence was seen, but the Greek eye for beauty and use of marble was more important. Another factor was the Roman discovery of cement made from volcanic earth which, when mixed with lime, formed a mortar of great cohesion. Cement enabled the Romans to build masonry arches without supporting columns. The effect was a sense of pomp and majesty. The use of cement also allowed the Romans to build structures of more than one story, such as the Colosseum.<\/p>\n<p>Roman architects used central squares or public forums in the center of their cities. Around these were built public buildings, temples, shops, and porticoes. The central square contained arches and monuments commemorating victorious emperors. The Roman concept of municipal planning was copied throughout the Roman Empire, including Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The shortage of water in a number of countries over which the Romans ruled compelled them to devise means of transporting it overland. This led to the development of the aqueduct. Roman architects were faced with the problem of maintaining a sufficient degree of slope to enable water to flow by gravity. Cemented channels supported by stone arches provided much of the solution to the problem. The architectural design of aqueduct systems remained the same throughout the imperial period. Foundation piers were spanned by round arches. A stone channel was built on top of the archway, lined with cement, and frequently covered by a curved roof.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestinianArchitecture\">Palestinian Architecture<\/p>\n<p>For a generation the Israelites had been tent dwellers, living only semisedentary lives at best, without need of permanent structures of any kind. When the time came for them to settle down, they were handicapped by their lack of construction skills. Archaeological excavation at such sites as Shiloh, Bethel, and Debir have uncovered Israelite attempts to rebuild on earlier Canaanite foundations. Their standard of workmanship was noticeably inferior to that of the Canaanite builders, as exhibited especially in Canaanite royal cities. Until the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, Israelite buildings tended to be small and narrow, partly because the architects had not devised any means of roofing a dwelling other than by laying beams across its width and placing a flat covering on top. The first vaulted arch in Palestine was built in the Persian period, but it was so innovative that the conservative Judeans refused to adopt it as an architectural style. Only in the Roman period did the arch and vault gain acceptance, due largely to the influence of Herod the Great.<\/p>\n<h5>Old Testament Architecture<\/h5>\n<h6>Cities<\/h6>\n<p>In the OT era, cities were built on hills or mounds and surrounded with a wall for protection. Generally houses were placed in a random fashion with winding paths or alleys connecting them. People unable to afford city life lived in villages that surrounded the city. They would work the nearby fields and in time of danger flee to the city for protection.<\/p>\n<p>Most essential to any city was an adequate water supply. For that reason cities were built on or near underground springs. Some cities used plastered cisterns and catch basins to collect rainwater to supplement the regular water supply. Underground springs were protected by stepped tunnels for access when the city was besieged.<\/p>\n<h6>Fortifications<\/h6>\n<p>During much of OT times the Israelites used the techniques of the middle Bronze Age to defend their cities. The central feature was a wall made of stone or brick, 25 to 30 feet (7.6 to 9.1 meters) high. The wall was sometimes made with an artificial slope and a ditch at the bottom to fortify it against enemy battering rams.<\/p>\n<p>During the Israelite monarchy, casemate walls were also built. These consisted of two parallel walls connected by a series of cross walls. The resulting rooms were then filled with dirt to give added protection against enemy battering rams (Ez 26:9). Sometimes walls 20 feet (6 meters) thick were built with overhangs so attackers could be subdued. The apostle Paul was let down off the wall of Damascus in a basket from a room in such a wall (Acts 9:25; 2 Cor 11:33).<\/p>\n<h6>Gates<\/h6>\n<p>Most city walls had two gates. One of these was for camel caravans, chariots, and larger vehicles; the other, on the opposite side of the city, was used for pedestrians, donkeys, and small animals. Many gates consisted of double doors (Is 45:1; Neh 6:1) made of wood and overlaid with bronze plating (Is 45:2). The doors were secured with horizontal bars of wood, bronze (1 Kgs 4:13), or iron (Ps 107:16) that fit into openings in the gateposts (Jgs 16:3).<\/p>\n<p>The location of the gates was important to the defense of the city. Often the road leading to the gate was laid out so that attackers, who carried their shields in their left hands, would have to face the wall of the city and its defenders on their right side. Sometimes the gate was part of a large tower (2 Chr 26:9). Occasionally, steps were constructed on the inside of the tower, so that sentinels could reach the top to stand watch (2 Kgs 9:17). At other times the gate was so positioned that it turned 90 degrees between the portals, in order to prevent enemy archers from making a straight shot through the gate.<\/p>\n<h6>Houses<\/h6>\n<p>An above-average Israelite house consisted of several rooms facing an open courtyard (2 Sm 17:18). The largest room was for the family, another was for the family’s cattle, and another was used as a general storeroom. Sometimes the walls were made of stones, with the joints filled with mud. Sometimes the inside walls were plastered with mud, although more prosperous homes had cypress or cedarwood. Floors were made of clay or polished plaster stones. The flat roofs were supported by beams and made watertight with wood or brushwood. An outside stairway gave access to the roof, and some people built roof chambers that in effect made a two-story house (1 Kgs 17:19). The flat roofs of houses provided additional sleeping and recreational space for crowded households. The Mosaic law required these roofs to be surrounded by a protective parapet to prevent people falling to their deaths (Dt 22:8).<\/p>\n<h6>Solomon’s Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Probably the most important piece of Israelite architecture was King Solomon’s temple. The building was located on the site where Abraham was supposed to have offered his son Isaac (Gn 22). It took seven and a half years to build and was notable for its beauty as well as its purpose. The plan of the temple was similar to that of the tabernacle, except that the dimensions were doubled and the height was tripled. The walls were made of stone overlaid with gold (1 Kgs 6:22), with gold also covering the ceilings and floor. The partition between the Holy of Holies and the Holy Place was made of gold-covered cedarwood. The entrance to the Holy of Holies consisted of a double door made of carved olive wood overlaid with gold. The doorway stood open but was veiled. Outside the temple were two courts, an inner court for the priests and an outer court for the people.<\/p>\n<p>Lack of constructional expertise in Israel compelled Solomon to hire Phoenician workmen. The result was a typically Phoenician structure, the ground plan of which closely resembled that of an eighth-century <span>BC<\/span> Canaanite chapel excavated at Tell Tainat in Syria. Columns and porticoes were doubtless a feature of the temple of Solomon, though the precise function of the freestanding pillars named Jachin and Boaz is still far from certain. Carefully dressed masonry seems to have appeared in Israel initially in Solomon’s time; excellent specimens of hewn and squared stone have been recovered from Samaria. The Samaritan site, along with Megiddo, has also furnished interesting examples of a decorated pilaster capital that derived its design from Canaanite artistic representations.<\/p>\n<p>When Babylon overthrew Jerusalem and leveled the city in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the temple was plundered of its wealth and burned to the ground. After Israel returned from captivity, the temple was rebuilt, with the foundation being laid in 525 <span>BC<\/span>. However, that second temple was far less magnificent than Solomon’s and was in great need of repair by the time of King Herod of Judea (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Although OT tradition gives considerable prominence to the Solomonic temple and lauds its grandeur, the building was actually an adjunct to the royal palace, serving as a chapel. Only in the postexilic period was the temple freed from royal associations to become an independent shrine where people could observe the prescribed rituals. Both pre- and postexilic temples were quite small and narrow in their dimensions, their width being limited by the length of the wooden beams available for roofing purposes. The only way such a building could be enlarged was in the usual Near Eastern manner of attaching additional rooms to the exterior.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Architecture<\/h5>\n<p>The architecture of NT times consisted of Greek and Roman structures, since those rulers had most recently dominated Israel. The Greek cities were architectural models, containing planned streets, arches, theaters, public baths, temples, and a central marketplace called the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agora<\/span><em>.<\/em> Jewish homes, however, continued to remain small, with flat roofs over rooms facing a courtyard.<\/p>\n<p>During Roman domination Herod the Great (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) built some remarkable structures, including aqueducts, cisterns, dungeons, palaces, and whole cities (e.g., Caesarea). His greatest work was the rebuilding of the temple, a remarkable structure that took 83 years to complete. It lasted in its completed state only six years before it was destroyed by Titus in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s temple managed to blend the old with the new. Though it appeared to embody the latest Hellenistic architectural fashions in its colonnades, marble columns, and facades, it was still firmly rooted in the traditions of Phoenicia. The Herodian structure was an enlargement, and to some extent a rebuilding, of the sixth-century <span>BC<\/span> temple. A series of courts and porticoes surrounded the reconstructed shrine, which was given an illusion of grandeur by means of an enlarged entrance. In the middle of that porch stood an enormous doorway that gave access to the much smaller inner door of the shrine itself. Unfortunately, nothing of the building itself survived the destruction of <span>AD<\/span> 70, leaving us almost completely dependent upon Josephus’s account. <em>See<\/em> City; Homes and Dwellings; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ARCHITECTURE Science, art, or profession of designing and constructing buildings, bridges, etc. Architecture is the practice of combining construction and art in order to produce “beauty with purpose.” The architect’s synthesis of creative imagination and technical skill produces structures of interest, unity, power, and convenience. When we look at a building, monument, or tomb, we are examining its art as well as its structure. Special types of architecture are mentioned in Scripture, inclu...","summary_en":"ARCHITECTURE Science, art, or profession of designing and constructing buildings, bridges, etc. Architecture is the practice of combining construction and art in order to produce “beauty with purpose.” The architect’s synthesis of creative imagination and technical skill produces structures of interest, unity, power, and convenience. When we look at a building, monument, or tomb, we are examining its art as well as its structure. Special types of architecture are mentioned in Scripture, inclu...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":53176,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:12-14<\/strong> The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become <em>a bare rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> a desolate haunt for local <em>fishermen to spread their nets<\/em> to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:12-14<\/strong> The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become <em>a bare rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> a desolate haunt for local <em>fishermen to spread their nets<\/em> to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:12-14 The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become a bare rock, a desolate haunt for local fishermen to spread their nets to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 BC).","summary_en":"26:12-14 The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become a bare rock, a desolate haunt for local fishermen to spread their nets to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 BC).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80802,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:12-14<\/strong> The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become <em>a bare rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> a desolate haunt for local <em>fishermen to spread their nets<\/em> to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:12-14<\/strong> The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become <em>a bare rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> a desolate haunt for local <em>fishermen to spread their nets<\/em> to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:12-14 The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become a bare rock, a desolate haunt for local fishermen to spread their nets to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 BC).","summary_en":"26:12-14 The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become a bare rock, a desolate haunt for local fishermen to spread their nets to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 BC).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108428,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:12-14<\/strong> The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become <em>a bare rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> a desolate haunt for local <em>fishermen to spread their nets<\/em> to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:12-14<\/strong> The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become <em>a bare rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> a desolate haunt for local <em>fishermen to spread their nets<\/em> to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:12-14 The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become a bare rock, a desolate haunt for local fishermen to spread their nets to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 BC).","summary_en":"26:12-14 The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become a bare rock, a desolate haunt for local fishermen to spread their nets to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 BC).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136054,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:12-14<\/strong> The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become <em>a bare rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> a desolate haunt for local <em>fishermen to spread their nets<\/em> to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:12-14<\/strong> The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become <em>a bare rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> a desolate haunt for local <em>fishermen to spread their nets<\/em> to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:12-14 The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become a bare rock, a desolate haunt for local fishermen to spread their nets to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 BC).","summary_en":"26:12-14 The end result was exactly as the prophet had described earlier in metaphorical language. Tyre would become a bare rock, a desolate haunt for local fishermen to spread their nets to dry, instead of a bustling center for long-distance trading vessels and caravans from the east (26:2). According to Josephus, Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, although it was not finally destroyed until the time of Alexander the Great (332 BC).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":53177,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:15-16<\/strong> The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along <em>the whole coastline<\/em><em>,<\/em> causing their <em>rulers<\/em> to abdicate.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:15-16<\/strong> The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along <em>the whole coastline<\/em><em>,<\/em> causing their <em>rulers<\/em> to abdicate.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:15-16 The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along the whole coastline, causing their rulers to abdicate.","summary_en":"26:15-16 The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along the whole coastline, causing their rulers to abdicate.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80803,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:15-16<\/strong> The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along <em>the whole coastline<\/em><em>,<\/em> causing their <em>rulers<\/em> to abdicate.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:15-16<\/strong> The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along <em>the whole coastline<\/em><em>,<\/em> causing their <em>rulers<\/em> to abdicate.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:15-16 The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along the whole coastline, causing their rulers to abdicate.","summary_en":"26:15-16 The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along the whole coastline, causing their rulers to abdicate.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108429,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:15-16<\/strong> The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along <em>the whole coastline<\/em><em>,<\/em> causing their <em>rulers<\/em> to abdicate.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:15-16<\/strong> The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along <em>the whole coastline<\/em><em>,<\/em> causing their <em>rulers<\/em> to abdicate.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:15-16 The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along the whole coastline, causing their rulers to abdicate.","summary_en":"26:15-16 The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along the whole coastline, causing their rulers to abdicate.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136055,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:15-16<\/strong> The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along <em>the whole coastline<\/em><em>,<\/em> causing their <em>rulers<\/em> to abdicate.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:15-16<\/strong> The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along <em>the whole coastline<\/em><em>,<\/em> causing their <em>rulers<\/em> to abdicate.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:15-16 The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along the whole coastline, causing their rulers to abdicate.","summary_en":"26:15-16 The economic impact of Tyre’s fall would spread out to her trading partners along the whole coastline, causing their rulers to abdicate.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":53178,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:17-18<\/strong> The <em>funeral song<\/em> (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • <em>naval power . . . spread fear:<\/em> Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:17-18<\/strong> The <em>funeral song<\/em> (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • <em>naval power . . . spread fear:<\/em> Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:17-18 The funeral song (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • naval power . . . spread fear: Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).","summary_en":"26:17-18 The funeral song (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • naval power . . . spread fear: Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80804,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:17-18<\/strong> The <em>funeral song<\/em> (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • <em>naval power . . . spread fear:<\/em> Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:17-18<\/strong> The <em>funeral song<\/em> (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • <em>naval power . . . spread fear:<\/em> Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:17-18 The funeral song (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • naval power . . . spread fear: Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).","summary_en":"26:17-18 The funeral song (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • naval power . . . spread fear: Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108430,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:17-18<\/strong> The <em>funeral song<\/em> (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • <em>naval power . . . spread fear:<\/em> Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:17-18<\/strong> The <em>funeral song<\/em> (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • <em>naval power . . . spread fear:<\/em> Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:17-18 The funeral song (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • naval power . . . spread fear: Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).","summary_en":"26:17-18 The funeral song (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • naval power . . . spread fear: Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136056,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:17-18<\/strong> The <em>funeral song<\/em> (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • <em>naval power . . . spread fear:<\/em> Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:17-18<\/strong> The <em>funeral song<\/em> (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • <em>naval power . . . spread fear:<\/em> Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:17-18 The funeral song (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • naval power . . . spread fear: Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).","summary_en":"26:17-18 The funeral song (see study note on 19:1-14) for Tyre would be taken up and repeated from place to place. • naval power . . . spread fear: Tyre’s trading practices were apparently based on conquest, subjugation, and exploitation (see 28:16, 18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":53179,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:19-21<\/strong> God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean <em>waves<\/em><em>,<\/em> with its inhabitants condemned to the <em>pit<\/em> where the unrighteous <em>dead<\/em> reside, never to return.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:19-21<\/strong> God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean <em>waves<\/em><em>,<\/em> with its inhabitants condemned to the <em>pit<\/em> where the unrighteous <em>dead<\/em> reside, never to return.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:19-21 God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean waves, with its inhabitants condemned to the pit where the unrighteous dead reside, never to return.","summary_en":"26:19-21 God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean waves, with its inhabitants condemned to the pit where the unrighteous dead reside, never to return.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80805,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:19-21<\/strong> God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean <em>waves<\/em><em>,<\/em> with its inhabitants condemned to the <em>pit<\/em> where the unrighteous <em>dead<\/em> reside, never to return.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:19-21<\/strong> God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean <em>waves<\/em><em>,<\/em> with its inhabitants condemned to the <em>pit<\/em> where the unrighteous <em>dead<\/em> reside, never to return.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:19-21 God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean waves, with its inhabitants condemned to the pit where the unrighteous dead reside, never to return.","summary_en":"26:19-21 God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean waves, with its inhabitants condemned to the pit where the unrighteous dead reside, never to return.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108431,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:19-21<\/strong> God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean <em>waves<\/em><em>,<\/em> with its inhabitants condemned to the <em>pit<\/em> where the unrighteous <em>dead<\/em> reside, never to return.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:19-21<\/strong> God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean <em>waves<\/em><em>,<\/em> with its inhabitants condemned to the <em>pit<\/em> where the unrighteous <em>dead<\/em> reside, never to return.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:19-21 God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean waves, with its inhabitants condemned to the pit where the unrighteous dead reside, never to return.","summary_en":"26:19-21 God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean waves, with its inhabitants condemned to the pit where the unrighteous dead reside, never to return.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136057,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 26:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 26:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:19-21<\/strong> God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean <em>waves<\/em><em>,<\/em> with its inhabitants condemned to the <em>pit<\/em> where the unrighteous <em>dead<\/em> reside, never to return.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:19-21<\/strong> God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean <em>waves<\/em><em>,<\/em> with its inhabitants condemned to the <em>pit<\/em> where the unrighteous <em>dead<\/em> reside, never to return.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:19-21 God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean waves, with its inhabitants condemned to the pit where the unrighteous dead reside, never to return.","summary_en":"26:19-21 God would demonstrate his sovereign power by utterly destroying Tyre. It would be as though that great city had sunk into the depths of the chaotic ocean waves, with its inhabitants condemned to the pit where the unrighteous dead reside, never to return.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":8925,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Place of the Dead","title_en":"Place of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>DEAD, Place of the<\/h3>\n<p>Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, one descends to Sheol (often translated as “grave,” “hell,” “pit,” or simply “the dead”), which at times means merely that one is laid in a grave (Nm 16:30, 33), but more often indicates an underworld. The abode of the dead is pictured as a place beneath the earth to which one “goes down” (Gn 42:38; Prv 15:24; Ez 26:20) and as a place of gloomy darkness (Jb 10:21-22), silence (Pss 94:17; 115:17), and forgetfulness (Ps 88:12). God is not remembered there and his praises are never sung (Pss 6:5; 30:9; 115:17). Even God himself, it was believed, does not remember those who are there (Ps 88:5, 11; Is 38:18). The dead were seen as permanently cut off from contact with the Lord and from participating in his activity in history. Even though the border between life and death was considered fluid (as shown by a resurrection in 2 Kgs 4:32-37 and by Samuel’s ghost in 1 Sm 28:7-25), communication with the dead was forbidden to the Jews (Dt 18:11). (Worshiping the dead was a common practice in the nations surrounding Israel.)<\/p>\n<p>Although one’s fate in the underworld could not properly be called life, it was a kind of existence, perhaps even in the company of one’s countrymen and ancestors (Gn 25:8; Ez 32:17-30). The realm of the dead was not beyond the reach of God’s power (Ps 139:8; Am 9:2; Jon 2:2). Although Sheol was pictured as a hungry monster wolfing down the living (Prv 27:20; 30:16), God’s power could save one from its grasp (Pss 49:15; 86:13). By the end of the OT period, there was even hope that one would finally be delivered from Sheol (Jb 14:13-22; 19:25-27; Pss 49:15; 73:23-28), although only Daniel expressed that hope clearly (Dn 12:1-2). So although the ancient Hebrews never looked forward to death in the same way that the apostle Paul could in the NT (2 Cor 5:1-8; Phil 1:21-23), nevertheless they did come to understand that death was not a hopeless state.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheIntertestamentalWritings\">In the Intertestamental Writings<\/p>\n<p>Between the exile and the beginning of the NT period (586 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 30, overlapping with the end of the OT), contact with the religions of Persia and Greece stimulated the Jews to clarify their ideas about life after death. When the OT was translated into Greek, the Greek name for the underworld, “hades,” was used to translate the Hebrew “Sheol.” In the NT, hades was carried over to become the common name for the abode of the dead.<\/p>\n<p>Along with new names came new ideas. Many different notions circulated about the place of the dead. A common one appears in the pseudepigraphal 1 Enoch 22, where the dead are said to be kept in hollow places in a great mountain waiting for the final judgment. One relatively pleasant section was reserved for the righteous and one full of torments for the wicked. Other writers continued the OT concept of hades or Sheol as a place of separation from God and from happiness (Ecclus 14:12, 16; 17:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>During that period, the Jews also began to use a new term, “Gehenna” (Hebrew “Hinnom”), the name of a valley south of Jerusalem. The valley was noted in the OT period for the abomination of child sacrifices (2 Kgs 16:3; 21:6; 23:10) and in the NT period for its smoldering garbage. Gehenna became a designation for the final place of the wicked dead, a place of fiery torment (1 Enoch 90:20-27; 2 Esd 7:70). Over against that place of punishment stood “paradise” (a Persian name for a pleasure garden), a place where the righteous would enjoy blessedness.<\/p>\n<p>All those concepts—hades, Gehenna, paradise—were molded by NT writers into forms most appropriate to the revelation of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although the NT uses a variety of terms for the abode of the dead, it contains surprisingly few references to it—about 35 verses in all. Those passages are concentrated in the Gospels and the book of Revelation. The apostle Paul said a lot about heaven, but only Jesus and John said much about hell.<\/p>\n<p>The word “hades” is attributed to Jesus only once, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:23). In that parable hades is a place of torment where the wicked go at death. The torment is described as a “flame” that afflicts a person physically despite bodily death. All comfort is refused to those in agony.<\/p>\n<p>Although the wicked go to hades as soon as they die, their ultimate destination is Gehenna, a place of fire and worms, both indicating corruption (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 18:9; Mk 9:48, quoting from Is 66:24). Jesus also referred to Gehenna as “the outer darkness” where there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30). Evidently, after the final judgment, the wicked are sent there at the command of Christ (Jn 5:22, 27; Acts 10:42; 17:31; 2 Tm 4:1). That place of torment picks up the negative side of the OT concept of Sheol as a place of separation from God.<\/p>\n<p>As a preacher of repentance, Jesus stressed the danger of Gehenna. He had much less to say about the place of the righteous when they die. Ultimately, though, the righteous would enter into “the kingdom,” instead of Gehenna, after the last judgment (Mt 25:34). Jesus twice indicated that the righteous enter a blessed state immediately at death. Luke 16:22 refers to the dead Lazarus as being in “Abraham’s bosom,” a place of comfort and peace. Luke 23:43 calls the same place paradise in a promise that the dying thief would join Jesus there at death. Paul’s wording about paradise seems to align it with heaven (2 Cor 12:2-3), and John associates paradise with the new heaven and new earth (Rv 2:7; 21:1-2; 22:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Paul and other writers of the NT epistles had little to say about the abode of the wicked dead. Paul spoke only in passing of “the abyss”—his term for the pit of Sheol (Rom 10:7). His reference to Christ’s descent to the “lower parts of the earth” (Eph 4:9) is probably only his way of saying that Christ, having died, went to the place of the dead. (“The lowest earth” was a term used by Jewish rabbis for Sheol\/hades\/Gehenna.) Peter spoke of Christ’s going in “spirit” after his death to some “prison” where he “preached to the spirits” (1 Pt 3:18-20). Interpretations of that passage differ. Some think that Christ entered hades and preached to the fallen angels of Noah’s day (“sons of God,” Gn 6:1-4), not that he preached to imprisoned human spirits. In 2 Peter 2:4 the prison for spirits (usually translated “hell”) comes from “Tartarus,” another Greek name for the underworld.<\/p>\n<p>Paul had much to say about the abode of the righteous dead. In his earliest letters he never mentioned their location, only that they would be resurrected (1 Cor 15; 1 Thes 4:13-17). After facing almost certain death himself (2 Cor 1:8-11), he began to discuss where the dead “went.” To die means to be with Christ, Paul said, and thus is better than life (Phil 1:23). To be “away from the body” is to be “at home with the Lord” (2 Cor 5:8). Paul probably meant that the righteous dead went directly to paradise to be with Jesus (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4, where Paul called paradise “the third heaven”). Death has absolutely no power to separate Christians from Christ (Rom 8:38-39). Instead, it brings them into the presence of God.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation contains much about the abode of the dead, especially the wicked dead. It uses two names for that place: “the abyss,” the home or prison of all evil spirits; and “hades,” the name for the place of the human dead. From the abyss (or bottomless pit) come the demonic forms that torment humanity (Rv 9:1-11) and the satanic “beast,” who kills the two witnesses and carries the “great prostitute” on its back (11:7; 17). There Satan himself will be imprisoned (20:2-3). Jesus described it as a place prepared for the devil and his angels (cf. Mt 25:41). The good news for Christians is that the abyss, or hades, is not an autonomous realm. The book of Revelation begins with Jesus’ announcement that he has the keys to hades (Rv 1:18), and in the end he will force it to give up its dead (20:13). Until then, the key to the abyss is not in the hand of Satan, but hangs on a heavenly key ring to be distributed only to the messengers of God (9:1; 20:1). In the end, hades, death, and the wicked will be cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), where they will suffer eternal torment (19:20; 20:10, 14-15; 21:8).<\/p>\n<p>John, the writer of the Revelation, agreed with Paul that the righteous will not share the fate of the wicked at death. Instead of going to hades, they go to heaven. The martyrs appear under the altar, calling to God to avenge them (Rv 6:9-11). In another image innumerable Christians appear before the throne of God, praising him (7:9-17). Those believers, shepherded by Christ himself, suffer no hunger, thirst, discomfort, or sorrow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>In summary, the place of the dead began in the OT as an undifferentiated, hazy idea of a place of separation from life and God. Later writers came to see that instead of one place for all (Sheol), there must be two. According to Christian teaching, the wicked enter the underworld, hades, a place of torment, where they suffer until the time of judgment; ultimately they will be cast into Gehenna, the lake of fire. Christ—not the devil—is in control of hades, as he is of the rest of creation. The righteous do not go to hades, but go directly to paradise (“Abraham’s bosom” or heaven). There they are with Christ; faith has become sight, suffering has become blessedness, and prayer has become praise. Christians believe that death, although fearful as the “last enemy,” has no torment for them. It has no power to separate them from their Lord. Rather, it brings them face-to-face with the One they love.<\/p>\n<p>This meeting may occur as soon as one dies or as soon as one is resurrected—the intervening time is of no consequence, because it is nothing more than just a time of sleep. In other words, the very next experience after death for the believer will be that of meeting Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Both Old and New Testaments speak of death as sleep. Commonly in the OT, when a person dies, he is said to go to sleep with his fathers (e.g., Dt 31:16; 2 Sm 7:12). Jesus himself spoke of death as sleep (Mt 9:24; Jn 11:11). So did the apostle Paul (1 Cor 11:30; 15:20, 51; 1 Thes 4:14). At least in some of these references it would seem that it is the temporary nature of death that is the reason why it is spoken of as sleep. Even in the OT passage Daniel 12:2, it is said that death is a sleep, until the dead rise up—some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gehenna; Hades; Heaven; Hell; Intermediate State; Paradise; Sheol.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEAD, Place of the<\/h3>\n<p>Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, one descends to Sheol (often translated as “grave,” “hell,” “pit,” or simply “the dead”), which at times means merely that one is laid in a grave (Nm 16:30, 33), but more often indicates an underworld. The abode of the dead is pictured as a place beneath the earth to which one “goes down” (Gn 42:38; Prv 15:24; Ez 26:20) and as a place of gloomy darkness (Jb 10:21-22), silence (Pss 94:17; 115:17), and forgetfulness (Ps 88:12). God is not remembered there and his praises are never sung (Pss 6:5; 30:9; 115:17). Even God himself, it was believed, does not remember those who are there (Ps 88:5, 11; Is 38:18). The dead were seen as permanently cut off from contact with the Lord and from participating in his activity in history. Even though the border between life and death was considered fluid (as shown by a resurrection in 2 Kgs 4:32-37 and by Samuel’s ghost in 1 Sm 28:7-25), communication with the dead was forbidden to the Jews (Dt 18:11). (Worshiping the dead was a common practice in the nations surrounding Israel.)<\/p>\n<p>Although one’s fate in the underworld could not properly be called life, it was a kind of existence, perhaps even in the company of one’s countrymen and ancestors (Gn 25:8; Ez 32:17-30). The realm of the dead was not beyond the reach of God’s power (Ps 139:8; Am 9:2; Jon 2:2). Although Sheol was pictured as a hungry monster wolfing down the living (Prv 27:20; 30:16), God’s power could save one from its grasp (Pss 49:15; 86:13). By the end of the OT period, there was even hope that one would finally be delivered from Sheol (Jb 14:13-22; 19:25-27; Pss 49:15; 73:23-28), although only Daniel expressed that hope clearly (Dn 12:1-2). So although the ancient Hebrews never looked forward to death in the same way that the apostle Paul could in the NT (2 Cor 5:1-8; Phil 1:21-23), nevertheless they did come to understand that death was not a hopeless state.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheIntertestamentalWritings\">In the Intertestamental Writings<\/p>\n<p>Between the exile and the beginning of the NT period (586 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 30, overlapping with the end of the OT), contact with the religions of Persia and Greece stimulated the Jews to clarify their ideas about life after death. When the OT was translated into Greek, the Greek name for the underworld, “hades,” was used to translate the Hebrew “Sheol.” In the NT, hades was carried over to become the common name for the abode of the dead.<\/p>\n<p>Along with new names came new ideas. Many different notions circulated about the place of the dead. A common one appears in the pseudepigraphal 1 Enoch 22, where the dead are said to be kept in hollow places in a great mountain waiting for the final judgment. One relatively pleasant section was reserved for the righteous and one full of torments for the wicked. Other writers continued the OT concept of hades or Sheol as a place of separation from God and from happiness (Ecclus 14:12, 16; 17:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>During that period, the Jews also began to use a new term, “Gehenna” (Hebrew “Hinnom”), the name of a valley south of Jerusalem. The valley was noted in the OT period for the abomination of child sacrifices (2 Kgs 16:3; 21:6; 23:10) and in the NT period for its smoldering garbage. Gehenna became a designation for the final place of the wicked dead, a place of fiery torment (1 Enoch 90:20-27; 2 Esd 7:70). Over against that place of punishment stood “paradise” (a Persian name for a pleasure garden), a place where the righteous would enjoy blessedness.<\/p>\n<p>All those concepts—hades, Gehenna, paradise—were molded by NT writers into forms most appropriate to the revelation of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although the NT uses a variety of terms for the abode of the dead, it contains surprisingly few references to it—about 35 verses in all. Those passages are concentrated in the Gospels and the book of Revelation. The apostle Paul said a lot about heaven, but only Jesus and John said much about hell.<\/p>\n<p>The word “hades” is attributed to Jesus only once, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:23). In that parable hades is a place of torment where the wicked go at death. The torment is described as a “flame” that afflicts a person physically despite bodily death. All comfort is refused to those in agony.<\/p>\n<p>Although the wicked go to hades as soon as they die, their ultimate destination is Gehenna, a place of fire and worms, both indicating corruption (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 18:9; Mk 9:48, quoting from Is 66:24). Jesus also referred to Gehenna as “the outer darkness” where there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30). Evidently, after the final judgment, the wicked are sent there at the command of Christ (Jn 5:22, 27; Acts 10:42; 17:31; 2 Tm 4:1). That place of torment picks up the negative side of the OT concept of Sheol as a place of separation from God.<\/p>\n<p>As a preacher of repentance, Jesus stressed the danger of Gehenna. He had much less to say about the place of the righteous when they die. Ultimately, though, the righteous would enter into “the kingdom,” instead of Gehenna, after the last judgment (Mt 25:34). Jesus twice indicated that the righteous enter a blessed state immediately at death. Luke 16:22 refers to the dead Lazarus as being in “Abraham’s bosom,” a place of comfort and peace. Luke 23:43 calls the same place paradise in a promise that the dying thief would join Jesus there at death. Paul’s wording about paradise seems to align it with heaven (2 Cor 12:2-3), and John associates paradise with the new heaven and new earth (Rv 2:7; 21:1-2; 22:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Paul and other writers of the NT epistles had little to say about the abode of the wicked dead. Paul spoke only in passing of “the abyss”—his term for the pit of Sheol (Rom 10:7). His reference to Christ’s descent to the “lower parts of the earth” (Eph 4:9) is probably only his way of saying that Christ, having died, went to the place of the dead. (“The lowest earth” was a term used by Jewish rabbis for Sheol\/hades\/Gehenna.) Peter spoke of Christ’s going in “spirit” after his death to some “prison” where he “preached to the spirits” (1 Pt 3:18-20). Interpretations of that passage differ. Some think that Christ entered hades and preached to the fallen angels of Noah’s day (“sons of God,” Gn 6:1-4), not that he preached to imprisoned human spirits. In 2 Peter 2:4 the prison for spirits (usually translated “hell”) comes from “Tartarus,” another Greek name for the underworld.<\/p>\n<p>Paul had much to say about the abode of the righteous dead. In his earliest letters he never mentioned their location, only that they would be resurrected (1 Cor 15; 1 Thes 4:13-17). After facing almost certain death himself (2 Cor 1:8-11), he began to discuss where the dead “went.” To die means to be with Christ, Paul said, and thus is better than life (Phil 1:23). To be “away from the body” is to be “at home with the Lord” (2 Cor 5:8). Paul probably meant that the righteous dead went directly to paradise to be with Jesus (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4, where Paul called paradise “the third heaven”). Death has absolutely no power to separate Christians from Christ (Rom 8:38-39). Instead, it brings them into the presence of God.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation contains much about the abode of the dead, especially the wicked dead. It uses two names for that place: “the abyss,” the home or prison of all evil spirits; and “hades,” the name for the place of the human dead. From the abyss (or bottomless pit) come the demonic forms that torment humanity (Rv 9:1-11) and the satanic “beast,” who kills the two witnesses and carries the “great prostitute” on its back (11:7; 17). There Satan himself will be imprisoned (20:2-3). Jesus described it as a place prepared for the devil and his angels (cf. Mt 25:41). The good news for Christians is that the abyss, or hades, is not an autonomous realm. The book of Revelation begins with Jesus’ announcement that he has the keys to hades (Rv 1:18), and in the end he will force it to give up its dead (20:13). Until then, the key to the abyss is not in the hand of Satan, but hangs on a heavenly key ring to be distributed only to the messengers of God (9:1; 20:1). In the end, hades, death, and the wicked will be cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), where they will suffer eternal torment (19:20; 20:10, 14-15; 21:8).<\/p>\n<p>John, the writer of the Revelation, agreed with Paul that the righteous will not share the fate of the wicked at death. Instead of going to hades, they go to heaven. The martyrs appear under the altar, calling to God to avenge them (Rv 6:9-11). In another image innumerable Christians appear before the throne of God, praising him (7:9-17). Those believers, shepherded by Christ himself, suffer no hunger, thirst, discomfort, or sorrow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>In summary, the place of the dead began in the OT as an undifferentiated, hazy idea of a place of separation from life and God. Later writers came to see that instead of one place for all (Sheol), there must be two. According to Christian teaching, the wicked enter the underworld, hades, a place of torment, where they suffer until the time of judgment; ultimately they will be cast into Gehenna, the lake of fire. Christ—not the devil—is in control of hades, as he is of the rest of creation. The righteous do not go to hades, but go directly to paradise (“Abraham’s bosom” or heaven). There they are with Christ; faith has become sight, suffering has become blessedness, and prayer has become praise. Christians believe that death, although fearful as the “last enemy,” has no torment for them. It has no power to separate them from their Lord. Rather, it brings them face-to-face with the One they love.<\/p>\n<p>This meeting may occur as soon as one dies or as soon as one is resurrected—the intervening time is of no consequence, because it is nothing more than just a time of sleep. In other words, the very next experience after death for the believer will be that of meeting Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Both Old and New Testaments speak of death as sleep. Commonly in the OT, when a person dies, he is said to go to sleep with his fathers (e.g., Dt 31:16; 2 Sm 7:12). Jesus himself spoke of death as sleep (Mt 9:24; Jn 11:11). So did the apostle Paul (1 Cor 11:30; 15:20, 51; 1 Thes 4:14). At least in some of these references it would seem that it is the temporary nature of death that is the reason why it is spoken of as sleep. Even in the OT passage Daniel 12:2, it is said that death is a sleep, until the dead rise up—some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gehenna; Hades; Heaven; Hell; Intermediate State; Paradise; Sheol.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEAD, Place of the Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT. In the Old Testament The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, ...","summary_en":"DEAD, Place of the Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT. In the Old Testament The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62461,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Afterlife","title_en":"The Afterlife","content_ro":"<h3>The Afterlife<\/h3>\n<p>Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>In Job, the key images of the realm of the dead are dark and dusty Sheol (Job 11:8; 14:13; 17:13, 16; 24:19; 26:6), a pit fouled with the filth of decomposition (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shakhat<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 9:31; 17:14; 33:18, 22, 24, 28, 30), and the grave (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qeber<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 3:22; 5:26; 10:19; 17:1; 21:32).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament does give occasional hints of deliverance from the grave (see 1 Sam 2:6; Pss 16:10-11; 30:3; 49:15; 56:13; 73:24-26; 86:13; 139:7-10; Isa 26:19). Job hopes that Sheol might relieve him of his troubles (Job 3:13-22; 14:13-17) and that a redeemer might justify him even after death (19:25-26). But only the New Testament gives the full promise of redemption from death (1 Cor 15:50-58).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6; 28:11-15; 1 Kgs 17:20-22; 2 Kgs 4:32-35; Job 3:13-22; 7:9; 14:13-17; 17:13-16; 19:25-27; Pss 6:5; 16:10-11; 17:15; 49:15; 86:13; 88:11; 139:8; 141:7; Prov 1:12; 15:11; Isa 26:19; 38:18; Ezek 26:20; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 15:50-58; Phil 3:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Afterlife<\/h3>\n<p>Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>In Job, the key images of the realm of the dead are dark and dusty Sheol (Job 11:8; 14:13; 17:13, 16; 24:19; 26:6), a pit fouled with the filth of decomposition (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shakhat<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 9:31; 17:14; 33:18, 22, 24, 28, 30), and the grave (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qeber<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 3:22; 5:26; 10:19; 17:1; 21:32).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament does give occasional hints of deliverance from the grave (see 1 Sam 2:6; Pss 16:10-11; 30:3; 49:15; 56:13; 73:24-26; 86:13; 139:7-10; Isa 26:19). Job hopes that Sheol might relieve him of his troubles (Job 3:13-22; 14:13-17) and that a redeemer might justify him even after death (19:25-26). But only the New Testament gives the full promise of redemption from death (1 Cor 15:50-58).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6; 28:11-15; 1 Kgs 17:20-22; 2 Kgs 4:32-35; Job 3:13-22; 7:9; 14:13-17; 17:13-16; 19:25-27; Pss 6:5; 16:10-11; 17:15; 49:15; 86:13; 88:11; 139:8; 141:7; Prov 1:12; 15:11; Isa 26:19; 38:18; Ezek 26:20; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 15:50-58; Phil 3:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Afterlife Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18). In Job, the key images of t...","summary_en":"The Afterlife Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18). In Job, the key images of t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":90087,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Afterlife","title_en":"The Afterlife","content_ro":"<h3>The Afterlife<\/h3>\n<p>Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>In Job, the key images of the realm of the dead are dark and dusty Sheol (Job 11:8; 14:13; 17:13, 16; 24:19; 26:6), a pit fouled with the filth of decomposition (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shakhat<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 9:31; 17:14; 33:18, 22, 24, 28, 30), and the grave (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qeber<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 3:22; 5:26; 10:19; 17:1; 21:32).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament does give occasional hints of deliverance from the grave (see 1 Sam 2:6; Pss 16:10-11; 30:3; 49:15; 56:13; 73:24-26; 86:13; 139:7-10; Isa 26:19). Job hopes that Sheol might relieve him of his troubles (Job 3:13-22; 14:13-17) and that a redeemer might justify him even after death (19:25-26). But only the New Testament gives the full promise of redemption from death (1 Cor 15:50-58).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6; 28:11-15; 1 Kgs 17:20-22; 2 Kgs 4:32-35; Job 3:13-22; 7:9; 14:13-17; 17:13-16; 19:25-27; Pss 6:5; 16:10-11; 17:15; 49:15; 86:13; 88:11; 139:8; 141:7; Prov 1:12; 15:11; Isa 26:19; 38:18; Ezek 26:20; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 15:50-58; Phil 3:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Afterlife<\/h3>\n<p>Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>In Job, the key images of the realm of the dead are dark and dusty Sheol (Job 11:8; 14:13; 17:13, 16; 24:19; 26:6), a pit fouled with the filth of decomposition (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shakhat<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 9:31; 17:14; 33:18, 22, 24, 28, 30), and the grave (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qeber<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 3:22; 5:26; 10:19; 17:1; 21:32).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament does give occasional hints of deliverance from the grave (see 1 Sam 2:6; Pss 16:10-11; 30:3; 49:15; 56:13; 73:24-26; 86:13; 139:7-10; Isa 26:19). Job hopes that Sheol might relieve him of his troubles (Job 3:13-22; 14:13-17) and that a redeemer might justify him even after death (19:25-26). But only the New Testament gives the full promise of redemption from death (1 Cor 15:50-58).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6; 28:11-15; 1 Kgs 17:20-22; 2 Kgs 4:32-35; Job 3:13-22; 7:9; 14:13-17; 17:13-16; 19:25-27; Pss 6:5; 16:10-11; 17:15; 49:15; 86:13; 88:11; 139:8; 141:7; Prov 1:12; 15:11; Isa 26:19; 38:18; Ezek 26:20; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 15:50-58; Phil 3:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Afterlife Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18). In Job, the key images of t...","summary_en":"The Afterlife Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18). In Job, the key images of t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117713,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Afterlife","title_en":"The Afterlife","content_ro":"<h3>The Afterlife<\/h3>\n<p>Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>In Job, the key images of the realm of the dead are dark and dusty Sheol (Job 11:8; 14:13; 17:13, 16; 24:19; 26:6), a pit fouled with the filth of decomposition (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shakhat<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 9:31; 17:14; 33:18, 22, 24, 28, 30), and the grave (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qeber<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 3:22; 5:26; 10:19; 17:1; 21:32).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament does give occasional hints of deliverance from the grave (see 1 Sam 2:6; Pss 16:10-11; 30:3; 49:15; 56:13; 73:24-26; 86:13; 139:7-10; Isa 26:19). Job hopes that Sheol might relieve him of his troubles (Job 3:13-22; 14:13-17) and that a redeemer might justify him even after death (19:25-26). But only the New Testament gives the full promise of redemption from death (1 Cor 15:50-58).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6; 28:11-15; 1 Kgs 17:20-22; 2 Kgs 4:32-35; Job 3:13-22; 7:9; 14:13-17; 17:13-16; 19:25-27; Pss 6:5; 16:10-11; 17:15; 49:15; 86:13; 88:11; 139:8; 141:7; Prov 1:12; 15:11; Isa 26:19; 38:18; Ezek 26:20; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 15:50-58; Phil 3:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Afterlife<\/h3>\n<p>Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>In Job, the key images of the realm of the dead are dark and dusty Sheol (Job 11:8; 14:13; 17:13, 16; 24:19; 26:6), a pit fouled with the filth of decomposition (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shakhat<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 9:31; 17:14; 33:18, 22, 24, 28, 30), and the grave (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qeber<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 3:22; 5:26; 10:19; 17:1; 21:32).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament does give occasional hints of deliverance from the grave (see 1 Sam 2:6; Pss 16:10-11; 30:3; 49:15; 56:13; 73:24-26; 86:13; 139:7-10; Isa 26:19). Job hopes that Sheol might relieve him of his troubles (Job 3:13-22; 14:13-17) and that a redeemer might justify him even after death (19:25-26). But only the New Testament gives the full promise of redemption from death (1 Cor 15:50-58).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6; 28:11-15; 1 Kgs 17:20-22; 2 Kgs 4:32-35; Job 3:13-22; 7:9; 14:13-17; 17:13-16; 19:25-27; Pss 6:5; 16:10-11; 17:15; 49:15; 86:13; 88:11; 139:8; 141:7; Prov 1:12; 15:11; Isa 26:19; 38:18; Ezek 26:20; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 15:50-58; Phil 3:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Afterlife Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18). In Job, the key images of t...","summary_en":"The Afterlife Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18). In Job, the key images of t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":145339,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Afterlife","title_en":"The Afterlife","content_ro":"<h3>The Afterlife<\/h3>\n<p>Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>In Job, the key images of the realm of the dead are dark and dusty Sheol (Job 11:8; 14:13; 17:13, 16; 24:19; 26:6), a pit fouled with the filth of decomposition (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shakhat<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 9:31; 17:14; 33:18, 22, 24, 28, 30), and the grave (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qeber<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 3:22; 5:26; 10:19; 17:1; 21:32).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament does give occasional hints of deliverance from the grave (see 1 Sam 2:6; Pss 16:10-11; 30:3; 49:15; 56:13; 73:24-26; 86:13; 139:7-10; Isa 26:19). Job hopes that Sheol might relieve him of his troubles (Job 3:13-22; 14:13-17) and that a redeemer might justify him even after death (19:25-26). But only the New Testament gives the full promise of redemption from death (1 Cor 15:50-58).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6; 28:11-15; 1 Kgs 17:20-22; 2 Kgs 4:32-35; Job 3:13-22; 7:9; 14:13-17; 17:13-16; 19:25-27; Pss 6:5; 16:10-11; 17:15; 49:15; 86:13; 88:11; 139:8; 141:7; Prov 1:12; 15:11; Isa 26:19; 38:18; Ezek 26:20; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 15:50-58; Phil 3:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Afterlife<\/h3>\n<p>Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>In Job, the key images of the realm of the dead are dark and dusty Sheol (Job 11:8; 14:13; 17:13, 16; 24:19; 26:6), a pit fouled with the filth of decomposition (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shakhat<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 9:31; 17:14; 33:18, 22, 24, 28, 30), and the grave (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qeber<\/span><em>;<\/em> see 3:22; 5:26; 10:19; 17:1; 21:32).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament does give occasional hints of deliverance from the grave (see 1 Sam 2:6; Pss 16:10-11; 30:3; 49:15; 56:13; 73:24-26; 86:13; 139:7-10; Isa 26:19). Job hopes that Sheol might relieve him of his troubles (Job 3:13-22; 14:13-17) and that a redeemer might justify him even after death (19:25-26). But only the New Testament gives the full promise of redemption from death (1 Cor 15:50-58).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6; 28:11-15; 1 Kgs 17:20-22; 2 Kgs 4:32-35; Job 3:13-22; 7:9; 14:13-17; 17:13-16; 19:25-27; Pss 6:5; 16:10-11; 17:15; 49:15; 86:13; 88:11; 139:8; 141:7; Prov 1:12; 15:11; Isa 26:19; 38:18; Ezek 26:20; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 15:50-58; Phil 3:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Afterlife Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18). In Job, the key images of t...","summary_en":"The Afterlife Writers in the Old Testament describe the realm of the dead as a place beneath the earth’s surface to which people descend (Ezek 26:20). Sometimes they are swallowed alive (Num 16:31-33; Ps 55:15), but generally they are dragged down by the cords of death (Ps 18:4-5) to be consumed (Num 16:30; Job 24:19; Pss 49:14; Isa 5:14; 14:11). In the Old Testament, the afterlife is generally regarded as a gloomy, hopeless place of no return (Job 7:9; Isa 38:18). In Job, the key images of t...","source":"ThemeNotes.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"}}